20年前，人们就知道法国人大量吃红肉但是不得心血管疾病，是因为他们喝红葡萄酒。红葡萄酒里面的有效成分resveratrol也早就为人所知。但是，在很长的时间内，提取出来的resveratrol价格太贵，一般人买不起，所以resveratrol也就成为空中楼阁，想用resveratrol降低患心血管疾病概率的人们，只好学着法国人的样子，每天饮用红葡萄酒。（因为resveratrol含在葡萄的颜色里面，所以白葡萄酒中，resveratrol的含量很少。
2003年，哈佛的研究人员David Sinclair相信通常隐性的sirtuin基因对长寿很有好处。他测试出resveratrol可以将sirtuin基因变为显性后，就Google了一下resveratrol，结果让他吃惊的就是红葡萄酒里含有大量的resveratrol。Sinclair说他知道对红酒的研究，当他将sirtuin基因和红酒联系起来的时候，差点没有从椅子上掉下去。
老鼠实验显示，过度显现sirtuin基因（SIRT1）会有降低胆固醇，降低血糖，和降低转氨酶的作用。
Sinclair和哈佛的另一个研究人员Christoph Westphal成立了Sirtris公司研究以resveratrol为基础的新药。2008年，Sirtris被药厂GlaxoSmithKline以72亿收购。目前，Sinclair和Westphal仍然在运作GlaxoSmithKline的子公司Sirtris。
Sinclair讲，resveratrol可以让九十岁的人向六十岁那样打网球。记得我曾在Caltech的网球场见到过90岁的人打网球，在和他的交谈中，他说：除了跑不太动以外，有时会有晕眩的感觉，毕竟年纪不饶人嘛。在那以外，我没有见过90多岁的人打羽毛球，或做这种有一定强度的锻炼的。
当然，目前resveratrol的研究还处于初步阶段。但是，天然提纯的resveratrol已经可以在很多商店里买到。其中resveratrol的含量，一般都百倍于红葡萄酒，而且价格完全可以承受。
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Friday, May 21, 2010
年轻人是奥巴马政策的最大牺牲者
YOUNG PEOPLE ARE HURT THE MOST BY OBAMA’S POLICIES
Ironies are everywhere in the Obama administration. For one thing, young people and the high tech company executives came out amass to vote for Mr. Obama. Yet, in the early days, Obama openly laughed at those executives that they voted him in so they have to work with him. I am sure that the executives can adjust. Also, Senator Arlen Specter, who turned Democratic to give ObamaCare the necessary 60th vote and lost the Democratic primary election to Joe Sestak, because the White House would not come out to campaign for him, would do just fine in his retirement life. Mr. Specter did this due to political reasons (that he was not likely to win the Republican primary if he had not switched party). The young people, who were duped into voting for the Obama, the Rock Star, were sent to the gutters.
One of the most significant indicators that we are becoming an European country is that the young people’s unemployment rate doubles the national average. As the national unemployment hovers around 10% (comparable to the European level), young people (25 and under) are suffering the unemployment rate of around 20%, also a typical European level.
Young people makes up their lack of experience by their diligent work. When I was young, I often sleep only four hours a day. Now, I am older and work with much less intensity. However, my experience more than makes up that gap. When I wrote columns for The Cavalier Daily, it typically cost me 20 hours to write a single piece. It was an enormous work load to turn out a piece every week. Now, it takes me about one to two hours to do the same, with higher quality.
Young people’s high work intensity makes them learn faster than older people, which is the reason that, when completely new technologies are under development, young people worth more than the older people, because experience does not count much. During the dot com boom, I was in my thirties and worked as the director of development department for several dot com companies. Except the CEOs and CTOs who are essentially the sales people, everyone in the company were younger than me. The learning stamina in young people is enormous. In those days, the gym near the office was full at 3 a.m., because the young people take a break at that hour to get some exercise. Sleep was pretty much ignored to development the new product.
It is that kind of work ethics and innovative spirit that made all technologies obsolete after six months. The joke of the day was that if you leave the field for six months, you would return as a total outsider. Experience, such as management experiences, even in those days, certainly had value. I was hired as development department heads mostly because of my management experience in large traditional companies (called brick-and-mortar then). However, if the experience spirit was not combined with my keen understanding of the technical progress, sufficient to tell developers what to do precisely, my management experience would hold little value.
