As expected the attacks on the presidential hopefuls will come in a matter of time. At the moment the guns were trained at Tan Kin Lian. Some smears have already been spread in the internet. Would it work or would it work to the advantage of Tan Kin Lian? The supporters of Tan Kin Lian will not be swayed by such smear tactics and are resolute in their support. They knew that some will have private agendas to bring down a candidate and it is nothing knew. Perhaps some could be mercenaries being paid to do the smearing, or some may have an axe to grind.
There are no saints among mortals. Everyone will have a few warts here and there. And it does not take much effort for the smearers to get hold of any unpleasant gossips to tar anyone. So far Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bok have been spared the worst. But as the election gets nearer, will shit begin to flow more profusely? Will those who are comfortable with throwing shit dictate how the presidential election be conducted and every candidate walks away smelly and embarrassed? Or will there be some restraint by all parties to maintain some dignity and decorum in an election for the highest office in the land?
Who will set the tone? The first shit has been thrown. Will it get worst or will it end abruptly just like what happened at the Bukit Timah Holland GRC during the GE? The field is quite level. Everyone can play the same game. When the attackers feel that it is free for all and everything goes, it can get really nasty.
And finally Tan Cheng Bock is making his appearance. He has been absent for a while and there were speculations that he was told to back off. This has proven to be untrue. Now the action is just beginning. Would there be smears thrown at him, or at Tony Tan?
7/14/2011
Myth 228 - The Myth of changing clothes
The most advanced public administration theory today is that all govt services and govt employees are inefficient and lack motivation to improve what they are doing. Or they basically sit on their chairs, drink kopi and read newspapers. They are lazy and irresponsible. Only know how to collect pay and more pay, but not willing to work. Thus the services they provided will only get worst and worst. They will not try to improve and nothing can be done to them, not even firing them.
But there is hope. The panacea for making govt services and employees become responsible, hardworking and efficient is to privatise them and the organization. So, the same bunch of employees, from the CEO to the office cleaners, all will become efficient and hardworking, and highly motivated, the moment they change their clothes to those worn by private company employees.
The same theory applies reversely. A bunch of private company employees will become lazy, inefficient, lack motivation etc etc, when the company is nationalized and when they put on govt employee clothings.
This is the magic formula of public administration. Just change the clothing and it will work instantly. The only thing they cannot privatise and will remain inefficient will be the govt. If only they could privatise the govt as well, efficiency will go up immediately. And of course, cost will be down.
But there is hope. The panacea for making govt services and employees become responsible, hardworking and efficient is to privatise them and the organization. So, the same bunch of employees, from the CEO to the office cleaners, all will become efficient and hardworking, and highly motivated, the moment they change their clothes to those worn by private company employees.
The same theory applies reversely. A bunch of private company employees will become lazy, inefficient, lack motivation etc etc, when the company is nationalized and when they put on govt employee clothings.
This is the magic formula of public administration. Just change the clothing and it will work instantly. The only thing they cannot privatise and will remain inefficient will be the govt. If only they could privatise the govt as well, efficiency will go up immediately. And of course, cost will be down.
Lui Tuck Yew defending the privatization of public transport
Lui Tuck Yew spoke against the Worker’s Party proposal to nationalize public transport. To him, the privatization formula works and if it is nationalized, it will become inefficient, non commuters will also have to pay and cost will go up and everyone ended paying more.
Assuming he is right, and I think he is. Look at the housing programme after it was privatized. Look at the medical care services after they are privatized, and transportation of course. All became world class and all so cheap and affordable. Ok, cannot say cheap, but affordable. If they were not privatized, the cost would have gone up even more and everyone paying more. Please be grateful that they are privatized.
And there will be no motivation for a nationalized public service to improve, except maybe the ministries. The ministries are not privatized, and presumingly running well. Or are they, like all non privatized organizations, running inefficiently and incurring more and more cost? In a nutshell, is the govt runnning efficiently without being privatized or it is running badly and incurring higher cost? If it cannot run efficiently without being privatized, then the govt/ministries should also be privatized.
Let’s move away from all these circular arguments that are self serving. Let’s ask a simple question. Can the transport companies continue to run, under the present system and staff, ceteris paribus, and don’t run into the red for another 3 years?
Another question, can the public transport companies operate with the current profit margin or lesser profit margin by ploughing back some profits to commuters and avoid another fare hike in the short term?
How much profit is enough for the privately run companies? Or is it a privately run company in the first place? Why is a minister defending a privately run company and its profits?
In my opinion, any able administrator could run the companies without raising fares for the next three years without making losses, unless fuel cost shot up dramatically.
