return public transport as a public service

The noise is getting louder. More and more are shouting for a reform of the public transport system. Not just about how the different transport services should be run. But to return public transport as a public service run by the govt. The myth that it has to be privatised to be efficient and effective should be grounded. No one believes in such myths anymore. Anyone running a public service and found to be incapable and inefficient should be sacked. Period. And make sure his replacement do a better job or else sack as well. Then we will see whether there is a need to privatise for efficiency. That is only one part of the myth. The second part of the myth is that public and essential services must be run for profits. This thinking needs to be revised. We need to go back to look after the interest of the people, especially the lower income group. Ok, please, no silly comments like running at a loss. Sack the CEO if he cannot run it as a going concern. And no lowering in the quality of service just because it is run to make lesser profits. This is another big bull. Many letters have been written to the press. What more feedback is needed? Or because these letters did not send to the official feedback unit, so not counted as feedback? Or maybe should ask Wei Ling to write another letter on this issue.

drums, gongs and kompangs for Remy

Perhaps, perhaps, if he was a foreign talent, he might deserve something better, more attention, more accolades, more fundings and more praising. Isn't home grown talents not worthy to be groomed? Or their achievements not to be trumpeted? Someone should ask him to sleep in the void deck with his bowling balls for one week and donate $500k for his effort. That would surely raise his presence and the interest in Remy. Come on sports reporters, do something good for our home grown heroes. Make up some interesting stories like what they did for Tiger Woods. Analyse and compare his achievements with other great bowlers, see what kind of records he has broken. The first Singaporean to win how many world titles, how many titles he has won so far? How many perfect games etc. Create a website for him. Popularise bowling through his achievements. Make every child wants to be a Remy ong like every Brazilian wanting to be Pele. Make bowling a national craze. Forget about football or sprinting, sports that we are physically disadvantage. Keep the Singapore League for commercial reasons to keep the footballers employed. Pay them and not foreigners. We will never be there in the world cup. Just treat it as a sweet dream. Be real. Better to promote things like bowling, yacthing, billiards, ok, badminton, table tennis etc where we really have a chance to be world champions. Oh, golf is possible too.

hedge funds, saviour or menace?

'...hedge funds were a vital source of liquidity - saviours when markets dry up.' Robert Rubin 'Asian policymakers saw them as predators causing undue volatility and overwhelming central banks. Said William Pesek. Now who is saying the true picture. Both said some truth but one is truer than the other. Just look at the main reason for the existence of hedge funds. Hedge funds exist solely for profits. Never forget this. Their presence in any market to provide liquidity is incidental and to their benefits. They are in a market to soak up the liquidity and will disappear as quickly as they appear when the market dries up. And they caused upheavals in the wake of their entry and departure. Governments must get it straight. The hedge funds are not there to bring in money. In a market when there are lots of foreign funds available, it may be acceptable for the hedge funds to come in and generate activities and liquidity. For the money they are going to scoop up could be from foreign funds. But when the money in the market belongs to the people, the citizens, one better thinks a little whether hedge funds should be welcomed to take all the people's money away. Sometimes it is better to have lesser activities and gradual growth and retaining the money in the market then to allow hedge funds to come in and off load everything away. And normally such activities will incur a cost to the hedge funds for playing in the market and these could provide additional jobs and revenue. What if the bulk of the traders were international? What if commissions are negligible or nothing to talk about? In such a situation the hedge funds could operate at practically no cost, generate few jobs, but through their expertises and collusion, could wipe out a whole market. Hedge funds that are uncontrolled and allowed to play by the law of the jungle are a menace to the financial markets and can break a country.

hedge funds, saviour or menace?

'...hedge funds were a vital source of liquidity - saviours when markets dry up.' Robert Rubin 'Asian policymakers saw them as predators causing undue volatility and overwhelming central banks. Said William Pesek. Now who is saying the true picture. Both said some truth but one is truer than the other. Just look at the main reason for the existence of hedge funds. Hedge funds exist solely for profits. Never forget this. Their presence in any market to provide liquidity is incidental and to their benefits. They are in a market to soak up the liquidity and will disappear as quickly as they appear when the market dries up. And they caused upheavals in the wake of their entry and departure. Governments must get it straight. The hedge funds are not there to bring in money. In a market when there are lots of foreign funds available, it may be acceptable for the hedge funds to come in and generate activities and liquidity. For the money they are going to scoop up could be from foreign funds. But when the money in the market belongs to the people, the citizens, one better thinks a little whether hedge funds should be welcomed to take all the people's money away. Sometimes it is better to have lesser activities and gradual growth and retaining the money in the market then to allow hedge funds to come in and off load everything away. And normally such activities will incur a cost to the hedge funds for playing in the market and these could provide additional jobs and revenue. What if the bulk of the traders were international? What if commissions are negligible or nothing to talk about? In such a situation the hedge funds could operate at practically no cost, generate few jobs, but through their expertises and collusion, could wipe out a whole market. Hedge funds that are uncontrolled and allowed to play by the law of the jungle are a menace to the financial markets and can break a country.

the paradox of opposition and power

'The only constant is that every state eventually ends up an oligarchy — to varying degrees of course. What a state does is that it "steals" the country from the people. And therefore when the people vote, the people get the government they deserve. And the government engineers the extent of the state — at some point beyond the control of the people — unless they want to take EXTREME measures like revolution, coups, civil war or assassinations. All of these: VERY BAD SCENE. (but entertaining nonetheless Laughing.' Matilah Singapura I fully agree with your above quote. This is the natural way for things to be. All things will find its own way to self destruct and for a new beginning. It goes in cycles. The state is initially intended for the good of the people. But once man got into power, power got into his head and it is always self that comes first. Then the slide begins for his own destruction. The people must always stand up to voice their disagreements and prevent the slide. Now this is funny. You need opposing voices to save the corrupted from getting more corrupt to save themselves and the system. For if the people just do nothing, the slide will be faster and the self destruction will come sooner. This strange law of nature works wonders. And if you look at the IMF-World Bank and their symbiotic relationship with the civil organisations who disagree with them, how one party needs the other to prolong the game, it is another level of enlightenment. If you have read my post on why the opposition always think that those in power needs to be brought down and the assumption by the powers that all oppositions are bad and incompetent, you will know that the assumptions of both sides could be just as wrong. Marx is right when he came out with the formula, thesis, anti thesis and synthesis. Every thesis will need an anti thesis to make way for another synthesis. This is the law of nature, the law of life. And it is enshrined in the story of the Animal Farm.