The whole world is paying trillions of dollars to US for the use of 4G

In the internet and telecommunication business the whole world has been paying trillions of dollars every year as copyright fees to the United States for the use of 4G which has been under the monopoly of four US companies viz AT&T, Verizo, T-Mobile and Sprint. In so far as the use of 4G under US control is within the auspices of the United Nations and agreement of all countries there is no problem for all countries in paying copyright fees to the aforementioned US companies.

The world countries pay more than 10,000 trillion Yuan in copyright fees to to the four US companies  . China's 4G pays US$100 million  in annual copyright fees to the US companies.

If the countries around the world switch to Huawei's 5G which now has the blessing of the United Nations to operate in the 'Internet of Things' in the next one hundred years, the US will lose more than 10,000 billion yuan of foreign exchange each year, which is set at 20% of the Annual GDP of the United States. Therefore the United States will not allow Huawei's 5G in the world as it is leading by a huge margin against all other western 5G aspirant companies.

The United States being a poor looser will use all kinds of underhand vile methods to  destroy Huawei in order to protect the interests of the US such as stopping the loss of at least 20% of USA's GDP. The United States is just a dishonourable big bully.

The world must know this is really the true and ulterior reason for USA's insistence on bringing down Huawei.

US is playing a very dangerous game. It is far more dangerous than a trade war. China is now trying to lower tension by lying low in self restrain. But it won't be long when China under the weight of the anger of the Chinese people is forced to take a tough policy against US and Canada. Let''s hope this will not lead to war between a peaceful China and Russia against the hostile savage warhawk United States, the Evil Empire.

Southernglory1

Tuesday, 19th February, 2019

Irresponsible retrenchment and irresponsible hiring

Irresponsible retrenchment of Singaporeans, especially the seniors and PMETs, has reached a crisis proportion.  It is a very serious affair for senior Singaporeans to be retrenched, dismissed or sacked under false excuses when finding another job at their age is almost impossible. The end result is financial difficulties and family hardship when there is no income and the paltry payout from CPF is unable to sustain a normal way of life in this most expensive city in the world.

Added to this is the irresponsible hiring of Indian nationals to replace the Singaporeans that were irresponsibly retrenched. Many Singaporean and non Singaporean CEOs have been adopting this foul practice to fire Singaporeans and replaced them with more Indian nationals.  I am not mincing my words.

The pervasive presence of Indian nationals in the ‘Chennai’ Business Park in Changi and ‘Mumbai’ Financial Centre in Marina Bay is a stark reminder of the pathetic state of affair affecting seniors and PMEs in Singapore. This reminds me of what an ex MP said about the blackout in Little India. Wonder what he would say if he visits the above two places and some corners of East Coast Park.

Let me first deal with the 62 year retirement age issue. Some Singaporeans are still thinking that 62 is the retirement age in Singapore. No, 62 is the minimum retirement age, something like the minimum sums in CPF savings, ie it is only a minimum and can be raised and raised. Here is a statement from MOM.

‘In accordance with the Retirement and Re-employment Act (RRA), the minimum retirement age is 62 years. Your company cannot ask you to retire before that age.

You have this protection if you:

 Are a Singapore citizen or Singapore permanent resident.

 Joined your employer before you turned 55.

Employees who turn 62 can continue to be employed in the organisation if they meet the eligibility criteria of re-employment.

Employers must offer re-employment to eligible employees who turn 62, up to age 67, to continue their employment in the organisation. The re-employment age was raised from 65 to 67 on 1 July 2017 to help older workers who wish to continue working as long as you are willing and able.’

Yes, employer cannot ask an employee to retire because of his age and must offer the employee post retirement employment up to 67, as in 2017. This age limit has actually been removed in practice and can be above 70 or more. In de facto, there is no retirement age in Singapore today.  Several politicians and govt appointees have worked way pass their 70s and still gainfully employed in govt services or GLCs.

