A world class city of no talents

More are singing the song of no talents in paradise and the soundness of having only a single political party to rule the country. How could there be no talent in a world class city when hundreds of straight As students were sent overseas to Ivy League universities for at least the last 20 years? At 250 a year, we should be having at least 5000 of the brightest living among us. Or are they fake? Their straight As were fake, their first class honours were fake? We are crying that we can only find 10 or 20 of them to serve in the govt and the rest were not good enough or not willing to serve. This is a myth that the simple minded Singaporeans are fed and expected to believe. For every first class doctor or lawyer or engineer in the govt, there will be at least 10 or 50 of them out there with as good a qualification. How can we dismiss the rest as no talent? Actually we are all talking bull. Political talent is not equated with professional talent in other fields. Just because someone is an excellent doctor or lawyer or engineer, does not make the person a great politician or leader of a country. People are gifted with different talents for different things. It is more likely that when one is gifted in one area, it is unlikely that he is equally gifted in other areas, accepted that this is not always the case. Neither is it the case the other way round. Do not think or believe that an excellent doctor, lawyer or engineer will make an excellent politician. This is a fallacy that must not be sold to the masses. We have actually seen the reverse as a bigger truth. Please stop singing the one party song and think. What we need are leaders and good men with a heart for the common people. No need for first class doctors or lawyers or engineers when the heart is not in the right place.

One day, news will be written this way

Rupert Murdoch has warned against the role journalists and old media have been conducting themselves. Soon they will run out of readership if they think they are still demigods. This is what Murdoch said, "It used to be that a handful of editors could decide what was news--and what was not. They acted as sort of demigods. If they ran a story, it became news. If they ignored an event, it never happened," Murdoch said. "Today, editors are losing this power. The Internet, for example, provides access to thousands of new sources that cover things an editor might ignore. And if you aren't satisfied with that, you can start up your own blog, and cover and comment on the news yourself. Journalists like to think of themselves as watchdogs, but they haven't always responded well when the public calls them to account." We shall write our own news and in the way and style we deem fit. We can shout and scream and kpkb. The old media cannot beat us on these.

Myth 194 - The fallen myths

There are many myths that have fallen flat on the ground. We used to be told that if people invest their money in stocks, in the long run they will be better off. This tooth has been proven beyond any doubt, that this is not the case. Many have lost their CPF savings when they put their money in stocks. So the next truth is to not to put money in stocks but in unit trusts to spread the risk. The result is the same. Kaput. Ok, try another option. Put your money with the experts. Let the fund managers handle your money and invest for you. What a wise recommendation. Another kaput. Trust only the big and proven funds. The bigger the better. We all know where it will all end up. The final option, keep your money in CPF. Very safe. Guaranteed. This one will surely not become a myth.

Downgrade if you cannot afford

This familiar song has been sung with increasing frequency and the singers are getting much more comfortable singing it. It sounded to me as a cocky and arrogant tune. If you cannot afford 4rm, go for 3rm or 2 rm. And if you are so desperate, don't worry, more rental flats will be built just for you losers. What happens to the more good years and Swiss standard of living? Why are we spiralling down instead of being better off? The losers have been 'encouraged' or dismissively told to live within their means. That is their lot, that is their station in life. But should that be the way to go? Can we lower the prices of flats? We have this game of downgrading. On the other hand there is another game of pushing up the prices of properties. Land sale will be withheld if they cannot fetch high prices to protect prices of properties from falling. Very good reason. Property developers, private or public, privatised public developers, will only have one choice, raise property prices as the cost of land can never come down, and so were other costs. It is forgiveable and unstandable for commercial developers to want to max their profits. But in so doing, they only facilitate the privatised public developers to raise their prices. No need to look at cost. Just look at market prices. Market price up, just up the price accordingly. Then tell the losers to downgrade their expectations. When one side is told to downgrade and the other is running away with higher prices, where will this lead to? Will it snap? Can we ask people who are earning millions to downgrade their lifestyle if they cannot keep up with those earning more than them? Or shall we give in to their demands and give them more money to spend? And mind you, giving money to millionaires is no small matter. They will not accept anything less than a peanut.

