Is this debate worth it?

Is this debate worth it? A definite yes from the PAP's point of view. It is an opportunity to air all the misconceptions and misunderstanding about the pay rise. It is all about transparency and that they have nothing to hide. And the PAP has achieved its objectives of explaining to the people and the people are satisfied with the explanation and justification for the formula and the pay rise. My impression is totally reverse. I think this is a serious tactical mistake on the part of the PAP. Once the formula is out for the airing, it was torn to pieces by everyone, the men on the street as well as inside Parliament. Only the converted will still want to believe that everything is alright and the formula is still worthy of what it was set out to be. The presentation of the charts etc did more harm than good to its cause. The whole debate is not only creating a big doubt. It confirms a lot of things which the people were not happy about. It reinforces the cynicism and scepticism that were once only heard in whispers. Now it is spoken loud and clear in Parliament and in prints in the MSM. Anyone agree or disagree with my assessment?

myth 131

Beware of your supporters! This guy dug a hole in the middle of the road. Then he went to his master and assured him the road ahead was all rosy. And together with a few more followers they cheered their master as he gingerly tip toed ahead towards the hole.

down with silly virtues and idealism

Virtues and benevolence in public office are passe I read with amazement, Chua Mui Hoong's article that in the present new age of Moneyism, old virtues should be dumped. Forget about Confucianism. Just think Money with a capital M. She also said that only the ministers and PAP MPs were strongly in support of high pay for ministers and the opposing voices came from the opposition and NMPs. This is only a simple generalisation as some MPs also spoke candidly about their opposition. What I am uneasy about is whether Chua Mui Hoong is extolling the new virtues of money talks? No money no talks. No money no public service, no passion for service to nation and people. Sacrifice is now an anachronism. And she put it as if this is what the new generation of Singaporeans are today. Is that a true picture? Are the people all so money minded? Are there no longer any saints or heroes among Singaporeans who would work just for a paltry $1 million in public service? Are chivalry, duty and honour, all to be dumped into the waste bin? I am wondering what are we teaching our young in schools today? I am also wondering what are we telling our soldiers and our civil servants? Would every Singaporean walk into his boss' office and ask, 'How much?'

work ethics and public assistance recipients

Public Assistance Recipients These people are defined 'as those with no kin nor any means to support themselves due to age, illness or disability.' What kind of work ethics can we expect from these people?

Defending an Indefensible position

Defending an Indefensible position An article by Jasmine Yin in the Today paper tried to defend the position that it is justifiable to pay ministers the million dollar payrise and $1 extra a day for the destitute. And it was argue that the two were separate issues and had 'no logical linkage'. Come on lah, the linkages are so loud and clear for all to see. Only the blind or those who refused to see them would say so. And it was also said that 'Money is not an issue'. What the f... Money is THE issue. If not, all these debate, all the time and resources would not have been spent to justify the million dollar increase. What I want to say is that the $290 for the poor and the multi million dollars for the ministers are very delicately intertwined. One is a social issue that the govt must look after. The other is the pay for the people who are going to look after this issue. How can $290 a month be enough when more than a million cannot be enough? It is all about public service. People who want to make millions must not think of making the millions from taxpayers money. There are many avenues to make the millions. Taxpayers money is to pay a reasonable rate for the passionate people who want to look after the nation and people. Not for cold logical people who want to be multi millionaires and still want the power of public service. Obviously after the debate, both in the media and parliament, many people do not agree with the increase and are unhappy with it. It is the people's view that matters. Maybe not. Maybe it is the decision makers' view that matters.