This may be a new concept to some but is not new in reality. A good example is the USA and Australia where the migrants became so extensive and a majority over the local population that they became the dominant political force of their country of adoption. It could be easier for it to happen in Australia, and New Zealand for that matter, as the local populations were small. For it to happen in the USA required extraordinary circumstances like mass and uncontrolled new migrants and a reversed process like genocide of the local population.
Reverse emigration is very easily effected in a small island and small population like ours. We could actually be near the tipping point where foreigners are more than the locals. It could already have been if PRs are recognized as foreigners, plus all the temporary stayers.
What would happen are the effects of life on the locals when the locals become a minority in their own country. We are not feeling the pressure yet as the language of English is still widely used officially and informally. When foreign languages become the lingua franca, when signboards are changed, when lifestyle and social habits are changed, when foreigners are imposing their rights over the locals, the impact would be more felt and immediate.
Would there be a day where there are more foreigners in a train or bus than locals? Would there be a day when the HR depts are dominated by foreigners who choose to hire foreigners and discriminate against the locals? Would there be a day when foreigners dominate the civil service and govt and policies are more favourable to foreigners? Would there be a day when foreigners are given free scholarship to study in our universities and locals would have to beg, borrow or steal to do that?
Would there be a day when foreigners would freely cut queues for services in retail outlets or public services because the providers of services were foreigners and not locals? Would there be a day where the landlords are foreigners and the tenants are locals? Would there be a day when signs are put up saying no Singaporeans and dogs are allowed?
Reverse emigration can become an ugly reality if we are not careful. Or are we there already? Without thinking, having more foreigners here seems so fun and so good for the economy. The world seems to be able to live with the reverse emigration in the USA, Australia and New Zealand. Some of the uncaring elite also share the view that it is better as the new migrants are much more talented and have led these countries to greater heights and better quality of life and development. Sounds very familiar to our meritocracy when talents are welcome and non talent locals are encouraged to go to Bintan, Batam and JB.
When would the seriousness of reverse emigration really hit the daft Sinkies for them to feel the pain? Unfortunately the day they felt it, it would be too late. When that day comes, Sinkies will find themselves in another country without physically migrating or moving. The foreigners moved in and became the majority. The complacent Sinkies got emigrated by staying put.
3/13/2012
The changing fortunes of LKY
1970, I was a young man in the land of our past colonial masters. I was in a pub one evening and the bartender told me that they would all be watching the TV later that night. I was curious. What was so important on the TV and why must he said that to me. I asked. His reply was that our Lee Kuan Yew would be speaking on their TV live that night. And probably the whole of England would be watching and listening to his wise words.
Those were the prime years of LKY. He was highly regarded, highly admired and highly listened to all over the world. He still does. The local citizens too were captivated by his oratory skills for decades too. Over time this following has gradually shifted, from great admiration to cautious and guarded reticence, to private criticism. This morning I read Feedmetothefish. He quoted an article by a Judy Zhou who openly criticized LKY, his policies and the way he demolished his political opponents. And she is not alone.
Criticism of LKY is getting more prevalent and more fortright today. Some could be very nasty. It is something that was unspeakable in his heydays. The foreigners are still holding him in high regards for his achievements and for the shining little jewel called Singapore. They did not have to live with his policies and his knuckle duster. Those who have and those who are living in the little jewel and disagreeing with or hurt by many of his policies are having different thoughts.
The changing perception of LKY is mirrored in the changing perception of his party, his ministers and MPs. From a time of high regards, deference and acceptance, it is now open criticism, questioning and opposition to ideas and policies that are no longer accepted with reluctance. The awe is gone and skepticism has crept in, and unstoppable when nothing seems right and everything seems wrong. It is a strange development, but it is happening. No amount of propaganda can remove the new perception of both LKY and his party and his chosen political leaders.
They still have 60% of the votes in the last GE and 35% of the vote for their sponsored President. How would these numbers changed come the next GE? A good indicator will be the coming Hougang by election, if there is one. It will be the harbinger of the PAP’s fortune in the next GE.
Those were the prime years of LKY. He was highly regarded, highly admired and highly listened to all over the world. He still does. The local citizens too were captivated by his oratory skills for decades too. Over time this following has gradually shifted, from great admiration to cautious and guarded reticence, to private criticism. This morning I read Feedmetothefish. He quoted an article by a Judy Zhou who openly criticized LKY, his policies and the way he demolished his political opponents. And she is not alone.
Criticism of LKY is getting more prevalent and more fortright today. Some could be very nasty. It is something that was unspeakable in his heydays. The foreigners are still holding him in high regards for his achievements and for the shining little jewel called Singapore. They did not have to live with his policies and his knuckle duster. Those who have and those who are living in the little jewel and disagreeing with or hurt by many of his policies are having different thoughts.
The changing perception of LKY is mirrored in the changing perception of his party, his ministers and MPs. From a time of high regards, deference and acceptance, it is now open criticism, questioning and opposition to ideas and policies that are no longer accepted with reluctance. The awe is gone and skepticism has crept in, and unstoppable when nothing seems right and everything seems wrong. It is a strange development, but it is happening. No amount of propaganda can remove the new perception of both LKY and his party and his chosen political leaders.
They still have 60% of the votes in the last GE and 35% of the vote for their sponsored President. How would these numbers changed come the next GE? A good indicator will be the coming Hougang by election, if there is one. It will be the harbinger of the PAP’s fortune in the next GE.
The untold nation builders of the 1950s
In the 1950s we were still not a country or a nation. We were a colony of the British Empire. After the war, the people were getting more politicised and aware that the British were colonial masters and running this island for their own interests. The interests of the people were secondary. The British only think of the purse of the king or queen in England. A few elites started thinking that they could run this island better, for the people who were making this place their home.
A simple thought of taking control of the country and to decide their own future became the seed of fermentation and the struggle for independence. The people wanted to determine their own future and not be led by the colonialists with their own agenda. They wanted a better distribution of the wealth of the island by seizing political power.
The few good men did what they needed to do. They agitated the people to stand up and fight for their own future. The otherwise stateless and docile people, the workers, were politicised. They could see a better future if they were willing to fight and risk their lives. The people were awakened to the possibilities, to be their own masters and not the servants. Those days they used to end their letters with the phrase, ‘Your obedient servant.’
The servant mentality was removed. They were unshackled. And they fought for what we have today. They continued to slog after independence to build a fairer and more equitable society for themselves and their children.
The course of our history would have been different if they have been cowed, frightened, kiasu and kiasi. The course of history would have been different if they have been apathetic, kia cheng hu, and remained docile and obedient to the power of the day.
They took their future into their own hands, to shape it the way they wanted it to be. The people decided what was best for them. Without their courage to confront the colonial govt, to fight for their own good, we would not be what we are today. We only have to thank them for standing up, to face the selfishness of the colonial govt, to say, ‘give me back my island.’ We would decide what was best for us.
History always have great moments like this, when being compliant, being docile, being obedient, being afraid, were not an option. The generations of the 50s gave us this country. As our inheritance, it is tragic to lose this country by default and sheer negligence on our part. It will be a great tragedy and an unfilial act to our forefathers, our benefactors, who fought for a country for us and our children. They were migrants to a non country. They gave us a country we can call home. We are no longer migrants and stateless.
The descendants and beneficiaries of the sacrifices of our nation builders have a duty and responsibility to protect this little island they inherited. It must not be given away freely to anyone on any flimsy excuses. If we lose this inheritance through inaction, the tragic shame will be on every Singaporean.
A simple thought of taking control of the country and to decide their own future became the seed of fermentation and the struggle for independence. The people wanted to determine their own future and not be led by the colonialists with their own agenda. They wanted a better distribution of the wealth of the island by seizing political power.
