By Dolly Chia
MORE job applicants are lying about their employment history, with those in the IT as well as banking and financial services among the biggest culprits.
According to First Advantage, a provider of employment screening solutions, the proportion of employees misrepresenting their qualifications on their resume in Asia-Pacific rose to 4.4 per cent this year from 3.2 per cent last year....Reported in a local media.
What do the 4.4 percentage points mean? It means that if we have 100,000 Employment Pass holders, 4,400 of them have false CVs. If the number is 300,000, probably the size of our EP, just my guesstimate, the number of false CVs working and living with us is a staggering 13,200. And it could be much more as many are still undetected.
What is unacceptable, not that they are laughing at our stupidity, is that these jobs could have gone to our pressure cooking products of our world best education system. Unfortunately they have been replaced by fakes.
The problem is serious and the govt needs to set up a body to investigate the CVs of all foreign talents coming in. We don’t want to have CEOs who attended a 2 week course in Harvard to claim to be a Harvard alumni. We don’t want a fake to be ordering our local talents around and being paid more for doing it. We don’t want a fake to be managing our local talents and depriving them of that job. We don’t want fakes to take our naivity and innocence for granted.
First world talents duped by third world non talents! Can you beat it?
9/28/2011
Two party system, who decides?
After the last GE, the prospect for a two party or multi party political system appears to be brighter. The invincibility of the ruling party had taken a sharp knock and is not like what it was before. It is looking very fragile and breakable. What it means is that more alternative parties could gain a foot hold in the future Parliament. The electorate are getting very uncomfortable with the political system and are showing signs of adventurism, that alternative parties could be the solution to the shit hole that many are stuck in and claimed to be the best there is.
What is telling is that the electorate should never ever flirt with the temptation of alternative parties. The ruling party will decide if the political system will evolve into a two party or multi party system. The message is distinctly clear that the outcome of what the political system will evolve is not for the people to decide.
So, how would the ruling party decide if there should be a multi party system? Simple, the new WP members in Parliament will be watched very carefully. How they perform will decide the fate of the future political system. Simply, they need to play ball with the ruling party, to win its confidence, that they are not out to destroy the party or the country.
Does it make sense? I think the message is that they must not ask funny questions that make the ruling party and the leaders look funny. Better still, try to make them look good, make them feel comfortable, then maybe more alternative party MPs will be able to get into Parliament. And they may even be invited to be grassroots advisors. If the WP’s MPs did not play ball and are contemptuous, and persist in asking embarrassing questions, then the fate of a multi party system will be sealed, be gone forever.
If this is the case, that the future of a multi party system is decided by the ruling party and not the electorate, then my advice to the WP MPs is to play ball, be nice. Then maybe in 2016, more alternative MPs will be allowed into Parliament.
What is telling is that the electorate should never ever flirt with the temptation of alternative parties. The ruling party will decide if the political system will evolve into a two party or multi party system. The message is distinctly clear that the outcome of what the political system will evolve is not for the people to decide.
So, how would the ruling party decide if there should be a multi party system? Simple, the new WP members in Parliament will be watched very carefully. How they perform will decide the fate of the future political system. Simply, they need to play ball with the ruling party, to win its confidence, that they are not out to destroy the party or the country.
Does it make sense? I think the message is that they must not ask funny questions that make the ruling party and the leaders look funny. Better still, try to make them look good, make them feel comfortable, then maybe more alternative party MPs will be able to get into Parliament. And they may even be invited to be grassroots advisors. If the WP’s MPs did not play ball and are contemptuous, and persist in asking embarrassing questions, then the fate of a multi party system will be sealed, be gone forever.
If this is the case, that the future of a multi party system is decided by the ruling party and not the electorate, then my advice to the WP MPs is to play ball, be nice. Then maybe in 2016, more alternative MPs will be allowed into Parliament.
