‘We should be more outspoken in speaking up on issues, not just in Parliament but also separately in our constituencies. Each MP would have to raise his own profile; we need to be more politically astute rather than just being implementors on the ground.’ - Baey Yam Keng
The above is the feedback from Baey Yam Keng on the last GE and what went right and wrong and what needs to be changed. What he said is the need for an MP to be himself, to be noticed as an individual leader, to have a voice and a view. So far, the political system under the PAP has been putting the PAP first and the rest of the MPs subsumed under the brand and become nondescripts. They have not much of an identity, not much of a view except those of the collective view or position of the PAP.
Perhaps the current state of affair is a legacy of the past, when anyone can become an MP, literate of illiterate, donkey or genius. In those situation, it was better that they be shut out and said nothing, just towed the line before they confused everyone and talked nonsense thinking that they were immortals.
Today the whole game has been changed. The PAP MPs in particular, are the best of the best, the best that the PAP can find in the island. They are the most talented and with leadership qualities in their blood. Many were even scholars with the best academic report cards comparable to the best in the word. It is a pity and a waste to keep them in the bottle, not allowing them to speak up and prove that they are really great leaders, with an ability to think independently. With their qualifications and the stringent selection criteria, every one of them should rightly be good enough as ministers if needed be.
I agree with Baey Yam Keng that such great talents must be allowed to shine and be seen and adored by the people. The only slight problem is that if they speak too freely and express contrarian views to PAP’s official position, it may be a bit difficult to swallow. And it could be worst when they are expected to vote for policies which they spoke vehemently against in public only to tow the line. It can undermine their integrity and sincerity or look hypocritical.
By all means, it is still a good suggestion to have these great talents speaking out more freely and more often instead of ‘no comments, it is party policies’.
6/17/2011
6/16/2011
Stop visiting Malaysia
The current episode of two women driving to JB in the wee hours of the morning for a cup of tea and the adrenalin sapping adventure they experienced is a hot topic on both sides of the causeway. Hishamuddin, the Home Affairs Minister, is setting up an inquiry into the case.
Many Singaporeans are angry and crying foul. Some are calling for a Stop Visiting Malaysia campaign to protest against the ill treatment of Singaporeans. The thinking is simple, why visit a country to be abused and harassed, not only by robbers and crooks, but also by the authority there to protect you? This is a double barrel risk to take.
This kind of reaction is quite natural in the heat of the moment. But with the complex relations between the two countries and people, this is just not possible. There are many people on both sides of the causeway that have all the good reasons to cross the causeway. The fact in this case, which is a genuine mistake with the errant parties walking to the immigration to correct the mistake but was hauled up and badly treated, like criminals, and with the authority throwing the books at them for immigration violation, has sent fears to innocent visitors to the country.
There was no attempt for discretion, to acknowledge a simple, honest mistake which many visitors to any country can make, and to subject visitors to such an ordeal cannot be taken lightly. Can’t the immigration officers see the difference between a genuine mistake and a criminal offence to arrest innocent visitors? The Immigration Authority is still claiming the high ground, that they were doing their duties when any normal thinking person would have handle the case differently.
Perhaps for Singaporeans who feel like protesting as a show of unhappiness, they could advise Singaporeans who have nothing important to stop visiting Malaysia for a month. Those casual visits, holidays etc, can be put off temporarily and would not cause any pain to anyone. It is just about sending a message. After that, hopefully the message is taken and visitors are treated a little courtesy as a show that they are welcome to visit Malaysia. It is basic hospitality and human decency to make your guests feel welcome, and to assist them when they make little mistakes because of unfamiliarity in a new environment.
Many Singaporeans are angry and crying foul. Some are calling for a Stop Visiting Malaysia campaign to protest against the ill treatment of Singaporeans. The thinking is simple, why visit a country to be abused and harassed, not only by robbers and crooks, but also by the authority there to protect you? This is a double barrel risk to take.
This kind of reaction is quite natural in the heat of the moment. But with the complex relations between the two countries and people, this is just not possible. There are many people on both sides of the causeway that have all the good reasons to cross the causeway. The fact in this case, which is a genuine mistake with the errant parties walking to the immigration to correct the mistake but was hauled up and badly treated, like criminals, and with the authority throwing the books at them for immigration violation, has sent fears to innocent visitors to the country.
There was no attempt for discretion, to acknowledge a simple, honest mistake which many visitors to any country can make, and to subject visitors to such an ordeal cannot be taken lightly. Can’t the immigration officers see the difference between a genuine mistake and a criminal offence to arrest innocent visitors? The Immigration Authority is still claiming the high ground, that they were doing their duties when any normal thinking person would have handle the case differently.
Perhaps for Singaporeans who feel like protesting as a show of unhappiness, they could advise Singaporeans who have nothing important to stop visiting Malaysia for a month. Those casual visits, holidays etc, can be put off temporarily and would not cause any pain to anyone. It is just about sending a message. After that, hopefully the message is taken and visitors are treated a little courtesy as a show that they are welcome to visit Malaysia. It is basic hospitality and human decency to make your guests feel welcome, and to assist them when they make little mistakes because of unfamiliarity in a new environment.
Stop selling Singapore
Today’s big news is that property sales have fallen, and prices may be falling. Is that good news? Even if the prices have fallen 50% it is still too high. Like the minister’s pay, the current property prices are outrageous.
The more important issue is to stop selling the few square feet of land that are still left for us to call this rock our country to foreigners. When the world is our customer, we don’t have enough land to sell. They will just buy up everything, every square inch if they are allowed to. And stop the myth about selling to foreigners who called themselves new citizens. This policy is as good as an open door policy to sell everything as there will be enough rich foreigners to come in and buy up everything. In the end we will have nothing left to call home.
The lunatics out there who still thing we have plenty of land to sell, just remember that any freehold land sold is as good as gone. There are still some left and it is time to take stock and keep what we have for the future generation. Please do not sell Singapore away. Please leave something for our children. We can only continue with this reckless policy of selling land if we don’t regard this as home, and plan to make all the profits and scoot to somewhere else. Even then, it is a silly thing to do as money will be withered away by inflation. The land is still there, as good as forever, unless sold.
The more important issue is to stop selling the few square feet of land that are still left for us to call this rock our country to foreigners. When the world is our customer, we don’t have enough land to sell. They will just buy up everything, every square inch if they are allowed to. And stop the myth about selling to foreigners who called themselves new citizens. This policy is as good as an open door policy to sell everything as there will be enough rich foreigners to come in and buy up everything. In the end we will have nothing left to call home.