To the many PMEs they may think this has nothing to do with them. The Employment Act protection is for the workers only. Not true. MOM has extended its services to PMETs who need assistance when they are

irresponsibly retrenched. The NTUC, the representative of workers, has also set up a unit called U PME Centre specifically to assist professionals, managers and executives that were irresponsibly retrenched.

The Govt and MOM did not go to sleep when this monumental problem is staring them straight in their faces.  As each day passes, more and more seniors and PMEs are losing their jobs and unemployed and in financial difficulties. They need help desperately and the Govt and MOM and the NTUC cannot look the other way. They are Singaporeans whose jobs have been taken over by the presence of hundreds of thousands of foreigners, particularly Indian nationals.

PMEs that are wrongly or irresponsibly retrenched or lost their jobs can go to U PME centre or the MOM to seek assistance. If these failed, they can petition the Prime Minister for help, to intervene into their plight when their rice bowls are affected. Seniors and PMEs have families to feed and dependents to take care of. If not manage properly this could turn into a political crisis for the govt.

What if all else fails? Well, the GE is around the corner. The elected Govt is supposed to take care of the people especially in providing good jobsfor them, not handouts and pittance subsidies that could not last the next day.

Irresponsible CEOs causing Singaporeans to lose their jobs and to replace them with Indian nationals must be put on notice that they cannot get away with crimes against the seniors and PMEs. Such malpractices must be put to an end immediately.

PS. Heng Swee Kiat's budget speech spoke about more restrictions on S pass and dependent pass for foreigners to deal with this problem. Hope it is not just lip service.

American white lie on Huawei unproven

Beijing and Washington traded barbs over Huawei Technologies and the South China Sea at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, as both sides also sought to sell their vision for regional security.

In a speech lasting almost 30 minutes, US Vice-President Mike Pence urged political leaders at the conference to reject the Chinese telecoms giant.

The US has been “very clear with our security partners on the threats posed by Huawei and other Chinese telecom companies”, Pence said.

“Chinese law requires them to provide Beijing’s vast security apparatus with access to any data that touches their networks or equipment,” he said, adding America’s allies must protect critical telecoms infrastructure.

Speaking immediately after Pence, Chinese State Councillor Yang Jiechi said China rejected “technological hegemony”.

“We need to follow the new approach of win-win and all-win cooperation and abandon ideological prejudices and the outdated mentality of a zero-sum game, and a winner takes all,” Yang said.

In a question-and-answer session following his speech, Yang added that Huawei was cooperating closely with European countries on the fourth industrial revolution.

“Chinese law does not require companies to install a back door or collect intelligence,” he said.

Total ban on China’s Huawei may be a mistake and it’s ‘more complicated than in or out’, Britain’s MI6 chief Alex Younger suggests

The Five Eyes intelligence alliance – the US, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand – as well as Japan have blocked or are planning to ban Huawei from taking part in building their 5G mobile network infrastructure, adding to pressure on the Chinese company. Other countries, such as Germany, are consulting telecoms operators before deciding whether to exclude the firm....

The above paragraphs were posted in Yahoo News.

The very fact that for so many years, and the recent spate of heightened investigation and scrutiny and intensive tests on Huawei equipment by many western countries, including the mischievous US putting Huawei under the microscope and still could not find any proof that Huawei's equipment are used to spy on other govt, this is the best proof that the Americans and 5 eyes accusation is a frivolous White Lie.  If Huawei is guilty, they would have lost not time to shown the evidence to the rest of the world with all the western media pasting them on their front pages. They could not as they could not find anything wrong with Huawei except making wild allegations and spreading lies.

The Huawei White Lie is about western hegemony and about economic dominance, about the fees that they would have lost to Huawei when fees from 4G becomes miniscule once 5G takes over the market. These are the real reasons, not spying or whatever mischievous allegations the Americans the the 5 eyes are telling the world.

The Americans and the whites are congenital liars. They cannot and have failed to prove their allegation is true.

