Be tough to Singapore!

This mentality was stamped in the Mahathir era and has been embedded deeply in the minds of those who have worked with him. Anwar is no exception. And his immediate response to Najib's agreement with Hsien Loong was that Najib was soft. Any Malaysian leader that signed or come to any agreement with Singapore must be soft. Then what is being tough? Being tough means never to sign any agreement with Singapore. If Singapore asks for 10% Malaysia must ask for 20%. If Singapore asks for 20% Malaysia must ask for 40%. The greatest example was the price of water to Singapore. It was a few cents and Mahathir asked for $3 for a starting price, I could not remember the exact figure. And when Singapore tried to negotiate, the price was raised to more than $10 and even higher everytime Singapore try to negotiate for a more reasonable price. This is what tough meant to Mahathir. Actually it is not tough. It is sheer stupidity. It is an approach that says he would not want to sign any agreement unless it is on his terms. In any business or bilateral agreement, how could any party think that an agreement can be signed on a one sided terms. To go forward, to negotiate any deals, the premise must be that both parties are comfortable with the deal and see benefits in them in an equitable manner. And that was exactly what happened when Najib and Hsien Loong met. And a deal was done. So, in the eyes of Anwar and Mahathir, and those who have been programmed to be tough, Najib must be soft. How to go forward like dat? PS. The best part is that after signing every deal that they had thoroughly studied in details before signing, they will come back and say they had a raw deal. That they were cheated.

Anwar dismisses Najib for being soft

The Pakatan Rakyat defacto leader said that the agreement which was announced yesterday raised concerns that Malaysia is seen to be too “submissive” in catering to Singapore’s demands. “There is a tendency that in the policy of Najib, like in the case of Barack Obama, he seems to be too submissive, agreeing, and there is a lot of concern. “Why is it we have now a Prime Minister that surrenders too easily?” asked Anwar. The above paragraph was posted in The Malaysian Insider in an article. 'Anwar flays ‘submissive’ Najib in Singapore deal' By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal May 25, 2010 The impression I get from Anwar's comment is that Malaysian leaders must act tough and play hard ball with Singapore. Otherwise they are seen to be soft, unfit to be Malaysian leaders. This is the underlying confrontational mindset that is prevailing since the Mahathir's time and is still existing today. Anwar's words are a revelation, that within closed doors, they must have been telling each other so. Be tough to Singapore leaders. With this kind of confrontational and aggressive mindset, it is tough to negotiate and come to any kind of agreement. No matter how good a deal, how fair a deal is, any agreement will be seen as a sell out, as being weak. So how to go ahead? Signing any agreement with Singapore is weakness. Signing any agreement with Singapore is signing a bad deal and to their disadvantage. When will they be able to sign an agreement that is fair or to their advantage? When can they sign an agreement and be seen as being tough? Strange mentality.

Concerns of a Harvard don

Cheong Suk Wai interviewed Harvard business administration professor Robert Pozen on his take of the world financial system. The professor was an advisor to George Bush and also chairman of MFS Investment Management, a mutual fund of US$200 billion in assets. The professor came under criticism for recommending that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac ‘be given a good shake up’. When asked by Suk Wai on ‘What should we be focusing on to prevent, or at least anticipate, future financial fallouts’, these are his replies. 1. When there are very high levels of leverage in the system, that means everyone is running for the exit at the same time.(Spelt derivatives) 2. When you have foreign money supporting a real estate boom, that creates fragility because such money is always hotter than local money. (Be prepare for a quick cash out and a run on the property market) 3. Mismatches between assets and liabilities: If your financing is highly dependent on short term financing against long term assets, you’re vulnerable to liquidity crises. (Careful when taking big loans on properties and depending on salaries to pay) 4. Beware of financial innovations that grow extremely rapidly without proper supervision.(Spelt property bubbles, derivatives, CDOs, toxic products) 5. If you have fixed exchange rate, lots of pressure will build up to make it disintegrate in a short time as opposed to a flexible exchange rate, which goes up and down. The professor also commented on the need for truly independent and professional directors and that at most one should sit in 3 boards to be effective. The concerns of the professor are nothing new as the professionals, govt and academics are all privy to the indiscretions and the flaws existing in the current system. Our little system in paradise is also exposed to the same flaws and risks and it is just a matter of time before they explode in our faces. Do we have the political will and ethical responsibility to clean up the mess before it is too big to do anything about it? The only thing I disagree with the professor is point 5 on fixed exchange rate. The pressure building up is caused by the manipulation of speculative funds and govts like the US who are thrashing it to hide the weaknesses in their own system. A fixed exchange rate under the present condition is much safer and stable and would not be attacked by unscrupulous big funds. It also allows govts to manage the exchange rates purposefully and orderly.

