Best Option for the WWTP in Regina May Be Neither DBFOM Nor DBB

A Variant of P3 Models Other than DBFOM

By Daniel Huang

The new regulations including the federal Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations (the "Regulations") on managing wastewater effluent under the Fisheries Act[i], add to municipal governments' existing legal obligations to bring up wastewater facilities to new standards in fairly short order. Given the cost, size and scope of the infrastructure needed, P3s pose to municipalities as an attractive and cost-effective implementation model to meet the new challenges.

According to a newly released report from the Conference Board of Canada, out of 42 P3 public infrastructure projects in the past three years, 22 were finished on time, the report shows. Thirteen came in early, while seven were completed late. The City of Saskatoon has also taken note of the approach, opting to go the P3 route for a future Civic Operations Centre for its public transit fleet. Those that see positive outcomes typically are not publicized, such as the Lac la Biche (in AB) wastewater treatment plant, completed in 2011, and a water treatment facility that came online in 2000 in Moncton, N.B[ii]. A study from the United Kingdom found that P3 projects typically finished one per cent earlier than scheduled and with virtually no cost overruns, while government-led projects finished 17 per cent late with cost overruns of 47 per cent[iii]. In May 2003, the Economist compared services in England to those in Scotland, where water remains a nationalized industry, and in Northern Ireland, where water is managed by a government department. It found that English utilities score better on drinking water quality tests, comply more often with sewage discharge regulations, and lose less water to leakage than do Scottish or Irish utilities. Furthermore, English utilities provide these superior services at lower costs. Average household bills are lower in England than in Scotland or Northern Ireland. Most striking is the difference in commercial water bills: A medium-sized Scottish office pays 16 times more for water than its English counterpart. The Economist’s conclusion was inescapable: “Private water firms beat the public sector on all counts.”[iv] Rich international evidence shows that P3s substantially outperform conventional government-led projects both in terms of cost and completion time.

While the government still owns the infrastructure and is ultimately responsible for ensuring related services are up to standard, the government can reduce or withhold payment if the private partner does not deliver. Goals in terms of cost savings (through use of economies of scale, )capacity, efficiency and effectiveness can be achieved while meeting the public need. Therefore, a P3 is not necessarily a bad thing.

Nevertheless, there are higher private financing costs and risk premiums that the city will ultimately have to pay the private company. Some would say that perhaps in principle a P3 can work, but so much depends on the specifics of the agreement negotiated between the City and private partners. In other words, a P3 might be cheaper, but it might be more expensive, even with the federal government subsidy. It just depends on the specifics of the contract. Risk might be mitigated, but how and to what degree may depend on the specifics.

If the City is SO forthcoming....then they should RELEASE the redacted portions of the Deloitte report, and then be prepared to have a REAL debate, in public, with the Yes side. Please bear in mind that the city manager has already set forward a $340,000 “education” budget to fund advertisement encouraging residents to say no, apart from the $120,000 set up for non-partisan referendum advertising[v].

While the taxpayers forego $460,000, they should at least expect something to see. The author suggests having a public debate at the Council on TV before holding the refe-rendum as simply voting DBB or DBFOM may not be a good idea. If the government does not lose money but profit from the Regina project, the taxpayers will be better off than if they are required to pay more if there are unexpected cost overruns or other unexpected costs. The difference of the interest, the extra money lost from leasing, the lack of transparency and the bundling of P3 Canada makes us to reconsider the choice of DBFOM. The BEST OPTION is to combine the outsourcing part of DBFOM and the long-term financing part of the City, the best from each model. The management model is similar to that of Lac La Biche County, AB, which is a successful example. The author suggests outsourcing the project for the designing and building stage and leasing the plant for the operating and maintenance stage. In the author's outsourcing model, the risk of additional costs is borne by the private sector partner, while the government interest rate bargain can be still taken advantage of. Also, the City can benefit from a bonding fee with a private contractor for the first two stages (please note that partial financing can be used if there is not a bonding fee so as to give the private contractor a restraint, which is reflected by the case of upgrades to the Evan-Thomas, Victoria and Sudbury facilities[vi]) and from a leasing fee for the next two stages.