The lunatics out there who still thing we have plenty of land to sell, just remember that any freehold land sold is as good as gone. There are still some left and it is time to take stock and keep what we have for the future generation. Please do not sell Singapore away. Please leave something for our children. We can only continue with this reckless policy of selling land if we don’t regard this as home, and plan to make all the profits and scoot to somewhere else. Even then, it is a silly thing to do as money will be withered away by inflation. The land is still there, as good as forever, unless sold.
6/15/2011
It was a common mistake
The Johore Immigration Director Nasri Ishak has clarified that making detainees to do squatting was not a normal procedure. But making them strip was necessary in case the detainees were hiding weapons in their bodies. He was referring to the two Singaporean women who went through a wrong immigration lane by mistake and returned to inform the immigration officers of their error.
In this case the officers were dealing with two innocent visitors who came to them to rectify a mistake. They were not someone picked up for suspicious activities or criminals. Why can’t the officers treat the case as an innocent mistake which happened very often, but treated them like dangerous criminals, stripping them, slapping them, checking for weapons, and putting them in detention?
Now we can see that the officers themselves have made an innocent mistake by making the two innocent women doing squats that were not proper procedure. In fact the whole matter of the two women reporting to them need not become such a big issue. They were not illegal immigrants that were caught sneaking into the country, but motorists who went into a wrong lane. Didn’t the officers have any commonsense to deal with the case as it is?
So, should the public demand that the officers be investigated, put under detention, be stripped, slapped, etc etc? Why can’t simple mistakes be handled simply and resolved expeditiously to avoid any unpleasantness? There were no indications that the two women were out to do mischief. They went back to the immigration officer to correct a mistake and what followed was a nightmare. The emotional and psychological stress and pressure imposed on them were unnecessary and uncalled for if Malaysia wants to be regarded as a first world and civilized country. They were not illegal immigrants in all counts even if the officers wanted to throw the book at them.
Come on Malaysia, when are you going to treat your visitors with some graciousness, respect and dignity?
In this case the officers were dealing with two innocent visitors who came to them to rectify a mistake. They were not someone picked up for suspicious activities or criminals. Why can’t the officers treat the case as an innocent mistake which happened very often, but treated them like dangerous criminals, stripping them, slapping them, checking for weapons, and putting them in detention?
Now we can see that the officers themselves have made an innocent mistake by making the two innocent women doing squats that were not proper procedure. In fact the whole matter of the two women reporting to them need not become such a big issue. They were not illegal immigrants that were caught sneaking into the country, but motorists who went into a wrong lane. Didn’t the officers have any commonsense to deal with the case as it is?
So, should the public demand that the officers be investigated, put under detention, be stripped, slapped, etc etc? Why can’t simple mistakes be handled simply and resolved expeditiously to avoid any unpleasantness? There were no indications that the two women were out to do mischief. They went back to the immigration officer to correct a mistake and what followed was a nightmare. The emotional and psychological stress and pressure imposed on them were unnecessary and uncalled for if Malaysia wants to be regarded as a first world and civilized country. They were not illegal immigrants in all counts even if the officers wanted to throw the book at them.
Come on Malaysia, when are you going to treat your visitors with some graciousness, respect and dignity?
To cry or not to cry?
We are a full fledged first world country, prosperous and well endowed with the best of everything. These cannot come about with half baked no brain citizens. They are called daft today, but nevermind. The fact is that we crowed of the best education system in the region, comparable to the best in the West. And parents invested heavily on their children, given them the best education money can buy.
Our children, many, went through the best childcare and kindergartens with facilities and education systems that the parents were willing to pay good money for. The same kids went through the best primary and secondary educations and tertiary educations with exceptionally good grades. Including the pre schools, most would have spent 20 years of good guidance in the education system.
Then what? They are not good enough when competing with the products of third world countries coming from less well equipped education system, lowly ranked relative to ours. Many have hard times applying for jobs and lost out to foreigners. And many top posts were given to foreigners because our local products were not good enough.
What is wrong? The gene pool has retarded? The education system is flawed despite the accolades? Or is it that a prophet has no place in his own home? Or really, the foreign products are much better than the daft locals?
Maybe it is all a myth. Our miraculous growth is a myth, our education system is a myth, the quality or ability of Singaporeans is a myth. What we are today is all the contributions of foreigners. We need more foreigners to replace the daft Singaporeans. All the tuitions and best kindergartens and best schools, and straight As are all myths, maybe fakes! I am referring to the straight As for Singaporeans. The straight As of foreign talents are real. In fact foreign talents with less than straight As are far better than locals with straight As, imported models.
Our children, many, went through the best childcare and kindergartens with facilities and education systems that the parents were willing to pay good money for. The same kids went through the best primary and secondary educations and tertiary educations with exceptionally good grades. Including the pre schools, most would have spent 20 years of good guidance in the education system.
Then what? They are not good enough when competing with the products of third world countries coming from less well equipped education system, lowly ranked relative to ours. Many have hard times applying for jobs and lost out to foreigners. And many top posts were given to foreigners because our local products were not good enough.
What is wrong? The gene pool has retarded? The education system is flawed despite the accolades? Or is it that a prophet has no place in his own home? Or really, the foreign products are much better than the daft locals?
Maybe it is all a myth. Our miraculous growth is a myth, our education system is a myth, the quality or ability of Singaporeans is a myth. What we are today is all the contributions of foreigners. We need more foreigners to replace the daft Singaporeans. All the tuitions and best kindergartens and best schools, and straight As are all myths, maybe fakes! I am referring to the straight As for Singaporeans. The straight As of foreign talents are real. In fact foreign talents with less than straight As are far better than locals with straight As, imported models.
Returning to sensibility
The policy of enforced consumption is starting to give way. Though it was hailed as the logic of the day that people must spend according to how much money in their pockets, some sanity is returning. In the first place, why should people be forced to eat sharksfin when they only want to eat ikan bilis? How many restaurants out there insisting that their rich customers cannot order cheaper meals?
This mean policy was implemented in the hospitals as well as the HDB. Minimum ceilings were set to force consumers to buy bigger flats or stay in more expensive hospital wards. It was really cock policy. Instead of encouraging thrift and prudence, to save and spend within your means, the policy forced the consumers into over spending, to empty their pockets literary.
