What do you think of this?

I found this in one of my fren’s pix in Friendster while surfing around a few days back. Kinda funny I guess. But is it true?

If only we learn this kinda Mathematical equations in class….maths will be so much simpler…..

If you read my previous post, I wrote about all my grandiose plans on all my studies that I’m so gonna catch up today.

But those plans just simply remained as plans. I did not accomplish any of them today. I have another few more hours for today to make amends, and that so I believe is to at least finish reading the Spectator magazine that I borrowed from school library. It’s due tomorrow.

I have read half the magazine and it’s really insightful on the [tag]Just War[/tag] theory. It explains to me the proportionality measurement that works as a measuring tool to determine whether a war is justifiable or not.

There are two main parts of the theory. First, it states that if the possible harm created from the war is more than the possible good which will result, then the war is not justifiable. Secondly, it also states that if the collateral damage it creates from an attach on the opponent is more than the military value of the target, then it is also not justifiable.

Most countries subscribe to the Just War theory in determining whether or not a war should be waged or not.

But this theory of measurement has several drawbacks. First, how do you give a measurement of proportionality on losses substantiated from the warring parties i.e. own and enemy? Secondly, it is also hard to determine the possible harm because there are many damages that are unintentional.

****

Anyway, that’s some short snipped on the Just War theory…Cool stuff….

Well, if you are wondering what happened today that made me abandoned all my grandiose plans, here’s the reason. I went out with my aunt and family who came down to Singapore.

They took a one month break from China and are now spending a few days in JB.

I met them at Queensway Shopping Centre and we had lunch there. Then we made our way to the Haw Par Villa….What’s that? More update + pixs in the next post…. =)

This will be the super theory of the year for me. I just learnt about this rule which states that 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes…

This principle was introduced by Quality Management pioneer, [tag]Dr. Joseph Juran[/tag]. He named the principle after the Italian economist, [tag]Vilfredo Pareto[/tag]who observed that 80% of income in Italy went to 20% of the population.

For my fellow JC students, just in case you are wondering why the name Pareto sounds so familiar in Economics, well, he is the exact same guy who introduced the concept of Pareto Efficiency which states that once the welfare of society is maximised, it is impossible for one individual to be better off without another individual being worse off.

This [tag]80/20 Rule[/tag] or also known as the [tag]Pareto Principle[/tag] has been applied to many areas. It is a common rule of thumb in business; e.g., “80% of your sales come from 20% of your clients.”

Dr. Joseph Juran recognized this universal principle he called the “vital few and trivial many” and reduced it to writing.

The original observation of wealth in Italy occurs in many different and mundane aspects too. For example, we wear our 20% most favoured clothes about 80% of the time and we spend 80% of the time with 20% of our acquaintances.

If you remembered last week, during the heat of the exam period, I tried to plot a graph relating effort, result and time? I call it the Effort-Result-Time Concept. Click on the link to see the graph.

Well, back then I didn’t know about this concept. A visit to my uncle’s place enlightened me about this and for students out there, I believe this is extremely true…

80% of the grades come from 20% of the effort. So why work so hard to get 100% when 80% is enough for an A? 20% of effort….Much less than what I had anticipated…Lol

Before all you people start buying axes and start throwing them at me, let me make this clear first. This [tag]graph[/tag] doesn’t apply to all. I plotted this graph because I saw some relationship on certain teenagers between the [tag]number of pimples[/tag] on their heads and the amount of [tag]stress[/tag] that they are undergoing…

Plotting (or designing) graphs are fun….I’ve plotted 2 other graphs during my exam period. You can check it out here and here.

I must be too bored studying….Living in a [tag]hostel[/tag] in Singapore is insanely scary. I have mid-years exams coming soon and everyone’s studying like mad, except me. Read here for more info on the scary hostel I’m in now.

Anyway, as the title suggest, I have plotted a graph to illustrate when is the best time to [tag]buy or sell your second hand cars[/tag]. Take a look at the graph here.

