It really makes me sick to hear people whining that they are sacrificing for the country. So ‘jia lat’. The ruling govt must be damn ‘chek ark’ to turn these people into martyrs of modern Singapore. When a Sinkie is called to stand for political office, the first thought that came to his mind is ‘sacrifice’, despite the world’s highest paid salary, with many even getting more than the President of the USA. My God, young men and women being paid that kind of money had sleepless nights worrying about the sacrifice they are going to make!
Of course it is not a calling. Many had left their high paying jobs when God called. For modern Singapore, the Brits used to pay their soldiers hardship allowance for a posting to the Far East, ie Singapore. Going into politics today must surely be a kind of hardship posting to Siberia.
Do we really need people who cried sacrifice so readily? Are they thinking that the people owe them a debt for their big sacrifice to go into politics to earn a miserable pay? Are they demanding that the ungrateful and unappreciative Sinkies kneel and bow and praise them for their sacrifice? Wan suay, wan suay, wan wan suay.
The opposition MPs in Parliament (never heard any of them griefing that they are making a big sacrifice without the big pay) should ask those who feel so aggrieved to stand up and be counted, and tell them there is a beeline of equally if not more able people who are willing to take their places. Just tell them, prease, no need to sacrifice lah. Just go home and be happy, there will be someone more willing, more committed and more capable and happier to do the job.
Do they believe that Sinkies are so untalented and the 80 plus are all the talents in this piece of rock and no one else is more able than them? Tell them they are not irreplaceable and not indispensable, that without them the island will not sink. How about a walk out, all resign and see if the country will sink? Don’t they feel embarrassed at all?
Where is the pride, the sense of duty and honour, the sense of recognition and satisfaction to be called upon to be leaders of a nation? Hey, the whole machinery is so well oiled to serve and put you into office, with all the grassroots running around at your becks and calls. These are the people who really sacrificed their time, money and energy to help the politician wannabes. Without them, the machinery and the GRCs, running for election is not going to be a cake walk. Many would not even make it. What a sacrifice!
But the people who sacrificed the most are the NS men. Some are even treated worst than new citizens, can’t buy public housing, not even invited to sacrifice for the country to be politicians, to be paid world best salary. New citizens who have not done any NS are called instead. And looking at them and looking at the Sinkies around, what is so great about the new citizens that the Sinkies are inferior to them? Why are good Sinkies left out of the great sacrifice to serve the people and country?
I think all the Sinkies will be queueing up to sacrifice themselves and happily say thank you Sir with the kind of pay they are not happy with.
1/19/2012
An arbitrary salary package based on judgement call
The ministerial salary recommendation was passed after three days of debate. Though there were some attempts to take issues with the recommendation on grounds of principles and methodology, eventually all was convinced that there was really nothing to discuss as it was a judgement call. And there was elation when a common number was found and a hurry to move on with no regards to how it is derived. The only agreement was that there is a need to pay well to attract the right calibre of candidates for the important position of ministers.
Though I have been away from the human resource industry for a while, I cannot help but to see a reluctance to really do a thorough proposal based on what should be the relevant factors and inputs to come out with a less subjective recommendation. The main flaws in the recommendation are the insistence on the use of top income earners and the refusal to use comparative salary of politicians of other countries. The latter was pooh pooh away by raising a few strawmen as justifications, that because of these flimsy excuses, comparing them would be unsatisfactory. I will come back to this later.
Why the preoccupation with the top 1000 income earners and how relevant is this? The perceived intrinsic bias to use these high numbers is that the salary will have a higher base to start with and thus self serving. The cynics would not be happy for many obvious reasons. The PAP’s argument to favour this selective pick of the top 1000 is that the potential candidates should come from this pool of people, apparently logical but not really.
I will just point out two fallacies from this assumption. One, top money earners are not necessary top political leadership material. Political leadership means many more important things than just about ability to make money from any means or profession. The second point is that top income earners are likely to be so wealthy that they would not be distracted by a few million dollars, plus or minus. Money is not really an issue to attract them as they have plenty of them. And this is well pointed out earlier by another MP.
Money is only important to the talents that are not making that kind of money, and wanted to earn more, or near to what these people are making. The disconnect between this logic and the target group is pretty obvious. It is a flawed argument, a flawed basis to work on.
The second point I want to make is the quick dismissal of using foreign political leaders for comparison. Why? The often quoted reasons are related to corruption and tangible and intangible perks or benefits. As far as benefits are concerned, it is easy to find out and easy to quantified. For people who shoot freely about Air Force One or about trying to pay peanuts, these are foolish arguments that should not be entertained as quoting them showed that they are not serious. Second home allowance or travelling allowances of UK politicians are only relevant to them as the country is big and it is costly to travel from Scotland to London for Parliament sittings. Armoured plated cars for Obama is not a benefit but a necessity as his head has a big price. When mentioning benefits, one must be serious and not spurious just to win an argument.
All the perks can be tabled and the compensation specialists can review them for their relevance. This is something very lacking in the whole process. The dismissal of inputs from the compensation experts and every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks that designing compensation packages is about commonsense and anyone can do it. Maybe they are right if it all boils down to judgement call. The taxi driver too can come up with a set of numbers.
Some benefits are specific and unique in nature and are simply inappropriate for consideration. Whatever perks that are official are obtainable and can be monetised in some ways. Intangible perks may be a problem if relevant. Getting a proper list of all the perks for consideration cannot be a difficult task for such an important matter.
The corruption part is more tricky but not unsurmountable either. We are talking about developed countries and not lawless dictatorships which should not even be part of the equation. Under table payouts cannot be considered as morally they are wrong and illegal. No sensible govt will dare to quote corruption as something that must be paid in a country that is incorruptible and makes corruption illegal.
Then again there are ways to by pass such issues of morality by creating a corruption index to help the incumbents from being corrupt. Of course this kind of thinking would not be tolerable to many. Assuming that it can be bulldozed through, then make a provision for it by calling it under whatever terms, or make a judgement call.
What I find disturbing is that there was no serious attempt to use the salary and perks of foreign political leaders for comparison when this is the most logical thing to do. All the exceptions and differences, in terms of size, economy, population, land mass, uniqueness etc can be moderated or massaged, with different weightages attached, to make them meaningful.
By brushing aside the most appropriate source of comparison and plunging into something that is really of no relevance to political leadership makes the recommendation and approval by Parliament a bit rancid and distasteful. Quite disappointing really, when the top and bestest talents were involved to challenge the recommendation or supporting it. At the end of three days, hook, line and sinkers were all swallowed in one big gulp and everyone seems so please, and with a sense of great achievement.
Where are the inputs from the human resource and compensation specialists?
Though I have been away from the human resource industry for a while, I cannot help but to see a reluctance to really do a thorough proposal based on what should be the relevant factors and inputs to come out with a less subjective recommendation. The main flaws in the recommendation are the insistence on the use of top income earners and the refusal to use comparative salary of politicians of other countries. The latter was pooh pooh away by raising a few strawmen as justifications, that because of these flimsy excuses, comparing them would be unsatisfactory. I will come back to this later.
Why the preoccupation with the top 1000 income earners and how relevant is this? The perceived intrinsic bias to use these high numbers is that the salary will have a higher base to start with and thus self serving. The cynics would not be happy for many obvious reasons. The PAP’s argument to favour this selective pick of the top 1000 is that the potential candidates should come from this pool of people, apparently logical but not really.
I will just point out two fallacies from this assumption. One, top money earners are not necessary top political leadership material. Political leadership means many more important things than just about ability to make money from any means or profession. The second point is that top income earners are likely to be so wealthy that they would not be distracted by a few million dollars, plus or minus. Money is not really an issue to attract them as they have plenty of them. And this is well pointed out earlier by another MP.
Money is only important to the talents that are not making that kind of money, and wanted to earn more, or near to what these people are making. The disconnect between this logic and the target group is pretty obvious. It is a flawed argument, a flawed basis to work on.
The second point I want to make is the quick dismissal of using foreign political leaders for comparison. Why? The often quoted reasons are related to corruption and tangible and intangible perks or benefits. As far as benefits are concerned, it is easy to find out and easy to quantified. For people who shoot freely about Air Force One or about trying to pay peanuts, these are foolish arguments that should not be entertained as quoting them showed that they are not serious. Second home allowance or travelling allowances of UK politicians are only relevant to them as the country is big and it is costly to travel from Scotland to London for Parliament sittings. Armoured plated cars for Obama is not a benefit but a necessity as his head has a big price. When mentioning benefits, one must be serious and not spurious just to win an argument.