Land Acquisition Act

Mahathir thought he could squeeze Singapore's balls by letting the Tanjong Pagar Railway Station to rot and be the eyesore in the heart of Singapore's business district. He forgot that the govt could throw the Land Acquisition Act on it and take it back with a little compensation like what it had done to acquire land for HDB flats and other infrastructure projects. If it was done, what Malaysia could get, going by the going rates for land acquisition will be peanuts. Of course nothing was mentioned on this option while we were still dependent on the water supply and water collection plants in Skudai. Now that this is no longer a trump card, and we could do without, using the Land Acquisition Act could be a matter of time. For good bilateral relations, it is good that we don't have to come to that and create more bitterness and animosities. Now we have a good ending to a fairy tale and they live happily ever after.

The dynamic duo of Ah Huay and Ah Lian

I can still recalled the infamous maiden speech of Ah Lian in Parliament about digging jamban and pangsai. If I am not mistaken it was to tell the opposition that this govt is not one that would wait for people queuing up to pangsai then start digging jambans. This is a highly strung govt of super talents, far sighted, proactive and always planning ahead, to anticipate problems before they appear. I would like Ah Lian to propose that Ah Huay make that speech again to remind everyone that this govt is still the same govt that would not dig jambans frantically only after people screaming to pangsai. And Ah Lian should also suggest that the speech be framed and hung on the walls of Parliament to remind everyone what this govt stands for. The combination of Ah Huay and Ah Lian can be a powerful act to make sure that nobody falls asleep in his job.

Magic Najib , awesome!

No one would believe that Najib was able to pull the Malayan Railway relocation project off so easily and quickly. For him to reach an agreement with Hsien Loong is like David Copperfield performing his majic and his audience staring in disbelief. The Malayan Railway was Mahathir’s pet subject in how to skin Singapore. Mahathir knew how badly Singapore wanted that piece of land for redevelopment and irritatingly refused to come to any agreement no matter what. It was simply no go. Najib has only been a PM for less than a year. And on the home front he has made many overtures and decisions that would give Mahathir a big nightmare. With Mahathir breathing down his neck and watching him like a hawk, and with a team of ultras in his cabinet waiting to pounce on him to prove that they are bluer than blue, any PM would be walking on trip wires. The agreement with Singapore, no matter how attractive and beneficial, is bound to come under attack before the ink is dry. For Najib to be able to walk away with it and smilingly is a sign that he is in control, whether by persuasion or sheer leadership, he must have his cabinet behind him. The agreement can be the most attractive and favourable to Malaysia in many counts, but if the cabinet is not behind him, it will never be accepted. If the cabinet is still stuck with the baggages of Mahathir, no Najib magic will work. I am still in a state of shock and disbelief that it is happening. And this bodes well for bilateral ties and economic cooperation between the two countries. It is a gigantic step forward and both sides can only benefit with more cooperations and joint ventures, bilateral or springing into the international arena. When both sides are willing to put aside the historical baggages and look ahead, there will be many more magical moments to come. There will be no need for any formal loose federation when the spirit of cooperation is there. Many of the unnecessary barriers could be lowered or remove to facilitate mutually beneficial activities. In Najib there is a new vibrancy in Malaysia. His mind is set on moving ahead rationally, for economic growth and development instead of fighting the shadows of past animosities. The unfruitful and unproductive politicking of the past is history. He has many tasks ahead and is wasting no time to kick start Malaysia into another economic powerhouse. If he is successful, he will easily outdo what Mahathir had done in the last 30 years in a fraction of that time. Now that the agreement has been signed, Najib is going home to face his doomsayers and the recalcitrants who would be pulling all the plugs under him. Would he be strong enough to stand on his feet and carry his dreams forward, intact?

