After watching the TV clip on the exchange between Hsien Loong and Low
Thia Khiang last night I have so many things to write about. My problem
now is how to write them constructively and not destructively. My bigger
problem is trying to decipher what is being constructive and what is
being destructive as I am quite blur after the exchange. Maybe after a
few rounds of meditation my mind will be clearer. Or maybe I need not
have to be bothered on those terms as they are meant for politicians in
Parliament.
Let me touch on the less important aspects of the exchange instead of
the serious stuff for the moment. Serious stuff involving policy matters
must spend more time and effort on them. Rushing in to take pot shots
or to make comments like bull arse flies may end up flip flopping, or is
it shifting or changing of position, can’t figure out which is a more
appropriate and right word to choose.
One thing to note is not to be too cynical or breathtakingly cynical.
Matilah Singapura said my posts are corrosively cynical. Which is more
powderful? I think Matilah was saying it as a form of compliment. Not
sure if Hsien Loong was complimenting Low Thia Khiang for his cynicism
in Parliament.
I think writing in blogs is not like in parliament and to be cynical is
good in its own way. And no one would expect any blogger to follow up
with recommendations and suggestions on policy changes. Not only
bloggers did not have the resources, neither do they have the data and
complete information on an issue. Without knowing the full details of a
problem and without the resources available, surely cannot expect too
much from bloggers right? What about opposition MPs, are they in a
position to provide real solutions giving their limitations on resources
as well? Are govt policies so simple that anyone can just offer
solutions with their little knowledge on the issues or their own
limitations in ability?
Oh, cynicism is a way of suggestions, can also be constructive too. As
an example, would it be enough to say that the water in the longkang is
deep enough for swimming, or ponding for the people paid to do the job
to get rid of the problem? Or must one also tell the people paid to do
the job how to clear the longkangs to be constructive? Often the
solutions are obvious and one needs only to point out the problem, or to
make a little cynical comment. And big problems often need big cynicism
to achieve the same effect. And bigger problems may need breathtaking
cynicism to jolt people from their sleep. And at times you may need
corrosive cynicism when all else fails and the problem just get
biggerer.
I am going to do more meditation to sort out the deep and challenging
thoughts from the exchanges in Parliament. I am also going to meditate
on what Hri Kumar said, ‘Singapore politics still free from cynicism.’
Obviously he has not heard of ‘breathtaking cynicism’. Matilah may
whisper to him about corrosive cynicism.
Kopi Level - Green
18 comments:
Let say he supposed to pay the person back at 55 as promised, which is trust, if you put your money in the bank as fixed deposit, you expect that you get your money back, you trust to get back your money as promised?
If he had $100K in his CPF?
If a person delay getting his money back 10 year if he expect to get back his money around $500 per monthly mean in order he can get back all his money of $100K which he promised to be returned to him by 55 he can get back all his money by 85 years old, 20 years later theoretically? Not including dividend yield?
How many people can live until these age?
Many would have died before 70 due to high stress and chemical food?
A person is very happy if he can live until 68?
Especially for those low income families, that why credit companies do a striving busiess, and ah long too? More credit companies will be opening as they will expect better business when the CPF is locked up?
Wonder what is the percentage of women who had took out all their CPF and spent it on Batam men, what a hilarious excuse to lock people CPF?
If the CPF locked schemes things can get worse, at previously those who had took out their money can diversity various places or blue chips to get regular high dividend yield plus capital gain?
And today heavy competition from cheap foreigners, and every year additional $30K of newer citizens came in to take away possible the new citizens jobs?
How to create additional 1.6 millions jobs for these newer citizens? What type of jobs?
From the dictionary:
cynical
adj.
1. distrusting or disparaging the motives or sincerity of others.
2. showing contempt for accepted standards of honesty or morality, esp. by actions that exploit the scruples of others.
3. bitterly or sneeringly distrustful, contemptuous, or pessimistic.
So when PM Lee said Teochew Ah Hia is breathingly cynical, is Ah Hia indeed those adj above, and breathtakingly as well? And of who? PAP? President's speech? Or even the new Foreigners First Party? Or all, any or none of the above?
Indeed I am also blur like RB, even though the meaning of cynical is clear from the dictionary.
Hahahahahaha.
Maybe Teochew Ah Hia is breathtakingly cynical about the Sinkie opposition being united to fight the PAP or even replace the PAP.
And for that, he has good reasons to be breathtakingly cynical, with the newest baby added to the already big and "united" family of Sinkie opposition parties.
Let said there is no GRC system which votes can be topped up those weaker candidates to come in the parliament in the place of opposition members, which can reduce the oppositions to ask tough questions?
