Irrelevance of qualifications and skill sets in politics

There is no specific qualification or skill set needed in political office. The closest in terms of relevance would be some social science disciplines and public administration, but still inadequate as some ministries could entail and demand very specific and professional skills, eg Defence, Home Affairs, Health, Housing, Education etc etc. It would be difficult to cast a specific academic qualification for appointments like the President or the Prime Minister. The presumption that anyone as long as he is an elected politician is good enough to helm any ministry is the biggest flaw in a democratic system.
 
Hsien Loong is a mathematician by training and he is the PM. Chee Hian is an engineer, Tharman an economics grad, Eng Hen and Vivian are in medicine, and there are some from law, the hard sciences etc etc. In political offices, the academic or professional qualifications needed are non specific except for a few ministries when professional qualifications are very useful like law and health or defence. The common denominator actually is that nothing is relevant.
 
What then is the qualification or skill set needed to be a politician? In my view, other than a basic academic qualification to show that one has the ability to understand the 3 Rs, the other important attributes are the intangibles. Leadership, trust, integrity, honesty, compassion and a heart of gold, to want to look after the interest of the people are more important attributes than academic qualifications. Our obsession with super talents ended up wasting supertalents but having to pay supertalented pay for skill sets that are totally irrelevant to the jobs.
 
Political office is about country, nation and people and their well being. From these aspects, it is clear that super talents in the professions are not a necessary requirement and irrelevant in many cases to the appointments. It is the man and his mission and his heart that make a good political leader. Political leaders must be clear that it is all about country and people, to prosper the country and people. It is not about how good one is a doctor or lawyer or engineer or how much one is earning in the profession. It is not about self and how well they should be compensated.
 
So, what is the relevance in making a case for super talents to be better politicians and demanding ‘out of this world’ salaries? Where is the relationship in a super eye surgeon and a ministry like defence or the environment? Where is the relationship in a super lawyer and the education or health ministry? Broadly, the only relation is a good heart, a good mind and a mission to serve the interests of the people.

A good leader is priceless but not demanding to be paid ridiculously. His value is not in his qualifications or profession but the lifting of the quality of life of the people and the people's interests.

Kopi Level - Green

China, Trying to Bolster Its Claims, Plants Islands in Disputed Waters

‘By EDWARD WONG and JONATHAN ANSFIELD; Bree Feng and Chen Jiehao
contributed research.

June 17 (New York Times) -- BEIJING --

....China has been moving sand onto reefs and shoals to add several new islands to the Spratly archipelago, in what foreign officials say is a new effort to expand the Chinese footprint in the South China Sea. The officials say the islands will be able to support large buildings, human habitation and surveillance
equipment, including radar....

Chinese actions have also worried senior United States officials. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel scolded China for "land reclamation activities at multiple locations" in the South China Sea at a contentious security conference in Singapore in late May....

"By creating the appearance of an island, China may be seeking to strengthen the merits of its claims," said M. Taylor Fravel, a political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology…

China says it has the right to build in the Spratlys because they are Chinese territory. "China has indisputable sovereignty over Nansha Islands," a Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, Hua Chunying, said last month,….’

Why is China wasting so much effort to bring sands and equipment to the islands? China should find a large piece of continent like North America, kill all the natives and just take over the land. It would be so easy, quick and fast and cheap.

Chuck Hagel and Taylor Fravel, what do you think? The Americans are experts at it, please go and teach the Chinese how to do it and don’t waste time filling up little islands with sands in the ocean.

Kopi Level - Green

PRs versus citizens – taking a cue from Jeff Cueller

‘Yahoo! Finance Singapore, 17 Jun 2014
What enrages you more? The fact you can’t cash out your CPF account unless you renounce your citizenship, or that Singapore PRs can withdraw all of their CPF funds And HDB sales proceeds with them when they leave Singapore.
 
Understandably you’re pissed off because it’s not fair that someone from another country cant take part in your social security program(CPF), use it as a glorified savings account, and withdraw all of it when he/she moves back home.
 
Let’s not forget the property issue as well. A PR flipping his/her property before leaving Singapore can easily make several hundred thousand dollars – more than enough to buy a huge landed property in 75% of the world.’
 
And to cap this with a little more icing, PRs that have withdrawn their CPF could return to work and start the whole process all over again. And the Sinkies are banging their heads against the wall, crying and begging for the return of their life savings locked up in the CPF. Why PRs are so privileged and citizens are not?
 
What Jeff Cueller did not mention are the advantages attached to citizenship, like the minimum sums schemes in the Medisave and Retirement Accounts. The Govt is so worried that the citizens would squander their life savings away if they allow for premature withdrawal and thus depriving the citizens the orgasm they duly deserved for staying in for the full duration. This satisfaction is not extended to the PRS. The PRs can take out prematurely and miss all the fun or they die their business. The PRs think they are very smart. The Govt is only thinking of the good of the citizens, to ensure that they will all retire very rich, if they ever retire at all. The PRs are likely to end up poor by squandering their CPF savings in the casinos or in Batam and Bintang. If Sinkies were to squander away their monies, the Govt would have to help them out at least with hawker food.
 
