It is so easy to make comments on another historical figure with a
little knowledge of the person and events. It is even easier to
selectively choose information to fit into a construct that one chose to
use. Chin Peng was a hero, Chin Peng was a freedom fighter, Chin Peng
was a terrorist, a fanatic, a simpleton or a genius. Just take your
pick. I can choose any one of these tags to write a story on Chin Peng
and it would sound even more credible if I called myself an expert, a
professor or add a Ph D behind my name.
Let me just give my 2 cents worth of what I know of this man from the
history books, news and some self proclaimed expert knowledge on this
man.
Chin Peng and his comrades were anti Japanese fighter first and
foremost. In the 1940s, the timing and years are important as they
defined who and what of a man he was. Both Singapore and Malaya were
British colonies, not countries. No citizenship or rights of citizenship
for the likes of Chin Peng. Their loyalty was to the Chinese
civilization and an ancient China. They were also British subjects if I
am not mistaken for being in Malaya.
There was a war of aggression in China conducted by the Japanese. Chin
Peng fought under the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army. They were
also part of Force 136 supported by and supporting the British. They
were fighting on the side of the British when the Japanese invaded
Malaya and Singapore. Up to this point Chin Peng and his men/women were
on the right side of history, fighting an aggressor, the Japanese. He
was a war hero and awarded the OBE by the British Empire. His men
paraded at our Padang in a victory parade. His OBE was withdrawn when he
took the side of the communist to fight an anti colonial war against
the British. Chin Peng was a good man turned bad for fighting the
British. If one is a member of the British Empire, Chin Peng was bad. If
one was anti colonialism, Chin Peng was a patriot.
Communism in the early 1930s and 40s was favoured by the revolutionary
Chinese over the corrupt Chinese Nationalist Party, the KMT. Chin Peng
was a communist, so was bad and on the wrong side. He was good in the
history books of CCP. How one looks at Chin Peng would depend on one’s
political inclination.
The Malayan Emergency was not a war of terrorism but a war against the
colonial master. Remember, 1948, Malaya was a British colony. The
natives could be fighting for their freedom from colonial rule as well.
Some fought, some chose to live with the colonial master, some simply
did nothing, and some worked and conspired with the British against the
CPM.
When the British outlawed the Labour Movement and started to arrest the
communist elements, the MPAJA was changed to MPABA, an anti British
Army. This was subsequently changed to the Malayan Peoples Liberation
Army fighting for the independence of Malaya from the British Empire.
History would look at Chin Peng differently if they had won and gained
independence for Malaya from the British. They lost that war and signed a
truce in 1955 in Baling. Malaya only gained independence from the
British in 1957. The CPM withdrew to the Thai Malayan border and kept a
low profile. The fact that a Thai Princess and many Thai generals paid
their last respect to Chin Peng spoke of a close and friendly working
relationship between them, and that Chin Peng was not a nuisance or
menace to Thailand. They regarded him as a friend.
Chin Peng was kept away from Malaysia more because of domestic political
reasons than for his revolutionary past. He could have been welcomed
back as a nationalist, a hero if he was a bumiputra. He was a soldier,
nothing more and nothing less. For some joker armchair critics to put
him in the same league as terrorists and the bombing of America is
simply a wild and cheap shot. Ever since the end of the Malayan
Emergency, Chin Peng and his men lived peacefully in Thailand and
probably became Thai citizens.
These are my comments on this historical figure of the twentieth century, one of the last survivors of those turbulent times.
10/01/2013
Gan Kim Yong learning well from Japan
Gan Kim Yong and his teams of officials from the Health and Housing
ministries have returned from their fact finding and learning mission in
Japan on ageing problems. He has learnt well, many times better than
Boon Heng. In yesterday’s ST he has already came out with a list of
innovative initiatives learnt from Japan for implementation. He is also
setting up a committee to look deeper into the ageing population
problems.
Among the things that the team has learnt for implementations are:
1. A need for support services during working hours when the young are at work. Also in cases of oldies living alone, night services are also needed.
2. Medical practitioners and polyclinics should be located near the ageing population.
3. Employ the elderly, and retirement age should be raised to 67. Only the Japanese could come up with such a clever idea. Didn’t we been employing people up to 90 and onwards?
4. Need for home care and more nursing homes as our population ages. Dunno if these facilities are provided free.
5. More support to caregivers, probably salary increases.
The govt should send more such study trips to learn from other countries to make life better for Singaporeans. They have forgotten to send Chuan Jin and the NTUC officials to study how other countries are handling their foreign workers and immigrant problems and if foreigners were discriminating their citizens how to deal with such problems. Maybe after such an enlightening trip the MOM could introduce more effective measures or at least get enlightened.
Money well spent for sure, every cent of it.
Among the things that the team has learnt for implementations are:
1. A need for support services during working hours when the young are at work. Also in cases of oldies living alone, night services are also needed.
2. Medical practitioners and polyclinics should be located near the ageing population.
3. Employ the elderly, and retirement age should be raised to 67. Only the Japanese could come up with such a clever idea. Didn’t we been employing people up to 90 and onwards?
4. Need for home care and more nursing homes as our population ages. Dunno if these facilities are provided free.
5. More support to caregivers, probably salary increases.
The govt should send more such study trips to learn from other countries to make life better for Singaporeans. They have forgotten to send Chuan Jin and the NTUC officials to study how other countries are handling their foreign workers and immigrant problems and if foreigners were discriminating their citizens how to deal with such problems. Maybe after such an enlightening trip the MOM could introduce more effective measures or at least get enlightened.
Money well spent for sure, every cent of it.
9/30/2013
Mah Bow Tan, poor thing
The thread on Mah Bow Tan in TRE is getting quite a review of the wrong
kind. It was about Mah Bow Tan’s interview by Sin Min on his stepping
down as a minister. Mah Bow Tan said he had given his best years to
public service and it was time to make way for a better man, in Khaw
Boon Wan, to take over the MND ministry.
Why were the comments on Mah Bow Tan so negative? He had done extremely well during his tenure in Housing and Transport. The transportation problem was nothing with SMRT running smoothly and efficiently with the woman in charge, and chalking up millions in profits every year. There were hardly any breakdowns or disruptions of services. COE prices were quite low. Look at the price of COE now, $80K+. It would not have gone up so high if Mah Bow Tan is still in charge. And SMRT would not experience so many breakdowns.
And housing was anything but affordable. There were some complaints but overall housing prices were affordable compare to the prices now. And Khaw has to ramp up the building programmes to meet the unstoppable demands. Looks like Khaw is not doing much better.
And the truth is that he was still the man to anchor his Tampines GRC team to victory. This showed that he was any time better and more popular than George Yeo, and has good ground support.
The views in TRE are a distortion of the truth. If Khaw Boon Wan cannot bring down housing prices to more affordable levels, Mah Bow Tan could make a come back to do what he knew best, making housing prices affordable again. Since Khaw Boon Wan took over, there seemed to be so many housing problems when there was none. The daft Sinkies just do not know how to appreciate the great contributions of Mah Bow Tan and are simply ungrateful and disgraceful.
Poor thing.Hsien Loong should give him a public star in the next National Day.
Why were the comments on Mah Bow Tan so negative? He had done extremely well during his tenure in Housing and Transport. The transportation problem was nothing with SMRT running smoothly and efficiently with the woman in charge, and chalking up millions in profits every year. There were hardly any breakdowns or disruptions of services. COE prices were quite low. Look at the price of COE now, $80K+. It would not have gone up so high if Mah Bow Tan is still in charge. And SMRT would not experience so many breakdowns.
And housing was anything but affordable. There were some complaints but overall housing prices were affordable compare to the prices now. And Khaw has to ramp up the building programmes to meet the unstoppable demands. Looks like Khaw is not doing much better.
And the truth is that he was still the man to anchor his Tampines GRC team to victory. This showed that he was any time better and more popular than George Yeo, and has good ground support.
The views in TRE are a distortion of the truth. If Khaw Boon Wan cannot bring down housing prices to more affordable levels, Mah Bow Tan could make a come back to do what he knew best, making housing prices affordable again. Since Khaw Boon Wan took over, there seemed to be so many housing problems when there was none. The daft Sinkies just do not know how to appreciate the great contributions of Mah Bow Tan and are simply ungrateful and disgraceful.
Poor thing.Hsien Loong should give him a public star in the next National Day.
Halimah Yacob has spoken – more drastic measures if…
Halimah is the next most senior politician after Chuan Jin to have
spoken about the need to hire Singaporeans instead of replacing them
with rubbish foreigners. She is coaxing the employers to take note of
the govt’s intent towards this new policy and to act or face more
drastic measures coming their way. She also asked the NTUC to be the
watchdog, to monitor the situation and to squeal on the recalcitrant
employers.
