While the govt keeps shifting the goal posts, the daft Sinkies, would you believe it, are resigned to the fate that their CPF savings are as good as gone, a given thing, a fait accompli sanctioned by new regulations!
Everyone enters the CPF scheme at a specific time with a list of accepted and agreed conditions and state regulations. The govt must honour them, or can it suka suka introduce new laws and apply them retrospectively like some unpredictable third world countries? The contractual and legal terms existing must continue to be applicable to the original parties. Any new rules, legislation should only be applicable to subsequent parties coming into the scheme. Failing to do so is unfair and unjust to the affected parties.
Of course the govt has all the power, laws and machinery to do as it pleases. It can introduce anything in Parliament and make them effective with little regards to the interests and feelings of the affected parties. The govt is the law. And this is democracy. The people elect the govt to rule over them and do whatever the govt claims to be good for the people. And the people cannot do anything or blame the govt for it. The people ask for it by voting the govt to be their masters and deserve everything they get from the govt.
Having said that, the human beans, no matter how daft, know that there are things called justice and fairness. What is yours must be yours and not belong to other people. No govt can cheat all the people all the time. Thinking that the people are daft and can be taken for granted will only last for a while and the people will wise up to know what is good or bad for them. A good govt will always have the people behind it. A bad govt will be sent away in due course.
What were the original agreements in the CPF Scheme?
1. It is the people’s savings and the money belongs to the contributors
2. There is a fixed date for complete withdrawal
3. There is a regulated interest rate to be paid
4. There are some rules and guidelines on how the savings can be used.
Changing these rules without the people’s consent is a breach of faith, is it not?. Sure, the people cannot do anything about it except to feel pissed off and pui pui all the time. And they will continue to vote the govt to power, trusting the govt to do good, even changing all the rules regarding their life savings and planning when they can or cannot use them.
And this will not change comes 2016. The people will continue to support the govt as they believe the govt is doing everything that is good for them, except for some who will continue to pui pui. And the people are so happy looking at how their savings are growing day by day. They can also bring their CPF statements with them one day, and rest in peace.
Does the govt really think that it can go on and on messing the people’s savings as it like and the people will continue to vote the govt into power to repeat the story forever?
2/23/2012
2/22/2012
Govt funding of public transport
550 buses plus operating costs and salaries of bus drivers for 10 years will be provided by the govt amounting to $1.1b. It is a significant sum to a public listed company, though originally a govt owned business started with tax payer’s money. It was also reported that nearly $70b have so far been doled out to the train operators in infrastructure cost and rolling stocks as well.
And the operators cried shareholder’s interest to see good profits. No doubt the majority shareholder is the govt or govt linked companies, many of the other shareholders are also feeding on the gravy train built with taxpayer’s money and demanding more and more profits.
It can’t be helped for the commuters to be pissed off when the bulk of the capital was taxpayer’s or their money in the first place, and now they have to keep feeding the organizations to feed the shareholders and big bonuses for the top management.
It is high time the govt reclaims the public transport companies and run them as they should be, state owned companies, for the country, people and supporting the rest of the economy. Price it as low as possible, (please assholes, I am not saying that it must be run at a loss) a national service to the people and country. The whole economy also needs an efficient and lowly priced transport system. High transportation cost will spiral into other operating costs and salaries of workers. It will affect the social activities and life of the people as well.
The mission of public transportation has to be relooked at and reformulated to serve the people and country, not just the shareholders.
And the operators cried shareholder’s interest to see good profits. No doubt the majority shareholder is the govt or govt linked companies, many of the other shareholders are also feeding on the gravy train built with taxpayer’s money and demanding more and more profits.
It can’t be helped for the commuters to be pissed off when the bulk of the capital was taxpayer’s or their money in the first place, and now they have to keep feeding the organizations to feed the shareholders and big bonuses for the top management.
It is high time the govt reclaims the public transport companies and run them as they should be, state owned companies, for the country, people and supporting the rest of the economy. Price it as low as possible, (please assholes, I am not saying that it must be run at a loss) a national service to the people and country. The whole economy also needs an efficient and lowly priced transport system. High transportation cost will spiral into other operating costs and salaries of workers. It will affect the social activities and life of the people as well.
The mission of public transportation has to be relooked at and reformulated to serve the people and country, not just the shareholders.
The dismal academic performance of Singaporean scholars
Sim Ann reported that 45% of foreign scholars got second upper or better degrees while Singaporean scholars only managed 32%. Is this proof and justification that the money spent on foreign scholars is the correct one? I am not going to dwell on the merits and advantages of spending millions of public money on so many foreign students instead of spending on our own children. I am not going to whine about spending money on other people’s children than our own.
What I am questioning is the quality of our local scholars? Are they really that bad? From past records, all local scholars are the cream of their cohorts and each would have a string of straight As in O and A levels. Some were even so good that they were allowed to skip the O level. And only 32% made it to second upper? Our straight A students, 68% could not get a second upper? Is there something wrong?
Who are these scholars that made up these statistics? Are they the same equivalent of the foreign scholars, with full scholarship as the foreign students? We need to know the make up of the statistics. If the quality of our local scholars is so bad, then their O and A level results is suspect, or the university grading is suspect. There can be some deviations from the norms, with some scholars getting themselves into problems or losing interests in their studies. But these are extremely good students to be awarded the scholarships and most of them are expected to do better at least a second upper.
68% getting less than second upper is unacceptable. A 20% or at most 30% getting less than second upper may be more reasonable. So, what is wrong with the statistics or with our education system? Can we have more information on what the data is made up of? And I am not even querying on the statistics to include our overseas scholars. It is reasonable to compare our scholars in our local universities and those foreign scholars here. I am not comfortable with such pathetic results of our local scholars. If scholars, I mean full scholarship offered by the govt or GLCs, could not even get a second upper, then something is drastically wrong. What kind of straight As or near straight A students are we having when they turned out to be less than second upper material?
The govt should save the money if the scholars are unable to perform. But it doesn’t mean that we should throw our money to train other people’s children and say money well spent. We need to know more about the statistics to get a better picture of the truth.
What I am questioning is the quality of our local scholars? Are they really that bad? From past records, all local scholars are the cream of their cohorts and each would have a string of straight As in O and A levels. Some were even so good that they were allowed to skip the O level. And only 32% made it to second upper? Our straight A students, 68% could not get a second upper? Is there something wrong?
