That was what he said in Parliament when asked by Christopher de Souza. So, there will be a by election but the timing will have to wait as Hsien Loong said, ‘In deciding on the timing, I will take into account all relevant factors, including the well being of Hougang residents, issues on the national agenda, as well as the international backdrop which affects our prosperity and security.’
A by election is not so simple and it is of utmost importance even if the govt has already be elected. Or maybe not to some as the main purpose of an election is to elect a govt and not an MP to serve the local residents. Everyone claimed to know the law and he is right. Got law like that one meh, everyone is right?
Let’s look at some of these relevant factors as pointed out by Hsien Loong. Firstly, the well being of Hougang residents. Assuming that this is equally important as the election of a govt. If not, then once a govt is elected, no MP never mind. Are the residents best served by an MP or by two non MPs of two opposition camps? At the moment, though there is no MP, there is Desmond Choo of PAP and the whole of the WP helping the Hougang residents. I think this is far better than being served by one MP. On this point, got or no by election, not important. It is better not to have a by election with so many eager beaver trying to help. Call it voluntary self help. No representation in parliament not really important. What more if MPs got more important things to do than attending parliament.
The second point is national agenda. Now what is this national agenda? Could it be the economy, security or what? I am clueless, no idea at all, so cannot make any reasonable statement on this. Could it be the population size not settle yet, the unhappiness over foreign talents, unhappiness over scholarship for foreigners, transportation or cost of living or, really no idea.
The third point is the international backdrop that affects our prosperity and security. Wah lan, everything under the sky can come under these two motherhood terms. So, is there anything affecting our prosperity and security at the moment? The Americans are saying the South China Sea area very dangerous and the housewife in Washington is saying that China does not know how to be a super power. In other words the Americans are telling the Chinese to get lost and they are taking over as the most responsible superpower and knows exactly how a super power should behave, ie, create more tension and start more wars.
On this point alone, the region is getting more unstable and our security will definitely be affected. And the Americans are plotting to have a trade war with China which means our prosperity too may be hit. I think better don’t call for a by election just yet and wait until China and the US agree to sleep together and make love.
Of the three relevant factors, two factors say no to holding a by election. The Hougang residents are better served now without an MP. And our prosperity and security are entering a troublesome phase and need special attention. The by election can wait.
As for the other factor of national agenda, I am not sure what it is but since two out of three factors are not in favour of a by election immediately, it is unlikely for a by election to be called soon even if Hsien Loong wants to call one. This is my assessment of the situation.
Another point is that the missing MP problem is created by the WP. So it is the WP problem and the WP must be solely responsible and be blamed for it. If no by election, cannot blame the ruling govt. Stretching this kind of argument a little, what if an MP is struck by lightning while playing golf, touch wood, it becomes an act of God. So can rightly put the blame on God and no need to call by election also? This kind of thinking and argument very difficult to understand in politics. As they say, there is no right and wrong answer.
3/09/2012
GST is fair
I am 85, retired, unemployed, why am I paying GST?
I am 70, retired, unemployed, why am I paying GST?
I am 60, lost my job and unemployed. Why am I paying GST?
I am 10, still in school, why am I paying GST?
I am 3, in nursery, why am I paying GST?
I am 3 months old, in my mother’s womb. Why am I paying GST?
I am 70, retired, unemployed, why am I paying GST?
I am 60, lost my job and unemployed. Why am I paying GST?
I am 10, still in school, why am I paying GST?
I am 3, in nursery, why am I paying GST?
I am 3 months old, in my mother’s womb. Why am I paying GST?
Manifesto for a pro Singaporean political party
Every political party claims to be there to serve the people and the people’s interests when voted to power. How many really live to these ideals when the votes were casted? I have listed a few things that I would like a pro Singaporean political party to stand for and live by it and be deserving of the people’s votes.
1. Priority housing for all Singaporeans. No stupid rules to rule out any Singaporean. This is our country and this is our home and the land belongs to the citizens. Citizens must have the first right of refusal to public housing. If there is enough land to build for foreigners, there is no reason why citizens should be deprived of public housing.
2. Tax payers’ money must be mainly used to benefit Singaporeans and their children. Not to benefit foreigners who have no stakes here. A little charity is acceptable but nothing extravagant.
3. Licence for small business must give priorities to Singaporeans. Some small businesses should be for citizens only. Foreigners are here to work for Singaporeans not to compete with citizens in small businesses. Big businesses are a different proposition.
4. Hospitals and medical services must be nationalized to serve the people, not to profit from the people. There is no amount of value that can be pegged to life and physical well being. It must be the responsibility of the state to provide cost effective medical services.
5. Land is really scarce and landed properties must not be sold off to foreigners freely.
6. Political offices, appointments in govt and stats boards must give priority to citizens especially senior positions. Unless there are specialized skills involved that no Singaporean is available, senior appointments must be given to Singaporeans. New citizens must be qualified by a time criteria. New citizens should not be an escape clause to by pass Singaporeans for top jobs. PRs are not citizens.
7. Citizenship must not be given freely like worthless rubbish.
8. The population of 5m is just about right and should not be allowed to grow rampantly to crazy numbers like 6m or more.
9. Pledge to implement policies that favour citizens and not to disadvantage citizens.
10. CPF money must be returned to the citizens at 60. CPF may offer incentives to attract people to leave their money with the board but must be strictly voluntary.
1. Priority housing for all Singaporeans. No stupid rules to rule out any Singaporean. This is our country and this is our home and the land belongs to the citizens. Citizens must have the first right of refusal to public housing. If there is enough land to build for foreigners, there is no reason why citizens should be deprived of public housing.
2. Tax payers’ money must be mainly used to benefit Singaporeans and their children. Not to benefit foreigners who have no stakes here. A little charity is acceptable but nothing extravagant.
3. Licence for small business must give priorities to Singaporeans. Some small businesses should be for citizens only. Foreigners are here to work for Singaporeans not to compete with citizens in small businesses. Big businesses are a different proposition.
4. Hospitals and medical services must be nationalized to serve the people, not to profit from the people. There is no amount of value that can be pegged to life and physical well being. It must be the responsibility of the state to provide cost effective medical services.
5. Land is really scarce and landed properties must not be sold off to foreigners freely.
6. Political offices, appointments in govt and stats boards must give priority to citizens especially senior positions. Unless there are specialized skills involved that no Singaporean is available, senior appointments must be given to Singaporeans. New citizens must be qualified by a time criteria. New citizens should not be an escape clause to by pass Singaporeans for top jobs. PRs are not citizens.
7. Citizenship must not be given freely like worthless rubbish.
8. The population of 5m is just about right and should not be allowed to grow rampantly to crazy numbers like 6m or more.
9. Pledge to implement policies that favour citizens and not to disadvantage citizens.
10. CPF money must be returned to the citizens at 60. CPF may offer incentives to attract people to leave their money with the board but must be strictly voluntary.
3/08/2012
Crazy woman!
Clinton urges China to prove intentions
Posted: 08 March 2012 0951 hrs
WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday called on China to show in "concrete ways" that its rise is in the world's interest, saying that Beijing needs to take greater responsibility....
China should just ignore her and all her stupid colleagues. China is not accountable to the USA for her rise as a global power. What can the US do or want to do? Attack China? What a stupid woman.
Posted: 08 March 2012 0951 hrs
WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday called on China to show in "concrete ways" that its rise is in the world's interest, saying that Beijing needs to take greater responsibility....
China should just ignore her and all her stupid colleagues. China is not accountable to the USA for her rise as a global power. What can the US do or want to do? Attack China? What a stupid woman.
Does China have a legitimate claim?