Let us look at the next table. We assume that the borrowing amount will be $118.3 million, and we will use the City’s borrowing rate 3.82% as the discount rate for DBB and 5.82%for DBFOM. The contract is for 30 years, and it is supposed that the City’s deal structuring cost is at 0.5%, and 8% for the private sector (with 4% for each party, besides the interest rate of 5.82%), federal funding of $58.5 million can be obtained for DBFOM, and that the plant can be leased at $5 million per year since the wastewater can be sold for $5 million annually to potash companies in north Saskatchewan[vii], then we can have the following results:

Project Management Models Comparison (in Million Dollars)

	DBB	DBFOM	Outsourcing without Private Financing
Amount Borrowed	118.30	118.30	118.30
Annual Borrowing Rate	3.82%	5.82%	3.82%
Annual Borrowing Cost	4.52	6.89	4.52
NPV of Borrowing Cost	79.90	96.69	79.90
NPV of Blended Borrowing Cost	198.20	214.99	198.20
Deal Structuring Cost	0.59	9.46	0.59
Federal Funding		-58.5
NPV of Leasing Revenue	0	0	-88.38
Net Total Cost	198.79	165.95	109.82

          Note: Much of the data of this table was based on the reports by Hugh Mackenzie and of Deloitte LLP though the author has changed the net present value calculation significantly[viii].

 

Here it is clearly demonstrated the government should not forgo the financing part as it is more economical if the government handles it. Moncton ended up paying $31 million for a $23 million water treatment plant due to the higher borrowing cost than the City. Also, the government need to take control of the project. Due to lack of control in the Hamilton wastewater treatment project, in addition to the workforce being cut in half within 18 months, millions of litres of raw sewage spilled into the Hamilton Harbour, homes were flooded and major additional costs were incurred[ix].

For supervision, a committee consisted mostly of elected members from independent organizations (which may include government officials in charge of different related departments) may be necessary to supervise the project and make decisions on some important issues.

In a word, though most P3s can actually enhance the ability of government to deliver core public services on-time and on-budget, while maintaining appropriate controls with the procuring government, an efficient, ecologically sound, environmentally friendly (eg using the system of Bear River Solar Aquatics Waste Water Treatment Plant in Nova Scotia[x]) and socially beneficial, accountable and sustainable project with the most increase in social welfare would be a priority.

---

[i] Wastewater Systems Effluent Regulations, SOR/2012-139; Fisheries Act, RSC 1985, c. F-14.

[ii] Vanessa Brown: P3s: Risks & Rewards, Leader Post, August 29, 2013.

[iii] Hugh MacIntyre and Charles Lammam: P3 Best Bet for Wastewater Project, Leader Post, August 6, 2013.

[iv] John Peet, Priceless: A Survey of Water, Economist, July 19, 2003, Page 6; Water Industry: Frozen Taps, Economist, May 31, 2003, p. 56.

[v] Marco Vigliotti: Plant Referendum on Sept. 25, Page 3, Regina Metro, August 15, 2013.

[vi] Catherine Doyle and Timothy J. Murphy: P3s in Wastewater Treatment Facilities: Opportunities for Municipalities, Nov, 2012. See more at: http://www.mcmillan.ca/P3s-in-wastewater-treatment-facilities-opportunities-for-municipalities#sthash.O8vpxymC.dpuf

[vii] Brent Patterson. 3 December 2012. “Regina Sells its Water for Potash Mining”, http://canadians.org/blog/?p=18251. 

[viii] Deloitte. 22 January 2013. “City of Regina Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion & Upgrade Project, Summary of Delivery Model Assessment”, Page 25. Hugh Mackenzie. 6 May 2013. “Flushing Money away”, Page 17.

[ix]The Council of Canadians. 29 August 2013. “Conference Board of Canada Report Sweeps P3 Problems under the Rug”, http://www.canadians.org/blog/conference-board-canada-report-sweeps-p3-problems-under-rug.