Watch this short clip about American White Lie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UN3cUQ2LdhQ

US trying to sabotage Huawei, ZTE and Sino-5G. Too late. Game over. China

Rising Radio Sinoland

CECA - Unequal Treaty

Twelve years ago on 29 June 2005, PM Lee triumphantly went to India to sign the free trade agreement, the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement or CECA, with the Indian government. At the official dinner hosted by the Indian PM for him in New Delhi, PM Lee happily announced that a “New India” is emerging....
 
Cleverly hidden clauses

In the agreement, Chapter 9 provides for the movement of people between the 2 countries.
In particular, it provides very laxed rules for the so-called “intra-corporate transfer” of employees, encompassing some 127 different type of professionals described in Annex 9A: IT professionals, architects, civil engineers, electrical engineers, doctors, biochemists, pharmacists, lecturers, accountants, auditors, financial analysts, psychologists, career advisers, etc.
In Article 9.5, Clause 1, it talks about providing a “long-term temporary entry” to “intra-corporate transferees”. In fact the name itself should have raised a red flag to PM Lee. How can an entry be simultaneously “temporary” but yet “long-term”?

The clause stated that “each party shall grant temporary entry to an intra-corporate transferee of the other party, who otherwise meets its criteria for the grant of an immigration visa, for an initial period of up to two years or the period of the contract, whichever is less. The period of stay may be extended for period of up to three years at a time for a total term not exceeding eight years”.

Bottom line is an “intra-corporate transferee” can stay up to 8 years before he is “rotated” out of the country.
And the person shall be exempted from any labour market testing or economic needs testing, as specified in Article 9.3:

“Neither Party shall require labour market testing, economic needs testing or other procedures of similar effects as a condition for temporary entry, in respect of natural persons upon whom the benefits of this Chapter are conferred.”

That is to say, economic needs testing like Singapore’s fair consideration framework which ensures fair hiring of Singaporeans cannot be applied to “intra-corporate transferees”.

To top it all, CECA Article 9.6 even allows the “intra-corporate transferees” to bring in their spouses or dependents to work too:

“A Party shall, upon application, grant the accompanying spouses or dependents of the other Party the right to work as managers, executives or specialists, subject to its relevant licensing, administrative and registration requirements.”

In cases where their spouses or dependents are not professionals, they shall be allowed to work in other areas:
“Such spouses or dependents can apply independently in their own capacity (and not necessarily as accompanying spouses or dependents) and shall not be barred by the Party granting them the right to work from taking up employment in a category other than that of managers, executives, or specialists solely on the ground that they as the accompanying spouses or dependents are already employed in its territory as managers, executives or specialists.”

India IT companies exploiting the “intra-corporate transfer” loophole

Hence with CECA, Indian IT companies like Wipro or Infosys can exploit the “intra-corporate transfer” loophole, to move large number of Indian IT workers into Singapore since CECA does not set any quotas.

They do not have to hire a single Singaporean in their Singapore-based subsidiaries.

Before the PAP govt notices, tens of thousands of Indian IT workers have already quietly entered Singapore with many of them working and settling in the East side of Singapore, creating their own enclaves.

In recent months, driven by higher unemployment among Singaporean PMETs as well as discriminatory hiring complaints from Singaporean workers, the PAP govt started to slow down the approvals of Indian IT professionals to work here....



The above is part of an article posted in theindependent.sg on 4 May 2017 by a Voltaire.

The most dangerous and most unequal part of this Agreement is Chapter 9 on the Movement of people between the two countries. 127 professions were highlighted, now 128 with the recognition of Indian nursing degrees in the upgraded CECA in 2018. See Annex 9 below for the list. The free movement of people apparently looks so innocuous and fair on paper. But in practice and in reality it is something else.

Millions and millions of Indians would be moving into Singapore to work freely. On the other hand, NOT a single Singaporean would want to work in India. OK I might have exaggerated, maybe 1 or 2 Singaporeans would want to work in India and be paid in rupees. What, for earning rupees and in jobs that paid 10% of what it would be paying in Singapore?

Look at the picture above of the Indian masses in Singapore's Chennai Business Park in Changi, oops I mean Changi Business Park. It is the same in MBFC aka Mumbai Financial Centre in Marina Bay.

