drums, gongs and kompangs for Remy

Perhaps, perhaps, if he was a foreign talent, he might deserve something better, more attention, more accolades, more fundings and more praising. Isn't home grown talents not worthy to be groomed? Or their achievements not to be trumpeted? Someone should ask him to sleep in the void deck with his bowling balls for one week and donate $500k for his effort. That would surely raise his presence and the interest in Remy. Come on sports reporters, do something good for our home grown heroes. Make up some interesting stories like what they did for Tiger Woods. Analyse and compare his achievements with other great bowlers, see what kind of records he has broken. The first Singaporean to win how many world titles, how many titles he has won so far? How many perfect games etc. Create a website for him. Popularise bowling through his achievements. Make every child wants to be a Remy ong like every Brazilian wanting to be Pele. Make bowling a national craze. Forget about football or sprinting, sports that we are physically disadvantage. Keep the Singapore League for commercial reasons to keep the footballers employed. Pay them and not foreigners. We will never be there in the world cup. Just treat it as a sweet dream. Be real. Better to promote things like bowling, yacthing, billiards, ok, badminton, table tennis etc where we really have a chance to be world champions. Oh, golf is possible too.

hedge funds, saviour or menace?

'...hedge funds were a vital source of liquidity - saviours when markets dry up.' Robert Rubin 'Asian policymakers saw them as predators causing undue volatility and overwhelming central banks. Said William Pesek. Now who is saying the true picture. Both said some truth but one is truer than the other. Just look at the main reason for the existence of hedge funds. Hedge funds exist solely for profits. Never forget this. Their presence in any market to provide liquidity is incidental and to their benefits. They are in a market to soak up the liquidity and will disappear as quickly as they appear when the market dries up. And they caused upheavals in the wake of their entry and departure. Governments must get it straight. The hedge funds are not there to bring in money. In a market when there are lots of foreign funds available, it may be acceptable for the hedge funds to come in and generate activities and liquidity. For the money they are going to scoop up could be from foreign funds. But when the money in the market belongs to the people, the citizens, one better thinks a little whether hedge funds should be welcomed to take all the people's money away. Sometimes it is better to have lesser activities and gradual growth and retaining the money in the market then to allow hedge funds to come in and off load everything away. And normally such activities will incur a cost to the hedge funds for playing in the market and these could provide additional jobs and revenue. What if the bulk of the traders were international? What if commissions are negligible or nothing to talk about? In such a situation the hedge funds could operate at practically no cost, generate few jobs, but through their expertises and collusion, could wipe out a whole market. Hedge funds that are uncontrolled and allowed to play by the law of the jungle are a menace to the financial markets and can break a country.

hedge funds, saviour or menace?

'...hedge funds were a vital source of liquidity - saviours when markets dry up.' Robert Rubin 'Asian policymakers saw them as predators causing undue volatility and overwhelming central banks. Said William Pesek. Now who is saying the true picture. Both said some truth but one is truer than the other. Just look at the main reason for the existence of hedge funds. Hedge funds exist solely for profits. Never forget this. Their presence in any market to provide liquidity is incidental and to their benefits. They are in a market to soak up the liquidity and will disappear as quickly as they appear when the market dries up. And they caused upheavals in the wake of their entry and departure. Governments must get it straight. The hedge funds are not there to bring in money. In a market when there are lots of foreign funds available, it may be acceptable for the hedge funds to come in and generate activities and liquidity. For the money they are going to scoop up could be from foreign funds. But when the money in the market belongs to the people, the citizens, one better thinks a little whether hedge funds should be welcomed to take all the people's money away. Sometimes it is better to have lesser activities and gradual growth and retaining the money in the market then to allow hedge funds to come in and off load everything away. And normally such activities will incur a cost to the hedge funds for playing in the market and these could provide additional jobs and revenue. What if the bulk of the traders were international? What if commissions are negligible or nothing to talk about? In such a situation the hedge funds could operate at practically no cost, generate few jobs, but through their expertises and collusion, could wipe out a whole market. Hedge funds that are uncontrolled and allowed to play by the law of the jungle are a menace to the financial markets and can break a country.

