The news of the three $1b dinosaurs has subsided. I think they should be on the way here, nicely packaged to be the biggest attraction on the island, to create the wows and draw in the tourists dollars. If I recalled, the three were a family, or at least from the same specie, two adults and a smaller one.
My main concern then was a place to exhibit them. Think they said they needed a museum or mausoleum that is going to cost a few hundred million, befitting of the size and importance of the three relics. Yes, they will link the new Singaporeans to the past, that we were once living with dinosaurs. There is another moral aspect to these exhibits. No matter how predominant the dinosaurs were in their heydays, they too will become dinosaurs, or relics of the past.
I was suggesting that the dinosaurs be placed on a floating platform in the Marina Bay to save on space. We can’t afford to use up so much space for some relics of the past, no matter how relevant they are to our history. Every inch of land in the island is worth more than its value in gold. We could build more top end structures for sale and earn more dollars, as long as they are not greenbacks.
It just dawns on me that there is an alternative place for the dinosaurs. If only the architects could incorporate the mausoleum into the Istana Park would be great. Keep the park as it is plus the three dinosaurs without wasting more valuable land. The Istana Park should be big enough for the three. To locate them anywhere else would be a waste of land.
And to think of how important the three dinosaurs are to our history, it will not be befitting to locate them somewhere in the wilderness of Jurong or Woodlands or Tekong. There is always a solution to all problems, especially when the mind is fully relaxed on a Sunday morning.
8/07/2011
The changing ethos of govt officers
The story of a permanent secretary driving around in his old 1.6 Japanese jalopy was legendary. Those were the days of thrift and leading by example. I remember a govt link company CEO was only comfortable with a 2000cc Mercedes Benz. Anything above was seen as flaunting and undesirable. A GM actually got a bollocking when he ordered a 3 litre limousine. That was seen as unbecoming. Thrift and propriety were important values to observe.
The ethos today is quite different. Not only is a 3 litre limousine common, some even flashed around in Lamborghinis and Ferraris. These are things that were frown upon in the good old days. I am not complaining as we have climbed the ladder of economic prosperity and what is a 3 litre car? It is time to enjoy our hard work and our success. Who would dare to announce a $50k cooking class in Paris then?
The ethos of new is to be who you really are. We need to announce that we have arrived. Perhaps it is also a dignity issue. In those days, a permanent secretary’s title is enough dignity to carry a long way. There is no need to show the pay slip and the number of zeros behind. Respect was more easily achieved and earned, and was real. Today, you need to be a billionaire to be respectable, or at least earn a million a year. Just flash it in the face of whoever and there will be instant recognition.
The ethos of the day is always set by the leaders. Monkeys see, monkeys do. Good example and exemplary behaviour at the top will be carried downwards. When the top is senget, you bet the bottom will be too.
The ethos today is quite different. Not only is a 3 litre limousine common, some even flashed around in Lamborghinis and Ferraris. These are things that were frown upon in the good old days. I am not complaining as we have climbed the ladder of economic prosperity and what is a 3 litre car? It is time to enjoy our hard work and our success. Who would dare to announce a $50k cooking class in Paris then?
The ethos of new is to be who you really are. We need to announce that we have arrived. Perhaps it is also a dignity issue. In those days, a permanent secretary’s title is enough dignity to carry a long way. There is no need to show the pay slip and the number of zeros behind. Respect was more easily achieved and earned, and was real. Today, you need to be a billionaire to be respectable, or at least earn a million a year. Just flash it in the face of whoever and there will be instant recognition.
The ethos of the day is always set by the leaders. Monkeys see, monkeys do. Good example and exemplary behaviour at the top will be carried downwards. When the top is senget, you bet the bottom will be too.
8/06/2011
I dunno what to say
In a high power forum chaired my Professor Tommy Koh, and with two key speakers in Law Minister K Shanmugam and Professor Thio Li Ann, the Law Minister repeated his position that the Elected President is not to be heard, or cannot express any views unless approved by the Govt. He said, ‘It is quite clear the president has no such power and that was not the role that was envisaged for the president.’ ‘The president,’ he added, ‘can speak on issues only as authorised by the Cabinet; and he must follow the advice of the Cabinet in the discharge of his duties.’
The only time the president can wield some influence on the PM is if he is on good terms with him, or if the PM finds him amiable and willing to listen to him. It is not the other way, that you have a president and the PM try to be nice to him and listen to him. Thus, a President that is pally pally with the govt is in a better position to be listened to by the govt. So the people should know who to vote if they want a president that can have influence on the govt.
What if the people want a president that does not need to be nice to the PM or the govt and want him to be firm and be ready to say no to the govt, should they then vote for someone that is more distant from the govt? To influence the govt or to check on the govt are two distinct roles that require quite a different character in the president.
But my main point is not all of these as they are immaterial. In more probability the president will have nothing of crisis level to do and spend his time writing his memoirs or raising funds for the disabled or shaking hands and waving at the crowd during NDP. Occasionally he may try to visit other countries to improve relations and trade. I am not sure that this is part of his portfolio, or if he is being advised by the govt to do so. Or maybe he is trying to give the Trade Minister a helping hand since he is not allowed to talk freely.
For such a role, do we need a president that should be as good as a permanent secretary, a chief justice material, or someone who manages a $100m paid up capital country when the PM and his ministers need not be that highly qualified? A butcher or a gardener can also be our PM under our constitution. And this must be the best part, the gardener PM is going to advise this high power president what to say and do. Does the country really need to pay him so many millions to perform such a role?
What is needed perhaps is a person of good conduct, dignified, good looking and respectable, and be given an honourarium of $500k per annum max. Of course a little commonsense and a tertiary education should be good enough as he would be advised by the Presidential Council and also the govt on what to do and what to say. No need to sweat the small stuff to find a super super talent and to pay him obscenely for the nature of the job. He may end up more dignified than the gardener PM who is going to tell him what to do.
Please feel free to disagree with me. If you don’t I will like to recommend some of the better and dignified looking Media Corp actors for the job. I am sure the people will love to shake their hands and feel good when they looked good standing side by side with kings and queens.
The only time the president can wield some influence on the PM is if he is on good terms with him, or if the PM finds him amiable and willing to listen to him. It is not the other way, that you have a president and the PM try to be nice to him and listen to him. Thus, a President that is pally pally with the govt is in a better position to be listened to by the govt. So the people should know who to vote if they want a president that can have influence on the govt.
What if the people want a president that does not need to be nice to the PM or the govt and want him to be firm and be ready to say no to the govt, should they then vote for someone that is more distant from the govt? To influence the govt or to check on the govt are two distinct roles that require quite a different character in the president.
But my main point is not all of these as they are immaterial. In more probability the president will have nothing of crisis level to do and spend his time writing his memoirs or raising funds for the disabled or shaking hands and waving at the crowd during NDP. Occasionally he may try to visit other countries to improve relations and trade. I am not sure that this is part of his portfolio, or if he is being advised by the govt to do so. Or maybe he is trying to give the Trade Minister a helping hand since he is not allowed to talk freely.
For such a role, do we need a president that should be as good as a permanent secretary, a chief justice material, or someone who manages a $100m paid up capital country when the PM and his ministers need not be that highly qualified? A butcher or a gardener can also be our PM under our constitution. And this must be the best part, the gardener PM is going to advise this high power president what to say and do. Does the country really need to pay him so many millions to perform such a role?
