China should learn from the USA

Xinjiang was hit by terrorists last Tuesday and 21 were killed by China’s security forces after the violent clash. As usual, though the US was under attack by terrorists in Boston, it attacked China for the way it handled the terrorist strike. A US spokesman, Patrick Ventrell, ‘called for a thorough and transparent investigation and expressed concern over discrimination against Uighurs and the practice of Islam.

I think the Americans have a point. The Chinese have very little experience in the handling of the minorities. China should seek the American’s help in how to deal with minorities’ uprisings against the authorities. The Americans were very successful in the uprising of the Red Indians and China should approach the Americans to learn how they decimated the Red Indian Uprising and brought peace to America. The second American success story is that after exterminating almost all the Red Indians, the Americans were very generous and compassionate in setting up reservations to protect the remaining few Red Indians that were still alive.

Actually the Red Indians were a majority but after the killings they became a minority in North America. China’s minorities, the Uighurs, are an historical minority and maybe there is no need to conduct a genocide to terminate them. China can skip this, just set up reservations and march the Uighurs into them to be protected. That would do the job like the Red Indians in the US.

China should send a high level delegation to the USA to seek advice on how this can be done efficiently and gain lasting peace in China. It is a great piece of American recipe that should be shared with countries around the world, in keeping the minorities under control and no more troubles from them forever. Make sure that only a few are left, too few to make any difference anymore.

One more thing, for those caught elsewhere, set up prisons in the model of Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo to lock them up without trial. If any western media or American senator or congressman is to question these prisons, just said they were recommended by the Americans. Ask them to go back and ask their Administration.

FT Myth 2

Hi all, the earlier Poll on this is behaving very weirdly and the numbers could not go up but keeps shrinking after every new high. It is now less than 20 respondents. I have sent a note to Bloggers to investigate and track why the Poll is behaving so badly. Hopefully they can reveal the problem facing this the earlier Poll.

I have created another similar Poll, FT Myth 2. Please vote again and see how this Poll will behave this time. Also, After you voted, please use the 'comment' in this post to indicate A for the first choice and B for the second choice to allow me to do a tally on the fictitious missing numbers. Just an A or B will do.

Thanks for your assistance.

Redbean

Tharman the untarnished, a possible next PM

Tharman has won praises from many quarters for his press interview last week and the balanced comments he made on several key issues that are hot in town. This has prompted Seah Chiang Nee to devote an article on him and sounded the possibility of Tharman becoming the next PM.

This could really be a reality as Tharman is possibly the only key minister that is relatively unscarred by controversies over govt policies. His eloquence and cool cucumber demeanour has stood him well with the people of all races. And who knows, come 2016, if some of the key ministers were booted out during the GE, Tharman could be a natural choice as there would be no one good enough left on the table.

Tharman could be a good choice for many reasons. He comes across as a fair and decent minister, not racist, very Singaporean and a strong believer of meritocracy. So the other races would not have anything to fear that he would fill the cabinets with ministers based on racial affinity. And even if he does so, it would definitely be based on meritocracy, that he could not find enough good ministerial candidates from the other racial groups and he has no choice but to take the difficult choice. And who can fault him then, even if hypothetically, 50% or 70% of his ministers are Indians but chosen based on meritocracy, the pillar of Singapore’s success formula? And being sensitive to the other racial groups, he would not take such a route if he can avoid it, and a more balance cabinet with some moderate changes is the likely outcome. Or he could fill his cabinet with the dream team in politics, by bringing in the best in America and Europe. We could have Obama, George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condolezza Rice, George Brown, and whoever in Europe. Just issue them a pink IC and they would be instant Singaporeans and can become ministers. Then there will be new a meaning to the term PMET, M would stand for Ministers and MPs that were replaced by these FTs. Our unique meritocracy policy is simply the best, the most flexible and practical solution to a borderless world and a progressive Singapore.

So far Tharman’s star is shining bright and providence could have its own way to propel Tharman to be the next PM no matter what people may think that the population is still not ready for an Indian PM.

My read is that 2016 is going to be an interesting year and anything can happen, the PAP losing power or losing its two third majority in Parliament, including Tharman becoming the next PM and a cabinet of newly minted citizens as ministers are not far fetched.

Now you are thinking.

Night Festival - A piece of RAR Art

Night Festival series. A painting created by Mother Nature.

Worried for Boon Wan and the HDB

Since Boon Wan’s revelation that HDB was losing money for every flat it sold and the amount was a scandalous billion dollar annually, he has been questioned and ridiculed by many bloggers who simply could not believe in what he said. Some of the attacks were quite personal and very unpleasant. What is more worrisome are the losses incurred by HDB now and later on.

According to Boon Wan, the annual losses over the last few years were about a billion, ie every year but not sure how many years he was referring to, no matter how many flats were built. The building programme was ramped up only last year after he came into office. The number of flats built was very small during the watch of his predecessor that led to the current housing problem and high property prices. So, how much is HDB losing for every flat that it sold? And how much will HDB be losing if the population increases to 6.9m? At 6.9, HDB will need to build another 400,000 units to house the increase of 1.6m people at 4 person per flat.

Let me hazard a guess. Taking a best case scenario to do a rough calculation, the building of 50,000 units under Boon Wan, and using his annual $1b loss, HDB should incur a loss of $20,000 for every unit sold. Tiok boh? If $1b is the loss when only 10,000 units were sold, then the loss per unit should be $100,000.

To build another 400,000 units, the loss could be in the region of $8b to $40b depending on which number one is using. This is a serious amount to lose and a big sum to save if the population is not increased and there is no need to build the 400,000 units of flats.  Would it be prudent and make more economic sense not to increase the population to incur more losses? But this is not all. Boon Wan is trying to bring down the prices of HDB flats from an average of 5.5 years of the buyers annual income to 4 years. This would definitely add to the losses that HDB would have to incur. I am terribly worried as to where the Govt is going to find the money to subsidise these losses. Yes, this is a lot of money and it must come from somewhere and someone would have to pay for it.

Maybe Boon Wan has already worked out the sums and the public need not have to worry. The flats will be cheaper and the losses would be taken care of, somehow.

PS: The original $80b to $400b is wrong and should read $8b to $40b. I have amended the text above.