What are Singaporeans being taken for?

The media had been inundated with spurious reports of cat fights as if Singaporeans are nosey people and have nothing better to do. And that cat fights are really something that is worth reading and talking about. Maybe there is nothing better to print or too much space to fill. But these are all so petty stuff in my view. It is just my view? The other aspect that is more disturbing is that after all these years of development, from illiteracy, poverty to a first world country, the mindset of a helpless, unthinking and stupid people is still unchanging. Did anyone notice any difference or agree with my observation? I am writing based on the comments and attitude coming out from Parliament. Every papa and mama in Parliament are thinking of how well to look after all these lost kids that never grow up and did not know how to take care of themselves. They wanted to set all kinds of rules to make sure the kids are not exploited or bullied in the streets. Even the little boys and girls who suddenly walked into Parliament also think so, that they are now the mamas and papas with heavy responsibilities in their hands. They fear for the safety of the kids, and the only wise thing to do is to set more rules for them to follow in case they misbehaved. Singaporeans are the forever never grow up kids that need to be told how to behave, how to walk, eat and sleep. And the lines are drawn very clearly for them. It is all for their own good. Without these papas and mamas running their lives Singaporeans will be lost, helpless and their lives in jeopardy. Thank god, or thank the papas and mamas, Singaporeans are so well looked after. It is also like when someone puts on a robe, he is instantly a well informed and enlighten person to dispense wisdom of the world for the laymen and laywomen..

All the hype about nothing

Not exactly nothing, but about 400 women in Aware. That is all the members in the association and the whole country is aroused. The main media went to town with something like 6 pages devoted to the association and recent happenings after non stop daily reportings of the grab for power. And even DBS has to come out in public to rebuke its senior staff for the gumption to accept the appointment as the President of the association. It is only an association of women for god sake, not an association of witches and vampires that could turn the country upside down or cast a spell on anyone that is considered enemy. Have we gone overboard over a none issue? Oops, sorry ladies, it is big issue.

Tea Party protest

The Americans are organizing a nation wide Tea Party protest against the govt of Obama for high taxes and high spending. For the size of America, the protest could easily reach out to millions of Americans and millions will be on the streets or assembling in public areas. Just imagine what would happen when they turn violent and go rioting? They will be out of control and there will be damages to properties and lost of lives. A highly dangerous thing to do. But the protest will go on in America like another Sunday church gathering. And very likely there will be no rioting except for a lot of noise and the people letting off steam in a boisterous way. Compare this with the dangerous cycling event that the WP was trying to organize in East Coast Park. Unimaginable. We were so lucky that such an event was not allowed to be staged, or else it could become dangerous to public safety and security. Now why are Singaporeans so dangerous and not allowed to assemble in groups of 4 or more? Basically Singaporeans are still a bit wild, irresponsible, reckless, a bit uncivilized or primitive I supposed, prone to violence, very typical of unruly Asians. Better if they can be caged for their own good. It will take years before Singaporeans will become civilized, to be like the Americans and be allowed to stage peaceful protest in the public. Singaporeans need to be educated to be peace loving and responsible. We need to learn a lot from civilized countries like the US. One day we will be civilized and will be allowed to stage peaceful protest. One day, but this one day will not be here sooner or in the foreseeable future. The thought of letting Singaporeans on the loose is so frightening. Don’t even think of it.

Are we capable of thinking for ourselves? II.

The example of the public demonstration in Thailand has been quoted as a bad thing. How could the people demonstrate in the streets, destroying public properties and hurting people, disrupting the economy and breaking down public order and security? Think for a moment, why did all these happen? At face value all these are bad, no doubt. But without understanding the background to what is happening to Thailand and how the Red Shirts were forced into the streets, one will be making a false or wrong judgement on the people and event. Violent demonstators! Guilty, no good, lock them up. Beat them up. Let me post a hypothetical case, say an event happening here in the future. A President Bum is installed at the Istana. He is not happy with a popularly elected PM and his cabinet. He incited the army generals and some groups to wear Yellow Shirts to demonstrate in the streets. He eventually forced the popularly elected PM and govt out of power and installed his own men as PM and govt, without the people electing them. Should the people then demonstrate in public about such an abuse of power or a violation of the democratic system of electing the govt? And if the people do demonstrate, is it bad, is it wrong? Or should the people just accept everything that has happened, do not break the law, do not demonstrate and disturb the peace. Peace and public security are paramount and under no circumstances should people be allowed on the streets. What you think?

Are we capable of thinking for ourselves?

This is the perpetual question that Singaporeans should be asking themselves. Or would they bother? The recent incidents of the Aware election and the Red Shirts in Thailand are two cases that we should be pondering. Or should we let others tell us what to believe, what is good, what is right and what should the way things should be? Let me start with the Aware case. The public was being bombarded with the following positions. The new committee are unknown, no track record, no experience, dunno what they are capable off, and more importantly, they may be up to no good. The only talents and acceptable people to run Aware must be the old horses. Only those who have been there have the right to be there or the right people to be there. Anyone who wants to fit in must be of the same mould or be acceptable to the old horses. A very familiar story. Why can't the public give the new committee a chance to prove themselves, the benefit of the doubt? Why can't the new committee ended as the better team eventually? I am not making any judgement on them without seeing what they have done. They may have different views, values and different ways of doing things. Are these really bad? Do we want to accept that there is only one way, one set of values, and only one group of people possess all the rights and goods and virtues that there is no talent left outside this group to provide a better alternative? Is change always bad? I remember some eminent people said that change is the essence of life. No change no progress. With change, there will be disruption and readjustment, but not necessarily bad. Give the new committee a chance. Give the new talents a chance. Or we have already prejudged that they have no talent? The fact that they could wrestle control from the incumbents proved that they are good and mean business. At least they are able of outfoxing the old talents in their own game.

Aware's new chief from DBS

The new committee of Aware is headed by a VP from DBS, Josie Lau Meng Lee. The team looks very able and respectable. Why is it that so many comments have been made which in a way have pronounced them guilty or with ill intent? Why is it that people only think of the negative, that these people are up to no good? Guilty before proven! Anyway, looks like Josie may not be able to continue with the appointment as the President of Aware. An official statement from DBS in Today said, 'DBS Bank requires all employees to obtain approval before running for or taking on an external appointment,...It had informed Ms Lau prior "to the Aware election" last night that, although the bank supported her involvement in Aware as council member in her own personal capacity, it was however "not supportive" of her intent to run for president of Aware, a spokesman told Today late last night. "We believe that as a VP in DBS, she already has a challenging job with many responsibilities and the role of president would demand too much of her time and energy."' This is a very reasonable position to take. No matter how talented a person is, wearing two hats or too many hats will definitely affect the quality of work of the person. How could anyone really think that he/she is so talented to wear two important hats, let alone 5, 10 or 20 hats? It will only dilute their attention to what they can do to each job.

Kan Seng has spoken

The police will be tough on protestors, local or foreign, who are bent to create civil disobedience. This is a warning to all who are thinking of creating trouble in the coming major events in the city state. Actually things will be much easier if a chip can be developed and implanted into every resident and visitors here. The chip can then be monitored and tracked by a master computer and linked to satellite technology. The movement of everyone will be known, who they met and where they are meeting will be totally transparent. The chips shall also have the capacity to immobilise the tagged person by the master controller when appropriate. A smarter chip can actually have programmes that can read the person's mind and any evil or criminal thought detected will trigger the chip to immobilise him. A team can then be sent out to pick him up. When such a chip and system are ready, the whole world will be a very peaceful and orderly place. Human beans can look forward to a safe and secure future.

Of power, freedom and money

In the debate on the Public Order Act the govt has made it very clear on its position on power and freedom of expression. Actually it does not need this debate to tell the story. For more than 40 years, the govt has been defining and refining its use of power to manage the people's freedom of expression and the people's money in the CPF. And all these were done for their(people's) own good. In the next election it will be good that these be made an election issue. All political parties should declare upfront their positions with respect to these issues. They should state how much freedom the people shall have, whether they can or cannot demonstrate or assemble in public, and also how they will manage the people's money in the CPF. The other key issue will be the cost of govt. How many PMs will they need, how many SMs, how many ministers without portfolio in the PMOs, how many deputies and how many deputies to deputies, and also how many mayors they need to run this country. And add all these together to get at the final cost of govt. Struggling opposition parties may want to make a case to pay the PM $10m and ministers $5m to attract better talents to join them in their quest. And if this is not enough, they should be brave enough to state that they needed more upfront before they come to power. I feel the people deserve to be told of the position of the political parties before they make their choices.

The appreciative new migrants

More than half a century ago many migrants came from neighbouring countries, including India and China. They were actually running away from poverty in their homelands. Somehow it was not possible to start anew in their home countries, or it was not as easy as trying out in a new country. The going was tough. But there was the promise of a better tomorrow. After a life time of struggle, some made it, some didn’t. Some made it in one generation, some took more. Some never. Fast forward, we are seeing new batches of migrants landing on our shores. They too were looking for a better tomorrow. Some were hungry, some not so. But their conditions were never like those who came earlier. The island is much richer, with better infrastructure and a more conducive socio economic environment to start a new life. Many quickly find success in double quick time, with govt assistance and a more level playing field. They are grateful for the new opportunities. So were the migrants of the past. Why are the locals, who were migrants once, feel left out and less happy with the situation? Or do they? I think many just do not bother. Any expression of unhappiness is likely to be personal and not a common reaction of the populace. Neither is the unhappiness that serious a matter that will be troubling to the policy makers. The govt is reviving the grateful migrants formula and will ride on their votes to power again. Equal opportunities for all, new and old citizens. New migrants will become old migrants and the cycle will be repeated again and again.

