The Singapore Dream

I am not calling this the Singaporean Dream for good reason. Some Singaporeans have their dreams fulfilled and living very very well indeed. For the majority of the Singaporeans, the Singapore Dream is beginning to turn into a bad dream. For a start, many would need govt assistance in order to make life bearable. Their life savings will not be enough to sustain them to their last days. Their dreams of car ownership, private properties are as good as day dreaming. Their dreams of happily retired with little worries to watch the sunset would not happen as they would need to work to have money to live after retirement age. And their dreams of dying in their own homes could also be in jeopardy.
 
The Singapore Dream is meant for foreigners. Many foreigners are here to live their Singapore Dreams, from the rich westerners to the workers of the 3rd World countries. Many have their Singapore Dreams fulfilled. Many came here poor and returned home rich. Many could not find employment at home but got good jobs here to live a life they could never dream of in their home countries.
 
At the rate it is going, millions of foreigners will be thankful for the opportunities to live out the Singapore Dream. Unfortunately many Singaporeans would have their Singapore Dream dashed, or made so much difficult to become true. To every foreigner stepping foot on this island there is hope, and many will succeed in varying degrees, to better their lives. Many Singaporeans will live their lives disappointed and full of regrets at the end of the day. Many will come nothing and leave nothing, not even have a HDB flat to bequeath to their children after all the downgradings. They need to trade the HDB flat for some stipends for their last days.
 
What an irony. Singaporeans could work for a whole life, save for a whole life, but ended up with nothing. Foreigners could be here for a few years and return home rich. Look at the queue of fortune hunters outside the door. And some of these foreigners are threatening to go elsewhere, to give up their Singapore Dream if the govt introduces more favourable policies for the citizens to make the Singapore Dream bearable.

Kopi Level - Green

CPF – Still didn’t get it

After two protests and a third last week, and a fourth in September, the Govt does not seem to get the message that the CPF is the people’s money and they want it back, not another miserable 20%. The Govt is still thinking that it has the right to take over the management of the people’s life savings, and can do as it pleases.
 
Why is the Govt adopting this deaf frog attitude and ignoring the people’s cry and risking losing the support of the people? Let me guess. It really does not think there is anything wrong with taking over the people’s life savings. The Govt has the right to do so. Another possible reason is the arrogance that the people cannot do anything about it no matter how wronged and how angry they were. We are the Govt and the people have to live with it, at least until it is booted in the next GE. Of course the Govt does not think so and must believe that the majority of the people would not mind at all.
 
The third reason is that it is desperate and in need of money despite the claim of having hundreds of billions in the reserve. The persistence to hold on to the people’s money is wrong, but the Govt has no choice. Returning the money to the people at 55 is no go, not an option. Die die it must grab hold to the money. It can ‘no hew’ the people and even alienating a big number of voters. So be it. The situation is dire if the CPF money is returned to the people. It is a case of no choice, no way out.
 
What could be the real reason behind this aloof and arrogant decision to hold on to the people’s money despite the growing anger is puzzling. Politically it is unsound and unwise, and suicidal. The party cannot afford to take such a high risk at this moment and pretends that it is alright to do so.
 
What about the stand of the various ministers and MPs? Do they agree that this is an acceptable thing to do, a right thing to do, or an expediency that is a do or die option? Several ex MPs and top civil servants have this habit of saying that they did not agree to some policies when they were in office but only saying it out after leaving office. With the CPF issue a hot potato now, the ministers and MPs do not have the luxury to remain reticent and thinking that they could say their piece when out of office. They are in it, agree to the policy and supporting it, or they are not. By keeping quiet, they are telling the people they are for the policy. They support the withholding of the people’s life savings without the consent of the people, and saying yes when the people are protesting and saying no. This violation of a fundamental principle, that the Govt can unilaterally take hold of the people’s money and do as it likes, under whatever flimsy excuse, is indefensible. There is no good reason, no justifiable reason, to take the people’s money from them.
 
The next GE would see this principle being put to the test. It would be the main issue in the election with the people voting for or against it. It would be the deciding factor.

Kopi Level - Green

SMRT traffic lights – What a bright idea!

‘SMRT will be throwing money at another ‘solution’ with the installation of “traffic lights” inside an MRT station. (even if they are outside, it still doesn’t make sense) link The reason to cow pei cow bu again is because the SMRT did not consult the public and stupid ideas will eventually translate into fare hikes for me.
What the lights mean for ordinary Singaporean commuters:
 
$MRT: Green (platform not crowded)
 
Commuter: Is this supposed to make my day?
 
$MRT: Amber (platform slightly crowded)
 
Commuter: Pointless to tell me this as I will still have to take the train. Am I expected to be happier knowing this in advance?
 
$MRT: Red (platform crowded, expect to wait longer. Consider taking the train at a later time)
 
Commuter: You stupid or what? Why don’t you inform all our employers that we will be late for work, admit it’s your bloody fault so they will not tell us to be at the station earlier in future? Even if it means waiting for 10 trains, do we have any choice when taking a taxi will cost tens of dollars? Don’t assume we always have a choice.
 