Those were the days when people in their 50s and even 40s are treated badly, because they cannot work till 2 a.m. seven days a week. The only people in that age group are CEOs and CTOs, whose job is to get investment and sell the products that we develop. Incidentally, while we, the young, did a marvelous job in developing technologies. They failed miserably for creating the so-called dot-com bubble.
Dot-com trained a stratum of young people, as older people were unable to hold cutting edge development and management positions. That experience made us believe that nothing is impossible in this world. Hard work would always be rewarded with great products and enjoyable experience. When the dot-com industry collapsed, I followed other managers to law school. Most of my Chinese friends thought then that I was crazy. However, the confidence that I gained in dot-com prevailed. Now, I get to combine my knowledge of law, my corporate management experience (in the practice of business law), and my technical and scientific background (as a patent attorney).
The driving forces of dot-com, either as principal developers or key technical managers, are in their 40s now. Thinking back, I am always amazed that “the boom” gave me, who come to the U.S. after graduating college in China on a physics scholarship, such an opportunity to build up my character. I have heard many people saying that immigrants can only live on the margins of the society. My experience contradicts that opinion.
Today, in the stagnate environment, experience can crush even the most indefatigable learning stamina, as I can produce better writing today with only 5% of the time in a mentally relaxed state. That is the reason that young people are neither needed nor wanted now. The macroeconomic indicators, e.g., unemployment rate, only reflect that reality.
The problems, certainly, do not rest with the young, but with the national policy. When Reagan died, I stood outside of his library from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. the next morning to show my respect, because his tax cut, his pro-business policies, his persuading of the American people that government is the problem, allowed me to have what I had. Under Obama, people believe government is the solution. I have to wait till November to see what people think that about Obama’s spending spree and ObamaCare. American people, without the likes of Reagan, are talked into the concept that the rich is evil and should be taxed to make the country fair. They don’t seem to look around to see who is giving them jobs. Obama is instituting a tax policy that 50% of the people do not have to pay any tax, and that public employees and entities, such as Fannie and Freddy, may freely use the taxpayer’s money to exert their influence on the government. It is the political game-playing that would suffocate the innovative spirit (i.e., if you lose, you take the loss; if you win, the government will redistribute it).
The U.S. is on a critical moment in history. If Obama is not stopped in November, massive government entities would be built under the laws that have just passed. Once these institutions are built, it is politically next to impossible to undo. That is the reason that Europe and Japan suffer from their perpetual economic anemia.
No American politicians dare to come out to explain the harsh reality to the people: the increasing inequality of earning abilities is caused by the fierce global competition. Those who can take creative jobs can demand their premium pay. But the earning ability of those who hold less creative jobs would be directly pressured by those who make much less in China. Allowing the creative people to flourish, so they can general work opportunities for those less creative, is the only possible economic path to success. Mr. Obama cannot wait to nurture the golden goose to lay eggs. He had a better idea: Let’s kill them for the eggs (government spending spree). Mr. Obama fails to think: after you killed the golden goose (i.e., high government deficit and a slow economy), then what? Greece is looming on the horizon.
Some may say: Government spending is ultimately translated to some form of spending, which should stimulate the economy. The answer is simple. That kind of stimulation is only valuable at the worst moment of the economic crisis to soften the blow. It cannot be turned into long-term entitlement. If the government persistently takes away the profit and redistribute it to the non-risk-takers for consumption, at best, it stimulates the traditional and existing economy, as, for instance, people buy cheap goods from stores. (Note: Government money is aimed at the low income brackets.) I am sure that China would be thankful, but it would not stimulate innovations, such as dot-com, which is the only way for the U.S. to compete. The worse scenario is that risk takers may take their business to other countries that actually encourage innovation. That would be the end of the American dreams as we know it.
There are signs that the American people have seen the mistake in electing Barack Obama. However, the Obama political machine, which obliterated John McCain, is hard at work and had its recent victories, as Democrats did much better than the Republicans to get out their votes.
