Uniquely Singapore – Metal gates along common corridor cannot open at the same time

There was this new country, I must emphasise, new country, probably 3^rd World country, just got independence or nation hood, and they started to build public housing for the citizens for the first time. They were in a hurry, no experience, and ended building flats with common corridors with doors facing each other, and the metal gates cannot be opened at the same time. How could this happen?

The reasons, no experience, lousy architects, no building control, no clerks of work to check, never done it before and want it cheap and good some more. Ok, for these good reasons I must say excusable and forgiveable. It is not easy for inexperienced workers and architects with fake degrees or degrees from the degree mills to get such things right. In 3^rd World countries, this is the norm.

But not to worry, in 3^rd World countries they are very imaginative and will find ways to correct such design faults. The more serious architects would knock down and shift the door on one side sideways, maybe a foot or two, and eureka, the gates can be opened. Some may make the gates smaller. Some may change to sliding gates. No real problems lah.

No they would not change the rules and regulations. Remember, 3^rd World countries got no rules and regulations to say smaller doors or gates cannot open are not allowed. Anything goes.

Singapore is so lucky. When we first built housing estates after the big fire in Bukit Ho Swee, we did not have much experience then. But we got good architects, architects with real degrees, not from degree mills. And the flats they built were very good. Gates can open at the same time even if facing each other. No need to design doors not facing each other. And one time done, no need to modify or alter or change the gates.

Now, 50 years after moving from 3^rd World to 1^st World, how can such things happened, unless we are back in the 3^rd World, starting everything anew, learning to  be 3^rd World again. Did we really design cheap flats, built in a hurry and ended up with gates cannot open at the same time, violating building regulations? Do we still hire real architects and not fake ones?  Our architects and engineers and building contractors are all properly qualified and real ones, and very experienced, 50 years of construction experience. And we got very strict BCA with rules and regulations that all architects, engineers and contractors know by hard. Can it really happen?

I think it would need a miracle for such a thing to happen in this country. Maybe the people are hard up for miracles and trying very hard for miracles.  Indeed we have become a city of miracles. And with such a miracle, there is no violation to safety requirements for sure. Anything goes, every inch like 3^rd world.

PS. Maybe they have started to prepare for 10m population.
Note. The error in calling the metal gates as doors has been corrected.

The intent is good, it is all for the good of Singaporeans

I used to be very angry with all the bizarre policies of the govt. I could not understand why these policies are so anti Singaporeans. I could not understand and see any good in them except for the good of foreigners. Now I beginning to understand and see things differently after Hsien Loong said this,

‘There may be different views on how the policy should be, but I hope people understand that the Govt’s intent is good.  We are doing this for Singapore, and for Singaporeans.’  Lee Hsien Loong quoted in ST 22 Jul 15

When Hsien Loong said that the Govt’s intent is good and doing all for the interests of Singaporeans, how can one not understand and don’t believe what he said? He is telling the truth from this heart. Then I went on to reflect on those policies that I was angry with him and now I understand, the Govt’s intent was good, and the policies were good for Singaporeans. Now I am at peace. I know many of you are still very cynical. I don’t blame you.

Now I know why raising GST is good for the poor people. I am looking forward for the GST to go to 10% after the GE perhaps. And I am going to wait for all the goodies going to the poor people and making them happy. Before this I simply cannot understand how it benefits poor and have doubts about the intent of the Govt.  Now I know the intent of the Govt is good. Don’t understand is my fault. I must try to understand and if I don’t understand, I should just believe on the side of goodness. I must admit I still don’t understand.

Of course the biggest bugbear must be the people’s CPF savings, including mine. I was cursing and swearing. Now I know it is for the good and interests of the people, me included. Now I am happier, really happy to know that when I die, I will die very rich, with a lot of money in my CPF, die with a smile on my face. For those who still cannot understand the Govt’s good policy, at least know that the Gov’t meant well and has good intent. Just the good intent is enough to absolve all blame and unhappiness.

I also cannot understand why the Govt gave  and is still giving so much free money to so many foreigners, students and lecturers but not to our own people and their children. This one is very serious, I still cannot understand even if the Govt is doing it for the interests of Singaporeans. But I am more at peace now, because I know the intent is good. Singaporeans deprived of university places, Singaporean lecturers lost their jobs to foreigners, no Singaporean core in the academia, never mind, it must be good for Singaporeans. Sometimes it is like a religion, have faith, just believe and all is well.