Many citizens are so enthralled by this great saving schemes that they do not mind keeping their money in the CPF to feel rich and safe, with no fear that their savings will run away. Oops, many mean 60% who are strong believers of this great scheme and are happy to leave their savings there forever. Jeff Cueller is misinterpreting the values of PRs versus citizenship.

Kopi Level - Green

The Art of Good Communication

Taking a leaf from Apple, Hsien Loong wrote in his Facebook exhorting his super talented colleagues to use simpler words when talking down to the people or the message may not get through. It is as simple as that. For Hsien Loong to say this, it must be something that his talented colleagues have been doing and resulting in miscommunication or poor communication of govt policies. They would not have so much problems with the CPF if they have said things in simple and clear words.
 
The honour of saying or speaking simply to the people must go to Lim Swee Say. He has coined many fabulous words and phrases that are uniquely Singaporean and very easy to undertand. The more frequent he uses his catchphrases the betterer he communicates.
 
In my view, communication is a very simple process involving two parties. One speaking and one listening. The one speaking must speak the language the listener can understand. But more crucial is the listener. Does he want to understand? Many failures in communication were not that the speakers spoke in bombastic languages or using high falutin words that no one understood. The words could be simple and easy to understand. The problem is that the listener refuses to listen, intentionally.
 
A good example is the phrase, ‘Return My CPF’ or ‘Return My CPF at 55’. Not simple enough? Any school children would also be able to understand. But the message is not getting across simply because the listeners refused to listen.
 
Has anyone heard of the philosophy of the deaf frog? It is not that the frog is deaf. The frog chooses to be deaf. In such a situation, no matter how simple one speaks, how simple the words are, nothing goes in, nothing heard, and no understanding.
 
How to communicate when the listener is not listening?

Kopi Level - Green

Kenneth Jeyaretnam – Gaining acceptance and credibility

After the fiasco in the Punggol East by election when Kenneth and Desmond both lost their deposits, the political fortune of Kenneth was at its lowest. I could not imagine how miserable he must have felt in that 4 corner fight. His dismal performance was not totally due to his fault, the voters there were just too sophisticated to allow their votes to be splitted. It was crucial to send an opposition candidate into Parliament. They simply made a decision on who they wanted to win against the PAP candidate and threw all their votes at him. It was a case of since the opposition parties could not avoid a 3 corner fight, it was a 4 corner fight, the voters would have to make sure that it was not. They made it into a 2 corner fight with only one opposition candidate against the PAP.
 
Kenneth should not take it too hard that he was not the chosen one. The voters could not have decided on two opposition candidates and ended like the Presidential Election with all the opposition parties ended the losers. Kenneth must take the lesson from Punggol East and move on. It is good to see him still standing and fighting and not losing that fighting spirit and the will to want to be in Parliament. Just make sure that it is not going to be another 3 corner fight.
 
Since then, I have been hearing many good words about Kenneth. His façade as a bit aloof, his Englishman accented English that made Singaporeans uncomfortable used to be an issue. Today, the people seem to have accepted what he is and also appreciate him better, as someone of substance and deserving of a place in Parliament. And from the people whom I spoke and interacted with, and from what I have heard in the kopitiams, they wanted someone like Kenneth that can stand up and fire away on his feet with good, factual and relevant arguments to be in Parliament.
 
Kenneth’s appearances with Roy at Hong Lim and at Hri Kumar’s honest conversation at Thomson-Toa Payoh were well received. He made Hri looked very uneasy in his presence. His forceful articulation of the IMF loan issue was well researched and detailed and his effort did not go unnoticed. All I can say is for Kenneth to keep pounding the streets and keep fighting for what he believes in and what is good for the people. Many are quietly wishing that he should stand in a single seat constituency to raise his chances of winning a seat in the next GE.
 
Well Kenneth, you listening, keep it up.

Kopi Level - Green

How low can you go? It is a shame!

The cries of the 76 year old aunty did not go unheard. Her sad and pathetic tales, for begging in public, for the return of her life time savings in the CPF is now free chowder for the unscrupulous to ridicule her. This has made Andrew Loh feeling so disgusted that he had to write something about it. And here is what Andrew wrote.
 
‘Andrew Loh: I never post things from this odious PAP page but this, I find, is well below the belt and is totally irresponsible.
 
I’ve blanked out the address (road name) of her house which FAP had included at the bottom of the picture.
The old lady is asking for her CPF money back. What does where she lives have anything to do with it?
I hope the PAP will have some decency and condemn this by FAP, and find out how FAP came to know of her address and even a picture of her house.’
 
[Source]: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=822788644412753&set=a.196460927045531.49833.100000448763402&type=1
 
Like they said, the fish rots from the head. When the head is rotting, the body will follow suit. The plight of this senior citizen is not political. The issue of the people’s money locked up in the CPF is not political. It is about the people wanting their money back. It is about the rights to one’s own property, in this case money.
 
