The plight of Pakistan today is simply pathetic. And they deserved every minute of it for flirting with the evil Empire. Once invited in, the Empire has no respect for the host, for national sovereignty or territorial integrity. They will brush the host aside and do what they want, like the raid on Obama deep inside Pakistan’s territory. Now they blatantly attacked and killed nearly 30 Pakistani soldiers in a prolonged and deliberate attack. So what are you going to do now Pakistan? The Empire has killed your soldiers.
Before the flirtation, the Americans would not dare to enter Pakistani territory or attack any Pakistani military positions. Now, it is fire at your own target and at your own time, at any Pakistani targets inside Pakistan.
Musharaff thought it was a great honour to be invited to the White House, to be feasted by the Emperor. He did not bargain for the outcome of his country becoming a semi colony of the Empire. That is the price Pakistan is paying today.
Asean leaders must be having wet dreams of being feasted in the White House as the honoured guest of the Emperor. The olive leaf has been waved and the invitation waiting to be delivered. Would Asean leaders take the bait and ended up with the same fate as Pakistan? For their personal ego of being seated on the right side of the Emperor, the price is their countries’ integrity as an independent nation, free from the Emperor’s troops. Some are eagerly waiting for the invitation, for the honour. The temptation is great.
11/29/2011
Kishore Mahbubani – top 100 thinkers
Kishore has been listed as one of the world’s top 100 thinkers by a US based Foreign Policy magazine. It is a great honour to be there among the Europeans in an European centric magazine that only understands western language and thoughts.
Who is this guy? He is not angmoh. He is the Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. He got to thank the school for not replacing him with an angmoh to give the school greater credibility and be more believeable in the western intellectual circuit. Think of it, it is one of the rare corners of Singapore where the top dog is a Singaporean. For this reason alone, it is worthy to keep this School relevant as a pride of the country, that a Singaporean is found good enough to head the school.
I am not sure how long before the CEOs of the 3 local universities be headed by foreigners as obviously there are just not enough local talents of international stature to raise the profiles and rankings of these world class universities. Having foreigners to front these universities, like many of the Singapore institutions, is a good thing as they will spread the news of Singapore and how great this island is. Their presence will put the universities connected to the best universities of the West.
Then again, if we do not allow out Singaporeans a chance to take on high profile positions, how would they gain recognition by the international community? How would someone like Kishore be recognized if he ended up just another professor in the School of Lee Kuan Yew or any local universities?
Our angmoh is good mentality is a self debasing policy. If we keep giving the plump jobs to foreigners, our local talents will forever have their heads under water, to be another statistics and nothing more. We need to give more chances to the local talents and thinkers to be in the limelight, to be seen and heard, to be recognized.
Good that we have someone like Kishore. But he could be the last, just like we have a Lee Kuan Yew, and he will be the last titan this little island ever produced.
Who is this guy? He is not angmoh. He is the Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. He got to thank the school for not replacing him with an angmoh to give the school greater credibility and be more believeable in the western intellectual circuit. Think of it, it is one of the rare corners of Singapore where the top dog is a Singaporean. For this reason alone, it is worthy to keep this School relevant as a pride of the country, that a Singaporean is found good enough to head the school.
I am not sure how long before the CEOs of the 3 local universities be headed by foreigners as obviously there are just not enough local talents of international stature to raise the profiles and rankings of these world class universities. Having foreigners to front these universities, like many of the Singapore institutions, is a good thing as they will spread the news of Singapore and how great this island is. Their presence will put the universities connected to the best universities of the West.
Then again, if we do not allow out Singaporeans a chance to take on high profile positions, how would they gain recognition by the international community? How would someone like Kishore be recognized if he ended up just another professor in the School of Lee Kuan Yew or any local universities?
Our angmoh is good mentality is a self debasing policy. If we keep giving the plump jobs to foreigners, our local talents will forever have their heads under water, to be another statistics and nothing more. We need to give more chances to the local talents and thinkers to be in the limelight, to be seen and heard, to be recognized.
Good that we have someone like Kishore. But he could be the last, just like we have a Lee Kuan Yew, and he will be the last titan this little island ever produced.
11/28/2011
When the crunch comes
Seah Chiang Nee wrote the above article in his Littlespeck blog. He is reading the warnings by the political leaders of an impending recession coming Singapore’s way and how it will impact the people.
The worst hit will be the PMETs, especially those with a million dollar or half a million dollar mortgage. What will they do if one of the paymasters got retrenched?
Don’t forget that there are many who have several hundred thousand dollar mortgages in HDB flats. There are many Singaporeans in this category which includes many PRs as well. When the crunch comes, when they lose their jobs, the 30 year mortgage will not go away. They all depend solely on their monthly incomes to service the debt.
I reckon this time the impact will be much greater as the outstanding housing loan sizes are much bigger, all expecting a 30 year free ride without having to worry about any financial crisis.
Just a few months back, it was all sunny skies and full of optimism. Dark clouds are forming overnight.
Be frightened, be very frightened.
The worst hit will be the PMETs, especially those with a million dollar or half a million dollar mortgage. What will they do if one of the paymasters got retrenched?
Don’t forget that there are many who have several hundred thousand dollar mortgages in HDB flats. There are many Singaporeans in this category which includes many PRs as well. When the crunch comes, when they lose their jobs, the 30 year mortgage will not go away. They all depend solely on their monthly incomes to service the debt.