This is a very serious article written by an academic, Robert Beckman, Director, Centre for International Law and Associate Professor at the Faculty of Law, NUS etc…in the ST today. It discusses about China’s claim to the group of islands in the South China Sea that were also claimed by a few of the littoral states. By posing such a question it takes a supposedly neutral stand, to question whether the claim is legitimate or illegitimate. So thought provoking.
Would the professor also discuss about the legitimate claims of Europeans as the owners of the USA, Australia and New Zealand and other colonized islands all over the world, like Guam, Gan, the Falklands? Or were the ownership of these continents and islands is now legitimate and a fait accompli because no one is there to challenge it or to write about it?
The concept of planting a flag in someone else backyard and claiming to have found it for the King or Queen sounds funny today, or not really?
Would the professor also discuss about the legitimate claims of Europeans as the owners of the USA, Australia and New Zealand and other colonized islands all over the world, like Guam, Gan, the Falklands? Or were the ownership of these continents and islands is now legitimate and a fait accompli because no one is there to challenge it or to write about it?
The concept of planting a flag in someone else backyard and claiming to have found it for the King or Queen sounds funny today, or not really?
Gan Kim Yong – Agent 002
In my article on Lui Tuck Yew I mentioned two agents of change. The other is Gan Kim Yong. I have trouble trying to catch up with the initiatives he has started to revamp the healthcare business, or was it public healthcare? I could not imagine that there are still so many things to do to make the system betterer. Didn’t his predecessor did a good job and make life more cosy for him? Unlike Tuck Yew’s inheritance of a pail of transportation shit, healthcare was supposedly well taken care off, with mean testing and bringing cost down? Did cost really come down? Did mean testing really work or creating more unnecessary and stupid work?
It is revealed in the ST that when they calculate a patient’s means to subsidy, they included every children of the patient. If the patient has twenty sons and daughters, married or unmarried, all their incomes will have to be computed. Unbelieveable to even imagine. Ok, Gan Kim Yong has simplified this a little by only taking in the incomes of those staying with the patient. I am not sure how many letters and emails were sent to the US, UK, China, India or Australia to trace down the children of those patients to qualify for subsidies.
Though steps were taken to make mean testing less mean, a better way would be to make it simpler by doing away with this demeaning and invasive act of prying into people’s privacy in the name of fairness and subsidies.
Gan Kim Yong will be launching his affordable Healthcare 2020, to provide good quality and affordable healthcare with some tweaking to the Medisave Insurance scheme, with higher premiums to go along. Let’s hope his version of affordability is the version that the citizens can understand and appreciate and not the public housing kind.
He is also ramping up hospital beds and community healthcare services working with GPs in the neighbourhood. How would these measures affect the people and the high cost of medicare is still waiting to be seen. If they indeed bring benefits to the people, then he could be another big agent of change. Tentatively, everything sounds good on paper but what is real? Shouting affordability does not mean that it is affordable as public housing is a good example. The bottom line is how hard would the pockets of patients be hurt, be emptied? The affordable housing schemes have resulted in many Singaporeans with not enough for retirement, and with big mortgages that need two incomes and 30 years to repay. If this is the same kind of affordable thinking, then it will be another big disappointment.
One positive point about Gan Kim Yong is his demeanour and composure in Parliament. He responded to questions from all parties purposefully without being ruffled or resorting to making snide replies to belittle others. He is a gentleman in many ways and a role model to other politicians on how to behave well in Parliament.
It is revealed in the ST that when they calculate a patient’s means to subsidy, they included every children of the patient. If the patient has twenty sons and daughters, married or unmarried, all their incomes will have to be computed. Unbelieveable to even imagine. Ok, Gan Kim Yong has simplified this a little by only taking in the incomes of those staying with the patient. I am not sure how many letters and emails were sent to the US, UK, China, India or Australia to trace down the children of those patients to qualify for subsidies.
Though steps were taken to make mean testing less mean, a better way would be to make it simpler by doing away with this demeaning and invasive act of prying into people’s privacy in the name of fairness and subsidies.
Gan Kim Yong will be launching his affordable Healthcare 2020, to provide good quality and affordable healthcare with some tweaking to the Medisave Insurance scheme, with higher premiums to go along. Let’s hope his version of affordability is the version that the citizens can understand and appreciate and not the public housing kind.
He is also ramping up hospital beds and community healthcare services working with GPs in the neighbourhood. How would these measures affect the people and the high cost of medicare is still waiting to be seen. If they indeed bring benefits to the people, then he could be another big agent of change. Tentatively, everything sounds good on paper but what is real? Shouting affordability does not mean that it is affordable as public housing is a good example. The bottom line is how hard would the pockets of patients be hurt, be emptied? The affordable housing schemes have resulted in many Singaporeans with not enough for retirement, and with big mortgages that need two incomes and 30 years to repay. If this is the same kind of affordable thinking, then it will be another big disappointment.
One positive point about Gan Kim Yong is his demeanour and composure in Parliament. He responded to questions from all parties purposefully without being ruffled or resorting to making snide replies to belittle others. He is a gentleman in many ways and a role model to other politicians on how to behave well in Parliament.
Lui Tuck Yew – Agent of change
I can’t remember praising any minister in the past, or at least not the new ministers. The pioneers were different as they were the pathfinders, the people who set the stage for the play today, selflessly. It is hard to praise the ministers now as they have held themselves up as supermen and superwomen and thus are expected to do super works. Mediocrity is not acceptable from super beans. And with the super pay they are claiming for themselves, anyone talking about sacrifices need to be stuffed with shit in their mouths.
The expectation is superlative. But when mediocrity is the order of the day, anything better is betterer and deserves some encouragement. I was watching in Parliament last night on telly and two ministers stood out for mentioning. Lui Tuck Yew is one of them. He came across as someone with a mission to do a big repair job. And he is earnest and tuned up for it.
The transportation mess that he inherited would have to be dealt with in a different light. The causes, the past assumptions, must be thrown into the dustbin and a new set of assumptions need to be put right. Wrong assumptions would lead to wrong results though perfectly logically and defendable. When 1 is 3 and 2 is 4, 1 + 2 = 7. Logic. No one can argue against such thinking.
The angst against public transportation was likely to be the result of a different set of perverse assumptions, eg, maximization of profits and with the Tokyo train as the role model to surpass. The comfort and graciousness of the people were not factors for consideration. Maximising profit would mean longer waiting time and jam packed trains to benefit the shareholders and big bonuses for the top management. Scintillating profit numbers are so good to look at. Then there is the added Tokyo standard to surpass. Jam packed train will only be at best as good as Tokyo’s. To surpass that, the trains must be bulging at the sides. Only then can it claim to be better than Tokyo’s.
What Tuck Yew has done is to dismantle such beliefs. Commuter comfort, efficiency and graciousness are equally important, or more important. More trains and buses will be added to reduce waiting time. The desired 95% load will be cut to 85% to provide more comfort and breathing space for the commuters. There will be overall increases in the number of trips run by trains and buses.
The new assumptions and standards would definitely make public transportation much better and tolerable than the standards of the past. There will be big costs involved but temporarily this will be delayed till a later date.
The changes are major especially in the mindset. Maximising profit has taken a rubbing for the moment to give way to commuter’s interests. Just hope the fare hike will not be too prohibitive and the Govt will give a helping hand. Public transportation is not simply a service and to be run primarily for profits alone. Public transportation affects our way of life, the way businesses are done, business costs, people’s costs, social and economic costs. Bringing public transportation cost down will benefit everyone and everything, including business and the govt. It is a big change for the better.