The American spirit, a.k.a. the American dream, was to explore, to adventure, and to enjoy the fruit of hard work. FDR has used the Great Depression to deny the American people of that. Ronald Reagan turned the ride by reducing the government interference to people’s lives. Reagan’s power was so strong that, at one time, the opportunistic Bill Clinton claimed that the era of big government was over. Now, Obama is using the Great Recession to repeat that cycle. Although I am confident that the American people will ultimately see through all this and turn the tide again, the question is: Would it take another 40 years? Would the young people, who were betrayed and denied their innovative and confidence-building experience by Obama, vote Democratic again?
There are anecdotal reports from China that the Chinese youth are suffering from high unemployment. Although I have not seen any data, the root of the problem is the similar: the saturation of the manufacturing sector (which had been absorbing the Chinese youth because that was new to the Chinese workforce then) and the inability to build a creative sector. In the end, the government’s policy of stimulating the internal consumption parallels Obama’s spending. With a much weaker economy, the Chinese policy quickly kicked up the consumer product and food price. Now, food, which cost around 1/6 the U.S. price only a few years ago, is several times more expensive now. Some American educated people, upon returning to China, found that they cannot afford ribs in supermarket. Many Chinese business people visiting the U.S. complained to me about the unfairness of the world that Americans are making more and able to buy Chinese products that are much cheaper in the U.S. than in China.
Maybe the whole world is at a critical moment.
Ironies are everywhere in the Obama administration. For one thing, young people and the high tech company executives came out amass to vote for Mr. Obama. Yet, in the early days, Obama openly laughed at those executives that they voted him in so they have to work with him. I am sure that the executives can adjust. Also, Senator Arlen Specter, who turned Democratic to give ObamaCare the necessary 60th vote and lost the Democratic primary election to Joe Sestak, because the White House would not come out to campaign for him, would do just fine in his retirement life. Mr. Specter did this due to political reasons (that he was not likely to win the Republican primary if he had not switched party). The young people, who were duped into voting for the Obama, the Rock Star, were sent to the gutters.
One of the most significant indicators that we are becoming an European country is that the young people’s unemployment rate doubles the national average. As the national unemployment hovers around 10% (comparable to the European level), young people (25 and under) are suffering the unemployment rate of around 20%, also a typical European level.
Young people makes up their lack of experience by their diligent work. When I was young, I often sleep only four hours a day. Now, I am older and work with much less intensity. However, my experience more than makes up that gap. When I wrote columns for The Cavalier Daily, it typically cost me 20 hours to write a single piece. It was an enormous work load to turn out a piece every week. Now, it takes me about one to two hours to do the same, with higher quality.
Young people’s high work intensity makes them learn faster than older people, which is the reason that, when completely new technologies are under development, young people worth more than the older people, because experience does not count much. During the dot com boom, I was in my thirties and worked as the director of development department for several dot com companies. Except the CEOs and CTOs who are essentially the sales people, everyone in the company were younger than me. The learning stamina in young people is enormous. In those days, the gym near the office was full at 3 a.m., because the young people take a break at that hour to get some exercise. Sleep was pretty much ignored to development the new product.
It is that kind of work ethics and innovative spirit that made all technologies obsolete after six months. The joke of the day was that if you leave the field for six months, you would return as a total outsider. Experience, such as management experiences, even in those days, certainly had value. I was hired as development department heads mostly because of my management experience in large traditional companies (called brick-and-mortar then). However, if the experience spirit was not combined with my keen understanding of the technical progress, sufficient to tell developers what to do precisely, my management experience would hold little value.
Those were the days when people in their 50s and even 40s are treated badly, because they cannot work till 2 a.m. seven days a week. The only people in that age group are CEOs and CTOs, whose job is to get investment and sell the products that we develop. Incidentally, while we, the young, did a marvelous job in developing technologies. They failed miserably for creating the so-called dot-com bubble.
Dot-com trained a stratum of young people, as older people were unable to hold cutting edge development and management positions. That experience made us believe that nothing is impossible in this world. Hard work would always be rewarded with great products and enjoyable experience. When the dot-com industry collapsed, I followed other managers to law school. Most of my Chinese friends thought then that I was crazy. However, the confidence that I gained in dot-com prevailed. Now, I get to combine my knowledge of law, my corporate management experience (in the practice of business law), and my technical and scientific background (as a patent attorney).
