With the pending lawsuit against Roy Ngerng and the protest rally at
Hong Lim this weekend on the people’s savings in the CPF, what is the
daft Sinkies thinking on this issue? Many are crying foul and demanding
that they get their money back, they want their life savings back at 55,
no more funny and unintelligent excuses. What would the rest of the
world be thinking, would they be puzzled, mouth wide open, eyes popping
out, at the thought of the people’s life savings being held back and to
be decided by the govt on when and how much they could take back?
Here are the thinkings of some Sinkies. Some are still questioning if
the CPF savings are indeed their money. And they need a minister to say
yes, it is their money. And they feel so relief in hearing that. Can you
believe it, Sinkies saving a life time, putting their hard earned money
into a saving scheme and not sure if the money is theirs?
And some even said, it is gone, treat it as a tax to feel better. To
this kind of thinking, by not acknowledging that it is their money, by
giving up, they will feel less painful. It is a kind of resignation, a
kind of capitulation. Can you imagine that daft Sinkies could think like
that? And the money is no small sum, hundreds of thousands of highly
valued and desired Singapore dollars, that many in other countries could
feel very rich and could live on for a life time.
And some take consolation, or maybe really feel it, to be exhilarating,
jubilant, when they see the string of zeros in their CPF statements,
feeling so very rich.
And some are still hurriedly putting in more cash into their CPF savings
to feel richer, to enjoy higher interest rates and to feel secure.
And there are some odd balls protesting and wanting their CPF money
back. They are rejecting the 4% interest rates for no interest. And they
are not only contributing money generously to a young man to make their
feelings felt to the Govt, but will attend in force in a protest rally
this Saturday at Hong Lim Park, the Speaker’s Corner, where no permit is
needed to hold a protest, just a simple registration of intent.
Would the media report on this strange protest and the strange behaviors
and thinkings of the daft Sinkies? Maybe the world’s media will report
this incident as a comedy, an uniquely Singaporean thing that would not
happen in any country, people protesting to have their life savings
back. The whole world may have a good laugh at the daft Sinkies if they
come to know what the protest is all about. This is going to be front
page news material for the world media except ours.
How can daft Sinkies be not a joke?
Kopi Level - Green
6/03/2014
Chuck Hagel farting in Shangri La
The Americans ‘will not look the other way when fundamental principles
of the international order are being challenged’. Is this a statement
of peace or a provocation for war? And Abe stressed about the rule of
law. In the first place the Japanese broke all rules of law when they
sneaked up to Pearl Harbour to destroy the American fleet without any
declaration of war. They also attacked Russia in 1939 without declaring war. Can anyone trust the Japanese to obey the rule of
law?
As for the Americans, as the Chinese General Wang Guanzhong pointed out, what rule of law when the Americans refused to ratified the UNCLOS? What laws was Chuck Hagel talking about, American law of the gun? At least the Chinese were a signatory to UNCLOS, a commitment to abide by the UN laws of the sea. The Americans refused to accept these laws, meaning they do not want to abide by it.
What laws did the Americans followed when they invaded Iraq and murdered Saddam Hussein and killed and wounded several hundred thousands of civilian and innocent Iraqis? They did not even apologize when they should be prosecuted in a tribunal for war crimes. They could repeat the same dirty trick in Asia. Malaysia, Myanmar and Indonesia better watch your backside.
And what did the Americans did in Libya when the UN forbade them to attack Libyan military positions but to maintain a no fly zone? They violated the UN resolutions, violated the trust the UN bestowed on the Americans to observe the rules of engagement. Can you trust the Americans to abide by the rules of law or fundamental principles of international order when they had violated every one of them at their own discretion?
The world’s number One gangster and the world’s number One rogue nation during the Second World War talking about abiding by international order and the rule of law? Or are they talking about gunboat diplomacy, the rule of threats, threatening other nations with military intervention? The American gunboats are everywhere in Asia. The Japanese are sending their gunboats to the Philippines and Vietnam. Are they for peace?
But not to worry, many Asian leaders and academics are American and Japanese apologists would believe them. They would tell you, Americans good, Japanese good. America is indispensable to keep peace in the region. And the barbaric Japanese, the murderers of hundreds of thousands of Asians, raping Asian women and making them comfort women, are the best peace keeper! My God, aren’t Asians stupid? I think they are stupid to the core.
PS: China should put its batteries of DF21 on Red Alert and roll out its war chest of American T bills to do battle with the White House and the Yakuzas.
Kopi Level - Green
As for the Americans, as the Chinese General Wang Guanzhong pointed out, what rule of law when the Americans refused to ratified the UNCLOS? What laws was Chuck Hagel talking about, American law of the gun? At least the Chinese were a signatory to UNCLOS, a commitment to abide by the UN laws of the sea. The Americans refused to accept these laws, meaning they do not want to abide by it.