$MRT: Flashing Red (seek alternative transport and refer to station announcements for updates)….’
The above is part of an article posted by Phillip Ang and appearing in TRS. Though Phillip Ang did not quite agree with SMRT throwing money away for such a ‘silly idea’ and with the commuters likely to pay for it later, I think it is really innovative. I really like the Red light explanation.
 
I would even suggest having electronic boards indicating how many empty seats are available and in the cabins of the next train, like electronic car park signs. Information could also be available on the noise level of the cabins, the temperature and whatever that one desires as well. Oh, this one very important, how many reserves seats is available and in which cabin.
 
We are now in an electronic age and technology is good. So let’s put technology to good use. I am going to sell a satellite global positioning system for the rich so that the owners would not be lost in their homes. They will know exactly where they are inside their palatial houses, or how to find the nearest toilet.
 
Come to think of it this gadget can also be installed in MRT stations so that commuters would not be lost in the station. I am still looking forward to enjoy my 5 seconds of busking in the station but so far don’t have any luck. It is something I am looking forward to.
 
Please give more feedbacks to SMRT to improve their services with more suggestions. Oh, with the Ebola or future disease epidemic, another traffic light sign to indicate the risk level of infection will be good, to make the commuters feel safe while travelling in the trains.

Kopi Level - Green

A caricature of the Hong Lim Protest Rally

Last week end was the 3rd Protest Rally on the Return Our CPF series. This is going to be a monthly affair and the next protest rally is scheduled to be held on 27 Sep. As usual, as expected, the turnout is not going to be as good as the first Rally when more than 6000 turned up.
 
Last Sat my estimate was about 500. Some were happy to chirp in, see so little people turning up, so interest is fading. This may be so and may be not. Many have gotten the message and understood the issue involved. Not turning up does not mean giving up. And it is not cheap to attend a rally when transport cost is so high. The important thing is that the issue is being kept alive, burning.
 
The other stark observation is that the Return Our CPF Rally is turning out to be a strictly people’s affair. It is not organized by a political party and political parties are clearly absent in these rallies. If they would care to support, each party could send a couple of hundreds of supporters to fill up Hong Lim. No, it is the people and their money and the govt. It is non political in this sense. It is the people demanding for the return of their life savings and the govt would have problem if it tries to pin it down as a politically motivated affair.
 
Why the political parties are staying away from Hong Lim and Roy and associates is puzzling. They could at least show some support to the people’s cause and unhappiness. Their absence is so glaring. Are they abandoning the people to fight for themselves against the govt? What would they have to say in the next GE when the people asked, why were you not there to support us and fight for us when we need you? Why are you leaving us alone and let Roy, Hui Hui and Leong Sze Hian to lead and stand shoulder to shoulder with the people, and you are not around?
 
The Hong Lim Rally has its good points. I can see how Roy, Hui Hui, Leong and a few of the speakers getting all the training needed to speak in a political rally. They are being honed, and getting better and better. They would be crowd pullers in the next GE, if they stand. They have gained stature as the leaders of the people. No one needs to bestow them or crown them as leaders. They are natural leaders and have stood up when the people needed them. They are not paper leaders but real leaders of the people. They sing and cry with the people, selflessly, and not getting a single cent for it. In fact they may have to pay if the donations did not come in for the rallies.
 
Who are the leaders of the people? Where are the leaders of the people?

Kopi Level - Green

Do we have good leaders?

One of the key points made by Chok Tong recently is, ‘we have good leaders, good government, good harmonious relationship between people of all races, and between people and govt.’ How true is this? In the past this will become a convenient truth. No want would argue or rebut back. Maybe Catherine Lim would, but likely to be dressed down for being out of place, ruled out of bound. And the MSM is unlikely to put up any contrarian views. And it will be accepted as the truth because no one was seen or heard to disagree.
Today things have changed. Like Hsien Loong said, whatever happened, said, would be splashed all over the social media instantly and everyone can have a bite at it and chew it thoroughly before spitting it out. How many people would agree or disagree with Chok Tong’s comments depends on what they have been exposed to.
 
Let me just touch on one specific point here, good leaders. I am not going to define what good leaders meant. The academics can write hundreds of books on it. I will do the layman’s way. Good leaders can be good when the people said so. Good leaders can be good because the leaders said so. No agreements here for sure. But sometimes the twains do meet.
 
The academics may academically list out 101 criteria or attributes of what they think a good leader means. They too would not agree among themselves. Some may try to be objective and quantitative and list out a number of things that a good leader could have done and be assessed on. Some may go technical and designed programmes, profiling etc into computers to churn out their version of good leaders, with inputs and outputs.
 
Let me try a simpler way by asking a few questions. When a leader stands up to speak, do the people start laughing at him? When a leader starts speaking, do the audience fall asleep or start to walk out? Or would the people make funny remarks behind the leader?
 
I think answering these questions would easily put a leader in his right place, good or bad or simply a laughing stock or whatever. So, do we have good leaders?

Kopi Level - Green