8/26/2011
Test for daft Singaporeans
This Saturday, 27 Aug 2011, Singapore will again have an opportunity to sit for a test to prove their daftness once again. For so many years, Singaporeans have not only been told that they are daft, they even agreed that it is true and accepted the fact shamelessly.
After a life time of slogging, when many have become grandfathers and grandmothers, when the normal process of growing up and ageing would have made them wiser, they were told that they cannot be trusted with their hard earned money. And this money will be kept away from them, maybe return to them in drips, and in exchange they will be given a piece of paper every month to tell them how rich they are, and also how daft they are.
They were also told that foreigners are here to help them, to create jobs for them. But before doing that, the foreigners would have to take some of their jobs. And if they lost out to the foreigners, they were told to buck up or that they were lazy, less competitive and must go for retraining, for a lower skill job than before. And also, the foreigners are here to help to increase the value of their properties that they cannot sell. For after selling, they would not be able to afford to buy the next property except by downgrading.
There are many other things that were shafted down their throats to confirm their daftness. This Saturday, they will be put on another test to confirm how daft they are, or whether they are beyond redemption.
The test is about a Justice Bao, a Song magistrate that was legendary for his impartial dispensing of justice, without fear or favour. This time the daft Singaporeans were told that Justice Bao has reincarnated. He is going to stand for election as the next President. And Justice Bao will uphold justice with absolute impartiality. He will not be affected by his relations with anyone in the execution of his duties. Any govt official that is corrupt will be beheaded under the tiger head guillotine. The Singaporeans are told to elect this Justice Bao the reincarnated as their President. And Justice Bao will demolish the myth that absolute power will corrupt. With Justice Bao as the President, there is no such thing as corruption of power. The more absolute the power the better for Singaporeans, when Justice Bao is around. Singaporeans will once again be told to vote for absolute power.
Would Singaporeans again prove themselves to be daft and vote the reincarnation of Justice Bao to be their President? The verdict will be out by 28 Aug 2011.
8/25/2011
Latest poll numbers
Less than 12 hours from the election campaign and Tan Jee Say is still in the lead with 69%. Overall his votes have slipped by 5% from the day the polls were set up. The other three candidates have a small share each of the 5% votes from Jee Say. Tan Cheng Bock is now at 18%, Tan Kin Lian at 6% and Tony Tan at 5%.
What do these numbers tell? There are a couple of assumptions that can be used to interpret how they would reflect the actual election. One, assuming that all those voting in this poll are anti PAP votes, which is not the case as some still voted for Tony and Cheng Bock is running in second place, and if the overall votes cast against the PAP is 50%, Tan Jee Say is going to garner 34.5% of popular votes. And this is likely to be the base support for Tan Jee Say.
Tan Kin Lian’s position is looking pretty weak and may lose more grounds on actual voting if the voters choose to throw everything with Tan Jee Say.
The big question now is between Tan Cheng Bock and Tony Tan. Theoretically, with all the endorsements, Tony Tan should carry at least 70% of the pro PAP votes. This will put him neck to neck with Jee Say at 35% against Jee Say’s 34.5%.
Tan Cheng Bock will have the balance of 15% plus the anti PAP votes of 9% (18% x 50) giving him 24%. His only chance to be in the running will be to take away more votes from Tony. To give him a real chance of catching up with Jee Say, he will have to take near to 50% of the pro PAP votes, which will give him 34% (25 + 9). 40% will not be good enough.
However, if Tony’s share of the pro PAP votes goes down to 60%, his total is going to be 30% (60% x 50) which will make him precariously close to losing to Tan Jee Say.
What is quite sure in this election is that 40% will be casting against the PAP camp with a likelihood of 50% this time. The pro PAP camp can count on 30% solid support plus another 20% swing votes. So my conclusion is that it will be Tan Jee Say versus Tony Tan or Tan Cheng Bock. It will be very close and if the anger is strong enough against the PAP, Jee Say is likely to be in with Cheng Bock pulling down Tony’s vote but not enough to lift him over Jee Say.
My take is on Jee Say taking a slight edge, beating Tony and Cheng Bock by a nose. But, if the polls here is representing 70% of all voters, less the 30% of hard core PAP supporters, then Jee Say is going to romp in with a comfortable 49% of votes count.
What do these numbers tell? There are a couple of assumptions that can be used to interpret how they would reflect the actual election. One, assuming that all those voting in this poll are anti PAP votes, which is not the case as some still voted for Tony and Cheng Bock is running in second place, and if the overall votes cast against the PAP is 50%, Tan Jee Say is going to garner 34.5% of popular votes. And this is likely to be the base support for Tan Jee Say.