All the perks can be tabled and the compensation specialists can review them for their relevance. This is something very lacking in the whole process. The dismissal of inputs from the compensation experts and every Tom, Dick and Harry thinks that designing compensation packages is about commonsense and anyone can do it. Maybe they are right if it all boils down to judgement call. The taxi driver too can come up with a set of numbers.
Some benefits are specific and unique in nature and are simply inappropriate for consideration. Whatever perks that are official are obtainable and can be monetised in some ways. Intangible perks may be a problem if relevant. Getting a proper list of all the perks for consideration cannot be a difficult task for such an important matter.
The corruption part is more tricky but not unsurmountable either. We are talking about developed countries and not lawless dictatorships which should not even be part of the equation. Under table payouts cannot be considered as morally they are wrong and illegal. No sensible govt will dare to quote corruption as something that must be paid in a country that is incorruptible and makes corruption illegal.
Then again there are ways to by pass such issues of morality by creating a corruption index to help the incumbents from being corrupt. Of course this kind of thinking would not be tolerable to many. Assuming that it can be bulldozed through, then make a provision for it by calling it under whatever terms, or make a judgement call.
What I find disturbing is that there was no serious attempt to use the salary and perks of foreign political leaders for comparison when this is the most logical thing to do. All the exceptions and differences, in terms of size, economy, population, land mass, uniqueness etc can be moderated or massaged, with different weightages attached, to make them meaningful.
By brushing aside the most appropriate source of comparison and plunging into something that is really of no relevance to political leadership makes the recommendation and approval by Parliament a bit rancid and distasteful. Quite disappointing really, when the top and bestest talents were involved to challenge the recommendation or supporting it. At the end of three days, hook, line and sinkers were all swallowed in one big gulp and everyone seems so please, and with a sense of great achievement.
Where are the inputs from the human resource and compensation specialists?
1/18/2012
The days the world fought with China
Below are 7 short clips of WW2 films about the Japanese invasion of China and how this poor and unprepared nation was battered to pieces. It was only their human will and the spirit to live a life of freedom and the assistance of foreign forces from the West that helped the Chinese people defeated the overpowering and well equipped Japanese invaders.
All peace loving and anti war human beans should watch how destructive and painful war can be. The West, particularly the Americans, should view these short films produced by the Americans, to have a better understanding of what it was when Americans and the Chinese and people who suffered under the brutal Japanese war machines fought together, side by side, for freedom and for mankind.
It was a very painful history of China on film for every living Chinese to remember the times when they forgot to stand up as a people, as a nation.
Subject: Fw: Battle of China
This is excellent footage and archival material on the invasion of China by the Japanese. I sat through the 7 videos to see how our ancestors fought back the invaders despite overwhelming odds and unspeakable atrocities committed, particularly in Nanking in 1937. Now we know why China had to be what she is today, for never again will she suffer humiliation from foreign invaders. China has come of age, reminiscent of days of old, with a culture that goes back four thousand years. How true: “China may be invaded but never, never conquered†.
BATTLE OF CHINA
World War II Films about China - Produced by US Government
A very good history lesson. Worth viewing the whole 7 segments.
Every Chinese should watch this wonderful series of documentary films, to really learn about China and the true history.
The amazing adversities and abilities of our ancestors can inspire us to take it easy with any difficulties we may have in our life and become a winner.
The film is in English with very good CHINESE subtitles. Now go to:
WW-II 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQTWtokeF5Q
WW-II 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcjVWe3xgAo&feature=related
WW-II 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTIylgLDHE&feature=related
WW-II 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6z-fZwpmME&feature=related
WW-II 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKHk6eepm0E&feature=related
WW-II 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_zntg-eFF0&feature=related
WW II 7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0hZiD5Uk5I&feature=related ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0hZiD5Uk5I&feature=related
All peace loving and anti war human beans should watch how destructive and painful war can be. The West, particularly the Americans, should view these short films produced by the Americans, to have a better understanding of what it was when Americans and the Chinese and people who suffered under the brutal Japanese war machines fought together, side by side, for freedom and for mankind.
It was a very painful history of China on film for every living Chinese to remember the times when they forgot to stand up as a people, as a nation.
Subject: Fw: Battle of China
This is excellent footage and archival material on the invasion of China by the Japanese. I sat through the 7 videos to see how our ancestors fought back the invaders despite overwhelming odds and unspeakable atrocities committed, particularly in Nanking in 1937. Now we know why China had to be what she is today, for never again will she suffer humiliation from foreign invaders. China has come of age, reminiscent of days of old, with a culture that goes back four thousand years. How true: “China may be invaded but never, never conquered†.
BATTLE OF CHINA
World War II Films about China - Produced by US Government
A very good history lesson. Worth viewing the whole 7 segments.
Every Chinese should watch this wonderful series of documentary films, to really learn about China and the true history.
The amazing adversities and abilities of our ancestors can inspire us to take it easy with any difficulties we may have in our life and become a winner.
The film is in English with very good CHINESE subtitles. Now go to:
WW-II 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQTWtokeF5Q
WW-II 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcjVWe3xgAo&feature=related
WW-II 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKTIylgLDHE&feature=related
WW-II 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6z-fZwpmME&feature=related
WW-II 5 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKHk6eepm0E&feature=related
WW-II 6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_zntg-eFF0&feature=related
WW II 7 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0hZiD5Uk5I&feature=related ://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0hZiD5Uk5I&feature=related
The Aussies celebrating ASX
The Sydney Morning Herald, 18 Jan 2012
Had the ASX deal gone ahead, Bocker could have comfortably hidden the far deeper downturn in equities trading experienced by his group than ASX over the past six months (although many a local stockbroker suffering loss of hair, sleep and a job might contest that view).
Acquiring the ASX would also have reduced (although in some ways deepened because of Australia's weighting to resources) SGX's currently heavy reliance on equities trading for revenue generation because the ASX is, in spite of perceptions, less dependent on the cash volume in the equities market....by Ian McIlwraith
The above is the first para of McIlwraith's article about how lucky ASX was in not merging with SGX. Good reading the whole article.
Had the ASX deal gone ahead, Bocker could have comfortably hidden the far deeper downturn in equities trading experienced by his group than ASX over the past six months (although many a local stockbroker suffering loss of hair, sleep and a job might contest that view).
Acquiring the ASX would also have reduced (although in some ways deepened because of Australia's weighting to resources) SGX's currently heavy reliance on equities trading for revenue generation because the ASX is, in spite of perceptions, less dependent on the cash volume in the equities market....by Ian McIlwraith
The above is the first para of McIlwraith's article about how lucky ASX was in not merging with SGX. Good reading the whole article.
Hsien Loong still thinking of career development
Hsien Loong is still thinking about promotion and career development of his employees. This kind of anomaly only exists in one country and no where else. No where in a democratically elected govt does a head of a political party has the privilege of career planning and development, and a salary scale for politicians as if they were employees of the state. In a normal healthy democracy every term of appointment could be the last term before the next general election.
Would Obama or Cameron be talking about career planning for their ministers with salary increment and promotion to come with it? What is happening here is a unique situation that could no longer exist in the next general election. It is not going to be the same anymore looking at how things are developing. Any political party that is elected to power should count themselves lucky. And to be reelected again, is not going to be a sure thing. In many countries, a two term party is a great achievement that many could only hope for.
What happens if a new govt is elected to power in 2016 and subsequently political offices change hand more regularly? It is something that can happen. To be elected again and again is no longer going to be a guarantee as the political system matures, as the people get wiser and more demanding and more selective.
Would Obama or Cameron be talking about career planning for their ministers with salary increment and promotion to come with it? What is happening here is a unique situation that could no longer exist in the next general election. It is not going to be the same anymore looking at how things are developing. Any political party that is elected to power should count themselves lucky. And to be reelected again, is not going to be a sure thing. In many countries, a two term party is a great achievement that many could only hope for.
What happens if a new govt is elected to power in 2016 and subsequently political offices change hand more regularly? It is something that can happen. To be elected again and again is no longer going to be a guarantee as the political system matures, as the people get wiser and more demanding and more selective.
Confirmed, Sinkies are not good banker/CEO material
David Conner is retiring from OCBC after 10 years. He took over from Alex Au, the previous CEO. Alex was a Hongkie. The successor to David Conner is none other than another Hongkie, Samuel Tsien. DBS too did not have a local bred CEO for nearly two decades. The only local bank that still has a local in charge is UOB, which surprisingly is out performing the foreign run local banks if the value of its share price is an indicator.
What should be done to get our local boys and girls to be good enough to be the top dog of local banks in the banking industry? Why is it that they are all found wanting? What is so lacking in the local talents. Maybe the real talents are all into politics, making sacrifices to serve the people.