[x] Government of Canada: Bear River Solar Aquatics, Aug. 13, 2013. Please also see the website: www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/eppp-archive/...nova/bearriver.html.

Foot Massage: History and Functions

                               

Foot massage or foot reflexology has a Chinese origin which may have dated back to more than 3,000 years ago and has been used in the prevention and cure of many health ailments. Some say foot massage dated back to ancient Egyptian times due to archaeological findings in cave drawings in Egypt.

The principle of foot massage rests in the premise that the meridian network connects all tissues, organs and cells in our body. Each organ in the body is connected to a specific reflex point on the foot through the intermediary of 300 nerves. This principle is not in congruence with western allopathic medicine. Western medicine sees the foot as a body part comprising of bones, ligaments and joints. However, foot massage is fast gaining popularity and acceptance as an alternative health treatment, and fans of foot massage believe it can cure not only colds and minor ailments, but also more serious ailments. These ailments include liver dysfunction, constipation problems, chronic headaches, skin allergies, etc.

While Western medicine promises speedy recovery of all unpleasant symptoms, foot massage therapy can be slow and gradual. Like most Oriental medical techniques, foot reflexology is a holistic treatment. It concentrates on treating the whole person rather than just the symptoms of one particular ailment.

A trained foot reflexologist can put pressure on different meridians or energy lines on the sole and side of the feet to determine the cause of illness. By using pressure to these reflex points, a foot massage is good for stimulating the activity of internal organs, and improving blood and lymph circulation. The top to bottom well being of a person can be taken care of through the foot.

Chinese medicine foot health has two characteristics: one is that anyone can practice anywhere, and the methods of pushing, rubbing and percussion are easy to grasp and non-time-consuming; the second is its scientific and instrumental nature based on the theory of traditional Chinese medicine and the related experience in diagnosis and treatment. 

                              脚底按摩：历史与功效

足部按摩或者足底按摩用于防治疾病在中国有着3000多年的历史。根据埃及考古发现的洞穴壁画，也有人说足部按摩可追溯至古埃及时代。

足部按摩的原理基于这样一个前提，即经络网络连接到我们的身体的所有组织、器官和细胞。体内各器官又通过300根神经线被连接到人脚上特定的反射点。这一原则与西方的对抗疗法是不一致的。西医认为，脚是包括骨头、韧带 和关节的身体的一部分。但是，足部按摩作为一种替代的保健疗法的知名度和认可度不断增强，足部按摩的爱好者相信它不仅能治感冒和其他轻微的疾病，还可治更 严重的疾病。这些疾病包括肝功能障碍、便秘、慢性头痛和皮肤过敏等。

虽然西医疗法许诺早日解除所有不愉快的症状，足部按摩疗效却是缓慢和渐进的。正如其他东方医疗技术一样，足底按摩是一个整体性的治疗。它侧重于治疗整个人，而不仅仅缓解一个特定疾病的症状。

一个训练有素的脚底感应按摩师可以挤压脚底和侧面不同的经络或能量线，以确定病因。通过对这些反射点施加压力，足部按摩可以刺激内脏的活动，并改善血液和淋巴循环。从头到脚的身体状况是可以通过脚来照顾得到的。

中医脚底养生有两个特点：其一是任何人都可以随时随地实行，按压搓和敲击的方法很容易掌握，费时不多；其二是以中医的理论和诊治经验为基础，具有科学性和可操作性。

A Third Way of Doing the Regina WWTP Project

Alternative Analysis of the Regina Wastewater Treatment Project

By Daniel Huang

 

Executive Summary

The author suggests having a public debate at the Council on TV before holding the referendum. Simply voting DBB or DBFOM may not be a good idea.

There are not many notable successful examples of DBFOM (note that Deloitte also admits that there are few examples of DBFOMs in the water/wastewater sector) in the water sector in Canada. From the Deloitte Report, one present project is the Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade at the capital cost of 15 million (which is insignificant) in the Town of Taber, AB. 

