1 man, 3 HDB flats, 10 wives, 64 children and incest

I have refrained from touching on this topic to steer clear of some primordial sensitivities. There are things in life that are left best unsaid or the otherwise sensible and clear thinking men and women could be consumed by irrational rage and tear down a whole nation. Why do they have to report this in the main stream media? It is no secret, and has been going for years, all 10 wives and 64 children are living monuments that paraded the streets daily. Why now and why make it as if it is great news? Obviously many must have thought that there was nothing wrong and tolerable. In a small little compact country like us, such things cannot escape the eyes of those who need to know. Where is the fault? Don't blame the authority. Everyone is at fault. When able men and women, some have strings of straight As, are prepared to sit in front of a charlatan, probably even failed his PSLE, and listen to his craps every week, and are afraid to disagree with him, that is the fault. It transcends all religions and races. I was reading this 'highly acclaimed book by a highly acclaimed man' called 'Jerusalem Countdown', and my immediate reaction was that this is probably the third most dangerous book ever written. The influence of this book has led to powerful personalities living their lives and dictating national policies based on the reasonings in the book. And they set out to kill and destroy and believing that it was all faithful duty and destiny. The authority of course does not come from this book, but from more dangerous books written in ancient times. And they believe it is all about righteousness, about a divine order, to kill other fellow men and women, young and old, to fulfil a prophecy. When would modern people be sane or confident enough to ask the right questions and debunk all the dangerous ancient myths that common sense would say are simply wrong? Is the fear of God a sign of wisdom or a sign of naivity?

Maslow's 5th level of Needs - Self Delusion

Maslow's 5th level of Needs - Self Delusion Have we crossed the rubicon? The staunch supporters of PAP, some MPs and Ministers, adamantly said no and are sticking to their guns. This is the best policy, though a giant bitter pill to swallow. This is reality. People loves money and will work only for money. They would even go to the extend of paying even more as the formula is deemed the correct formula and the answers coming out from the formula must be correct. A cold calculative method, delinked from any emotional attachment and sentiments. Another GIGO. Can political decisions be made by a mathematical formula that does not take into consideration all the sensitivities of politics? Why is there a need to get our best minds to be in Humanities? Maybe this is a case of too much hard sciences and engineering. The lack of the human element is so glaring. Just hear the responses from the ground as reported in the Straits Times. 1. The numbers just don't look good, laments Nee Soon South grassroots leader Poh Phien Seah....he is finding it almost impossible to explain to constituents why the same govt that this week said it was necessary to raise ministers' salaries to $1.6 million, also refused to raise the public assistance allowance for its poorest citizens by more than $30 a month. 2. The disparity is so great...says Mr Poh, who owns a logistics business. 3. People ask me, why not do more for the poor, especially in their twilight years? I don't know how to explain to them...grassroot leaders 4. Shanmugam, ...the decision was bound to strain the social compact. This is one of those policies on which political capital has to be spent. 5. Medical practitioner Edith Quah, a grassroots leader in Chong Pang, warns that some community volunteers are so disillusioned by the Govt's decision, they might stop helping out. I am talking about very loyal grassroots people who are saying this. Why? Because they see the fragmentation in society. We feel this move is a bit self serving and the timing is very insensitive. Here you have people struggling to buy school books and uniforms for their children. Despite such negative feedbacks, is there any minister who will say that it is a bad thing to do? Or how many MPs will still insist that it is a right thing to do? Or would they have stuck to the position if they were not ministers or MPs? Do they really believe in what they are saying if they were not in the same camp? Here comes the self delusion. At this stage, no decision can be wrong. Every decision is the best decision and must be right. Like it or not, it has been decided and it is for the good of the people and country. The people are just too ignorant to understand the goodness and wisdom of the decision. I know best. And they will forget when the next election comes. Or when the economy is good the decision will be vindicated. The people appreciate the Govt's transparency and intention and are probably more receptive to the proposal now. Presumably some bought the arguments.... The people will just move on because there is nothing much they can do except to register in private ways their disquiet. Where it matters, at election time, Singaporeans will not judge the PAP govt on this issue only. I think the next election will be just another walkover. Just paste a dollar sign on the candidate's face and nothing more needs to be said.

Is this debate worth it?

Is this debate worth it? A definite yes from the PAP's point of view. It is an opportunity to air all the misconceptions and misunderstanding about the pay rise. It is all about transparency and that they have nothing to hide. And the PAP has achieved its objectives of explaining to the people and the people are satisfied with the explanation and justification for the formula and the pay rise. My impression is totally reverse. I think this is a serious tactical mistake on the part of the PAP. Once the formula is out for the airing, it was torn to pieces by everyone, the men on the street as well as inside Parliament. Only the converted will still want to believe that everything is alright and the formula is still worthy of what it was set out to be. The presentation of the charts etc did more harm than good to its cause. The whole debate is not only creating a big doubt. It confirms a lot of things which the people were not happy about. It reinforces the cynicism and scepticism that were once only heard in whispers. Now it is spoken loud and clear in Parliament and in prints in the MSM. Anyone agree or disagree with my assessment?

myth 131

Beware of your supporters! This guy dug a hole in the middle of the road. Then he went to his master and assured him the road ahead was all rosy. And together with a few more followers they cheered their master as he gingerly tip toed ahead towards the hole.

down with silly virtues and idealism

Virtues and benevolence in public office are passe I read with amazement, Chua Mui Hoong's article that in the present new age of Moneyism, old virtues should be dumped. Forget about Confucianism. Just think Money with a capital M. She also said that only the ministers and PAP MPs were strongly in support of high pay for ministers and the opposing voices came from the opposition and NMPs. This is only a simple generalisation as some MPs also spoke candidly about their opposition. What I am uneasy about is whether Chua Mui Hoong is extolling the new virtues of money talks? No money no talks. No money no public service, no passion for service to nation and people. Sacrifice is now an anachronism. And she put it as if this is what the new generation of Singaporeans are today. Is that a true picture? Are the people all so money minded? Are there no longer any saints or heroes among Singaporeans who would work just for a paltry $1 million in public service? Are chivalry, duty and honour, all to be dumped into the waste bin? I am wondering what are we teaching our young in schools today? I am also wondering what are we telling our soldiers and our civil servants? Would every Singaporean walk into his boss' office and ask, 'How much?'

work ethics and public assistance recipients

Public Assistance Recipients These people are defined 'as those with no kin nor any means to support themselves due to age, illness or disability.' What kind of work ethics can we expect from these people?

Defending an Indefensible position

Defending an Indefensible position An article by Jasmine Yin in the Today paper tried to defend the position that it is justifiable to pay ministers the million dollar payrise and $1 extra a day for the destitute. And it was argue that the two were separate issues and had 'no logical linkage'. Come on lah, the linkages are so loud and clear for all to see. Only the blind or those who refused to see them would say so. And it was also said that 'Money is not an issue'. What the f... Money is THE issue. If not, all these debate, all the time and resources would not have been spent to justify the million dollar increase. What I want to say is that the $290 for the poor and the multi million dollars for the ministers are very delicately intertwined. One is a social issue that the govt must look after. The other is the pay for the people who are going to look after this issue. How can $290 a month be enough when more than a million cannot be enough? It is all about public service. People who want to make millions must not think of making the millions from taxpayers money. There are many avenues to make the millions. Taxpayers money is to pay a reasonable rate for the passionate people who want to look after the nation and people. Not for cold logical people who want to be multi millionaires and still want the power of public service. Obviously after the debate, both in the media and parliament, many people do not agree with the increase and are unhappy with it. It is the people's view that matters. Maybe not. Maybe it is the decision makers' view that matters.

More than just MONEY

More than just MONEY Balaji Sadasivan finds more value in being a Minister of State, earning lesser money, than being a practising neurosurgeon. The position of a Minister or Minister of State is a position of a national leader and cannot be measured simply in monetary terms. So what if someone is making several millions more? A minister, the appointment as a minister, the role or function of a minister is much much more. A minister is a much respected and honoured member of our society. He is someone to be looked up to, a leader, a guardian of the people and nation. Let us not degrade the value of a minister and the respect and honour due to such a position and compare them to money. Money is just money, to be earned and spent. It is not recognised as anything worthy except as as a commodity. We should accord more respect to our political office just like in developed countries. Why would so many successful people want to take up political offices and assume the role of Presidents, Prime Ministers and Ministers, and getting lesser income? Do they take up public office because they can take more under table money? Obviously not. These positions are positions of authority, of fame, of recognition, of being part of history. How can we equate them with cheap money? We should cease comparing the value of political office with money. For all the money that a person may earn, he is never in the same standing as the political leaders of a nation. Balaji knows when he chose to remain as a Minister of State. It is a greater honour. Money cannot buy such positions. Can it? And I am not even talking about the power that comes with it. Why is it that historically many leaders will just cling on to the seat of power and refused to let go?

a gaffe, to correct or not to correct

Singapore Press Club gets it right the second time 'It has been an embarrassing start for the new management of the Singapore Press Club. The first order of business was to correct a gaffe.... A news report in the ST, based on the circular, triggered a flurry of email among club members and office bearers, with one describing the circular as "misleading and inaccurate" and urging that it be withdrawn immediately. Another member wrote "the record does need to be set straight" but added that it would be a "shame if issuing a correction to members is at the ocst of any embarrassment to..." A third member who said he was uncomfortable with the circular wrote "we need to quickly control the damage".' The above was reported in the Today paper on the mistake made regarding the appointment of Patrick Daniel as the 'new First Vice President" of the Press Club but there was no such position. The mistake was later corrected by Leslie Fong.

