‘Funny how SIA keeps putting foreigners in charge at their ICC (low cost carrier). Don’t they have faith in Singaporeans. I do. My Commercial Head is a Singapore. Odd company. If I were a Singaporean, I would really be upset with SIA.’ Tony Fernandez. CEO Air Asia
What Fernandez is saying is part of the Battlestar Galactica plot. There can be several reasons for this. One is that Singaporeans are really inepts despite their great paper grades. Two Singaporeans lack confidence and need to hide behind a European face to do business. The colonial hangover is difficult to treat. Four, and this is like doing a Michael Jackson act. No I am not white. It is natural, or a disease. Not my fault.
Don’t be surprise the next President could be George Bush or Bill Clinton if they are willing to change to a pink IC. Anyone clamouring to have Queen Elizabeth II as our head of state again? We will have Prince William and Princess Kate gracing our community centres and flagging off our marathons. Nice, ain’t it?
7/21/2011
My second daft Singaporean story for the day
Transport fares are going up, as sure as the sun will rise. This law is more permanent and unyielding than the law of gravity. So what can the Singaporeans do? KPKB is one thing. The next logical thing in the daft Singaporean mind is to say, fare goes up we want to see improvement in services. If no improvement, cannot.
So they are willing to concede to have more fare hikes if there is improvement in services. And they are still complaining that the service quality is bad. Now what does this mean? After 10 or 20 fare hikes, the same daft Singaporeans demanding that service quality be improved and the promises that fare hikes would lead to improvements, and what is the situation now?
Was there any improvement in the service quality after every fare hike? Or would this call for improvement be just a lip service that the daft Singaporeans sought to appease themselves, that there is nothing else they could do? If I were the operator, I will simply say the fare hike will improve the service quality.
Come next year, ask for fare hike to improve quality again. Imagine if there were 20 fare hikes and really 20 times improvement in quality, our transport services must be the best in the world. What or where were the improvements after every fare hike?
But of course, this time the call for fare hike is not to improve service quality but due to higher cost, petrol, manpower and also new buses. Ok, the later could be related to better services, with new and more comfortable buses. But the main part is higher cost. So what is this call about improving services?
So they are willing to concede to have more fare hikes if there is improvement in services. And they are still complaining that the service quality is bad. Now what does this mean? After 10 or 20 fare hikes, the same daft Singaporeans demanding that service quality be improved and the promises that fare hikes would lead to improvements, and what is the situation now?
Was there any improvement in the service quality after every fare hike? Or would this call for improvement be just a lip service that the daft Singaporeans sought to appease themselves, that there is nothing else they could do? If I were the operator, I will simply say the fare hike will improve the service quality.
Come next year, ask for fare hike to improve quality again. Imagine if there were 20 fare hikes and really 20 times improvement in quality, our transport services must be the best in the world. What or where were the improvements after every fare hike?
But of course, this time the call for fare hike is not to improve service quality but due to higher cost, petrol, manpower and also new buses. Ok, the later could be related to better services, with new and more comfortable buses. But the main part is higher cost. So what is this call about improving services?
Myth 230 - The Presidential Myth
Before 31 Aug is up Singaporeans would have voted for a Tan to be their next Elected President. And many are gearing up for the event, to decide who they want as the President. They want to use their vote to pick their man. This is one myth that they did not bother to think about. No they did not decide, or cannot decide, who should be their man to be President.
No? The man to be the next Elected President will be decided by the Presidential Election Council, by three wise men. They will pick the man or men whom they decide will be suitable to be the President of Singapore. Only then can the Singaporean cast their vote. If they so decide on one candidate, Singaporeans would LL have to accept it. So, who decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? The citizens?
Then again, this is only one of the myths. The second myth is that the three men could only decide on whoever was deemed good enough, eligible, by someone else. The criteria, the conditions were already decided before the three wise men can say who? This is the bigger myth that daft Singaporeans totally forgotten. That is why we need more thinking foreigners to lead the unthinking and simplistic Singaporeans. They simply can’t think, can’t see anything beyond their noses.
Who really decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? You tell me.