Politicians may want to treat this as a political football. But people, ordinary people, must not be embroiled in this issue to bash the hapless elderly lady when all she was asking is for the return of her money that rightfully belongs to her. Have some decency, have a little sense of right and wrong.
 
Don’t be an asshole! This is a very bad reflection of the kind of people backing them. People who condone such despicable acts are no better than them. Don’t ridicule an old lady for the sake of scoring political points. She has the right to demand for the return of her money. It is her money!

Kopi Level - Green

Singapore 20 or 30 years forward

What would Singapore be like in 20 or 30 years’ time? At the top, would govt leaders like ministers be new citizens? Would the top civil servants also be new citizens? Would the top management in IT, banking and finance be filled by new citizens and foreigners? Would the medical, legal and teaching professions in the universities be dominated by foreigners?

What about the properties? Would the top end and good quality properties be owned by foreigners with a sprinkle of local elite sharing a small portion of them? Would the HDB flats be occupied by new citizens and PRs? Would they still be as clean as before, like how we maintained them in the last 40 years? Or would the HDB estates be turned in modern slums, dirty, filthy and smelly befitting a 3rd World city filled with 3rd World people? Our trains smelling like filth, with people clinging on the windows outside?

Would there still be a Singaporean middle class left? Or would the society be so extremely stratified that you only have a small obscenely rich upper class and the rest consisting of poor lower middle class and the new poor, all eking a living in this grossly expensive city?

Would Singaporeans become an absolute minority in this city state and actually ended up working as maids and manual labourers, taxi drivers and security guards and all the good jobs taken over by foreigners who are hiring Singaporeans as housekeepers and drivers?

What would become of our lovely city state that we called home? Would all the daft Sinkies realise that things have gone too far and there is no return and regretted their foolishness yesterday for wearing a blinker and congratulating themselves that everything was fine and there was nothing to worry about when they should be worrying about?

I really hope that we are really on the right path and not rotting into oblivion. I hope we are not so short sighted that we cannot see further than the tip of our nose. Where are we heading as a people, as a nation, as a country? Are we being robbed as a people, as a nation, as a country right under our nose? Can we see the changing patterns of things that are detrimental to us as a people, a nation and a country?

No, everything is fine, everything is going as planned? I am just looking at 20 and 30 years forward. What about further down the road?

Kopi Level - Green

Medishield Life – 3 holes to plug

Without knowing the fine details of the Medishield Life Scheme, pending announcements, the intention and objective of this scheme look quite positive or very positive. The frightening thing is that such a good scheme has to be enforced by compulsion. The act of compulsion is never seen as something positive. Doesn’t the Govt believe that this is a very good scheme and every mentally sane person would want to be in the scheme except for those who are unable to pay for it? But this is no longer an issue as the Govt has a string of assistance plans to make sure that no one will be left out for not being able to afford the scheme. It is thus a non issue and there is no need for compulsion as those who have weird reasons not to participate would be very small.
 
The Scheme could be more sustainable, likeable and attractive if 3 things are considered and be worked into the formula. One is medical cost. Medical cost must be closely monitored and not be allowed to run away. This hole is somehow not addressed by the Committee as far as I can recall. And this is a very dangerous hole that could turn into a nightmare to the computation of premiums in the future. When cost gallops away, the pressure to raise premium would be very demanding and even appears logical and necessary. Would there be a watchdog or govt body to put a lid on medical cost? I cannot believe the Committee could totally ignore this devil in the scheme when it is the primary driver of premium rates.
 
The second hole that needs to be plug is profit. The Medishield Life is a compulsory national scheme and profit must not be factor in the equation. And no one must use the issue of uncertainties to impute too thick a cushion to address the sudden rise in demand for medical care. Such reasonings of padding the premiums or collecting as much premiums as the insured can afford is a dangerous precedent in the thought process. It is outrageous. The premiums must be carefully computed to be just enough though no one is able to predict the margin of errors. Any excess cost by future uncertainties should be treated separately as an act of God or accident of nature. If one is allowed to build in all the future uncertainties, the unthinkables, then the premiums would never be enough.
 
Related to the issue of profit is the issue of excess premiums collected. Premiums that have accumulated from lower claims must be ploughed back to reduce future premiums payable. Such excesses should not be conveniently channeled to another reserved fund to be accumulated for the rainy days. This is a national scheme to provide for the needs of the insured to pay for their medical care and not a profit making scheme or a scheme to fill the national reserve. Has this been discussed and worked out?
 
Would the Committee address these issues and incorporate them into the Medishield Life Scheme? Have they done it, or would they do it? These are three very big holes that could allow the premiums to go up and up and looking very justifiable, no choice. High cost, high claims so premiums must go up. Excess premiums or profits have already been set aside as reserves and untouchables.

