Parliament is the legislative arm of the govt. Parliament is made of elected representatives of the people from all political parties to discuss national issues and make laws for the country. So, is Parliament a part of the govt? I don’t think anyone will say no. But some may insist that only part of the Parliament forms the govt. The opposition camp is not part of the govt?
Seriously, honestly, administratively, legally, are opposition MPs a part of the govt? We have an obtuse system that the opposition MPs are a small minority and can be easily ignored and dismissed of as not part of the Parliament, or part of the govt. If the representation of both camps is about equal, would anyone dare say that the opposition camps are not part of Parliament, and not part of the govt?
Every MP, no matter which party, sits in Parliament, and has equal rights to speak and vote for a bill. They are also paid by the country’s coffer too. Why are the opposition MPs seen as not part of the govt? Oh the majority party forms the govt so they are the govt, and the minority does not form the govt and thus not the govt nor part of the govt. They are just a part of Parliament which is not the govt of the country, which is part of the legislature, which has the power to make laws, but not the govt.
Very confusing arguments huh?
9/12/2011
Free spaces, free parkings
I was in Johore over the weekend, meandering through small little towns with big detached houses and sprawling gardens. The Malaysians are growing, developing, quietly and at its own pace, with a lot of space for living, and with a cost of living that is not running away. One does not need $3m or $5m dollar salary to live well. This is the quality of life that we cannot afford any more. And one can drive the car anywhere and park freely, anywhere, without having to pay a bomb. There is growth, but no frantic cries of being too slow.
Today the ST is screaming that we need more spaces for public parks. They are now so popular that they are no longer tranquil getaways from the hustle and bustle of a city. The parks are now amusement parks in a way. Families with children are everywhere having a picnic. The noises are as loud as a fish market. Even in far off Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserves, the birds and the monitor lizards were not spare from the noise of human chatters.
We need more land for parks, for sanity. We have road congestion, hospital squeeze and squeezes of all kinds. The squeeze is heading into the parks.
But no worry. We will need another 900,000 people to fill the roads and the parks. We need them for economic growth. Our TFR is falling and we need to keep the rate up. We need to fill up the parks as well to see growth. We need to find an equilibrium in the TFR and the size of our population.
I think we did quite well when we were 1.5m, when we were 2m. Now we are 3.7m and another 1.5m foreigners, and we are saying not enough. We need to grow and we need more people.
There are only two such insane countries in the world that are pushing for population increase. India wants to be the world’s most populous country, more than the 1.3m Chinese. That is a superpower ambition. What are we chasing, the world’s most densely populated piece of rock?
The 2.1% TFR is like LSD. We will need it at 5m, we will need it at 10m, we will also need it when we are 20m. No free parking for cars, no free entrance to public parks. There may be kiosks dispensing fresh air like canned drinks at $10 a can. ERP may be set up for pedestrians with a fee to pay on busy walkways. Is that the progress we are striving for?
By then Singapore will be owned and populated by new citizens. Is that what we want? Is that progress?
PS. The German and Jap politicians were not paid the out of this world salary. And they could maintain their quality of life, with economic growth despite having near zero population growth. Our supertalents can only see growth by growing the population. Without population growth, there will be no growth.
Today the ST is screaming that we need more spaces for public parks. They are now so popular that they are no longer tranquil getaways from the hustle and bustle of a city. The parks are now amusement parks in a way. Families with children are everywhere having a picnic. The noises are as loud as a fish market. Even in far off Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserves, the birds and the monitor lizards were not spare from the noise of human chatters.
We need more land for parks, for sanity. We have road congestion, hospital squeeze and squeezes of all kinds. The squeeze is heading into the parks.
But no worry. We will need another 900,000 people to fill the roads and the parks. We need them for economic growth. Our TFR is falling and we need to keep the rate up. We need to fill up the parks as well to see growth. We need to find an equilibrium in the TFR and the size of our population.
I think we did quite well when we were 1.5m, when we were 2m. Now we are 3.7m and another 1.5m foreigners, and we are saying not enough. We need to grow and we need more people.