The few good men did what they needed to do. They agitated the people to stand up and fight for their own future. The otherwise stateless and docile people, the workers, were politicised. They could see a better future if they were willing to fight and risk their lives. The people were awakened to the possibilities, to be their own masters and not the servants. Those days they used to end their letters with the phrase, ‘Your obedient servant.’
The servant mentality was removed. They were unshackled. And they fought for what we have today. They continued to slog after independence to build a fairer and more equitable society for themselves and their children.
The course of our history would have been different if they have been cowed, frightened, kiasu and kiasi. The course of history would have been different if they have been apathetic, kia cheng hu, and remained docile and obedient to the power of the day.
They took their future into their own hands, to shape it the way they wanted it to be. The people decided what was best for them. Without their courage to confront the colonial govt, to fight for their own good, we would not be what we are today. We only have to thank them for standing up, to face the selfishness of the colonial govt, to say, ‘give me back my island.’ We would decide what was best for us.
History always have great moments like this, when being compliant, being docile, being obedient, being afraid, were not an option. The generations of the 50s gave us this country. As our inheritance, it is tragic to lose this country by default and sheer negligence on our part. It will be a great tragedy and an unfilial act to our forefathers, our benefactors, who fought for a country for us and our children. They were migrants to a non country. They gave us a country we can call home. We are no longer migrants and stateless.
The descendants and beneficiaries of the sacrifices of our nation builders have a duty and responsibility to protect this little island they inherited. It must not be given away freely to anyone on any flimsy excuses. If we lose this inheritance through inaction, the tragic shame will be on every Singaporean.
3/12/2012
A reminder to nuclear infidelity
Yesterday was the anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Channel News Asia devoted nearly the whole day of its programmes to remind everyone of this tragedy and how the Japanese are coping with it. Flirting with danger is a trait of daft human beans. Many have nothing better to do than to jump over high buildings for fun. Some tied a string on their legs and jumped over mountain cliffs or tall bridges. Cool. Anything that is flirtatious is tempting, a temptation that is simply exciting and nothing else.
While CNA was reminding the world of the nuclear disaster in Japan, is it also sending a signal to the flirtatious that flirting with nuclear disaster is a very dangerous thing to do and to be avoided at all costs? Is our flirtation with nuclear energy still on course as we plan ahead for a population of 10m or more? The wild ambition to grow our population to be richer and richer in economic numbers is one of the primary causes of this flirtation. We need not only nuclear energy but may other resources to sustain such a huge population, water, food, infrastructure, in fact everything, to feed the needs of a 10m population.
The good thing is that we will get there. We will build a nuclear power station that would not go wrong. Going wrong is not an option. But should there be a slight mishap like the Fukushima, the damage will be contained. The Jap’s incompetence screwed it up, we won’t. And if there is an explosion, the explosion will be small enough not to risk sinking the island. That we will make sure. What if the explosion is big enough? No worry, the design will make it blow out through the other side of the earth. The island will be made perfectly safe with a perfectly safe nuclear power station underneath. That is how good our nuclear fantasy can be.
The CNA memorial is only good for the converts who are now living in fear and dreaming of a nuclear disaster everyday. They are the fools. For the brilliant and super talented, nothing is beyond them. We will triumph with the best talents money can buy and the best technology that will not fail us. That is how good we are.
While CNA was reminding the world of the nuclear disaster in Japan, is it also sending a signal to the flirtatious that flirting with nuclear disaster is a very dangerous thing to do and to be avoided at all costs? Is our flirtation with nuclear energy still on course as we plan ahead for a population of 10m or more? The wild ambition to grow our population to be richer and richer in economic numbers is one of the primary causes of this flirtation. We need not only nuclear energy but may other resources to sustain such a huge population, water, food, infrastructure, in fact everything, to feed the needs of a 10m population.
The good thing is that we will get there. We will build a nuclear power station that would not go wrong. Going wrong is not an option. But should there be a slight mishap like the Fukushima, the damage will be contained. The Jap’s incompetence screwed it up, we won’t. And if there is an explosion, the explosion will be small enough not to risk sinking the island. That we will make sure. What if the explosion is big enough? No worry, the design will make it blow out through the other side of the earth. The island will be made perfectly safe with a perfectly safe nuclear power station underneath. That is how good our nuclear fantasy can be.
The CNA memorial is only good for the converts who are now living in fear and dreaming of a nuclear disaster everyday. They are the fools. For the brilliant and super talented, nothing is beyond them. We will triumph with the best talents money can buy and the best technology that will not fail us. That is how good we are.
Saying all the right things
Saying all the right things is not the same as doing the right things. Some are good at saying the right things and doing the wrong things. To be credible and believeable, there is a saying, walk the talk.
I like what Shanmugam said and printed on the cover of Today paper this morning. ‘…the govt does not want younger Singaporeans to be saddled with tax burdens, even as it ensures that the elderly are taken care of and no one is left behind.’ He added, ‘We keep our tax rates competitive, 20 per cent at the top….’
This is the best part, ‘We rather people keep their money and spend it as they like, buy insurance for their health…’ Please tell the CPF that the people want to spend their savings as they like, can? And this is even better, ‘…only about 50 per cent of Singaporeans pay taxes.’ In my earlier posts I mentioned that at 85 years old, a Singaporeans would still be paying taxes through the GST, and so is an unborn baby. Of course he is talking about income tax. GST is not income tax. Don’t confuse the two.
Singaporeans are so lowly taxed that they have hundreds of thousands left in their CPF accounts under two minimum sum schemes which are their savings, and understandably they can keep their money and spend it as they like. And young Singaporeans are not burdened by taxes because of the old and ageing population. And the govt is looking after the oldies. Really? How many oldies are being looked after by the govt and how much does it cost the govt? To my simple mind, the oldies will be looking after themselves through their CPF savings which they cannot spend as they like.
As for the young, do they still have money left to pay taxes given the huge sum of money they have to pay for a roof over their heads and the huge minimum sums that are not taxed but kept in their CPF for them to spend as they liked?
It is always good to listen to the good side of the story. Hear only the good stuff.
I like what Shanmugam said and printed on the cover of Today paper this morning. ‘…the govt does not want younger Singaporeans to be saddled with tax burdens, even as it ensures that the elderly are taken care of and no one is left behind.’ He added, ‘We keep our tax rates competitive, 20 per cent at the top….’
This is the best part, ‘We rather people keep their money and spend it as they like, buy insurance for their health…’ Please tell the CPF that the people want to spend their savings as they like, can? And this is even better, ‘…only about 50 per cent of Singaporeans pay taxes.’ In my earlier posts I mentioned that at 85 years old, a Singaporeans would still be paying taxes through the GST, and so is an unborn baby. Of course he is talking about income tax. GST is not income tax. Don’t confuse the two.
Singaporeans are so lowly taxed that they have hundreds of thousands left in their CPF accounts under two minimum sum schemes which are their savings, and understandably they can keep their money and spend it as they like. And young Singaporeans are not burdened by taxes because of the old and ageing population. And the govt is looking after the oldies. Really? How many oldies are being looked after by the govt and how much does it cost the govt? To my simple mind, the oldies will be looking after themselves through their CPF savings which they cannot spend as they like.
As for the young, do they still have money left to pay taxes given the huge sum of money they have to pay for a roof over their heads and the huge minimum sums that are not taxed but kept in their CPF for them to spend as they liked?
It is always good to listen to the good side of the story. Hear only the good stuff.
Hilarious taxi woes of a third world country
We are first world, run by the best super talents money can buy. Don’t ever associate this top notch country with the third world. With all the restructuring of taxi fares, controls and regulations, and use of GPS and satellites, our taxi woes must be a thing of the past. What I read in the ST on Saturday morning was quite an eye opener.
