2018年7月16日 星期一

日均九人失蹤 報案唔使等足48個鐘

on.cc東網專訊

「有時尋人,不論是生是死,都想讓家人求個安心,有個答案。」警方失蹤人口調查組(調查組)每年於全港接獲逾三千宗案件,平均每日就有九人失蹤,至今有一百七十三宗案件尚在尋人。各區失蹤人口主要牽涉長者及青少年為主,佔整體案件近半數字。警方指,市民若懷疑有失蹤案,毋需等足四十八小時才報案。

警隊五大總區均設有調查組,由於新界北總區幅員最廣,遍及屯門、元朗、邊界及大埔警區,接獲失蹤案是全港之冠,去年錄得八百四十二宗,其中屬「高危」分類有三百八十七宗,高危意指是十二歲以下少年、有自殺傾向人士、定時需服藥人士,以及精神上無行為能力人士。

新界北總區調查組高級督察楊少芳指,區內失蹤者主要以長者及青少年為主,其中曾處理一案需長達四天時間尋找,失蹤者患有腦退化症,可能已上山,故安排近百人於山上搜索,她說:「雖然最後只找到屍體,但對家人是一種欣慰,因為都想知是生是死。」

近年智能產品普及,不少隨身物具有定位裝置,更有失蹤者因此成功被尋回。該組女警黃潔瑩稱曾處理一名患有情緒病失蹤者,因電話具有定位功能,故鎖定其位置於旺角,最後成功尋回他。另外,警員朱志光指至少要四十八小時才符合「失蹤」標準只是電影橋段,現實只要市民認為該人失蹤,就可經由警方報案渠道舉報。


近年各總區失蹤人口舉報數字:
總區/2017年/2018年1-6月
港島/418/201
東九龍/682/324
西九龍/568/284
新界北/842/454
新界南/601/341
水警/5/7
總數/3116/1611

資料來源:警務處

2018年7月15日 星期日

本周金融大事一覽!聚焦「普特會」及聯儲褐皮書

on.cc東網專訊

美國總統特朗普將與俄羅斯總統普京會面(「普特會」)為本周重點,歐洲對於美俄會面的反應,對整個市場將造成影響。至於美國聯儲局主席鮑威爾將向國會提交貨幣政策報告,投資者可從中窺探下半年的加息走向,當局周四凌晨公布的褐皮書,則能讓投資者更確切了解各地區的經濟活動情況。

【7月16日星期一】
早上10時:中國6月社會消費品零售總額、中國第二季國內生產總值(GDP)、6月及上半年規模以上工業增加值
下午4時:意大利5月貿易帳
下午5時:歐元區5月季調後貿易帳
晚上8時30分:美國6月零售銷售

日內舉行的「普特會」為重中之重,將討論美俄關系和國際問題。

【7月17日星期二】
早上6時45分:新西蘭第二季度消費物價指數(CPI)
下午4時:英倫銀行行長卡尼出席議會財政委員會,討論金融穩定報告
下午4時30分:英國6月失業率
晚上9時15分:美國6月工業產出

【7月18日星期三】
凌晨4時30分:美國截至7月13日當周API原油庫存變動
下午4時30分:英國6月零售物價指數及CPI
晚上10時:聯儲局主席鮑威爾在參議院銀行業委員會聽證會上作證,向國會提交半年度貨幣政策報告。(鮑威爾上周已出席眾議院聽證會,是次參議院的講話可能會重申通脹目標的看法。)
晚上10時30分:美國截至7月13日當周EIA原油庫存變動

【7月19日星期四】
凌晨2時:聯儲局公布經濟褐皮書
早上7時50分:日本6月未季調商品貿易帳
早上9時30分:澳洲6月季調後失業率
下午4時30分:英國6月季調後零售銷售
晚上8時30分:美國截至7月14日當周初申領失業救濟金人數

【7月20日星期五】
早上7時30分:日本6月CPI
晚上8時30分:加拿大6月CPI、5月零售銷售

HIFU溶脂可致腦中風 74%人唔知醫療儀器無規管

on.cc東網專訊

消費者委員會去年接獲57宗有關高能量光學療程及入侵性療程的醫療美容投訴,立法會明天(16日)將討論規管醫療儀器的立法建議,有醫學組織於網上向1000名市民進行調查,發現74%人不知道香港現時沒有立法規管醫療儀器,85.5%人認為應立法規管。

