A shitty article written by a lump of shit

Thursday, September 24, 2009 Singapore hopes for an end to its shame They must be spitting razors in Singapore’s corridors of power as I write this. ...... Imagine then the outrage, the fury, the sheer indignation felt in the island city-state at the certainty that their country will now forever more be associated with easily the most blatant example of crookedness in motor racing and one of the worst ever in the history of sport itself. The 2008 Singaporean Grand Prix could hardly have been more execrable. Nelson Piquet Jr. was ordered to crash his car by his bosses at Renault in order to force a safety car episode at a time which so suited his team-mate Fernando Alonso that he went on to win the race. Formula One is now thought about as a mafia-controlled, vile sport where anything – even people’s lives – is expendable. Because of the skulduggery of Flavio Briatore and his loyal lieutenant, Pat Symonds, the first ever night-time Grand Prix – an event which was supposed to showcase the best of Formula One’s glamour and pizzazz - is now linked with the ludicrous new word “Crashgate”. Oh dear. It does not take too much imagination to see that some hapless government official or minister from the appropriate government department was probably summoned to the office of Mr Lee Kuan Yew – who, although well into his eighties, now sits in the Singapore cabinet of his son, the Prime Minister, as Minister Mentor – and had heavy objects hurled at his head. The above is an extract of an article by a joker by the name of Gitau Githinji posting in his blog in UK. And he called himself a writer. I can't imagine that the fraudulent crash by the Renault Team is now a Singapore problem and Singapore should be ashamed of it. What kind of shit did he store in between his ears? His full article is at http://gitaugrandprix.blogspot.com/2009/09/singapore-hopes-for-end-to-its-shame.html

Myth 211 - Public housing cheaper than private properties

Most Singaporeans believe, superficially, that public housing are cheaper than private properties. Is this true? In truth, public housing is expensive like hell. Let me use some simple statistics and formula to prove this. Just like there are many formulas and creative ways of computing affordability of public housing, let me prove that public housing is really expensive relative to privately developed housing. A 5rm HDB flat at $500k for 99 years will cost $5000 a year to the owner to live in the property. A private condo of a similar size at $1.5m for 999 years or freehold, will cost the owner $1500 a year. Can this be true? Of course it is true. A 3000 sq ft landed property could be had for $2.5m or $2500 a year. And this is double the size of a 5 rm flat. The govt and the banks should review their housing and loan policies. I would suggest that the govt build public housing for foreigners and repackage private housing with 999 yrs or freehold lease for Singaporeans. And the banks should allow Singaporeans to repay the loans in 3 or 5 generations or more. A 100 yr or 500 yr loan and the borrower needs only to service the interest computed annually at a special rate like the HDB's. With the 999 yr or freehold property as collateral, and appreciating in prices, the borrower can choose to liquidate when the price doubles or triples, or continue to let the descendants to service the loan repayments. The bank has no fear with an appreciating asset in the bank vault. Such an approach will see Singaporeans owning 999yr/freehold properties while foreigners live in 99 yr public housing. Of course the quality of public housing can be upgraded and the price be according to market pricing. Think about it.

Downgrading the quality of living

Without any hassle or hullabaloo, Singaporeans are downgrading their quality of living and paying more for it. In my personal view, a family of 4 hardlanders, their lives are not much to talk about anyway, but they should deserve a living space of at least 1000 sq ft or 90 sq m. They are human beans too. But this is subjective. Some may think that 600 sq ft should do the trick and some may be more generous and think 1500 sq ft should be more decent. It all depends on what one would consider decent and comfortable. I think going anywhere lesser than $1000 sq ft is going down to living like dogs in a kennel. We are human beans and we need some decent space to live reasonably comfortably. I would suggest that the govt should use this as a guideline in their estate planning and as a yardstick for decent living. And not to forget, the people should not have to strife a life time to pay for such a small space. Yes we have limited space. So don't crowd it by bringing in more foreigners, aspiring a 6m or 8m population. A family of 4 in less than 1000 sq ft is bad. Anyone who thinks that it is good should be prepared to live in one. Please don't use Tokyo or Hongkong as a reference point. They are bad examples. And please don't use Africa to say how lucky we are. We need to live better and in bigger and better space, not in smaller and more expensive space. Call it the people's dream, or aspiration. Does the govt share the people's dream?