These are the right things to say given the unforgiving mood of hurt Sinkies and their hurt pocket and pride. The anger is bursting and the noise of discontent is getting louder, thanks to the internet. You don’t hear such things in the main media. Maybe the other half of Sinkies of the main media genre are very happy and comfortable with the situation and thus do not know what the fuzz is all about. The people are all very happy getting rich. No problem at all.
Halimah is not exactly a minister to step into this fiasco to highlight the flaws in this foreign talent nonsense, at least she carries some weight. Are the rest of the ministers in agreement with Chuan Jin and Halimah to want to support this change? Relatively we have a new and junior minister in Chuan Jin and a Speaker of the House talking about the issue. What signal is the govt sending to the employers, that this is a serious or not really that serious issue? Is this just a wayang to appease the Sinkies and not to ruffle the feathers of the employers?
Halimah has missed out one big employer that she has all the muscle to exert some pressure to do the right thing. She can tell the civil service, stats board and of course the GLCs to make the first move. Reading the comments in TRE, she may want to start off with DBS. The govt can issue directives to support this policy. Failing to do so will be seen as NATO.
When is the govt going to do something concrete and not just talk only? Or would the govt really act on this?
These are the right things to say given the unforgiving mood of hurt Sinkies and their hurt pocket and pride. The anger is bursting and the noise of discontent is getting louder, thanks to the internet. You don’t hear such things in the main media. Maybe the other half of Sinkies of the main media genre are very happy and comfortable with the situation and thus do not know what the fuzz is all about. The people are all very happy getting rich. No problem at all.
Halimah is not exactly a minister to step into this fiasco to highlight the flaws in this foreign talent nonsense, at least she carries some weight. Are the rest of the ministers in agreement with Chuan Jin and Halimah to want to support this change? Relatively we have a new and junior minister in Chuan Jin and a Speaker of the House talking about the issue. What signal is the govt sending to the employers, that this is a serious or not really that serious issue? Is this just a wayang to appease the Sinkies and not to ruffle the feathers of the employers?
Halimah has missed out one big employer that she has all the muscle to exert some pressure to do the right thing. She can tell the civil service, stats board and of course the GLCs to make the first move. Reading the comments in TRE, she may want to start off with DBS. The govt can issue directives to support this policy. Failing to do so will be seen as NATO.
When is the govt going to do something concrete and not just talk only? Or would the govt really act on this?
9/29/2013
Singapore about to introduce a ‘living tax’
Oh, you have not heard about it. I am telling you now, it is
not called a tax and not really a tax. It is called Medishield Life, just like
the CPF Minimum Sum Schemes, they are also not called tax. To be exact, it is
called Medishield Life Insurance Scheme for everyone, young and old, sick or
healthy, no one will be missed. It is compulsory! It is as good as till death
do we part. And very likely from the very moment when a child is born. I am
waiting to hear the angels sing. One can choose to buy or not to buy an
insurance policy. One can choose to adapt a healthy lifestyle to avoid being
robbed by the medical professionals. This one there is no such option. Healthy
or sick, you pay. If it is not a tax, what is it? You tell me.
The GST is a very regressive tax where the poor actually pay
more as a percentage of their income. Even those without an income have to pay
the GST as long as one has to consume goods and services. But compares to the
Medishield Life, GST is nothing, or at least one can be selective and opt out.
One can eat or consume less or not consuming at all to avoid paying GST. In the
case of Medishield Life, there is no escape.
Now the little problem is what would the govt do to those
who really cannot pay and do not have any minimum sum locked up in their CPF to
be carved away? A legalised compulsory scheme imposing on the people to pay means
that not paying is an offence. It must be. Hsien Loong has mentioned about peer
pressure, making your neighbours or families or friends know that you did not
pay your dues, a way of shaming one in public. Would the expertise of Ah Long
runners be called upon for this? Would the full force of the law be applied,
with policemen knocking at your door for not paying? The evil is in the
details, so they say. Wait for the details. Many are so happy about this
comprehensive ‘cover all’ insurance scheme and earnestly waiting for it to be
implemented. So it must be a good thing.
Poor Sinkies are going to incur another unwarranted and
unwanted cost of living expenses imposed on them by the caring and
paternalistic govt. The govt is very foresighted and always been thinking of
how to take good care of the people, and with the people paying for whatever
schemes the govt can think of. It knows the people are over reliant on the
govt.
The foreigners need not have to pay for this living tax for
sure. The non citizens, not sure about the PRs, are not so lucky and will not
be affected. And if PRs are affected, their children and dependents who are not
PRs would definitely not be affected. Heheh, being citizens has its privileges,
to pay another tax.
With such a comprehensive and all encompassing scheme that
makes every living citizen pays, at $1k per citizen, it will be $3.3b added to
the GDP I think. If PRs were to be added, that is another 540m annually. With
an unthinking population over reliant on the govt to think and plan for them,
it is so easy to generate this kind of money with very little effort but a
stroke of the pen. There is no need to waste time and effort selling the
product. It’s a done deal and a very lucrative one. A super extraordinary
salesman and his super product, exceptional talent!
Would there be a political price to pay for this living
tax? Oops, I mean compulsory Medishield
Life Insurance Scheme for all citizens, or is it for locals only? One thing for
sure, the cost of living of the people, especially the lower income and the ‘no
income’ will just become more unbearable or simply unbearable and unaffordable.
Thank God you are alive and have the good fortune and
privilege to pay for this ‘living tax’. Is this a blessing or a curse?
9/28/2013
2% or 3% GDP growth maybe about right for a mature economy
We
are going to get this kind of growth rate for a while given the maturity of our
economy. Many mature economies are going at the same rate unlike the emerging
countries that are talking of 5 to 10% growth rate. We had a miracle of 15% in
2011 which could be the last flash in the pan.
What
is not so comfortable is that the GDP growth is attained through high
population growth, inflated housing prices, high rentals and high car prices,
or at least these items contributed to a large extent to provide the growth
numbers.
What
would happen without the influx of more migrants, if property balloon gets
deflated, if a more efficient COE system is implemented to replace this highly
inefficient and loaded system? Where is the growth going to come from without
high inflation?
Are
our industries growing and chalking up decent numbers to give the GDP a
positive number? Or are we running out of steam, running out of ideas and by
hook or by crook we will need to inflate the economy, bring in more head
counts, retain the COE to keep car prices high, keep housing prices high, keep
medical cost high and higher? And yes, introduce Medishield Life to boost the
GDP and whatever that needs to be boosted.
Without
these highly inflated industries what would become of the economy? Is there a
growth sector that can uplift the economy to show growth?
9/27/2013
Dubai – Food for thought for material Singapore
‘So many myopic comments here. Myanmar is a far larger and more complex
country than tiny Spore. And Myanmar should not adopt Spore’s style of
meritocracy and penchant for material success.
A better comparison is Dubai which has emerged from the bleak landscape of the desert to be a vibrant financial and tourism place. Dubai is more than 95% managed and operated by foreigners and is thriving. They also have brilliant Emerati leadership and top class CEOs.
Singaporeans are a very unhappy lot. They do not appreciate the journey that Spore has taken since independence and Dubai imitated Spore initially but has over-taken Spore in many aspects.’
The above is a comment by a Webex in TRE. For a country like Singapore to be over taken by Dubai is nothing surprising. There was really not much growth in the island for many years if we take out the elements of influx of foreigners, the housing balloon, the ever increasing high rentals, the COEs and car prices and the high medical fees. These factors alone could have wiped out all the growth there was, or negative growth in their absence. How’s that?
But with the example of Dubai there is real hope. Singapore should imitate Dubai to over take Dubai with our brilliant leadership, at the moment second only to Dubai. What Singapore needs is to rely more on foreigners. 50% foreigners could only bring us 2-3% growth. Dubai is managed by 95% foreigners. If we follow Dubai, we could increase our growth by 4-6%, which is good. According to a banker Mak Weijie as quoted in the Today paper, ‘As long as the person is capable enough, it doesn’t matter what nationality he is.’ (My comment: Are you a citizen or a new citizen? We have a country, not a shop)
And what is 6.9m? Go for it, 95% foreigners, Singaporean core reduces to 5%, and we will be so much richer as a shop, oops, I mean a country. Our population could be what, 30m? Knn, what am I thinking?
A better comparison is Dubai which has emerged from the bleak landscape of the desert to be a vibrant financial and tourism place. Dubai is more than 95% managed and operated by foreigners and is thriving. They also have brilliant Emerati leadership and top class CEOs.
Singaporeans are a very unhappy lot. They do not appreciate the journey that Spore has taken since independence and Dubai imitated Spore initially but has over-taken Spore in many aspects.’