The expectation is superlative. But when mediocrity is the order of the day, anything better is betterer and deserves some encouragement. I was watching in Parliament last night on telly and two ministers stood out for mentioning. Lui Tuck Yew is one of them. He came across as someone with a mission to do a big repair job. And he is earnest and tuned up for it.
The transportation mess that he inherited would have to be dealt with in a different light. The causes, the past assumptions, must be thrown into the dustbin and a new set of assumptions need to be put right. Wrong assumptions would lead to wrong results though perfectly logically and defendable. When 1 is 3 and 2 is 4, 1 + 2 = 7. Logic. No one can argue against such thinking.
The angst against public transportation was likely to be the result of a different set of perverse assumptions, eg, maximization of profits and with the Tokyo train as the role model to surpass. The comfort and graciousness of the people were not factors for consideration. Maximising profit would mean longer waiting time and jam packed trains to benefit the shareholders and big bonuses for the top management. Scintillating profit numbers are so good to look at. Then there is the added Tokyo standard to surpass. Jam packed train will only be at best as good as Tokyo’s. To surpass that, the trains must be bulging at the sides. Only then can it claim to be better than Tokyo’s.
What Tuck Yew has done is to dismantle such beliefs. Commuter comfort, efficiency and graciousness are equally important, or more important. More trains and buses will be added to reduce waiting time. The desired 95% load will be cut to 85% to provide more comfort and breathing space for the commuters. There will be overall increases in the number of trips run by trains and buses.
The new assumptions and standards would definitely make public transportation much better and tolerable than the standards of the past. There will be big costs involved but temporarily this will be delayed till a later date.
The changes are major especially in the mindset. Maximising profit has taken a rubbing for the moment to give way to commuter’s interests. Just hope the fare hike will not be too prohibitive and the Govt will give a helping hand. Public transportation is not simply a service and to be run primarily for profits alone. Public transportation affects our way of life, the way businesses are done, business costs, people’s costs, social and economic costs. Bringing public transportation cost down will benefit everyone and everything, including business and the govt. It is a big change for the better.
3/07/2012
Vivian Balakrishnan replies to Low Thia Khiang
From affordable housing to affordable medicare and affordable water bills. Singaporeans are so lucky. All the ministers are working so hard to make housing, medical and water for bathing affordable. Why are they still complaining? Ingrates or unthinking? Please go down on your knees and show your gratitude.
There was a bundle of data on water fees and water bills shown in Parliament by Vivian in reply to Low Thia Khiang. The total cost ‘to operate Singapore’s water treatment and reclamation plants and sewerage system’ is $1.3b annually. The revenue collected, $674m in water tariffs and $327m in waterborne and sanitary appliances fees. Immediately I notice the huge subsidy that the govt is providing for water usage. If not, then the whole operation is a big loss. Better to privatise it to make it more efficient. I got no details to put under the microscope to read further about how 3c per cubic meter water can cost so much and still operating at such a loss. Someone please correct me if it is no longer 3c. I know this has been going on for donkey years.
Whatever the data say, the most important statement by Vivian is that ‘the Govt will ensure that water remains affordable for everyone.’ This is the most pleasant message, like music to the ears.
There was a bundle of data on water fees and water bills shown in Parliament by Vivian in reply to Low Thia Khiang. The total cost ‘to operate Singapore’s water treatment and reclamation plants and sewerage system’ is $1.3b annually. The revenue collected, $674m in water tariffs and $327m in waterborne and sanitary appliances fees. Immediately I notice the huge subsidy that the govt is providing for water usage. If not, then the whole operation is a big loss. Better to privatise it to make it more efficient. I got no details to put under the microscope to read further about how 3c per cubic meter water can cost so much and still operating at such a loss. Someone please correct me if it is no longer 3c. I know this has been going on for donkey years.
Whatever the data say, the most important statement by Vivian is that ‘the Govt will ensure that water remains affordable for everyone.’ This is the most pleasant message, like music to the ears.
NS allowances up $60
More recognition for NS men. There will be an across the board increase of $60 for all NS men beginning next month. Recruits will be getting $480 and a Lieutenant will be getting $1,180. This is a very handome increase given the fact that citizens with a monthly income of $1000 can afford to buy a 2 rm HDB flat.
From the above figures, a recruit can now afford such a flat if his girl friend is working for anything less than $1000 pm. A Lieutenant will definitely find it very comfortable with his single income to buy such flats. Only problem is that he may be disqualified if his girl friend is earning more than $1000. He could only by pass this ruling if his girlfriend stops working until they got their keys.
The NS men must be feeling very rich and smiling all over for their new found fortune. The quality of their lives will definitely be better, by $60. It makes their sacrifices so much more rewarding.
From the above figures, a recruit can now afford such a flat if his girl friend is working for anything less than $1000 pm. A Lieutenant will definitely find it very comfortable with his single income to buy such flats. Only problem is that he may be disqualified if his girl friend is earning more than $1000. He could only by pass this ruling if his girlfriend stops working until they got their keys.
The NS men must be feeling very rich and smiling all over for their new found fortune. The quality of their lives will definitely be better, by $60. It makes their sacrifices so much more rewarding.
Property prices, the $64k question
Anyone suggesting that property prices to come down or HDB to lower the sale price of its new flats is likely to be met with anger from all property owners. This is natural as many have sunk in a lot of money and falling property prices will affect a lot of people adversely.
On the contrary, property prices just cannot keep going up without killing the new buyers. The current suggestion that a $1000 pm income is enough to buy a 2 rm flat is quite enlightening. The govt is prepared to cough out a $60k grant leaving a net price of $40k for the flat which is a steal in today’s hot property market. It is even cheaper than rental, mind you. So why isn’t there a rush to buy such flats? There was a post by a divorcee with two kids and $60k cash in her savings. And she chose to rent a flat for fear of losing her $60k if she buys a flat. Why didn’t she be allowed to buy a $40k 2rm flat instead and free herself from the rental market and with a net gain of at least $100k should she sell her flat?
Anyway, that is another matter. What I am looking at is the opportunity for the govt to sell HDB flats to first time owners at substantially reduced price with a similar grant of $60k or $100k proportional to the size of flats without rocking the market prices. Make this an exclusive offer to Singapore citizens who have done their fair share of NS and are buying flats for the first time. Make this a privilege to be citizens, and ownership of a flat an entitlement for citizens who have pledged to defend this country with their lives. The new and young leaders have forgotten the importance of owning a roof over one’s head and how this policy was the pillar of our national building in the beginning of our nationhood. They prefer to force those who are earning a bit more, or fail to qualify under HDB rules, to lose all their money paying the private developers or end up with no homes. Citizens without a roof over their heads will take the next natural step, migrate. And their places will be filled by new ingrates. Is this a sound exchange?
By giving a substantial grant on a one time basis, the market price should not be shaken as theoretically the new buyer is still buying at the HDB list price. And by not offering to PRs, or to new citizens unless they have served NS and with a qualifying time period of say 5 years as a citizen, it will make a significant difference between citizens, new citizens and non citizens. And it is the biggest acknowledgement by the govt that this country believes in citizens first and the citizens have something worthy to defend and lay down their lives for. It will be very costly for new citizens who chose to avoid NS or to rubbish the contributions of NS men.
It is a win win situation as unwinding the prices of HDB flats is a no go and not unwinding is going to empty the savings of new flat buyers. It is a social contract and something very tangible that will benefit both citizens and the govt/state and not making the present owners feeling sore with falling property prices.
Would the govt seriously review the relationship between state and citizens and put the interests of its citizens and state above all other considerations? This is a major commitment by the govt, a statement of faith to the people, to its loyal citizens, instead of throwing money to still unknown new citizens and non citizens like scholarships that will incur more anger from the citizens. And to rub salt into the wound, they sell their HDB flats with a tidy profit and go on to seek greener pasture.