Kopi Level - Green

Pope Francis attacks the world’s economic system

Agence France Presse reported on 14 Jun 14 that ‘Pope Francis launched a sweeping attack of the world’s economic system in an interview…saying it discards the young, puts money ahead of people and survives on the profits of war.’
 
And this is what the 77 year old pontiff said, ‘It’s madness…We discard a whole generation to maintain an economic system that no longer endures, a system that to survive has to make war… But since we cannot wage the Third World War, we make regional wars. And what does that mean? That we make and sell arms.’
 
Now who is the Pope referring to? Which economic system is he referring to? For the enlightened, the answers are obvious. For the daft, they have been glorifying and praising the same economic system and the Evil Empire as the Empire of peace run by peace loving people. Now, would they believe the Pope or would they say the Pope is lying?

Kopi Level - Green

CPF – All the right reasons to keep your money safe and sound

The withdrawal age needs to be raised and more money needs to be kept in the minimum sums of RA and Medisave Accounts. Without raising the withdrawal age, without raising the minimum sums, the lives of the CPF members will be adversely affected, maybe cannot retire, no money for medical bills.
 
Let’s revisit the right reasonings for these good policy changes.
 
1. People are going to live longer. Many people will live till 80, 90 or older. So they must have more money in their retirement savings. Any statistic to show how many will live to 80 and above and how many will not live to 60 or 65?
2. Inflation will destroy the value of their savings. So the amount to be saved must be regularly adjusted and pegged to inflation rate. This reasoning very good. If inflation every year goes up by 10%, the amount to be kept in the minimum sum must go up accordingly. Nevermind if the salary is inflation adjusted.
3. The people need $120k in their retirement account, excluding their Medisave Account, can’t remember which year this $120k was based on, to be able to live a comfortable retirement life. I dunno how they got this amount, I only eat porridge and pickled vegetables. And I don’t go holidays, I don’t go to theatres, I don’t go to foodcourts or restaurants, I just stay at home and do nothing by the time I hit 70, if I am that lucky. I think I don’t need so much money to live on.
4. This one very important, some will squander their retirement money away on women, wine and songs, and the casinos. I think this one not applicable to me. I am vegetarian and living like a monk.
5. People after 55 years are incapable of looking after their own money, irresponsible and will either spend and spend, or will be cheated of their money. Really?
6. If these people squandered their savings, no one will be there to help them. Don’t expect the Govt to be there, don’t expect their children or family to provide the financial support. I believe my children and grandchildren will abandon me on the streets. And I can depend on my blogger friends to buy me kopi.
7. Putting the money in the CPF is the safest place on earth. Money will not run away. I got no money to live now, where got money to put in the CPF?
8. Interest rate also very high. Higher than inflation?
9. And it is all done for your own good. What good can it be if cannot touch the money?

What do you think? I have added some comments based on my own situation and needs. Not sure how applicable are these right reasonings to you people.

Kopi Level - Green

The desperate cries of a pathetic 76 year old aunty

Hri Kumar did not bargain for it. He did not invite non constituent residents to his honest conversation on the CPF. But his resident, a 76 year old aunty, was there with a plate of genuine misgivings. At 76 year old, she belongs to the generation that should have withdrawn all her CPF savings when she reached 55 and has nothing more to do with the CPF. I think she chose to leave some savings in the CPF for safe keeping. She did not know that once left inside the CPF, her savings would be subject to the changes in CPF rulings, and now her money is treated just like other younger CPF members, locked up and cannot be withdrawn unlike the old terms. She did not bargain for it. CPF is the safest place on earth to keep her money. She trusted the govt with her money. And CPF did not fail her. Her money is very safe with the CPF but can only be withdrawn subject to CPF’s rules and regulations.

Hri Kumar did not bargain for her presence and her untold story of pain and struggle to get her money back from the CPF. She even revealed that her money in a local bank was withdrawn without her consent, to pay her property tax to the Inland Revenue. People are now questioning whether a bank has the right to take money from the depositors without the depositor’s consent and hand it to another govt agency.

The plight of this aunty is unusual and should not happen at all. Why must she be subject to the new CPF regulations? When she opted to leave her savings in the CPF, did the CPF explain to her that the money will be affected by new regulations? Or when new regulations came into force, did the CPF give her a chance to withdraw her money before it comes into effect, or it was too troublesome to do so? This is the same as the arbitrary transfer of money from the OA to the RA when a CPF member reaches 55. And the CPF did not bother to inform the members that once the money is transferred to the RA it cannot be used to pay for HDB mortgages. Should not the CPF inform the members as this is a major policy change and affects the finances of its members? Many members were caught by this unpleasant surprise and ended up having to fork out cash when they had more than enough money in the CPF to service their mortgages.

Why did the CPF think it not necessary to inform the members of such policy change? And why were there no CPF officers present in the conversation to answer any technical or specific question concerning CPF policies and regulations? This is a public conversation conducted by the govt or MP to answer the questions of the people. And the aunty rightly asked and expected CPF officers to be there to give her answers to her queries.