The above is a comment by a Webex in TRE. For a country like Singapore to be over taken by Dubai is nothing surprising. There was really not much growth in the island for many years if we take out the elements of influx of foreigners, the housing balloon, the ever increasing high rentals, the COEs and car prices and the high medical fees. These factors alone could have wiped out all the growth there was, or negative growth in their absence. How’s that?
But with the example of Dubai there is real hope. Singapore should imitate Dubai to over take Dubai with our brilliant leadership, at the moment second only to Dubai. What Singapore needs is to rely more on foreigners. 50% foreigners could only bring us 2-3% growth. Dubai is managed by 95% foreigners. If we follow Dubai, we could increase our growth by 4-6%, which is good. According to a banker Mak Weijie as quoted in the Today paper, ‘As long as the person is capable enough, it doesn’t matter what nationality he is.’ (My comment: Are you a citizen or a new citizen? We have a country, not a shop)
And what is 6.9m? Go for it, 95% foreigners, Singaporean core reduces to 5%, and we will be so much richer as a shop, oops, I mean a country. Our population could be what, 30m? Knn, what am I thinking?
Fake degree holders – Get out while you can
The Philippines Embassy is warning its citizens here to submit only
genuine degrees and certificates and avoid being caught with their pants
down. It seems that they have been given notice that the MOM is coming
down hard on fake degree holders. If this be the case, it means that all
the embassies must also been notified of the next move by the MOM.
For those fakes currently under employment here, it may be wise for them to get out while they still can. The easiest thing to do is to submit their resignation and return home as soon as they can. Any day of delay will increase the risk of them being detected, caught and charge in court. The sentence could be $20k fine or up to 2 years of imprisonment.
The window period for those who are here under fake qualifications is closing down fast. They must know how efficient the Singapore govt is when they made up their mind to go after the culprits. They are damn good. The real Singapore talents when tasked to do a job will do it extremely well. Get out you still can and do not hesitate or waste a single day here. Never think that you have been here for many years and you can get away with it. Trust the Singapore talents to do what they are good at.
Good luck. And this will also apply to those who have converted to citizens or PRs using fake qualifications. You will be caught. It is a matter of when. When the Singapore govt means business it is business. You have been warned. Just because things were slack before they can be taken as slipshod and did not know what was happening. When time to be efficient, you bet they will be very efficient. Our car park attendance is a good example of how good they are.
For those fakes currently under employment here, it may be wise for them to get out while they still can. The easiest thing to do is to submit their resignation and return home as soon as they can. Any day of delay will increase the risk of them being detected, caught and charge in court. The sentence could be $20k fine or up to 2 years of imprisonment.
The window period for those who are here under fake qualifications is closing down fast. They must know how efficient the Singapore govt is when they made up their mind to go after the culprits. They are damn good. The real Singapore talents when tasked to do a job will do it extremely well. Get out you still can and do not hesitate or waste a single day here. Never think that you have been here for many years and you can get away with it. Trust the Singapore talents to do what they are good at.
Good luck. And this will also apply to those who have converted to citizens or PRs using fake qualifications. You will be caught. It is a matter of when. When the Singapore govt means business it is business. You have been warned. Just because things were slack before they can be taken as slipshod and did not know what was happening. When time to be efficient, you bet they will be very efficient. Our car park attendance is a good example of how good they are.
9/26/2013
USA, The Biggest and Most Evil Rogue State
USA -- The Biggest Rogue State And International Terrorist Country
It is time to carry out a regime change in USA - The Evil Empire which is the cause of all troubles, wars, distability and strive in all aspects of life in this world. Since the end of the Second World War, USA has wasted no time in creating endless wars and distability in various parts of the world. The biggest industry in USA is the War Industry and so The Evil Empire has always been using the medium of wars as a conduit of sustaining this industry and enriching itself by selling arms to other countries at wars incited and fomented by USA through sowing seeds of dissension , suspicion and contention among the targeted unsuspecting victimised nations. The White American concept of perpetual and permanent warfares both direct and indirect through proxy wars has been on going and institutionalised since the first year of its independence from Imperial Britain. With this insidious policy America has always used it to grab lands and resources from other countries and to hold sway and hegemony over all other countries big or small. The original USA started with thirteen states comprising a territory of about five hundred thundred thousand square miles. Then with its aggressive policy of wars of expansion it marched westward to attack, conquer and eventually annexed all the selfgoverning native American Indian states and of course after killing eighty-five million or over ninety-percent of the native American Indians. Then from 1840s to around 1890s The Evil Empire continued its war of aggression against the Mexicans and took by force Mexican lands of about one million six hundred and fifty thousand square miles comprising the present territories of Florida, Texas, Utah,Nevada, New Mexico, Dakota and California. At present this concept of perpetual wars of aggression and expansion shows no sign of stopping. Instead it is getting hotter and more hostile as can be seen in the American fomented wars and distabilities in the Middle-East, North Africa, in East Asia, South China Sea and its surrounding countries and South Asia in India , Pakistan and South West China.
The Evil Empire has created enough trouble, wars and miseries in this world. When can all the countries wake up and unite to put a stop to this Western carnage headed by USA? It is time the countries of the world unite to carry out regime change of the USA government, failing which it will allow The Evil Empire to drag the whole world to virtual destruction.
Southernglory1
The silly myth of bringing in better talents
The craps of not wanting to lose out on a better foreign talent is being
waved by everyone especially the foreigners and foreign recruiting
agencies as the excuse to bring in foreign talents. This silly reasoning
must be put to a stop. I can replace every Sinkie in every profession,
including ministers as there will be one better foreigner to replace
him.
We must be very clear why we allowed foreigners to work here. We need better foreign talents, we are short of talents/professionals in some fields, but no, we don’t need to bring in another foreigner because he happens to be a little better than another Sinkie so we can replace the Sinkie.
Take the foreign footballers as an example. What good is there to bring in the foreign footballers? Do they make our national team better? Or should we replace everyone in our national team with these foreign footballers? In this particular case, the only reason for them to be here is to fill up the numbers in the few clubs that we have. Even this is really not necessary, unnecessary. We can still have our football league with our local boys kicking the balls around and the bets going on as usual. There is no real value add with all the foreign footballers here.
What is so great about having a few better accountants, managers, engineers, bankers just because they are claimed to be better? Did they change anything in the game? If they are game changers, that makes a big difference. Those are the type of talents that we need. Do we need more talented mee siam sellers to replace our mee siam sellers?
For practical reasons, we only need professionals to fill jobs where there is a real shortage in a particular field. Many of the professional jobs can be filled by Sinkies or by so called foreigners and nothing really changes. A good example is the way the Australians handle such economic migrants. There is a list of jobs like plumbers, sewerage engineers, carpenters, cooks, nurses etc that they need as they did not have enough Australians working in these jobs. The migrants are allowed in not because they were better plumbers, better cooks or better nurses, but because there is a shortfall.
If the logic is to bring in better talents in mundane routine jobs, we don’t need Sinkies anymore. And mundane routine jobs can be PME jobs. We have enough trained and qualified Sinkies for these jobs. And only stupid and irresponsible people will accept the stupid reasoning that we should replace Sinkies with foreigners because the foreigner is a better talent than the Sinkie. What difference does it make if a better foreign civil engineer or IT professional is recruited to replace a Sinkie? Nothing. They are all doing the same job, nothing more nothing less, unless the Sinkie is not qualified and cannot do the job.
Shouldn’t a graduate be employed to be a petrol pump attendant as he is better talented? Is he going to be more productive than a ‘boh tak cheh’ ah pek? The graduate is a talent of course, a better talent than the ah pek. So? What is the competition, competing against who and making money from where and who?
The only good reason is that we don’t have enough in the profession that we need foreigners. We don’t need foreigners so that our Sinkies can be replaced and made jobless, no matter how talented the foreigners are.
Stop spewing rubbish and myths to con the daft Sinkies.
We must be very clear why we allowed foreigners to work here. We need better foreign talents, we are short of talents/professionals in some fields, but no, we don’t need to bring in another foreigner because he happens to be a little better than another Sinkie so we can replace the Sinkie.
Take the foreign footballers as an example. What good is there to bring in the foreign footballers? Do they make our national team better? Or should we replace everyone in our national team with these foreign footballers? In this particular case, the only reason for them to be here is to fill up the numbers in the few clubs that we have. Even this is really not necessary, unnecessary. We can still have our football league with our local boys kicking the balls around and the bets going on as usual. There is no real value add with all the foreign footballers here.
What is so great about having a few better accountants, managers, engineers, bankers just because they are claimed to be better? Did they change anything in the game? If they are game changers, that makes a big difference. Those are the type of talents that we need. Do we need more talented mee siam sellers to replace our mee siam sellers?