What laws did the Americans followed when they invaded Iraq and murdered Saddam Hussein and killed and wounded several hundred thousands of civilian and innocent Iraqis? They did not even apologize when they should be prosecuted in a tribunal for war crimes. They could repeat the same dirty trick in Asia. Malaysia, Myanmar and Indonesia better watch your backside.
And what did the Americans did in Libya when the UN forbade them to attack Libyan military positions but to maintain a no fly zone? They violated the UN resolutions, violated the trust the UN bestowed on the Americans to observe the rules of engagement. Can you trust the Americans to abide by the rules of law or fundamental principles of international order when they had violated every one of them at their own discretion?
The world’s number One gangster and the world’s number One rogue nation during the Second World War talking about abiding by international order and the rule of law? Or are they talking about gunboat diplomacy, the rule of threats, threatening other nations with military intervention? The American gunboats are everywhere in Asia. The Japanese are sending their gunboats to the Philippines and Vietnam. Are they for peace?
But not to worry, many Asian leaders and academics are American and Japanese apologists would believe them. They would tell you, Americans good, Japanese good. America is indispensable to keep peace in the region. And the barbaric Japanese, the murderers of hundreds of thousands of Asians, raping Asian women and making them comfort women, are the best peace keeper! My God, aren’t Asians stupid? I think they are stupid to the core.
PS: China should put its batteries of DF21 on Red Alert and roll out its war chest of American T bills to do battle with the White House and the Yakuzas.
Kopi Level - Green
Roy Ngerng – More than $70,000 raised in 4 days
This episode started out as a defamation suit by Hsien Loong against
blogger Roy Ngerng. To Hsien Loong and his legal counsel, Davinder
Singh, it was just a simple case of one person claimed to be wrong and
seeking recourse in the courts of law.
Roy Ngerng knew he could not afford the hefty legal fees and sought help from the people. The ferocity and speed that Singaporeans rushed forward to stuff money into Roy’s hands to pay for his legal fees are telling a different story. It is no longer a legal tussle between the Prime Minister and a young blogger. This is looking like the Prime Minister taking on a blogger who is backed by people that did not like what was happening and what they saw. They knew that Roy would not stand a chance against Hsien Loong in this case. They knew that Roy would lose but that did not deter them from throwing their money behind Roy. They knew the money would not win Roy the case. But this is not about winning or losing in the courts of law.
This is no longer about David and Goliath. This is about social justice and more. This is about the CPF money of the people and the ever increasing minimum sums and when they are able to get their money back. It could also be about a people losing faith in the PAP Govt and its style of politics.
Hsien Loong would win the defamation suit hands down and could claim all the monetary compensation he wants. But there is a very heavy price to pay for it. The people are going to bankroll Roy and would pay for his legal fees as well as the damages demanded. There are enough people with Roy, and you can even say against the Govt. A legal victory for Hsien Loong could result in irreparable political damages to him and the PAP that would not be easily undone. It could deal a fatal blow to him and the PAP’s chances of winning the next GE. As a political observer, I think this development is very serious, like a spontaneous uprising, and would affect the fate and viability of the PAP as the next Govt. The lid of oppression has been lifted.
Can anyone feel the ground shaken, like the shift of the tectonic plate? Never in Singapore’s political history since independence had the people been so united, so committed to a cause, to close rank behind a single citizen on the wrong side of the political equation. In the past, such individuals were left to fend for themselves, all alone, and the people watched on the sideline like uninterested spectators. None of their business.
The people supporting Roy are no longer the usually meek and daft Sinkies, apathetic and disinterested, that the Govt was familiar with. There is conviction, there is purpose and there is passion, to pick up the cudgel to see it through in defence of not only a young man but for a bigger cause. Not only they want their money in the CPF back, but more.
Could Hsien Loong and the PAP see what is coming, or would they think this is just another flash in the pan incident that can be ignored? It is only a matter of good communications and everything will be back to normal! Any wrong move on the part of Hsien Loong is going to lead to a road of no return, and PAP may not regain the trust and support of the people for good. This could be PAP’s final act before the next GE. It could be an act that would seal the fate of the PAP.
Is there still time for Hsien Loong to pull back and recoup the losses, change the course and to do some damage control, and hopefully still have the majority of the voters behind him and the PAP? Or is my assessment of this episode too overly pessimistic, too dramatic and there is really nothing to it, nothing political? And there will be no harm to the PAP and to Hsien Loong’s political fortune at all.
Am I reading too much into this? What do you think?