The driving forces of dot-com, either as principal developers or key technical managers, are in their 40s now. Thinking back, I am always amazed that “the boom” gave me, who come to the U.S. after graduating college in China on a physics scholarship, such an opportunity to build up my character. I have heard many people saying that immigrants can only live on the margins of the society. My experience contradicts that opinion.
Today, in the stagnate environment, experience can crush even the most indefatigable learning stamina, as I can produce better writing today with only 5% of the time in a mentally relaxed state. That is the reason that young people are neither needed nor wanted now. The macroeconomic indicators, e.g., unemployment rate, only reflect that reality.
The problems, certainly, do not rest with the young, but with the national policy. When Reagan died, I stood outside of his library from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. the next morning to show my respect, because his tax cut, his pro-business policies, his persuading of the American people that government is the problem, allowed me to have what I had. Under Obama, people believe government is the solution. I have to wait till November to see what people think that about Obama’s spending spree and ObamaCare. American people, without the likes of Reagan, are talked into the concept that the rich is evil and should be taxed to make the country fair. They don’t seem to look around to see who is giving them jobs. Obama is instituting a tax policy that 50% of the people do not have to pay any tax, and that public employees and entities, such as Fannie and Freddy, may freely use the taxpayer’s money to exert their influence on the government. It is the political game-playing that would suffocate the innovative spirit (i.e., if you lose, you take the loss; if you win, the government will redistribute it).
The U.S. is on a critical moment in history. If Obama is not stopped in November, massive government entities would be built under the laws that have just passed. Once these institutions are built, it is politically next to impossible to undo. That is the reason that Europe and Japan suffer from their perpetual economic anemia.
No American politicians dare to come out to explain the harsh reality to the people: the increasing inequality of earning abilities is caused by the fierce global competition. Those who can take creative jobs can demand their premium pay. But the earning ability of those who hold less creative jobs would be directly pressured by those who make much less in China. Allowing the creative people to flourish, so they can general work opportunities for those less creative, is the only possible economic path to success. Mr. Obama cannot wait to nurture the golden goose to lay eggs. He had a better idea: Let’s kill them for the eggs (government spending spree). Mr. Obama fails to think: after you killed the golden goose (i.e., high government deficit and a slow economy), then what? Greece is looming on the horizon.
Some may say: Government spending is ultimately translated to some form of spending, which should stimulate the economy. The answer is simple. That kind of stimulation is only valuable at the worst moment of the economic crisis to soften the blow. It cannot be turned into long-term entitlement. If the government persistently takes away the profit and redistribute it to the non-risk-takers for consumption, at best, it stimulates the traditional and existing economy, as, for instance, people buy cheap goods from stores. (Note: Government money is aimed at the low income brackets.) I am sure that China would be thankful, but it would not stimulate innovations, such as dot-com, which is the only way for the U.S. to compete. The worse scenario is that risk takers may take their business to other countries that actually encourage innovation. That would be the end of the American dreams as we know it.
There are signs that the American people have seen the mistake in electing Barack Obama. However, the Obama political machine, which obliterated John McCain, is hard at work and had its recent victories, as Democrats did much better than the Republicans to get out their votes.
The American spirit, a.k.a. the American dream, was to explore, to adventure, and to enjoy the fruit of hard work. FDR has used the Great Depression to deny the American people of that. Ronald Reagan turned the ride by reducing the government interference to people’s lives. Reagan’s power was so strong that, at one time, the opportunistic Bill Clinton claimed that the era of big government was over. Now, Obama is using the Great Recession to repeat that cycle. Although I am confident that the American people will ultimately see through all this and turn the tide again, the question is: Would it take another 40 years? Would the young people, who were betrayed and denied their innovative and confidence-building experience by Obama, vote Democratic again?