GIC profit - another version, another truth

Thursday, September 24, 2009 Who is responsible for GIC's profit? (A tale of 2 news paper report.) Who is responsible for saving GIC's hide? Lee Kuan Yew and his team of fund managers or Barrack Obama and his team of advisers? If the US govt decided not to approach GIC to convert to common stock in Feb, do you think they would have recouped their losses and managed a profit? Their original conversion price was $26.35 not the $3.25 they received in Feb. The Straits Times is bragging that GIC had the foresight to invest in banks that were too big to fail. That is very dangerous- betting on what the Federal government decided to do instead of market and company fundamentals. GIC was lucky this time. But what about UBS? Is it making a profit? GIC should thank their lucky stars that Lehman collapsed before Citi. The sudden collapse of Lehman made the Federal govt realise that they had to intervene and bailout the banks.... The above was copied from an article posted in http://singaporeanskeptic.blogspot.com/. It presented another version of the truth.

China's spokesman said...

China will never let Singapore draw away Chinese gamblers to the island. China's spokesman Steve Wynn said this when addressing the press on his IPO listing in Hongkong. Below is the detail of the AFP report. Wednesday, September 23, 2009 Wynn: China & Macau Govt Will Never Let Spore Draw Away Chinese Gamblers AFP HONG KONG — Las Vegas mogul Steve Wynn said Wednesday that China has relaxed travel curbs for Guangdong residents visiting Macau, giving a boost to the Hong Kong listing of his casino group next month. "It is a macro-economic consideration by the central government," he told a press conference. Asked if he was concerned that Singapore, which will see its first casino project open by end of this year, will draw Chinese gamblers away from Macau, Wynn said it was unlikely. "Will the government of Macau and the government of China let it happen? I don't think so."

Obama's speech in UN on corporate excesses

This is the gist of what Obama said at the UN on corporate excesses, cheats and corruptions in high places. 'And that means setting new rules of the road and strengthening regulation for all financial centres, so that we put an end to the greed, excess and abuse that led us into disaster, and prevent a crisis like this from ever happening again.' We have been copying corporate America like a little twin. Would we continue to copy America and start to tighten our regulations, or we are in such a comfortable position that we can sail along as it is? Maybe we can. We don't have that kind of excesses and corruption in the scale of corporate America. We don't have bankers paying themselves hundreds of millions. We don't have banks and insurance companies going down. We don't have a housing crisis. I think we are doing very well. Carry on.

GIC proven critics wrong

Splashing across the front pages of our major newspapers is the news that GIC has made $2.3b profit after selling half of its stakes in Citigroup. And it is sitting on a similar profit on paper, maintaining its 5% share in the bank. 'GIC chief investment officer Ng Kok Song said the "good outcome" was down to judgement calls which "turned out to be right".' Other anaylsts are also showering praises on how GIC managed to turned around and '...getting out of jail free.' All the critics who disparaged GIC and Temasek for buying high and selling low will now have to eat their own words. They have been proven wrong. The strategy and investment decisions of GIC and Temasek were well conceived and right from the beginning. And with more profits coming in, it is time to make more investment decisions.

Whose view matters?

The govt, or Mah Bow Tan said in Parliament that HDB flats are affordable. HDB also said so and explained why they are affordable. The Straits Times went one step further with its reporters making in depth analysis and reports on why HDB flats are affordable. And in today's Editorial, it again confirmed that they are affordable, and those who insist that they are not affordable have only themselves to blame. They are unyielding, selfish, suffered from an odd mentality that new towns are 'ulu', insensible, obstinates and quirks. On the other side of the fence the voice of unhappiness and grief is getting louder. And there is now a petition by the unhappy, insensible, obstinates and quirks calling for signatures to support their perceived grievances. The petition now has more than 900 signatures. The HDB flats being affordable side is obviously right according to their logics and reasons. And they are getting very annoyed by these unreasonable demands of the people. Are the unhappy voices unreasonable and illogical? Officially it is. So, no matter how many signatures were collected, their cause is a lost cause. Their views, their interest, their unhappiness are not important. They don't matter.