Here is a short summary of the points raised and the four causes of taxi woes in our first world country. Plenty of taxis but under utilised because some work on one shift with one operator per taxi. Some earn enough would call it a day. Not all 27,000 taxis will be on the road all the time. So, you know the problems right, what are you going to do about it? Why pay millions to people who tell you the problem and that is the end of the story? What we need is solution.
Unfortunately the solution is the problem itself. Pay higher for bookings. This was a brilliant solution. Now all the enterprising taxi drivers would want to wait for call bookings rather than pick up passengers. And plenty of brilliant suggestions to make this solution turned problem a solution again. Increase the charge for call bookings. I have a betterer idea which I will volunteer later.
A narrow window for shift change over because all the drivers want to participate in driving at peak hours. So the peak hour solution also becomes a problem in its own right. Drivers play hide and seek at non peak hours and not picking passengers just before peak hours come into play.
Call bookings got through but no cabs around. This is expected in such a big city like Singapore where one can drive a sports car into the sea within 10 mins of non stop acceleration. With GPS and satellites and modern communication, cannot find a cab near the caller? How far can a cab be from a caller in this 700 sq km piece of rock? Anyway it is a genuine problem and no one has a solution for it. It is just like that lah, what to do?
There is no solution but problems. Everyone can tell you the problems but not the solutions. The best they could do was to throw in solutions to become problems tomorrow. That I also know. I can offer this kind of solutions for free. But solutions there are plenty from the public. Make calls more expensive. Make flag down charge more expensive. Some even suggested that the caller makes a higher offer if he needs a cab urgently and sure, all the cab drivers will be rushing to his doorstep.
Taxis cost much because the passengers are paying for convenience. Now getting a taxi, paying more, is causing more trouble to the passengers. Waiting for 30 minutes is a norm. Now I must praise Lui Tuck Yew for 3 minutes wait for trains even at peak hours. Why so silly, pay $20 to $50 and wait like crazy on the road side for a taxi that takes 30 minutes to arrive? Taking a train one will be at the destination long before that.
Now my unbeatable solution formulated from all the above suggestions. In the first place people don’t mind paying more for convenience. What is the most efficient system then? Outcry, like in the old stock market. Just shout out the fare, $100 to the airport. The passenger just make a call offering how much he wants to pay for his trip and where he is. That is all he needs to do and let the taxi operators broadcast to the drivers. Not only the taxis will rush to him super fast, there will be more than 10 taxis coming to serve him depending on how high is his offer. Now who can beat this superb solution?
Pay for service and the service will go to the highest bidder. Now a warning, the roads will be turned into a F1 racing track and taxis will be zooming all over the island to make their catch. No more long waiting time. : ) As for the losers who cannot afford to raise the bid, continue queuing at the taxi stands and hope a taxi will turn up. You need to pay for good service!
PS. I think the more meritocratic cab users are already putting this into practice by calling the operator and offering to pay another $50 above the meter fare. Sure he will get his cab ahead of everyone else. Could this be another cause to the problem of difficulties in getting a cab even on call bookings?
Here is a short summary of the points raised and the four causes of taxi woes in our first world country. Plenty of taxis but under utilised because some work on one shift with one operator per taxi. Some earn enough would call it a day. Not all 27,000 taxis will be on the road all the time. So, you know the problems right, what are you going to do about it? Why pay millions to people who tell you the problem and that is the end of the story? What we need is solution.
Unfortunately the solution is the problem itself. Pay higher for bookings. This was a brilliant solution. Now all the enterprising taxi drivers would want to wait for call bookings rather than pick up passengers. And plenty of brilliant suggestions to make this solution turned problem a solution again. Increase the charge for call bookings. I have a betterer idea which I will volunteer later.
A narrow window for shift change over because all the drivers want to participate in driving at peak hours. So the peak hour solution also becomes a problem in its own right. Drivers play hide and seek at non peak hours and not picking passengers just before peak hours come into play.
Call bookings got through but no cabs around. This is expected in such a big city like Singapore where one can drive a sports car into the sea within 10 mins of non stop acceleration. With GPS and satellites and modern communication, cannot find a cab near the caller? How far can a cab be from a caller in this 700 sq km piece of rock? Anyway it is a genuine problem and no one has a solution for it. It is just like that lah, what to do?
There is no solution but problems. Everyone can tell you the problems but not the solutions. The best they could do was to throw in solutions to become problems tomorrow. That I also know. I can offer this kind of solutions for free. But solutions there are plenty from the public. Make calls more expensive. Make flag down charge more expensive. Some even suggested that the caller makes a higher offer if he needs a cab urgently and sure, all the cab drivers will be rushing to his doorstep.
Taxis cost much because the passengers are paying for convenience. Now getting a taxi, paying more, is causing more trouble to the passengers. Waiting for 30 minutes is a norm. Now I must praise Lui Tuck Yew for 3 minutes wait for trains even at peak hours. Why so silly, pay $20 to $50 and wait like crazy on the road side for a taxi that takes 30 minutes to arrive? Taking a train one will be at the destination long before that.
Now my unbeatable solution formulated from all the above suggestions. In the first place people don’t mind paying more for convenience. What is the most efficient system then? Outcry, like in the old stock market. Just shout out the fare, $100 to the airport. The passenger just make a call offering how much he wants to pay for his trip and where he is. That is all he needs to do and let the taxi operators broadcast to the drivers. Not only the taxis will rush to him super fast, there will be more than 10 taxis coming to serve him depending on how high is his offer. Now who can beat this superb solution?
Pay for service and the service will go to the highest bidder. Now a warning, the roads will be turned into a F1 racing track and taxis will be zooming all over the island to make their catch. No more long waiting time. : ) As for the losers who cannot afford to raise the bid, continue queuing at the taxi stands and hope a taxi will turn up. You need to pay for good service!
PS. I think the more meritocratic cab users are already putting this into practice by calling the operator and offering to pay another $50 above the meter fare. Sure he will get his cab ahead of everyone else. Could this be another cause to the problem of difficulties in getting a cab even on call bookings?
3/11/2012
Manifesto for a pro Singapore political party
This manifesto is slightly different from the pro Singaporean one. This one is pro Singapore, as long as Singapore is looking good, Singaporean is not really important, or not all Singaporeans are important. One is for people and one is for the concept of state in theory but for a few individuals in reality.
I have listed a few things that would favour a pro Singapore political party, and the people or citizens exist for the country, not the country for the people.
1. Priority housing for those who can afford to pay for it. From the lowest income to the highest income, housing price will be adjusted accordingly to fit their incomes. The more they earn, the more they pay. The lesser they earn the lesser they pay. Very equitable and very fair. But many will just have enough to pay and nothing left for retirement.
2. Tax payers’ money will be used to benefit anyone regardless of nationality as long as he has merit. It would be better if they are talents, from anywhere also can.
3. Licences for small businesses will be given to whoever is allowed to stay and work here. Priorities given to foreigners as they need to feed themselves and to help the citizens, and to provide jobs for the citizens.
4. Hospitals and medical services must be privatized to be efficient and affordable with the help of insurance schemes by paying forward. As not many people really need to pay, the pooling together of their savings will make it easier for those who need to pay for affordable hospital bills.
5. Land is really scarce and landed properties must be sold off to foreigners to maximize profits and returns. The profits can then be used for overseas investments in our sovereign funds or put into our national reserves. The purpose of sovereign funds and national reserves, no one knows, maybe for that rainy day that is supposed to come one day.
6. Political offices, appointments in govt and stats boards must give priority to able citizens and also able foreigners. Nationality is not important, merit is.
7. Citizenship must be given to those who are hungry and willing to migrate here to raise our GDP numbers. They would also help to create a buzz. Not forgetting that they will improve our gene pool. The new bastard generation will be strong and fitter and maybe more talented also.
8. The population of 5m is too little. We need to grow our population to generate growth in our GDP. There shall be no limits to the size of the population as long as it is good for our GDP. We can build modern towers of Babel that will dwarf the old Babel tower.
