6/01/2011
I did not ask for it
Hypothetically, or just my imagination, when the huge increments and pay were thrown at the lap of the President, could his eyes pop out and follow by a grumble, ‘Why so much? I didn’t ask for it.’ Nathan is a simple man, nothing ostentatious in his lifestyle, and probably very happy with his banana leaf fish head curry. He has never been seen as someone who would flaunt his wealth, spending wildly. Neither is his wife. Both very decent people living quite a simple lifestyle.
The millions of dollars thrown at him would probably go into his bank accounts and never see daylight. I am being presumptious of course. My point is that we are paying too much for a non executive president. We are not living in a kingdom where blue blooded aliens must be kept to live very well from the taxes paid by the people.
Also, whoever is elected to this high office, he is likely to be a man that is held in high esteem by the people, and unlikely to be corrupted. So no need to pay him an out of this world salary to keep his fingers away from the coffer. Anyway, his position is unlikely to get him too close to where the money is kept. The idea of paying an officer a lot of money to keep him from becoming corrupt is demeaning to such an office. For all its honour and dignity, this concept must be taken out of the equation when the good office of the Presidency is concerned.
Paying people to prevent them from corruption should be kept at those levels where people are likely to do so. I still got this funny feeling that the whole reasoning is foul, at least I can smell that something is not right.
I hope the Salary Review Committee will take the Presidency out of the package and deal with it separately, away from the stigma and idea of corruption. The thought of a president that is incorruptible may be a bit idealistic. But the safeguard is the office of CPIB, watching everyone to keep them honest.
The millions of dollars thrown at him would probably go into his bank accounts and never see daylight. I am being presumptious of course. My point is that we are paying too much for a non executive president. We are not living in a kingdom where blue blooded aliens must be kept to live very well from the taxes paid by the people.
Also, whoever is elected to this high office, he is likely to be a man that is held in high esteem by the people, and unlikely to be corrupted. So no need to pay him an out of this world salary to keep his fingers away from the coffer. Anyway, his position is unlikely to get him too close to where the money is kept. The idea of paying an officer a lot of money to keep him from becoming corrupt is demeaning to such an office. For all its honour and dignity, this concept must be taken out of the equation when the good office of the Presidency is concerned.
Paying people to prevent them from corruption should be kept at those levels where people are likely to do so. I still got this funny feeling that the whole reasoning is foul, at least I can smell that something is not right.
I hope the Salary Review Committee will take the Presidency out of the package and deal with it separately, away from the stigma and idea of corruption. The thought of a president that is incorruptible may be a bit idealistic. But the safeguard is the office of CPIB, watching everyone to keep them honest.
A decade of failed public housing policies
With only a couple of weeks in office, Koh Boon Wan has virtually overturned many of the old housing policies of his predecessor and frantically trying to make up for lost time to make good what had went wrong drastically. Would the changes in housing policies be good enough evidence of the mismanagement of public housing or just a change of policies and nothing more?
The decade of under building of public flats and the influx of foreigners have caught many first time buyers of HDB flats sleeping. Many did not really understand what was happening and were caught napping through no fault of theirs. As a consequence, many ended up buying excessively priced flats or missed the boat altogether. Many too have to put off plans for marriage, for starting a family, while some were forced to buy resale flats at higher prices or private properties at even higher prices. The net result is that many young people have to pay overpriced properties and cleaning up their savings. Those that missed the boat are just as bad as the little savings they stinged to save can never make up for the runaway prices.
Could the victims of the decade of misguided public housing policies find recourse or reprieve in some way with new policies that will recognize their plight? Many have been forced out of the market for not being able to buy a HDB flat when their incomes were within the HDB ceiling. Is it their fault? Would there be an amnesty of sort to let these victims of past policies back into the public housing system? Or would it be a case of just too bad, caught by wrong policies at the wrong time? Or would some wise guy quip, ‘It happened, let’s move on?
How flexible and people centric will the new regime be to the victims of flawed policies?
5/31/2011
An unbelievable world record!
Other being a PAP MP, he(Yeo Guat Kwang holds) has an amazing 64 other positions !!!