Let’s have a referendum

We have 45 years of success under the able leadership of the ruling party. I think people will have a hard time trying to disagree with this truth. We are here today because of the unique political system that we have developed and copyrighted. And it is a system that is not easily replicated. It is a system based on able and benevolent leadership, tough paternalistic and incorruptible leaders. What is the referendum all about? We need to give the people a choice to choose a political system they want. We have a tested system that the people have lived in and proud of. It has been proven beyond any doubt, comparing to the countries around the world, that our system delivers. This one party dominance system must be one of the two choices to be offered to the people. The next is a benevolent dictatorship, a slight variance from the current system. The conditions for its success are quite similar from the one party dominance system except that you can do away with elections. Let the benevolent dictatorship rule and make everyone rich and happy. Both may not be near to the ideal western model of democracy, but both work efficiently to provide the people with the best leaders and a high standard of living. There is no need to blindly follow the West to want a western democracy. What the people should decide is what is good for them. Let the people choose in a referendum, for a one party dominance govt or a benevolent dictatorship. The people cannot claim that there is no choice. Just choose one.

Why no opposition MPs at Hong Lim?

There have been many criticisms on the no show of opposition as well as ruling party MPs at Hong Lim. Let me try to address the opposition side of the unhappiness. Many would have seen this as a golden opportunity for opposition MPs to dig in and side with the people, and score political points. It is a straight forward expectation of how things should be. But look at it closely for a moment. What could the presence of opposition MPs help the distressed investors? I think it will make things worst. They would have politicize the issues and make life more miserable for the investors. By not taking the sides of the investors, the ground is left open for the govt to step in to do the right thing. The govt need not be seen fighting with the opposition for credit or becoming defensive with their presence. And the issues can be handled in a less complicated and proper way. Tan Kin Lian’s presence should not pose too much of a problem as he is just an individual and does not belong to any political party. Is my explanation logical?

Lack of political talents

I wonder how many of you believe that there is a lack of political talents in paradise. I, for one, agree that there is really a lack of political talents. Look at everyone around, you can hardly claim that they are talents. This is the sad state of affair in paradise. Everyone is excellent in making big bucks, but being a political talent there are so few in between. Oh, please disagree with me if you think you are better than whatever talents there are out there. Don't feel slighted. We just got enough for one political party. And that is a fact. Oh dear, those not in the ruling party are going to be angry with me. I am just telling the truth. If they are good enough, they should have won the election and form a new govt. But they have lost to more able opponents, more talented than them. Anyone want to prove me wrong?

Enshrining a one party system

Shall we enshrine our one party political system into our constitution? There are views that a two party adversarial system is not good for us. According to who and who shall determine what is good and bad for us? Maybe I should ask who is the 'us'? And there is also this view that we don't have enough talents to run two good political parties. Really, we are so short of political talents? In the artificiality of our existing system, politicians can be created by drawing them out from a hat. And you can draw out as many as you want. There cannot be any shortage of political talents using this method. If our political system should only have one party, why waste the time of having so many political party registered? Or can we have a strong Workers Party or a New party with strong and able candidates? Or one party dominance system means only THE PARTY and nothing else can do? Definitely a one party system does not mean a Workers Party govt or any party govt.

Help is along the way

Should we be frightened by it again? We have experienced many helps in the past that we wonder whether we are better off with or without the help. Like it or not, the people will be getting help. We get help in good times and in bad times. And help reaches everyone other than those that are really rich. So should Singaporeans be looking forward for more help? In the current state of the economy, Singaporeans have no choice but to look for help. The richest country in Asia next to Japan and its people are in trouble and waiting for help. This time it will take more than a Tan Kin Lian to help them. What if help does not come? Can we imagine how paradise will become?

One Pinnacle crumbled, one more to come

The announcement of Pinnacle Notes 9 and 10 becoming worthless is another bad news to hit the Singaporean investors. Another 700 investors are hit this time, adding to the earlier lists involving minibonds and high notes and low notes. These are events that have come to fruition and now it is only about picking up the pieces. I am looking at another Pinnacle that may hit the innocent Singaporeans. This one is waiting to happen and can still be avoided. I am referring to the Pinnacle at Duxton. The HDB has happily added another $200k to the prices of the flats on offer in the second round. It claims that it is justifiable as the market prices of similar flats in the same area have gone up much higher. Actually it could be more than $200k if not of the subsidies against market prices. Now, given the recession, people losing jobs, losing money in investments, property prices coming down, there is a high possibility that if these new buyers are going to pay $200k more, they could find themselves paying much more before they move in should the market turn down. So there will be another batch of eager buyers going in with their eyes wide open. Should that happen, it probably may not, Tan Kin Lian would be very busy again. And Hong Lim Park will see more activities and visitors, this time from new home buyers. Would this Pinnacle crumble like the Pinnacle Notes 9 and 10? The flats would not become worthless for sure. But if the price drop is substantial, the new flat owners would not be too happy either.