For practical reasons, we only need professionals to fill jobs where there is a real shortage in a particular field. Many of the professional jobs can be filled by Sinkies or by so called foreigners and nothing really changes. A good example is the way the Australians handle such economic migrants. There is a list of jobs like plumbers, sewerage engineers, carpenters, cooks, nurses etc that they need as they did not have enough Australians working in these jobs. The migrants are allowed in not because they were better plumbers, better cooks or better nurses, but because there is a shortfall.
If the logic is to bring in better talents in mundane routine jobs, we don’t need Sinkies anymore. And mundane routine jobs can be PME jobs. We have enough trained and qualified Sinkies for these jobs. And only stupid and irresponsible people will accept the stupid reasoning that we should replace Sinkies with foreigners because the foreigner is a better talent than the Sinkie. What difference does it make if a better foreign civil engineer or IT professional is recruited to replace a Sinkie? Nothing. They are all doing the same job, nothing more nothing less, unless the Sinkie is not qualified and cannot do the job.
Shouldn’t a graduate be employed to be a petrol pump attendant as he is better talented? Is he going to be more productive than a ‘boh tak cheh’ ah pek? The graduate is a talent of course, a better talent than the ah pek. So? What is the competition, competing against who and making money from where and who?
The only good reason is that we don’t have enough in the profession that we need foreigners. We don’t need foreigners so that our Sinkies can be replaced and made jobless, no matter how talented the foreigners are.
Stop spewing rubbish and myths to con the daft Sinkies.
Die a natural death
After some release of pent up anger, most issues raised in cyberspace
would die a natural death as expected, just like sunrise and sunset. The
AIM issue is long gone and forgotten. The latest ballot box issue is
already on its way to history. That is the beauty of a first world
society, all sensible and rational people. Everything talk only, no
violence, very civilized. All they want is the right to express their
unhappiness or frustration. Once this is allowed and done, anger
dissipated, life goes on.
The govt must be comforted by this development. The earlier fear of the internet is unfounded. The freedom of expression that was more limited in the pre internet days when nothing much was heard for good reasons became a worrisome preoccupation of the govt when internet first came into the picture. How would the people react given this new freedom? Should they be controlled, should internet be controlled? How would internet interfere with the politics of the country? How would internet influence the way people think and vote?
The truth is that nothing really changed. In fact internet has offered an avenue for people to let off steam, vent their frustrations when they needed to and to feel good about it when done. And in most cases there is a feeling of well being when they could get things off their chest in the internet. They had their final say.
Tan Jee Say and Tan Cheng Bock had their pieces published in cyberspace questioning the suspicious reappearance of the ballot boxes. Having said that and done with, case closed. There seems to be a closure that the main media could not give. With internet, the injured or supposedly wrong party or victim has the right to have a last stand. This is an improvement over the old ways when these people would have to swallow whatever perceived injustice quietly as they would not be heard. And that could lead to them harbouring deep grievances that may seek an outlet sooner or later in the most unexpected way.
Such feelings of outrage and seething sense of injustice could be ameliorated by allowing the parties to say whatever they want, curse whoever they want, and go home and have a good sleep.
This is a great contribution of the internet, to defuse a time bomb, to make people feel better. Yaacob should take note of this and take his hands off the internet to let the unhappy people say what they want. Better this way than street protest and violence. With internet there would not be any Spring. People will talk about their problems and dissatisfaction verbally and better still if the govt could engage them verbally as well. Uh, they called this communication and engaging the people.
The govt must be comforted by this development. The earlier fear of the internet is unfounded. The freedom of expression that was more limited in the pre internet days when nothing much was heard for good reasons became a worrisome preoccupation of the govt when internet first came into the picture. How would the people react given this new freedom? Should they be controlled, should internet be controlled? How would internet interfere with the politics of the country? How would internet influence the way people think and vote?
The truth is that nothing really changed. In fact internet has offered an avenue for people to let off steam, vent their frustrations when they needed to and to feel good about it when done. And in most cases there is a feeling of well being when they could get things off their chest in the internet. They had their final say.
Tan Jee Say and Tan Cheng Bock had their pieces published in cyberspace questioning the suspicious reappearance of the ballot boxes. Having said that and done with, case closed. There seems to be a closure that the main media could not give. With internet, the injured or supposedly wrong party or victim has the right to have a last stand. This is an improvement over the old ways when these people would have to swallow whatever perceived injustice quietly as they would not be heard. And that could lead to them harbouring deep grievances that may seek an outlet sooner or later in the most unexpected way.
Such feelings of outrage and seething sense of injustice could be ameliorated by allowing the parties to say whatever they want, curse whoever they want, and go home and have a good sleep.
This is a great contribution of the internet, to defuse a time bomb, to make people feel better. Yaacob should take note of this and take his hands off the internet to let the unhappy people say what they want. Better this way than street protest and violence. With internet there would not be any Spring. People will talk about their problems and dissatisfaction verbally and better still if the govt could engage them verbally as well. Uh, they called this communication and engaging the people.
Aung San Suu Kyi’s house arrest
ASSK was under house arrest on and off for more than 10 years as a
political prisoner. The authoritarian military junta in a way was quite
kind, I mean relatively, to let her stay in her own house. At least she
was at home most of the time and with her supporters around her. It was
not the solitary confinement type, and if I am not mistaken, she was
spared the rounds of torture that some political prisoners were put
through in other military dictatorship or authoritarian regime.
And she was released and allowed to contest in a general election, and won. And she is now travelling the world as a legitimate politician, a free woman. On these points, the military junta of Myanmar is not that bad after all. And who knows what could happen in the next general election. Would she be allowed to take over the govt of Myanmar, or would the military step in and have another coup and lock her up again if her party won?
With Thein Sein in charge, and if he is still around, or if the other military top brass are of the same thinking, there is a high possibility that a change of govt, a civilian govt could be in place in Myanmar. This is not bad, better in many democracies that a change in govt could bring out the military to seize power.
What do you think? Is the Myanmese junta more liberal, less ruthless and more democratic than Singapore?
And she was released and allowed to contest in a general election, and won. And she is now travelling the world as a legitimate politician, a free woman. On these points, the military junta of Myanmar is not that bad after all. And who knows what could happen in the next general election. Would she be allowed to take over the govt of Myanmar, or would the military step in and have another coup and lock her up again if her party won?
With Thein Sein in charge, and if he is still around, or if the other military top brass are of the same thinking, there is a high possibility that a change of govt, a civilian govt could be in place in Myanmar. This is not bad, better in many democracies that a change in govt could bring out the military to seize power.
What do you think? Is the Myanmese junta more liberal, less ruthless and more democratic than Singapore?
9/25/2013
Logical deduction by selective reasoning
Logical thinking is a highly demanded skill of an individual. But it is
also possible to teach people to think stupid and still logical and
sounding absolutely reasonable, and can even be mathematically proven.
Let me try, 3 children only drink tea or coffee while a fourth drinks chicken essence. Now if the result of this fourth child is better than the other 3, then it can be concluded that drinking chicken essence indeed can improve one’s grade. It can be the other way too.
Another example, most male Sinkies have done NS. And if a sample study on 3 of them and a foreign student from a university is conducted and found that the foreign student did better academically, it can be concluded that doing NS is bad for academic studies. Or some may even conclude that NS men are more stupid or less smart than those who did not do NS, ie foreigners and the local girls.
To confirm this finding, check out on the same cohort of girls against the NS men. If the girls are doing better, one more confirmation that doing NS makes the men stupid. Then look at the foreign talents and if they are appointed or employed in top positions over those who have done NS, this is second confirmation that doing NS really made our boys stupid.
With this astounding finding, the employers could go to the HR to demand recruiting people that have not done NS. NS makes men stupid. So all the top positions should rightfully go to foreigners or maybe girls who have not done NS.
See how logical the reasoning is? Nah, I don’t think this kind of thinking is being used to employ foreigners to fill up top positions in the country, both in the public and private sectors, both in govt and in the industries.
Logical deduction can be very misleading if the intention is to mislead. Ok, ok, this is academic or intellectual infidelity or dishonesty.
Let me try, 3 children only drink tea or coffee while a fourth drinks chicken essence. Now if the result of this fourth child is better than the other 3, then it can be concluded that drinking chicken essence indeed can improve one’s grade. It can be the other way too.
Another example, most male Sinkies have done NS. And if a sample study on 3 of them and a foreign student from a university is conducted and found that the foreign student did better academically, it can be concluded that doing NS is bad for academic studies. Or some may even conclude that NS men are more stupid or less smart than those who did not do NS, ie foreigners and the local girls.