A public conversation is unlike a private conversation among friends. Many people have had many frank and honest conversations with their friends and did not need the presence of some authoritative figures around. They knew that their conversations were just talking cock sessions with no requirements to solve any issues or problems. Yes they were talk cock and sing song sessions. But the public and honest conversation on the CPF, organised by an MP, cannot just be a talk cock sessions, oops, my apologies, cannot be just a mere conversation. It was a serious conversation and if there were problems that needed to be ironed out, they must be done. And if there were questions to be answered, it would be best for CPF officers to be present to answer them. It is unfair to expect a MP to know the details of CPF policies even if he is a super talent that is supposed to know everything.

Would this 76 year old aunty get her CPF money back when the money should have been returned to her when she hit 55? It is so sad to see a dignified ex school teacher begging the Govt to return her life savings in the CPF. Can you believe that?

Kopi Level - Green

Good policies and bad politics

I could not believe my eyes when I read what Chua Mui Hoong wrote in the Sunday Times this morning. The title of her article was ‘Good policies hampered by bad politics’. I am not going to dwell on how bad the politics were or even bother to figure out what were the good policies. Anyone who is aware of the population squeeze, influx of foreigners, housing shortages, transportation and high property prices, healthcare facilities and cost, CPF protest etc etc would know what is good policy and what is bad policy.

What is remarkable in the article is the rehashing of some issues that I thought would be forgotten, best left unsaid and not to be spoken again. Or at least that was the impression I had when I saw the deflection towards the wilderness and a refusal in a meeting of the minds.

What were the pertinent points raised by Low Thia Khiang in his opening address in the last Parliament session? Other than the phrase constructive politics, I don’t thing anyone remembers. Whatever he had raised were drown by the pompous outbursts of what is good politics and all that remained was a statement and reinforcement of power politics. I am constructive and you are destructive. Period.

Chua Mui Hoong remembered some of the things I wanted to write about but got caught in the latest round of CPF angst and thought it best to leave them aside while the CPF issues take the centre stage. Here are the very strong points raised by Low Thia Khiang that provoked so much unrestrained hostility in Parliament. It was like stirring the hornet’s nest.

1. If the people continue to support a govt party that uses high handed tactics against its political opponents, we are endorsing a bullying political culture.

2. If the people support a govt party that uses governmental resources, including civil servants, to serve its partisan goals, we are condoning the abuse of political power as an acceptable culture.

3. Using differentiating measures in policies to punish people who voted for the opposition breads a culture of divisive politics.

4. It also used to be said that the political incumbent has no obligation to level the playing field, that might is right, and that the political incumbent has the right to use all legal means to remain in poser because everyone will do it they are the incumbent. This is building a self serving political culture.

The above points clearly described the political culture of the day and how constructive can the political culture be if these cultures continue to dominate the politics of this wanna be democracy? What went on in Parliament after what Low said was all about the above, the kind of ‘constructive politics’ that are uniquely Singapore.

And what is amazing in Chua Mui Hoong’s article is a dressing down of the govt for its brand of constructive politics. Unbelieveable, and I do not wish to elaborate further and anyone who wants a better feel of what she said should discover the truth by reading the article itself. 

Though there was a vain attempt to blame the WP for not playing constructive politics, it did not hold much water. The opposition parties cannot engage in constructive politics when the tone and culture of politics are set by the dominant power of the day. The total absence of a follow up discussion on the above 4 points raised by Low is the best testimony of not wanting to talk about them. The subsequent robust attacks were more a diversion from the subject matter and to ignore the elephant in the room. And Chua Mui Hoong summed it up by asking ‘whether good policies can make up for bad politics – or the absence of any meaningful discussion of it’.  She presumed that all policies were good, so let it be. Can there be constructive politics when the conditions and culture mentioned by Low Thia Khiang continue to drive the politics here?

Why was there no discussion on the 4 main points raised by Low? Were they utterance of political myths, high falutins, or were they idealistic aspirations that don’t mean anything?

Kopi Level - Red

The CPF issue took down a minister in 1984

In 1984, Howe Yoon Choong, then Minister of Health, produced a paper, Report of the Committee on the Problems of the Aged, with the main objective of delaying withdrawal of CPF savings from age 55 to 60. This created an up roar with the workers telling the trade unions they were strongly against it. The feedback was so negative that it led to his stepping down from politics.

Though the report was stating a demographic problem that was waiting to happen, it was wrong news at the wrong time. It is always never pleasant to be a messenger of bad news. Often the messenger got fried. Howe’s recommendation was a simple delay from age 55 to 60, but it was bad enough to bring down a serving minister for suggesting it.

Since then, several changes had taken place in the CPF scheme. Withdrawal age was pushed back to 60, 62, now 65 and may go higher. The withdrawal sum is no longer a lump sum but in the forms of drips and drapes, an annuity payable monthly. Then there are now two minimum sum schemes that are holding back a huge sum of the people’s savings, at current rate, about $198k with the Medisave included. In addition, the CPF members are compulsorily required to purchase CPF Life annuity insurance and an akan datang Medishield Life medical insurance.

