“If Singapore depends on the talent it can produce out of three million people, it’s not going to punch above its weight. Lee Kuan Yew
We were 1m, then 2m, then 3m before we added all the foreigners to 5m. When we were 1m and 2m, we were already producing the talents that built the foundation for our economic miracles. We were producing talented Singaporeans even then. Unless those were not talents, then we are just slapping our own stupid face.
Now we are 5m. Did the increased population with foreign talents, throw out any great talents? The only foreign talent that is worth mentioning is Olivia Lum of Hyflux. The rest were plain employees, sitting on their fat asses and get fat pay which any Singaporeans can also do so given the chance. Many of the CEO positions can easily be filled by Singaporeans and you will not see any difference in performance, maybe even better.
The three local banks were built by Singaporean talents. Without local talents there would not be any big local banks to think of. SIA, SMRT, Creative, Singtel were also locals. Not sure about Temasek and GIC. The hospitals with their specialists and state of the art equipments were mainly run by Singaporeans and Malaysians. By the way, I think Singaporeans have never regarded the Malaysians as foreigners historically.
Did we produce lesser talents when we were 1m and 2m than we are now? There are some great talents in R and D, imported. But these are instant trees. Would their offsprings be more talented than the offsprings of coolies and labourers, washerwomen and salesmen? What about the risk of offsprings from fake papers and fake talents?
If we can produce talents before, when we were 1m and 2m, I don’t see why we can’t produce talents when we are 3m. The bigger the population, the bigger the pool of genes, but not necessary will produce better talents. Many small countries are producing more talents than bigger countries with bigger populations.
Today we are punching above our weights by individuals who were produced during a time when the population was a million or less.
7/27/2011
Two party system will ruin Singapore
This is LKY’s view. In his one dimensional experience with Singapore, he can only see goodness in one party system and badness in everything else. I could up his ante by claiming that dictatorship is even better, without contention, with a dictator or emperor calling his shot, everything can be done at his beck and call. Super fast and super efficient, for good or for bad.
Really, every system is good and every system is bad. It all boils down to the goodness of the leader. A dictator or emperor can be an excellent leader and can bring progress and greatness to the country and people, provided his intention and goals are benevolent.
Historically the goodness of such leaders was often temporary as they soon got intoxicated by power and their own egoistic pride that they could do no wrong or they were gods. There have been many such examples when the leaders could not see glaring mistakes of their own. They will believe only in themselves and their self serving logic.
We have seen that, and have paid for it. All men are fallible and corrupt to a matter of degree. A one party system can be good but can also entrench corruption and misdeeds of the leaders. And in such a system it is very difficult to dislodge them and undo their wrongs. To make matter worst, one party rule or its dictatorial equivalents are often run by strong men that makes removing them even more difficult.
Two party and multi party systems have their strength and weaknesses as well. But given leaders with good intention, from both sides of the coin, it can be a more amiable system, more compassion, less brutal and brash in policy making. In a mature society where the leaders of both sides are made up of honourable men and women, knowledgeable and wiser, all striving for the good of country and people, and not self serving, it can be much better than single party system that often failed to check itself and its own abuses.
Single party or multi party systems are just systems. It is the leaders that make them good or bad. We have seen how a single party system can be good and also can be bad. It is not the panacea or the only panacea for good governance. It is as flawed as the leaders running it.
Really, every system is good and every system is bad. It all boils down to the goodness of the leader. A dictator or emperor can be an excellent leader and can bring progress and greatness to the country and people, provided his intention and goals are benevolent.
Historically the goodness of such leaders was often temporary as they soon got intoxicated by power and their own egoistic pride that they could do no wrong or they were gods. There have been many such examples when the leaders could not see glaring mistakes of their own. They will believe only in themselves and their self serving logic.
We have seen that, and have paid for it. All men are fallible and corrupt to a matter of degree. A one party system can be good but can also entrench corruption and misdeeds of the leaders. And in such a system it is very difficult to dislodge them and undo their wrongs. To make matter worst, one party rule or its dictatorial equivalents are often run by strong men that makes removing them even more difficult.
Two party and multi party systems have their strength and weaknesses as well. But given leaders with good intention, from both sides of the coin, it can be a more amiable system, more compassion, less brutal and brash in policy making. In a mature society where the leaders of both sides are made up of honourable men and women, knowledgeable and wiser, all striving for the good of country and people, and not self serving, it can be much better than single party system that often failed to check itself and its own abuses.
Single party or multi party systems are just systems. It is the leaders that make them good or bad. We have seen how a single party system can be good and also can be bad. It is not the panacea or the only panacea for good governance. It is as flawed as the leaders running it.
7/26/2011
Rise of a regional military power?
In his speech to the nation, Benigno Aquino III announced that he will increase the purchase of more weapons, including a patrol boat to defend the Spratley Islands. The Philippines will defend by force, in this case against China, and from his tones, will attack Chinese ships entering the area. China has to be careful of this rising military power and avoid sending its naval crafts as they will be attacked and probably sunk by the mighty Filipino Navy.
Aquino can talk loudly, while standing on the head of the Americans, waving the military treaty they have signed in the 1950s. While the Filipino patrol boats may be good only against fishing vessels, there lies, lurking in the dark and under the South China Sea, a mighty American fleet and submarines that are waiting for the Chinese ships. One can expect the Filipinos to fire at the Chinese fire to draw fire from the latter and the US jumping in to declare that China is bullying its smaller neighbours. And the White Knight will have all the reasons to flex its muscles and entrench their presence in the region.
The Americans may think that the Chinese will back off. They must not forget that China will not blink and will go to war when their territorial sovereignty is at risk, even taking on the mighty Americans. The emerging regional power or flotsam navy can continue shouting their lungs out and think that they have come off age. This dangerous pariah country is a risk to regional stability, thinking that it has the world’s biggest bully on its beck and call, and it can take on the Chinese. It is a frivolous and dangerous tribe.
Aquino can talk loudly, while standing on the head of the Americans, waving the military treaty they have signed in the 1950s. While the Filipino patrol boats may be good only against fishing vessels, there lies, lurking in the dark and under the South China Sea, a mighty American fleet and submarines that are waiting for the Chinese ships. One can expect the Filipinos to fire at the Chinese fire to draw fire from the latter and the US jumping in to declare that China is bullying its smaller neighbours. And the White Knight will have all the reasons to flex its muscles and entrench their presence in the region.
