Chiam See Tong said he is aggressively pushing for leadership renewal for his party. The departure of the 6 promising young men and women is a big set back to the Party. It is not reported that the party is aggressively trying to bring in people in their 20s into the CEC. Chiam is now 76 and still young if other politicians can still be active in the late 80s. So Chiam has another ten more years to bring up the youth in his party to fill his shoe.
What is a bit unfortunate is that at this point in time, there is hardly anyone to fill his big shoe and to take over the party leadership just in case. Chiam may have very high and demanding standards for whoever to succeed him. Such a person must be difficult to find for him to take so long and has to look at the twenty somethings. Maybe with Lina Chiam in charge, there is still plenty of time as she is only 62.
LKY also has a big shoe to fill. And being a giant in his own right, finding anyone to fill his shoe was a near impossibility. But he managed to find several to fill it. It is really no mean feat to find someone to fill LKY’s shoe.
I hope Chiam will be able to find someone quick to fill his shoe as well, no matter how big it is, or how difficult it is to find someone good enough. Filling political shoe is a very demanding task as the expectations are extremely high from the incumbent’s perspective. The emperors generally found it easier to have their own sons to fill them. The North Koreans are still doing it. In a democratic process, it is a bit touchy when sons are expected to fill the shoes of fathers, and of course, much easier to fit in.
2/03/2012
A minority in your own country
Singaporeans becoming a minority in his own country is becoming a reality. Front page news in mypaper reported that in a foreign bank, in a team of 12 middle management banking staff, only 5 are Singaporeans. And it seems that this phenomenon is getting more widespread and may become a permanent and pervasive feature in the banking industry and other industries as well, particularly IT.
The reason for this pathetic state of affair is that Singaporeans did not possess the specialized skills set or experience for these positions. And the foreign banks could only find them from overseas, Europe, India and the Philippines.
As for skill sets, these are partially acquired on the job and through academic training in the learning institutions. It is now apparent that our leaning institutions are producing graduates that are not marketable or do not possess the skill sets needed, or producing too little. Whose fault is that? Is it so difficult to produce the kind of skill sets that the finance industry needs if developing countries like India and the Philippines are producing them in hordes? I am sure these talents from the developing countries do not buy their papers from streets of Manila or Mumbai. They must have the skill sets that our learning institutions failed to produce and our industries needed.
The remedy is to send our students to the learning institutions in India and the Philippines for their education. They seem to be doing something right and we, despite our world rankings, are not producing the graduates for the market, or in trickles.
The second important point is experience. Singaporeans do not have the required experience but developing country workers have. Where and how these workers acquired the experience that our workers could not get? Who gave them the opportunity to acquire the experience?
This is the main cause of the lack of experienced Singaporean CEOs in the finance industry because we do not give our people the chance and the experience. And if this is the way to go, soon all the CEO positions will be filled by foreigners and so will be the finance industry middle management, and so will be the IT industry and other industries.
We have become a country that not only did not produce the right products for the industry, we don’t even offer them the chance to gain the experience to become more professional and for higher appointments.
What is happening? And in many cases, the experience and opportunities were given to foreigners to gain their experience here. And this is progress. Singaporean first? This is our country, this is our home. And we are supposed to defend it while the good jobs are given to foreigners. A new citizen is still a foreigner yesterday. If every foreigner is given all the plump jobs and become citizens tomorrow because of it, then technically all the top jobs are Singaporeans. Is this acceptable or the right thing to do? We need to reclaim this country for Singaporeans before it is too late.
The reason for this pathetic state of affair is that Singaporeans did not possess the specialized skills set or experience for these positions. And the foreign banks could only find them from overseas, Europe, India and the Philippines.
As for skill sets, these are partially acquired on the job and through academic training in the learning institutions. It is now apparent that our leaning institutions are producing graduates that are not marketable or do not possess the skill sets needed, or producing too little. Whose fault is that? Is it so difficult to produce the kind of skill sets that the finance industry needs if developing countries like India and the Philippines are producing them in hordes? I am sure these talents from the developing countries do not buy their papers from streets of Manila or Mumbai. They must have the skill sets that our learning institutions failed to produce and our industries needed.
