myth 60

'The Little Red Dot is not viable' We have lived with this myth for 41 years. We started off with a population of less than 2 million. We were heading towards a dead end, political suicide for leaving our Malaysian hinterland without resources and a treasury that is virtually empty. All these are history. Today the same threat has been raised, that Singapore will not survive if we do not increase the population to 6-8 million. This time it is not outsiders that said we cannot survive. This time we said it ourselves. And to survive, we need the influx of more foreigners. The originals are no longer good enough and is a dying breed. It is like cattles with too much inbreeding. We need a dosage of new DNAs to boost out the impoverished stock. And so far everyone believe so. At least the whole govt machinery believe so. And the whole main stream media also believe so. No one has uttered a little disagreement to this embracing truth. We die if we do grow our population. The little voices in cyberspace, from the not too well educated, the unprofessional and not too objectives, the kopit tiam kakis, seem to think otherwise. So we have a competition of ideas from the thoughtful against the unthinking gossipers. Obviously the unthinking cannot be believed. The thinkers and policymakers must be right. There is another group of thinkers in the academia. Why are they saying notthing? Do they agree or disagree? Silence is golden, silence is consent. Silence can also mean protest. Or they have spoken but not heard. This is a major issue that will change the nature of the nation and its future. The academics cannot be clueless or without any views. Still waiting to hear some hot debates among the high brow thinkers on this issue. Or the viability of this nation without the doubling of its population is a truth and not a myth?

cheaper and better

When I first bought my Nikon camera a couple of years back, it cost me $399. My plasma tv cost $6000. Today, less than two years, I can get a better Nikon for the same price, with better features and improved technology, from 4 megapixels to 6 and a 1.5 inch LCD to a 2.5 inch. So is a plasma tv. A laptop used to cost at least $2k. Today it can cost below $1.5k. All the prices are coming down but without compromising on quality. In fact the quality has improved in leaps and bounds. Why is it that in this little queer island called Uniquely Singapore, the price of everything can only go up. And any suggestion of cutting down cost, the immediate reply is that quality will be compromised. That lower cost means lower quality. A CEO is a CEO and is himself. Pay him $1m or $10m, he is the same turkey producing the same work. Of course he will turn into a monkey if he is being paid peanuts. The only problem here is that nobody thinks that he is paid enough or excessively. And with the govt setting the trend, telling people that all cost and prices and salaries must go up (except for those at the lower rung that are faced with fierce international competition), it is like an edict to raise prices. And salaries are raised even in positions that have no international competition. Positions that are the reserves of Singaporeans. Then look at all the low tech industries like public transportation, essential services and basic food, how can their cost keep going up when high tech industries with cutting edge technologies, employing the best brains are able to produce better products at lower cost? Something is seriously wrong in this logic that cheap means lower quality. Just look at those who are getting ever higher salaries and compare their performances and see whether there is a proportional improvement in their performance. I bet many were just doing the same shit in and out or may even be worst. Some may spend time networking for more kickbacks for doing nothing but to show their faces or lend their names. But this is not a game of golf when a name like Tiger Woods sells.

like a virgin, george yeo in cyberspace

George Yeo is like a virgin taking her first tentative walk in the ghettos. And he chose to be in one that he is more familiar with, and feel a little safer. Can't blame him, knowing how treacherous cyberspace can be with many demons and devils of all stripes and hues lurking in the dark corners waiting to pounce on him. Nonetheless it is a very brave move and most appreciated by netizens. If all goes well, if he is not mugged, and when he spread the words among his other virgin peers, cyberspace may see more luminaries appearing for a chat. What is important now is for him to feel safe. And netizens should encourage him to visit more frequently by responding positively to his brave gesture. The nature and credibility of cyberspace depend on the netizens themselves not to engage in vicious attack on other netizens regardless of their background. It will help the growth of cyberspace community and improve communication between people and those who will influence their lives with their decisions. Cyberspace welcomes George Yeo as a netizen. PS: Though I have no specific rules in this forum, I reserve the right to delete posts that attack another forumer personally.

it is all in the faces

Well they said a picture is worth a thousand words. And I was looking at the colourful picture of Lui Tuck Yew and the six students in the Straits Times yesterday. One whole page devoted to the topic of National Education and a 5R full colour photo of the participants right in the middle. I skipped the wordings, too wordy and a topic too familiar to read it in detail. What fascinated me was the facial expression on the faces of the students and their body language. Hanisah Maskon said, 'What's Lui talking about?' Hers was a quiet attentive look. Next was this red shirt guy, Benjamin Lin, with his body leaning away from Lui as if saying better to keep your distance. And Gayle Goh, her fist in her mouth and a look that said she was in Orchard Road or somewhere out there. She was so far away though sitting so near to Lui. Tan Yee Ling was listening, but you cannot miss the scepticism in her expression. Robert Straughan was more interested in the chemistry of the half empty glass of ice cream or milk shake. He was trying to guess which was which. And Muhammad Nabil, the bright one from RI was perhaps the only one still engaged in the conversation. And of course, Lui was the one doing the preaching, or talking. Was there a generation gap or were they talking about something world's apart?

radical thoughts about babies

Radical Thoughts Babies shortage, not enough man to be soldiers, more new citizens needed. The question is how many soldiers are needed to defend against the perceived foe? The second question is whether we can survive just on our own capability or do we need backups from allies? It all depends on the strategy on how to defend a small island state. It may not be appropriate to discuss such matters here and also it is not a simple issue to deal with. But we could take some broad strokes on this dwindling number of service men to defend the country. If we can maintain the present strength, maybe a little lesser if we cannot produce the numbers we want, the small shortfall can be compensated by technology and superior weapons. With this as the bottom line, is it possible not to be too obsessed with more in numbers? What about mecenaries as a supplement? Would an additional two divisions of mercenaries be enough? We have been living with the Gurkhas as mercenary soldiers for sometime. Could options be made to have one or two divisions of Gurkhas on call if needed? Given their lower cost, we should be able to pay for them in a crisis. Not forgetting that we have a standing armed forces of our own, which is the key to our own defence and that only we can defend our own country, to activate the mercenary soldiers, it would mean that we are in a state of war, which is still a remote possibility. The other option is to sign defence treaties with friendly forces like the 5 Nation Defence Pact, or maybe with the US to come to our defence when attacked. We still have our own forces to hold the fort for the initial phases of engagement. With these two options available, we may not be so desperate to have more headcounts as war is not an option for us. We should at all times be striving for peaceful co existence with everyone and the ultimate defence by military means should hopefully not be called upon. Simply put, diplomacy first, and building bridges to avoid conflict. Second, have a respectable defence capability of our own. Third, to be able to draw upon a mercenary force or from friendly allies. Would these be adequate measures to avert the pressure of not enough babies?