What is needed perhaps is a person of good conduct, dignified, good looking and respectable, and be given an honourarium of $500k per annum max. Of course a little commonsense and a tertiary education should be good enough as he would be advised by the Presidential Council and also the govt on what to do and what to say. No need to sweat the small stuff to find a super super talent and to pay him obscenely for the nature of the job. He may end up more dignified than the gardener PM who is going to tell him what to do.
Please feel free to disagree with me. If you don’t I will like to recommend some of the better and dignified looking Media Corp actors for the job. I am sure the people will love to shake their hands and feel good when they looked good standing side by side with kings and queens.
So a fare hike of 1% instead of 2.8%
Rejoice, celebrate, the unhappiness of the people has been heard. The PTC must have taken heed of the general unhappiness of the people over the rising cost of living and came out with a smaller increase for public transport fare. A 2c increase per trip is negligible and well absorbed, may even be unnoticeable. There are still complaints. People are still unhappy.
The PTC quoted the profits of other private companies including non transport operators, to justify the increase. Other organisation’s profits ranged from 3 to 14.9%. These include companies like Hongkong’s Transport International and MTR, London’s Stagecoach Group. SembCorp Industries and Singpost. And the profits of SBS and SMRT were 7.8 to 11.2%, very reasonable and within the spread of the companies quoted.
There is no point trying to go into the details of the little data provided. For those who are sceptical, doubts on the credibility and relevance of the data are glaring. I could quote more transport companies and non transport companies running at a loss to justify that it is ok to run public transport companies at a loss or with little profit.
What is still seen as wrong or unacceptable with the minimal increase? What is 2c when people are earning millions? The issue here is the principle of public transport and how this is treated as any other organisation whose interest is profit. And the operators deserved to be making profits like any other organisation.
Is public transportation with the privileges of a monopoly attached, to operate without competition, any other organisation? A govt run public transport monopoly is a govt monopoly under any colour or stripe. And a public transport system is an essential service and should not quickly be swept away as any other business for profit.
Why is the govt so obsessed with the public transport companies making profit as its major concern to shareholders, and coming out to defend its right to such profits? Why is the govt so persistent in proclaiming that the govt officers are daft and unable to run a public transport system if it is returned as a stats board? It is unbelieveable that any govt would say such a darn thing, that they could not run a transport service unless it is run privately. What a profound statement to acknowledge an inadequacy in a govt filled with top talents. I just dunno what to say.
The PTC quoted the profits of other private companies including non transport operators, to justify the increase. Other organisation’s profits ranged from 3 to 14.9%. These include companies like Hongkong’s Transport International and MTR, London’s Stagecoach Group. SembCorp Industries and Singpost. And the profits of SBS and SMRT were 7.8 to 11.2%, very reasonable and within the spread of the companies quoted.
There is no point trying to go into the details of the little data provided. For those who are sceptical, doubts on the credibility and relevance of the data are glaring. I could quote more transport companies and non transport companies running at a loss to justify that it is ok to run public transport companies at a loss or with little profit.
What is still seen as wrong or unacceptable with the minimal increase? What is 2c when people are earning millions? The issue here is the principle of public transport and how this is treated as any other organisation whose interest is profit. And the operators deserved to be making profits like any other organisation.
Is public transportation with the privileges of a monopoly attached, to operate without competition, any other organisation? A govt run public transport monopoly is a govt monopoly under any colour or stripe. And a public transport system is an essential service and should not quickly be swept away as any other business for profit.
Why is the govt so obsessed with the public transport companies making profit as its major concern to shareholders, and coming out to defend its right to such profits? Why is the govt so persistent in proclaiming that the govt officers are daft and unable to run a public transport system if it is returned as a stats board? It is unbelieveable that any govt would say such a darn thing, that they could not run a transport service unless it is run privately. What a profound statement to acknowledge an inadequacy in a govt filled with top talents. I just dunno what to say.
8/05/2011
The battle for cyberspace
Controlling the media by any political party or ruler is a strategic move to control a country. Control of the media means controlling what the people see and hear, controlling the agenda, saying all the good things on the right people and all the wrong things on the wrong people. The masses are easily swayed and manipulated in their thoughts and views. That is why advertising is such a powerful tool. Controlling the media the controls the minds of the people.
Most govts of the day have more or less a monopoly of the main media to do as they pleased. And their opponents were often denied such access, may be persecuted or rubbished repeatedly in the media with no ways of replying. It was a very comfortable position to be in, to be able to take potshots at political opponents at will and the other party unable to hit back.
Cyberspace is a free for all zone, and no govt is able to control much of it other than blocking it off from its citizens. This requires big machinery and an army of keyboard soldiers hammering at the buttons full time. It is a costly affair and a misuse of public fund. The nature of how the internet works makes surveillance that much more tedious and often unenforceable.
In the last few days there seemed to be a big battle going on in cyberspace. Many popular forums and blogs were subjected to unexplained down time or difficulties in access. Many links and videos that were provided were blocked and getting through them is a tough act. Even the NLB was down with some old news not retrieveable. But that was due to some internal updating issue. The popular political forum of TRE was purportedly under heavy attacks and was down most of the time. So were some other blogs and sites. Even my little blog is facing difficulties and many bloggers have complained that it is moving exceptionally slow and can be very irritating. There are many strange things happening in cyberspace lately.
Competition for the attention of readers is hotting up especially with the run up to the Presidential election. With the main media becoming a has been, when local news are no longer exciting but a regurgitation or rerun, they have lost the grip for readership. Who wants to read stale news that is no better than listening to an old tape recorder?
On the other hand cyberspace is fresh and exciting. And reporters/bloggers are given a free hand to post whatever they want, free from any restraints or editing. Investigative journalism is taking on a fervor that is hardly known in the main media. And these people are doing it without being paid. And the material is informative, controversial and thought provoking. It is an act that the main media finds difficult to replicate to the extent that they look like boy scouts. Or maybe they are all busy covering the National Day Parade.
While the main media are busy or on vacation, the internet is driving and firing all its engines. All systems are running at full speed. And the readership is flocking into cyberspace in increasing numbers. A small outfit like The Temasek Review Emeritus operated by a few volunteers are garnering more readership than many professional media with a huge budget. It has in a way becomes the primary alternative media here.
Who is winning this battle for readership, for the people’s mind? The battle of cyberspace has begun, and the winner will determine how the people think and look at things. The Presidential Election is likely to be the first test case of the power of alternative media to influence how the people will vote. Control of cyberspace is like control of the sky in military terms.
Most govts of the day have more or less a monopoly of the main media to do as they pleased. And their opponents were often denied such access, may be persecuted or rubbished repeatedly in the media with no ways of replying. It was a very comfortable position to be in, to be able to take potshots at political opponents at will and the other party unable to hit back.
Cyberspace is a free for all zone, and no govt is able to control much of it other than blocking it off from its citizens. This requires big machinery and an army of keyboard soldiers hammering at the buttons full time. It is a costly affair and a misuse of public fund. The nature of how the internet works makes surveillance that much more tedious and often unenforceable.
In the last few days there seemed to be a big battle going on in cyberspace. Many popular forums and blogs were subjected to unexplained down time or difficulties in access. Many links and videos that were provided were blocked and getting through them is a tough act. Even the NLB was down with some old news not retrieveable. But that was due to some internal updating issue. The popular political forum of TRE was purportedly under heavy attacks and was down most of the time. So were some other blogs and sites. Even my little blog is facing difficulties and many bloggers have complained that it is moving exceptionally slow and can be very irritating. There are many strange things happening in cyberspace lately.