Why can’t the govt do something really beneficial to its own citizens for once? The lower income earners need help and so do the middle income earners. It is a serious matter to cough out a few hundred thousand bucks just to buy a roof over one’s head.
Believe me, the govt will win a lot of hearts and votes for such a pro citizen policy and will lose a lot of votes for pro new citizens and foreigner policies.
On the contrary, property prices just cannot keep going up without killing the new buyers. The current suggestion that a $1000 pm income is enough to buy a 2 rm flat is quite enlightening. The govt is prepared to cough out a $60k grant leaving a net price of $40k for the flat which is a steal in today’s hot property market. It is even cheaper than rental, mind you. So why isn’t there a rush to buy such flats? There was a post by a divorcee with two kids and $60k cash in her savings. And she chose to rent a flat for fear of losing her $60k if she buys a flat. Why didn’t she be allowed to buy a $40k 2rm flat instead and free herself from the rental market and with a net gain of at least $100k should she sell her flat?
Anyway, that is another matter. What I am looking at is the opportunity for the govt to sell HDB flats to first time owners at substantially reduced price with a similar grant of $60k or $100k proportional to the size of flats without rocking the market prices. Make this an exclusive offer to Singapore citizens who have done their fair share of NS and are buying flats for the first time. Make this a privilege to be citizens, and ownership of a flat an entitlement for citizens who have pledged to defend this country with their lives. The new and young leaders have forgotten the importance of owning a roof over one’s head and how this policy was the pillar of our national building in the beginning of our nationhood. They prefer to force those who are earning a bit more, or fail to qualify under HDB rules, to lose all their money paying the private developers or end up with no homes. Citizens without a roof over their heads will take the next natural step, migrate. And their places will be filled by new ingrates. Is this a sound exchange?
By giving a substantial grant on a one time basis, the market price should not be shaken as theoretically the new buyer is still buying at the HDB list price. And by not offering to PRs, or to new citizens unless they have served NS and with a qualifying time period of say 5 years as a citizen, it will make a significant difference between citizens, new citizens and non citizens. And it is the biggest acknowledgement by the govt that this country believes in citizens first and the citizens have something worthy to defend and lay down their lives for. It will be very costly for new citizens who chose to avoid NS or to rubbish the contributions of NS men.
It is a win win situation as unwinding the prices of HDB flats is a no go and not unwinding is going to empty the savings of new flat buyers. It is a social contract and something very tangible that will benefit both citizens and the govt/state and not making the present owners feeling sore with falling property prices.
Would the govt seriously review the relationship between state and citizens and put the interests of its citizens and state above all other considerations? This is a major commitment by the govt, a statement of faith to the people, to its loyal citizens, instead of throwing money to still unknown new citizens and non citizens like scholarships that will incur more anger from the citizens. And to rub salt into the wound, they sell their HDB flats with a tidy profit and go on to seek greener pasture.
Why can’t the govt do something really beneficial to its own citizens for once? The lower income earners need help and so do the middle income earners. It is a serious matter to cough out a few hundred thousand bucks just to buy a roof over one’s head.
Believe me, the govt will win a lot of hearts and votes for such a pro citizen policy and will lose a lot of votes for pro new citizens and foreigner policies.
3/06/2012
Another strategic acquisition for Singtel
Monday, Mar 05, 2012
AFP
SINGAPORE - Singapore Telecom said Monday that it will buy US mobile advertising start-up Amobee for US$321 million (S$401 million) to expand group revenues from ads and marketing across Asia.
SingTel, Southeast Asia's biggest telecom firm by revenue, said its 100 per cent buyout would boost mobile ad sales in India, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, where it has large affiliates.
"A vast majority of our 400 million (clients) are in emerging markets," said Allen Lew, chief executive of the SingTel Group's newly formed "digital life" unit announced Monday as part of a top-level reorganisation.
Citing data from technology research firm Gartner, Lew said the global mobile ad market is likely to exceed US$20 billion by 2015 from about US$7.0 billion this year, with 35 per cent of it generated in Asia-Pacific.
Amobee, founded in 2005 and based in Redwood City, California, has offices in Europe, Asia and Latin America....
Despite Amobee having unaudited net assets worth only US$600,000 as of November, Lew told a news conference SingTel was not overpaying for the firm with the all-cash acquisition.
"The way we value this company is not based on the net tangible assets. We value this company based on what we think is eventually going to be worth." ....
This must be another great strategic acquisition for Singtel to grow its business. It must be value for money.
AFP
SINGAPORE - Singapore Telecom said Monday that it will buy US mobile advertising start-up Amobee for US$321 million (S$401 million) to expand group revenues from ads and marketing across Asia.
SingTel, Southeast Asia's biggest telecom firm by revenue, said its 100 per cent buyout would boost mobile ad sales in India, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Pakistan, where it has large affiliates.
"A vast majority of our 400 million (clients) are in emerging markets," said Allen Lew, chief executive of the SingTel Group's newly formed "digital life" unit announced Monday as part of a top-level reorganisation.
Citing data from technology research firm Gartner, Lew said the global mobile ad market is likely to exceed US$20 billion by 2015 from about US$7.0 billion this year, with 35 per cent of it generated in Asia-Pacific.
Amobee, founded in 2005 and based in Redwood City, California, has offices in Europe, Asia and Latin America....
Despite Amobee having unaudited net assets worth only US$600,000 as of November, Lew told a news conference SingTel was not overpaying for the firm with the all-cash acquisition.
"The way we value this company is not based on the net tangible assets. We value this company based on what we think is eventually going to be worth." ....
This must be another great strategic acquisition for Singtel to grow its business. It must be value for money.
Blimey, the govt is still talking about affordable housing
Tan Chuan Jin ‘said that his ministry tracks “very closely” the incomes of Singaporeans, to make sure that HDB flats are priced and subsidised so they’re affordable at different income levels.’
What is the govt’s definition of affordable housing? Two pay checks and 30 years to pay the mortgage. Right? Affordable in the past was one pay check and 15 to 20 years to pay. The difference between the two formulas for affordability is like heaven and hell. In the first formula it means two persons working for 30 years and leaving not much for retirement. Further, with two persons working, there is no way for the wife to stop work and look after babies as there will not be enough to pay the housing loan. See where is the source of baby problem?
In the second formula, the wife has the option to work which will provide more extra cash for a better and less financially stressful lifestyle. And if the wife so chooses to make more babies, it will not hurt the repayment of the mortgage. And in 15/20 years, the loan will be fully paid up and the rest can go to their retirement savings.
Both formula are technically right in terms of affordability. But one means work and work and hope that nothing goes wrong with the income before the loan is fully repaid. The other has a lot more slack without both spouses working to keep up with repayment of the loan.
What kind of quality of life and what kind of affordability are we talking about? This is the same kind of situation where some jokers said the island can take in 6m or 9m people while some say 5m is already too much. Everyone is right but at what cost and what consequences.
So very affordable huh? $1000 pm income can afford a 2rm flat. What about the life of the family? What kind of life? Would Tan Chuan Jin’s ministry track the affordability of one income and work on that basis and not one that would empty the savings of two incomes?
What is the govt’s definition of affordable housing? Two pay checks and 30 years to pay the mortgage. Right? Affordable in the past was one pay check and 15 to 20 years to pay. The difference between the two formulas for affordability is like heaven and hell. In the first formula it means two persons working for 30 years and leaving not much for retirement. Further, with two persons working, there is no way for the wife to stop work and look after babies as there will not be enough to pay the housing loan. See where is the source of baby problem?
