Today is the festival of light and I am trying to see some light by browsing through the net. Yes there is light everywhere in a bright sunny morning. But I assure you, not many can see the light and still muddle around in darkness.
In one of the comments in my blog I saw some light. One said that our graduates are the new middle class, living in HDB flats that are beautifully furnished and very comfortable, maybe contented as well. This in a way is wisdom, contentment. Just be happy with what you have, make the best of what you have, and one can be as happy if not happier than those who have millions but worrying when the next million will come.
If Singaporeans can be easily contented with the good life of a HDB flat, there will be abundance everywhere. But there will be those who would want to own private properties, not one but many, and will never be contented. And there will also be those who earn millions, and scheming to get more millions. Some may think they are crazy or foolish. Some may say greed is good and that is how they get richer and richer.
In between these two extremes there are the average Singaporeans who just get on with life, day by day, sometimes happy sometimes not.
Looking at another angle about contentment is that it is the sign of regression. When people are too easily contented and are comfortable with the little they have, the drive to be better may suffer. Then someone may want to stick a spur on their backs to get them moving, for more achievements and more progress.
The part that I find uncomfortable is how people willingly accept their station in life when it could be much better. There was a time when even a secondary school graduate or drop out could aspire to own 5rm HDB flats, not that they were successful businessmen or entrepreneurs, but just skilled workers or taxi drivers. And if they were graduates, they could aspire and end up living in private properties.
Shall I rejoice when the graduates of today are contented to live in 4rm flats after investing hundreds of thousands for their education? Is this a good thing? Would anyone want to ask why this is the fate of our graduates, when they could live a better quality of life in the material sense? Have they surrendered and accepted that this is the best they could be in life as a graduate? Don’t they want the stars, don’t they want to live in private properties? Or they know that these things are beyond them.
Did they know that those things were quite attainable in yesteryears to the non graduates? How did our society be managed to such a state that people’s expectation has to go down, and be contented to have less, and think it is the norm? Tomorrow they will expect graduates to be counter salespersons, to drive taxis and to live in 3rm flats and take public transport to work. It is still quality living, but why like that?
Anyone see the light?
10/26/2011
10/25/2011
The affordability plea
A stay at home mum, Cheryl Lee, wrote to the ST forum pleading to the govt to make housing more affordable. She is a graduate, a professional but is being forced to stay at home to look after children and work part time. She lamented the days when as a fresh graduate her starting salary was only $800. Though the salary of graduates has quadrupled, housing prices have gone up by at least 10 times. A 5 rm flat then was $35k but $450k today. Are we really better off?
To her this is not affordable. To the govt it is, very affordable. It depends on what is meant by affordable. We know, it shifted from one income and a 15 year mortgage to two incomes and 30 years of mortgage. Funny, why is this kind of arithmetic seen as being clever and even brilliant? And people in high places can tell the people straight in their faces that they are not lying, that it is affordable!
And this Cheryl Lee is making a plea, to make housing affordable in terms of one income so that mother can stay home and look after their precious children, and not leave them at the mercy of strangers that may be deranged or have very poor childcare skills, or even bad attitude or values.
The children are the most valuable gift of life, the blessings that no amount of money can trade for. (Bullshit. What children, only softies and losers are sentimental about children). But this gift of life is being neglected, put at risk, because of our enslavement to money and material goods. We are willing to sacrifice the bringing up of our children, good parental care and bonding, for money. Actually no. It is the first world and most envious social economic system that we have created, minus happiness and human warmth, that we believe is the best for us. This is the best system in the world, all glitters, all money and nothing else. This is what life and living is all about.
The plea by this stay at home mum that values her time and relationship with her children will go to the wilderness. She will be very lucky if they did not extend the mortgage to two generations or four incomes to service. To return to the days of one income and 15 years is a never, even if it is a one income for 30 years. That is our meaning of progress and world class standard of living. And it is good.
Did we compromise anything that is really valuable to life and living? No, money is everything. Material well being is everything. Children and their welfare are only lip service. Don’t believe in them. If we don’t have more head counts, we can buy them, import them, to feed our labour force. That is what children are meant for.
And the parents should continue to be in the workforce, to raise the GDP. That is the only thing that counts. And be prepared to work till one drops dead. That is our meaning of a well lived life, minus the irritating stuff of bringing up children. Keeping pets could be better option. But no, we still need children for our workforce.
To her this is not affordable. To the govt it is, very affordable. It depends on what is meant by affordable. We know, it shifted from one income and a 15 year mortgage to two incomes and 30 years of mortgage. Funny, why is this kind of arithmetic seen as being clever and even brilliant? And people in high places can tell the people straight in their faces that they are not lying, that it is affordable!
And this Cheryl Lee is making a plea, to make housing affordable in terms of one income so that mother can stay home and look after their precious children, and not leave them at the mercy of strangers that may be deranged or have very poor childcare skills, or even bad attitude or values.