Criticism of Public Order Act 2009

Why so many criticisms against the Public Order Act? The law is for the good of the people, to protect the people. Singaporeans should welcome more of such laws that are good for them, ala GST. When things are done for the good of the people the people should be happy and accept them with open arms. Criticisms of good acts and intention are misplaced. My only concern is that what if these good laws were abused by a rogue govt or rogue enforcers of the law? Yes, Sylvia Lim is right on this, that it can become draconian. But with good leaders in charge, everything will be fine. Let's pray that we will forever be blessed with good leaders.

Falling in the line of duty

In three months, he had done so much and touched the hearts of many in DBS. Richard Stanley, the well liked and respected CEO of DBS succumbed to more complications and passed away after months of chemotherapy treatment. And from the flood of obituary in the ST, in his short stay in office he must have won the hearts of many. From peers, associates, business partners and union leaders, and all the staff, only good words were spoken of Richard Stanley. DBS also marked his demise with a one minute silence at 2.45pm yesterday. Richard is the first foreign talent that fell while on duty. He came on board and the minibond crisis fell on his lap. He must have gone through agonising time to tackle this crisis and this must have taken its toll on him. Richard was called home at the prime of his life. He could have done much more for DBS and its staff. But when God calls, it is time to go home.

An IM for food hygiene and handling

The criticism is piling up. Now the target is National Environment Agency. Letters were written to the media and the usual is that it cannot happen here. We are the best, first world, world class talents and salaries. This kind of mass food poisoning can only happen to poorly managed developing countries. It is shocking, alarming. What have the NEA done? We need a hero to resolve this crisis. I think Tan Yong Soon is cut out for this job. He should put what he learnt in Paris to good use. Come out with an Instructional Manual on food hygiene and handling for kitchens and food handlers and the cooks. His culinary course must have included these as a major part of the syllabus. The quality and cleanliness of food, utensil, equipment and people are very important to produce good and safe food. Let's have a comprehensive IM for all the hawker stalls, markets and food courts. Or perhaps privatise them would also do. The standard of cleanliness should also improved with privatisation. And if they pay the food handlers and cooks better, better qualified people will become hawkers in markets and food courts. But don't suggest sending them to Paris, please.

What a genius!

What an ingenious idea! This appeared in the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper yesterday. TheBusiness Section had asked readers all week for ideas on "HOW WOULD YOU FIX THE ECONOMY?" This man nailed it. Dear Mr. President, Patriotic retirement: There's about 40 million people over 50 years old in the work force - pay them $1 million apiece severance with the following stipulations: 1) They leave their jobs. Forty million job openings - UNEMPLOYMENT FIXED 2) They buy NEW American cars. Forty million cars ordered - AUTO INDUSTRY FIXED. 3) They either buy a house or pay off their mortgage - HOUSING CRISIS FIXED. Like I have been saying, they are bailing out the wrong people. We can modify this solution and it would not cost that much. And the govt will definitely be returned to power in the next GE.

Fear is in the air

Since the brilliant grab for power in Aware, there have been many postings questioning the group and its intention. There were many speculations and even talks of bigger things to come and bigger organisations to capture. Why should there be fear as long as the group is legitimate and not criminal? In a democracy, it is all about organisation. The people with the resources and organisation skills will be in a better position to grab power, and then grab anything they want. And with morality at its most perplexing time, when rights and wrongs are all grey, who shall stand on high moral grounds to be the judge of who is good or bad? Let the contest of ideas, organisation, ability and talent begins. And winners take all. Everything is up for grabs to the talented and well organised.

My feedback to the Stock Exchange in June 2005

The Relevance and Effectiveness of Corporate Governance I will like to express my appreciation to the Stock Exchange for asking the public for feedback to improve the trading system. I will just touch on three issues here, A. Corporate Governance and Independent Directors, B. Responsibilities and Accountability of Issue Managers/Auditors, and C. The Roles of SGX as a Regulator and a Business Concern. A. Corporate Governance and Independent Directors Independent Directors can play a very important role in ensuring that companies are proper and professional in the conduct of their businesses. By being involved, and being hands on with company operations, the Independent Directors are by far the most suitable candidates to help in ensuring compliance and due diligence in all corporate matters. However, the current procedures and system of appointing Independent Directors are seriously flawed. It is not the numbers that matter, but how Independent Directors are being appointed to the Board of Companies. When companies and their management staff have the sole prerogative to appoint Independent Directors, when the remuneration and tenure of Independent Directors are dependent on the goodwill of company management, how independent can Independent Directors be? Like it or not, Independent Directors have vested interests to maintain a cordial relationship with the company’s management and even major shareholders. There is thus a need to balance the opposing demands to oversee company operations in a professional manner and, on the other hand, to be acceptable to company management so as to be nominated to the board again. Independent Directors who are too thorough, too demanding, or even becoming whistle blowers, will soon work themselves out of all company boards. They will carry their reputations along with them and will not be appointed to any boards in a matter of time. No whistle blowers can ever hope to be invited to sit in any organizations. They can blow their whistles only once. In order to maintain as ‘correct’ a relationship as possible, and to improve the chances of being reappointed, Independent Directors may have to compromise their positions, and may even restrain themselves in the execution of their duties, thus undermining their roles as the watchdog of company wrongdoings. Recommendation 1 A new procedure to appoint Independent Directors is obviously needed. Independent Directors must be appointed independent of company management. Those appointed by company management have a credibility problem. There will always be a doubt as to whether they can be truly independent if their benefactors are the company management. It is a practical and real issue. The setting up of an unrelated independent body to appoint Independent Directors to company boards is a prerequisite to impartiality and transparency. The position of Independent Directors must not be compromise in anyway if they are to do a proper job. Otherwise it is a fallacy to believe that Independent Directors are really independent. What good is there if all the Independent Directors are either the relatives, friends or drinking kakis of the management, chosen and paid for by the management? A possible candidate to take on this task is the Stock Exchange itself. Or alternatively the Securities Investors Association of Singapore, SIAS, can be appointed by SGX/MAS to assume this role. SIAS is an ideal candidate as it is the representative of small investors who, as a group, represented quite a substantial interest in companies listed in the SGX. The small investors have so far been the victims of all these corporate frauds, and it is time that their interests be taken care of. Independent Directors selected and appointed by an organization representing small investors could fit in this role nicely. No other organization can claim to represent the small investors and to defend their interests. By giving SIAS a bigger role in this area, SGX and MAS can then be seen to be fair to the small investors. For the Independent Directors to be effective, three Independent Directors should come from SIAS and be represented in the Nomination, Remuneration and Audit Committees of the Companies. These committees shall provide the Independent Directors with access to information that affects the health and wealth of the companies. SIAS can set up a department to select, train and appoint Independent Directors under a set of guidelines that best served to protect the interests of small investors, and in the process self regulate company operations and management to comply with SGX regulations and good governance. An added feature is for SGX to emphasise the responsibilities and accountability on all Independent as well as non Independent Directors. Appointment to company boards must not be seen as a birthday party, but a serious undertaking that demands professionalism and integrity. All directors, including Independent Directors, shall be held accountable for negligence, wrongdoings or not doing their due diligence while on the boards. They must be made aware that they are holding in trust the interests of all investors, large and small, and must not be found wanting, or they will be taken to task. They are paid to do a job and this comes with a heavy responsibility. B. Responsibilities and Accountability of Issue Managers and Auditors Issue Managers are the key people who promote and market a company to investors resulting in large sums of monies being invested by the public. The Issue Managers and their associates, especially the management and finance professionals, are the people in the know. They are also the people who prepare the company operations and financial reports. How truthful, accurate and proper are these reports will solely be dependent on the professionalism, trustworthiness and integrity of these professional people. The investors, including professional fund managers, are likely to make their decisions based on these reports and the presentation of the company by the Issue Managers and the management. It is accepted that Issue Managers/Auditors and company management will want to present the best picture they can to the investors. It is their task to sell the company. What the investors and regulators can hope for is that these people are truthful and professional in the packaging and marketing of the companies. They are expected to do their due diligence. They are not expected to make misrepresentation of the companies, or worst, make fraudulent reports to deceive the investors into investing in unsound companies. Recommendation 2 Nothing short of accountability and making good of what the Issue Managers/Auditors and company management made their companies out to be. Caveat emptor is not enough. When there are misrepresentations or wrongdoings, the guilty parties must be dealt with severely. Full restitutions for losses must be made to compensate the innocent investors. The public must not be put in a position where they are at the mercy of Issue Managers/Auditors and company management without any recourse. It is inadequate and unfair when a public issue goes drastically wrong due to negligence or misrepresentation and caveat emptor becomes a convenient excuse. Issue Managers/Auditors and company managers must all be aware of the severity of their actions and the recourse of criminal proceedings if they are found to commit wrongdoings or negligence in the course of listing the companies. The SGX has a duty to protect the public investors. C. Role of SGX as a Regulator and as a Business Concern SGX is now a private company with profit making as a primary objective. Its other role as a regulator is now incompatible with its new status. There is a conflict of interests and the two functions must be detached and managed separately. SGX cannot function as a player as well as a referee in the same game. It cannot be objective when it is also involved in generating profits for itself from the system. Even if it does try to be objective, other parties may not perceive it in the same way. Its dual roles only complicate matters further and will undermine the credibility of SGX. People will always be skeptical of whatever actions or decisions it takes that affect the players and the market. Recommendation 3 For transparency and good business practice, SGX may want to consider relinquishing its role as the regulator of the stock market. An independent agency shall replace SGX to ensure that there is fair play and a level playing field for all the players. No matter how impartial or above board SGX can be, it is in the best interest of SGX for it to be monitored separately. This is to avoid being accused of any complicity whenever a decision is seen to be doubtful in the eyes of the public. An interested party can never be objective in its own dealings. A Side Issue I must raise this issue though it is not directly related to the above. It is very serious and it is affecting the viability of the stock market and the stockbroking industry if nothing is done to arrest the problem. I will make it very short and brief. Before the liberalization of the industry, foreign funds must trade through local broking houses, paying commission for their trades. With liberalization, these huge funds can now trade on their own by setting up offices here. And trade they did at no commission. What this means is that they could literally trade in hundreds of millions of dollars worth of stocks at practically no cost other than the minimal clearing fees and GST. They could thus push stocks up or down at their whims and fancy, making profits at the expense of small investors and traders. The big trading volumes we are seeing daily are thus fictitious. We have replaced syndicate trading of the past with fund manipulations at a more vicious scale. With syndicate trading activities, at least they still pay some commission that will somehow filter back to lubricate the system. With big fund trading today (including proprietary trading), no commission of such nature will be generated. If syndicate trading activities were seen as an undesirable and criminal act, how can we justify fund manipulations as legitimate and desirable, and at no cost? When all the small players and traders are wiped out from the market, when there are no more money to be made from the market, these big funds could just wind up their activities over night, and we will have a ghost town, a stock market devoid of trading activities. It will lead to an immediate collapse of the stockbroking industry. The scenario that I have painted may have been too extreme. But the possibility of it becoming a reality is very real. We have already witnessed the first phase of casualties, the small traders. Most of them have lost their pants or are too fearful to reenter the market. What the SGX may want to consider is to provide a level playing field for the big boys to play. Let the fund/broking houses, the proprietary traders and the private syndicates be the market movers on equal terms. Let them rejuvenate the market and trade within the existing rules. But the terms given to these players shall not be vastly different from the small players and investors. A special levy comes into mind.

