How long does it take to admit a silly mistake?

A few people came to me shaking their heads just to ask why it took 6 long years and wasting so many precious hours of unproductive time to realise that the no lunch break is a total failure from the start? The promise and optimism of some half baked logic that longer hours with no lunch break meant more business,  would increase trading business by 10%, were at best be good for a laugh. Only someone not in the industry could think that such an idea would work when anyone with a couple of years in this business and with a little grey matter would know how silly it was. And it took a whole solid 6 years to admit that it was all an expensive mistake, an unproductive farce.

Then I also heard some clowns still saying that it was a great idea and it did not fail, it was a great success. The no lunch break farce gave SGX a big advantage over other bourses that have to close for lunch. The clown even bragged that if one bought one share in Timbuktu and the market crashed, the buyer of that one share could sell it in SGX without missing a bid while other bourses were closed for lunch.

I must say that I agree with the clown's clever reasoning. We could boast to the world that we have a market that opens a whole full day, so efficient and so convenient for all the traders of the whole wide world to trade here. I would also agree that if the market is open 24 hours, better still, then our aunties and uncles and ah mahs could trade in all the markets all over the world any time they like. They can even wake up in the middle of the night after having a good tip from their dreams to buy shares, and the Singapore market will be there waiting for them.

Come to think of it, the failure of the no lunch break would not have happened if they open the market 24 hours a day non stop. (Oops, I know some disagreed that it was a failure and would still swear that it was a great success.) And business would boom and everyone in the business will be laughing to the bank and no one would be complaining of no business or a waste of time. It must be, 8 hours of business, now 3X8 hours would mean business would triple. As they said, want to do something well, go all the way, no half hearted measures like no lunch break.

Many are cheering that they are having their lunch break back. Please forgive these people for they did not know what they missed and how good it would be, how good it could be, if the market remains open 24 hours a day. The only reason for these folks to be happy for a miserable lunch break, I think, is that they are not talented so unable to appreciate how good no lunch break is for the business. A child in the kindergarten would also be able to work out the arithmetic. The idea is so simplistic! But that is the brilliant part and even simpletons would know that it would work. How can anyone say it would not work or it did not work?

Maybe we need to engage a foreign talent to teach these simple folks how good it is if a market has no lunch break, or better still operates on a non stop 24 hours basis. Give it more time to succeed, keep the no lunch break. 6 years is too short a time for this great idea to bear fruits. Please don’t throw out such a clever idea.

Stupidity has no cure.

A consolation is that the market still has many great innovations that would keep it flourishing and in the pink of health. I particularly like algo trading, computer trading, smaller bid size, can trade one share at a time to improve liquidity and cheaper for children to play with their piggy bank savings. $1 can buy 100 shares. Now isn’t that nice? And main board shares some more. More than 2 billion shares are traded daily, and will be bigger tomorrow. Don't pray pray. See how healthy is the stock market or not? It is growing from strength to strength.

It is such a pity that they are bringing back the lunch break. Now business will surely be adversely affected.

Critics and cynics to be invited to share their disruptive views

The word disruptive is now being floated like a new panacea to cure the ills of everything. I thought I was dreaming when the island’s top 5 govt spokesmen and women proposed that critics/cynics aka disruptors, should be invited to sit in govt boards to share their opposing and disruptive views and ideas. Kishore Mahbubani, Tommy Koh, Chan Heng Chee, Han Fook Kwan and Danny Chan gathered at a seminar organized by the SMU to share their new and disruptive thoughts derived from the success of disruptive technologies. It is time to slay sacred cows and bravely confront the new forces of disruptive change.

Kishore has this to say, ‘We need more naysayers. Singapore cannot take its formulas for success developed over the last 50 years and apply them to the next 50 years, as the world has changed drastically. We need to create new formulas, which you can’t until you attack and challenge every sacred cow. Then you can succeed.’

Heng Chee too agreed with Kishore’s view by adding this, ‘But it is in policies and leadership teams that Singapore needs people willing to challenge authority. more robust internal discussions on policies with a wider range of people from different backgrounds. We need naysayers in leadership teams who can think the unthinkable.’