What about the PMEs that have become taxi drivers? It must also be good for them, I think. Otherwise they would not be their own boss and enjoy the independence of being your own boss showing how good quality of service is all about, carrying and loading luggages into the taxi with a smile. And saying thank you when a big tip is received for good service. Never mind, the intent of the Govt is good. More foreigners here are good for Singaporeans, to grow the economy, to create good jobs for the Singaporeans. How come I could not understand this simple logic before? Now everything is looking so simple and so clear. The Govt is doing it for the good of Singaporeans. Tiok. How, I dunno, but tiok good enough for me.

Housing for poor Singaporeans, I mean HDB built public flats, and a bit higher income Singaporeans, not just the rich, must buy private flats, good quality and live well. Now I also understand. The income ceiling, last time I think not right that NS men cannot buy public flats. Now I also understand that this is good for Singaporeans also. If they cannot buy HDB flats they sure must buy private flats, good for them and good for the property developers also. Win win for everyone. So simple, but I was confused last time. Boon Wan must not change the policy to make sure every Singaporean can buy a HDB flat so that as NSmen they have something to fight for. Let them buy private properties. Private properties cheap and affordable to the richer Singaporeans. Now they have more expensive properties to defend for, and doing NS becomes more meaningful. They would love to pay their big mortgages for the next 30 years as proof that they are richer.

I could go on and on. Now everything seems so positive, knowing that the Govt’s intent is good and doing everything for the Singaporean’s interests. It cannot be otherwise right? If otherwise how can they be elected to the govt again in the next GE. It only means that many have known this truth but not me. Now with the intent so clear, sure get elected to the govt with bigger majority in the next GE. Hsien Loong should have talked about the intent part earlier to win the hearts and minds of the people.

Now I also agree the ground is sweet. Quick call for election, I can feel the sincerity all over the place.

PS. When I read some of the comments in similar posts in the TRE I just cannot understand why so many people disagree with me and still refused to understand and cannot see the intent and insincerity of it all. What a pity. But, but everyone has a right to disagree. Tiok boh? The difference is whether you see the intent or not.

China – The peaceful rise of a global power

There was an interesting article on the rise of global powers by Jean Pierre Lehmann in the ST on 23 Jul 15. The author is the emeritus professor of international political economy at IMD, Switzerland and visiting professor at the University of Hong Kong. The article titled, ‘ China’s historic quest for a peaceful rise’, reminded the western powers that their rise to global powers were never peaceful and never responsible. From Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Japan and the USA, their rise was accompanied by ‘conquest, destruction, enslavement, executions, looting and the like were the order of the day’. The Americans were infamous for genocide of the Red Indians, slavery and bullying of the Mexicans and land grabbing. The Spanish were infamous for their mass murders of natives in the name of God and civilization. Japan and Germany were key players of invasion, aggression and conquest in the two World Wars. The British were the criminals in the Opium Wars against China and subduing and robbing India.

China was the biggest victim to the rise of European and Japanese powers, being colonized piece meal by the foreign powers and robbed of everything. Jean Pierre found it ludicrous for the Americans and westerners to chide China to be a responsible stakeholder as it rises to be a global power. The hypocrisy was so clear that nothing more needs to be mentioned, especially from the irresponsible Americans in their conduct of world domination by provoking and starting wars in all corners of the globe.

In his thesis, Jean Pierre concluded that there is no such thing as a peaceful rise of a global power.  He has doubt as to China’s peaceful rise and asked whether ‘China will behave with the same ruthless cynicism and cause as much misery and mayhem as its nine predecessors, or whether it will break the pattern and tear asunder the great power rising paradigm by rising peacefully.’ And he said it again, ‘It’s a tough challenge, especially, I repeat, as there is no precedent, no guidebook one can take off the shelf, no historical mentor one can turn to’.

