Under building and overbuilding are both troublemakers

The Govt did a marvelous job in solving the housing problems left behind by the colonial masters. It was sheer neglect, disinterest, to build for a growing population after the war. But that was what colonial masters were. They only looked after their own interests, not so much the interests of the colonized people if they could get a way with it.

It was a mammoth task to house a population that was huddled into clusters of attap and zinc roof huts, dilapidated old buildings of cubicles spreaded across the island. The massive rebuilding of the city and country was achieved within a matter of a decade or slightly more. The people were well housed and with a few to spare. One could buy a flat like walking into a departmental store.

Then came the brilliant idea and logic of a super talent. Too many flats not sold meant a lot of assets unused or under used and a heavy cost to the Govt. Get rid of them! And so they did. Then came the next flawed logic. Build only when the demand was firmed. Place the order and pay the deposit first. Only then would the Govt start to acquire the land, do the planning and design and then build. It would take 4 or 5 years. But that was the price for a clinically systematic Govt that prided itself of super efficiency at the expense of the people. There would be no wastage. Every unit of flat built would have an immediate buyer/owner who waited for the last 5 years.

The policy was not to build in advance but to under build. And now we have the gigantic problems of today with housing prices shooting through the roof, with many young people having to wait and wait for their flats. With many marriages delayed, babies delayed and all the consequences of a housing shortage.

Now another new and enlightened wisdom has surfaced. We shall build in advance, we shall over build to provide for future needs. Whoa, like dat oso can. Macam masak masak. Yesterday like that cannot, not like that is the brilliant answer to a wronged policy. Would anyone be crying out loud that a few hundred billions of assets be laid in waiting and costing a lot of money and interests to the Govt? Tiok boh? How can build so many flats in advance and waiting for buyers? Now, who is so clever to come up with such a policy? KNN, I also dunno what is right or wrong, what is good policy or bad policy. Toss a coin to see which one is good or bad.

Is this what super talent is all about? Is this why we have to pay millions for the crème ala crème?

The real test of a Sinkie

There is no need to ask any high brow question about what is a Sinkie. There is no need to know about shared values, culture, experience growing up and all the craps of what not, can speak the language or know the history of the island. The real test comes when there is a crisis and a letter or a public announcement that all adults must register at specified centres for service to the country. This is not necessarily restricted to NSmen. Every Sinkie will answer the call, will go to the reporting centres to sign up. There will be no question ask, no second thoughts. Cause they know that they are Sinkies and this is their country and this is what they have to do.

When a Sinkie has to question himself if he has to sign up, if he wants to sign up, or should he take the next flight out, nationhood has failed. It may have already. How to expect foreigners or new citizens, don’t bother about PRs, to report to the centres when many don’t even want to do NS? A Sinkie is a Sinkie by nature, it is in him or her to serve the country when needed. No erat erat, no reasoning on whether it is good or bad, or what is there for me, they will answer the call of the country.

At least I know that the older generations did just that, before NS came into effect. Being a citizen is a part of the psyche of a citizen, something like falling in love, no need any reasons or justification. I wonder how many of the new citizens, forget about the PRs, will react when there is a crisis and a general mobilization.

Quote by Joey, a blogger in TRE

This is a quote by a blogger in TRE to my article on How much GIC and Temasek have contributed to the public coffer. And I take liberty to modify it a little. This is the original comment, ‘People working harder and harder for lesser and lesser to feed an elite group which is getting fatter and fatter.’

This is my extended version…People working harder and harder for lesser and lesser to buy smaller and smaller flats at higher and higher prices and the elite getting richer and fatter.

How to weaken the Sinkie core?

This is a simple question with many simple solutions. But there is a catch. When one is talking about the core, it reminds me of biology lessons when the core of a cell is the tiny nucleus. That is the core, and the core is meant to be very small though a very important critical mass. Is this the population core that the Govt is talking about, a smaller core is still acceptable, the smaller the stronger, or strengthening by making it smaller?

In conventional logic, to strengthen the population core, it must be increasing the numbers that are making the core. A 70% Sinkie core is definitely a stronger core than a 60% or 50% core. No craps about quality replacing quantity and a core of 30% of super talents is better than a 70% core of the masses. Theoretically this is good on papers but rubbish in reality. No country can have a population of super talents and no average or below average citizens unless the latter are all culled in a screening process, or expelled.

Weakening the Sinkie core is so easily done, by reducing their numbers or percentage in the population. Another way is to dilute them with foreigners as new citizens to hide the truth, that there are now more Sinkies but not really Sinkies as a Sinkie would know.

There are many ways to get rid of Sinkies. Forcing them to emigrate, some left because they find themselves no longer competitive vis a vis foreigners, under pressure by the system, disadvantaged. How about a policy that invites foreign talents to replace local talents? Sounds logical, clinical, practical, functional but totally devoid of the intangibles of country and citizens, of a social contract between govt and its people with share values and a common bond and destiny. It is all so numerical, so calculative and economic. Man is not just an economic animal. A country is not an economic unit.

Nothing can be worst than to replace local talents with fake talents or half baked talents. And that is not strengthening the core but eroding the core, undermining the Sinkie core. It is so easy to weaken the Sinkie core.

North Korean bomb making East Asia a safer place

Contrary to all the hue and cry about the latest detonation of a nuclear bomb by North Korea, this act and the nuclear capability of the North Koreans have in many ways helped to stabilise the East Asia region from going into war. Japan and South Korea will now have more reasons not to provoke the North Koreans or threaten military actions every other day. The consequences of a hostile act by any of these two countries could be devastating. There are now more reasons to want to be nice to the North Koreans and develop more lasting and peaceful economic and diplomatic relations instead of making enemies.

The bigger threat of war in the region, the evil Empire in the US too will have to take cognizance of the North Korean’s ability to deliver the black eye. The Americans cannot afford a nuclear bomb on any of its major cities. Any preventive strike, any hostile act of aggression, any premeditated invasion, threat or provocation, or war games, will have to be very carefully calibrated and restrained. The cowboy’s shoot first talk later cannot work anymore as the price to be extracted by the North Koreans is unacceptable.

And no, the North Koreans, like any nuclear power, will not be trigger happy to fire a nuclear missile at any country any moment. Such an act is assured self destruction of North Korea. The American nuclear arsenal is formidable and unchallenged and cannot be challenged. The nuclear capability is an insurance certificate the North Koreans have bought for themselves against any cowboy president in the US that thinks he could strike with impunity. The North Koreans have secured their country from foreign attacks.

