China is conducting a nation wide inspection of all ride hailing companies after a passenger was raped and murdered after calling a ride from Didi. It always needs a painful lesson for people to wake up. But for the stupidity has no cure type, no amount of lessons would change their thinking and way of life unless it affects them personally.
China is in a way quite homogeneous other than the autonomous regions. They too are quite homogeneous in their own ways. Any foreigner or stranger to their provinces would be noticeable. In Red Dot, when more than 50% of the residents are foreigners, with a large number of foreigners given citizenship, everyone is a stranger and no longer raise the red flag.
With ride hailing companies, and with taxis allowing locals, ie foreigners and new citizens to drive taxis, are there risk to personal security? Our strawberry generations are happily jumping into taxis and Grab rides without a single thought on who is the driver and his background. Singapore is very safe and safety is being taken for granted, not only by the strawberry generations but by parents and the govt.
The strangers, now locals, that were brought in are totally unknown elements, just like the maids. And they are given the right to drive our people, children and women in their cars to anywhere they like, and the maids are trusted to take care of our olds and babies with very little supervision, and to live in the homes. What kind of people are they, any psychiatric, psychopathic or mental problems, terrorist connections, paedophiles, sex maniacs, people with questionable morality and criminals?
The lackadaisical ways we go about allowing these foreigners to come in and live with us, and mingle with us like one of us is scary if one has any sense of fear and safety concerns. The exception clause always applies to Singapore. It would not happen here. We are very safe, very well governed. The foreigners we brought in are good people. They don't commit crimes, only Singaporeans commit crimes.
Good luck to the stupidity has no cures.
9/07/2018
AWAS - Sick minds at work
The MHA has issued a statement that Thum PJ and his group have crossed
the red line for inviting Mahathir to bring democracy to Singapore. My
eyes are rolling. What, what? Is democracy a bad thing for Singapore? Is
not Singapore being telling the world that it is a democracy and not a
dictatorship or any other not too nice sounding political names?
Let me put it in a different way. Would someone be crossing the red line for asking Xi Jingping to bring more investment into Singapore, or to bring the BRI into Singapore? The question to ask, are investments and BRI good for Singapore? Or would it be the same if Thum and group called on Mahathir to support the HSR?
Oh, the key is Mahathir is a foreigner, so calling a foreigner to do anything that is good for Singapore is crossing the red line, interfering in Singapore’s domestic affairs, even if it is good for Singapore, like democracy. Ok, I am assuming, I am assuming that democracy is good for Singapore. Is it or is it not?
Oh, does Singapore want democracy, does Singapore have democracy? For Thum and group to ask Mahathir to bring democracy to Singapore implies that Singapore does not have democracy or lacking in democracy? Tiok boh?
This is indeed funny. Does Singapore have democracy? Is Singapore a democracy? Why is bringing democracy to Singapore a bad thing, that Thum and group do not wish Singapore well? Bring democracy to Singapore is not in Singapore’s interest? Bring more foreigners to take over Singapore, oops, to become Singaporean, to steal Singaporeans’ lunch is good for Singapore, no crossing of red line?
Actually what did Thum, or actually Tan Wah Piow, invite Mahathir to do? It was reported that Tan Wah Piow asked him to bring democracy or to talk about democracy in SE Asia, not Singapore in particular. Well all pegs are round pegs as long as you hammer them hard enough into a round hole. This kind of contorted logic or injustice would be turned around when political power changed hands. By then the traitors would become the angels and the angels would become traitors. That day will come, it is a matter of when, like in Malaysia or in any country or empire for that matter. Nothing is forever. The wheel of fortune would turn and pity the rascals of the last empire or regime or the last emperor.
What do you think?
Let me put it in a different way. Would someone be crossing the red line for asking Xi Jingping to bring more investment into Singapore, or to bring the BRI into Singapore? The question to ask, are investments and BRI good for Singapore? Or would it be the same if Thum and group called on Mahathir to support the HSR?
Oh, the key is Mahathir is a foreigner, so calling a foreigner to do anything that is good for Singapore is crossing the red line, interfering in Singapore’s domestic affairs, even if it is good for Singapore, like democracy. Ok, I am assuming, I am assuming that democracy is good for Singapore. Is it or is it not?