To confirm this finding, check out on the same cohort of girls against the NS men. If the girls are doing better, one more confirmation that doing NS makes the men stupid. Then look at the foreign talents and if they are appointed or employed in top positions over those who have done NS, this is second confirmation that doing NS really made our boys stupid.
With this astounding finding, the employers could go to the HR to demand recruiting people that have not done NS. NS makes men stupid. So all the top positions should rightfully go to foreigners or maybe girls who have not done NS.
See how logical the reasoning is? Nah, I don’t think this kind of thinking is being used to employ foreigners to fill up top positions in the country, both in the public and private sectors, both in govt and in the industries.
Logical deduction can be very misleading if the intention is to mislead. Ok, ok, this is academic or intellectual infidelity or dishonesty.
US rhetoric at UN aims at 'bullying Russia, China' into Syria resolution
This article is from "Russia Today"
US rhetoric at UN aims at ‘bullying Russia, China’ into Syria resolution
Get short URL
Published time: September 24, 2013 21:57
United States President Barack Obama waves after speaking at the 68th United Nations General Assembly on September 24, 2013 in New York City. (Andrew Burton/Getty Images/AFP)
US President Barack Obama requires a “mask” to legitimize unilateral action in Syria, Brian Becker, Director of Answer Coalition, told RT. He needs Russia and China to back a resolution so it can be conducted under a UN banner rather than the US alone.
RT: Obama says the US must remain heavily engaged in the Middle East because there won’t be anyone to fill the vacuum if Washington pulls out – is that a credible claim?
Brian Becker: Well, of course the US is acting in what it perceives to be its own interests, and I would have to say these are not the interests of the American people, per se, who don’t have big oil or banking investments in the Middle East. But there are big banks and there are big oil corporations and they have global interests, and they have particular interests in the Middle East. And the US policy is to protect those interests; that’s where two thirds of the world’s oil is.
President Obama says “we are an exceptional country,” meaning we shed our treasure and our blood for the interests of all but not for our own interests. I mean, that’s bogus, that’s completely a fraud. The US wants to dominate and it’s been the priority of its foreign policy to dominate this oil-rich region for the past 50 years.
RT: In defending past US military interventions, he also continued to build a case for regime change in Syria. How is that being received at the general assembly?
BB: I think all the countries of the world who want to be independent and sovereign countries who realize that President Obama – when he says “sovereignty cannot be a shield for tyrants” – that means the US government is arrogating to itself which regimes, which governments live, and which should be overthrown. So I think for those who are independent – they all see this as a great threat – not only to Syria, but to all those who may at some point defy the empire. Obama said in his speech “we a not an empire, it’s just useful propaganda,” but in fact the US government conduct itself exactly the way an empire does, only this time uses lofty rhetoric and noble causes as the motivation, presumably, for its interests.
US President Barack Obama proposes a toast during a luncheon at the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly September 24, 2013 at the United Nations in New York. (AFP Photo/Don Emmert)
US President Barack Obama proposes a toast during a luncheon at the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly September 24, 2013 at the United Nations in New York. (AFP Photo/Don Emmert)
RT: Let’s talk about those developments in Syria: The world’s chemical weapons watchdog – it’s said that it’s already cooperating on the chemical disarmament deal – so what about this idea of a UN Security Council resolution – would that actually change anything?
BB: We have to see – what the US and France are trying to do at the Security Council is to bully Russia and bully China in order to get wording into that resolution that would authorize them to carry out a military action under the rubric of the UN. But clearly the Obama administration says it has the authority to act unilaterally, but it would like to have some sort of shield or at least mask for that sort of unilateral operation. So they want to put in language that says that there must be consequences. And President Obama in his speech said if we don’t have consequences to enforce Syria’s compliance – which apparently Syria is complying – then it shows the UN has no ability to enforce international laws in its own resolutions.
We should remind President Obama the UN passed resolution 242 that said to Israel leave the Golan Heights, leave the West Bank – that was 46 years ago. No military action against Israel, and none is in the future. It’s a double standard, it’s hypocrisy. The US is trying to bully the UN Security Council to do what it really wants to do, which is to escalate the conflict in Syria, to overthrow their government.
RT: But isn’t it a fair condition – if Syria simply doesn’t play by the rules and doesn’t comply, then surely some sort of force has got to be put on it in order to make it comply – it’s a fair call isn’t it?
BB: I don’t think so – you notice President Obama said 98 percent of humanity says chemical weapons should be banned. The United States’ principle ally, Israel, refuses to get rid of its chemical weapons stockpile, or biological weapons, or nuclear weapons, so the Obama administrations is in fact quite selective about who can have and who shouldn’t have chemical weapons. But that’s not really the point.
Chemical weapons in this instance are a pretext for an escalating intervention. The Obama administration’s hand has been steadied because of global opposition, including massive domestic opposition in the United States. They’re trying to come back but they are in a weakened position right now.
US rhetoric at UN aims at ‘bullying Russia, China’ into Syria resolution
Get short URL
Published time: September 24, 2013 21:57
United States President Barack Obama waves after speaking at the 68th United Nations General Assembly on September 24, 2013 in New York City. (Andrew Burton/Getty Images/AFP)
US President Barack Obama requires a “mask” to legitimize unilateral action in Syria, Brian Becker, Director of Answer Coalition, told RT. He needs Russia and China to back a resolution so it can be conducted under a UN banner rather than the US alone.
RT: Obama says the US must remain heavily engaged in the Middle East because there won’t be anyone to fill the vacuum if Washington pulls out – is that a credible claim?
Brian Becker: Well, of course the US is acting in what it perceives to be its own interests, and I would have to say these are not the interests of the American people, per se, who don’t have big oil or banking investments in the Middle East. But there are big banks and there are big oil corporations and they have global interests, and they have particular interests in the Middle East. And the US policy is to protect those interests; that’s where two thirds of the world’s oil is.
President Obama says “we are an exceptional country,” meaning we shed our treasure and our blood for the interests of all but not for our own interests. I mean, that’s bogus, that’s completely a fraud. The US wants to dominate and it’s been the priority of its foreign policy to dominate this oil-rich region for the past 50 years.
RT: In defending past US military interventions, he also continued to build a case for regime change in Syria. How is that being received at the general assembly?
BB: I think all the countries of the world who want to be independent and sovereign countries who realize that President Obama – when he says “sovereignty cannot be a shield for tyrants” – that means the US government is arrogating to itself which regimes, which governments live, and which should be overthrown. So I think for those who are independent – they all see this as a great threat – not only to Syria, but to all those who may at some point defy the empire. Obama said in his speech “we a not an empire, it’s just useful propaganda,” but in fact the US government conduct itself exactly the way an empire does, only this time uses lofty rhetoric and noble causes as the motivation, presumably, for its interests.
US President Barack Obama proposes a toast during a luncheon at the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly September 24, 2013 at the United Nations in New York. (AFP Photo/Don Emmert)
US President Barack Obama proposes a toast during a luncheon at the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly September 24, 2013 at the United Nations in New York. (AFP Photo/Don Emmert)
RT: Let’s talk about those developments in Syria: The world’s chemical weapons watchdog – it’s said that it’s already cooperating on the chemical disarmament deal – so what about this idea of a UN Security Council resolution – would that actually change anything?
BB: We have to see – what the US and France are trying to do at the Security Council is to bully Russia and bully China in order to get wording into that resolution that would authorize them to carry out a military action under the rubric of the UN. But clearly the Obama administration says it has the authority to act unilaterally, but it would like to have some sort of shield or at least mask for that sort of unilateral operation. So they want to put in language that says that there must be consequences. And President Obama in his speech said if we don’t have consequences to enforce Syria’s compliance – which apparently Syria is complying – then it shows the UN has no ability to enforce international laws in its own resolutions.
We should remind President Obama the UN passed resolution 242 that said to Israel leave the Golan Heights, leave the West Bank – that was 46 years ago. No military action against Israel, and none is in the future. It’s a double standard, it’s hypocrisy. The US is trying to bully the UN Security Council to do what it really wants to do, which is to escalate the conflict in Syria, to overthrow their government.
RT: But isn’t it a fair condition – if Syria simply doesn’t play by the rules and doesn’t comply, then surely some sort of force has got to be put on it in order to make it comply – it’s a fair call isn’t it?
BB: I don’t think so – you notice President Obama said 98 percent of humanity says chemical weapons should be banned. The United States’ principle ally, Israel, refuses to get rid of its chemical weapons stockpile, or biological weapons, or nuclear weapons, so the Obama administrations is in fact quite selective about who can have and who shouldn’t have chemical weapons. But that’s not really the point.