The ‘lepers’ of Paradise

Were they abandoned? They were frightened, lost, in despair and crying for help. But their voice was lost in the din of heavy traffic and the vibrancy of a city in a hurry. No one heard them. For many who heard, the replies were rather dismissive. They were greedy. They knew what they were in for and they should walk away without an arm or a leg. That is the rule of the game. In their hour of desperation came a shining light. He came not sitting on a golden chariot. Neither did he have any trappings of authority or marks of approval. He stood on the mount in Hong Lim. He spoke and they listened. And they followed him. A leader has risen in adversity. A bond has been built between the lost sheep and the man who is to lead them. He could be the stone that the builder has rejected. And this could become the cornerstone of a new movement. There was a genuine and urgent need for leadership of a different kind, a leadership that is built on the need and helplessness of a people who are looking for one. It was a classic storybook scenario for great men to rise to lead. The natural leaders of the people will come forward to serve, not for money, but to answer the people’s call. This is real leadership.

Confucianism or Confusionism

The ideology of Confucianism is very clear about the roles of people and their relationship in society. Everyone has a proper place and should behave accordingly. The king must behave like a king and be responsible for his kingly roles. The people must be people and go about their lives as the ruled. Also, people must behave responsibly to fellow human beings. The father or mother must be what they are, as responsible parents. Relationships and roles are clearly structured, no overlapping or crisscrossing, no confusion. And no wearing multiple hats of conflict and contradiction. When such conditions exist, society or country will be orderly and peaceful. When the roles are mixed or interwoven, when king acts like commoners, or parents like irresponsible children, or acting as both, everything under heaven will be in turmoil. Applying these to our present polity, I can see only Confusionism instead of Confucianism. What we have today is a govt that is not only the govt but also in business. And businesses, with govt participation, think or sometimes behave like they were the govt. The workers are represented by the Union. The Union is also the govt, or led by the govt. So the govt is the union and is the worker and vice versa. This confused or complex state of beings has completely blurred the respective roles and responsibilities of the organizations. Obviously the design of these organizations to be in this way was cleverly crafted to operate in harmony and efficiency. When things are running smoothly, the system will be greatly admired and appreciated. We have attributed our success and good fortunes to these creations, tripartism, Singapore Inc, privatized public hospitals and privatised public business organizations etc etc. But when things start to go wrong, when there is conflict of interest, people get confused. What are they supposed to do when they are 3 in 1, govt, business and people? The holy trinity is supreme only in the heavenly abode when each can switch roles instinctively with ease without compromising one another. In the earthly dimension, human beans are not that godly to be able to switch their roles efficiently. A time delay often occurs when the incumbent responsible has to decide which hat he wants to wear or should wear. The minibond crisis and the great retrenchment are classic examples of how people got confused in their roles. There are many other examples. Should they act on the side of the govt, or on the side of business, or on the side of the people? Which is the correct role to play? It is Confusionism at its best. In the midst of this confusion, Tan Kin Lian rises to lead the people when many people and organizations should be doing so but not doing. Once the void is filled, the divide gets clearer and wider by the days. Confucianism is good when there is no confusion. Confusionism is troublesome.

Graciousness by examples

We have been talking about being a gracious people for many years with campaigns and leaders teaching and guiding the people on how to be gracious. I think being gracious must be something good and desirable. It speaks a lot about what a person is when the person is being complimented as a gracious person. Straits Times Senior Correspondent, Lim Siew Hua, wrote an article about how gracious McCain was in his concession speech after losing the Presidential Election to Obama. Or was it American graciousness rather than the graciousness of a single man? Al Gore was equally gracious when he lost to George Bush. And that incident was particularly disturbing and veered towards the element of fraud or misdeeds. It would be disastrous if it happens here. So were the other losing Presidential candidates. They all had kind words to say about the victors. But graciousness is not only from the losers. The victors were equally gracious and magnanimous to their defeated opponents. They only have praises for them and could have hugged and kissed them once the election is out of the way. Obama talked about what a wonderful man and hero McCain was. And after the election it begins a healing process when both parties come together as one people. There will be post mortems, but not to find out what wrongs were committed by the other party and to settle scores. No one is going for the butcher knife. That is the graciousness of a people of a great country. But America has more than 200 years of history to learn how to be gracious. It takes time to learn the nice things about life. Learning to be an expert in expletives, in being bad, is easy. In fact it is so natural that no learning is required. To be gracious is a difficult thing to learn, and to be.

