u might get it.

6 months ago... on 27 aug 2013, i bought at 1.24.

Is it wise for anyone to have FD when the rates are below that of inflation ? You are just lending your money to the banks for them to make mega bucks in exchange for peanut rates.  

RM100K today, 10 years later or 100 years on will still remain RM100K. By itself, it is not productive and cannot generate wealth. But it's value will be greatly reduced by inflation and the QE necessary to keep the financial system afloat.

Whatever money should be converted to productive assets like stocks, property/land etc that can generate wealth. Use such assets to establish facilities from the banks for cash flow or convenience purposes. What is important here is not hard cash but access to cash.

Money in the banks is not without risks. In the event of a catastropic financial failure, the guarantee to our money in the banks could be worthless. The company insuring your money may also collapse. But you can still grow your own food and survive on your land.

Stocks are only risky if you treat the stock exchange as a casino and gamble blindly. Shares of good companies can outlast wars and many economic crises. Imagine if your great great grandfather had invested RM100K in a good company like Nestle CH since it's inception. It has gone through 2 World Wars and numerous world economic crises but it keep growing in value . . . meaning the investment can generate enough wealth to keep you and your great great grandchildren above financial needs without lifting a finger to work.  

So now you need to identify the good stocks to invest. You need to think like a businessman with good foresight.
Is Nestle more risky than REITS ? What about LPI ? Why are you not interested in Padini, Carlsberg and blah blah etc. Is risk your only criteria for investments ? Not interested in capital growth? Is your money for investment earmarked for anything within the next 2/3 years ? Would you buy/sell based on what XYZ analyst/media says?? and ETC.

How successful your investments are depends on how you approach questions like the above . . .

Cheers and good luck.  

From Warren Buffett...

The riskiness of an investment is not measured by beta (a Wall Street term encompassing volatility and often used in measuring risk) but rather by the probability -- the reasoned probability -- of that investment causing its owner a loss of purchasing power over his contemplated holding period. Assets can fluctuate greatly in price and not be risky as long as they are reasonably certain to deliver increased purchasing power over their holding period. And... a nonfluctuating asset can be laden with risk.