There are anecdotal reports from China that the Chinese youth are suffering from high unemployment. Although I have not seen any data, the root of the problem is the similar: the saturation of the manufacturing sector (which had been absorbing the Chinese youth because that was new to the Chinese workforce then) and the inability to build a creative sector. In the end, the government’s policy of stimulating the internal consumption parallels Obama’s spending. With a much weaker economy, the Chinese policy quickly kicked up the consumer product and food price. Now, food, which cost around 1/6 the U.S. price only a few years ago, is several times more expensive now. Some American educated people, upon returning to China, found that they cannot afford ribs in supermarket. Many Chinese business people visiting the U.S. complained to me about the unfairness of the world that Americans are making more and able to buy Chinese products that are much cheaper in the U.S. than in China.
Maybe the whole world is at a critical moment.
Monday, May 17, 2010
正在走向黑暗的美国
AMERICA ON ITS WAY TO DARKNESS
Whenever there is a problem, many people automatically think that government is the solution, even when the problem is primarily caused by the government. So when there is an increased disparity in earnings, let's vote for a socialist president (Mr. Obama) to redistribute wealth by outrageous government spending. (I haven't heard anyone applauding the redistribution. Mr. Obama repeatedly claims that he is not a socialist. This somehow echoes China's claim that it is not capitalist.) When there is a sub-prime mess, let's have a set of new laws to have the government take care of it, while nobody ask why the nation suffers these financial problems periodically, forcing repeated necessity of government's (really taxpayers') bailout of someone else's risk-taking mistakes or fraud.
The problem of the increased disparity of earning is not caused by the lack of government intervention but by the global competition that has essentially taken out the old profit margin of the entire manufacturing industry. Only creative endeavors, which require both a lot of creative thinking and a lot of risk-taking, can possibly get high reward. In other words, if a person cannot make himself creative (as an employee) or take some long risks (as a small business owner), he would not be able to command high earnings. Government intervention (i.e., redistribution) cannot change that reality. The world has spent the last century proving that socialism kills all initiatives of private risk-taking. Look no further than Cuba and ask: Do we really want to become the next Cuba? Incidentally, one of Fidel's claims of fame was universal healthcare.
The fundamental problem of the sub-prime mess is created by the big government pension funds buying these repackaged worthless mortgage bonds (which are called CDOs, repackaged to obscure its original worthlessness). When the rating agencies, e.g., Moody's, give these worthless debt triple A rating, and then banks buys CDS (a de facto insurance designed to evade insurance laws, primarily to avoid the required reserves) to insure it, large pension funds, especially government pension funds, bought them in billions.
New laws increase the complexity of the financial market, leading it in the wrong direction. They may legally require transparency, which will do good. However, when everyone, including the pension funds, banks, insurance companies, other financial institutions that do not want to be called banks or insurance companies, newspapers, television stations, regulatory agencies, the Fed, Congress, etc., work together to game the system, the next problem will most certainly appear in the next 10 to 20 years.
What we need are people who can recognize these things (these people do exist) and a government that can respond accordingly (the U.S. Government, among other components mentioned in the last paragraph, has lost that ability). In 2006, the bill to put a stop to Freddy and Fannie's reckless lending practice failed to pass Congress, because it is not in line with Barney Frank's political game playing. As its size increases, we can expect the government to have less and less to do with reason.
Big government is a monster. Now, out of frustration, we are working hard to increase its size, with the private-sector's risk-taking money much needed to kick start the economy. In the end, the smart people will adjust their risks (why take the long odds when the loss is entirely theirs and the major portion of the winning has go to the government) and do fine. The middle class (or, to be more precisely, from mid-middle class down), who so whole heartedly voted for big government and does not pay much income tax, if any, will be swallowed by the monster that they made.
While the Democrats are driving the train full steam in the wrong direction, the Republicans, even if they retake both houses this November, may not be able to give up the political game playing and start to think reason. Incidentally, a government that is unable to see reason is the identifying characteristics of a banana republic. What we really need is another enlightenment movement, leading to another age of reason.
Whenever there is a problem, many people automatically think that government is the solution, even when the problem is primarily caused by the government. So when there is an increased disparity in earnings, let's vote for a socialist president (Mr. Obama) to redistribute wealth by outrageous government spending. (I haven't heard anyone applauding the redistribution. Mr. Obama repeatedly claims that he is not a socialist. This somehow echoes China's claim that it is not capitalist.) When there is a sub-prime mess, let's have a set of new laws to have the government take care of it, while nobody ask why the nation suffers these financial problems periodically, forcing repeated necessity of government's (really taxpayers') bailout of someone else's risk-taking mistakes or fraud.