In the news today, 43 young couples have wisely chosen to buy smaller HDB flats when the restrictive income ceiling was raised from $3000 to $4000 to qualify for 3 room flats. Under the old policy, they have no choice but to buy the more expensive 4 room flats that they could barely afford. They are careful and responsible young professionals who think ahead of their financial commitments. As young couples, the bills are going to get more and bigger when they set up families.
How many young couples were forced against their wills, to buy bigger flats? How many people were forced to pay for more expensive hospital wards against their wills? And how many young couples were forced into the private housing markets and forced to take up big housing loans against their wills?
Freedom of choice, downgrade if one cannot afford it, was the official slogan. Why no freedom of choice to buy cheaper flats or stay in cheaper hospital wards? Why the need for mean testing? I did not misspell. It is mean testing and not means testing as far as the victims are concerned.
Even how much people are willing to spend and consume is dictated by cock policies. Can you beat that? Will real freedom of choice be returned to the people? The crap about people who have a few dollars more adding to the housing queue or Class C ward queue is a big bull. Just increase the supply to meet the needs of the consumers. Turning off the tap and blame the consumers is a lame excuse.
This mean policy was implemented in the hospitals as well as the HDB. Minimum ceilings were set to force consumers to buy bigger flats or stay in more expensive hospital wards. It was really cock policy. Instead of encouraging thrift and prudence, to save and spend within your means, the policy forced the consumers into over spending, to empty their pockets literary.
In the news today, 43 young couples have wisely chosen to buy smaller HDB flats when the restrictive income ceiling was raised from $3000 to $4000 to qualify for 3 room flats. Under the old policy, they have no choice but to buy the more expensive 4 room flats that they could barely afford. They are careful and responsible young professionals who think ahead of their financial commitments. As young couples, the bills are going to get more and bigger when they set up families.
How many young couples were forced against their wills, to buy bigger flats? How many people were forced to pay for more expensive hospital wards against their wills? And how many young couples were forced into the private housing markets and forced to take up big housing loans against their wills?
Freedom of choice, downgrade if one cannot afford it, was the official slogan. Why no freedom of choice to buy cheaper flats or stay in cheaper hospital wards? Why the need for mean testing? I did not misspell. It is mean testing and not means testing as far as the victims are concerned.
Even how much people are willing to spend and consume is dictated by cock policies. Can you beat that? Will real freedom of choice be returned to the people? The crap about people who have a few dollars more adding to the housing queue or Class C ward queue is a big bull. Just increase the supply to meet the needs of the consumers. Turning off the tap and blame the consumers is a lame excuse.
6/14/2011
Time for a Malay President
Since Yusof Ishak, we have Sheares, Wee Kim Wee, Nair, Teng Cheong, and Nathan on two terms as president, I believe many Singaporeans are looking forward to a Malay president. Though there is no constitutional provision for a system of rotation, it will be nice to have a Malay president after such a long while.
I also think that PAP is planning for a Malay president this time round, and Abullah Tarmugi seems a likely candidate. But with the ire against anything PAP at the moment, Abdullah may have a problem in a contest. And to make matter worst, there are two irritants in Tan Cheng Bock and George Yeo coming into the fray. Then Tan Kin Lian will take away all the votes for those who do not want to see a PAP mark on the presidential candidate, no matter how faint it is.
Now it is unlikely that a good Malay candidate will be elected to be the next president. The only possibility for it to happen is for all the other candidates to be disqualified, and a walkover like Nathan did before takes place. Don’t think it is easy to do that.
The GRC is not working to the PAP’s scheme of things. This elected presidency is turning into another big headache.
I also think that PAP is planning for a Malay president this time round, and Abullah Tarmugi seems a likely candidate. But with the ire against anything PAP at the moment, Abdullah may have a problem in a contest. And to make matter worst, there are two irritants in Tan Cheng Bock and George Yeo coming into the fray. Then Tan Kin Lian will take away all the votes for those who do not want to see a PAP mark on the presidential candidate, no matter how faint it is.
Now it is unlikely that a good Malay candidate will be elected to be the next president. The only possibility for it to happen is for all the other candidates to be disqualified, and a walkover like Nathan did before takes place. Don’t think it is easy to do that.
The GRC is not working to the PAP’s scheme of things. This elected presidency is turning into another big headache.
A lesson from Malaysia
Every weekend, eves of long weekends and holidays in particular, long queues will form at the immigration check points at the Second Link or at the Causeway. Hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans, squeezed into a tiny piece of rock, need the space and fresh air to feel like human beans again. So they jammed the two entry points to Malaysia. Never mind if it is 6 hours or 10 hours at the jams. It is worth the trouble.
Malaysia has been very successful in attracting Singaporeans and the PRs to visit the country in hordes. This is success story, without having to blow the trumpet, is confirmed by the jams. In numbers, aggregated over a year, how many tens of millions of visits must have been chalked up by the visitors?
Singapore may be crowing about its success in attracting tourists to our shores. But the numbers can never match the Singaporeans heading to Malaysia. Look at all the entry points, no crowds, no jams. That shows that the number of tourists visiting the island is too small to cause any jams.
And Singapore has been laying the red carpet to invite the visitors to visit. A thousand smiles will greet the visitors. Singaporeans too were chastised for not treating the visitors well. Some visitors knew how important they are to Singaporeans that it has become a past times by some to beat up Singaporeans when they are here, just for some excitement. Just make sure the injuries are not severe enough and it will become just a personal trespass. The Singaporean victims can only seek redress if they have the money to engage the top class lawyers that are in abundant supply, at top class fees too. If they don’t have the money, never mind, just accept the few bruises as their contributions to welcome visitors to the country.
If they are rude or too harsh to visitors, the visitors will complain or go to some better places, like Malaysia. And we will lose out on the tourist dollars. In Malaysia, it is slightly different. Today’s paper reported about two Singapore women driving past Malaysian checkpoints without having their passports chopped and were arrested when they reported their mistake. They must have thought that Malaysia also welcomed their visitors like Singapore, with open arms and with a big smile. So they drove in happily for the adventure.
In this case they were treated like hardcore criminals, stripped naked, slapped, made to do squats, with hands pulling their own ears, and ended in jail. Quite similar to Guantanamo really. Anyone thinking of a Guantanamo experience need not go too far, and need not have to pay for expensive airfares. It is at our doorstep. What is so exciting about visiting Sentosa and pay like hell when real excitement is free? Their adrenalins must be supercharged. What a high!
