The President's Son Shaking in His Boots

For the latest Philippine news stories and videos, visit GMANews.TV

Dear Mikey,

A few things.

You're making your lawyers do an accountant's job. The SALN is, yes, a statutory requirement, but it is, first and foremost, a form of financial report. I do not see the logic there to have your lawyers do it. Unless you are more concerned with circumventing the law than issuing an accurate SALN.

You're pulling my leg. The corporation that you claim you have a 40% or so interest therein owns the California mansion. You figure that such a corporation is engaged in real estate. In short, assuming that what you're saying is legit, the mansion is part of the corporation's inventory (held for sale), and yet, it is used by the shareholders as a residence whenever they are in California. Such shareholders, you say, are relatives. Such reporting of shareholdings rather than real property on your SALN, you say, is justifiable. Such method of putting real property under the name of a corporation, you say, is legal. Because the corporation is separate and distinct from its stockholders? Eh, Mikey, have you heard of the doctrine of piercing the veil of corporate fiction? A corporation shall be denied from the use of such a corporate privilege if and when it is used "as a shield to further an end subversive of justice". Kakaaral ko lang 'yan. I can't get it wrong.

You must be kidding us. You want us to bring you to court just so we could prove that such irregularities in your SALN are, in fact, a direct product of corruption? Ha? Do we need a court to find out if dogs bark?

Ang obvious mo lang, 'te. Tigilan mo na kami. Namimihasa na ang pamilya niyo. Boo.

xtin

Starbucks Hitlist [an update to part 1]

A couple of months have passed since the time I promised a second installment of my Starbucks Hitlist. I’ll be making good my nasty promise in a few weeks or so. Really. Need not worry. But before proceeding to it, I think it is only fitting to revisit Part One of my hitlist and give you some updates. I know you want it anyway, wehehe. Have your pistols ready, then.

KOREAN MOB slash ALL FOR ONE CUP, ONE CUP FOR ALL

These Kimchi Martians (pun intended, sorry) were very much on the freeloading prowl again. All these pictures were taken in a span of 6 hours in Starbucks BF (as expected). The air was filled with their back-of-the-throat murmurs and gibberish. There was excitement as if there was a birthday party of sorts. And, to my surprise, there indeed was. They occupied at least one-third of the tables and when this one girl entered the store, they broke into what I could only fathom as the Korean version of the birthday song.

NOTE THAT NOT ONE OF THEM, NI ISA MAN LANG, ORDERED ANYTHING FROM STARBUCKS. TABLES ARE TOTALLY EMPTY. COURTESY TOTALLY LACKING AT THIS POINT, EH?

The nerve of these people really. WALA na ngang mga order ang mga ito, nasikmura pang magkakanta at mag-celebrate ng birthday party? Wow ah.

Kill me, please, kill me.

ALL FOR ONE CUP, ONE CUP FOR ALL: PINOY (JOLOGS) VERSION

These Jay-z posse wannabes, douchebags really, were also caught freeloading. And you thought only foreigners have the nerve to do this shameless deed. Pinoys are precisely more notorious at it, mainly because most of us have the tendency to social climb and, at the same time, be parasitic. Take these idiots as examples. They were a group of at least five, I think, and only one of them bought a cup of Starbucks coffee just so they could be seen hanging out at the café. Honestly, they were misplaced in the area. For one, they wore these cheap-thus-hideous gangster get-ups. Two, they even had this little mp3 player that blasted what they thought was gangster music (this is a separate category in my second installment of this hitlist…coming very soon). Talk about JOLOGS. No wonder. Freeloading is simply their second nature.



CAMERA WHORES

Recall in my original post that I included pictures of camera whores who were not the STEREOTYPICAL camera whores, as indicated by the tell-tale signs (teeny boppers taking their own pictures, etc.)? Well, I’m very proud to say that I was graced with the presence of THE STEREOTYPICAL CAMERA WHORES… teeny boppers, bangs, Frappucinos, and all. Batteries not included, though.