No? The man to be the next Elected President will be decided by the Presidential Election Council, by three wise men. They will pick the man or men whom they decide will be suitable to be the President of Singapore. Only then can the Singaporean cast their vote. If they so decide on one candidate, Singaporeans would LL have to accept it. So, who decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? The citizens?
Then again, this is only one of the myths. The second myth is that the three men could only decide on whoever was deemed good enough, eligible, by someone else. The criteria, the conditions were already decided before the three wise men can say who? This is the bigger myth that daft Singaporeans totally forgotten. That is why we need more thinking foreigners to lead the unthinking and simplistic Singaporeans. They simply can’t think, can’t see anything beyond their noses.
Who really decides who can be the Elected President of Singapore? You tell me.
7/20/2011
Let’s teach the Brits
Rupert Murdoch was quoted to have told the British Govt that they should emulate Singapore in paying millions to their political leaders. In that way the politicians can be cleaner and less corrupt, no need to resort to making spurious expense claims, or having dinners with him and Murdoch picking up the tabs. I think this is a wise thing to say.
Singapore has the cleanest and least corrupt govt in the world, by paying them not to be corrupt. We should share our world best formula with the British and the West, plus the ingenious arguments. They will be very thankful that they could finally learn something from the East. We are the pathfinders for a govt that is not corrupt, with a pay that is so good that makes corruption obsolete.
The British and the Americans would surely love the formula. Obama could be looking at $200m and David Cameron could probably be looking at 50m sterling pounds. Given that they have not been corrupted with their present salaries, maybe a 50% discount from these amounts would be enough to send them to the moon in glee.
Singapore has the cleanest and least corrupt govt in the world, by paying them not to be corrupt. We should share our world best formula with the British and the West, plus the ingenious arguments. They will be very thankful that they could finally learn something from the East. We are the pathfinders for a govt that is not corrupt, with a pay that is so good that makes corruption obsolete.
The British and the Americans would surely love the formula. Obama could be looking at $200m and David Cameron could probably be looking at 50m sterling pounds. Given that they have not been corrupted with their present salaries, maybe a 50% discount from these amounts would be enough to send them to the moon in glee.
If we do away with the President…
Think of all the advantages of doing away with the president. I can think of all the good things and nothing bad. There is no need to hold on to this historical legacy. Why waste so much money and land just to keep up such an image? Even the British were thinking of doing away with their monarchy many years back. The only reason is that the British monarchy provides jobs for the people. Dunno who is paying for it.
In our case we don’t need those jobs. We have full employment and the staff can be deployed into more productive areas. But don’t think of building properties on the Istana land for sale. Keep it as a green lung, a park in the city for the benefits of the people, everyday, not 3 or 4 times a year. The property belongs to the people and everyone should be allowed to benefit from it, not a few individuals under the present system.
And I am sure our foreign workers would love to have the Istana park for leisure over the weekend. We need all the free space we can get hold of to share with the people and to loosen up the crunch.
So much money saved. And no need to spend time and money just to elect a ceremonial head that is mainly a rubber stamp but collecting millions and millions from the public coffer. This is definitely bad.
How many of you agree with doing away with this office? To me it is not an institution that is a must have, definitely no need to be so costly. If we are so preoccupied with high offices or monarchys, it may be more romantic to instal a royal family. Then we can have coronations, prince and princess, uncles and aunties of royal families. These will be good stuff for fairy tale authors and the media.
In our case we don’t need those jobs. We have full employment and the staff can be deployed into more productive areas. But don’t think of building properties on the Istana land for sale. Keep it as a green lung, a park in the city for the benefits of the people, everyday, not 3 or 4 times a year. The property belongs to the people and everyone should be allowed to benefit from it, not a few individuals under the present system.
And I am sure our foreign workers would love to have the Istana park for leisure over the weekend. We need all the free space we can get hold of to share with the people and to loosen up the crunch.
So much money saved. And no need to spend time and money just to elect a ceremonial head that is mainly a rubber stamp but collecting millions and millions from the public coffer. This is definitely bad.
How many of you agree with doing away with this office? To me it is not an institution that is a must have, definitely no need to be so costly. If we are so preoccupied with high offices or monarchys, it may be more romantic to instal a royal family. Then we can have coronations, prince and princess, uncles and aunties of royal families. These will be good stuff for fairy tale authors and the media.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)