The current spate of fist waving and table thumping are likely to subside and reasons and cool heads will take over. The war rhetoric and war games the Americans and South Koreans conduct regularly near the North Korean’s border would have to be toned down for good measures. Any military intervention for a regime change in North Korea is now out of question. When the bully does not have overwhelming superiority to hit out at a weaker enemy that cannot hit back, the bully would have to talk less aggressively from now on.

The North Koreans have bought peace and avoided the fate of an Iraq or Libya. It is now the turn of the Iranians to do the same to protect themselves against an invasion led by the evil Empire and its proxies. Only then would Iran be safe from the evil Empire and Israel. No country would want to start a war with a nuclear power. For they cannot win and should it come close, the nuclear power will just unleash its nuclear might to end it all.

Strange but it is the hard truth. The world is a safer place with the acquisition of nuclear power by small nations to protect themselves against aggressive and belligerent evil Empires and their proxies that believe in might is right.

How much weight to carry around?

Do you want to walk around with 60kg, 100kg or 150 kg as your body weight? Between 60 to 100kg I think many could still feel quite comfortable to move around with their daily life routines. Beyond that, to carry more than a 100kg of body mass, getting around is not going to be easy and there are many other negative side effects. The first part is to keep and maintain that weight, it is going to be very costly in the consumption of food and medical services/products. Even the whole wardrobe got to be changed, as well as the furniture.

On the lighter side of 100kg, living is that much easier, and that much cheaper. One does not need to eat a pail of rice and all the meat and vegetables to go with, maybe a bit obese but not too heavy on the knees and the feet and the heart. There is no need to eat like a glutton, wasting so much food that is totally unnecessary. The intake of a 150kg is going to be more than twice that of a 60kg, and more of everything.

This is a very simple analogy of what a population of 5m, 6m and 7m is going to be like. If we can get along fine with 5m, why pushing for 6m or more? Can we live with 5m and remain healthy? The Govt’s view is that we are hitting a crisis of a life time if we don’t go the 7m way. The reasons given were not convincing and never look like anything of a crisis. There will be major adjustments that needed to be made. The adjustments are much easier at the current level than when it balloons to 7m. It will then be a 7m kind of problem.

There is often the call to be mean and lean and fighting fit. 7m is not going to be fighting fit but going to slow down everything as the cost to sustain a 7m population is going to be very much more difficult and the returns will be marginal. The fact that the GDP will only grow by 2 – 2.5% for a 100k increase of heads annually just does not make reasonable sense. Why are the social and other costs and consequences not spelt out for the people? So far everyone has been told of the good things but no one is telling the bad part.

We all know what it is like of a 150kg body. The similarities need no imaginations.

Japan, the first of 21 Demands in the 21st Century

Japan is back to its mischief once again like it did to colonise Korea, Manchuria and China and eventually the whole of Southeast Asia. During its imperialist days, it repeated fabricated acts and incidents in China and blamed it on the weak Qing Govt and later the ROC. And after creating every incident it will demand apologies, compensation and special concessions from China. It kept on bullying China and eventually invaded China in an attempt to colonise the country.

Japan has started to create incidents to provoke China by first making a fictitious buying out of the Diaoyu Islands which it snatched from China in the late 19^th Century. This has forced the Chinese hands to exert their rights over the islands. The Japanese escalated the tension by scrambling fighter aircrafts and naval crafts to intercept Chinese surveillance planes and ships. The latest tension is the accusation that a Chinese frigate locked radar onto a Japanese destroyer. This is like the Tonkin Incident when the Americans accused the Vietnamese for ramming their patrol boats against an American warship.

And the haughty and arrogant Japanese PM Abe is making his demand that China apologise for the act. This is going to remind the Chinese of the 21 Demands Japan made on China to control China and seized Chinese territories. Many Chinese are going to be riled by this demand and will react in a hostile manner and raising the temperature in the island dispute. Japan is provoking China to defend itself and to accuse China of acting aggressively. This is likely to be part of an American Japanese plot to show to the Southeast Asian nations that China is indeed an aggressive big power.

What can China do? China cannot run away from this fight. It has to take the Japanese and the Americans on or it would have endless troubles and even losing Diaoyu Islands for good. China must demand that Japan withdraw all its ships from Diaoyu Islands or face the consequence of war. This is the new bottom line.

How much have GIC and Temasek contributed…

How much have GIC and Temasek contributed to the national coffer annually? The combined asset managed by these two SWFs could be near a trillion. One used to claim a return of 17% annually but lately the numbers seemed to be more down to earth, something like 5%. Correct me if I am wrong on this as I am recalling it from some faded memories.

At 5% interest for a sum of $1 trillion it will work out to $50b annually. It the sum managed is $600b, the profit is some $30b annually. DBS Bank’s profit is about $3b lately and used to be between $1b to $2b. The two funds are equivalent to 15 to 25 DBS Banks in terms of profit. In a more general term, the amount could be the profits of a whole industrial estate like Jurong. It is big money and can make the budget that much easier on the Govt.

With this kind of profits, the contribution to the national coffer must be quite substantial and is a major source of national income. How have these returns benefited the people, in what ways, how much, not many people really know. It would be nice for the Govt to tell the people how great the contributions were from these two very profitable organizations and how the citizens have greatly benefited from them. Would there be some numbers coming out soon?

What is Singapore’s GDP now? $300b or $400b? The White Paper is planning for a GDP growth of around 2% or 2.5%. At 2% growth rate, the GDP should increase by $6b or $8b using the $300b as base. And this is what the White Paper seeks to achieve with the import of nearly a 100,000 immigrants annually over the next 17 years. This is really pathetic for the added social and economic costs of housing an additional 1.6m people in the island.

Compare the profits that could be generated by GIC and Temasek combined? With a lower average of $30b in annual profits, do we really need to import 1.6m people just for a token $6b to 8b increase in our GDP and to live with the consequences of a highly densely populated city? If the two SWFs could increase their profits by 10%, they could do what the import of 1.6m people could do. That would be neat isn’t it?

Now I have a better proposal than the White Paper and the WP’s paper. No need to increase the population at all. Just work on the productivity of the two SWFs and to raise their annual profits and there is no need to live in a congested concrete jungle with everything shrinking except the population.

Lim Wee Kiat prefers suicide to euthanasia

“The feedback I received from my friends was that the alternative plans would kill the economy and this is euthanasia for Singapore. Between suicide for PAP versus euthanasia for the country… my choice is clear, I support the White Paper.” Said Lim Wee Kiat.

