Asian affairs, western perspective

I just read 'The week in Review' in the Straits Times this morning. There was this whole page touching on issues in Thailand, Japan, Sino Russian relations and the Asian market downturn. Only the first article had the author's name under it. So it is clear who wrote the article. The other 3 articles did not specifically said who wrote them. But at the top of the page was the photo of Jonathan Eyal of the Straits Times Foreign Desk. So presumably they must be contributed by Jonathan. There is no doubt that Jonathan is a prolific writer and an expert in Asian and world affairs. And I enjoy reading his articles. But the approach of his writings is very similar to writers like William Pesek and Tom Plates, a western view, tinted, to reflect western interest, obsession and agenda. And this is the kind of material that readers are fed with practically everyday. And eventually they will used these material subconsciously to form their opinions and viewpoints of things, especially the negative perspective and agenda of the west on Asian countries. It would be more balance if national papers of Asian countries publish more of the views of their local writers on Asian affairs and give them an Asian favour. Maybe the Asian countries truly are lack of Asian talents to write about issues and matters concerning Asian interests. This must be the greatest failure of all their institutions of higher learnings. Can't even produce writers and commentators on their own affairs. It is a pathetic state of affair that today, we are still looking at ourselves through western glasses. When will this change?

Capitulation of Opposition Parties

All the opposition parties are silent and dare not breathe a word on the issue of whether Malaysia is an Islamic state. They were told to shut up and they shut up. I thought this happens only in the red dot. Only an East Malaysian Minister in the Prime Minister's office, Tan Sri Bernard Giluk Dompok, dares to speak out on the issue. To him the minorities cannot live in a state of denial when things are obviously wrong. To him, if the people's representatives, the leaders representing minority races, refuse to speak up, then they must give up their positions as leaders of their people. The MCA and MIC have sold out their people in the past and are doing so in this issue. So are the other minority parties. Do they still believe that they have the right and moral authority to represent their people? As Malaysia progresses, certain issues must be discussed in the open, intellectually and rationally. Not by the threat of the kris and blood letting. If it is too much to debate in public, at least it should be debated in parliament among civilised men. Can this be taken for granted? And it needs not be telecast live to the people. Keeping mum and not talking about it is a betrayal of the people they represent. The Malaysian politics have been held at ransom by the ultras under threat of violence for too long. It is time Malaysia changes its course in the political development of the country and works towards a more progressive and mutually tolerant society among the various races.

Parameters for retirement CPF

Today we are not dealing with chief clerks that only had a primary education to work out policies and decisions for us. We are paying top dollars for top talents and we must demand for serious and meticulous computations and for the best solutions money can buy. No more straight jacket one solution fits all occasions decision with no regards to how it can adversely affect many. We need to tailor make policies and decisions that are meaningful and appropriate and logical to the diverse population. The present one minimum sum for all and one medisave for all are unacceptable. If the govt still think that these kinds of solutions are good enough, then they don't deserve the million dollar price tag. The $120k minimum sum is too much for many and too little to many. How can this sum be shafted down the throat of all Singaporeans? You don't need a super talent to make this kind of decisions. An average university grad, pay him $3k a month will be able to come up with a better alternative. The parameters to revise and compute the minimum sum and medisave portion should include the following: 1. The income of the individual, which means what he is used to live on, or his lifestyle. It is not easy and simple. That is why the people are paid top dollars. When you get top dollars, you must serve out top dollar decisions. 2. The average life expectancy. Male and female life expectancies are different. Don't simply lump them together. 3. The assets of the individual. 4. The educational level. 5. Occupation. 6. Family support. 7. Health at 55, to determine the medisave quantum. And if someone is already served a notice that he has a limited days or years to go, he should be allowed to take back all his money. 8. There must be several options and variations for the people to choose from. Do not force people to accept simple and unpractical solutions by making them compulsory. This is the 21st century. We not only have super talents, we also have super computers, science and technology to come up with a sophisticated systems that can be tailor made to individuals or at least classes of individuals. Maybe class is a bad term. Called it social or income groups. The policy makers must start cracking their super brains for a super solution for the unthinking masses. The people are waiting, and watching. Any slipshod solutions must be criticised. The people must not allowed slipshod solution to get by without questioning and poking at them. Only then will we get a deserving and sound solution. The people must raise their level of expectation and push the govt to its limits. Only then can we get progress. The unreasonable man changes the world to suit his needs. We can have aircon in the middle of the desert and a heated room in the centre of the arctic. These are unreasonable things that are against nature. Man has conquered nature by being unreasonable.

New laws needed to protect the weak and innocent.

The Odex case is revealing in the sense that the weak can be subject to extortion by the rich and powerful. People can be dragged to court or pay a ransom for the slightest infringement of the law. Then there is this guy who wrote to the press begging that something be done to restrain his neighbours 5 rottweilers from attacking any passerbys. After highlighting the fear and the possibility of a child being tear to pieces by the dogs, he pleaded sheepishly on what recourse he would have from the barking of the dogs. There must be laws to protect the innocents from people who live dangerously and exposed others to potential harm and destruction of lives. No recourse is going to make any difference to a child or an oldie who is badly mauled by ferocious animals. What the hell is happening? Are we waiting for disasters to happen just to make a few idiots happy with their wild animals? Tame? Animals are only tame when they don't attack. You just can't be too sure how the animal minds work and when it is going to be provoked or go berserk. Please, get rid of those beasts. Or at least have a law to cane the owners if their beasts attack anyone. Monetary compensation is useless to the victims. Make caning of the owners mandatory when an attack takes place.

CPF minimum sum should be $300,000

James Chi Han Hsuan in a letter to Today suggested that the minimum sum in the CPF should be raised to $300k. His justification is that he has many friends who have more than $200k in their savings accounts and they are squandering their money buying all kinds of luxury goods. I can't agree more with James. All these rich people with so much money and do not know what to do must be made to save more. I have also many friends who have millions in their bank accounts. I would want to suggest that the minimum sum be raised to $1 mil so that these people cannot squander away their money. 'Pssst, what about me, I don't have any money in my savings account?' Ah Pek asked.