The best speaker in Parliament

Guess who? It hit me straight away when I tuned in to the 9.30pm news on Channel 5. Lim Swee Sway was propounding his Theory of Productivity in Parliament and the audience was dumbfounded. The camera panned across the House and the MPs and NMPs were wide eyed, mouth opened, and written on their faces was the sign of shock disbelief. They listened to him intensely and probably thinking to themselves how come they did not know of such a great Theory. Ok, I shall not put words into the Minister mouth. He did not call it the Theory of Productivity. I will rate this 'Theory of Productivity' in the same category as the Theory of Relativity in its profound and impactful implications. Let me put it briefly, 1% increase in productivity of 3m workers equals 30,000 workers (I can understand this part) and this can be translated into something like 50% of something, or call it output. He went on so fast, with so many numbers that I could not grasp what they were. I scoured the papers this morning to confirm the numbers Swee Say quoted, but those buggers did not think it newsworthy to be printed. Nothing was reported. I can't believe it My lesser brain could not understand the implications of 2% or 3% productivity growth. Now I understand. If 1% productivity growth can lead to 50% of whatever growth or output, 2% will give 100% of whatever! This is simply phenomenal. Forgive me for not knowing what this 50% is all about. But I will try to trace this amazing speech and theory and correct this post when I find it. Whatever, Swee Say was able to captivate the attention of all the Parliamentarians when no one could. PS. I appeal to the Straits Times to print Swee Say's speech in full.

Selling snake oil to gullible Asians

British insurer Prudential is tapping sovereign wealth funds in China and Singapore to help finance its 35.5 billion dollar buyout of US insurance giant AIG's Asian arm, a report said Tuesday. It said the Singaporean and Chinese sovereign wealth funds had not made a final decision but their response was positive...From Sydney Morning Herald I hope we have learnt our lesson and stop buying more snake oil products when nobody dares to touch. All the oranges bought so far are lehmons. If we ever commit to another lehmon and lose another few billions, it is like begging to be screwed.

Myth 216 - The Rajaratnam Myth

In a main article in the Editorial section of the ST today, Kishore Mahbubani wrote an article in praise of S Rajaratnam, one of the key founding fathers of modern Singapore. He lamented at the lack of interest and knowledge of this pioneering leader of our country, or city. In honour of Rajaratnam's great contributions to the city or country, Kishore suggested that we should create more myths around this man for posterity and our history. I will not disagree with him for wanting to honour our great leaders of the past and to remember them fondly for the good things they did. But why myth, a word that he agrees, connotes very negative feelings and meaning. The Myths of Rajaratnam! Down the road we may even create the Myths of Goh Keng Swee and the Myths of Lee Kuan Yew. I want to protest and disagree with him on the word myth. Kishore is a great artist in the use of words. But I would rather Kishore choose the word legend instead. Legends may also not be true and can be created, dressed up, but the feelings are more praiseworthy and positive. The Legends of Davy Crockett, the Legends of Huang Fei Hong, the Legends of Rajaratnam, the Legends of Goh Keng Swee, the Legends of Lee Kuan Yew! Sound better right? The Myths of Rajaratnam! Sounds awful to me.

Lower standard of Chinese for easy learning

There is an interesting article in Viewpoints in mypaper by a Chua Chern Nee on teaching and learning Chinese in Singapore. Many parents have been so frustrated and desperate as their children just could not learn the language or find it so difficult and boring. And many fled to foreign countries where they don't have to learn Chinese. And we have come out with a solution, lower standard of learning to fit the ability of different students. The writer quoted the case of a Korean boy who came here without any background in basic Chinese and he aced the subject after 10 months of learning the language. How could this happened? My guess is that the Korean boy ate rice as his staple food. And for those who have difficulties learning Chinese, it must be their diet, eating too much kantang. Maybe changing their diet will make a difference. As for those who went overseas, it may become compulsory to learn Chinese as a second language in America and Australia in time to come. Ok, it is a new myth. I like creating myths and I have a column dedicated to myths, all 200+ of them. And I am going to add one more, the Rajaratnam Myth.

The correct definition of Productivity

There have been too many confusing definitions of Productivity. Some believe that Productivity means up skill, re skill, multi skill, be cheaper, better and faster. These are myths. We have been doing all these for so many years but our Productivity remains flat. I think my definition to increase price like my char kway teow example is better. And some workers think that slogging longer hours, work harder or staying longer in the office to show the boss are equivalent to higher productivity. Here is the correct version by Amy Khor. Productivity = doing more but in the same timespan or less. She forgot to post her credential as an example of what is higher productivity. She is MP, Mayor, Chairman of Reach, Chairman of countless committees, Advisors to countless committees, her own profession, and maybe, I am not sure, directors of some companies. And she did that within her 24 hours a day like everyone of us. Now that is productivity, doing more in the same timespan. So those office workers who stay behind to slog late into the night, please think again. You are very unproductive, doing the same amount of work or a little more, but taking so much time. And those who are still thinking of multi skill and mult tasking, please do it within the same timespan or less. Now I can see the brilliance and productivity of people who are directors of many companies. The more directorships or chairmanship the more productive.