The Americans may think that the Chinese will back off. They must not forget that China will not blink and will go to war when their territorial sovereignty is at risk, even taking on the mighty Americans. The emerging regional power or flotsam navy can continue shouting their lungs out and think that they have come off age. This dangerous pariah country is a risk to regional stability, thinking that it has the world’s biggest bully on its beck and call, and it can take on the Chinese. It is a frivolous and dangerous tribe.
Legally right but morally wrong?
The issue of life long pensions in the millions is going to bug the govt and the people for a long time to come. Though everything has been above board, approved and passed in Parliament, something seems to be missing. Why are the people so unhappy about this pension scheme for the ministers and political office bearers?
Recently two ministers and an office holder lost their parliamentary seats. Several senior ministers were retired from the cabinet for good or not so good reasons. What is shocking is the revelation that they will all be receiving million dollar pensions for life, even if they are no longer ministers or office holders. What is more shocking is that many are already receiving million dollar pensions on top of their multi million dollar salaries when they hit 55, or have been receiving them for umpteen years. Some have been collecting the huge pensions for more than ten years.
What irks the people more is that the age for CPF withdrawal and retirement age for the public at large have been pushed further back. CPF savings can now be withdrawn partially at the age of 62. And the political leaders, with their huge salaries, are getting their huge pensions at 55.
Is this a case of legally right and morally wrong? Of course in cases of morality, everyone has his moral standards and everyone can claim to be on moral high grounds. The only hint of morally wrongdoing is that when the guilty party is afraid to stand up on the high box of morality to state his case. If it is morally right, everyone will jump on it to pronounce their innocence and that they are on high moral grounds for what they are doing.
Would the political leaders stand up and say that the high pensions are not only legally right but morally as well? Would they be able to tell straight in the eyes of entry level superscale admin officers in the H Grade, who are working their guts out, and drawing a couple of hundreds of thousand in annual income while they are receiving millions for life for doing nothing? Would there be a full disclosure on how many political leaders are already on the pension schemes and how many more will qualify and the cost to pay for these pensioned leaders? Even if it is going to cost only 2 plates of char kway teow, it is of public interest that the people should know.
It would be nice if this is reported in the next parliamentary sittings to clear whatever doubts and wrong perceptions there may be among the people. Political leaders must be seen to be standing on high moral grounds, not just legally. This issue has to be raised in Parliament and buried for good as the doubts and uneasiness are spreading quietly. Or would it ever be closed?
Recently two ministers and an office holder lost their parliamentary seats. Several senior ministers were retired from the cabinet for good or not so good reasons. What is shocking is the revelation that they will all be receiving million dollar pensions for life, even if they are no longer ministers or office holders. What is more shocking is that many are already receiving million dollar pensions on top of their multi million dollar salaries when they hit 55, or have been receiving them for umpteen years. Some have been collecting the huge pensions for more than ten years.
What irks the people more is that the age for CPF withdrawal and retirement age for the public at large have been pushed further back. CPF savings can now be withdrawn partially at the age of 62. And the political leaders, with their huge salaries, are getting their huge pensions at 55.
Is this a case of legally right and morally wrong? Of course in cases of morality, everyone has his moral standards and everyone can claim to be on moral high grounds. The only hint of morally wrongdoing is that when the guilty party is afraid to stand up on the high box of morality to state his case. If it is morally right, everyone will jump on it to pronounce their innocence and that they are on high moral grounds for what they are doing.
Would the political leaders stand up and say that the high pensions are not only legally right but morally as well? Would they be able to tell straight in the eyes of entry level superscale admin officers in the H Grade, who are working their guts out, and drawing a couple of hundreds of thousand in annual income while they are receiving millions for life for doing nothing? Would there be a full disclosure on how many political leaders are already on the pension schemes and how many more will qualify and the cost to pay for these pensioned leaders? Even if it is going to cost only 2 plates of char kway teow, it is of public interest that the people should know.
It would be nice if this is reported in the next parliamentary sittings to clear whatever doubts and wrong perceptions there may be among the people. Political leaders must be seen to be standing on high moral grounds, not just legally. This issue has to be raised in Parliament and buried for good as the doubts and uneasiness are spreading quietly. Or would it ever be closed?
7/25/2011
The Rise of Asia Forum at NUSS
Professor Kishore Mahbubani, would be speaking live on 27 July 2011 from 7.30-8.30pm. The event will be webcasted live through the dedicated website (http://ualive.nus.edu.sg) and also includes an interactive forum that allows viewers to send real time comments and questions to the speakers via Facebook, Twitter or MSN messenger while watching the live show. Viewers can watch the seminar live on Wednesday through the URL (http://ualive.nus.edu.sg).
In addition to live participation, we are also trying to encourage interested viewers to post and vote questions here (http://www.google.com/moderator/#15/e=a18b6&t=a18b6.40&f=a18b6.4e0cbe) from now till the actual event. These too will be addressed by the Professor.
In addition to live participation, we are also trying to encourage interested viewers to post and vote questions here (http://www.google.com/moderator/#15/e=a18b6&t=a18b6.40&f=a18b6.4e0cbe) from now till the actual event. These too will be addressed by the Professor.
Awesome Red Lions!
Watching the Singapore Malaysia soccer match on Saturday was so satisfying and with a sense of pride. For once, don’t have to shake the head so often for silly passes and silly mistakes. Wow, we played like a real contender for a place in the World Cup. All the Singaporeans supporters walked with a special air around them after the game.
I was cheering and screaming, ‘Go Qiu Li, Go!’ or ‘Go Jia Yi, Go!’ Then the two great goals by Duric, the old war horse, at 40, still beats every young lion to shame. But he scored. We may missed the 2010 deadline to be in the World Cup. But what the heck if we can make it in a couple of years later. The World Cup is where we are going.
Singaporeans are all so proud of our national football team.
I was cheering and screaming, ‘Go Qiu Li, Go!’ or ‘Go Jia Yi, Go!’ Then the two great goals by Duric, the old war horse, at 40, still beats every young lion to shame. But he scored. We may missed the 2010 deadline to be in the World Cup. But what the heck if we can make it in a couple of years later. The World Cup is where we are going.
Singaporeans are all so proud of our national football team.
Temasek Review unable to access
Whenever I hit the forum I will end up at some used car site or something else. Don't seem to be able to get in. Anyone able to get in? Something fishy eh?