One way to make this situation less embarrassing to the Sinkie bankers and Singaporeans in general, is to include a citizenship application form when a foreigner is offer a CEO position in any large Singapore corporation. And the appointment will only be confirmed on approval of citizenship. Then all can be happy that the CEOs are Singaporeans, that Singaporeans also got talent.
What should be done to get our local boys and girls to be good enough to be the top dog of local banks in the banking industry? Why is it that they are all found wanting? What is so lacking in the local talents. Maybe the real talents are all into politics, making sacrifices to serve the people.
One way to make this situation less embarrassing to the Sinkie bankers and Singaporeans in general, is to include a citizenship application form when a foreigner is offer a CEO position in any large Singapore corporation. And the appointment will only be confirmed on approval of citizenship. Then all can be happy that the CEOs are Singaporeans, that Singaporeans also got talent.
Filling the ocean
This guy was at a public tap with a big hose and filling water into a big tanker. Standing beside him was a long queue of human beans each with a pail or plastic container waiting for their turns.
They have been waiting for hours but the tanker is so huge and may take several hours to fill it up. And several tankers were also waiting. Occasionally the guy at the tap would turn around and slosh a few seconds of water into a couple of empty pails and then turn back to fill the tanker.
Just for a few minutes, many of those in the queue would have their pails filled and can go home happily to continue with their lives. But because the tankers must be filled, probably owned by some big shot, the rest of the peasants would have to wait for their turns, and a little mercy from the dispenser.
The moral of this incident is similar to someone trying to fill the ocean that is full of water and ignores the little ponds, rivers and streams, leaving them high and dry. This is what is happening in countries that believe in pure meritocracy, when the more the merits, the more deserving one should be, and their bank accounts should be continuously be filled even when they have no time to spend the money. The lesser merit or undeserving ones can go on and be hungry. Randians? Wide income gap is natural and nothing can be done about it, so said the meritorious and deserving. Get out of my elite uncaring face.
This is the basic pillar of a pure meritocratic system, pure capitalism. This is the road we are marching on.
They have been waiting for hours but the tanker is so huge and may take several hours to fill it up. And several tankers were also waiting. Occasionally the guy at the tap would turn around and slosh a few seconds of water into a couple of empty pails and then turn back to fill the tanker.
Just for a few minutes, many of those in the queue would have their pails filled and can go home happily to continue with their lives. But because the tankers must be filled, probably owned by some big shot, the rest of the peasants would have to wait for their turns, and a little mercy from the dispenser.
The moral of this incident is similar to someone trying to fill the ocean that is full of water and ignores the little ponds, rivers and streams, leaving them high and dry. This is what is happening in countries that believe in pure meritocracy, when the more the merits, the more deserving one should be, and their bank accounts should be continuously be filled even when they have no time to spend the money. The lesser merit or undeserving ones can go on and be hungry. Randians? Wide income gap is natural and nothing can be done about it, so said the meritorious and deserving. Get out of my elite uncaring face.
This is the basic pillar of a pure meritocratic system, pure capitalism. This is the road we are marching on.
Exceptional country, exceptional solution
We must see ourselves as the number one place to live for exceptional people. We must be an exceptional country and for that, the pay of our political leaders must be exceptional. We want the best and we shall pay the best salary in the world to get the best talent the world can provide.
So far every suggestion and proposal for the minister’s salary is arbitrary. The logic is arbitrary logic, selective and some may say self serving. The team making the recommendation chose who they want to compare with, chose the criteria they want to ensure that the pay is still in the millions. Chose to treat ministers like employees, call it pragmatic or to be unkind, mercenary. Chose to motivate them like employees of a company instead of leaders of a country leading the people by their exemplary conduct and dedication.
Let me suggest another selective arbitrary proposal. Pick ten of the world’s top countries, on any criteria, logically should be first world or developed advanced countries, not kingdoms or sheikdoms, and take the salary of their heads of govt for reference. Include all the perks that are measurable and relevant. Forget about Air Force One. It is a stupid comparison.
Convert all their perks into monetary terms and add them to their salaries. At the end of the exercise, take the average number, in monetary terms, and pay them to our head of govt. The rest of the ministerial salary can be a percentage of that. No one then can argue that there is no real comparison because these leaders have other perks. We add in the perks.
I think this formula should provide a handsome income to our ministers. And make it clean, no more other incomes or perks or bonuses. It is arbitrary but arbitrarily fair and logical. And like the Worker’s Party suggested, make the total payout public. It cannot be a case of clean and transparent but cannot tell. There should be nothing to be ashamed of that cannot be made public. Unless all the claims of transparency and clean wage is hogwash. Please tell.
The only unfair bit is that the talents may not live up to it as our talents come from a small pool of self proclaimed elite. Nevermind, be generous and aim to be an exceptional country with exceptional leadership. It may look like an aspiration, an idealistic goal, but we need to start somewhere. And starting with an exceptional salary for our leaders is a good start in the right direction.
So far every suggestion and proposal for the minister’s salary is arbitrary. The logic is arbitrary logic, selective and some may say self serving. The team making the recommendation chose who they want to compare with, chose the criteria they want to ensure that the pay is still in the millions. Chose to treat ministers like employees, call it pragmatic or to be unkind, mercenary. Chose to motivate them like employees of a company instead of leaders of a country leading the people by their exemplary conduct and dedication.
Let me suggest another selective arbitrary proposal. Pick ten of the world’s top countries, on any criteria, logically should be first world or developed advanced countries, not kingdoms or sheikdoms, and take the salary of their heads of govt for reference. Include all the perks that are measurable and relevant. Forget about Air Force One. It is a stupid comparison.
Convert all their perks into monetary terms and add them to their salaries. At the end of the exercise, take the average number, in monetary terms, and pay them to our head of govt. The rest of the ministerial salary can be a percentage of that. No one then can argue that there is no real comparison because these leaders have other perks. We add in the perks.
I think this formula should provide a handsome income to our ministers. And make it clean, no more other incomes or perks or bonuses. It is arbitrary but arbitrarily fair and logical. And like the Worker’s Party suggested, make the total payout public. It cannot be a case of clean and transparent but cannot tell. There should be nothing to be ashamed of that cannot be made public. Unless all the claims of transparency and clean wage is hogwash. Please tell.
The only unfair bit is that the talents may not live up to it as our talents come from a small pool of self proclaimed elite. Nevermind, be generous and aim to be an exceptional country with exceptional leadership. It may look like an aspiration, an idealistic goal, but we need to start somewhere. And starting with an exceptional salary for our leaders is a good start in the right direction.
1/17/2012
Alvin Yeo makes good sense
Be realistic and compares apple with apple. Alvin Yeo brought out an interesting point, that the political leaders of UK and US came from wealthy background and could afford to take lower salary. He quoted a few British politicians with net worth of 4 or 5 million pounds with the Cameron’s waiting to inherit a 30m pound fortune. For those with 4m or 5m pounds, actually ‘sub sub suey’ compare to our politician’s wealth.
The American leaders are worth more, in the region of $100m or $200m. So they can afford to take in lesser salaries. This is an excellent point.
I do not know how wealthy are our ministers, but I think they are worth not less than the Brits and Americans, except for a few. Or they were not that rich before joining politics.
What is important is that if we want to attract the best, the rich or big income earners, we must go for it, get the really rich to serve. And the irony is that the really rich in the US and UK don’t need to be fed more to be fatter. Are our really rich the same as them, or they are different, that they need to be fatter cats? Even without taking the calculator or computer, one can easily conclude that the top 1000 high income earners would worth as much as the British and American leaders and should not be eyeing for more money.
The whole argument seems to go round and round. They are so rich, they need not be paid so much. And then we need to attract these very rich and need to pay them more? They would not be happy with less? Maybe as a non talent, I am unable to grasp the brilliance or logic in the argument. Really pai seh.
The American leaders are worth more, in the region of $100m or $200m. So they can afford to take in lesser salaries. This is an excellent point.
I do not know how wealthy are our ministers, but I think they are worth not less than the Brits and Americans, except for a few. Or they were not that rich before joining politics.
What is important is that if we want to attract the best, the rich or big income earners, we must go for it, get the really rich to serve. And the irony is that the really rich in the US and UK don’t need to be fed more to be fatter. Are our really rich the same as them, or they are different, that they need to be fatter cats? Even without taking the calculator or computer, one can easily conclude that the top 1000 high income earners would worth as much as the British and American leaders and should not be eyeing for more money.
The whole argument seems to go round and round. They are so rich, they need not be paid so much. And then we need to attract these very rich and need to pay them more? They would not be happy with less? Maybe as a non talent, I am unable to grasp the brilliance or logic in the argument. Really pai seh.
KPIs are good and bad
Heard everyone screaming for KPIs like words from the mouth of gods. KPIs are the answer to work performance and an objective way to measure performance of an employee. HR professionals would tell you that it is just a tool. And a tool is as good as the person using it. It is not something so simple to set.