But this will likely be forgotten and Singaporeans will continue to jam the causeway to visit Malaysia. Because Malaysia is really a great place to be. Die die they will queue up at the Malaysian immigration check points, under the hot suns for 6 hours or more, to enjoy Malaysia. Yes, Malaysia is not only a great place, it is the place for Singaporeans, and for a wonderful experience and adventure. Better than Disneyland or Sentosa. Malaysia, here we come. Thank you for your hospitality and the fun and excitement.
And Malaysia Tourism Board will say, Selamat Datang. I would suggest they change their campaign slogan to , Malaysia, for an adrenalin charged experience!
Malaysia has been very successful in attracting Singaporeans and the PRs to visit the country in hordes. This is success story, without having to blow the trumpet, is confirmed by the jams. In numbers, aggregated over a year, how many tens of millions of visits must have been chalked up by the visitors?
Singapore may be crowing about its success in attracting tourists to our shores. But the numbers can never match the Singaporeans heading to Malaysia. Look at all the entry points, no crowds, no jams. That shows that the number of tourists visiting the island is too small to cause any jams.
And Singapore has been laying the red carpet to invite the visitors to visit. A thousand smiles will greet the visitors. Singaporeans too were chastised for not treating the visitors well. Some visitors knew how important they are to Singaporeans that it has become a past times by some to beat up Singaporeans when they are here, just for some excitement. Just make sure the injuries are not severe enough and it will become just a personal trespass. The Singaporean victims can only seek redress if they have the money to engage the top class lawyers that are in abundant supply, at top class fees too. If they don’t have the money, never mind, just accept the few bruises as their contributions to welcome visitors to the country.
If they are rude or too harsh to visitors, the visitors will complain or go to some better places, like Malaysia. And we will lose out on the tourist dollars. In Malaysia, it is slightly different. Today’s paper reported about two Singapore women driving past Malaysian checkpoints without having their passports chopped and were arrested when they reported their mistake. They must have thought that Malaysia also welcomed their visitors like Singapore, with open arms and with a big smile. So they drove in happily for the adventure.
In this case they were treated like hardcore criminals, stripped naked, slapped, made to do squats, with hands pulling their own ears, and ended in jail. Quite similar to Guantanamo really. Anyone thinking of a Guantanamo experience need not go too far, and need not have to pay for expensive airfares. It is at our doorstep. What is so exciting about visiting Sentosa and pay like hell when real excitement is free? Their adrenalins must be supercharged. What a high!
But this will likely be forgotten and Singaporeans will continue to jam the causeway to visit Malaysia. Because Malaysia is really a great place to be. Die die they will queue up at the Malaysian immigration check points, under the hot suns for 6 hours or more, to enjoy Malaysia. Yes, Malaysia is not only a great place, it is the place for Singaporeans, and for a wonderful experience and adventure. Better than Disneyland or Sentosa. Malaysia, here we come. Thank you for your hospitality and the fun and excitement.
And Malaysia Tourism Board will say, Selamat Datang. I would suggest they change their campaign slogan to , Malaysia, for an adrenalin charged experience!
6/13/2011
All talks and talks and nothing but talks
The roles of the president have been clearly stated and explained by so many political luminaries, including Jayakumar. Among the 5 discretionary custodial duties is the protection of reserves.
Nathan has been quoted in the media that he had done a lot, quietly, as the President. Presumably he must have done all that is expected of his 5 discretionary custodial duties exemplarily. While the current attention is on the new candidates to assume the office of the Presidency, would the people be interested to know how well he has done, quietly, all these 12 years as the President? Or would the people be interested to know how much has he done to protect the reserves?
One of the fundamental questions raised during Ong Teng Cheong’s Presidency was the value of the reserves. He wanted to know how much or what he was supposed to guard. Without knowing how much was there in the reserves, it was woolly woolly for him to be able to protect it. Maybe I am wrong. He did not need to know how much there was to protect. All he needed to know was that it was one of his major duties as the President, to hold the second key.
Of course Teng Cheong would not accept that kind of logic. He must know what he was guarding and how much was there to protect in the first place. The stumbling block was that it would take 52 man years to know the exact amount.
Nathan has been the President for 12 years. This is still short of 40 years to reach the magical number of 52 years. Does it mean that it will take another 40 years to churn out the numbers? Apologies, I think another 40 years will be just right for the final numbers to be known. But that is for one man to work on it full time.
I am not sure how many men are working on it to produce the numbers for the guardian. Does the President know the numbers already, or would he be able to tell the people how many more years before the numbers will be available? Any progress been made in this as it is the first thing that any president guarding the reserves must know?
Nathan has been quoted in the media that he had done a lot, quietly, as the President. Presumably he must have done all that is expected of his 5 discretionary custodial duties exemplarily. While the current attention is on the new candidates to assume the office of the Presidency, would the people be interested to know how well he has done, quietly, all these 12 years as the President? Or would the people be interested to know how much has he done to protect the reserves?
One of the fundamental questions raised during Ong Teng Cheong’s Presidency was the value of the reserves. He wanted to know how much or what he was supposed to guard. Without knowing how much was there in the reserves, it was woolly woolly for him to be able to protect it. Maybe I am wrong. He did not need to know how much there was to protect. All he needed to know was that it was one of his major duties as the President, to hold the second key.
Of course Teng Cheong would not accept that kind of logic. He must know what he was guarding and how much was there to protect in the first place. The stumbling block was that it would take 52 man years to know the exact amount.
Nathan has been the President for 12 years. This is still short of 40 years to reach the magical number of 52 years. Does it mean that it will take another 40 years to churn out the numbers? Apologies, I think another 40 years will be just right for the final numbers to be known. But that is for one man to work on it full time.
I am not sure how many men are working on it to produce the numbers for the guardian. Does the President know the numbers already, or would he be able to tell the people how many more years before the numbers will be available? Any progress been made in this as it is the first thing that any president guarding the reserves must know?
6/12/2011
I am starting to know more about dogs
‘Leadership is in the blood, says Mr Lee.’ This is a headline in ST on 27 May. LKY was expounding his theory on leadership in Japan, and he explained how certain groups of people are born with this quality. It is in the blood, in the bloodline.