Oh, does Singapore want democracy, does Singapore have democracy? For Thum and group to ask Mahathir to bring democracy to Singapore implies that Singapore does not have democracy or lacking in democracy? Tiok boh?
This is indeed funny. Does Singapore have democracy? Is Singapore a democracy? Why is bringing democracy to Singapore a bad thing, that Thum and group do not wish Singapore well? Bring democracy to Singapore is not in Singapore’s interest? Bring more foreigners to take over Singapore, oops, to become Singaporean, to steal Singaporeans’ lunch is good for Singapore, no crossing of red line?
Actually what did Thum, or actually Tan Wah Piow, invite Mahathir to do? It was reported that Tan Wah Piow asked him to bring democracy or to talk about democracy in SE Asia, not Singapore in particular. Well all pegs are round pegs as long as you hammer them hard enough into a round hole. This kind of contorted logic or injustice would be turned around when political power changed hands. By then the traitors would become the angels and the angels would become traitors. That day will come, it is a matter of when, like in Malaysia or in any country or empire for that matter. Nothing is forever. The wheel of fortune would turn and pity the rascals of the last empire or regime or the last emperor.
What do you think?
9/06/2018
Lawrence Wong – factually, legally wrong
‘It is "factually and legally wrong" to claim that Housing Board flat
buyers do not own their flats and are merely renting them, said Minister
of National Development Lawrence Wong.
That is because all buyers of leasehold properties - whether public or private - enjoy ownership rights over their properties during the period of the lease.
"They can also sell their properties and benefit from any upside, or rent it out if they choose to," he said at the Peak Forum for property industry professionals at HDB Hub on Tuesday (Sept 4)….
Mr Wong added that the Government welcomes all feedback and views on public housing, especially as the topic is one that Singaporeans care deeply about.
"But the debate must always be based on facts, not misinformation and half-truths," he said.
He did not name any commentators but The Straits Times had published a commentary on Aug 14 by International Property Advisor chief executive Ku Swee Yong, who recommended "that we be honest with ourselves and recognise that we are merely lessees who rent the HDB flats for their terms".’ Asia One
The controversy over whether HDB flat owners are lessees or tenants of rental flats continues. The people are increasingly taking the view that they are not owners of HDB flats but tenants on long rentals. The govt is very annoyed by this interpretation and insists that the HDB flat owners are owners but on a 99 year lease. This controversy is starting to sound funny if not of the legal implications like property tax and freedom to do what they want with their flats if they are the owners.
The govt is taking the high ground that it is agreeable to a public debate by the debate must be based on facts, not misinformation and half truths. In the above quote, Ku Swee Yong was quoted to say this, ‘that we be honest with ourselves and recognise that we are merely lessees who rent the HDB flats for their terms’, implying that this is either not facts, or misinformation or half truths or a combination of all three. I dunno which is which as the person quoting it would have his own interpretation and so would anyone reading it. There must be some misgivings on the govt’s part, or is it Asia One for quoting Ku Swee Yong. Now, what is the problem with this statement?
What about this statement by Lawrence Wong, ‘That is because all buyers of leasehold properties - whether public or private - enjoy ownership rights over their properties during the period of the lease.
"They can also sell their properties and benefit from any upside, or rent it out if they choose to.’
Are these statements facts, misinformation or half truths? Are public leasehold properties the same as private leasehold properties? Off hand I could point out a few differences. 1. The cost of the land is different in the sense that private leasehold lands are bought at market price. Some public leasehold lands are acquired under different sets of rules and prices. 2. There are many conditions attached to public leasehold properties that are absent in private leasehold properties. 3. The paying of a sales levy instead of the full sales price that means profits from price appreciation will be taken away by the govt. 4. No collective sales. 5. Cannot remortgage except under HDB terms. 6. No commercial loans after 60 years. 7. Stringent HDB rules on subletting. 8. Basically no full ownership rights. 9. Time restriction on resale after 5 years.
So, are public leasehold properties the same as private leasehold properties? Are the statements full facts, not misinformation or half truths?
When one is talking about facts and truths, one must be talking about apple and comparing apple with apples not apples with oranges. Tiok boh?
KNN, everyone claiming to be telling the truth, nothing but the truth, not half truth. Can anyone tell me who is telling the truth and who is telling half truth?
