Super talents that are not

Our supertalents are at best good in names only. Or if not, the only skill they have is to hire consultants to do the job and thinking for them. But that surely does not require much talent. Most of the poorly educated Ah Beng bosses are doing the same thing, employing MBAs and PhDs to work for them. We are engaging consultants to study and find solutions to get out of the Brazil list of tax havens. And we know why we were in the list. Our tax bracket is below 18%. And the Brazilians need to include us there so that they can tax their own companies operating here and our companies operating in Brazil. The Brazilian Embassy said so. Do we really need to pay millions to consultants to study on this? Don't we have any local talents to do the same thinking?

Wrongful allocation of resources

One of the major strategic error of our education system is the allocation of university places to less financially rewarding courses. Every year thousands of fresh undergrads were admitted to the Arts, Social Sciences, or even Engineering Facualties and only a few hundreds to the extremely lucrative Law School. And when these students graduated and go into the job market, the law graduates on the average are going to earn 10 times more than the other graduates after a few years in the profession. What the system should do is to reverse the intake. Send a few thousand students to take up law and a few hundred for the other courses. Then we will produce students that are highly marketable and in demand. The legal profession will be happy, the civil service will be happy as there will be no shortage of lawyers, the parents will be happy and the graduates will also be happy. Now, why should we continue to send so many students to pursue courses that are economically to their disadvantage? And the students and parents knew but could not get them into Law School because of an artificially created small number of places available. There is no shortage of students wanting to study law and all of them will be very qualified for the course. Or are we underpaying the graduates of the other courses?

Does CPF changes affect Malaysians/PRs?

I don't think all these Minimum Sum, Medisave and delayed withdrawal will affect Malaysians or PRs working here. Not very sure on this. Any one knows? Or would it mean that Singaporeans are now even worst off than non Singaporeans on this?

Subsidised patients demand for same standard

A letter by Lee Sze Teck to Today in a way demanded that subsidised patients must received the same standard of treatment. This is how foolish Singaporeans have become. Doesn't he know that a little tipping can get one ahead of a queue? Did he know that you pay for good service and better quality of service? The case was over sick leave and hospitalisation leave. The former is normally 14 days paid leave and the latter can continued to be paid on sick leave up to 6 months. And the patient wanted the doctor to change the sick leave to hospitalisation leave. The reply by the hospital is less than satisfactory. Either the patient deserved sick leave or hospitalisation must be dependent on the medical condition. To say that a subsidised patient cannot make any request for such a change is distasteful. But that is a different issue. Subsidised patients cannot expect the same quality of medical care as one who paid more. That is a brutal fact of life that they must accept. What they can expect is decent quality medical care. They are not going to get the most expensive and best doctor to attend to them. They are not going to get the most expensive medicine available for free or at a heavily subsidised price. They are not going to get all the frills and thrills that money can buy. Subsidised patients are there to be treated just for his/her medical condition with due medical care and attention by a qualified doctor or professional. Yes, they cannot demand or choose who should treat them. They want that, they must pay for it. They think this is a communist country where all men are equal? Stupid Singaporeans.

Did Jonathan Lock get a fair deal?

Jonathan Lock and his lawyer called a truce and both withdrew their cases against each other. Is it a fair and just ending? Did our justice system provide the justice due to either of them? Would Jonathan Lock withdraw his claims against his lawyer if not for fear of mounting legal cost should he pursue the case? And for pursuing his case, his lawyer will counter sue him for defamation, which means that he may even incur more financial losses. So Jonathan Lock chickened out. He had to abandon his claim against his lawyer not that he did not have a case. But the punitive legal cost was a huge obstacle to cross. The poor citizens will forever be faced with such a situation, not to pursue a legal tussle because they cannot afford it. And anyone who is faced with a legal claim, or any apparent wrong, could simply threaten to sue if he has money, and win.