9. Pledge to implement policies that favour both citizens and non citizens based on merits. There shall be no discrimination against non citizens or PRs.
10. CPF money must be carefully managed to ensure that all citizens have enough to live forever. The minimum sums must be regularly adjusted to inflation.
The above 10 conditions will ensure that the country Singapore will last forever even if all its citizens become quitters. More and able foreign talents will be eager to come here to replace them.
Majulah Singapura.
I have listed a few things that would favour a pro Singapore political party, and the people or citizens exist for the country, not the country for the people.
1. Priority housing for those who can afford to pay for it. From the lowest income to the highest income, housing price will be adjusted accordingly to fit their incomes. The more they earn, the more they pay. The lesser they earn the lesser they pay. Very equitable and very fair. But many will just have enough to pay and nothing left for retirement.
2. Tax payers’ money will be used to benefit anyone regardless of nationality as long as he has merit. It would be better if they are talents, from anywhere also can.
3. Licences for small businesses will be given to whoever is allowed to stay and work here. Priorities given to foreigners as they need to feed themselves and to help the citizens, and to provide jobs for the citizens.
4. Hospitals and medical services must be privatized to be efficient and affordable with the help of insurance schemes by paying forward. As not many people really need to pay, the pooling together of their savings will make it easier for those who need to pay for affordable hospital bills.
5. Land is really scarce and landed properties must be sold off to foreigners to maximize profits and returns. The profits can then be used for overseas investments in our sovereign funds or put into our national reserves. The purpose of sovereign funds and national reserves, no one knows, maybe for that rainy day that is supposed to come one day.
6. Political offices, appointments in govt and stats boards must give priority to able citizens and also able foreigners. Nationality is not important, merit is.
7. Citizenship must be given to those who are hungry and willing to migrate here to raise our GDP numbers. They would also help to create a buzz. Not forgetting that they will improve our gene pool. The new bastard generation will be strong and fitter and maybe more talented also.
8. The population of 5m is too little. We need to grow our population to generate growth in our GDP. There shall be no limits to the size of the population as long as it is good for our GDP. We can build modern towers of Babel that will dwarf the old Babel tower.
9. Pledge to implement policies that favour both citizens and non citizens based on merits. There shall be no discrimination against non citizens or PRs.
10. CPF money must be carefully managed to ensure that all citizens have enough to live forever. The minimum sums must be regularly adjusted to inflation.
The above 10 conditions will ensure that the country Singapore will last forever even if all its citizens become quitters. More and able foreign talents will be eager to come here to replace them.
Majulah Singapura.
3/10/2012
Hsien Loong will call a by election in Hougang
That was what he said in Parliament when asked by Christopher de Souza. So, there will be a by election but the timing will have to wait as Hsien Loong said, ‘In deciding on the timing, I will take into account all relevant factors, including the well being of Hougang residents, issues on the national agenda, as well as the international backdrop which affects our prosperity and security.’
A by election is not so simple and it is of utmost importance even if the govt has already be elected. Or maybe not to some as the main purpose of an election is to elect a govt and not an MP to serve the local residents. Everyone claimed to know the law and he is right. Got law like that one meh, everyone is right?
Let’s look at some of these relevant factors as pointed out by Hsien Loong. Firstly, the well being of Hougang residents. Assuming that this is equally important as the election of a govt. If not, then once a govt is elected, no MP never mind. Are the residents best served by an MP or by two non MPs of two opposition camps? At the moment, though there is no MP, there is Desmond Choo of PAP and the whole of the WP helping the Hougang residents. I think this is far better than being served by one MP. On this point, got or no by election, not important. It is better not to have a by election with so many eager beaver trying to help. Call it voluntary self help. No representation in parliament not really important. What more if MPs got more important things to do than attending parliament.
The second point is national agenda. Now what is this national agenda? Could it be the economy, security or what? I am clueless, no idea at all, so cannot make any reasonable statement on this. Could it be the population size not settle yet, the unhappiness over foreign talents, unhappiness over scholarship for foreigners, transportation or cost of living or, really no idea.
The third point is the international backdrop that affects our prosperity and security. Wah lan, everything under the sky can come under these two motherhood terms. So, is there anything affecting our prosperity and security at the moment? The Americans are saying the South China Sea area very dangerous and the housewife in Washington is saying that China does not know how to be a super power. In other words the Americans are telling the Chinese to get lost and they are taking over as the most responsible superpower and knows exactly how a super power should behave, ie, create more tension and start more wars.
On this point alone, the region is getting more unstable and our security will definitely be affected. And the Americans are plotting to have a trade war with China which means our prosperity too may be hit. I think better don’t call for a by election just yet and wait until China and the US agree to sleep together and make love.
Of the three relevant factors, two factors say no to holding a by election. The Hougang residents are better served now without an MP. And our prosperity and security are entering a troublesome phase and need special attention. The by election can wait.
As for the other factor of national agenda, I am not sure what it is but since two out of three factors are not in favour of a by election immediately, it is unlikely for a by election to be called soon even if Hsien Loong wants to call one. This is my assessment of the situation.
Another point is that the missing MP problem is created by the WP. So it is the WP problem and the WP must be solely responsible and be blamed for it. If no by election, cannot blame the ruling govt. Stretching this kind of argument a little, what if an MP is struck by lightning while playing golf, touch wood, it becomes an act of God. So can rightly put the blame on God and no need to call by election also? This kind of thinking and argument very difficult to understand in politics. As they say, there is no right and wrong answer.
A by election is not so simple and it is of utmost importance even if the govt has already be elected. Or maybe not to some as the main purpose of an election is to elect a govt and not an MP to serve the local residents. Everyone claimed to know the law and he is right. Got law like that one meh, everyone is right?
Let’s look at some of these relevant factors as pointed out by Hsien Loong. Firstly, the well being of Hougang residents. Assuming that this is equally important as the election of a govt. If not, then once a govt is elected, no MP never mind. Are the residents best served by an MP or by two non MPs of two opposition camps? At the moment, though there is no MP, there is Desmond Choo of PAP and the whole of the WP helping the Hougang residents. I think this is far better than being served by one MP. On this point, got or no by election, not important. It is better not to have a by election with so many eager beaver trying to help. Call it voluntary self help. No representation in parliament not really important. What more if MPs got more important things to do than attending parliament.
The second point is national agenda. Now what is this national agenda? Could it be the economy, security or what? I am clueless, no idea at all, so cannot make any reasonable statement on this. Could it be the population size not settle yet, the unhappiness over foreign talents, unhappiness over scholarship for foreigners, transportation or cost of living or, really no idea.
The third point is the international backdrop that affects our prosperity and security. Wah lan, everything under the sky can come under these two motherhood terms. So, is there anything affecting our prosperity and security at the moment? The Americans are saying the South China Sea area very dangerous and the housewife in Washington is saying that China does not know how to be a super power. In other words the Americans are telling the Chinese to get lost and they are taking over as the most responsible superpower and knows exactly how a super power should behave, ie, create more tension and start more wars.
On this point alone, the region is getting more unstable and our security will definitely be affected. And the Americans are plotting to have a trade war with China which means our prosperity too may be hit. I think better don’t call for a by election just yet and wait until China and the US agree to sleep together and make love.
Of the three relevant factors, two factors say no to holding a by election. The Hougang residents are better served now without an MP. And our prosperity and security are entering a troublesome phase and need special attention. The by election can wait.
As for the other factor of national agenda, I am not sure what it is but since two out of three factors are not in favour of a by election immediately, it is unlikely for a by election to be called soon even if Hsien Loong wants to call one. This is my assessment of the situation.