Does anyone know how much time and effort to write a good and reasonable KPI and how much time and effort to monitor it? It is a very tedious process. But some employers think it is so easy. Either they write it in 10 minutes and tell the employee to write his KPIs which he does not have any clue whatsoever. And the discussion is over in 30 minutes or less, to meet again in 12 months time. And the appraisal is to do the appraising thinking he knows what the employee did all this time. The other flaw is that the result may be achieved by means that have adverse and harmful consequences.
Another issue, who sets the KPIs? You the people who are being affected by the KPIs or the PM who decides the KPIs whether you like it or not, or benefits you or adversely affecting you? The assumption is that the KPIs are good for the intended people and country and the people agree to it. An excellent example is HDB. What should be the KPIs for the minister in charge? Build more and cheaper flats? Build less and charge higher and bring in more profits? Hold back the building to shrink the supply for higher profits? Or tell the buyers, you buy according to my schedule. I need to maximize profit and minimize waste.
Would an employee blindly pursue the KPIs at the expense of other issues for his bonuses instead of long term good of the organization, inn this case the people? Many organizations are caught by this short term KPI trap. There are many conflicting interests in govt than in a private organization. The latter is so much simpler. Governing is not a black and white issue and often more grey and compromises.
Should the people set the KPIs instead? Why should the PM be setting the KPIs? Is there a conflict between what is good for country and people and what is good for party? No, anyone say no? Think of the Whip.
Would there be KPIs for MPs? Who is going to set KPIs for opposition MPs and are they entitled to the same kind of reward and bonuses? It is public money you know.
Does anyone know how much time and effort to write a good and reasonable KPI and how much time and effort to monitor it? It is a very tedious process. But some employers think it is so easy. Either they write it in 10 minutes and tell the employee to write his KPIs which he does not have any clue whatsoever. And the discussion is over in 30 minutes or less, to meet again in 12 months time. And the appraisal is to do the appraising thinking he knows what the employee did all this time. The other flaw is that the result may be achieved by means that have adverse and harmful consequences.
Another issue, who sets the KPIs? You the people who are being affected by the KPIs or the PM who decides the KPIs whether you like it or not, or benefits you or adversely affecting you? The assumption is that the KPIs are good for the intended people and country and the people agree to it. An excellent example is HDB. What should be the KPIs for the minister in charge? Build more and cheaper flats? Build less and charge higher and bring in more profits? Hold back the building to shrink the supply for higher profits? Or tell the buyers, you buy according to my schedule. I need to maximize profit and minimize waste.
Would an employee blindly pursue the KPIs at the expense of other issues for his bonuses instead of long term good of the organization, inn this case the people? Many organizations are caught by this short term KPI trap. There are many conflicting interests in govt than in a private organization. The latter is so much simpler. Governing is not a black and white issue and often more grey and compromises.
Should the people set the KPIs instead? Why should the PM be setting the KPIs? Is there a conflict between what is good for country and people and what is good for party? No, anyone say no? Think of the Whip.
Would there be KPIs for MPs? Who is going to set KPIs for opposition MPs and are they entitled to the same kind of reward and bonuses? It is public money you know.
There was nothing self serving
The debate on the Ministerial Salary has started. A brief description of what I heard and read is that everything about high ministerial salary is for the good of the country and people. There is nothing about self serving.
The island needs strong, good and capable leaders. And how to get them is through paying them well. The ministers and MPs are arguing for more money not for themselves, but for the country and the people. Bad leadership will turn the country upside down overnight. They are preparing the groundwork for future able leaders to come on stage.
Bad leaders are likely to be corrupt and self serving. Only more money can keep them from being corrupt and self serving. Like the gardener, pay him less and he will help himself with the apples to make himself richer. It is human instinct, natural human traits.
The choice of not comparing with foreign leader’s salary is that they are getting much more in undisclosed perks. Ours is clean and everyone knows how much our leaders are getting, from the types of allowances, the number of months of bonuses, the other appointments etc etc. All their income is clean and transparent. These are nothing compare to what foreign leaders are getting in other kinds of perks.
Pegging them to the top 1000 income earners has a logic, not arbitrary. We need people from this group of high income earners to step forward to serve. Never mind that this group of people are high achievers and not really in need of additional money to live on. Many would have been comfortable for life without having to earn another cent. But there is a need to be fair to them, to their families, that their lifestyle is not affected by stepping forward to serve the people and country. The high salary is for this purpose, to attract these people, to tell them that they will not lose out in monetary terms.
Not all people are altruistic and selfless. We got to be pragmatic and realistic. People who made a lot of money are motivated by money. And it is good to provide more monetary incentives to motivate them to work better which will end up better for the people. Bonuses, variable bonuses will be a good start to lure these people into public service, like bait in a mouse trap. We used to have daft and selfless people coming out to serve the country. But that generation of leaders is over. We are living in a brave new world where the ethos is self first. We must accept this and the high salary for ministers is really a recognition of a new reality.
The people must support this high salary recommendation. It is good for the country and people as we go forward. We are talking about the future leadership, about the well being of our children. There is nothing self serving to support such a recommendation.
The island needs strong, good and capable leaders. And how to get them is through paying them well. The ministers and MPs are arguing for more money not for themselves, but for the country and the people. Bad leadership will turn the country upside down overnight. They are preparing the groundwork for future able leaders to come on stage.
Bad leaders are likely to be corrupt and self serving. Only more money can keep them from being corrupt and self serving. Like the gardener, pay him less and he will help himself with the apples to make himself richer. It is human instinct, natural human traits.
The choice of not comparing with foreign leader’s salary is that they are getting much more in undisclosed perks. Ours is clean and everyone knows how much our leaders are getting, from the types of allowances, the number of months of bonuses, the other appointments etc etc. All their income is clean and transparent. These are nothing compare to what foreign leaders are getting in other kinds of perks.
Pegging them to the top 1000 income earners has a logic, not arbitrary. We need people from this group of high income earners to step forward to serve. Never mind that this group of people are high achievers and not really in need of additional money to live on. Many would have been comfortable for life without having to earn another cent. But there is a need to be fair to them, to their families, that their lifestyle is not affected by stepping forward to serve the people and country. The high salary is for this purpose, to attract these people, to tell them that they will not lose out in monetary terms.
Not all people are altruistic and selfless. We got to be pragmatic and realistic. People who made a lot of money are motivated by money. And it is good to provide more monetary incentives to motivate them to work better which will end up better for the people. Bonuses, variable bonuses will be a good start to lure these people into public service, like bait in a mouse trap. We used to have daft and selfless people coming out to serve the country. But that generation of leaders is over. We are living in a brave new world where the ethos is self first. We must accept this and the high salary for ministers is really a recognition of a new reality.
The people must support this high salary recommendation. It is good for the country and people as we go forward. We are talking about the future leadership, about the well being of our children. There is nothing self serving to support such a recommendation.
The Civil Service is the backbone of the country
The obsessive attention on the politicians and their political pay package has distracted the people from the vital role the civil service plays in the running of the country. The politicians come and go, by choice or by being ousted by the people when they are no longer trusted. The civil servants are career employees who will be there to serve whichever govt that comes to power. They will only have to leave with the politicians should they be compromised or be beholden to the incumbent political leadership and leaving is the only option when the benefactors depart.
The core of talents of the govt is in the civil servants. They are really the talented ones, the scholars. They will do a very good job under good and dedicated leaders. They will only go astray under misguided leadership or compromised to work for politicians instead of the people.
A politician is a politician. The honourable and selfless ones will devote their energy and effort to serve the people. The less honourable ones will be less for the people and more for self. They will keep telling you how much sacrifice they have to take to serve the people, loss of privacy, loss of income, lower quality of life etc etc. It is always about themselves and their own interests. There are plenty of examples in history of good and bad political leaders.
What in my view are good political leadership? A sense of commitment to serve country and people. For these, you don’t need rocket scientists or top surgeons or top lawyers or top money earners. What is needed are people with a heart in the right place and good or above average intelligence to know what is good for country and people. Too clever people with the heart in the wrong place, in their pockets, are unsuitable for political leadership. There must be honour and moral righteousness in people assuming political leadership. Nothing less.
A good political leadership can always count on the pool of top talents in the Civil Service to do the meticulous work of running the country. And they are there to set the right direction for the people and country, not for themselves. They are there also as the guiding light, to lead by examples, to control the civil servants to do the right things. They can only do that when they are upright and honourable, and above money and rewards.