In the second formula, the wife has the option to work which will provide more extra cash for a better and less financially stressful lifestyle. And if the wife so chooses to make more babies, it will not hurt the repayment of the mortgage. And in 15/20 years, the loan will be fully paid up and the rest can go to their retirement savings.
Both formula are technically right in terms of affordability. But one means work and work and hope that nothing goes wrong with the income before the loan is fully repaid. The other has a lot more slack without both spouses working to keep up with repayment of the loan.
What kind of quality of life and what kind of affordability are we talking about? This is the same kind of situation where some jokers said the island can take in 6m or 9m people while some say 5m is already too much. Everyone is right but at what cost and what consequences.
So very affordable huh? $1000 pm income can afford a 2rm flat. What about the life of the family? What kind of life? Would Tan Chuan Jin’s ministry track the affordability of one income and work on that basis and not one that would empty the savings of two incomes?
CPF Life will help lower income
Singaporeans are so lucky. They can now look forward to a stream of retirement income for life. And they have a choice of having more upfront or leave more for their beneficiaries. This is really good in paradise and Singaporeans have to thank their lucky stars for having a good govt to provide them with such a comprehensive retirement plan.
Where did the govt get to money to provide such a great retirement scheme? Fuck it, it is our own money isn’t it? With the CPF scheme, the govt does not need to provide any more social security for the people with a few exceptions. There is no need to budget for such an expenditure anymore. The people shall provide their own retirement fund for their own retirement plans. And no need any subsidies. The people are on their own from birth to death.
Every Singaporean will have to be part of this plan, like it or not. And it is also reported in the ST that ‘two thirds of those aged 65 and above receive family support and do not need to tap these schemes. So two thirds were in for a joy ride when they do not need it? Right? And all their money held in ransom!
I can’t believe that such a comprehensive scheme that forces the whole population into compulsory savings and compulsory insurance schemes is only because one third of the people needs it.
What can’t there be fine tuning to allow those who do not need it to be spare the compulsion? By the time someone hits 60, the cards are all on the table as to what they need and whether they need to be compelled to such schemes. Shouldn’t they be given the options to be in or out, or half in half out? Why should two third of the people be punished because of a one third minority?
Are Singaporeans lucky or unlucky to have such a caring govt that even plans for their retirements with their money?
Where did the govt get to money to provide such a great retirement scheme? Fuck it, it is our own money isn’t it? With the CPF scheme, the govt does not need to provide any more social security for the people with a few exceptions. There is no need to budget for such an expenditure anymore. The people shall provide their own retirement fund for their own retirement plans. And no need any subsidies. The people are on their own from birth to death.
Every Singaporean will have to be part of this plan, like it or not. And it is also reported in the ST that ‘two thirds of those aged 65 and above receive family support and do not need to tap these schemes. So two thirds were in for a joy ride when they do not need it? Right? And all their money held in ransom!
I can’t believe that such a comprehensive scheme that forces the whole population into compulsory savings and compulsory insurance schemes is only because one third of the people needs it.
What can’t there be fine tuning to allow those who do not need it to be spare the compulsion? By the time someone hits 60, the cards are all on the table as to what they need and whether they need to be compelled to such schemes. Shouldn’t they be given the options to be in or out, or half in half out? Why should two third of the people be punished because of a one third minority?
Are Singaporeans lucky or unlucky to have such a caring govt that even plans for their retirements with their money?
3/05/2012
The increasing presence of dogs in Sin
The reference to dogs for comparison to life in paradise is getting more prevalent. The MOE foreign scholar commented that there are more dogs than humans in here. In a way he is right, and there are MPs who agreed with his observations and wanting Sinkies to seriously consider how relevant this remark is to life in paradise.
The top dogs in the paradise, those in leadership positions, are often been referred to as sheep dogs, with an uncanny leadership quality to round up sheep and control the sheep. This is great quality in a dog, like needing only a handful of dogs to control a herd of sheep.
The latest desired dog that is posted in the net is the attack dog. This is a specialized breed, to attack, just bite and bite without having to think. The stronger the bite the better is the attack dog.
Then of course the famed quality of dogs being obedient to the master and doing the biddings of their master needs no further introduction. I am waiting for more variations and maybe compile it into a dictionary of Singapore’s most valued dogs. Stray dogs or abandoned dogs will be exempted as they will be taken care of by the SPCA and dog lovers.
The top dogs in the paradise, those in leadership positions, are often been referred to as sheep dogs, with an uncanny leadership quality to round up sheep and control the sheep. This is great quality in a dog, like needing only a handful of dogs to control a herd of sheep.
The latest desired dog that is posted in the net is the attack dog. This is a specialized breed, to attack, just bite and bite without having to think. The stronger the bite the better is the attack dog.
Then of course the famed quality of dogs being obedient to the master and doing the biddings of their master needs no further introduction. I am waiting for more variations and maybe compile it into a dictionary of Singapore’s most valued dogs. Stray dogs or abandoned dogs will be exempted as they will be taken care of by the SPCA and dog lovers.
In the name of transparency and accountability
Please tell, how much it costs to build a HDB 2rm flat, 3 rm flat, 4 rm flat, 5rm flat and an EC flat.
Why must contribute to CPF?
Silly me, why am I asking such a simple question? You need to build up a savings to buy affordable HDB flat mah. Tiok boh? Like that also dunno. You also need to have some money for retirement right? Tiok. And you need money to pay for big and affordable medical bills when you are old lah. So simple and I have to ask. And there are other things to pay for with the CPF savings, like Medisave Insurance, CPF Life, university fees for yourself or your children and more minimum sums to top up. I think got some more. But just stop here first. Too many very confusing and can easily forget if got dementia.
How many people need to buy HDB flats at 60 years old? Kee chiu.
How many people need to have retirement savings when he is going to work till he dies when there is no retirement?
How many people need medical insurance or a huge sum in minimum sum if he is going to work till he dies when the company will have corporate insurance schemes to cover them?
How many people will have no dependents, or children to look after them, no private medical insurance, no savings and die die must depend on their CPF savings to survive?
How many people want to spend $100k or $500k for major ops at 70 or 80 or 90?
I have checked the historical records and I think the position has changed for many people. Last time happy to retire at 55 and die at 60. Last time life expectation very short but now very long. Last time married one time, now can marry a second time at 60. Last time bought HDB flat at 30 to get married. Now must buy HDB flat at 60 or 70 to get married one more time. Last time went to hospital and pay $2000 a lot of money. Now serious illness $200k also nothing except for open heart surgery. This one exception, only $8. Last time old already at 60 and die never mind. Now 90 years old also don’t want to die and want to go for major operations to live another 100 years.
Last time… now where am I? Oh, the position has changed. So you see, the position has changed. So what? Position changed because things changed lah. Changing position is a crime or what? Cannot change position huh? Last time two child enough third child punishment. Now the more the better, got incentive to have more some more. So, position not change huh? Crime or no crime? Malu or not malu when position changed? Must explain or not? So embarrassing leh, changing position never explains, and changed quietly and think people dunno.
If one is to work till death do us part, still need to save for afterlife meh? How many people want to be a rich dead man? By the way, how many people age 80 or 90 will be left that needs to be taken care of by the govt using public money? Can the govt afford or not? Wait wait, all these oldies must have contributed a lot of CPF to subsidise the govt in one way or another and what did they get in return? 2.5% and 4% interests? That’s all? How many hundred billions were parked in the CPF by the people for so little returns? Can the govt put aside some of these money or profits from the cheap loan to provide a life line for the 80s and 90s when they are penniless? Is it asking too much when these people have contributed a life time to the CPF for the govt to use?
