The Malaysian political intrigue

What is happening in Malaysian politics today will easily beat West Wing or Yes Minister! There are so many plots and sub plots and juicy news, including conspiracies and counter conspiracies. And there are also enough sex to liven up the stories. Malaysia will have an international hit serial if they could turn it into a mega movie. And the best part of it all, it is real! If no want in Malaysia wish to produce it, Singaporean producers should quickly rush over and grab the story.

Transparency versus behind the scene dealings

PN Balji was not too happy that Tan Kin Lian took the issue with NTUC Income public. To Balji, it is better done behind closed doors. I thought transparency is good. Now that the issue is open and no matter the messenger or the way it is being done, right or wrong must be upheld, and so must be the insterest of the consumers. In this case, Balji's conclusion is that because of the way it was aired in public, the consumers will suffered. He is presuming that all the great leaders will take it personally and will dig in their heels at he expense of the innocent consumers. I believe our leaders are objective and rational people and will rise above personal differences and will put the interest of the consumers first. Let's see if I am right or Balji is right. Will the consumers be better off or at least not be worst off.

The changing demographic pattern

'Foreign Affairs Adviser Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury yesterday said Singapore is a good destination for skilled and semi-skilled Bangladeshi workers.' I can add a few more. Singapore is a great place for Filipino, Indonesian, Indian and Sri Lankan maids. Singapore is also a good place for Chinese, Indian, Sri Lankan and Bangladeshi workers. With Singapore becoming a haven for these third world low talent and low skill workers, the demographic pattern will soon change. I can simply divide them into two groups, the haves and the have nots. The haves will be the elite and the real foreign talents, driving around in their limousines and residing in exclusive suburbs or in the clouds. At the lower and down to earth end will be the hardlanders and the MRT squeeze with our third world workers. After travelling in MRTs for a while, the ingenuity of nature soon makes one less sensitive to odour and human heat and sweat. Well, got to get use to life in the lower strata of society, taking public transport to work. Mind you, this is world class transport at its best. Imagine if the population continues to increase or when the aircon breaks down. Life in paradise or more accurately living in a third world haven is really great, especially if one comes from the rundown and properly kept public facilities of developing countries. Everything here is like heaven indeed.

Rule less, do more

The MOE has this brilliant concept of teaching less and learning more. Can this same concept be applied in the current state of our national development? After 40 years of rapid growth in all areas, except the political system, are our people matured enough, educated enough, to be ruled less and be freer to do and live a freer life on their own? Or are we still in the same state of enlightenment as the Middle Ages when the people were still made up of the ignorant masses and needed to be ruled with an iron fist? Are we progressing or regressing? Looking at some young upstarts who have never been concerned about the people's well being except how to make their first million and telling the people about life and nation is quite creepy. As we continue to brag about how advanced and progressive we are, how knowledgeable and wealthy we are in the pocket and in the head, which I believe is true relatively to our past, it is time to change the mindset of the rulers to lead instead of to rule. Or what we are experiencing today is actually an advanced stage of ruling less?

Being led to believe

You were being persuaded to buy something on the belief that it will perform according to some specifications or will provide some satisfaction to you, or will reward you in some ways. A certain expectation is being built into the transaction. And if it is not met, no deal, or there is a breach of the agreement, in this case a downgrading of expectation. This is perhaps what the NTUC Income bonus issue is all about. Tan Kin Lian said, 'please keep to your promise.' Is such an expectation unreasonable? Why should the buyer be made to accept terms that make them worst off because the seller has to juggle and improve his solvency problem? The key question here is whether the existing buyers are better off. Would it be too much to ask for or to demand that the seller keep to its promise to existing buyers and only apply the new terms to new buyers? I thought this is the only decent and ethical thing to do. Apparently this shifting of the goal posts and applying it to existing buyers and incumbents is the accepted way of doing business here. The changing of the terms of CPF contributions affecting the date of withdrawal, the interest rate, and the withholding of the money saved are similar to changing the terms in an agreement. The affected people keep quiet, so they are presumed to have given their consent or approval to the changes. The decision maker will say, see, no protest, so the people must be happy. The people who made the changes think that it is ethically and morally right to do so, probably on the declared objective that 'it is for the good of the buyers or incumbents.' What kind of logic is this? There are many brilliant people here but none of the brilliant people has questioned these changes. Would Ngiam Tong Dow say something on this since he is on a speak your mind spree? Maybe all the super talents share the same logic, that it is alright. Another Uniquely Singapore feature?