Sighting happened in Starbucks Greenhills Theater Mall. Good thing these girls only took a few shots. Had they taken one more shot, I would’ve hung myself then and there.


THE BROKEN-HEARTED AND THE SHOULDER-TO-CRY-ON

When I came up with the first installment of my Starbucks Hitlist, in speaking of “the broken-hearted and the shoulder-to-cry-on”, what I had in mind was the image of two females, one distraught and broken, the other so eager to listen and supportive.

Upon a subsequent visit, though, to Starbucks BF, this particular hitlist category has somewhat evolved. Apparently, males also can fill in the shoes of the broken-hearted and the friend-in-time-of-need.

The two guys, to cut it short, were obviously gay. At first, I thought they were talking about some business venture or something. The problematic between the two of them was sitting nearer the window in a baby blue, starch-crisp polo. I say problematic because it was evident in his tone of voice. I could readily sense his infuriation and frustration by the way he squeaked at the end of his sentences.

I was listening in to their conversation not because I wanted to, but because, again, it was hard for me NOT to overhear them. And of course, it became a little more interesting. It was, I must say, a truly unbelievable conversation.

Background: The Broken-hearted Gay apparently had, just recently, broken it off from his boyfriend. This boyfriend of his was Chinese. His boyfriend’s mom supposedly found out about their relationship and, him being pure Filipino, was completely unreceptive and suspicious of him. And so he says…

Broken-hearted: Grabe, talaga ang mom niya. Noong nakita ako, sinabi daw n’un mom niya tignan daw ang butt ko, baka meron daw akong [insert unintelligible terms].

Shoulder-to-cry-on: Omaygad…

xtin: [thinks] Nakupo! Why in the world did I have to hear that? Why, lord? Why?

Unbelievable? Believe it. I’ve heard about airing dirty laundry in public. But his was literally filthy.

Dishing out these updates only confirms how on-target the tell-tale signs I’ve come up with in identifying these Starbucks dwellers are.

So…shooting spree, anyone? Oh, wait. Not just yet. Wait for the second installment of the hitlist, that way there will be better chances for us to actually bring someone down. Hehehe.

Artificial Intelligence

If I hear one more person giving some sermon on the US stock market bailout issue, I'm going to have to punch someone. Know-it-all idiots, if you ask me.

The events in the stock markets, here and abroad, the past couple of weeks have prompted much talk among everyone. The Wall Street meltdown that was instigated by the filing for Bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, Inc. has been all over the papers, net and TV. Of course, just as any scandal would, news has made its way through the grapevine as well. Everyone is talking. The economists. The financial analysts. The stock brokers. The investors. The business people. The business-intelligent. And, of course, also the artificially-business-intelligent.

I say artificial because it is feigned.

This stock market controversy is chiefly the type of thing where people who thrive in "intellectual" conversations brandish their knowledge of the facts and what-nots. And I say thrive because these people simply use the opportunity to make themselves appear smart.

It could be a defense mechanism. It could also be part of one's inferiority complex. Whatever it is, one thing's for sure. I hate it. Ikaw? Intelligent? PWEH.

One problem though with artificial intelligence is it is hardly detectible, if at all. One can go about fooling everyone with feigned intelligence and do so successfully. All of us could pay our precious attention to someone making a Lehman Brothers controversy sermon and have ourselves effectively drawn to the seemingly highly-knowledgeable person talking in front of us. We may be impressed by the seeming authenticity of his competencies, all the while not knowing that all we have in front of us is bootlegged.

Is it not scary knowing that there is artificial intelligence and we might have been and could still be fooled by the idiots who make use of it? More than anything else, is it not insulting?

It is. And today is the day that I do something about it. I hate artificial intelligence and I refuse to be perpetually bound in its foolishness. Ihinto ang pagpapanggap. Tigilan na ang pagbabalatkayo.

How would you know if one is just feigning intelligence?

Here's how.

#1 In Writing – Check for Shift+F7 words

When you get an email or read a blog post, try to count the highfalutin words that appear in the composition. Take note also if there are Latin maxims. If the amount of the non-layman jargon seems too good to be true, it probably is.