對於立法規管醫療儀器的功用,82%人認為能幫助他們選擇合適的治療,83.2%人認為能提升香港市面上醫療儀器的質素,84.4%人認為能加強對市民或消費者的保障。

香港皮膚科醫學院前院長陳衍里指,最常造成美容事故的醫療儀器包括超聲刀(HIFU)和高能量激光。他稱,曾經有一名患有心漏的女性進行超聲刀溶脂,結果脂肪粒掉進血管中,造成腦中風。

根據食物及衞生局提出的規管醫療儀器草案修訂建議,政府計劃高風險儀器推出市面前必須註冊,而未符註冊規定的醫療儀器可有5年過渡期,先列於衞生署表列制度內,香港皮膚科醫學院、香港醫學會等4個醫學組織建議過渡期應縮短為3年。

由美容師使用醫學儀器的做法一直備受爭議,香港皮膚及性病學會委員陳俊彥指,不少消費者發生醫美事故後,並不認得由哪位美容師負責,而且有美容師只是僵化地按供應商的指示使用儀器,並不知道要按不同人的皮膚調節儀器。

政府去年曾提出風險高的醫療儀器需要特定人士操作或監督,但是次政府草案卻因美容業界反對而讓步,未有再提及操作員管制,陳衍里認為是次立法為第一步,起碼要求列明醫療儀器的更多資訊,亦將會追蹤到儀器的入口商,期望政府未來會就管制儀器操作員進行立法。

九西劏房5452間 間牆鑽孔抖氣恐火警蔓延

on.cc東網專訊

香港大學科斯產權研究中心及關注基層住屋聯席去年11月至今年5月進行調查,探訪全港最多劏房的三區油尖旺、深水埗和九龍城324幢樓宇,88%有劏房單位,1742個單位劏成5452個房間,即平均每個屋宇單位被劏3.1間房間,最多有一劏9、10房的情況,大大增加大廈結構負荷,有結構及消防安全隱患。根據2011年建築物消防安全守則,劏房大廈的人口平均比大廈的居住負載量超出4成。

聯席選取個別樓層單位與圖則作比對,發現其中一層2個單位劏成7間房,單是計算牆身、廚廁及灶頭已經增加7500磅,尚未計入傢俬、地台加高位置,擔心會嚴重增加樓宇負荷。

團體到訪其中30間劏房,記錄內部違例情況,發現7成單位內的走廊闊度少於《消防條例》的限制1.05米,並堆滿雜物,如發生意外或會阻礙逃生。團體又發現不少劏房在間牆上開洞以作空氣流通,惟一旦發生火警,濃煙及火警會快速蔓延。

該研究中心講座教授鄒廣榮指,劏房會增加承載及電力負荷,安全問題最為重要,有機會發生火警及傳染病,成為都市計時炸彈,政府需要正視問題,建議可增建過渡性房屋。聯席的組織幹事任真建議政府促進大廈管理,設立業主立案法團,要求政府嚴格執行大廈安全條例,設立適切住屋條件,嚴格監管政府土地及盡快興建公屋和過渡性房屋。

港人長壽40年要建1200院舍? 政府推科技助居家安老

上星期幾晚都追睇TVB的節目[長壽百二歲], 每一個國家都有自己的老人問題:


日本的下流老人和老人監獄 !


韓國的老人高自殺率和老人劏房; 有老人說, 後悔太早派資產俾下一代, 當初仔女還會俾錢和來睇自己, 依家自己乜都無 !


香港老人在老人院俾人綁住, 因為人手短缺 ! 所以要揀都唔會揀老人院啦 !

依家本人隔離屋都有一對老年夫妻和工人租用, 睇來好似是來之國內, 在大時大節會有人來探望, 所以居家安老是可行的 !


on.cc東網專訊

香港正面對人口高齡化的挑戰,勞工及福利局局長羅致光今(15日)撰寫網誌表示,香港85歲或以上人口到2041年是2016年的3倍,到2066年是4.4倍,反映未來對醫療及安老服務需求增加的幅度,而以此推算單是2037至2047年的10年間,便需要興建458間資助安老院,但若由現時至2058年的40年間,若按同樣的需求率,更要興建1200間資助安老院。

不過他指出,上述推算很大可能仍會低估了面對的挑戰,例如1995年推算2056年的65歲或以上人口是18.5%,但到2017年更新推算,2056年65歲或以上人口的比率卻是36%;2007年推算2016年的人均壽命,男性是80.6歲,女性是86.3歲,但到了2016年,人均壽命卻是男性81.3歲,女性87.3歲。而推算失準的主要原因,是常用的統計方法低估了香港人長壽增長的速度。