Competition for the attention of readers is hotting up especially with the run up to the Presidential election. With the main media becoming a has been, when local news are no longer exciting but a regurgitation or rerun, they have lost the grip for readership. Who wants to read stale news that is no better than listening to an old tape recorder?
On the other hand cyberspace is fresh and exciting. And reporters/bloggers are given a free hand to post whatever they want, free from any restraints or editing. Investigative journalism is taking on a fervor that is hardly known in the main media. And these people are doing it without being paid. And the material is informative, controversial and thought provoking. It is an act that the main media finds difficult to replicate to the extent that they look like boy scouts. Or maybe they are all busy covering the National Day Parade.
While the main media are busy or on vacation, the internet is driving and firing all its engines. All systems are running at full speed. And the readership is flocking into cyberspace in increasing numbers. A small outfit like The Temasek Review Emeritus operated by a few volunteers are garnering more readership than many professional media with a huge budget. It has in a way becomes the primary alternative media here.
Who is winning this battle for readership, for the people’s mind? The battle of cyberspace has begun, and the winner will determine how the people think and look at things. The Presidential Election is likely to be the first test case of the power of alternative media to influence how the people will vote. Control of cyberspace is like control of the sky in military terms.
What should Tony Tan do?
It is not easy to be in Tony Tan’s shoe now. His shiny armour of a white knight is now smeared with tomatoes and eggs. It takes great effort and convincing to remove the grits. The thing is, how is this going to be done? Can god stand up and say Tony has done no wrong. Period. Let’s move on.
Even if god is to pronounce that Tony is innocent, the point is that would the people accept the judgement? If the people do not agree, then comes the election and Tony might get a real bruising, and this is no good.
On the other hand if there is no election, a walkover, unthinkable but possible, the smear will not go away. It will harden into a scar. Not only will Tony be affected, the whole institution will come under questioning and a big dark cloud will fall over the island. I don’t think this is an acceptable scenario, and the pus will keep festering and spread to the whole system.
There is another possibility, with a case that is like jumping into the Yellow River will not wash away the dirt, will Tony do the necessary and withdraw his candidacy for the EP? If this be the case, if Tony is no longer in the lime light like some of his contemporaries, the vibes may just fade away.
Well, what if Tony were to walk into the Istana uncontested, this episode is likely to be hanging in the air, in cyberspace, for as long as he is the Elected President, or by walkover. And the plot may thicken.
Which is a better or amiable scenario? An important point to note is that nearly every male Singaporeans has gone through NS and knew how the system should work. Any variation or deviation could be spotted from a mile away. Never try to bluff a NS man about NS. They can get very angry. They have given the best part of their lives to it.
PS. Another possibility. The PEC decides not to issue Tony with the COE in view of the controversies surrounding him and his son. Ok, this is really remote. Heheh. Whatever, once the election campaigns start, many of the concerns raised in the internet may spill over to the main media. It is not going to look good.
Even if god is to pronounce that Tony is innocent, the point is that would the people accept the judgement? If the people do not agree, then comes the election and Tony might get a real bruising, and this is no good.
On the other hand if there is no election, a walkover, unthinkable but possible, the smear will not go away. It will harden into a scar. Not only will Tony be affected, the whole institution will come under questioning and a big dark cloud will fall over the island. I don’t think this is an acceptable scenario, and the pus will keep festering and spread to the whole system.
There is another possibility, with a case that is like jumping into the Yellow River will not wash away the dirt, will Tony do the necessary and withdraw his candidacy for the EP? If this be the case, if Tony is no longer in the lime light like some of his contemporaries, the vibes may just fade away.
Well, what if Tony were to walk into the Istana uncontested, this episode is likely to be hanging in the air, in cyberspace, for as long as he is the Elected President, or by walkover. And the plot may thicken.
Which is a better or amiable scenario? An important point to note is that nearly every male Singaporeans has gone through NS and knew how the system should work. Any variation or deviation could be spotted from a mile away. Never try to bluff a NS man about NS. They can get very angry. They have given the best part of their lives to it.
PS. Another possibility. The PEC decides not to issue Tony with the COE in view of the controversies surrounding him and his son. Ok, this is really remote. Heheh. Whatever, once the election campaigns start, many of the concerns raised in the internet may spill over to the main media. It is not going to look good.
8/04/2011
The Chinese fools in Fangzheng, Heilongjiang
When Japan was colonizing China, they did what the Israelis are doing today, by sending thousands of Japanese settlers into Manchuria. By a stroke of ill fate, they lost the war and these colonialists fled Manchuria after the war. Many died in the process, at least 5,000 on record.
Zhou Enlai did the humanly decent thing by giving them a proper burial. Today, the local govt of Fangzheng went one step further by erecting a monument on the grave site of these occupiers. This act has incurred the wrath of a nation that suffered the brutality of Japanese occupation forces when millions were killed and maimed, when the country was devastated and the dignity of a people erased from their faces.
The foolish people of Fangzheng have forgotten that if the Japanese had won the war, they would be victims of these dead Japanese and their atrocities as conquered people. No country in the world is silly enough to build monuments to honour their conquerors. I doubt Singapore would dare to put up a monument to honour the Japanese soldiers killed in the island during the Japanese Occupation.
The Americans too did not set up monuments to honour the millions of Red Indians decimated during their conquest and occupation of Red Indian country. The Indians and Africans too did not build such monuments to honour the dead colonialists. Many even tore down buildings and landmarks of their colonial rulers.
How much sillier can the Chinese be?
Zhou Enlai did the humanly decent thing by giving them a proper burial. Today, the local govt of Fangzheng went one step further by erecting a monument on the grave site of these occupiers. This act has incurred the wrath of a nation that suffered the brutality of Japanese occupation forces when millions were killed and maimed, when the country was devastated and the dignity of a people erased from their faces.
The foolish people of Fangzheng have forgotten that if the Japanese had won the war, they would be victims of these dead Japanese and their atrocities as conquered people. No country in the world is silly enough to build monuments to honour their conquerors. I doubt Singapore would dare to put up a monument to honour the Japanese soldiers killed in the island during the Japanese Occupation.
The Americans too did not set up monuments to honour the millions of Red Indians decimated during their conquest and occupation of Red Indian country. The Indians and Africans too did not build such monuments to honour the dead colonialists. Many even tore down buildings and landmarks of their colonial rulers.
How much sillier can the Chinese be?
Dr Patrick Tan – A bigger issue at stake
The public scrutiny of Tony Tan and Patrick Tan has led to a bigger issue, the integrity of the system as a whole, particularly Mindef. A doubt has been created in the minds of the public and all NS men and their families are feeling very uneasy. It is very important that this be led to rest quickly before the election of the President takes place.
No matter what Tony Tan and Patrick Tan said, no matter what Mindef tries to explain, there will be all kinds of innuendoes and perceptions, rightly or wrongly. The longer this issue is dragged on, the more perplex it will become and wild imaginations in the minds of the people can be expected.
What I think would be a better way to clarify this confusion, which is not going to do good to Tony and Mindef, is to state clearly the milestones of Patrick’s scholarship, deferment, enlistment and reservist training, including ICTs and IPPTs. List the events and dates clearly and let the people see for themselves and make their decisions based on facts. Mindef can include some explanations along the way to clarify on why the decisions were made and the policies of the day.
I think this should be QED to clear the air.
No matter what Tony Tan and Patrick Tan said, no matter what Mindef tries to explain, there will be all kinds of innuendoes and perceptions, rightly or wrongly. The longer this issue is dragged on, the more perplex it will become and wild imaginations in the minds of the people can be expected.