Another point is that the missing MP problem is created by the WP. So it is the WP problem and the WP must be solely responsible and be blamed for it. If no by election, cannot blame the ruling govt. Stretching this kind of argument a little, what if an MP is struck by lightning while playing golf, touch wood, it becomes an act of God. So can rightly put the blame on God and no need to call by election also? This kind of thinking and argument very difficult to understand in politics. As they say, there is no right and wrong answer.
3/09/2012
GST is fair
I am 85, retired, unemployed, why am I paying GST?
I am 70, retired, unemployed, why am I paying GST?
I am 60, lost my job and unemployed. Why am I paying GST?
I am 10, still in school, why am I paying GST?
I am 3, in nursery, why am I paying GST?
I am 3 months old, in my mother’s womb. Why am I paying GST?
I am 70, retired, unemployed, why am I paying GST?
I am 60, lost my job and unemployed. Why am I paying GST?
I am 10, still in school, why am I paying GST?
I am 3, in nursery, why am I paying GST?
I am 3 months old, in my mother’s womb. Why am I paying GST?
Manifesto for a pro Singaporean political party
Every political party claims to be there to serve the people and the people’s interests when voted to power. How many really live to these ideals when the votes were casted? I have listed a few things that I would like a pro Singaporean political party to stand for and live by it and be deserving of the people’s votes.
1. Priority housing for all Singaporeans. No stupid rules to rule out any Singaporean. This is our country and this is our home and the land belongs to the citizens. Citizens must have the first right of refusal to public housing. If there is enough land to build for foreigners, there is no reason why citizens should be deprived of public housing.
2. Tax payers’ money must be mainly used to benefit Singaporeans and their children. Not to benefit foreigners who have no stakes here. A little charity is acceptable but nothing extravagant.
3. Licence for small business must give priorities to Singaporeans. Some small businesses should be for citizens only. Foreigners are here to work for Singaporeans not to compete with citizens in small businesses. Big businesses are a different proposition.
4. Hospitals and medical services must be nationalized to serve the people, not to profit from the people. There is no amount of value that can be pegged to life and physical well being. It must be the responsibility of the state to provide cost effective medical services.
5. Land is really scarce and landed properties must not be sold off to foreigners freely.
6. Political offices, appointments in govt and stats boards must give priority to citizens especially senior positions. Unless there are specialized skills involved that no Singaporean is available, senior appointments must be given to Singaporeans. New citizens must be qualified by a time criteria. New citizens should not be an escape clause to by pass Singaporeans for top jobs. PRs are not citizens.
7. Citizenship must not be given freely like worthless rubbish.
8. The population of 5m is just about right and should not be allowed to grow rampantly to crazy numbers like 6m or more.
9. Pledge to implement policies that favour citizens and not to disadvantage citizens.
10. CPF money must be returned to the citizens at 60. CPF may offer incentives to attract people to leave their money with the board but must be strictly voluntary.
1. Priority housing for all Singaporeans. No stupid rules to rule out any Singaporean. This is our country and this is our home and the land belongs to the citizens. Citizens must have the first right of refusal to public housing. If there is enough land to build for foreigners, there is no reason why citizens should be deprived of public housing.
2. Tax payers’ money must be mainly used to benefit Singaporeans and their children. Not to benefit foreigners who have no stakes here. A little charity is acceptable but nothing extravagant.
3. Licence for small business must give priorities to Singaporeans. Some small businesses should be for citizens only. Foreigners are here to work for Singaporeans not to compete with citizens in small businesses. Big businesses are a different proposition.
4. Hospitals and medical services must be nationalized to serve the people, not to profit from the people. There is no amount of value that can be pegged to life and physical well being. It must be the responsibility of the state to provide cost effective medical services.
5. Land is really scarce and landed properties must not be sold off to foreigners freely.
6. Political offices, appointments in govt and stats boards must give priority to citizens especially senior positions. Unless there are specialized skills involved that no Singaporean is available, senior appointments must be given to Singaporeans. New citizens must be qualified by a time criteria. New citizens should not be an escape clause to by pass Singaporeans for top jobs. PRs are not citizens.
7. Citizenship must not be given freely like worthless rubbish.
8. The population of 5m is just about right and should not be allowed to grow rampantly to crazy numbers like 6m or more.
9. Pledge to implement policies that favour citizens and not to disadvantage citizens.
10. CPF money must be returned to the citizens at 60. CPF may offer incentives to attract people to leave their money with the board but must be strictly voluntary.
3/08/2012
Crazy woman!
Clinton urges China to prove intentions
Posted: 08 March 2012 0951 hrs
WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday called on China to show in "concrete ways" that its rise is in the world's interest, saying that Beijing needs to take greater responsibility....
China should just ignore her and all her stupid colleagues. China is not accountable to the USA for her rise as a global power. What can the US do or want to do? Attack China? What a stupid woman.
Posted: 08 March 2012 0951 hrs
WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday called on China to show in "concrete ways" that its rise is in the world's interest, saying that Beijing needs to take greater responsibility....
China should just ignore her and all her stupid colleagues. China is not accountable to the USA for her rise as a global power. What can the US do or want to do? Attack China? What a stupid woman.
Does China have a legitimate claim?
This is a very serious article written by an academic, Robert Beckman, Director, Centre for International Law and Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, NUS etc…in the ST today. It discusses about China’s claim to the group of islands in the South China Sea that were also claimed by a few of the littoral states. By posing such a question it takes a supposedly neutral stand, to question whether the claim is legitimate or illegitimate. So thought provoking.
Would the professor also discuss about the legitimate claims of Europeans as the owners of the USA, Australia and New Zealand and other colonized islands all over the world, like Guam, Gan, the Falklands? Or were the ownership of these continents and islands is now legitimate and a fait accompli because no one is there to challenge it or to write about it?
The concept of planting a flag in someone else backyard and claiming to have found it for the King or Queen sounds funny today, or not really?
Would the professor also discuss about the legitimate claims of Europeans as the owners of the USA, Australia and New Zealand and other colonized islands all over the world, like Guam, Gan, the Falklands? Or were the ownership of these continents and islands is now legitimate and a fait accompli because no one is there to challenge it or to write about it?
The concept of planting a flag in someone else backyard and claiming to have found it for the King or Queen sounds funny today, or not really?
Gan Kim Yong – Agent 002
In my article on Lui Tuck Yew I mentioned two agents of change. The other is Gan Kim Yong. I have trouble trying to catch up with the initiatives he has started to revamp the healthcare business, or was it public healthcare? I could not imagine that there are still so many things to do to make the system betterer. Didn’t his predecessor did a good job and make life more cosy for him? Unlike Tuck Yew’s inheritance of a pail of transportation shit, healthcare was supposedly well taken care off, with mean testing and bringing cost down? Did cost really come down? Did mean testing really work or creating more unnecessary and stupid work?
It is revealed in the ST that when they calculate a patient’s means to subsidy, they included every children of the patient. If the patient has twenty sons and daughters, married or unmarried, all their incomes will have to be computed. Unbelieveable to even imagine. Ok, Gan Kim Yong has simplified this a little by only taking in the incomes of those staying with the patient. I am not sure how many letters and emails were sent to the US, UK, China, India or Australia to trace down the children of those patients to qualify for subsidies.
Though steps were taken to make mean testing less mean, a better way would be to make it simpler by doing away with this demeaning and invasive act of prying into people’s privacy in the name of fairness and subsidies.
Gan Kim Yong will be launching his affordable Healthcare 2020, to provide good quality and affordable healthcare with some tweaking to the Medisave Insurance scheme, with higher premiums to go along. Let’s hope his version of affordability is the version that the citizens can understand and appreciate and not the public housing kind.