LKY then used the example of a sheepdog and explained how easily it is to train sheepdogs to guard and dominate the sheep. Not any dog will do. It must be a certain kind, a sheep dog.
I quote LKY, ‘There is a certain group of dogs that genetically have been born and been specially bred for this purpose. If you just take your ordinary dog, you can spend all your time training it, it will not work.’
So, for those who are thinking of importing dogs, think Australia or New Zealand. Think sheep dog and not mongrels. The latter can be found in the less developed countries, so plentiful, but do not have that special quality of leadership in their blood.
It is more relaxing to talk about pets, hobbies and dogs on a Sunday morning.
LKY then used the example of a sheepdog and explained how easily it is to train sheepdogs to guard and dominate the sheep. Not any dog will do. It must be a certain kind, a sheep dog.
I quote LKY, ‘There is a certain group of dogs that genetically have been born and been specially bred for this purpose. If you just take your ordinary dog, you can spend all your time training it, it will not work.’
So, for those who are thinking of importing dogs, think Australia or New Zealand. Think sheep dog and not mongrels. The latter can be found in the less developed countries, so plentiful, but do not have that special quality of leadership in their blood.
It is more relaxing to talk about pets, hobbies and dogs on a Sunday morning.
6/11/2011
The angry cries for housing
Read the comments in cyberspace and you can’t help hearing the cries of desperation for housing. Yes they cannot afford public housing. Families with little children, broken families, people who because of poor finances, bad luck, circumstances, some of their own foolishness or irresponsible acts, are out there looking for a roof over their heads. Is that not the duty and responsibility of the govt to provide them with a roof, any kind of roof? A temporary shelter, a small rental flat in place of a pitch tent in a vacant land. They may have mismanaged their lives, then what, leave them in the cold?
While these people are pleading, some have gone to the extent of cursing at the govt and HDB. When people are at wits end, and the govt is not there to help, you can’t blame them. And there is no reason for the govt not to help them. It is unacceptable and irresponsible as a govt to forsake its people in times of need.
Boon Wan is cautioning those who have bought or are buying private properties of a bubble bursting. Some may be burnt when it happens. But don’t worry, they can afford to be burnt. Pity the young professionals who were forced by his predecessors and his policies into the private market and with a huge mortgage to service. I dare say, it is no fault of theirs and the blame should be placed squarely on the govt for allowing it to happen, when the crash comes.
In the meantime, the govt must quickly rethink its policies and responsibilities to the people, to provide them with a really affordable roof. Even those who are disqualified for all the right and wrong reasons, the govt must take care of them as a govt is expected. The woes of the citizens will become the stress to the society and country.
Boon Wan has taken the right step to ramp up the building of rental flats. Not everyone is a super talent to be able to afford expensive housing. Not everyone can afford even to buy small affordable public housing. The govt has to cater to all the different levels and needs of the people. What is the use of a govt who shirks this responsibility and leaves the people in dire straights in the lurch?
The well being of the people is the govt’s responsibility. Remember, it is the people who elect the govt to look after them. The people do not elect the govt to tell them you mess up, just too bad, your problem.
Go back to basics and think of providing every citizen a roof over his head first. Stop the stupid policy of an artificial ceiling to disqualify young people and push them towards the cliff. Stop the ruthless mindset of punishing the less able, the losers or unfortunate. Look after the people.
While these people are pleading, some have gone to the extent of cursing at the govt and HDB. When people are at wits end, and the govt is not there to help, you can’t blame them. And there is no reason for the govt not to help them. It is unacceptable and irresponsible as a govt to forsake its people in times of need.
Boon Wan is cautioning those who have bought or are buying private properties of a bubble bursting. Some may be burnt when it happens. But don’t worry, they can afford to be burnt. Pity the young professionals who were forced by his predecessors and his policies into the private market and with a huge mortgage to service. I dare say, it is no fault of theirs and the blame should be placed squarely on the govt for allowing it to happen, when the crash comes.
In the meantime, the govt must quickly rethink its policies and responsibilities to the people, to provide them with a really affordable roof. Even those who are disqualified for all the right and wrong reasons, the govt must take care of them as a govt is expected. The woes of the citizens will become the stress to the society and country.
Boon Wan has taken the right step to ramp up the building of rental flats. Not everyone is a super talent to be able to afford expensive housing. Not everyone can afford even to buy small affordable public housing. The govt has to cater to all the different levels and needs of the people. What is the use of a govt who shirks this responsibility and leaves the people in dire straights in the lurch?
The well being of the people is the govt’s responsibility. Remember, it is the people who elect the govt to look after them. The people do not elect the govt to tell them you mess up, just too bad, your problem.
Go back to basics and think of providing every citizen a roof over his head first. Stop the stupid policy of an artificial ceiling to disqualify young people and push them towards the cliff. Stop the ruthless mindset of punishing the less able, the losers or unfortunate. Look after the people.
6/10/2011
We are Singaporeans, dare you abuse us
The ill treatment of an aged patient in Nightingale Nursing Home was shown on prime time news last night. The old lady was left topless for half an hour as was reported, in an air con room. She was then bundled by two assistants, looking more like FTs, and dumped into her bed. She growled because of the pain and was smacked by one of the assistants.
The family paid good money to the Nursing Home to take care of their loved one. What she got was not care but being manhandled in a very bad way. It is pitiful and disgusting to see our senior citizens being treated this badly by their caregivers. No matter if they are locals or foreigners, they must be severely punished as an example to protect our elders who are entrusted to caregivers whom we believed are kind and trained professionals paid to do the job.
The case must be swiftly dealt with and all guilty parties punished. If they are foreigners, they must be banished from our homeland for ill treating us, their gracious host, providing them with shelter and the opportunity to earn good money. I say to them, piss off from my country.
For those who are still here, please be reminded that you are guests at our pleasure. Some may open their arms to embrace and kiss you, but we expect no less in return for our kindness. Any Singaporean apologists need to be gorenged by all Singaporeans. This is our home. We are Singaporeans and cannot be victims to foreigners
The family paid good money to the Nursing Home to take care of their loved one. What she got was not care but being manhandled in a very bad way. It is pitiful and disgusting to see our senior citizens being treated this badly by their caregivers. No matter if they are locals or foreigners, they must be severely punished as an example to protect our elders who are entrusted to caregivers whom we believed are kind and trained professionals paid to do the job.
