Tiger Mums

There were several discussions on this phenomenon of so called Tiger mums and their extraordinary babies created under pressure hot house regime. The children turn out to be more than extraordinary. And the Tiger mums undoubtedly must be very proud of their achievements and the methodology applied in the process. I congratulate all the Tiger mums for their blessings for having some fine children. For parents whose children are lesser endowed or poorly endowed, please do not despair that your children would not turn out to be exceptional like the children of Tiger mums. Life is a gift, or a reason for it to be that way. Just live life and don’t feel down because one doesn’t have the blessings of Tiger mums. Every life is there for a reason. Every morning I met this auntie fetching her precious little girl to school. She has to help her as her ability to move is not normal. Nonetheless you can see the great love and devotion of a mother caring for her loving child. This little girl will not excel even under the best Tiger mum. The bus that came to fetch her is from a special school. The special is not meant to be extraordinary, extra brilliant. It means she needs special care. Mothers of special care children deserve more attention and recognition for what mothers do best, simply providing tender loving care for their children, against all odds. Never mind about no straight As. Life is not just about achieving straight As and not all children are gifted for that.

Mickey Mouse flats is a correct policy

It is only right and the way to go forward, to build more small flats instead of bigger flats. Our population of duds is not going to reproduce themselves. So it is useless to waste resources to build bigger flats. What for, when only two persons will live in them, maybe three. Come to think of it the developers are more far sighted than HDB. They already see the trend in the future. People are getting married but not reproducing. Three cheers to the builders and developers of small flats. Despite the kpkb about low fertility rate and wanting people to produce more children, the reality speaks for itself. You can’t believe anyone telling you to produce more children when he builds flats for two. You can’t take him seriously when he says one thing and does the other. On the other hand those people buying Mickey Mouse flats may regret one day when they don’t have extra room to let out for retirement income. They need a room for themselves and one or two extra rooms for renting. This is now the only compelling reason to want to have bigger flats, not for babies and children.

Demolish my house when I am gone

This is the will of LKY. It is spoken in public and everyone now knows what he wants. Being a public figure of such a stature, a kind of celebrity, I think his wish may not be granted. There are those who want to keep it as a national monument to preserve a little bit of history and historical buildings that are still around. There are some who sees the monetary value of that piece of land and its surroundings. How much more money can be made. Yes, making money is all that we can think of. The argument to gazette the place as a historical site may be losing ground when money is at stake. Who cares about our history, or who cares about LKY, some may argue. Money talks, and money talks louder. Let me try to use the money argument that may favour the keeping this house as it is. Fengshui plays a vital part in the life and fate of people and country to the believers. I think the location of this house is in an excellent fengshui location. The site has given birth to two Prime Ministers and three President scholars. How much more auspicious can one get? And with the site being kept as it is, without changing or altering the fengshui, Singapore prospers for the last few decades. So, anyone want to risk changing the fengshui of the area and demolish the house? You may not know what you are demolishing. Singapore could also be demolished in the same effort. Whatever little money made by the developers will go up in smokes. Now, did I frighten the shit out of those who want to make some money from the site and replace it with a 30 storey condo?

Am I amused?

I got this impression that foreigners are much more politically savvy than Singaporeans after reading an article in the ST yesterday. It was about the slowing down in giving PRs to new applicants. The rejection rate is growing and the criteria for acceptance have gone up. Official statistics said the number of PRs approved last year was down to 29,265, less than half of 2009’s 59.460, much less than 2008’s 79,200, and 2007’s 63,600. Nothing was mentioned about the comparative numbers for new citizens. I bet that must also have gone down. But I may be wrong. So more unhappy applicants are going to threaten to apply for PRs in other better countries? Horrors! How can we lose all these talents to other countries? Quick, quick, reverse the flow, accept more or else… they will leave. I can sense the panic of those clamouring for more talented PRs to join our workforce. Some applicants are more sanguine about the situation, or maybe smarter. They knew that it is the election year. No sweat. After the election things will be back to normal. The govt is now appeasing the anger of the people and closing the door a little. After the election they will apply again. Is this amusing? The foreigners know exactly how the system works here. They are bidding their time now and know that they will get their PRs in double quick time after the election. How come Singaporeans don’t understand or never understand how the game is being played? Things before an election and things after an election will be poles apart. Maybe they are hoping that the leopard will change its spots. Maybe this time it will be different, or from now on it will be different. So, who is smarter, the foreigners or the citizens?

Old and New PAP

When one put up a topic like that, it simply implies that there are issues between the new and the old. Definitely there are and many, both good and bad. What distinguishes the old from the new is that it was a highly respected party, with a few rough corners for making tough decisions for the people. It was a lean party and the people knew that whatever it did, it was really for the good of the party. And the leaders lived by the principles that they shared the woes of the people and would carry them and walked a long with them through thick and thin. The people might not be too happy with some of the policies but went along, and elected the party to power elections after elections. The leadership was impressive. Not that all of them were super talent material, but their hearts were together with the people. The ministers were well regarded, each a tower of strength. Any GRC that was deemed to be weak or facing tough opposition, just threw in a minister and the GRC would be as good as in the pocket. What is the situation today? The party is still doing a lot of good work for the people. I perceive that in spite of this, the ground has shifted. The people are angry, really angry. OK, not everyone is angry. There were many policies and decisions that were seen as bad and unacceptable. It may be only a perception, it may be real too. On the party side, it thinks and sincerely, honestly believes that it is doing everything for the good of the people. They forget that it is the people that is the judge. Why is there such a big gap in the people’s perception and the party’s own thinking? An erroneous perception can be easily explained away with some effort. Bad decisions and policies don’t go away, no matter how much trumpet blowing, and will end up as sophistry. They said you cannot bluff the people all the time. Too many untruths propagated as truths would surely back fire. It is no longer palatable to take the position that the people are stupid and unthinking masses, can be easily manipulated, or unable to see the goodness of good policies. Our superb education system must at the least do some good, make the people more knowledgeable and critical of the things they see or are happening to their lives. They cannot be unthinking people with all the exposure to the world and the high educational level they have attained. Are the people with the new PAP? There are hard core supporters and oppositions on both sides. The important segment is the middle ground. Has this moved? If the anger expressed in the new media is true, forget about the views of the old media as we know what they are, then the writing is on the wall. But it is not just the perception of the people that has changed. The leadership in the new PAP is quite fragile to be polite. Many ministers today are liabilities to the GRCs they are helming to the extent that fielding them will guarantee that the GRC will be lost. I know some may read this point with eyes popping out. Believe me, quite a number of ministers no longer carry the ground. The only thing that has never changed is that the PAP, old and new, is still led by one man, the same one man that started it. Even though LKY does not hold any decision making position directly like a ministry, he is still the man. It is still his party, his Singapore. Can the man carry the party again one last time, really, that he will stand for one more election? Or is the party coming to an end together with the fading away of the man that is synonymous with the PAP from day one to his last days?