Chemical weapons in this instance are a pretext for an escalating intervention. The Obama administration’s hand has been steadied because of global opposition, including massive domestic opposition in the United States. They’re trying to come back but they are in a weakened position right now.
Medical appointments in world class health service
We have a world class health service, both private and public, and
equivalent to the best in the developed countries. This is something we
should be proud of and good for those who need medical care. This
morning there is a letter in the media by a Ms Tay Soh Hoon complaining
about a more than one year medical appointment for her husband with a
renal specialist in a public hospital, the Singapore General Hospital,
run like a private hospital as it has been privatized to be as efficient
as private hospitals.
Now, what is it like for someone with a medical condition that is deemed serious enough to need to see a specialist, in this case is something related to the kidney? Many would be worried to death and would want an immediate appointment with the specialist. A one month appointment would be deemed too long. A one year appointment is definitely unacceptable. How many with a condition could actually get into more serious trouble or may not survive a one year wait.
Waiting for one year in public privatized hospitals is becoming pretty common especially for non life threatening cases like fixing a set of braces. The waiting time could be 2 or 3 years. By then the urge or itch to have a set of braces may be gone. How many cases that were reasonably serious in nature and still need to wait for months or more for an appointment? Is this something acceptable from the professional opinion of the medical practitioners? Definitely it is not desirable and unacceptable for a world class medical health care service.
Heard that if one is willing to pay, go to the real private hospitals and appointments could be had immediately or within a few days depending on how much or desperate one is willing to pay. Heard also that in urgent cases, the waiting period could be shortened in public privatized hospitals as well. In this particular case, after many complaints for urgency, a 16 months wait was finally shorten to a year. Should Ms Tay rejoice for the victory? Should we celebrate that we have a world class healthcare system? Or maybe world class for those who can afford to pay in hard cash in the private hospitals?
What is going on? What world class? Have you heard of die waiting?
Now, what is it like for someone with a medical condition that is deemed serious enough to need to see a specialist, in this case is something related to the kidney? Many would be worried to death and would want an immediate appointment with the specialist. A one month appointment would be deemed too long. A one year appointment is definitely unacceptable. How many with a condition could actually get into more serious trouble or may not survive a one year wait.
Waiting for one year in public privatized hospitals is becoming pretty common especially for non life threatening cases like fixing a set of braces. The waiting time could be 2 or 3 years. By then the urge or itch to have a set of braces may be gone. How many cases that were reasonably serious in nature and still need to wait for months or more for an appointment? Is this something acceptable from the professional opinion of the medical practitioners? Definitely it is not desirable and unacceptable for a world class medical health care service.
Heard that if one is willing to pay, go to the real private hospitals and appointments could be had immediately or within a few days depending on how much or desperate one is willing to pay. Heard also that in urgent cases, the waiting period could be shortened in public privatized hospitals as well. In this particular case, after many complaints for urgency, a 16 months wait was finally shorten to a year. Should Ms Tay rejoice for the victory? Should we celebrate that we have a world class healthcare system? Or maybe world class for those who can afford to pay in hard cash in the private hospitals?
What is going on? What world class? Have you heard of die waiting?
Significant progress on hot button issues
In yesterday’s programme on Asking the PM, Hsien Loong was to a certain
extent congratulating the govt for making significant progress on hot
button issues like housing, public transport and foreigners/employment. I
could not hold my eyeballs steady as they kept rolling while he was
saying these things.
Should the people be jubilant, praise the govt for reacting to these painful issues that have hurt the people real bad for so long? How in the world could a proactive govt with its fingers on the pulse of the people allowed these problems to escalate to a point of losing control is amazing. And who the hell created all these problems in the first place?
My eyeballs rolled faster when he talked about the sense of identity, strengthening the Singaporean core, about individual citizens sacrificing for the national goals and blaming this generation for being different and less sacrificing than the early generations.
Somehow I got this feeling that citizens and the interests of citizens were cast aside in the mercenary pursuit for economic growth at all cost over the last decade or so when foreigners were brought in to replace citizens in nearly every aspect of life in the island.
The housing problem is a big shit that could not be unwound with the people all deep in debt. The employment scene when foreigners are happily employed by the millions and poor Sinkies ended jobless or underemployed or even being discriminated to favour employment of foreigners did not happen yesterday. How come the govt allowed it to happen, or the govt did not know?
Should the people pat the govt for doing a good job or whack it with a big stick? The FCF that is being rolled out is greeted with a lot of mixed feelings, sneers and suspicion that it is going to be another wayang. This tells a lot about the trust the people have on the govt. No need to say more. How did the govt reach just a state of distrust if it has been doing all the good things for the people? The people are daft and ungrateful?
Solving problems together, the govt thinking ahead and the people not thinking ahead? What was the govt thinking and saying when the people were crying out loud about the housing problems? No housing problem, no need to build more, housing was affordable, where got problem? If the people have not screamed their heads off in cyberspace about the employment shit when citizens were booted out of their jobs to be replaced by the foreigners, would the govt look up and listen, and take note?
Actually all the problems in a way were faked, over blown in cyberspace. If there is no internet and social media, there will be no problem at all. Nothing would be heard. The netizens are a nuisance, creating false and imaginary problems and giving the govt a hard time for no good reasons.
Now that the govt has acknowledge some of the problems raised, now that the MOM has started to do something about it, let’s hope the cynicism of the people does not turn out to be true, that it was all a wayang. The govt needs to rebuild its trust by the people if it is to stay relevant and believeable and be re elected. The people are watching with a very critical and cynical mindset. They are not going to take the words of the govt for granted. They want to see actions and real results that favour citizens, not locals.
So? Where do we go from here? Does the govt know that a medical appointment with the specialist in govt privatised hospitals can take more than a year? Is this an acceptable state of affair?
Should the people be jubilant, praise the govt for reacting to these painful issues that have hurt the people real bad for so long? How in the world could a proactive govt with its fingers on the pulse of the people allowed these problems to escalate to a point of losing control is amazing. And who the hell created all these problems in the first place?
My eyeballs rolled faster when he talked about the sense of identity, strengthening the Singaporean core, about individual citizens sacrificing for the national goals and blaming this generation for being different and less sacrificing than the early generations.
Somehow I got this feeling that citizens and the interests of citizens were cast aside in the mercenary pursuit for economic growth at all cost over the last decade or so when foreigners were brought in to replace citizens in nearly every aspect of life in the island.
The housing problem is a big shit that could not be unwound with the people all deep in debt. The employment scene when foreigners are happily employed by the millions and poor Sinkies ended jobless or underemployed or even being discriminated to favour employment of foreigners did not happen yesterday. How come the govt allowed it to happen, or the govt did not know?
Should the people pat the govt for doing a good job or whack it with a big stick? The FCF that is being rolled out is greeted with a lot of mixed feelings, sneers and suspicion that it is going to be another wayang. This tells a lot about the trust the people have on the govt. No need to say more. How did the govt reach just a state of distrust if it has been doing all the good things for the people? The people are daft and ungrateful?
Solving problems together, the govt thinking ahead and the people not thinking ahead? What was the govt thinking and saying when the people were crying out loud about the housing problems? No housing problem, no need to build more, housing was affordable, where got problem? If the people have not screamed their heads off in cyberspace about the employment shit when citizens were booted out of their jobs to be replaced by the foreigners, would the govt look up and listen, and take note?
Actually all the problems in a way were faked, over blown in cyberspace. If there is no internet and social media, there will be no problem at all. Nothing would be heard. The netizens are a nuisance, creating false and imaginary problems and giving the govt a hard time for no good reasons.
Now that the govt has acknowledge some of the problems raised, now that the MOM has started to do something about it, let’s hope the cynicism of the people does not turn out to be true, that it was all a wayang. The govt needs to rebuild its trust by the people if it is to stay relevant and believeable and be re elected. The people are watching with a very critical and cynical mindset. They are not going to take the words of the govt for granted. They want to see actions and real results that favour citizens, not locals.
So? Where do we go from here? Does the govt know that a medical appointment with the specialist in govt privatised hospitals can take more than a year? Is this an acceptable state of affair?
9/24/2013
Material Singapore kena slap, slap
The 5 day visit by Myanmar’s democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi ended
yesterday with a confirmed slap slap on materialistic Singapore. Many
Singaporeans must be squeezing to get up close with this lady from a
Third World country, economically and materially, with a whole list of
what Singapore can do for Myanmar. Come see this Singapore and that
Singapore. Come see Orchard Road and Sentosa, Changi Airport, HDB
flats…. We can build industrial parks for Myanmar, airports, sea ports,
shopping centres, artificial gardens, artificial beaches and parks, and
yes HDB flats. We can teach Myanmar, plenty of things, and plenty of
things for Myanmar to learn from us.