He is also ramping up hospital beds and community healthcare services working with GPs in the neighbourhood. How would these measures affect the people and the high cost of medicare is still waiting to be seen. If they indeed bring benefits to the people, then he could be another big agent of change. Tentatively, everything sounds good on paper but what is real? Shouting affordability does not mean that it is affordable as public housing is a good example. The bottom line is how hard would the pockets of patients be hurt, be emptied? The affordable housing schemes have resulted in many Singaporeans with not enough for retirement, and with big mortgages that need two incomes and 30 years to repay. If this is the same kind of affordable thinking, then it will be another big disappointment.
One positive point about Gan Kim Yong is his demeanour and composure in Parliament. He responded to questions from all parties purposefully without being ruffled or resorting to making snide replies to belittle others. He is a gentleman in many ways and a role model to other politicians on how to behave well in Parliament.
It is revealed in the ST that when they calculate a patient’s means to subsidy, they included every children of the patient. If the patient has twenty sons and daughters, married or unmarried, all their incomes will have to be computed. Unbelieveable to even imagine. Ok, Gan Kim Yong has simplified this a little by only taking in the incomes of those staying with the patient. I am not sure how many letters and emails were sent to the US, UK, China, India or Australia to trace down the children of those patients to qualify for subsidies.
Though steps were taken to make mean testing less mean, a better way would be to make it simpler by doing away with this demeaning and invasive act of prying into people’s privacy in the name of fairness and subsidies.
Gan Kim Yong will be launching his affordable Healthcare 2020, to provide good quality and affordable healthcare with some tweaking to the Medisave Insurance scheme, with higher premiums to go along. Let’s hope his version of affordability is the version that the citizens can understand and appreciate and not the public housing kind.
He is also ramping up hospital beds and community healthcare services working with GPs in the neighbourhood. How would these measures affect the people and the high cost of medicare is still waiting to be seen. If they indeed bring benefits to the people, then he could be another big agent of change. Tentatively, everything sounds good on paper but what is real? Shouting affordability does not mean that it is affordable as public housing is a good example. The bottom line is how hard would the pockets of patients be hurt, be emptied? The affordable housing schemes have resulted in many Singaporeans with not enough for retirement, and with big mortgages that need two incomes and 30 years to repay. If this is the same kind of affordable thinking, then it will be another big disappointment.
One positive point about Gan Kim Yong is his demeanour and composure in Parliament. He responded to questions from all parties purposefully without being ruffled or resorting to making snide replies to belittle others. He is a gentleman in many ways and a role model to other politicians on how to behave well in Parliament.
Lui Tuck Yew – Agent of change
I can’t remember praising any minister in the past, or at least not the new ministers. The pioneers were different as they were the pathfinders, the people who set the stage for the play today, selflessly. It is hard to praise the ministers now as they have held themselves up as supermen and superwomen and thus are expected to do super works. Mediocrity is not acceptable from super beans. And with the super pay they are claiming for themselves, anyone talking about sacrifices need to be stuffed with shit in their mouths.
The expectation is superlative. But when mediocrity is the order of the day, anything better is betterer and deserves some encouragement. I was watching in Parliament last night on telly and two ministers stood out for mentioning. Lui Tuck Yew is one of them. He came across as someone with a mission to do a big repair job. And he is earnest and tuned up for it.
The transportation mess that he inherited would have to be dealt with in a different light. The causes, the past assumptions, must be thrown into the dustbin and a new set of assumptions need to be put right. Wrong assumptions would lead to wrong results though perfectly logically and defendable. When 1 is 3 and 2 is 4, 1 + 2 = 7. Logic. No one can argue against such thinking.
The angst against public transportation was likely to be the result of a different set of perverse assumptions, eg, maximization of profits and with the Tokyo train as the role model to surpass. The comfort and graciousness of the people were not factors for consideration. Maximising profit would mean longer waiting time and jam packed trains to benefit the shareholders and big bonuses for the top management. Scintillating profit numbers are so good to look at. Then there is the added Tokyo standard to surpass. Jam packed train will only be at best as good as Tokyo’s. To surpass that, the trains must be bulging at the sides. Only then can it claim to be better than Tokyo’s.
What Tuck Yew has done is to dismantle such beliefs. Commuter comfort, efficiency and graciousness are equally important, or more important. More trains and buses will be added to reduce waiting time. The desired 95% load will be cut to 85% to provide more comfort and breathing space for the commuters. There will be overall increases in the number of trips run by trains and buses.
The new assumptions and standards would definitely make public transportation much better and tolerable than the standards of the past. There will be big costs involved but temporarily this will be delayed till a later date.
The changes are major especially in the mindset. Maximising profit has taken a rubbing for the moment to give way to commuter’s interests. Just hope the fare hike will not be too prohibitive and the Govt will give a helping hand. Public transportation is not simply a service and to be run primarily for profits alone. Public transportation affects our way of life, the way businesses are done, business costs, people’s costs, social and economic costs. Bringing public transportation cost down will benefit everyone and everything, including business and the govt. It is a big change for the better.
The expectation is superlative. But when mediocrity is the order of the day, anything better is betterer and deserves some encouragement. I was watching in Parliament last night on telly and two ministers stood out for mentioning. Lui Tuck Yew is one of them. He came across as someone with a mission to do a big repair job. And he is earnest and tuned up for it.
The transportation mess that he inherited would have to be dealt with in a different light. The causes, the past assumptions, must be thrown into the dustbin and a new set of assumptions need to be put right. Wrong assumptions would lead to wrong results though perfectly logically and defendable. When 1 is 3 and 2 is 4, 1 + 2 = 7. Logic. No one can argue against such thinking.
The angst against public transportation was likely to be the result of a different set of perverse assumptions, eg, maximization of profits and with the Tokyo train as the role model to surpass. The comfort and graciousness of the people were not factors for consideration. Maximising profit would mean longer waiting time and jam packed trains to benefit the shareholders and big bonuses for the top management. Scintillating profit numbers are so good to look at. Then there is the added Tokyo standard to surpass. Jam packed train will only be at best as good as Tokyo’s. To surpass that, the trains must be bulging at the sides. Only then can it claim to be better than Tokyo’s.
What Tuck Yew has done is to dismantle such beliefs. Commuter comfort, efficiency and graciousness are equally important, or more important. More trains and buses will be added to reduce waiting time. The desired 95% load will be cut to 85% to provide more comfort and breathing space for the commuters. There will be overall increases in the number of trips run by trains and buses.
The new assumptions and standards would definitely make public transportation much better and tolerable than the standards of the past. There will be big costs involved but temporarily this will be delayed till a later date.
The changes are major especially in the mindset. Maximising profit has taken a rubbing for the moment to give way to commuter’s interests. Just hope the fare hike will not be too prohibitive and the Govt will give a helping hand. Public transportation is not simply a service and to be run primarily for profits alone. Public transportation affects our way of life, the way businesses are done, business costs, people’s costs, social and economic costs. Bringing public transportation cost down will benefit everyone and everything, including business and the govt. It is a big change for the better.
3/07/2012
Vivian Balakrishnan replies to Low Thia Khiang
From affordable housing to affordable medicare and affordable water bills. Singaporeans are so lucky. All the ministers are working so hard to make housing, medical and water for bathing affordable. Why are they still complaining? Ingrates or unthinking? Please go down on your knees and show your gratitude.
There was a bundle of data on water fees and water bills shown in Parliament by Vivian in reply to Low Thia Khiang. The total cost ‘to operate Singapore’s water treatment and reclamation plants and sewerage system’ is $1.3b annually. The revenue collected, $674m in water tariffs and $327m in waterborne and sanitary appliances fees. Immediately I notice the huge subsidy that the govt is providing for water usage. If not, then the whole operation is a big loss. Better to privatise it to make it more efficient. I got no details to put under the microscope to read further about how 3c per cubic meter water can cost so much and still operating at such a loss. Someone please correct me if it is no longer 3c. I know this has been going on for donkey years.
Whatever the data say, the most important statement by Vivian is that ‘the Govt will ensure that water remains affordable for everyone.’ This is the most pleasant message, like music to the ears.