Who are these scholars that made up these statistics? Are they the same equivalent of the foreign scholars, with full scholarship as the foreign students? We need to know the make up of the statistics. If the quality of our local scholars is so bad, then their O and A level results is suspect, or the university grading is suspect. There can be some deviations from the norms, with some scholars getting themselves into problems or losing interests in their studies. But these are extremely good students to be awarded the scholarships and most of them are expected to do better at least a second upper.
68% getting less than second upper is unacceptable. A 20% or at most 30% getting less than second upper may be more reasonable. So, what is wrong with the statistics or with our education system? Can we have more information on what the data is made up of? And I am not even querying on the statistics to include our overseas scholars. It is reasonable to compare our scholars in our local universities and those foreign scholars here. I am not comfortable with such pathetic results of our local scholars. If scholars, I mean full scholarship offered by the govt or GLCs, could not even get a second upper, then something is drastically wrong. What kind of straight As or near straight A students are we having when they turned out to be less than second upper material?
The govt should save the money if the scholars are unable to perform. But it doesn’t mean that we should throw our money to train other people’s children and say money well spent. We need to know more about the statistics to get a better picture of the truth.
2/21/2012
Paying foreigners with our money to call us dogs
‘Despite sparking widespread anger among Singaporeans with his offensive remarks on there “being more dogs than humans in Singapore”, NUS PRC scholar Sun Xu remains unrepentant and unapologetic.
When asked about the controversy by a Chinese tabloid, Sun replied nonchalantly without offering a public apology or showing any signs of remorse:
I am only complaining. It is just a small matter and I do not want to blow it up. Anyway, I have already deleted the comment.’
The daft Sinkies have been bitten again, by the dog that it is feeding with the public’s money. How can the Sinkies accept such a situation, giving out money out of our generosity to be called derogatory terms by the recipient?
What is the moral of the story? Are we that dull? Are Sinkies offended?
When asked about the controversy by a Chinese tabloid, Sun replied nonchalantly without offering a public apology or showing any signs of remorse:
I am only complaining. It is just a small matter and I do not want to blow it up. Anyway, I have already deleted the comment.’
The daft Sinkies have been bitten again, by the dog that it is feeding with the public’s money. How can the Sinkies accept such a situation, giving out money out of our generosity to be called derogatory terms by the recipient?
What is the moral of the story? Are we that dull? Are Sinkies offended?
The daft Sinkies are still not thinking
The govt is going to spend billions to help the people. $1.1b will be spent to buy 600 buses. More technology acquired and trains be bought to improve the train system. Top people deserved to be paid in the millions in both private and public. One simple question is, where is the money coming from, or who is the ultimate paymaster?
There is no running away from it. You, the daft Sinkies will pay for all these great stuff and the high pays of the great talents in one way or another. Look at the pathetic state of the CPF savings! Is it still your money or other people’s money? Why is your money be kept away from you? You find the answer. For your own good or someone else’s good?
Do not be happy when public organizations are spending huge sum of money in the name of improvement. Make sure that there is a real need for improvement and that there is improvement with the money spent. If there is no need to spend the money, then the money should not be spent. It is always your money that is being spent and you will have to pay for it. Even the pay of top honcho employees of public companies are paid by the people unless they are making their money from overseas. If they are making money from the people, the huge profit is what they made from the people to pay themselves.
And don’t be too happy about the hundreds of billions in our reserves and sovereign funds unless they benefit the people. If they just benefit the few who are managing them, then it is nothing but like the CPF statements, good to feel but cannot touch. And worst, the reserves must come from somewhere, the sovereign fund’s capital must also come from somewhere. Make a guess.
As long as your CPF is being held captive against your will, never be happy about it. Either the CPF savings are returned to the people or the people must elect a govt that will return them to the people. There are just too much of the people’s money being kept away from the rightful owners for all kinds of excuses.
The daft Sinkies are still happily in dreamland. The bulk of the Sinkies that need their savings are deprived from using their savings. Like Gintai said, the minimum sum is going to be bigger and bigger, and so is the Medisave. What is left for the owner of this money? What is the point of saving, or why call it savings? Saving for who?
There is no running away from it. You, the daft Sinkies will pay for all these great stuff and the high pays of the great talents in one way or another. Look at the pathetic state of the CPF savings! Is it still your money or other people’s money? Why is your money be kept away from you? You find the answer. For your own good or someone else’s good?
Do not be happy when public organizations are spending huge sum of money in the name of improvement. Make sure that there is a real need for improvement and that there is improvement with the money spent. If there is no need to spend the money, then the money should not be spent. It is always your money that is being spent and you will have to pay for it. Even the pay of top honcho employees of public companies are paid by the people unless they are making their money from overseas. If they are making money from the people, the huge profit is what they made from the people to pay themselves.
And don’t be too happy about the hundreds of billions in our reserves and sovereign funds unless they benefit the people. If they just benefit the few who are managing them, then it is nothing but like the CPF statements, good to feel but cannot touch. And worst, the reserves must come from somewhere, the sovereign fund’s capital must also come from somewhere. Make a guess.
As long as your CPF is being held captive against your will, never be happy about it. Either the CPF savings are returned to the people or the people must elect a govt that will return them to the people. There are just too much of the people’s money being kept away from the rightful owners for all kinds of excuses.
The daft Sinkies are still happily in dreamland. The bulk of the Sinkies that need their savings are deprived from using their savings. Like Gintai said, the minimum sum is going to be bigger and bigger, and so is the Medisave. What is left for the owner of this money? What is the point of saving, or why call it savings? Saving for who?
2/20/2012
The minimum sum straight jacket solution
The minimum sum to be kept by the CPF will increase from $123k to $131k this July. This is based on a person reaching the age of 55 and a retirement income when he hits 65 for life?
The assumptions:
1. At 55, the person only has his CPF minimum sum to live on.
2. He has no family support or filial children to give him pocket money.
3. He stops work at 55.
4. He needs a certain amount to live on as prescribed by the minimum sum.
5. He lives to 80 or 90.
How many of the assumptions are true? What about those with their own savings, flats and children to look after them? What about those who continue to work to 65, 70 or older? Do they still need the magical $131k that will balloon every few years? Do they need $100k or more when they are already in their 70s or 80s? How much do they really need when all they want to do is to stay at home and watch TV? How many of them will live past 60 or 70?