From missionary to mercenary

Historically we have seen many beans answering to a calling to become missionaries. Many stayed that way throughout their lives, living frugally and accepting whatever that was provided for them. The monks lived off the alms while the priests lived off the parish or the church. These are devout believers with a heard of gold. Modern days have changed many things. Even monks who took vows to abstain from material comfort and wealth could defend their lavish lifestyles on grounds that things have changed, values have changed. Modern living and the pursuit of material well beings are compatible with monks and missionaries. Men and women with hearts of gold easily succumbed to modern lifestyles and became men and women with minds for gold. Charitable organisations, religious or secular, are not spared. The missionaries could not resist the temptation of greed and turn themselves into very rich mercenaries, and still claiming to be to a calling. They still wear their robes and badges of honour like the early missionaries who toiled for a cause without asking for more. Indeed time has changed, people have changed, moral and ethics have also shifted to new grounds. Hearts of gold are now minds full of gold.

Intelligence Report: US authorised sinking - By Freeman Cain

A classified independent intelligence analysis of a deadly torpedo attack on a South Korean warship concludes that the US authorised the torpedo assault, according to senior officials who cautioned that the assessment was based on their sense of the political dynamics there rather than hard evidence. The officials said they were increasingly convinced the US ordered the corvette Cheonan sunk to help secure the continued presence of American soldiers in South Korea and their bases in Okinawa. An official involved in the assessment said: 'There is very little doubt, based on what we know about the current state of the American leadership and the military.' Both the conclusion and the timing of the assessment could be useful to the US as it rallies world support against Pyongyang....Another WMD justification in the making. So far, the US and South Korean leaders have been careful never to link Mr Kim in public to the attack, which killed 46 crews. Officials said that was partly due to the absence of hard evidence, but also largely to avoid playing into America's hands by casting one of the worst attacks since the 1953 armistice as another piece of lore about the Kim family taking on South Korean and the West to justify the American presence. The American's propaganda surrounding that imagery has been used to sustain two generations of American military presence in South Korea and Japan, and the leading theory in the independent intelligence community is that the Cheonan's sinking was part of an effort to extend the American military presence. North Korea has denied involvement despite the presentation of forensic evidence last Thursday - including parts of a torpedo found in the wreckage - that experts from three countries said established the torpedo was launched from a North Korean submarine. Although officials would say little about what led them to conclude the US was directly involved, one factor appeard to be intelligence that Hilary Clinton was in Japan on a closed door discussion with the Japanese on the sinking. Both have vested interests to raise the tension in the Korean peninsula to justify the continued semi colonisation of South Korea. PS: The above article is an adulterated version of an article by David E Sanger in NYT and reprinted in the mypaper today. I just replaced words like North Korea and Kim Jong Il to the US, Americans and Clinton. How could an intelligence report coming out at this time and based on nothing but gut feel deserved such a prominent exposure and to be read by the gullible readers? _________________

I am Marxist, declared Dalai Lama

When the Dalai Lama unashamely called himself a Marxist, believing in the goodness of Marxism which he said, 'has moral ethics, whereas capitalism is only how to make money' it heralds a new tomorrow on the ascend. The moral degradation and irresponsibility of western Capitalism is acknowledged by the premier institutions that manufactured countless numbers of production line MBAs that are helping to destroy the world's financial institutions. Harvard's admission of guilt and wrongdoing is their planned introduction of a hippocratic code mirrored along the medical schools. It is meant to remind their graduates that making money immorally, indiscriminately and devoid of ethical considerations is simply bad. But many laughed at it as another meaningless gimmick that would not change the direction of things. Hippocratic code or hypocritic code, the message is clear. The western model of Capitalism and the western institutions of learning need a thorough revamp and what is sorely missing is the element of moral responsibility or ethics. When the Asian financial crisis hit, the western overlords landed in their shining chariots from heaven with a cane in their hands. Asian govts were treated with disgust as simpletons who could not manage their own finances, and harsh words and actions were the order of the day. But they say all things come in full circle. Now we have seen how the Americans messed up their country and the world despite the strings of top financial institutions churning out the 'best' financial gurus and working for the system. Now we have the European financial crisis when they mismanaged at a scale no less than the Americans and much worst that the simpleton Asian govts. What was noticeable is that there were no harsh words and forcing the sick govts to sign on the dotted line for recommendations to treat their woes. And the best part is that they are only pushing their problems to their future generations to pay. The bad part is that they have nothing to pay except for a few who strike black gold in the North Sea or the Gulf of Mexico. The Asians were lucky as countries like Indonesia, Malaysia and the Phillipines have abundant natural resources to pay for their temporary excesses. For naive Asian countries that swear by the western economic model, it is time to wake up and reassess where they are heading. It is like the communist doctrine of thesis, anti thesis and synthesis. Western Capitalism was the anti thesis of Communism. A new anti thesis to western Capitalism is needed to reach a synthesis. Blind following and apeing of the western model is inviting the same danger and awaiting the same fate.