And not that everyone will live till 80 or 90. And not that everyone who lives till 80 or 90 needs charity. Some may mismanage their lives, some may be hit by accidents or misfortunes or the cruel turns in life. Can the govt repay some kindness and charity for the CPF savings that these people have lent to the govt in their younger days and stop forcing these people to continue to contribute to their CPF after 60, and holding a huge ransom in the name of Minimum sums in the Retirement and Medisave Accounts? Why can’t the govt show some gratitude, some compassion and some sense of justice and fairness to look after those in the 80s and 90s using the money made from these people’s CPF savings over a life time? This is only right and not charity as the govt had benefited from the people’s savings of a life time. Or the govt is thinking that the money in the CPF is what the people owed to the govt and there is no need to be grateful or to repay the people for the cheap and unconditional loan? Where is gratitude?
How many people need to buy HDB flats at 60 years old? Kee chiu.
How many people need to have retirement savings when he is going to work till he dies when there is no retirement?
How many people need medical insurance or a huge sum in minimum sum if he is going to work till he dies when the company will have corporate insurance schemes to cover them?
How many people will have no dependents, or children to look after them, no private medical insurance, no savings and die die must depend on their CPF savings to survive?
How many people want to spend $100k or $500k for major ops at 70 or 80 or 90?
I have checked the historical records and I think the position has changed for many people. Last time happy to retire at 55 and die at 60. Last time life expectation very short but now very long. Last time married one time, now can marry a second time at 60. Last time bought HDB flat at 30 to get married. Now must buy HDB flat at 60 or 70 to get married one more time. Last time went to hospital and pay $2000 a lot of money. Now serious illness $200k also nothing except for open heart surgery. This one exception, only $8. Last time old already at 60 and die never mind. Now 90 years old also don’t want to die and want to go for major operations to live another 100 years.
Last time… now where am I? Oh, the position has changed. So you see, the position has changed. So what? Position changed because things changed lah. Changing position is a crime or what? Cannot change position huh? Last time two child enough third child punishment. Now the more the better, got incentive to have more some more. So, position not change huh? Crime or no crime? Malu or not malu when position changed? Must explain or not? So embarrassing leh, changing position never explains, and changed quietly and think people dunno.
If one is to work till death do us part, still need to save for afterlife meh? How many people want to be a rich dead man? By the way, how many people age 80 or 90 will be left that needs to be taken care of by the govt using public money? Can the govt afford or not? Wait wait, all these oldies must have contributed a lot of CPF to subsidise the govt in one way or another and what did they get in return? 2.5% and 4% interests? That’s all? How many hundred billions were parked in the CPF by the people for so little returns? Can the govt put aside some of these money or profits from the cheap loan to provide a life line for the 80s and 90s when they are penniless? Is it asking too much when these people have contributed a life time to the CPF for the govt to use?
And not that everyone will live till 80 or 90. And not that everyone who lives till 80 or 90 needs charity. Some may mismanage their lives, some may be hit by accidents or misfortunes or the cruel turns in life. Can the govt repay some kindness and charity for the CPF savings that these people have lent to the govt in their younger days and stop forcing these people to continue to contribute to their CPF after 60, and holding a huge ransom in the name of Minimum sums in the Retirement and Medisave Accounts? Why can’t the govt show some gratitude, some compassion and some sense of justice and fairness to look after those in the 80s and 90s using the money made from these people’s CPF savings over a life time? This is only right and not charity as the govt had benefited from the people’s savings of a life time. Or the govt is thinking that the money in the CPF is what the people owed to the govt and there is no need to be grateful or to repay the people for the cheap and unconditional loan? Where is gratitude?
3/04/2012
11 year old handcuffed
Below is a letter posted in 3in1kopitiam blog. I am not sure if this is true and if found untrue I will remove it immediately. I just felt that I am seeing a child being raped in broad daylight. And I hope this is not true. It must not happen in my country, when a little girl of 11 is being handcuffed for a petty crime.
My 11 year old daughter was arrested and handcuffed for 2 hours today.
Dear all,
I, a Singapore born and raised Chinese citizen would like to apologise to the Singapore Government and all tax paying fellow citizens for my failure to teach my children enough about the folly of stealing
I am a night shift worker so I sleep in the day.
At 5 pm today, I woke up and discovered my younger 11 year old daughter missing. I asked the older 13 year girl but got evasive answers. After a half hour later, I panicked and called the Police. Ten minutes after the call, they called back to inform me that my daughter had been arrested for shoplifting at a Guardian Pharmacy store and that I have to bring the elder along as well to the NPC as she was involved. My queries for answers as to the circumstances under which she was arrested were curtly declined.
When I reached the NPC, I was horrified to see my daughter slumped over a table sleeping with her right hand cuffed to a railing on the wall. Sitting opposite her and typing a statement into the computer was a female uniformed Malay officer. I ascertained later she was one of two Malay arresting officers. Having been an SC before, I understand police procedures but had never seen the lack of discretion when it comes to minors as I was witnessing in my daughter's case. That female Malay officer made no eye contact with me at all for the entire duration I was in the station. Not even when she in the report room where I was.
I vented my anger at the officers present about the necessity of handcuffing my daughter leaving her in such a torturous physical position to endure despite the fact that she was already in Police custody. I told them that as a minor, she is not going to be charged for her first offence. What purpose does it serve with regard to procedural safety? That she will snatch their revolvers and turn it against them? Why subject her to the same treatment for adults committing more serious crimes?
A Malay SSSgt led me into an adjoining interview room and gave me a summary account of my daughter's arrest. He told me he will get my elder daughter's statement expedited so that we can go home as soon as possible.
I went outside for a smoke to help calm myself down before returning. I saw then that the handcuffs on my daughter were removed. She was released for her elder sister's turn to be interviewed and for a police statement to be made. I checked her wrists and discovered abrasions on both her wrists and a contact burn mark in one. I took photographs on the spot. Earlier on, I had taken a photo while she was handcuffed to the wall railing. I want to have it printed, framed and mounted in our home so that they will never forget this episode.
I was allowed to bring my younger daughter out for a quick dinner. When we returned the elder daughter had just finished her statement. She was not handcuffed. We left the NPC after I had signed both their bail bonds. We have to return to the Police Div HQ at a later date.
I took my daughter to a hospital emergency department to have her wounds attended.
Back home, I interrogated my children and found that it was the elder sister who has a compulsive obsession with makeup products, instigated the younger to pilfer that $11.90 pair of lipstick. My younger daughter has a timid temperament and is very vulnerable to suggestions. She is still undergoing counselling in school after she slashed herself from elbow to wrist not too long ago when she was ten years old after constant bullying in school.
When they were spotted they ran and escaped but the younger, out of a sense of guilt returned to surrender the stolen item to the Malay shop assistant who detained her and called the Police.
I share this story with all because I fervently hope that parents will not have to undergo the same turmoil in my heart that I feel now and that they will use my children as an example on the consequences of stealing and getting caught eventually.
Once again, let me express the deep remorse I feel for the shame I had brought to the Singaporean Chinese community through my less than adequate nurturing of my children's absorption of good moral values.
I also like to thank the Malay shop assistant who detained my child when she tried to return the stolen item and Guardian Pharmacy's strict non-negotiable policy to deter shoplifting and the teaching of a good lesson.
Lastly, I would like to thank the Singapore Police Force and the Government for the benefit of the experience my child had gone through, that benevolence which I hope my child would repay with interest when she grows up into adulthood. She don't have a passport, she can't flee the country and not return. So please do not worry.
Peace be upon all.
My 11 year old daughter was arrested and handcuffed for 2 hours today.