The children are the most valuable gift of life, the blessings that no amount of money can trade for. (Bullshit. What children, only softies and losers are sentimental about children). But this gift of life is being neglected, put at risk, because of our enslavement to money and material goods. We are willing to sacrifice the bringing up of our children, good parental care and bonding, for money. Actually no. It is the first world and most envious social economic system that we have created, minus happiness and human warmth, that we believe is the best for us. This is the best system in the world, all glitters, all money and nothing else. This is what life and living is all about.
The plea by this stay at home mum that values her time and relationship with her children will go to the wilderness. She will be very lucky if they did not extend the mortgage to two generations or four incomes to service. To return to the days of one income and 15 years is a never, even if it is a one income for 30 years. That is our meaning of progress and world class standard of living. And it is good.
Did we compromise anything that is really valuable to life and living? No, money is everything. Material well being is everything. Children and their welfare are only lip service. Don’t believe in them. If we don’t have more head counts, we can buy them, import them, to feed our labour force. That is what children are meant for.
And the parents should continue to be in the workforce, to raise the GDP. That is the only thing that counts. And be prepared to work till one drops dead. That is our meaning of a well lived life, minus the irritating stuff of bringing up children. Keeping pets could be better option. But no, we still need children for our workforce.
Opposition to put forward constructive suggestions
‘The Govt has put forward its views, and the idea of a a debate must be that the Opposition puts forward constructive suggestions on how the Govt’s agenda and policies and programmes can be improved. K Shanmugam
Shanmugam was reported in yesterday’s Today paper to acknowledge opposition’s ‘role in finding improvements to govt policies and programmes.’ He also added that all good ideas must be accepted, that all MPs are people’s representatives and representing the people’s views and aspirations.
There was a robust debate in the Parliament’s first sitting. Has any view or suggestion been accepted by the govt? Were they constructive? Or were they not? Given the way they were summarily attacked and dismissed by the ruling party MPs and ministers, it looks like the opposition still has a lot of work to do, to come out with constructive suggestions. So far it seems that they have failed.
And though Shanmugam in the same breath claimed that the PAP did not have a monopoly of wisdom, the fact that nothing from the opposition were seen as constructive suggestions or worthy of wisdom, does it not imply that the monopoly of wisdom is still with the PAP? Yes, they don’t have the monopoly of wisdom, but the opposition has none. Every statement from the opposition will be attacked or rubbished.
Wow, I am going to flatter myself for the way I am arguing against myself. Everything I say is wrong and is also right.
Shanmugam was reported in yesterday’s Today paper to acknowledge opposition’s ‘role in finding improvements to govt policies and programmes.’ He also added that all good ideas must be accepted, that all MPs are people’s representatives and representing the people’s views and aspirations.
There was a robust debate in the Parliament’s first sitting. Has any view or suggestion been accepted by the govt? Were they constructive? Or were they not? Given the way they were summarily attacked and dismissed by the ruling party MPs and ministers, it looks like the opposition still has a lot of work to do, to come out with constructive suggestions. So far it seems that they have failed.
And though Shanmugam in the same breath claimed that the PAP did not have a monopoly of wisdom, the fact that nothing from the opposition were seen as constructive suggestions or worthy of wisdom, does it not imply that the monopoly of wisdom is still with the PAP? Yes, they don’t have the monopoly of wisdom, but the opposition has none. Every statement from the opposition will be attacked or rubbished.
Wow, I am going to flatter myself for the way I am arguing against myself. Everything I say is wrong and is also right.
10/24/2011
The storm over Sun Yat Sen
There are two camps taking sides for and against the Sun Yat Sen Museum. Those in favour could see the relevance of this revolutionary and his brief sojourn in the island. It was a time in our history when most of the residents were non citizens but migrants here only to earn a living and would probably return to their motherland. The Chinese were Chinese from China, Indians were Indians from India. The colonial masters would not grant them citizenship so easily as they owned the island. They would not be so silly to give citizenship to foreigners. They could come and work, but no citizenship. Citizenship is a valuable status and not to be given away freely. Only govt that do not think citizenship is of any great significance will give away citizenship freely. They did not understand that such an act is like giving the country away, to the new citizens.
The history of Sun Yat Sen tells us that citizenship is important and should not be treated foolishly as an economic good. The Chinese and Indians of those days fought for their countries because they were citizens of those countries. They identified and belonged to their motherland.
History has since taken a turn and many are now citizens of this island and no longer think of China and India as their motherland. Maybe we are revisiting this old phenomenon with new citizens thinking like the old Chinese and old Indians, and are still attached to their motherland. It would take several generations to change this mindset.