The remedy is to send our students to the learning institutions in India and the Philippines for their education. They seem to be doing something right and we, despite our world rankings, are not producing the graduates for the market, or in trickles.
The second important point is experience. Singaporeans do not have the required experience but developing country workers have. Where and how these workers acquired the experience that our workers could not get? Who gave them the opportunity to acquire the experience?
This is the main cause of the lack of experienced Singaporean CEOs in the finance industry because we do not give our people the chance and the experience. And if this is the way to go, soon all the CEO positions will be filled by foreigners and so will be the finance industry middle management, and so will be the IT industry and other industries.
We have become a country that not only did not produce the right products for the industry, we don’t even offer them the chance to gain the experience to become more professional and for higher appointments.
What is happening? And in many cases, the experience and opportunities were given to foreigners to gain their experience here. And this is progress. Singaporean first? This is our country, this is our home. And we are supposed to defend it while the good jobs are given to foreigners. A new citizen is still a foreigner yesterday. If every foreigner is given all the plump jobs and become citizens tomorrow because of it, then technically all the top jobs are Singaporeans. Is this acceptable or the right thing to do? We need to reclaim this country for Singaporeans before it is too late.
2/02/2012
Bonk, bonking, bonked
Is it because of the liberalization, or is it because of the craze for artistic expression, this little uptight nanny state seems to be preoccupied with bonkings lately. The latest gossips, not gossips, newsworthy news that many Singaporeans are demanding to know or want to know, is who is bonking who. And it sells papers too I think, like the great tabloids or evening news.
The only thing good coming out this episode is for a few celebrities in high places to appear as role models in bonking as a past time. Then the dragon year will definitely become a bountiful year for making babies, legitimate or illegimate. Who cares as long as we have more population growth, more NS men, more workers to push up the GDP and more bonuses?
I think this is the real problem why this nanny state is not producing the babies that are needed. Not enough bonkings or bonking being seen as something unhealthy, undesirable, unsavory or unsophisticated. There is a need to put a new spin into bonking to make it attractive, virility, libido, manhood, ego, conquest…what else. If only the prudes are aware that bonking is quite common in today’s nanny state except not in the news. A few more reports would probably kill the curiosity on bonkings.
I heard of a complaint that someone bonked a guy. And the company nanny was serious enough to ask him for an explanation. Of course he denied. And the self confessed victim was furious. The complainee almost wanted to give the retard two black eyes. But knowing that he was sick, and with all the advices from all who knew this sicko, telling him that it was not worth it, he restrained himself from bonking the sicko to his satisfaction. Maybe the sicko was really asking to be bonked.
Ok, don’t get the wrong idea. Bonk in Hokien is something very innocuous, ie touch. I bonk you is like saying I touch you. And this cracko complained that the other guy bonked him all because the guy denied him the chance of going mad with another lady in the office. The sicko wanted to bonk her in his mentally retard ways of course. And for being unable to bonk the lady, he countered by taking it out on the innocent guy, by accusing him of bonking him.
There are many weird people around that should be locked up in IMH. But really, be careful about bonking in paradise. No bonking allowed. They only play with fiddles and read poems at the underground station. By the way, beating the citizens, even ladies, manhandling them, give them a few body blows, are perfectly fine. And just a friendly advice, please don’t ask a lady if it is alright to bonk her.
The only thing good coming out this episode is for a few celebrities in high places to appear as role models in bonking as a past time. Then the dragon year will definitely become a bountiful year for making babies, legitimate or illegimate. Who cares as long as we have more population growth, more NS men, more workers to push up the GDP and more bonuses?