the paradox of opposition and power

'The only constant is that every state eventually ends up an oligarchy — to varying degrees of course. What a state does is that it "steals" the country from the people. And therefore when the people vote, the people get the government they deserve. And the government engineers the extent of the state — at some point beyond the control of the people — unless they want to take EXTREME measures like revolution, coups, civil war or assassinations. All of these: VERY BAD SCENE. (but entertaining nonetheless Laughing.' Matilah Singapura I fully agree with your above quote. This is the natural way for things to be. All things will find its own way to self destruct and for a new beginning. It goes in cycles. The state is initially intended for the good of the people. But once man got into power, power got into his head and it is always self that comes first. Then the slide begins for his own destruction. The people must always stand up to voice their disagreements and prevent the slide. Now this is funny. You need opposing voices to save the corrupted from getting more corrupt to save themselves and the system. For if the people just do nothing, the slide will be faster and the self destruction will come sooner. This strange law of nature works wonders. And if you look at the IMF-World Bank and their symbiotic relationship with the civil organisations who disagree with them, how one party needs the other to prolong the game, it is another level of enlightenment. If you have read my post on why the opposition always think that those in power needs to be brought down and the assumption by the powers that all oppositions are bad and incompetent, you will know that the assumptions of both sides could be just as wrong. Marx is right when he came out with the formula, thesis, anti thesis and synthesis. Every thesis will need an anti thesis to make way for another synthesis. This is the law of nature, the law of life. And it is enshrined in the story of the Animal Farm.

myth 64

'Who says we are intolerant of opposing views?' I have posted what Lee Wei Ling said about helping the poor since we are such a rich country. And I quote her here again. 'As a First World country where millions of dollars are being poured into making us a cultured and vibrant society, could a few million dollars be spared to build nursing homes for disabled patients whose parents are getting too old to look after them any longer.' Dr Lee Wei Ling I think she is asking for too much. There is no such things as a free lunch. Neither is the govt responsible to look after the people's welfare. Everyone must be responsible for their own health and problems. Wei Ling's view is definitely not the same as the govt. Boon Wan is having great plans to build retirement villages. These will not be for free. But disagreeing with the govt's position is acceptable. It is not always a case of right or wrong when people disagree. Someone insists that durian is the best fruit in the world. Some will strongly disgree and think it is the most smelly fruit. Then again, for the safety of the IMF-World Bank delegates, we wanted to ban 27 activists. But the IMF-World Bank disagreed and protested that the 27 should be let in. And we listen and accepted their opposing voice. We allowed 22 to come in. We are willing to listen to people who disagree with us and if they are reasonable, change our position. Who is complaining that we are intolerant of opposing voices?

Fortress Singapore

I was in town this morning and decided to take a look at Fortress Singapore. Never seen so many uniformed and non uniformed police in one little area. All around Suntec and Raffles Hotel and Raffles City, roads were blocked and there were also gurkhas in police uniform and fully armed guarding the entrances of hotels and the main roads leading to Suntec. And of course the barricades were there. We are taking the security of the delegates very seriously. And Kan Seng did the right thing to deny potential trouble makers from coming in, until last night when 22 of the 27 deemed dangerous were also let in. Are we going to see more agitations from this dangerous lot? Have we compromise anything? The IMF-World Bank Show has been on for several years. And they have lived to love the agitators and the demonstrators. They have such a good understanding that after every protest and demonstration they will go home and come back again the next round. Very likely they know each other by name now and were friends except for having different views of things. If this is not maturity what else is. If this is not first world what else is?

a rich first world country

'As a First World country where millions of dollars are being poured into making us a cultured and vibrant society, could a few million dollars be spared to build nursing homes for disabled patients whose parents are getting too old to look after them any longer.' Dr Lee Wei Ling I think she is asking for too much. There is no such things as a free lunch. Neither is the govt responsible to look after the people's welfare. Everyone must be responsible for their own health and problems. So what if the govt has more than $200 billions in the reserves? These are for the future. (Not sure for what or when they will be used). For the time being, if people need help, go and organise a few charity shows and ask the public for donations. This is reality. We are not a welfare state. The state's money is not your money. And your money is also not your money.

a malaysian joke

Wanted: Chinese teachers to teach in National Schools. Malaysia is going to import hundreds of Chinese teachers to teach Mandarin in National Schools.