Should not the minimum sum be graduated downwards when a person is economically active, with family support, with savings and properties to live on? Why is this straight jacket sum be imposed unilaterally on everyone? How many people who live past 70 need public assistance and can the govt afford to give them 3 meals in a public nursing home?
The assumptions:
1. At 55, the person only has his CPF minimum sum to live on.
2. He has no family support or filial children to give him pocket money.
3. He stops work at 55.
4. He needs a certain amount to live on as prescribed by the minimum sum.
5. He lives to 80 or 90.
How many of the assumptions are true? What about those with their own savings, flats and children to look after them? What about those who continue to work to 65, 70 or older? Do they still need the magical $131k that will balloon every few years? Do they need $100k or more when they are already in their 70s or 80s? How much do they really need when all they want to do is to stay at home and watch TV? How many of them will live past 60 or 70?
Should not the minimum sum be graduated downwards when a person is economically active, with family support, with savings and properties to live on? Why is this straight jacket sum be imposed unilaterally on everyone? How many people who live past 70 need public assistance and can the govt afford to give them 3 meals in a public nursing home?
Treading on dangerous water
The opening up of cyberspace and social media has given the critics a lot of room to air their grievances. Everything seems to be fair game for the commentators and policy makers would no longer be able to whitewash poorly crafted policies that adversely affect the people. Life has never been that good before until internet came to the scene. It used to be one way but not any more.
I must admit that attacking and questioning a policy is easy. Every policy, no matter how well conceived, would have flaws or would be good to some and bad to others. Some are more bad than good. The housing policy has been whipped and thrashed for quite sometime and will continue to be the angst of the people. But it has done a lot of good in increasing the paper value of property owners and none will be complaining about it. It also has severe consequences on those who come late and could not keep up with the runaway prices. The young and future generations will bear the full brunt of this bad policy.
It is right and proper to want to dismiss this policy for good and modify it to a more well balanced one to be kinder to the young as well. Putting on the pressure for change, kpkb, etc is fine. But the critics have to be careful not to end up attacking the policy maker and ended up with defamation suits.
Shanmugam has sent in his lawyers. Hsien Loong is also taking TRE to task. And the issues or complaints were defamation. They have their rights to clear their names from any accusations or allegations. And being where they are, they have more rights than others for sure. You can’t expect the country’s top leaders to be the same as the man in the street. Even celebrities have bigger rights by virtue of their income and public image which are important to their earning abilities.
So far the lighter touch policy is appearing to be intact with both parties asking for the removal of the offending articles and an apology. Let’s hope that in these cases, sorry is enough and no further action be taken, no cost and damages be lined up after sorry is said.
A reminder to all, criticize for all you want. Attacking and accusing someone for wrongdoings would require proof and the will and resources to go further in the courts of law when challenged.
I must admit that attacking and questioning a policy is easy. Every policy, no matter how well conceived, would have flaws or would be good to some and bad to others. Some are more bad than good. The housing policy has been whipped and thrashed for quite sometime and will continue to be the angst of the people. But it has done a lot of good in increasing the paper value of property owners and none will be complaining about it. It also has severe consequences on those who come late and could not keep up with the runaway prices. The young and future generations will bear the full brunt of this bad policy.
It is right and proper to want to dismiss this policy for good and modify it to a more well balanced one to be kinder to the young as well. Putting on the pressure for change, kpkb, etc is fine. But the critics have to be careful not to end up attacking the policy maker and ended up with defamation suits.
Shanmugam has sent in his lawyers. Hsien Loong is also taking TRE to task. And the issues or complaints were defamation. They have their rights to clear their names from any accusations or allegations. And being where they are, they have more rights than others for sure. You can’t expect the country’s top leaders to be the same as the man in the street. Even celebrities have bigger rights by virtue of their income and public image which are important to their earning abilities.
So far the lighter touch policy is appearing to be intact with both parties asking for the removal of the offending articles and an apology. Let’s hope that in these cases, sorry is enough and no further action be taken, no cost and damages be lined up after sorry is said.
A reminder to all, criticize for all you want. Attacking and accusing someone for wrongdoings would require proof and the will and resources to go further in the courts of law when challenged.
2/19/2012
Pleasing the small racist mind
We had our D&D last night and we all had great fun. The MC was great with his mimicry and acting to bring live and laughters to an otherwise staid occasion. He used the four major racial groups as the background of his games, the Malays, the Chinese, the Indians and the Others, which is synonymous with Eurasians or the English Language. One of his main acts was to play 4 different pop songs and let the participants lip sync their roles. He was great in his introduction of how to play the game and the staff was equally great to play on as guided. And he kept apologising just in case someone thought it was insensitive.
Seriously I thought it was a great evening. I believe everyone would say that too. Now I am having second thought. Would someone be hurt or felt insulted because of his/her race being on stage to be part of a hilarious game?
The Sunday Times is reproducing several letters on the horrors of UOB’s D&D that was reported last Sunday. It was perceived as a PR disaster, with critiques attacking UOB for being insensitive to the Indians in their party theme, Bollywood Night. The employees were encouraged to dress up in Bollywood fineries and with faces painted black. The whole intent and purpose was to have good fun. Many such theme parties have been organised without big problems.
Why is the UOB theme seen as being offensive and be pronounced as racism? It is all in the minds of the little racists. In many cases, the real racists are the attackers who rapped others as racists for the slightest remarks. Such people see everything in the racist line and are out watching for such violations and infringements.
I was at a scene when a guy was deeply offended when another senior guy called him uncle. The reasoning, he felt that he was younger and thus slighted. But that was not all. To be more senior than the other guy in age connotes the possibly that biology will take its natural causes earlier than a younger guy.
How would another party understand what is going on in the other person’s mind? I called many of my Indian friends ‘mama’ which is uncle if I am not mistaken. The small racist mind will think it is offensive. Now I have a different reason not to use it. No one is going to look at the intent and the context in which a word is being used, or the theme of a D&D. Would the event planner dare to plan such a theme if racism is the intent? Would a big organisation touch it with a 10 metre pole? Would the employees want to provoke the racists to attack them?