Aung San Suu Kyi was more amused than anything. What is there to learn from Singapore except materialism, mad rush, rat race. She was quoted to say, ‘That made me think, what is work all about? What are human beings for? What are human lives for? The Singapore answer will be to work, work and work. Work is everything, work is pride and dignity.
To this lady of international fame for fighting for democracy and human rights, there is more to just work and money, and work and work. There is a life worth living for. The quality of life is not just about materialism. She conceded that there are things that Myanmar could learn from Singapore but definitely not to copy our model of work, work and work. Myanmar would want to walk its own path to find its own way and happiness.
Her parting shot to Singapore, ‘Perhaps Singapore could learn from us a more relaxed way of life. Perhaps warmer and closer family relationships. I think we have much to offer you, you come and find out.’ Oooh la lah… This must be shocking to many successful Singaporeans with a lot of cash to paste on their faces. This woman from Myanmar wanted to teach us? How can?
Aung San Suu Kyi lives a life to improve lives, for freedom and human rights. We live a life of materialism, money and work. We even have to pay the govt for visiting our parents or our friends in their HDB flats. How is that for building kampong spirit and building a warmer relationship with friends and dear ones? We pay for everything and thus have to work and work to pay and pay.
Well, it is a matter of opinion and expectation of life. We still want to pay that hundred or two hundred thousand bucks to the hospitals to keep us alive to 100 years when we are 90. We need to find more money to live to 100 years. Thank God there is this god sent Medishield Life to help the Singaporeans to live a good life.
Aung San Suu Kyi was more amused than anything. What is there to learn from Singapore except materialism, mad rush, rat race. She was quoted to say, ‘That made me think, what is work all about? What are human beings for? What are human lives for? The Singapore answer will be to work, work and work. Work is everything, work is pride and dignity.
To this lady of international fame for fighting for democracy and human rights, there is more to just work and money, and work and work. There is a life worth living for. The quality of life is not just about materialism. She conceded that there are things that Myanmar could learn from Singapore but definitely not to copy our model of work, work and work. Myanmar would want to walk its own path to find its own way and happiness.
Her parting shot to Singapore, ‘Perhaps Singapore could learn from us a more relaxed way of life. Perhaps warmer and closer family relationships. I think we have much to offer you, you come and find out.’ Oooh la lah… This must be shocking to many successful Singaporeans with a lot of cash to paste on their faces. This woman from Myanmar wanted to teach us? How can?
Aung San Suu Kyi lives a life to improve lives, for freedom and human rights. We live a life of materialism, money and work. We even have to pay the govt for visiting our parents or our friends in their HDB flats. How is that for building kampong spirit and building a warmer relationship with friends and dear ones? We pay for everything and thus have to work and work to pay and pay.
Well, it is a matter of opinion and expectation of life. We still want to pay that hundred or two hundred thousand bucks to the hospitals to keep us alive to 100 years when we are 90. We need to find more money to live to 100 years. Thank God there is this god sent Medishield Life to help the Singaporeans to live a good life.
The Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) consideration
The much awaited policy change from Chuan Jin has finally arrived. As
usual this is received with much trepidation, scepticism and jubilation.
Some welcomed it as something that has to be done, better late than
never, some dismissed it as too little too late, and why must it take
another year to be implemented. Reactions from the employers are muted
but fairly agreeable except for the recalcitrant companies that are
keeping mum for their indiscretion over the years.
Singaporeans should welcome this move or gesture as a step in the right direction. It may seem too little and lacking in what it intends to achieve, but like the atrocious housing problem that was left to ferment and rot for too long, the problem is so immense and widespread that a simple policy change like this would not do very much and cannot do very much. We should give Chuan Jin some time to fine tune this change along the way. And he has mentioned that there will be close monitoring and follow up measures to rein in the culprits that are taking advantage of the generosity of Singapore and Singaporeans.
What can also be done is to look at some other measures that could compliment the works of MOM. Patrick Tay of NTUC is still mooting over the introduction of dependency ratio or quota for the employment of PMEs. Let’s make this very clear as some are still talking about foreign workers. This is an issue that concerns PMEs and the policy change should be confined to this sector. For those still sleeping, please leave out the issue of foreign workers from this discussion. They are a different matter to be dealt with separately. NTUC should not miss the chance to take the initiative to reinforce the FCF with their own recommendations to give more meat to this change and make it look real and not wayanging. It would lose its credibility as a national institution for not looking after the interests of Singaporeans.
What could also be done is to dovetail this process by overhauling the HR practices of Ministries, stats boards and the civil service, and GLCs. Chuan Jin may want to give these organizations the same one year grace to put their house in order. Govt service, ministries and stats boards should be the employer of citizens and PRs only, and the ratio could be 70:30 for PME positions. There is no need for foreigners to be in such services unless some jokers believe that there are no Singaporeans that can do the job. Only nuts will believe in such nonsense. There are exceptions where specialists or professionals are needed due to their special skills or a shortage in the industry. Exceptions can always be handled separately.
In the case of GLCs, these are also within the control of the govt, and not market forces like the housing farce, the dependency ratio could be 70:20:10 for PMEs ie citizens, PRs and non citizens. I need to emphasise PMEs again and again to make sure idiots do not start uttering about foreign workers in the same breath.
In both the govt service and GLCs, the ratios quoted are only a guide and could be toggled and fine tuned to meet the realities of needs and supply and demand. For a start, all HR positions in govt service and GLCs must be filled by a Singaporean to protect the interests of Singaporeans. There is absolutely no need for HR positions to be filled by a foreigner. And to avoid people gaming the system, new citizens of less than 5 years should not be allowed to fill such a position.
Get our own house in order first, ie govt service and GLCs. The MNCs and private organizations can be tackled at a different pace with a lighter touch, but a dependency ratio is still needed.
Chuan Jin and the MOM staff have worked hard for this change. And they did not waste time and money going on overseas trips to learn from other countries to come up with the measures. This only shows that they meant business and not thinking of ‘jia hong’ and another wayang. Let them do the job and make changes along the way. Many things have to change for this Singapore Spring to take place within the govt, with govt support and the will to see it through.
Singaporeans should welcome this move or gesture as a step in the right direction. It may seem too little and lacking in what it intends to achieve, but like the atrocious housing problem that was left to ferment and rot for too long, the problem is so immense and widespread that a simple policy change like this would not do very much and cannot do very much. We should give Chuan Jin some time to fine tune this change along the way. And he has mentioned that there will be close monitoring and follow up measures to rein in the culprits that are taking advantage of the generosity of Singapore and Singaporeans.
What can also be done is to look at some other measures that could compliment the works of MOM. Patrick Tay of NTUC is still mooting over the introduction of dependency ratio or quota for the employment of PMEs. Let’s make this very clear as some are still talking about foreign workers. This is an issue that concerns PMEs and the policy change should be confined to this sector. For those still sleeping, please leave out the issue of foreign workers from this discussion. They are a different matter to be dealt with separately. NTUC should not miss the chance to take the initiative to reinforce the FCF with their own recommendations to give more meat to this change and make it look real and not wayanging. It would lose its credibility as a national institution for not looking after the interests of Singaporeans.
What could also be done is to dovetail this process by overhauling the HR practices of Ministries, stats boards and the civil service, and GLCs. Chuan Jin may want to give these organizations the same one year grace to put their house in order. Govt service, ministries and stats boards should be the employer of citizens and PRs only, and the ratio could be 70:30 for PME positions. There is no need for foreigners to be in such services unless some jokers believe that there are no Singaporeans that can do the job. Only nuts will believe in such nonsense. There are exceptions where specialists or professionals are needed due to their special skills or a shortage in the industry. Exceptions can always be handled separately.
In the case of GLCs, these are also within the control of the govt, and not market forces like the housing farce, the dependency ratio could be 70:20:10 for PMEs ie citizens, PRs and non citizens. I need to emphasise PMEs again and again to make sure idiots do not start uttering about foreign workers in the same breath.
In both the govt service and GLCs, the ratios quoted are only a guide and could be toggled and fine tuned to meet the realities of needs and supply and demand. For a start, all HR positions in govt service and GLCs must be filled by a Singaporean to protect the interests of Singaporeans. There is absolutely no need for HR positions to be filled by a foreigner. And to avoid people gaming the system, new citizens of less than 5 years should not be allowed to fill such a position.
Get our own house in order first, ie govt service and GLCs. The MNCs and private organizations can be tackled at a different pace with a lighter touch, but a dependency ratio is still needed.
Chuan Jin and the MOM staff have worked hard for this change. And they did not waste time and money going on overseas trips to learn from other countries to come up with the measures. This only shows that they meant business and not thinking of ‘jia hong’ and another wayang. Let them do the job and make changes along the way. Many things have to change for this Singapore Spring to take place within the govt, with govt support and the will to see it through.