This is the first time that a PAP MP spoke honestly about what he thought of the White Paper. He knew that it was political suicide. This is one thing that the people will deal to the PAP comes 2016. What is of greater concern is whether the White Paper would also lead the country into a suicidal path. Many think so except the 77 and are speaking out to stop this self destruction down the road. The fact that the country has come to this juncture where the PAP admitted is a crisis of a life time and going along with the White Paper, a road of no return, speaks for the quality of the Govt to lead the country to a safe landing. Sinkies are now offered an option to jump from a frying pan into the deep blue sea.

Why not give the WP’s proposal a chance as they have not contributed to this crisis that needs another no choice do will die and don’t do will also die proposition of the PAP? The PAP may try to run down the WP proposal or any proposal from anyone, and to call it euthanasia. But that is PAP’s view of things and the WP did not think so and neither do the people. On record, every policy or decision by the PAP is a near perfect solution as claimed, a most well thought out solution, carefully calibrated, but still ended up with this crisis of a life time. It is also a historical fact that none, nothing from the opposition will ever be deemed as workable. Thank God that this is the case and the WP can sleep well that they did not contribute anything to the current crisis and needs another crisis loaded White Paper that is, as expected, touted as the only solution for the day.

Could the current crisis be avoided if the PAP had borrowed some ideas from the opposition, listen a little and not to adopt a ‘knows all’ and infallible attitude? The PAP deserves the full credit of what is happening today and the crisis that it has brought to the people. They have adopted the deaf frog attitude to do what it thought were best that lands the country into the current state of affair.

Without the Whip and without any regards to party loyalty, how many of the 77 would vote against this White Paper? When Hsien Loong shouts charge, how many will be charging with him and how many will just stay put and watch him charging ahead? Hsien Loong can be comforted by having the ministers running beside him, and of course Lim Wee Kiat and a few others.

The GE may come much sooner than 2016. This White Paper could have caused a serious rift within the PAP and a break could come into the open at the earliest opportune time. Surely not every PAP MP is agreeable to this suicidal path. In the last breakout the breakaway camp formed the Barisan Socialis, But history was not on their side and PAP came up tops. Barisan Socialis is history. The impending break could turn the table and the PAP could be on the losing end. All it needs is 37 PAP MPs to walk away to form a coalition with the WP, they could form a majority and the next Govt. This would force the PAP to call for a GE prematurely.

Don’t say not possible.

Who is qualified to comment on national policies?

‘According to the snapshot which TR Emeritus (TRE) received from a regular TRE reader, a Facebook user calling himself “Zhi Hao” has opined that only those who have studied economics, law, sociology, history, anthropology, public administration, public policy, national politics, international relations, comparative politics, psychology, political organization and political theory are qualified to comment on “policy the government came out with”.’ This is an extract of an article posted in TRE.

I am posting this article in jest. If we agree with this Zhi Hao, doctors and engineers, architects, among those excluded from his list should not be commenting on govt policies and national issues. But can doctors, engineers and architects be politicians and sit in Parliament talking politics and making decisions on national issues? : ) Taxi drivers and the Ah Pehs and Ah Mahs in kopitiams sure not qualify to talk politics. And all those who never make it to universities cannot also.

This is definitely from a young man. It is good to be young and say what you like when you are young and when people know you are young. The young will grow up one day.

Weekend is good for such snippets. Sinkies shall enjoy their blessings while it lasts.

Happy Lunar New Year to everyone

祝大家新年快乐

These are two of my rar arts from the Bloodline Series. Both are untitled. Maybe I shall call them Chinese New Year Celebration I and II.

PM Lee: We are all in this together

The Parliament has passed the White Paper for 6.9m population in 2030 with all 77 PAP MPs voting yea. And Hsien Loong proudly said, 'We are all in this together.' Do the people have a say or a choice not to be part of this madness?

I think Hsien Loong forgot to complete his sentence, 'We are all in this together, all 77 of us.' Did he know that the opposition MPs and the NMPs +NCMPs are not in this together? Did he know that the majority of the citizens are not in this together with his 77 MPs? According to the mini poll conducted in this blog, 97% were not together with him. And this can be confirmed by the number of people that have indicated that they will be attending the protest rally on 16 Feb at Hong Lim Park.

The attendance in this rally is probably one of the most important event in the history of this island. The cramming of additional 2m people into the island in the last 10 years went on sneakily without the consent of the people. The influx of foreigners were allowed in by the Govt and causing a lot of hardship, dislocation and disruption on the lives of the citizens. High cost of living, high property prices, high COEs, congestion, competition for space and services and straining of the infrastructure, transport systems and facilities, are getting on the nerves of the people. The patience of an otherwise very kiasu, kiasi and kiachenghu people has reached a BTH state, beh tahan liao.

And Hsien Loong said 'We are all in this together.' Really? This statement is going to rile more angry protestors. We are all NOT in this together. Wait for the voices of the people at the protest rally to be heard.

Gilbert Goh, the organiser of the protest is overwhelmed. He thought it would be the usual 200 crowd. Now the feedback is not even 2000 but many times more. The news of a massive turnout has wetted the interests of the international media and all the big guys will be there to report on this event.

The Singapore Spring has finally arrived, prompted or initiated by courtesy of the Govt through the highly unpopular White Paper.

77 MPs voted in favour of the White Paper

The very unpopular White Paper on future population in the island was passed yesterday with 77 for, 11 nay and 1 abstained. At least two PAP MPs were not present, LKY and Inderjit Singh. PAP has 80 MPs in Parliament. 79 PAP MPs were counted, 77 +2. Who is missing? All opposition MPs and NMPs voted against except for the diplomatic Eugene Tan who chose to abstain. The house is divided with PAP against the others on this population issue.

It is clear that the only way for a PAP MP not to vote along party line is to be absent with valid excuses, like LKY and Inderjit. Those who are present in Parliament would have to vote accordingly no matter if they agree or disagree with the motion or even spoke against it. Is this enough to confirm that no PAP MP can be an independent MP, to vote according to his belief and conscience, or be his own man or woman, to take a stand against the party position?

The fate of this island having 6.9m population is sealed. We are going to get more foreigners into the country to maintain a strong Sinkie core. They are here for the good of Sinkies. ‘We are doing it for Singaporeans…’ I got goose pimples hearing these words spoken by politicians.