Racism and respect of other race and religion are constantly on the headlines to remind people to be aware and sensitive to other people’s sensitivities. No decent or proper organisation would skirt near such tabooed stuff. Attacking them for being insensitive and racist is uncalled for and harbours a hidden agenda.
The society must be more careful of the real racists living in our midst and going around attacking other people as racists. And we are going to face more of such rubbish as we open our door to more foreigners. Europe is starting to face the problems of immigrants wanting their way of life, to live separately, to impose their lifestyle and demanding their own private space.
While we happily and naively go about bringing in the hordes from around the world, and thinking nothing but economic growth numbers, we are intentionally bringing along all the problems associated with the different people, culture, race and religion that they bring. The silliness in this policy must be raised before it hits us real hard in the future. I think it is already too late and the tension is brewing.
There is no place for racism here. And people hiding under the guise of attacking anyone or things which they perceived as racists must be taken to task before they grow in numbers and exploded into our face. There must be no appeasement to the racist living in our midst, the kind of people that see everything in terms of racism and trying to light the fire of hatred and intolerance and trouble. The media has an important role to tell them off instead of encouraging them to go on to paint others in all kinds of unpleasant colours.
Seriously I thought it was a great evening. I believe everyone would say that too. Now I am having second thought. Would someone be hurt or felt insulted because of his/her race being on stage to be part of a hilarious game?
The Sunday Times is reproducing several letters on the horrors of UOB’s D&D that was reported last Sunday. It was perceived as a PR disaster, with critiques attacking UOB for being insensitive to the Indians in their party theme, Bollywood Night. The employees were encouraged to dress up in Bollywood fineries and with faces painted black. The whole intent and purpose was to have good fun. Many such theme parties have been organised without big problems.
Why is the UOB theme seen as being offensive and be pronounced as racism? It is all in the minds of the little racists. In many cases, the real racists are the attackers who rapped others as racists for the slightest remarks. Such people see everything in the racist line and are out watching for such violations and infringements.
I was at a scene when a guy was deeply offended when another senior guy called him uncle. The reasoning, he felt that he was younger and thus slighted. But that was not all. To be more senior than the other guy in age connotes the possibly that biology will take its natural causes earlier than a younger guy.
How would another party understand what is going on in the other person’s mind? I called many of my Indian friends ‘mama’ which is uncle if I am not mistaken. The small racist mind will think it is offensive. Now I have a different reason not to use it. No one is going to look at the intent and the context in which a word is being used, or the theme of a D&D. Would the event planner dare to plan such a theme if racism is the intent? Would a big organisation touch it with a 10 metre pole? Would the employees want to provoke the racists to attack them?
Racism and respect of other race and religion are constantly on the headlines to remind people to be aware and sensitive to other people’s sensitivities. No decent or proper organisation would skirt near such tabooed stuff. Attacking them for being insensitive and racist is uncalled for and harbours a hidden agenda.
The society must be more careful of the real racists living in our midst and going around attacking other people as racists. And we are going to face more of such rubbish as we open our door to more foreigners. Europe is starting to face the problems of immigrants wanting their way of life, to live separately, to impose their lifestyle and demanding their own private space.
While we happily and naively go about bringing in the hordes from around the world, and thinking nothing but economic growth numbers, we are intentionally bringing along all the problems associated with the different people, culture, race and religion that they bring. The silliness in this policy must be raised before it hits us real hard in the future. I think it is already too late and the tension is brewing.
There is no place for racism here. And people hiding under the guise of attacking anyone or things which they perceived as racists must be taken to task before they grow in numbers and exploded into our face. There must be no appeasement to the racist living in our midst, the kind of people that see everything in terms of racism and trying to light the fire of hatred and intolerance and trouble. The media has an important role to tell them off instead of encouraging them to go on to paint others in all kinds of unpleasant colours.
2/18/2012
Inclusive budget for everyone
At least 2 families are happy with the budget. Yazit, the general worker with a family income of $800 pm will receive $250 GST cash voucher and $260 utility rebates. He is happy that he could now give his primary one son a bit more as pocket money.
Gina Loo, a part time administrative assistant earning $500 pm, also a sole breadwinner, with a daughter and parents to look after, will get $250 for each adult and a $260 utility rebate. Incidentally, Yazit’s wife is not a citizen and will not receive the GST voucher.
Both families are happy with every dollar they received. It is amazing how they coped with the kind of cost of living in our world class city. But they are managing and can still put on a warm smile for the reporters. Their stories are in the ST today.
The GST voucher is to help the lower income families offset the GST that they have been made to pay as the GST knife is pretty blunt, and does not care if one is a multi millionaire or with a few hundred bucks as household income. The examples given in the ST, a retiree couple will receive enough, $1,240 to offset an estimated GST of $840, with some to spare. A ‘younger lower income households with no elderly members…will also receive a significant GST offset…It should cover about half of the total GST they pay each year.’ This means that they will have to pay the other half of the GST tax despite the significant offset.
Some jokers are still arguing angrily that the poor are not taxed. This is a good example of the unpleasant truth. How could a rich country, with so much in reserves, tax on the very poor? And best, claiming that the GST is to help them.
Well, at least the very poor are still happy that the $250 cash voucher will better their lifestyle for a few months, until the next budget comes.
Gina Loo, a part time administrative assistant earning $500 pm, also a sole breadwinner, with a daughter and parents to look after, will get $250 for each adult and a $260 utility rebate. Incidentally, Yazit’s wife is not a citizen and will not receive the GST voucher.
Both families are happy with every dollar they received. It is amazing how they coped with the kind of cost of living in our world class city. But they are managing and can still put on a warm smile for the reporters. Their stories are in the ST today.
The GST voucher is to help the lower income families offset the GST that they have been made to pay as the GST knife is pretty blunt, and does not care if one is a multi millionaire or with a few hundred bucks as household income. The examples given in the ST, a retiree couple will receive enough, $1,240 to offset an estimated GST of $840, with some to spare. A ‘younger lower income households with no elderly members…will also receive a significant GST offset…It should cover about half of the total GST they pay each year.’ This means that they will have to pay the other half of the GST tax despite the significant offset.
Some jokers are still arguing angrily that the poor are not taxed. This is a good example of the unpleasant truth. How could a rich country, with so much in reserves, tax on the very poor? And best, claiming that the GST is to help them.
