Wrong place to look for role models

Edison Chen said he was not a good role model. His girlfriends in the videos admitted that they were naive. Why would children all look up to these bad role models and naive girls as role models? There are many good role models in many other professions. The last place to look for role models, you know where. The most naive group of people coming out from this episode are those people who look at them as role models.

ERP, pay according to usage

Thomas Koshy has some great suggestions in his article on ERP rates in Today. The principle he relies on is that the more one crosses the gantry, the more one pays. And for those who cross more, the rate will also be higher. At the other end, I like this best, is infrequent users will be given a kind of waiver for the first time they cross a gantry. The fees not collected is compensated from the high users. As for those in the transport business and need to transport goods and people, try to use buses and MRT to save on paying more ERP charges. And for those unfortunate poor buggers whose travel patterns require them to cross ERP frequently, or have an ERP outside their homes, maybe they can introduce something like a frequent travellers or mileage rewards like what the airlines are doing. Very interesting suggestions, the same principle as using water. The lesser water people used the better. The lesser people use the roads, the better. Why do we need to build roads and rails?

High property prices

How to help Singaporeans when property prices are destined to go higher? I dreamt of a good scheme to ensure that all Singaporeans will have money to buy their dream flats. I mean HDB flat. The private sector high end flat is a different kind of dream. So how does this work out? My premise is that all the young men and women at the age of 25 must have at least $100k in their CPF accounts. This money can come from a CPF insurance scheme paid by their parents on the day of their birth. For a start, the day a baby is registered, $30k of one of the parent's CPF accounts should be deducted and set aside for a Housing Endowment Fund. This fund will simply grow and by the time the child is 25, it should be around $100k or more. If the parents have two or more children, the equivalent amount should be set a side for the respective children. With such a scheme, no young people will have problem paying for a HDB flat in the future. Not bad idea huh.

Money to bail out sick banks.

Below is an extract from an email that came to me. It shows how much money we have to invest in sick banks which I agree is a great opportunity given to us and a risk worth taking. But I also share the author's sentiment about why we were so desperate to need to raise GST by another 2% to help the poor when we actually have so much money to bail out sick banks. (I have omitted copying the cynical and naughty parts of the arguments as I am not sure of the source of this article.) In the past year alone, the Singapore government ¡V through its investment arms of Temasek and GIC - invested a whopping $34, 560, 000, 000.00 in various investments worldwide. That's $34.56 billion. GIC: UBS - $14 billion British Land - $388 million Citigroup - $9.8 billion US Hedge Fund - $429 million Temasek: British Bank Barclays - $4.3 billion Merrill Lynch - $5 billion Standard Chartered - $643 million And if you think the government is stretching itself too thin, no worries. GIC deputy chairman and executive director Tony Tan says the GIC has capacity to bail out another bank. (AFP) Now, government investments are not a bad thing, to be sure. Of course there are questions of transparency and accountability which some people have brought up. Be that as it may, what is even more troubling is another issue. This is the constant lament of the government about not having enough money or financial resources to deal with Singapore 's ageing population, helping the poor, providing subsidized healthcare and so on. Thus, the government has introduced the GST hike to 7% ("to help the poor"), and is introducing the Compulsory Longevity Insurance (for our ageing population), and Means Testing (for healthcare). All of these are paid for by Singaporeans, in some way or another. In raising the GST to 7%, Channel NewsAsia reported PM Lee as saying: "Mr Lee explained that the hike was necessary to finance the enhanced social safety nets, needed to help the lower income group.." (CNA) The extra 2% will give the government a further $1.5 billion to finance "the enhanced social safety nets, needed to help the lower income group". Now, if the GIC and Temasek Holdings have $34 billion to bail out ailing foreign banks, why does the government not have the money ( a mere $1.5b) to help poorer Singaporeans, which it says it needs? Why does the government not have enough money to spend more on the aged and healthcare? Contrast the obscene spending by the GIC and Temasek with the pathetic excuse given by MCYS minister Vivian Balakrishnan about giving those on public assistance a further $23 increase, which some MPs have asked for: "The government is reviewing the S$290 monthly public assistance (PA) allowance for needy Singaporeans to see if it should be increased. It is also conducting a separate review on the qualifying income limit for assistance, which currently stands at S$1,500 a month. The review is expected to be completed later this year." (CNA) (TOC) Why does the government need to have months of "review" to ascertain whether giving another $23 to those most in need is justified? If this is not the height of hilarity, then I don't know what is. It would be funny if it weren't so sad ¡V that our government would not blink an eye in spending billions bailing out foreign banks in risky undertakings while being so hardfisted about giving a mere $23 to its most vulnerable and needy citizens. Something is just not right. How did the government suddenly make $34.5 billion appear out of thin air when they were just lamenting, not too long ago, that they didn't even have $1.5 billion to help the poor? Now, the next time I hear the government says it does not have enough money and need to raise this and raise that to fund certain "programmes" to "help the poor", I will tell them: "Please stop....."

Bee tang ah! Huat ah!

Gabriel Chen wrote in the ST about this guy whose net worth is about $6m and after some computation found that he has an angpow of $200k! Wow, what about those with $20m or $200m net worth? Huat ah, huat ah : ) Thanks to the Good Year Ang Pow Budget. And Singaporeans still complaining not enough?