Tan Kin Lian’s position is looking pretty weak and may lose more grounds on actual voting if the voters choose to throw everything with Tan Jee Say.
The big question now is between Tan Cheng Bock and Tony Tan. Theoretically, with all the endorsements, Tony Tan should carry at least 70% of the pro PAP votes. This will put him neck to neck with Jee Say at 35% against Jee Say’s 34.5%.
Tan Cheng Bock will have the balance of 15% plus the anti PAP votes of 9% (18% x 50) giving him 24%. His only chance to be in the running will be to take away more votes from Tony. To give him a real chance of catching up with Jee Say, he will have to take near to 50% of the pro PAP votes, which will give him 34% (25 + 9). 40% will not be good enough.
However, if Tony’s share of the pro PAP votes goes down to 60%, his total is going to be 30% (60% x 50) which will make him precariously close to losing to Tan Jee Say.
What is quite sure in this election is that 40% will be casting against the PAP camp with a likelihood of 50% this time. The pro PAP camp can count on 30% solid support plus another 20% swing votes. So my conclusion is that it will be Tan Jee Say versus Tony Tan or Tan Cheng Bock. It will be very close and if the anger is strong enough against the PAP, Jee Say is likely to be in with Cheng Bock pulling down Tony’s vote but not enough to lift him over Jee Say.
My take is on Jee Say taking a slight edge, beating Tony and Cheng Bock by a nose. But, if the polls here is representing 70% of all voters, less the 30% of hard core PAP supporters, then Jee Say is going to romp in with a comfortable 49% of votes count.
The arithmetic of the 26 sites
The PA is leasing 26 sites from the HDB for community events. How long is the lease and how much would it cost the PA for the lease? The next question is the number of days that these sites will be used.
If the usage of the sites, averaging once a week for each site, it will mean that the sites will be unused for 365 - 52 days or 313 days. Double the usage to 2 days every week, ie Sat and Sun, it will still be 261 days unused. A long lease in such a case would mean that the PA will be paying the HDB 261 to 313 days for not using them. Ok, the rate of rental for long lease could be lower than daily rate.
The question is whether it is cheaper for PA to pay for rental of the sites on a used basis, or daily rate? I don’t have the numbers but I think it will be much cheaper to pay on use than to pay for long term lease when the sites are not intensively used.
Can someone work out the numbers? One thing good about paying from one pocket to another pocket is that it will look good on economic numbers like GDP. Perhaps the PA could sublet the sites at a higher rate with profits.
If the usage of the sites, averaging once a week for each site, it will mean that the sites will be unused for 365 - 52 days or 313 days. Double the usage to 2 days every week, ie Sat and Sun, it will still be 261 days unused. A long lease in such a case would mean that the PA will be paying the HDB 261 to 313 days for not using them. Ok, the rate of rental for long lease could be lower than daily rate.
The question is whether it is cheaper for PA to pay for rental of the sites on a used basis, or daily rate? I don’t have the numbers but I think it will be much cheaper to pay on use than to pay for long term lease when the sites are not intensively used.
Can someone work out the numbers? One thing good about paying from one pocket to another pocket is that it will look good on economic numbers like GDP. Perhaps the PA could sublet the sites at a higher rate with profits.
What is happening in the stock market?
Hundreds of millions have been lost in the stock market by small investors since programme trading, algo and high computers were attached to the system of the stock market. This development means that the big funds are able to take full advantage of technology by plugging their computers into a system that they were once forbidden to do so, and trade against small investors, and cleaning them up.
Nobody is crying foul, or nobody dares to, or nobody wants to. So everyone pretends like there is nothing wrong, just like the toxic notes and Lehman bond crisis. The money lost in the stock market is many multiples of the previous scam and the number of victims were much more numerous.
One day it is going to explode and as usual, everyone will pretend to be ignorant of it. Everyone will say I dunno. Is there anything wrong with the stock market trading system? Is there a level playing field? Are there any violations to the rules and regulations of stock trading?
I swear to god that there is nothing wrong. I think the system is perfect, and volume is increasing and the stock exchange is making a lot more money than before. Those losers just got to blame themselves. I am sure the SGX and MAS know exactly what they are doing and everything is just fine. We can trust the super talents to do their homework as they are paid very well to do their jobs.
Some people have been complaining to me that something is really foul with the system. I disagree completely. But if they do feel strongly that something is wrong they need to prove it. Or they may want to take advantage of the presidential election and bring their grouses to the presidential hopefuls. These are honourable men who have pledged to safeguard the nation’s reserves with integrity. And if the small investors think that are caught in a scam, and brought to their attention, they will definitely take up their case to protect the small investors. They are men of honour and their positions with regards to the banning of MP Chen Show Mao in Aljunied are testimonies to their principles for fair play and justice.
