For advertisement

Sample

4/18/2006

ge round 33: issues of contention

Issues of Contention The PAP is of the view that there is no issues or the opposition has run out of issues in this election. The opposition is keeping mum and not saying much, keeping the PAP guessing. Allow me to state what would be the likely issues of contention in this election. PAP's version. 1. To attack WP's manifesto on abolition of the presidency, abolition of grassroot organisations, abolition of HDB racial quota. 2. Poor quality of opposition candidates compare to their high achiever candidates. 3. Their track records of achievements. 4. A brighter future by staying together and moving ahead. 5. More upgradings and more handouts. Opposition version. 1. NKF as a reflection of the failure of the system, accountability, transparency and high pay against corruption. 2. High Minister's pay 3. Upgrading is public money and should not be used as a ransom against the people. 4. High cost of livings. High education fees, high transport fares, high medical fees, etc 5. Foreign talents, retrenchment and jobs for Singaporeans. 6. Casinos 7. One party rule is dangerous for Singapore 8. Need for opposition to check the govt. 9. Attack PAP's manifesto as all sound and no substance. 10. CPF money is the people's money, Medisave etc

15 comments:

redbean said...

The above issues of contention is very different from what was reported by a reporter, Jasmine Yin, who actually share the same views as the PAP. Her interpretation, from her survey, that there is really not many issues.

And among the issues which she think the people will not be interested will be Casino, NKF, Foreign Talents and Minister's salaries.

Where did she come from, or where have she been, or what lenses is she wearing? How come her views are so different from mine?

Maybe my views are so biased that it is far from reality. I must have lost touch with the people's feelings and concerns.

Anonymous said...

For every one right minded individual who sees the actual facts, there are one hundred blind PAP zombies just going with the flow.

Anonymous said...

I think after having had it so good for so long, Singaporeans have lost their survival instincts. Fact of the matter is we cannot rely on the govt to help us. We have to help ourselves, period. For example, the issue of FTs taking away our jobs, the way I see of solving that is for us to leave our comfort zone and become FTs ourselves.

Times have changed and no govt in the world, what more Singapore's can effectively insulate thelselves from the forces of globalisation. That is the crux of the issue.

redbean said...

one major changes is the meaning of loyalty. and this started in the corporate world when the old are quickly retired to bring in cheaper young workers.

this shift in valuing loyalty is similarly applied to loyalty of citizens when citizens are now valued lesser than foreign talents. citizens are now dispensable. what is important is talent. used or outdated citizens must make way for young foreign talents.

this undermines one of the key pillars in a society and a nation.

Anonymous said...

redbean, even the Americans have this problem of locals being displaced by cheaper FTs. I should know because I was one fo those FTs for a good 5 years. Don't over dramatise the issue. It's got nothing to do with loyalty, it's an issue of economic realities and expediencies.

redbean said...

i have the same exchange with another forumer in redbeanforum on this. the issue is that in pure economic terms, cost efficiency and productivity are the key considerations.

but in politics, economic considerations cannot be applied in a vacuum. in politics, it has a lot to do with the distribution of power and wealth to the people. politics is about economics and also about people.

once we have the term nation, we have the we and them divide, the family and kinship divide. if economic consideration is to rule supreme, then we should also open up the political leadership to foreign talents, the police and military appointments as well.

with the money we are paying our political leaders, we can buy the best politicians the world can offer today, and only to pay half of what we are paying the locals. this is economics without political considerations.

but here there is citizenship involved. why are countries like america putting pressure on china, imposing tariffs and threatening trade embargoes to protect their industries and jobs? they should not. the cheapest and most efficient shall do the job.

this is my point. economic theories cannot be applied without political considerations.

Anonymous said...

redbean, if we start to put political considerations ahead of economic ones, we will end up doing things like our northern cousins. Singapore has gotten this far to this position because we have not shied from making difficult decisions no matter how unpopular they may be, eg. the non-restoration of the CPF cut. This is something that's unique to us and is not readily applied in other countries. We cannot stray from this principle. Our survival depends on it.

Anonymous said...

Alsso, to add America can get away with what they're doing because they are a superpower. Singapore cannot. Therein lies the difference.

redbean said...

if you read my points carefully, you will notice that i did not advocate extremes. i am saying that the policies can be moderated. like gst, i am not against gst but to be a bit more discsriminating.

i am not against foreign talents, but be more careful when implementing them so that the people's interest must come first.

a more extremist view would be to allow foreign talents in the armed forces, police and even be political leaders. they are definitely much cheaper and better. foreign talents are tested and competed in the world market.

tough decisions must be made. but cannot make tough decision as an easy way out. we went crazy with the foreign talent policies leading to a lot of unemployment at the middle management level. the govt is now backtracking on this after so much hardship and pain were inflicted.

ask yourself this question. why should people who are badly affected by govt policies vote for the govt? why is the PAP now waving the motto, staying together, moving ahead?

they can't be saying this if they think they can dispense with the people's interest, right?

Anonymous said...

Ever heard of the phrase, better the devil you know than the devil you don't know ? That aptly sums up why I believe the electorate keeps voting for the PAP no matter what's thrown at them.

Singaporean FT said...

redbean, I was one of the middle managers who couldn't get jobs after I got retrenched during the financial crisis. However, I didn't wallow in self-pity or go to my MP to beg for a job. I decided to help myself by becoming an FT myself and I have not looked back since. I would like to see more Singaporeans take the same route I did instead of sulking and whining about the govt not being fair to locals by opening the floodgates to foreigners to come and work in Singapore.

redbean said...

hi singapore ft,

welcome to the blog. it is heartening to know that you are doing well. many are following the route that you have taken. few months back there was another forumer who have to quit and went to the middle east. he is a professional and could not find anyone here willing to make him an offer.

for those who are able, relocating, re inventing oneself is not a big issue. but for everyone that succeeded to do so, there will be at least another who is struggling. it is not easy when family commitments are still there. some of my friends are very qualified but have to make do with half of what they used to be getting.

and some are just twiddling their thumbs at home trying not to be embarassed.

nice for you to join us in the chat. hope to here more from you.

redbean said...

the electorate are continuing to vote for pap simply because there is no better alternative. and yes, better the devil than the unknown.

and the devil is not necessary the best available.

Singaporean FT said...

Well, redbean, I believe in the age-old saying Where there's a will, tehre's a way. It's not that I don't have family commitments to consider too. However, at the end of the day, I figured I am not of much use to my family stuck at home, twiddling my thumbs as you put it. The rest as they say is history. The point is there is a big world out there ripe for the picking, if only we have the courage to step out of our comfort zones.

redbean said...

hi sporeft,

the world indeed is very big and it is up to a person to find his own way.

just the internet virtual world alone is enough to keep me very busy. there is no need to step out of the house to see the world and talk to the world, and doing biz.

people of our age group actually has a new found freedom, another chance to do what we want where the children are on their own.

we should enjoy the second chapter of our lives.