Tommy Koh, another doyen of Singaporean thought makers did not want to be outdone and added, ‘When we appoint people to boards, we can also appoint challengers who are subversive and who have alternative points of view. That’s the kind of cultural change we want to see. It makes Singapore stronger, not weaker.

I could not believe my eyes reading such disruptive comments from the thinkers of the establishment. I am not alone. Danny Chan, one of the panelists, could not help himself and took a dig at his fellow panelists. ‘You talk so much to me but when the minister is present, in front of him, you’re absolutely silent. This habit stems partly from a fear of looking bad in front of others and of failing.’ Oops, maybe he was referring to the audience.

Danny Chan could not stand the hypocrisy of the session. Maybe the talk shop was just a talk shop without any minister around and the message would be different when a minister is around. Maybe there is really such disruptive talks going around in the circles of natural aristocrats, that it is time to test the unknown and the unthinkable. Disruptive thoughts and disruptors are the new darlings of change, the change agents.

Critics and cynics like Philip Ang, Leong Sze Hean, Cynical Investor, Richard Wan and company may be receiving invitation letters to sit in some govt boards as disruptors to throw spanners into the works and hopefully things would get better. I would not include names of opposition party leaders as it would be too much to take to think that they could be invited. The non political individuals may have a rare and a one in a million chance to see this happening, definitely not those politically connected. I may even add the out of question candidates like Amos Yee and Roy Ngerng.

After saying this, maybe it is just another wet dream, too good to be true. Danny Chan should know better for highlighting the hypocrisy of the talk shop. If only the thought leaders are the decision makers, then there may be a little chance of it happening. For the moment, enjoy the musing.

World Affairs in Perspective: Diego Garcia US military base in the Indian Ocean. PART 2

US made irrelevant noise when China built self defense facilities in her own island territories in the South China Sea. US said China should not militarise the South China Sea. But US can sail its flotilla of aircraft carriers, destroyers, submarines and frigates in the South China Sea and within 12 KM of Chinese coast. US can conduct overflight of its bombers and jet fighters over the region. All this is done purportedly to demonstrate its freedom of passage and navigation through the region. But freedom of passage and navigation has never been a problem in the South China Sea. China has never stopped any vessel in the region. Nor does it intend to do so in the future. Then what is the problem? The fact is US has surrounded China with over 400 military bases since the end of Second World War. Are these American military bases in China's periphery for peace? No, they are a show of force to awe China and to contain China's peaceful development. The sellf righteous US says China is not allowed to progress too fast to be on parity or even overtake US in wealth and stature. Therefore the noise about China's self defense facilities in her own territories in the South China Sea is a bogey. It is an excuse to carry out insidious plan and strategy to stir trouble and conflict among the littoral states in the region so as to hold back China's peaceful development.

Instead US should take note of the world's deep concern about its illegal and illegitimate military bases in Diego Garcia of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean. American military bases in Diego Garcia is a launching pad for constant US aggression against countries in the Middle East Arab Islamic countries, Central Asia and Africa. US had and is still using Diego Garcia military base to launch attack, bomb and invade Iraq,Afghanistan, Libya, Somalia. Yemen and Syria. US has been coveting the region which is rich in oil and other mineral resources.

In building a gigantic military base in Diego Garcia, US has committed a horrendous crime against the few thousand original inhabitants, the Chagossians of Diego Garcia and against humanity.

Immediately after the Second World War US started to look for a military outpost in the Indian Ocean. England which then controlled the Mauritius Island archipelago inclusive of the Chagos Islands and Seychelles was obliged to lease to US, Diego Garcia the largest island in the Chagos Archipelago because it still owed US a huge debt. The Chagos Islands which form part of Mauritius was supposed to be granted independence by England. But before granting independence to Mauritius, England at the behest of US annexed the Chagos Islands and then leased out Diego Garcia, the largest island in the group to US in 1966 for fifty years for just a paltry sum of money. US had used arm twisting on England to get the Diego Garcia lease at the expense of the Chagossians who eventually suffered tremendously .