9/27/2011
Poll on the Elected Presidency
The rice is cooked, we have a new Elected President in the Istana. And he is still getting his millions as salary. All the controversies raised during the election for the new EP were somehow forgotten, as usual. The heat is gone. This is very typical of Singaporeans when the pain is not enough. They only kpkb for the moment and then resigned to the fait accompli.
We just conducted a poll and 40% of the respondents wanted the EP to be abolished. Another 40% didn’t mind having the office of the Presidency but wanted a ceremonial one that does not come with the outrageous multi million dollar salary.
This is the feedback of the people who bothered to take a stand. Would the govt take this feedback seriously and cancel the EP office, replace it with a ceremonial one? The sample size of the poll may be small, but I think it is quite representative of the views of the population. The govt may want to conduct a bigger poll to get a confirmation that this is what the people want and not what the govt wants for the Presidency.
This is feedback too.
We just conducted a poll and 40% of the respondents wanted the EP to be abolished. Another 40% didn’t mind having the office of the Presidency but wanted a ceremonial one that does not come with the outrageous multi million dollar salary.
This is the feedback of the people who bothered to take a stand. Would the govt take this feedback seriously and cancel the EP office, replace it with a ceremonial one? The sample size of the poll may be small, but I think it is quite representative of the views of the population. The govt may want to conduct a bigger poll to get a confirmation that this is what the people want and not what the govt wants for the Presidency.
This is feedback too.
The safest Singapore bank
I would put UOB as the safest Singapore bank for one simple reason. It is managed by the real owner. You can’t imagine the real owner selling away its family jewel. It is possible only if a prodigal son appears on the scene. Not likely at the moment.
The risk of UOB going the way of Barings or UBS is much lesser. There is ownership. In the case of banks managed by professional managers, you would not know when they will strike a deal or did a Nick Leeson and the bank will be gone.
In today’s world, where integrity and trustworthiness can be bought by money, it is always the price to pay. The old virtues of righteousness, honesty, loyalty and yes, integrity and trustworthiness, are good to have ideals. Not meant to be taken seriously by those who are too smart. When they are too smart, the only interest is their own pockets.
In every commercial deal someone will be taking a cut. The bigger the deal the more attractive will be the cut. The Chairman or directors would also be in the game for the cut. When the new ethos is every man for himself, all institutions and organizations managed by clever professional managers are at risk.
When countries can be sold, what is so special about banks or sovereign funds when they are managed not by the true owners but by professional managers who owe no loyalty to the organization except to themselves? Most of the big international banks and MNCs are now in the hands of professional managers with the minority shareholders not knowing what is happening and still very trusting of the management.
What is so special about Singapore and Singapore govt owned organizations when they are managed by professional managers who owe no loyalty to the country? Who is there to guard against professional theft or adventurism when UBS too can do nothing about it?
Nothing beats the real owner sitting in management and watching his own money carefully. The day UOB goes the way of being run by professional managers, without the owners in control, I will withdraw my view that it is the safest bank.
The risk of UOB going the way of Barings or UBS is much lesser. There is ownership. In the case of banks managed by professional managers, you would not know when they will strike a deal or did a Nick Leeson and the bank will be gone.
In today’s world, where integrity and trustworthiness can be bought by money, it is always the price to pay. The old virtues of righteousness, honesty, loyalty and yes, integrity and trustworthiness, are good to have ideals. Not meant to be taken seriously by those who are too smart. When they are too smart, the only interest is their own pockets.
In every commercial deal someone will be taking a cut. The bigger the deal the more attractive will be the cut. The Chairman or directors would also be in the game for the cut. When the new ethos is every man for himself, all institutions and organizations managed by clever professional managers are at risk.
When countries can be sold, what is so special about banks or sovereign funds when they are managed not by the true owners but by professional managers who owe no loyalty to the organization except to themselves? Most of the big international banks and MNCs are now in the hands of professional managers with the minority shareholders not knowing what is happening and still very trusting of the management.
What is so special about Singapore and Singapore govt owned organizations when they are managed by professional managers who owe no loyalty to the country? Who is there to guard against professional theft or adventurism when UBS too can do nothing about it?