I used to hate it when I encountered yearbook write-ups with words like penchant, façade, enigma, etc. I wanted to strike all of those overrated terms and dress the write-up down. "Masyado naman nag-enjoy sa Shift+F7 sa MS Word!" I thought.
It's not just freakishly uncommon gobbledygook. There were also idioms and proverbs. I even caught one using the very pedestrian idiom "Still waters run deep". "Still" you say, hija? STILL? If they are "still", then why are they running? Demnit. I could not bring myself to believe that these terms are used by teenagers in their everyday conversations. A write-up is supposed to be descriptive of the person. It should be candid and realistic, not a vocabulary-building exercise.

There was also this one email that I received from a client a month ago. It read…

xxxxxxxxxx.xxxxxx@xxxxxx.com wrote on 08/12/2008 02:56:04 PM:

> Hi Tin!
>
>

>Good day!
>Sorry for the late reply, just got back from the Finance's lunch
>out. I totally agree with you in the sense that the entries-in-
>question are in fact manually prepared...blah blah blah... But
>is the control really ineffective, ceteris paribus, and that only
>these "clearing account entries" are not reviewed and approved? Talk about practicality . blah blah blah

>Thanks a lot Tin and I'm still counting on your immediate response...

>Regards,
>xxxxx

I read the email and could not comprehend the purpose of using "ceteris paribus". Was it a ploy to intimidate me with foreign language maxims? Well, I was neither intimidated nor impressed. I was not going to be fooled. I knew pretty well that this guy would not have used this term had we corresponded personally. I was actually tempted to email back something like: genus nunquam perit res perit domino ratio legis est anima ut magis valeat quam pereat ora et labora ad maoriem dei gloriam. I wouldn't have had made sense, yes, but maybe I would've feigned an increase in a few IQ points.

#2 While speaking – See if it's scripted

If you're in a seminar or in a simple conversation, familiarize yourself with the person you are talking to. Notice how much time he spends in making unwarranted sermons on current events and issues, in highly technical English. Observe how he articulates himself. Listen intently then ask yourselves these questions:

Is he an actual authority on the topic he his rambling on about?

Do his expressions sound natural and effortless?
Do his statements make sense?
Barok ba siya?
Is English second-nature to him?

If "no" is the only response you have for your own questions, then honey, the person in front of you has artificial intelligence. It is not beyond comprehension that that idiot read a book on his topic of choice and memorized a few lines from it. Maybe, just maybe, he even threw in a few actions that would make him seem ultra confident.

You don't believe me? Here. Memorize this:

A derivative is a financial contract whose value depends on the performance of a foreign exchange rate, a commodity price, an interest rate, the price of another financial instrument or other financial variables.

Now, when asked of what a derivative is, retrieve the script from your brain. Then, while reciting your lines, make hand gestures as if you're making some important point with every other statement you utter. Ha. If you pull this off, do you not think you'll be a hoot?

I once had a trainer in an audit seminar. I heard endless monologues of technicalities (just like the definition of a derivative as stated above) and expressions like, "Well, I don't know for the life of me" and I kept on thinking, "Really? You use that expression? You—a man who can't articulate even a simple sentence in full English." Isn't that nice. Straight from the business book he just read, if you ask me. Or is it Dilbert? Either way, he seemed so lame and I was so pissed off. Hindi kasi bagay eh. It was so unnatural.

#3 As regards the subject matter – Make sure it's not just a product of 5 minutes in Google and Yahoo! Answers

When the guy starts blabbing on about Lehman and other business shit, don't be impressed just yet. Artificially intelligent people tend to superficially study the topic just so they could talk as if they know the entire thing. Ask really inquisitive questions. If they either get unreasonably ticked off or act as if you've asked the dumbest question ever or just fumble for answers before your eyes, aah…there's an idiot in your presence.