他續指,目前的資助安老院平均有約18%的個人護理員空缺,而過半數的個人護理員已年過50,而且到2041年社會需要多3倍的護理員,惟由2023年起香港勞動人口會開始下降,因應上述各點,科技應用是主要策略考慮之一。

他解釋稱,應用科技可以協助長者更容易居家安老,更可以提升安老服務的效能,減低人手壓力,所以政府成立了10億港元的「樂齡及康復創科應用基金」,支援服務機構購置/租借或試用科技產品,目標是於今年第四季開始運作。

2018年7月14日 星期六

加入金銀甲的新人必讀

投資乜都好, 一定要先識基本知識, 所以最好先睇完本網誌成個[投資金銀手冊]後先好落場買野 !
投資實金實銀, 一唔訓身, 二唔借錢, 三只用閒錢買貨 !

想易套現就買實金(註:實金差價大, 也不大適宜短炒的), 而實銀是長線投資 !!
 

實銀心急放就拿去上環忠記溶金舖一定可以套現, 不過只拿回純銀價, 可能靚野會俾返多少少錢你, 而想高價放就拿去網拍 !

世上無 sure win, 也無不勞而獲, 唔經分析亂投資後果自負, 到時輸錢唔好怨任何人 !

收藏幣介紹

本人已開多個[收藏幣介紹]分區來貼收藏幣, 唔係個[投資金銀手冊]會變得太長, 導致想睇實金實銀知識的人須睇多好多文貼 !

低溢價幣如楓葉/鷹楊/愛樂和增值幣如澳洲生肖會留在[投資金銀手冊]分區, 雖然收藏幣也可以變為增值幣, 而低溢價幣和增值幣也可以變為收藏幣 !


新人開始買實金實銀時, 多數會去計價買邊隻實貨會最平, 但之後買下買下就會愈買愈高溢價金銀幣, 而最後只為靚而買不再理價錢 !

近來發現, 原來有一班人是由收藏開始才接觸金銀幣, 所以收藏幣是有出路的, 不過一定要限制自己唔好中曬收藏毒癮買太多和太貴的金銀幣, 因為自己出發點是投資 !

所以買收藏幣, 只會選又有特色而又唔太貴的金銀幣來買 !

日本政府委員會批准 福島核電站棄儲水罐

on.cc東網專訊

福島核災距今已經逾7年,其遺留下來的問題仍有待解決。負責處理核災問題的委員會周五(13日)表示,福島第一核電站的污水淨化後,產生了大量含放射物質氚的水。政府將研究新的處理污水方法,避免繼續將水儲存在罐內。

按照現時做法,工作人員會將含有污染物的水存入罐中。委員會在當日的會議上表示,政府不應再將污水儲入罐中,要以其他方式處理污水,包括排放至大海等。委員會又表示,現時必須取出第一核電站1至3號機組的燃料碎片,使其進入穩定狀態。

委員會定出分別於下月30日及31日,先後在福岡縣富岡町、郡山市及東京都舉行聽證會,商討輻射水的處理方法及時間表等。

You Now Can't Leave The U.S. Unless The IRS Lets You

www.zerohedge.com

Authored by Ryan McMaken via The Mises Institute,

When it comes to human migration, nearly everything we hear nowadays in relation to the United States and Europe is related to immigration into North America and Europe.

This is not surprising since government have always attempted to "monopolize the legitimate means of movement" as noted by historian John Torpey. For Torpey, author of The Invention of the Passport: Surveillance, Citizenship and the State, a preferred method of "regulating international movement" has been the passport. Wendy McElroy puts things less subtly when she describes the passport as a tool the state can use to "exert social control by refusing travel to 'enemies of the state.'"

It should not be surprising, then, that the US government is now cracking down on Americans who have outstanding tax bills — by holding their passports hostage. This could affect more than 360,000 Americans.

Former Congressman Bob Barr notes this week :

In an extremely troubling move three years ago, the Republican-controlled Congress handed the Internal Revenue Service the power to strip individuals of one of the most important and tangible rights possessed by American citizens – their passports. The Service is now starting to use this hammer.

Barr rightly points out that, given we already know the IRS uses its power to target political enemies, this new power of the agency is especially troubling.

He also asks how long other agencies might demand similar power from Congress, such as the power to stop a citizen's ability to "secure a driver’s license, obtain[...] a loan from a federally-insured financial institution, or clear[...] a background check prior to purchasing a firearm?"

These sorts of powers have long been used by abusive and authoritarian states. But the ability to regulate movement through emigration and travel controls are especially attractive to states.

The US, of course, has long been especially contemptuous of potential emigrants, as "the United States is one of only two countries (the other being Eritrea) that taxes its citizens no matter whether they reside." This acts as a sizable disincentive to Americans looking to move abroad.