Compare these changes to what Howe Yoon Choong had proposed the delay from 55 to 60 was nothing. How did the Govt managed to get so far without an uprising or an up roar like the time of Howe? Maybe the people did not protest. Maybe the trade unions did not protest. Maybe the protests were not fed back to the Govt. Maybe the Govt simply ignored the protests. Whatever, things seemed to have gone down well superficiality, or quietly. No protest meant the people agreed to the changes.

7 Jun told a different story. It was like all the problems and anger were bottled up and just exploded. The can of worms was ripped apart and no one can close it anymore. The issues and unhappiness are in the open. No complaints, no protest, no demonstration? What is real?

Is the anger is real? If the misgivings and unhappiness are real, would this CPF thing bring down another minister? Or would it bring down instead a Prime Minister? I think not. I think it could be worse. Everything that is wrong with the CPF has come together as one big problem and is blowing up at one go.

Please feel free to disagree. I know, many would think this assessment is an over exaggeration of a small problem or no problem. Don’t make a molehill out of a mountain. Oops, don’t make a mountain out of a molehill. It will fizzle off and nothing more would be heard of it. Life will return to normal. And the minimum sums will just keep piling up as planned.

Kopi Level - Green

When no one is protesting outside Parliament

I could not remember which minister said this. When no one is protesting outside the Parliament House, it means the people are happy or have accepted the new policy. Or if no one is complaining, then the people are supporting the govt policy. Did anyone complain when the minimum sum schemes were introduced? I think no one did. So the Govt must have read the ground saying it was ok, the people supported the policy change.
 
Now some noises were made against the minimum sum schemes and no one can blame Chuan Jin for saying that this was implemented many years ago and what is happening to day, to raise the minimum sum to $155k, is just a continuation of a policy decision made many years back. And the minimum sums would continue to rise as part of the plan to keep up with inflation to ensure that the people’s savings in their CPF will stay at the value of $120k when it was first decided. Sounds very logical and very correct and very right.
 
7 Jun in Hong Lim Park has changed something. About 5000 people turned up to support the protest against the minimum sum schemes and several other conditions tied to the CPF scheme. Would this make any difference? Would the Govt accept this as a protest by the people and their unhappiness with the CPF scheme? Oh, the protestors did not march to Parliament House. So got count or no count? Or would 5000 be seen as a drop in the ocean, nothing to worry about? Or would it be a case of too little too late. The decision was made many years back, cannot change anymore.
 
How would the Govt make of the Return My CPF protest? If it is seen as a small incident, a small anomaly, and all systems go, what would it take to make sure the Govt get the message that the people are unhappy and disagree with the govt policy on the CPF? Would more people turning up at Hong Lim make any difference?
 
There will be another protest on the same subject on 12 Jul. Could this be the opportune time to reconfirm, double confirm the message so that the Govt understood and do some changes to the CPF scheme? Should the protestors march to Parliament House after the rally in Hong Lim? How many people would be needed to make a difference, 12,000 or 20,000? The Govt will be reading the attendance to decide if the people are with or against the policy.
 
Or would it need to take a GE to change?
 
By the look of things, the schemes within the CPF are as good as cast in stone. The minimum sums would be there and would keep on increasing. The withdrawal age will keep on increasing, the premiums for Medishield Life will likely to increase after the initial years, and so would be the premiums for CPF Life to keep up with inflation. And the interest rates of 2.5% and 4% will be the norm with the occasional extra 1%.

Kopi Level - Green

Is this the Singapore for Singaporeans

Read the case of a 43 year old Singaporean with a BA from NUS and a MBA from a UK university. He was forced to leave his job and had 19 years of corporate experience. He has a family to feed. He sent out many resumes but still unable to get a job. He had an A for Economics at A level and at MBA level. He even tried to be a tuition teacher to teach A level Economics but no one wants him. He is desperate and suffering from depression.

Another 42 year old with a B of Commerce degree also could not find a decent job in the banking industry. This is a man who tried to upgrade himself, a lot of fight, and got a degree at 39. This is not a man who gives up. But nobody wants him. Recruitment agencies recommended him to work as an operator in a call centre. Is this what a Singaporean with a degree is fit for? His may not be the normal degree but he worked hard for it.

How many Singaporeans in their 40s and 50s are caught in such dire situations? The sickening thing is that this country is providing PME jobs to at least half a million foreigners. This is becoming like a country that has no place for its own citizens.

Would MOM and Tan Chuan Jin start to do something seriously to see that young Singaporeans in their 40s and 50s who are willing to work get a decent job? They have heavy family responsibilities, children and mortgages. This is very serious matters and may drive them to suicide. They have no dignity, losing their confidence and self respect, and unable to put food on the table or money in their children’s pockets.