The case must be swiftly dealt with and all guilty parties punished. If they are foreigners, they must be banished from our homeland for ill treating us, their gracious host, providing them with shelter and the opportunity to earn good money. I say to them, piss off from my country.
For those who are still here, please be reminded that you are guests at our pleasure. Some may open their arms to embrace and kiss you, but we expect no less in return for our kindness. Any Singaporean apologists need to be gorenged by all Singaporeans. This is our home. We are Singaporeans and cannot be victims to foreigners
Myth 227 – Logic of superior beans
This friend (call him John, not this real name) of mine related his interview for the head of Asia Pacific Region marketing job. He was about the best in his field and was head hunted for the position.
Everything went fine and the date for him to come on board was fixed. Then they went into the compensation package details. John was quite comfortable with his half a million dollar package. But being an absolutely honest Singaporean, he told the interviewer his true feelings. He said the job was very attractive and he could also be tempted to be corrupt. There were plenty of opportunities to do so in his new position. He confessed that he was after all a human bean and was subject to temptations of the monetary kind.
He suggested to the interviewer that in paradise such a temptation was easily taken care of by paying a sum that was good enough to keep an honest bean from being corrupt. The interviewer nodded and agreed with him that it was a novel idea of superior logic. They finally agreed that another half a million bucks would do the trick and the company could be 100% at peace that John would do his job well, diligently and would never stoop to corruption. It was a win win situation.
They parted with an assurance that the letter of appointment would follow in the next few days. That was more than a decade ago. The letter of appointment did not arrive. John was also taken off the headhunter’s list. He applied his superior reasoning and concluded that his superior logic was ahead of time and his potential employer was still stuck in the medieval age.
John is now happily driving a taxi as a profession. Of course this story is only good for reading as a fiction.
Everything went fine and the date for him to come on board was fixed. Then they went into the compensation package details. John was quite comfortable with his half a million dollar package. But being an absolutely honest Singaporean, he told the interviewer his true feelings. He said the job was very attractive and he could also be tempted to be corrupt. There were plenty of opportunities to do so in his new position. He confessed that he was after all a human bean and was subject to temptations of the monetary kind.
He suggested to the interviewer that in paradise such a temptation was easily taken care of by paying a sum that was good enough to keep an honest bean from being corrupt. The interviewer nodded and agreed with him that it was a novel idea of superior logic. They finally agreed that another half a million bucks would do the trick and the company could be 100% at peace that John would do his job well, diligently and would never stoop to corruption. It was a win win situation.
They parted with an assurance that the letter of appointment would follow in the next few days. That was more than a decade ago. The letter of appointment did not arrive. John was also taken off the headhunter’s list. He applied his superior reasoning and concluded that his superior logic was ahead of time and his potential employer was still stuck in the medieval age.
John is now happily driving a taxi as a profession. Of course this story is only good for reading as a fiction.
How to give cash to our senior citizens without paying for it - CCE
Think COE and how CCE can be applied to benefit the citizens and the govt. The govt has been selling COEs to the car owners at a price that is determined by supply and demand. At a time it was as high as $100k and currently around $50k+. It is a costly piece of paper just to buy and own a car for 10 years. The benefits of this scheme go mainly to the govt’s coffer.
A car is a very precious temporary asset. How could this be more valuable than a Citizenship Certificate Entitlement? Many are queuing to enter this prosperous city state where the roads are laid with gold. Many have come and return home rich. Many remain here and get richer. Many have paid a heavy price just to earn a right to be here to work, even as maids and manual workers, with the hope of a better life later.
A Singapore Citizenship is very valuable not just to earn a good living, but also a passport to the West, US and Europe. There is no need to give the citizenship to anyone on a silver platter. Foreigners should be willing to pay for it, to buy the right to make it rich, to a better life in a well developed city country.
How could this piece of paper be turned into an asset, like a COE, and with greater value? A simple way is for the govt to sell it in market like the COEs. But this will only benefit the govt alone. My suggestion is to issue a certificate to every senior citizen on reaching 60 years of age. This is like giving some cash to the citizens without the govt having to pay for it, a kind of retirement benefit. The certificate can then be sold to a foreigner who wants to be a citizen, and after meeting all the criteria of citizenship.
The state shall also benefit by a levy from the seller when a CCE is disposed. So the state is also getting something in return.
Why would a new citizen want to buy a CCE? Well, if the citizenship is attractive enough to him. And the value is retained as the CCE can still be resold when he decides to give up his citizenship, or when he kicks the bucket. There is thus no loss, but could be a long term investment like a stock, can appreciate in value. His below 21 years children will get one each when they reach 60. This means he could double or triple his investment and could stay fully invested here.
Yes, the CCE can also be listed in the Stock Exchange for trading if not converted to a citizenship. By doing so, its economic value will be so much higher. There are also many other benefits that can be derived from listing it as a stock. It also allows the govt to buy and sell the CCEs to control its supply and demand. It also prevents all the CCEs from being converted to new citizenships.
The govt thus does not need to throw away citizenships freely and the senior citizens will be pleased with the windfall. The Stock Exchange too will be pleased with another instrument for trading.
This is just a preliminary concept and many details can be worked out to make it workable. It is creating wealth from selling a piece of paper, for the senior citizens and paid by new citizens, like COEs. The oldies will have another source of cash for their twilight years. But the benefits of being a citizen, rights to reproduction etc must be tweaked. It will definitely help to increase reproduction as each CCE is worth quite sum money.
PS. I declare that I own the intellectual property right to this concept or other similar instruments that could be introduced in the future serving similar objectives.
A car is a very precious temporary asset. How could this be more valuable than a Citizenship Certificate Entitlement? Many are queuing to enter this prosperous city state where the roads are laid with gold. Many have come and return home rich. Many remain here and get richer. Many have paid a heavy price just to earn a right to be here to work, even as maids and manual workers, with the hope of a better life later.
A Singapore Citizenship is very valuable not just to earn a good living, but also a passport to the West, US and Europe. There is no need to give the citizenship to anyone on a silver platter. Foreigners should be willing to pay for it, to buy the right to make it rich, to a better life in a well developed city country.
How could this piece of paper be turned into an asset, like a COE, and with greater value? A simple way is for the govt to sell it in market like the COEs. But this will only benefit the govt alone. My suggestion is to issue a certificate to every senior citizen on reaching 60 years of age. This is like giving some cash to the citizens without the govt having to pay for it, a kind of retirement benefit. The certificate can then be sold to a foreigner who wants to be a citizen, and after meeting all the criteria of citizenship.