Nothing beats the real owner sitting in management and watching his own money carefully. The day UOB goes the way of being run by professional managers, without the owners in control, I will withdraw my view that it is the safest bank.
Milestones of Communism
In 1978, Deng Xiao Ping visited Singapore and started an economic reform in the vein of capitalism. White cat black cat never mind as long as it catches mice. 1978 possibly marked the end of Communism except in name in China. In 1981, Deng Xiao Ping also ordered the closure of the Malayan Revolutionary Radio broadcasting to Malaysia and Singapore.
Govt to govt relationship between Singapore and China was on the mend and improving by leaps and bounds. Communism was as good as dead as an alternative govt or for exporting revolution by the 1980s when Gorbache’s glasnost and petroiska led to the break up of the Soviet Union.
This is not true in Singapore as a small group of young men and women were plotting a Marxist revolution by infiltrating into the Catholic Church. Obviously they could not be gaining any support from China as Deng Xiao Ping would not allow it or his relationship with LKY would be over. Could this Marxist Group be supported by the Russians or the Communist Party of Malaya(CPM)? With Gorbachev in charge, Russia was in a different kind of revolution, opening up to the West. The CPM was dormant since the silencing of its radio broadcast. In 1989 they signed a peace accord with Malaysia and officially ended their fight for Communism and a Malayan state.
The Marxist Group in Singapore was arrested in 1987 under Operation Spectrum for plotting to overturn the govt by force. Their existence was proof that there must be another revolutionary organization supporting the Marxist movement. They could not be supported by China or Russia or the CPM. Unfortunately, after Operation Spectrum there was no further news of the organization that was behind this Marxist Group for armed revolution in Singapore. It must have gone into hiding. As long as they are not flushed out, the danger is still there.
The 16 arrested could not be a meaningful force to take down the govt on their own or by a revolution. Not by any imagination. They didn’t look that able against an efficient ruling govt and a well equipped armed force. My theory is that they were not supported by the Communist giants but a more powerful force. Who and where is this force that is behind them? They are called Marxists, not Communists, for Communism’s platform of violent overthrow of govts was long a spent force. By the late 1980s, who cared about Communism? Perhaps the origin of this force could be from the dark side.
Govt to govt relationship between Singapore and China was on the mend and improving by leaps and bounds. Communism was as good as dead as an alternative govt or for exporting revolution by the 1980s when Gorbache’s glasnost and petroiska led to the break up of the Soviet Union.
This is not true in Singapore as a small group of young men and women were plotting a Marxist revolution by infiltrating into the Catholic Church. Obviously they could not be gaining any support from China as Deng Xiao Ping would not allow it or his relationship with LKY would be over. Could this Marxist Group be supported by the Russians or the Communist Party of Malaya(CPM)? With Gorbachev in charge, Russia was in a different kind of revolution, opening up to the West. The CPM was dormant since the silencing of its radio broadcast. In 1989 they signed a peace accord with Malaysia and officially ended their fight for Communism and a Malayan state.
The Marxist Group in Singapore was arrested in 1987 under Operation Spectrum for plotting to overturn the govt by force. Their existence was proof that there must be another revolutionary organization supporting the Marxist movement. They could not be supported by China or Russia or the CPM. Unfortunately, after Operation Spectrum there was no further news of the organization that was behind this Marxist Group for armed revolution in Singapore. It must have gone into hiding. As long as they are not flushed out, the danger is still there.
The 16 arrested could not be a meaningful force to take down the govt on their own or by a revolution. Not by any imagination. They didn’t look that able against an efficient ruling govt and a well equipped armed force. My theory is that they were not supported by the Communist giants but a more powerful force. Who and where is this force that is behind them? They are called Marxists, not Communists, for Communism’s platform of violent overthrow of govts was long a spent force. By the late 1980s, who cared about Communism? Perhaps the origin of this force could be from the dark side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)