The problem of the increased disparity of earning is not caused by the lack of government intervention but by the global competition that has essentially taken out the old profit margin of the entire manufacturing industry. Only creative endeavors, which require both a lot of creative thinking and a lot of risk-taking, can possibly get high reward. In other words, if a person cannot make himself creative (as an employee) or take some long risks (as a small business owner), he would not be able to command high earnings. Government intervention (i.e., redistribution) cannot change that reality. The world has spent the last century proving that socialism kills all initiatives of private risk-taking. Look no further than Cuba and ask: Do we really want to become the next Cuba? Incidentally, one of Fidel's claims of fame was universal healthcare.
The fundamental problem of the sub-prime mess is created by the big government pension funds buying these repackaged worthless mortgage bonds (which are called CDOs, repackaged to obscure its original worthlessness). When the rating agencies, e.g., Moody's, give these worthless debt triple A rating, and then banks buys CDS (a de facto insurance designed to evade insurance laws, primarily to avoid the required reserves) to insure it, large pension funds, especially government pension funds, bought them in billions.
New laws increase the complexity of the financial market, leading it in the wrong direction. They may legally require transparency, which will do good. However, when everyone, including the pension funds, banks, insurance companies, other financial institutions that do not want to be called banks or insurance companies, newspapers, television stations, regulatory agencies, the Fed, Congress, etc., work together to game the system, the next problem will most certainly appear in the next 10 to 20 years.
What we need are people who can recognize these things (these people do exist) and a government that can respond accordingly (the U.S. Government, among other components mentioned in the last paragraph, has lost that ability). In 2006, the bill to put a stop to Freddy and Fannie's reckless lending practice failed to pass Congress, because it is not in line with Barney Frank's political game playing. As its size increases, we can expect the government to have less and less to do with reason.