The Missionaries

As Dr Goh's body lays in Parliament House awaiting a state funeral, the people came from near and far to pay their last respects and tributes to a great and honourable man who had done so much for so little for his country. All the words were of the works that he had conceived and done. They remembered the times they met him when he was serving as a minister and busily doing what he had to do. And words would not be enough to describe all the things that Goh Keng Swee had done in his ministries. One word was starkingly absent. No one mentions anything about sacrifice. No one tells how men of his time, including senior civil servants, slogged through days and nights just to get the job done. If I can recollect, even when he was a minister, he had never complained about the sacrifice he made for the people and country. For he did not need to justify for himself or what he was doing. There were plenty of works to be done and they went about it like missionaries. A calling, a duty to the people and the country. And they did a damn good job for it without the glamour and the trappings of extravagant rewards to go with it. They were men and women on a mission. Dr Goh was an exceptional missionary.

Twisted logic of high finance

Attacking a country’s currency, stock market or financial system, if done by a country is tantamount to a hostile act, an act of war. Done by a bunch of fund managers, it is ok. They can bring down the currency or financial system of a country and it is considered legitimate, part and parcel of investment strategies! And sovereign countries allow this to happen and could not do anything about it. Who are these fund managers? A bunch of crooks, or are they a cloak and dagger operation of some govts? The latter seems easier to handle while a bunch of crooks are free to do whatever damage they could to bring a country to its knee, to bankrupt countries. And the US is accusing China as a currency manipulator for controlling the exchange rate of Yuan. They want China to free the Yuan to allow the crooks to manipulate it under the guise that if it has a weakness they have the right to bring it down. With the crooks operating as an irresponsible wolf pack out to destroy countries and their financial system, it is better that countries return to the fixed exchange rate system to protect themselves. Mahathir in this sense has done the right thing. China is also doing the right thing to protect itself. Let the West and their freedom to act, irresponsibly, to destroy themselves at their own time. But Obama knows that this is wrong and trying to curb the madness in the finance industry inside the US.

How much did we subsidise tertiary education?

In my article yesterday, the British universities are charging EU and their own citizens a flat fee of 3,290 pounds and international students at 21,400 pounds. In our case, we charge our citizens $7000 against $11,000 for international students. Two points to make from this comparison. The cost of education in British universities are much cheaper than ours as relatively their cost of living are higher. The second point is that they make international students pay 7 times what their citizens paid. This means that if the cost of education is double what their citizens are paying, guessing only, then each international students could be subsidizing 50% of the tuition fee of 5 UK/EU students. It is a case of looking after their citizens first. Let's take a look at the tuition cost and subsidies as published by the NUS website. For an Arts and Social Science course, the grant or subsidy is $19,000. This plus the $7,000 fee the students are paying will make up the full tuition cost, ie $26,000. And if we apply the same formula for the cost of education in the UK, the British are actually charging international students the full fees, with practically no subsidies. What about our international students. If the full cost is $26,000 and our international students are paying $11,000, then they should be receiving a subsidy of $15,000. According to the NUS website, the full fee for international students is $30,000 and they too get a $19,000 grant. I am not going to quibble why the full fee between citizen and non citizen has a $4,000 difference. But why do we need to offer international students a $19,000 grant? Could we charge international students a little more to subsidise our local students like what the British are doing? Of course we can't charge them the same 21,400 pounds or about $42,800 pa. We may also be world class but no foreigners will want to pay the same for a Singapore education if they could get a British one. Still we could raise it to maybe $15,000 or $20,000 if our education is really world class, and at a 50% discount to what the British universities are charging, it must still be a bargain. We could then charge our citizens much lesser, subsidised by international students instead of the govt subsidising international students to a tune of $19,000.