And now, if you fail to pay taxes while living outside the US, the IRS can simply revoke your passport if you return to the states.

A Brief History of Emigration Controls

With this sort of behavior, the US government has joined the long list of governments which over the centuries have attempted to use their coercive powers to control the flow of emigrants outside their jurisdictions. Historian David Fitzgerald has noted:

While the academic tendency to ignore emigration policies implies that they either don’t exist or don’t matter, all major European states had significant emigration controls at some point.. States can execute those who attempt to leave, force emigrants to pay stiff exit fees, refuse to issue passports, prevent departure with personal property, and strip emigrants of their nationality. ... Discursive techniques are also available, like publicly deriding emigrants as traitors to the motherland. Local governments have multiple pressure points where they could limit the transmission of vital records, assistance with lost or stolen remittances, and other bureaucratic transactions with emigrants. In short, governments have a potentially large and effective tool kit to make emigration an unpleasant experience, especially as many emigrants leave home with at least the illusion of returning

We don't hear much about emigration controls anymore, though, thanks to the (partial) success of laissez-faire liberalism:

Most Western European states stopped trying to restrict emigration in the nineteenth century because of a shift from a merchantilist policy of hoarding population to laissez-faire capitalism allowing workers greater freedom of movement to sell their labor, and the related ascendancy of a right to exit in liberal political philosophy.

Fitzgerald's work specifically focuses on pre-1970s Mexico as a case study in emigration control. Mexican nationalists had long yearned to prevent emigration by a variety of means, fearing both domestic labor shortages and "national humiliation" caused by large outflows of emigrants. In 1904, for example, "Mexican federal and state authorities ordered municipal governments to stop issuing travel documents used by U.S.-bound workers." Similar measures were used over the years, but Mexico's liberal constitution, and the realities of a decentralized political system, made it difficult to control emigrants.

Mexico was hardly alone in its nationalism-inspired opposition to emigration, especially during the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century.

In Europe, efforts to refuse emigration outright, and in general, were usually rejected, but efforts were made to prosecute those who facilitated emigration.

In the late nineteenth century, for example, these so-called "emigration agents," who usually were in the business of helping people re-locate to the United States, sometimes faced criminal prosecution. According to Tara Zahra in The Great Departure: Mass Migration from Eastern Europe and the Making of the Free World, "In 1914, over three thousand agents faced criminal charges in the Austrian half of the monarchy... They were clearly orchestrated as a warning to would-be emigrants about the hazards of leaving home."

Often the agents were accused of human trafficking or of swindling their customers. It is likely that these accusations were true some of the time, but the the motivation behind efforts to discredit these travel agents appears to have been more nationalism than consumer protection.

According to Zahra, over time, these attacks on emigration agents were only one part of a wide variety of anti-emigration laws in Europe:

The English Passenger Vessel Act of 1803, initially intended to monitor shipping firms, were gradually expanded to regulate emigration agents, labor brokers, and rooming houses, in order to protect migrants from unscrupulous brokers. Laws passed in France in 1854 and Belgium in 1876 required emigration agents to obtain licenses. The Swiss government was the first to ban advertising for emigration completely. Closer to home, Bohemian authorities banned emigration agencies in the 1850s. Other laws regulating emigration followed in Japan (1896), Germany (1897), Italy (1901), and Hungary (1903). The Hungarian law was the most restrictive to date, and it became a model for legislation across East Central Europe after World War I.

In the Hungarian legislation in question, "Hungarian men were not legally permitted to emigrate after their seventeenth birthday without written permissions from the Defense and Interior Ministries.The stated purpose of many of these laws was the "protection" of citizens who exposed themselves to potential danger and impoverishment by emigrating.

Anticipating the American policy of revoking passports of alleged tax delinquents, German states required that emigrants "settle all debts and taxes" before being allowed to leave.

In some cases, as in Russia, an "emigrant" passport was available only after paying a stiff "fee" and the document was a one-way ticket out of the country. Return was forbidden, and ensured an emigrant was cut off from family ties. It also meant the emigrant risked statelessness if unable to enter the destination country.

The Russian distaste for emigration, of course, brings to mind the years of the Iron Curtain when emigration controls were used across Eastern Europe. Indeed, when modern people think of recent emigration-control efforts, they tend to think of the Berlin Wall and the communist world in general. But these controls weren't limited to communist countries. The Nationalist Chinese regime in Taiwan was known to use emigration controls up until the 1980s. 