The new meritocracy
Regardless of race, language or religion, regardless of one’s background, worker or RMS, everyone who is good can aspire to be the best he can be in paradise. Through education, everyone can change his station in life and rise to the top of his profession or calling.
For several decades, many Singaporeans have lived their dreams, many become successful and living well. Singapore is a land of opportunities. If one is good, one can do well. There are no serious false ceilings to talk about, except one or two.
The country is run on meritocracy. No favouritism. This meritocracy has taken on a new meaning, regardless of nationalities. We welcome foreign talents and they can find their dreams here based on meritocracy. Membership has its privileges but meritocracy is paramount. Citizens that are no good will be discarded based on merits.
The new National Day Pledge may need a little modifications like the Gaga Song. We the people of Singapore, regardless of race, language, religion or nationalities….The National Day Message must be one where we acknowledge that we welcome foreign talents based on meritocracy. Maybe they can become political leaders and run for PM and the Elected Presidency as well.
One more thing, all the restrictions against foreign talents owning or buying properties must be removed. We cannot discriminate against our foreign talents. And so are all the unjust policies where foreigners should pay more for this or that. Let this be a truly meritocratic country where talents are welcomed from across the world, to help the daft Singaporeans and to give them a lift to better life.
For several decades, many Singaporeans have lived their dreams, many become successful and living well. Singapore is a land of opportunities. If one is good, one can do well. There are no serious false ceilings to talk about, except one or two.
The country is run on meritocracy. No favouritism. This meritocracy has taken on a new meaning, regardless of nationalities. We welcome foreign talents and they can find their dreams here based on meritocracy. Membership has its privileges but meritocracy is paramount. Citizens that are no good will be discarded based on merits.
The new National Day Pledge may need a little modifications like the Gaga Song. We the people of Singapore, regardless of race, language, religion or nationalities….The National Day Message must be one where we acknowledge that we welcome foreign talents based on meritocracy. Maybe they can become political leaders and run for PM and the Elected Presidency as well.
One more thing, all the restrictions against foreign talents owning or buying properties must be removed. We cannot discriminate against our foreign talents. And so are all the unjust policies where foreigners should pay more for this or that. Let this be a truly meritocratic country where talents are welcomed from across the world, to help the daft Singaporeans and to give them a lift to better life.
Vote PAP for more FT Policy?
Would this be the election slogan of PAP in 2016? The praises heaped by LKY on the great contributions of the foreigners and how Singapore owed them for being what we are today is a clear message that this country, or is it a country, must continue to depend on more foreigners to bring a better life to the daft Singaporeans. During his speech, and Hsien Loong’s, the immigration door is fully thrown open, an open invitation for more foreigners to come ashore. 900,000 may now be an under estimation.
We are going to celebrate our National Day in another few weeks. 46 years of independence and nation building and economic progress. We owe it all to the foreigners. Without the foreigners, we would not be punching above our weight. I think I saw a rat standing on the head of a lion and thinking it is roaring like a lion. That is beside the point. The truth is that for 46 years, the daft Singaporeans were sleeping. Or they were lazy and not contributing anything useful to the progress of this place.
Today, they woke up to enjoy all the good stuffs, and have the foreigners to thank for. I fear the day the foreigners leave or stop coming, the island will sink, and yes, all the women folks will end up as foreign maids. And everything will ground to a halt. The daft Singaporeans will not be able to do anything to maintain the prosperity and growth of this island. And all will become the poor coolies like their forefathers one more time.
And by then, regrets will be too late. Without the foreigners and their talents, we will be finished. Quickly change the National Day message to make sure the foreigners get it, that they are indispensable to our well being and we will kneel down to beg them to come and stay with us, and have our jobs, the jobs that we are unable to do for the lack of talents. Majulah, the Singapore Spirit? Or Majulah, the FT Spirit!
I am convinced by the powerful arguments. I am a new convert. I will join the 60%. It may be a bit too late to change the theme of this year’s National Day Parade of the Singapore Spirit. I hope the foreign talents will not be offended. The theme for the next NDP is obvious. We shall celebrate the Foreign Spirit. Our FTs will be honoured and be invited to be the VIPs. Dick Lee and his gang, please step aside. We will bring in some FTs to write a FT song for the parade. After so many years of praising our coolie spirit and how a fishing village became a modern city, it is time to honour the true contributors to our progress, so that we can punch above our weight.
I am getting excited about the thoughts of NDP 2012. It is so refreshing.
We are going to celebrate our National Day in another few weeks. 46 years of independence and nation building and economic progress. We owe it all to the foreigners. Without the foreigners, we would not be punching above our weight. I think I saw a rat standing on the head of a lion and thinking it is roaring like a lion. That is beside the point. The truth is that for 46 years, the daft Singaporeans were sleeping. Or they were lazy and not contributing anything useful to the progress of this place.
Today, they woke up to enjoy all the good stuffs, and have the foreigners to thank for. I fear the day the foreigners leave or stop coming, the island will sink, and yes, all the women folks will end up as foreign maids. And everything will ground to a halt. The daft Singaporeans will not be able to do anything to maintain the prosperity and growth of this island. And all will become the poor coolies like their forefathers one more time.
And by then, regrets will be too late. Without the foreigners and their talents, we will be finished. Quickly change the National Day message to make sure the foreigners get it, that they are indispensable to our well being and we will kneel down to beg them to come and stay with us, and have our jobs, the jobs that we are unable to do for the lack of talents. Majulah, the Singapore Spirit? Or Majulah, the FT Spirit!
I am convinced by the powerful arguments. I am a new convert. I will join the 60%. It may be a bit too late to change the theme of this year’s National Day Parade of the Singapore Spirit. I hope the foreign talents will not be offended. The theme for the next NDP is obvious. We shall celebrate the Foreign Spirit. Our FTs will be honoured and be invited to be the VIPs. Dick Lee and his gang, please step aside. We will bring in some FTs to write a FT song for the parade. After so many years of praising our coolie spirit and how a fishing village became a modern city, it is time to honour the true contributors to our progress, so that we can punch above our weight.
I am getting excited about the thoughts of NDP 2012. It is so refreshing.
7/24/2011
The bankrupt hijacking ARF agenda
The Asean Regional Forum in Indonesia came to a peaceful closed but not before the world’s biggest bankrupt nation tried to hijack its agenda. Last year it tried to take over the leadership by nominating itself as the arbiter of the South China Sea disputes between China and its southern neighbours. This failed.
