An obvious ruse.

DBS Bank is being sued by 200 investors over its now worthless Lehman linked DBS High Notes 5. (HN5). The reason for the suit is that the literature accompanying these high notes was contradictory as to what would happen in a "credit event". The suit points out that the true meaning of the literature and the correct payout cannot be determined, so the agreement should be considered void.

DBS, a bank partially owned by the Singapore government through Temasek and Maju holdings, is defending itself by stating that the literature contains "an obvious clerical error" that the investors should have been aware of, if they read it. The "error" states that the payout will be 1 minus the value of the notes, in a credit event. This means that the payout INCREASES as the value of the NOTES decrease. This amounts to an insurance against loss, interestingly.

Now, I find it very, very curious indeed, that DBS are claiming that their contract contains an obvious clerical error - for the obvious counter to that is, if the error is SO obvious - why did no-one at DBS spot it before printing the materials? Surely, it was someone's job to proofread the materials and check them carefully before approval. The very fact that this was not effective in spotting this error is proof of one of two situations: either the DBS staff appointed to approve the literature are incompetent and perhaps, even, stupid (for if it were "obvious" only a stupid or inattentive person would not have noticed) OR it is NOT an obvious error.

DBS cannot, in any way, claim that an error was OBVIOUS that was NOT noticed by their own staff who should be well-versed indeed in how such notes work. In fact, if the DBS staff did NOT notice it - which they didn't - then that is PROOF that the error is not obvious. If it were obvious, it would not be there, because it would have been spotted. Indeed, the threshold for what is obvious should be much, much lower for customers, to whom the products will be less familiar, perhaps even strange, than it is for DBS staff.

The bottom line is this: the DBS staff didn't notice the error - so the customers should not be expected to either.

Of course, this now means that DBS must make what amounts to FULL refunds to its customers for the value of the notes lost. For, of course, 1 minus zero is 1 - or the full value of the notes.

I think, if DBS are to be seen as an honest company and not one consumed by an undue lust for the customer's cash at all costs - they should own up that they were at fault - and pay up. It would be the right thing to do, given the circumstance.

We will see how much integrity DBS shows in this instance.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals.If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

Become a scientist - and be poor.

Why, I wonder, are scientists so poorly paid in the United States? I was somewhat stunned to learn of the way scientists are treated in the US, today.

Here is a typical career profile of a successful scientist in America:

age 18-22: shelling out high tuition fees as an undergraduate
age 22-30: at graduate school, living on just $1800 per month
age 30-35: working as a post-doc for $30,000 to $35,000 per year
age 36-43: professor at an OK university for $65,000 per year
age 44: a parent of young children, yet "denied tenure" by the university - that is, fired

Thereafter is anybody's guess, depending on how able the former scientist is to secure another job in a market that doesn't like to take on middle-aged newcomers.

Given the economic conditions above, is it any wonder that most Americans don't want to be scientists? So, who does the science in America, then? Immigrants. America dangles the tiniest of carrots to Indians and Chinese nationals, "30,000 to 35,000 a year" - and they arrive in droves, for such small sums have seemed like riches to them.

However, there is a problem, here, which puts in question the whole future of American science - and consequently, the success of America itself. China and India are beginning to do very well for themselves. They have more to offer their own people...so the US doesn't seem so attractive anymore - especially since they must become aware, in time, that the wages offered are little more than a con. I don't think those Indian and Chinese immigrants are going to be coming to America for very much longer.

America has treated science as something to be offered to slave labour immigrants, at pitiful wages. The thinking seems to have been that, since these immigrants are willing to do the work for so little, why should they offer more? Well, there are very good reasons to offer more. If salaries in science are so far below what a professional could secure with similar training (ie. $500,000 a year), then the best people will not be drawn to science, but will be lured away. Science is far too important to the future of Man, to allow it to be unable to secure the best and brightest.

Science should be competing for the best minds there are. It should not be satisfied with "we can get somebody to do that for 30K...so that is how much we will pay." It should pay as much as law or medicine, or any other professional job, so that the best people will strive to be scientists - and not put those people in the position of choosing between science and making even a basic living.

For contrast to the figures above, I have read that a law graduate from a good University in the US, can expect to start on 125K - that is double the earnings of a typical science professor, a couple of decades older.

We can conclude from this that America does not value its scientists, or science - but that it likes to argue a lot.

Perhaps, when the immigrants stop coming to the US, because their home countries offer a better deal, America will start paying its scientists what they are worth - if, that is, they haven't all left for Europe and Asia.

Given the present state of science in America and the way American scientists are (not) remunerated, I don't think Ainan, for one, will work there (unless conditions improve a lot). It would be foolish of him, to do so, given the conditions that prevail there. No doubt, there are many young scientists, who think similarly about prospects in the US.

The present American financial crisis - combined with their lack of respect for scientists - makes me wonder at whether America is going to go into a permanent decline. A country where post-doc researchers make 30K and the head of Lehman brothers was paid several hundred million dollars in the past few years, has got something seriously wrong. Lehman is not more important than a scientific researcher. Science is more fundamental to the long-term future of the nation, than the financial games of the Lehman's of this world. Yet, the market says otherwise. The market values the man able to destroy 150 years of banking history by himself, more than the young scientist able to bring something new into the world. Therein lies the problem with America, today: the wrong things are valued. That which is of true value is sidelined.

I don't think it is going to work out well, in the long-term.

Good luck, USA.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to: http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.)