9/23/2013
HEALTH ALERT - Processed Meats Declared Too Dangerous for Human Consumption
| |||
HEALTH ALERT -- Processed Meats Declared Too Dangerous for Human Consumption
By Mike Adams
The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) has just completed a detailed review of more than 7,000 clinical studies covering links between diet and cancer. Its conclusion is rocking the health world with startling bluntness: processed meats are too dangerous for human consumption. Consumers should stop buying and eating all processed meat products for the rest of their lives. Processed meats include bacon, sausage, hotdogs, sandwich meat, packaged ham, pepperoni, salami and virtually all red meat used in frozen prepared meals.
The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) has just completed a detailed review of more than 7,000 clinical studies covering links between diet and cancer. Its conclusion is rocking the health world with startling bluntness: processed meats are too dangerous for human consumption. Consumers should stop buying and eating all processed meat products for the rest of their lives. Processed meats include bacon, sausage, hotdogs, sandwich meat, packaged ham, pepperoni, salami and virtually all red meat used in frozen prepared meals.
They are usually manufactured with a
carcinogenic
ingredient known as
sodium
nitrite. This is used as a colour fixer by
meat companies to turn packaged meats a bright
red colour so they look fresh. Unfortunately, sodium nitrite also results
in the formation of
cancer-causing
nitrosamines in the human body. And this leads to a
sharp increase in cancer risk for those who eat
them.
A 2005 University of Hawaii study found
that processed meats increase the
risk of pancreatic cancer by 67 per cent. Another study revealed that every 50
grams of processed meat consumed
daily increases the risk of colorectal cancer by 50 per cent. These are alarming numbers. Note that these cancer risks do
not come
from eating
fresh, non-processed meats. They only appear in
people who regularly
consume processed meat products containing sodium
nitrite.
Sodium nitrite appears predominantly in red
meat products (you won't find it in chicken or fish products). Here's a
short list of food items to check
carefully
for sodium nitrite and
monosodium
glutamate (MSG), another
dangerous additive:
* Beef jerky
* Bacon
* Sausage
* Hot dogs
* Sandwich meat
* Frozen pizza with meat
* Canned soups with meat
* Frozen meals with meat
* Ravioli and meat pasta foods
* Kid's meals containing red meat
* Sandwich meat used at popular restaurants
* Nearly all red meats sold at public schools, restaurants, hospitals, hotels and theme parks
If sodium nitrite is so dangerous to humans, why do the FDA and USDA continue to allow this cancer-causing chemical to be used? The answer, of course, is that food industry interests now dominate the actions by U.S. government regulators. The USDA, for example, tried to ban sodium nitrite in the late 1970's but was overridden by the meat industry. It insisted the chemical was safe and accused the USDA of trying to "ban bacon."
* Beef jerky
* Bacon
* Sausage
* Hot dogs
* Sandwich meat
* Frozen pizza with meat
* Canned soups with meat
* Frozen meals with meat
* Ravioli and meat pasta foods
* Kid's meals containing red meat
* Sandwich meat used at popular restaurants
* Nearly all red meats sold at public schools, restaurants, hospitals, hotels and theme parks
If sodium nitrite is so dangerous to humans, why do the FDA and USDA continue to allow this cancer-causing chemical to be used? The answer, of course, is that food industry interests now dominate the actions by U.S. government regulators. The USDA, for example, tried to ban sodium nitrite in the late 1970's but was overridden by the meat industry. It insisted the chemical was safe and accused the USDA of trying to "ban bacon."
Today, the corporations that dominate
American
food and agricultural
interests hold tremendous influence over the FDA and USDA. Consumers are offered no real protection
from dangerous chemicals intentionally added to foods, medicines and personal
care products.
You can protect yourself and your family from the dangers of processed meats by following a few simple rules:
1. Always read ingredient labels.
2. Don't buy anything made with sodium nitrite or monosodium glutamate.
3. Don't eat red meats served by restaurants, schools, hospitals, hotels or other institutions.
And finally, eat more fresh produce with every meal. There is evidence that natural vitamin C found in citrus fruits and exotic berries (like camu camu) helps prevent the formation of cancer-causing nitrosamines, protecting you from the devastating health effects of sodium nitrite in processed meats. The best defence, of course, is to avoid eating processed meats altogether.
You can protect yourself and your family from the dangers of processed meats by following a few simple rules:
1. Always read ingredient labels.
2. Don't buy anything made with sodium nitrite or monosodium glutamate.
3. Don't eat red meats served by restaurants, schools, hospitals, hotels or other institutions.
And finally, eat more fresh produce with every meal. There is evidence that natural vitamin C found in citrus fruits and exotic berries (like camu camu) helps prevent the formation of cancer-causing nitrosamines, protecting you from the devastating health effects of sodium nitrite in processed meats. The best defence, of course, is to avoid eating processed meats altogether.
[Ed. Note: Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
a
leading authority on
healthy living -- is on a mission: to explore,
uncover
and share the truth
about harmful foods and beverages, prescription
drugs,
medical practices and
the dishonest marketing practices that drive
these
industries. For his
latest findings, click here.]
 |
Bo Xilai, the man who could be President
Seeing this man in handcuffs is creepy. He was the forerunner to be the
President of China. He was charismatic and had a string of records in
public administration, taking on tough appointments and the triads in
his last appointment. A bright rising star eclipsed at the peak of his
power.
China has just brought down one of the most power man in the Communist Party, stripped off his post and sentenced to life imprisonment for corruption and abused of power. His wife is serving a suspended death sentence for the murder of a British, Neil Heywood, whom they trusted and entrusted with the well being of their son and their overseas investments. This story is a repeated of the colonial days when the decadent rich sucked up to the foreigners to guard their ill gotten wealth and eventually got ripped off by them. History is repeating with the pathetic Chinese rich not learning the lessons of the past.
This is perhaps the biggest story of modern China, to take down one of their close comrades at such a high level, put him on trial and ended with a life sentence. The evidence was so overwhelming that justice was served in accordance with the rule of law and the rumour of a revolt by the supporters of Bo fizzled out quietly.
There were fears of a coup of sort or instability. They were fears that justice would not be served. The trials of Bo Xilai and Gu Kailai were a showcase of modern Chinese legal system and transparency. It was also a statement that corruption would be dealt with even at the highest place of power. This is not seen in many countries, including Asean.
The verdict on Bo Xilai is a signal the Xi Jinping leadership is sending to the Chinese bureaucracy that corruption and abuse of power will not be tolerated. Would this lead to more heads being rolled? Given the prevalence of corruption at high places, this is only the beginning, an unnecessary evil that has to be done and seen to be done to keep China on an even keel and prevent it from collapsing prematurely.
Xi Jinping needs to run a tight ship to keep the Chinese govt in a healthy state for the future. Allowing corruption to sink roots and corrupt officials to run the country would see the growth of China going down quickly as predicted by many doomsayers in the West. The taking down of Bo Xilai is a gingerly step forward and more needs to be done to prevent China going back to its decadent past.
China has just brought down one of the most power man in the Communist Party, stripped off his post and sentenced to life imprisonment for corruption and abused of power. His wife is serving a suspended death sentence for the murder of a British, Neil Heywood, whom they trusted and entrusted with the well being of their son and their overseas investments. This story is a repeated of the colonial days when the decadent rich sucked up to the foreigners to guard their ill gotten wealth and eventually got ripped off by them. History is repeating with the pathetic Chinese rich not learning the lessons of the past.
This is perhaps the biggest story of modern China, to take down one of their close comrades at such a high level, put him on trial and ended with a life sentence. The evidence was so overwhelming that justice was served in accordance with the rule of law and the rumour of a revolt by the supporters of Bo fizzled out quietly.
There were fears of a coup of sort or instability. They were fears that justice would not be served. The trials of Bo Xilai and Gu Kailai were a showcase of modern Chinese legal system and transparency. It was also a statement that corruption would be dealt with even at the highest place of power. This is not seen in many countries, including Asean.
The verdict on Bo Xilai is a signal the Xi Jinping leadership is sending to the Chinese bureaucracy that corruption and abuse of power will not be tolerated. Would this lead to more heads being rolled? Given the prevalence of corruption at high places, this is only the beginning, an unnecessary evil that has to be done and seen to be done to keep China on an even keel and prevent it from collapsing prematurely.
Xi Jinping needs to run a tight ship to keep the Chinese govt in a healthy state for the future. Allowing corruption to sink roots and corrupt officials to run the country would see the growth of China going down quickly as predicted by many doomsayers in the West. The taking down of Bo Xilai is a gingerly step forward and more needs to be done to prevent China going back to its decadent past.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)