The attractiveness of Singapore as a production and business centre

Singapore is what it is today not just because of cheap labour. There are many factors that make Singapore a very attractive and business friendly country. Thanks to the Govt, we have a very pro business climate, good infrastructure, good govt rules and regulations, ease of doing business with negligible corruption, transparency, good labour, govt and business relations and a highly educated workforce. English is the common language for govt, business and social activities. The legal system is based on the British model that many developed countries are familiar with. There is hardly any restriction on the transfer of money, ease of transport and communication system, good international connectivity and a very safe and clean and liveable environment. It is so easy to just move in and live in this city. The tax rate is about the lowest in the world.

With so many advantages, even the high cost of living is not too much an issue. We have full employment. There is really no need to create more employment unless the Govt is thinking of increasing the population/workforce which means more jobs are needed. If the population is more or less capped at the present level, even with some leaving, the employment situation is unlikely to be seriously affected. Any company that leaves will likely to be replaced quickly by more productive and higher value added companies. 

The Govt could use this opportunity to restructure the economy, allow the less productive and labour intensive companies to leave. Those that need cheap labour and could not live without them can also leave. Those companies that think they could operate in this city will still come. With our highly educated workforce, the high value added companies would not have problem fitting in to benefit from all the first class facilities and advantages this country is providing. The country should keep upgrading, keep the population at the current level without straining on the infrastructure and resources, and raising the income level of the workforce at the same time.

There is no need to keep relying on cheap labour industries that are not paying well. That is an area that the country has moved away from and should not return to. The jobs and pay they are creating are worthless numbers that we can do without. Whatever residual companies, let them be, and if they are not competitive, let them move to neigbouring countries to tap on their cheaper workforce and infrastructure if they find it difficult to get cheap labour. 

We need to attract good quality companies with high paying jobs for our graduates from the universities and tertiary institutions. Otherwise these graduates will be competing for lower and cheaper jobs with cheaper PMETs with lower quality papers and qualifications. We have world class universities churning out quality graduates not to be cheap labour.

By keeping the population at this level, many of the land and facilities can be improved without straining them and without incurring huge infrastructure development cost. The large reclamation of land and housing may not be necessary or less will be needed. This is also in a way a chicken and egg situation, one feeding on the other.

Singapore is a very attractive place to live and do business without being cheap. We don’t have to sell this country as cheap and good. We are good and very good. Many rich and famous would want to be here and live here. Let’s throw away the mantra of CBF. Lets be expensive and good and high paying. We are already expensive in many ways and the businesses are still coming. We can be selective, not grabbing the cheap and less productive ones. Does this argument make sense?

What do you think?

Hong Lim Park Protest

I just like to have a feel on how many people may be attending the Hong Lim Park Protest on the White Paper. The rally is on Sat 16 Feb 13 at 4.30 pm. The Poll is on the right.

And also click the advertisement for my breakfast. Thank you.

Redbean

What makes a citizen Singaporean?

This has never been an issue, but it is now. The amount of privileges and public money given to new citizens as subsidies and national bonuses, the priority in housing when some true blue Sinkies are not even allowed to buy, is becoming a big pain in the neck for the real citizens of the country they built and they sacrificed for. What the fuck is happening to my country? Why are citizens, the original citizens being treated as second class citizens, being disadvantaged by new citizens and even PRs and foreigners? Does the Govt know this, or does the Govt know that it is the cause of all these unfair treatments against its very own citizens it is supposed to look after?

The facetious remarks made by some MPs and Tan Chuan Jin are rude and offensive to Singaporeans, I mean the true blue Singaporeans. The examples raised of Amy Khor, Chen Show Mao and some ministers were selective examples that evade the angst and anger of the people. Don’t evade the main issue, the real pain the people are feeling. It is the new citizens that the people are fed up with when they are given so many privileges at the expense of the true blue Singaporeans.

You are not a citizen like one of us if you don’t serve NS when you could. You are not a citizen when you evade NS. Don’t come up with craps that you are saving babies and helping the economies by working in your profession. NS is the rite of passage to citizenship for male citizens. NS is the badge of honour, the common path that all male citizens will have to take as their contribution to nationhood. Do not degrade and abuse NS as something else when you have not donned the uniform, to train, to defend and to be maimed or die for this country.

All new citizens, using an arbitrary figure of 5 or 10 years, must not receive the same subsidies and handouts as true blue Singaporeans. All male citizens that are eligible to do NS but did not is not deserving to be a citizen and must not be allowed to hold senior positions in public office, especially to be seated in Parliament.

Our little island is now flooded with millions of new citizens and the number is going up. If we do not make a difference between the new citizens and true blue citizens, we will be short changing ourselves, selling our rights away.

White Paper – Don’t listen to snake oil salesmen

The debate on the 6.9m population is getting heated up in Parliament. The position of the PAP is that without the more than 1m foreigners coming into the workforce, the city will sink and Sinkies will really be sinking. Our reputation will be impaired, MNCs threatening to pull out, hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, standard of living will go down, and they forgot to add that our women folks will all become maids in foreign countries. What else is new? Crying wolf to little children?

97% of Sinkies have said no to this outrageous scheme of turning our country into a foreigners hub. Are the 97% population so stupid and the handful of snake oil salesmen genius, the white knights that are here to save the people and country? I have written a piece about the restructuring of our economy in the early days when many of these wise men were still playing golies or flying kites. Didn’t they know that we have gone through a very critical phase of skills upgrading to high value added jobs to raise the income of our workers? When has this country turned into another cheap labour joint?

Restructuring the economy…if you can remember

Many seniors would remember how Jurong Industrial Town started. It was primary industries, some heavy industries and many were labour intensive industries. When we started to industrialise, labour intensive industries were the only thing available even if the pay was low. There were plentiful of not well educated workers available and needed jobs. We were competing for investments by being cheap and good.

This went on for a decade or two before China opened up. Our immediate neighbours too were encouraging low cost industries to locate there. The writing was on the wall. We could not compete based on cheap labour. Productivity was the key to lift the economy and industries to the next level. The Govt consciously allowed, or no choice, when many labour intensive garment and electronics companies uprooted to cheaper sources of labour. We have the National Productivity Board, famously known as NPB, to boost productivity.

The Govt went on to attract high value added industries here. We promote ourselves as a hub for knowledge based industries. Highly educated and high quality workers and higher pay. We have to compete at a different level to survive. No more cheap labour!

Some years ago the NPB’s name was changed to Spring. I am wondering what the hell that word meant. It cannot be an Arab Spring or Singapore Spring. But what was clear, Productivity is no longer the key word. And the productivity of the industries and economies actually got buried and forgotten. Productivity has gone to sleep. Whatever GDP growth there was is now directly related to the number of workers, skilled, unskilled and low skilled, that are brought into the country. There is nothing to do with productivity but low cost.

