$147k for a C Class hospital bill

Tan Guan Seng, calling himself an average Singaporean worker, was served with a C Class ward hospital bill from NUH. After deducting from company’s insurance, from Medisave, Medishield, he is still left with $50k outstanding. He probably forgot about the 3rd M which could reduce his bill to $8 like someone with a major heart operation. The facts of this case include the following: it is a work accident so no subsidy. The family ‘request to upgrade him to a private ward, the hospital’s staff informed her that the estimated bill would exceed the quantum to be borne by …Work Injury Compensation Act …at a cap of 25k.’ Also hospital has discretion to downgrade when it found patients may have difficulties to pay. Did the request for upgrading got through? Did the hospital downgrade the patient subsequently? These were left hanging without confirmation. As they were mentioned in the hospital’s reply, they must have happened. Otherwise they were unnecessary information to talk about. There were several issues that are interesting. Firstly, Singaporeans must be thankful that their lives are now so worthy that hospitals could easily charge them a few hundred thousand for admission. People with cheap lives will not pay such ransom and choose to die. The Work Injury Compensation Act needs a revision as the quantum provided to protect work injury accidents is definitely inadequate. The minimum sum insured should be at least $150k and increasing every year to meet the rising cost of hospitalisation. Insurance companies are smiling now. The vicious cycle is starting, much like motor insurance. It seems a norm that patients admitted to hospitals would like to upgrade, like upgrading from HDB flats to private properties. No one seems to ask how much would it cost. Or they may believe that with 3Ms, they only need to pay $8 or around that sum. The question is why the hospital never do a mean testing to make sure that patients who cannot pay cannot be upgraded? It seems that mean testing is to ensure that patients should stay in more expensive wards than the other way round. Oh, in this case the hospital did a downgrading subsequently I think. Otherwise the bill could be $300K. There are many issues and things to do to ensure that workers can afford to pay for their expensive lives. For one, the govt should not encourage the mindset of upgrading in hospitalisation. Perhaps only two classes of wards should be provided to keep the ignoramus out of harm and suddenly claimed ignorance and unable to pay when a handsome hospital bill is presented to them on a gold platter. (Come to think of it, this should be the manner to serve a bill of that size, by a specially appointed emissary). Just have a ward called Very Expensive Ward for the rich and those who can afford to pay. And Very Good Ward for the rest of the people at subsidised rate that is ‘affordable’ to the masses. Calling it Very Good will make the masses feel good. And calling the expensive ward expensive will remind them that it will not cost only $8 but $800k. Simple people need simple solution. The masses have a thinking brain and thinking pattern that are very different from the super talents, and very strange. The smart ones will always want to be admitted to cheaper wards which ended with a reprisal in the form of Mean Testing. The silly ones just don’t care and would want the best wards even if they cannot afford to pay. Paying is the last thing in their minds. Maybe the govt should seriously consider applying the mean testing to make sure people who cannot pay be admitted into cheaper wards and not the other way round. Of course there will be outcry by the people who would accuse the govt for not seeing them up and ill treating them and putting them in low class wards. That is why I suggested only two types of wards. Very Expensive Wards and Very Good Wards to cater to the rich and the masses.

Clever or stupid question?

William Choong, senior writer of ST, asked a Chinese professor and a Chinese Ambassador about transparency and Chinese military build up. And he deservedly got told off by the Chinese for asking those questions. Why wouldn’t he ask the Americans for more transparency in their weapons development and what their military arms were for? I believe the Americans will tell him it is just a hobby, or toys for the big boys to play with. Would that be good enough answers for him? There is this group of analysts and reporters who have run out of wits and did not know what to write, and so whenever they see a Chinese official, they will ask the same stupid questions. What are China’s military build up for? The Chinese should simply say, to screw your arse. China had been a victim of foreign aggression and nearly lost its independence as a country because it was militarily weak. Does that answer all the silly questions? A smart analyst will know what military weapons and soldiers are for. There is no need to announce their stupidity in the public. The stealth fighter is a problem? What problem? What is the range of the aircraft and its armaments? Can it fly to the US? Yes, it has attack capability. But with its limited range, it is good only to defend the Chinese coast against enemy attacks. And when the enemies are at the door step, what should the Chinese do? Do I have to explain what an aircraft carrier is for? I hope no military analyst or expert is going to ask that silly question. Just look at its range, and the weapons it is carrying. Yes, an aircraft carrier is to party. It is an offensive weapon! William Choong wrote in his article today explaining his line of questioning. He said, ‘…my question had been open ended and harmless…I had posed a question that was deemed a tad too critical.’ I must praise him for his child like innocence. The Chinese reply to his childish questions was most appropriate though he thought that the Chinese were over reacting. And no, the Chinese were not trying to be smart. They were smart. And definitely they were not incompetent and did not want to answer silly and naïve questions. The Chinese should adopt a practice to say, ‘We don’t answer stupid questions. Next please.’