If the government does not lose money but profit from the Regina project, the taxpayers will be better off than if they are required to pay more if there are unexpected cost overruns. The difference of the interest, the extra money lost from leasing, the lack of transparency and the bundling of P3 Canada makes us to reconsider the choice of DBFOM.

The author suggests outsourcing the project for the designing and building stage and leasing the plant for the operating and maintenance stage. It is actually contracting the right to operate the utility to a private party, while ownership of public utilities is still in the government’s hands. Under normal circumstances, the assignee is generated through open competitive bidding other than one to one negotiation. The main objective of leasing is to reduce the operating costs of the government and consumer usage charges as leasing is granted to those who meet the technical and financial requirements and who can provide the most services at the present rate. Public bidding increases competition pressures on businesses, and regular tenders on natural monopoly utilities concession form pre-contract competition. The example of German water companies’ management (such as outsourcing and making shares available to the public) can also be learned, so that our perspective can be broadened.

Private management can be more cost saving, efficient, accountable and even more beneficial to consumers. However, private management is not the aim but a means to encourage competition, improve the quality, increase service access and give customers more choices.

For supervision, a committee consisted mostly of elected members from independent organizations (which may include government officials in charge of different related departments) may be necessary to supervise the project and make decisions on some important issues. 

What should also be noted is how much of the old plant can be utilized and how the workers in the present plant will be restructured to both meet the upgrade’s need and stabilize the employees. Also, an ecologically sound, environmentally friendly and socially beneficial and accountable project would be a priority.

Bill Gates: 3 Things I've Learned from Warren Buffett

3 Things I've Learned from Warren Buffett

Not many people get to ask Warren Buffett for advice on a regular basis. I feel very lucky in that regard: The dialogue has been invaluable to me, and not only at Microsoft ... Here are three things I've learned from Warren over the years:

I’m looking forward to sharing posts from time to time about things I’ve learned in my career at Microsoft and the Gates Foundation. (I also post frequently on my blog.)

Last month, I went to Omaha for the annual Berkshire Hathaway shareholders meeting. It’s always a lot of fun, and not just because of the ping-pong matches and the newspaper-throwing contest I have with Warren Buffett. It’s also fun because I get to learn from Warren and gain insight into how he thinks.

Here are three things I’ve learned from Warren over the years:

1. It’s not just about investing.

The first thing people learn from Warren, of course, is how to think about investing. That’s natural, given his amazing track record. Unfortunately, that’s where a lot of people stop, and they miss out on the fact that he has a whole framework for business thinking that is very powerful. For example, he talks about looking for a company’s moat—its competitive advantage—and whether the moat is shrinking or growing. He says a shareholder has to act as if he owns the entire business, looking at the future profit stream and deciding what it’s worth. And you have to be willing to ignore the market rather than follow it, because you want to take advantage of the market’s mistakes—the companies that have been underpriced.

I have to admit, when I first met Warren, the fact that he had this framework was a real surprise to me. I met him at a dinner my mother had put together. On my way there, I thought, “Why would I want to meet this guy who picks stocks?” I thought he just used various market-related things—like volume, or how the price had changed over time—to make his decisions. But when we started talking that day, he didn’t ask me about any of those things. Instead he started asking big questions about the fundamentals of our business. “Why can’t IBM do what Microsoft does? Why has Microsoft been so profitable?” That’s when I realized he thought about business in a much more profound way than I’d given him credit for.

2. Use your platform.

A lot of business leaders write letters to their shareholders, but Warren is justly famous for his. Partly that’s because his natural good humor shines through. Partly it’s because people think it will help them invest better (and they’re right). But it’s also because he’s been willing to speak frankly and criticize things like stock options and financial derivatives. He’s not afraid to take positions, like his stand on raising taxes on the rich, that run counter to his self-interest. Warren inspired me to start writing my own annual letter about the foundation’s work. I still have a ways to go before mine is as good as Warren’s, but it’s been helpful to sit down once a year and explain the results we’re seeing, both good and bad.