Well, at least the very poor are still happy that the $250 cash voucher will better their lifestyle for a few months, until the next budget comes.
2/17/2012
$800 sole breadwinner with 3 kids
The front page of ST highlighted the plight of Yazit Saleh, a 42 year old general worker with an $800 monthly income. He lives in a rental flat with his wife and 3 little children. I am lost for words.
How is he going to cope with the high cost of living here? Rental, transportation to work, food and clothing! And how much worse would his financial situation be when the children start to go to school?
No amount of financial assistance can help Yazit if the cost of living keeps running away. This is not a case of eating in hawker stall, foodcourt or restaurant. I can’t imagine how tough life is for them and the children growing up. Simply unbelieveable!
How is he going to cope with the high cost of living here? Rental, transportation to work, food and clothing! And how much worse would his financial situation be when the children start to go to school?
No amount of financial assistance can help Yazit if the cost of living keeps running away. This is not a case of eating in hawker stall, foodcourt or restaurant. I can’t imagine how tough life is for them and the children growing up. Simply unbelieveable!
Xi Jinping visited Muscatine
A little time down memory lane. That was what Xi Jinping did when he was in the US for a preparatory visit to meet the American leaders before his appointment as the new leader of China. His trip included a side trip to a little town called Muscatine in Iowa, in the heart of America. He was there 27 years ago as a young govt official to learn about farming, agriculture and pig rearing from the Americans.
China started to open up 30 years ago and one of the most important countries to learn from was America. They have sent armies of young technocrats and govt officials, students and businessmen to learn everything they could from the most advanced and prosperous country of the 20th Century.
Today, practically everything American is in China, technology, pop culture, fashion, the cowboy jeans, American businesses and factories are in China. In a way China is more American than the Americans could ever believe. The Chinese are also producing goods at ridiculously low prices to feed the Americans and reducing their cost of living. And there is no anti Americanism in China. The occasional flare ups were mostly provoked by the Americans but the reactions petered off quickly. The noise made was more of patriotism and pride of a rising China than xenophobia and anti America.
The visit of Xi Jinping to America was to bolster ties and seek avenues for more cooperation and mutual interests. It is a relationship that is of paramount importance for the two countries and for the world. If the two countries can maintain a cordial working relation, promote trade and economic growth, the world could see more pleasant times ahead.
On a personal level the warmth between Xi Jinping and his hosts was quite genuine. Joe Biden was a great host, and so were the people of Muscatine. Obama also stretched out his hands of friendship. Unfortunately such gestures of friendliness often proved shortlived and the Americans would return to their anti China rhetoric in no time. And provocations, insinuation, bickering, accusations etc would return to the American media. And the coming Presidential Election would present a convenient stage for more anti Chinese jingoism.
The kiss and kill relationship between the two countries will go on and on and is not expected to die down for years to come. There is great rivalry for influence and power despite the need to cooperate and prosper in many other fields. As long as the bickering can be contained with kiss and make up along the way, there is still hope that the rivalry will not break out into open conflict. The alternative is unimaginable.
China started to open up 30 years ago and one of the most important countries to learn from was America. They have sent armies of young technocrats and govt officials, students and businessmen to learn everything they could from the most advanced and prosperous country of the 20th Century.
Today, practically everything American is in China, technology, pop culture, fashion, the cowboy jeans, American businesses and factories are in China. In a way China is more American than the Americans could ever believe. The Chinese are also producing goods at ridiculously low prices to feed the Americans and reducing their cost of living. And there is no anti Americanism in China. The occasional flare ups were mostly provoked by the Americans but the reactions petered off quickly. The noise made was more of patriotism and pride of a rising China than xenophobia and anti America.
The visit of Xi Jinping to America was to bolster ties and seek avenues for more cooperation and mutual interests. It is a relationship that is of paramount importance for the two countries and for the world. If the two countries can maintain a cordial working relation, promote trade and economic growth, the world could see more pleasant times ahead.
On a personal level the warmth between Xi Jinping and his hosts was quite genuine. Joe Biden was a great host, and so were the people of Muscatine. Obama also stretched out his hands of friendship. Unfortunately such gestures of friendliness often proved shortlived and the Americans would return to their anti China rhetoric in no time. And provocations, insinuation, bickering, accusations etc would return to the American media. And the coming Presidential Election would present a convenient stage for more anti Chinese jingoism.
The kiss and kill relationship between the two countries will go on and on and is not expected to die down for years to come. There is great rivalry for influence and power despite the need to cooperate and prosper in many other fields. As long as the bickering can be contained with kiss and make up along the way, there is still hope that the rivalry will not break out into open conflict. The alternative is unimaginable.
Hougang opening up a big hole for all
Many people see Hougang as a great opportunity to get into Parliament. Tan Jee Say was quoted in the media as a potential candidate. There were also suggestions that Ong Ye Kung could be given a chance to find his place in Parliament. George Yeo was also mentioned as a come back kid.
The speculation is getting wilder. Most see it as a chance to sneak into Parliament. Can’t blame them, everyone who aspires to be an MP would not want to miss a by election or any election. It is like the line of hopefuls queuing up for the Toto tickets. What is there to lose as long as there is a wink of hope.
So, would Hougang be turned into a free for all show for opportunists, the die hards, the gamblers, the desperadoes, the party’s gambits or would sanity and strategic interests still the nerves of all the aspirants?
The most sensible statement to emerge so far is from the SDP. They are opting out to prevent a multi corner fight that will weaken the position of the opposition. Their stand is to keep Hougang away from the PAP. It is a very selfless and admirable decision that is good for the opposition parties. Would others bite and do the same? Would there be some cranks that will step forward to throw a spanner into the works?
Hougang is a carefully nurtured constituency of Low Thia Khiang and the WP. Would the opposition parties show some deference to him and the WP to avoid a fracas, a riot? Anyway, the people of Hougang are strongly behind the WP and Low and any attempt to mess it up will not only reflect very badly on the adventurer and worst, would even fall flat and shuffle out in the most ungraceful manner. Any opportunists attempting to enter the fray could do more damage to their own standing and reflected badly on themselves.
