Medisave versus Medishield

Medisave versus Medishield Would any MP raise the necessity of having Medisave and Medishield at the same time? Why is there a need to keep so much money in Medisave when people already opt in to for Medishield? Shouldn't this be an either or option? And many even have their own medical insurance in addition to Medisave. Do the people need to be covered 2 or 3 times over? Isn't it a waste of money kept in the unproductive care of Medisave? The people must be given a choice to decide which option they so desire, Medisave, Medishield or Private Medical insurance. Surely one should be more than enough.

Of Living Hell and Paradise

Of Living Hell and Paradise I was in Chinatown during the CNY to take in the sight and I strayed into the little corners around Sago Lane. The very old of Chinatown are there. Many of them. Yes they are alive, heart pumping and breathing. But are they living? There are many of these pathetic souls that can be found in all corners of the heartland. Sitting in the void decks or some little corners oblivious to what is around them. They have defied nature, humans have distorted the course of nature, when they should have moved on and be in paradise. Many still cling to the idea that keeping people alive for as long as they can is a good deed. Life must be preserved on this living hell for as long as possible. And now we have created this enormous problem of the aged, not knowing how to deal with them. For nothing can be done unless youth can be restored and vitality returned to their fading lives. What could have been done is to make them live the last leg of their lives with dignity and with peace and without pain. The latter medical science can do quite a bit. For them to live with 3 decent meals, without worries should be the minimum the country can do for them. What is the cost of 10 packet of 3 in 1 coffee or tea a day? Or 3 meals of sweet potato porridge and vegetables or beancurd? For the lonely and destitute and unable to work, shouldn't they be taken care of by the state? Or shall we say that they deserved to be where they are? It is very cheap to provide some free meals and coffee for those above 60 or 65s in the citizen's corners. It would not cost more than a couple of hundred bucks per head to do it. Not all senior citizens will need them. Only a handful will. Welfare state? It is welfare in a way and a necessary one. Whose fault to keep them alive for so long when their bodies are no longer useful for work to pay for their own living cost?

babies are national assets

Medishield to reach newborns This is another very good scheme. Babies are national assets, boys or girls. The country must give them the best medical care to raise them into productive adults. This is like organisations calling their human resource as the most important asset of the company but...treating them like shit. The country has been encouraging the people to produce more children in a declining birthrate. And without the children coming, the country will perish unless replace by foreigners. If the country treasures these babies, shouldn't their health at these early stages of their precious lives be the concerned of the country and the little cost of insurance be paid out by the state? If we can pour in so much money on beautifying the parks and canals, don't these babies deserve better?

Celebrating Singaporean - John Chen

John Chen the Singer I take my hat off to John Chen for doing something he loves. He was an academic turned politician and now turns singer. Go for it John, do the things that make you happy and enjoy life. Don't be a slave to money. How many people can take such a dramatic turn in life? Ok, he has made his dole. And that is exactly what making money is for, to earn enough to buy oneself the freedom to be what one wishes to be. I can see John Chen a happier person, more joyful and younger even. He is now sporting a new celebrity look, so different from his past expressionless, dull academic and politician image. Let's see more Singaporeans follow his happy path.

china less attractive with higher corporate tax

China is raising its corporate tax on foreign companies from 15% to 25% while lowering the local companies' tax from 33% to 25%. This would make Chinese corporate tax very much higher than our 18/20%. Would this make us now more competitive than China? No doubt China has other comparative advantages like a huge market and a huge labour pool and can afford to raise its taxes. MNCs will have to make their assessments as to where will give them the best value. And Bintan/Batam with their own sets of problems that make operating there unprofitable, Singapore will now be slightly more attractive as a preferred destination. Oops forgot to mention India as another choice market. But we still have to lower everything to make ourselves competitive, except wages. But we have comparative advantage in having a big pool of local and foreign talents that can command higher wages. So not a problem there. Oh, workers level, that is another story.