Govt ‘has interests of citizens at heart’

‘Purely from the perspective of numbers, it makes sense to take in foreign labour and immigrants. But from an emotional standpoint, it is not easy for people to accept, to agree and support.  We have explained the reasons many times. I think people may not necessarily want more explanations.

What I hope people will know, and I mean this from my heart, is that on immigration and population, we have Singaporeans’ interests at heatt.

We have this responsibility; we are the Govt , we need to lead the country, we need to make the best possible decision for Singaporeans. Even on the most difficult issue, we need to make the best decision and be accountable to the people. There may be different views on how the policy should be, but I hope people understand that the Govt’s intent is good.

We are doing this for Singapore, and for Singaporeans.’  Lee Hsien Loong quoted in ST 22 Jul 15

 

In the above statement Hsien Loong’s position is that the people may disagree with govt policies and the decisions the govt is making, and that is fair. But he also said that the govt should do what it thinks is right, without quoting the example of the arrogant deaf frog, because it is the govt, and if it says it is for the good of the people it must be good for the people.

These two points deserved some discussions and disagreements. In the first instance, the govt must know that this is a democracy and the govt is elected to be the govt for only a 4 or 5 year term. It is not a life time govt. Any govt should take cognizance of this reality and when it makes decisions that have very long term impact on the people, with possible adverse effects, it must seek the consent of the people. The govt is there to represent the people’s interests and the people’s interests must be determined and decided by the people. A major decision like increasing the population to double its size, to turn the original Singaporeans into a minority cannot be taken lightly and not by a govt that is supposed to be there for a 4/5 term. When the people disagree, a democratically elected govt has no right to go ahead against the wishes of the people.

The second point is about Singaporean interests, for the good of Singaporeans. This is a very subjective statement. What is good for gander is not necessarily good for the geese. The govt may think it is good, the intent of the govt, which may be totally incongruent to what the people want,  may be good in the govt’s own interpretation. But does the govt ask the people whether the people agree and think so? Many political decisions are not necessarily a matter of good or bad. The people may have different interests and views on what is good or bad for them. Can a govt of a few men and women, elected to be the govt for a few years, decide the fate of the people unilaterally and go against the wishes of the people just because it claims that it is good for the people, and they are the govt and must decide?

The power of the people vested on an elected govt is temporary and not a blank cheque to do anything the elected govt pleases and thinks it is the right thing to do. There are things and times for an elected govt to come down to the people and ask what the people want eg the people’s money in the CPF or the billions given to foreign students. This is not an autocracy or a totalitarian state, not a dictatorship or a monarchy where the leader holds absolute power, unquestionable power to do as it pleases as if they own this country.

How many of you think or agree that the govt can do anything it likes because it is the govt and because it thinks it is good for the people? Does the political leaders understand what is the meaning of democracy, a republic?

In the same article in the ST, Hsien Loong was also quoted to say this:

‘No matter how the system evolves, we hope that politicians admit that the task is to serve Singaporeans – not a party, or an interest group, but all Singaporeans.’

I am sure every one of you would have a view on this statement.

George Yeo – One Belt, One Road for everybody

At the FutureChina Global Forum held here yesterday, George Yeo said and I quote, ‘China’s One belt, One Road policy holds  immense promise of benefits for many countries, although there are bound to be many complex challenges before it takes off – not least the Western world’s lack of understanding of the plan.’  George Yeo is being so polite. He surely must know that the Westerns are no idiots and would know the benefits this China policy could bring to the countries within the belt and road. The objections by the Westerns were never about the benefits but about their lost of power and influence to China. They are objecting to it just like they are objecting to the AIIB for their own political and economic interests.

Yaseen Anwar, a Pakistani American banker adviser to the Industrial and Commercial Bank put it more directly, ‘They view it as a threat. “You are now making a power move against me, so I’ll oppose the AIIB.”’ This is further collaborated by George’s comment that if China were to pull the One Belt, One Road policy through, ‘it’s going to change the geoeconomic, geostrategic map of Asia.’  Whether China likes it or not, intends for it or not, it will increase its influence in world affairs that would mean a relative decline in the influence of the West. One thing for sure as mentioned by Li Cheng, director of John L Thorpton China Centre at the Brookings Institution, ‘China benefited from the international system…(and) has no interest to challenge the existing international system.’

The Western Powers cannot accept the new reality, that they are no longer the only One calling the shot even in Asian affairs. They must and will do everything to disrupt and derail the AIIB and this One Belt, One Road policy that would benefit the Eurasia countries. That is the realpolitick of things.

There is no need to be sheepish and to apologise to the Westerners for this China initiative. Just do it and lump the Westerners. They cannot be controlling and meddling with the affairs of Asians and to decide what is good or no good for Asians. The Asians must have the confidence to do what they think is good for their own interests. They have to change their colonial or West is superior mindset. They have to stand up and take their place in the world stage as equals to the West, to decide their own future, free from western domination and control. But some are very happy to remain under the rule of Pax Americana.

How to con the daft people

I will use a simple example to illustrate how easy it is to con the daft people. As Sun Tzu wrote, know your enemy know your strength, winning is assured. Take the case of education, knowing that the daft people are all for glory, to be Number One for the right or wrong reasons,  and better still if this can be bought by money, just sell the glory to them. You can find it in many fields. Let me show you how it can be done.