This year it tried a different methodology, insisting that all parties must show legal proof for their territorial claims, which Hillary Clinton forgot, would only weaken the claims of Vietnam, the Philippines and the rest of the Asean states involved. The Chinese have written records long before these states became countries and nations and have their own written languages. The Chinese were sailing the South China Seas long before these states built a boat that was more than 10m long and could sail the high seas.
Hillary still declared that ‘These incidents endanger the safety of life at sea, escalate tensions, undermine freedom of navigation and pose risks to lawful, unimpeded commerce and economic development.’ This was poof poofed by Yang Jie Chi, Chinese Foreign Minister who said China guaranteed freedom of navigation in the region and the proof was that no one had its freedom to sail in the seas impeded.
What Hillary wanted was the American’s version of peace and stability, without endangering safety of life, escalating tension, like in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, with American’s military might in full play. Fortunately the Asean states and China would not be drawn into a conflict dictated by the Americans and turn the region into another Afghanistan or the Middle East.
A bankrupt country, with US$14 trillion in debt, and expending US$4 trillion in the Afghan and Middle East Wars, is trying to start another war in East Asia. Now how much is US$14 trillion? The combined economy of Asean and Australia is only US$3 trillion. That is how big the American debt. And the Americans could not see the bleeding. They are running out of American dollars and could only resort to printing and printing. It is only a matter of time before they bleed to death. They just have no money to continue with their wars and war mongering. Every conflict, every day of wars is going to be every costly, and the clock is running before they end up like the former Soviet Union. The Americans would soon join the ranks of beggar countries.
The Americans again left the ARF empty handed, banging and pulling their hair with no one listening to their nonsense and war mongering.
This year it tried a different methodology, insisting that all parties must show legal proof for their territorial claims, which Hillary Clinton forgot, would only weaken the claims of Vietnam, the Philippines and the rest of the Asean states involved. The Chinese have written records long before these states became countries and nations and have their own written languages. The Chinese were sailing the South China Seas long before these states built a boat that was more than 10m long and could sail the high seas.
Hillary still declared that ‘These incidents endanger the safety of life at sea, escalate tensions, undermine freedom of navigation and pose risks to lawful, unimpeded commerce and economic development.’ This was poof poofed by Yang Jie Chi, Chinese Foreign Minister who said China guaranteed freedom of navigation in the region and the proof was that no one had its freedom to sail in the seas impeded.
What Hillary wanted was the American’s version of peace and stability, without endangering safety of life, escalating tension, like in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, with American’s military might in full play. Fortunately the Asean states and China would not be drawn into a conflict dictated by the Americans and turn the region into another Afghanistan or the Middle East.
A bankrupt country, with US$14 trillion in debt, and expending US$4 trillion in the Afghan and Middle East Wars, is trying to start another war in East Asia. Now how much is US$14 trillion? The combined economy of Asean and Australia is only US$3 trillion. That is how big the American debt. And the Americans could not see the bleeding. They are running out of American dollars and could only resort to printing and printing. It is only a matter of time before they bleed to death. They just have no money to continue with their wars and war mongering. Every conflict, every day of wars is going to be every costly, and the clock is running before they end up like the former Soviet Union. The Americans would soon join the ranks of beggar countries.
The Americans again left the ARF empty handed, banging and pulling their hair with no one listening to their nonsense and war mongering.
The Govt’s responsibility in Education
The top and foremost responsibility of the Govt is to provide good and affordable education for the people. Tsk, my first sentence is already flawed when people argued that with so many loans, financial assistance schemes and bursaries available, our students need not come out with any cash outlay to study in our universities. It would be better to say that they can study for free, like my mother used to say, govt hospitals are free, can pay by CPF, no need money.
Back to my first principle, the Govt’s responsibility to its people, the tax payers, the people that will defend this country in the event of war or crisis. It is very painful and disgusting to hear of Singaporeans, fully qualified, with distinctions, with very good grades but unable to find places in our local universities. And the parents, some are able financially, some have to sell their homes or take loans, to send their children overseas. And the sickening cause of this, many university places were given to foreign students.
What is our govt’s responsibility to these foreign students that ended with our children being pushed aside, our citizens being discriminated and have to suffer financial obligations when they don’t have to? Does our Govt owe an obligation or duty to educate the foreign students? Is the Govt doing an international social duty to provide some places to foreign students? Or is provision of university places for foreign students a way to up the rankings of our universities? Or is it a revenue generating source? This is unlikely as many were here on full scholarships, fees and lodging and allowances.
Look at the practices of the European countries, the countries that we always used as our role models. Why are they accepting foreign students? Are they doing so at the expense of their own people? If I am not wrong, many are doing so to generate revenue. And they have spare capacities to do so without compromising the interests of their citizens. The least thing in their mind in accepting foreign students is for their rankings to look good. If this is the reason, it is plain silly.
If we want to take in more foreign students, by all means, go ahead, to make money, to provide more vibrancy and diversity, but never do it at the expense of our own people. If the foreign intake is going to be big, increase the capacities. If this cannot be done, then don’t do it. There is no greater reason to take in more foreign students only to force our own to study elsewhere. For those who have the means and wanted to study overseas, as a matter of choice is irrelevant.
Let’s treat our people well. Our people are deserving of a good education at home, first. Foreigners must be second. If need be, build another university for the foreign students, and funded by the tuition fees. And whatever ‘subsidies’ the Govt chooses to provide.
Singaporeans first must be real and seen to be real. Talk is cheap and the Govt will have to pay the price for neglecting the interests of its own people and for frolicking with foreigners. The Singaporeans are not daft. They know what is good and what is bad for them, especially when their pockets are hurt real bad.
Back to my first principle, the Govt’s responsibility to its people, the tax payers, the people that will defend this country in the event of war or crisis. It is very painful and disgusting to hear of Singaporeans, fully qualified, with distinctions, with very good grades but unable to find places in our local universities. And the parents, some are able financially, some have to sell their homes or take loans, to send their children overseas. And the sickening cause of this, many university places were given to foreign students.
What is our govt’s responsibility to these foreign students that ended with our children being pushed aside, our citizens being discriminated and have to suffer financial obligations when they don’t have to? Does our Govt owe an obligation or duty to educate the foreign students? Is the Govt doing an international social duty to provide some places to foreign students? Or is provision of university places for foreign students a way to up the rankings of our universities? Or is it a revenue generating source? This is unlikely as many were here on full scholarships, fees and lodging and allowances.