What kind of country is Singapore becoming when its own citizens cannot find decent jobs and foreigners keep flooding in with jobs ready for them? Can someone tell the jobless Singaporeans what is happening? I am puzzled that things are still so peaceful in the streets.

I hope Singaporeans do not talk nonsense to rubbish these Singaporeans in trouble over getting a job. Please have a heart, no nasty silly remarks. The problem in Singaporean getting a decent job is a very serious matter. Please don’t ask them to go and eat shit. They deserve some respect for trying very hard and desperately wanting to get a job.

But the millionaires would probably have more important things to do, like where is the best place to take their families for a holiday. You can see them everywhere with their smiles of contentment written all over their rich faces and not a worry to care. Even if you tell them that Singaporeans are desperately seeking for jobs, they would just smile as if they were non events.

Gilbert Goh’s Transitioning.org has many such cases pleading for help. This is not politics but survival. The cost of living here is one of the highest in the world and not having a decent income is frightening and a death threatening thing. These Singaporeans need help urgently. MOM must set up a team or unit to help them quickly. Stop wasting time and resources on the good to have things like kindness movements, save the dogs and cats, more parks and bicycle lanes. These people need a job urgently. They are not asking for charity or subsidies. What is the point of bragging about full employment when our citizens are going to starve while foreigners are having a party here?

Kopi Level - Green

Huffington Post: Is Singapore the perfect country of our time?

‘You land at Changi Airport after flying for what seems a lifetime, and you're naturally disoriented, even before you hit the customs booths that feature bowls of mints, dire warnings about the death penalty for those bringing in drugs, and digital comment cards asking if the service was to your liking. Duck into a public restroom and you'll be exhorted to aim carefully and to "flush with oomph" for the sake of cleanliness. Outside, it's tropical sticky but impeccably clean, in a city inhabited by Chinese, Malays, Indians, and a multiplicity of guest workers from around the world -- all speaking English.’
 
My simple answer to this poser is yes, Singapore is the perfect country for the English speaking rich. You can live here, feel very at home, and flaunt your wealth in perfect safety and do as you please minus the small irritation of no gum chewing, and no drugs. If you can live with these two minor misgivings, Singapore is the perfect city to live in.
 
And the best part, it is going to be better and better, provided you can afford the convenience and luxury of peace, safety and stability at a price. Not many can afford it, not even the millionaire citizens. Many would be here for the last time, downgrade, have a good fling with life until their last dollar is spent and off to another paradise. Their children would have to find their own way except for the scions of the very rich.
 
Everything is superbly fine in Singapore. The only thing rotting is the core. The Singaporean core, the original people that built this wonderful city, will shrivel and eventually cough out like the stone of a plum. The new core, assuming that they are just as good, will take their place so that this unbelieveable city of prosperity and opulence will go on and on.
 
Even the CPF scheme is designed that way though not spoken. The average citizens can only enjoy their wealth by trading their citizenships that allowed them to withdraw their lifesavings. This would allow them to be rich in a cheaper country of their choosing. If they stay put, many would not be able to afford the high cost of living when a cheap small car would cost $100k, and a cheap 3 bedroom public flat would cost nearly half a million Sing$. A private apartment of the same size would cost a million easily and treatment for a major illness will cost more than the price of a 3 bedroom flat. This is small change for the super rich but would bankrupt the average citizens.
 
Yes, Singapore is the perfect place to be in, for those who can afford it when a few hundred thousand dollars are small change, when paying $10 daily for ERP is small change.

Kopi Level - Green

The CPF is a good scheme if….

The CPF was a good scheme and can continue to be a good scheme with many people happily putting their life savings into it. What needs to be done is to modify the terms with more elements of options and choices and the removal of compulsion.
 
Let the original withdrawal age be at 55, or perhaps, this is a big retreat from its original position, to allow two withdrawal age, ie 55 and 60. The minimum sum schemes should be hanged or mothballed. There is no good reason to dictate that a person’s life savings should be retained against his wish even if by legislation. Where is the moral justification to mess around with other people’s money?
 
What the Govt can do is to provide a few options for the people to want to leave their life savings with the CPF after the withdrawal age. A 4% interest rate against a near zero bank interest rate would be very attractive for people who do not need the money urgently. And to make the scheme more attractive, those who left their money in the CPF after the withdrawal age should be allowed to make withdrawals any time if they so choose to. This will give confidence to people to keep their money in the CPF.
 
Not everyone will want to keep all their life savings in the CPF when they could withdraw them. But there will be a substantial number of people who would want to enjoy the higher interest rate or whatever attractive annuity schemes the CPF board could offer on a voluntary basis.
 
The Govt would have a much more happier group of people putting their money with the CPF as a matter of choice. There would be people who, no matter what, would not want to leave any money with the CPF. But when they can withdraw them at will, anytime, it makes sense for many to leave their money with the CPF. And there will be the odd balls that would squander their money away the very next day they took them out. These are social problems that the Govt would have to deal with and cannot be reasons to punish the whole population in a straight jacket policy. What kind of logic is that? Simple Simon?
 