3. Know how valuable your time is.

No matter how much money you have, you can’t buy more time. There are only 24 hours in everyone’s day. Warren has a keen sense of this. He doesn’t let his calendar get filled up with useless meetings. On the other hand, he’s very generous with his time for the people he trusts. He gives his close advisers at Berkshire his phone number, and they can just call him up and he’ll answer the phone.

Although Warren makes a point of meeting with dozens of university classes every year, not many people get to ask him for advice on a regular basis. I feel very lucky in that regard: The dialogue has been invaluable to me, and not only at Microsoft. When Melinda and I started our foundation, I turned to him for advice. We talked a lot about the idea that philanthropy could be just as impactful in its own way as software had been. It turns out that Warren’s brilliant way of looking at the world is just as useful in attacking poverty and disease as it is in building a business. He’s one of a kind.

Photo: Bill Gates

我从沃伦·巴菲特那里学到的三样东西

没有多少人可以从巴菲特那里获得定期的建议。我觉得自己很幸运，在这方面的对话一直对我非常宝贵，而且不仅在微软...这里是我多年来从沃伦那里学来的三样东西：

我期待着不时分享我在微软职业生涯中和盖茨基金会学到的东西（我也经常在我的博客上发表文章）。

上个月，我去参加奥马哈一年一度的伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股东大会。它总是有很多乐趣，这不只是因为我有与巴菲特一起进行的乒乓球比赛和报纸投掷比赛。因为我有机会学习沃伦和洞察他的思维方式，这也使事情变得有趣。

这些年来我从沃伦那里学到了三样东西：

1、这不只是投资。

人们从沃伦那里学习的第一件事，当然是怎么考虑投资方面的事。因为他的惊人纪录，这是很自然的。不幸的是，有很多人就此驻足不前，从而忽略了一个他有一个非常强大的商业思维整体框架这样一个事实。例如，他谈到找一个公司的护城河，其竞争优势，它是萎缩还是增长的。他说，一名股东要像他拥有整个企业那样行事，寻找未来的利润流，决定什么是值得的。你必须愿意忽视市场，而不是顺从它，因为你想利用市场的错误，那些被低估了的公司。

我不得不承认，当我第一次见到沃伦，他有这个框架的事实对我是一个真正的惊喜。我见到他在一个我母亲宴请的一个饭局上。在我去那里的路上，我想，“为什么我要去见这个选股的家伙呢？”我想他只是利用各种市场相关的事情，如数量，或者价格如何随着时间变化，来作出他的决定。但是，当我们开始说话的那一天，他没有问我任何有关那些的东西。相反，他开始问有关我们业务基本面的重大问题。 “为什么不能IBM做微软在做的东西？微软为何如此有利可图？“这时候我意识到，他对企业的思维方式比我事先想象的要开阔的多。

2、使用你的平台

很多企业领导人写信给股东，但沃伦以他独有的信件出名。那可能部分是因为他天生的幽默感浸透其间，部分是人们认为这将有助于他们更好的投资（他们是对的）。这也许因为他能直言不讳，并批评类似股票期权和金融衍生品之类的东西。他并不害怕采取立场，比如与他的自我利益背道而驰的对富人的加税。沃伦启发我开始写我自己有关基金会工作的年度公开信。我仍然有许多要做才能使我的东西与沃伦相比是一样的好，但是每年一次坐下来就我们所看到的，包括好的和坏的东西作出解释，是非常有益的。

3、知道你的时间有多么宝贵

无论你有多少钱，你不能买更多的时间。每个人的一天只有24小时。沃伦对这一点非常敏锐。他不会让他的日程表被无用的会议所充满。另一方面，对于他信任的人，他的时间是非常慷慨的。他给他在伯克希尔的亲密顾问他的电话号码，他们就可以直接致电给他，而他会接听电话。

虽然沃伦每年确定会给几十个大学讲课，没有多少人会有机会定期获得他的咨询意见。在这方面我觉得自己很幸运：对话一直对我非常宝贵的，而这不仅仅是在微软方面。当我和梅琳达创办我们的基金会时，我向他讨教。我们谈了很多关于慈善事业的想法，认为它可以以自己的方式施加类似于软件曾经做到的那样的影响力。事实证明，沃伦卓越的世界观对于建立一个企业以及与贫穷和疾病作斗争，是一样有用的。他是出类拔萃的。