40 percent of the oppositions votes should be around 35 seats?
Due to the topped up votes GRC systems, which are another good excuses,which they are good at? The opposition only can get 7 seats out of 87 seats? or only 8 percents of the seat out of 40pc?
The proportion of 77 votes for the white paper out of 87 MP, 3 absent, whereas Singapore have the greatest all time protest at staggering 6000 people turn up in a heavy rain Hong Lim Park, for the white paper fearing overpopulation causes many undesirable consequences?
These how tough questions and issues are swept under the carpet if there is not enough oppositions had the time to ask tough questions to debate on it?
The highly successful advanced countries Northern Europe had enough oppositions from various parties to represent their diverse interest? So with heavy competition, that a lean and trim govt is represent all their diverse interest?
Most have free education until tertiary so they are highly skills, so no problem as oppositions parties take over the government? The people understand the need to checks and counter check the main excess, which is crucial to the country success? And bring different ideas?
Many in Singapore now feel that it time to introduce more MP from different parties of Singapore, the medias should encourage it?
I have lost trust in the government, as Dr Tan commented it seemed the presence of "mistrust" was out there among the people....
i don't know what to make from the showdown.. i'm juz amazed by the parliament "roar" from the whiter than white supporters
NB.. IBs picking on Low's command of language.. same as when their master picked on Chiam's o'level results
Why we need to benchmark and set a standard against these highly successful small countries?
Singapore is a small country with no resource, which used to trading as one of the busiest, there is limit to it keep increase it population to boost the economy?
There are many ways to grow the economy, Israel is one of the advanced country with no resource, yet it can became an advanced country, similar many countries with lots of resources unable to manage their countries well through wasteful usages and other reasons?
Singapore can't be like Hong Kong overpopulation and many sleep in the cage houses?
So the way is through competitive ideas, as Tan Cheng Bock said Singapore want more oppositions in the Parliament to foster capable leaders from various industries and give their ideas for consideration in the parliament?
Now they want to stop the election president so Tan Cheng Bock?
Right only 8 percents seats out of 40 percent oppositions votes represent the oppositions voices, due to the GRC systems?
Many of the social problems now are because previously no enough oppositions in the parliament, which isssues were swept under the carpet, which could manifest more serious later? With little opposition to have robust debate about it?
If don't have GRC Singapore could have been an advanced country by now with lower income gap, higher birthrate and higher standard of living?
As Singapore used to be the most promising 4 dragons, but only South Korea with a much large populations make it?
The recent Tekka riot bring out the question, can Singapore afford too many foreigners and as new citizens, which newer citizens will depress and takeaway jobs of new citizens?
With the white paper of 69M, increasing 30K every year and also the Chinese riot in Geylang?
Once severe economic problem or other crisi these newer citizens will they act like the recent Tekka riots?
The questions should be asked is how to create additional 1.6 millions new jobs without taking away the new citizens jobs and their children?
It is not easy to continue to create additional new 30K of jobs for the newer citizens without taking away or depress the new and old citizens jobs?
What type of jobs suitable and able to create for these new comer without affecting the new citizens and their children jobs?
I don't care about CONstructive politics.
How does CONstaructive politics benefit Singaporeans?
I only support politics that benefit me the Singaporean.
I support pro Singaporean politics.
Gutter politics on default mode display default mode.
Goading, baiting and name-calling Low TK using words like "weasle out" etc.
Really better than expected performance from PM. PAP is increasingly helping itself to longer and more rope to hang itselfin the court of public opinion.
The smirk and smug from some of the PAP Cabinet Members are just too obvious which included the Education Minister. And the Very Behaviours were due to poor parental, school and leadership upbringings. It appears that IF PAP REMAINS THE GOVERNMENT AFTER THE NEXT GENERAL ELETION, SINKIES WILL BE RULED BY SOME ILL- NATURED CHARLATANS.
Be prepared for it Sinkies.
Me am one cynical Sinkie.
patriot
What if Low turned to the speaker and said, Madam, he called me a weasel!
How come Singapore not on the list?
No standard lah. Chao kah, pui pui! Parliament, please show the world, you also can.
Legislative Violence
Akan datang.
LTK should just shoot a few chinese idoms and make pinky looks like a dumbass.
“You saw this huge revolt. I think what happens when you suppress the dreams of the middle classes is you get rather peculiar and very dangerous political movements beginning to emerge,” he argued."
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/hay-festival/10860796/Middle-classes-will-disappear-in-next-30-years-warns-Government-adviser.html)
it is informative post for human.This post publish new important news.This post article is important and helpful.Thanks a lot for share your great post.
Post a Comment