Kopi Level - Green
Roy Ngerng knew he could not afford the hefty legal fees and sought help from the people. The ferocity and speed that Singaporeans rushed forward to stuff money into Roy’s hands to pay for his legal fees are telling a different story. It is no longer a legal tussle between the Prime Minister and a young blogger. This is looking like the Prime Minister taking on a blogger who is backed by people that did not like what was happening and what they saw. They knew that Roy would not stand a chance against Hsien Loong in this case. They knew that Roy would lose but that did not deter them from throwing their money behind Roy. They knew the money would not win Roy the case. But this is not about winning or losing in the courts of law.
This is no longer about David and Goliath. This is about social justice and more. This is about the CPF money of the people and the ever increasing minimum sums and when they are able to get their money back. It could also be about a people losing faith in the PAP Govt and its style of politics.
Hsien Loong would win the defamation suit hands down and could claim all the monetary compensation he wants. But there is a very heavy price to pay for it. The people are going to bankroll Roy and would pay for his legal fees as well as the damages demanded. There are enough people with Roy, and you can even say against the Govt. A legal victory for Hsien Loong could result in irreparable political damages to him and the PAP that would not be easily undone. It could deal a fatal blow to him and the PAP’s chances of winning the next GE. As a political observer, I think this development is very serious, like a spontaneous uprising, and would affect the fate and viability of the PAP as the next Govt. The lid of oppression has been lifted.
Can anyone feel the ground shaken, like the shift of the tectonic plate? Never in Singapore’s political history since independence had the people been so united, so committed to a cause, to close rank behind a single citizen on the wrong side of the political equation. In the past, such individuals were left to fend for themselves, all alone, and the people watched on the sideline like uninterested spectators. None of their business.
The people supporting Roy are no longer the usually meek and daft Sinkies, apathetic and disinterested, that the Govt was familiar with. There is conviction, there is purpose and there is passion, to pick up the cudgel to see it through in defence of not only a young man but for a bigger cause. Not only they want their money in the CPF back, but more.
Could Hsien Loong and the PAP see what is coming, or would they think this is just another flash in the pan incident that can be ignored? It is only a matter of good communications and everything will be back to normal! Any wrong move on the part of Hsien Loong is going to lead to a road of no return, and PAP may not regain the trust and support of the people for good. This could be PAP’s final act before the next GE. It could be an act that would seal the fate of the PAP.
Is there still time for Hsien Loong to pull back and recoup the losses, change the course and to do some damage control, and hopefully still have the majority of the voters behind him and the PAP? Or is my assessment of this episode too overly pessimistic, too dramatic and there is really nothing to it, nothing political? And there will be no harm to the PAP and to Hsien Loong’s political fortune at all.
Am I reading too much into this? What do you think?
Kopi Level - Green
6/02/2014
Contributions to Roy Ngerng’s legal fee hits $50,000
This morning I read that the donations to the cause of Roy’s legal fee
have hit $50,000 in 3 days. This shows that Singaporeans are willing to
stand up to fight for a cause they believe in, in this case it is not
only about defending a young man but also about the fate of their CPF
money.
The contributions are still pouring in and are likely to go beyond the $70,000 target. This is the spirit of true blue Singaporeans, the type of Singaporeans that disappeared into Sinkies but rising and standing on their feet and putting their money where their mouth is. The Singaporeans are standing behind Roy, to support the underdog in a worthy cause.
That’s the way to go. For every Singaporean that contributed, there must be tens or hundreds or thousands also in support of this cause. After all it is their money they are defending. The turnout at Hong Lim this Saturday is likely to exceed those that went to support the protest against the Population White Paper.
It is interesting to see how many would be there to fight for their CPF savings. This could be the Kopitiam Movement that is taking shape, a spontaneous cry of the people never seen before.
Kopi Level - Yellow
The contributions are still pouring in and are likely to go beyond the $70,000 target. This is the spirit of true blue Singaporeans, the type of Singaporeans that disappeared into Sinkies but rising and standing on their feet and putting their money where their mouth is. The Singaporeans are standing behind Roy, to support the underdog in a worthy cause.
That’s the way to go. For every Singaporean that contributed, there must be tens or hundreds or thousands also in support of this cause. After all it is their money they are defending. The turnout at Hong Lim this Saturday is likely to exceed those that went to support the protest against the Population White Paper.
It is interesting to see how many would be there to fight for their CPF savings. This could be the Kopitiam Movement that is taking shape, a spontaneous cry of the people never seen before.
Kopi Level - Yellow
The wisdom of saving for retirement
Many people worried about not saving and providing enough for their
retirement. So die die must make sure they will have enough money when
they are still alive at 90 or 100. Lets assume that a person needs 200
packets of chicken rice to live during his economically active and
younger life. And lets say he needs another 200 packets of chicken rice
during his retirement.
Case 1. A is wealthy and has 2000 packets of chicken rice. He sets aside 500 packets of chicken rice for retirement. Very comfortable retirement I should say and would not affect his luxuriously lifestyle in his youth.