Often, these laws were selectively enforced. Emigrants with property were often stripped of their property or simply barred from emigrating. Less desire potential emigrants were allowed, or even encouraged to leave. In multi-national Austria-Hungary, for example, local officials often encouraged minority ethnic groups to leave, in order to solidify the majority of the locally dominant ethnic group. The was sometimes then accompanied by efforts by ethnic nationalists to prevent emigration by members of the locally-dominant ethnic group. Then as now, migration policy, whether involving immigrants or emigrants, was employed with the hop of manipulating demographics.

The American Embrace of Emigration Surveillance and Control

In turning to greater use of emigration controls, the US is embracing ever greater control of its domestic population and its resources. Such oversight of US citizens, however, was almost completely unknown in the nineteenth century. As McElroy notes:

passports were not mandatory [in the United States] except for a period during the American Civil War (1861–1865) and during World War I (1914–1918). The latter can be seen as the beginning of the current American passport. On December 15, 1915, President Woodrow Wilson issued Executive Order No. 2285, "[r]equiring American citizens traveling abroad to procure passports" and advising the "Secretary of State, in co-operation with the Secretary of the Treasury, will make arrangements for the inspection of passports of all persons, American or foreign, leaving this country."

Passport law varied between permissive and restrictive until World War II, after which passport mandates became nearly universal. As is so often the case, the state uses war and foreign policy interests as excuses to crack down on domestic freedoms.

Nor did taxation of non-citizens exist until the twentieth century with the advent of the income tax. There had been efforts to tax all emigrating American citizens indefinitely before this. But it was only after the passage of the sixteenth amendment, and the Supreme Court's ruling in Cook v Tait, that taxation of American emigrants became well-established in American law.

During the Cold War, politicians were often keen on comparing the United States to the Soviet Union and pointing out how many freedoms Americans enjoyed compared to the Soviet. Free emigration was one of the freedoms.

In the United States of 2018, though, you're only free to leave if the IRS says so — and as long as you keep paying taxes to the US government indefinitely, no matter where you are. Many of the anti-emigration laws of nineteenth-century Europe looks positively enlightened in comparison.

港首推區塊鏈培訓促科企發展

文匯報

香港文匯報訊(實習記者 黃懿汶)香港科技園公司,聯通香港應用科技研究院及分子區塊鏈中心有限公司,昨宣佈在環球創業飛躍學院首推區塊鏈創企培育計劃,計劃預計8月開始全球招募,並於11月正式展開,費用全免,明年2月舉辦展示日,展現成果。

香港科技園公司科技創業培訓計劃主管莫偉軒指,開辦課程是計劃的第一步,首先希望課程在3個月內,有不少於14堂課程,包括三大範疇,商業培訓、差距分析、專業服務,又指希望做到小班教學,約5至10班, 最多12班。

課程涵蓋範疇廣 

第二步是參考第一期的課程成效等,再作調整,相信參加計劃的公司,無論是科技方面,或是市場和融資方面,都有得益。

技術含量評選關鍵 

莫偉軒解釋,今次計劃想培訓有實戰經驗的初創企業,所以改名學院。他又指,評選公司準則,最重要是看技術含量,其次是團隊合作等,公司的財務表現排最後。

他表示,計劃是想幫助有潛力的公司發展,增加企業能力,不希望是用資金吸引或直接提供幫助。

在區塊鏈應用方面,香港英諾天使投資脈絡主席譚偉豪表示,區塊鏈的第一個應用,一定是金融,其次就是知識產權,其他國家在幾十年前,知識產權已經受到保護,但現在內地知識產權有一個問題,就是太多了,在內地的大力推動下,有很多專利被註冊,但專利的認可性很低,內地稱為「不是核心的專利」,代表那些專利是轉化不了金錢,因此擁有太多知識產權,未必是好事。

促降專利註冊成本 

另外,譚偉豪也指,註冊專利的費用高,他曾為一間大學做過專利審計,這間大學有約600個專利,平均一年用幾萬元,長遠很浪費金錢。

他指,擁有的知識產權,但沒法有效地將專利發放出去,就會變成負擔,區塊鏈可令註冊專利更有效和低成本。

明年辦成果展 

其中一個例子是北京 Context Box,是數碼音樂及電影的平台 ,作者一旦上載音樂及電影,即時受加密保護,免被非法下載,每次下載,會馬上收錢,又可以使用區塊鏈網上付款,及認證上載者和用戶的身份。

環球創業飛躍學院首推區塊鏈創企培育計劃,計劃預計8月開始全球招募,並於11月正式展開,費用全免,明年2月舉辦展示日,展現成果。