Tell the daft people you can make their universities ranked among the top universities in the world, practically for free.  Whatever that means, no need to bother with the cost and returns and any adverse consequences. And tell them with a little effort their universities can even rank higher than Cambridge or Harvard, you can put them into your pocket. But don’t tell them there is no free lunch. They did not know there is no such thing as free lunch although their idol founding father had told them many times. And to tell them that they could get it for free, my goodness, you can literally see their saliva turning into ponding.

The method is like this. Tell them to subscribe to your ranking system. Tell them it is an internationally recognized system, reputable some more. And if their universities are ranked among the tops, it is something to be proud of, very prestigious, never mind if the students turned out to be duds, unemployable. That is the students’ problem, not your problem.

Once they are sold, tell them to hire foreigners, at least 30% or more, to give the universities an international feel and look. Foreigners are always seen as better than the daft locals. The grass is always greener over the fence. Then tell them to bring in foreign students also, 30% or more the merrier. Con them to believe that with the presence of foreigners, somehow their students would become smarter or appear to be smarter and the universities will somehow become better or more reputable. And the universities would also be more desirable.

When they swallow this line of conning, they would go back and do all the silly things without thinking. They would sack their own citizen lecturers and hire foreign lecturers at higher pay to turn the universities into foreign universities to serve foreign interests. Never mind, it is OPM. And if their citizen lecturers lost their jobs, tell them they are not good enough and they themselves are to blame. See, providing employment to foreigners against the interest of their citizens they would also do.  Maybe they also think that the country belongs to the whole world, so what is the problem of the universities belonging to foreigners. Whose money is being spent to feed the foreigners, who cares? Then 20 years forward, they would find out that they don’t have local talents in the universities like in the banking and finance industries. Then they will start to talk about planning ahead for a citizen core like real.

What about foreign students? Who cares? As long as they are good for the university’s ranking, if no foreign students want to come, they would use taxpayer’s money to pay for the foreign students to come. And they would not even spare a thought at the thousands of places they are snatching away from the children of their citizens. As long as the university ranking is high, they would claim they have achieved something, done well, for who never mind. Our universities are world class.

The net effect would be the hollowing of local lecturers in the universities and many children of the citizens being deprived of university places. And the foreigners will be laughing themselves silly for the easy money they are getting. Where in the world got govt allowing universities to pay, train and nurture foreigners using tax payers’ money? How would all these affect the interests of the citizens is of no concern. And they may even put up letters by grateful foreign lecturers and students saying thank you for their generosity in their notice boards. And these daft would be so elated, feeling so good that the foreigners really appreciate what they have done for them, throwing money at them.

See the recipe for the daft? Daft people easy to con or not? It sure works one. For the sake of a little superficial glory, they would do anything, sacrifice the interests of their citizens and use the taxpayer’s money with no qualms about it. The citizens, the parents and students craving for a place in the universities can cry their hearts out, who cares?

See, under my watch the university is world class in ranking! Paid for by OPM. The trick is to look for a silly country to put this into practice. Which country in the world would allow this to happen? Which country’s top academics would be silly enough to be conned by this formula? Can it really happen?

The above is of course a fantasy. It would not happen. It can’t. Top academics and govt leaders are all top talents and would not dare to waste taxpayers’s money on foreigners at the expense of the taxpayers for a cheap glory scam.

An easier method would be to follow what the football leagues are doing. Buy up top universities and change their names to the name of the country buying it. Instant world famous universities!

Redbean Soup all orders sent out

Hi all,

I have sent out all the books and everyone should receive them by this Friday or earlier. For multiple books for local addresses, you will get your book one at a time but not on the same day.

Anyone who did not receive the book by this Friday please let me know.

Thanks again. Still some books available.

Redbean

Yellow ribbon for Roy Ngerng, No?

How many of you have heard of this thing called Yellow Ribbon that people wore on their chests to show how compassionate and merciful they were towards ex criminals? They want to give the ex criminals who have paid their dues a second chance, and rightly so as many are not hard core criminals that would return to their crimes again. Let them return society, give them a job to be responsible and respectable people again.

I heard Roy Ngerng is still jobless one year after he was sacked by the hospital for defaming the Prime Minister. Why is Roy having such difficulties finding another job? He is not qualified, no good, lazy, did not want to work? Or he is unable to compete with the hoards of foreigners that are more talented than him? Roy is a young man, not the middle age PMETs and not demanding an unaffordable salary. Why is he still unemployed?  Or is Roy being ostracized, discriminated, by who?

Roy did not commit a crime and is not a hard core criminal. Neither is he a recalcitrant. He made a mistake and he apologized, and would be paying for his mistake. Would anyone who ever wore a Yellow Ribbon think Roy should be given a second chance, just to be employed? Is Roy unemployable?

Yes, why is Roy unemployable? No employer dares to employ him? No second chance? Are the inhabitants of paradise inhuman that no one is willing to help this young man to get a job? Or should Roy enroll in the NTUC e2i course to make himself competitive internationally so that he can find a job overseas? Is Roy being condemned for his mistake for life?

What do you think?