What I think would be a better way to clarify this confusion, which is not going to do good to Tony and Mindef, is to state clearly the milestones of Patrick’s scholarship, deferment, enlistment and reservist training, including ICTs and IPPTs. List the events and dates clearly and let the people see for themselves and make their decisions based on facts. Mindef can include some explanations along the way to clarify on why the decisions were made and the policies of the day.
I think this should be QED to clear the air.
What would the PEC be looking at?
All eyes are now on the President Election Council where three wise men are supposed to pass an edict on who are the presidential hopefuls that will get their blessings to receive a COE. What they have to fall back on is a list of criteria in an Act to make their godly decisions. The terms are public knowledge today, but though everyone thinks they know what they meant, everyone is also at a lost as to what they meant. Everyone is having an opinion as to who will qualify and who will not.
Some of the criteria are quite specific, a permanent secretary or equivalent, CEO of a public company with a paid up capital of $100m and at least three years in the job. With these conditions, some have already pronounced that only Tony Tan qualifies while the rest are doubtful starters if the PEC applies them stringently. It seems quite an easy task if one is to act like an unthinking robot and goes by the letters in the legislation. And if that be the case, only Tony will qualify. Anyone with any objections can be asked to read the Act themselves. See, must be a permanent secretary or a CEO of a public listed company with $100m paid up capital. Anything else is outside the law.
The PEC can also attempt to try to read the spirit of the Act, as to what was the intention of the provision. As in all legislations, the words are limited and cannot cover all conditions, variations or exceptions. What was the intent of the people who passed the Act? Do they really mean that only those few people as indicated qualify to stand as a candidate, or is the provision meant to cover a wider area to include more able people for the Presidency? To many laymen, that must be the case and the provisions are just guidelines to ensure that people of good character, with sufficient intellect and abilities to decide on the use of the nation’s reserve be allowed to stand. The Act cannot be so rigid, a straight jacket, that will rule out anyone that do not fit its brief descriptions to the T.
The four/five candidates, with their qualifications and experiences, are good and able men that would have no problem in performing the duties of the Elected President. They are more than the average men on the street. They have good credentials and no one is saying that they are not good enough unless it can be proven that they have character flaws or did anything that is unbecoming of the office of the President.
The job of the PEC should be quite easy actually if it is just the interpretation of the Act. Unfortunately there are other political considerations and complications that will affect their final edict. The people all knows what the considerations are. There are the interests of the ruling party and also the interests of the country and people to take note of. We have heard comments about a neutral President that is not beholden to any political party. A President that has the courage and stature and toughness to take a stand against the ruling govt. After all he is to check on the govt when the use of the reserves is placed on his table. He is also expected and some say good, to be able to work closely with the ruling govt while able to say no if necessary.
See, things start to get messy here, to be friendly, pally, to be nice but also to be able to stand up to the govt. Or to be not so friendly and to be not so nice and glad to have the opportunity to say no. As far as the govt is concerned, they would want someone nice and pally, someone that would give them the least annoyance. Maybe someone that will say yes when the govt wants to dip into the reserves. In this case, an ex party member with close ties would be ideal. Strange relationship huh?
On the other hand, the people would want a President to be really, truly, and strongly independent minded, independent of the govt, and happy to be objective and ready to say no to the govt. In this case, a non ruling party member, someone who has never slept in the same bed before must be the chosen one.
So, how would the PEC decide then, given the unspoken interests of the ruling govt to take care of and the interests of the people who are more comfortable with a really independent President, not just by words alone, or personal claims, but to be able to act independently of the ruling govt? Would the spirit of the Act hold sway and a broader interpretation be used by the PEC? Or would a different kind of spirit takes an upper hand and every letter in the Act is taken literally with no rooms for exception, leading to the disqualification of several candidates?
What kind of spirits would rule the day and lead the PEC to go about their work? I can see that people are praying everywhere in the streets for good blessings from the spirits. The govt can be angry, the spirits too. And there is the wrath of the people to consider. This is a non political appointment, a non political President and the election must be devoid of politics. So some wise men would say. Non political? Can that be?
The least that the people can expect is that this election is done with great respect, decorum, honour and decency. And it starts from the moment the application for a COE is submitted. This election must be clean and free from all the ugly accusations of a GE where all kinds of perceptions were present to discredit or cast doubt to the whole affair. The PEC and its three wise men have a very vital role to play to set the tone for the election of a President that is not tainted with political undertones.
Some of the criteria are quite specific, a permanent secretary or equivalent, CEO of a public company with a paid up capital of $100m and at least three years in the job. With these conditions, some have already pronounced that only Tony Tan qualifies while the rest are doubtful starters if the PEC applies them stringently. It seems quite an easy task if one is to act like an unthinking robot and goes by the letters in the legislation. And if that be the case, only Tony will qualify. Anyone with any objections can be asked to read the Act themselves. See, must be a permanent secretary or a CEO of a public listed company with $100m paid up capital. Anything else is outside the law.
The PEC can also attempt to try to read the spirit of the Act, as to what was the intention of the provision. As in all legislations, the words are limited and cannot cover all conditions, variations or exceptions. What was the intent of the people who passed the Act? Do they really mean that only those few people as indicated qualify to stand as a candidate, or is the provision meant to cover a wider area to include more able people for the Presidency? To many laymen, that must be the case and the provisions are just guidelines to ensure that people of good character, with sufficient intellect and abilities to decide on the use of the nation’s reserve be allowed to stand. The Act cannot be so rigid, a straight jacket, that will rule out anyone that do not fit its brief descriptions to the T.
The four/five candidates, with their qualifications and experiences, are good and able men that would have no problem in performing the duties of the Elected President. They are more than the average men on the street. They have good credentials and no one is saying that they are not good enough unless it can be proven that they have character flaws or did anything that is unbecoming of the office of the President.
The job of the PEC should be quite easy actually if it is just the interpretation of the Act. Unfortunately there are other political considerations and complications that will affect their final edict. The people all knows what the considerations are. There are the interests of the ruling party and also the interests of the country and people to take note of. We have heard comments about a neutral President that is not beholden to any political party. A President that has the courage and stature and toughness to take a stand against the ruling govt. After all he is to check on the govt when the use of the reserves is placed on his table. He is also expected and some say good, to be able to work closely with the ruling govt while able to say no if necessary.
See, things start to get messy here, to be friendly, pally, to be nice but also to be able to stand up to the govt. Or to be not so friendly and to be not so nice and glad to have the opportunity to say no. As far as the govt is concerned, they would want someone nice and pally, someone that would give them the least annoyance. Maybe someone that will say yes when the govt wants to dip into the reserves. In this case, an ex party member with close ties would be ideal. Strange relationship huh?
On the other hand, the people would want a President to be really, truly, and strongly independent minded, independent of the govt, and happy to be objective and ready to say no to the govt. In this case, a non ruling party member, someone who has never slept in the same bed before must be the chosen one.
So, how would the PEC decide then, given the unspoken interests of the ruling govt to take care of and the interests of the people who are more comfortable with a really independent President, not just by words alone, or personal claims, but to be able to act independently of the ruling govt? Would the spirit of the Act hold sway and a broader interpretation be used by the PEC? Or would a different kind of spirit takes an upper hand and every letter in the Act is taken literally with no rooms for exception, leading to the disqualification of several candidates?
What kind of spirits would rule the day and lead the PEC to go about their work? I can see that people are praying everywhere in the streets for good blessings from the spirits. The govt can be angry, the spirits too. And there is the wrath of the people to consider. This is a non political appointment, a non political President and the election must be devoid of politics. So some wise men would say. Non political? Can that be?