New kinds of entrepreneurship

While touting is raising its head among taxi drivers, don't blame them entirely. It is a way of living, to earn that extra $2 to feed the rising cost of living. Look at it positively, it is entrepreneurship. Not everyone has millions of dollars in their war chests to fight in the big league. The small guys have their own turfs to play with. Look around the kopitiams and MRT stations and you will notice a new kind of buzz. More entrepreneurial people are setting up shops, as buskers and beggars. Very lucrative and low capital. Tax free also. These different kinds of talents need an outlet to earn a living. Can't just dump them behind bars. Too costly. And they need to survive in this very costly city. The GST of 7% is eating into their bones. Shall we support such entrepreneurship? Shall we give them a chance to earn a few dollars?

PSLE, communication gap?

Tan Yap Kwang, Executive Director of the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board replied to the recent furore on the difficult PSLE Maths Paper. What he was saying was that there was no difference between this year and last year's paper. The questions were set from a blueprint by experienced teachers and examiners. I tend to agree with his comments. The only possibility, if there is an increase in difficulty, is for someone to try out something new. Given the constant change in policies recently, this cannot be ruled out. Otherwise, given the regularity of the examinations over the years, they are unlikely to err too far away. From a different angle, some parents may feel that their children are geniuses and are expected to get 100 marks. And some will see anything less than 100% correct as bad. What may be of concern is to set too high a level of difficulty that frightens or stresses out the young minds. But if this was explained to them in advance and they know what to expect, then it should not be an issue. The children and parents must expect some of the questions to be beyond them. Is there a communication gap?

Greed in Corporate America

80% of the public, including 2/3 of the CEOs interviewed, agreed that the salaries of American CEOs were too high. Only 2.2% said it was too low. Understandable. The high salaries of American CEOs have been going on for too long. It is the worst kind of robbery, robbing minority shareholders of their real worth and the latter cannot do anything about it. What they need to do is to sack all of them across America and pay half of their existing salaries to the next in line or those young and eager beavers to take over. Corporate theft in the American style has been going on even in our squeaky clean island. And they did it all legally and legitimately by getting the boards to pass all the resolutions to grant them more shares, bonuses and higher pay. Oh, they will not call this robbery but legitimate rewards for their talents.

How much do you pay for your water?

1 Cu M is $1.17 Waterborne fee is 30c Water conservation tax is 30% of $1.17 GST is 7% The final cost to a user is $1.948 per Cu M. Cost, is it still 3c? How much is processing and administrative cost? Water conservation tax is 35c. GST is 8.2c. Total tax is 43.2c.

Good acts and good intentions

When too much goodness turns bad. That is how mankind will eventually destroy itself. That is how Singapore too will follow the same road. Today we praise the great achievements of medicine and technology to extend life. We live with great hope and exciting anticipation of life at 100. Thanks to our high standard and quality of life and health system. All these means one thing. We are defying nature, the law of nature in self renewal. Nature must wear. Nothing is forever and must not be kept forever. By extending life, apparently a good thing, we are creating more stress to our system. All these lives must be supported. They consumed energy, space and resources. Can our system take it? The world is dying, as they say. Climate change due to a growing population that only consume and destroy the earth's resources. How many people can the earth sustain before it finds it unbearable anymore? The world will not be able to cope with an incessant increase in population. Man has lengthen the self renewal process of life. And the world is fighting back. Natural disasters are sweeping across the earth to destroy what it cannot afford to sustain. We as a small country, will face the same fate as the earth when we over populate our island and burst at the seams. That is how we will end up if we keep on gourging ourselves. The success and big strides forward will quicken our own demise.

How to make quick and easy money

I mean how to make quick and easy money from Singaporeans. It is a piece of cake. Just sign up with a foreign party, form a company, create a beautiful catalogue of prime housing in a foreign shore, the best is Bintan and Batam. Then sell them to Singaporeans. In the process of selling, build a few units as show houses to lure more Singaporeans in and put in more deposits. Then when enough is collected, just fold up and disappear, with the money of course.

Taxi drivers touting!