The people are ready for minority PM

Not only are the people ready for a minority PM, the political system is also ready for it. We have the GRC to ensure the presence of minority MPs. And we have a system whereby the PM is elected by the cabinet or core leaders which can be counted by a pair of hands or maybe add a pair of legs. These are the wise men and women that decide who is the PM, not the people. The people are not ready? Who says so? Is there a poll being conducted? From the discussion in the media and cyberspace, the majority are all very happy to have a minority as a PM. They all believe in meritocracy and the best man or woman wins. And this feeling for a minority PM is especially more pronounce among the majority as many have already been colour blind after 45 years of being a Singaporeans. Look at the inter racial marriages taking place and you will know that the majority loves the other races more than their own kind, and have no inkling of racial differences. Malay, Indian, European, all are happily married to the majority. And many from the majority have spoken up in favour of a minority PM. And we have tested this with the elected Presidency. The current elected President is a minority and happily accepted by the majority. He is also very popular across the races. In short, Singaporeans are already colour blind. I am not too sure of the new citizens who are still very conscious of their own ethnic identity.

Union should stand up to face more retrenchment

With Singapore's number one bank firing 900 staff, other banks and companies could take the cue and go into full drive to shed the unnecessary fat that they have accumulated during the hazy days of good profits. Time to start trimming the excesses and grow lean. What will the union do in the face of more workers facing the chopping block? Lim Swee Say has made the harshest comment so far on DBS. But what's next? We have more than 10 years in converting our rigid pay structure to a flexible one with built in flexi wage and bonuses just for a day like this. Apparently this has been forgotten and everyone is happily wielding the axe as the cure all of the ills of years of irrational exuberance. There are many other measures that can be implemented other than just axing staff, plus the flexi wage system. There is still a last cut from the CPF. But this is still a long way off. For companies that believe in equal misery and every employee is a member of the big family, that they are caring employers, the first thing to do is to cut bonuses and later wage reduction, early retirement etc. Given the present crisis, some jobs will not be there anymore and this is a unique problem of its own. The unions must have a list of criteria to look at before giving the nod for companies to cut jobs. Are the companies still profitable? What is the bottom line before union will agree to such a drastic measure? Have other alternatives been explored and adopted that are less painful? Would the retrenchment mean that those who stay will enjoy no loss in pay or benefits? And like it has happened before, after a few months, companies that retrenched staff start to hire again and paying huge bonuses that they benefited from the retrenchment. Companies also have a responsibility as a corporate citizen. If everyone is so trigger happy to cut staff, we will have a big unemployment problem in hand and many families are going to have a hard time. It is time that companies, especially those that are 'protected' in some ways be it monopoly or special privileges, connections etc be made to absord some of the pains of the recession and stop thinking that making profit is a guaranteed right of being. It is time that they accept that in bad times, they must absord some losses and look after their employees. The investors were told to take their losses for bad decisions in investing in wrong notes. The union should pass this message through and wave the red flag and cry foul.

The lesser beings are trembling

The lesser beans in Japan and Australia are trembling in fear of short sellings in their stockmarkets. Australia yesterday announced that they would continue to restrict shortsellings in their market. The higher beans in paradise are still so confident that they can manage short selling in the market and are not doing anything about it. Or they are oblivious to the damage that it is causing to the investors here and the viability of the stock market in the long run. We are simply brilliant!

A matter of ethics

How ethical are we? The word ethics becomes popular over the last few weeks. Even the minibond fiasco becomes a case of ethics to some. But that was pushing it a bit far. The minibond issue is a simple commercial issue, a contractual issue, with legal documents. Once you sign on the dotted line accepting what were written in the document, and if it says you will die after reading it, just too bad. Go to courts, they will interpret it legally. There are contractual terms and obligations. Tough huh? Ethics became an issue in the case of donors of human eggs for scientific experiments. These donors can donate but cannot reap monetary benefits from it. Next came the issue of organ donors. They too should not benefit from donating their organs. But the committe back off a little by saying that some compensation can be made as long as they are not worst off or better off. So the pedicab drivers cannot take more for donating their organs. It will be seen as organ trading. But the specialists operating for these organs can charge for the sky and be paid handsomely for it. Both are saving lives. To stretch the argument a little further, can hospitals whose mission is to save lives be allowed to charge as much as they want as long as the patient can afford to pay for it? Is this a matter of ethics or a matter of business? Is it ethical to keep raising prices of everything because it is convenient to do so and the people cannot object to it? It is quite strange to be discussing about ethics and not being ethical to make money when everyone lives by that principle. Make profits, legally or illegally, is an admirable trait. It is called talent here.