The least that the people can expect is that this election is done with great respect, decorum, honour and decency. And it starts from the moment the application for a COE is submitted. This election must be clean and free from all the ugly accusations of a GE where all kinds of perceptions were present to discredit or cast doubt to the whole affair. The PEC and its three wise men have a very vital role to play to set the tone for the election of a President that is not tainted with political undertones.
8/03/2011
High falutins in the Green Movement
Saving the world, go green, cut carbon emission etc etc are all barking up the wrong tree. The solution to prevent the destruction of gaia and human life is to stop the relentless and reckless consumption of food and natural resources. The wanton destruction and reproduction of goods to feed the mad consumption pattern of human beans that is growing and growing, is the biggest problem to saving mother earth.
High consumption is primarily the result of high population growth and longetivity. The secondary cause of high consumption is the commercially driven demands for material goods and the hurried production and manufacturing of goods that need not be. It looks extremely good in terms of feeding the economic growth formula but at the same time lighting the fuse to destroy life on earth.
High population growth must be stopped. Has the earth reached its capacity to sustain the 6/7 billion populations, or in its micro aspect, has Singapore reached a population size that it is going to be increasingly difficult to sustain.
The mad economists will tell you that with increased productivity the earth can feed and house more people, GM food, digging deeper for oil, using advanced technology to fish the oceans, just like this island can feed and house more people, maybe 20 million. What kind of life will it be?
Can the alternative of maintaining the present level of production but maintaining or reducing the population lead to a better quality of life, with more for lesser people? If every country is to adopt growth with uncontrolled growing population, the end is sure to come faster for everyone. Is higher income, higher growth, higher population, higher inflation, higher cost of living, and the depletion of the earth’s resources the way to go?
High consumption is primarily the result of high population growth and longetivity. The secondary cause of high consumption is the commercially driven demands for material goods and the hurried production and manufacturing of goods that need not be. It looks extremely good in terms of feeding the economic growth formula but at the same time lighting the fuse to destroy life on earth.
High population growth must be stopped. Has the earth reached its capacity to sustain the 6/7 billion populations, or in its micro aspect, has Singapore reached a population size that it is going to be increasingly difficult to sustain.
The mad economists will tell you that with increased productivity the earth can feed and house more people, GM food, digging deeper for oil, using advanced technology to fish the oceans, just like this island can feed and house more people, maybe 20 million. What kind of life will it be?
Can the alternative of maintaining the present level of production but maintaining or reducing the population lead to a better quality of life, with more for lesser people? If every country is to adopt growth with uncontrolled growing population, the end is sure to come faster for everyone. Is higher income, higher growth, higher population, higher inflation, higher cost of living, and the depletion of the earth’s resources the way to go?
Changing trends in political persecution
JB Jeyaratnam, Tang Lian Hong, Chee Soon Juan, James Gomez are familiar names in the local political scene. They have many things in common, from being in the wrong camp, persecuted in the courts of law, for personal or political digressions etc etc. All were victims in the game of Predators and Preys. Three were bankrupts except for Gomez.
Their persecutors were tenacious, never letting go after the first bite. And they were on the run, desperately trying to fend off every attack but in vain. Once the process of the Predators and Preys game started, there was no where to hide, only how badly would they be mauled.
The last of such preys was Andrew Kuan, though he did not suffered as much, but the process was quite similar. It was like a pack of hyenas appearing from all corners in the the pursuit of their lonely victim. He was rudely dismissed and his aspiration to be a candidate for the Elected Presidency came to naught.
This game seems to have taken a different character after the last GE. On the wrong side were Tin Pei Ling, Foo Mei Har and Puthuchery. Could have been more but when the preys went into hiding the pursuit ended. The tenacity of the predators was not of the same degree and zeal. Not until the latest attack on President hopeful Tony Tan.
Tony Tan became the newest prey in the game. The attackers were different, not from any political party, but the anonymous masses in cyberspace. And the battle zone too is not the main media but the new media. The attacks came fast and furious, appearing to be concerted but not, more like spontaneous. There is no chance that Tony will end up in the courts of law, but he will face a different kind of justice that will not see him becoming a bankrupt.
Tony will appear in the people’s court of justice. It is the people, or some of the people, that are putting Tony on trial. It is not a personal vendetta or a feud. They have accused him of favouritism or abuse of authority in granting special exemptions for his son in National Service. Would this be proven or would Tony be found guilty by the people’s court? For the time being, they have screamed guilty.
Tony and his son have been defending furiously against the accusations. Both the media, new and old, were giving him space to present his case. The Ministry of Defence too issued statements to support his defence.
The interesting part will be the findings and judgement. In the people’s court, there will be no official findings or an official pronouncement. The rights and wrongs will be formed in the hearts and minds of the people. There will be just as many who will think he is guilty as those who will think he is not. One thing for sure, Tony will not be made a bankrupt and neither can the predators make any unreasonable claims of compensation from him.
The glaring difference of this game of Predators and Preys is that the victim now comes from the ‘right’ side as oppose to the ‘wrong’ side as in the past. No one will ever imagine that the elite could be put on trial and have to defend themselves to clear their names. They need not have to as it is not really a court of law. It is a kind of common law, a kind of natural justice, a prick on the conscience. The victim can totally ignore the persecution and dismiss the whole case without answering, and remain silence. The sore point is that keeping silence is no longer an option.
The rules of game have changed. The Predators and Preys have also changed. The political climate is set to be changed.
Their persecutors were tenacious, never letting go after the first bite. And they were on the run, desperately trying to fend off every attack but in vain. Once the process of the Predators and Preys game started, there was no where to hide, only how badly would they be mauled.
The last of such preys was Andrew Kuan, though he did not suffered as much, but the process was quite similar. It was like a pack of hyenas appearing from all corners in the the pursuit of their lonely victim. He was rudely dismissed and his aspiration to be a candidate for the Elected Presidency came to naught.
This game seems to have taken a different character after the last GE. On the wrong side were Tin Pei Ling, Foo Mei Har and Puthuchery. Could have been more but when the preys went into hiding the pursuit ended. The tenacity of the predators was not of the same degree and zeal. Not until the latest attack on President hopeful Tony Tan.
Tony Tan became the newest prey in the game. The attackers were different, not from any political party, but the anonymous masses in cyberspace. And the battle zone too is not the main media but the new media. The attacks came fast and furious, appearing to be concerted but not, more like spontaneous. There is no chance that Tony will end up in the courts of law, but he will face a different kind of justice that will not see him becoming a bankrupt.
Tony will appear in the people’s court of justice. It is the people, or some of the people, that are putting Tony on trial. It is not a personal vendetta or a feud. They have accused him of favouritism or abuse of authority in granting special exemptions for his son in National Service. Would this be proven or would Tony be found guilty by the people’s court? For the time being, they have screamed guilty.
Tony and his son have been defending furiously against the accusations. Both the media, new and old, were giving him space to present his case. The Ministry of Defence too issued statements to support his defence.
The interesting part will be the findings and judgement. In the people’s court, there will be no official findings or an official pronouncement. The rights and wrongs will be formed in the hearts and minds of the people. There will be just as many who will think he is guilty as those who will think he is not. One thing for sure, Tony will not be made a bankrupt and neither can the predators make any unreasonable claims of compensation from him.
The glaring difference of this game of Predators and Preys is that the victim now comes from the ‘right’ side as oppose to the ‘wrong’ side as in the past. No one will ever imagine that the elite could be put on trial and have to defend themselves to clear their names. They need not have to as it is not really a court of law. It is a kind of common law, a kind of natural justice, a prick on the conscience. The victim can totally ignore the persecution and dismiss the whole case without answering, and remain silence. The sore point is that keeping silence is no longer an option.
