The ongoing evolution of Singaporean Chinese names

When the southern Chinese migrated to the south seas, many were from the lower social class. Many were farmers, fishermen and workers. They came to eke out a living and nothing else. Their names were simple and nothing flowery, Tan Ah Kow, Lim Tua Tow, Chan Ngau etc etc. Inevitably the names of animals became common as they were seen as good for the children less the gods would punish them or take them away. The illiterates were just not too comfortable with the words Over the years the names started to evolve and adapt to the social and historical changes, including the intervention of govt and the turns of economic fortunes. Our colonial and religious heritage had their first influence on the people. Tan Ah Kow became James Tan. Lim Tua Tow became John Lim. The Tua Tow disappeared or became TT. The next phase of change was the hanyu pinyin campaign. This was another of the unifying efforts of the govt, to do away with dialects and have a common language. It's effects turned out to be a bit of a rojak. Tan Ah Kow became Chen Ya Kou. The father and son had differently written surname in English, From Mr Tan to Mr Chen. Some refused to accept this as it looked funny. So Tan Ah Kow became Tan Ya Kou, retaining the surname in dialect and the same spelling. Another variation is use Chen Ya Kou alias Tan Ah Kow. The next phase of development was economic. With wealth and affluence, Ah Kow, Ah Ngeow and Ah Gu were no longer acceptable. How could it be when pet dogs and cats were called more respectable human names like Tom and Jerry? That ended the phase when humans were called names of animals while animals continues to have human names. Then came a period when we wanted to become international citizens and adapted international norms of writing names. Tan Ah Kow became Ah Kow Tan. It could be because some foreigners could not understand that Chinese family name was written in front and not at the end. To avoid Tan Ah Kow being addressed as Mr Kow instead of Mr Tan, that was the solution. The most colourful phase came in the 80s when originality and being unique were the fad. Uniquely Singapore must have been an offshoot of this truly Singaporean beginning. Glamorison Tan and Feliciality Tan started to appear everywhere, everyone unique and different and only limited by one's imagination and the combination of words. Forgive the ignorants to think that Singapore was invaded by aliens from another planet. Today I read about John and Melissa becoming too common place. Everyone being introduced is either a John or a Melissa. And for that little uniqueness, after all a name is to identify a person and be different one from another, John will now be John Michael and Melissa will be Melissa Margaret. So, how shall John Michael Tan Ah Kow writes his name? Should it be John Michael Ah Kow Tan or could it be Tan Ah Kow John Michael or Tan John Michael Ah Kow? John Michael Tan Ah Kow is not going to be. His family name is right in the centre and will never be discovered. He will never be a Mr Tan. How about John Michael A K Tan? Possible. Sounds better too. Hi, I am Florissian Lantany Lee. Nice to meet you. I am Jamon Honchu Wong.

How much is our reserves?

Everyone seems to be quoting this word, 'reserves' freely. How much is actually our reserves, what constitute our reserves and where are they? Our CPF a part of the reserves? How much of Temasek and GIC assets are part of our reserves? Then there is another reserves guarded by the President. How much is this and where and in what form? Can someone clarify on the above mess and put the amount and parts in a simpler manner so that we know what it is all about?

How benevolent is our govt?

The govt just announced the resilience budget worth more than $20b to help the people in such a difficult time. Should the people be grateful? We heard the call that we are all family, looking and caring for each other, helping each other and making life better for everyone. I did not hear wrongly. Then you look at the HDB policy, market pricing to max what they can get from the buyers. They used all public resources to monopolise public housing to squeeze it out as much as they could from the people they called family. And when you complain they said it is affordable because you can pay with all your CPF. Hey, the CPF is people’s retirement money! What happens if they have nothing left for retirement and hospital bills? Then the Health Ministry got worried. With so much money being taken to pay for flats, better lock up some in case they need to pay for hospital bills. And there goes another chunk into the Medisave. Then another proclamation, Singaporeans got no problem paying for medical bills. Then another ministry got worried. What if they got no money to retire and demand public assistance? Better lock up for this before there is no money left. Hey, what about me, the one who contributes to the CPF? I got nothing left for myself. Just too bad lah. And don’t expect charity or free lunch from the govt. The govt does not believe in encouraging crutch mentality. As long as the people got money to pay for HDB flats, pay for hospital bills, the two big ticket items, that’s good enough. Oh now got compulsory CPF Life and with easy options except no option to opt out. So now all the money got locked up for some good reasons, and here comes the recession and people got no more savings to fall back on, we have the resilience package. How much will each get and how long will it last? So there you are, a benevolent govt, and a people with one of the highest savings and all crying money not enough.

The Obama Message getting through

Who said Obama could not do anything? His US$500k salary cap for bailout banks is getting through to the thieves. Citibank's Vikram Pandit has seen the writing on the wall and volunteered to pay himself US$1 and no bonuses till Citi is profitable again. Though the rest of the top bankers are still recalcitrant, still did not know that they have moral responsibility and accountability for their decisions, they are now asking Congress to take a lighter touch in the face of fierce critics and congressional grillings. But again, they are not going to walk away without asking for more. They are putting forth the subtle threats to leave for European banks, presuming that European banks and Asian banks would be silly enough to pay them what they are asking when the Americans are saying no to their looting ways. They were told by Paul Kanjorski that they cannot live in a 'one way mirror unaccountable to the public at large and often sheltered from scrutiny.' This should also apply to govt and govt regulators for sleeping on their job or doing a lousy job. Goldman Sach's Lloyd Blankfein accepted the criticism and commented that 'Many people believe - and in many cases justifiably so - that Wall Street lost sight of its larger public obligations and allowed certain trends and practices to undermine the financial system's stability.' Are we also having something like this going around here? Has our govt also lost sight of its larger public obligations and allowed certain trends and practices to undermine our system and stability? Maybe I should write something about this. The statement by the committee's Democratic chairman Barney Frank deserves special mention here. 'Why do you need to be bribed to have your interests aligned with the people paying your salary.' No further comments from me on this. Obama has set a new trend. The looting in New York and corporate America will have to stop and accountability is the now the new morality. But from the comments for congressman Michael Capuano, the thieves are still getting away too easily. He asked, "Who was the brilliant person who came to you and said, 'Let's do credit default swaps?' Find him, Fire him." So easy meh? Just walk away without any criminal charges? And after collecting all the fat bonuses and pay? No restitution?

What is wrong with Boon Wan's nursing home?

Absolutely nothing wrong. It makes perfect cents. Oops I mean sense. From the practical and pragmatic point of view, from the dollar and sense point of view, it is the ideal solution to land scarce and high cost Singapore. You get value for money in JB, and not too far away from home. For those who want to compute on the additional benefits, they can think of the cheaper shopping and makan and also the petrol to go with. They could save more when all these are added. Why are people so angry with Boon Wan? I can only sense one reason. These people are using their hearts and not their heads. They cannot think logically devoid of emotions and sentiments. They will only come to terms with Boon Wan's good suggestion if they can think like him, think of money and how much can be saved. Then they can be won over. Think utilitarian!