Dear all,
I, a Singapore born and raised Chinese citizen would like to apologise to the Singapore Government and all tax paying fellow citizens for my failure to teach my children enough about the folly of stealing
I am a night shift worker so I sleep in the day.
At 5 pm today, I woke up and discovered my younger 11 year old daughter missing. I asked the older 13 year girl but got evasive answers. After a half hour later, I panicked and called the Police. Ten minutes after the call, they called back to inform me that my daughter had been arrested for shoplifting at a Guardian Pharmacy store and that I have to bring the elder along as well to the NPC as she was involved. My queries for answers as to the circumstances under which she was arrested were curtly declined.
When I reached the NPC, I was horrified to see my daughter slumped over a table sleeping with her right hand cuffed to a railing on the wall. Sitting opposite her and typing a statement into the computer was a female uniformed Malay officer. I ascertained later she was one of two Malay arresting officers. Having been an SC before, I understand police procedures but had never seen the lack of discretion when it comes to minors as I was witnessing in my daughter's case. That female Malay officer made no eye contact with me at all for the entire duration I was in the station. Not even when she in the report room where I was.
I vented my anger at the officers present about the necessity of handcuffing my daughter leaving her in such a torturous physical position to endure despite the fact that she was already in Police custody. I told them that as a minor, she is not going to be charged for her first offence. What purpose does it serve with regard to procedural safety? That she will snatch their revolvers and turn it against them? Why subject her to the same treatment for adults committing more serious crimes?
A Malay SSSgt led me into an adjoining interview room and gave me a summary account of my daughter's arrest. He told me he will get my elder daughter's statement expedited so that we can go home as soon as possible.
I went outside for a smoke to help calm myself down before returning. I saw then that the handcuffs on my daughter were removed. She was released for her elder sister's turn to be interviewed and for a police statement to be made. I checked her wrists and discovered abrasions on both her wrists and a contact burn mark in one. I took photographs on the spot. Earlier on, I had taken a photo while she was handcuffed to the wall railing. I want to have it printed, framed and mounted in our home so that they will never forget this episode.
I was allowed to bring my younger daughter out for a quick dinner. When we returned the elder daughter had just finished her statement. She was not handcuffed. We left the NPC after I had signed both their bail bonds. We have to return to the Police Div HQ at a later date.
I took my daughter to a hospital emergency department to have her wounds attended.
Back home, I interrogated my children and found that it was the elder sister who has a compulsive obsession with makeup products, instigated the younger to pilfer that $11.90 pair of lipstick. My younger daughter has a timid temperament and is very vulnerable to suggestions. She is still undergoing counselling in school after she slashed herself from elbow to wrist not too long ago when she was ten years old after constant bullying in school.
When they were spotted they ran and escaped but the younger, out of a sense of guilt returned to surrender the stolen item to the Malay shop assistant who detained her and called the Police.
I share this story with all because I fervently hope that parents will not have to undergo the same turmoil in my heart that I feel now and that they will use my children as an example on the consequences of stealing and getting caught eventually.
Once again, let me express the deep remorse I feel for the shame I had brought to the Singaporean Chinese community through my less than adequate nurturing of my children's absorption of good moral values.
I also like to thank the Malay shop assistant who detained my child when she tried to return the stolen item and Guardian Pharmacy's strict non-negotiable policy to deter shoplifting and the teaching of a good lesson.
Lastly, I would like to thank the Singapore Police Force and the Government for the benefit of the experience my child had gone through, that benevolence which I hope my child would repay with interest when she grows up into adulthood. She don't have a passport, she can't flee the country and not return. So please do not worry.
Peace be upon all.
Abusing the legal system
The hyenas went to court. In a corner sat an old ox, alone. The door swung open, a pack of hyenas strutted in, led by two burly lawyers. It was like an entourage of mafias in all its grandeur.
‘Your honour, I have suffered tremendous stress and sleepless nights because of the old ox. He had intimidated me, threatened to trample upon me. I have been living in fear of him. My life is a misery.’ The hyena told the judge. And mama hyena gave the young hyena a motherly hug, saying, ‘My poor innocent child.’ And the rest of the hyenas yelled, ‘Bad ox, bad ox!’
Then one burly lawyer stood up slowly. He gave the lonely old ox a cold stare. He turned to the judge and spoke in a cold measured tone. ‘Your honour, the ox had been intimidating my client for a very long time. I am submitting two summons against him for criminal intimidation and causing duress to my client.’
After reviewing the summons the judge told the lawyer to tell his client that it was a minor case and the client might want to find an alternative way to resolve the matter with the ox. The hyena jumped up, ‘No way, the ox had made me suffered, threatened to beat me, to trample on me, to kick me. I cannot accept anything. I want to sue the ox.’ The lawyer nodded and told the court this was the position of his client. The hyena wanted blood. The client would not consider any other options.
The judge ordered the lawyer to discuss the matter with his client one more time and the court would resume after a break. When they returned, the ox was still sitting in his corner, feeling very intimidated by the pack of hyenas and the condescending glare of the lawyers. The lawyer turned to the court and firmly announced that his client insisted that the matter must be settled in court. ‘My client would pay all legal cost to see the ox behind bars. And we will be framing more charges against the ox, like being too slow and obstructing my client on the road….the ox is a public nuisance.’
The judge repeated by asking if that was the final position of his hyena client. The lawyer confidently said it was. The judge pondered for a moment and then said. “This is a small matter and going to court would not in anyway solve the problem. The court has many more important cases to handle and would not be appropriate to use its resources to attend to such a case. The case is hereby dismissed.’
The hyenas jumped to their feet and screamed their disapproval. They did not know that they had hit the wall of justice. They did not know that the court would not be abused to execute their law of the jungle. The two burly lawyers were equally shocked that their meticulously crafted summons were thrown out by the court. They stood there looking sheepish in front of the pack of hyenas.
The judge told the old ox who was sitting there silently throughout the session that he could go home. Outside the court, the sun smiled at the old ox. The court of law stood firm and would not bow to the law of the jungle. The instruments of the law were there to serve justice and not to be abused by the rich, the powerful and the ugly. Every element of the legal system, from the judge to the legal counsels, was part and parcel of the legal system, to see to it that justice is carried out and not abused. The guardians of the court of law must be seen to be protecting justice and not to abuse the law for their private agenda.
The hyenas left the court feeling very sore and angry that they could not use the court of law to settle their personal vendetta against the ox.
‘Your honour, I have suffered tremendous stress and sleepless nights because of the old ox. He had intimidated me, threatened to trample upon me. I have been living in fear of him. My life is a misery.’ The hyena told the judge. And mama hyena gave the young hyena a motherly hug, saying, ‘My poor innocent child.’ And the rest of the hyenas yelled, ‘Bad ox, bad ox!’
Then one burly lawyer stood up slowly. He gave the lonely old ox a cold stare. He turned to the judge and spoke in a cold measured tone. ‘Your honour, the ox had been intimidating my client for a very long time. I am submitting two summons against him for criminal intimidation and causing duress to my client.’
After reviewing the summons the judge told the lawyer to tell his client that it was a minor case and the client might want to find an alternative way to resolve the matter with the ox. The hyena jumped up, ‘No way, the ox had made me suffered, threatened to beat me, to trample on me, to kick me. I cannot accept anything. I want to sue the ox.’ The lawyer nodded and told the court this was the position of his client. The hyena wanted blood. The client would not consider any other options.