Time to arrest the big fund managers for treason

I just read this from the Telegraph. From Telegraph “Germany’s ‘desperate’ short ban triggers capital flight to Switzerland” A year ago, Germany’s financial regulator BaFin warned that the toxic debts of the country’s banks would blow up “like a grenade” once hidden losses from the credit crisis caught up with them. An internal memo at the time showed that BaFin feared write-offs might top 800bn (£688bn), twice the reserves of Germany’s financial institutions. Nobody paid much attention. But the regulator’s shock move on Tuesday night to stop short trading on banks, insurers, eurozone bonds as well as a ban credit default swaps (CDS) on sovereign debt has left markets wondering whether the slow fuse on Germany’s banking system has finally detonated. BaFin spoke of “extraordinary volatility” and said CDS moves were jeopardising “the stability of the financial system as a whole”. It is unsettling that the BaFin should opt for such drastic measures a week after EU leaders thought they had overawed markets with a 750bn rescue package and direct purchases of Greek, Portuguese and Spanish debt by the European Central Bank. BaFin’s heavy-handed move seems to proclaim that the rescue has failed.... The big fund managers think they are very smart in shorting the Euro or any stocks or currencies in a big way to make money. Such action is an equivalent to a run on the banks. It is a deliberate attempt in creating fear which could precipitate into a crisis while govts and regulators are trying to solve the problem. Those involved in such activities should be arrested for treason. The sentiment in the stock market is now so bad that everyone is staying out. The cumulative actions of the big speculators will destroy the world's financial system if not put to a stop. They are criminals!

How much is our world class education?

Singapore citizens pay about $7000 tuition fee per year at NUS for year 2010/11. International students pay about $11,000. We consider ourselves very lucky to receive a tertiary education in one of the top universities in the world. The tuition fee for Imperial College of London, the top 3 university in UK and ranked 5th in the world by Times is 3,290 pounds for UK and EU citizens. For international students the fee is 21,400 pounds for an Engineering course. Am I right to say that a UK or EU citizen is paying lesser for a world class education in Imperial College than our citizens in NUS? The exchange rate is S$2 to a pound. In fact practically all the universities in UK is charging the same tuition fee for UK and EU citizens.

Going after short and naked sellers

If you are short and naked, and a seller in stocks, the German Stock Exchange will ban you from trading. You can be short but not naked, or naked but not short. Or better to be tall. The action by the German Stock Exchange to curb wild sellings led to another rout yesterday. Edward Krudy reported in New York that the SEC was treating the symptoms instead of the cause of the failures of the stock exchange. The stop gap measures of having circuit breakers are not dealing with the cause of the big plunge in the market. They must go after the high frequency traders. All of them are treating the symptoms and not the cause. The real cause is the problem of being too big. In the past, local syndicates were considered too big to manipulate the stock markets and were watched like a hawk. They were monitored and policed very closely to prevent them from doing mischiefs and harm. But these syndicates are like a little mouse compare to the hedge funds and investment banks with their billions to thrash around. These are the biggest threats to the stability of stock markets, currencies and countries. They could ruin them by their concerted effort to sell down markets or currencies and destroy a country and its economy. Then the investors have suddenly realised that Goldman Sachs was making billions of profits while their clients were losing billions following their recommendations. Why? It's elementary. Conflict of interest. Investments banks must not be allowed to make recommendations and trade for themselves and their clients. Period. All the regulators must wake up from their stupor to rein in the big funds and banks from their destructive selling and buying activities. The big funds have a huge unfair advantage and are hundreds of times more dangerous and destructive than the local small syndicates. Would anything be done? I doubt so. And stock markets across the world will continue with their roller coaster rides, dictated by the big funds. And the victims are the small innocent investors.