When privatisation is a fear word

Privatisation used to be the key word to symbolise improved efficiency, better quality of products and services and a necessary evil, higher cost. The last part is always unspoken. No body wants to talk about it. Two letters by Ang Ah Ho and Zhuang Kuan Seng in the Sunday Times were literary pleading for mercy against HDB and privatisation. They questioned the role and responsibility of HDB in a tender exercise for Sengkang wet market. It went to the highest bidder, Renaissance Properties, at $500,001 pm. All these make business sense as the new tenants will definitely improve the efficiency of running the wet market as well as improving the quality and services. The residents only see fear of higher cost of basic food that they will get from the market. And they were concerned even in the way HDB framed its reply in a nonchalant way. But they were barking up the wrong tree. HDB is no more a govt organisation. It is privatised, just like the wet market is going to be. And profit is one of its key goals. They must remember how the second batch of Duxton Pinnacles flat owners have to cough out another $200k for each unit because the prices of similar flats have gone up. The residents in Sengkang should look at the brighter and positive side of things. Life style will improve with new concepts in wet marketing. The fish, meat and vegetables will be fresher and of better quality. And the stall holders will probably say thank you when they buy from them. And the higher cost of living is just part of the deal. It has to be. But it will be very affordable. All new housing estates have better quality food courts than the heart of Raffles Place and Chinatown. The food centres at Golden Shoe, Hong Lim and Chinatown are much cheaper, $2.50 can get one a bowl of noodle or rice, mixed vegetable rice or chicken rice. But the quality must be not so good as the food courts at HDB estates, and no aircon some more. Soon everyone will be frequenting food courts in HDB estates. I pray and pray that these hawker centres will not be privatised. Personally the quality of their food, at $2.50, is damn good. But I am biased. And so must be all the happy customers, some wearing ties and Prada frequenting them. Please do not privatise them. Not everybody has a first world income and want to pay first world prices for basic needs. As for the Sengkang residents, they are welcome to Raffles Place to enjoy a $2.50 meal, if they can afford the train or bus fare. For the time being, they should count their blessings. Actually we must be very thankful that the govt did not privatise all the ministries. Of course the quality and efficiency will improve, but the cost of their services will be much higher than now.

Working is a crime! The officer was in hot pursuit of an illegal worker. He fell, picked himself up immediately and continued the chase. The culprit was arrested. Such is the drive, dedication and commitment of a well trained team of MOM officers in the call of duty. They have a job to do and they did well. Efficiency in the line of duty is hallmark in all civil servants. And one should not forget the exemplary efficiency and effectiveness of our car park attendants. They never miss issuing a ticket if it is deserving. What am I grumbling about? The illegal immigrants were not selling pirated VCDs or operating a gambling den or prostituting. Many were just moonlighting as cleaners and odd job labourers. They were prepared to sweat, work hard, to exchange their labour for a few dollars. Why are they turned into criminals, chased around by govt officers, arrested, fined and maybe even caned? Yes, they are criminals. The law said so. No permit to work is a crime. Period. What about the employers who employed them and exploited them for their cheap labour? Why were they not arrested? Would it not be easier to arrest the employers and terminate this vicious cycle when hungry men and women are turned into criminals just because they want to work? Oh, these are children of lesser gods. Just a general comment. The law is neutral and has no feelings, and inhuman at times. And the law is the law. The issue is the zealousness in the execution and persecuting of the violaters. I would be more at ease if public officers, in the course of their duties, think a little about rights and wrongs, about being humans, about justice and fairness, about righteousness and moral principles. If public officers cannot think or will not think, and leave morals and principles in their lockers, govts will be better off deploying a task force of Robocops, machines that just do within thinking, with no morals, no feelings and no moral principles. I am saying this in general. This sickness is affecting govt officers all around the world, and particularly so in dictatorship or authoritarian regimes. And worst of all, the biggest violators of such inhuman acts is the US. There, children of lesser gods have no rights, and are treated as collateral damages. The hideous acts of public officers when they abused their positions of power are more criminal than the crimes committed by criminals. Sad thing is that they did not think so and think that it is their job, in the course of duty,something to be proud of. A couple of days back there was this woman in China who had her 4 front teeth knocked out by public officers just for protesting about a crime or injustice done to her. Sometimes you would not know who are the real gangsters. I always call George Bush and his team gangsters.

Aware – What a brilliant coup!

They came and took over Aware in an AGM. Veterans and established Aware members were in shock and disbelief. They were caught completely off guard when an army of new members marched into the AGM and out voted almost everyone, and grabbed 9 out of 12 executive committee seats. With the exceptionally high turnout the incumbent committee still did not see it coming. And one by one the old committee members were knocked out of office by brazen new faces, all unknown. How would they dare to do such a thing? Who were they, what do they stand for, how could they just take over an established institution, just like that? No big no small! The old committee members were jolted out of their comfort zone. It was very troubling, alarming, and they made an attempt to challenge the right to take over. Basically they were saying, hey, this is our turf, you have no right to do this. If you want to take over, join the queue and wait to be invited. Unfortunately the new and brash challengers were in no mood to explain the whys. Neither did they bother about the feeble resistance. They simply brushed them aside, irrelevant. Their main concern was to win as many seats as they could. They were well prepared for it, with military precision. It was a coup well executed! Well done girls. Your planning and execution were meticulous and brutally efficient and effective. I am keen to know what is their next target. With such organising skills and talents, they could achieve anything they want to. Don’t just stop at Aware.

Kenneth Jeyaretnam joins Reform Party

This is about the best news to break the otherwise dull and mindless churning of stale political news. Finally we are seeing a very able young man standing up to carry on the job of his father. I hope no one is going to say that there is no political talents in Singapore and that Kenneth is a no talent. He has a double first like Hsien Loong. He may not have taken the ride in the bandwagon to earn tens of millions in this small pond. But he has worked overseas, depending only on his own talent and skills to earn his keep. I believe there must be many able young people like Kenneth who are waiting to step forward to serve the country and not waiting to be invited for tea. Would our political system be magnanimous enough to welcome these people as they step forward, or will they face the same sad stories of their predecessors in an unkind environment that has no room for talents in the opposition wing? We are watching and the world is also watching as the game is being played. The same old play or a new play with enlightened players sparring but without the viciousness of a medieval society? The entry of Kenneth into the political fray should raise the standard of politicking to a more sophisticated level. I dread that this is the beginning of another round of gutter politics in the making. We shall see and judge the truth from the tooth.

What’s wrong with disagreeing over issues or policies in cyberspace?

Siew Kum Hong commented that many people gripe or take pot shots at issues beneath the cloak of anonymity and that they should come out of their comfort zones to do something. I agree and disagree with parts of his comment. There is nothing wrong with being anonymous as long as the comments are fair and reasonablel. But agree, it will be better to let people know who is behind the comment in order to give a better feel and measure of what it was all about. The reasons why many are still speaking in anonymity can be found in the soul of the article by Wong Kim Hoh and reflected by Siew Kum Hong’s own sense of fear. He reminded and also made it clear that he disagreed with ‘the lawsuits and defamation schemes used to suppress dissenting views.’ There need no further explanation why people are not willing to come out into the open to state their views when the political climate is such. People who are comfortable in their lives will not want to get into an unlevel playing field and get hurt for the slightest indiscretion. And as for the challenge to come out and do something if people feel strongly about things, I think this is a bit idealistic in the context of our political culture. Stepping forward, be counted, getting the hands dirty may not lead to anything meaningful. Who really thinks that he/she can make a difference by coming out to get his/her hands dirtied except for a fortunate few? It is quite audacious to even think so. And what is so great about making a ‘political contribution’ if it is just to make a statement, a record on what the citizens feel when, ‘After all the debate…nothing’s changed…so what is the purpose?’ Or what is so different about making a point to be put on record in Parliament and making a point in the media, new and old, to express what some of the citizens are feeling? Maybe there is a big difference to some. But I don’t see or feel it that way. What are the contributions of NMP, NCMP, opposition MPs and the unelected but undying opposition politicians? I must say that each have contributed in their own ways to the political process and development of the country. On the other hand, the contributions of cyberspace and bloggers cannot be underestimated and are in no way lesser than these know politicians. In fact there are many things that cyberspace could do and did much better, like keeping issues alive and harping on them repeatedly in case people claimed that nothing said so no more an issue. Or worst, nothing heard, the people must have accepted them. The biggest contributions of cyberspace and bloggers are griping, kpkb and constantly and repeatedly not letting any issue die. This is an area that no politicians or the old media can compete with. The issues will be posted in cyberspace 24/7 and 365 days a year, for the world to see.