FT PM also can consider

I posted about the possibility of a minority PM and issues like keeping foreigners as PRs as well as having different PMs for different ethnic groups. I am not having much of a discussion, or interest shown in them. Is it a case of distinterest or apathy? Anyone agree or disagree with what I have said? I taunted by saying that the 3 Indian ministers are better than the rest of the majority and I thought this will provoke some reactions. Maybe everyone agrees huh? Or maybe not. Maybe all our locals are not good enough and we should be looking at the new citizens, the FTs that are presumably better than the locals and are here to save us and provide us with better genes. The first foreign talent I have in mind is Gong Li. She is making a lot of money and well known internationally. How? At least she makes more money than any of our ministers and should qualify as a supertalent. The next possible candidate is Taksin. A former PM looking for a job and a home. And he has proven himself more than worthy in all areas to be a possible PM. I think he will have no problems blending in here as he has been here many times. And he has money! Hey, how about Vijay Singh? He was here before, like Obama in Indonesia. He should feel very comfortable being one of us. And he is a supertalent as well, making a lot of money and world famous. These are candidates that we can identify with. And there are many more who are already citizens and living with us. I think our talent pool is much richer now with all the FTs who have turned citizens.

Mission confused or mixed up kids

The pricing of HDB flats to market prices is just a natural and convenient process. When market prices go up, prices of HDB flats must go up. But HDB is also kind enough to price them with a market subsidy so that the buyers still pay less than the market price. Is that not fair? Yes it is fair, and very logical and very reasonable too. What about the immediate and long term consequences of higher property prices? The immediate problem to the new buyers is that their money shrinks every time the market price goes up. The young couple could be saving for their $300k dream flat. And they think they have saved enough only to find that money still not enough because the $300k flat is now $500k. Thanks to the appreciation of property prices and HDB’s pricing policies. And thanks to the great subsidy the HDB is giving them. But money still not enough after several years of savings. It is like chasing an illusion. Ok, buy a smaller dream flat. Don’t buy what you cannot afford. That’s life man! Profit is good. Why shouldn’t HDB make the extra profit when they can? Making profit from who and for what? The person who made this clever decision should be rewarded with a $10m bonus. The decision is so brilliant and the profit so clean and easy. But he shall remember that he has just hung a $200k millstone on the neck of the new buyers. And the affected buyers are not going to think kindly of it. Even donating his millions to charity will not be enough to amend the losses or burdens that the people will have to carry. As a govt body, the mission is to serve the people, not simply making more profit from every opportunity. It is an unnecessary decision that HDB need not make. A smaller increase would be much palatable. Instead, the $200k will be seen as an opportunistic decision by a mixed up organisation that forget its main mission. And it will reflect badly on what govt is all about. When the roles of govt and business got entangled and the bearing lost, this is what the people can expect. When the govt thinks it is doing business and when business thinks it is the govt, everything will be turned upside down.

We create our own model and our own problems

During the early days of our independence, we were still suffering from the colonial hangovers. The residence were not all citizens and still lived as if they were British subjects. Home or obligation was to their motherlands. This island was a transitional place, to make a living and to return to their homelands. Do they bother about who became the Prime Minister or was he of a particular race? In fact they were more accustomed to a European face as the political master. And if not, anyone would do. It was not their concern. For those who were eligible to vote, a minority, they could vote whoever they want. No hard feelings, no emotional attachment, no ethnic pride to boot. They knew that they were just migrants, did not belong here. After 45 years of independence and nation building, we have created a fragile nation from the various races. We wanted one people regardless of race and religion. But we also want every race to retain their own identity as their cultural ballasts. The is our paradox. We want to be one but our policies do not turn us into one. Our identity card still says we are of this or that race. Can we then rise above our racial divide and become one people? There was a time when we were moving closer as one people. Then we have this influx of foreigners whom we called new citizens. They came and they accentuate our differences more distinctly. We are back to square one, to redevelop a new people from all over the world. As the number increases, prepare for more diversities and pulls into all directions. If we have let our socio political development to continue without the disruption of the new citizens, the issue of what colour is our PM will be naturalised over time and a good man will be seen as a good man, regardless of race or religion, and will just fit into the shoe without much hullaboo. The more we raise such questions, the more will be the awareness of our differences and the sensitivity of why not a minority PM. Only time can overcome such differences. But if we keep diluting the pot and prevent a Singaporean identity to surface, we only have ourselves to blame. Two possible path forward to alleviate such an issue. Since we have regarded PRs as locals, it may be better to keep them as PRs. Then they will know how to shut up and stop demanding for their rights as a citizen and for their own PMs, like what we were during the colonial time. The other is to continue what we are doing, have more new citizens and be prepared for the new interest groups to demand recognition of their tribes. Maybe we should evolved a system with 4 or 5 PMs each of difference races.