Look at the practices of the European countries, the countries that we always used as our role models. Why are they accepting foreign students? Are they doing so at the expense of their own people? If I am not wrong, many are doing so to generate revenue. And they have spare capacities to do so without compromising the interests of their citizens. The least thing in their mind in accepting foreign students is for their rankings to look good. If this is the reason, it is plain silly.
If we want to take in more foreign students, by all means, go ahead, to make money, to provide more vibrancy and diversity, but never do it at the expense of our own people. If the foreign intake is going to be big, increase the capacities. If this cannot be done, then don’t do it. There is no greater reason to take in more foreign students only to force our own to study elsewhere. For those who have the means and wanted to study overseas, as a matter of choice is irrelevant.
Let’s treat our people well. Our people are deserving of a good education at home, first. Foreigners must be second. If need be, build another university for the foreign students, and funded by the tuition fees. And whatever ‘subsidies’ the Govt chooses to provide.
Singaporeans first must be real and seen to be real. Talk is cheap and the Govt will have to pay the price for neglecting the interests of its own people and for frolicking with foreigners. The Singaporeans are not daft. They know what is good and what is bad for them, especially when their pockets are hurt real bad.
7/23/2011
Distorting an argument
Argue for argument’s sake. Argue just to win. Argue just to insist that one is right despite all the evidences proving against it. This seems to be the position many have taken in the issue of foreign talents in Singapore. We need foreign talents or else we will not be where we are today. Yes and no.
In a way, practically every Singaporean is a foreign talent. Our forefathers were migrants, so we are migrants. Up to a point, I may say yes, our forefathers were migrants. But we Singaporeans born and bred here are not migrants. We were the original people here on first principles just like the aborigines of every country were the first people. There were some locals but not many. Our forefathers built this place and we inherited from them as the first owners of this land. Subsequently the Johnnys come lately are the migrants, the foreigners. This is where the line I like to draw. We are not migrants in this sense. So for those who still want to push the argument that since our forefathers were migrants, there is nothing wrong with welcoming more migrants. I say bull. Our forefathers maybe migrants but we are not.
And neither are Singaporeans anti foreign talents. Which clown still harping on this point that Singaporeans are anti foreigners? No one is anti foreign talents. So anyone accusing Singaporeans for being anti foreign talents is talking through his arsehole. The crux of the matter, of why this foreign talent issue becomes such a pain, is that many were not really talents vis a vis Singaporeans. And worst, they were made to look better than Singaporeans and given plump jobs which otherwise would have been given to Singaporeans. The other issue is the over crowding which I am not addressing here.
Singaporeans would have no difficulty accepting real foreign talents. Singaporeans would have not difficulty if a position has to be filled by a foreign talent because of job specific needs or because no Singaporean is good enough for it. We need an angmoh face to look good. Ok, get an angmoh. The good examples are the CEOs of SMRT, DBS, SGX, OCBC, and even some positions in the academia. These are talents that are much superior to Singaporeans, or jobs that no Singaporean is good enough to do. I read in the paper that it took SATS 37 years before they were able to find a Singaporean good enough to fill the job of a CEO. Now he has just left, and very likely a foreigner will replaced him as Singaporeans talented in airline food is hard to come by.
And Mediacorp finally got a Singaporean to be its CEO, a President scholar, when they could not find a more talented man than him after months of search. If they could, this President Scholar Singaporean too will have to play second fiddle. Oh, I forgot, even MPs and Ministers, when they can’t find Singaporeans good enough, they can find foreign substitutes.
When and which Singaporean is against genuine and real foreign talents? Please lah, don’t talk nonsense and argue for the sake of arguing. Singaporeans will continue to be pissed off with ‘foreign talents’ when the foreign talents are not really talents or anything better than Singaporean talents. Singaporeans will continue to be pissed off when jobs that Singaporeans can easily filled but given to foreigners who are no better than them, which is a great insult to our own people.
Seriously, how many of the top jobs given to foreigners cannot be filled by Singaporeans? Seriously, do we need foreigner, or new citizens to be MPs? Oh, we have many great ministers that were foreigners. This was due to a different stage in our history when we were a new nation. Even Boon Wan has been living here and a citizen for many years and not really new. Now what is new? No need silly reasons to win this argument.
Can Singapore do better without the average ‘foreign talents’ or the many fake talents with fake papers? Having said all this, I am sure all Singaporeans will agree with me in showing our appreciation to all the real foreign talents that really make a difference to our economy and well being. No one will deny their great contributions. But please lah, nothing great about the average foreigners that are here to contribute to be the bread and butter in our society and to deprive jobs and university places that should rightly go to Singaporeans. This is like being sold out, betrayed.
I can only say one thing. They refused to listen to what the Singaporeans are saying and refused to understand them.
In a way, practically every Singaporean is a foreign talent. Our forefathers were migrants, so we are migrants. Up to a point, I may say yes, our forefathers were migrants. But we Singaporeans born and bred here are not migrants. We were the original people here on first principles just like the aborigines of every country were the first people. There were some locals but not many. Our forefathers built this place and we inherited from them as the first owners of this land. Subsequently the Johnnys come lately are the migrants, the foreigners. This is where the line I like to draw. We are not migrants in this sense. So for those who still want to push the argument that since our forefathers were migrants, there is nothing wrong with welcoming more migrants. I say bull. Our forefathers maybe migrants but we are not.
And neither are Singaporeans anti foreign talents. Which clown still harping on this point that Singaporeans are anti foreigners? No one is anti foreign talents. So anyone accusing Singaporeans for being anti foreign talents is talking through his arsehole. The crux of the matter, of why this foreign talent issue becomes such a pain, is that many were not really talents vis a vis Singaporeans. And worst, they were made to look better than Singaporeans and given plump jobs which otherwise would have been given to Singaporeans. The other issue is the over crowding which I am not addressing here.
Singaporeans would have no difficulty accepting real foreign talents. Singaporeans would have not difficulty if a position has to be filled by a foreign talent because of job specific needs or because no Singaporean is good enough for it. We need an angmoh face to look good. Ok, get an angmoh. The good examples are the CEOs of SMRT, DBS, SGX, OCBC, and even some positions in the academia. These are talents that are much superior to Singaporeans, or jobs that no Singaporean is good enough to do. I read in the paper that it took SATS 37 years before they were able to find a Singaporean good enough to fill the job of a CEO. Now he has just left, and very likely a foreigner will replaced him as Singaporeans talented in airline food is hard to come by.