Corruption of the bonus system

The first thing that Obama did right was to curb the abuses of the compensation and bonus payout system in corporate America. No longer will the corporate big wigs be allowed to pay themselves crazy by abusing the trust of the minority shareholders and corruptly paying themselves with their so called bonus schemes. They design and decide how much to pay themselves, with approval of course. Actually I can't use the term corrupt as the bonus schemes were all approved by the board of directors. The payout is thus legitimate and above board, objective and according to an approved formula. The top management could even claimed that every cent they got from the bonus system is deserving. And some companies were paying their CEOs tens of millions even when the companies were bleeding, losing hundreds of millions. Superficially the bonus system appears sound. But as they said, the devil is in the details. Were the formula transparent and made known to the shareholders, and accepted by the shareholders? What were the factors in the formula and how relevant were they to the health of the companies? Could the formula pay out exorbitant amounts, unlimited amounts at the expense of the shareholder's interest? Could the factors be juggled and doctored by the accountants to reflect whatever they want to and to maximise the payout? The other problem with the bonus system is that it can be used to pull wool over the eyes of the shareholders. The top management can, for cosmetic reasons, adopt a pay freeze, smaller increases, or even a pay cut to appease the shareholders. But on the contrary they could boost up their bonus payouts from 3 mths to 6 mths, or 6 mths to 12 mths or 24 mths. No one is wiser except the people designing the scheme and managing the scheme. Transparency is important but not often practised. Obama did the right thing to freeze or cap the bonus payout. And now the American corporate wants to side step this by paying themselves upfront. The top management will scheme and scheme to pay themselves as much as they could as they don't own the companies. They were just employees. Grab as much as they can when in office.

They trusted him

In the Shi Ming Yi case in court yesterday it was reported that they trusted him and let him determine his own salary. And they have good reasons to do so. Ren Ci is so successful today because of one man, I mean monk. Shi Ming Yi is so talented and has a lot of followers and is able to raise the profile of Ren Ci and the multi million dollar donations that it received over the years. So, shouldn't people be grateful to his great contribution and talent and let him continue to run the organisation the way he knows best?

How we pay multi million dollar politicians

Now that the world is standing up to take notice of this extraordinary feat maybe we should enlighten them on the hows and whys. The rest of the world, especially politicians, must be wondering how we could pay politicians this kind of salary and the people are happy and supportive of it. They may think that if they were to propose it in their own countries there will be immediate mass demonstrations and riotings in the streets. But we did it, and for so many years, it has become part of our system of good governance. For the likes of Obama, Brown or Sarkozy, who may want to think about how to go about convincing their electorates to pay them a few million dollars in salary, the following could be a useful guide. In the first place the country must be rich enough to be able to afford the million dollar salaries. And for America and the rich European countries, this is a given and not an issue. If the people were to quibble about it, just tell them that it would cost them each a hot dog a year. Very reasonable and affordable. The next point or the most important point is to convince the electorate that they must have the best talents to lead the country. And the only way is to pay them well. Otherwise they will want to become bankers and lawyers or be in Wall Street making hundreds of millions. Our slogan is pay peanuts and you get monkeys. Surely they would not want their parliaments and congresses to be filled with monkeys. This is a very powerful argument. The other important argument is human nature. People in position of power will by nature become corrupt. To stop them from becoming corrupt, pay them up front, and pay them well so that there will be no incentive to become corrupt. This is understanding nature and human weaknesses. Once these arguments are out of the way, work out a formula to make it objective. Peg the salary of the politicians to the 100 highest paid employee's salary in the private sector. But don't peg it to the top dog. That would be too excessive. Say pick the 49th person or 50th person's salary as the bench mark. That will look very reasonable. Now debate the formula in parliament and passed it into law. Then the salary package will become legal and legitimate. See, QED. Oh, there are some other conditions to make this formula successful. The ruling party must have an absolute majority to ensure its safe passage in parliament. As for street protest in case the ignorant electorate could not understand the brilliance of such a formula, ban them. Actually, the successful implementation of this million dollar salary package for politicians requires supertalents. Only supertalents have the ability to pull this through and be able to convince the people that it is good for them and the country. Actually no, you need exceptional supertalents. Better still if they are demigods and immortals.

Highest paid politicians - the numbers are wrong!

Yes, the numbers quoted for the world's highest top 30 politicians are wrong, way off the mark. Too conservative. What were quoted in the article were only the basic 12 months' salary of the politicians. There is another element that forms part of the package. Oh actually there were two elements, another bonus payment that can go as high as 12 months of the monthly salary. Some have quoted a figure of 16 months. And there is also pension. To quote Hsien Loong during his answer to Steve Chia, a NCMP, this was what he said. 'Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an entire package. When we calculate the salary, we look into how much a person receives now, how much he receives in the CPF, and how much he can expect to save in pensions. And when a person retires, he has a choice of having a pension stream for the rest of his life or taking a commuted lump sum at the point of retirement. In fact, as a matter of fact, nearly everybody who retires prefers the commuted lump sum. Because you take a lump sum, you invest it, you do what you want. If it runs out, it runs out. There is no free lunch. If you do not have your CPF, you have the pension. If you have the pension, you have less CPF. So it all adds up to a finite amount. The Member's implicit question is: are the Ministers enriching themselves again? And the answer is, we are going on market terms and, if anything, we are paying below what the market is.' It is an entire package, ....it all adds up to a finite amount. So, when we said that a minister or Prime Minister is getting say $3m, he could possibly get $6m, plus or minus a little depending on his bonuses. Then on top of that, if he has reached 55 years of age and has served 8 years as a minister, he is entitled to another 2/3 of his basic salary. There is a formula and definition of the basic salary in the Parliamentary Pensions Act. So if a Prime Minister is getting $3.9m, he could be getting another $3.9m in bonuses and another 2/3 of an X salary. This could easily be another $2m. That will come to around $9.8m. This $9.8m is the entire package, excluding other perks. Thus, all the figures quoted are way off their marks. They should be multiplied by 2 or 2.67 times. Would these numbers drive the political leaders of the world, especially the rich western nations, insane? They must be kicking themselves for being so underpaid.

This blog is quoted in the London Times!

Thank you Green Peas. Your article is not only quoted in the London Times online and in many other blogs and forums around the world, it also enlightens the world on how well we are governed as a country. http://www.mysingaporenews.blogspot.com/ is now famous man! I have noticed that the readership these few days have shot up furiously. Here is the link: http://timesbusiness.typepad.com/money_weblog/2009/04/the-10-highest-paid-politicians-in-the-world.html#more

Citizens versus Netizens

Joel Gn from Mediacorp wrote an article on the merits of netizen views and how representatives they were in Today. His conclusion can be summarised into the following. 1. There is no face to face discussion and many netizens hide behind the veil of anonymity, especially with regard to policy matters. Thus their views were not credible. Ha, I choose to differ. It is exactly because of the culture of fear here that anonymous views are more real and representative of the truth. Many who spoke in public actually would not disclosed their true feeling and views for obvious reasons. 2. The views expressed in cyberspace are views of a few individuals. So, the views expressed in the old media are not the views of individuals? Even many of the crap surveys and pushed out as the people's views were views of individuals. Even national policies were views of individuals and not the views of the people. Agree? Remember, it is for your own good. Or shall we concede that the views expressed by the professional reporters and journalists were the views of the people, not their individual views? Joel Gn forgot that in cyberspace it is 'the message and not the platform' or the people articulating it that is important. Anyone, no matter how big his title is, if he talks nonsense in cyberspace, he will be declared a clown immediately by netizens. On the other hand, an unassuming person with no title or status but could articulate a sensible view, the view will be respected. It is the message, not who you are. And that is exactly what Joel Gn said. That is the strength of cyberspace. You can't fool anyone by virtue of your position of title. And currently, cyberspace provides the anonymity for truthful opinions and gut reactions to be aired. You can't do it in the old media. They will either be censored, or one will get himself into trouble for airing the truth.

Which blog or forum is part of the PAP stable?

The PAP has been preparing itself to play a bigger role in cyberspace. Having recognised that this is an area it cannot neglect and cannot close down, the only other option is to engage cyberspace fully as an active participant. It mentioned that it has its blogs and forums in place and it can be expected to launch its entry into cyberspace with a big bang. Now which are the blogs and forums that are actually linked with the PAP? So far we have only heard of the famous P65 and the YPAP forum. Which other ones will stand up and declare that it is also a PAP blog/forum? It will be interesting to see the real faces when the curtains are drawn. But I bet not every blog/forum will reveal its true affiliation. So there will still be a lot of guess work to try to identify who is the real McCoy.