There are only two such insane countries in the world that are pushing for population increase. India wants to be the world’s most populous country, more than the 1.3m Chinese. That is a superpower ambition. What are we chasing, the world’s most densely populated piece of rock?
The 2.1% TFR is like LSD. We will need it at 5m, we will need it at 10m, we will also need it when we are 20m. No free parking for cars, no free entrance to public parks. There may be kiosks dispensing fresh air like canned drinks at $10 a can. ERP may be set up for pedestrians with a fee to pay on busy walkways. Is that the progress we are striving for?
By then Singapore will be owned and populated by new citizens. Is that what we want? Is that progress?
PS. The German and Jap politicians were not paid the out of this world salary. And they could maintain their quality of life, with economic growth despite having near zero population growth. Our supertalents can only see growth by growing the population. Without population growth, there will be no growth.
9/11/2011
What is a translator?
This innocuous term is best described or seen as a profession to help two parties of different worlds communicate and understand each other. When world leaders met, they have translators sitting between them to translate the messages expressed in a foreign tongue to be comprehensible by both parties. We have translators between those who can hear and speak with those who can’t. We have tangkees to translate the messages of the spirits to the human beans. We even have horse whisperers who speak to the horses.
I met this grand old man, in his eighties, who told me that he was a translator in his youth. He was a Malaysian then. He worked for the British colonial govt in a division called the Special Branch. In those days, Communism was a hot issue and Communists were fighting a war of liberation from the British Occupation.
In his expressive mood, to share a bit of his mysterious past, a bit of his past glory, he told his stories to eager listeners. He was quite a bit shot among the local employees of the British though he was just a small pawn in the colonial master’s bigger game plan.
He was anything but a translator. He was a key figure in helping the British to round up the Communists in the community. He conducted raids, arrested suspects, interrogated and beating them up to extract confessions. He did not say how many died because of him. I suspect there were blood in his hands.
He was a local Chinese in a small Malaysian town. And those arrested and beaten up were mostly local Chinese. Did he feel that he had betrayed his community? The question did not disturb him. As a non politicised youth, whose intellect had not been activated with politics, with the rights and wrongs of political ideologies and colonialism, to him, he was just an employee doing his job and getting paid for it.
Yes, he was arresting the people in his hometown, some he knew well, but never had his conscience prick him. He has never seen his translator job as a betrayal of his own people. The British were very successful in creating a small group of local elite who grew, prospered through association with them. Some were flown to London to be knighted. The local elite were proud to be mingling with their colonial masters.
In his twilight years, there is still this little pride in his eyes when he spoke fondly of his days in the Special Branch. I bet he must have kept a few photos of himself in full British uniform, and with his little revolver in his belt. No one ever call him a traitor. He led a good life, very rich in his own ways.
A translator is a translator is a translator.
I met this grand old man, in his eighties, who told me that he was a translator in his youth. He was a Malaysian then. He worked for the British colonial govt in a division called the Special Branch. In those days, Communism was a hot issue and Communists were fighting a war of liberation from the British Occupation.
In his expressive mood, to share a bit of his mysterious past, a bit of his past glory, he told his stories to eager listeners. He was quite a bit shot among the local employees of the British though he was just a small pawn in the colonial master’s bigger game plan.
He was anything but a translator. He was a key figure in helping the British to round up the Communists in the community. He conducted raids, arrested suspects, interrogated and beating them up to extract confessions. He did not say how many died because of him. I suspect there were blood in his hands.
He was a local Chinese in a small Malaysian town. And those arrested and beaten up were mostly local Chinese. Did he feel that he had betrayed his community? The question did not disturb him. As a non politicised youth, whose intellect had not been activated with politics, with the rights and wrongs of political ideologies and colonialism, to him, he was just an employee doing his job and getting paid for it.
Yes, he was arresting the people in his hometown, some he knew well, but never had his conscience prick him. He has never seen his translator job as a betrayal of his own people. The British were very successful in creating a small group of local elite who grew, prospered through association with them. Some were flown to London to be knighted. The local elite were proud to be mingling with their colonial masters.