And Mediacorp finally got a Singaporean to be its CEO, a President scholar, when they could not find a more talented man than him after months of search. If they could, this President Scholar Singaporean too will have to play second fiddle. Oh, I forgot, even MPs and Ministers, when they can’t find Singaporeans good enough, they can find foreign substitutes.
When and which Singaporean is against genuine and real foreign talents? Please lah, don’t talk nonsense and argue for the sake of arguing. Singaporeans will continue to be pissed off with ‘foreign talents’ when the foreign talents are not really talents or anything better than Singaporean talents. Singaporeans will continue to be pissed off when jobs that Singaporeans can easily filled but given to foreigners who are no better than them, which is a great insult to our own people.
Seriously, how many of the top jobs given to foreigners cannot be filled by Singaporeans? Seriously, do we need foreigner, or new citizens to be MPs? Oh, we have many great ministers that were foreigners. This was due to a different stage in our history when we were a new nation. Even Boon Wan has been living here and a citizen for many years and not really new. Now what is new? No need silly reasons to win this argument.
Can Singapore do better without the average ‘foreign talents’ or the many fake talents with fake papers? Having said all this, I am sure all Singaporeans will agree with me in showing our appreciation to all the real foreign talents that really make a difference to our economy and well being. No one will deny their great contributions. But please lah, nothing great about the average foreigners that are here to contribute to be the bread and butter in our society and to deprive jobs and university places that should rightly go to Singaporeans. This is like being sold out, betrayed.
I can only say one thing. They refused to listen to what the Singaporeans are saying and refused to understand them.
7/22/2011
Can the President speak?
Elgin Toh talks about the right of free speech by the Elected President in his article in the ST today. Apparently, the official position is that the EP has no right to speak independently as a President. This is what the Prime Minister’s Office said, ‘It is not the president’s role to support or oppose the govt of the day or to advance his own agenda or policies’. Shanmugam was also quoted as saying, ‘National policies and running of the Govt are the responsibility of the prime minister and Cabinet…’
So, if the governing of the country is none of the EP’s concern, does he have a right to speak for or against govt policies? It is not his role to support or oppose? What does this mean? He cannot talk about them except speaking neutrally or no comments?
He is not allowed to have his own agenda or policies. It is as good as saying, please shut up. Let’s gag the President. I am in favour of it as he is basically a ceremonial piece, good for waving hands during National Days or shaking hands with foreign dignitaries and the people visiting the Istana grounds and engages in the exchanges of pleasantries. No, he can be an extension of the govt, by speaking in favour of govt policies and agenda. He can also promote trades!
Why the hell is the President being paid $4m annually, and maybe another 10 or 20 mths of bonuses when he is just what he is constitutionally, a rubber stamp? How to justify this kind of obscene pay?
So, if the governing of the country is none of the EP’s concern, does he have a right to speak for or against govt policies? It is not his role to support or oppose? What does this mean? He cannot talk about them except speaking neutrally or no comments?
He is not allowed to have his own agenda or policies. It is as good as saying, please shut up. Let’s gag the President. I am in favour of it as he is basically a ceremonial piece, good for waving hands during National Days or shaking hands with foreign dignitaries and the people visiting the Istana grounds and engages in the exchanges of pleasantries. No, he can be an extension of the govt, by speaking in favour of govt policies and agenda. He can also promote trades!
Why the hell is the President being paid $4m annually, and maybe another 10 or 20 mths of bonuses when he is just what he is constitutionally, a rubber stamp? How to justify this kind of obscene pay?
UK more corrupt than it thinks
The mypaper picked a very interesting article about how corrupt the UK is though it looks clean and good in public. The choice is timely, as it seeks to expose corrupt govts hiding under the veil of legality and decency through the use of camouflage and control of the media. I will just quote some of the pertinent verses by Peter Apps, a REUTERS Analysis, below. Read them and reflect a moment on their relevance to present day context.
‘Britons love to lecture the world about integrity and the rule of law, but the News of the World phone hacking scandal has laid bare a web of collusion between money, power, media and the police.
Behind the façade of probity, London offers a haven for oligarchs and despots, a place where foreign media magnates have bought access to and influence over the govt….
In fact, it points to a bigger problem in British society – overly cosy relationships among elites that are ethically dangerous, even when they do not involve outright criminality….
“It is ….often a more sophisticated form of high level political corruption. It may not be strictly illegal – or it may be more subtle – but that does not mean it is not very costly for society or the economy,” said Dr Kaufmann, a former director of the World Bank Institute….If unchecked, “elite capture” of political systems can become “privatization of public policy”….
Transparency International published a report earlier this month titled Britain: More Corrupt than You Think, showing that the majority of people believed corruption was worsening in the country….”The long term result is likely to be a further erosion in the credibility of the British establishment, particularly the media and the police, in the eyes of the citizens.”
‘Britons love to lecture the world about integrity and the rule of law, but the News of the World phone hacking scandal has laid bare a web of collusion between money, power, media and the police.
Behind the façade of probity, London offers a haven for oligarchs and despots, a place where foreign media magnates have bought access to and influence over the govt….
In fact, it points to a bigger problem in British society – overly cosy relationships among elites that are ethically dangerous, even when they do not involve outright criminality….
“It is ….often a more sophisticated form of high level political corruption. It may not be strictly illegal – or it may be more subtle – but that does not mean it is not very costly for society or the economy,” said Dr Kaufmann, a former director of the World Bank Institute….If unchecked, “elite capture” of political systems can become “privatization of public policy”….
Transparency International published a report earlier this month titled Britain: More Corrupt than You Think, showing that the majority of people believed corruption was worsening in the country….”The long term result is likely to be a further erosion in the credibility of the British establishment, particularly the media and the police, in the eyes of the citizens.”
7/21/2011
Battlestar Galactica Episode 2
‘Funny how SIA keeps putting foreigners in charge at their ICC (low cost carrier). Don’t they have faith in Singaporeans. I do. My Commercial Head is a Singapore. Odd company. If I were a Singaporean, I would really be upset with SIA.’ Tony Fernandez. CEO Air Asia
What Fernandez is saying is part of the Battlestar Galactica plot. There can be several reasons for this. One is that Singaporeans are really inepts despite their great paper grades. Two Singaporeans lack confidence and need to hide behind a European face to do business. The colonial hangover is difficult to treat. Four, and this is like doing a Michael Jackson act. No I am not white. It is natural, or a disease. Not my fault.