I think this is the real problem why this nanny state is not producing the babies that are needed. Not enough bonkings or bonking being seen as something unhealthy, undesirable, unsavory or unsophisticated. There is a need to put a new spin into bonking to make it attractive, virility, libido, manhood, ego, conquest…what else. If only the prudes are aware that bonking is quite common in today’s nanny state except not in the news. A few more reports would probably kill the curiosity on bonkings.
I heard of a complaint that someone bonked a guy. And the company nanny was serious enough to ask him for an explanation. Of course he denied. And the self confessed victim was furious. The complainee almost wanted to give the retard two black eyes. But knowing that he was sick, and with all the advices from all who knew this sicko, telling him that it was not worth it, he restrained himself from bonking the sicko to his satisfaction. Maybe the sicko was really asking to be bonked.
Ok, don’t get the wrong idea. Bonk in Hokien is something very innocuous, ie touch. I bonk you is like saying I touch you. And this cracko complained that the other guy bonked him all because the guy denied him the chance of going mad with another lady in the office. The sicko wanted to bonk her in his mentally retard ways of course. And for being unable to bonk the lady, he countered by taking it out on the innocent guy, by accusing him of bonking him.
There are many weird people around that should be locked up in IMH. But really, be careful about bonking in paradise. No bonking allowed. They only play with fiddles and read poems at the underground station. By the way, beating the citizens, even ladies, manhandling them, give them a few body blows, are perfectly fine. And just a friendly advice, please don’t ask a lady if it is alright to bonk her.
Cheating the ignorants
I have just called my phone service provider to cancel a service that I have not subscribed for, something like GPRS, which I was charged $5.57. I am not sure if I could have been paying for it in my previous bills. It seems that the service came together with an Android mobile phone. Many uncles and aunties or children have bought phones with many high tech stuff embedded that they did not know and may not even use or did not know that they will be charged for it.
I have cancelled several of such services from the service providers before when I encountered them. For many users of mobile phones, what they need is a phone and nothing else. Some may need the sms while others may need more. The service providers must have the decency to offer the additional facilities to the users on a demand basis and not simply lump them as a package and expecting the ignorant users to pay for them.
I am wondering how many uncles and aunties are paying for such service that they did not want or need, or are paying for their children’s bills without knowing why or what the hell they are paying for. If only they know how to read their bills and demand that nonsense should be taken out.
CASE must step in to protect innocent and ignorant customers from such abuses by service providers. It is a lot of unethical profits charged to the ignorant masses if everyone has to pay a few dollars monthly for things that they don’t need. Some paying without even knowing. The literate will be spared but the poor illiterate will be made victims as they would not be able to protect themselves. This is as good as bullying the poor masses.
The other unethical corporate practice is making cold calls to unwary customers and the latter ended up paying for the phone time used and phone bills. Phone calls are not free and such practices must be stopped. It is not that innocent, and not free. If companies are going to continue with such nuisance calls, they must be made to pay for the phone bills of customers that they called, the recipients must not bear the cost of nuisance calls and wasting their time as well.
Unethical practices by corporate entities must be stopped.
I have cancelled several of such services from the service providers before when I encountered them. For many users of mobile phones, what they need is a phone and nothing else. Some may need the sms while others may need more. The service providers must have the decency to offer the additional facilities to the users on a demand basis and not simply lump them as a package and expecting the ignorant users to pay for them.
I am wondering how many uncles and aunties are paying for such service that they did not want or need, or are paying for their children’s bills without knowing why or what the hell they are paying for. If only they know how to read their bills and demand that nonsense should be taken out.
CASE must step in to protect innocent and ignorant customers from such abuses by service providers. It is a lot of unethical profits charged to the ignorant masses if everyone has to pay a few dollars monthly for things that they don’t need. Some paying without even knowing. The literate will be spared but the poor illiterate will be made victims as they would not be able to protect themselves. This is as good as bullying the poor masses.
The other unethical corporate practice is making cold calls to unwary customers and the latter ended up paying for the phone time used and phone bills. Phone calls are not free and such practices must be stopped. It is not that innocent, and not free. If companies are going to continue with such nuisance calls, they must be made to pay for the phone bills of customers that they called, the recipients must not bear the cost of nuisance calls and wasting their time as well.
