The philosphy of Goodlife Makan

The ESM has launched a new initiative in his Marine Parade ward to bring life to the senior citizens. It is called Goodlife Makan, where the seniors are encouraged to do things together, and what else is better than food? Goodlife Makan is all about the seniors and makan. And if I am not mistaken, Monfort Caré is taking care of the cost of the project.

“When we discuss challenges facing old people, we tend to look at them as problems – who will look after them, do they need more funds, what will be the cost of looking after them? That is the wrong approach. It's how to turn that into strengths - what can they do for themselves? How can they help others?” said ESM Goh.

How true is the above statement. Old people all got problems. The poor ones got poor problems, the rich ones got rich problems. Some got no money and would really appreciate Goodlife Makan for a day of free makan, I am presuming here, and a day of socialising. Some got so much money that the money becomes a problem itself.

Yes, the right approach is to turn their challenges into strength. The poor should just enjoy themselves without having to pay for it since they got no money anyway. And the rich should be given the opportunity to show their generosity and pay for the makan. Like that win win. The poor would be grateful to the rich and the rich would be thankful there is a useful way to spend their money. Otherwise so much money would only go to waste. Now they can really do something for themselves, to enjoy the pleasure of sharing a little of their wealth and good fortune with those that have little.

Nice thought on a Sunday morning. But putting it into practice is not easy.

Japanese history repeating itself

Historians read the past to understand what is happening today. There is another way of looking at history by looking at what is happening today to understand what happened in the past. The history of Japan during WW2 is still cloaked with controversies. Who were the real villains that led Japan to its barbaric invasion of Asia and South East Asian? The verdict at the military tribunal put the blame on the Emperor Hirohito, the father of present Emperor of Japan. Many members of the royal families were also found guilty, among them many princes who held command positions in the Imperial Army.

Did the tribunal nailed the real culprits that led Japan to the disastrous war or the Emperor Hirohito was made a scapegoat and the politicians and soldiers who wanted the war and did the butchering of the people they invaded? Emperor Akhihito is now touring the Pacific countries, including Japan and is showing remorse and repentance to the victims of the Japanese invasion and barbarity.  He acknowledged the crimes of Japan in WW2 but was not allowed to say much by the politicians, just like his father during the WW2. The Emperor was just a figure head if what is happening today was the same as the past. The politicians called the shot then and now. Japan was dragged into WW2 by the politicians and the soldiers, not by the Emperor.

While the Emperor and other members of the Imperial household have spoken about the horrors of wars, and feeling repentance over the criminal acts of the Japanese Imperial Armies and the politicians then, the politicians today are shutting up the Emperor and embarking a another mission to rearm Japan, tearing away the pacifist Constitution, and going around the world thumping their chests that they would want to engage in wars. They are building more weapons of wars and signing military alliances and supporting and agitating for wars.

Should Japan embark on WW3 and lose, the fingers must point directly at the politicians and Shinzo Abe and his gang in the govt. They are the ones that are pushing Japan to the path of militarism and war. The Imperial household has nothing to do with what the politicians are doing and wanting to commit Japan on a war path.

In the next war tribunal, the Japanese Emperor must not be made another scapegoat to take the blame from the politicians. The evidence is all there and mounting up daily, the deeds and words of Abe and his gangs of militants.

National Day a day of mourning

How many countries would celebrate or mark their National Day as a day of mourning? 26 Jan is the National Day of Australia but also the day of mourning. Here is why.

‘Sydney, Australia - For many Australians the national Australia Day holiday is a chance to celebrate their country with a day off from work and a drink. For Indigenous Australians, it is a day of protest and mourning.

Several thousand Indigenous Australians and their supporters marched through the streets of Sydney to protest at what they have renamed 'Invasion Day', which marks the 1788 establishment of the first British penal colony.’ Al Jazeera

Now you know why. Every story and event has two sides. The winner’s side and the loser’s side, the conqueror’s story and the defeated’s story. 26 Jan is the day the British, I think led by James Cook, landed Australia and robbed it from the native aborigines, then later gave the land to their convicts from England. Yes, the white Australians would celebrate this day just like the white Americans would celebrate Thanksgiving Day, the day Columbus landed on North America and robbed the continent from the native Red Indians.

The bananas have also been celebrating Thanksgiving Day and some may join the Australians to celebrate Australian Day without knowing why. To the natives of both continents, both days are days of sorrow, genocide and mourning. One side would be celebrating stealing the lunch of the natives and their land and killing them, the other side mourning for the losses of their land and people and subjugation.


Ignorance is bliss but also stupidity and looking silly. You may still want to ask why such events were not reported in the western media.