There was a bundle of data on water fees and water bills shown in Parliament by Vivian in reply to Low Thia Khiang. The total cost ‘to operate Singapore’s water treatment and reclamation plants and sewerage system’ is $1.3b annually. The revenue collected, $674m in water tariffs and $327m in waterborne and sanitary appliances fees. Immediately I notice the huge subsidy that the govt is providing for water usage. If not, then the whole operation is a big loss. Better to privatise it to make it more efficient. I got no details to put under the microscope to read further about how 3c per cubic meter water can cost so much and still operating at such a loss. Someone please correct me if it is no longer 3c. I know this has been going on for donkey years.
Whatever the data say, the most important statement by Vivian is that ‘the Govt will ensure that water remains affordable for everyone.’ This is the most pleasant message, like music to the ears.
NS allowances up $60
More recognition for NS men. There will be an across the board increase of $60 for all NS men beginning next month. Recruits will be getting $480 and a Lieutenant will be getting $1,180. This is a very handome increase given the fact that citizens with a monthly income of $1000 can afford to buy a 2 rm HDB flat.
From the above figures, a recruit can now afford such a flat if his girl friend is working for anything less than $1000 pm. A Lieutenant will definitely find it very comfortable with his single income to buy such flats. Only problem is that he may be disqualified if his girl friend is earning more than $1000. He could only by pass this ruling if his girlfriend stops working until they got their keys.
The NS men must be feeling very rich and smiling all over for their new found fortune. The quality of their lives will definitely be better, by $60. It makes their sacrifices so much more rewarding.
From the above figures, a recruit can now afford such a flat if his girl friend is working for anything less than $1000 pm. A Lieutenant will definitely find it very comfortable with his single income to buy such flats. Only problem is that he may be disqualified if his girl friend is earning more than $1000. He could only by pass this ruling if his girlfriend stops working until they got their keys.
The NS men must be feeling very rich and smiling all over for their new found fortune. The quality of their lives will definitely be better, by $60. It makes their sacrifices so much more rewarding.
Property prices, the $64k question
Anyone suggesting that property prices to come down or HDB to lower the sale price of its new flats is likely to be met with anger from all property owners. This is natural as many have sunk in a lot of money and falling property prices will affect a lot of people adversely.
On the contrary, property prices just cannot keep going up without killing the new buyers. The current suggestion that a $1000 pm income is enough to buy a 2 rm flat is quite enlightening. The govt is prepared to cough out a $60k grant leaving a net price of $40k for the flat which is a steal in today’s hot property market. It is even cheaper than rental, mind you. So why isn’t there a rush to buy such flats? There was a post by a divorcee with two kids and $60k cash in her savings. And she chose to rent a flat for fear of losing her $60k if she buys a flat. Why didn’t she be allowed to buy a $40k 2rm flat instead and free herself from the rental market and with a net gain of at least $100k should she sell her flat?
Anyway, that is another matter. What I am looking at is the opportunity for the govt to sell HDB flats to first time owners at substantially reduced price with a similar grant of $60k or $100k proportional to the size of flats without rocking the market prices. Make this an exclusive offer to Singapore citizens who have done their fair share of NS and are buying flats for the first time. Make this a privilege to be citizens, and ownership of a flat an entitlement for citizens who have pledged to defend this country with their lives. The new and young leaders have forgotten the importance of owning a roof over one’s head and how this policy was the pillar of our national building in the beginning of our nationhood. They prefer to force those who are earning a bit more, or fail to qualify under HDB rules, to lose all their money paying the private developers or end up with no homes. Citizens without a roof over their heads will take the next natural step, migrate. And their places will be filled by new ingrates. Is this a sound exchange?
By giving a substantial grant on a one time basis, the market price should not be shaken as theoretically the new buyer is still buying at the HDB list price. And by not offering to PRs, or to new citizens unless they have served NS and with a qualifying time period of say 5 years as a citizen, it will make a significant difference between citizens, new citizens and non citizens. And it is the biggest acknowledgement by the govt that this country believes in citizens first and the citizens have something worthy to defend and lay down their lives for. It will be very costly for new citizens who chose to avoid NS or to rubbish the contributions of NS men.
It is a win win situation as unwinding the prices of HDB flats is a no go and not unwinding is going to empty the savings of new flat buyers. It is a social contract and something very tangible that will benefit both citizens and the govt/state and not making the present owners feeling sore with falling property prices.
Would the govt seriously review the relationship between state and citizens and put the interests of its citizens and state above all other considerations? This is a major commitment by the govt, a statement of faith to the people, to its loyal citizens, instead of throwing money to still unknown new citizens and non citizens like scholarships that will incur more anger from the citizens. And to rub salt into the wound, they sell their HDB flats with a tidy profit and go on to seek greener pasture.
Why can’t the govt do something really beneficial to its own citizens for once? The lower income earners need help and so do the middle income earners. It is a serious matter to cough out a few hundred thousand bucks just to buy a roof over one’s head.
Believe me, the govt will win a lot of hearts and votes for such a pro citizen policy and will lose a lot of votes for pro new citizens and foreigner policies.
On the contrary, property prices just cannot keep going up without killing the new buyers. The current suggestion that a $1000 pm income is enough to buy a 2 rm flat is quite enlightening. The govt is prepared to cough out a $60k grant leaving a net price of $40k for the flat which is a steal in today’s hot property market. It is even cheaper than rental, mind you. So why isn’t there a rush to buy such flats? There was a post by a divorcee with two kids and $60k cash in her savings. And she chose to rent a flat for fear of losing her $60k if she buys a flat. Why didn’t she be allowed to buy a $40k 2rm flat instead and free herself from the rental market and with a net gain of at least $100k should she sell her flat?
Anyway, that is another matter. What I am looking at is the opportunity for the govt to sell HDB flats to first time owners at substantially reduced price with a similar grant of $60k or $100k proportional to the size of flats without rocking the market prices. Make this an exclusive offer to Singapore citizens who have done their fair share of NS and are buying flats for the first time. Make this a privilege to be citizens, and ownership of a flat an entitlement for citizens who have pledged to defend this country with their lives. The new and young leaders have forgotten the importance of owning a roof over one’s head and how this policy was the pillar of our national building in the beginning of our nationhood. They prefer to force those who are earning a bit more, or fail to qualify under HDB rules, to lose all their money paying the private developers or end up with no homes. Citizens without a roof over their heads will take the next natural step, migrate. And their places will be filled by new ingrates. Is this a sound exchange?
By giving a substantial grant on a one time basis, the market price should not be shaken as theoretically the new buyer is still buying at the HDB list price. And by not offering to PRs, or to new citizens unless they have served NS and with a qualifying time period of say 5 years as a citizen, it will make a significant difference between citizens, new citizens and non citizens. And it is the biggest acknowledgement by the govt that this country believes in citizens first and the citizens have something worthy to defend and lay down their lives for. It will be very costly for new citizens who chose to avoid NS or to rubbish the contributions of NS men.
It is a win win situation as unwinding the prices of HDB flats is a no go and not unwinding is going to empty the savings of new flat buyers. It is a social contract and something very tangible that will benefit both citizens and the govt/state and not making the present owners feeling sore with falling property prices.
Would the govt seriously review the relationship between state and citizens and put the interests of its citizens and state above all other considerations? This is a major commitment by the govt, a statement of faith to the people, to its loyal citizens, instead of throwing money to still unknown new citizens and non citizens like scholarships that will incur more anger from the citizens. And to rub salt into the wound, they sell their HDB flats with a tidy profit and go on to seek greener pasture.
Why can’t the govt do something really beneficial to its own citizens for once? The lower income earners need help and so do the middle income earners. It is a serious matter to cough out a few hundred thousand bucks just to buy a roof over one’s head.
