Hougang does not matter, really?

Would the result of who wins Hougang really matter at all? A WP win will add the tally for opposition MPs from 5 to 6. A PAP win will add the PAP’s majority from 81 to 82. So what is the difference?



PM Lee: Whoever wins Hougang by-election will not change the basic picture in Parliament



And he is telling the truth. Hougang is non issue, inconsequential. The WP will remain an insignificant minority party that would need a loud speaker to have its voice heard or it would be drowned out by a cacophony of laughters. As for the PAP, all the bills will be passed, constitutions can be changed at will as it still holds more than two third majority.



So, is the Hougang by election a waste of time? Yes, it is. At least for the term of this Parliament, nothing will really change. At best there will be one extra vote against unpopular bills. At betterer than best, there will be one PAP MP in the name of Desmond Choo that would speak for the Hougang people, but would he still vote for whatever the PAP tabled even if he is against it, spoke against it, or if the Hougangkia did not like it. How can any MP be effective when he cannot vote against a motion by his own party? Such MPs will be as ineffective as the bloggers, only can kpkb for a bit of wayang.



Hougang is immaterial for the short term. Hougang is only meaningful in the longer term. Hougang is like a glimsp of the future, a statement from the people of what they really want or who they want to represent them as the govt of the people. A vote for the PAP is an affirmation that the PAP is the right party to stay and run the country. A vote for the WP is a statement that change is needed, whether a regime change or a change for more opposition MPs to check the govt and have a govt that is more representative of the whole spectrum of the population, not just for the winners and the elite.



But there will be many minor issues that will distract the voters, some very personal and private, some very mundane, some over a bowl of porridge or a hearing aid, or some because they have stood their ground for fairness and democracy. Would the larger good of the people and country take the main stage? Would the WP be able to raise the thinking of the Hougangkia to a higher level, to see further over the horizon? Or would the Hougangkia be convinced that it is a non issue, vote whoever you like, or vote for a little goodie or handouts? It doesn’t really matter, really.



And the big turnout were there just for a party, just for fun? Daft Sinkies do not think politics or politics is not something that bothers them. This Hougang could mean more good years, depending on who you are. Hougang could also mean a stamp of disapproval of the PAP. If the later comes true, Hougang will be a very significant milestone in our political development and political history. The PAP will be history in 2016 if the WP could add on to their previous gains.



What will Hougang foretell in a week’s time? Whatever, it is best not to dismiss Hougang as inconsequential.

Rar Art - A Life Time

This is a piece of very complex rar art. It combines a blending of colours, criss crossing of lines and strokes and layering. All these features come together in a harmonious way without anything looking out of place. The colours are beautiful, the strokes are mature and well executed while the layering gives it depth and complexities.
There is a couple in the centre of the painting and it looks like their whole lives were unfolding in front of them. As one views the painting slowly, more and more images will appear to tell a series of stories of the lives of the couple. Take your time to enjoy this beautiful creation of Mother Nature

A different perspective to population growth

We need population growth to generate economic growth to enjoy a better quality of life. This is the biggest bullshit to come out from any sensible person. Population growth is not the only factor that leads to growth and a better quality of life. The sure things about population growth are inflation, congestion, higher demand for goods and services and many undesirable social and economic consequences that cannot justify the little benefits of growth.

Take a continent like Australia as an example. If with 50m, they can enjoy the whole continent, be productive enough to grow all the food and wine to make merry, why do they need to rush the population to 100m? If without population growth, maintaining at 50m for perpetuity, and they can produce a bit more for each person to better their life, what is the point of producing 100 times more to feed 100m people but did not live better except for a few super rich?

Coming back to home, if with 2m people, the people can have all the space to live in bigger properties, and own cars with more roads to drive around, and they could produce more goods and services to raise the quality of life, why do they want to push the population to 5m or 10m to have lesser space to live, cannot own cars but only to work ever harder to feed a population of 5m or 10m? 

What for? Because the economists say there is no growth? If the population can be maintained at 2m, and everyone has a bigger property and two cars to go with, no traffic jams, and higher skills of people, goods and services produced are getting better with higher productivity, who the shit needs another 3m or 5m people to take away all the land and roads and landed everyone in shoebox flats and car ownership becomes limited only to a few? 

I think the thinking is too simplified. What kind of growth, what kind of progress, what kind of quality of life? If every leader in the world subscribe to the population growth formula for a better life, the whole will be destroy at double quick time. Nature has ensured that population is controlled and not allowed to growth indiscriminately by throwing in many measures to keep it that way. If a better quality of life is simply to have more people, there is no need to have super talents or smart people to run govts.

The situation in Europe is slight different. They could continue to have a good life by being creative, innovative, improving knowledge skill and productivity with a smaller but able population. But they conned themselves into allowing less productive immigrants to fill the ranks and bloated the population base.  They have reached a turning point where the Caucasian or Aryan stocks are being depleted by lesser stocks. This will bring about their demise as a self inflicted cancer. Japan will shrink its population but will continue to enjoy a better quality of life without being adulterated with lesser productive stocks to bloat its population. A smaller and leaner population is good for them.

 If we are not careful, we could end up in the same way as Europe. Irresponsible and mindless increase of population is like drug consumption.

JP Morgan Chase is the best

Obama has about US$1m deposit in JP Morgan Chase. And he is so confident of the bank to praise it as one of the best managed bank in the US. If JP Morgan Chase is one of the best and losing US$2b due to a flawed risk management formula that they have relied on, how many lesser well managed American banks are waiting to implode? Or is this a case of American is best, even when they can fouled up to such an extent?

How many high net worth private investors are licking their wounds for their blind faith in American financial wizardry? How many Sinkies are still staunch believers while privately cursing at the money they have lost from listening to American bank advisers?

Come to think of it, like Obama said, what is US$2b? There are many very well run funds losing tens of billions or hundreds of billions and still crowing how well their funds are being managed. Losing US$2b is chicken feat, a great achievement really, seriously, honestly. Just don’t check my books. The American banking and financial system is the best. They have exported this great formula of success to the world. The last port of call is China, before curtain’s up.

Blessed are the believers.

Hougang - A very strange feeling

I got this gut feeling but not sure if everyone feels the same. There is Desmond Choo out there in the trenches at the front line fighting. And he is telling his superiors to leave him alone, to let him fight his own battle. Is he really that confident that he could win this fight without the big guns? Or is he worried that the big guns will do him more harm than good, like killed by friendly fire? In football parlance it is called scoring own goals.

Could the big guns instead of hitting the enemies, landed on their own troops. The first minister that spoke in the by election is Boon Wan. And he is drawing more fire from the critics. Who is next to speak and to draw more fire to himself and Desmond Choo?

This is the gut feel that is bothering me. Ministers used to lend their weight to a candidate to make the fight easier. What if the minister himself is unworthy or not seen as credible and anything he said could only make things worst? Can this be the case in Hougang? Is there any minister that could speak out and win more grounds for Desmond Choo instead of doing him in?

The whole ball game has changed. How could Desmond Choo depend on the big guns when the big guns are a suspect and could be better off to stay away from him?