Spend more to win election

On 28 Mar, the ST ran an article ‘Lee Li Lian is by election’s top spender’. It was reported that she spent $65,227 against Koh Poh Koon’s $62,991. The details of what is included in these numbers and what are not would be another area of contention. And she held three rallies instead of the latter’s two. No wonder she won the by election. She must have worked harder and willing to spend more money, altogether $2,236 more than Koh. And her votes won were 16,045 while Koh got 12,875.

Just analysing the statistics will simply say that spending more and working harder is the formula for success. Can we expect all the political parties to be spending more and working harder in the next GE? I think many parties would have problem achieving both as they may be able to work harder, but many would not have the money to do so. Fortunately Li Lian was able to come up with more money on the table. This is quite strange as the PAP was never short of money. Or is it that they thought spending nearly $63k would be hard to beat as the WP, being a workers’ party, would not be able to match the rich elitist party with many millionaires and multi millionaires in their ranks.

This must be WP’s secret weapon, got plenty of money to campaign for election, and must be a big surprise to the PAP. Maybe it was because it was only a by election and its resources were focused on one event. If the WP would to contest in a GE then they may not have enough money to spread around. Fielding so many candidates and running so many rallies would be very very costly. No wonder in GE the PAP always sure win.

If the PAP thinks that the WP only got enough money for a by election by putting all in, then it should not present much problem with $63k per candidate in the GE. With 87 seats, this will cost the PAP at least $5.5m on the average to fight the next GE. If the WP were to contest half the seats, it will be 43 x $65k or $2.8m. Can the WP afford this kind of money?

What if both want to up the stake by adding another $10k or so per candidate, it will be very much more to put on the table. The rest of the smaller parties would have to think twice whether to follow or to fold their cards. Very likely they would only be able to do well by concentrating their limited resources to a few candidates. Winning an election definitely cost money and the stake is getting higher and higher. Do not rule out higher deposits for the candidates.

The higher cost of fielding a candidate is expected as the rewards are also quite handsome. For $63k to $65k, the return at $16k per month for 5 years is $960k, quite close to a million. And then there is the big bonus of becoming an office holder, with a top prize of several millions annually. Spending $60+k is really cheap when compare to the returns. Not a bad investment looking at the odds and the monetary winnings.

We are hitting 5.5m soon

'Theweek.com, 30 Mar 2013
Singapore
Population: 5,460,302
GDP: $326.7 billion
Tax incentives: Tax rates that max out at 20 percent and no capital gains taxes, according to Reuters.
Foreign cash: Reuters reported that estimates put "the amount of German money moving to Singapore in the double-digit billions," forcing the German government to step in and negotiate more transparent banking standards....'

These are the introductory paragraphs of an article from Theweek.com dated 30 Mar 2013. Does anyone notice the population of Singapore is now 5.460,302 and not 5.3m? Our population has gone up by another 160,000 from the often cited 5.3m.

I believe Theweek must have quoted from a reliable source.  It takes less than 40,000 and we will be 5.5m. The rate of growth is frightening despite our below replacement rate of fertility rate. What is happening? Would the population be 5.5m by May Day?

Paintings of Gods

This is a series of mysterious paintings from my rar art collection. Every one of these paintings is created by Mother Nature. I have enough of such paintings in many different series that can fill up an art gallery in every major city.

The Big Thing in Sin City

In this small little island of millionaires, everything is big. Even a small little nimrod will think very big and imagining that it is the most desirable big thing and women will beg to have it in their mouths. I think we are going to be the biggest customers of the US in the purchase of the most sophisticated aircraft of the future. It is flying but will only be ready in the future as it is not flying right yet. The thing big about this aircraft is the price tag.

I just read an advert that someone paid $147k for a Porsche 911. The Sinkies are so rich that they would not want to buy anything on the cheap. They would pay for a piece of worthless paper called COE for $100k to give them the privilege to plonk down another half a million for the same car. Why would they do that, I dunno. It must be a dignity thing. Things must have a big price tag to be good. Oh, they just raise the tuition fees for universities and polytechnics to make them better. The more expensive the better the quality.

Yes, the Big Thing in Sin City is the price tag. Everything has to be priced big to be good and saleable. A public housing flat with a 99 year lease, very likely less than 90 or 80 years left, was selling like hot cakes at $1m or more. And the millionaire Sinkies, I supposed, would congratulate themselves for such a good buy. The guy who bought the Porsche would probably get 2 or 3 landed freehold properties for the same price of one public housing flat. Across the Causeway one could buy several landed properties too, for that price tag.

And many will save a life time for that final visit to the hospital to empty their life savings. It must be a final charitable act, to donate everything to the hospitals and to tip the staff for the good service, or is it the hospital price tag?

And the citizens are so generous that they are happily paying their political leaders millions to keep them from corruption. Of course the leaders are the most dignified and talented people on earth, or at least in the island. Their forte is to learn from other countries, what other people are doing before applying what they learnt to the island. And if they failed to learn anything, they will pay for expert consultants to do the job. Or they may even ask the people, the ordinary men in the street for answers. The price tag for the ministers is not only big, but very big. Obama would have faint if the Americans decide to pay him half the amount being paid to his counterpart here.

Paying big, buying big, getting big pay are the norms here. The thought of how much to pay for the things we paid here can drive many people elsewhere crazy. Imagine how many life times will one need to earn a $100k in many countries. Here it is only good enough to buy a certificate only to be entitled to buy a car with a bigger price tag.

That is how big our money has become.

When meritocracy is stupidity

The problem of highly qualified Singaporeans unable to find employment is not only serious but politically unacceptable to a Govt that has responsibility to its people first and foremost. Silly politicians that keep harping blindly on meritocracy need to be voted out from Parliament. Meritocracy and the practice of meritocracy as a country are very different and complex from practising meritocracy in a well of frogs. In the well, the frogs are safe from intruders and have only among themselves to see who is more meritocratic. In the land of the blind the one eye frog shines.

Singapore only has a population of 3.3m, citizens and PRs. An open door policy to invite foreigners here to work, with only meritocracy as the criteria, is simply insane, stupidity at its peak. There are 6 or 7 billion people out there and if being more talented, or merits, is justification to work here, to replace another Singaporean, the whole 3.3m people should be replaced, from the President and PM and to the low down beggars on the street. Sure you can find millions of people out there that are more meritocratic than a Singaporean or the PM.

Just because the frogs in the well are protected from competition, they can throw the meritocracy card at everyone, not good enough get out, there is always a better foreigner to replace another Singaporean. Why don’t the frogs allow fair competition and let the more meritocratic foreigners to replace them? Never, they know too well that there will be many many out there that will be better than them, every one of them.

In practice, many jobs can be done by a Singaporean. The education and skill level of many Singaporeans are more than adequate to do the job. You don’t need someone with 3 degrees or a master’s to be a middle executive doing administrative work. You don’t need to drive a sports car to get from point A to B when any good decent car will do. It is a fallacy to pick the best when the best is ten times over qualified for the job that a Singaporean is qualified to do? Does this sound complicated?

Who are we kidding, that Singaporeans are not good enough to fill all the middle management positions with the qualifications they got from our world class education system and universities? Who are we kidding when many are employed instead of Singaporeans for all the wrong reasons except being meritocratic?

The nonsense that is happening in the employment scene must be made right and it is the duty and responsibility of the Govt to put it right. It is the Gov’t’s thoughtless policy of opening the door widely to foreigners with little due consideration to the employment needs of the citizens that is the problem. Meritocracy without due recognition to country and citizenship is simply crazy, madness, and idiocy. The whole population should be moved out and replaced by more meritocratic people from all over the world. Yah?