no kidding

I find this very interesting. It is reported in the paper that MICA is disputing IHT's comment that PAP is losing popularity because of the 66.6% votes. On the other hand PAP is claiming that it is the best result since 1980, except for the election after 911. Who is right? It is like a glass half full and half empty. Both parties arguing their position vehemently. One insisting that it is half empty and the other refusing to concede and claimed that it is half full. Does it really matter as the election is all over. And whether it is gaining more popularity or losing popularity, only the next election will tell. At best it is like the guy staring at the mirror and proclaiming himself that he is so good looking. And he is very happy by believing it to be so. Don't laugh. The is serious matter.

the price of justice

Thomas Koshy wrote an article on how expensive our legal system is when one has to pay through his nose to the lawyers for his innocence. The legal fee is now so high that one actually has to pay or be held at ransom when dragged to court, rightly or wrongly. Many of the innocent poor, or those who cannot afford the high legal fee, could take the easy way out, plead guilty and suffer a lesser consequence then be cleared of the charges and be bankrupted in the process. Is this what justice meant to the average person in this first world country? Anyone with the money to spare can drag another person to court and break him if the victim has no money to find a good lawyer, or to break his bank even if he has some money to do so. And with enough financial muscles, the legal case can drag on and on with appeals after appeals, and the poor bugger will become poorer and poorer by each court sitting. Then there is the possibility of being prosecuted by the law. Now this one is even worst. No chances of claiming for damages against the state prosecutor. Only hope is to be found innocent, after emptying one's pocket. Against a private law suit, the accused can still sought compensation and damages from the plaintiff if he won the case. But when the charges are made by the state, there is no such thing as compensation for the cost or for the wrongful charges, or the agony and harrowing experience of being charged, or even put under detention. Poor chaps would have to live by this expensive justice system and choose between being broke financially or being broken by it. With money, one can do a lot of wonders, to right a wrong or to buy a wrong.

the myth

I am going to start this new thread and see how long it can run by looking at all the myths in our little island. I will also be considering another serial-like thread on the legendary figures too. This latter thread will be on the supernatural power of our super talents, that we have plenty to boast, and their extraordinary pursuits and achievements. Let me first start with this mythical thread and forumers shall also feel free to add in their own myths here. These are book material. Myth 1. I heard this before, many times, and many of you too. I just heard it over the weekend. It goes like this. Singaporeans can vote for the opposition, but must not change the govt. Changing the govt will bring disasters to Singapore. How is that? The opposition is assumed to be men of lower calibre and abilities. And their objectives is to bring instability to the country and to destroy it. Of course, because of their lesser abilities, they will not be able to run the country. And all the foreign investors will be so frighten that they will pack up their investments and run. All foreign investors love our one party system and also think that Singapore cannot have a multi party system. Singapore can only continue to exist under the able leadership of the ruling party, comprising able men of high integrity, honesty and incorruptibility. No other party, now or in the future, can ever produce the same kind of quality people the ruling party is producing. Associated with this Myth 1 is Myth 2. Myth 2 proclaimed that a one party govt, better still, a 100% one party govt is the best kind of govt, at least for Singapore. Having oppositions in Parliament is bad. The Singapore govt will function at its best without any opposition members. Singaporeans should put all their faith and trust in one political party, which is infallible forever. And this myth, oops, this truism has been proven over the years and will not fail.

a new singapore icon - the holy trinity

The Sunday Times wrote about the latest achitectural monument in town, the Sands IR. From the achitectural perspective, some love it, some loath it. I love it. I find it very majestic and has a unique presence. A very enormous and distinctive piece of structure. And the geomancers have their say too. The three tall buildings resemble three joss sticks. The roof garden represents a cap on its growth, or the flatness appears like a knife slicing through the sky. Any building taller than this blade will be cut down. Or it resembles a piece of flyover disconnected from both ends. And the pool on top is like a building drown in water. All very imaginative and creative. Let me offer a very Singaporean interpretation. The three pillars symbolise the tripartite system of Government, Labour and Employer. How's that? And the roof top? Oh because of the sensitivity of the Govt and the people, the casino will be allowed to make handsome profits. But this will be kept at certain level and not allow to runaway uncontrolled. And there is this lotus structure which looks like the buddha's palm. This means that the IR will be expected to donate a lot of its profits to charity. And one final one. The lower buildings appears to be covered by a number of large tarpaulins. Hmmm, plenty of things to cover up. It is very easy to let wild your imiginations and put in your two cents worth. Whatever, it is a nice icon for a world class city state. And now we can tell the world of our extremely successful tripartite system that is the key foundation of a peaceful labour and industrial environment, a formula for growth.

helping third world countries

Corruption is a dirty word used in whatever context. Even mentioning it will draw ire from those who think it is meant for their ears. Corruption generally happens in third world countries or badly managed countries. When we are talking to third world countries, or trying to advise them on how to beat the plague of corruption in their countries, it may be better if the word corruption is not mentioned. We may talk to them about how to cap the income of their civil servants. Everyone works, in whatever capacity, to make a living. All the civil servants in the third world countries is no exception. They also have the same aspiration and motivation of developed countries' civil servants. And they want to earn more to live a better life. But they find it very difficult to raise their official salaries and thus have to resort to other modes of income, officially or unofficially, legally or illegally. It is a case of lack of ingenuity to justify how to pay themselves well. Basically all they need to do is to cap corruption among their civil servants to an acceptable level and make it legal and transparent. After that, put them on a firing squad if they resort to corruption again. It is a carrot and stick solution, and important to make it transparent and understood. The only headache is to determine their appetite.