Bring the problems to them and let them raise the issues with the proper authority. For me, I don’t see anything wrong so I would not know what to say. The SRS, SIAS, the broking houses, too are interested parties and they too did not see anything wrong and are not complaining.
Those people who complain about unfair practices, uneven playing field, unfair advantages, may not have a case, I think. If they think they cannot beat the system, don’t get it. It is caveat emptor.
How a LPPL President can be critical to a power shift?
In my earlier article I explained why the EP is at most a LPPL President. His key role to check on a rogue govt is at best a scarecrow attempt. A rogue govt in all counts will be in control of every instrument of the state and would just rubbish the EP if they have to, and there is nothing the EP can do about it. They could crudely bundle him out of the Istana in a gunny sack.
But under certain conditions, the EP is a source of strength in a contest for power and dominance. A likely scenario where the EP can play a crucial role is during a freak election. Take the last GE for illustration. If the PAP had lost the election they will have to rely on the EP for some semblance of authority and legitimacy if they want to take up a fight with the new govt. My speculation below is just for discussion.
When a new party takes office, what it would face is a whole machinery of govt organizations with heads appointed by the defeated ruling govt. The loyalty of these heads, from the military, civil service, judicial and all the ministries are likely to be still with the past govt. And the new govt would have to make changes to be rubber stamped by the EP. See what the EP can do in such a situation? The retention of all the incumbents in office will mean that the defeated party is still the de facto force to reckon with. And the new govt will have a hard time if these heads refuse to tow the line, and cannot be removed because of a veto by the EP.
Any attempt to break the impasse would only lead to more tension, and raises the importance of the EP office that is backed up by all the incumbent heads. Yes, this will include the military, police and all uniformed groups. Someone said they will be called upon to remove a rogue govt or a new govt. Possible, likely? In such a situation, the authority of the EP can be called upon to march out the troops. That is the only legitimate source of power left for the ex govt.
And yes, the EP can block any attempt to touch the reserves with all the govt agencies behind him. He is not a lame duck or a straw man in such a situation.
The EP is the fall back position. And he is worth every cent paid to him when such a situation arises. Don’t pray, pray with the LPPL President. He has a big role to play when a crisis demands it. Other than this, his role is primarily ceremonial. Nathan lives that role perfectly, to the letter in the Constitution. And Tony Tan knows it too. He will be an excellent EP in the same mould as Nathan.
The other 3 candidates appeared to be eager beavers, wanting to do a lot of things that the EP was not designed to do. A strong PM can completely ignore him or shut him off. Can an EP order a PM or minister to listen to his rants or to have tea with him? All they need to do is to tell him they are busy. Period.
But under certain conditions, the EP is a source of strength in a contest for power and dominance. A likely scenario where the EP can play a crucial role is during a freak election. Take the last GE for illustration. If the PAP had lost the election they will have to rely on the EP for some semblance of authority and legitimacy if they want to take up a fight with the new govt. My speculation below is just for discussion.
When a new party takes office, what it would face is a whole machinery of govt organizations with heads appointed by the defeated ruling govt. The loyalty of these heads, from the military, civil service, judicial and all the ministries are likely to be still with the past govt. And the new govt would have to make changes to be rubber stamped by the EP. See what the EP can do in such a situation? The retention of all the incumbents in office will mean that the defeated party is still the de facto force to reckon with. And the new govt will have a hard time if these heads refuse to tow the line, and cannot be removed because of a veto by the EP.
Any attempt to break the impasse would only lead to more tension, and raises the importance of the EP office that is backed up by all the incumbent heads. Yes, this will include the military, police and all uniformed groups. Someone said they will be called upon to remove a rogue govt or a new govt. Possible, likely? In such a situation, the authority of the EP can be called upon to march out the troops. That is the only legitimate source of power left for the ex govt.
And yes, the EP can block any attempt to touch the reserves with all the govt agencies behind him. He is not a lame duck or a straw man in such a situation.
The EP is the fall back position. And he is worth every cent paid to him when such a situation arises. Don’t pray, pray with the LPPL President. He has a big role to play when a crisis demands it. Other than this, his role is primarily ceremonial. Nathan lives that role perfectly, to the letter in the Constitution. And Tony Tan knows it too. He will be an excellent EP in the same mould as Nathan.
The other 3 candidates appeared to be eager beavers, wanting to do a lot of things that the EP was not designed to do. A strong PM can completely ignore him or shut him off. Can an EP order a PM or minister to listen to his rants or to have tea with him? All they need to do is to tell him they are busy. Period.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)