So why the hurry to raise fare?
Assuming he is right, and I think he is. Look at the housing programme after it was privatized. Look at the medical care services after they are privatized, and transportation of course. All became world class and all so cheap and affordable. Ok, cannot say cheap, but affordable. If they were not privatized, the cost would have gone up even more and everyone paying more. Please be grateful that they are privatized.
And there will be no motivation for a nationalized public service to improve, except maybe the ministries. The ministries are not privatized, and presumingly running well. Or are they, like all non privatized organizations, running inefficiently and incurring more and more cost? In a nutshell, is the govt runnning efficiently without being privatized or it is running badly and incurring higher cost? If it cannot run efficiently without being privatized, then the govt/ministries should also be privatized.
Let’s move away from all these circular arguments that are self serving. Let’s ask a simple question. Can the transport companies continue to run, under the present system and staff, ceteris paribus, and don’t run into the red for another 3 years?
Another question, can the public transport companies operate with the current profit margin or lesser profit margin by ploughing back some profits to commuters and avoid another fare hike in the short term?
How much profit is enough for the privately run companies? Or is it a privately run company in the first place? Why is a minister defending a privately run company and its profits?
In my opinion, any able administrator could run the companies without raising fares for the next three years without making losses, unless fuel cost shot up dramatically.
So why the hurry to raise fare?
7/13/2011
Singapore’s two most valuable living assets
LKY and Chok Tong are in great demand as statesmen dispensing good advices to less experienced leaders over the world. There must be a beeline queuing up to meet them and to seek their views and advices on world issues and economic development.
These are two very valuable men. In fact world leaders will be more willing to hear their views and wisdom than Bush or Clinton and the likes from the White House. And to think that these ex American Presidents are taking millions on their public talks just for novelty sake, I am sure our two wise men could command a bigger lecture fee.
They should engage a manager to market their popularities and turn themselves into profit centres. It is also good for the country to have two eminent men in the lecture circuit and educating the world leaders. If world leaders are prepared to pay to listen to jokers or one line puns from Hollywood celebrities, I am sure they will pay good money to hear pearls of wisdoms.
What are we waiting for? Both are living legends of modern history. Why give free advice when there are plentiful of money to be made? The income can be used to defray the cost of their offices and the supporting staff.
These are two very valuable men. In fact world leaders will be more willing to hear their views and wisdom than Bush or Clinton and the likes from the White House. And to think that these ex American Presidents are taking millions on their public talks just for novelty sake, I am sure our two wise men could command a bigger lecture fee.
They should engage a manager to market their popularities and turn themselves into profit centres. It is also good for the country to have two eminent men in the lecture circuit and educating the world leaders. If world leaders are prepared to pay to listen to jokers or one line puns from Hollywood celebrities, I am sure they will pay good money to hear pearls of wisdoms.
What are we waiting for? Both are living legends of modern history. Why give free advice when there are plentiful of money to be made? The income can be used to defray the cost of their offices and the supporting staff.
Is it a god damn right?
What makes the transport companies think that it is their god damn right to make millions in profits every year? And when profit is not enough, they simply apply to the LTA to raise fare? Is it a business that guarantees them profit year after year? Is there a business that has such a privilege status? Pow chiat business!
If they cannot make decent profit they should not be in the business and let someone else runs it. Don’t give the crap that they are answerable to the shareholders. They are answerable to the commuters too. Just because they are privatized, they can claime shareholders interests as the number one priority. Have they paid back the huge infrastructure cost of constructing the lines from public money?
In whatever guises, it is a public transport system and has a national duty to keep transportation cost low and to run efficiently. Making profit is secondary. The most important thing is that it is not running at a loss. For the last 10 to 20 years, how many billions have the transport companies been making, at about $200m to $300m annually?
It is time they think of the interests of the nation and the commuters. No business has a god damn right to be profitable year after year. Allow real competitors to run alternative routes and break down this monopoly.
If they cannot make decent profit they should not be in the business and let someone else runs it. Don’t give the crap that they are answerable to the shareholders. They are answerable to the commuters too. Just because they are privatized, they can claime shareholders interests as the number one priority. Have they paid back the huge infrastructure cost of constructing the lines from public money?
In whatever guises, it is a public transport system and has a national duty to keep transportation cost low and to run efficiently. Making profit is secondary. The most important thing is that it is not running at a loss. For the last 10 to 20 years, how many billions have the transport companies been making, at about $200m to $300m annually?
It is time they think of the interests of the nation and the commuters. No business has a god damn right to be profitable year after year. Allow real competitors to run alternative routes and break down this monopoly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)