图片：比尔·盖茨

Canada's Start-up Visa Program Provides Quick Access to Entrepreneurs

Canadian Globally Unique Start-up Visa Program Implemented since April 1, Allowing Applicants Six Months to Obtain Permanent Resident Status

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney points out that "Canada is open for business to the world’s start-up entrepreneurs," he stressed,  "Innovation and entrepreneurship are essential drivers of the Canadian economy. That is why we are actively recruiting foreign entrepreneurs - those who can build companies here in Canada that will create new jobs, spur economic growth and compete on a global scale - with our new start-up visa."

 

The "entrepreneurial visa" is the best weapon for Canada to compete internationally to introduce entrepreneurs. Although the United States made ​​a similar "business visa" scheme earlier than in Canada, but it is still in the Congress discussion stage, which does not become a bill, and this put Canada ahead.

The Start-up Visa Program requires, in addition for participating foreign entrepreneurs to be recognized by "venture capital funds" or "angel investors" organizations, their language skills are also required to meet "Canadian Language Standards" (CLB) Benchmark 5 in listening, speaking, reading and writing, and must have at least one year of post-secondary education.

The Start-Up Visa Program is a pilot program that will run for five years. Immigration Department said, applicants who participate in the "Designated Venture Capital Fund", will have to invest a minimum amount of $ $200,000, but those who participate in "angel investors" organizations, the minimum investment amount is $75,000.

(For more information, please see:  http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/releases/2013/2013-01-24.asp)

加拿大全球首创的创业签证计划已于4月1日开始，申请人最快可在6个月内取得永久居民身分。

移民部长康尼(Jason Kenney)指出，「加拿大现在正式对于世界级活跃的创业企业家开放」，他强调，「创新与企业家精神是推动加拿大经济的主要动力，这也是为何我们需要征求外国企业家，吸引他们到加拿大创业，并创造新的就业机会」。

「创业签证」是加拿大与国际竞争，吸引企业家前来的最佳利器。美国虽然较加拿大更早提出类似「创业签证」的计划，但却还在国会讨论阶段，未成为法案，结果让加拿大领先。

「创业签证计划」规定，外国企业家除了必须参与已获认可的「创业基金」或「天使投资人」组织，其语言能力亦须达到「加拿大语言标准」(CLB)听、说、读、写能力的5级，并且必须至少曾读一年的专上教育。

「创业签证计划」为一项试验计划，初步为期5年。 移民部指出，申请人若参加「指定创业基金」，最低投资额为20万元，但若是参加「天使投资人」组织，最低投资额为7.5万元。

(更多内容请见：For more information, please see:  http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/releases/2013/2013-01-24.asp)

What People Forget about Success

Five Essential Things to Remember about Success
by Chris Esty on the Bible Post, May 2, 2013

So I spent some time thinking about what it means to be successful, and have come up with five essential things worth remembering,
dealing with subject matter that a lot of people struggle with. I hope you’ll find these thoughts to be helpful in your journey through life!

Success

1. No Other Way but God’s Way
God will always give you the best in life. It’s yours. You simply need to open your hands and receive it. Once you do that, you will have something in your possession worth more than anything you could ever hope to gain from the world. God’s way is always best. Follow His lead.

2. Success Doesn’t Define You
Just because you don’t have the measure of success you hope to achieve, it doesn’t mean you’re a failure. It simply means you have a goal to work towards . . . one step at a time.

3. You’re Worth More than That
Just because someone has something you lack, it doesn’t make him or her better than you. Work hard to materialize your dreams, but don’t let materialistic things rob you of your self-worth. You will always be more valuable than the things you work for.

4. Generosity Goes a Long Way
A person’s social status isn’t what determines his or her level of success; attitude does. There’s nothing to admire about those who only live for themselves. Don’t forget your roots. Give thanks to God for the success you have by generously sharing it with others.

