singaporeans no need to worry about high medical cost

Khaw Boon Wan said Singaporeans should not be unduly worried about medical cost as long as they have medisave and medishield. So for those who did not have any of these, they better be worried. And for those who have, he said that as long as they are prudent in the choice of wards, they should be ok. Now, is there a change in the govt's position on this? In the past we have heard that only the poor can choose lower class wards. For those who can afford to pay more and want to be prudent, they will not be allowed to. There will be a means test to make sure that those who have money in their medisave will have to pay for more expensive wards. I really hope that there is real change. Otherwise it does not make any difference. Anyone can be hit by a chronic life threatening disease and it could empty all his savings in the medisave at one go. It is thus prudent for people to choose a ward that will not cost them a bomb even if they can afford it. It is unacceptable, knowing that medical cost can be very expensive to force people to go for more expensive wards just because they have some money to pay. We will see whether the manifesto is only an election gimmick or the PAP really has changed its position on this issue. There are only two ways for people to feel a bit more at ease. One is to see a reduction in medical cost. And second for the people to choose and determine whether they should go to C wards. If this is not available, then the manifesto rings quite hollow.

ge round 32: staying together, moving ahead

Have we been staying together and moving ahead...together? If we have, then it is a continuity and people must be very happy, moving ahead together. Have we, did we? If we haven't? What's wrong? Why now then we are saying this? The people have been staying together all these 40 years. There is no doubt on this one. Moving ahead? The nation has been moving ahead despite a few years of consolidation and standing still during the financial crisis. But the other question is whether the people are moving ahead. Some do. Some ran far far ahead. But many were left behind. Why were people been left behind? Was the govt conscious of it, or they have forgotten along the way that they need to bring the people along? Or Rip Van Winkle just woke up and discovers that many of the people are still struggling to get by. And now it is necessary to tell the people that we will move ahead together...during a general election. Would the govt forget again? I would suggest a better motto, less people forget their mission again. The pioneering leaders were very clear in what they want. Build the nation and serve the people. The later leaders did not forget to build the nation. But serving the people? The new motto shall be Serve the People. Not squeeze the People.

ge round 31: a strong mandate to show our foreign friends

Chok Tong said: - "It is important that he gets a strong mandate because, despite all that he has done, if the mandate is weak, what signals are we giving him? "What signals are we giving to our friends outside of Singapore and what signals are we giving to investors? So it is important that we give him a strong mandate." However, Mr Goh declined to be drawn into setting a winning margin for the ruling People's Action Party (PAP). 'If there's a mandate, I would know whether it was strong or weak, but at this stage, I'm not in the business of measuring the support level for him,' he said. The above is lifted from littlespeck.com. What is this thing about a strong mandate? 84/84? Why is 70/84 not a strong mandate, or a popular vote of 60% not good enough? This is a serious problem affecting the thinking of Singaporeans. We are obsessed by abundance. And while some corners of the population are crying money not enough, there are some corners that cannot appreciate what is more than enough or having too much. I can foresee that they will suffer from indigestion one of these days. Our society is suffering from excesses which we are blind to see and pretending to understand that money not enough is a problem to some people. And we need a strong mandate to tell our foreign friends, to pass them a signal? What do our foreign friends want? What the American and Europeans want to see is obvious. I kind of getting use to this word obvious. They want to see multi party representation in parliament. They want to see more opposition members being elected. Now what signal do we want to pass to our foreign friends?

sunday morning lethargy

Woke up this morning, still sleepy eyes and was immediately slammed by the Straits Times with 6 full pages of coverage on the general election. The 7th page don't count. Looks like anything worthy to be mentioned were in the 6 brightly coloured pages with happy people and smiling faces. I flipped onto the next section. Wow, pretty faces again. And only half a page. My inner self said that is all he will give me before going back to snooze. Ya, I thought, how to read 6 full pages of hard solid stuff on a Sunday morning? This reminds me of what Seah Chiang Nee told me. Keep your post short and sweet. Nobody bothers when it is too long. I visited the world of the livings, enjoyed their pursuit of the good life. High living, low thinking. Oops, my apologies. Just tickling. These are the real people whose main concern in life is whether they are invited to the next party, where to order their next designer tog. All the togs flew in first class by SIA from Paris, London and New York. Any where else is an embarassment. And the god they worship is not LKY but a Dr Woffles. Reminds me of hobbits and wizards. And their crown prince is a Dick. Now why are people so obsessed about a 20c increase in bus fare? There is a beautiful life to live. Maybe it is time to forget about all the walking zombies who can't even make ends meet. And everyday complaining about money not enough. I know what I want to do. Visit some remote regions in Tibet or China to find the secret recipe or herbal concoction to stay young and beautiful forever. Then I can make all these blessed people beautiful even for a night. And I will be their new god. Be invited to all the parties and celebrated, with everyone trying to take a picture with me. Good morning Sunday.

the crooked bridge,: a kl perception

A KL viewpoint From Khiary Jamaluddin, influential son-in-law of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. New Straits Times.Apr 15, 2006 GOVERNMENTS the world over will only consider a volte-face in policy as a last option. The one thing that political leaders want to avoid is a U-turn, a track back, a change of mind.... Why the about-turn, especially after some very strong and categorical statements from senior government leaders that work on a curved half-bridge would commence shortly? We knew the Singapore Government was not keen on a bridge replacing the Causeway. The last thing they want is easier access across the Johor Strait for Singaporeans to spend their money in Malaysia. They know that a new bridge combined with the new Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ) complex would considerably alleviate traffic woes for the 70 million users of the Causeway every year and make the trip up north all the more palatable. A bridge would have also been a catalyst in promoting Johor as a cargo, logistics and transshipment gateway. They have also been aware for some months that the Prime Minister has earmarked southern Johor as a new growth centre for services, strategically positioning it as a competitor to Singapore which has natural limits to growth and a richly valued property market. With this in mind, they could not allow any project — like the bridge — that would accelerate the development of southern Johor. But obviously they couldn’t afford to be so obvious in showing their hand.... When dealing with slippery opponents, hardheadedness is the worst strategy. Call their bluff, change your mind, walk away, even float like a butterfly. Now they know it’s game on. * The writer is an investment banker and deputy head of BarisanNasional Youth. the above full article can be viewed from littlespeck.com. though khairy brought out many objective points, but the slant of the article is very obvious. that singapore is a slippery opponent with other objectives, and misleading the malaysians. his key argument is that singapore does not want to have a convenient access for singaporeans to visit jb or malaysia. putting aside arguments like the higher cost and toll fees and lesser relatively cheaper goods and services as reasons for singaporeans rushing over to malaysia, lets put his argument to the test. i would suggest that the malaysian govt, with all its sincere effort to build a wider and more convenient road of access to malaysia, propose to the singapore govt to widen the existing causeway to a 20 lane causeway. i am sure that will greatly reduce the jam and facilitate two way travel for the people. and to make it more attractive, do not increase the toll fees or maintain it at a reasonable level. then we will see whether the singapore govt will still object to extending the causeway. and that will prove that khairy is right, or wrong, if the singapore govt says go ahead with few demands.