The state shall also benefit by a levy from the seller when a CCE is disposed. So the state is also getting something in return.
Why would a new citizen want to buy a CCE? Well, if the citizenship is attractive enough to him. And the value is retained as the CCE can still be resold when he decides to give up his citizenship, or when he kicks the bucket. There is thus no loss, but could be a long term investment like a stock, can appreciate in value. His below 21 years children will get one each when they reach 60. This means he could double or triple his investment and could stay fully invested here.
Yes, the CCE can also be listed in the Stock Exchange for trading if not converted to a citizenship. By doing so, its economic value will be so much higher. There are also many other benefits that can be derived from listing it as a stock. It also allows the govt to buy and sell the CCEs to control its supply and demand. It also prevents all the CCEs from being converted to new citizenships.
The govt thus does not need to throw away citizenships freely and the senior citizens will be pleased with the windfall. The Stock Exchange too will be pleased with another instrument for trading.
This is just a preliminary concept and many details can be worked out to make it workable. It is creating wealth from selling a piece of paper, for the senior citizens and paid by new citizens, like COEs. The oldies will have another source of cash for their twilight years. But the benefits of being a citizen, rights to reproduction etc must be tweaked. It will definitely help to increase reproduction as each CCE is worth quite sum money.
PS. I declare that I own the intellectual property right to this concept or other similar instruments that could be introduced in the future serving similar objectives.
6/09/2011
Abandoned
A few tweaks needed in the Salary Review Committee
One clearly needed change is the presence of a truly independent member that has little association with the people whose salary are affected, and be able to look at the whole issue objectively from a distance. Such a person will then be in a position to provide an impartial view of the remuneration package.
The inputs of HR professionals is definitely useful, but must be from an independent source, not from the ministries.
Though Gerard is talking about starting from a clean slate, his comments are still tainted with the present system of discount and paying high. A discount is only necessary when the package is not right to begin with, a kind of over paying. If the package is correctly or reasonably conceived, there is no need for any further discount. The pricing of public housing is a glaring example of what discount or subsidy is not what it is meant to be.
The paying high is something that reasonable Singaporeans are willing to concede. But what is high and what contributed to the high should be carefully considered. There is no need to pay high to compensate for corruptibility. Anyone who is tempted to be corrupt, let the law deals with him. And there is no need to pay obscene salary just because it has yet to break the treasury.
Then there is the issue of compensating for loss of potential income. Any honourable man/woman coming forward to serve the country at the highest office the country can offer is an honourable calling. If he/she is asking to be compensated for loss of potential earnings then such people should be left to earn their money in their profession. There is no need to make people sacrifice unnecessarily to serve the country when they are unwilling to do so. A political calling or any calling cannot be measured in monetary rewards. An excellent surgeon or lawyer or any professional, does not simply turn into an excellent national leader. There is no direct correlation in what they are doing in their profession to political appointment. To compensate in such terms is irrational thinking.
From the above, the most important tweak needed is the mindset of the Review Committee. If they are still thinking in the same wavelength as those who conceived the current package, the statement of a new slate is a myth. They need to free their mindset from the flawed reasoning of the past.
The inputs of HR professionals is definitely useful, but must be from an independent source, not from the ministries.
Though Gerard is talking about starting from a clean slate, his comments are still tainted with the present system of discount and paying high. A discount is only necessary when the package is not right to begin with, a kind of over paying. If the package is correctly or reasonably conceived, there is no need for any further discount. The pricing of public housing is a glaring example of what discount or subsidy is not what it is meant to be.
The paying high is something that reasonable Singaporeans are willing to concede. But what is high and what contributed to the high should be carefully considered. There is no need to pay high to compensate for corruptibility. Anyone who is tempted to be corrupt, let the law deals with him. And there is no need to pay obscene salary just because it has yet to break the treasury.
Then there is the issue of compensating for loss of potential income. Any honourable man/woman coming forward to serve the country at the highest office the country can offer is an honourable calling. If he/she is asking to be compensated for loss of potential earnings then such people should be left to earn their money in their profession. There is no need to make people sacrifice unnecessarily to serve the country when they are unwilling to do so. A political calling or any calling cannot be measured in monetary rewards. An excellent surgeon or lawyer or any professional, does not simply turn into an excellent national leader. There is no direct correlation in what they are doing in their profession to political appointment. To compensate in such terms is irrational thinking.
From the above, the most important tweak needed is the mindset of the Review Committee. If they are still thinking in the same wavelength as those who conceived the current package, the statement of a new slate is a myth. They need to free their mindset from the flawed reasoning of the past.
Timothy Geithner was rebutted by Singapore and Hongkong
Tim Geithner, the American Secretary of Treasury, was calling for more stringent controls of dubious derivative tradings conducted by dubious operators with dubious modus operandi. He cautioned other regulators not to compromise their regulatory systems to accommodate the rogues of the finance industry that the US is trying to regulate more closely with more stringent rules and regulations. His fear is that while the US was tightening the screws, other regulations are playing easy to take in the rogues and their business. The danger the rogues and their malpractices were thrown into the wind at their own risks.
Singapore and Hongkong have stood up to defend their regulatory systems as much more stringent than the Americans and told the Americans to look elsewhere. Our systems are in good hands. No problems.
I also think so. Hope there is no outcry like the minibond crisis in the future. The next one or two years could be telling if we are doing the right thing. As things are going, my prediction is that some operators will start to retrench staff and cut cost as the business is not generating the returns to cover their overheads, that is, if things do not improve. That will be the test of whether we are doing the right thing or the wrong stuff. The rest are just rhetorics. Let’s wait for the real stuff to unfold.
Singapore and Hongkong have stood up to defend their regulatory systems as much more stringent than the Americans and told the Americans to look elsewhere. Our systems are in good hands. No problems.
I also think so. Hope there is no outcry like the minibond crisis in the future. The next one or two years could be telling if we are doing the right thing. As things are going, my prediction is that some operators will start to retrench staff and cut cost as the business is not generating the returns to cover their overheads, that is, if things do not improve. That will be the test of whether we are doing the right thing or the wrong stuff. The rest are just rhetorics. Let’s wait for the real stuff to unfold.