Appropriate sense of proportion

Appropriate sense of proportion I worked up this morning with a few old songs ringing in my head. The first one goes like this, 'If you want it, here it is come and get it. But you gotta hurry costs it may not last.' The second one was by the rock group the Monkeys, and it goes like this, 'Money, money, money. Must be money. It's a mad, mad world.' How could one explain why people can correlate the same thing to different things? For instance you point to a dog and a child will scream 'dog.' You point it to a teenager, and he will shout 'pet.' And you point it to a foreign worker, he will shout 'food.' So don't be surprised when you show someone a $600,000 bill and the person shouts 'peanut.' It is all about circumstances and experience in life. Some people count the number of zeros behind the number and some count the zeros in front of it. Once they get use to them, it becomes second nature. $30 is huge to someone who is used to get by with $260 a month. That is more than 10%. A few million is small change to those who are used to the numerous zeros behind the number. So the recipient of the $30 will be very grateful. But the recipient of the millions may not. For $1, I have been worshipped like a god by a bicycle cab peddlar. The ride was $1 but I gave him $2 instead. He immediately dropped on his knees and prayed to me like he was praying to Buddha. That extra $1 was a windfall to him. This story only tells the right sense of proportion at different level of society. It is a different world to different people. It is a mad mad world.

PAP's most severe test in 40 years

PAP's most severe test in 40 years Shall I or shouldn't I put my frank assessment of this current crisis facing the PAP after the controversial decision to raise ministerial pay? I emphasise, the issue is ministerial pay and not the increment for the civil servants. Though the main stream media is trying to do its best to present a picture that the people are mostly in support of this decision, the truth is far from it. And they have bungled badly. I know that no one would be happy with the messenger of bad news. But the situation has deteriorated so far that only the blind would fail to see the true picture. Until today, I have yet to hear an honest person telling me that all is well and the ministerial pay is a good thing and a welcome thing. So I will try to be as diplomatic as possible to tenderly touch on the unpleasant truth. Actually, the whole ugly episode can be akin to the severance of a strong bond between the government and the governed, painstaking built over a period of 40 years. With this bad decision, the Red Sea was parted. This is truly a very bad judgement call of unbelievable proportion. The debate in parliament was clearly divisive with many MPs trying very hard to express their disagreement without breaking rank. It's negative impact is like the NKF but at a national scale. For those who spoke out in favour of this move they would have to live with the consequences of their misjudgement in times to come. Hsien Loong must have sensed the seriousness of the temper on the ground and is trying to do some damage control by announcing that he will freeze his own pay, to gain some moral authority on this issue. Unfortunately the damage is quite devastating if one really and honestly try to feel the ground. It was a tough decision and a tough call. The worst thing is that it was seen as self serving. The people find it hard to see how this is to benefit them and not the ministers. The obvious is just too obvious. The cardinal rule that one must not decide to benefit one's self interest has been broken. The objective and honourable justifications become irrelevant. Would any minister or the President have the temerity to hang on to the pay increase and still think that the people will see them the same way as before? Like it or not, it is the people and their perception that matters, not the clever arguments in parliament. It is right to say that it is an emotional issue. But the logic and reasoning also failed miserably to convince the people that it is the right and necessary thing to do. People are free to disagree with my assessment. But the question now is how the PAP is going to turn this around and regain the confidence and trust of the people? The moral ground, the moral authority has been severely undermined. It is not a right or wrong thing to do. It may sound logical on paper. But if the government cannot sell it and the people refuse to buy it, it becomes a disaster. It is politics and a political decision, and the reaction of the people is political and yes, emotional.

White House official floored by our Ministerial Pay

White House official floored by our Ministerial Pay He shouldn't be. It takes tremendous skills and ability to be able to push through such a motion without the people protesting. The White House official should also deserve a huge payrise if he can get it pass Congress for a similar motion.

myth 130

Myth 130 Singapore leaders are the highest paid in the world 'The Taiwanese media reported on Monday that our Prime Minister's salary is 10 times that of their President's...their President gets a private jet, spending millions with each overseas trip, whereas our Prime Minister only gets to travel first class on Singapore Airlines.' Ong Ah Heng At least we have the Taiwanese who are paid more than us. And they are also facing corruption charges while we are clean.

making tough decisions

'Even if a person has a wonderful brain, without the hands, legs, eyes, nose and ears, he cannot function effectively. We need to pay top civil servants well, but we must not forget the rest of the public service.' Halimah Yacob. In the past when pay increases were implemented, everyone would get roughly the same percentage, a little plus and minus. And then the lower income will get a lump sum which actually boosted their percentage to a very high level. It was all because everyone knew that in percentage terms, the higher income will get that much more. 10% of $100k is $10k. 10% of $1k is $100. Today, there is no attempt to be apologetic. The ministers are going to get something like 25% increase. And at the lower end, something like 14% ot 33%. And in absolute terms, the amount is in hundreds of thousands against a few hundred bucks at the lower end. This is indeed a very tough and unpopular decision. They really deserve to be paid the huge increase for having the nerves and toughness to make such an unpopular decision, all for the good of the people. We need strong leaders who can make tough decisions like this one.

A profound quote

A profound quote 'As responsible leaders, we must be careful not to leave behind a system or structure that combines power and monetary rewards to such high levels, where incumbents are so handcuffed by this lethal combination that they find it hard to let go.' Denise Phua Ah Kow and his party will be waiting in the wing, and with our stupid electorate, one day Ah Kow and his party is going to be elected into power. And yes, they will not let go. With so much power and money for the taking, who would want to let go?

The formula is flawless

The formula is flawless The timing is right. The methodology is good. The amount is just right. The assumptions and reasonings are all well thought out. In other words, it is flawless, the best formula there is. Chee Hean has all the answers to queries, questions and objections. And all were answered perfectly to the satisfaction of every questioner. Any more questions? But I find this quote quite difficult to understand. 'If a person is motivated by money, then even a low salary has its dangers.' Teo Chee Hean I am still trying to understand the essence of this quote. But the people can rest assured that all the politicians are not motivated by money. For if they are, they would have been dismissed long ago.

A matter of values and perception

A matter of values and perception Who says the ministerial salary is high? There will be those who say the ministers are underpaid for whatever reasons. And there will be those who say that it is too high, unreasonable and unjustifiable. And some will be very angry that you say so and will tell you how important they are and that they should be paid even higher. It all depends on who you are, which angle one is looking at it and also whether you have a vested interest in it. Better not ask a minister if his salary is high. Better not ask Ng Eng Heng as he is famous for earning $4 million a year. Can we ask ministers who used to earn $200k, if there is one? And also don't ask an aspiring minister. His answer will be too obvious. Or shall we ask the people if the salary is high? Who should it matter whether the salary is high or low? Does it matter to anyone at all? I think it does not matter to anyone. Everyone will have his own view on this, right or wrong. Life goes on. Let's move on.

hard questions in parliament

Samples of Hard Questions raised in Parliament 'My Greatest worry is that an open ended linkage between ministerial salaires and top earners,...could in the long run undermine the moral authority the Govt needs to lead the people...' NMP Siew Kum Hong 'There are others who feel our Govt leaders are paid to much compared to other countries...This comparison is grossly unfair.... The key issue here is that of opportunity cost. If our ministers decide not to be ministers...chances are they'll be head honchos of some of our listed companies....' NMP Gautam Banerjee 'With the right leaders, no amount is too much. With not the right leaders, any amount sees too much- that is the heart of the issue.' MP Alvin Yeo 'I believe that the great public interest generated...serves as a timely reminder for those of us in public office that we are measured by the extent of our active compassion for our fellow citizens.' Mayor Zainudin Nordin '...the senior civil servants will never, ever have to face a downward cycle because it is pegged to the salaries of top earners (in the private sector) and there will always be top earners.' MP Lim Biow Chuan The issue is about timing. 'Has the PM lost a single minister or a perm sec? I think the issue is not as urgent as it's made out to seem....about a month ago, debating and arguing why we shouldn't be giving our Public Assistance recipients - some 3,000 of them - another $100...and now we are talking about million dollar salary increases.' MP Inderjit Singh 'What signals are we sending Singaporeans?' Inderjit Singh '....We believe there is no need for enormously large salaries to attract and retain the right talent... It's also ironic that we are consuming taxpayers' money and discussing how much more of a fraction of a million to pay civil servants and ministers while we haggle over additional tens of dollars to hand out to our needy and disadvantaged citizens.' MP Low Thia Khiang '...ministers in other countries may make more money after their term in office ends, such as through public speaking.' Well spoken by MP Josephine Teo

How much is your IQ?

How much is your IQ? The intelligence or ability of Singaporeans is measured by how much the person earns. The more he earns the higher is his intelligence and the more qualified he is to run the country. At least that is about what it means during the discussion on ministerial salary over the last few days and in Parliament. We need to pay competitive salary, actually means very high salary, to attract good people, which means people earning very high salary, to be in the govt. People like Wee Cho Yaw, Ng Teng Fong, Ong Beng Seng and Quek Leng Beng, or Sim Wong Hoo, or our Popiah King, or the former Remisier King, will be excellent candidates for the next election. Unfortunately the salary for ministers is still too low to attract them. Mahamat Gandhi, the pauper, will not qualify as a talent in our context. So will Deng Xiao Ping. Or for that matter, all the Presidents and Prime Ministers around the world who earn less than a peanut, will not be good enough for us. Our talents can now briefly be classified under $300,000 a month Top Super Talent or TST. The next level is $30,000 a month Super Talent or ST. The $3000 a month talent should be familiar to all, the FT or Foreign Talent. At the lowest level, the $300 a month NT, No Talent. And one group that I have left out or best forgotten, the ULT, Unwanted Local Talent, found only in overseas market. Some can be found hiding behind the wheels of taxis.

good news!

