There is an article in today’s ST on tuition by Nirmala, ST’s
correspondent. In the article she quoted a Professor Mark Bray on some
of the characteristics of East Asian societies and the growth and
importance of tuition. ‘These East Asian territories are highly
globalised and competitive. They stress a need for workers to remain
ahead in skills and for students to acquire skills relevant to the
global economy….the Singapore education system is a good one that has
delivered high quality output.’ She added, ‘But Singaporean parents,
like those in many other cultures, are competitive, seeking what they
perceive to be the best for their children in a competitive system, and
thus are trying to add more even though the school system is already
delivering much that is already very good, he(Bray) said.’
Now what is so silly or sickening about all these comments? Did not our
education system and the parents make them the best educated and skilled
workers for the workforce?
It is not about the inequality that tuition will cause as this is a
harsh reality that the poorer working class must get used to. The rich
will pay for the best tutors for their children. You cannot ban tuition
and tell them not to pay for tuition. Well, South Korea did ban tuition
for 20 years, but has since allowed it to practice again. There were
many ways to curb tuition to prevent it from worsening the inequality,
which is absolutely a silly thing to do and to even think about for any
govt. Forcing the people to level down is an idiotic thing to do,
really, believe me.
Then what is so silly about tuition? With so much money and effort put
in to develop the young, with such great education system and to quote,
‘They stress a need for workers to remain ahead in skills and students
to acquire skills relevant to the global economy’, now can you see what
is wrong or sickening?
Our workers lack motivation, lack drive, lack of skill, uncompetitive,
lack of talent, that we need to bring in workers from third world
countries without the competitive culture, without the resources and the
drive to do well in education or a good education system to replace
them in jobs here. They don’t even have competitive parents to make sure
their children received the best education money can buy. Basically
after all the stress and money spent, the startling result, our students
turned workers are a useless bunch for the job market. Really, trust
me.
What an irony? The less competitive societies and lesser equipped
education system are producing all the qualified and skilled workers
that our system could not produce.
Shall I laugh or cry?
What is wrong, MOE, MOM?
10/01/2013
Stop this ‘local’ shit
PRs are not locals but foreigners. Locals are the citizens. This
deception of calling PRs locals to conceal the employment of citizens in
the job market must cease. Let’s tell the truth. Let’s face the truth.
Let’s be honest and transparent. Or else don’t talk about trust.
When statistics are used, when Singaporeans want to know how many citizens are employed versus foreigners, ie, PRs and non citizens, please tell us the truth. People who have been telling everyone to be honest and transparent must be honest and transparent to be believeable.
What is the percentage of citizens being employed in the banks, both local and foreign? The people want the truth. What is the percentage of citizens, PRs and foreigners in the various banks here?
Cannot tell? What is there to hide? The truth cannot be hidden for long. The citizens know what is happening. By not telling the truth it only makes thing worst and leading to mistrust. Who is standing on the roof shouting to the people about being honest and transparent?
When statistics are used, when Singaporeans want to know how many citizens are employed versus foreigners, ie, PRs and non citizens, please tell us the truth. People who have been telling everyone to be honest and transparent must be honest and transparent to be believeable.
What is the percentage of citizens being employed in the banks, both local and foreign? The people want the truth. What is the percentage of citizens, PRs and foreigners in the various banks here?
Cannot tell? What is there to hide? The truth cannot be hidden for long. The citizens know what is happening. By not telling the truth it only makes thing worst and leading to mistrust. Who is standing on the roof shouting to the people about being honest and transparent?
Chin Peng, a commentary from an armchair expert
It is so easy to make comments on another historical figure with a
little knowledge of the person and events. It is even easier to
selectively choose information to fit into a construct that one chose to
use. Chin Peng was a hero, Chin Peng was a freedom fighter, Chin Peng
was a terrorist, a fanatic, a simpleton or a genius. Just take your
pick. I can choose any one of these tags to write a story on Chin Peng
and it would sound even more credible if I called myself an expert, a
professor or add a Ph D behind my name.
Let me just give my 2 cents worth of what I know of this man from the
history books, news and some self proclaimed expert knowledge on this
man.
Chin Peng and his comrades were anti Japanese fighter first and foremost. In the 1940s, the timing and years are important as they defined who and what of a man he was. Both Singapore and Malaya were British colonies, not countries. No citizenship or rights of citizenship for the likes of Chin Peng. Their loyalty was to the Chinese civilization and an ancient China. They were also British subjects if I am not mistaken for being in Malaya.
There was a war of aggression in China conducted by the Japanese. Chin Peng fought under the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army. They were also part of Force 136 supported by and supporting the British. They were fighting on the side of the British when the Japanese invaded Malaya and Singapore. Up to this point Chin Peng and his men/women were on the right side of history, fighting an aggressor, the Japanese. He was a war hero and awarded the OBE by the British Empire. His men paraded at our Padang in a victory parade. His OBE was withdrawn when he took the side of the communist to fight an anti colonial war against the British. Chin Peng was a good man turned bad for fighting the British. If one is a member of the British Empire, Chin Peng was bad. If one was anti colonialism, Chin Peng was a patriot.