Since when have we become a low cost production centre and cheap labour joint and trying to compete with our neighbours and giants like China, India and Indonesia, and even Malaysia? And why are there so many low cost industries here today and now trying to blackmail the Govt not to restrict the inflow of cheap labour? Why is the Govt not doing the same as in the early 80s, to shift out the labour intensive and cheap labour industries? Or how did so many of these industries creep into this knowledge based economy in the first place?

Would the Govt got weak knees and beg the MNCs to stay put? Please don’t go, we will obey and let you have whatever you want. We will import more cheap labour?

What is happening?

When we were all Sinkies

There was a time when we were all Sinkies, some like to call themselves Singaporeans. Every Sinkie was equal in many ways. The males got thrown into the back of 3 tonners and taken to some God forsaken place they had never been in their lives, put on some green uniforms and went charging up Pengkang Hill, with gusto, sleeping in grave yards and in the mud, under rain or shine. There were complaints of tough training and all, $90 allowance and meals that were churned out by cooks that barely knew how to boil water. They were lucky when the Inche in the cook house did the real cooking to have something nicer to fill their stomach. But they went home and slept well. They were later discharged after completing their NS, ROD and so happy.

They accepted their duties to serve the country, to die for the country. Many unfortunate parents did not see their sons any more. They gave up their lives for the country while training to defend the country. Some came back unrecognizable, with parts of the body missing. And many continue to serve the country as reservists. There were still complaints, but all took them in their stride. They were NS men, the country and the people depended on them should the day come for them to be at the front line.

Those were the days when everyone was a citizen, and everyone was equal.

Today they are still serving NS but less equal than foreigners that are called FTs and PRs, or new citizens. While they are slogging in the fields, in the jungles, in some foreign lands, the foreigners are taking over their jobs, some even taking over their wives and girlfriends or girls that could have been their wives. Foreigners who took up citizenships need not serve NS but got all the perks and handouts like the NSmen and the native citizens. And foreigners could even be ahead of the queue for public housing. And many of these shitty NSmen are not even eligible to buy a public housing flat. And they are to protect the country, the new citizens and the PRs and what not.

Why are the NSmen not complaining, or why are they complaining? Why are they feeling disillusioned or cheated, short changed, or being less equal in their country compare to new citizens and PRs? Why are the NSmen angry?

Why like that?

An ageing population is a triumph of development.

‘We should stop seeing elderly Singaporeans as just a drain on our economy and as a hindrance to our goal to keep Singapore dynamic. Older Singaporeans have much to offer us, and not all of it can be measured in economic terms.

In fact, our elderly Singaporeans are essential to maintaining a Singapore core. Older Singaporeans are custodians of culture and, as some have suggested, can be employed in schools to teach subjects such as social studies and national education, or encouraged to volunteer to do so. This is also a way of encouraging cross-generational sharing and learning, particularly in a society where family trends are shifting and there may be less opportunities for inter-generational sharing within the family.’….

I like this part of Chen Show Mao’s paper. The senior citizens are not a waste or rubbish waiting to be thrown away. Many are a store house of information and history. The accumulated experience in them is wisdom that cannot be found in the text books.

And with today’s medical advancement and the quality of life, many are very healthy and can go on till 70 or 80. I see myself going on to 70 without much stress. And many of the seniors are in such shape but thinking that their days are over, as society or govt has so fixed, and thus wasting their times in club houses or playing golf. Many can still be gainfully employed if they so choose.

The employment policies of the govt and private organizations, public and private institutions, should cater for this mindset change to welcome more seniors back to the work force. Many are financially sufficient and do not need abundance of money to work. A decent salary will be enough to keep them happy. By so doing, the labour cost could be lowered and more seniors would be independent instead of being a liability. And there is lesser need for foreigner to support a bigger ageing population when more are supporting themselves. When seniors are working till 70 or 80, they are economically active and contributing and supporting the economy as well. Isn’t that good?

There must be a serious conviction and commitment to restructure the workforce, to retain more people in the workforce for as long as possible. After all we have become an economic animal and working to death is our new mantra. Just look at the cleaners in the foodcourt will do. This, couple with the savings in their CPF or in their bank accounts or assets, the data on ageing population to be supported by a bigger and younger pool of workforce, particularly the PMETs, and that’s what our seniors will be as we move ahead, is thus misleading. There are many PMET jobs that are not directly related to ageing. The new seniors are knowledge based seniors. Many are armed with professional and tertiary degrees and wide ranging skills and knowledge. They are no longer the artisans or coolies of the past.

Think sinkie first and as the WP suggested, think of tapping the pool of the seniors and those females that can participate in the economy. Cut down on the one track mind of relying on foreigners. It is a drug, a bad habit. Kick the habit. Don’t be lazy, think harder.

Pro Sinkie or pro foreigner policies better

The WP proposal put up by Chen Show Mao came under immediate attack by the PAP bench. The WP’s proposal is basically to tap on the big pool of unemployed or underemployed Sinkies to the sum of 1.2m people. These people can go to waste, remain unemployed or underemployed but could be economically productive if they are returned to the workforce. What is so wrong with this? Why ignore them totally?

The PAP’s White Paper is about bringing in more foreigners, diluting the Sinkie element to about 50% by 2030. Between the two proposals, which one is more pro Sinkie and which is more pro foreigner?

Can the WP proposal work, fully, partially, it would mean more Sinkies in the workforce and lesser need to import more foreigners. Why can’t the PAP look into it to see if there are some merits and useful recommendations that can be incorporated into the bigger plan? Why must it be rejected lock, stock and barrel? NG!

Can the PAP proposal be moderated? Is it a no way out option that without the huge influx of foreigners, it cannot work? The foreigner content seems to be the core of the future workforce. And the foreigners are really here to improve the core of Sinkies by reducing the percentage of Sinkies in the country? I have a bit of problem trying to disentangle the logic or fallacy of the arguments.

The wayang in Parliament

The WP has stoically spoken against the White Paper but still conceded to 5.9m people. Several PAP MPs also spoken against the 6.9m population. Among the notables who were not in favour are Christopher De Souza, Arthur Fong and Seah Kian Peng who spoke out strongly about the population projection. Inderjit Singh also wanted the Govt to take a breather to solve the present cumulated problems before embarking on such an ambitious projection. There are more than 40 PAP MPs who are scheduled to speak on the subject.