From 1966 to 1973 USA carried out force dispossession and deportation of the native Chagossians to Mauritius and Seychelles in an extreme decrepit condition and without any compensation. The Chagossians were left on the disused docks in Mauritius and Seychelles without any support. They were left homeless, jobless and with little money. The Chagossians were put in overcrowded cargo ships which were used to carry guano. Throughout the five days trip to Mauritius and Seychelles they slept on top of guano, causing them to vomit, urinate and purge in the cargo hold. Their extreme predicament and living in abject poverty was later exposed by journalists.

The US lease in Diego Garcia expired in 2016 and according to the terms of the lease the Chagossians were to be allowed to return to their homes after the expiry of the lease. But both the British and the Americans were dishonourable and did not allow the natives to return. Instead US insisted on renewing the lease for another fifty years.

The Chagossians have been fighting for compensation and the right to return home to Diego Garcia but so far to no avail.

I t must be pointed out that the unconscionable forced dispossession and deportation of the Chagossians were illegal and illegitimate and that they should be sufficiently compensated and be allowed to return home.

In 2015 a United Nations Tribunal delivered a ruling which found UK continued to sideline Mauritius sovereignty over the Chagossian islands. But UK at the behest of US is adamant in keeping the Chagos Islands as its last colony and vestige of power in the Indian Ocean though actually it is done in submission to US coerce, might and power.

In the meantime the Evil Empire made it clear it was determined to renew its lease claiming that Diego Garcia is of vital strategic importance to US security. How can that be when US is more than ten thousand miles away? US always harps on its security. US security is always at the expense of other countries' insecurity. Now the whole world knows Diego Garcia military base is a staging outpost for US aggression and world hegemony. Diego Garcia is planned by US for staging future air strikes against Russia, China, India and Indonesia should US plans its future aggression and wars against these countries.

As a ploy to keep the Chagossians permanently out of Chagos Islands and Diego Garcia US connived with UK to declare the Chagos Islands to be a " Marine Protected Area " alledgely to protect it delicate ecosystem. It was just a contrived ploy to make it impossible for the original Chagos inhabitants to pursue their claim for resettlement on the islands if the entire Chagos archipelago were a marine reserve.

US occupation of Diego Garcia is evil and illegal. It had secretly built a huge military base in Diego Garcia for aggression, conquest and world hegemony. US forced dispossession and inhuman way of forced deportation of the Chagossians were illegal and a crime against humanity.

United Nations must bear on UK to hand back Chagos Islands and Diego Garcia to the people and government of Mauritius. US  must dismantle its insidious military base in Diego Garcia for good.

USA should stop complaining about China's self defense facilities in her own territories in the South China Sea. Unlike US military bases in Diego Garcia and all parts of the world, China is building self defense facilities in her own sovereign islands  and so it is of no concern to US, Japan or any nosey others. US is intentionally harping on China's defense facilities in her own islands just to sidetrack and distract the world of its own massive buildup in Diego Garcia,Japan, Guam, South Korea, Marshall Islands and the Philippines. America military bases in Diego Garcia and elsewhere are poised for aggression and world hegemony whereas China,s defense facilities in her own territories are for selfdefense against American and Japanese aggression.

The world will be safer If US gives up its Psyche of aggression, warmongering and world hegemony

Southernglory1

Tuesday, 28th February, 2017

World Affairs in perspective: S.China Sea & Diego Garcia

South China Sea     ( PART  1  )

The native Americans say " Whitemen speak with fork tongues and cannot be trusted. " This truth can be reflected in USA's position in the South China Sea and in US huge military base in Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. In the South China Sea, China owns the Paracels and Spratly Islands in which it has sovereignty and historical rights for thousands of years. In the Indian Ocean, USA stole Diego Garcia from the Chagossians of Mauritius and secretly and illegally built a military base for aggression and world hegemony.