That is because all buyers of leasehold properties - whether public or private - enjoy ownership rights over their properties during the period of the lease.
"They can also sell their properties and benefit from any upside, or rent it out if they choose to," he said at the Peak Forum for property industry professionals at HDB Hub on Tuesday (Sept 4)….
Mr Wong added that the Government welcomes all feedback and views on public housing, especially as the topic is one that Singaporeans care deeply about.
"But the debate must always be based on facts, not misinformation and half-truths," he said.
He did not name any commentators but The Straits Times had published a commentary on Aug 14 by International Property Advisor chief executive Ku Swee Yong, who recommended "that we be honest with ourselves and recognise that we are merely lessees who rent the HDB flats for their terms".’ Asia One
The controversy over whether HDB flat owners are lessees or tenants of rental flats continues. The people are increasingly taking the view that they are not owners of HDB flats but tenants on long rentals. The govt is very annoyed by this interpretation and insists that the HDB flat owners are owners but on a 99 year lease. This controversy is starting to sound funny if not of the legal implications like property tax and freedom to do what they want with their flats if they are the owners.
The govt is taking the high ground that it is agreeable to a public debate by the debate must be based on facts, not misinformation and half truths. In the above quote, Ku Swee Yong was quoted to say this, ‘that we be honest with ourselves and recognise that we are merely lessees who rent the HDB flats for their terms’, implying that this is either not facts, or misinformation or half truths or a combination of all three. I dunno which is which as the person quoting it would have his own interpretation and so would anyone reading it. There must be some misgivings on the govt’s part, or is it Asia One for quoting Ku Swee Yong. Now, what is the problem with this statement?
What about this statement by Lawrence Wong, ‘That is because all buyers of leasehold properties - whether public or private - enjoy ownership rights over their properties during the period of the lease.
"They can also sell their properties and benefit from any upside, or rent it out if they choose to.’
Are these statements facts, misinformation or half truths? Are public leasehold properties the same as private leasehold properties? Off hand I could point out a few differences. 1. The cost of the land is different in the sense that private leasehold lands are bought at market price. Some public leasehold lands are acquired under different sets of rules and prices. 2. There are many conditions attached to public leasehold properties that are absent in private leasehold properties. 3. The paying of a sales levy instead of the full sales price that means profits from price appreciation will be taken away by the govt. 4. No collective sales. 5. Cannot remortgage except under HDB terms. 6. No commercial loans after 60 years. 7. Stringent HDB rules on subletting. 8. Basically no full ownership rights. 9. Time restriction on resale after 5 years.
So, are public leasehold properties the same as private leasehold properties? Are the statements full facts, not misinformation or half truths?
When one is talking about facts and truths, one must be talking about apple and comparing apple with apples not apples with oranges. Tiok boh?
KNN, everyone claiming to be telling the truth, nothing but the truth, not half truth. Can anyone tell me who is telling the truth and who is telling half truth?
Talking Point & View Points 2: US Treasuries A Ponzi Scheme
Part One: The havoc of the Petrol Dollar.
US treasuries or bonds is a worldwide ponzi scheme to suck in the wealth and riches of all other countries. USA is a very heavily indebted country. It has a national debt of about $US 26 trillion. So US sells treasuries to other countries to keep its economy afloat. China and Japan hold about two trillion and one trillion American bonds or treasuries respectively. Practically almost every other country holds some billions or hundreds of millions of US treasuries.
The ponzi scheme works because of the American toxic Petrol Dollar. It all began in 1973 because of the demise of the previous Bretton Woods Agreement of the Gold Standard where every American dollar was once solidly backed by gold and where every ounce of gold was pegged at $US35,00. In short if you hold three hundred and fifty billion American dollars you can demand payment from US government in real solid gold to the equivalent value of that amount at the exchange rate of $US35 per ounce of gold.
However, since 1973 the US dollar is no more supported by gold or other precious metals or resources. The dollar is then known as the Petrol Dollar. US tricked and armed twisted Saudi Arabia and other Arab oil producing countries in the Middle East to trade and sell oil or purchase other products only with $US dollars only. So eventually every country which wants to buy oil or trade with America and other countries must first buy $US dollars. America's Private Federal Reserve Bank just need to print all the billions or trillions of paper notes to meet this demand. It means US has actually been paying nothing for its trade with the world. The buying or selling or trading via the $US dollar must go through "SWIFT" the American control International Monetary Exchange. American dollars is now just fiduciary issues with no gold or asset backing.