Yes it is about leadership, lead by examples. The idea of paying leaders to motivate them is rubbish, ludicrous. Leaders don’t need to be motivated by monetary rewards or any rewards. They lead the way, they show the way. It is ridiculous for leaders to ask for rewards to do better. Unbelieveable! They can even be paid lesser than the civil servants who are professionals in their work who are there as career employees, not someone parachuted from somewhere, without a clue about govt or the technical abilities of specialised ministries and starts to act and behave like experts.
Political leaders are decision makers, acting on the advice and recommendations of the professionals, the civil servants. Their main concerns are nation and people’s interests, the good of the people and country. They are the checks and balance on the civil servants. The civil servant may be ruthlessly efficient in their jobs, cold and calculative, living by every rule in the book. It is the politician that is there to make them more compassionate and people centric. The decision making process is important and the self serving may argue that this is more valuable, money wise, than just getting the work done. Agree. But such thought already disqualify a political leader from leading as the thought is self serving, greed.
It will be good for political leaders to be as technically competent as the civil servants, but not a pre requisite. In reality it is not always possible. But a good mind and a good heart will lead to good decisions. A misplaced heart will never lead to good decisions, but self serving decisions.
The civil servants and the politicians have different roles, complimentary and also in contrary to each other. They support and assist each other as well as checking on each other. When the interest of the two merges, for the good of people and country, things will be well. When their interests merge for their own good, then there will be chaos and the interests of people and nation compromised.
It is vital to preserve and maintain the integrity and independence of the Civil Service from politicians and vice versa. When the two are in cahoot, the people and nation will fall victims to their self serving schemes and policies.
The core of talents of the govt is in the civil servants. They are really the talented ones, the scholars. They will do a very good job under good and dedicated leaders. They will only go astray under misguided leadership or compromised to work for politicians instead of the people.
A politician is a politician. The honourable and selfless ones will devote their energy and effort to serve the people. The less honourable ones will be less for the people and more for self. They will keep telling you how much sacrifice they have to take to serve the people, loss of privacy, loss of income, lower quality of life etc etc. It is always about themselves and their own interests. There are plenty of examples in history of good and bad political leaders.
What in my view are good political leadership? A sense of commitment to serve country and people. For these, you don’t need rocket scientists or top surgeons or top lawyers or top money earners. What is needed are people with a heart in the right place and good or above average intelligence to know what is good for country and people. Too clever people with the heart in the wrong place, in their pockets, are unsuitable for political leadership. There must be honour and moral righteousness in people assuming political leadership. Nothing less.
A good political leadership can always count on the pool of top talents in the Civil Service to do the meticulous work of running the country. And they are there to set the right direction for the people and country, not for themselves. They are there also as the guiding light, to lead by examples, to control the civil servants to do the right things. They can only do that when they are upright and honourable, and above money and rewards.
Yes it is about leadership, lead by examples. The idea of paying leaders to motivate them is rubbish, ludicrous. Leaders don’t need to be motivated by monetary rewards or any rewards. They lead the way, they show the way. It is ridiculous for leaders to ask for rewards to do better. Unbelieveable! They can even be paid lesser than the civil servants who are professionals in their work who are there as career employees, not someone parachuted from somewhere, without a clue about govt or the technical abilities of specialised ministries and starts to act and behave like experts.
Political leaders are decision makers, acting on the advice and recommendations of the professionals, the civil servants. Their main concerns are nation and people’s interests, the good of the people and country. They are the checks and balance on the civil servants. The civil servant may be ruthlessly efficient in their jobs, cold and calculative, living by every rule in the book. It is the politician that is there to make them more compassionate and people centric. The decision making process is important and the self serving may argue that this is more valuable, money wise, than just getting the work done. Agree. But such thought already disqualify a political leader from leading as the thought is self serving, greed.
It will be good for political leaders to be as technically competent as the civil servants, but not a pre requisite. In reality it is not always possible. But a good mind and a good heart will lead to good decisions. A misplaced heart will never lead to good decisions, but self serving decisions.
The civil servants and the politicians have different roles, complimentary and also in contrary to each other. They support and assist each other as well as checking on each other. When the interest of the two merges, for the good of people and country, things will be well. When their interests merge for their own good, then there will be chaos and the interests of people and nation compromised.
It is vital to preserve and maintain the integrity and independence of the Civil Service from politicians and vice versa. When the two are in cahoot, the people and nation will fall victims to their self serving schemes and policies.
1/16/2012
Singapore is a big city indeed
It takes about 13 hours to be in London, or if one drives, about 5 hours to be in KL. This woman and her two teenage daughters took more than a day to walk from Yishun to Tampines. They took a break in Chai Chee at night, sleeping in the void deck, and prepared to walk another 6km to Tampines.
She had recently gone through a divorce and has no place to stay. They were walking to seek help from a relative living in Tampines. And with all their personal belongings they dragged themselves, on foot to Tampines.
They could not even afford the really affordable public transport that Singaporeans are all shouting cheap, cheap, cheap. Or they were trying to save every dollar, perhaps for their meals. Or did they have their meals at all?
In super rich city state of Singapore, there will be those not too clever and maybe like some said, irresponsible and messed up their own lives for not knowing how to take advantage of the pro business culture and system, to grow rich. Some of these successful jokers think that everyone is born the same, with the same opportunities, with parents that are rich and influential, or with a good brain, to earn millions and drive around in Ferraris.
No, in life, not everyone is dealt the same hand of cards. Some may be even have very good DNAs, but the circumstances made it difficult to find a way out of the shit they are in. Some are just too unfortunate to be given a bad hand of DNAs and just simply stand no choice at all. To the uncaring and elitist mindset, these losers have only themselves to blame, for being lazy, stupid and not wanting to work. There are plenty of jobs available.
Life is not always kind to everyone. For those who are better blessed, they can afford to be unkind to those that are not too blessed. It is their good fortune. Enjoy while they can. Spit at the downtrodden, lazy and useless buggers who could not make it, and enjoy that sense of achievements.
I do not know the fate of the mother and daughters. One MP, Tan Chuan Jin, had offered help and was walking with them part of the journey. But the poor too have dignity and pride. They refused all help. It was said that finally they took a ride from a police car.
Life can be tragic and pathetic even in a land of millionaires and roads paved with gold. And to some, their only means of transportation is their pair of legs. This is real! The public transportations may be cheap for the cheapos, but not cheap enough for a few laggards.
She had recently gone through a divorce and has no place to stay. They were walking to seek help from a relative living in Tampines. And with all their personal belongings they dragged themselves, on foot to Tampines.
They could not even afford the really affordable public transport that Singaporeans are all shouting cheap, cheap, cheap. Or they were trying to save every dollar, perhaps for their meals. Or did they have their meals at all?
In super rich city state of Singapore, there will be those not too clever and maybe like some said, irresponsible and messed up their own lives for not knowing how to take advantage of the pro business culture and system, to grow rich. Some of these successful jokers think that everyone is born the same, with the same opportunities, with parents that are rich and influential, or with a good brain, to earn millions and drive around in Ferraris.
No, in life, not everyone is dealt the same hand of cards. Some may be even have very good DNAs, but the circumstances made it difficult to find a way out of the shit they are in. Some are just too unfortunate to be given a bad hand of DNAs and just simply stand no choice at all. To the uncaring and elitist mindset, these losers have only themselves to blame, for being lazy, stupid and not wanting to work. There are plenty of jobs available.
Life is not always kind to everyone. For those who are better blessed, they can afford to be unkind to those that are not too blessed. It is their good fortune. Enjoy while they can. Spit at the downtrodden, lazy and useless buggers who could not make it, and enjoy that sense of achievements.
I do not know the fate of the mother and daughters. One MP, Tan Chuan Jin, had offered help and was walking with them part of the journey. But the poor too have dignity and pride. They refused all help. It was said that finally they took a ride from a police car.
Life can be tragic and pathetic even in a land of millionaires and roads paved with gold. And to some, their only means of transportation is their pair of legs. This is real! The public transportations may be cheap for the cheapos, but not cheap enough for a few laggards.
Rogues in uniform
The ST reported several cases of Singaporeans travelling overseas and were detained for months in foreign jails and treated by criminals. And their crimes were due to some rogues in uniform and their wild imaginations. They arrested them on grounds of suspicions or when they were under some kinds of hallucination that a family could be involved in human trafficking or trying to sell the children they under their care.
Civil Engineer Shirley Too and her husband were arrested in Dubai. They were heading to Rome for the blessing of the baby she was conceiving and ended up in a miscarriage because of the wrongful detention of nine months in Dubai jail, and not allowed to contact the Singapore Embassy staff. Her imagined crime was the four boys, three teenagers and a 12 year old, whom the rogues in uniformed imagined were to be sold by them. A simple inquiry would have resolved such a misunderstanding or false accusation. They were many cases of worst accusations involving drug trafficking when the ulterior motive was bribe money that the rogues demanded for the release.
