垃圾的群

关于 生活 老公最好自己插到自己嘴里 喷一脸。Hi Kelly. Thanks for your efforts.

Allow me to state my opinion. There is nothing personal here (there cannot be anything personal, since I have never met you, and do not know you at all).
I cannot fail to notice, however, that the English is now so deficient that it is barely intelligible. It remains unclear whether there is a structure – in any case, your sentences do not convey that structure. To me, at least, much of it in its current form makes no sense. It is for now neither necessary nor of interest to me to make further inquiries in that direction.

I do however think that you have not improved, but worsened & deteriorated the essay. But there is no need for us to agree on this.

It seems MORE important to me to state that this is not your fault– we have not formed this group by choice, but have been coerced to work together. I personally believe to observe that the differences among us are such that the result will necessarily be poor. I personally think that this kind of assignment to a group of people who have never met is not feasible.

I will need to be in touch with the professor to bring this to his attention (I am referring to the nature of the assignment here, not to our specific group. I am certainly not blaming any one of us).

Again: It is not your fault, nor the fault of any of us individually – the fault lies in the nature of the assignment, which is not compatible with the differences among us, which, it seems, cannot be reconciled unless we meet in person.

Kind regards from Michael.

但 我唾弃你的坟墓

能不能说个来龙去脉

不骂人不代表

不知道

狗几把。

Tell me about it and come to 98809158.

千万不要 网络人肉98809158

来。


Tell mw about it .

必须的打给我

98809158。

楼主参加什么学习班，被分组做什么project。结果被对方嫌弃，说完全不懂楼主英文的句式和表达。
准备和教授反映情况。
对方说这不是楼主的错，是教授拉郎配，
把2个脑回路完全不同的人拉在一起，肯定不会有什么好结果。

我还以为楼主只有中文表达有问题，没想到英文也是。。。

======

只是字面的意思。但是楼主2楼那个标题提到了老公，是啥意思？好污的标题。

居然开心了改了五次的结局


你的评论开心了

我可咋办

我觉得我 写的 很 清楚[10-1] Current economy aims to gain on marginal economic growth when market present scarcer opportunities. Thus, Keynesian’s theory is wildly adopted to boost aggregated demand. However, it firstly generalized that there is finite amount of resources contributing to economy where supply-demand approach will work accurately and secondly it fails to assess the speculative monetary demand in addition to transactional and precautionary demand where gain from price movement rather than fundamental value was observed often among speculative investors in the real estate market during 2008 crisis where investors takes unaffordable loans to over staff their portfolio based on the belief that price of house will always go up and they can harvest the return in future by arbitraging the available low interest rate.

[10-2] It is because that when the market perceives productivity can always be improved and regulations are made solely to harness the systematic risks in this direction. Otherwise we should have already solved the stagflation and capital deepening issue, being it with or without financial crisis.

[10-3] We also contrasted our analysis to complete free market. Although Singapore and Hong Kong are ranking on top by world free market index before US and Japan, both have given their approach in different ways. The debate is still intense around the conflict between managerial capitalism and financial regulations. We believe the top-ranking countries realized the concerns but have not yet find the right solutions.


[10-4] We demonstrated a few other examples illustrated that it is rather difficult to ascertain the over simplified approach would regulate the financial market has it intended should such regulations are built without cohesive consideration because financial regulations manned for such economy would cause zero-sum game in the society after-all. i.e. wealth redistribution at the loss of another.

[10-5] We believe in a more cohesive approach when comes to design the effective and sustainable regulation. Humane factors should be considered rather than government-driven directional approach.

[10-6] Thus, sustainable growth should be always be back of the mind of regulation makers because economy growth is rather exogenous than endogenous ,. And secondly market regulations on preventing price derailing (bubble) should also be further understood from the perspective of human rights rather than transforming the risks outside of the financial system. It should challenge the central banks on its fundamental policies that ever trying to manmade the price of assets in additional to 1) microprudential requirements i.e. regulations on credit rating (the CRAs ) and declaration of agency-principal relationship (MiFID II); and 2) macroprudence requirements i.e. BASEL II.

[10-7] The hallmark of good financial regulation: that statute does not stipulate more than it does may be not shortcoming, but foresight: It so prevents interference with the laws of economics and the markets and hence are unchangeable. The law where it has stood the test of time is very a mature form of regulation - it leaves the microprudence to the people, and only sets a stage for them about their business.

感恩翻译中文英文我都能看懂但依然没明白为什么会骂到老公去了……

我的意思假如
现在机会很少 宏观经济要赚钱 依赖于一直加强的生产力

然后根据所谓宏观经济学 这样的话价格可以进一步带动生产力

但这在我看来 还是局部的。 因为生产力无限生长的结局没人知道。

还好意思说 为了崩盘现在qE都对的 敢说不 崩盘

把说的落实 。 就喝一壶了。

是个好人就他说的
也没法行动cant act upon !!!!!!!!