The Art of comparing pay

Just a few weeks back, Liew Mun Leong was in cloud nine. He was the highest paid CEO in the island. So far no one is claiming to be paid more more $21m. He is also the highest pay employee in the island, private, public, civil servants, politicians, charity organisations, religious organisations all considered. Today he is probably feeling not so high when ST compares him with the CEOs of America. There they were being paid in hundreds of millions and in US$. What Liew Mun Leong got was peanut, yes, peanuts. And based on the ST articles, Liew Mun Leong is very deserving. The American companies are paying their CEOs more than Liew Mun Leong even when their companies were losing money. It is indeed a great lesson in how to compare pay and how to make one looks good or looks not too great. Our politicians sure don't look too good when compare to Liew Mun Leong. But when apples are compared to apples, our politician's salary are beyond comparison. I hope they now believe that they should not be asking for more increases until at least Barack Obama catches up. Maybe the old media should do an investigative report on all the incomes of the world's top politicians, including all the corrupt money they are getting. I am wondering how much corrupt money is Obama and Brown or Kevin Rudd getting, or Sarkozy? Then our politicians salary will be peanuts once again. And they can then justify for another round of increases. And the people will say, ya, they are underpaid.

Finding square pegs for round holes

The second round of the election campaign came on this morning. The first round was to feature the last batch of recruits that are now in office. Today we are seeing 5 new faces being featured, all very talented and successful young people. However, all 5 denied that they were interested in politics and would want to continue to pursue in their own chosen career path. For saying this, they have passed the most crucial test to be selected as candidates for the next election. Saying yes will be an immediate rejection, for harbouring political ambition. So, the next 5 new candidates for the PAP, based on my deep knowledge and understanding of how the system works, are: Terence Foo, 38, Managing partner of financial communications agency Kreab Gavin Anderson, Nizam Idris, 41, executive director of foreign exchange strategy at UBS Investment Bank, Adrin Loi, 54, executive chairman of Ya Kun International, Sybil Rocha, 25, lawyer, and Chew SuTat, 36, executive vice president and head of market development at Singapore Exchange. These are all fine young people who are professionally trained and with excellent track records in their own fields, but zero or near zero track record in politics. The only exception is Chew SuTat, a PAP member who has worked with an MP and also in the Young PAP Executive Committee. A clean slate is an advantage for a new programme to be installed into their systems of values and beliefs. We can expect more publicity to be given to another few batches of candidates in the next couple of months. Yes, the election campaign has started.

The TOP 30 highest paid politicians in the world

The TOP 30 highest paid politicians in the world are all from Singapore: 1. Elected President SR Nathan - S$3.9 million. 2. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong - S$3.8 million. 3. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew - S$3.5 million. 4. Senior Minister Goh Chok Thong - S$3.5 million. 5. Senior Minister Prof Jayakumar - S$3.2 million. 6. DPM & Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng - S$2.9 million. 7. DPM & Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean - $2.9 million 8. Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo - S$2.8 million. 9. National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan - S$2.7 million. 10. PMO Miniser Lim Boon Heng - S$2.7 million. 11. Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang - S$2.7 million. 12. PMO Minister Lim Swee Say - S$2.6 million. 13. Environment Minister & Muslim Affairs Minister Dr Yaccob Ibrahim - S$2.6 million. 14. Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan - S$2.6 million. 15. Finance Minister S Tharman - S$2.6 million. 16. Education Minister & 2nd Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen - S$2.6 million. 17. Community Development Youth and Sports Minister - Dr Vivian Balakrishnan - S$2.5 million. 18. Transport Minister & 2nd Minister for Foreign Affairs Raymond Lim Siang Kiat - S$2.5 million. 19. Law Minister & 2nd Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam - S$2.4 million. 20. Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong - S$2.2 million. 21. PMO Minister Lim Hwee Hwa - S$2.2 million 22. Acting ICA Minister - Lui Tuck Yew - S$2.0 million. 23 to 30 = Senior Ministers of State and Ministers of State - each getting between S$1.8 million to S$1.5 million. Note: 1. The above pay does not include MP allowances, pensions and other sources of income such as Directorship, Chairmnship, Advisory, Consultancy, etc to Gov-linked and gov-related organisations or foreign MNCs such as Citigroup, etc. 2. Though it is based on an estimate, the data cannot be far off the official salary scales. The above was posted in redbeanforum by Green Peas.

Terrorists at home

I am very sadden by the child abuse video posted in Stomp. I feel so sorry for the poor child who was being kicked around by the woman in the house. A child expects love and tender care. She must be so shock and did not even know what was going on. My god, how could this be allowed to go on? I recommend to parade the woman in the street and let the public kick her for pleasure. Why would people pay so much to bring a terrorist home?

Sentosa up its price for attractions

Some of the more popular attractions in Sentosa will have price hikes from $1 to $6. This is to increase the value of these attractions. Oh, like GST is to help the people. Quite logical actually. Sentosa has spent quite a bit of money in an advertising blitz in February to attract visitors to the island. The money spent must come from somewhere. Further, one can expect that the attractions will be more attractive with the price hike as Sentosa is going to give more value for more money paid. Just keep the entry into the island free and they can raise all the fees they want. Then it will be a case of demand and supply. I hope this island in the sun for Singaporeans will remain forever free. I dread the day when Singaporeans will again have to pay to visit the island.

PAP Youth Wing coming online

Yes, Teo Ser Luck is leading the YPAP into cyberspace. This is reported in the old media today. The YPAP forum, P65, PAP facebooks and what not, will be given a revamp and a big boost, a big bang into cyberspace. This is good news for the new media. This new position of PAP is the best sign of approval that cyberspace is going to be here for now and tomorrow. We will have more views, more pro PAP and pro govt views to balance the current negativity in cyberspace. There will be more exchanges and debates over issues, and this will liven up the discussion. The army of young PAP activitists have been released into the cyberspace playground. No longer will they be leased or kept within their closed doors to chat among themselves. The first thing I did was to take a peep at the YPAP forum this morning. No change yet. Still the same as it was before. I am truly excited and looking forward to the change. At the very least they will delete all the pornography being posted there. Now, will the PAP activists take on the challenge of the cyberspace guerillas, warts and all, and return the same compliments?

Top 10 highest paid politicians in the World 1. Lee Hsien Loong - Singapore Salary in dollars - $2.47 million Salary in local currency - S$3.76 million 2. Donald Tsang Yum-Kuen - Hong Kong Salary in dollars - $516,000 Salary in local currency - HK$4 million 3. Barack Obama - United States Salary in dollars - $400,000 4. Brian Cowen - Ireland Salary in dollars - $341,000 Salary in local currency - €257,000 5. Nicolas Sarkozy - France Salary in dollars - $318,000 Salary in local currency - €240,000 6. Angela Merkel - Germany Salary in dollars - $303,000 Salary in local currency - €228,000 7. Gordon Brown - UK Salary in dollars - $279,000 Salary in local currency - £194,250 8. Stephen Harper - Canada Salary in dollars - $246,000 Salary in local currency - C$311,000 9. Taro Aso - Japan Salary in dollars - $243,000 Salary in local currency - Y24 million 10. Kevin Rudd - Australia Salary in dollars - $229,000 Salary in local currency - A$330,000 The above is an extract from a Times Online article posted in Singapore News Alternative. And my god, the information was so wrong. Shall I correct it? Doesn't Times know who are the top 10 highest paid politicians in the world?

When numbers are Pure Nonsense!

The saga of Liew Mun Leong is still on going. Another article by Lee Su Shyan in ST today questions the logic and ridiculous nature of the way numbers are being used to justified pay and think that it is reasonable and acceptable. Liew Mun Leong's bonus is equivalent to 0.7% of the company's profit which is very, very reasonable. Compare to Kwek Leng Beng's in percentage term, his $20.7m is smaller and thus fairer. Kwek Leng Beng's is 1.1% of his company's profit. Wow, too much! Such use of numbers as comparison and justification is an insult to the shareholders intelligence. And it make a mockery of Obama's pay compare to the US economy of US$10 trillion. Obama should be paid many times more. And closer at home, Hsien Loong's pay is ridiculously low in percentage term to the GDP or whatever national data one wishes to use. When would such cock reasoning be slammed as bullshit and a reasonable compensation formula become the norm in industries? Yes, the shareholders have a lot of questions to ask in the next AGM. They should also ask what the top twenty employees' bonuses were to be fair to Liew Mun Leong. If the top twenty employees are getting several millions each, then Liew Mun Leong should not be the one that is under the spotlight.

Myth 206 - How accessible is our justice system to the poor?

The pride of our judicial system is that it is fair and just and accessible to everyone, theoretically. Everyone must have remembered the NKF cases when a few victims quietly paid up when faced with lawsuits even when they were in the right. They had to pay up, apologised and looked like a fool all because they could not afford the legal fees in a lawsuit. And there have been other cases when the victims simply weighed the cost and find it cheaper to pay and walk away than to fight it out for justice. Motor accidents must have many of such incidents. Is our legal system really accessible to the poor victims? A few who have met the criteria of being shamefully poor may be able to get legal aids and assistance. But many will not fit in. I can safely said that legal justice is available to those who can afford to pay for it or those who are so poor to qualify for aid. In the case of tort or non criminal lawsuits, it is unlikely that legal aids or assistance will be available. Correct me if I am misinformed on this. Is there anyway to make our justice system more accessible to the masses and the victims of injustice? I was reminded of the American 'contingency fee based system' which means no legal fees unless the case is won. I am still disturbed by the fact that this practice is not allowed here? What is so criminal or unjust or unfair to have such a system? Under the present system, like it or not, when a lawsuit is knocking, you have to pay up first. Be prepared to pay and hope to win to claim damages against the other party. No money you lose by default. A 'contingency fee based system' will allow the lawyers to judge a case and take on the other party when there are merits for it. This in a way can stamp the frivolours lawsuits initiated by those with deep pockets. The govt's legal aid can also provide such a service based on the merits of a case rather than on how poor is the applicant. Justice will then be available to the innocent and not innocent and poor. And the cost can be claimed from the other party. It is not necessarily a totally free service. The availability of such a service will level the floors in the public courts and also provide more businesses for the legal profession. Of course spurious and frivolous cases will be lesser as the bully will know that justice is available to the poor and innocent as well.

