100,000 more jobs coming

We can expect 100,000 jobs to be created and some will definitely have to go to foreign talents. How many will go to them and how this will translate into more foreigners in the country and how this will affect our infrastructure and housing for our people is an urgent problem? Do we have the ability and people to compute all these and start doing the necessary so that no one will be caught off guarded again? A 50% of these jobs going to foreigners could add 200,000 people into the system, assuming each comes with a family of 4. The failure in our housing system to cater for such big inflows of residents here should be a lesson not to be repeated. Then the transportations, even COEs will be affected. The eating places, entertainment, ok we have two casinos to take in some of the influx, but many facilities will be stretched and stressed. Are we prepared for our targeted 6m population? I know many are and have already bought into properties and waiting for the prices to go through the roof. For those who are still looking for a property, better go and grab anything that is available. The shortage is unlikely to be met if history is to tell its story again. Before we bring in another 200,000, let’s get the housing sorted out first. This is the commonsensical thing that any simple mind would not fail to miss. At this moment I don’t think anything has been done on this area. Some people even believed that the demand for BTO launches were fake.

Human rights lesson from Singapore

Maxwell Coopers wrote an article in FreeMalaysiaToday forum with the above title. He was amused by the UN representative, Githu Muigai's recommendations about what Singapore should do to improve its human rights. I too agree with Maxwell. What Muigai should do is to look at all the countries around the world and see if any of them could have a better system and record than Singapore on human rights and treatment of minorities. Look at countries around Singapore for comparison. He should be there instead of in Singapore. There is one good reason for him to be in Singapore. And that is to study the brilliant and workable system that we have put to practice and how the general well being of our minority groups are better than the standard of living of majorities in other countries, and how they could practise their customs and cultures freely as long as they don't infringe on the rights of others. The majority is also subject to this restraint. This will be the best testimony that Muigai could bring to the UN and recommend that the Singapore system be used as the model for other countries plagued with discriminations against their minorities. I think he would have done a great job in doing this and will receive a standing ovation at the UN instead of his ridiculous recommendations to improve a system that can only be found workable in paradise.

Myth 221 - Singaporeans are hard to please

Is that so? The official line is that Singaporeans are fuzzy, choosy and very difficult to please. I don't know how people got that impression. My impression is that Singaporeans are so easy to please. They can be easily appeased and will feel very grateful if given a few dollars. The 1% CPF hike is an excellent example of how easily contented are Singaporeans. The $10 to $40 hike in CPF contribution is already a call for celebration. They were so happy, even when they cannot touch the money for another 30 years. So how can Singaporeans be called choosy and fuzzy and hard to please? Actually there are some Singaporeans that are hard to please. Even with salary that can buy them a million dollar private property every year and they arestill not happy, and asking for more. But these are few and should not be generalised. So the fuzzy, choosy and hard to please Singaporean is a myth or a legend?

Banks should do the right thing?

The Obama govt is trying to cut down the banks to size. Banks should return to do traditional bankings, ie deposit taking and not investing activities. Banks should not be allowed to do all kinds of businesses and grow to a size that they cannot afford to fail. Smaller banks will make the banking system safer. Making the banking system safer is THE right thing to do. The last financial crisis is a warning that if it is not done, the next one could wipe out everything. But no, no one is taking heed even if it is the right thing to do. The popular thing to do is to continue with the looting. The bigger the banks the better as they could muscle in to all deals, conflict of interest is never a consideration. Moral righteousness is not an issue. The issue is to make as much money as possible, at all cost. The looting mentality is so prevalent that it must have sicken the Obama administration. And it is reported that the legal fees for the bankruptcy proceedings of Lehman is now US$730m and will hit $1b. And those in the know knew that many of the charges were exorbitant and questionable. But that is the game big financial thieves are playing. And people just smile and say that's the way it is. Join in the game and have fun. Who cares about whether it is the right thing or wrong thing to do. This join in and have fun mentality of irresponsibility is sweeping across the world. We can also see it manifesting in our way of life. Everyone is also grabbing whatever they can. That's the way it is. It is not a matter of doing the right thing but what and how much one can get out of it. This is the new morality of the 21st Century.

Hanging modern day thieves

The New York SEC is throwing charges at Goldman Sachs for financial frauds and selling fraudulent CDOs out to cheat the innocent investors. So far there appeared to be strong prima facie evidences to bring Goldman Sachs to the courts, but whether anyone will be put behind bars is another matter. The final outcome could be a hefty fine on Goldman Sachs as an organisation and not a single thief found guilty. And they could continue with their game of deceit and theft. What the public have failed to see or not led to see is the role of the SEC. Is SEC culpable, an accomplice to all these big thieves, abetting and helping them in their fraudulent ways? The SEC is a regulator to provide a set of rules and regulations, and a sound system, a level playing field, that is fair to all players in the finance industry, including the stock market. What if the SEC connived, innocently or uninnocently, undestood or misunderstood the dangers of a system that they approved for the investors, should they also be hanged? The Senate and Congress must investigate the role of the SEC as well, the financial systems, rules and regulations and practices to see if the SEC is also at fault. Looking at the unfair practices, a far from level playing field, and the unfair advantages of the big funds against the small investors, the SEC is as guilty as Goldman Sachs and must be answerable to their misdeeds, if proven. All thieves, whether they be big financial organisations or regulators, are thieves if proven so and must be hanged.