Don’t be surprise the next President could be George Bush or Bill Clinton if they are willing to change to a pink IC. Anyone clamouring to have Queen Elizabeth II as our head of state again? We will have Prince William and Princess Kate gracing our community centres and flagging off our marathons. Nice, ain’t it?
What Fernandez is saying is part of the Battlestar Galactica plot. There can be several reasons for this. One is that Singaporeans are really inepts despite their great paper grades. Two Singaporeans lack confidence and need to hide behind a European face to do business. The colonial hangover is difficult to treat. Four, and this is like doing a Michael Jackson act. No I am not white. It is natural, or a disease. Not my fault.
Don’t be surprise the next President could be George Bush or Bill Clinton if they are willing to change to a pink IC. Anyone clamouring to have Queen Elizabeth II as our head of state again? We will have Prince William and Princess Kate gracing our community centres and flagging off our marathons. Nice, ain’t it?
My second daft Singaporean story for the day
Transport fares are going up, as sure as the sun will rise. This law is more permanent and unyielding than the law of gravity. So what can the Singaporeans do? KPKB is one thing. The next logical thing in the daft Singaporean mind is to say, fare goes up we want to see improvement in services. If no improvement, cannot.
So they are willing to concede to have more fare hikes if there is improvement in services. And they are still complaining that the service quality is bad. Now what does this mean? After 10 or 20 fare hikes, the same daft Singaporeans demanding that service quality be improved and the promises that fare hikes would lead to improvements, and what is the situation now?
Was there any improvement in the service quality after every fare hike? Or would this call for improvement be just a lip service that the daft Singaporeans sought to appease themselves, that there is nothing else they could do? If I were the operator, I will simply say the fare hike will improve the service quality.
Come next year, ask for fare hike to improve quality again. Imagine if there were 20 fare hikes and really 20 times improvement in quality, our transport services must be the best in the world. What or where were the improvements after every fare hike?
But of course, this time the call for fare hike is not to improve service quality but due to higher cost, petrol, manpower and also new buses. Ok, the later could be related to better services, with new and more comfortable buses. But the main part is higher cost. So what is this call about improving services?
So they are willing to concede to have more fare hikes if there is improvement in services. And they are still complaining that the service quality is bad. Now what does this mean? After 10 or 20 fare hikes, the same daft Singaporeans demanding that service quality be improved and the promises that fare hikes would lead to improvements, and what is the situation now?
Was there any improvement in the service quality after every fare hike? Or would this call for improvement be just a lip service that the daft Singaporeans sought to appease themselves, that there is nothing else they could do? If I were the operator, I will simply say the fare hike will improve the service quality.
Come next year, ask for fare hike to improve quality again. Imagine if there were 20 fare hikes and really 20 times improvement in quality, our transport services must be the best in the world. What or where were the improvements after every fare hike?
But of course, this time the call for fare hike is not to improve service quality but due to higher cost, petrol, manpower and also new buses. Ok, the later could be related to better services, with new and more comfortable buses. But the main part is higher cost. So what is this call about improving services?
Myth 230 - The Presidential Myth
Before 31 Aug is up Singaporeans would have voted for a Tan to be their next Elected President. And many are gearing up for the event, to decide who they want as the President. They want to use their vote to pick their man. This is one myth that they did not bother to think about. No they did not decide, or cannot decide, who should be their man to be President.
No? The man to be the next Elected President will be decided by the Presidential Election Council, by three wise men. They will pick the man or men whom they decide will be suitable to be the President of Singapore. Only then can the Singaporean cast their vote. If they so decide on one candidate, Singaporeans would LL have to accept it. So, who decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? The citizens?
Then again, this is only one of the myths. The second myth is that the three men could only decide on whoever was deemed good enough, eligible, by someone else. The criteria, the conditions were already decided before the three wise men can say who? This is the bigger myth that daft Singaporeans totally forgotten. That is why we need more thinking foreigners to lead the unthinking and simplistic Singaporeans. They simply can’t think, can’t see anything beyond their noses.
Who really decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? You tell me.
No? The man to be the next Elected President will be decided by the Presidential Election Council, by three wise men. They will pick the man or men whom they decide will be suitable to be the President of Singapore. Only then can the Singaporean cast their vote. If they so decide on one candidate, Singaporeans would LL have to accept it. So, who decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? The citizens?
Then again, this is only one of the myths. The second myth is that the three men could only decide on whoever was deemed good enough, eligible, by someone else. The criteria, the conditions were already decided before the three wise men can say who? This is the bigger myth that daft Singaporeans totally forgotten. That is why we need more thinking foreigners to lead the unthinking and simplistic Singaporeans. They simply can’t think, can’t see anything beyond their noses.
Who really decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? You tell me.
7/20/2011
Let’s teach the Brits
Rupert Murdoch was quoted to have told the British Govt that they should emulate Singapore in paying millions to their political leaders. In that way the politicians can be cleaner and less corrupt, no need to resort to making spurious expense claims, or having dinners with him and Murdoch picking up the tabs. I think this is a wise thing to say.
Singapore has the cleanest and least corrupt govt in the world, by paying them not to be corrupt. We should share our world best formula with the British and the West, plus the ingenious arguments. They will be very thankful that they could finally learn something from the East. We are the pathfinders for a govt that is not corrupt, with a pay that is so good that makes corruption obsolete.
The British and the Americans would surely love the formula. Obama could be looking at $200m and David Cameron could probably be looking at 50m sterling pounds. Given that they have not been corrupted with their present salaries, maybe a 50% discount from these amounts would be enough to send them to the moon in glee.
Singapore has the cleanest and least corrupt govt in the world, by paying them not to be corrupt. We should share our world best formula with the British and the West, plus the ingenious arguments. They will be very thankful that they could finally learn something from the East. We are the pathfinders for a govt that is not corrupt, with a pay that is so good that makes corruption obsolete.
The British and the Americans would surely love the formula. Obama could be looking at $200m and David Cameron could probably be looking at 50m sterling pounds. Given that they have not been corrupted with their present salaries, maybe a 50% discount from these amounts would be enough to send them to the moon in glee.
