crooked bridge: another sound argument in its favour

a lot of sound is coming down from across the causeway in support of its demolition. this time the reasoning is that the water in the straits is like water in a giant toxic sink. funny that no fish has been found floating belly up over the last 82 years. for the same reasons, the water in all the rivers are water in a toxic sink. and all the lakes must be containing deadly water. the living and thriving fishes in the straits is the best testimony of the quality of water in the straits. hey, come off the craps! the water is a huge waterway leading into the open seas on both sides. it is not dead water. come to think of it, our reservoir must be containing poisonous water as the water are land lock. the giant toxic sink description would fit our reservoirs perfectly. and we are drinking them. we should all be dead now. or no, all the aquatic life in the reservoirs should be dead, poison, under this kind of stretched and contrived logic.

the best news today

nus and ntu are both raising their fees, again, the second time in two years after acquiring autonomous status. this augurs well for the education scene in singapore. the two universities will soon be among the top few universities in the world. they needed the money to raise the standard and quality of their courses and degrees. well, at least if they don't get it to the top in quality they will be in the tops in fees, in no time. maybe they are already there if we measure the fees relative to the income of the population. and if these hikes did not improve the quality, they should make a more hefty hike next year and the year after. sure the quality will improve. if i were in the opposition parties i will place education on top of my agenda. and tell the voters, if elected, fire all those who are the reasons for the fee hike. this silly thing about money equals quality must be put to a stop. we have a lot of quality shit everywhere.

national service: the singapore solution

as expected, the over reaction mentality is again put into motion. heavier penalties and more stringent regulations to curb ns evasion. children below the age of 16 will now be affected if they stay overseas for more than 3 months without permit. fines and fines. this is the standard way of public policy making. just whack the people with more fines, use the stick, use more disincentives. why can't the approach be more incentives for citizens and those who serve ns as a dutiful citizen? the concept of tightening the noose around the citizens neck is very negative. the nation cannot force the people who longer wish to stay... to stay. by tightening the noose, it only increase the push factor for people to want to get out. and citizenship becomes so restrictive and a huge burden of can't dos. i would thought a better approach would be to let those who want to leave... leave. and then add on the incentives for citizens who stay, who do their duties as citizens. make citizenship really worthwhile, an attractive and desirable choice. not a citizenship that has nothing more to offer except more restrictions, regulations and penalties. why are singaporeans be put on a leash? what is clear now is that citizenship is nothing better, but a worse off option. is that what singapore citizenship is all about? where is the value and heart and soul to be a citizen?

ge: you want my vote? listen to me

in every election it is always the politicians who tell the voters this is what i am going to do for you. this is what you will get when you elect me. never did the politicians ask the voters what they want. and this is about the best time for the voters to register their minds and thoughts. you want my vote, listen to me. this is what i want. this is what i think is good for me. is there a platform for the people to tell the politicians what they want? the internet chat sites and blogs and the media forum may be the place for it. this is an opportunity presented for the voters to say their piece. these are what i want, if you want my vote. 1. i want my cpf back at 55. you may keep $10k for a medical insurance. the rest is my money and i want it back. 2. i want public transport to be returned to the people. deprivatise public transport and return it to the stats board as an essential service for the people. no profit motive. 3. no more essential services to be privatised. if they do, make sure that the citizen's access to such service is not subject to profit motive. 4. take care of the citizens first. all jobs between $1000 to $10k must first be offered to the citizens. only if no takers shall it be given to ft. exceptions can be given to mncs. all govt and stats boards and glcs must prioritise to give jobs to citizens. 5. keep medical cost down with every citizen accessible to c wards if he so chooses. these are just the starters from me, for my vote. don't tell me what is good for me. i tell you what is good for me.

budget terminal budget decision

when i switched on the news i chanced to hear sin boon ann asking the minister of transportation whether the building of the budget terminal was a hasty decision. it seems that till now only one budget airline has committed to use the budget terminal. what about the rest of the budget airlines? lim hwee hua said that they were adopting a wait and see approach. sin boon ann also questioned whether there were excess capacity at changi where budget airlines could operate temporary while the situation was still developing. or could the transport ministry also adopt a wait and see approach before committing millions to the new budget terminal. when have singapore reached this state of affair when million dollar decision were done hastily and now we got a practically empty terminal. a buangkok terminal? but there were only what, 4 budget airlines in operation? so one out of four, that is 25% of the market. not too bad statistically. it would only look funny when the rest of the airlines choose not to use the budget terminal. why is transportation in singapore so difficult to handle? must go to waterloo street and bathe with flower water, i think.