Good news! 'MINISTERS' salary will rise to $1.6 million from $1.2 million by end of this year. Announcing the pay rise, Minister in-charge of civil service, Teo Chee Hean said on Monday, ministers' pay will be raised further to $1.94 million by end of 2008.' posted by legolas in YPAP forum. Let's hope the ministers are happy with the pay rise and we can have a clean and honest govt. Singaporeans are so lucky that they are not asking for the full offset of the shortfall according to the formula.

Don't expect hefty payrise

Don't expect hefty payrise Hay Group, a human resource consultancy, has cautioned that payrise would be in the range of 2.8% to 3.2% for professionals and senior management. And the reason, according to its MD Roland Ruiz, 'Singapore's current salary levels are already among the highest in the region, which explains the smaller percentage growth.'

Ministerial Pay Debate

Ministerial Pay Debate Today is the day for Parliament to debate on the issue of Ministerial Pay. Let me summarise the justifications put forth so far. 1. The formula said so. According to the formula, the minister's pay is below the bench mark by $1 mil. 2. If we don't pay them the govt may become corrupt. 3. Or they may be poached by Morgan Stanley or other American companies and be paid $5 mil or more. 4. No talented people will come forward to serve. 5. Our women folks will become maids. 6. Singaporeans and the economy will suffer. While there will be a debate, I just read in the paper that there will be no voting. No need to vote? That means it will be passed. Anyway, the MPs promise to ask tough questions. Might as well since the decision has already been made and nothing they said will change the outcome. So far Dr Lim Wee Kiak has said the smartest thing. 'Instead of waiting a few years and doing a big adjustment, why not do a small adjustment every year.' Yeah man, just like bus fare increases. A little at a time, looks more affordable. $1 million increase spread out over 5 years, $200,000 a year. I hope the MPs will also ask where in the world can one earns a life time pension after serving 8 to 10 years in a job? And also it is acceptable and reasonable for people who is to benefit from the pay rise be allowed to put up the supporting reasons and decide on it as well? Don't we need an independent third party that has no interest in the formula to make the proposal and decision? But then again, where to find an independent party that has no vested interest? And with such compelling reasons put forward, how to disagree? I will abstain from commenting on the compelling reasons and let the MPs comment about them in Parliament.

Means Testing is back

Means Testing is back People opt for C wards mainly for two reasons. The first is affordability. The second is an age old wisdom called thrift. For those who are hard on their cash flow, looking at the statistics provided in the MSM, probably 50% of the population will be hardup when faced with a huge hospitalisation bill, this is understandable. The other of course is a great virtue, thrift, spending within your means so that one will not become a burden to other people or society. And no one knows how much one really needs to have to be enough. Thus being thrifty is the best guarantor to be self sufficient. Should our official policy frown on people being thrifty and choose to endure the lesser comfort of a C ward than the creature comfort of A and B wards? There is subsidy and so people are deemed to cheat or deprive others from the subsidy. Good reason. I will never be a cheat because I have a million in my saving. Not yet actually. Still waiting for the Toto winning to fill it up. Maybe next week. When there are so many people demanding for C wards, it means that there is a genuine need for such level of services. It is good reasoning to say that we must always level up, upgrade the quality of our services. Who does not want that? Unfortunately, the income of most people are not levelling up. Many have stagnated and going downhill and would make do with lesser quality of services. Insurance and Medisave are not a real alternatives. They suck away the little cash that the lower income people have for other necessities in living. These people have limited income and any amount stased away for medical uses will mean that some thing has to go. And if we let this great quality of medical service and cost to runaway, it will only mean that the lower income earners are going to be poorer overall. It is a zero sum game when every cent counts.

When there is no honour...but MONEY

When there is no honour...but MONEY The public service is all about public service, a service to the public. Or at least that was what it used to be. Throughout history, great people have stood up to serve country and people in the name of honour above all else. Today, in a new world when such values, including honesty, integrity, magnanimity, compassion, or just to make a difference in the lives of less able people, are now as good as outdated. All these have been subsumed by a new motivator called money. I have left out sacrifice from the list as sacrifice is no longer a factor. In our context I cannot see any sacrifice in the real sense of the word. What we are seeing is a new morality, a self serving morality, a morality of greed. We have all turned to become very practical people, and always ask what's in it for me. And more, to have more. Are our ministers suffering from being underpaid? Can $1m a year plus other perks that can or cannot be quantified be called underpaid? Yes and no. No when $1 a year can buy all the niceties in life and with a lot more to spare. I will be the first to support a payrise if a minister cannot afford to buy his $2 million private property after a 5 year term. But yes because other people are getting more. The main reason why there is this urgent call to double the $1 million is simply because relatively they are paid less. There will not be any call for a pay revision at this level if the other top earners are earning less. And with a formula that is built with all the biases to shoot to the sky, the $2 mil or $10 mil will never be enough. The formula will demand that the salary must continue to go up. When we replace honour with money, all our values change. We should not continue to teach our children values that are best described as 'admirable sentiments.' Let's get real. The moral values we are teaching our children in schools are impractical and smack of hypocrisy. They can no longer survive in a new world where self interest and well being comes first. We must not bring them up into a world that is totally different from their textbooks. They will suffer a culture shock when they realise that all the goodness that the teachers are teaching them is but a farce. The real world is not like that. We need to teach them a new set of values that befits the survival of the fittest. And yes, a return to the laws of the jungle.

the dumb and selfless heroes

Reaching out to the needy in the heart of Singapore. This is a heading in the Straits Times by Radha Basu. 'There are around 22,000 vulnerable residents in the heart of Singapore who may need financial help, according to estimates by the Central Singapore Community Development Council.' And island wide there could be hundreds of thousands of them. And we are arguing that $1.2 mil a year is not enough. And the people pounding the ground, doing the sweatings, are volunteers of welfare and grassroot organisations. These are the dumb heroes of the people who work without getting paid. Socially responsible and with a heart to serve the people without asking how much they are going to get for their sacrifice. Maybe they get a pat on the back and be invited to the Istana for a year end party. These are the selfless men that should be the examples for all Singapsoreans to emulate.

The biggest bullshit

The biggest bullshit Ho Kong Loon wrote, 'Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew spoke so plainly and precisely that dissenters to the proposed salary increase for ministers and top civil servants cannot but nod, albeit reluctantly, in assent at the sheer force, simplicity and veracity of his stand.' I can agree that it was spoken plainly, simply, precisely and with sheer force. I can agree that civil servants should be paid well but nor exorbitantly. But for once I find the justification totally unacceptable. We are no longer paying peanuts at the top level. What is enough or not enough is relative. Ho Kong Loon added that Singapore is what it is today...'only if the leadership is focussed, steely minded, possess extraordinary IQ and EQ, and is socially responsible and incorruptible. Good governance is a rare commodity.' Again I agree but with a little exception. Can you use the word 'incorruptible' on anyone who tells you that he will become corrupt if you don't pay him his asking price? An incorruptible man is incorruptible no matter how much you pay him. He may have a stupid principle that tells him that he should not be corrupt. And he lives by it. This is the plain, simple and precise message. Is this the compelling reason why Ho Kong Loon is so convinced? To me, just this point alone is deeply troubling. Only in Singapore can such an argument be used to justify one's own pay rise. Tell that to the American Congress or the British Parliament and see what the elected representatives of the people will have to say. Can anyone see what I am saying? Can anyone understand the underlying assumption of this kind of logic? Do we need to pay so bloody well to attract the best and talented and incorruptible Singaporeans to come forward to serve the country and people? Or maybe I should rephrase this and ask why are all the good and able men shunning the political minefield? Do we have a political system that encourages the best to step forward willingly for altruistic reasons or are we creating a system that is attracting people who are only interested in the money? If people step forward simply because there are a few millions on offer, what kind of men are they? Socially responsible and incorruptible? If we are serious in getting more able people to step forward to serve. we need to re examine why they are not coming forward in the first place. Singapore has many talents. Singapore's success speaks for itself. Singapore's success cannot be attributed to a handful of individuals alone. It goes all the way down. And at the top, people who are able to run the country as well as the current leadership, you can bet there are at least a few thousands of them with such ability, integrity and honesty out there.

George Bush demands for more money or else...

Heard this story in the lift. A FT was telling his peers. It goes like this. George Bush went to congress and threatens to quit if he did not get what he asked for. And he also threatens to go the corrupt way to get it. George was fighting for a noble cause, asking for money to protect his troops in Iraq.

how predictable!

How predictable! Even before the ink is dry the expected backtracking has started. The two free access zones in the IDR are now scrapped because of domestic politickings. How much confidence can foreign investors have on a govt that is so fickleminded and will bend to local political pressure no matter how hysterical and irrational they may be? Who is there to guarantee that 3 weeks or 3 months down the line all the terms and conditions will be changed? Will the IDR becomes an Internal Development Region catering to the domestic markets and interests like all the housing estates built but cannot be sold? With all the backtrackings as a norm, investors must think very carefully before putting money in the IDR. The other point that led to the scrapping of the FAZs, other than the irrational fear of becoming slaves of foreigners in their own country, is the anti semitic mindset. Historically, the Bumis and the Jews were living in two separate corners of the globe and hardly know each other. Why is there so much hatred for the Jews to be a reason to scrap the FAZs?? This kind of unthinking hatred for another race is very frightening. Don't the Bumis have a mind of their own and think what have the Jews got to do with them that they have to hate the Jews so intensely? There will be reasons to hate their former colonial master for exploiting and ruling them as a subject people. But what have the Jews done to deserve such acrimony?