The judge ordered the lawyer to discuss the matter with his client one more time and the court would resume after a break. When they returned, the ox was still sitting in his corner, feeling very intimidated by the pack of hyenas and the condescending glare of the lawyers. The lawyer turned to the court and firmly announced that his client insisted that the matter must be settled in court. ‘My client would pay all legal cost to see the ox behind bars. And we will be framing more charges against the ox, like being too slow and obstructing my client on the road….the ox is a public nuisance.’
The judge repeated by asking if that was the final position of his hyena client. The lawyer confidently said it was. The judge pondered for a moment and then said. “This is a small matter and going to court would not in anyway solve the problem. The court has many more important cases to handle and would not be appropriate to use its resources to attend to such a case. The case is hereby dismissed.’
The hyenas jumped to their feet and screamed their disapproval. They did not know that they had hit the wall of justice. They did not know that the court would not be abused to execute their law of the jungle. The two burly lawyers were equally shocked that their meticulously crafted summons were thrown out by the court. They stood there looking sheepish in front of the pack of hyenas.
The judge told the old ox who was sitting there silently throughout the session that he could go home. Outside the court, the sun smiled at the old ox. The court of law stood firm and would not bow to the law of the jungle. The instruments of the law were there to serve justice and not to be abused by the rich, the powerful and the ugly. Every element of the legal system, from the judge to the legal counsels, was part and parcel of the legal system, to see to it that justice is carried out and not abused. The guardians of the court of law must be seen to be protecting justice and not to abuse the law for their private agenda.
The hyenas left the court feeling very sore and angry that they could not use the court of law to settle their personal vendetta against the ox.
3/03/2012
The Singapore People’s Subsidy (SPS)
Has anyone heard of this SPS? The people have been bombarded with govt subsidies everyday that they are either going bonkers or numbed. If you read the number of subsidies that the govt is giving to the Singaporeans, the govt will be bankrupt long time ago. The latest is something like $60k for a 2rm flat that costs $90k. Wow, wow, how can be so much. Where is the money coming from? There university fees, $20k but pays $6k, and what else…? I am also thinking of giving subsidies to the people, cheap rice at $20 per kilo. My cost is $100. Please queue up.
Not to be distracted, what is this SPS? This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions. The Govt calls it national reserves. Should it be called the people’s money or savings? How does this money become the national reserves? Or are they really two different things?
Have the citizens been subsidising the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions through the CPF? Maybe not. Dunno where the CPF money is or with who. I have read that the two national sovereign funds did not borrow from the CPF. They something like borrowed from dunno where. But somewhere somehow, they got the money. Anyway, the Govt has a lot of money to set up big investment funds to pay huge salaries to big time investment managers to invest the money and make more money to pay themselves in big bonuses. How I wish I can be appointed as a director, no need to be Chairman.
Is there any linkage between the money of the two sovereign funds and the CPF money or the people’s money? If there is…, something like A lends to B and B lends to C and C lends to D, so legally, technically, D only borrows from C and got nothing to do with A. So A cannot claim that his money is now subsidising D.
But where is A’s money if it is not subsidising someone? And what is A getting in return? 2.5% or 4% interests that could easily be wiped out by inflation. Further, A cannot touch the money for a very very long time. Some may never in their lives.
This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt. And this is real money, no mark up to mark down. Maybe I am wrong. Where got the people subsidising the Govt? I am talking rubbish.
Not to be distracted, what is this SPS? This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions. The Govt calls it national reserves. Should it be called the people’s money or savings? How does this money become the national reserves? Or are they really two different things?
Have the citizens been subsidising the Govt in the tune of hundreds of billions through the CPF? Maybe not. Dunno where the CPF money is or with who. I have read that the two national sovereign funds did not borrow from the CPF. They something like borrowed from dunno where. But somewhere somehow, they got the money. Anyway, the Govt has a lot of money to set up big investment funds to pay huge salaries to big time investment managers to invest the money and make more money to pay themselves in big bonuses. How I wish I can be appointed as a director, no need to be Chairman.
Is there any linkage between the money of the two sovereign funds and the CPF money or the people’s money? If there is…, something like A lends to B and B lends to C and C lends to D, so legally, technically, D only borrows from C and got nothing to do with A. So A cannot claim that his money is now subsidising D.
But where is A’s money if it is not subsidising someone? And what is A getting in return? 2.5% or 4% interests that could easily be wiped out by inflation. Further, A cannot touch the money for a very very long time. Some may never in their lives.
This is the Singapore People’s Subsidy to the Govt. And this is real money, no mark up to mark down. Maybe I am wrong. Where got the people subsidising the Govt? I am talking rubbish.
3/02/2012
$1000 income can buy a flat!
The logic of $1000 income can buy a flat is the same as $8 for an open heart surgery. But don’t laugh, it is true, it can be done. How, I dunno. But it is uttered in Parliament so must be a fact. It’s elementary, Watson!
I have known a young couple whose combined income is about $14k and with a couple of hundred thousands in savings. They will not be coming home. They could not afford to buy a private flat as it would mean emptying everything they have saved. And that is not all, still got to take nearly a million dollar mortgage.
Only fools will think of taking a million dollar mortgage and think it is alright. Or maybe a gambler will do that as there is always the hope of making more money as the value will appreciate, surely. And then sell it to buy a more expensive flat and take another bigger loan and keep snowballing the winnings.
The young couple will not be qualified for HDB flats for sure. So they must be sent to the private property market as cannon fodders to feed the developers. This is how merciless this govt has become in its housing policy and everyday pretending to ask why the Sinkies are not coming back home or moving out instead.
They are telling the highly qualified young that if they want to come back, prepare to pay a million bucks ransom first. And if the young want a bit more comfort in owning a car, another $100k at least for a cheap car. They think the young are so stupid to return home to be suckered? When they have been abroad and knowing what one million bucks can provide them, who the shit would want to come home to settle into a mickey mouse flat for the same sum, and reservist liabilities to add on?
But for less qualified professionals like FTs who would not be above the $12k income ceiling, it is okay. Convert to pink IC and buy a relatively cheaper HDB flat which the better qualified Sinkies would not be allowed to buy and no NS or reservist liabilities. Bid the time, let the property price go up and sell it to another suckered Sinkie that is not allowed to buy from the HDB direct and get out of here.
This kind of policy is so brilliant that it hurts the eyes.
I have known a young couple whose combined income is about $14k and with a couple of hundred thousands in savings. They will not be coming home. They could not afford to buy a private flat as it would mean emptying everything they have saved. And that is not all, still got to take nearly a million dollar mortgage.
Only fools will think of taking a million dollar mortgage and think it is alright. Or maybe a gambler will do that as there is always the hope of making more money as the value will appreciate, surely. And then sell it to buy a more expensive flat and take another bigger loan and keep snowballing the winnings.
The young couple will not be qualified for HDB flats for sure. So they must be sent to the private property market as cannon fodders to feed the developers. This is how merciless this govt has become in its housing policy and everyday pretending to ask why the Sinkies are not coming back home or moving out instead.
They are telling the highly qualified young that if they want to come back, prepare to pay a million bucks ransom first. And if the young want a bit more comfort in owning a car, another $100k at least for a cheap car. They think the young are so stupid to return home to be suckered? When they have been abroad and knowing what one million bucks can provide them, who the shit would want to come home to settle into a mickey mouse flat for the same sum, and reservist liabilities to add on?
But for less qualified professionals like FTs who would not be above the $12k income ceiling, it is okay. Convert to pink IC and buy a relatively cheaper HDB flat which the better qualified Sinkies would not be allowed to buy and no NS or reservist liabilities. Bid the time, let the property price go up and sell it to another suckered Sinkie that is not allowed to buy from the HDB direct and get out of here.
This kind of policy is so brilliant that it hurts the eyes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)