Big government is a monster. Now, out of frustration, we are working hard to increase its size, with the private-sector's risk-taking money much needed to kick start the economy. In the end, the smart people will adjust their risks (why take the long odds when the loss is entirely theirs and the major portion of the winning has go to the government) and do fine. The middle class (or, to be more precisely, from mid-middle class down), who so whole heartedly voted for big government and does not pay much income tax, if any, will be swallowed by the monster that they made.
While the Democrats are driving the train full steam in the wrong direction, the Republicans, even if they retake both houses this November, may not be able to give up the political game playing and start to think reason. Incidentally, a government that is unable to see reason is the identifying characteristics of a banana republic. What we really need is another enlightenment movement, leading to another age of reason.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
华人社区已经逐步成为全美最富庶的地区
我二十多年以前来美国的时候，华人社区，可以用“脏乱差”来形容。记得有一次我带一个白人朋友去纽约中国城过春节。中国城放鞭炮，放得一地碎纸屑，把她吓得我一说中国城她就皱眉头，死也不去中国城了。中国城在大家心目中，只是一个吃美式中餐的地方。对于我们这些人来说，那种中餐，真是不吃也罢。我们从学校里出来以后找住处，绝对是避着中国城走。
十多年以前，我决定离开纽约来洛杉矶。当年作这个决定，就是因为我喜欢洛杉矶的华人社区。和其它地区的华人社区不同，洛杉矶的华人社区不是一个或几个点，而是绵延十几英里的，和其它族裔社区交织在一起的一个混合体。洛杉矶的种族分配大概是西裔50%以上，亚裔10%，白人30%。这种情形，就产生了一种特殊的风土人情。我能够想出来的最好的一句描述洛杉矶的话就是：这里是现代的大唐盛世。在这里，各民族交融在一起，共同奋斗，共同创建自己的社区。（我不是说这里没有一些相当严重、相当棘手的问题。例如，华人的成功已经遭到别的族裔—包括白人—的嫉妒。）
可能是华人比白人勤奋吧，从我来洛杉矶以后，白人的生意（最引人注目的是超市）一倒闭，取而代之的一定是华人生意。慢慢地，经过十几年的和平演变，华人生意已经全面取代白人生意。与此同时，我也从白人社区搬入当时华人刚刚过半的Arcadia。说起Arcadia，有一个故事。当年，老蒋搞土改，创造了一批富人（老毛土改靠的是“杀”字，老蒋土改靠的是“买”字）。这些人有了钱，就来美国买房子。当然，这些土财主不知道哪里的房子好，就请台湾的风水大师来裁决。风水大师来到洛杉矶一看，说Arcadia是龙头上的龙眼，是个好地方。这样，台湾人就开始一批一批地在Arcadia买房子。慢慢地，Arcadia的学区也好了起来。对于中国人来说，学区就是命（“孩子就是命”的衍生物）。学区一好起来，大批华人开始涌入Arcadia。Arcadia的房价也就高了起来。
亚裔进入Arcadia以后，就逐渐地开始参政。当年（2002），鄂志超竞选Arcadia市议员，他的志愿者一批一批地劝我投票给他，还要把他的小牌子插到我的草坪上，都让我拒绝了（我对地方政治不太感兴趣）。结果投票当天，鄂志超亲自打电话过来，问我有没有什么问题他可以解决，我说那倒没有。他就说如果我将来有什么问题一定可以去找他。然后他说：“你能不能去投我一票。”这样，我就跑去投了他一票。华人就是以这样的坚韧不拔，一点一点地在政治、经济、文化等各个方面开始起主导作用。可惜的是2010年的市议员选举，几个亚裔候选人搞得非常不好。结果，三个亚裔失利共同落马，三个白人全部当选。
今天，洛杉矶东面，很有点全面被华人接管的意思。从市中心向东行驶，绵延二十余英里，从已经败落的中国城开始，经Monterey Park、Alhambra、San Gabriel、San Marino、Arcadia、Rowland Heights、到新开发的Diamond Bar，华人社区已经连成一片。在San Marino和Arcadia这样的富庶地区，地价已经被华人推到其它族裔觉得匪夷所思的高度。显现出的现象就是亚裔逐步把其它族裔排挤了出去。与此同时，华人在这些地方，渐渐地建设出了具有自己特色的世外桃源。最近连续两年，Arcadia都被评为加州最适合孩子成长的城市。学区将这件事写成专稿，通过学生，送给所有家长。