What a shameless thing to do. Taxi drivers are touting and cheating foreigners by charging them high fares and not using the meters. Wow, Singaporeans turning into another kind of robbing. Why is it that taxi drivers are not allowed to rob their passengers? They are just doing it to earn a living to feed their families in the face of ever rising cost of living. What is wrong with taxi drivers trying to earn a bit more? When other people are earning by the millions, why can't taxi drivers aspire to earn half a million? Oh, maybe they don't have a piece of paper with a first class honours chopped on it. So they are undeserving to earn a million dollar. Oops, I mean a measly half a peanut. Are people envious of these low down poorly educated people who can earn a million or trying to earn half a million? Actually the taxi drivers are not robbing. They are entrepreneurs offering their services to a select group of customers. They are willing to provide a higher level of personalised service to these customers, like the high net worth clients of banks, premier banking, no need to queue and service with a specially created smile. Hey, it is willing buyer willing seller. If the foreigners did not want to take their cabs at their asking price, so be it. They did not put a knife at their throat to force them to take their cabs. It is not compulsory huh. No coercion. And they are talking of a pathetic $20 ride. In New York, London or Tokyo, they can easily charge $100 plus tips! Now compare this with the $30k compulsory savings in the Medisave, the $99,600 compulsory savings in the Minimum Sum, the akan datang compulsory annuities which is going to be another few thousands? Come on, give the poor taxi drivers a break. Let them make a few dollars more to have a bottle of stout or a pack of cigarettes after a day of backbreaking work. Free the market and let them charge their own prices. Service with a difference must come with a price. It raises the standard and quality of service. They may earn enough to have the luxury to go for personal grooming courses to serve their customers better. Dress better and smell better. This is just another way of looking at the issue. Or shall we accept the guiding principle that low down people must not be allowed to earn more money than the super talents? Only super talents can charge and demand whatever they want and low down workers must accept whatever that is being decided for them?

Is CPF turning into a robber?

What is the basic reason for the existence of the CPF? Is it there to hoard people's money on whatever excuses that it can cook up? Or is it there to ensure that the members would have some money to tie them over during their old age, that they don't become destitutes and having to bleed the govt of public fund? I may not be a supertalent. And it does not need anyone to be a supertalent to know that the CPF main objective is to make sure that the retirees have a sum of money to live through their lives. As long as anyone can make his own provisions with cash, savings or properties or any assets that exceeds the value of what CPF declared as the Minimum Sum needed, such people have more than adequately provided for themselves. Actually many don't need so much money to live through their golden years. A Goh Mui Sim wrote to the ST forum saying that at 53, she had already bought a $100k annuity to provide her a $500 payout from $62 till her death. And she has pledged this to the CPF When she turned 55, CPF took $99,600 from her Ordinary Account to put into her Retirement Account. She argued that she had a $100k annuity that is more than the $99,600. But CPF said her annuity is short of the $790 by $290 and she could apply for a partial exception. Why can't the CPF take only the amount that is short? Why take the whole $99,600? The CPF could not understand that this lady has planned her own retirement well ahead of the govt's thinking, even more than the Minimum Sum requirement. She has covered a period past the Minimum Sum to her death, with her annuity. All these are not enough. All CPF is concerned is the $99,600 that it wants to grab hold on. And of course, another $30k in the Medisave and more in annuity insurance. Ok, this last one the CPF definitely cannot find anymore excuse to touch this lady. This Goh Mui Sim, like many, is a responsible and thinking Singaporean. She has planned her retirement well ahead. But this is not acceptable because her plan is not what the CPF planned for her and all Singaporeans. What utter rubbish! Why must every Singaporean need $99,600k and $30k in Medisave? Why must they still need an annuity plan when they have made their own plans? What is the CPF for? What is the CPF for? Has the CPF turned itself into a robber, putting a knife on the member's throat to demand more money to be held by CPF, totally disregarding the interests of the people? And its interest is to grab the people's money, as much as possible, and hold it as long as possible? No matter what reasons or explanations, this is the impression that the people is getting.