This White Paper is a good test case to see how independent PAP MPs could be from party stand and whether they can be their own men or women, to speak and vote against party position. The proof is in the pudding. If they are only able to speak but still got to vote along party line, then in the future no PAP candidate should feel so free to declare he is an independent man and would stand on his beliefs, values and principles, even voting against the party if he feels strongly against an issue.

We have seen four PAP MPs so far, and may there be more to come, and the findings could be based on a larger sample size.

97% responded to Poll on the 6.9m population

621 bloggers have voted in the one week Poll on whether they are for or against the 6.9m population in the White Paper. 604 said no, 15 said yes, and 2 said dunno. If this sample is a true representation of the people’s feeling against the population increase, it means an overwhelming majority of the citizens opposed such a big population for the country. And the respondents here are not the unthinking and uneducated Ah Pek and Ah Mah but well read and mostly well informed PMETs.

From feedbacks in cyberspace, not much in the main media, and even from what some MPs in Parliament said, including those from the PAP, the majority of the citizens is against this move. Would the Govt take heed of the citizens’ position and make amendments to the White Paper? Though the Govt is claiming that this is only a number for the planners, it has not come up with a target population size for the people to take note. What is the number that the Govt is working on?

The WP has spoken that it does not support 6.9m but maybe 5.9m. What Govt is avoiding to say is the optimum population size that it wants for the island. The undertone in the White Paper is that 6.9m is workable even if it is the worst case scenario. The infrastructure is being prepared for 6.9m.

Can the people have a say in the final number? Would the Govt want to ask the people, in a referendum perhaps, on what is the number that the people want and abide by the wishes of the people? Be it 5m, 6m or 7m, these are numbers that can be workable and can be the parameters for the restructuring of the economy and the lifestyle and quality of life of the people. Any number would have its pros and cons. It is not an absolute good or bad number, but the bigger number is seen as being too crowded and undesirable. The final number must be what the citizens want and be comfortable with, not what the Govt wants.

Would the Govt seek the people’s view and consent? Or it is already cast in stone?

Repost from TRE, article by Mr N D

I have reposted this article from TRE which I think many Sinkies are in the same fate, victims of the Govt policies.

HDB unfair policy: I’d rather trade places with PRs


HDB

There is something seriously wrong with a country that penalises its citizens and fawns at foreigners. One such flawed policy which clearly demonstrates this is HDB’s policy on the eligibility to buy new flats.

Under HDB’s policy, a family nucleus consisting of at least one Singapore Citizen is eligible to buy a flat direct from HDB. This means that a family nucleus consisting of PRs can effectively buy a direct HDB flat as long as one of them is a citizen.

This is an unfair policy that allows foreigners to exploit loopholes in the system. A foreigner who buys a flat direct from HDB (with another citizen) effectively enjoys the subsidy which a citizen enjoys because he buys the flat at a subsidised rate. In addition, he enjoys the novelty of owning a brand new unit.

I am a citizen in my twenties. I do know of university peers who are permanent residents. They are two years younger than me because they did not have to do national service. Now, they are the future co-owners of HDB BTO units because they applied for BTO units with citizen counterparts. Also to note, their income was beneath the income ceiling, one of the eligibility criteria to buy a flat. I myself with my partner, also a citizen, are not eligible because our combined income is higher than the income ceiling. Even in the HDB resale market, we are not eligible for any subsidies.

This is great injustice. While I have spent 2 years of my youth in NS and am saddled with ongoing NS reservist liabilities which is disruptive to my career, I am worse off than a free-loading foreigner. The foreigner pays less taxes because of his lower income but is unreasonably rewarded simply because he meets the income ceiling criteria. He enjoys the full subsidy and perks of buying a flat direct from HDB which only a citizen should enjoy. The foreigner did not have to provide any service or commitment to this country to earn this subsidy.

Singapore is now facing a shortage of housing supply. This policy has to be reviewed to put as many citizens first, and to prevent the wrongful disbursements of subsidies to undeserving persons.

I read with interest about suggestions by the Ministry of National Development to raise the income ceiling for buying of HDB flats. However, this must be complemented with more stringent criteria of disallowing PRs from being co-owners of direct HDB flats. Otherwise, the raising of the income ceiling would also mean more foreigners unjustly enriching themselves through this loophole.

In that case, I would rather trade places with my PR peers. Singapore citizenship would be nothing but a liability.

Mr N D

How can there be a worst case scenario of 6.9m?

Our current population is 5.3m. How can this population shoot to 6.9m? The local population of 3.3m is unlikely to double by 2030. At less than 2.1% fertility rate, or 1.2%, the local population can hardly replace itself and likely to be not more than 4m. So where is the 2.9m coming from? It must be from immigration, the new citizens, the PRs, the E pass holders etc.

Only by import can the population grow to 6.9m. Now who controls the import of foreigners to add to the population? Every foreigner coming into the country must be approved by the Govt. The only reason for foreigners to increase sharply is by sheer design, by the Govt approving it. Thus a worst case scenario is either caused by the Govt blindly approving the influx or sleeping on the job. The foreign composition of our population cannot increase without the Govt’s approval or consent.

That is why I say that there cannot be a worst case scenario. If the govt has capped the population at 6m or whatever, it is in full control to turn off the tap of immigration. What is this talk about a worst case scenario? It is an unnecessary preoccupation or concern.

Citizens of convenience

Legally when a new citizen is given his pink IC and citizenship certificate he is a citizen of the country. There is no dispute to that. But emotionally, psychologically, intentionally, socially, how many of the new citizens are really the citizens like the true blue local citizens? Or when will a new citizen be really like a local citizen, emotionally and psychologically embracing this country as his country, his home? How many are just here for economic gains, for economic expediency, citizens of convenience, and planning another foot to get out at the next opportunity when this place is no longer useful or as attractive as before?

Over the last ten years or so, we may have given at least half a million citizenships to new citizens and many more as PRs. The statistics in favour of citizens in jobs and employment, in housing allocations etc are misleading in this sense as many went to new citizens at the expense of true blue citizens. This is a serious matter that must not go unnoticed and unspoken of. What are the real benefits and disadvantages that have befallen our native citizens?

Of the 5.3m population now, how many are true blue citizens if we exclude those new citizens that are less than 5 or 10 year old? Where are the statistics on this?

