Work to live longer

LKY has said it and proven this to be true. He is a living example. Yesterday there was a letter to Today’s paper disputing this claim and quoting two research papers, one by Japanese Nobel Laureate Dr Leo Esaki and another by Dr Ephrem Cheng of the University of Alberta. Both papers pointed to people living longer if they retired earlier than later. The studies based on American workers in AT&T and Boeing, Lockheed and Lucent concluded that employees who retired at 65 died within two years of retirement. On the other hand those who retired at 50 or 55 could live up to 85. Is there a contradiction or conflict in LKY’s position and those of the two academic. Actually no. What is important is that people who retire early should continue to work on a part time basis and ‘at a more leisurely pace, without the stress of the daily grind.’ And, ahem, that is what LKY is doing. He had retired from the premiership many years back and is working at a pace comfortable to him, without the stress of the daily grind. For those who are going to continue to work and retire after 65, the study says they will die within two years after retirement. But there is a little hope. If they just stay on the job, they may live and work till the day they die, may be 80 or 85, provided the job is still there for them. The food court cleaners are the best example. They will live to a ripe age, working happily in the food court. But my experience in the food courts is that none of them appear happy. They are mostly grumpy, grouchy, hot temper and quarrelsome, anything but happy.

Solving problem Singapore Style

We have just solved the night car parking problem in HDB car parks. We have solved the jams in our road system, we have solved gambling addictions among Singaporeans, we have solved our housing problems. We have solved the problem of not able to get quality politicians by using money. We solved the corruption problem too. Even insurers of motor vehicles have learnt the trick. We have solved many problems by applying the same principle, using money. How we used money to solve problems can be classified under two distinct categories. The first is to throw money at the problem. The more money thrown at it, the faster will the problem be solved. The second method is to make the affected party pay for the incompetence of the organisation. In applying this method, every problem becomes a money making opportunity. I think problems are most welcome as problems will end up in boosting the bottom line. Naturally the second method is the preferred choice. The smarter Singaporeans are aware of this and are afraid to raise new problems as their own pockets will be affected. The ignorant will continue to raise problems to be solved with their pockets being emptied. A few outstanding problem awaiting to be solved. The recurrent flooding in Orchard Road and many other areas, and the crowding in MRT trains. The solutions are at hand.

Should Singaporeans be angry?

In a discussion in PAP's Facebook, it was claimed that a PR by the name of Fahim Hameed had called Singaporeans scums for not appreciating the things the govt have done for them. I am not sure how true this is, but it sounds real as several blogs have reported on it. Should Singaporeans be angry to be called scums by a PR they invited to live with them, to make money here, and also to enjoy our hospitality? I think they should not and there are many reasons for it. In the first place, the PRs are here to help the Singaporeans, help to create jobs for Singaporeans, help to increase GDP growth, have in population growth, help to improve our genetic pool, help Singaporeans to be more productive and competitive. And Singaporeans can sell their flats and make profits from the PRs too, or rent out rooms for pocket money. Be grateful, Singaporeans. And to have a PR to call Singaporeans scums is actually an honour. If Singaporeans are scolded by lesser talents, then it will be an insult. But PRs are normally more talented. And to be insulted by a better talent is no shame. Singaporeans should instead say thank you to this Fahim Hameed. Without Fahim, Singaporeans would not know that they have become scums in the eyes of FTS.

The Booms and Fear

Seah Chiang Nee posted an article in the Malaysian Star paper titled, GDP up, but no cheer heard. It is a true reflection of the sentiment on the ground. Who cares or is interested in the 15% GDP growth? Who would such a number benefits? Only those that will benefit from it will be quietly patting themselves of the good news and the goodies coming their way. The surprising reaction is that the booming economy is going to lead to more fears. The fear of high inflation and higher cost of living. The first frightening news is the arrival of another 100,000 foreign workers to meet the demand of a booming economy. What this simply means is that more people crowding the public facilities and transportation system. Higher property prices. More social problems, more competition by cheap labour. Singaporeans would likely ask, what is in it for me? Economic boom, bigger reserves, GIC and Temasek’s holding in record high. For who, benefit who? Singaporeans would be lucky to be given an angpow of a few hundred bucks. The trouble is that no sooner than the angpow is received, they will be taken back in many other ways. The public transport companies have already started to raise their fares by a whopping 40% and the people are asked to tolerate and wait for it to benefit them. This is new. In the past, they give first before taking back. Now take first then give and probably take back more later. Maybe this will answer Seah Chiang Nee’s observation on why no cheer for a booming economy.

The Cocks are crowing

With the high ridership in public transport system, particularly the trains, all kinds of brilliant and silly ideas are being churned out. There are actually no brilliant ideas at all but mostly silly ones. They are as silly as those offered and implemented to reduce road congestions. All ends up with the motorists paying more for being caught in slow traffic and jams. The silly ideas being bounced around will do the same thing. They will increase fares without improving the situation. The problem must be addressed first if we are to solve the overcrowding in trains. The problem is simply too many commuters and too few trains, like too many cars and too few roads. Some of the ideas like employing staff to shove commuters into trains were happily suggested as if it is a fashionable and acceptable thing because the Japanese are doing it. It is obnoxious to shove people around like animals into a cage. Never learn or do silly things just because a developed country is doing it. Think first, on what is good, reasonable and desirable in a first class transport system. Don't copy blindly. Another silly idea is to charge more for peak hours like ERPs. Another stupid idea of course. Most of the commuters are not rich and have to arrive at their places of work on time. Stop thinking of fleecing the poor commuters on an inefficient or inadequate system. The overcrowding is a simple manifestation that the train system is unable to cope with the increase ridership. You need more trains running or more lines. On the contrary you need to bring down ridership. The latter is no go as the public are encouraged to take public transport and give up their cars. Wait till another 100,000 foreign workers join the crowd. The signs of over capacity are there for all to see. The island is overcrowded and the infrastructure is straining. The flooding is another sign that there is just so much space left and further development or demands on space will lead to system breakdown. Say again, 6.5 million or 10 million population is our target? We need more people to ensure economic growth? It is time to stop adding more sardines into the tiny can.