America is now using the Petrol Dollar as a weapon to contain and constrain China's economic development. It denies China the right to buy US assets or companies under the fake distorted reason of for national security. America and its allies Australia, Britain, France and Germany are colluding to deny China to invest in their companies or assets. America needs Chinese loans to bail out its economy but will not allow Chinese companies to buy its failed companies. So China can continue to hold the toxic Petrol Dollar but unable to use it.
China may want to unload the Petrol Dollars and sell back the treasuries to US. Here comes the catch. As the saying goes "If you owe the bank one million dollars, you have a problem, but if you owe the bank one hundred billion dollars the bank has a problem. China is now in this situation and America doesn't care. Even if China manages to sell the toxic bonds US Federal Reserves will just print the dollars to pay China and it comes back to square one. The only plausible avenue to get rid of the petrol dollars is to use it to buy gold and silver and other resources and then work out a solution to destroy the Petrol Dollar.
Russia has already got rid of almost eighty percent of the American treasuries. China and Russia and some other countries are already using their own currencies for trade to by pass the Petrol Dollar. The BRIC countries are working together to slowly getting rid of the Petrol Dollar. In fact many countries are already using the Chinese Yuan or swap their currencies for mutual trading.
PART Two : SANCTIONS
The Petrol Dollar enables America to use "SANCTIONS" to play havoc with other countries economy. When America sanctions your country it means you cannot conduct trading and commerce with other countries and vice versa. This is economic strangulation to destroy your country. It is a sort of collective punishment for the whole population of the country. Sanctions impoverish the country and make the people suffer. China was sanctioned by US and its allies for almost three decades after the Second World War. In early 1990s American sanctions wrecked the Soviet Russia's economy and caused the break up of the USSR. DPRk and Iran are now under US and its allies sanctions. However Russia and China being big continental countries can sustain with the strength of their huge internal economy. Iran and DPRK fortunately now has the strong support of Russia and China. But Venezuella is now a victim of American sanction and is now suffering badly .
US using Tariffs as a weapon
US is unable to compete with China in fair trade even though China is trading under American impose rules and regulations. In the last four decades American companies have flocked to China to take advantage of cheap labour. American companies have made hundreds of billions of profits every year. They re-export the products make in China to America and the Americans benefit greatly from cheap Chinese products. Now the American government claim that China is indulging in unfair trade because US has a trade deficit with China of a few hundred billion dollars every year. Actually this trade deficit is due to America's refusal to sell China high tech industries and products. Other than commercial aircrafts and a few agricultural products like soyabeans, corn, fruits, poultry and beef or pork they have practically nothing worth to sell to China. Moreover they bar China from investing in almost all their big conglomerate commercial companies claiming it on grounds of security reasons. So Trump and his pack of extreme China haters impose high tariffs on practically every Chinese product to stop China from selling to America. It is another wicked set up to punish the Chinese people collectively. However they cannot do much harm to China now because not only China now has a huge consumer population but also China now trades with almost every country in the world and is now also the biggest importer and exporter to almost all these countries.
By weaponising the American petrol dollar and using sanctions and tariffs as additional weapons US is actually building its own death knell for eventual self-destruction. All these wicked schemes have galvanized victimised countries to become more resolved, more resilient and more self-reliant.
Southernglory1
Thursday, 6th September,2018
US using Tariffs as a weapon
US is unable to compete with China in fair trade even though China is trading under American impose rules and regulations. In the last four decades American companies have flocked to China to take advantage of cheap labour. American companies have made hundreds of billions of profits every year. They re-export the products make in China to America and the Americans benefit greatly from cheap Chinese products. Now the American government claim that China is indulging in unfair trade because US has a trade deficit with China of a few hundred billion dollars every year. Actually this trade deficit is due to America's refusal to sell China high tech industries and products. Other than commercial aircrafts and a few agricultural products like soyabeans, corn, fruits, poultry and beef or pork they have practically nothing worth to sell to China. Moreover they bar China from investing in almost all their big conglomerate commercial companies claiming it on grounds of security reasons. So Trump and his pack of extreme China haters impose high tariffs on practically every Chinese product to stop China from selling to America. It is another wicked set up to punish the Chinese people collectively. However they cannot do much harm to China now because not only China now has a huge consumer population but also China now trades with almost every country in the world and is now also the biggest importer and exporter to almost all these countries.