The artificiality of an Aquarium

The artificiality of an Aquarium Nobody begrudges anyone earning too much money. Even the ministers are not begrudging other high earners from earning too much money. But they only said that they deserved to be earning as much as other top earners by virtue of the assumption that they are the top talents and holding the top jobs in the country. It is even suggested that all of them would be offered more by top foreign companies, a proposition that has not been proven. Maybe a couple of them could receive that kind of offers. I doubt more than one will have such a rare privilege. What were thrown out in all the debates recently re nothing but a green eye syndrome. What other's have I must also have. Like the 'eye' which they called it the 'flyer.' Other countries have the ferris wheel so must we. This is hardly a rational justification for being paid the same as the private sector. A business concern is totally different from a public service. One is money and profit oriented, the other is people oriented, a lot of nobility, passion and mission towards a country and the people's well being. The rewards are different. The political structure or system that we have is an artificiality that cannot be replicated nor continue to exist forever anywhere in the world. Up to a point it will look ridiculous and will self destruct. It will be dismantled or become a joke in times to come as all things artificial must go the same way. Our system is built by a one party dominance system that has entrenched itself and thinks that this is it and will be institutionalised for perpetuity. A political system is a political system. It is never meant to be an occupation where people can built a lifelong career, as an employee. The conditions, prerequisites, mentality and expectations are totally different. In the first place the political appointees do not need any objective qualifications. Anyone, a barber, taxi driver, or even a comedian without any skills in govt, or the discipline of higher education, can stand for election and get elected by the people. The supertalent concept is only a system applied by the ruling party. No other party is doing the same. And given the unpredictability of the electorate, the party of supertalents may be voted out and replaced by a party of average talents. When it happens, the whole pay system will become incongruent to the reality. It is no laughing matter paying millions to a wayward group or pretenders. And whose millions are being used to pay the politicians? It is the people's money. The billions of the nation's money are the people's money and cannot be used to pay politicians to serve the interest of any political party. Everyone receiving public money must be accountable to the huge sums he is being paid. If he is redundant or not doing a job worthy of that kind of money, then it is a misuse of public fund. The value of the job must justify the money paid and not for any other reasons. In a commercial enterprise, especially a family owned business, the grandfather and grandmother can continue to draw exorbitant salaries for doing nothing, maybe given a big title as chairman or director. That is private business and private money. One can do whatever one is happy with his own private money. The govt must look at the bigger picture and understand that the current aquarium set up is a temporary condition, an artificiality that may not hold in the longer run. Sooner or later, the longkang fish, the tadpoles, and the worms are going to infest the aquarium and it will not look so perfect on the window display. And a country cannot be held at ransom for fear that the elite will become corrupt or be offered a higher pay by the private sector and leave the people in the lurch. There will be a few not so clever individuals who will step forward to serve the country for more noble and altruistic reasons. Unless this money culture has already set roots in the minds of all Singaporeans. Then we will be doomed for sure. And I can assure everyone that it is a matter of time before the nation will be sold to the highest bidder.

are they joking about us?

Has anyone heard what the foreigners were saying about our logic that we need to pay millions to keep our ministers from being corrupt? I heard something, a little, inside the lift. But most of it were drown by the giggling and laughing that followed. What I heard was when would it stop, or something like how much would it be enough? Or is it like a dog chasing after its tail?

notable quotes

"Retrenchment is good for singapore. If there is no retrenchments, then I worry." - SM Goh "I don't think that there should be a cap on the number of directorship that a person can hold." - PAP MP John Chen who holds 8 directorships. "It's not for the money because some of the companies pay me as little as $10,000 a year." - PAP MP Wang Kai Yuen who holds 11 directorships. "If you want to dance on a bar top, some of us will fall off the bar Top. Some people will die as a result of liberalising bar top dancing… a young girl with a short skirt dancing on it may attract some insults from some other men, the boyfriend will start fighting and some people will die." - Vivian Balakrishnan, Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports "I would want to form an alternative policies group in Parliament, comprising 20 PAP MPs. These 20 PAP MPs will be free to vote in accordance with what they think of a particular policy. In other words, the whip for them will be lifted. This is not playing politics, this is something which I think is worthwhile doing." - SM Goh "If you sing Jailhouse Rock with your electric guitar when others are playing Beethoven, you are out of order. The whip must be used on you." - SM Goh again, on a dramatic u-turn, rethink or backtrack, whatever you call it. "Save on one hairdo and use the money for breast screening." - another gem from Lim Hng Kiang "We started off with (the name) and after looking at everything, the name that really tugged at the heartstrings was in front of us. The name itself is not new, but what has been used informally so far has endeared itself to all parties." - Mah Bow Tan on the $400,000 exercise to rename Marina Bay as Marina Bay. "Having enjoyed football as a national sport for decades, we in Singapore have set ourselves the target of reaching the final rounds of World Cup in 2010." - Ho Peng Kee "Only 5% are unemployed. We still have 95% who are employed." - Yeo Cheow Tong "Singaporean workers have become more expensive than those in the USA and Australia." - Tony Tan "People support CPF cuts because there are no protest outside parliament." - PM Lee "No, it was not a U-turn, and neither was it a reversal of government policy. But you can call it a rethink." - Yeo Cheow Tong "…I regret making the decision because, in the end, the baby continued to be in intensive care, and KKH now runs up a total bill of more than $300,000…" - Lim Hng Kiang, regretting the decision to save a baby's life because KKH ran up a $300,000 bill "Without the elected president and if there is a freak result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it." - MM Lee Kuan Yew "Please do not assume that you can change governments. Young people don't understand this" - Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, post-2006 General Elections

The inevitable is here

Today is a very important day. Luckily it is not April 1.

Ominous signs are everywhere, from the front page of the major news media and through all the pages. It is the sign a sickness that will eventually eat up everything. We have gone down the slippery road and everyone is cheering what a great ride it is as we go down.

When it is time for a change, it will come and nothing can be done about it. All the factors will pull and push towards the change. And don't be surprised it will come much sooner than expected.

changing times changing values

Time changes everything, it changes men, ideals and value systems. Even the value of money also changes. The days of youthful idealism, of sacrifice for people and country are over. At best such values can be called 'admirable sentiments.' Today, everything is about self, self worth and how much. The western ideals of self as the most important element in living has taken root in our island. Everyone shall look after his own interest first. All the silliness about serving society, serving people, helping the poor and weak and ideals are best shafted into the cabinet and forgotten. Welcome to the real world of the 21st Century. Be the best of the best, and champions of champions and be paid handsomely. There is no room for philantrophy, no room for generosity, no room for magnanimity, no room for charity. In future, all political parties will present a package on the minister's salary during a general election and the people will vote accordingly. As how much to pay the ministers become a major issue, all the good men will get together to form their own parties and decide how much they are worth. And the people will have the opportunity to see which party provides the best value for the money they are asking for. It is all veru business like. It will be a transparent thing. No more raising of minister's pay after an election. It will all be upfront, transparent. And the electorate likes that.

Year 2XXX, Ah Kow's Party sweeps to power

Year 2XXX, Ah Kow's Party sweeps to power Ah Kow appoints himself as the Prime Minister. And he names his Cabinet. Minister of Defence: Mr Wang See Foo, Master pugilists of Lion's Roar Martial Arts School. His martial art training is very useful for training the soldiers. Minister of Home Affairs: Mr Sam Seng Kia, former gangster chief who knows the crime world like the back of his hand. Minister of Foreign Affairs: Mdm Mah Ma San. Her diplomacy and skills in handling clients will put her in an advantage when dealing with other FMs. Minister of Trade: Mr Pah Kang Tau. The most ideal man in making trade deals. Minister of Finance: Mr Tai Yee Long. Very skillful man in handling money, interest rates and collecting debts. Minister of Education: Mr Boh Tak Cheh. Highest standard passed, PSLE. But believes that adult education from the University of Hard Knocks is very valuable to people like him. Minister of Transport: Mr See Ho Yee. Owns a private bus company. All the ministers will naturally be paid the super talent ministerial salary package handed down by the past regimes. Each will be geting $10 million while Ah Kow will be paid $25 million. As political leaders are elected by the people and educational background is not a criterial as long as they have no criminal records, any tom, dick and harry could actually become super talents, or at least be paid super talent salary. Ah Kow and his gangs laughs all the way to the bank.

One good suggestion.

One good suggestion. The civil service and political service should learn from the uniformed services. Pay and promote them young and fast to the top and catapult them to the private sector to earn more millions. With all the experience and networkings they have made they should worth very much more. The headhunters will love them. And their joining the private sector is not a loss to the country. They are still contributing in a more productive capacity. It is like a second career, and more lucrative too. By having this alternative route in addition to a fast track, the civil service will become even more popular and more in demand. And it will be lighter on the taxpayers pocket.

the thing cannot be said

In an island somewhere in the Pacific, a mother and daughter were checking in at the immigration and had to go through the standard screening. Daughter: What are they doing, mum? Mum: They are checking for things? Daughter: What things mum? Mum: Hmmmm...that thing? Daughter: What is that thing? Mum: Officer, can you please tell my little girl what you are checking? Officer: Getting annoyed, 'We are checking for that thing lah!' Daughter: Getting a little frighten, 'Mum, I still do not know what is that thing?' Officer overheard and screamed: That thing is that thing. No one can say it. If you say that thing you will get into trouble with me. Mum: Alright girl. No more questions. Daughter: That thing, that thing, dunno what thing. Officer: If you say that thing once more I will lock you up. This kind of thing can only happen in some primitive little islands.