The Philippines is not the Sick Man of Asia

There have been many misguided comments that the Philippines is the new Sick Man of Asia. This is not true. The only semblance of a Sick Man is its economy, that is not doing as well as the Asean states. Other than this, the Philippines is every inch a proud sovereign state. The Pinoys are a proud people and had recently driven the colonial master, the USA, out of their country. They have reclaimed full independence of their national sovereignty, with no foreign bases and soldiers in their country. They are even standing up to fight China and competing to claim islands in the South China Sea as theirs. They even want to claim or take over Singapore as their new colony. They may not be rich, but the Philippines is anything but a Sick Man of Asia.

Reflect what qualified China of the 19^th Century as the Sick Man of Asia, the conditions of the country and people. China was not only economically weak, the country was cut up by foreigners with foreign concessions where foreigners lived like they owned the country, in their own enclaves in Shanghai. The foreigners have more rights in China than the locals. When they ended up in court, the court would rule in favour of them. And the corrupt elites were sleeping with the foreigners, allowing more foreigners into the country, taking over businesses and anything that had economic values, even messing around with the govt. The foreigners were having all the good jobs and top jobs in the country.

What about the locals? The local Chinese were kicked aside, no jobs and begging the foreigners for jobs. The foreigners were in control of everything. the govt, the economy and jobs and wining, dining and partying everyday. The natives lost all pride as citizens of the country. Got bashed by the foreigners, kicked around by the foreigners, insulted and abused by the foreigners, as good as no talents. And the natives could not do anything and the govt could not do anything. The elites would not dare offend the powerful foreigners. The natives lost all fighting spirit in their own country. Many escaped overseas to find jobs and to look for a better life. The people lost hope in their own country and their elites.

Did the Philippines meet these conditions? Some, but not all. The Pinoys are still in charge in their own countries and foreigners could not boss around with them of abuse them. The foreigners know that in the Philippines, the Pinoys are the owners and they better behave well in front of the Pinoys. They would not dare to beat up a Pinoy. There is still pride in the Pinoys. How can they be called the Sick Man of Asia?  It is not just about money? Money is dignity? It is national pride, the pride as a nation, as a people. Lose that, you become the Sick Man of Asia.

A Sick Man of Asia is when a country is taken over by foreigners, run by foreigners, foreigners could boss around with the locals and the locals are helpless when abused by the foreigners. When the foreigners formed and lived in foreign enclaves and sneering and despising the natives. And the natives lost all pride and spirit to live, lost confidence in themselves, all planning to run away from the country, when their very own govt cannot protect them, cannot offer them good jobs, and the good jobs were taken over by foreigners.

I definitely disagree that the Philippines is the Sick Man of Asia. They even despise daft Sinkies.

The trend of development in GRCs

The statisticians and social scientists that read trends to predict the future and who are looking at the trend of GRC development would point to one conclusion. I show you the conclusion later.

We started with single seat constituencies. Every MP stood for one constituency to represent one constituency of people. Then the conventional wisdom and realities changed. There was a need to ensure minority candidates are present in Parliament. The wisdom of the day said the people would be voting on ethnic grounds and minority candidates would not be elected in the future. No one was up to it to question this hard truth. So that was it. There shall be light, oops, there shall be GRCs. Each GRC should have 3 or 4 candidates with one from the minorities.

After a few elections, different needs appeared. Now the reason was not to ensure minority representation but other convenient or practical reasons like economy of scale, efficiency, expediency, ministers very busy so need other MPs to cover for them, or when one dies, others can cover the dead MP’s duties and so on and on. See the shifting goal posts and reasons?

Then we have bigger and bigger GRCs, the unsinkable battleship, the bigger the battle. Weak oppositions were struggling to catch up to field even a GRC with decent candidate and with the cash. But that was their problem. Big GRCs were good and the intent and purpose were good. It was good for the politics of the country, like Elected President was better than Appointed President.

Then again things changed. Big GRCs not so good leh. So must have lesser big GRCs. Reasons I am still blur. And now I heard there is a need to have more smaller GRCs and SMCs. Reasons I also dunno but must be good for the political system and for the country and people.

See the trend and reasoning? So the next change, what would be the next change, what is the trend leading to? Yes, GRCs are bad and we must go back to SMCs.  Why, because the people are not really racist, they are Singaporeans and colour blind. The Singaporeans would vote for good candidates regardless of race, language and religion. This is in the national pledge, idiot. There is no need for GRCs. And some may be wondering, which smart alec came up with this GRC thing? What crap! But this is the future. I am bringing this up as a social scientist would do, to study the social trend and make a prediction of the future political system as the trend will take. As they say, things will come around in circles.

All back to square one. In the process everyone was taken for a ride without a say and without knowing why.  And who knows, there will be no more Elected President in the future and the President sitting in the Istana will be just a ceremonial president and no multi million dollar salaries in the future, just a presidential stipends of $500k a year.