IMF-World Bank should be grateful to Singapore

IMF-World Bank should be grateful to Singapore Singapore should tell all the delegates that what it is doing is all for their own good. We are their protectors while they are here as our guests. We want to see them going home safe and sound. And this is our commitment and responsibility to them. Now they can have their meetings in peace and at ease, knowing that every measure has been taken. How can they be so ungrateful and accused Singapore of breaching the MOU? The message that Singapore is sending out to the world is that this is a tropical wonderland. Come and play and have fun. We will make sure that you will be very safe, and feel very safe. STB should sell this message in their promotion to tourists. Come to Singapore and experience how Singaporeans feel in this safe haven.

singapore did not breach the MOU with IMF-World Bank

Did Singapore breach the MOU with IMF-World Bank. Singapore did not. But Paul Wolfowitz, World Bank's President said Singapore did. And Singapore explained. The issue lies in between two conditions. One is for 'Singapore to '(assure) expeditious entry procedures including the issuance of visas... for any observers and other persons... who are accredited'. The other is for 'Singapore to take all necessary measures for the safe passage of all persons in and out of Singapore and for their personal security and safety of their property and the property of the organisations and delegations. The two conditions is like day and night. Having one will compromise on the other. You can't have day and night at the same time. For Singapore to ensure the safety of all delegates, it must have the full authority to exercise caution and take preventive measures. In this sense, if Singapore thinks that Paul Wolfowitz is a security threat himself, he can be barred from Singapore under the agreement. So Singapore is perfectly right to stop those whom it thinks will pose a danger to the Meeting. On the other hand, if Singapore is to abide by the first condition, to allow all and sundry to attend the Meeting, it will compromise itself, and safety and security of delegates, and any trouble Singapore will be blamed and be answerable. The devil is in the details really. It is like George Bush raising a red flag that Iraq is a danger, or the terrorist threat. So hiding behind the threat he can do anything he wants to protect America and its people. Paul Wolfowitz should be familiar with this kind of reasonings.

the moral of kopi susus

It is quite heavenly to have a cup of steaming hot black coffee first thing in the morning. The aroma of a coffee brew is really fragrant. And the perk kicks in once the black shining liquid gets into your system. Then some ingenious people started to add milk into the coffee. At the right proportion, the combination is a different goodness. And some will only take coffee with milk. Given a cup of coffee, if one continues to add milk unrestrained, and with no concern to the final outcome, the coffee will either be diluted, or if allowed to overflow, will end up with nothing but a cup of milk. Is the coffee more important or the milk? Or just a cup of drink regardless of what is inside? In the same vein, as the govt calls for more foreigners into our rojak bowl, what does the govt think is the important final result? Does the viability of the state overrides the interest of the kopi and susu? A state exists for the good and interests of its people, the citizens. If the citizens are not important, the state is but like an empty vessel. Just throw anything into it. As long as the vessel is filled and desirable, that counts. If this be the case, shall we change the kopi susu or its maker? Or we have really transformed ourselves into a hotel? Everyone is a guest and and how well one is treated or appreciated depends on ones value or propensity to spend.

Singapore Encyclopedia

Now I am unhappy. I just read that Annabelle Chong made it to the Singapore Ency. Does anyone know whether Mr Brown make it? Or what about Mr Wang, Gayle Goh and Redbean?

myth 63

'Population growth is necessary for our survival' China is facing a high growth rate despite population control. In fact the official policy of China is to reduce population growth as too much growth in this area will put a huge burden on the country. But I am too clever in selecting an out of context example to prove a point that people do not believe in. Ok, lets look at a smaller countries that can sustain growth without forcing a population growth, and maintaining a high standard of living for its own people. Yes, yes, you guess it right. Our model country Switzerland. Belgium, Luxemburg, Denmark, etc are all small countries. Australia is also a small country in terms of population size. Do they need to frantically boost up their population for more growth? This is very low level if not primitive approach to economic growth. What happens to high tech and leading edge industries as engines of growth? Fail? The influx of foreigners as a good thing today is just the reverse of the 2 child policy and population control in earlier days. One more is good and the other less is good. When all our systems and physical networks are choked up by a huge population, we will die like a fat man under his own weight, with all his blood vessels blocked, cannot breathe.