Unethical practices by corporate entities must be stopped.
Why the Whip?
Why was the Whip not lifted during the debate on Ministerial Salary? If the PAP believes so strongly in its philosophy and policy on high pay for public service, should not all the MPs and ministers also believe in the same ideology? Or was the rumour of a split on this issue true, that some MPs and ministers were not agreeable with the policy of high pay?
How serious was the divide? Could the against faction be more than the for faction? If so, then the majority in the party is being overruled by the minority. But this is highly unlikely given the passion they exhibited in supporting this policy. Or could it be the MPs versus the ministers as the MPs are not the real beneficiary of the policy?
Hypothetically, if the Whip is lifted and more MPs and ministers were to speak against it, then it can become embarrassing. Or it could be the MPs speaking and voting against the ministers.
When that happens, the hypocrisies will be difficult to bear. It will clearly show the self interest of those in favour of high pay defending their high pay. Another form of hypocrisy that could be exposed will be MPs speaking against it and voting for it. And if that happens, it will be very awkward for PAP MPs to lash out at other political parties for hypocrisy.
Now that the debate and voting are over, no one will be wiser or have the good fortune to know what it could have been. It is just a speculative thought though. Who knows, all the MPs and ministers could come out with their guns firing in support of the recommendation. Then again, given the need to impose the Whip, perhaps this is an unlikely scenario.
Another hypothetical and disastrous ending, if the Whip was not imposed, would see the recommendation defeated by PAP MPs voting against it. That will be a real shocker.
The Whip is very effective in such a vital policy debate, and with an absolute majority, the phrase, ‘let’s vote for it’ is really an insult on the daft Sinkies. But this is democracy at its best, with a little aid from the Whip.
The other big question is whether the high salary bill is an issue of national interest or a matter of conscience. The advocates claimed that it is national interest with the red herring that it is all about the greedy politicians in the future, nothing to do with the present bunch. Well, how many would take this bait? If it is an issue of conscience, then it is not proper to impose the Whip as it will taint every MP and Minister in the same smear of colour.
Is this issue water under the bridge?
How serious was the divide? Could the against faction be more than the for faction? If so, then the majority in the party is being overruled by the minority. But this is highly unlikely given the passion they exhibited in supporting this policy. Or could it be the MPs versus the ministers as the MPs are not the real beneficiary of the policy?
Hypothetically, if the Whip is lifted and more MPs and ministers were to speak against it, then it can become embarrassing. Or it could be the MPs speaking and voting against the ministers.
When that happens, the hypocrisies will be difficult to bear. It will clearly show the self interest of those in favour of high pay defending their high pay. Another form of hypocrisy that could be exposed will be MPs speaking against it and voting for it. And if that happens, it will be very awkward for PAP MPs to lash out at other political parties for hypocrisy.
Now that the debate and voting are over, no one will be wiser or have the good fortune to know what it could have been. It is just a speculative thought though. Who knows, all the MPs and ministers could come out with their guns firing in support of the recommendation. Then again, given the need to impose the Whip, perhaps this is an unlikely scenario.
Another hypothetical and disastrous ending, if the Whip was not imposed, would see the recommendation defeated by PAP MPs voting against it. That will be a real shocker.
The Whip is very effective in such a vital policy debate, and with an absolute majority, the phrase, ‘let’s vote for it’ is really an insult on the daft Sinkies. But this is democracy at its best, with a little aid from the Whip.
The other big question is whether the high salary bill is an issue of national interest or a matter of conscience. The advocates claimed that it is national interest with the red herring that it is all about the greedy politicians in the future, nothing to do with the present bunch. Well, how many would take this bait? If it is an issue of conscience, then it is not proper to impose the Whip as it will taint every MP and Minister in the same smear of colour.
Is this issue water under the bridge?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)