And now the second part. 'Payrise is not an entitlement.'

And now the second part. 'Payrise is not an entitlement.' The way the proposed payrise is put forward, it is like an entitlement. As long as the top eight income earners in the formula made a killing, the ministers should also be entitled to a killing. Logical? Should we ask what are they doing, what have they contributed, what are their achievements? And forget about the last 40 years of achievements. Some of them were probably kids when all the hard work were put in to build the strong foundation for what Singapore is today. What are their contributions for the present Singapore? The other issue is the portfolios they are holding, or without portfolio. Some are shouldering very heavy responsibilities, some very little. Some looking after the welfare of kids, sports, some looking after the elderly, some looking after the economy, the safety and security of the people and country. Should all be paid in millions? We need to need to look at the jobs, the responsibilities and the contributions, current contributions, to pay them accordingly. Past contributions have already been paid, and continuously being paid in the form of pension. They should be paid by their own performance and not the performance of the top eight high earners. The pay of ministers is from public money and needs to be accounted for prudently.

ungrateful singaporeans

Let me post two opposing views on this hot potato. I will title this first part 'The ungrateful Singaporeans.' It is quite distressing really, for our ministers to come up in the open to ask for a payrise for themselves. The payrise for ministers should be pushed by the Singaporeans for all the great work the ministers have done for Singapore. Over the last 40 years, the ministers have worked so hard to bring Singapore from a struggling small sea port to a first world city. Now that is achievement and hard work, brain work. They deserve every penny we pay them and more. They deserve to be paid more. And they are the best talents that Singapore has produced. So logically they must be paid the highest salaries as the rest in the private sector are second to them. They did not want to be politicians. They were called to be politicians against their wills. Otherwise they will be the captains of the industries and be in the top positions of all the professions in the private sector. And they wear so many hats. Everyone of them wears probably more than 20 hats, and all for the people and country. Can't the people appreciate that? And for doing so, they work at least 18 hours a day. Who else would want to work in this way, no day and no night? Then the big sacrifice, they have very little time for their own families. Their children very likely see them less than the people. Their time are public time. What is more amazing is that having made it in life, all of them have a big fat account in the bank and do not need to work any more, they refuse to retire and smell the roses and play with their grand children. They still come forward to slog for the people and nation when they don't have to. And the people are so ungrateful, criticising them and calling them names. Just remember, we have a clean, competent, conscientious, committed and corruption free govt because of all these great men that stepped out to serve. Pay them what they should be getting.

myanmar sand, a friend indeed

In politics you do not know who is your friend. Your best friend, the so called friends, could turn out to be your enemy. And the countries that you least expect will be there with open arms to help you when you needed help badly. In the past we have Israel to help us during the difficult formative years. Today, under pressure from ungrateful friends, we have Myanmar offering us all the help that we needed most. We should welcome this friend with open arms. And best, we can terminate all our needs for sand and granite from Indonesia. Make it a clean and final decision. We should impose a ban on importing sand and granite from Indonesia.

a young malaysian talent in the making

Malaysia Its Singaporean inferiority complex We seem to be obsessed with Singapore; why do we live in our neighbour's shadow? Klang blogger johnleemk Mar 23, 2007 Malaysians have this odd obsession with Singapore. While reading Malaysia Today a few days ago, I scrolled past several pieces with only half a dozen comments, down to a piece posted around the same time with over 50 comments. Its subject? Singapore. The only things that can get more controversy are, I think, race, religion and sex (not necessarily in that order). But why are Malaysians so pathetically insecure that we live virtually in the shadow of our southern neighbour? Why is it that nearly every political debate has to include some reference to Singapore? What makes this neighbour of ours so special? Historically speaking, it's probably the fact that Singapore was considered an integral part of the country until after World War II, when the Malayan Union failed to include it. Afterwards came a painful merger between an independent Malaya with Singapore and the former British colonies of Sabah and Sarawak. Then two years later came an even more painful separation between Singapore and Malaysia. To that, I think, a lot of our insecurities can be traced. Since separation, Singapore has moved forward much more than Malaysia, joining the ranks of developed countries and overshadowing Malaysia. Even today, the one thing people tend to credit ex-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad most for seems to be for taking Malaysia out of Singapore's shadow. (This seems to be patently untrue, though; when I tell Americans I'm from Malaysia, they get confused until I tell them we're just north of Singapore.) Thanks to this, whenever Singapore gets brought up in casual conversation, things can get heated — and often political. Almost everyone seems to have an opinion about Singapore, and a rather strongly-held one, too. Generally, these strong-held opinions fall into one of two categories. The first is one extremely enamoured with Singapore. The people who fall under this category often tend to be non-Malays, especially Chinese, who look up to Singapore as a model for meritocracy, and an oasis of good governance in a desert of administrative inefficiency. The other category is for opinions which are diametrically opposite. These opinions often are held by Malays upset with what they perceive to be the injustices of a country where minorities are implicitly discriminated against, where the country is not really much more free or much less corrupt than Malaysia, and where the stuck-up Chinese majority continually thumbs its nose at its neighbours across the Straits of Tebrau. As usual, I think the truth lies somewhere between these two extremes. But that's a subject for another day. For the time being, what we are concerned with is the apparent inferiority complex Malaysians have with Singapore, to the point that half the country appears to long to ape the island republic's every move, while the other half refuses to do anything that might be seen as learning from the island republic's lessons — both for the sake of menegakkan maruah Malaysia (loosely translated, standing up for the honour of Malaysia). I think that, in the end, it all comes down to two things: race. No, there's no mistake — I mean "race" as in "ethnicity" and "race" as in "competition". When it comes to the first issue of race, Malaysians can't help but feel terribly strongly about our relationship with Singapore. Malaysia has had pro-Malay policies in place from the time of the British colonial era, while Singapore refused to bow to Malay demands for greater Malay hegemony, with the end result of separation. When it comes to the second issue of race, in almost every sphere of competition, Singapore has us beat flat. Whether it's tourism, biotechnology, industry, prestige, the exchange rate, net immigration — we're on the mat, begging for mercy, and Singapore is kicking the hell out of us. It's hard not to feel touchy and inferior about this desolate rock we had the temerity to kick out 40 years ago. During the administration (or maybe regime would be a better word) of Mahathir, the relationship between the Malaysian and Singaporean governments was probably at an all-time low. It was even worse than at the time of separation — indeed, part of the reason Malaysia and Singapore separated was because Tunku Abdul Rahman, our PM at the time, thought he could get along better with Lee Kuan Yew as a neighbour rather than a rebelling local statesman. Since then, things have improved. There have been changes in heads of government on both sides of the causeway, and there's cause for optimism at the elite level. But at the grassroots level — in the mamaks and in the kopitiams — it seems that controversy about the Malaysia-Singapore relationship is more alive than ever. Malaysians have yet to release themselves from the grip of this inferiority complex. When we stop thinking about political questions in terms of "What would Singapore do?" and then decide to do as they would do (or, in the case of the contrarians, precisely what Singapore would not do), and reason without reference to that neighbour down south, then maybe we'll have made some progress to actually beating Singapore in some race. But of course, it's doubtful that this will happen. Malaysia's relationship with Singapore is much like a relationship between two bitter exes — they can't stand to see each other, but bitch about the other at every opportunity they get. Until we escape this bitterness, we will remain as politically immature as a nation as we were at independence. (John Lee Ming Keong is a 16-year-old living in a suburb of the Klang Valley in Selangor, Malaysia.) I copy the above from littlespeck.com. This young man, John Lee Ming Keong, I must say that I am terribly impressed by his maturity in thoughts and his ability to express so well, in English, a foreign language. I think he will soon be offered a scholarship to study in Singapore. For his tender age, the intelligence level is evident.

hurry, property prices shooting up!

Boomtown Charlie, Property prices on the rise Everyone in the business is using his loud hailer shouting that property prices are shooting to the sky. Quick, quick, go out and grab one before it is too late. My rich neighbour already bought 4 properties, one for son, one for daughter and two for suckers. Where are the suckers coming from? Most heartlanders have one or two children who would probably inherit the little flat they have bought. The rich, like my neighbour, have already bought all they wanted, and in excess, and waiting. Sure there will be a few young couples who have made it and wanted a place of their own. And these will have to play catch up if they can afford it. But many young people will not have enough, with the kind of pay they are getting, to buy those skyrocketing price private properties. Where is the demand coming from? Maybe some foreigners going for the top end. What about the general market, the HDB market? Is there really a demand to chase prices up? The memory of the balloon bursting is still deeply etched in the minds of many who have been made bankrupt. Bang, bang, bang, propery prices going up!

kopitiam up prices

My cuppa of kopi up by 10c! This is outrageous. How can the kopitiams increase my kopi by so much, more than 10%? We must protest to bring down the unjust increase. My pay has not increased and they are already increasing my kopi. But I would like to offer my secret formula to the kopitiams, at a fee of course, so that when they increase their prices, no one can complain that it is not justified. All they need to do is to peg it to some bankers or top income earners' salary. So when their income goes up, automatically the price of the kopi must go up. Objective and transparent.

myth 129

Singapore mentality not the same as Malaysians It was reported that 800,000 of 2.1 million Malaysian civil servants moonlight to earn extra income. And they took on extra jobs like taxi drivers, cashiers, gardeners as well. And these less talented workers choose to do it the hard way instead of resorting to corruption. Corruption only happens in high places where people earn more than RM$5,00 pm, so the papers reported. Now this is very difficult to understand. In Singapore, the higher people are paid, the lesser they are corrupt. In Malaysia, it seems that the higher you pay them the more they are corrupt. It is indeed a big contradiction. Are we made differently?

myth 128

Is there a value to a job? The traditional method of evaluation the worth of a job and how much it should be paid is no longer relevant in the modern context, or at least in the Singapore context. In the past, a job is carefully evaluated with relevant factors to determine how much it is worth. It is quite a tedious and complicated process. Today, the determination of the value of a job is so much easier. Just peg it to somebody's income. In fact the value of all the jobs in Singapore can be done that way. And whether the value of the job increases or decreases will be determined by the income of the top eight lawyers, accountants, bankers, CEOs of MNCs and local enterprises, and engineers. And workers can likewise peg their pay to them. And when these people earn a lot of money, their pay can likewise be adjusted accordingly. The process is clean, transparent, objective and clinical. No need to argue about how much is a job worth anymore. No need to go for collective negotiation with management. Afterall the value of a job is only relative, relative to whoever one chooses to peg it with.