If Sinkies are now the absolute minority or going to be, then why should Sinkies be made to do NS to protect a country of foreigners? Should not the pay/allowance of NS men be raised to market value as they are now more like mercenaries hired not to serve country and people but foreigners and their assets? Why are Sinkies slogging and suffering in the field doing NS while foreigners are taking over their cushy jobs and speculating in properties to make money from Sinkies?

Has anything changed? Are the fundamentals of nationhood and national defence changed?

Population Poll

One day left for you to make your voice heard on this issue. 512 have voted. Keep it coming. This is important.

Thank you.

And don't forget the advertisers : )

Strengthening the Singaporean core

This is one of the major objectives of the White Paper that aimed to have 50% foreigners and 50% Sinkies. What is the percentage of Sinkies in the population today? 3.3m out of 5.3m works out to be 62%. And we used to be more than 70% or 90%.

So, with the dwindling percentage of Sinkies in the whole population, is the White Paper strengthening the Sinkie core or weakening the Sinkie core? And don’t forget the fact that many of the Sinkies are actually new citizens, actually foreigners with very shallow roots here. So, at 50% in 2030, what is the real true blue Sinkie core, 30%?

The preponderant maid/servant mentality

The employment of maids here is becoming a national preoccupation, a sign of affluence, a statement of having arrived. Everyone of any social standing would want to have a maid to tag along wherever they go. The maid/servant concept is now a necessity and the importance of maid/servant in a household is growing in importance. In many cases, the maid/servant has become indispensable and a must have. And the maid/servant knows the importance of their role in the household. Many have assumed the function of the butler and rule the house like their little fiefdoms. And the masters of the households are hapless as they have got too used to the whims and fancies of the maid/servant. They think they cannot do without the maid/servant running the house.

What has now become a new reality is that the maid/servant has usurped the power of the household and started to run the household to their likings, feeding the masters on what they thought or decided would be good for the masters. Some hold the purse strings, sort of, and buy what they wanted and dispense away with what they did not fancy. The masters are comfortable to return to a home as long as the home is kept tidy and in order and dare not ask for more. They just turn a blind eye to the growing power and control of the maid/servant.

Some maid/servants even have the audacity to bring in their friends to the homes. It started stealthily but it is now done in bright daylight. The households are frequented by guests of the maid/servant. They even occupied the guest rooms and would soon be using the master bedroom as well. And when the master protests, the maid/servant insists that their friends were there to help out to look after the house. Without the friends presence, the household will run down and turn into a mess. The master of the household sheepishly accepted the arrangement with little protest.

When will the maid/servant take over the household and drive the master out of the house? As it is, the children of the master have left as the house is either too small or getting undesirable for them to stay anyway.

PAP could have won Punggol East

There were two articles in the Sunday Times by Warren Fernandez and Han Fook Kwang analysing the Punggol East by election. Warren’s comments could be summarised under the following points, The writing was on the wall for the PAP, There’s no winning without a fight, Politics may be local, but all elections are national, Voters want ‘someone like me’, and Politics contrains policies. In these headings he more or less explained why the PAP lost Punggol East. If only the PAP could read his analysis before the by election, it would have won. There are so many enlightening comments and strategies which would help PAP in the by election and may be in the next GE.

Han Fook Kwang’s recommendation was simpler. He suggested that the PAP needed ‘to relook is the type of candidates it fields for elections….Get the right people in its leadership and the right policies will follow.’ What Han Fook Kwang did not say is that the PAP had been recruiting the wrong people that came up with the wrong policies. This is just what I read between the lines.

To me there were many issues facing the PAP then and going forward. The quality of its candidates, some were good, left much to be desire. It was so obvious to the voters but not to the PAP. Even some ministers are doubtful starters in the GE. They were the ones who formulated all the policies that were not only unpopular but seen as against the interests of the citizens. And obviously they did not get it and quickly propounded this great theory of a 6.9m population without highlighting the consequences of such a crowd but only economic growth. And we know what the PAP wants is not what the people want. And trust me, they are going to vote for the White Paper in Parliament with overwhelming majority. And they will proclaim that it was approved in Parliament.

Will a change in the type of candidates work? It is not just because they were elitist, not because they were parachuted down in the last hour, not because they could not connect with the people, I think there are more to it. It is history at works.

White Paper on population in Parliament

The MPs have probably one week to read the White Paper before debating in Parliament. I am sure many are very well prepared to debate this Paper by looking at the report that said 42 MPs will be talking on this issue.

One question that comes to mind is the position of the MPs. Will they be speaking for or against the 6.9m population? And the follow up question, how did they come to their final position? Did they talk to their constituents to seek their views on this crucial issue? How many of the constituents did they speak to in less than one week?

Or maybe they know what their constituents want and simply walk into Parliament to speak on their behalves. Or maybe there is no need to talk to their constituents as they have given them the full mandate as their representatives to say what, being the talented knows all MPs, they think is good for the constituents?

And I am sure they will vote for the interests of their constituents. And I am sure each one will be their own man or woman, to think and speak independently, and to vote independently with their conscience, and of course for the good of their constituents.

The people’s interests are in good hands. Trust me.

Time to bring back Stop At Two Policy

The Stop At Two population control policy was effective and needed in the 70s as our economy was underdeveloped and could not provide the jobs needed with a rapidly growing population. Then the economic boom came but the Govt fell asleep on this policy and let it dragged on when it should have been stopped. An expanding economy needs more workers and Stop At Two was obsolete, with hindsight. But there was no natcon to tell the Govt so. A loosening of this policy could have revived the slowing birth rate or at least reignite the sexual urge to reproduce and have more babies.

Rip Van Winkle continued to sleep when he was paid to think, to plan and to work. Maybe he was happily dreaming about the fortune he had been paid or enjoying his Karaoke sessions. And the Govt went on a buying spree, importing millions of foreigners dressed up as foreign talents. And now the population hits 5.3m and being unprepared for it, the infrastructure is straining. The most obvious are the public transport system, the hospital beds and housing.

Rip Van Winkle continued to sleep or high on drugs. The first neglect was forgetting to turn on the tap for the babies to start flowing. Now it is compounding the mistake by falling asleep again and wanting the tap to keep flowing when the bathtub is overflowing. The Govt does not know that there are now too many people in the island and it is time to turn off the tap. Instead it wants more, a population of 6.9m!

What is really needed now is to cap the population at 5.5m or thereabout. Over the last ten years our population growth was way beyond 3% annually, like on steroid. We have out grown and overshot the replacement rate.  It is time to recalibrate the population, resize and moderate and adjust the mix between citizens and non citizens. By adopting a national policy of 5.5m population, the rest of the Govt policies could then be fine tuned to this new target and status quo.