You see what you want to see. You believe what you want to believe, especially when one is conditioned to think by decades of fabricated truth. Even before China’s rise as a global power, it has been demonized as an evil power when in fact it was the victim of the rise of global powers. China is still the victim of western powers and western oppression. There is now a contradiction and an unpleasant truth that western thinkers and politicians refused to see or acknowledge. When there was a Chinese Empire before the invasion of western colonial powers, China’s global GDP was 30%, befitting of a global power. It was a global power without wrecking or savaging the world.  The rise of the dynastic Chinese empires did not lead to world wars. Dynastic China had its own world view of things and the only wars it conducted were the usual border wars with neighbouring tribes and countries when the borders were not defined. And many of these wars were defensive in nature, to ward off aggression from neighbouring tribes. In many ways, the rise of dynastic China as a global power without global ambition was peaceful in the global context.

This may not be sufficient to dispel the thesis of no peaceful rise of a global power. The proof for such a phenomenon is right before our eyes but none willing to see and accept this unpleasant truth. Is China now a global power? In many senses it is a global power, financially, economically, militarily, unless the definition of a global power is one that engages in wars of conquest. China is the undisputed second largest economy in the world. Militarily it is second only to the Americans.

Is China not a global power today? If the answer is yes, then China has proven that it is possible to become a global power without conducting wars and causing mayhem to the rest of the world or to its neigbours. Today’s China is happy as a global power without having to attack any country or indulging in conquest to acquire territories. It reclaims islands from the seas based on historical rights. Its only other claim is to reclaim territories ceded by conquest when it was weak.

China is already a global power and has yet to fire a single bullet to claim its arrival. China does not need a war to be a global power. In fact a war would derail China’s rise and ambition as a world power.  It is avoiding war to the point that little countries could provoke and agitate and even make claims on China’s islands in the South China Sea while Japan continues to claim Diaoyu Islands as theirs. China’s peaceful rise may not remain so if the Americans and the Japanese are bent on provoking a war with China. Even if so, its rise as a global power is already a peaceful one to date, unless one is denying that China is still not a global power. And what is this nonsense of an irresponsible stakeholder? China has been playing everything with the rules of international laws and norms and has not behaved aggressively like the Americans and the Japanese.

Who is or are the irresponsible stakeholders? Definitely not China!  The West cannot accept a responsible world power like China and its peaceful rise. To them there is no such thing as a responsible China and a peaceful China as a global power. They refused to see this reality, that China has risen as a world power, peacefully and acting responsibly as a global power. Their mindset is that China cannot be a world power. If China is a world power it must be an irresponsible world power. And it cannot rise to be a global power peacefully. So China is not a global power yet. It can only be acknowledged as a global power after it creates havoc and mayhem to the world.

China has risen, peacefully, as a global power. Get it? The Americans and their allies can keep on demonizing China. The hard truth, Americans and their allies are the real demons instead.

The lying and mischievous Japanese

Japan has published a White Paper branding China as an aggressive nation and putting up some of the unilateral acts committed by China as hostile acts. These included building oil rigs and structures in the waters within China’s sovereignty, reclaiming islands in the South China Sea and claiming Diaoyu Islands seized by the Japanese through war.  China’s growing military might is also claimed as an act of hostility as proof that China is an aggressive country.

On the other hand Japan is a friendly country but is tearing its Pacifist Constitution that forbids Japan to conduct wars of aggression so that Japan can conduct wars again. And what had Japan done to China before? Japan declared wars unilaterally on China in several occasions in the 19^th and 20^th centuries. It invaded China, attempting to conquer and colonize China and colonized Korea, putting it under oppressive Japanese rule. It invaded the whole of South East Asia and committed wars of aggression, killing wantonly, forcing neighbouring countries’ women to become sex slaves, robbing the conquered countries, raping, looting and killing millions of Chinese. It still held on to Chinese territories like Diaoyu Islands and renaming them as Senkakus, as Japanese territories.

It is now telling lies about China like it did before it invaded China unprovoked, unilaterally, to conquer China. It was defeated by the Allied Forces led by the Americans after it conducted a sneak attack on Pearl Harbour, destroying the American Pacific Fleet and killing thousands of American servicemen. Now with the connivance of the Americans, it is reclaiming its right as an Imperial military power to conduct wars again.

Who is the aggressive and dangerous country? Who is the peaceful country that was violated, invaded, lost territories and millions of live of its citizens, and now wanting to reclaim its lost territories due to conquest?