What about Desmond Choo? Does anyone care about the feelings of Desmond Choo for fighting so hard in the last election? Would he be dumped to make way for another bigger chip? Or would the PAP think the ground is sweet to put in a bigger chip into the contest?
There will be a by election in Hougang soon. With only a few months into a new term, not having a by election is deprivation of the Hougang people of an MP for almost a full term is intolerable and unacceptable. If Hsien Loong would to decide not to have a by election, it will only show that he has a weak hand of cards. It will show that the PAP is afraid to take on the WP. The PAP cannot afford to display weaknesses and would want to prove how confident it is to win back Hougang, and now the door is opened again.
When will be the by election?
The speculation is getting wilder. Most see it as a chance to sneak into Parliament. Can’t blame them, everyone who aspires to be an MP would not want to miss a by election or any election. It is like the line of hopefuls queuing up for the Toto tickets. What is there to lose as long as there is a wink of hope.
So, would Hougang be turned into a free for all show for opportunists, the die hards, the gamblers, the desperadoes, the party’s gambits or would sanity and strategic interests still the nerves of all the aspirants?
The most sensible statement to emerge so far is from the SDP. They are opting out to prevent a multi corner fight that will weaken the position of the opposition. Their stand is to keep Hougang away from the PAP. It is a very selfless and admirable decision that is good for the opposition parties. Would others bite and do the same? Would there be some cranks that will step forward to throw a spanner into the works?
Hougang is a carefully nurtured constituency of Low Thia Khiang and the WP. Would the opposition parties show some deference to him and the WP to avoid a fracas, a riot? Anyway, the people of Hougang are strongly behind the WP and Low and any attempt to mess it up will not only reflect very badly on the adventurer and worst, would even fall flat and shuffle out in the most ungraceful manner. Any opportunists attempting to enter the fray could do more damage to their own standing and reflected badly on themselves.
What about Desmond Choo? Does anyone care about the feelings of Desmond Choo for fighting so hard in the last election? Would he be dumped to make way for another bigger chip? Or would the PAP think the ground is sweet to put in a bigger chip into the contest?
There will be a by election in Hougang soon. With only a few months into a new term, not having a by election is deprivation of the Hougang people of an MP for almost a full term is intolerable and unacceptable. If Hsien Loong would to decide not to have a by election, it will only show that he has a weak hand of cards. It will show that the PAP is afraid to take on the WP. The PAP cannot afford to display weaknesses and would want to prove how confident it is to win back Hougang, and now the door is opened again.
When will be the by election?
2/16/2012
Losing a battle to win a war
There are many views on the merits or demerits of the dismissal of Yaw Shin Leong. Some argue that politically it is unwise to risk a hard fought seat in Hougang only to deliver it to the enemy on a platter. A better game is to hold on to the seat, keep it warm and safe till the next GE. This is just another way to play the game. It would also be an option that gives the ruling party the moral high ground, to question the moral standards of the WP and the quality of their MPs. It would be an Achilles heel to be rubbed at the pleasure of the ruling party.
The spread of comments and criticism in the main media and social media is raising the temperature. The WP will be put on the defensive from now on till the next GE and would be ridiculed all over and over again. And they would look very sheepish if they just remain reticent, and looking very helpless.
By dismissing Yaw now, it will take the sting from the attack. They will have a temporary set back of losing a hill but could possibly fight to win it back. What the WP is looking at is further down the road. It is positioning itself as a morally upright party with integrity and respect to challenge the ruling party on high moral grounds. They have won the first battle with Chen Show Mao proving that money is not in their mind. This is a big victory so far.
Holding on to Yaw would greatly compromise their carefully guarded position of high moral and high ethics. In fact they could use this strong position to challenge the ruling party to maintain the same level of moral righteousness which they know would be a tough act to follow. From a defensive position, the WP is now on the attack. And the ball is now back in the PAP’s court. Who is more morally correct? Who can stand tall with heads held high when personal conduct is in question?
The critique will be muted and frustrated that the target for taking pot shots has been removed and nothing to hit at anymore. And the WP’s camp could be lining up targets instead.
Hougang is just a battle, but there is a war to be won in 2016.
The spread of comments and criticism in the main media and social media is raising the temperature. The WP will be put on the defensive from now on till the next GE and would be ridiculed all over and over again. And they would look very sheepish if they just remain reticent, and looking very helpless.
By dismissing Yaw now, it will take the sting from the attack. They will have a temporary set back of losing a hill but could possibly fight to win it back. What the WP is looking at is further down the road. It is positioning itself as a morally upright party with integrity and respect to challenge the ruling party on high moral grounds. They have won the first battle with Chen Show Mao proving that money is not in their mind. This is a big victory so far.
Holding on to Yaw would greatly compromise their carefully guarded position of high moral and high ethics. In fact they could use this strong position to challenge the ruling party to maintain the same level of moral righteousness which they know would be a tough act to follow. From a defensive position, the WP is now on the attack. And the ball is now back in the PAP’s court. Who is more morally correct? Who can stand tall with heads held high when personal conduct is in question?
The critique will be muted and frustrated that the target for taking pot shots has been removed and nothing to hit at anymore. And the WP’s camp could be lining up targets instead.
Hougang is just a battle, but there is a war to be won in 2016.
Yaw Shin Leong sacked
The WP has finally taken the unpleasant decision that everyone was waiting for in sacking Yaw Shin Leong from the party for personal indiscretion. Though these are still yet to be confirmed, the rumour mills have reached a point that silence is no longer acceptable and a decision has to be made.
It is a very painful political decision as the precious seat of Hougang is now to be contested again and in any election, the final outcome is uncertain. What is pertinent in this case is that the WP has set a standard of conduct for its members standing for election and to tell the people what the party stands for. It is a party that believes in transparency and accountability and exemplary conduct from its MPs. It expects its MPs to come clean and explain if they have committed any violations. On the part of the party, it does not see a need to explain the nitty details of what, when, where and how. If the MP does not account for his own wrongdoings, the party will dismiss the MP.
This is quite similar to the judicial process. A guilty person will be punished and paid for his crime. There is no requirement for the guilty party to say sorry and explain the sordid details of his wrongdoings. And there is no need for his associates to explain in detail how, when and where the wrongdoings started. However, this is not the final position of the WP and they may come out with the details that they knew.