If we do away with the President…
Think of all the advantages of doing away with the president. I can think of all the good things and nothing bad. There is no need to hold on to this historical legacy. Why waste so much money and land just to keep up such an image? Even the British were thinking of doing away with their monarchy many years back. The only reason is that the British monarchy provides jobs for the people. Dunno who is paying for it.
In our case we don’t need those jobs. We have full employment and the staff can be deployed into more productive areas. But don’t think of building properties on the Istana land for sale. Keep it as a green lung, a park in the city for the benefits of the people, everyday, not 3 or 4 times a year. The property belongs to the people and everyone should be allowed to benefit from it, not a few individuals under the present system.
And I am sure our foreign workers would love to have the Istana park for leisure over the weekend. We need all the free space we can get hold of to share with the people and to loosen up the crunch.
So much money saved. And no need to spend time and money just to elect a ceremonial head that is mainly a rubber stamp but collecting millions and millions from the public coffer. This is definitely bad.
How many of you agree with doing away with this office? To me it is not an institution that is a must have, definitely no need to be so costly. If we are so preoccupied with high offices or monarchys, it may be more romantic to instal a royal family. Then we can have coronations, prince and princess, uncles and aunties of royal families. These will be good stuff for fairy tale authors and the media.
In our case we don’t need those jobs. We have full employment and the staff can be deployed into more productive areas. But don’t think of building properties on the Istana land for sale. Keep it as a green lung, a park in the city for the benefits of the people, everyday, not 3 or 4 times a year. The property belongs to the people and everyone should be allowed to benefit from it, not a few individuals under the present system.
And I am sure our foreign workers would love to have the Istana park for leisure over the weekend. We need all the free space we can get hold of to share with the people and to loosen up the crunch.
So much money saved. And no need to spend time and money just to elect a ceremonial head that is mainly a rubber stamp but collecting millions and millions from the public coffer. This is definitely bad.
How many of you agree with doing away with this office? To me it is not an institution that is a must have, definitely no need to be so costly. If we are so preoccupied with high offices or monarchys, it may be more romantic to instal a royal family. Then we can have coronations, prince and princess, uncles and aunties of royal families. These will be good stuff for fairy tale authors and the media.
Battlestar Galactica Singapore
I was reading the discussion on how the three universities have been colonized by foreigners. Oops, maybe colonized is not an appropriate term. There seems to be a pre occupation and adoration of foreigners from academic staff to students. Some said it got to do with the rankings. The more foreign or alien elements there are, the higher will be the rankings for the universities. I say, to hell with it. If our university’s high rankings are due to the presence of foreigners and not the quality of local staff and local students, forget it. Want Liverpool to represent Singapore in the World Cup?
Then again, many will disagree with me. A brand, a good brand, is important. Who cares if the handbags are made in China or Thailand. They care if it is meant to be made in Italy but then found to be from China. Other than this little aberration, a top brand is a top brand. Made in China or Thailand or Indonesia, also can. Actually some of the products out sourced to these countries are still working just as well. My Nikon is made in China.
How could this relate to a degree Made in Singapore but with academics from Europe and America and students from third world countries? Yes, on paper the ranking is high and nice, maybe close to Harvard, MIT or Cambridge huh? Can stand side by side with such premier academia must be good. But would employers buy the degree and say good degree? Would the graduates be sought after as quality graduates? Or would employers go after graduates from third world countries for cheapos or graduates from second or third tier universities in western universities as quality? The job market never lies. The truth is out there.
What about Battlestar Galactica? Are our universities turning into Battlestar Galactica? Those of you who have watched this Hollywood creation will know who are the masters and the majority in Battlestar Galactica. They ruled the universe. Is this the bigger game plan, to turn Singapore into a Battlestar Galactica where the locals will play second fiddles, as supporting casts? Yes Captain, what’s his name? Not Spock, something more western. Oh yes, Commander William Adama, I think.
No lah, this cannot be lah. It is Singaporeans first. Just look at some of the big local institutions headed by foreigners for a little contradictions. But can’t blame these institutions as the local employees are just not good enough. It is the low quality of locals to be blamed. Would UOB be headed by a foreign talent soon? What about SIA, GIC, Temasek?
Battlestar Galactica cannot be the big game plan. It would only become a reality out of necessity and circumstances, when the locals are not good enough, that our world best and highly ranked universities are unable to produce the world best local talents to put the mantra ‘Singaporeans first’ into a national practice, where Singaporeans will be highly sought after to head our big institutions.
For the time being, Battlestar Galactica Singapore will sail on to bring glory to Singapore.
Then again, many will disagree with me. A brand, a good brand, is important. Who cares if the handbags are made in China or Thailand. They care if it is meant to be made in Italy but then found to be from China. Other than this little aberration, a top brand is a top brand. Made in China or Thailand or Indonesia, also can. Actually some of the products out sourced to these countries are still working just as well. My Nikon is made in China.
How could this relate to a degree Made in Singapore but with academics from Europe and America and students from third world countries? Yes, on paper the ranking is high and nice, maybe close to Harvard, MIT or Cambridge huh? Can stand side by side with such premier academia must be good. But would employers buy the degree and say good degree? Would the graduates be sought after as quality graduates? Or would employers go after graduates from third world countries for cheapos or graduates from second or third tier universities in western universities as quality? The job market never lies. The truth is out there.
What about Battlestar Galactica? Are our universities turning into Battlestar Galactica? Those of you who have watched this Hollywood creation will know who are the masters and the majority in Battlestar Galactica. They ruled the universe. Is this the bigger game plan, to turn Singapore into a Battlestar Galactica where the locals will play second fiddles, as supporting casts? Yes Captain, what’s his name? Not Spock, something more western. Oh yes, Commander William Adama, I think.
No lah, this cannot be lah. It is Singaporeans first. Just look at some of the big local institutions headed by foreigners for a little contradictions. But can’t blame these institutions as the local employees are just not good enough. It is the low quality of locals to be blamed. Would UOB be headed by a foreign talent soon? What about SIA, GIC, Temasek?
Battlestar Galactica cannot be the big game plan. It would only become a reality out of necessity and circumstances, when the locals are not good enough, that our world best and highly ranked universities are unable to produce the world best local talents to put the mantra ‘Singaporeans first’ into a national practice, where Singaporeans will be highly sought after to head our big institutions.
For the time being, Battlestar Galactica Singapore will sail on to bring glory to Singapore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)