The irony of it all

The irony of it all The people who are struggling to make ends meet and slogging away are all silent while the fat cows are screaming for more. In a society like ours, those who are earning less than $3k a month, not to mention those earning less than $1k, are just living from hand to mouth. Anyone who earns $20k a month are very comfortable. Anything more than that will either go to their savings or for more luxury. And it is this latter group that keeps saying 'I want more and more and more.' It is so distasteful. Oops, I am wrong. I have lost touch with reality, with the people's aspiration, and the brutal truth.

great opportunity to start anew

The IDR is the greatest opportunity for Malaysia and Singapore to start on a new phase of cooperation. The Malaysian High Commissioner did not miss this out and is calling for more effort towards a hassle free transit in and out of JB. He is pushing for a new Causeway card that will make transiting a breeze. But there are many other things that need to be ironed out, especially the controversial and ambiguous rulings which the police, immigration and customs are famous for. Tinted glasses for cars, red plated off peak cars, no chopping of passports, checks and harassments for no rhymes or reasons, spot checks, stopping by traffic police etc etc. These are the irritants that make live very miserable and uncertain for visitors to JB and Malaysia. Maybe the High Commissioner could come out with a list to clarify all these things in a booklet form for Singaporeans to carry along to show to the law enforcing officers that they have crossed the line. If it will help. It may not as they could throw whatever booklet away and insist that one follows them to the police station and spend another few days in Malaysian against one's will.

best quote from swee say

The most convincing quote from Swee Say. Payrise for Ministers will benefit the people.

mindboggling pension scheme

The pension scheme is an accepted practice in the govt service introduced by the British. Now this scheme is also extended to politicians, people who are elected by the people on a 5 year term basis. And it is not even an employment. Then all one needs to be entitled to the lifelong pension is to be in office for two terms or a max of 10 years. Invariably it is lesser, between 8 to 9 years. Compare this to the original concept of pension when a person has to work practically all his life, 25 to 35 years before he is entitled to it and may lose it along the way if he fumbles. And the number is mindboggling. A person can be in office for 10 years and will be paid around $.5 to $1 million for the rest of his life. If he lives for another 25 years, the state could have to pay him $12.5 mil to $25 mil. Not sure if he is still entitled to all the medical perks. I am not saying that the scheme is right or wrong, good or bad. It is just mindboggling.

to inform or to expose?

Loh Chee Kong was thinking aloud on the role of journalists after Vivian said that one of the media's role is to expose Govt's wrongdoings. This is a major shift, if for real, in the role of the media. But Chee Kong was sensible enough to ask whether it is just a red herring. And everyone in the media too did not think it wise or worth more reading into it. It was spoken and forgotten. Silence follows on this issue. The role of the media is simply to inform, educate and entertain. I will just stick to this sacred formula to be safe.

what is enough?

What is enough? $290 a month is enough. $1 million a year is not enough. Depending on who you are and how one tries to justify one's position, it is all relative. $5 million or $10 million is also not enough given the present formula. What if the top eight performers of each group worked exceptionally hard, did exceptionally well, and luck was all on their side, and they made $10 or $20 million each, the formula would say $2 mil is not enough and not because of the effort or the spectacular performance of the people expecting the windfall. Performance is not really in the formula. One gets, all gets, big portfolio, no portfolio, great performance or mediocre performance, no difference. As the ministers are going around persuading the people to accept their payrise, and as Swee Say said, 'Progressively, more and more union leaders and workers will come to accept and realise that it's actually in (their) interest to ensure that the Govt will do whatever is necessary to attract a fair share of the talent.' Since it is in the interest of the people, there is no reason why they should not be a payrise. An easier approach would be to name how much is enough and get it over with. Trying to apply a formula that many do not agree only make things more incomprehensible. Perhaps during a GE the party shall let the electorate know that for the elected term the ministers shall be paid so much and no one need to be apologetic about it later. 'What we need are political leaders and civil servants who really care a lot about the ground, who understand their anxiety, who understand their aspirations, to take the necessary measure to help them realise their aspirations.' Swee Say said. I believe the people all have a simple aspiration and share the same anxiety. While the ministers are going to have their big big payrise, the people will be very happy, and their anxiety removed, and their aspirations taken care of, if everyone is given a $10k handout. This is the simple aspirations of the people, or at least what I think it is.

big bucks!

Big Bucks That is the headline in the Sunday Times in an article asking who are the people in Singapore earning top dollar. 'Last year's income tax assessments showed that, in 2005, $4.29 million was the median pay for the eight top earning lawyers, $3.72 million for accountants, $3.33 million for bankers, $2.7 million for MNC executives, $2.3 million for local manufacturing head honchos and $0.62 million for engineers.' What would be interesting would be the median pay for the top eight civil servants and the top eight politicians. They are somewhere there, probably better than the engineers but how far from the rest is not known. The only figure that I am uncomfortable is the median pay of bankers. There are only 3 local banks and published figures showed that the top 6 got paid more than $5 million. And this did not include the top earners of foreign banks here. The $3.3 million definitely appeared pretty low from my guess. I am just guessing. From the figures given, it seems that the top five lucrative jobs that are paying big bucks are lawyers, accountants, bankers, heads of MNCs or local manufacturing and not forgetting civil servants or politicians. Engineering is out and should be forgotten. A little about comparison. Why lawyers and accountants? These are professionals like doctors and architects or professional gamblers. Their jobs are not in the management of a huge corporation like running a bank or a MNC. The latter two are more similar in nature to running a ministry. Is there any flaw in comparing individual skills or flairs against management skills, the management of large number of people and making decisions that affect a large number of people? I cannot see the rationale from a job evaluation perspective. Logically speaking, all the head honchos should be paid more than the lawyers and accountants as the skills of these professionals only affect a very limited number of people and have lesser widespread consequences. The head honchos should be demanding for higher pay.

It is cultural differences!

It is cultural differences! Why Singaporean employers feed their maids with a bowl of plain porridge or a piece of bread a day? Don't blame them. It is cultural differences. The Singaporeans believe that Indonesians needed only that to live. Another reason, which is more compelling, is that the Singaporean employers do not understand what the maid needs or what is a proper meal for a maid. Poor thing, all these first world people! These are the reasons given by maid agencies to justify why maids were fed with a piece of bread or a bowl of porridge a day and expected to work for 24 hours. I strongly recommend that we should introduce public lynching in Singapore. At least it will teach the world class Singaporeans a little about human decency or what a human being needs to eat to be kept alive.

Myth 127

Myth 127 Sacrifice family for the Nation Our politicians are the most self sacrificing people in the country and deserve to be paid well. They wear so many hats, spent 18 hours working and 6 hours sleeping and dreaming about how to run the country, and totally have no time for the family. Where on earth can you find such honourable people who are willing to give up so much to serve the people? And when it is time to retire, and continue to receive a well rewarding 2/3 of their last drawn salary, to spend time with the family that they have neglected, they choose to stay on to work for the people and nation. They will work till they die on the job. The success of Singapore is a result of their sacrifice and commitment to the nation.

The choice of where to peg

The choice of where to peg Would it be nice if the top govt official's salary is pegged to a middle civil servant's salary? I can immediately see the advantage of such a pegging. It is likely to benefit the salary of all civil servants, at all levels. As with the present formula, pegging to the top earners, almost to the top, would only mean that the income gap will get wider and it becomes a case of 'cannot be helped' even if everyone knows that it is undesirable. But if we pegged it at the middle civil servant level then the income gap may not widen that fast. But it still could, and the final amount could still be very large, depending on how many times is seen as decent and acceptable, and that it will not lead to them running to join the private sector or to prevent corruption from taking place. Then again, the reality is that no amount is enough. Long long ago, $5000 pm for minister is enough. Then $50,000 is considered very good. But if time permits, the number can keep going up, $100k pm or maybe eventually $1 million pm. It is all relative and depends on human greed. No one is humble enough to ask how many bowls of super grade rice he can eat a day, or how many bungalows he can sleep in a night, or how many limousines he can drive at one time, or how many pretty lasses he can sleep with in one night. Hey, that reminds me of what Einstein said about limits. The difference between a genius and an idiot is that a genius knows his limits.

