Is Lui Tuck Yew kidding?

‘Given Singapore's limited space for new roads, the government plans to further curb vehicle growth from next year, revealed Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew.’ This is quoted from Yahoo News.

We have just heard of a White Paper discussing about Singapore having a population of 7m from the current 5.3m. Can the island have enough space for an additional 1.7m people when it cannot find space for new roads and have to curb the growth of vehicles on the road? It is either the island still has a lot of space for more people or the island has not enough space. It cannot have more space for more people but not enough space for vehicles unless these people do not need the use vehicles in their lives, for private or public transport. The growth of road network will also be halved. Lui said, "You can't allow it (the vehicle quota) to grow at the rates in past years simply because the road networks are not expanding as what we have done before,"

It is getting very confusing. When population growth is concerned, we can grow and grow and build and build more housing to support the growth. Then we cannot have space for more roads for more vehicles.

Subsidies are like crutches, for the richest people in the world

More subsidies, more subsidies, as if the govt is the Santa Claus. Oops, no, not the Santa Claus but the rich man doing charity and those stretching out their hands must feel grateful to this demi god. Without this demi god there will be no subsidies and the cost of everything will be unaffordable. So the grateful citizens that need subsidies will be forever grateful that the demi god is around. And this group of grateful will stretch from the low income to the middle income. This is a lot of grateful people.

Really, subsidies are like lelong sales. Price marked up exponentially only to give an equally big discount for the recipients to think they are getting a good deal. For that, they may even be cheated as the cost could be much lower and the price could be much lower too. If the prices are not marked up so high, there is no need for subsidies at all. It is all a matter of packaging. What really is important is the bottom line, what the people have to pay for it.

The other negative aspect of subsidies is that the recipients are portrayed as helpless, dependencies, desperadoes and needing charity, needing handouts. When or if the price is priced correctly, there is no need to queue for handouts. The dignity of the recipients will not be thrashed. Why make people go and beg for subsidies?

There are better ways to bring down the cost of operators or service providers without having to make the recipients queuing up for it, submit their particulars to plea for help. Things can be done much simply and respecting the pride and dignity of the recipients.

The proposed babies and parenthood scheme will eventually be eroded and the fees be raised by the operators to near the same level, with subsidies. The calibration to fine tune the handouts according to level of income is a very tedious and embarrassing affair, micro managing the life of people. The govt could work out the subsidies with operators and service providers, controlling their fees by giving more subsidies to more reasonably priced services while the upmarket brand be given less or no subsidies.

Still this is not the best option. It will, yes, become another crutch mentality thing. Making babies, bringing up babies must depend on govt subsidies! Why no one is talking about crutch mentality anymore?

Sinkies have become a people living on crutches, on govt handouts, despite being millionaires, multi millionaires or half a millionaires. Weird isn’t it? The richest people in the world but needing govt subsidies in almost everything to get by!

Punggol East – So far very tame, very civilised

For the watchers of this by election who expect a lot of fire and storm, it must be a big disappointment. So far everything appears to be very mild and tame. There were great expectations given the indiscretion of the ex MP who was also the ex Speaker of Parliament. Many could remember the fire and ferocity of the attack by the ruling party against the WP then in Hougang. All the big guns were firing in full force and the WP was finding no place to hide. It was shame, shame and shame all round. It was high morality against individual failings and indiscretion. It was monks and priests against sinners.

In this case all the shame, shame and shame somehow disappeared. There was a lack of viciousness from the WP side. Even the name Michael Palmer was not even mentioned, I think, forgive me if I am wrong on this, but I wasn’t following the rally speeches closely. I can only feel the kindness and the politeness in the whole tussle from all quarters. My respect to the honourable men and women in the opposition for not spreading the swill and shit out into the open for airing.

And even the AIM saga that was a time bomb waiting to explode but got defused. Or was it that no one is willing to light the fuse? Minus all the drama and fiery speeches, this is really like a tea party. Perhaps the politicians have matured and are less quarrelsome and less vicious. No longer behaving like little school boys or ruffians picking up on petty quarrels to look saintly. And this is good.

Well, who shall we thank for for such a civilized election campaign? Could it be a repeat of another Hougang dirty saga if the fallen MP was an opposition party MP? Would the niceties be exchanged for ‘please tell, please come clean’ for all to see who is cleaner or whiter than white? Thank God that things did not go down the longkang way. And no opposition speakers claimed or peddled to be men and women of high morals or of religious pedigree. And they still maintain a very respectable decorum and conduct while pitching for support from the voters without trying to tarnish or destroy anyone for personal flaws.

What more is there to say?

Obama's inaugural speech " sheer rhetoric" . BY Linh Dinh

Obama’s inaugural speech ‘sheer rhetoric’     Written by  LINH  DINH

Wed Jan 23, 2013 7:47AM

U.S. President Barack Obama’s inaugural speech was a “sheer rhetoric,” which many Americans know that “the situation is much different,” an analyst said.  

“In his inaugural speech, Obama said a decade of war is now ending and that the U.S. will walk to resolve future crises peacefully, but that is all rhetoric,” author and activist Linh Dinh told Press TV’s U.S. Desk on Tuesday.

“Because Obama is starting new wars, you know it is the attack on Libya and the hell that he is creating in Syria is entirely instigated by the United States, and he’s now provoking China.” he added. “The Prime Minister of Japan is visiting Washington DC next month, and this man is quite literally a nutcase. He is a very dangerous man. He denies that Japanese troops committed atrocities during World War II. He denies there were comfort women, that is, sex slaves, Korean sex slaves, during World War II, so he is the new Japanese prime minister, and he is an ally in the US provocation of China, so that’s another crisis that the US is starting, and why is the US doing that? It’s because the USS thrives in the war business. That’s the only business it has left.”

After taking his second inaugural oath of office in front of the Capitol building on Monday, Obama declared misleadingly that “a decade of war is now ending,” while pledging to maintain America’s superpower status through a global military presence.

“America will remain the anchor of strong alliances in every corner of the globe; and we will renew those institutions that extend our capacity to manage crisis abroad, for no one has a greater stake in a peaceful world than its most powerful nation,” Obama said in his speech.

Jonathan Tan - The AIM saga taking the spotlight again


The internet is buzzing again with more disclosures of the AIM saga. Someone has disclosed an ex staff of NCS, Jonathan Tan, posting his achievements that included his work with the Town Councils amounting to $30m and a software licence fee of $5m. (S$30 million deal with Singapore Town Council. Software license at S$5 million. This is found in his Linkedin page). How are these numbers related to the cost of developing the Town Council Management System is going to be interesting. The $30m could include hardware and software development and the $5m could be a one time license fee, or would the Town Council be required to pay more license fee for continuous used are not clear.

Some netizens are already screaming their heads off by assuming that the management system costs $30m and being sold for $140,000. On face value it looks quite ugly. But given proper and creative accounting, everything will be in order. There will be fair wear and tear and a large portion could go to hardware and equipment.

There is this thing called depreciation or writing down of goodwill. So if all these have been written off as goodwill or depreciation, there is no value left to the software. And those who think that a $30m system selling at $140,000 will incur a big loss will be mistaken. When the residual value is 0, the $140,000 will become pure profit. Yes, selling the software for any amount is profit.

You may choose to disagree with my ingenious reasoning and explanation.