Communism in the early 1930s and 40s was favoured by the revolutionary Chinese over the corrupt Chinese Nationalist Party, the KMT. Chin Peng was a communist, so was bad and on the wrong side. He was good in the history books of CCP. How one looks at Chin Peng would depend on one’s political inclination.
The Malayan Emergency was not a war of terrorism but a war against the colonial master. Remember, 1948, Malaya was a British colony. The natives could be fighting for their freedom from colonial rule as well. Some fought, some chose to live with the colonial master, some simply did nothing, and some worked and conspired with the British against the CPM.
When the British outlawed the Labour Movement and started to arrest the communist elements, the MPAJA was changed to MPABA, an anti British Army. This was subsequently changed to the Malayan Peoples Liberation Army fighting for the independence of Malaya from the British Empire.
History would look at Chin Peng differently if they had won and gained independence for Malaya from the British. They lost that war and signed a truce in 1955 in Baling. Malaya only gained independence from the British in 1957. The CPM withdrew to the Thai Malayan border and kept a low profile. The fact that a Thai Princess and many Thai generals paid their last respect to Chin Peng spoke of a close and friendly working relationship between them, and that Chin Peng was not a nuisance or menace to Thailand. They regarded him as a friend.
Chin Peng was kept away from Malaysia more because of domestic political reasons than for his revolutionary past. He could have been welcomed back as a nationalist, a hero if he was a bumiputra. He was a soldier, nothing more and nothing less. For some joker armchair critics to put him in the same league as terrorists and the bombing of America is simply a wild and cheap shot. Ever since the end of the Malayan Emergency, Chin Peng and his men lived peacefully in Thailand and probably became Thai citizens.
These are my comments on this historical figure of the twentieth century, one of the last survivors of those turbulent times.
Chin Peng and his comrades were anti Japanese fighter first and foremost. In the 1940s, the timing and years are important as they defined who and what of a man he was. Both Singapore and Malaya were British colonies, not countries. No citizenship or rights of citizenship for the likes of Chin Peng. Their loyalty was to the Chinese civilization and an ancient China. They were also British subjects if I am not mistaken for being in Malaya.
There was a war of aggression in China conducted by the Japanese. Chin Peng fought under the Malayan People’s Anti Japanese Army. They were also part of Force 136 supported by and supporting the British. They were fighting on the side of the British when the Japanese invaded Malaya and Singapore. Up to this point Chin Peng and his men/women were on the right side of history, fighting an aggressor, the Japanese. He was a war hero and awarded the OBE by the British Empire. His men paraded at our Padang in a victory parade. His OBE was withdrawn when he took the side of the communist to fight an anti colonial war against the British. Chin Peng was a good man turned bad for fighting the British. If one is a member of the British Empire, Chin Peng was bad. If one was anti colonialism, Chin Peng was a patriot.
Communism in the early 1930s and 40s was favoured by the revolutionary Chinese over the corrupt Chinese Nationalist Party, the KMT. Chin Peng was a communist, so was bad and on the wrong side. He was good in the history books of CCP. How one looks at Chin Peng would depend on one’s political inclination.
The Malayan Emergency was not a war of terrorism but a war against the colonial master. Remember, 1948, Malaya was a British colony. The natives could be fighting for their freedom from colonial rule as well. Some fought, some chose to live with the colonial master, some simply did nothing, and some worked and conspired with the British against the CPM.
When the British outlawed the Labour Movement and started to arrest the communist elements, the MPAJA was changed to MPABA, an anti British Army. This was subsequently changed to the Malayan Peoples Liberation Army fighting for the independence of Malaya from the British Empire.
History would look at Chin Peng differently if they had won and gained independence for Malaya from the British. They lost that war and signed a truce in 1955 in Baling. Malaya only gained independence from the British in 1957. The CPM withdrew to the Thai Malayan border and kept a low profile. The fact that a Thai Princess and many Thai generals paid their last respect to Chin Peng spoke of a close and friendly working relationship between them, and that Chin Peng was not a nuisance or menace to Thailand. They regarded him as a friend.
Chin Peng was kept away from Malaysia more because of domestic political reasons than for his revolutionary past. He could have been welcomed back as a nationalist, a hero if he was a bumiputra. He was a soldier, nothing more and nothing less. For some joker armchair critics to put him in the same league as terrorists and the bombing of America is simply a wild and cheap shot. Ever since the end of the Malayan Emergency, Chin Peng and his men lived peacefully in Thailand and probably became Thai citizens.
These are my comments on this historical figure of the twentieth century, one of the last survivors of those turbulent times.