Japan a peaceful country? It has been peaceful in the last 70 years because it was defeated by the Americans and prevented from becoming another menace, forced to accept a Pacifist Constitution. It has no choice but to behave like a good boy. Now it is given the consent by the Americans to tear away its Pacifist Constitution, to remilitarize and to conduct wars again. It is showing its intent to be the aggressive and barbaric Japan all over again, spreading lies to start wars, just like the Americans.

The world and the Americans would live to regret once the Japanese have fully rearmed to take on the world again, and America would have to repay for the two atomic bombs on Japan and the millions of Japanese killed in the Battles of the Pacific Islands. The complacent Americans would have to relive Pearl Harbour once again, with more destructive forces than 1941.

The passing of the new bills to allow Japan to conduct wars is the clearest proof of the real Japanese intent and what the real Japanese are, like their forefathers during the Second World War, aggressive and imperialist militants. All the public protests against the Abe and his military ambition are only a sly act to deceive the world that they want peace and did not want wars. The majority in the Diet tells the whole truth and nothing but the truth of Japanese military ambition.

Good luck Americans!

Govt ‘has interests of citizens at heart’

‘Purely from the perspective of numbers, it makes sense to take in foreign labour and immigrants. But from an emotional standpoint, it is not easy for people to accept, to agree and support.  We have explained the reasons many times. I think people may not necessarily want more explanations.

What I hope people will know, and I mean this from my heart, is that on immigration and population, we have Singaporeans’ interests at heatt.

We have this responsibility; we are the Govt , we need to lead the country, we need to make the best possible decision for Singaporeans. Even on the most difficult issue, we need to make the best decision and be accountable to the people. There may be different views on how the policy should be, but I hope people understand that the Govt’s intent is good.

We are doing this for Singapore, and for Singaporeans.’  Lee Hsien Loong quoted in ST 22 Jul 15

 

In the above statement Hsien Loong’s position is that the people may disagree with govt policies and the decisions the govt is making, and that is fair. But he also said that the govt should do what it thinks is right, without quoting the example of the arrogant deaf frog, because it is the govt, and if it says it is for the good of the people it must be good for the people.

These two points deserved some discussions and disagreements. In the first instance, the govt must know that this is a democracy and the govt is elected to be the govt for only a 4 or 5 year term. It is not a life time govt. Any govt should take cognizance of this reality and when it makes decisions that have very long term impact on the people, with possible adverse effects, it must seek the consent of the people. The govt is there to represent the people’s interests and the people’s interests must be determined and decided by the people. A major decision like increasing the population to double its size, to turn the original Singaporeans into a minority cannot be taken lightly and not by a govt that is supposed to be there for a 4/5 term. When the people disagree, a democratically elected govt has no right to go ahead against the wishes of the people.

The second point is about Singaporean interests, for the good of Singaporeans. This is a very subjective statement. What is good for gander is not necessarily good for the geese. The govt may think it is good, the intent of the govt, which may be totally incongruent to what the people want,  may be good in the govt’s own interpretation. But does the govt ask the people whether the people agree and think so? Many political decisions are not necessarily a matter of good or bad. The people may have different interests and views on what is good or bad for them. Can a govt of a few men and women, elected to be the govt for a few years, decide the fate of the people unilaterally and go against the wishes of the people just because it claims that it is good for the people, and they are the govt and must decide?

The power of the people vested on an elected govt is temporary and not a blank cheque to do anything the elected govt pleases and thinks it is the right thing to do. There are things and times for an elected govt to come down to the people and ask what the people want eg the people’s money in the CPF or the billions given to foreign students. This is not an autocracy or a totalitarian state, not a dictatorship or a monarchy where the leader holds absolute power, unquestionable power to do as it pleases as if they own this country.

How many of you think or agree that the govt can do anything it likes because it is the govt and because it thinks it is good for the people? Does the political leaders understand what is the meaning of democracy, a republic?

In the same article in the ST, Hsien Loong was also quoted to say this:

‘No matter how the system evolves, we hope that politicians admit that the task is to serve Singaporeans – not a party, or an interest group, but all Singaporeans.’

I am sure every one of you would have a view on this statement.