Forcing round pegs into square holes
Just a month after the GE and Singaporeans are greeted with some refreshing changes in the way some ministries are working. Boon Wan is throwing out a whole basket of waste policies in one go. Tuck Yew is going down to the ground to understand the problems of the people and to explore solutions that will make life more pleasant to the citizens.
In short, they are trying to change the holes so that all shapes and sizes of pegs can fit in. This is a big deviation from past attitude and policies when every peg must be shaped to fit the square holes. Those that could not fit in, just too bad, it is their fault.
The thinking or mindset then was that I am calling the shot, I decide what is good for the people, and the people must fit into my criteria to benefit from my policies. A glaring example is how housing policies were shafted down the people’s throat. Singles, single mothers, under achievers, over achievers, people who messed up their lives for good or bad reasons, not my problem, you created your own problems. Singles go and get married, single mothers, go and get married, under achievers, downgrade to your station in life, over achievers, go to the private market. Ha, ha, ha. There is no need to sweat the little thing to worry about the people’s concern and their angst.
And it was a case of, I only build at my own convenience, at my terms, at my pleasure. You wait, ok? And you know how my policies worked, you plan your life and finances to suit my policies. Don’t muck around with me. What I am doing is the best you can ever get, with affordably priced housing that you can afford, to pay and to wait. Yes, you can afford, I say so. You can wait, I say so.
The way MND works and how it treated the people is about the best example of what it was like then. Now they are trying to listen to the people, wanting to know how to serve the people better. At least it is a big step forward, a departure from the high and mighty and arrogant style of the past.
In short, they are trying to change the holes so that all shapes and sizes of pegs can fit in. This is a big deviation from past attitude and policies when every peg must be shaped to fit the square holes. Those that could not fit in, just too bad, it is their fault.
The thinking or mindset then was that I am calling the shot, I decide what is good for the people, and the people must fit into my criteria to benefit from my policies. A glaring example is how housing policies were shafted down the people’s throat. Singles, single mothers, under achievers, over achievers, people who messed up their lives for good or bad reasons, not my problem, you created your own problems. Singles go and get married, single mothers, go and get married, under achievers, downgrade to your station in life, over achievers, go to the private market. Ha, ha, ha. There is no need to sweat the little thing to worry about the people’s concern and their angst.
And it was a case of, I only build at my own convenience, at my terms, at my pleasure. You wait, ok? And you know how my policies worked, you plan your life and finances to suit my policies. Don’t muck around with me. What I am doing is the best you can ever get, with affordably priced housing that you can afford, to pay and to wait. Yes, you can afford, I say so. You can wait, I say so.
The way MND works and how it treated the people is about the best example of what it was like then. Now they are trying to listen to the people, wanting to know how to serve the people better. At least it is a big step forward, a departure from the high and mighty and arrogant style of the past.
6/08/2011
Investigative journalism
There is a big report in the ST today about the number of MPs holding directorships in listed companies. Apparently Hsien Loong’s message has sunk in and not many are now holding such directorships, and those who are holding have only a handful to show.
It will be more interesting to know what the situation was like say a year ago or at its heyday when many MPs were sitting in the board of directors and how many were they accepting then. This will give a true picture of how effective Hsien Loong’s message has gone down and how the MPs have started to tow the line.
Another area of investigative journalism that the people would like to see is the remuneration of Ministers last year. This will be a good reference point to compare the change when the Salary Review Committee comes out with its recommendations. The 2009 and 2010 remuneration payouts are of great interests to the public and should not be forgotten though a review is in progress. It is a kind of a milestone, from where it came and where it goes.
Or perhaps some statisticians in the new media may want to take on this task. Many are dying to know so that they can tell how far the Salary Review Committee has come.
It will be more interesting to know what the situation was like say a year ago or at its heyday when many MPs were sitting in the board of directors and how many were they accepting then. This will give a true picture of how effective Hsien Loong’s message has gone down and how the MPs have started to tow the line.
Another area of investigative journalism that the people would like to see is the remuneration of Ministers last year. This will be a good reference point to compare the change when the Salary Review Committee comes out with its recommendations. The 2009 and 2010 remuneration payouts are of great interests to the public and should not be forgotten though a review is in progress. It is a kind of a milestone, from where it came and where it goes.
Or perhaps some statisticians in the new media may want to take on this task. Many are dying to know so that they can tell how far the Salary Review Committee has come.
PAP sponsored Presidential candidate
Two interesting developments today with Nathan saying he has not decided if he should run another term and Tony Tan surfacing as a potential PAP sponsored candidate. This brings me to ponder over the selection process of a PAP sponsored candidate. Will it be similar to the Tea Party used to screen potential MPs for GE, where the candidates will go through some kind of interview before being offered to run? This would also imply that the final decision to field a candidate is decided by the PAP and not the candidate who says, ‘I want, I want.’ Or is it that a candidate first decide if he wants to run and then informs the PAP of his intent?
How would the few candidates fit into the PAP selection process or scheme of things? Presumably Tan Kin Lian and Tan Cheng Bock would not even be considered if they inform the PAP of their participation and hoping for the party’s support. What about George Yeo? Would he be considered a candidate for sponsorship?
If the PAP decides to sponsor George, and if Nathan also decides that he wants to run, and if Tony also comes into the picture, would we then have 3 PAP sponsored candidates to choose from? Or can the PAP say no to the candidates and only select one while the others can go and run as independent candidates like the two Tans? Interesting if both Nathan and Tony say yes and PAP says no to any one of them. It can also say no to George if he asks for the party’s sponsorship.
Then if they go ahead to run, they would then be running against the interests of the PAP or running against a PAP sponsored candidate? Now would that runs against the vein and ruffles a few feathers in the process?
How would the few candidates fit into the PAP selection process or scheme of things? Presumably Tan Kin Lian and Tan Cheng Bock would not even be considered if they inform the PAP of their participation and hoping for the party’s support. What about George Yeo? Would he be considered a candidate for sponsorship?
If the PAP decides to sponsor George, and if Nathan also decides that he wants to run, and if Tony also comes into the picture, would we then have 3 PAP sponsored candidates to choose from? Or can the PAP say no to the candidates and only select one while the others can go and run as independent candidates like the two Tans? Interesting if both Nathan and Tony say yes and PAP says no to any one of them. It can also say no to George if he asks for the party’s sponsorship.
Then if they go ahead to run, they would then be running against the interests of the PAP or running against a PAP sponsored candidate? Now would that runs against the vein and ruffles a few feathers in the process?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)