Gan Kim Yong learning well from Japan
Gan Kim Yong and his teams of officials from the Health and Housing
ministries have returned from their fact finding and learning mission in
Japan on ageing problems. He has learnt well, many times better than
Boon Heng. In yesterday’s ST he has already came out with a list of
innovative initiatives learnt from Japan for implementation. He is also
setting up a committee to look deeper into the ageing population
problems.
Among the things that the team has learnt for implementations are:
1. A need for support services during working hours when the young are at work. Also in cases of oldies living alone, night services are also needed.
2. Medical practitioners and polyclinics should be located near the ageing population.
3. Employ the elderly, and retirement age should be raised to 67. Only the Japanese could come up with such a clever idea. Didn’t we been employing people up to 90 and onwards?
4. Need for home care and more nursing homes as our population ages. Dunno if these facilities are provided free.
5. More support to caregivers, probably salary increases.
The govt should send more such study trips to learn from other countries to make life better for Singaporeans. They have forgotten to send Chuan Jin and the NTUC officials to study how other countries are handling their foreign workers and immigrant problems and if foreigners were discriminating their citizens how to deal with such problems. Maybe after such an enlightening trip the MOM could introduce more effective measures or at least get enlightened.
Money well spent for sure, every cent of it.
Among the things that the team has learnt for implementations are:
1. A need for support services during working hours when the young are at work. Also in cases of oldies living alone, night services are also needed.
2. Medical practitioners and polyclinics should be located near the ageing population.
3. Employ the elderly, and retirement age should be raised to 67. Only the Japanese could come up with such a clever idea. Didn’t we been employing people up to 90 and onwards?
4. Need for home care and more nursing homes as our population ages. Dunno if these facilities are provided free.
5. More support to caregivers, probably salary increases.
The govt should send more such study trips to learn from other countries to make life better for Singaporeans. They have forgotten to send Chuan Jin and the NTUC officials to study how other countries are handling their foreign workers and immigrant problems and if foreigners were discriminating their citizens how to deal with such problems. Maybe after such an enlightening trip the MOM could introduce more effective measures or at least get enlightened.
Money well spent for sure, every cent of it.
9/30/2013
Mah Bow Tan, poor thing
The thread on Mah Bow Tan in TRE is getting quite a review of the wrong
kind. It was about Mah Bow Tan’s interview by Sin Min on his stepping
down as a minister. Mah Bow Tan said he had given his best years to
public service and it was time to make way for a better man, in Khaw
Boon Wan, to take over the MND ministry.
Why were the comments on Mah Bow Tan so negative? He had done extremely well during his tenure in Housing and Transport. The transportation problem was nothing with SMRT running smoothly and efficiently with the woman in charge, and chalking up millions in profits every year. There were hardly any breakdowns or disruptions of services. COE prices were quite low. Look at the price of COE now, $80K+. It would not have gone up so high if Mah Bow Tan is still in charge. And SMRT would not experience so many breakdowns.
And housing was anything but affordable. There were some complaints but overall housing prices were affordable compare to the prices now. And Khaw has to ramp up the building programmes to meet the unstoppable demands. Looks like Khaw is not doing much better.
And the truth is that he was still the man to anchor his Tampines GRC team to victory. This showed that he was any time better and more popular than George Yeo, and has good ground support.
The views in TRE are a distortion of the truth. If Khaw Boon Wan cannot bring down housing prices to more affordable levels, Mah Bow Tan could make a come back to do what he knew best, making housing prices affordable again. Since Khaw Boon Wan took over, there seemed to be so many housing problems when there was none. The daft Sinkies just do not know how to appreciate the great contributions of Mah Bow Tan and are simply ungrateful and disgraceful.
Poor thing.Hsien Loong should give him a public star in the next National Day.
Why were the comments on Mah Bow Tan so negative? He had done extremely well during his tenure in Housing and Transport. The transportation problem was nothing with SMRT running smoothly and efficiently with the woman in charge, and chalking up millions in profits every year. There were hardly any breakdowns or disruptions of services. COE prices were quite low. Look at the price of COE now, $80K+. It would not have gone up so high if Mah Bow Tan is still in charge. And SMRT would not experience so many breakdowns.
And housing was anything but affordable. There were some complaints but overall housing prices were affordable compare to the prices now. And Khaw has to ramp up the building programmes to meet the unstoppable demands. Looks like Khaw is not doing much better.
And the truth is that he was still the man to anchor his Tampines GRC team to victory. This showed that he was any time better and more popular than George Yeo, and has good ground support.
The views in TRE are a distortion of the truth. If Khaw Boon Wan cannot bring down housing prices to more affordable levels, Mah Bow Tan could make a come back to do what he knew best, making housing prices affordable again. Since Khaw Boon Wan took over, there seemed to be so many housing problems when there was none. The daft Sinkies just do not know how to appreciate the great contributions of Mah Bow Tan and are simply ungrateful and disgraceful.
Poor thing.Hsien Loong should give him a public star in the next National Day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)