Redbean Soup all orders sent out

Hi all,

I have sent out all the books and everyone should receive them by this Friday or earlier. For multiple books for local addresses, you will get your book one at a time but not on the same day.

Anyone who did not receive the book by this Friday please let me know.

Thanks again. Still some books available.

Redbean

Yellow ribbon for Roy Ngerng, No?

How many of you have heard of this thing called Yellow Ribbon that people wore on their chests to show how compassionate and merciful they were towards ex criminals? They want to give the ex criminals who have paid their dues a second chance, and rightly so as many are not hard core criminals that would return to their crimes again. Let them return society, give them a job to be responsible and respectable people again.

I heard Roy Ngerng is still jobless one year after he was sacked by the hospital for defaming the Prime Minister. Why is Roy having such difficulties finding another job? He is not qualified, no good, lazy, did not want to work? Or he is unable to compete with the hoards of foreigners that are more talented than him? Roy is a young man, not the middle age PMETs and not demanding an unaffordable salary. Why is he still unemployed?  Or is Roy being ostracized, discriminated, by who?

Roy did not commit a crime and is not a hard core criminal. Neither is he a recalcitrant. He made a mistake and he apologized, and would be paying for his mistake. Would anyone who ever wore a Yellow Ribbon think Roy should be given a second chance, just to be employed? Is Roy unemployable?

Yes, why is Roy unemployable? No employer dares to employ him? No second chance? Are the inhabitants of paradise inhuman that no one is willing to help this young man to get a job? Or should Roy enroll in the NTUC e2i course to make himself competitive internationally so that he can find a job overseas? Is Roy being condemned for his mistake for life?

What do you think?

Scholarship for foreigners – How many and how much have been spent?

Mr Heng Swee Keat: The annual number of scholarships awarded to international students at the undergraduate level has come down in recent years. Since 2012, about 900 such scholarships are awarded each year.

The scholarships include school fees, and typically include accommodation and some allowances. The annual cost per scholarship is about $25,000 on average.

The questions were to get an update from data I had obtained when I first entered parliament. In January and February 2012, MOE had revealed then that it awards 170 and 900 scholarships at the undergraduate level each year to ASEAN and non-ASEAN students respectively, making a total of 1,070 new international scholars a year. Budget per scholar then was between $18,000 and $25,000 a year….

At $25,000 per year per international scholar and with a scholarship lasting typically 4 years, the annual budget on international scholars would be $25,000 x 900 x 4, giving a total of $90 million a year (this figure excludes the amount spent on pre-tertiary and post-graduate scholarships, as well as that spent on tuition grants). The expenditure on an international scholar would be $100,000 over the 4-year time period to obtain his/her first degree. I believe this figure excludes tuition grants of typically $10,000-$20,000 per annum per student which almost all international students will get.

The above was from a post in the TRE titled, ‘Review scholarship framework for Intl Students’. Heng Swee Kiat was reply to Yee Jenn Jong in Parliament on the number of scholarships that were given to foreigners. The numbers given were sketchy and neither here nor there. It would be good if Heng Swee Kiat could provide a comprehensive picture of the number of scholarships given out in the last 20 years and the amount of money spent for the people to understand whether there is any problem on this generous offer by the govt. The statistics should include Asean and non Asean students, from secondary to post graduates. And if scholarships are given to primary schools as well, then it should also be included, though I think this is not the case. There should be a breakdown as to school fees and living allowances including accommodation.

The figure will give the people a good feel of how much have been spent on foreign students and a comparative data on the number of govt scholarships given to Singaporeans in the same period. The minister can also explain the objectives of this generous offer, what the govt tries to achieve and how effective is the result. Please explain to the people why spending so much money is for the good of Singaporeans and how it benefits the Singaporeans.

Please also explain why taking away a thousand places annually, or more before the cut back, from Singaporeans to give to foreign students is good for Singaporeans.

Another question to ask is whether spending so much public money needs the approval of Parliament or any minister is good enough to authorize such expenditure? What is the approval limit of a minister without having to go through Parliament?

PS. The Singaporeans, especially the parents, and the undergrads of non nobles and aristrocrats would be wondering how the money spent on the foreigners could benefit them and other Singaporeans if this scheme is scrapped altogether, or if we are to do charity, let it be on a more humble scale that is more akin to the thinking of peasants. The generosity of nobles and aristocrats in spending public money is difficult to accept by the workers and peasants who would love to have a bit of it to make it easier on their pockets.

The most silly myth uttered – Need more young people to support more retirees

I am so exasperated that I have to write about this again. I will call anyone yaking about this myth as silly, unthinking parrot. Just because one unthinking clown said the population of the oldies is growing and our birth rate is too low, we are in deep shit if we don’t bring in more foreigners, and every unthinking parrot will just repeat every word like gospel truth. Let me just quote two reasons to dispel this myth for good. Please listen carefully and don’t be a dumb parrot again.