Petition on high HDB prices

There is an online petition seeking support and signatures at http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/lower-hdb-valuations-or-build-more-affordable-hdb-housing-for-singaporeans More than 850 signatures have been collected over the last few days.

So many complaints about high HDB prices!

It is so pathetic, so ridiculous, for Singaporeans to be complaining about high HDB prices. They cost only a few hundred thousands, so cheap, so affordable. Why are Singaporeans making so much noise for cheap quality housing? I just visited The Sail over the weekend. A unit with the equivalent floor area of a 5rm flat is asking for $3m to $4m. And all sold out. What is a few hundred thousands by the way? Singaporeans should know the real market prices of quality housing and be grateful that they are getting HDB flats at such affordable prices. Incidentally when I was there, there was hardly any hardup Singaporeans in sight. Oh my host was one of the rare Singaporean specie that could afford to buy a unit there. Be grateful huh.

Ah Mah and Ah Kong's Singlish

How many of you have been entertained by the Singlish of Ah Mah and Ah Kong? It is hilarious if one is kind, difficult and irritating for the less tolerant, and outright outrageous and stupid for the Anglophiles. For the latter, Ah Mah and Ah Kong are simply idiotic, can't speak simple English. They should be kept away from the polished crowd of sophistication and well cultured WOGs. How much different is Ris Low from Ah Kong and Ah Mah? I am waiting to read more letters to attack Ris Low for her poor command of the English Language. Let the campaign continues to drive Ris Low into hiding. Make her feel ashame, huh? We are the sikit atas Singaporeans. We spaek good Inglish. If you cannot spaek good Inglish, stay away from us. I shall use my control of the blog/forum to attack such poor Inglish speakers.

Notable quotes by Teo Chee Hian

'Religion is a force for good, and it's important that it does not become exclusive and that it reaches out to other groups and communities to build strong social cohesion.' Teo Chee Hian I also say the same truth everyday. So do many believers, that religion is good. This is the conventional truth, a populist belief that ignores the empirical and historical evidences of how evil and destructive religion was, is and can be. Anyone who thinks that religion is all goodness, please read the content of the scriptures and at historical records on what religion actually did to the non believers and also to their believers. Heard of the Inquisition and the role of religion in the conquest of the world of savages? The truth is ugly and it is better not to tell the truth.

Top brands offering subsidies

Pravda, Blurberry, Lois Vittoon, Armaine are selling so well that they could sell their products at any price. The market demand is so good that using market pricing mechanism will mean astronomical profits. The higher they priced their products the greater will be the demand. As a goodwill gesture to reward their unthinking and faithful followers, they are going to sell their products at a discount. But discount is a bad word. So they are going to adopt a different promotion strategy. They cannot sell their products at lower prices of course. It will affect the value of their products the buyers will feel like suckers. So they are going to call it 'subsidy'. For one month only, all their products will be sold at subsidised prices. The huge price tag will remain, or inflated higher, to give their customers a feeling that they are getting more subsidies. This promotion is only available in paradise island.