US is ten thousand miles away and is not a claiment to the disputed islands in the South China Sea. For over two thousand years China hold sovereignty over the Paracels and the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. During the Second World War Japan invaded and occupied these islands. At the end of the Second World War Japan handed back these islands to China officially and legally through the League of Nations and later the United Nations and through legal documents signed at the Cairo Conference 1943, the Potsdam Treaty 26-07-1945, the Yalta Treaty 11-02-1945 and the San Francisco Treaty 08-09-1951.

At that period of time the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai Shek was the party in power in China. The Kuomintang was defeated in the Chinese civil war and fled to Taiwan with the help of US which then blockaded the Taiwan Strait with its Seventh Fleet to prevent Chairman Mao's People's Liberation Army from taking Taiwan to consummate the unification of China. US had wrongly and callously interfered in Chinese internal affairs. If US had not interfered there would not be a Taiwan problem or divided China today.

However, after the defeat of Kuomintang, the reign and sovereignty over the Paracels and Spratly Islands remain to be under China though under a new government of Mao's People's Republic of China.

In the mid 1970s many South East Asian littoral states under the behest of US, stole some Chinese islands largely in the Spratly island archipelago. China then was not able to do much except to lodge some protest because of the presence of the US Seventh Fleet in the region. Vietnam stole 25 of the Chinese islands, Philippines 9, Malaysia 7 and Brunei 5.

Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia began to build forts and military naval strongholds with airstrips for harassing Chinese fishing boats. While these illegal activities were going on there was total silence in US, Japan and the whole of the western world and no one condemn the illegal provocative activities of these American minions except the only the official protests of China. China could have easily evicted Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia from the islands they stole from China but choose not to do so for the sake of peace.

In June 1986 US and the West tried to supplant China's sovereignty and historical rights over the islands in the South China Sea by floating a new concept of economic rights of a country within 200 KM of its continental sea shelf. Since China has a long coastline it agreed to the new treaty but only on the proviso that the treaty would not infringe the existing Chinese Sovereignty and historical rights of these islands. Incredulously US and a few western countries did not even want to sign and submit themselves to this treaty. On hindsight it can be seen US and the West were using this treaty as a ploy and strategy to rob off the Paracels and Spratly islands from China. Fortunately China had foreseen this chicanery and signed with the proviso that stated clearly that the new treaty would not be allowed to infringe on the Chinese South China Sea islands. In short the new treaty should not supercede Chinese sovereignty and historical rights over the Chinese territorial islands, shoals, atols and reefs in the South China Sea.

Thus US is speaking with fork tongues when it says China should not claim those islands especially those islands stolen from China by Vietnam, Philippinnes and Malaysia. US is being dirty when it tries to invoke the 1986 treaty to supercede China's sovereignty and historical rights.

With encouragement and some finance from US , Vietnam, Philippines and Malaysia have seen fit to militarise the islands they occupy by building airstrips and naval stations to harass Chinese fishing boats. Of course China will not allow these wrongs done to her in her own territorial islands and seas. Instead of using force to take back her stolen islands China choose to dredge some of her islands and build light houses and selfdefense facilities in them to forestall American and perhaps Japanese aggression. Now America and the West and Japan were quick to raise a furore and accused China of militarising the South China Sea while at the same time US was sailing aircraft carriers and other naval vessels in the region and conducting overflights with jet fighters and bombers as a show of force to awe the Chinese. Who then is militarising the South China Sea?

US has no business to interfere in the issues of the South China Sea since they do not concern them. US is speaking with fork tongues when its says the South China Sea is of strategic importance to US security though it is ten thousand miles away. On the other hand US conveniently forgets that the South China Sea is vital to China's security and survival. China and South East Asian states are able to talk, negotiate and hold peace in the region. US should cease its military activities and illegal naval patrols in the region for the sake of peace and tranquility in South East Asia. South East Asian countries should bear on warmongering US not to turn the region into a second Middle East turmoil and destructive wars.

It must be pointed out before 2010, US like the rest of the world was supportive of those agreements and treaties that Japan officially and legally returned the Paracel and the Spratly islands to China. However in 2010, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in their streaks of insanity somehow reneged on those treaties in their pivot to Asia to contain China.