By weaponising the American petrol dollar and using sanctions and tariffs as additional weapons US is actually building its own death knell for eventual self-destruction. All these wicked schemes have galvanized victimised countries to become more resolved, more resilient and more self-reliant.
Southernglory1
Thursday, 6th September,2018
9/05/2018
Seah Kian Peng – Lighting a small fire
Seah Kian Peng’s criticism of Thum Ping Tjin for inviting Mahathir to
bring democracy to Singapore and the remark ‘it appears quite clear to
me that PJ Thum does not wish Singapore well’ is like lighting a small
fire that threatens to burn down a forest. This comment is read by Thum
as calling him a traitor is ‘ridiculous and unfounded’. No decent person
would be comfortable to be on the receiving end of being called a
traitor to his country.
The accusation has fired up two opposing camps, with those supporting the group that met Mahathir calling it baseless and a more dangerous development for the group that supported or believed in Seah Kian Peng’s finger pointing. The result as reported in thenewpaper is “‘a torrent of accusations of treason’ and death threats against the group”. Hopefully this is just wild reactions from the hotheaded and nothing more and nothing untowards happened to the threatened group of people.
Seah Kian Peng might have noticed the ginny out of the bottle and is calling for some calm and decorum and ‘not get personal or abusive’ about the matter. It is just a matter of ‘different viewpoints and we can agree or disagree and be civil about it’. It is good that Seah Kian Peng saw the severity of the accusation and reactions from the ground and wanted to lower the temperature. And since it is just a matter of viewpoints, hopefully there will be no follow up threats of calling Sue or police investigation on the group and Thum in particular. He added, “It is regretful that I see all kinds of abusive remarks that are made by many different individuals (and trolls) against each other. I do not support such types of comments, regardless of what views of positions they take.”
The master has spoken. Would the trolls or doggies stop barking and stop biting? It must be quite frightening to Thum and his group to be branded traitors in the media and by a MP of the ruling party. OK, Seah Kian Peng did not use the word traitor on them, but it is how they felt and perceived and how the trolls and public read and reacted to it.
I hope the general public would be mature enough to see the nuances and the real stuff and not be misled by any silly comments. Can I say let’s move on? Or would there be more sinister things brooding?
PS. Napoleon has unleashed his attack dogs to bite.
The accusation has fired up two opposing camps, with those supporting the group that met Mahathir calling it baseless and a more dangerous development for the group that supported or believed in Seah Kian Peng’s finger pointing. The result as reported in thenewpaper is “‘a torrent of accusations of treason’ and death threats against the group”. Hopefully this is just wild reactions from the hotheaded and nothing more and nothing untowards happened to the threatened group of people.
Seah Kian Peng might have noticed the ginny out of the bottle and is calling for some calm and decorum and ‘not get personal or abusive’ about the matter. It is just a matter of ‘different viewpoints and we can agree or disagree and be civil about it’. It is good that Seah Kian Peng saw the severity of the accusation and reactions from the ground and wanted to lower the temperature. And since it is just a matter of viewpoints, hopefully there will be no follow up threats of calling Sue or police investigation on the group and Thum in particular. He added, “It is regretful that I see all kinds of abusive remarks that are made by many different individuals (and trolls) against each other. I do not support such types of comments, regardless of what views of positions they take.”
The master has spoken. Would the trolls or doggies stop barking and stop biting? It must be quite frightening to Thum and his group to be branded traitors in the media and by a MP of the ruling party. OK, Seah Kian Peng did not use the word traitor on them, but it is how they felt and perceived and how the trolls and public read and reacted to it.
I hope the general public would be mature enough to see the nuances and the real stuff and not be misled by any silly comments. Can I say let’s move on? Or would there be more sinister things brooding?
PS. Napoleon has unleashed his attack dogs to bite.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)