A $10 million solution

The govt is spending $10m to integrate new citizens and PRs into our system. With such an expensive approach to solving this problem it is only a matter of time before the newcomers find themselves being embraced by the locals. And if $10m is not enough to resolve the issue, maybe another $20m or $30m should do the trick. For the govt to spend so much money on an apparently non issue is puzzling. Or is there genuine problem in the integration of the newcomers? Or the locals are not accepting them or the newcomers not making any effort to integrate with the locals? I don't think the govt of the past bothered or spent a cent more to integrate the early migrants when they arrived. Everyone would have to find their way to survive and live with the locals or early arrivals. There was this natural tendency to live and let live, to adapt and accommodate each other with the least resistance. And those migrants were mostly poor and illiterate. Maybe poor and illiterate are easier to please. Today the migrants were talents, well educated and highly praised. Would these be the source of their problems in adapting and integrating with the lesser talented locals? Or maybe the locals could not meet the expectations of the new talents or feel inferior to them. So, how should the money be used to get the two to be nice to one another? Give treats to the new to make them less snobbish and be kinder to their less able locals? Or to give to the locals to be nice to the new migrants? For the latter, maybe a reward system will expedite the mixing of the two groups. $100 for making a new friend of a new citizen. $1000 for 10. And an award of $10k for the most friendly local who have made the most new friends among the new citizens. Can we really expect people to make love with each other overnight just because the govt says so? We are having so many foreigners in our midst and the novelty of meeting people from other countries is turning into an irritation to some and a pain to others. A few at a time may not present any problem and the locals may go all out to make them welcomed, out of curiosity and being helpful. When the newcomers come in hoards and become almost a nightmare, everywhere, the feeling is indifferent and uncomfortable. And if the newcomers are overbearing or demanding, they can only expect the locals to reciprocate, not necessary violence, but keeping a cold distance. It is not uncommon for the locals to feel that they are being invaded by aliens in the trains or buses. And the aloofness or unfamiliar characteristics or traits of newcomers may rub the wrong way. I think more money will definitely help to resolve this problem.

HDB's version of subsidy, affordability and fair prices

Today's Sunday Times has a little article to explain how HDB determines the prices of flats and I believe this must be HDB's version. I quote, "A new flat's equivalent market price is first determined by looking at the recent transacted prices of resale units nearby. Adjustments are then made to account for factors like location, finishes of the flat and other attributes The price reflects the flat's value at the point of purchase and is what people are willing to pay on the open market for such a unit. The HDB then sells it at a significant discount, which is the subsidy given by the govt. The HDB sells flats base on market price instead of cost as this is the fairest way of pricing new flats. A market base pricing approach ensures that all groups of buyers enjoy similar discounts to the market and would be fair to those who are buying other HDB flats today...." There you have it, the definition of fairness, subsidy and market pricing are all there. And this is not only the HDB's definition, it is also the current govt's definition. They have meticulously come to these definitions as the fairest and best for the citizens. Like it or not, agree with it or not, you just have to accept it. I wonder if they ever consider that the high prices of resale flats is also contributed by some who got a windfall from enbloc sales, by foreigners and by some who are urgently in need of a flat? Would any other worthy political party offer another set of definitions as their party's stand to challenge these definitions in the next election? Any change to the present definitions must only come from an alternative party. So far the alternative parties are not offering anything on this as far as I know of. The people just have to live with the govt they voted in and accept what the govt considers as the best it can offer. The sad thing is that we don't have a worthy alternative party with a clear set of party manifesto to offer to the people, yet. Or a group of passionate leaders with fire in their belly to contest the election to serve the people's best interests that is different from the current govt.

The Bizarre Behaviour of Singaporeans - V2.1

The Bizarre Behaviour of Singaporeans - observations made by a German national who has lived in Singapore for 9 years. This same article which I posted on 11 Aug 09 in this blog is now posted in Tan Kin Lian's blog and attributed to a German national who has lived here for 9 years. I tried to insert a comment in Kin Lian's blog but it was not shown. Anyway, Kin Lian, if you are reading this, you may want to correct the slight error. Cheers. PS. I am Singaporean and not German.