Time for a petition to the govt

The motorists must do something to prevent the motor insurance companies from reaping them off with the reckless increase in insurance premiums. Many motorists have clean driving records and the NCD is supposed to recognise this by reducing their insurance premium. Instead, their insurance premiums are now ever higher than before. How can this thing be allowed to go on and nothing can be done to it? Is there any govt organisation that can put a stop to this mindless daylight robbery? It is time to petition the govt for action. Innocent motorists cannot just keep quiet and let the insurance companies imposed whatever premiums they deem fit when the high cost is not due to these motorists. Can the govt agencies do something immediately? There is no point in talking cock and wasting time. Action is needed now. At least freeze the rate to last years and talk later.

Victims of ethics

Madam Chiang Meng Lee wrote to ST about her involvement in an accident which was clearly the fault of the other party and a few days later a legal letter came accusing her of being the cause of the accident. I too had such a case in the past when a reckless taxi driver swerved into my lane. And I was accused of causing the accident. This kind of tactic, to point the guilty finger at the other party cannot have come from the drivers but must come from other interested parties. Whoever offered such advice must be totally devoid of morals and ethics. The main intention is to win even if turning the table against the innocent parties. This is how dark our society has become. And if one does not have the money to engage an equally good lawyer and pay through your nose, just too bad. Be prepared to become the victim and pay for all costs, including legal cost. Yes, our judicial system is fair to all, but conditional that you have more money than the other party. Where is the ethics?

Money or your life?

This was the infamous catchphrase of the 60s and 70s when the island was infested with triads and secret societies. It was a common occurrence to find a knife at one's throat while walking alone and the phrase, 'money or your life' would threaten the intended victim. Many would just have their wallets emptied and walked away a few dollars poorer. Today, 'money or your life' has taken a new meaning. The amount is much much bigger. And the victims were not healthy people walking alone at night, but walked with a whole entourage of family members into a posh hospital. There, the extortionists were not the gangsters or triad boss but clean and sophisticated professionals armed with the best medical degrees from the best medical universities. And if the potential victim happens to be suffering from a critical illness, it is as good as hearing the catchphrase, 'money or your life' being repeated. And they are not asking for a few dollars. It can be in the hundreds of thousands, or several hundred thousands of dollars. But there is a big difference between the gangster's demand and the demand by the professionals. After paying the gangster, the victim walked away alive, though a bit shaken. In the other case, they may go home in a casket after paying the huge ransom. There is no guarantee that after paying the money asked for that his life will be safe. Money or your life, or maybe money first, then we see how it will go.

S Chips in the news for all the wrong reasons

Well, after warning about the corporate governance and trustworthiness of S Chips, finally the old media is catching up on this act. Two reports, one in the ST by Yang Huiwen and another in Today by Conrad Raj, posed the same concern about the dangers of playing with S Chips. At the rate the S Chips are turning turtle, just give another couple of them going into the rubbish dump, I think it will be enough for the investors to dump them completely. They are looking to become so wild, as wild as the days of Malaysian Clob shares. Be warn. Tread with care. We have very little control and knowledge of what is going on. For those who are not in stockbroking, S Chips refer to Chinese stocks listed here. Now the there is a new version of this which refers the S Chips to Scam Chips.

The ingenuity of Wall Street thieves

They knew that the outrageous bonus game is over. So they have come to terms with it and decided not to pay huge bonuses any more. But pay themselves well is something that they must do, by hook or by crook. Their new game plan is to pay out front. They will raise the basic pay of their CEOs and senior management by as much as 70%. So a CEO who is getting US$180k will have his basic pay raised to $300k. This kind of robbery is only on the personal side. At the corporate level, they have been hookwinking the Obama govt that all of them are going bust without a bailout of several tens of billions of dollars. But the moment the Fed decided that they could not pay indecent bonuses when receiving govt bailout fund, they started to tell the govt they don't need the money, they are starting to make profits, and one even want to return the govt money immediately. These are the exceptional talents of Wall Street. We must be salivating to welcome them on board as shining examples of out of this world super talents. America main street and Europe need a revolution to rid the country of such thieves.

The shifting timeline

We are still hearing complains that above 40 years need not apply for jobs and these relatively young and healthy people are getting angry and desperate. I call them young and healthy because the timeline has changed and many are not realising this. Today's 40 is yesterday's 30. And many of them are having kids in primary schools. So far the only organisation that is taking this into consideration is the civil service. More and more civil servants are working past 60, with some noticeably past 70 and 80. Why is it that the private sector is refusing to acknowledge or recognise this shift? In the 60s and 70s, people get married at 21. Today the marrying age is 30 or 35. Then people retired at 55 and died at 60. Today people die at 80 or 90 but retire at 55 with a few exceptions. Then people started to work at 16 or 18, after O or A level. Today they start work at 23/25 or later, after university and NS for the guys. They used to make babies at 18 or below 20. Now many only do this after 30. The anomaly is now a reality. The prime of a person's life is 60 and he/she can go on to 80 or 90, another 20 years to go at least. 30 is still a child wet behind the years. With improving living condition, food and health, and medical careful, people are definitely healthier today than yesterday. When will the human resource practitioners and employers understand this shift in timeline and adjust their expectations? Perhaps we are in a state of transition. The first batch of healthy 60s will come from the baby boomers, or maybe the later baby boomers. Or shall we bring out all the million dollar 'Yodas' in the public and private sector to prove this point? They are many of these hiding in their top floor or penthouse offices and calling the shots, still alive and kicking in their 70s, 80s and perhaps 90s.

The business of keeping people alive

Mediacorp had a few news clips of the happy senior citizens in the homes or community hospitals over the weekend. They appeared healthy and enjoying every moment of their time alive. What they did not know is the heavy cost to keep them alive. From the look of it, the cost was paid by their children. Obviously they did not know that they were bankrupting their children or straining their financial resources just to keep them there. It is not cheap definitely. Ignorance is bliss but not for those who have to struggle to pay the bills. One is deemed financially able to foot the bills if the household income is above $1,500. Unbelieveable! Khaw Boon Wan has been in charge of the MOH for several years and have been working very hard to keep medical cost down. How successful has he been? Has medical cost come down or still spiralling up? The recent increase of fees in community hospitals is a testament that the cost is just going up. For those who are still healthy, pray not the day you have to be admitted to any hospitals or nursing homes. Many will not be able to afford it even with their Medisave and medical insurance. Some of their savings may not last even one month when the bill can go to tens or hundreds of thousands. With the high cost of hospitalisation and medical fees, everyone who is sick or ageing is a walking liability to himself and the family. And we celebrate for being able to keep people alive to 80, 90 or 100 years.

How to juggle accounts for a bigger bang?

This incident is still vivid in my mind. Quite many years ago I came to know of this group of companies and how well they paid out bonuses according to each subsidiary's performance. Some averaged 3 months some averaged 6 months and the exceptional ones got 12 months. All looked clean and fair, according to the books. Indeed the payout of bonuses was according to the book, actually according to the cooked book. One of the subsidiary companies actually cooked the book, brought in all future sales, WIP, etc and recorded as realised revenue and profits. That year the company was like boomtown Charlie. Every employee got 12 months bonuses. Not sure how many months the CEO and the top management staff got for cooking the book. What happened the next few years, never mind. The boat will straighten as it reaches the bridge. If the next few years lose money, take lesser bonuses. But one good year every now and then is good enough. For good years, the reward is amazing. For bad years, no sweat, the pay is still there. And if the company goes bust, just too bad. Find another company. This is the beauty of being in the corporate world and managing public companies, and being an employee. You never stand to lose your capital nor your pay, except if the company closes down. But when the company chalks up big profits, take as much as you can. Claim all the credits despite the fact that a large part of the profits were money makes money. Does anyone ask how much profit should be generated from the capital invested before talking about the excess profits? As an example, if the company has an asset of $1b, assuming that this money should give a decent return of 10%, given the risk in business, otherwise park in the bank for guaranteed risk free interest, a $100m profit is just about acceptable. Nothing to crow about. Only when profit is in excess of 10% would it be considered a contribution from the management and employees. (Not counting cooking books) It is not uncommon for management of a $1b company to crow about great profits and demand big bonuses even if the profit is less than 10% of the asset and capital invested. Another common practice by hedge funds or fund managers is to measure their performance with market indices. If they perform better than such indicators, they have done well, and need to be rewarded. Thus if everyone is losing 70% of their investment and if one is losing 60%, that one has done well. Clever accounting and clever logic.

Singapore United the way to go

This is the new war cry of Hsien Loong. He is calling on Singaporeans to work together to find solutions to the crisis. How real and relevant is such a call? The work together may be a bit real as everyone has to work to keep the machine running, the economy running. If everyone just plays his part be it a cleaner or a minister, things will continue to move. The part about finding solutions to the crisis is best left to the super talents. How could the less able be in a position to find solutions when the greatest minds in the US are still fumbling along? Even if they have any small ideas, they will quickly be brushed aside by the supertalents. They will be a laughing stock to have the audacity to suggest a solution to such an immense problem when supertalents could not resolve. And if assuming that they could get the idea across, make known to the supertalents. Oh yes, they can write to ST Forum or to Reach with their great ideas. I rather be real. Every one just do their parts well. Let the cleaners do the cleaning and the govt do the governing, the thinkers do the thinking. Hey, this is very Confusion, oops, Confucian I mean.