There must be international laws to punish such rogues if, for any reason, is to protect the innocent from the injustice, cruelty and nightmare that they had to put up with. Children were not spared by such criminals in uniform. Where is the UN when such blatant acts of violating human rights were so prevalent? Could they not do anything?
In the Shirley Too’s case, not only an apology will be adequate. The Dubai govt must be made to pay compensation for the time under wrongful detention and the miscarriage. The release of Shirley Too or other Singaporeans under wrongful detention is not enough or acceptable. The rogues must be punished and their victims compensated. Only then could such incidents be reduced. It is frightening and torturing to be put through such an ordeal for anyone, adult, woman or child.
How many animals are in uniform and given authority to abuse the innocents and could simply get away with their crimes?
Civil Engineer Shirley Too and her husband were arrested in Dubai. They were heading to Rome for the blessing of the baby she was conceiving and ended up in a miscarriage because of the wrongful detention of nine months in Dubai jail, and not allowed to contact the Singapore Embassy staff. Her imagined crime was the four boys, three teenagers and a 12 year old, whom the rogues in uniformed imagined were to be sold by them. A simple inquiry would have resolved such a misunderstanding or false accusation. They were many cases of worst accusations involving drug trafficking when the ulterior motive was bribe money that the rogues demanded for the release.
There must be international laws to punish such rogues if, for any reason, is to protect the innocent from the injustice, cruelty and nightmare that they had to put up with. Children were not spared by such criminals in uniform. Where is the UN when such blatant acts of violating human rights were so prevalent? Could they not do anything?
In the Shirley Too’s case, not only an apology will be adequate. The Dubai govt must be made to pay compensation for the time under wrongful detention and the miscarriage. The release of Shirley Too or other Singaporeans under wrongful detention is not enough or acceptable. The rogues must be punished and their victims compensated. Only then could such incidents be reduced. It is frightening and torturing to be put through such an ordeal for anyone, adult, woman or child.
How many animals are in uniform and given authority to abuse the innocents and could simply get away with their crimes?
Ministerial Salary - Day of reckoning
Monday 16 Jan 2011 could be the most significant day in the history of Singapore politics. It is a day when the grossly overpaid compensation package of the ministers, a world record that belittles all other records in the Guinness Book of Records, will be put under the microscope. It could be expected that every single dollar paid under the system will be questioned. But one thing for sure, the world record will stand at least for another 4 years.
What is important is that the ruling govt will have to defend its position and justifications for the high salary at a time when its credibility is under question. It is also a time when there are more than 2 opposition party MPs sitting on the opposition bench, and with everyone of them equally and professionally qualified, to challenge the crème de la crème of Singapore’s hard nose elite.
The whole bunch of PAP MPs will be closely watched on what they say, what they defend, what they stand for and their value system. This will be a day when the truth of what they represent will be hung up for all the people to see. How real are they will determine their fortune in the next GE if they are still around. Who knows, some may feel so embarrassed and may be pricked by their conscience to want to quit prematurely than to go through it till 2016.
What is of great concern is that the people will also be watching the opposition MPs closely. Will they measure up to the PAP? Are they meticulous and reasonable in their disagreement with the high salary recommendations? Are they good enough to form the base for a bigger opposition in the next GE and even to win the next election? They have a tough job and a heavy responsibility to prove to the electorate that they are worth their trust to represent them and are as good as the ruling party in intellect, and better morally, to be the next govt.
The media, mainly the professional reporters and journalists, have an arduous task of keeping the people informed of every pertinent things said by every MP in Parliament, to provide a clean, objective and unbiased account of the debate in Parliament. They too are being watched.
This is the Battle Royale the people are waiting for, with an equally sensitive and emotionally charged agenda on the table. But the people must accept that the battle is strongly against the opposition MPs in numbers. The only big gun they have is the conscience of PAP MPs and the power of the people who will be gunning for justice and equality and will not be forgiving if the PAP MPs proved to be a disappointment. They will be judged by the people, not by any KPI the PM handed to them at his discretion. It is the people’s KPI, the people’s expectation of what is a good MP and what the people want, not what the PM wants.
This is the real KPI that is under scrutiny, the KPI that counts, would not pay them more bonuses, but the electorate will reward them with another term, or they are fired.
What is important is that the ruling govt will have to defend its position and justifications for the high salary at a time when its credibility is under question. It is also a time when there are more than 2 opposition party MPs sitting on the opposition bench, and with everyone of them equally and professionally qualified, to challenge the crème de la crème of Singapore’s hard nose elite.
The whole bunch of PAP MPs will be closely watched on what they say, what they defend, what they stand for and their value system. This will be a day when the truth of what they represent will be hung up for all the people to see. How real are they will determine their fortune in the next GE if they are still around. Who knows, some may feel so embarrassed and may be pricked by their conscience to want to quit prematurely than to go through it till 2016.
What is of great concern is that the people will also be watching the opposition MPs closely. Will they measure up to the PAP? Are they meticulous and reasonable in their disagreement with the high salary recommendations? Are they good enough to form the base for a bigger opposition in the next GE and even to win the next election? They have a tough job and a heavy responsibility to prove to the electorate that they are worth their trust to represent them and are as good as the ruling party in intellect, and better morally, to be the next govt.
The media, mainly the professional reporters and journalists, have an arduous task of keeping the people informed of every pertinent things said by every MP in Parliament, to provide a clean, objective and unbiased account of the debate in Parliament. They too are being watched.
This is the Battle Royale the people are waiting for, with an equally sensitive and emotionally charged agenda on the table. But the people must accept that the battle is strongly against the opposition MPs in numbers. The only big gun they have is the conscience of PAP MPs and the power of the people who will be gunning for justice and equality and will not be forgiving if the PAP MPs proved to be a disappointment. They will be judged by the people, not by any KPI the PM handed to them at his discretion. It is the people’s KPI, the people’s expectation of what is a good MP and what the people want, not what the PM wants.
This is the real KPI that is under scrutiny, the KPI that counts, would not pay them more bonuses, but the electorate will reward them with another term, or they are fired.
$125m elevation map
'Elevation map that can help fight flooding may cost up to $125m
Data from such mapping can be used in a computer model to predict floods, experts say
A map that can show the height of land across Singapore and help fight the flooding problem could cost up to $125 million.
Users of the map, accurate to within 10cm, would have a better idea of where rainwater would flow during storms. The data, plus information on land use and rainfall patterns, would be a good fit for a flood-prediction computer model which does not now exist….'
This is the headline and first two paras of a report in the main media. $125m for a map is cheap. I got mine for $2 at the petrol kiosk. At least it is a fraction of what was brooch sometime back that it would cost at least a few billion bucks to have a computerised signalling system for the trains to travel faster and keep the trains apart from 3 sec to 2 sec, safely. I am wondering how many trips will the train company have to run to cover the cost of a few billion bucks and how many years, to break even. Only tin heads can even consider such a proposal as worth mentioning.
But a $125m map is different. It will help the engineers and planners to know where the rain water will flow and can then come up with a precise and effective drainage system to prevent ponding. Funny that until today, with all the flooding, they still did not know where the water will flow and where the floods are. So far all the great recommendations would come to billions of dollars for infrastructure works and a sophisticated monitoring system. Wonder if the damages at Liat Tower cost that much to justify the expenditure of billions of dollars of OPM or even $125m?.
What is good is that many jobs will be created, map making companies will have additional business, and the economy will be given a morphine jab. It is another way of circulating the money and lubricating the economy. Good idea and money worth spending. A few more of such ideas and there will be no fear of the economy slowing down.
Data from such mapping can be used in a computer model to predict floods, experts say
A map that can show the height of land across Singapore and help fight the flooding problem could cost up to $125 million.
Users of the map, accurate to within 10cm, would have a better idea of where rainwater would flow during storms. The data, plus information on land use and rainfall patterns, would be a good fit for a flood-prediction computer model which does not now exist….'
This is the headline and first two paras of a report in the main media. $125m for a map is cheap. I got mine for $2 at the petrol kiosk. At least it is a fraction of what was brooch sometime back that it would cost at least a few billion bucks to have a computerised signalling system for the trains to travel faster and keep the trains apart from 3 sec to 2 sec, safely. I am wondering how many trips will the train company have to run to cover the cost of a few billion bucks and how many years, to break even. Only tin heads can even consider such a proposal as worth mentioning.
But a $125m map is different. It will help the engineers and planners to know where the rain water will flow and can then come up with a precise and effective drainage system to prevent ponding. Funny that until today, with all the flooding, they still did not know where the water will flow and where the floods are. So far all the great recommendations would come to billions of dollars for infrastructure works and a sophisticated monitoring system. Wonder if the damages at Liat Tower cost that much to justify the expenditure of billions of dollars of OPM or even $125m?.
