out of quotes

'My outlook on life is not based on what possessions I own, knowing how transient life is; or what others think of me, knowing how seldom they do.' Peter Lim in Today paper. I don't know which Peter Lim this is. There could be thousands of them in the streets. Personally I have known at least half a dozen. Doesn't matter. But this is crap and dangerous in a way. It will undermine the ethos of our society. People may start to give up the chase for more dollars. People may stop working. We will have employers crying for employees and may end up with more imports of foreign workers. And if people refuse to work, to earn money, to buy those properties, the property market may collapse. We cannot say such things. Quite stupid actually. Money is good. The smell of money is the smell of success and recognition. No money no honey.

whose right balance?

Another great debate in the making - The right balance This time we are seeing learned counsels trained to argue in courts arguing in the media. And we are seeing two of the best taking sides on Champs, Chumps and Chimps. The key issue probably is about who are the Champs, the Chumps and the Chimps. Philip Jayeratnam is not comfortable about the remuneration system in the public sector, including the salaries of Ministers. Shanmugam is now out to defend the goodness of the system. The Today paper reported, 'Mr Shanmugam, however, argues that Singapore must strike the right balance between valuing the contribution to society through public service and paying reasonably for that service.' Now, right balance according to who? Many, including Jeyaratnam, must have disagreed with the present right balance. That's why the issue was hotly talked about in every little corners of the society, including the msm and cyberspace. But this is the right balance, the best balance, in fact less than perfect, as the salaries paid are still below the benchmark provided by the formula. So who should have the final call and say 'I am right. My version of the right balance is the right balance.'

The basics of education

An educated workforce is an asset to the nation. Govt will find it to its advantage, and also its responsibility to educate its people, which in turn benefits both country and people at the same time. Educating the population is thus both a necessity and a responsibility of a govt. The investment ploughed into education will bear its fruits and the country will be rewarded with a better educated and trained workforce. Initially it may appear to be a cost centre. But it is more than just the churning out of more employable workers, it encompasses the whole well being of a nation, the quality of life and the social environment, and everything that got to do with progressing up the ladder towards an advanced country. But education has been seen as an avenue for profit by some wise guys. Which is true to a certain extent. However, when profit is the only driving goal for education, it undermines its reason to exist as an industry. The assumption of private education for profits must be quality education to befit its high price. And quality education, which culminates in producing quality students, does not depend on the infrastructure and the quality of the teachers. It also depends on the quality of the students. Another case of rubbish in rubbish out. Here comes the problem. Quality students will either be provided with scholarships to pursue their studies in quality institutions or will qualify for admission to state universities at a much lower cost. There is no need for them to pay through their nose to private institutions for a quality education. Private institutions will thus be snuffed out of their supply of good quality students. This is a simple fact that they must know. Unless private universities can provide such a high quality education that established universities cannot provide and can attract quality students to pay for it. In reality, only those who cannot get into cheaper state universities will opt for private universities and willing to pay a higher fee. What these students would expect is that the entry requirements must be lower. That is the expectation. This is the contradiction that private universities must live with. Who the hell would want to pay more for admission to a lesser private university when they can get admitted into the best universities at a lower fee? Education for profit must thus compromise the quality of the education for the students. And this has been going on in many countries when grades were inflated to keep paying students happy and coming. Exceptional cases can be made out for niche markets or for very well established universities that can still retain the high entry requirement and command a high fee. A Harvard or MIT campus here will attract some very good students who are willing to pay the high fees which again may be relatively cheaper than pursuing it in the US. Any other average brand universities must reckon with the hard realities that they will only get the second or third best candidates available if they set up business here and want to command a higher fee. Would ivory tower professors understand this simple business logic?

Myth 140 - Unsolvable Problems

It is a myth that Singapore cannot solve any problem. The latest problem on difficulties in finding taxis during peak periods has been solved. This is a problem caused by heavy usage and calls for taxis during the certain hours. The solution, raise the surcharge. This will reduce the demand for taxis. It's so elementary and so ingenius. And any expressway that is too congested, raise the toll fees. Then traffic will be directed from expressway A to expressway B. And when B is congested, raise the toll fees. Traffic will then be diverted back to A which is having lesser traffic. And when it gets congested again, raise the toll fees again. Traffic will then go to B again. Just keep doing it and the problem will be solved. And if people are consuming too much food and there is food shortage, just raise the price. Then people will consume less. Just like saving water. This is the magic formula to problem solving.

Abe not good enough

ABE not good enough. No, I am not referring to Shinzo Abe but A level grade. When a ABE grade cannot find a place in the local universities, this is going to be a bigger issue than the UNSW. In the latter, it concerns only 250 students, and maybe half are foreigners. For a university place, it is going to affect many Singaporeans, dotting parents and their precious wards. Now people are going to question why their children with reasonably good passes are not going to find a place in local universities. Admittedly what are reasonable grades may be subjective depending on the standard of the affected parties and the universities. What will eventually be dragged out to air will be the number of places given to foreigners, including scholarships using public money, and how many local children would have been displaced from such a policy. The parents are now up in arms. We are the citizens of the country. We are the taxpayers. We are the people to defend this country. I could here them say...Welcome to the Hotel California, such a lovely place, such a lovely place...