For those who were against the museum, they are also the descendants of the past, who now think that the past, especially foreigners, should not have too much of a place in our history. They forget that many of those in Bukit Brown were non citizens, some even with official titles from their motherland. Then again, they should deserve some honour and recognition.
We have a very short history and very few heroes and fables. We need to create more. We can’t just live on Hang Tuah alone. We need more histories of our past, more folk heroes to tell their stories to our young. Our past, our predecessors, should form part of our rich heritage. Maybe they were not in too eminent a position to be recognised. They could be the forefathers of our Kennedy’s and our Carnegies, our Tans and our Lees.
If Indonesians can feel proud of Obama just because he was there as a child, now a President of the US, there is no reason why we should treat the presence of Sun Yat Sen with lesser importance. He was here not as a nobody child but then already a revolutionary leader. Histories are made of these. Every little bits to form the tapestry of our history. We need to treasure our history, our past.
Without our past, we will all be silly Singaporeans, without roots, like duck weeds floating in the sea, thinking everything and everyone was great except our own kind and our own history.
The history of Sun Yat Sen tells us that citizenship is important and should not be treated foolishly as an economic good. The Chinese and Indians of those days fought for their countries because they were citizens of those countries. They identified and belonged to their motherland.
History has since taken a turn and many are now citizens of this island and no longer think of China and India as their motherland. Maybe we are revisiting this old phenomenon with new citizens thinking like the old Chinese and old Indians, and are still attached to their motherland. It would take several generations to change this mindset.
For those who were against the museum, they are also the descendants of the past, who now think that the past, especially foreigners, should not have too much of a place in our history. They forget that many of those in Bukit Brown were non citizens, some even with official titles from their motherland. Then again, they should deserve some honour and recognition.
We have a very short history and very few heroes and fables. We need to create more. We can’t just live on Hang Tuah alone. We need more histories of our past, more folk heroes to tell their stories to our young. Our past, our predecessors, should form part of our rich heritage. Maybe they were not in too eminent a position to be recognised. They could be the forefathers of our Kennedy’s and our Carnegies, our Tans and our Lees.
If Indonesians can feel proud of Obama just because he was there as a child, now a President of the US, there is no reason why we should treat the presence of Sun Yat Sen with lesser importance. He was here not as a nobody child but then already a revolutionary leader. Histories are made of these. Every little bits to form the tapestry of our history. We need to treasure our history, our past.
Without our past, we will all be silly Singaporeans, without roots, like duck weeds floating in the sea, thinking everything and everyone was great except our own kind and our own history.
Notable quote by Shanmugam
Govt has to acknowledge that segments of the population have been left behind. K. Shanmugam
This is the most profound statement that has come out from a minister for a long time. Why is this so important? It says that there are segments of the population that have been left behind. It also says that the govt is not acknowledging this fact. See how frightening things have become. People have been left behind, the govt knows, but refused or not going to admit it. Or maybe the govt really does not know, only Shanmugam knows. Which is which?
This is very similar to the claims that housing was not a problem and housing is affordable. That housing is a very serious problem that demands Boon Wan to work extra hard, and HDB to ram up building of HDB flats are remedies taken urgently to solve the housing problem. By why were people given the impression that there was no housing problem?
Then the affordable claim. Really, that housing is affordable, or people just have no choice but to buy and to work for it for the next 30 years? Would any minister wish to stand up and say it honestly that it is not affordable? Or would it just be like housing, was never a problem and just live with it?
I would like to ask again. Is it true that there are people who are left behind? And why is it that the govt must acknowledge that there are people who are left behind? What is all this about? Got problem pretends no problem or did not know there is a problem, or know got problem but did not want to admit there is a problem? Either way, this is a very serious situation to prompt Shanmugam to say such a thing. I think he tak boleh tahan oredy.
This is the most profound statement that has come out from a minister for a long time. Why is this so important? It says that there are segments of the population that have been left behind. It also says that the govt is not acknowledging this fact. See how frightening things have become. People have been left behind, the govt knows, but refused or not going to admit it. Or maybe the govt really does not know, only Shanmugam knows. Which is which?
This is very similar to the claims that housing was not a problem and housing is affordable. That housing is a very serious problem that demands Boon Wan to work extra hard, and HDB to ram up building of HDB flats are remedies taken urgently to solve the housing problem. By why were people given the impression that there was no housing problem?
Then the affordable claim. Really, that housing is affordable, or people just have no choice but to buy and to work for it for the next 30 years? Would any minister wish to stand up and say it honestly that it is not affordable? Or would it just be like housing, was never a problem and just live with it?
I would like to ask again. Is it true that there are people who are left behind? And why is it that the govt must acknowledge that there are people who are left behind? What is all this about? Got problem pretends no problem or did not know there is a problem, or know got problem but did not want to admit there is a problem? Either way, this is a very serious situation to prompt Shanmugam to say such a thing. I think he tak boleh tahan oredy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)