In the case of the PAP, presumably they will likewise sack their MPs for any misconduct or wrongdoing. They also believe in transparency and accountability and a high moral standard from their MPs. The PAP expects more, as what its Chairman Khaw Boon Wan said, ‘…the Worker’s Party needs to come out clean and clear, as I said, what did the know, what did they know in recent days, and how long did they know such information? And if they knew earlier, why did they still field such a candidate? Because otherwise, you are actually misleading the voters.’
Both parties’ positions are now quite clear and both will be held accountable to the standards they claimed to uphold. And they will be challenged and ridicule for failing to live up to their high standards and principles of moral conduct. As for whether the WP would square up with the PAP’s standard of the party having to explain more, this is still unclear. What is clear is that if PAP MPs are found wanting, the PAP as a party will make an explanation, very close to the party’s position that sorry must also explain.
Let’s hope that no more MPs will be caught in the same shit and no party needs to make any explanation according to the standard defined by Boon Wan.
It is a very painful political decision as the precious seat of Hougang is now to be contested again and in any election, the final outcome is uncertain. What is pertinent in this case is that the WP has set a standard of conduct for its members standing for election and to tell the people what the party stands for. It is a party that believes in transparency and accountability and exemplary conduct from its MPs. It expects its MPs to come clean and explain if they have committed any violations. On the part of the party, it does not see a need to explain the nitty details of what, when, where and how. If the MP does not account for his own wrongdoings, the party will dismiss the MP.
This is quite similar to the judicial process. A guilty person will be punished and paid for his crime. There is no requirement for the guilty party to say sorry and explain the sordid details of his wrongdoings. And there is no need for his associates to explain in detail how, when and where the wrongdoings started. However, this is not the final position of the WP and they may come out with the details that they knew.
In the case of the PAP, presumably they will likewise sack their MPs for any misconduct or wrongdoing. They also believe in transparency and accountability and a high moral standard from their MPs. The PAP expects more, as what its Chairman Khaw Boon Wan said, ‘…the Worker’s Party needs to come out clean and clear, as I said, what did the know, what did they know in recent days, and how long did they know such information? And if they knew earlier, why did they still field such a candidate? Because otherwise, you are actually misleading the voters.’
Both parties’ positions are now quite clear and both will be held accountable to the standards they claimed to uphold. And they will be challenged and ridicule for failing to live up to their high standards and principles of moral conduct. As for whether the WP would square up with the PAP’s standard of the party having to explain more, this is still unclear. What is clear is that if PAP MPs are found wanting, the PAP as a party will make an explanation, very close to the party’s position that sorry must also explain.
Let’s hope that no more MPs will be caught in the same shit and no party needs to make any explanation according to the standard defined by Boon Wan.
2/15/2012
Scroobal the Deep Throat
If anyone can recall the Watergate story that made two journalists famous overnight, the character Deep Throat immediately comes into the picture. Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein were the two journalists that brought down President Nixon with their investigative journalism with inside stories provided by Deep Throat.
The narratives of Scroobal were compelling and absorbing reading. How much is truth and how much is fiction no one knows. But he came on as someone well informed of the workings of some inner circles of people in high places.
Scroobal has attained recognition and cult status overnight. This will be the most talk about and recognizable name in the world of paparazzi, social and main media. Everyone will be wondering who is this mysterious person. Is he the Deep Throat, the Woodward or the Bernstein?
The narratives of Scroobal were compelling and absorbing reading. How much is truth and how much is fiction no one knows. But he came on as someone well informed of the workings of some inner circles of people in high places.
Scroobal has attained recognition and cult status overnight. This will be the most talk about and recognizable name in the world of paparazzi, social and main media. Everyone will be wondering who is this mysterious person. Is he the Deep Throat, the Woodward or the Bernstein?
Check the interests for your CPF savings
I just checked my CPF statements and found the interest rates for my Retirement Account is 4% but that of my Medisave is 2%. I have just posted an email to CPF for an explanation. I believe it should also be 4% as well.
Please check your CPF statements.
Please check your CPF statements.
A religious Order for Sin City
The rage against infidelity and personal indiscretion in the media continues unabated. Everyone is taking potshots at the transgressors and demanding apologies or confession. Bill Clinton must be quietly telling himself how lucky he is to be living in the US. If he was our President, he could be stoned to death or attacked in public.
This thing about the high expectation for a high moral conduct could be a manifestation that in a paradise called Sin City, there indeed resided many sinless residents. Only the sinless could dare to demand such a high standard of moral behavior from others, to equal theirs.
And soon there could be a call for a higher standard of conduct from civil servants and political leaders. Do not be surprised that they could demand an annual declaration of fidelity and good conduct like the annual non indebtedness declaration. And all new candidates could be expected to sit through a moral test followed by an interview by a board of monks and priests before being accepted to the religious order. And of course the Prime Minister would then be elevated to the position of High Priest of Paradise. Anything less of a perfect personal conduct would not do.
Just a word of caution. When standing on a high pedestal to pass judgement on personal indiscretion, do not be personal. The power of the internet and the right to freedom of speech do not give anyone the right to personal attacks. Let’s restrain and restrict ourselves to policies and issues. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with policies or be disgusted by them. Every policy can be good and bad to different people. Stay clear from being personal even if in Sin City.
This thing about the high expectation for a high moral conduct could be a manifestation that in a paradise called Sin City, there indeed resided many sinless residents. Only the sinless could dare to demand such a high standard of moral behavior from others, to equal theirs.
And soon there could be a call for a higher standard of conduct from civil servants and political leaders. Do not be surprised that they could demand an annual declaration of fidelity and good conduct like the annual non indebtedness declaration. And all new candidates could be expected to sit through a moral test followed by an interview by a board of monks and priests before being accepted to the religious order. And of course the Prime Minister would then be elevated to the position of High Priest of Paradise. Anything less of a perfect personal conduct would not do.
Just a word of caution. When standing on a high pedestal to pass judgement on personal indiscretion, do not be personal. The power of the internet and the right to freedom of speech do not give anyone the right to personal attacks. Let’s restrain and restrict ourselves to policies and issues. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with policies or be disgusted by them. Every policy can be good and bad to different people. Stay clear from being personal even if in Sin City.
2/14/2012
More privileges for foreigners
Foreign employment pass dependants can stay, but some Singaporeans' foreign spouses can't?