生活好了，大家就开始关心健康。目前，在San Marino、Arcadia这样的富庶亚裔地区，亚裔妇女平均寿命95.0，亚裔男性89.5，寿命之长，居世界第一。即便是全美平均，亚裔妇女的寿命也高达87.4。男性82.1。（中国总平均73岁。）因为大家都比较注意健康，加上大陆食品的质量无法保证，目前超市里，除了台湾货以外，架子上有大量的日本货。在有些货架前，日本货喧宾夺主，如果你不注意，会觉得身居日本超市。近些年，超市促销产品的时候，也注明产地，以说明此货不是来自中国大陆。华人社区建设的这个优异的成绩，是和多少年来大家的勤奋工作分不开的。目前，住在南加州富庶亚裔社区里，全套的生活供应、服务系统，包括中文的报纸、电台、电视台、出版社，已经全面形成。在这些社区里，一个人可以不讲英语，解决生活中遇到的所有问题，包括娱乐。（这种文化，也有其副产品。例如，这片宝地被不少大陆的二奶看中。依照自己的经济实力，她们带着孩子在这些社区安家落户。有一些地方，因为她们群居，居然有二奶村之称。）
或许是因为生活在这个环境之中吧，我也不由自主地关心起健康问题。以后，我会慢慢地把我自己在健康方面的体会，和一些有关健康的资料，写下来，供各位参考。
十多年以前，我决定离开纽约来洛杉矶。当年作这个决定，就是因为我喜欢洛杉矶的华人社区。和其它地区的华人社区不同，洛杉矶的华人社区不是一个或几个点，而是绵延十几英里的，和其它族裔社区交织在一起的一个混合体。洛杉矶的种族分配大概是西裔50%以上，亚裔10%，白人30%。这种情形，就产生了一种特殊的风土人情。我能够想出来的最好的一句描述洛杉矶的话就是：这里是现代的大唐盛世。在这里，各民族交融在一起，共同奋斗，共同创建自己的社区。（我不是说这里没有一些相当严重、相当棘手的问题。例如，华人的成功已经遭到别的族裔—包括白人—的嫉妒。）
可能是华人比白人勤奋吧，从我来洛杉矶以后，白人的生意（最引人注目的是超市）一倒闭，取而代之的一定是华人生意。慢慢地，经过十几年的和平演变，华人生意已经全面取代白人生意。与此同时，我也从白人社区搬入当时华人刚刚过半的Arcadia。说起Arcadia，有一个故事。当年，老蒋搞土改，创造了一批富人（老毛土改靠的是“杀”字，老蒋土改靠的是“买”字）。这些人有了钱，就来美国买房子。当然，这些土财主不知道哪里的房子好，就请台湾的风水大师来裁决。风水大师来到洛杉矶一看，说Arcadia是龙头上的龙眼，是个好地方。这样，台湾人就开始一批一批地在Arcadia买房子。慢慢地，Arcadia的学区也好了起来。对于中国人来说，学区就是命（“孩子就是命”的衍生物）。学区一好起来，大批华人开始涌入Arcadia。Arcadia的房价也就高了起来。
亚裔进入Arcadia以后，就逐渐地开始参政。当年（2002），鄂志超竞选Arcadia市议员，他的志愿者一批一批地劝我投票给他，还要把他的小牌子插到我的草坪上，都让我拒绝了（我对地方政治不太感兴趣）。结果投票当天，鄂志超亲自打电话过来，问我有没有什么问题他可以解决，我说那倒没有。他就说如果我将来有什么问题一定可以去找他。然后他说：“你能不能去投我一票。”这样，我就跑去投了他一票。华人就是以这样的坚韧不拔，一点一点地在政治、经济、文化等各个方面开始起主导作用。可惜的是2010年的市议员选举，几个亚裔候选人搞得非常不好。结果，三个亚裔失利共同落马，三个白人全部当选。
今天，洛杉矶东面，很有点全面被华人接管的意思。从市中心向东行驶，绵延二十余英里，从已经败落的中国城开始，经Monterey Park、Alhambra、San Gabriel、San Marino、Arcadia、Rowland Heights、到新开发的Diamond Bar，华人社区已经连成一片。在San Marino和Arcadia这样的富庶地区，地价已经被华人推到其它族裔觉得匪夷所思的高度。显现出的现象就是亚裔逐步把其它族裔排挤了出去。与此同时，华人在这些地方，渐渐地建设出了具有自己特色的世外桃源。最近连续两年，Arcadia都被评为加州最适合孩子成长的城市。学区将这件事写成专稿，通过学生，送给所有家长。
生活好了，大家就开始关心健康。目前，在San Marino、Arcadia这样的富庶亚裔地区，亚裔妇女平均寿命95.0，亚裔男性89.5，寿命之长，居世界第一。即便是全美平均，亚裔妇女的寿命也高达87.4。男性82.1。（中国总平均73岁。）因为大家都比较注意健康，加上大陆食品的质量无法保证，目前超市里，除了台湾货以外，架子上有大量的日本货。在有些货架前，日本货喧宾夺主，如果你不注意，会觉得身居日本超市。近些年，超市促销产品的时候，也注明产地，以说明此货不是来自中国大陆。华人社区建设的这个优异的成绩，是和多少年来大家的勤奋工作分不开的。目前，住在南加州富庶亚裔社区里，全套的生活供应、服务系统，包括中文的报纸、电台、电视台、出版社，已经全面形成。在这些社区里，一个人可以不讲英语，解决生活中遇到的所有问题，包括娱乐。（这种文化，也有其副产品。例如，这片宝地被不少大陆的二奶看中。依照自己的经济实力，她们带着孩子在这些社区安家落户。有一些地方，因为她们群居，居然有二奶村之称。）
或许是因为生活在这个环境之中吧，我也不由自主地关心起健康问题。以后，我会慢慢地把我自己在健康方面的体会，和一些有关健康的资料，写下来，供各位参考。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)