The danger of racial riots

In LKY’s book on Hard Truths, he touched on the dangers of racial riots and the Muslim community’s ability to integrate with other communities. These have touched on raw nerves and attracting several replies from across the causeway and from our Malay Community. In cyberspace, Solo bear is putting his views on his interpretation of the issue of race and riots. It is healthy if this issue can be discussed in a rational manner, even in the main stream media, without provoking racial tension and worst, a racial riot. I hope the parties involved could go on discussing for as long as they like and keeping an even keel. Not discussing it openly does not mean that there is no problem. However, discussing them does not mean that the problem can be discussed away. Race and religion are divisive by nature, with each have their own characteristics and beliefs that would want it to be different from others. Some would not want to be compromised by others or worst, insisted that others must be like them. Believing or claiming that race and religion are for harmony and peaceful coexistence is self deception. The seed of division is in every race and religion. It is a me against you kind of mentality. There will be no end to the troubles that can be caused by such divisions in race and religion. They will not go away. LKY is talking about racial riots. Solo bear is talking about riots, any kind of riots. Solo bear takes it that the Malays are somehow identified as the cause of riots but actually the Chinese were involved in most of the riots in Singapore. He quoted the Maria Hertogh riot, the National Service riot, Hock Lee Bus riot, the Chinese student riot, the 1964 and 1969 riots. Of the 6 quoted, 3 were racial riots and 3 were political. The Hock Lee and Chinese student riots were rooted in anti colonial movements. In the absence of colonial masters, they are unlikely to happen again. But anti govt riots could still be possible. What would not go away is the pugnacious racial riot. This is so sensitive and so easily instigated that a fight between two neighbours could ignite into a racial riot if the race element is played up. Even a fight between two commuters in a train can be turned into a racial riot if the flame of race is fanned. We live in a multi racial society and the three major racial groups have a significant presence. At any one time there could be a significant presence of any one of these groups in a location engaging in occupational, cultural or religious activities. Without a forceful govt intervention to ensure peaceful coexistence, the potential for racial dispute is really very high. All races must always bear in mind that avoiding racial dispute or preventing any dispute from becoming racial is vital to the well being of everyone here. What happened in the past, pointing at any one group will only incite anger. No one, even if guilty of racial trespassing, will want to admit guilt of wrong doings. Everyone can judge from the records of history and form his own private and personable opinion and let it stay there. It is pointless to say who was at fault as the guilty party would come up with hundred and one reasons to deflect its action. What is important is to know that racial riots can happen today or tomorrow. Everyone needs to be exceptionally sensitive to avoid such a scenario at all cost.

Loan shark Country – An effort in vain

Many loan shark runners have been arrested recently when the police stepped up their acts. Many were jailed or caned. When the police meant business, no way can the criminals hide. Those who are still engaging in this activity, to threaten the innocents and to paint graffiti everywhere they like should take note. It is only a matter of time before they go behind bars, and their behinds will be sore too. And ouch, another photo in the media showing another O$P$ graffiti at the Kallang Tennis Centre when an international tournament is in progress. Talking about arrogance, who can beat them? The loan sharks really believe that they are one step ahead of the law. They are as good as flipping their nose at the law. This problem used to be other people’s problem for too long. Innocent victims have suffered for months and years at the mercy of the loan sharks. As long as it remains as OPP, nothing much will be done. Would the latest affront against the law at the tennis centre be enough to provoke the law to come down harder and extinguish the light of the loan shark activities? By reading the reports that only little runners were being caught all the while, it looks like the law is just scratching the surface of the problem. If the big sharks are not in the net, there will be an unending supply of runners running around in circles in loan shark country.

Crying foul again!

Super computers and high speed trading system in equity and derivative tradings. These traders are armed with the latest technology, computer systems and algorithms to place their bets in the stock markets. The technology gives them the advantage to buy and sell at the best price after having a quick peep at all the orders in the market. And they have a big war chest to back up their bets to drown out the small traders. Now, is this a game of pokers, a game of chance, or stock trading? Is it investing or gambling? Who are the big traders with their expensive gambling machine playing against? Are they gambling against their peers with the same formula 1 machine or are they cheating or violating the small investors? When they are competing against the same kind with the same level of resources, technology and equipment, it is fair play. But if they are employing their mean machine to take advantage of the small and ill equipped investors, someone must cry foul. Fair play is what stock markets swear to do. Protecting the small investors against foul play, against being taken advantage of by unfair practices is what the stock markets stood for. By allowing such machine to maul down the innocent small investors must be a serious breach of the integrity of stock market principles and operations. If not, stock markets must be renamed as casinos and be governed by the rules of gaming applicable to casinos.