The assassination of Ris Low

It started of as a guise, projected as good humour and clean fun to poke at the way Ris Low, the newly crowned Miss Singapore World, speaks English. It was so innocent and with good intention, that Ris Low should speak good English or else.... Now part of the deception is off. The campaign to assassinate her continues. The ST reported that 40 letters were received on Ris Low's poor command of English and wow, 11 writers were quoted. I am now wondering how many letters were written to ST on the high cost of property prices. But 40 letters must be a big sampling of the voices to support the case Ris Low is not fit to represent Singapore. On face value this is a lot when all national issues probably got a handful of letters. But of course no such statistics were given except for this case. ST is just doing its objective role of reporting the groundswell. Who is mastermind behind this character assassination? What is his true intent or identity? Is speaking good English a criteria in this beauty contest? If it is, then this requirement must be stated clearly from the start and contestants must be interviewed to screen them out of the race. Obviously not. If I can remember, contestants from non English speaking countries can choose to have a translator. Ris Low can ask for a translator and speak in Mandarin or dialect or Singlish and get it translated. Why not when Japanese, Spanish, or whatever contestants can do so? Anyway, what's so big deal about a beauty contest when the contestants won by default as the true beauty of a nation will never stand out to be chosen? It is just a little fun and fancy contest. And I agree with what Woffles Wu said as quoted in ST. Go for it Ris Low. Be yourself and not what the pretenders expect you to be. The way you speak is what you are. And if you want to speak the best you can, choose the medium that you are comfortable with and not be forced to use a foreign tongue. I hope the nasties will not continue with the attack and go after her schools, teachers and her families. The vibes are disgusting. Hiding behind the veil of good intention to destroy another person is low down behavior. Will the mastermind behind this saga owns up?

Temasek's Report card briefing

Loh Chee Kong's front page report(Today paper) on the Temasek briefing highlighted one pertinent point. Temasek's investment is for the long term, for the long long term, and it should be judged on the long long term. How I wish Temasek can park a few million with me for long term investment. The other point is Temasek's defence on not fully disclosing its financial position to avoid exposing itself to its competitors. So, how much of the numbers are real if there is this 'hidden element' in its report? Is the total sum disclosed as under Temasek's management, all $172b, the true amount or the full sum? How much is Temasek really managing since the truth cannot be disclosed? I also read Alvin Foo's report in the ST. It pointed that the worst drop in value in Temasek's holding was contributed by the 10 largest Singapore listed companies. This amount was $30b out of the $55b decline. This was huge compared to the $18b lost due to the top 10 foreign listed companies. My suggestion is for Temasek not to invest in local companies as the risk is so high. Sell off its local assets, like selling off the power stations and invest in foreign assets which are statistically safer and the loss would be smaller.

A big challenge today!

Malaysia has staked its claim on 5 popular dishes as Malaysia' national dishes. These include Nasi Lemak, Chicken Rice, Bak Kut Teh, Chilly Crab and Laksa. It was like the British claiming that they founded Singapore. Ok, now that the heat is on, let me claim something for Singapore before they are claimed by other countries. I hereby stake these claims, and without exceptions, unconditionally, that these are our national dishes: 1. Mee Goreng 2. Mee Rebus 3. One Ton Mee 4. Roti John 5. Rojak 6. Satay And for deserts, 1. Chendol 2. Bo Bo Cha Cha 3. Ice Kacang And for drinks, 1. Teh Tarik 2. Teh O 3. Kopi O 4. Kopi C 5. Ice Kosong Oh, maybe I shall defer Teh Tarik to Malaysia since they have experimented it in space and made it world famous. I was thinking of adding Bubble Tea but Li Ao will call us stupid again. And how can I forget Mee Siam. This must be truly Singaporean. No one would dare to challenge this unique dish of ours. I will find some time to write a piece and submit it to Wikipedia to make it official. Now, what is so challenging about this challenge of the day? I am hoping that someone will make a more hilarious claim than mine. My only concern is that this may trigger a diplomatic spat.

Calibrating benefits for citizens

It may be a bit late but better than never. Vivian is taking the cue from Hsien Loong and will be looking at the benefits that citizens should have over non citizens. And yes, membership will have its privileges. And all the ministries and stat boards will also be looking into it to make citizens feel worthy of being citizens, recognition of their responsibilities and sacrifices. Who says kpkb in cyberspace has no use and the govt will not listen? The voices in cyberspace will only grow louder if they are ignored. Any govt that believes in serving the people cannot ignore the voices in cyberspace and just listen to their own contraptions and feedbacks. Like it or not, the noise in cyberspace is real, though at times unpleasant to the ears. We are hurt! Oops, I mean heard!