Buddha said:

Again, it may be understood by a person's conversation whether or not he is competent at discussing things. If, on being questioned, a person is evasive, changes the subject, displays anger, malice or sulkiness, then he is incompetent to discuss things. If a person does not do these things, then he is competent at discussion.

Yet again, it may be understood by a person's conversation whether or not he is capable of constructive discussion. If, on being asked a question a person loads scorn on and beats down the questioner, laughs at him and tries to catch him out when he falters, then he is incapable of discussing things. If a person does none of these, then he is capable.

Buddha certainly knew what he was talking about.

I really hate people, and trust me when I say I've met more than a handful of people like this, who frantically research on something just so the next day, they could pass off their overnight knowledge as stock knowledge.

Having immense knowledge of something is particularly impressive if acquiring such was effortless for you. Knowing that you're bragging of your knowledge about the NYSE and the US' largest bailout you just got from a 30-minute run in Yahoo! Answers is a DEAL BREAKER to me. Don't get me wrong though. There's nothing wrong with researching (or using Yahoo! Answers). Just don't act as if knowing such details is second nature to you. Don't act like the guru which you are most obviously not.

Funny thing is these creatures who feign intelligence, as Buddha said, get mad when they're asked questions. How could we blame them, really? They have squat of an idea what they got themselves into. It's but natural for them to act defensive and get mad.

See this post from the blog "Things We Love to Hate".

Argh. If you have no idea how to answer a question, just say so and if, by some miracle, you do admit not knowing, don't act as if it was a dumb question to begin with. Stop shitting us. Don't pretend like you actually know. You're making it difficult for us not to believe that you're making an ass of yourself. We know more about life in outer space than you know anything about Lehman. Yeah, you're that stupid.

Now that y'all know how to spot these fakers, let's all unite and take our time hating them. Let's have our pistols ready and fire at them for every bit of bullshit they utter.

For those of you who want to feign knowledge on Lehman, see Yahoo! Answers. If you do decide to brandish your artificial intelligence, better get out of my way. If I don't catch you off guard with my probing business and finance questions, I'd just stab you just because you're an ass, because I'm sure that, just like all the fakers out there, you'll look like an ass as well…crack, fuzz, [bull]shit, and all.

When handwriting becomes eligible and a bachelor becomes illegible

“Stop it, people, stop it. You’re confusing the hell out of me.”

I have been attending training sessions for the past week. Audit training sessions, mind you. Of entity level controls, combined risk assessments, PM/TE/SAD Nominal, and analytical review procedures. Oh, I’m sorry…am I boring you? Good. Because I was bored to death myself.

Apart from endowing upon me the gift of boredom, an added perk of the training sessions, or any audit training session for that matter, is first-hand exposure on auditor/accountant-specific vocabulary and pronunciation.

Accountants share not only technical jargon, but also a unique way of pronouncing even the most pedestrian words. I have been trying to be politically correct with this, but there is no better way of putting it than simply saying that it is kabarokan. I think we drown in the monotony of our work that we often lose our morals of grammar and pronunciation. Worse, more often than not, we are unaware of these loose morals. Not that I enjoy putting my own profession down, but this fact has never gone under the radar anyway.

I may be wrong, though. It just might be the people I work with. That’s what scares me—that this culture of accountant kabarokan is prevalent only in our office. I admit that I don’t have impeccable choices in grammar and pronunciation, but it surely is terrifying sort of knowing that I’m in an environment which fosters such fallibility. And, of course, it’s simply annoying hearing all those misplaced modifiers and short E’s in place of long E’s put together in a week-long training event.

During the past week, when I hear someone say something like “team planning event” as if it’s “TIM PLANNEENG EH-VENT” or “my role as audit senior” as if it’s “MY ROHL AS AUDIT SINIOR” or “STAFFS” instead of “staff members” or “associate” as if the word talks of a dog, there’s stress on the first syllable and there are just three syllables instead of four (AH-SO-SHEYT), I hold back my tears (of laughter) and try oh so hard to exude nonchalance. But again, there is the fear that because of the frequency and regularity of these types of occurrences at work, I just might develop immunity to it.