Let me explain the graph. On the left axis (and the black curved line) is the price of 2nd hand cars. The reason the price decreases exponentially is quite common sense. We all know the rate of depreciation for any new car value is at the greatest during the initial stage after buying right? And the rate of depreciation slowly decreases till it reaches a point where the car is not worth selling as a car anymore but would garner more value if it were to be sold as scrap metal….

As for the right axis (and the blue curved line), it refers to the maintenance cost of cars. Assuming this car has no factory defect, the cost of maintenance at the initial stage is minimal. But as the car gets older, and is subject to more wear and tear, the maintenance cost will increase exponentially.

The horizontal axis represents time. And it can be observed from the graph that there is a point of intersection between the two curves. I’ve marked them as Eq on both axes.

So when is the best time to buy 2nd hand cars? On my analysis, it is best if we buy 2nd hand cars somewhere around the big red dot on the black curve

Why do I say so? It’s because somewhere around that red dot, the cost of acquiring the 2nd hand car will not depreciate much more in the near future (or the depreciation value will be negligible)…Also, since the car is pretty new, the cost of maintenance will not increase very steeply yet….

In other words, my theory is that somewhere around that red dot, the depreciating value of the car and the maintenance cost of the car will be at the minimum to the new buyer.

If we buy a new car (or anywhere to the left of the red dot), the depreciating value of the car will be extremely great over time.

So does it mean that it is the best time to buy a 2nd hand car as the price is half its original value? Or 2/3rd it’s original value? That I’m not so sure because that will require further analysis of car prices which I do not have the time to do…

Then, what significance does the Eq on the graph bear other than the intersecting point of the two curves? The Eq here stands for the turning point when it is of the best interest to the seller to sell his/her car.

At this point, the value of the car has depreciated to such an extent that over time, the value will not decrease significantly anymore. However, this point marks the point when the car will start getting into more problems and maintenance cost will start to increase exponentially.

As a buyer, it is not a good idea to buy cars over here (unless you don’t mind the increasing maintenance cost) but simply because of the low value of the car.

****

This is just some analysis based purely on monetary value. Of course I did not factor in many other variables when buying 2nd hand cars such as the mileage, whether it’s accident free, whether it has some factory defects etc….

This graph is just some opinion of mine regarding goods which depreciate in value over time such as cars. I have this idea in mind that to stretch your cash, that is to lose the least amount of money over time, it is better if we buy 2nd hand goods for goods which has [tag]depreciating value[/tag] such as cars, cameras, handphones etc. And in the opposite sense, it is better to buy new goods for goods which have appreciating value over time such as land, property etc

Here’s the deal….The left axis and the line in black signifies EFFORT PUT IN…It ranges from zero effort all the way to infinity effort…
The right axis and the light blue shaded area signifies the RESULT you will get meaning your exam marks…..n it ranges from zero to a maximum of 100%
And this effort/result graph is in respect to time on the horizontal axis….

As you can see, we can put in a constant increasing amount of effort into studying for exams…..But our results will not be increasing at a proportionate rate with respect to amount of effort put in….

At the initial stage, we can see that the result obtained is more than proportionate than the effort put in, but at the later stage we will realise that it drops till it reaches a limit.

And once we have reached the limit, no further effort put in will increase our result….I call this the cap or ceiling….

So in an ideal situation, to enjoy life and to still score the maximum obtainable result for an individual, we shall all strive for the Eq (Equilibrium position), that is putting in Eq amount of effort using Eq amount of time that will bring maximum yield (result)….

With the Eq position, we will reach the maximum capability of our individual self….

And of course this graph/theory/concept doesn’t factor in efficiency….meaning the amount/percentage of information absorbed/understood in a certain period of time.

And one last drawback about this graph/theory/concept is that it is extremely hard to determine the Eq position….

What shall I call this concept? The [tag]effort-result-time concept[/tag]? Bleh….doesn’t sound very sophisticated….Come give me some techno-sophisticated name for this new concept of mine…..Gives it more weight and credibility….

Haha….that’s my 2 cents worth….I’m stressed out looking at people studying….Everyone’s been studying but here I am blogging and writing about this new concept of mine…..

Any use for my exam? Probably not…But one thing’s for sure, I enjoy doing this…..and that’s more important in life….to be happy