http://www.parliament.gov.sg/mp/yeo-guat-kwang?viewcv=Yeo%20Guat%20Kwang
1) Member, Government Parliamentary Committee on Manpower
2) Member, Government Parliamentary Committee on Community Development, Youth & Sports
3) Member, GPC for Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts
4) Vice Chairman, Aljunied Town Council
5) Alignment Director, NTUC Quality Worklife & All Nationalities
6) Acting Advisor to Taxi Operators’ Association
7) President of Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE)
Vice-Chairman, North East Community Development Council
9) Member, Board of Directors of PUB Board
10) Advisor to the Singapore Table Tennis Association
11) Advisor to the Singapore WeiQi Association
12) Advisor to the Ren Ci Hospital
13) Advisor to the Bright Vision Hospital
14) Advisor to Artistes & Performers’ Association
15) Advisor to Restaurants Association of Singapore
16) Executive Secretary, Singapore Chinese Teachers’ Unions
17) Director, Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDReC)
1 Advisor, Federation of Merchants’ Associations, Singapore
19) Executive Secretary, Amalgamated Union of Statutory Board Employees
20) Member, Workplace Health and Safety Council
21) Co-Chairman, National Tripartite Committee on Workplace Health
22) Co-Chairman, Customer Centric Initiatives
23) Co-Chairman, NTUC-SNEF Migrant Workers’ Forum
24) Member, Aids Business Alliance
25) Member, Mental Health Alliance
26) Member, Centre for Service Excellence and Leadership Governing Council
27) Member, SPRING Standards Council
2 Patron to Pets Enterprises & Traders Association (PETAS)
29) PAP Community Foundation HQ Executive Committee
30) Member, Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning (CPCLL)
31) Member, Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA)
32) Member, AVA Human Resource Committee
33) Member, WSH Council Finance Committee
34) Member, Tripartite Committee on Employability of Older Workers
35) Member, Tripartite Committee on Portable Medical Benefits
36) Member, Tripartite Committee on Flexible Work Arrangement
37) Member, Quality Service Advisory Council
3 Member, Institute for Service Excellence @ SMU (ISES) Governing Council
39) Member, Motor Industry Disputes Resolution Centre Pte Ltd Board of Governors
40) Member, Retail Price Watch Group
41) Member,Tobacco Licensing Consultative Panel
42) Member, Ngee Ann Kongsi Council
43) Advisor, Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore Staff Union (IRASSU)
44) Advisor & Trustee, NatSteel Employees Union (NEU)
45) Business Advisor, NTUC LearningHub Pte Ltd
46) Advisor, Yeo Clan General Association
47) Advisor, Singapore Taoist Federation
4 Advisor, Fo Guang Shan (Singapore)
49) Advisor, Mun San Fook Tuck Chee
50) Advisor, Society of Sheng Hong Welfare Services
51) Advisor, Sian Chay Medical Institution
52) Advisor, Society of Tourist Guides (Singapore)
53) Advisor, Singapore Furniture Association
54) Advisor, Eggs’ Import/Export Trading Association (Singapore)
55) Advisor, Federation of Merchants’ Singapore
56) Advisor, JCI Senators Club of Singapore
57) Advisory Board Member, Singapore-China Association for Advancement of Science & Technology
5 Patron. Buddist Fellowship
59) Independent Director, Grandwork Interior Pte Ltd
60) Independent Director, Japan Foods Holding Ltd
61) Independent Director, Koyo International Ltd
62) Independent Director, United Envirotech Ltd
63) Independent Director, Asia Water Technology Ltd
64) Independent Director, HLH Group Ltd
The above is copied from Thoughts of a Singapore Statistician. This is the kind of overworked super talents that Singaporeans can be very proud of. As an average individual, I would forget at least 80 per cent of the names of the organizations in the above list. It is a marvel to even remember them, let alone trying to perform all the duties associated with them. But I am just an average bean.
The uncomfortable or unfair part is that for a miserable $15k per month, this super talent is made to shoulder such an unenviable number of important positions and responsibilities. I really feel sorry for him. I doubt he even has time to eat or sleep if he is to do his duties, just to attend meetings alone. But when I look at how well he looks, I think he is coping very well.
And he is not alone. I believe all his peers are also shouldering a fuller list of appointments, maybe more.
So Singaporeans should not begrudge these great talents and the money paid to them. They deserve every penny they received. In fact they should be paid more. I will die trying to do more than 3 jobs.
Singapore is indeed blessed with such super human beans, rightly described as more than mortals.
How long will the Ponzi Scheme last?
Many have commented that the public housing scheme is another Ponzi Scheme or something similar in nature. In all sense, it will die a naturally death by the time the lease expires in 99 years, all 900,000 of them. On that day, all will be worthless.
There seems to be a way out though, to extend the game, by SERS, whereby the HDB will buy back the flats before the lease expires, offer the lessee a new flat of the same market value or slightly more. The lessee will be happy to get a new flat for a smaller fee and a new lease.
This option of buying back and offering a new flat can go on and on provided certain conditions are present. Without these conditions, the renewal and new life will still come to an end.
The first condition is that the flats to be acquired are low lying, and on the same plot of land a doubling of the units of flats can be built. A 10 storey block can easily go to 20, and 20 to 40. After that it must go to 80 or 100 storeys so that the cost of building the new flats can be paid by new lessees.
As the cost of building is going to be much higher, and there is inflation to add on to the cost, it is also assumed that the income of the new lessees will go up proportionally to pay for the much more expensive flats. Or else, the aspiration will be for smaller and smaller units or smaller in size like what is happening now.
The third condition is that there must be more and more buyers to buy the new flats. As the formula is based on the doubling of the units, if all the flats are to be rebuilt, it will need a doubling of the population, from 5m to 10m. So the floodgate for foreigners cannot be closed.
The fourth condition is that the island will not sink with all the Towers of Babel loading on it. And hopefully, the supporting infrastructure to house the kind of population density can cope with the increase.
If all the conditions are met, the Ponzi Scheme can go on and on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)