From the pictures you will know how serious CECA has turned jobs in Singapore into jobs for Indians from India, not for our PMETs.  Who are the big employers of Indian nationals? GLCs? Are GLCs giving good jobs to Indian nationals and sacking Singaporeans in the process, causing undue financial hardship to Singaporean and their families?

A picture tells a thousand words.

 When Tan Chuan-Jin was still Manpower Minister, he said this in parliament: (He is no longer a minister)

“We have also heard of situations where Singaporeans were retrenched or made to resign in the name of down-sizing, only to realise later that their positions were given to foreigners, who were coincidentally from the same countries as the business heads.”

“Let me be quite blunt. Would these practices not sound discriminatory? Would any respectable progressive company endorse these practices? If this hiring is indeed because they care only about choosing familiar candidates and not about hiring the ‘best man for the job’, then such practices have no place in Singapore’s workplaces. Discrimination will not and cannot be tolerated.”

 Annex 9A LIST OF PROFESSIONALS  
1 System Designer & Analyst 2 Network System & Data Communication Analyst 3 Software Engineer 4 Computer and Information Systems Manager 5 Computer Operations and Network Manager 6 Application Programmer 7 Systems Programmer 8 Multi-media Programmer 9 Network System & Database Administrator 10 Database Administrator 11 Information Technology Auditor 12 Information Technology Security Specialist 13 Information Technology Quality Assurance Specialist 14 Building Architect 15 Interior Architect 16 Landscape Architect 17 Town Planner 18 Civil Engineer (General) 19 Dredging Engineer 20 Dock and Harbour Construction Engineer 21 Structural Engineer (General) 22 Building Construction Engineer 23 Sewerage & Sanitary Engineer 24 Soil Mechanic & Piling Engineer 25 Trenchless Technology Engineer 26 Quantity Surveying Engineer 27 Transportation and Highways Engineer 28 Electrical Engineer (General) 29 Electromechanical Equipment Engineer 30 Electrical Traction Engineer 31 Power Generation & Distribution Engineer 32 Lift Engineer 33 Electronics Engineer (General) 34 Telecommunications Engineer 35 Computer Engineer 36 Computer Systems Engineer 37 Computer Applications Engineer 38 Computer Hardware Design Engineer 39 Semi-conductor Engineer 40 Audio & Video Equipment Engineer 41 Instrumentation Engineer 42 Mechanical Engineer (General) 43 Industrial Machinery & Tools Engineer 44 Marine Engineer 45 Ship Construction Engineer 46 Naval Architect 47 Aeronautical Engineer 48 Automotive Engineer 49 Air-conditioning & Refrigeration Engineer 50 Chemical Engineer (General) 51 Chemical Engineer (Petroleum) 52 Chemical Engineer (Petrochemicals) 53 Manufacturing Engineer (General) 54 Production Engineer 55 Automation Engineer 56 Robotic Engineer 57 Biomedical Engineer 58 Biochemical Engineer 59 Biotechnology Engineer 60 Materials Engineer 61 Industrial Health, Safety & Environment Engineer 62 Petroleum & Natural Gas Engineer 63 Metallurgist 64 Quantity Surveyor 65 Ceramics and Glass Technologist 66 Food and Drink Technologist 67 Dairy Technologist 68 Leather Technologist 69 Textile Technologist 70 Oil Technologist 71 Pulp, Paper, Paint and Plastics Technologist 72 Biologist (General) 73 Botanist 74 Zoologist 75 Anatomist 76 Biochemist 77 Physiologist 78 Neurologist 79 Medical Pathologist 80 Clinical Pathologist 81 Veterinary Pathologist 82 Pharmacologist 83 Animal Scientist 84 Microbiologist 85 Bacteriologist 86 Immunologist 87 General Physician 88 General Surgeon 89 Specialised Surgeon 90 Anaesthetist 91 Psychiatrist 92 Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 93 Paediatrician 94 Endocrinologist 95 Dermatologist 96 Ophthalmologist 97 Cardiologist 98 Radiologist 99 Industrial Physician 100 Medical Service Physician (School) 101 Public Health Physician 102 Dentist (General) 103 Specialised Dentist 104 Veterinarian 105 Veterinary Epidemiologist 106 Pharmacist (Dispensing) 107 Other Pharmacists 108 University Lecturer 109 Polytechnic Lecturer 110 Accountant 111 Cost Accountant 112 Company Secretaries (who are Accountants) 113 Taxation Professionals (who are Accountants) 114 Auditor (Accounting) 115 Career Adviser 116 Financial Analyst 117 Credit Analyst 118 Fund Manager 119 Treasury Manager 120 Market Research Analyst 121 Advertising Account Executive 122 Economist 123 Sociologist 124 Anthropologist 125 Historian 126 Political Scientist 127 Psychologist