What is good is that many jobs will be created, map making companies will have additional business, and the economy will be given a morphine jab. It is another way of circulating the money and lubricating the economy. Good idea and money worth spending. A few more of such ideas and there will be no fear of the economy slowing down.
1/15/2012
Maslow’s Needs Theory
Many people are familiar with Maslow’s four levels of needs Theory. The normal progression of normal human beans is from one level to the next.
After observing recent developments in our society, I will take liberty to offer a couple of variations to this great social theory. The theory states that once a person has attained all this needs for Recognition in level 3 he will proceed to level 4 when Self Actualisation becomes a natural thing. Here many will want to do what he enjoys doing just for his own enjoyment, with no care of money or other factors. As long as he is happy, he will just do it. So some will just want to spend time travelling and see the world, play with grandchildren or become karaoke singers or chefs to cook for family and friends.
There is one variation to this. Of course there could be many variations. To my observation, some can be stucked in level 3 and unable to move out of it. They will continue to seek wealth, power and recognition and be intoxicated in these preoccupations. They forgot that there are better things to do in level 4. The theorists may argue that their level 3 and level 4 actually merged. Or they haven’t had enough of recognition and rewards. They are happy to continue to do what that makes them happy, be it acquisition of more wealth and more recognition and power. These could explain why some refuse to stop working and enjoy working till they die. They don’t find pleasure in their grandchildren, or lesser pleasure than what they are doing, they don’t like singing or travelling, they don’t like to smell the roses. They may look silly to those who don’t understand them. Some may condemn them as the Shylock of Shakespearian fame, living for money and nothing else.
Another variation is the propulsion or double promotion from level 3 to level 5. Instead of Self Actualisation, they ended in a state of Self Delusion. Some may start to imagine they are infallible, they are immortals. Some may believe that they are indispensable and without them the world will collapse. Such grandeur in their thinking could have negative consequences. On their own, if they remain in a sanatorium, things will be manageable. If they continue to live in society and be mentality and economically active, they may make demands that will appear insane to normal people.
The state of Self Delusion or Level 5, my addition to the Maslow’s Theory of needs, borders very closely to the state of Insanity. A very thin line dividing the two. In this state, people no longer understand that their behavior is queer, overbearing and abusively intolerable or unacceptable to the normal people. They could not understand why they have become so nauseating and difficult to be with, that people don’t agree with them any more.
But what to expect when they are in self delusion? How could they be knocked back to consciousness and which level will they find themselves in when it happened? By then they could not even remain in level 3, where there is recognition. They would be rejected by society and would not be able to command the respect and value for what they will be doing. It is like hitting the head of a snake in a snake and ladder game and the fall could go down deep, like falling from grace.
Maslow’s Theory can be quite interesting look at the new variations.
After observing recent developments in our society, I will take liberty to offer a couple of variations to this great social theory. The theory states that once a person has attained all this needs for Recognition in level 3 he will proceed to level 4 when Self Actualisation becomes a natural thing. Here many will want to do what he enjoys doing just for his own enjoyment, with no care of money or other factors. As long as he is happy, he will just do it. So some will just want to spend time travelling and see the world, play with grandchildren or become karaoke singers or chefs to cook for family and friends.
There is one variation to this. Of course there could be many variations. To my observation, some can be stucked in level 3 and unable to move out of it. They will continue to seek wealth, power and recognition and be intoxicated in these preoccupations. They forgot that there are better things to do in level 4. The theorists may argue that their level 3 and level 4 actually merged. Or they haven’t had enough of recognition and rewards. They are happy to continue to do what that makes them happy, be it acquisition of more wealth and more recognition and power. These could explain why some refuse to stop working and enjoy working till they die. They don’t find pleasure in their grandchildren, or lesser pleasure than what they are doing, they don’t like singing or travelling, they don’t like to smell the roses. They may look silly to those who don’t understand them. Some may condemn them as the Shylock of Shakespearian fame, living for money and nothing else.
Another variation is the propulsion or double promotion from level 3 to level 5. Instead of Self Actualisation, they ended in a state of Self Delusion. Some may start to imagine they are infallible, they are immortals. Some may believe that they are indispensable and without them the world will collapse. Such grandeur in their thinking could have negative consequences. On their own, if they remain in a sanatorium, things will be manageable. If they continue to live in society and be mentality and economically active, they may make demands that will appear insane to normal people.
The state of Self Delusion or Level 5, my addition to the Maslow’s Theory of needs, borders very closely to the state of Insanity. A very thin line dividing the two. In this state, people no longer understand that their behavior is queer, overbearing and abusively intolerable or unacceptable to the normal people. They could not understand why they have become so nauseating and difficult to be with, that people don’t agree with them any more.
But what to expect when they are in self delusion? How could they be knocked back to consciousness and which level will they find themselves in when it happened? By then they could not even remain in level 3, where there is recognition. They would be rejected by society and would not be able to command the respect and value for what they will be doing. It is like hitting the head of a snake in a snake and ladder game and the fall could go down deep, like falling from grace.
Maslow’s Theory can be quite interesting look at the new variations.
1/14/2012
The inconvenient truth
Monday is a big battle day in Parliament. 25 MPs will take to the floor to discuss the recommendations of the Ministerial Salary Review Committee headed by Gerard Ee.
The agenda has been set. They will be discussing about the recommendations for future salary for primarily political appointment holders. The salary for MPs is more or less accepted as reasonable and may at most received a cursory mention.
How meaningful and relevant will the discussion be will be affected by the presumptions that the MPs have in their mindset. Many are still clinging to the notion that political office is an employment and must come along with the whole gist of annual increments, bonuses, performance evaluation, etc as normal. There is also the assumption that political appointment is a great sacrifice, tangible and intangible, with monetary loss as the main factor. And the compensation package is always a discount from what the politicians are getting if they were to remain in the private sector.
The dichotomy between a political appointment and employment need no further discussion. They are completely two different animals. Not many countries can politicians take for granted that they will be elected elections after elections and can see it as a job with a big amount of certainty. Thus career development, and annual increment and bonuses become very important. When being elected is no longer a guarantee, all these factors may become superfluous and may not even be discussed, and they will turn to a different compensation package that is more relevant towards the uncertainties of political office.
The great sacrifice of monetary loss is only meaningful maybe to a handful of professionals. Maybe 80-90% of the politicians will not see any sacrifice at all. Many could be laughing all the way to the bank with their new political appointments with income they cannot even dream off in their whole life. So far there is no serious attempt to provide the statistics to show how many really took a pay cut and how many were quietly congratulating themselves with the windfall from entering politics.
And the subsidy or getting a discount from their peers in the private sector is another bull or myth that has been perpetuated for too long and will continue to be if no one stands up to challenge this myth. Where on earth can anyone earn $5m or $10m to shake hands with strangers, posed for photographs and looking good and wearing a perpetual smile? The latter is probably the most stressful of all the job requirements. Where on earth would one be paid a million bucks just to be a time keeper in Parliament which probably sits for less than 30 days in a year? There are many very well endowed positions that are paid handsomely that would not be tolerated in the private sector without the shareholders screaming foul.
Unless these assumptions are challenged, they will be taken for granted as truth and real, and will form the basis for the recommendation on how much the politicians shall be paid. And when that happens, the final results will be just as misleading and hazy as before.
While the agenda has been set to discuss about the future package, would the inconvenient truth of what and how much the political appointees really were paid under the existing package see the light?
The agenda has been set. They will be discussing about the recommendations for future salary for primarily political appointment holders. The salary for MPs is more or less accepted as reasonable and may at most received a cursory mention.
How meaningful and relevant will the discussion be will be affected by the presumptions that the MPs have in their mindset. Many are still clinging to the notion that political office is an employment and must come along with the whole gist of annual increments, bonuses, performance evaluation, etc as normal. There is also the assumption that political appointment is a great sacrifice, tangible and intangible, with monetary loss as the main factor. And the compensation package is always a discount from what the politicians are getting if they were to remain in the private sector.
The dichotomy between a political appointment and employment need no further discussion. They are completely two different animals. Not many countries can politicians take for granted that they will be elected elections after elections and can see it as a job with a big amount of certainty. Thus career development, and annual increment and bonuses become very important. When being elected is no longer a guarantee, all these factors may become superfluous and may not even be discussed, and they will turn to a different compensation package that is more relevant towards the uncertainties of political office.
The great sacrifice of monetary loss is only meaningful maybe to a handful of professionals. Maybe 80-90% of the politicians will not see any sacrifice at all. Many could be laughing all the way to the bank with their new political appointments with income they cannot even dream off in their whole life. So far there is no serious attempt to provide the statistics to show how many really took a pay cut and how many were quietly congratulating themselves with the windfall from entering politics.
