Yes, we got the message!

Haven’t you Singaporeans got the message? What message? Alright let me tell you all in plain simple Singlish,’No Govt cannot do.’ Yes, all the so called privatization for efficiency, competition for the good of consumers, are plain bullshit. Singapore needs the Govt to run all the major services, from hospitals to telecommunications, to transport, childcare and burial services. If you need further proof of how important and effective the govt is in providing fair and affordable services, without being held at ransom, just look at the recent World Cup fiasco will do. If the telcos were one, if own by the Govt, we would not have to pay through our noses, paying more than anyone else, and Fifa standing there, high and haughty, telling us take it or leave it. Let’s petition the Govt to take back all the organizations and services that have been privatized. We need the Govt to run this place efficiently and cheaply. Unless you think the hospital fees are cheap, public transport are cheap, watching football is cheap…HDB is also privatized and you know the story. Just claiming that it is affordable does not mean so. Take back HDB and return it as a statutory board. The HDB of the past was a pride of Singaporeans, providing the people with cheap and good housing. Singaporeans are forever grateful to the HDB when it was a statutory board. Need more reasons why we cannot do without the Govt running this place? Need more reasons why privatization is bad, why competition is bad?

Thinking simplicity

The debate on mother tongue continues. And it boils down to how difficult and time consuming it is to learn a language that is of less functional value. Teach maths, science, innovation, creativity, moral values, integrity etc etc except mother tongue. When we simplify our thinking and reduce our minds to a machine, we will fail to think through an issue holistically. Is teaching the mother tongue so simple, just about an emotional attachment, about racial identity, about culture...? Come on all you silly buggers, despite all the education that you received, can you be so blinded by your individual interests to look into a pin hole and say there is the problem, a pin head? Teaching a language encompasses everything that comes with that language, its history and culture, the moral values, the ethics, the collective wisdom, a sense of being, a moral and historical compass, and everything, including creativity, innovation, science, integrity, morality and all that is about living and life. It is not simply about communication, a tool, a function or dysfunctional tool. A human bean without a language and all that comes with it, no matter how intelligent, is nothing but a machine. Living with just the English Language will determine a person's make up and a set of values, culture, philosophy, history and all that comes with it. It applies to other languages as well. Do not simply discard a language and say anything will do. A language is not simply a language. A language is the living soul of a civilisation.

The ruthlessness of being BIG

I wrote an article ‘The regulators say Yes’ to expose how dangerous the big funds are when they acted for their selfish good and with impunity. They are untouchable as the regulators believe that they needed the big funds to turn the wheels of fortune, to move the stock markets and lubricate the financial industry with their ingenious products and huge liquidity. The regulators became willing accomplices, appeasing the big funds in all their demands. Goh Eng Yeow wrote an article in the ST about learning from the Asian financial crisis when the speculators raided the markets for a big killing and almost bankrupt several countries. He is advocating that more regulations and safeguards be introduced to limit the irresponsible acts of the speculators. Actually he meant the big funds. Small speculators cannot do much harm on their own. They could only if they gang up and work in unison. Fortunately this is rare. On the other hand, the big funds, a handful of them working together can destroy a whole market of even bankrupt countries. And their untouchable status, like diplomatic immunity, only encourages them to turn wild. The ruthlessness of big financial institutions has manifested itself in all the major and minor financial centres, and Obama in particular is trying to do something to curb their extravagant and irresponsible ways. They need to be cut into smaller bits to be effective. They must be laws and regulations to limit how big they can become before they become too big to fail, and too big and dangerous. Then of course the regulators need to look in the mirror and ask how much of the crimes were part of their own doing, inviting the wolves into the dining room and dining with them. If the regulators continue to sleep with the devils, and probably benefitting from the association, this rewarding relationship will compromise their objectivity and moral responsibility to doing what is necessary for the good of the system and the investors at large.

Remembering Charlie Chan

The older generations may still recall this Hollywood creation called Charlie Chan. I think he was some kind of a Chinaman detective with the Fu Manchu moustache, slit eyes and everything of a stereotypical Chinaman except the actor. Charlie Chan was always acted by a caucasian. In those days it was difficult to find a Chinese actor to play a lead role in any Hollywood films or TV serials. I am wondering how the movies of Charlie Chan would be received today. I suspect there will be cries of racism. In the Today paper the Australian Chinese are crying foul again. The Australians are making a film about an Australian Chinese war hero during WWI. The soldier, Billy Sing, was a very successful sniper who killed more than 200 enemy soldier in the Gallipoli campaign, and was a decorated war hero. Isn't it generous for the Australians to want to make a movie of an Australian Chinese soldier? Now why the outcry? Oh, they could not find a Chinese actor for the lead role and it went to a white actor. I just hope they did not put a set of Fu Manchu moustache on this Billy Sing, and to make it more authentic, an additional pigtail will be just fine. : )

How much did we pay to be kicked around?

Heard someone said it is so cheap, only $1 per game! Really? $1 of what? How is this $1 derived? Fee divided by 4.8m people? Or fee divided by the 10% or so football fans? Then do we know how much are the rest of the world paying? How much are the Germans or Japanese paying? These are the more sensible people who would not throw their money away simply at any price? Or for that matter, how much are the football crazy nations like Brazil, England and Argentina paying, using the same formula of course? Then there are the countries that are in the competition and have more reasons to want to watch the games, how much are they paying? Cannot tell, cannot tell! Trade secret, malu? Another case of overpaying? All CEOs of corporations, public or private, have a social and fiduciary duty to make sure that money is well spent and not throw away just because it is other people's money. There must be accountability. Maybe prudence is no good. Yes this must be the reason, since we are making our consumers pay for as much as they can afford, no need to be prudent. Pay any price and just charge it to the consumers.