5. Accept Your Limitations
What you want to become may not be what’s best for you. Do your best to better yourself, but recognize your limitations. Trying to force yourself into the mold of someone else will only lead to despair. Be content with who you are . . . be yourself!

要记住的有关成功的五个要点

克里斯·埃斯蒂发表于《圣经邮报》2013年5月2日

所以我花了一些时间思考成功意味着什么，并总结出出五个多人还弄不清其主题的、值得记忆的五个基本点。我希望你会发现这些想法对你的生命历程是有帮助的！




成功
1、上帝的方式而不是别的方式
上帝总会给你生命中最好的。它是你的。你只需要打开你的双手，并接受它。一旦你这样做，你将拥有价值超过任何你所能希望从世界上获得的东西。上帝的方式永远是最好的。要跟着他前行。

2、成功没有定义您
仅仅因为你没有你希望达到的成功的手段，并不意味着你是一个失败者。它只是意味着你有一个目标要努力...一步一步向前。

3、你比这更有价值
仅仅因为有人有你缺少的东西，它并没有让他或她比你更好。努力实现你的梦想，但不要让物质的东西夺走你的自我价值。你将永远比你为之努力工作的东西更有价值。

4、大器需要时间
一个人的社会地位并不决定他或她的成功水平，而态度使然。没有必要佩服那些只为自己而活的人。不要忘了自己的根。通过慷慨与别人分享，感谢上帝助你成功。

5、接受你所有的局限
你想成为什么可能不一定最适合于你。尽你所能地完善自己，但认识你所有的局限。试图强迫自己按照别人的方式生活，只会导致绝望。你要对现在的你感觉满意...要活出精彩的自己！

（该文由加华翻译与公证公司翻译自The Bible Post,  http://www.thebiblepost.com/five-thoughts-worth-remembering-on-success)

China and the West: Whom Should Be Learned from?

 中国与西方：谁学谁？
北京大学光华管理学院客座教授 贾尔斯·钱斯  英国《金融时报》中文网2013年03月25日

在所有发达国家，领导人都未能理解经济问题的深层次的严峻现实，也未能找到有效的解决方法。2000年以来，来自新兴市场国家、尤其是中国的需求快速增长，其影响十分强大，不仅帮助改变了澳大利亚、智利、巴西等出口型资源大国的国内经济结构，而且帮助了德国等资本设备生产国。英国财政部应该学一学中国实施经济刺激措施的做法，增加基础设施建设方面的投入，这能弥补英国在这方面的严重不足，并能让投资者和商界相信，恢复经济增长的决心是认真的。如果没有毛泽东和邓小平，今天的中国将是什么状况？英国当今真正的问题是缺乏有魄力和远见的领导层。而自1980年以来，中国恶劣的经济环境、尤其是其过于庞大的人口，迫使其领导人做出了许多艰难的抉择，而正是这些抉择让中国处于目前的强势地位。发达国家的领导人应该去北京听取中国人的建议，而不是去那里给中国人提建议。

China and the West: Whom Should Be Learned from? (Abridged)
Giles Chance, Visiting Professor at Peking University's Guanghua School of Management,  British "Financial Times" Chinese Edition, March 25, 2013




Leaders have failed to understand the grim reality shown from the deep-seated economic problems in all developed countries. Since 2000, the rapid growth in demand from the emerging market countries, especially from China has its impacted other countries very powerfully, not only having helped change the domestic economic structure of such big export-oriented resource big countries like Australia, Chile and Brazil, but also having helped Germany and other capital equipment production countries . The UK Treasury should learn how China implemented economic stimulus measures to increase investment in infrastructure building, which can make up for the serious shortage of the UK in this regard, and to allow investors and the business community to believe that the determination for economic growth recovery is serious. Without Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, how would China would be today? The British real problem is the lack of bold and visionary leadership. Since 1980, China's harsh economic environment, especially its huge population, forced its leaders to make a lot of tough choices which put China at a strong position in the current situation. The leaders of developed countries should go to Beijing to listen to some advice from the Chinese, rather than go there to advise to the Chinese people.