The Evil corner

The Evil corner While we crow about how first world we are, how many millionaires and billionaires we have, how many millions should our top officials be rewarded, and all the good lives, let's not ignore the little evil corners that live among us. As we gain material wealth and comfort, and a better quality of life, as we upgrade ourselves to a position where all the menial tasks are done by maids, we should not forget that maids are human lives, just like everyone of us. The incidents of maids being ironed or becoming a punching bag have not appeared on our papers for a while. Maybe our evil corners have behaved a little better. Maybe not and the ironing and punching have continued but not reported. But the ill treatment of the maids is still going on going by the number of distress calls that the help agencies are receiving. The Indonesian Family Network group alone received 45 calls for help. And 25 of the calls were for food deprivation where employers deprived their maids of food or feeding them with leftovers or nothing at all. These inhuman acts within our society is a shame and make us no better than animals. First world? And for these things to happen regularly, daily, only speak on the mentality of a people, all the way from top down, that they could live with such human cruelties. By not doing anything about them is as good as being an accomplice to the crime against humanities. The perpetuators of such acts must be dealt with seriously, instantly and shame, yes shame publicly. Let such crimes be wiped out completely from this so called first world island, and completely from their mentality that this can be tolerated. There are laws provided to deal with the culprits. But for so many incidents to repeat itself daily means that it is not enough. It has to be stopped immediately if we are to be seen as a civilised people. When the evil corners are still thriving and lurking among us, let's stop crowing about how great we are as a people and as a nation. Ok, after airing a little conscience, let's start to justify about how many millions shall one get.

why is life expectancy higher for singaporeans?

Very simple. Singaporeans are very rich. All of them will retire will hundreds of thousands in their CPF, and also some properties. So when they reach a point in life when they can no longer see, can't hear, can't walk, can't move, can't think,can't eat, can't desire, can't do anything, they still can't die. Singaporeans can't die! For they can still afford to be hooked up to a machine and live for as long as there is money to pay the medical bill to keep them alive. What a beautiful life.

rethink on cpf

With the concept of retirement at 55 being thrown into the rubbish bin, the cpf and the huge minimum sum that has to be retained is no longer relevant. I have written about this issue but not getting any response from any one. Is there anyone thinking and agree that CPF policies need to be changed in view of all the changes in the lifestyle and working life of the people? If someone is working and earning a decent income to keep himself alive till 70 or 80, is there still a need to have 100k or 200k in his CPF when he dies? Or have we to live with this straight jacket policy under someone important enough say something?

set the talents free

I find it very unfair to keep the best talents in the govt and pay them a miserable salary that is below what they should earned. We should free these talents and their enterprises and encourage them to join the private sector and join the list of billionaires. That is their destiny, as they are gifted people and must not be restrained by being cooped up in public service. Let them serve their terms in public service and then release them to prosper. By doing so, not only we have many rich and happy individuals, we will also have many talents with bright ideas to help revitalise the private sector, and the nation will benefit too. And with so many young talents waiting in the wings, it will allow them to get promoted faster, and be happier as well. And the younger and eager talents will be out there to push themselves to serve the people and nation better. It is all for the good of the nation to spread out our talents. Just look at the brighter side, if all the ministers and top civil servants above 50 were to join the private sector, we will definitely have a more vibrant and creative climate and more companies and corporations will surge to the forefront internationally. No need foreign imports. The approach of keeping these talents and limiting their pay and having to justify to a people that do not believe in public services being overpaid is bad for the country. We must think creatively and find a solution that will benefit the poor talents that are kept in the public services from becoming billionaires in their own right and abilities. Set them free.

myth 126

6.5 million people is a big squeeze Far from it. If we plan properly, build upwards and downwards and using the best technology, Singapore can easily take in 30 million. Just build the whole island like the Tower of Babel. Use steel and glass. Yes a lot of glass, like a glass tower towards the heaven. We will be the most futuristic city, fully airconditioned, and several layers over layers. Bukit Timah will become a mole hill when all the surrounding buildings are 3 or 5 times taller. And we can connect everywhere, at different levels, with travellators. No need cars and no need petrol. With the whole Tower of Babel adapted to become a solar cell, we can maximise the use of clean solar energy. That will be the future of Singapore. A glass city of the future, built by the best minds money can buy.

our vessels still in indon hands

Britain is putting all diplomatic pressures to secure the release of the 15 marines arrested by Iran. And if these fail, the next phase could be war. We have our vessels arrested by the Indonesians, which is supposed to be our friend, and a neighbour with close relations with us. It is appropriate that we try all diplomatic means to secure their release. So far nothing works. Next could be to table it at ASEAN meetings or later at the UN. If all else fails, what cards are there left for us to play? Should we let the Indonesians arrest our vessels illegally or under false pretence and let it be, be compliant? The Indonesians claimed that investigation is still going on. What kind of bull is that? If it is smuggling, it is smuggling. If there are sand there are sand. It does not take more than two days to find out these facts. Or are they trying to cook up something to justify their illegal acts? With the vessels in their control, and with so much time, they can do anything they want to them and present whatever evidence they want. Who is there to stop them from fabricating evidence?

minister's pay debate

Finally we are seeing a real debate going on. The issue of minister's pay is being discussed everywhere and by everyone. And the points raised are serious and relevant, not polemics or hogwash. Many valid points have been put forth by the public, mostly to oppose the linking of minister's pay to the private sector, or the current formula. Some even question the multiple hats that senior servants are wearing, which to me, is not an effective utilisation of a man's ability no matter how supertalent the person can be. Everyone is limited by the 24 hours we have per day and minus all the rest hours and time for food, bed and R & R, there are just a few hours left. And expecting a super talent to take on 5 or 6 important appointments with the same limited hours is just asking too much and expecting too much. Dilution will be the consequence of such a hectic demand, or skimming through the details will be another. One point that I would like to add is that civil servants and minister's are getting double or almost double what they are getting today. I am not referring to the perks and other benefits that they could derived from their appointments but pension. They are entitled to pension which is 2/3 of their last drawn salary for life. This is a very significant portion of their pay that have not been included into the current formula. Many have raised the issue of public service and private sector employment as two different kinds of fish and rightly cannot be compared the way it is being done. We need people with passion to serve the nation and be paid reasonably well and not exorbitantly well, like the private sector whose main interest is profit to pay themselves. If money is what they want and their main motivation, then let them join the private sector. There are always brighter and more eager young talents to take over their places. No one is indispensable. As it is, the top echelon of civil servants are very well paid, including ministers. This is the view of the masses. It is the junior officers that were doing the donkey work and being paid like national servicemen. The recent survey of new graduate salary is a glaring example of how underpaid are the young officers. They will simply leave. For those at the senior levels, resignation is not a problem and should be encouraged to share their expertise and talents with the private sector. Let the debate continues. It will be good if the MPs and senior civil servants will also share their views on this.

myth 125

The Asian Corrupt Culture Asians are born with a hereditary condition called corruption. Corruption is in their psyche and the earlier we know and accept this condition the better. The good thing about this is that the outbreak of this sickness can be delayed by money and more money. The bad thing about this is that how much money will be enough is relative. So the disease will soon rear its ugly head and need more money to suppress it and keep it benign. As long as there is periodic increase in money, be it $1 million or $10 million or $100 million, the sickness will be contained but will not go away. It is like syphillis.

payrise need more convincing?

The other day I saw Lim Swee Say in the news trying his very best to explain why pay rise for ministers is important and necessary. Somehow it just did not come through as convincing. You can see the doubt in the faces of the listeners. Is it because he did not explain it well enough or the issue is simply too difficult for the people to accept? Or is it that the people just cannot accept it? Whatever, the increase will be a reality comes 9 April. The govt has explained and that is what it is going to do. And it is done for the good of the people and country. Can't imagine the consequences if all the ministers quits to join the private sector for more pay. Things can be worst if the payrise is not implemented.

poor buggers - indon quarry workers

1500 quarry workers in Karimun out of jobs and running out of money. There could be another few thousands in Batam and Bintang in the same state of despair. Thanks to their govt for looking after them so well. Their govt is trying to get them a better deal, a better price for their granite and sand by demanding that buyers must pay the price they want. This is how they think business should be done, a seller's market. They do not need to read economics to know that the price is determined by demand and supply and needs to be negotiate and not shaft down the buyer's throat. For the time being the quarry workers can go hungry for all they care. Poor pawns in a big corruption game. Any price increase will not translate to any increase in their pay but go to someone else's pocket. The people deserve the govt they get.

ERS/NSS and new citizens

We are now being given ERS/NSS shares as citizens. Does anyone know whether there is a qualifying period for new citizens to be given these shares? Or if one becomes a citizen yesterday one will immediately be qualified for such shares? The payout of ERS/NSS were from revenue made from funds accumulated and contributed by citizens in the past. New citizens or very new citizens, eg those who are less than a year, an arbitrary figure, do not contribute to the cumulative national reserves that generate this revenue and it is unfair that they be given these shares immediately. (To newsgean: this is an issue that questions the right of new citizens to benefit from national reserves which they have not contributed to. It is like some countries that rule out citizens not by birth from holding top govt offices.)

A minister or a bank CEO?

A minister or a bank CEO? What drives a man in his choice of a career or his mission in life? Which is more attractive between being a minister that pays him $1m and a bank CEO that pays him $7m? In America, many big earners gave up lucrative jobs just to be in the govt. And they continue or go on to earn much more after their stints in the govt, not in the govt but in the private sector. Obviously the two jobs have different motivations and people consciously choose what to be according to their callings. Some even choose to earn barely enough when the calling is from God. Are these jobs to be compare under the same set of factors? Should national leaders think that they are bankers and bankers think that they are national leaders? Are they one and the same? Or should national leaders compare their income with sportsmen and artistes who earn millions by the hour?

Are we Sparta or Athens?