If looks can heal

I saw this beautiful structure in the Sunday Times this morning. A lot of glass, reminding me of the futuristic glass complex proposal for the Sentosa Casino. Very impressive looking building. This one is actually an artist's impression of the New National Heart Centre. It boasts of great facilities when ready in 2013. What keeps capturing my attention is the fine architecture and the feeling of being in a futuristic and well designed building. It is a great feeling. I think the patients would feel good too, and their hearts will feel better even before any medical treatment. I hope the building design was selected not just on good look but with cost consideration in mind. Otherwise, the cost of building such a great facility will ultimately be carried by the patients' bills. Nice building, and I already have this good sense of well being.

The need to control the beast

We have seen what had happened to the great American genies and how clever they were in bringing down the whole of America, not just the industries or the financial system. America will now be in debt for centuries to come. It is bankrupted many times over. The cause is simply too many clever people who thought they could make a lot of quick money by being too clever. They were not concern about real productivity, providing more goods and services, they were only interested in churning out numbers to represent huge paper profits in the short term, for their own vested interests, for the huge bonuses that they stood to win in the huge bets they put into the financial market. There was no responsibility, no conscience, no morals, no nothing, except how much was in it for them. And the tool that helped them to acquire their ill gotten gains at the expense of everyone, is derivatives. The first giant to fall because of gambling in derivatives is LTCM, or Long Term Capital Management, a hedge fund. Without the US govt intervention, the domino effect would have toppled many more financial institutions in 1998. That was just a warning but went unheeded. In a 2004 Bank Derivatives Report it was stated that the total values of derivatives held by US Banks was US$84.2 trillion. The bank risk exposure was US$804 billion. Today we know the answer of exposing to such high risk. The house of cards has collapsed. But be frighten, be very frighten, not because the America house of cards has collapsed. Be frighten because many are still convinced that derivatives and hedge funds are the way to go into the future. And they are pumping more money into these two beasts. How on earth would clever people be convinced to do so, when all the evidence of the disasters that can happen and already happened, be blinded to go along into the deeper and more dangerous end? They must be convinced by cleverer people that it is safe and the way to go. In relative terms, the clever people are smarter people and the clever people are just plain stupid. Way back in 2003, Warren Buffett had warned that derivatives are 'time bombs, both for the parties that deal in them and the economic system....In our view, however, derivatives are financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that while now latent, are potentially lethal.' These words were more than prophetic. It has come to reality. At that time Buffett admitted that he could not understand how much risk the major banks were running themselves in. 'The derivatives genie is now well out of the bottle, and these instruments will almost certainly multiply in variety and number until some event makes their toxicity clear. Central banks and govts have so far found no effective way to control, or even monitor, the risk posed by these contracts.' Do we not know the answer today? Do we still want to dabble in derivatives and allow them, and hedge funds to mess around with the financial system and market? We need independent bodies with different interests and missions to control and regulate the financial systems, the banking industry and the stock market. These institutions have their own short term interests to guard and will be blinded by them to take on higher risks than acceptable. Their exploits to grow and make more profits must be reined in by independent bodies whose interests are long term and the viability and sustainability of the system and institutions, and the foundation of a stable nation state. The financial system and the stock market must not be turned into high risk casinos. There is a need to control the beasts before they destroy everyone, every institution and the nation as a whole. The people within the industry are the most dangerous people to be tasked to regulate themselves. There is simply a conflict of interest, and self interest, short term interest will override the longer term interest and interest of other parties.

Promotions, promotions and promotions

Everyone is happy when they are promoted. But promotions do not come free. It means more pay! How much more pay and who is paying? Where are the money coming from?

Would Wee Cho Yaw pay himself $20m bonus?

He owns the biggest bank here. The turnover of UOB is not less than Capitaland. The profits made by UOB were consistently higher than Capitaland. Why did Wee Cho Yaw pay himself a miserable $6m or thereabout when an employee in a public listed company could be paid $20m? My take is that in the case of UOB, there is ownership. When you own the company, when you know that it is your money, you will be more careful. You would not just pay away the profits of the company. If the top guy got $20m, what about the next 10 guys and the next 100 guys? Together, their bonuses will become a bomb, maybe $100m or more. The rot in Wall Street was exactly due to a lack of ownership. The Wall Street thieves and robbers literally robbed their shareholders of their wealth by paying themselves crazily. And the small minority shareholders got the crumbs and paid for all the losses should the companies go bust. The employee CEOs and top management staff will just send in their resignation letters and laugh all the way to the bank. This is the anomaly and injustice in public listed companies, where the employees just dipped into the coffers, legally, all approved by the board of directors. Very familiar isn't it?

UMNO will still be UMNO

I thought after the General Election UMNO will really reinvent itself to be more national than communal. And the PM to be also called for big changes to remain relevant. Yesterday's election of Khairy as the new UMNO Youth chief confirms that UMNO will still be the same UMNO. Nothing will change UNMO. It will be what it was and will be today and tomorrow. The kris was wave and kissed again. It was handed to Hishamuddin by non other than Khairy, who looks like having a higher potential to use it. Good luck UMNO. Good luck Malaysia.

What? Too much?

These seem to be the reaction of the public and the letters to the media forum. They are envious of the huge bonus that Liew Mun Leong has been rewarded. But what Liew got was all legal and just reward for his talent. Come on, what he got is peanuts compare to those in Wall Street or in Fleet Street. If we aspire to be a nation of rich billionaires, we must learn from Wall Street and pay the best talents their just rewards. Then only we can have more billionaires. I hope no one is going to call Liew Mun Leong to return his big bonus or a new law being passed to tax it at 90%. That will ruin our policy of rewarding real talents. All our talents will run away and we will end up as the net losers. In fact we should reward more to those who are underpaid when their responsibilities are much greater than Liew Mun Leong but getting less than him. Let Liew Mun Leong's bonus be the reference point to attract more super talents to our shores. Liew Kai Khuin wrote to the ST about the grotesque 700,000 pounds pension being paid for life to the former CEO of RBS. Why should it be troubling to pay him so much for life when his contribution and merits will be good for life even after he has left RBS? His contribution will continue, everlasting. And the public anger in the US over the bonuses paid to AIG was also raised. But we are different. We are making money, a lot of money! In the ST today it was reported that the homes of Sir Fred Goodwin, the disgraced CEO of RBS, has been attacked. And the attackers warned that it was only the beginning. They called themselves 'Bank Bosses are Criminals.' What is the world turning into? People getting honest rewards, just because the losers think that the rewards were a bit too much to stomach and they want to attack them? The losers must be put in their place. They must be reminded that if they were just as good, they too would be getting the multi million dollar bonuses. Please don't begrudge talents being paid their worth. Can I have some crumbs?

To spend or not to spend

Like real, as if I got all the money in the world to spend, to help the economy. I was planning to go for a foot massage. But now I am not too sure. LKY said, "I've got economists saying you've got to change your system. Wall Street Journal has said, 'Oh, this won't work, consume yourself'. Four million people to consume and keep an industry that supplies the world with top-end goods - it's rubbish." If what we spend, no matter how much, is not going to make any difference, I think I better save my $20.

34 more subsidised hospital beds

This is the bold headline in My Paper. Because of rising demand due to population growth, about 1 mil more non Singaporeans, and an ageing population, 34 more subsidised beds were added to bring the total to 3,656. Shall I congratulate the MOH for such a big increase in number of beds available?

Celebrating Singaporeans - Liew Mun Leong

Finally we have a Singaporean that could command a multi million dollar salary, getting closer to the talents in Wall Street. Liew Mun Leong of Capital Land was paid a performance bonus of $20.52 mil for year 2007. His total pay packet came to $21.7 mil as reported in Today. Can I presume that his annual salary is $1.18m or less than $100k pm? If that be the case, how many months of bonuses will his $20.52 mil equate to? 205.2 months! I am beginning to doubt my arithmatic. Did we have another world record? Well done Liew Mun Leong.

What is going on?