I reckon this time the impact will be much greater as the outstanding housing loan sizes are much bigger, all expecting a 30 year free ride without having to worry about any financial crisis.
Just a few months back, it was all sunny skies and full of optimism. Dark clouds are forming overnight.
Be frightened, be very frightened.
The new story
I wonder if any of you noticed the theme in the media with regards to housing. As I scanned through the articles over the last few weeks, there is a new song being sung almost daily. Small is good. Small flats are good. Small flats do not compromise on the quality of life. There are many beautiful parks outside that the people can go to for the space they want. Small flats are ideal for smaller households.
Small is the way to go. And we have a very long way to catch up with Tokyo and Hongkong, to go smaller. It is not only a trend. Our population is growing and we need to keep housing small to make way for more people, for economic growth and better quality living.
Small is the way to go. And we have a very long way to catch up with Tokyo and Hongkong, to go smaller. It is not only a trend. Our population is growing and we need to keep housing small to make way for more people, for economic growth and better quality living.
PAP Convention
Caught some reporting on the PAP Convention and Hsien Loong’s speech over the news last night. The party has done quite a bit of work in assessing the last GE and what needs to be done to win the next GE. And they are confident that they are on the right track with all the mistakes figured out and the appropriate remedial actions will be put in place. And though the party acknowledged that the next GE will see fiercer competition, and clean sweep is not that easy anymore, they are quietly confident of taking back Aljunied.
My personal view is that they are in for a rude awakening in the next GE. The ground has shifted. More and better candidates will be moving to the alternative party camps as wearing white and being invited for tea is no longer a guarantee for a safe passage to Parliament.
What about govt policies and the bread and butter issues, unemployment, housing, foreign talent, transportation etc that the people felt aggrieved about? Would there be any real changes that will win back the support of the people?
The party still believes that their policies are good for the people and supported by the people. And very likely there will be more cooked policies for discussion in Parliament, though Inderjit was advocating for more half cooked policies to be better discussed before they are cooked.
I think this is the main area that the party is going to lose more grounds as it marches towards 2016. The attitude and mentality and the logic of past policies do not seem to change. Everything is still as per normal. The rapid ramming up of public housing is only treating a superficial wound when the cancer is still growing untreated. So are the high property prices, the high population and congestion issues, and the presence of great numbers of foreigners that the govt sees as the cure all for economic growth but irks the people in general.
As long as the govt thinks it knows best and what is good for the people, it will continue to push through its bestest policies and distance itself from the people who do not agree with them. They believe that the only problem is communication with the people. That is their only fault. If they can communicate well, there is no policy problems.
How could the party with the bestest talents accept that their bestest policies have to change to appease the not so talented views of the people? This is a tough one.
Unless the party is willing to compromise its bestest policies, undermine its bestest talents effort and say, ok, the daft Singaporeans need to be listened to and their less talented views and wishes be accommodated, there will always be a conflict and constant tension between what the party wants and what the people want. Explaining to the daft Singaporeans is easy, especially with clever arguments and statistics. Would the people buy? How many ministers would be able to do the explaining and be able to win the hearts and minds of the people?
Caving in to the daft Singaporeans is never a thing that the party will give way. It is the core value of the party, they will continue to push their cooked policies through, like deaf frogs.
This is the strongest virtue of the party, to do what it thinks is best, to implement tough policies for the good of the people. The question is whether the people think so and whether the policies are really good for the people. The servants will judge the masters or the masters judge the servants? Who will have the final say?
My personal view is that they are in for a rude awakening in the next GE. The ground has shifted. More and better candidates will be moving to the alternative party camps as wearing white and being invited for tea is no longer a guarantee for a safe passage to Parliament.
What about govt policies and the bread and butter issues, unemployment, housing, foreign talent, transportation etc that the people felt aggrieved about? Would there be any real changes that will win back the support of the people?
The party still believes that their policies are good for the people and supported by the people. And very likely there will be more cooked policies for discussion in Parliament, though Inderjit was advocating for more half cooked policies to be better discussed before they are cooked.
I think this is the main area that the party is going to lose more grounds as it marches towards 2016. The attitude and mentality and the logic of past policies do not seem to change. Everything is still as per normal. The rapid ramming up of public housing is only treating a superficial wound when the cancer is still growing untreated. So are the high property prices, the high population and congestion issues, and the presence of great numbers of foreigners that the govt sees as the cure all for economic growth but irks the people in general.
As long as the govt thinks it knows best and what is good for the people, it will continue to push through its bestest policies and distance itself from the people who do not agree with them. They believe that the only problem is communication with the people. That is their only fault. If they can communicate well, there is no policy problems.
How could the party with the bestest talents accept that their bestest policies have to change to appease the not so talented views of the people? This is a tough one.
Unless the party is willing to compromise its bestest policies, undermine its bestest talents effort and say, ok, the daft Singaporeans need to be listened to and their less talented views and wishes be accommodated, there will always be a conflict and constant tension between what the party wants and what the people want. Explaining to the daft Singaporeans is easy, especially with clever arguments and statistics. Would the people buy? How many ministers would be able to do the explaining and be able to win the hearts and minds of the people?
Caving in to the daft Singaporeans is never a thing that the party will give way. It is the core value of the party, they will continue to push their cooked policies through, like deaf frogs.
This is the strongest virtue of the party, to do what it thinks is best, to implement tough policies for the good of the people. The question is whether the people think so and whether the policies are really good for the people. The servants will judge the masters or the masters judge the servants? Who will have the final say?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)