Leslie Chew, would a gentler touch be better?

As expected, the social media and the opposition would have something to say regarding the arrest of Leslie Chew, the cartoonist. Cherian George has spoken and so has SDP, calling for a gentler touch and no need to use the sledgehammer to smash an ant. Unfortunately their calls could make things worst.

It is not right for Leslie to use the term ‘racist’ on the Govt as it is accusing the Govt of a very serious act. The part on the judiciary is also touchy as the integrity of the judicial system is being questioned. But the reaction by the Govt is seen as being too harsh, over reaction. The question is whether a call to retract the statement would be good enough, and for added measures an apology in his comic front page.

Leslie Chew is just a small guy, ok his cartoons are rubbing people up the wrong side. What I feel is necessary is for Leslie Chew to do some damage control by cleaning up the false or wrong image that he has painted of the judiciary and the Govt, to right a wrong and close the matter. Arresting him just make the matter looks so uncomfortable for a first world country. Other than the converts who would believe in anything, how many would really believe the accusations by Leslie Chew? Many would brush it off as some wild accusations. It is as good as calling an angel a rapist when it is obvious that that is not true.

Going too hard on Leslie Chew may send a message, 杀鸡吓猴, and many messages to the world the kind of society we are living in. What happens to the kinder society and the gentler touch?

Yes, Leslie Chew has printed something unsavoury. How much damage is done by Leslie Chew’s comment to deserve a police arrest? The whole world is watching. After this, the Govt may need to mount a bigger PR exercise for the smear that came with the handling of this case.

More PMETs retrenched

The majority of people losing jobs last year were PMETs, forming 54% of the 11,000 made redundant. The percentages for 2010 and 2011 were 35% and 42% respectively. The other interesting point is that the PMETs that were retrenched were getting younger, in the 20s, 30s and 40s, not necessarily the 50s or older.

The dicey part of this information is that without job security in Sin City, these PMETs that were retrenched are going to have a hard time, really bad time. Not only they have a family to look after, school going children, there is also the 30 year mortgage to pay for. 

Job security in Sin City is a top most concern to all Singaporeans. They cannot afford to go without work for at least 30 years. And for these PMETs to lose their jobs at such early ages this is troubling even if they could find a replacement job fast. Any long break without an income is dire.

Isn’t this frightening? And we have several hundred thousand foreign professionals being employed here while our locals are getting the butts every now and then. This is no joking matter. As a country we cannot afford this kind of situation to get worst. It will only aggravate the already big pool of unemployed PMETs and will cost a heavy strain on the social fabric of our society.

The Govt and MOM cannot be cavalier with this problem as it will hit more and more citizens across all industries. The govt service may be affected too, including those in uniform or in civilian if the direction is not reversed.

Mysterious things happened to the FT myth poll

I am certain that the number of respondents to the poll was more than 90 last night. I dunno why the number has dropped to 22 now. Google system must be suspect, unsteady, unreliable.

Good news, 71 F35s on the way

According to My Paper today, an US Air Force Lieutenant General Christopher Bogdan has said Singapore is close to a deal to buy 71 pieces of the yet to be operational, yet to be combat tested leading edge multi role futuristic combat aircraft from the USA. It will cost only $11b or about $155 mil a piece. Now that is cheap. The US must have slashed the price to make it so attractive that we are going to get more than the earlier rumours. Or maybe we have gone there and drove a good bargain, for cash, 50% discount, take it of leave it.

The best part of this deal is that the aircraft is still on a developmental stage and would definitely be the most modern and fresh out of the oven aircraft that any country can hope to buy from the Americans. Often the Americans would sell only aircraft that have been in service for 20 or 30 years so that the buyer would not get the state of the art technology and aircraft. Singapore must be in a very enviable position to seal this deal.

With 71 of the finest and most advanced aircraft available in the future, no delivery date mentioned yet, may 10 or 20 years, we have positioned ourselves as the mightiest air force in Asia. North Korea and even China would not be a problem if they dare to launch an air attack on us.

Singaporeans can now sleep in peace. Our sky is safe. Good buy.

Would Singaporeans behave as one like the Bostonians

Hsien Loong wrote in his facebook, “If ever Singapore encounters an incident like this, may we have the courage and the humanity to respond with the same grace and unity as the Bostonians.”

This is a big if. In America, other that then the rich elite feasting on the country’s wealth, the rest of the Americans are fairly equal as one people despite the myriads of nationals that made up the Americans. The stratification of the Americans is not institutionalised like what we have here. I am not just talking about the CMIO division, and I am also not talking about the citizens versus foreigners when the latter is now nearly 50% of the population. In any crisis, 50% of the population, or the foreigners, can be ruled out, they will say not their business, and scoot.

What about the Singaporeans? I think this is increasingly becoming a big issue with the Singaporeans being pigeoned hole into so many categories. Would the Singaporeans ask themselves, how much should I contribute in a crisis? I am the low income earner and expected to take public transport, so how much should I contribute compare to those who can afford expensive cars? I am the average Singaporean and this is how much I should contribute, with or without subsidies. Then the higher income earners may ask how much should they discount their contributions when they are being deprived of so many things, like housing, and made to pay more for more expensive hospital wards and higher tuition fees with no subsidies for their children. And what about the super rich that have so many good things in their way, would they say, sure we are the biggest beneficiary of the system and we will contribute the most?

The Govt has been dividing and subdividing the Singaporeans into so many categories with all kinds of subsidies and penalties, in monetary terms. Would the Singaporeans be just as calculative as the Govt and say, all the calls and pledges to defend and die for country are just nice sounding aspirations. Now if there is a real crisis, what and how the Govt pigeon holed and treated me will be how I repay and contribute to the country?

Those who are given lesser or no subsidies may say, let those with more subsidies be the first line of defence. And those who are not even allowed to buy public flats may say, those who are entitled go first?

Did I hear inclusiveness, inclusive society? Or did I hear a country and people divided along the lines of incomes, entitlements and subsidies? Compare this with the Bostonians who are not stratified into so many layers and classes, can our people react and unite as one in times of crisis, standing together as one people? Or would they be bickering, that fellow earns more, that one earns less and that one gets more subsidies? Or would they be competing with each other to be at the back line? Where are those who are angry that those who earn a few dollars more should not be allowed to compete with those who earn less in public housing and screaming unfair advantage?

In times like this, many would want to say all is equal and all contributes the same. Would it be too late to say so? Would someone earning millions contribute like someone earning a few hundred dollars? Is it all about how much one was given or what one can afford? Those who have to sell homes to finance children to study overseas, what would they say? Those with low or no priority in public housing, what would they think? Are we one people or many people in a country separated by the rich poor divide or entitlement divide?