Locals Not Welcome

From ST: June 28, 2007 Is it the colonial mentality or just plain rudeness? I WAS waiting to go into the fitting room at Zara Marina Square on June 22 during lunchtime. A Caucasian lady emerged from one of the fitting rooms with an armful of clothes, none of which she wanted to buy. As the Zara salesgirl took them from the Caucasian lady, she was all smiles and politeness. The salesgirl thanked the lady brightly and wished her a good day. I was next up. Immediately the smile vanished. As she took the one piece of clothing I was holding to remove the hanger, she looked almost annoyed with me for taking up her time. Her face was 'black'. I wouldn't have felt it if she had not treated the person immediately before me so well. Is it because that lady was Caucasian? Zara's clothes are nice, but the service is nowhere close. Veronica Chan Miao Hua I chance to see this letter. Some may feel irated by the behavior of the salesgirl. I suggest that since we are so cosmopolitan and encouraging more foreigners to be here, we should take such an attitude in our stride. Perhaps for shops that would like to cater for foreigners only, they should hang out a sign on their shop windows, 'Locals Not Welcome' or 'Expats Are Welcome'. That would make it very clear to the locals and the locals can avoid them and not become an irritant in the shop.

How awfully wrong

'Even if the man spent only $1000 a month, he would need $240,000 over the next 20 years. And that is before medical expenses are factored in. Would that be enough?' Lim Boon Heng How awfully wrong is the number. Even without taking medical expenses into consideration, he would need at least $480,000, taking into account inflation and the diminishing value of the dollar. The minimum sum, to be adequate, must be raised continuously to $1 million at least. The people must be educated and be prepared for this.

corporate governance and guardians

The issue of corporate governance is getting more attention. One principle that must not be violated, and for corporate governance to be effective, is that one cannot allowed the potential thieves to appoint his accomplices to guard the vault. Any system that allows this is flaw. Another principle is to have people who have a vested interest in the money in the safe to be the watchdog instead of people who are making a living as guards. Guards or guardians too may help themselves when the alternative is more attractive. You can always bribe the guards or guardians.

Zage versus Rasif - what's the message

From the trend of the questioning by Hri Kumar, the Zages should bear part of the blame for trusting Rasif and not taking reasonable precautions to safeguard their money. Though Mrs Zage was not called stupid, she broke down after being asked if it was wise of her to leave her money in trust for a property deal. The moral of the story is 'don't be too trusting with your money to anyone, even an organisation.' And remember what Gerard Ee said? Someone may just helped himself to the money. And this is exactly what happened. And recently we have seen so many cases of such nature. I want my money in my own pocket where I have full control over it. Do not trust anyone with your money. Not even god. The other point arising from this case is related to the Singapore Brand. People have so much faith in our system that they will sign away a $10 million dollar cheque. Would one do it in countries that one have doubts about the system? But if it goes on like this, soon this Brand will become No Brand. Once we lose it, once we lose the trust, it is gone. There is nothing wrong with the practice of depositing cheques in clients' accounts. It is a common practice in the finance industry. Only the safeguards appear to be in question. Are there loopholes? Or is it a case of fraud when parties are involved in facilitating the fraud? Again, don't trust your money in anyone.

NKF story - Efficiency in law enforcement

Am I proud of our system? The latest I heard in the news is that Durai will face another charge for paying $5000 to a non existing company to recruit a senior manager. It is clear that no stone is left unturned in the investigation. After the first charge of a $20,000 cheque, now another charge of a $5,000 payment. Will more be revealed in due course and bigger amounts appeared in the picture. Or is this the trend? $20,000, $5,000, $500....