Make the CPF an attractive scheme that the people would chose to keep their money by choice after the withdrawal age and be grateful to the Govt. The present schemes have started to smell and the rotting smell will only get worse and becomes unbearable. It is nearly there.
 
The Govt has a choice to do the right thing.

Kopi Level - Green

An honest dialogue on the CPF

MP Hri Kumar wanted to have a dialogue with his residents in Thomson and Toa Payoh on 14 Jun. The banner for this dialogue reads, ‘CPF – An Honest Conversation: Public Dialogue with Thomson-Toa Payoh Residents’. I wrote about this earlier that Roy Ngerng, KJ Jeyaretnam, Leong Sze Hian and Ariffin Sha had registered to attend this dialogue.
 
The latest, Kri Kumar did not accept their registration as the event was only for his residents. Ariffin posted a couple of responses by Hri Kumar saying that he was pleased that residents from outside his constituency were interested in the dialogue.
 
Netizens are crying foul that Hri Kumar is not accepting residents from other constituencies to attend this dialogue on the CPF which is a national issue. I thought it would be a great opportunity for Hri Kumar to give the govt’s version of the CPF story and clarify whatever doubts raised by the people. And if necessary, Hri could bring in more experts like Indranee Rajah or a minister to assist him in this very important conversation. It would be the first opportunity for the govt to rebut whatever issues that were raised at the Hong Lim Park protest rally.
 
It is all about communication and explaining govt policies to the people and this dialogue could be raised to a national level and would receive greater publicity than intended. It would be good for Hri Kumar and the govt to say what they need to say to the residents and to remove whatever wrong perceptions they have on the CPF issue.
 
Why should an MP not willing to engage in a serious conversation on a serious matter with the residents, or a few residents just because they were from different constituencies? This is a golden opportunity not to be missed for the govt to say its piece. Why not? Why abstain when so many doubts and issues have been raised by the speakers at Hong Lim and needing answers?
 
Should not this be what constructive politics be, engaging the people?

Kopi Level - Yellow

Bankruptcy in the banking and IT industries

Oh I am not referring to the monetary aspect of these two industries. I am referring to the skill sets of the professionals particularly at the senior and top management levels. There seems to be a dearth of local talents in these two industries today. 20 years ago, we were already a major financial centre in the region and our locals were filling up the top management positions in these industries. Particularly in banking and finance, the MAS, under the leadership of Koh Beng Seng, were telling the foreign banks operating here to train the locals to assume top management positions.
 
Today, the top management positions are filled by foreigners and more foreigners are coming in to replace the locals caused they can’t find any locals good enough. What is happening? What were the foreign banks doing in the last twenty years? Why is this financial centre and highly IT connected city facing bankruptcy in its local human resource to fill the needs of these industries?
 
The situation is real bad when it has to recruit its top management staff from a third world country like India. Singapore was so advanced in banking and finance and IT relative to India. Why is Singapore becoming dependent on India for its professional manpower in these industries? Why is a first world city state losing out in developing its manpower skill sets to a third world country that is anything but a financial centre?
 
And the pathetic thing today is the call to train our young recruits in these industries for future leadership positions. What it means is that the current batch of middle and senior management staff are duds or inepts, not good enough, not material for top management. And it would take another 20 or 30 years to groom the young things of today to prepare them for the future. In the meantime, in the next 20 or 30 years, the top financial centre and IT city will have to depend on foreigners to fill up top positions in these two industries. In total at least 50 years have been wasted with a vacuum of top management talents that would put the city state in a very precarious position. It has no talents!
 
Is this a joke? If this is real, then it is a very serious problem caused by bad planning and lack of foresight. It cannot be intentional. It is no laughing matter that we can take our own sweet time to talk cock and sing song.

Kopi Level - Yellow

Roy Ngerng was sacked by TTSH

Roy Ngerng the blogger that is being sued by the PM Hsien Loong was sacked from his job at Tan Tock Seng Hospital yesterday. He should have seen this coming. His sacking was a matter of time. The reasons, using office hours to advance his social cause that were not within the scope of his work, and worse, engaging in anti govt activities. He had breached the civil service code of conduct and his terms of employment. TTSH may be a private govt hospital but if I am not mistaken, is still run administratively like a civil service set up.
 
There is nothing wrong with his sacking. And there is nothing wrong with the PM suing him for defamation. The funny thing is that there is a foul smell in the air. There is unease and eyes are rolling all over like something is not right. Unfortunately everything is right, everything is in accordance with rules and procedures and the law, just like the high ministerial pay and all the political appointments. Everything is done legally and no one can find any fault with them.
 
Like George Yeo said, everything is so perfect, so right and so proper. Roy Ngerng would just have to find another job that allows him to do what he is doing and to wait for his defamation case in court.

Kopi Level - Yellow