Are we Sparta or Athens? When I caught sight of this heading by Lim Cheng Tju I immediately burst out laughing. I instantly recalled the jokes that an invading army would be stalled by the massive traffic jams in Bangkok while another invading army would laugh itself to death when starring down at our soldiers. Now comparing ourselves to 300 Spartans who fought themselves to death, without asking for a cent more, or the creativity and imagination of Athens, a vibrant and intellectually stimulated city, are we having a drink too much? In a country that is driven by monetary rewards, when every decision is made on monetary terms, when citizenship rings hollow, when the citizens are happily being replaced by foreigners that have little emotional attachments to this island, where can one find the passion like the spartans or the creativity of Athens? The callous input of foreigners to boost up our population is as good as undermining the whole foundation of nationhood. The immigration patterns of today, the motivation, and how the immigrants would immerse themselves and set roots in a new country are very different from the past. To use our immigrant historical background as a justification for more immigrants is a dangerous starting point. We were created out of accident, out of a historical past where nationhood was not our choice. Even the USA was a historical accident. But to try to repeat the same formula is a very simplistic approach to nation building. We are just thinking about numbers and ignore the social glue that needs to bring the diverse people together as one. We have tried that for 40 years and still without much success. The influx of foreigners would only weaken whatever we have built in nationhood. There must be value and passion in the people. Philip Yeo was angry that Singaporeans, especially the young scholars, did not have any value with regard to being a citizen of a country. They think self and money. And in his fit of dismay he said to the effect that money would be better spent on better foreign talents. This is true when value and passion are not important. Just buy talents. And talents that can be bought with money can also be bought by others. That is what foreign talents is all about. It is about their market value and which country offers the best value. We are heading towards a society that has no root, no value, no passion, but only money. Yes, we are creating a culture of mercenaries. Or should we ask, where is the passion?

nkf story - just a thought

Just a thought If the court finds Durai innocent of all the charges, or the one charge that they can frame against him, then rightfully Durai should be reinstated as the CEO of NKF to continue his good work. He could even counter claim for wrongful dismissal and loss of salary and claim compensation for the sufferings he went through, including tarnishing his reputation. Actually the one and only charge of a $20k payment speaks for itself, that there is nothing criminal in what Durai had done. After spending so many hours of expensive investigation time, this is the only thing that came near to a crime and still got thrown out by the court. We shall be proud of the transparency of our legal system and how the rule of law is upheld in our country.

looking for soft options

Lawrence Low wrote a letter discussing about the weak students and the strong students sitting for the same national exam in the Today paper. He lamented that these weaker students would only do less well than the good students. So? Should we have a set of lower standard exam papers for weaker students and one for stronger students? That is what his letter is implying. Actually we already have that, the N level. The weaker students are already doing N level. Are we saying that this is not enough, that we should have a NO level for the weaker students doing the O level so that they will appear to do better, like N level students scoring 6 As which are of lower standard than O level? This kind of averageing down to make the weaker students happier but having fictitious grades is definitely a shift towards a soft solution. What is needed is to raise the standard of weaker students, or spot their talents in other fields instead of trying to compete academically when they are not so gifted. They are meant to do well in other fields. Everyone is gifted in their own ways. Lets not force square pegs into round holes.

convincing the people

There are several key issues today that are testing the govt and the people. The minister's pay is not only one of them, but a major one. Then there is the widening income gap which is also related to the minister's pay, the rising cost of living in every area from education to hospitalisation, food and essential services. All from the basic premise that you pay for what you get and all organisations must be profit driven. Then the CPF and all the people's money being locked away against their wishes. The 6.5 million population is also not sitting down well. There have been many explanations, but all mainly top down, shafting down into the throat type. And the people are expected to swallow it, like it or not. All the decisions have been made. It is actually more like telling the people that we are telling you this is what we are going to do. No way are we going to change what we have set out to do. We are the thinkers and knew best what is good for you and what is good for us. And we have explained to us. So let's move on. Now the real test comes. The quality of leadership is not just getting things done but to be able to convince the people to go along with the decisions. Failing to do so will only draw down on the goodwill of past credits and once expended, it will be pay back time. Are our leaders convincing in their arguments on all these critical and sensitive issues? Are the people buying them or just gritting their teeth and seaming with anger inside them? It will show over time.

Pay rise, looking at the big picture

Pay rise, looking at the big picture This pay rise for Ministers is undeniably the hottest topic today. There is no running away from it. Everywhere everyone is talking about it. So there is no point in putting the head in the sand and pretend that nothing seen, nothing heard and nothing is happening. What is important is to discuss it rationally so that everyone gets a fair hearing and a better understanding of the issue. Sue Ann Chia or Chia Sue-Ann said we must look at 'A big picture view of public sector pay.' She mentioned Dr Henri Ghesquiere, an adjunct professor at the LKY School of Public Policy, saying 'It would look high when viewed in isolation.' What Henri is saying is that it is not high if one look at the big picture, ie, Singapore's success as a first world country. 'Consider how Singapore comes out tops in global rankings for effectiveness of govt and efficiency of the court system....Highly remunerated officials are expected to go the extra mile and deliver beyond the call of duty, he added.' This is another way of looking at the issue other than that they will also not be corrupt. What Henri said also pointed to our obsession to be rated number one in everything. Maybe this is one of the yardstick which the govt is using to measure Singapore's success and the contribution of ministers and civil servants. The more number ones, the more deserving for higher pay. The grassroots must be trained to look at the big picture.

NKF trial a shining light for Singapore

NKF trial a shining light for Singapore Singapore is a police state that used draconian methods of interrogation to extract confessions from offenders. This has been the impression published in most unfriendly media on Singapore. But when one listens to the cross examination of Sant Singh on Osman Ahamed, the chief special investigator with the CPIB, it is very clear that the police will have to abide by certain standard of decency. And a person under police custody has all the rights including an interrogation room that must be at least the size of a hotel room, to make him comfortable and not feel coerced. Definitely not the Guantanamo type of standard and practices. According to Sant Singh, David Tan was interrogated in a very small room, about 4m by 4m, there about. And the light was kept on at all times to add to the pressure to "induce" him to give testimony for the prosecution, including being detained overnight in a 2.1m by 2.4 metre room. By virtue of the fact that these are grounds of complains to coerce a person, under police custody, speaks very well of Singapore. Perhaps if the govt can be more generous and build bigger and more comfortable interrogation rooms with cushion sofas, and rooms to hold suspects or possible offenders over night, then it will be just perfect. And no bright lights please. Too glaring on the eyes and intruding into a person's privacy. Provided the taxpayers did not complain about extravagance on the govt's part to provide luxury for possible offenders or violators or the law.

Philip Yeo the real blogger

Philip Yeo the real blogger I was reading the exchange between Philip and Chen Jiahao in the Sunday Times today. Philip in all aspects is a suave and cool blogger, the style and words used, without mincing. That's what a real blogger is. Saying it as it is or in the way it should be said. And he did not pick a safe topic to talk about. He chose the issue of the day and smack right into it like any cool blogger will do. No hiding or shying a way. If Philip just joined the fray because it is cool to do so, or because he wants to be seen to do it, then it will be comical. Imagine Philip posting about his favourite pie and his favourite ang tau tng. Kudos to Philip for truly engaging the bloggers in their turf. So far he is the One senior civil servant who feels secured enough to do. :wink:

off on saturday : )

Hi all, Will be out at sea over the weekend and probably start posting on Sunday afternoon. Cheers.

Role of the Internet - Balakrishnan speaks

Role of the Internet - Balakrishnan speaks Govt will continue to take a light touch approach to the internet as they are not really that significant. The Govt will 'continue to set the political agenda and rules of engagement.' Below are some of the notable extracts of what light touch could mean. 'the Govt would not hesitate to 'demolish' those who crossed the line...' 'Any political leader worth his salt will sooner or later be unmasked and, therefore, can be dealt with or engaged on political terms, one on one.' I am trying to figure this one out on what he meant by political terms and one on one. 'I put this not in a threatening way but (the point is) that at the end, the cyberworld cannot escape the realities of the real world.' Luckily he did not use the term brutal truth. 'But he said Singapore's leaders have nothing to hide and are not afraid of the new media.' 'If it is true, I have to reply. If it is untrue, I have to demolish it. If it is seditious or defamatory, we will go after the person.' I think I am alright. 'the PAP had seen the press "cynically manipulated by politicians for short term goals."' 'I don't need The Straits Times to be the mouth piece of the Govt. We have the ministry spokespersons....' I think bloggers and forumers will now have a better picture of he govt's stand on internet postings.

nkf story - durai could walk free

The NKF story - Durai could walk free Now the rest of the story ...@#$%@#$%&*..............................................................#@#$%.

If New York and London can...

If New York and London can... We cannot simply pluck examples out of context and use them as justifications to our cause. We have heard so many supporters of a highly dense Singapore, with 6.5 million people, as reasonable because there are New York, London, Tokyo or Shanghai that have bigger populations than us. 6.5 million is simply another case of peanuts, a relative term depending on what one is comparing. I will just elaborate on two points why using these examples is a serious flaw. These are big cities of a reasonably big country. Or at least there is a countryside to talk about where the people can disperse outwards if they need too. And even if they did not do so, mentally there is this sense of space around them. Psychologically it is very reassuring to know that they are not strapped into a shit hole. We don't have this privilege. The doorway north can be closed or strangled at any time. In the south more or less the same. Claustrophobia? Then there is the bigger population to even out the acute abnormalities built up in the big cities. The greater population and the greater culture will be there to absorb and balance off the vast diversities of the cities. We don't have that either. Once we mess it up, that's it. We are in a little shit hole and we will be full of shit. No running away, no running out, except for the privilege few. So for those who will have to face the shit if the little red dot is risking to become a shit hole, they better stand up and say their peace. It can be a paradise with 6.5 million. It can also be a hell hole. Who is God enough to say it will be this or that? I am just sharing my reservations and concern.