The first reason is related to your CPF. What is happening to your CPF? It is going to be locked up for good so that you can retire, hopefully enough to last your life time. Those who are about 65 may be neither here nor there as they belong to a generation born in trouble times, ie after the war. Many may not be well educated and did not have much savings to last a life time. But many have a property, some private property, to downgrade and live very well, no need any young people to support them. They are financially independent. Some would have a HDB to remortgage to the HDB with just enough to last till their last days.

The second reason, those below 60s or 50s, many are not only well educated and have a substantially big nest egg as their incomes are much better than the oldies of today, many will work till they drop dead, to the 70s and 80s. Yes, they are going to work till they die, economically active unlike their predecessors that have to retire at 55 or 60. Do you think this people need to be supported?

The truth is that they will remain in the workforce for at least another 20 years. Does this fact change the equation of dependent oldies? Does this new reality change the need to have more young people?

And look at the rubbish that the immigration policy is bringing in, a middle age couple plus 4 oldies, ie parents and parents in law. And if they managed to produce two kids, it would still work against the equation of having two young people supporting 6 oldies. How could bringing in more foreigners help to distribute the load of more oldies with more younger people?

Get the picture? It is a new situation down the road with new variables. The productive age of a person is not from 20 to 60 but 20 to 80. And many would be working till they drop dead. We have increased their productivity by another 20 years. How would this change the thinking and economic formula of dependency?

Still can’t get it? It is like the Stop at Two policy, keep talking about it unthinkingly until overtaken by events and still did not know how to change tact. Now everyone is acting like dumb parrots, keep repeating this growing retiree population and refusing to see that things have changed.

If you still cannot see the difference, I give up.

The real reason for population increase is because they have run out of ideas for economic growth. They need more and more people to buy homes, to eat, to use services, to collect fees and taxes, nothing really productive. In simple language for the dumb parrots to understand, these people are imported to sleep, to eat and to shit and to pay for all these services that the economist could massage into economic numbers called growth.

I rest my case.

Auditor General Office Reports – A very uncomfortable week

The AGO’s report submitted to the President last week was the most unpleasant thing to happen and so near the GE. Fortunately, a miracle really, that there was no wrongdoings except for some discomfort and explanations to do. And after the explanations things will be normal again, unlike the AHPETC saga. The revelations by the AGO reports were nothing serious unlike the AHPETC that was all about incompetence.  In the AHPETC’s case, also very ‘heng’, no wrong doings. Please disagree with me if you have to.

The AGO report was most unfortunate in the sense that many distinguished grassroot leaders, some like to spell it as grassloot in TRE, were found wanting with lapses like conflict of interests that were not declared. It was unfortunate as these people are definitely honourable people, and mostly very rich and would not have been involved in any wrongdoings. Rich people are less likely to play foul as they have a lot of money and dignity. They are selfless volunteers committing time and money to serve the society. Many have been awarded PBMs or BBMs to reward them for public service and service to the people and also statement of their honesty and integrity.

And many of these are likely to be of noble birth or from the aristocracy and it is so unfortunate that while serving the people, some times lapses are simply innocent lapses, they are now seen in a bad light. They would be cursing themselves for volunteering their services and ended in such uncomfortable position through no fault of theirs. I think many would have second thoughts about serving in the grassroot organisations.

One commentator in the TRE has this to say and I quote,

Ang Saw Huat:

July 17, 2015 at 5:46 pm  (Quote)

“Mr de Souza said one important consideration is that the changes must not be so onerous on grassroots leaders that these volunteers no longer want to serve the community.”

What he say is right! Grassroot volunteers work for free, no salary, if you make their work hard, they will not come volunteer anymore! There is only one free lunch left in singapore : grassroots volunteer service!

I must fully agree with this Ang Saw Huat and de Souza. The govt must not make it hard on these distinguished and honourable people or they would not volunteer their services again, for free some more. The govt must give them some ropes, some laxes, so that they can continue to do what they are doing, I mean to serve the people, without getting anything in return. These are only isolated cases, not widespread, no mischief intended.  After so many years, this is the first time it has happened. Now with this AGO report, many of these grassroot would not want to serve in the grassroot organisations any more. So sad to see these good and trustworthy men and women leaving.

What should be done to keep them serving the grassroot organisations? Ang Saw Huat and De Souza’s suggestion of not making things too onerous is worth considering. You want not self serving and honourable men and women to work for free, how can? And still want to make things tough for them? There is a saying, close one eye, open one eye is the best. Everyone happy happy.

What do you think, close one eye, open one eye good or not? Can work or not? How about going with the flow? Can pakai or not?