In his twilight years, there is still this little pride in his eyes when he spoke fondly of his days in the Special Branch. I bet he must have kept a few photos of himself in full British uniform, and with his little revolver in his belt. No one ever call him a traitor. He led a good life, very rich in his own ways.
A translator is a translator is a translator.
9/10/2011
How to sell Christmas Island?
Christmas Island was sold against the interest of Singapore. But then, what could the residents of the island do when they were still subjects of an Empire, and the colonial masters said so? Under those circumstances, when the people had no control over their destiny, you can’t really blame anyone for selling out the island. Under those circumstances, it is not right to accuse Lim Yew Hock for selling the island, or a traitor to the people of Singapore. The people then were not owners, mostly stateless. One only becomes a traitor to the people if the people own the land that was sold away.
Christmas Island can still be sold without selling it the way it was sold, lock, stock and barrel, to another country. Say the residents of Christmas Island, a tiny little piece of rock, decided that they could build properties and sell them to foreigners. In no time every piece of land will be sold to the rich foreigners and the foreigners became de facto owners of the island.
Another way of selling the island against the interests of its inhabitants is to bring in more foreigners to populate the island in the name of progress. When the foreigners become the majority in the island, they will literally inherit everything in the island from its original inhabitants.
Sure, in the name of economic progress, Christmas Island could be the next cosmopolitan city island in the world, the perfect playground for the rich and famous. What about its poor inhabitants? Squeezed out of the island and lost the island forever, to a bunch of new owners.
Selling out in another form. At the end of the day the island will have new owners, belong to other people forever, no longer own by the islanders.
Christmas Island can still be sold without selling it the way it was sold, lock, stock and barrel, to another country. Say the residents of Christmas Island, a tiny little piece of rock, decided that they could build properties and sell them to foreigners. In no time every piece of land will be sold to the rich foreigners and the foreigners became de facto owners of the island.
Another way of selling the island against the interests of its inhabitants is to bring in more foreigners to populate the island in the name of progress. When the foreigners become the majority in the island, they will literally inherit everything in the island from its original inhabitants.
Sure, in the name of economic progress, Christmas Island could be the next cosmopolitan city island in the world, the perfect playground for the rich and famous. What about its poor inhabitants? Squeezed out of the island and lost the island forever, to a bunch of new owners.
Selling out in another form. At the end of the day the island will have new owners, belong to other people forever, no longer own by the islanders.
9/09/2011
Big time rollers
Below is a list of the bets we have placed over the years. This list is, my guess, only a small portion of the total bets we have placed everywhere. It only shows how much money we have to play. I only wish they could let me have $50m to bet on their behalf. I don’t think I can do any worst.
Micropolis $630m
Suzhou Industrial Park $150m
Thai Danu Bank $500m
Dao Heng Bank $1.83b
Virgin Mobile US$700m
Pacific Internet Amount not available. Share price dropped from US$90 to US$2.97 in 2000
Air New Zealand $100m
Shin Corp US$3.8b
ABC Learning $400m
Barclay Bank US$4.5b
Merrill Lynch US$5b
Bank America US$4.6b
Macquarie Telecom Bought 15m shares at $3/share and sold 14m shares at 18c/share.
UBS US$10b
Stuyvesant Town US$575m
Citigroup US6.9b
Micropolis $630m
Suzhou Industrial Park $150m
Thai Danu Bank $500m
Dao Heng Bank $1.83b
Virgin Mobile US$700m
Pacific Internet Amount not available. Share price dropped from US$90 to US$2.97 in 2000
Air New Zealand $100m
Shin Corp US$3.8b
ABC Learning $400m
Barclay Bank US$4.5b
Merrill Lynch US$5b
Bank America US$4.6b
Macquarie Telecom Bought 15m shares at $3/share and sold 14m shares at 18c/share.
UBS US$10b
Stuyvesant Town US$575m
Citigroup US6.9b
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)