The rules of game have changed. The Predators and Preys have also changed. The political climate is set to be changed.
8/02/2011
The dumb Arabs
The musical chairs of the Arabian Nights are being played and replayed over and over again. They were supposed to be ancient and wise civilizations. Somehow they never get over their colonial hangovers. They trusted their colonial masters more than themselves. They fight among themselves and ended as divided people and conquered by the West one by one.
After independence, they forgot about their colonial legacies and went sleeping with their former colonial masters. And they happily parked their wealth in Europe and America only to be confiscated or locked away when they fell out of favour with the Europeans or Americans. And whoosh, all their wealth here today gone tomorrow. And they never learnt.
Now the Brits just declared that they did not recognize the Gaddafi govt and all the monies now go to whichever rebel groups they are supporting. The Arabs are so pathetic. How are they to act as leaders of the Muslim world when they are in such a mess, and being made mince meat by the Westerners?
Would Asian and African countries learn any lessons from the Arabian fiasco and their sleeping with the Europeans and Americans. I think many Asian and African despots and dictators are still parking their ill gotten wealth in Europe and America only to be sorry one day when the loots were forfeited by their safe keepers.
After independence, they forgot about their colonial legacies and went sleeping with their former colonial masters. And they happily parked their wealth in Europe and America only to be confiscated or locked away when they fell out of favour with the Europeans or Americans. And whoosh, all their wealth here today gone tomorrow. And they never learnt.
Now the Brits just declared that they did not recognize the Gaddafi govt and all the monies now go to whichever rebel groups they are supporting. The Arabs are so pathetic. How are they to act as leaders of the Muslim world when they are in such a mess, and being made mince meat by the Westerners?
Would Asian and African countries learn any lessons from the Arabian fiasco and their sleeping with the Europeans and Americans. I think many Asian and African despots and dictators are still parking their ill gotten wealth in Europe and America only to be sorry one day when the loots were forfeited by their safe keepers.
A stroke of brilliance
Yesterday the SGX went on full time, no lunch break, to improve trading volume. And the result was immediate. During the one and a half hour of trading, without lunch break, it chalked up 100m shares traded. This, as reported, was an increase of 6.4% in volume.
I was dumbfounded. For all the years I spent in human resource management, the profession has been bugged by the difficulties in raising productivity. Money were spent to improve productivity throught mechanization and computerization. The catchphrase was to work smart and not work hard, to work intelligently and not slogging over long hours. And we did not achieve much.
Now I realized that we have missed the wood for the trees. The solution was so simplistic yet so brilliant, so effective. Just extend working hours man. And 100m shares were achieved in an additional one and a half hour of trading. Nevermind if the overall volume was down from 1.7b on Friday to 1.46b yesterday. The 240m shares lost can easily be recovered by increasing trading hours by another two hours.
This is a remarkable discovery of a management theory of great significance. I must write an article to the SHRI’s newsletter on how to raise productivity in the simplest way and cheapest way. If the ministers and their ministries were to work through lunch, gaining another one hour of working time, their productivity would increase accordingly. And if the no lunch break is extended across the country, across all industries, viola, the country would have a 6% increase in GDP. There is thus no need to increase the influx of foreign workers and foreign talents which would bring along high inflation, high property prices, high congestion and competition for space and air.
After 40 years of independence, I think Spring Singapore would not have thought of such a great concept. We have wasted all this time trying out all the dump ideas to improve productivity which obviously did not work. And the one that works, influx of foreigners, actually works on the same principle. Increase in workforce means increase in manhours working. This is the same as increasing the number of working hours, like no lunch break.
I think we will progress more rapidly if everyone simply works longer hours. We will progress, from First World to the Third World.
I was dumbfounded. For all the years I spent in human resource management, the profession has been bugged by the difficulties in raising productivity. Money were spent to improve productivity throught mechanization and computerization. The catchphrase was to work smart and not work hard, to work intelligently and not slogging over long hours. And we did not achieve much.
Now I realized that we have missed the wood for the trees. The solution was so simplistic yet so brilliant, so effective. Just extend working hours man. And 100m shares were achieved in an additional one and a half hour of trading. Nevermind if the overall volume was down from 1.7b on Friday to 1.46b yesterday. The 240m shares lost can easily be recovered by increasing trading hours by another two hours.
This is a remarkable discovery of a management theory of great significance. I must write an article to the SHRI’s newsletter on how to raise productivity in the simplest way and cheapest way. If the ministers and their ministries were to work through lunch, gaining another one hour of working time, their productivity would increase accordingly. And if the no lunch break is extended across the country, across all industries, viola, the country would have a 6% increase in GDP. There is thus no need to increase the influx of foreign workers and foreign talents which would bring along high inflation, high property prices, high congestion and competition for space and air.
After 40 years of independence, I think Spring Singapore would not have thought of such a great concept. We have wasted all this time trying out all the dump ideas to improve productivity which obviously did not work. And the one that works, influx of foreigners, actually works on the same principle. Increase in workforce means increase in manhours working. This is the same as increasing the number of working hours, like no lunch break.
I think we will progress more rapidly if everyone simply works longer hours. We will progress, from First World to the Third World.
8/01/2011
Investigative journalism taking on new meaning
Investigative journalism is the pride of the journalistic world. To be able to fish out information of public interest that are hard to come by must be the aspiration of all great journalists who want to make a name for themselves.
Investigative journalism is taking on a new form, investigating news by the citizens and not by the professional journalists. And their reach is far wider and deeper than the professional journalists. Citizens are up in arms, with the power and tool of the internet, to make their own investigation and contribution to put to print, newsworthy news that are somehow not printable or not available in the main media.
The internet has made possible the availability of news, with no fear or discrimination, to the people. In this area, especially in countries when news are controlled and managed, investigative journalism by the people, a kind of people’s power, is taking shape. The pen is mightier than the sword. Today it is the key pad that is mightier than the pen.
The main media will now have a worthy successor to their once privilege position of telling news the way they want it. The internet will tell the news the way it wants it, in a freedom that has never been experienced before. The internet is going to be the new champion of news and information. The main media will become dinosaurs if they cannot stand up to this challenge, of reporting news that is newsworthy. Both sides can now report selectively, news that each deemed is news. The readers will have a better choice of news to read, of media to look for the news they want to know and to read.
Every citizen can now write their own news, to call his news, 'My News.'
Investigative journalism is taking on a new form, investigating news by the citizens and not by the professional journalists. And their reach is far wider and deeper than the professional journalists. Citizens are up in arms, with the power and tool of the internet, to make their own investigation and contribution to put to print, newsworthy news that are somehow not printable or not available in the main media.
The internet has made possible the availability of news, with no fear or discrimination, to the people. In this area, especially in countries when news are controlled and managed, investigative journalism by the people, a kind of people’s power, is taking shape. The pen is mightier than the sword. Today it is the key pad that is mightier than the pen.
The main media will now have a worthy successor to their once privilege position of telling news the way they want it. The internet will tell the news the way it wants it, in a freedom that has never been experienced before. The internet is going to be the new champion of news and information. The main media will become dinosaurs if they cannot stand up to this challenge, of reporting news that is newsworthy. Both sides can now report selectively, news that each deemed is news. The readers will have a better choice of news to read, of media to look for the news they want to know and to read.
Every citizen can now write their own news, to call his news, 'My News.'