Tuesday, March 24, 2009 This blog is down until further notice. a. Regular CNA forumer JohnLaw who first reported on the CDC bonus has not been seen. b. Wayang.Party has been shutdown by ISP. c. Blogger PoThePanda was investigated by the police & ISD for his articles. I receive a few emails that a number have been followed. Something may be on. I'll be back once the picture is clearer Posted by LuckySingaporean at 3:24 AM The above was posted in Diary of a Singaporean Mind. What is happening? WayangParty reported that it is now back online and is investigating the cause of the breakdown. They suspected foul play. Coincidently Redbeanforum was also out on Monday evening. Are we thinking the same thing that something sinister is brewing? Who on earth would want to do such a damn thing? Lucky Tan's post makes one thinking of some forces at work, that we are being watched like the Communist countries or the days of Gestapo. I think it is all our imagination. Our security personnel are paid by public money and have better and more important things to do than to stoop so low and become petty pawns in a political game. The only reason for them to act will be threats to national security or terrorism. I don't think bloggers belong to these two categories. Should my postings be interpreted as a threat to national security, please email me or give me a call. I shall cease posting. Or maybe I shall post about lingeries and underwear, or which celebrity is sleeping with who. Or maybe I shall write about cookings, or better still write a cook book. That should be safe enough for good Singaporeans. Then I shall write about the most intellectual pursuit of Singaporeans, writing cook books. Then we will become the most intelligent

A Govt in a Forbidden City

Over the years we have seen more liberalisation in the economy and financial industry. The reverse is true after new and more stringent laws were enacted yesterday on Film Acts and Control of Public Demonstration, in the political arena. Why is there a need to keep increasing govt control of the people and public demonstration? Is there a perception that there will be more demonstrations and the demonstrations will become more serious? The new laws point to such a scenario or perception. Will we see more barriers be erected around the Govt or Parliament House and the Istana? Would these eventually lead to a physical wall around them and even guns and barb wires? A govt that keeps protecting itself from the people, and barricading itself behind laws and walls will end up holing itself inside a forbidden city. When such an eventuality becomes a reality, it is a sign that the govt is no longer with the people. It will be a govt that is afraid of the people. And the fact is that no govt can hide itself behind high walls and barricades even protected with guns. The most powerful wall that can protect and safeguard a govt is the Wall of Hearts and Souls of the people. Such an invisible wall does not divide but protects the govt by the people. It is not a govt against the people but a govt with the people. In the past, our ministers could walk around and mingle with the people freely. Today, the body guards are everywhere, shoving and pushing the people with their hostile looks, very familiar with the outings of a triad boss. And even ordinary MPs are being threatened by the people and attacked by the people. How and when have we reached this state of being when ministers and MPs are afraid of the people? They are the representatives of the people, elected to look after the people and should be loved and respected by the people. Why the protection, news laws to control the people, dishing out freedom to the people as if the freedom of the people is for the govt to give? Who is the govt representing? Who elects the govt? Where are we heading?

Buangkok East Drive saves 7 minutes

Buangkok East Drive saves 7 minutes The openinging of the Buangkok Drive extension has made travelling to the city that much faster, by 7 mins. Wonder how much was spent to save that precious 7 minutes. And there is great expectation that this new road will make travelling on the KPE more popular. I will probably agree if the ERP charges are not too prohibitive. A lot of planning and resources have been invested into this new road. And many more resources and planning will be invested building more new roads and extensions to improve traffic flow. The thing that motorists must know is that we are in a phase of diminishing returns. With so many vehicles on the road and a limited number of roads, this is the best that can be done. A few hundred millions more may save another precious few minutes as we explore more space for roads.

An end of a legacy and a new one in the making

I did not sign up for the opening ceremony of the new Kent Ridge NUSS Guild House, which was also an occasion to listen to LKY in person. Neither did I read his speech in the media except glancing over a few key points. Nothing unusual actually. But in a bigger perspective it marks a change and a new beginning. LKY has created a legacy for what he has done to this little island. He used to hold his audience in awe when he spoke. Two generations of Singaporeans grown up under this spell. Even foreigners looked forward to hear him speak. After last Friday, that chapter was closed. Somehow, though he came through on the TV as still very forceful and lucid, he looked like a man out of time and out of place. LKY did not say anything new. He reiterated old values that have been flogged over the years. Saying those things to wide eyed and young eager beavers may make some sense. I am just wondering how many people were with him when he said those things, or how many were just twiddling their thumbs and rolling their eyeballs at the new meanings of those values and virtues. As what the elites are for the past years, they will listen and just shut up. If there were anything they want to say you will know hear them unless one is in their circle of confidante. The views in cyberspace were more robust and direct. And the views expressed, if they are anything to come by, is an indication of an old legacy forgotten and a new one in the making.

Hospital fees, legal fees and insurance premiums

The combination of these three elements in one go is the best we can get to emulate the great American society. We have arrived, in a way, like the Americans. And soon what is happening to AIG and the strong detest of the way they paid themselves will affect the people here. The AIG executives are living in fear of the brickbats that are coming their way. How long can they go on ripping the people off? The Americans are up in arms. And with the availability of firearms, do not be surprised if a few of them will be shot for crimes against the American public. The American society is plagued by huge hospital fees, huge legal fees and huge insurance premiums. And the way things are, we are heading into the same quagmire. The beauty of it is that we know exactly what it is going to be and we believe that this is the solution for a rich country like ours, like the Americans. Just pay your way through. No money no talk. How could the medical bill for a student suffering from leukemia reached $400K? Sure, you can count every item in the whole process, from ward charges to medicine and professional fees. So it is justifiable to charge that kind of inhuman fees? Totally transparent and accountable. This was the bill for Zhang Xiaoou that was highlighted in the Sunday Times today. How many people can afford this kind of money? Even $20k is a big problem to many. Then the whole process, in the case of car insurance and claims for damages and injury involving legal fees, my goodness, we have progressed as a nation, as a people beyond any means. Everyone is getting rich in the whole process without asking anything about the conscience of making money. Just find the reason, right or wrong, legal or illegal, and make the other party pays. And finally the innocent motorists will be the ultimate paymaster. And this is a free market economy. Nothing can be done. Everyone is paying market price for everything. It is the way and it should be.

A team of rivals

This was the main theme of an article by ST’s China Bureau Chief, Peh Shing Huei on Saturday. He was referring to the Obama Administration which is made up of both the Democrats and Republicans, some from the George Bush Administration. This rival mix in politics is gaining popularity out of necessity and expediency. China has started this trend after Deng Xiaoping’s successors took over the leadership. The current Thai govt is also a gathering of a mixed bag of politicians. And so is the State Governments in Malaysia. In fact UMNO is also an alliance of convenience among the communal parties. Singapore’s history also took off with a team of rivals, the left wing Barisan Socialis and the right wing or socialist PAP. But the marriage of convenience was shortlived and the Barisan Socialis MPs were either imprisoned or fled the country. I wanted to ask if such a marriage of convenience is possible or workable for the long term good of the component members and the country today. The answer is quite obvious. It cannot be and will only lead to one party swallowing the other or running down the weaker party. Politics has never been a pleasant tea party of friends but of vicious politicians trying to out manouvre each other with the winner takes all before the party is over. It was never meant to be a game for ladies and gentlemen but for schemers and cunningness to fix up or destroy the enemy at all cost. Have things changed? Has the world changed or the people changed to such an extent that the thought of partying with the rivals is now relevant and a necessity? Would we see the different political parties coming together after a general election as national leaders sitting in Parliament to agree and also to disagree without trying to take a swipe at each other at every opportunity? Looking at the ethics and temperaments of politicians, we are still a long way off. We may be emulating the Americans in many things. But the new trend of embracing rival politicians like what Obama is doing is the furthest thing that will be copied here. The medieval rules of the survival of the ruthless, and the destruction of every opponent in the way, will still be the political ethos and morality of politics here. Am I wrong?

Eunice Chew Li Xin

Another pathetic story of a 14 year old girl who died unnecessarily in this very unforgiving city state when you can't go on living without money. According to the story in AsiaOne online, her mother was so broke that she had not eaten for a few days. This 14 year old girl had to work in fast food outlets to buy food for the jobless mother who is also having medical problem. Her parents were divorced. And Eunice was stabbed to death by her mother, probably in a state of despair after days of hunger pangs. No matter how wide is the safety net, as long as the cost of living is high, there will be many that will not be discovered and will continue to live in a life of drudgery. Wonder if they qualify or were on public assistance programme. In a country that is so kind and compassionate to the losers in life, we need not do anything to be cruel.

The AIG fallout

The stubborn persistence to be paid huge bonuses even when the company was going bust and needing US$185 billion in public money to keep it afloat is the height of plain stupidity and abusive arrogance. The House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel called it 'Near criminal indulgence.' The Americans were outraged. But will the expectation of high and exorbitant pay and bonuses continues to be the way of life or will they see the end of an era of robbers and thieves? Paul Heng, the MD of NeXT Career Counsulting here thought that it could be the beginning of the end of big, fat, obscene bonuses. Singapore is not free from such near criminal indulgence. We have been blindly and greedily following the Wall Street thieves in their daylight robbery and extortion of public money or shareholders money. And the best part is that we are proclaiming that our pay is still too low, not enough, they needed to be pay more. How much more? How much is enough? When an employee can throw away $50k for a cooking course, you cannot be so blind not to know that he is obviously being paid too much that he can't wait to burn it away. As a public policy, it is of great importance to pay the employees well, especially the talented, for them to live well and contribute well to society and country. But when paying well becomes excessively well, something must be gravely wrong. Then there are other consequences in the formula. High pay, high consumption, high cost of living, high cost of everything that needs higher pay is like a dog chasing its own tail. The workers are working just to keep paying for their food and essentials. At the lower end, the high cost of living is just that. No money left for anything, not even for retirement. And forget about an expensive cooking class. The govt has a very important responsibility to grapple with high cost and high pay controversy. What it should least do is to add to it and make this vicious cycle turn even wilder. The workers can never earn enough when other agencies are all waiting, counting how much they have in their pockets and CPF, and price their products and services to make sure that every cent is taken away from them. This is called affordability pricing or market pricing. A way to make sure that what you earn is just enough for them to take away. Many still cannot see the woods from the forest and think all these high property prices and high pay is a good thing. So the high HDB price, the high medical fees, education, etc are all affordable and good. The high rentals that the landlords are charging the shops and businesses are paid by the consumers, every cent of it. What is important is to curb the growing cost that often is unncessary and self inflicted. When cost is lower, the people can live more comfortably with lesser pay. The value of money is not eroded away that fast. Otherwise the money in the CPF, even a few hundred thousands, may worth nothing when it is time to take them out. And if the cost of 2 or 3 bungalows continues to go up, the public employees will demand that they are not paid enough and want to be paid in 10 or 20 millions. Hold the madness. Stop the dog from chasing its tail. It is never ending. It is unrestrained greed. The best part, the balloon must burst one day.