MRT jumpers, a cheap and easy solution

Another jumper missed the train, or the train missed the jumper. The jumper was on the track but train stopped in time. Jumper hauled up and sent to hospital with minor injuries. Looks like the jumpers are ever ready to smash at the train as long as the sophisticated screen doors are not installed. The multi million dollar system is still waiting for full delivery, or maybe SMRT are monitoring its effectiveness before commissioning the whole works. Actually a cheaper and easier solution can be found and be implemented instantly. Why can’t the trains be made to slow down to a speed that would not kill as it near the station? Is that so difficult to implement? How much time will it lost, 10 sec per station? The little time lost can be made up with a small increase in speed on its way to the next station, and no time would be lost at all. And once the jumpers know that the train speed is slow enough not to kill, they would not risk jumping down to get injured only to live. See, no need to spend multi million dollars and complicated system. And there is a high recurrence and maintenance cost to foot in the long run. Just a little procedural change and training were all that is needed. This is common sense and the same principle is being applied to road speed. Why so many roads are limited at 50 kph and the expressways at 90 kph? Safety, and to minimise road accidents of course. A slowing down of train speed before hitting the station could solve the jumper problem so easily and cheaply. They better pay me for consultancy fee. I don’t offer ingenious ideas for free.

The shame of the diplomatic corp

Is Silviu Ionescu a typical example of the character and integrity of a diplomat? If he is, then the whole diplomatic corp is a sham. How could a man of such low integrity and despicable conduct be chosen by a country to be their representative? And presumably he is the best that Romania can find. It is either their system is so flawed, or the quality of their civil servants is suspect. And if they do not bring him to justice it will reflect very badly on what Romania is all about. On the diplomatic corp here, what are their views and stand on this Ionescu incident? So far they have been very quiet. It would be nice if the head of the diplomatic community take a stand to distance themselves from this obnoxious man whom they wined and dined and embraced as one of them. If they still think that Ionescu is one of them and a good one, then the diplomatic corp will become a joke in town.

The MTL Debate

The debate continues. Actually it is a very healthy exercise to talk about this issue as it affects practically every school going child and the parents. And the outcome will have a very significant impact on the future of the generations of children to come, and what Singapore will be. At the moment the tussel is between those for and those against MTL with some in between. Both camps have strong reasons to argue for their cases. In between there is a middle camp that accepts MTL but wants it to be made simpler or easier. Ng Eng Hen and his team would now have to sweat it out to come out with a compromise solution to appease the parties. I doubt that in this case they would dare to use the compulsory sword and just decide and make the people accept it like CPF Life, Medisave, Minimum Sum etc etc. Taking such an option will be very costly politically. Whatever the final decision on this, let's hope it is a wise one. The unfortunate thing is that not everyone is going to be happy about it no matter how it turns out. This is clearly an area that is not white or black. Maybe he can fall back on his policy as a long term one as the consequences of the policy will take generations to bear fruits, be it sweet, sour or poisonous. Only the future will tell.

Notable quote by Goh Keng Swee

"A system may arise in which the dominant minority... arrogate to itself not only the openings to the seats of power, but also the avenues by which individuals can fit themselves out for such positions of power. The dominant minority is thus able to point out those outside of the charmed circle just do not have the necessary qualifications to be admitted to the elite group." Dr Goh Keng Swee I copied the above quotes from Loh Chee Kong's article posted in Corporate Observer. In the same article there are several quotes that are worth readin, to freshen up from the staleness of the new mantras that violate the wisdom of the old. Reading his speech and the quotes gives one the impression that he had seen it coming and was warning us of how things could turn out in the future. His reticence after retirement could say a lot.

CPF threatening to sue and fine

I read Gilbert Goh’s post about CPF demanding him to pay for the shortfall in his Medisave account for a sum of $16,600 as his contribution for being self employed. All self employed, regardless of age, must contribute to the Medisave for as long as they are alive and working. Isn’t this a cock policy when people are starting to collect their CPF savings at 55 and some delayed till 62? Why should people who continue to work after 55 be expected to contribute to the Medisave when they are in a better position than those who have retired and not working? These self employed are economically active and earning an income to support themselves and no need to draw down or depending on their savings to support themselves. According to the Medisave Act, there is no exception. So if one is working at 100 years old, the old hag must still contribute to his Medisave. How outrageous. But no one is complaining. Like the story goes, when they came for the Jews, I kept quiet coz I am no Jew. When they came for the Christians, I kept quiet, coz I ain’t no Christian. When they came for the Commie, I kept quiet coz I ain’t no Commie. Then when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me.