Cannot buy drinks for me

You guys, especially Wally, please don't buy drinks or chicken rice for me. The latest I heard is that bloggers who received gifts or whatever in kind or money, must declare or else...hmmm. And if any of you buy me drinks and I say good things about you without declaring that I have been bought by you or I am now beholden to you, then I will be in trouble. Actually not like this lah. The MDA, I heard in the kopitiam only, is pondering to introduce controls on bloggers who received payments or goodies from merchants and then wrote glowing reports about them to promote their products or services. It is like kind of advertisement ya. I wonder those analysts writing about stocks were also in such category and must declare as well. What if I write good reports about cameras and the cameras are really good, the truth, can or not? Can they pay me to tell the truth because I really believe the cameras are good?

19,000 applicants for 2,100 flats

The latest exercise for the sale of balance flats by HDB saw a 9 times over subscription for the 2100 flats available. Assuming that each batch of flats put up for sale is 2000, to clear this 19000 applicants will take another 8 sales exercises. And if the sales are done twice annually, it means it will take another 4 years to satisfy all the applicants. Of course this will not be the case. But one thing for sure, if these 19,000 applicants are real, then many will need to apply and apply and apply again before they can get to their dream flats. How many will get their flats on first time application?

Another crisis in the making

A crisis in the making or making waves? 70 banking staff from RBS Coutts defected or were poached by a Swiss private bank, BSI, because of curbs in bonus payments. The 70 can become 700 and then 7000 and the whole financial industry will be in turmoil. With all the banks making so much money, they can afford to pay their talented staff more, and those who are willing can go to the market and woo the best to their folds. Are we going to see a spate of defections and mass resignations from the more stingy banks? Or course I am exaggerating, an alarmist. But these are the exact reasons given in America and Europe to continue to pay their overpaid bankers more. And our local institutions may also sing the same song to pad up their pockets. And we will see the game of musical chairs being played in full swing. Will there be panic? Such high turnovers are bad and destabilising. Something must be done to make sure that these employees are not allowed to change their jobs at their fancies. How about introducing some regulations to prevent job hopping? Or how about the industry players work out some arrangements not to poach staff from each other by trying to outbid each other? I know that such practices are prevalent in some industries. The best part is that when there are only a handful of players and some smart alecs still think it is a clever move to outbid each other or to undercut each other for a better share of the business. What is important? A free market, free movement of staff with the accompanied little tsunamis or a stable and controlled market with seemingly orderliness? In a small little pool, how long can the game of musical chairs be played before the music stops? The high payout must come from somewhere. Any CEOs going to press the panic button?

Low Thia Khiang wrong in LUP

According to Lim Yuin Chien, Press Secretary to the Minister for National Development, Low Thia Khiang was wrong to think that just because he was the MP he should lead the LUP programme. An adviser who is a grassroot leader appointed by the Govt is the rightful person to do so. The details of the all the reasons are in his letter in the ST forum today. Anyone has a different view, politically, constitutionally, administratively or whatever? Would the highly analytical and professional media experts be interested to do an in depth study on this issue by consulting more experts, including legal experts and explain the position from an disinterested angle? Somehow I got this feeling that all the eminent experts will not have any opinion on this issue. I can expect silence. The LUP is a govt programme and how and when a LUP should be launched to benefit the residents should be in accordance to some objective criteria. Whether the blocks of flats are in govt run constituencies or opposition constituencies should not be a factor in the formula for such a programme. The govt is for all citizens. The govt's fund belongs to the citizens, not someone's private savings. Should the criteria for LUP be transparent and made known publicly so that the people know when their flats are due for LUP? Should the priority of an LUP be influenced by lobbying, talking to ministers by MPs or grassroot leaders, or any other subjective factors? I think there must be a standard criteria and SOP in the ministry for such a programme and no amount of lobbying or differential access should be allowed for any precinct to jump queue or be left out of the programme. I may be too idealistic and naive to make such an observation.

Why blame the PRs?

12 October 2009 China woman took up Singapore PR for 'easier travel' I read with outrage a ST Forum letter written by a China national praising Zhang Yuan Yuan, the Singapore PR who declared her loyalty to China on CCTV. It is already ridiculous that a China woman with just a diploma can apply and get PR status in just two months. Accusing Singaporeans of 'naivety' and 'insecurity' is plain outrageous! The fact that Ms Zhang does not hide her true intention of getting PR for the purpose of easier travel is not an indication of her 'pragmatism' or 'motivation'. It is a perfect example of a greedy foreigner taking advantage of the PAP's overly liberal immigration policies for personal benefit. Period.... The above are the first few paragraphs of an article posted in Singapore Dino blog. Apparently there have been many criticisms of Zhang Yuan Yuan for marching in the China National Day Parade. I personally feel that the anger directed at Zhang Yuan Yuan is misplaced and rather unfair to her. She is NOT a Singapore citizen. Period. However foolish we choose to include PRs as if they are part of our citizens or residents, it is our own doing. A PR is just a citizen of another country being granted the right to stay here permanently but never, and not our citizen. The PR has all the rights to be loyal to his/her our country of which he/she is a citizen. The fault lies with us. If there is anyone to be blamed, blame it on ourselves. If we want to grant PRs so happily, citizenship so easily, why blame those who go by the rules and accept our PRs or citizenship? If we want people to take advantage of us, why blame on others for taking advantage of us? As if we do not know what is the intent of many of these PRs? If we want to be hardup and go on our knees to beg people to come here knowing that they are only here when the going is good, why be angry with them and not with our own stupidity?