The Americans should have learnt from us
The US could have avoided the subprime crisis if they were willing to learn from us. In fact they would have become a much richer nation if they were to implement the same immigration policies as ours. They would have their property prices shooting to the sky and benefit all their property owners who would then be able to sell them at enormous profits to the new immigrants. All they need to do is to let in 10 or 20 million new immigrants who would then need to buy up the properties to stay. And if they are more aggressive, they could let in a 100m, and the US will be boom town Charlie. All the original Americans will be laughing to the banks by just selling their properties or looking at their market values.
It is a sure win formula. Dumb Americans. They could have turned a crisis into a great opportunity. And to think that they have been coming here to get good advice or words of wisdom. I think they never bother to listen when they were here, just pretend to listen but not letting anything to get into them.
It is a sure win formula. Dumb Americans. They could have turned a crisis into a great opportunity. And to think that they have been coming here to get good advice or words of wisdom. I think they never bother to listen when they were here, just pretend to listen but not letting anything to get into them.
Medisave double speak
Medisave Minimum Sum
The Medisave Minimum Sum is the amount you need to retain in your Medisave Account whenever you make a withdrawal of CPF savings (e.g. at age 55, 56, etc). The Medisave Minimum Sum will ensure that you set aside enough savings to meet your future healthcare expenses. The Medisave Minimum Sum from 1 July 2011 is $36,000 and is adjusted every July of the year.
Medisave Required Amount
The Medisave Required Amount (MRA) refers to the amount you are required to set aside in your Medisave Account after meeting the CPF Minimum Sum requirement. If you have met the CPF Minimum Sum and have a MRA shortfall at the point of withdrawal, you are required to make a top-up to your Medisave Account with part of the balance from your Ordinary Account and/or Special Account to meet the prevailing MRA.
The MRA is set at $27,500 from 1 January 2011 and will increase by approximately $2,500 (to be adjusted for inflation) each year until it reaches $25,000 (in 2003 dollars) on 1 January 2013.
The above is quoted from the CPF online site. How many of you understand what they mean? One point to note is ‘minimum’ which means that they can make you pay more than this, or take more money from you to be locked up. My Medisave saving is now more than the $36,000 minimum and growing. And this taking money from the people to be locked away, hopefully you have a beneficiary to pick them up when you are deleted, the money will go to the govt’s charity.
Read MRA above carefully. It said it is the amount to be set aside after meeting the Medisave Minimum Sum of $36k at this point in time, and this MRA to be set aside is $27.500. They could technically make a CPF depositor set aside $36k + $27,500 or $63,500, and growing every year.
How much money is kept away from the people by this scheme? At 36k per head, at 2m contributors, that is $72b! This is money that rightfully belongs to the people and must be returned to the people. Under the present scheme, even after 62 or 65, or 70, depending on how far the goal posts are shifted before you can get your monthly pittance from the CPF Dispensary, this money in the Medisave still cannot be touched. This is definitely a violation of human rights, when the people’s money is taken away from them, oh, ‘for the people’s good’, so they said.
Just for this reason alone, it is good enough to vote for another govt to make this withholding of the people’s life savings illegal. At the moment it is legal because the people voted them to Parliament to make this legal. How silly can the people be to vote a govt to take their life savings away from them when they need it?
There are many other things that are legal today that should be made illegal by a govt of the people and for the people. I am waiting and will definitely vote for another govt that will make these illegal and return the money to the people.
Why vote for a President to protect a reserve that we do not know? The people should be voting for a President or govt to protect their life savings in their CPF, to be returned to them when they need it, to be returned to them when they are alive, and not when they are dead.
What is the point of going for a heart by pass at 70 or 80 because one has some money in the Medisave, to be kept alive and penniless in old age? Would it be better to spend the money, enjoy a bit of life, and just let old age and the wear and tear of the body take one’s life away, and live more comfortably, even be an emperor for a few days with one’s own hard earn money?
The Medisave Minimum Sum is the amount you need to retain in your Medisave Account whenever you make a withdrawal of CPF savings (e.g. at age 55, 56, etc). The Medisave Minimum Sum will ensure that you set aside enough savings to meet your future healthcare expenses. The Medisave Minimum Sum from 1 July 2011 is $36,000 and is adjusted every July of the year.
Medisave Required Amount
The Medisave Required Amount (MRA) refers to the amount you are required to set aside in your Medisave Account after meeting the CPF Minimum Sum requirement. If you have met the CPF Minimum Sum and have a MRA shortfall at the point of withdrawal, you are required to make a top-up to your Medisave Account with part of the balance from your Ordinary Account and/or Special Account to meet the prevailing MRA.
The MRA is set at $27,500 from 1 January 2011 and will increase by approximately $2,500 (to be adjusted for inflation) each year until it reaches $25,000 (in 2003 dollars) on 1 January 2013.
The above is quoted from the CPF online site. How many of you understand what they mean? One point to note is ‘minimum’ which means that they can make you pay more than this, or take more money from you to be locked up. My Medisave saving is now more than the $36,000 minimum and growing. And this taking money from the people to be locked away, hopefully you have a beneficiary to pick them up when you are deleted, the money will go to the govt’s charity.
Read MRA above carefully. It said it is the amount to be set aside after meeting the Medisave Minimum Sum of $36k at this point in time, and this MRA to be set aside is $27.500. They could technically make a CPF depositor set aside $36k + $27,500 or $63,500, and growing every year.
How much money is kept away from the people by this scheme? At 36k per head, at 2m contributors, that is $72b! This is money that rightfully belongs to the people and must be returned to the people. Under the present scheme, even after 62 or 65, or 70, depending on how far the goal posts are shifted before you can get your monthly pittance from the CPF Dispensary, this money in the Medisave still cannot be touched. This is definitely a violation of human rights, when the people’s money is taken away from them, oh, ‘for the people’s good’, so they said.
Just for this reason alone, it is good enough to vote for another govt to make this withholding of the people’s life savings illegal. At the moment it is legal because the people voted them to Parliament to make this legal. How silly can the people be to vote a govt to take their life savings away from them when they need it?
There are many other things that are legal today that should be made illegal by a govt of the people and for the people. I am waiting and will definitely vote for another govt that will make these illegal and return the money to the people.
Why vote for a President to protect a reserve that we do not know? The people should be voting for a President or govt to protect their life savings in their CPF, to be returned to them when they need it, to be returned to them when they are alive, and not when they are dead.
What is the point of going for a heart by pass at 70 or 80 because one has some money in the Medisave, to be kept alive and penniless in old age? Would it be better to spend the money, enjoy a bit of life, and just let old age and the wear and tear of the body take one’s life away, and live more comfortably, even be an emperor for a few days with one’s own hard earn money?
7/31/2011
The last talented yodas
The people rejoiced when it was announced that JY Pillay is coming out to save Tiger Airways. Cheers and jubilations everywhere like the appearance of the American Hero, the one wearing the red underwear inside out. On the other hand I feel so sad, so tragic, that Singapore needed another yoda to come out from semi retirement, to save a small little organisation. It is frightening, how many more yodas we have left before we ended up high and dry?
The few yodas left are the few native talents we have produced in this little island. After their arrivals, from a stroke of providence, there was a long eclipse, and no more talents were produced here. And that is why we are so dependent on the yodas, some actually walking corpses, and in their place we have to beg foreign talents to save our future generations.
We need not fear of Singapore going into the gutters when we have a strong opposition presence in Parliament, to be called a two party or multi party system. We need not have to wait for that long for it to happen.