As a Singaporean, I find it somewhat ironic that an average of 35,000 dependents of employment pass holders who are foreigners, entered Singapore each year from 2005 to 2010, of which about 4,200 have gained employment, when thousands of Singaporeans' foreign spouses were denied permission to live in Singapore, or to work here.
The above is by Leong Sze Hian from his article posted in TOC
Foreigner's dependants and wives can stay and work, those of Singaporeans can't. Leong Sze Hian was referring to a Malaysian wife of a Singaporean who died and would probably be deported. Now, does she have children that are Singaporeans and also own a HDB flat? Or they were not qualified?
As a Singaporean, I find it somewhat ironic that an average of 35,000 dependents of employment pass holders who are foreigners, entered Singapore each year from 2005 to 2010, of which about 4,200 have gained employment, when thousands of Singaporeans' foreign spouses were denied permission to live in Singapore, or to work here.
The above is by Leong Sze Hian from his article posted in TOC
Foreigner's dependants and wives can stay and work, those of Singaporeans can't. Leong Sze Hian was referring to a Malaysian wife of a Singaporean who died and would probably be deported. Now, does she have children that are Singaporeans and also own a HDB flat? Or they were not qualified?
Petition by Transitioning.org
I was reading the comments in the above petition on employing Singaporean first. One signatory said he is not coming back as he did not have a roof over his head. Some will say not true. There are plenty of private flats out there what? Just because he is not qualified to buy HDB does not mean that he cannot buy from private or rent or stay with his parents. To me, such arguments are cock arguments.
For a professionally qualified Singaporeans and willing to live a less flashy lifestyle, which is prudence, they should not be forced into the private market to spend a million bucks just to have a roof over their heads. This is a $1m ransom just to return home to stay, produce children to do NS after they have done their share of NS.
Compare to the deal for PRs and new citizens, the Singaporeans cannot but feel cheated by the govt policy. The govt must allow every Singaporean the option to buy a public flat. The stupid excuse of the higher income competing with the lower income for flats is simply bull.
There is no competition if the govt builds enough flats for all Singaporeans. A roof over the head is a sound and pro citizen policy that was the foundation of our nation building in the early years. The current policy of forcing Singaporeans to pay through their noses in the millions for a small private flat is anti Singaporean.
Doesn’t the govt understand why Singaporeans are not returning home? The govt should stop singing songs and talking cock. It is such anti Singaporeans policies that are preventing Singaporeans from returning home. Or would the govt prefer more new citizens from other countries without any emotional ties or family bonds to replace our very own citizens who have done their share of NS? The govt must seriously review its housing policy to allow Singaporeans to buy a public flat, a roof over their head. This is how we started, where we came from. Don’t forget the basics. If the govt does not think this is important, then it can forget about Singaporeans coming home to roost and have babies for NS. The PRs will send their children away too when the time for NS comes.
For a professionally qualified Singaporeans and willing to live a less flashy lifestyle, which is prudence, they should not be forced into the private market to spend a million bucks just to have a roof over their heads. This is a $1m ransom just to return home to stay, produce children to do NS after they have done their share of NS.
Compare to the deal for PRs and new citizens, the Singaporeans cannot but feel cheated by the govt policy. The govt must allow every Singaporean the option to buy a public flat. The stupid excuse of the higher income competing with the lower income for flats is simply bull.
There is no competition if the govt builds enough flats for all Singaporeans. A roof over the head is a sound and pro citizen policy that was the foundation of our nation building in the early years. The current policy of forcing Singaporeans to pay through their noses in the millions for a small private flat is anti Singaporean.
Doesn’t the govt understand why Singaporeans are not returning home? The govt should stop singing songs and talking cock. It is such anti Singaporeans policies that are preventing Singaporeans from returning home. Or would the govt prefer more new citizens from other countries without any emotional ties or family bonds to replace our very own citizens who have done their share of NS? The govt must seriously review its housing policy to allow Singaporeans to buy a public flat, a roof over their head. This is how we started, where we came from. Don’t forget the basics. If the govt does not think this is important, then it can forget about Singaporeans coming home to roost and have babies for NS. The PRs will send their children away too when the time for NS comes.
Child adoption could promote crimes against children
CNA recently screened several documentaries about child adoption and the crime of child snatching to feed the needs of childless couples. A child could fetch tens of thousands in places like Quangzhou. I was particularly touched by the documentary ‘I love mommy’, about a little orphan girl from Quangzhou, if I can recollect, being adopted by American parents. There was a little difficulty in the early period of adjusting into a new life. But love by the adopted parents conquered everything and the child grew up quickly into her new home and new parents. It was a very happy ending, with both adopted parents and child having a wonderful union living together as a family.
Many children, especially the girls, were abandoned in China, and in many poorer countries. It is a very good thing for couples with no children to want to bring them home to give them love and shelter. The problem is child snatching to feed the adoption industry. The fear and anguish of children and parents being forcibly separated is a very cruel act of crime. It is simply unimaginable and intolerable. The number of child snatching in China alone comes to a few hundred thousands annually. It is a very serious problem.
There must be very strict laws and punishment for child snatching. The criminals, child snatchers, are inflicting so much pain that lasted a lifetime on their victims.
While the adoption of orphaned children is a good thing, an act of compassion and love, it must not lead to a growing industry of crimes against innocent children and their parents. When the criminals see the demand, the more they will be tempted to snatch children. Parents must be extremely careful when looking after their children, particularly in red areas when child snatching is a common state of affair.
Many children, especially the girls, were abandoned in China, and in many poorer countries. It is a very good thing for couples with no children to want to bring them home to give them love and shelter. The problem is child snatching to feed the adoption industry. The fear and anguish of children and parents being forcibly separated is a very cruel act of crime. It is simply unimaginable and intolerable. The number of child snatching in China alone comes to a few hundred thousands annually. It is a very serious problem.
There must be very strict laws and punishment for child snatching. The criminals, child snatchers, are inflicting so much pain that lasted a lifetime on their victims.
While the adoption of orphaned children is a good thing, an act of compassion and love, it must not lead to a growing industry of crimes against innocent children and their parents. When the criminals see the demand, the more they will be tempted to snatch children. Parents must be extremely careful when looking after their children, particularly in red areas when child snatching is a common state of affair.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)