Jonathan Lock is saved

Tan Suee Chieh, the CEO of NTUC Income has intervened to waive $45k of legal fees NTUC is claiming against him. According to Tan, it was effort misplaced and unnecessary. So much effort and money all for a $1,200 compensation. What a big relief to the poor teacher, Jonathan Lock. But he still owed his former lawyer another bill of $80k and more legal fees to fight the claim. Tan Suee Chieh is showing what a socially responsible and sensible CEO can do instead of being blinded by money and legal form. He did not say a mistake is a mistake and Lock should just pay up. He took a human decision instead of behaving like a computer, sending Lock the $45k bill and said this is generated by a computer and no signature is required. We need thinking and sensible people to run the corporations and country. But then again, another school of thought may look at this negatively. This Tan Suee Chieh is spoiling the system. He is setting a very bad precedent. He should not have interfered in this way. Many people's ricebowls are affected and many big bonuses will slip away. We have a very good system that feeds a lot of people along the way. All the lawsuits are good as they generate a lot of income for the professionals to buy big houses and cars and holidays. I like the soft and human touch of Tan Suee Chieh. I think he is not a Singaporean. A Singaporean would probably have said, you have my sympathy, but please pay up.

What earthquakes?

Earthquakes in Indonesia? 8.4 in the Richter scale? Does it bother us? It has nothing to do with us and there is no need to sweat the little thing. Then last night I heard over the news that Mercy Relief and the Red Cross were sending aids to Bengkulu. Is this a prelude to the whole army rushing over there as well? My immediate thought was on the ships that they had seized during the sand saga. About 20 of our ships were seized and facing drum up charges. Even one of our companies mining sand in Karimun was bombed and its executives arrested. Not sure what happened to them. And have our ships been returned and compensated? I just hope Singaporeans do not behave like little poodles, or worst, like stray dogs eagerly wagging their tails to anyone on the street hoping for a little crumb. We have been kicked, slapped and spitted at and are we going to crawl back to beg for more? Let's have some self respect and do not debase whatever little dignity that we have in calling ourselves a nation.

Black September 14?

It was supposed to be September 8, the day Cyberspace designated as Black September. It did not get much airing in the media of what actually happened or did not happen. Then last night, I thought it was September 8 again, on CNA. Were my eyes playing tricks on me? Or was it a small prank, or a subtle message that CNA was trying to send out? The wearers of black put on a cheeky smile in all their faces, you could tell quite easily. First in full black suit was Melvin Yong on 9pm news. Hardly have I seen Melvin in full black. And beside him, the attractive Glenda Chong, not in black but in a tan dress. Look carefully again, there was a huge black rose on her right chest, as big as an outstretched palm to make sure you notice. It would be a bit too much to have Glenda in full black as well. Not enough of blackness? Then came a live feed from a reporter overseas, missed the country, probably China or somewhere in east Asia. And she was in a black dress as well. Her name was something like Wong Lee Yong. Enough of blackness? Ok, back home, yes Valerie Tan was in full black reporting her story. All these within a few minutes apart in that 30 minute news. Was CNA trying to be a little cheeky? Or was CNA trying to say that black is the fashion? The cheekiest moment, I think, went to Lim Boon Heng when he appeared to comment about the annuity proposal, and in full black. I am paranoid.

A hospice in every estate

As our population ages, and as more are expected to live to 85 and beyond, many will end up in hospices. This is an urgent and essential facility for the good of our people. Very likely all those 75 and above will need to be housed in such well equipped and modern facilities. Either they are physically disabled or their children will not have the time and abilities to keep them at home. The cost, probably $1500 pm with subsidies. This will mean $18k a year, excluding medicine or hospitalisation. and at 75, they will probably have another 20 years to go. So each will need $360k without adjusting for inflation and other rising costs. It is important that the people be made aware of this need and start to incease their savings in the CPF. I would like to propose that the minimum sum be increased to $200k, and with interest should be sufficient, I think. Now let the people go and talk and whine about it. And the unthinking masses' reaction will be quite predictable. Yes we need this. Good idea. Maybe change a bit here and there. None or very few will ask the question, 'Do we really need it.' They will blindly believe that it is for their own good and it is very well thought out. I just thought it out in 2 minutes. Wanna bet?

Why cause hardship in the name of paternalism?

There are many poor buggers out there who can make their lives so much better, or breathe a sigh of relief when they can lay hands to their hard earned life savings. Even $20k is a lot of money to these humble people who have been living from hands to mouth all their lives. The question is why deprive these poor buggers from having a few days easier? And many of them will have to set aside $30k in Medisave and another $120k in the minimum sum which they may not touch before they kick the bucket. For sure, many will have to leave behind at least $30k in the Medisave. Is this good for the people? Is this what paternalism is all about? Or should the meaning and definition of paternalism be changed? Many terms in the dictionary should also be changed to accommodate such a new definition of paternalism when one cannot distinguish between good and evil, mean and kindness, helping and oppressing. Like the famous phrase, with such good friends, you don't need enemies.