Singapore will go down within the next few years as most of the leftover yodas will be gone. Deleted. And without them, you can bet that they will be no one to save Tiger Airways, or SIA, the big banks, the public transport system or any organisation or institutions of any worth.
Unbelieveable but it happened. When there is no native talents available, go knocking at the caves of the yodas. If that fails, open the door for more foreign talents. So pathetic. We are indeed a country dearth of talents. I am still so amazed, very lost, that they could not find anyone to save Tiger Airways except to fall back on a yoda. This is slightly better than finding a departmental store manager to run the MRT.
I just dunno what to say.
The few yodas left are the few native talents we have produced in this little island. After their arrivals, from a stroke of providence, there was a long eclipse, and no more talents were produced here. And that is why we are so dependent on the yodas, some actually walking corpses, and in their place we have to beg foreign talents to save our future generations.
We need not fear of Singapore going into the gutters when we have a strong opposition presence in Parliament, to be called a two party or multi party system. We need not have to wait for that long for it to happen.
Singapore will go down within the next few years as most of the leftover yodas will be gone. Deleted. And without them, you can bet that they will be no one to save Tiger Airways, or SIA, the big banks, the public transport system or any organisation or institutions of any worth.
Unbelieveable but it happened. When there is no native talents available, go knocking at the caves of the yodas. If that fails, open the door for more foreign talents. So pathetic. We are indeed a country dearth of talents. I am still so amazed, very lost, that they could not find anyone to save Tiger Airways except to fall back on a yoda. This is slightly better than finding a departmental store manager to run the MRT.
I just dunno what to say.
The daft Singaporeans putting Tony Tan on trial
It is looking like a public trial of Tony Tan and his son’s NS record. They are questioning why he was allowed to defer his NS liability twice and not assigned to be a Medical Officer during NS after completion of his studies.
Tony Tan has explained. His son Patrick Tan has explained. Mindef also came out with an explanation. Unfortunately the daft Singaporeans could not understand the logic given and is pursuing tenaciously at this issue. Maybe there are simply too daft, or maybe they just refused to accept the explanations, or maybe the explanations are not up to their expectation. And they wanted more explanations like saying sorry is not enough.
When will they end their pursuit of this case and call it off? How many more explanations are required from Tony Tan, the Presidential Hopeful, and Mindef before they are willing to say let’s move on?
This is unprecedented, that a top ex politician, a member of the elite, is subject to so much public scrutiny. I just dunno what to say. What is happening?
Some are calling for a BOI. Would it help? The bigger question is how would this incident affect Tony Tan’s hope to be the Elected President? For the moment he is like a man on public trial, a kind of kangaroo court conducted by the faceless public.
Who will be next in the dock of public conscience and people's court?
Tony Tan has explained. His son Patrick Tan has explained. Mindef also came out with an explanation. Unfortunately the daft Singaporeans could not understand the logic given and is pursuing tenaciously at this issue. Maybe there are simply too daft, or maybe they just refused to accept the explanations, or maybe the explanations are not up to their expectation. And they wanted more explanations like saying sorry is not enough.
When will they end their pursuit of this case and call it off? How many more explanations are required from Tony Tan, the Presidential Hopeful, and Mindef before they are willing to say let’s move on?
This is unprecedented, that a top ex politician, a member of the elite, is subject to so much public scrutiny. I just dunno what to say. What is happening?
Some are calling for a BOI. Would it help? The bigger question is how would this incident affect Tony Tan’s hope to be the Elected President? For the moment he is like a man on public trial, a kind of kangaroo court conducted by the faceless public.
Who will be next in the dock of public conscience and people's court?
7/30/2011
Who is getting the most heat?
As the Presidential Election gets closer, the heat is building up. It used to be one way, with the main media setting the agenda, and the ‘outlaws’ on the run, targeted and trying their best to duck the arrows. With the new media in play, not only the ‘outlaws’ are being arrowed, the ‘in laws’ are finding the situation a bit uncomfortable as well, as they have never been in such a position before, with their dirty laundry and skeletons dragged out of the cupboards.
Of the four candidates, Tony Tan is in heat or deeply in the heat. Cheng Bock, Kin Lian and Jee Say are getting some shit but not as bad. The past is catching up with the present. There is no running away. When both sides can play the same blame game or shit throwing, it can end up with who is better at digging for shit. And the more one party tries to dig deeper, the other parties will not be outdone. The playing field is finally levelled.
Tony may be regretting for quitting his comfortable position in GIC which probably paid more than the EP and without having to face the ugliness of the media. I think it is a bad decision for him to offer to run for the EP.
The real heat is actually on the shoulder of the three wise men. They are to decide who meets the stringent legal criteria to even stand as a candidate. And the whole population is watching them like a hawk. Any mis-step is going to see their fathers and mothers being invited to the media for a big screwing. They have to think very carefully. Their integrity as honourable and respectable citizens are at stake.
Do they have to take sides? Or in a non political presidential race, are there two sides and two vested interested parties to account for? To disqualify any of the candidates this time will bring the sky down for sure, unlike in the past when the people had no voice and no avenue to voice out their displeasure. To allow all candidates to get through will, ahem, make some corners very unhappy and uncomfortable.
The three wise men must act wisely, objectively, without favour, with the greater interest of the country as the key consideration. Anything else will bring the wrath of the people on them. They may end up as the villains in the history of this island. They are under pressure, tremendous pressure, to watch which way the wind blows. You need very strong and independent minded people who will act regardless of… to give the people a fair choice on who to elect as the mostly ceremonial, rubber stamper.
Of the four candidates, Tony Tan is in heat or deeply in the heat. Cheng Bock, Kin Lian and Jee Say are getting some shit but not as bad. The past is catching up with the present. There is no running away. When both sides can play the same blame game or shit throwing, it can end up with who is better at digging for shit. And the more one party tries to dig deeper, the other parties will not be outdone. The playing field is finally levelled.
Tony may be regretting for quitting his comfortable position in GIC which probably paid more than the EP and without having to face the ugliness of the media. I think it is a bad decision for him to offer to run for the EP.
The real heat is actually on the shoulder of the three wise men. They are to decide who meets the stringent legal criteria to even stand as a candidate. And the whole population is watching them like a hawk. Any mis-step is going to see their fathers and mothers being invited to the media for a big screwing. They have to think very carefully. Their integrity as honourable and respectable citizens are at stake.
Do they have to take sides? Or in a non political presidential race, are there two sides and two vested interested parties to account for? To disqualify any of the candidates this time will bring the sky down for sure, unlike in the past when the people had no voice and no avenue to voice out their displeasure. To allow all candidates to get through will, ahem, make some corners very unhappy and uncomfortable.
The three wise men must act wisely, objectively, without favour, with the greater interest of the country as the key consideration. Anything else will bring the wrath of the people on them. They may end up as the villains in the history of this island. They are under pressure, tremendous pressure, to watch which way the wind blows. You need very strong and independent minded people who will act regardless of… to give the people a fair choice on who to elect as the mostly ceremonial, rubber stamper.
7/29/2011
Serving for Life!
Public service is also called civil service or civil servants, a job to serve the people. Some stay for awhile while some serve for life. Political leaders too are in the act of serving the people, as long as they are not self serving. Some serve a few years, some serve for life too. Some may argue whether they are serving the people or serving themselves.
One thing for sure, the people will have to serve the retired politicians for life, and to live in abundance. Serving for life is taking on a new meaning.
One thing for sure, the people will have to serve the retired politicians for life, and to live in abundance. Serving for life is taking on a new meaning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)