And the subsidy or getting a discount from their peers in the private sector is another bull or myth that has been perpetuated for too long and will continue to be if no one stands up to challenge this myth. Where on earth can anyone earn $5m or $10m to shake hands with strangers, posed for photographs and looking good and wearing a perpetual smile? The latter is probably the most stressful of all the job requirements. Where on earth would one be paid a million bucks just to be a time keeper in Parliament which probably sits for less than 30 days in a year? There are many very well endowed positions that are paid handsomely that would not be tolerated in the private sector without the shareholders screaming foul.
Unless these assumptions are challenged, they will be taken for granted as truth and real, and will form the basis for the recommendation on how much the politicians shall be paid. And when that happens, the final results will be just as misleading and hazy as before.
While the agenda has been set to discuss about the future package, would the inconvenient truth of what and how much the political appointees really were paid under the existing package see the light?
1/13/2012
3 aircraft carriers in the Gulf of Hormuz
This is really unprecedented and the US is denying that it has anything to do with bullying or intimidating Iran. USS John Stennis, USS Carl Vinson and USS Abraham Lincoln will be waltzing in the area very soon. This amassing of forces is more than the two carrier groups in the Western Pacific Ocean during the tense confrontation between China and Taiwan a few years back.
All the indications are that a blow up is going to happen. And why not when the Americans can hit Iran and the Iranians cannot hit back? Those who want to see justice may hope that the Iranians have been supplied with Chinese or Russian anti ship missiles that could sink one of the aircraft carriers before it be blasted to oblivion. The collateral damage this time is going to be hundreds of times more than in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya combined. Millions of civilian lives in Iran will be at stake and at most an aircraft carrier with 4000 men and aircraft to go with.
No one thinks it is important to step in to moderate and allow the American some face saving excuse to quit the chicken game. No one is complaining that it is the aggressive evil Empire that is intimidating the Iranians and forcing them into a corner.
When the Americans say that Iran or any country is a threat to their security, it must be true. The Americans can go around the world pointing its finger at any country as a threat to their national security and no country would dare to dispute it. This is how obnoxious the Americans are today. And the indoctrination of its soldiers is so intense that they hated all their enemies to their bones. Silly unthinking American soldiers filled with hatred for the Talebans that they would even pee on their dead bodies. What Geneva Convention and treating the enemy soldiers decently? It is Third World behavior from a First World country.
I really hope the Iranians have it to sink one of the aircraft carriers to put the evil Empire in its right place that going around starting wars can have its consequences. The nuclear weapon threat is the biggest irony. It is exactly the lack of nuclear weapons that is putting Iran or any country at risk of being attack by the Americans. Once the weapon is at hand, the threat of being attack will be greatly reduced. An alternative to counter this unprovoked attack is for Iran to tell the Americans that when attacked, they will unleash chemical weapons inside the US, in the big cities. That should put some fears into the reckless Americans, and hopefully hold them back from their aggression. And it could be easier done than delivering a nuclear warhead to the US.
All the indications are that a blow up is going to happen. And why not when the Americans can hit Iran and the Iranians cannot hit back? Those who want to see justice may hope that the Iranians have been supplied with Chinese or Russian anti ship missiles that could sink one of the aircraft carriers before it be blasted to oblivion. The collateral damage this time is going to be hundreds of times more than in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya combined. Millions of civilian lives in Iran will be at stake and at most an aircraft carrier with 4000 men and aircraft to go with.
No one thinks it is important to step in to moderate and allow the American some face saving excuse to quit the chicken game. No one is complaining that it is the aggressive evil Empire that is intimidating the Iranians and forcing them into a corner.
When the Americans say that Iran or any country is a threat to their security, it must be true. The Americans can go around the world pointing its finger at any country as a threat to their national security and no country would dare to dispute it. This is how obnoxious the Americans are today. And the indoctrination of its soldiers is so intense that they hated all their enemies to their bones. Silly unthinking American soldiers filled with hatred for the Talebans that they would even pee on their dead bodies. What Geneva Convention and treating the enemy soldiers decently? It is Third World behavior from a First World country.
I really hope the Iranians have it to sink one of the aircraft carriers to put the evil Empire in its right place that going around starting wars can have its consequences. The nuclear weapon threat is the biggest irony. It is exactly the lack of nuclear weapons that is putting Iran or any country at risk of being attack by the Americans. Once the weapon is at hand, the threat of being attack will be greatly reduced. An alternative to counter this unprovoked attack is for Iran to tell the Americans that when attacked, they will unleash chemical weapons inside the US, in the big cities. That should put some fears into the reckless Americans, and hopefully hold them back from their aggression. And it could be easier done than delivering a nuclear warhead to the US.
Tin Pei Ling
I have abstained all this while from making reference to her directly with due respect to all parents, husbands and brothers and sisters of every young person. She is after all someone’s daughter, somebody’s wife and sister. It is not very kind to be so harsh in our comments on her. Many do not know her and made remarks based on the few things or comments they heard or read about her in the media.
She is just like any other young person, chasing her dreams, wanting to serve in her best capacity in her chosen endeavour. She has accepted the challenge to go into politics. Whether that is a right or wrong decision, it varies with individuals. If there is anything wrong with that, it must be the people who selected her and put her in the deep end.
Is she good enough for the job? The problem of Tin Pei Ling at the moment is more of PR and the image that the public perceived her. She is young and looked young, and that became a disadvantage. In politics, it is better to look matronly, with more girth and more meaty to look more substantive yah? Can she carry the responsibilities as a MP, to take care of her constituents, to discuss national issues in Parliament? Only time will tell.
When the perception of her is so wrong from the start, everything negative comes together to make things even worst for her. People are not happy that she is getting the huge MP allowance that was designed for super talent which people think is very excessive for someone that they think is still too young for it.
It is no longer about logic, about abilities, but about emotions and personal biases. And this is making life very tough for Tin Pei Ling. Every little movement from her will come up for criticism. I think this is grossly overdone. The rice has been cooked. If the people are unhappy, go after the people who cooked the rice. It was never her fault. She saw an opportunity, she seized it and thought she can do it. No one can fault her for this. For putting her on the high pedestal as another super talent, for thinking that she is good enough and that the people would embrace her, now looks like a bad judgement call from the people who made the decision to field her.
Tin Pei Ling is paying a very heavy price for the mistakes of others. She may blossom later and prove others wrong. For the moment, the public perception is that she is just not ready for political leadership. And the constant attack on her is not graceful and very unkind. Let’s be more graceful and let her have some peace and get on with life.
I say again. It was not her fault. She is just like any other young person starting out to work, to take the challenge in life. Let’s not make her life miserable and to pay for other people’s mistake. After the day is over, it may not be a mistake after all. No one knows better. People should refrain from attacking her at every opportunity. She did not create GRCs to get into politics.
She is just like any other young person, chasing her dreams, wanting to serve in her best capacity in her chosen endeavour. She has accepted the challenge to go into politics. Whether that is a right or wrong decision, it varies with individuals. If there is anything wrong with that, it must be the people who selected her and put her in the deep end.
Is she good enough for the job? The problem of Tin Pei Ling at the moment is more of PR and the image that the public perceived her. She is young and looked young, and that became a disadvantage. In politics, it is better to look matronly, with more girth and more meaty to look more substantive yah? Can she carry the responsibilities as a MP, to take care of her constituents, to discuss national issues in Parliament? Only time will tell.
When the perception of her is so wrong from the start, everything negative comes together to make things even worst for her. People are not happy that she is getting the huge MP allowance that was designed for super talent which people think is very excessive for someone that they think is still too young for it.
It is no longer about logic, about abilities, but about emotions and personal biases. And this is making life very tough for Tin Pei Ling. Every little movement from her will come up for criticism. I think this is grossly overdone. The rice has been cooked. If the people are unhappy, go after the people who cooked the rice. It was never her fault. She saw an opportunity, she seized it and thought she can do it. No one can fault her for this. For putting her on the high pedestal as another super talent, for thinking that she is good enough and that the people would embrace her, now looks like a bad judgement call from the people who made the decision to field her.
Tin Pei Ling is paying a very heavy price for the mistakes of others. She may blossom later and prove others wrong. For the moment, the public perception is that she is just not ready for political leadership. And the constant attack on her is not graceful and very unkind. Let’s be more graceful and let her have some peace and get on with life.
I say again. It was not her fault. She is just like any other young person starting out to work, to take the challenge in life. Let’s not make her life miserable and to pay for other people’s mistake. After the day is over, it may not be a mistake after all. No one knows better. People should refrain from attacking her at every opportunity. She did not create GRCs to get into politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)