good news, fare hike but affordable

The best news today is that bus and train fares are up, but not as much as last year. Singaporeans are really lucky people. Gerard Ee, Chairman of PTC, said that PTC has taken care to ensure that fares remain affordable for the majority of commuters relative to their updated income. Presumably the income of the majority of commuters went up by at least the same margin to be absorbed by transport cost. What's left? Lim Boon Heng, Labour Chief, commented in Today, 'The public will be relieved to hear that the increase for ez link card holders is relatively small...' What is a 3c increase to commuters who may earned $5k to $10k a month? Just heard from a commuter that a trip from Tanjong Katong to Raffles Place is $1.05 by public bus. The same journey cost 80c by private bus.

what if i own a main stream media

I was having a discussion with a very senior journalist on what I could do if I own a MSM. I have to brag about 'very senior journalist' to give it a little weight. If I were to say that I was talking to myself, people would just brush it off. Now the eyes and ears are wide open. Ok, let's talk about the content of the media, international relations, domestic issues, social, political economics, sports and funs etc. I will start with international news. I think this is a lucrative source of revenue for MSM. Many countries, especially the rich and powerful ones, would like to set their agenda. Country A may want to condemn country B as a terrorist nation, or branded country C as a rogue nation. Or some may want to blaster another country for abuse of human rights. Now if I were the MSM owner, I will willingly print what they want me to print in my press. But I will ask how much? These countries must be made to pay for their propaganda in my press. And there is no reason for me to help them to badmouth other countries for free. What is worst, or silly, is to publish their propaganda, get into the bad books of the wronged countries and still have to pay for them. I am sure many MSM are making tons of money doing this. I don't believe they will be silly enough to be paying to do this dirty job for other countries.

the great psychotherapeutic shows

Do not have pity on a beggar. Better thank him for giving you the chance to throw him a few coins. The beggar is there for you to show kindness and compassion as a warm human being. He is there for you to gain merits for your future life, that is, if you believe that life does not end and will go on and on. Do not be mistaken. You are not helping him but yourself. We have plenty of charity shows over the years. And we have many tough and hard luck stories being beamed into our living rooms. We were touched and we emptied our pockets. And the beneficiaries were so grateful that we did. Looking at it another way, we are the ones to be grateful. Where in the world will there be a chance to see so many poor souls, real people, baring their grief and pains for us to be entertained? Singaporeans, especially the younger ones, are born in a generation of plenty. Many have never experienced the pains of want and not having the wants satisfied. Some may watch in disbelief that there are poverty and sufferings in our midst. Singaporeans should be thankful that these charity shows could draw out the little emotions and humanity in them. To make them feel and empathise with other unfortunate fellow beings. Some may even be so moved to shed a few tears. Some even burst out crying. And they felt so good after that. And for those who have been whining and feeling depressed over their plight or humble life, the beneficiaries of the shows will make them feel better, that their situations are not that bleak. They should be thankful to be able to just walk, see and take a bus without assistance. What should have happened is that all viewers who are being entertained should pay a minimum sum of $5. For those who feel better or less depressed, they should phone in to pay $20. Those who shed some tears could pay $30. And those who are more fortunate to experience rapture and break out crying should pay $100. Going to a shrink will definitely cost more. As for the performers, the actors, dancers and singers, each should pay at least $500 to $1k for the opportunity to do charity and be seen as celebrities with a heart. And the two MCs must pay even more for their greater exposure in hosting the shows. The person who benefits the most and who should donate the most is the patron of the show. He gets all the credits, merits and honour for all the performance and money raised in his name. In future shows, the patron should at least foot out $50k for such glory. If there are too many volunteers, then they can bid for the privilege to patronize the shows. Finally, everyone should say a big thank you to the beneficiaries who braved all reservations to pour out their deprivations and pathetic lives for all to see. And all future shows shall be marketed as Psychotherapy Shows. They have great therapeutic effects on the viewers. A great stress reliever. Oh, before I forget, those who are unhappy with such shows may call up the Association for the prevention of cruelties against humankind to protest.

