This guy was at a public tap with a big hose and filling water into a big tanker. Standing beside him was a long queue of human beans each with a pail or plastic container waiting for their turns.
They have been waiting for hours but the tanker is so huge and may take several hours to fill it up. And several tankers were also waiting. Occasionally the guy at the tap would turn around and slosh a few seconds of water into a couple of empty pails and then turn back to fill the tanker.
Just for a few minutes, many of those in the queue would have their pails filled and can go home happily to continue with their lives. But because the tankers must be filled, probably owned by some big shot, the rest of the peasants would have to wait for their turns, and a little mercy from the dispenser.
The moral of this incident is similar to someone trying to fill the ocean that is full of water and ignores the little ponds, rivers and streams, leaving them high and dry. This is what is happening in countries that believe in pure meritocracy, when the more the merits, the more deserving one should be, and their bank accounts should be continuously be filled even when they have no time to spend the money. The lesser merit or undeserving ones can go on and be hungry. Randians? Wide income gap is natural and nothing can be done about it, so said the meritorious and deserving. Get out of my elite uncaring face.
This is the basic pillar of a pure meritocratic system, pure capitalism. This is the road we are marching on.
6 comments:
We need a new social compact, as surmised by several Singapore economist.
It has probably been vetted by the government before allowing this to be released (i.e note that GST is just considered "more regressive" and not simply a regressive tax), but nonetheless, a pretty decent article. Hope it will not become hogwash when it reaches the upper echelons of power.
http://blogs.wsj.com/searealtime/2012/01/16/singapore-inc-needs-a-rethink-economists-say/
--> The entire article can be found in a link in the article.
If only that were true redbean. Whilst there are elements of a meritocracy-centered laissez faire political economy, it is FAR from being a Randian ideal.
For starters, Ayn Rand passionately defended FREEDOM OF SPEECH. And whilst she adopted the Lockeian view of government being necessary to SECURE individual and property rights, IMO she would be critical of the size of Singapore's government. She would also probably criticise CPF as theft, the ISA as "evil", Temasek and the GIC as "economic dictatorships", capital punishment as "illogical" and HDB as a political tool of control.
Rand was a great believer in voluntary action, and voluntary association between and among individuals to achieve common objectives. She supported the idea of PRIVATE CHARITY to help others who are temporarily disadvantaged.
Don't believe any PAP member or PAP true-believer who tells you Singapore is a Randian "utopia" based on individual personal enterprise. They're usurping Ayn Rand to achieve political dominance and gain ground on being able to MANIPULATE people, so that the elites maintain their positions of power, wealth by confiscation, and "winning" by crushing opponents by foul means.
Rand hated PRAGMATISM. She argued that if you adopt "the end justified the means" attitude, then you could justify any heinous action to achieve any objective, especially sacrificing human lives to achieve goals for "the greater good". Singapore is OPENLY pragmatic.
Singapore a pure capitalist meritocracy? NOT EVEN CLOSE. Not as long as you have the government as big as it is controlling everything
A 16 minute talk on Income Inequality by Richard Wilkinson in Scotland.
Singapore is mentioned at least 3 times!!!
Well worth a listen. The first 3 minutes should already captivate you.
http://blog.ted.com/2011/10/24/how-economic-inequality-harms-societies-richard-wilkinson-on-ted-com/
They must be praising Singapore. And if they are the elite, they must be envious of our elite.
No redbean
The 16 minute talk gives you the statistical proof that income inequality is bad for the country and the citizens.
Singapore was mentioned because it is an extreme outlier in a few instances.
For those who have, more should be given unto them.
Post a Comment