Believe me, the govt will win a lot of hearts and votes for such a pro citizen policy and will lose a lot of votes for pro new citizens and foreigner policies.
3/06/2012
Another strategic acquisition for Singtel
Monday, Mar 05, 2012
AFP
SINGAPORE - Singapore Telecom said Monday that it will buy US mobile advertising start-up Amobee for US$321 million (S$401 million) to expand group revenues from ads and marketing across Asia.
SingTel, Southeast Asia's biggest telecom firm by revenue, said its 100 per cent buyout would boost mobile ad sales in India, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, where it has large affiliates.
"A vast majority of our 400 million (clients) are in emerging markets," said Allen Lew, chief executive of the SingTel Group's newly formed "digital life" unit announced Monday as part of a top-level reorganisation.
Citing data from technology research firm Gartner, Lew said the global mobile ad market is likely to exceed US$20 billion by 2015 from about US$7.0 billion this year, with 35 per cent of it generated in Asia-Pacific.
Amobee, founded in 2005 and based in Redwood City, California, has offices in Europe, Asia and Latin America....
Despite Amobee having unaudited net assets worth only US$600,000 as of November, Lew told a news conference SingTel was not overpaying for the firm with the all-cash acquisition.
"The way we value this company is not based on the net tangible assets. We value this company based on what we think is eventually going to be worth." ....
This must be another great strategic acquisition for Singtel to grow its business. It must be value for money.
AFP
SINGAPORE - Singapore Telecom said Monday that it will buy US mobile advertising start-up Amobee for US$321 million (S$401 million) to expand group revenues from ads and marketing across Asia.
SingTel, Southeast Asia's biggest telecom firm by revenue, said its 100 per cent buyout would boost mobile ad sales in India, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, where it has large affiliates.
"A vast majority of our 400 million (clients) are in emerging markets," said Allen Lew, chief executive of the SingTel Group's newly formed "digital life" unit announced Monday as part of a top-level reorganisation.
Citing data from technology research firm Gartner, Lew said the global mobile ad market is likely to exceed US$20 billion by 2015 from about US$7.0 billion this year, with 35 per cent of it generated in Asia-Pacific.
Amobee, founded in 2005 and based in Redwood City, California, has offices in Europe, Asia and Latin America....
Despite Amobee having unaudited net assets worth only US$600,000 as of November, Lew told a news conference SingTel was not overpaying for the firm with the all-cash acquisition.
"The way we value this company is not based on the net tangible assets. We value this company based on what we think is eventually going to be worth." ....
This must be another great strategic acquisition for Singtel to grow its business. It must be value for money.
Blimey, the govt is still talking about affordable housing
Tan Chuan Jin ‘said that his ministry tracks “very closely” the incomes of Singaporeans, to make sure that HDB flats are priced and subsidised so they’re affordable at different income levels.’
What is the govt’s definition of affordable housing? Two pay checks and 30 years to pay the mortgage. Right? Affordable in the past was one pay check and 15 to 20 years to pay. The difference between the two formulas for affordability is like heaven and hell. In the first formula it means two persons working for 30 years and leaving not much for retirement. Further, with two persons working, there is no way for the wife to stop work and look after babies as there will not be enough to pay the housing loan. See where is the source of baby problem?
In the second formula, the wife has the option to work which will provide more extra cash for a better and less financially stressful lifestyle. And if the wife so chooses to make more babies, it will not hurt the repayment of the mortgage. And in 15/20 years, the loan will be fully paid up and the rest can go to their retirement savings.
Both formula are technically right in terms of affordability. But one means work and work and hope that nothing goes wrong with the income before the loan is fully repaid. The other has a lot more slack without both spouses working to keep up with repayment of the loan.
What kind of quality of life and what kind of affordability are we talking about? This is the same kind of situation where some jokers said the island can take in 6m or 9m people while some say 5m is already too much. Everyone is right but at what cost and what consequences.
So very affordable huh? $1000 pm income can afford a 2rm flat. What about the life of the family? What kind of life? Would Tan Chuan Jin’s ministry track the affordability of one income and work on that basis and not one that would empty the savings of two incomes?
What is the govt’s definition of affordable housing? Two pay checks and 30 years to pay the mortgage. Right? Affordable in the past was one pay check and 15 to 20 years to pay. The difference between the two formulas for affordability is like heaven and hell. In the first formula it means two persons working for 30 years and leaving not much for retirement. Further, with two persons working, there is no way for the wife to stop work and look after babies as there will not be enough to pay the housing loan. See where is the source of baby problem?
In the second formula, the wife has the option to work which will provide more extra cash for a better and less financially stressful lifestyle. And if the wife so chooses to make more babies, it will not hurt the repayment of the mortgage. And in 15/20 years, the loan will be fully paid up and the rest can go to their retirement savings.
Both formula are technically right in terms of affordability. But one means work and work and hope that nothing goes wrong with the income before the loan is fully repaid. The other has a lot more slack without both spouses working to keep up with repayment of the loan.
What kind of quality of life and what kind of affordability are we talking about? This is the same kind of situation where some jokers said the island can take in 6m or 9m people while some say 5m is already too much. Everyone is right but at what cost and what consequences.
So very affordable huh? $1000 pm income can afford a 2rm flat. What about the life of the family? What kind of life? Would Tan Chuan Jin’s ministry track the affordability of one income and work on that basis and not one that would empty the savings of two incomes?
CPF Life will help lower income
Singaporeans are so lucky. They can now look forward to a stream of retirement income for life. And they have a choice of having more upfront or leave more for their beneficiaries. This is really good in paradise and Singaporeans have to thank their lucky stars for having a good govt to provide them with such a comprehensive retirement plan.
Where did the govt get to money to provide such a great retirement scheme? Fuck it, it is our own money isn’t it? With the CPF scheme, the govt does not need to provide any more social security for the people with a few exceptions. There is no need to budget for such an expenditure anymore. The people shall provide their own retirement fund for their own retirement plans. And no need any subsidies. The people are on their own from birth to death.
Every Singaporean will have to be part of this plan, like it or not. And it is also reported in the ST that ‘two thirds of those aged 65 and above receive family support and do not need to tap these schemes. So two thirds were in for a joy ride when they do not need it? Right? And all their money held in ransom!
I can’t believe that such a comprehensive scheme that forces the whole population into compulsory savings and compulsory insurance schemes is only because one third of the people needs it.
What can’t there be fine tuning to allow those who do not need it to be spare the compulsion? By the time someone hits 60, the cards are all on the table as to what they need and whether they need to be compelled to such schemes. Shouldn’t they be given the options to be in or out, or half in half out? Why should two third of the people be punished because of a one third minority?
Are Singaporeans lucky or unlucky to have such a caring govt that even plans for their retirements with their money?
Where did the govt get to money to provide such a great retirement scheme? Fuck it, it is our own money isn’t it? With the CPF scheme, the govt does not need to provide any more social security for the people with a few exceptions. There is no need to budget for such an expenditure anymore. The people shall provide their own retirement fund for their own retirement plans. And no need any subsidies. The people are on their own from birth to death.
Every Singaporean will have to be part of this plan, like it or not. And it is also reported in the ST that ‘two thirds of those aged 65 and above receive family support and do not need to tap these schemes. So two thirds were in for a joy ride when they do not need it? Right? And all their money held in ransom!
I can’t believe that such a comprehensive scheme that forces the whole population into compulsory savings and compulsory insurance schemes is only because one third of the people needs it.
What can’t there be fine tuning to allow those who do not need it to be spare the compulsion? By the time someone hits 60, the cards are all on the table as to what they need and whether they need to be compelled to such schemes. Shouldn’t they be given the options to be in or out, or half in half out? Why should two third of the people be punished because of a one third minority?
Are Singaporeans lucky or unlucky to have such a caring govt that even plans for their retirements with their money?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)