leading by the new water way

When the New Water formula became a reality, it was still a problem convincing the people to take a sip at their own excretion. Then one by one the Ministers, including Prime Minister, demonstrated that it was ok to drink what was not drinkable before. It was a change of perception. But more. It was leading by example. Since then drinking New Water was never an issue. Today we are hearing many dramatic changes in our policies. There were calls to leave the nest and find greener pastures overseas. Calls to invite foreigners to the homes. Calls to take a pay cut and expect lower salaries in the face of competition from foreigners in our backyard. And there were the retirement age of 62. Grumblings were aplenty on the ground. Somehow all these calls seemed less real, less legitimate. The people who are going to bear the brunt of these calls are unconvinced. Maybe we should see and other exercise like the New Water Campaign. Lead by examples and show the way.

this is our country, this is our home

Do we invite foreigners to our homes and allow them to insult us and tell us to get out? This seems to be the latest development in the game of foreign talents and welcoming more people to our shores, as citizens. Many well meaning people have been singing praises of foreigners and how important they are to our survival in the future. And this message has sunk into the heads of many foreigners and Singaporeans alike, that we need them to save us. And they believe so. Some Singaporeans also believe so. And foreigners are even telling us that if we are uncompetitive, want high salaries and less work, then we should ship out. They are willing to come here to work harder and for less. The remarkable thing is that some Singaporeans do agree wholeheartedly to this kind of argument. There are Singaporeans who are working overseas as foreign talents and understand how tough it is to be foreigners competing against the locals. And they have achieved some success in doing so. And they empathise with the foreigners working here. They understand the logic that more work and less pay is the only way to fight the competition. Singaporeans can no longer rely on the stupid idea that they must be paid first world salaries when others are willing to work for less. Admittedly this reasoning is logical and true. There is no pleasant alternative in a globalised world. Singaporeans must work more and be prepared to earn less, except for positions where foreigners are not allowed to compete in. For such occupations, they can go on as before and keep increasing the salaries at will. Would there be any profession where the incumbents dare to say they are over worked? Or after being given more perks and increments, have the audacity to ask for less work and responsibilities? Now that this new living mantra is the accepted conventional truth, it can only be expected that life will be a bit tougher for the lazy or less talented Singaporeans. So what can we expect them to do? Are they expected to tighten their belts and fight with foreigners for jobs here, asking for lesser pay? And is this a fair equation? Foreigners are hungry, have no stake or responsibilities here. They can live with less. Should we allow them to proceed to compete with our own people for jobs? Are we saying that time has changed and Singaporeans have to look backward, to a level of living like in the past? The other alternative is for talented Singaporeans to rough it out like our foreign talents. Go forth and seek for new pastures. And there are jobs galores overseas. Singaporeans are in high demand as foreign talents and logically will be getting better pay in foreign lands. Strange isn't it? Why are Singaporeans in great demand overseas but not wanted in their homeland? Or is this a game of musical chairs? We export our unappreciated talents overseas and welcome foreigners to take their places. Would we reach a stage that the more able Singaporeans will be found living overseas and their homes rented and occupied by foreigners? If this is the likely development, what kind of nation or society will we become? Citizens of the world? The Filipino and Indonesian maids went overseas to earn foreign exchange and left behind an empty nest. Some returned to find their nests occupied by strangers and they were no longer wanted or could not fit into the new equation. Would we pay the same price if this happens to us? And very likely the price will be much higher. For instead of the women folks being abroad, our able men folks are the one that are missing from home. A home without a man or a nation without its men or talented men can have unimaginable consequences. This is our country, this is our home. What would it be like if our homes are now overseas and our country becomes the homes of foreigners?

scam stories

hi fellas, i have started a column in my forum on scam stories that i replied to and the details of the exchanges over email. i have received many in the past but conveniently deleted them. i think it will be educational to all by playing along and reveal how their modus operandi. i have started on two cases now, one claiming from bank of africa and another from uob singapore!

Scam Stories

hi fellas, i have started a column in my forum on scam stories that i replied to and the details of the exchanges over email. i have received many in the past but conveniently deleted them. i think it will be educational to all by playing along and reveal how their modus operandi. i have started on two cases now, one claiming from bank of africa and another from uob singapore!