晚上到后来 还有人说


宏观经济学 什么猪头三。

无非 流氓假仗义没啥。

s随便摘一段：[10-4] We demonstrated a few other examples illustrated that it is rather difficult to ascertain the over simplified approach would regulate the financial market has it intended should such regulations are built without cohesive consideration because financial regulations manned for such economy would cause zero-sum game in the society after-all. i.e. wealth redistribution at the loss of another.

这句式完全不对吧？没有标点，没有主从关系，前个句子的最后一个字自动变成下个句子的第一个字，然后几个句子就这样无缝的连在一起。。。

我觉得对方在说看不懂你的表达，而不是他的观点跟你不同。

楼主的这个表达真的让人看的一声叹息……

不过楼主可以先消消气，对修改意见不认同也不是什么大事。

我也乱了financial regulations manned for such economy would cause zero-sum game in the society after-all. i.e. wealth redistribution at the loss of another.

A few other examples illustrated in the paper
that it is rather difficult to ascertain thru the over simplified approach that one can regulate the financial market as it intended should such regulations are built without cohesive consideration.

我觉得第六遍也改不好了

看样子是群里吵起来了那个迈克的信其实还好
估计是另外几个人也有些不太客气的言语
楼主被激怒然后吵起来了
另外楼主这会儿估计又喝高了

嗯喝高跪回家

看到邻居老公 叫他回家 不回

无奈。

无奈。

自己还在纠缠着这些。

不知道 是否不客气关于做义 l理解偏差

关于自省机制和 善意

不会怎样

也说不清无奈无奈无奈 无奈无奈无奈无奈无奈。

挖个 树洞 给 百无一用 的书生。

越来越为狮城帮感到担忧已经不是第一次第二次见过神精失常的。在新加坡工作生活压力真的有这么大吗？

总觉得少了点什么确实需要强大点的心脏保持心理稳定。

不知道在国内生活的话，是不是也这样。

目测撕逼大战一触即发

洋文咱不懂，但我看出了4个字，恼羞成怒。

哇这个英语跟lz的中文风格好一致。

原来是这样，楼主干嘛以己之短攻敌之长啊？说中文不就完了。

我一般不看楼主的贴因为我基本上看不懂她在说什么

逻辑混乱。。。


但是，

她竟然有个很有钱的老公。。。

倒没吵我继续改了一遍

就没吵 我的意思 这是个例子


最近表达又退步了。
工作写的信 别人看懂了。

Good morning.

Technically maybe we could understand and learn their thinking on “first do no harm “ also termed as fundamental risk of loss because we aimed to reduce risk by investing through Bostwick;

And if the fund can evolve with the market condition termed as“style drift”, especially in the capacity being robust in current overall market condition.

Example can be : we had a NAV underperformance by RIEF and I personally not sure if the fund will turn around as why it lost and how would it work again.

Humbly I find above are important because the underlying funds of Bostwick can be quite correlated or we can ask for the information if otherwise. I am asking this more from perspective of understanding its association and suitability to our overall portfolio rather than questioning its empirical performance. I thought we have to work around with hedge funds being it opaque or not.

This could be very well the same agenda as the Bostwick manager in terms of portfolio construction. It is more TOP down than bottom up because we are not buying 1 dollar with 50 cents and they are not just middle man.

Operationally we might also want to know how would they source “deals” as how they find the potential hedge fund candidates etc and what is sweet spot in terms of right mix of managers etc.

Just my humble grinding 2-cent comments plz and I sincerely hope our investment interest is not underrepresented.

And from legal check via SEC, the fund started representing by MS from 2016 and no adverse filing so far.

怒在本来 还好 老公打电话来问 问了之后就劈头盖脸 说了我一顿 老生常谈 说我又死了多少个脑细胞 喝酒越喝越笨
跟喝醉的人讲道理。。细节我不记得 i就觉得生他的气。
但我 也明白了 必须回家 不然会出事 但我不会生气 表达不出

结果 看到邻居爸爸 在喝酒 也不知道为啥 直觉觉得 应该拉他回家

老公又不停电话 说我多管闲事

不是这件事 写作业的事另外一件事 不能说

三件事情粘在一起了。

垃圾的群号称自己 北大

垃圾

垃圾

垃圾。

垃圾。

---
该帖荣获当日十大第1，奖励楼主25分以及37狮城帮币，时间：2020-10-25 22:00:01。

Law and regulations for financial markets 觉得这个题目有可能跑偏了

过于谦虚我就说我没有法律背景
我老公说不卑不亢就行 过谦没必要

我牛津也考了六次gmat

面试官都笑了

英文不好 是硬伤 但我也没办法。。 必经 24之前就不学英文 。 最后很多词不会拼。 还好工作中同事帮忙