At one particular point, I felt that fear starting to materialize. I was listening in to the discussion and found myself trapped in an unexpected confusion:

AUDIT TRAINOR (sic): What do you think should a good senior be like?

PARTICIPANT: Like in making review notes, good seniors should not have EH-LEE-GEE-BOL (stress on second syllable) handwriting, so that the staff will understand it.

XTIN: (zones out and goes to a deep and sudden introspection)

Hmmmm…wait. Did he say illegible or eligible? It’s just so hard to differentiate between the two as both seem to have the same accountant-specific pronunciation. Well, either way, it’s wrong.

Not one of the two is pronounced as EH-LEE-GEE-BOL, with stress on the second syllable.

Illegible, or not decipherable, is pronounced as EE-LEH-JIH-BOL, stress on the second syllable.

Eligible, on the other hand, or qualified or unattached, is pronounced as EH-LIH-JIH-BOL, stress on the first syllable, not the second.

Wait, or is it the other way around? Shocks! Stop it, people, stop it! You’re confusing the hell out of me!

Shit. I had to relearn the semantics of these two words just so I could finally differentiate between illegibly and eligibility. There was momentary dyslexia there.

XTIN: (comes back to reality with a renewed sense of self, only to find out that she is still in the training room in the presence of her TRAINOR [sic] and her co-participants, still engaged in their accountant-specific conversations)

Damn.

You need to be SINGLE to understand Sex and the City

I sometimes find myself in the middle of a conversation thinking what I could have done in my life to have deserved to be part of such a conversation. And during those rare but momentous occasions, I always get this nagging feeling in the pit of my stomach…the urge of slapping who I’m talking to at that moment and telling the half-wit, “What did you say? Seriously?”

A week or so ago, I got myself in such a conversation with an officemate. We were talking about Sex and the City, The Movie. I was telling her that I really liked the movie and it has been the only movie for quite some time that I enjoyed watching. Apparently, she also watched the movie and wanted to tell me how much she was not able to “relate” to the movie.

Basic fact to know before reading the following conversation: I, XTIN, AM SINGLE. AND SO IS MY OFFICEMATE’S COUSIN. The cousin is a girl, btw.

Officemate: Oo, nga e. Nagandahan nga din yung cousin ko, eh. Naiyak siya sa movie.

Xtin: Ako din, may times na medyo naiiyak ako pero hindi naman natuloy.

O: Talaga?

X: Oo. Nakakaawa kasi si Carrie, eh...

O: Yun nga, eh. Ako kasi hindi ako masyado nag-enjoy/naka-relate. So nung kinikwento sa akin ng cousin ko na naiyak siya, inisip ko, “Bakit ako hindi naiyak? Anong WALA SILA NA MERON AKO?” Tapos ayun, naisip ko, “AY, OO NGA PALA. AKO MAY BOYFRIEND.”

X: (@#$%^&*waatdapakkkk!?!?!...NOSEBLEED)

Huwaw. Seriously? So you need to have NO boyfriend to be able to understand or even feel sad for Carrie? Much more, you need to be single, pathetic, and hapless to comprehend the humor of Sex and the City? Shet. Holy shet. KAYA PALA GETS NA GETS KO AND TAWANG-TAWA AKO SA MOVIE. OH, DEAR GOD, TAKE ME AWAY!!!

And I thought knowing who Mr. Big was and what Manolos are was enough for me to “get” the movie. Apparently, I have to be involved in some lame-ass relationship before I could laugh at Charlotte for having soiled her panties.

And is the phrase not ANONG MERON SILA NA WALA AKO? Talk about making a statement work for you.

UNBELIEVABLE.

*then i came to wonder...what would i have needed to get the humor of KUNG FU panda? should have i gotten myself a talking panda first, so that i could somehow fathom the cute "face nerve" antics of Po? Hmmm...come to think of it...maybe i should have gotten me a panda, because I REALLY DIDN'T GET IT AT ALL. Geheddemmit.