Case 2. B has 400 packets of chicken rice. So setting aside 200 packets for retirement not a problem and would live happily ever after with no drop in his standard of living during retirement.
Case 3. C has only 300 packets of chicken rice. He can either set aside 100 packets for retirement and live normally. Conversely he can set aside 200 packets for retirement but tighten his belt a bit for an easier retirement.
Case 4. D has only 200 packets of chicken rice. He can set aside 100 packets for retirement and stinge a bit now. It is like living with half a stomach full now and also half a stomach full during retirement.
Case 5. E has only 100 packets of chicken rice but needs 200 packets to keep his stomach full. So how? Live with half full stomach and leave nothing for retirement or set aside 50 packets for retirement and live with only a quarter full stomach now and a quarter full stomach during retirement?
Case 6. F has only 50 packets of chicken rice to live on. Barely enough to survive. How to set off for retirement?
Then comes the do gooder. Everyone must save for retirement. It is compulsory. Everyone must have 200 packets of chicken rice for retirement. Case 3 and 4 must set aside 200 packets for retirement. How much they are left with is not the do gooder’s problem. Case 5 and 6 must set aside all they have, 100 packets from Case 5 and 50 packets from Case 6 for their retirement. If not who is going to feed them. And Case 5 and 6 would need to top up the balance to 200 packets when they have more incomes. Tomorrow is more important than today.
I remember a Buddhist teaching about today and now. Today and now are the more important and precious moment, for tomorrow and the next moment one could be dead. The philosophy of saving for tomorrow is to have a lot in the future is more important than being dead now. Always look and plan for tomorrow, even if it does not come.
The intention is good. And all of them will have a good retirement up to 90 years old with no worries, provide they are still alive. Those who have not enough to eat now, just too bad. They must go and find their own way to feed their hungry stomachs.
What happens if they die at 60 years old? Well they will leave behind a lot of chicken rice uneaten while in the case of Case 5 and 6, they were hungry while setting aside the chicken rice for retirement but never live to enjoy them. They could have filled their stomach while alive or at least half filled their stomach when they could.
Should they thank the do gooders for helping them to save for their retirement and suffered while in alive, while in the prime of their youth and not enjoying a single packet of the chicken rice they were forced to set aside.
What do you think?
Kopi Level - Green
Case 1. A is wealthy and has 2000 packets of chicken rice. He sets aside 500 packets of chicken rice for retirement. Very comfortable retirement I should say and would not affect his luxuriously lifestyle in his youth.
Case 2. B has 400 packets of chicken rice. So setting aside 200 packets for retirement not a problem and would live happily ever after with no drop in his standard of living during retirement.
Case 3. C has only 300 packets of chicken rice. He can either set aside 100 packets for retirement and live normally. Conversely he can set aside 200 packets for retirement but tighten his belt a bit for an easier retirement.
Case 4. D has only 200 packets of chicken rice. He can set aside 100 packets for retirement and stinge a bit now. It is like living with half a stomach full now and also half a stomach full during retirement.
Case 5. E has only 100 packets of chicken rice but needs 200 packets to keep his stomach full. So how? Live with half full stomach and leave nothing for retirement or set aside 50 packets for retirement and live with only a quarter full stomach now and a quarter full stomach during retirement?
Case 6. F has only 50 packets of chicken rice to live on. Barely enough to survive. How to set off for retirement?
Then comes the do gooder. Everyone must save for retirement. It is compulsory. Everyone must have 200 packets of chicken rice for retirement. Case 3 and 4 must set aside 200 packets for retirement. How much they are left with is not the do gooder’s problem. Case 5 and 6 must set aside all they have, 100 packets from Case 5 and 50 packets from Case 6 for their retirement. If not who is going to feed them. And Case 5 and 6 would need to top up the balance to 200 packets when they have more incomes. Tomorrow is more important than today.
I remember a Buddhist teaching about today and now. Today and now are the more important and precious moment, for tomorrow and the next moment one could be dead. The philosophy of saving for tomorrow is to have a lot in the future is more important than being dead now. Always look and plan for tomorrow, even if it does not come.
The intention is good. And all of them will have a good retirement up to 90 years old with no worries, provide they are still alive. Those who have not enough to eat now, just too bad. They must go and find their own way to feed their hungry stomachs.
What happens if they die at 60 years old? Well they will leave behind a lot of chicken rice uneaten while in the case of Case 5 and 6, they were hungry while setting aside the chicken rice for retirement but never live to enjoy them. They could have filled their stomach while alive or at least half filled their stomach when they could.
Should they thank the do gooders for helping them to save for their retirement and suffered while in alive, while in the prime of their youth and not enjoying a single packet of the chicken rice they were forced to set aside.
What do you think?
Kopi Level - Green
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)