Natural for citizens to criticise, as well as praise Govt.

'It is natural that citizens should criticise the Govt. It is also natural that citizens should praise the Govt for doing good. This is how a healthy relation is established between the individual and the collective.' George Yeo I could have copied the whole article in the Today paper by Nazry Bahrawi. The expression by George, perhaps the most down to earth minister with a halo over his head, shows a different kind of maturity and security in a person. He does not see every criticism as an attack and a need to respond with a sledgehammer. He sees a healthy relationship with the people that may not see eye to eye with the govt in some issues. And he accepts that it is the right of the citizens to criticise if needed be. 'But for a country to work, an active citizenry is crucial.' This is a comment by Nazry in his article.

The Royalties - A new dynamics

Amidst the throes of heightened tension in a country that has lost its direction, when parochialism and kampong politics were elevated to the national stage, a calming voice is emerging from an erstwhile quiet corner. The crown prince of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, a Harvard PHD holder in Political Economy and Govt, is steadily making his voice of reasons heard. The diminshing presence of the Malaysian Royalties, once seen as not contributing much to the development of the country, is emerging from its past shadow. A Harvard PHD, and a rational and sensible approach to nation building, is a far cry from the wild minds of what UMNO now represents. UMNO is no longer the vehicle of modernity and progress, but regression. UMNO is all about money and how to enrich one another by sucking the wealth of the country without any positive contribution. It is about sharing without contributing. A similar position that the royalties were once in. Straits Times has an article on Raja Nazrin Shah and his views of Malaysian politics. It is refreshing, and more impressive to have come from a Malaysia prince. This is the kind of leaders that Malaysia needs, well educated, progressive, confident and insightful. Not the yelling, chest thumping and kris kissing type. Those are kampong politicians, not statesmen. Malaysia needs more of such leaders to be in office to lead the country forward, not backward. As Badawi has said, Malaysia shall not be what the football team is today, regressive, backward and nothing to prove or show except being more bumiputras. Yes the Malaysian football team is a good example of what Malaysia is today. Study the football team carefully to understand why it fails and why Malaysia will also fail.

Odex or Odium?

The hefty fines that children are made to pay for downloading anime from the net is just. A crime is a crime. So age is a non issue. You download you infringe on people's copyright and intellectual properties. You must pay. I also believe that the law looks at children differently. Children cannot be jailed or caned, or hanged. But we are a nation that operates under the rule of law. We must accept the law with no exceptions. Reminds me of the school girl without a student pass. Just administer the law. And also of the streetdirectory provider. You download a few pages, the damages will come to tens of thousands. That is justice in a rule of law country.

America has started a war with China

Human rights, yuan revaluation, now poison paint, micro magnets etc are but the tools of an economic warfare. The Americans have fired the first shot and China is hurt. The damages are in hundreds of millions and bad publicity, lost of confidence and market etc China will have to react. China will need US$ to pay for all the losses. China will start to dump US bonds to pay for the losses. And the war will escalate. This is another front, other than the Middle East and Afghanistan that the Americans are opening. Fight on America. The righteous shall win. God will bless America.

CPF is forced saving

The CPF is a forced saving for the old age just in case everything is gone. It is not meant to be the sole means of survival for anyone. That is why the term used even to retain after 55 is called minimum sum. It is not the maximum sum or something extravagant. Now that people are talking about compulsory this and that, let them not forget that you can make things compulsory as long as they are within the confines of a minimum sum. Anything excessive will invite rotten eggs and anger. Now, what is minimum sum? This is an illusive figure that varies according to one's pocket, lifestyle and appetite. The $120k figure being used is a ridiculous figure to many people who hardly see $5k in their savings in their whole life. The premises for a compulsory saving scheme after 55 should include a clearer definition of what is minimum. A useful number should be the $300 pm that the govt is giving to the destitutes. This should form the basis of minimum sum. Compulsory saving should work upwards from this number. The people are not saving to eat in restaurants. Such luxury should be voluntary and be left to those who can afford them. Many will do well eating in hawker stalls or cooking for themselves. The next factor is a 20 year time frame, ie 62 to 82. Forcing people to save after 82 is ass talk. By 82, the bulk of the people would have gone. The remaining few if still needed state assistance would not be too much a burden for the state to bear. $300 pm or less. Whether it is annuity or to leave the sum in the CPF should be optional. And for those who wanted to save $120k or $300k in their CPF, by all means. The people must be allowed the option to opt for more savings to be left in their CPF at 55. The compulsion part should only be for the minimum sum, using $300 pm as the starting point for computation. For people who are working beyond 62, the minimum sum can be lowered proportionately and not increased. Who's the idiot who said the longer one works, the more must be saved? The above should be some of the basic premises to compute the minimum savings needed for the aged. As I am not paid for this, this is as far as I am prepared to offer. Let those who are being paid in millions to think of something more realistic and workable. They are not paid that kind of money for nothing. The higher one is being paid, the greater is the expectation. No more slipshod solutions. They must justify the supertalent pay that they are being paid for.