Southernglory1

Monday, 27th February,2017

NB:   PART   2  will be published on Tuesday, 28th February, 2017

‘We need a new govt’

This one not I say one. I received so many of such comments from all over. Some said this has been said many times and many years ago but nothing happened. To me this is surprising, not because it is being said but why it needs to be said. The people are all for the govt, behind the govt. Look at the result in the last GE and also the by election, all for the PAP. Then why is there this kind of talk about changing the govt, about the need for a new govt?

Didn’t the Singaporeans know that they have the best govt in the world, the most talented of talents in the govt, the most selfless, self sacrificing people working and serving them and everyday thinking of how to help them to improve their lives even if Singaporeans did not ask for it? Not only that, these are the most clever men and women that money can buy, most honest too and definitely incorruptible. Where else can one find such a fine collection of men and women who risk their lives, sacrificing the quality of life of their families just to serve the people for a few million dollars when they could make many more millions in the private sector?

After deep thoughts I finally concluded that the problem is that the daft sinkies are unable to appreciate what the govt is doing for them and did not know their blessings. The daft sinkies cannot comprehend what is good and an incorruptible govt made up of very clever men and women and very honest too. Maybe the daft sinkies are looking for less clever men and women, or not so honest men and women so that they don’t have to pay so much for the quality. Not too clever men would not think of being paid in the millions.

A good example of how honest and clever the men and women in the govt is the way they are telling the people about the need to increase water charges. They said the price of water has not been increased for the last 17 years which is a fact. No bluff one. Ok they did not say the cost of water from Malaysia did not increase for the last 50 years but the people did not ask so cannot blame them. Then again, the cost of water has risen with the growing population and the 13 or so reservoirs would not be enough. To keep up with a growing population, maybe 6.9m or 10m, more desalination plants must be built. And this is not only fact but innovation or a forward looking strategy for survival. A govt of not so clever men and women would not know how to solve the problem of shortage of water for a big population.

Oh, the people also did not ask how many kinds of taxes have been added to the water bills though the price has remained unchanged. What are the taxes? Water borne fees, water conservation fees and GST. How much would these add up to the cost of water or price of water? Water borne fee is 28% for households and 48% for business use, water conservation tax is 30% and there is a 7% GST. How much would these add up to?

Someone has worked this out and I reproduced the numbers. I am not sure of its accuracy but it would give a good idea of how much the total price of water the people would have to pay despite no increase in price in the last 17 years. Assuming all these taxes are not there, the price of water would remain the same for the last 17 years, if one is paying $50 then, one would still be paying $50 now.

The picture is different if the taxes are added. The example worked out is as below.  Assuming a $50 water usage bill. Add 28% for water borne fee or +$14, and another 30% for water conservation tax ie +$15 and another 7% or $3.50 for GST, the total bill will become $82.50. What so much? Tiok or not? No increase in water charges for 17 years but the amount to be paid is $82.50 instead of $50?  I think my computation is not very right. Someone please correct for me.

Now the numbers given to me on the 30% increase by Heng Swee Kiat are like this.

$50 plus 30% will be $50 + $15=$65. Add 28%($18.20) water borne fee, add 30%($19.50) for water conservation, the total bill will become $102.70. Now add 7% for GST or another $7.19, the grand total for a $50 bill today will become $109.89. And this is for household consumption. For commercial use, the water borne fee is 48% instead of 28%. How many percent more is that?

The important thing is that the govt is telling the truth. No one is telling lies. The only lie would be the numbers given to me if they are proven untruth or incorrect.

Now back to the call for a new govt. Yes, perhaps a new govt that is not too clever would be good for Singapore. They would not know how to increase water bills without increasing the price of water for 17 years. They would also not dare to ask to be paid in the millions and pretend that they are also very clever. Not so clever govt also has its own blessings I supposed.

Come to think of it this is quite a logical deduction and a good call for a new govt, one that is not too clever.

What do you think?

PS. The above discourse did not take into consideration the increase in SC&C and electricity charges. Now you know how important it is to be earning million dollar salaries, can twiddle thumbs and talk cock when such increases are no more than spare change. Don’t have to worry about got increase or no increase in water charges.