Singapore Malaysia reunion

This topic has been raised again and understandably you will get a wide range of views on it. Most of the hostile views were either directed at the personality level or the fundamental issue of Bumiputra right. The personality issue will go away with time. Not sure about the latter. But one cannot rule out the possibility of it going away when Malaysia gets more properous and more confident of itself. There are issues that we cannot accept or settle today. We cannot predict what the future generations will do. It may not be the same kind of merger as envisaged in the past or today. But for the two countries to work closer, cooperate more, work out more areas where national barriers can be sidestepped or broken down, freeing the people from the baggages of the past, are the natural things to come for mutual benefits. It cannot go on like this forever. Some time later, two visionary leaders from both sides may emerge and say lets hold hands and work together for our own good without dismantling too many fundamental rights of each people and country. The future is uncertain and is rosy.

Violations of human rights and Geneva Convention

Jimmy Carter had put it squarely that Bush violated human rights and the Geneva Convention in the interrogation of prisoners. And Abu Ghraib and the infamous Guantanamo Camps were testaments to the crimes of the Bush regime. Why is it that they are allowed to continue for so long and the self righteous western press and govt just made skim comments and do nothing? What kind of hypocrisy is that that even an ex American President deemed it enough and could not take it any more to say it out loud?

About birds and bees

Today I am thinking of just talking about the birds and the bees and anything else except what I have been posting here. That would make many people very happy for a change. We shall talk about where to eat the best chicken rice or prata, where is the most rustic place in Singapore, how to plant tomatoes, how to enjoy living. And we can spend hours doing research on such subjects and fill up the pages. Did anyone talk about critical thinking and serious issues affecting the people and more thorough discussion should be devoted to them? Yes. And eating, planting tomatoes, living and enjoying lives are very serious issues. In organisations, some who say they want entrepreneurs to take risks, insurgents to stimulate change etc. But once the guy turns his back, another guy will point his finger and say 'nothing of that sort.' One may say he wants to do more businesses, be more aggressive, take more risks. Another will say do not be too clever, do not take risks that are unnecessary. Just get on with the daily routine. Nothing happens is good. This dichotomy is prevalent everywhere, where the left hand and right hand don't clap together. Corporations big or small suffer because of such inconsistencies, conflict of opinions and objectives, politicking or saboing. I have just happened to witness a few episodes recently. Need a big iron grill to do some grilling.

Ineffective ERP

When one pays ERP charges, one expect to travel in a freer road. When one pays 50c, the quality of the road flow may be lower. When one pays $1, it should be better. When one pays $1.50, it should be even better. But if after paying for all the increases, the condition is still the same, then should not the authority return to the 50c rate since there is no improvement and the flow is as was at 50c level? Ok, the authority can say, we will increase the cost to $5. That should do the trick. I think that should be the answer. But wait a minute. When transportation is going to cost a bomb, then business cost is going to shoot up as well. People's cost of living will also go up as well.

Threats of high legal cost

Jonathan Lock is faced with another legal battle with his lawyer. And the most intimidating factor is the high legal cost. How many people will have the money to fight a legal battle in our courts? The first thing that will hurt is the big hole in the pocket. For those people who have no problem in paying for the huge legal fee, taking anyone to court seems to be a convenient practice as it is to their advantage. And most poor buggers will have to back off, even apologise and pay damages knowing that they are right. Is this how our justice system is going to be?

First frivolous protest

Allow protest, even frivolous ones for a start. A site was identified for the stockpile of granite in Lim Chu Kang. And the farmers are protesting that the granite dust will affect their crops. And the 6m fencing is also seen as a threat, blocking sunlight from the crops. I am refraining from laughing out loud. How serious can this protest be? But it is a good start. No demonstration or people marching down Orchard Rd or Shenton Way. Just standing up to say no. And with a petition to back up.

What if?

The Americans and the West are furious that the Myanmese military junta beat up the peaceful protestors, used tear gas and bullets on them. And they are calling for a regime change, saying that the junta is unfit to run the country. Now what if Chee Soon Juan is able to gather a couple of hundreds of people in a public and peaceful protest and forces the police to use the baton and other means of physical force? Would the Americans and the West also call for a regime change? It would be tricky.