A financial centre with NO stock market - Uniquely Singapore

Uniquely Singapore is not a mere slogan. There many things that are very abnormal in Singapore and would together bring the prosperity and good life of Singaporeans to an abrupt ending.

Uniquely Singapore can count on having the most expensive universities in Asia, claimed to be in the company of the top 20 universities in the world but could not produce top talents and leaders and have to import many fake talents from third world and unrecognised universities.

Uniquely Singapore can also count on being the financial centre of Asia but have no local talents to helm the top jobs in the banking and finance industry.

Uniquely Singapore also confounded many with the lack of IT talents in a modern city and went everywhere to promote smart cities using ITs but depending on third world talents to do the job.

Uniquely Singapore is a major sea port that provides and supports trade but has no national shipping line.

Uniquely Singapore is about a govt that professed to be looking after the interests of Singaporeans but would soon find that Singaporeans are a minority and becoming a threaten specie in its own country.

Let me return to this Uniquely Singapore financial centre issue. Could Singapore become a financial centre without a stock market? Bloomberg has written a recent article on the rapid demise of the stock market when there were more good companies delisting than listing in the stock market. The pathetic state of the stock market is there for all to see. And from informed sources, it is likely to end up like NOL, if big broking houses start to wind up their stock broking business here.

The failure of the NOL led to it being sold but turned around immediately by its new owners. What does this say about the NOL story? Was it a rotten apple that had to be thrown away or was it gold but the stupid could not its intrinsic value?

The stock market is dying, the broking houses are not making money. So, is the govt thinking of closing down the stock market and the stock broking business? Do they understand what is wrong with the stock market, why is it not performing and how could it be saved and revived? Or they have conveniently ruled that the stock market is like another NOL, beyond hope, so the logical thing is to close it down, just like the NOL, or like Singapore has no talent, so simply import foreign fake talents?

Can a financial centre survive without a stock market? It is not just the stock market and the broking houses that would be done, but the supporting industries including the banking and finance industry that pays for and supports the real estates, also the industries and corporations that need the finances of the stock market. How serious are the implications with the collapse of the stock market if the govt allows it to wind down?

The  closing down of the stock market is unlike the selling of NOL. It is not that the selling of the NOL would not affect Singapore as a major sea port, it will and the full impact would be felt over time. If the govt allows the stock market to collapse by not doing anything about it, if broking houses take their own initiative to close down, the impact could be immediate and many times more severe than selling NOL.

Singapore cannot afford not to have a stock market to have a thriving financial centre. Anyone thinking of closing down the broking houses, any attempt to close down broking houses, must be looked into it immediately. Any act of such nature is like removing the foundation of the house it is built on. Any act that compromises or threatens the viability of the stock market is undermining the whole economy.

When time was good, when the stock market was booming, they forced broking houses to partner with banks or else.  Now that market is no good, the banks want to unwind their broking businesses to the extent of retrenchment and even closing the business. How can like that? Which irresponsible bank is going to be the first to shut down its broking house and lead to another wave of retrenchment and unemployment?

Uniquely Singapore, a financial centre without a stock market would bring an end to the successful Singapore Story in double quick time.

What would happen if a Singapore bank closes down its stock broking business?

What would happen if a govt bank closes down its stock broking business?