As the local bred and born citizens start to reproduce, more and more foreigners can then be allowed to leave. Let the locals replace the foreigners systematically and not the other way, and all the time keeping in mind the 5.5m population target. By doing so, there is really a need to reintroduce the Stop At Two policy again without letting the population size run away to 6 or 7m. Not only that the influx of foreigners needs to be stopped, the growth of the local population has also to be managed to keep it at 5.5m.

Don’t fall asleep and let things run uncontrolled to create another crisis. The island cannot afford to let the population grow unchecked, and from the general conversation, the citizens are more comfortable with 5.5m population. High population is a double edged sword and can cut both ways.

Please, no more sleeping and no more over killed or over blown. It is very difficult to have faith in a govt that did not know when the population is too small or too big.

6.9m is like acquiring a nuclear reactor

Once our population hits 6.9m, the need and call for a nuclear reactor to provide the energy will no longer be an option but a compulsion. The price of oil by then will be so expensive, and other forms of energy will not be efficient and are also likely to be just as expensive. So tak dah choice, mesti pergi nuclear. And we will be living with one nuclear reactor underground and a nuclear reactor on the surface.

A 6.9m population is not a joke. It needs to be fed, to be housed, it needs jobs and all kinds of goods and services, and everything is a cost. Another 1.7m mouth to feed and house is not ‘main main’. My God, any crisis will turn this population into a nightmare. When things are good and rosy, when the economy is good, there is nothing to worry about, who cares, trust me. When there is an economic downturn, the 7m is not going to go away overnight. And when their needs are not met, they are going to implode.

The nuclear reactor underground is less of a worry than the one above. The 6.9m is ticking and kicking and will not go to sleep. It is like keeping pets, dogs and cats and now big cats. The bigger the more to feed and the more dangerous when food runs out.

Don’t pray pray. It is not masak masak. You want 6.9m, and when you don’t want just flush down the toilet. They are intertwined and attached with the whole economy and infrastructure. It is not easily unwind like our housing prices. The difference between a genius and a berserk is only a fine thin line.

And I am not talking about water and reservoir and all the rest that are needed.

Enlightening speech with a Foreign Talent

 

 Enlightening speech with a FT citizen

I was in a remote western region in China and we were stranded at this small lousy airport. And there is only 1 Indian man (age 59, I found out from him later). No one could help him and I knew I was the only one and of course being kind hearted, and naive Singaporean, I voluntarily went. I saw his "RED passport" and we connected!!! Then we started to discuss the Punggol East By-election, the government and the policies. (Please do not assume a RED passport is automatic bred and bornt in Singapore... I was lambasting how Singapore has transformed from a lovely state to a state where everyone has become emotionless and working round the clock to pay for everything and to survive.) 15 minutes into the discussion, he told me he is FT who came to Singapore 10 years ago and quickly offered PR and new citizen in less than 2 years. By the way, this guy is not Foreign Trash, he is Senior Management in Fortune 500 (the ranking is below 50) and paid over $20,0000++ a month. Below are questions from me and answers from him:-

Me: The government is doing a bad job and people are suffering.

FT: I read the Straits Times and every survey is indicating good, I dont agree what you said is true and today. (I said, you really believe that BS? You did not have time to browse the web than to believe the propaganda...I went on to tell him many examples like AIM etc, he was shocked... but the newspaper version is so different.... but anyway he said he did not have time, working very long hours every day)

Me: Well, do you feel we imported too many FT, especially low quality ones from neighbouring regions.

FT: Yes, totally agreed, its getting too crowded and also the pay for average guy is getting lower but living expenses are sky high. (But he was a FT himself but of course this man used to work in the US and UK for many years before arriving into SG, probably what they called a real FT)

Me: If Singapore is so good, are you going to retire in Singapore?

FT: Retire in Singapore? (shrugs with a laugh)

Me: Why? You said Singapore is so good etc.... And you said those surveys damn good.

FT: Honestly speaking, my pay is crossing $20,000 a month but I wont retire here. First, our CPF is trapped and the medical cost and daily expenses are so high. I am going to renounce and take all the cash and move back to India. Anyway, I also dont want to die in a foreign land.

Me: Arent you one of us?

FT: In a way but I still need to go back, this place is getting too expensive to live and I dont want my body to be resting here, I am not bornt here.

Me: $20k a month you telling me this? How about those making $5000 or ....

FT: Dont pretend you dont know, they work and pay all their lives until they die. And I am not going to be in that position.

Me: Your kids in Singapore?

FT: I sent them to UK and US and told them not to come back.

Me: Singapore is such great place, you told me and why.... ahhhhh (cynicism)

FT: I could not imagine that they be paid $2500 after their graduation, compete with millions of foreigners and pay a debt of 30 years for that million dollar HDB. And education in US is more prestigious and they can get into Fortune 500 companies easily and they buy houses and drive cars etc. And if they really return to SG (which I doubt so.. because they are originally from Calcutta and honestly, they dont really like Singapore), they will be Foreign Talent and be paid very high like me, no need to fight with those foreigners.

Me: They did not serve NS huh?

FT: You asking me silly questions, I did not convert them PR before 18... I found way to go around it (laugh very hard)

Me: Warao (Singapore style). You enjoy so much from Singapore and how you going to thank us?

FT: I voted PAP every GE, and that is thank you. And they gave me PR, new citizenship and also my HDB (I sold at record profits and now living in nice condo in Jurong East). When I retire, I will sell and take all the CPF to India. I really appreciate Singapore.

wah piang eh...... i am really that daft and naive like most Singaporeans.

What we need is more space

What we need is more space and not more people. When we were 2m, life was definitely much more comfortable with lesser congestion and more space for everything. We have bigger homes, more room for cars and car ownership did not cost a leg or an arm. We have many parks and land for recreation and simply running around.

We now have more than 5m people. We are digging out our ancestors’ graves, doing away with cemeteries and sending our old folks to homes across the causeway. And we keep on building skyscrapers that cost a lifetime to pay when better and bigger homes could be had at cheaper cost if we have more land.

What I thought would be better is to reclaim more land and provide more living space instead of stuffing them up again with people and concrete. I believe the quality of life will be much better for young and old when the island is less congested instead of all cramming up in little pigeon holes in the air, and the roads so congested with cars. The quality of life cannot be better with more people squeezed into this piece of rock. This is not progress but regression.

We do not need more people for some economic growth numbers. We need more space to live and play and a more leisure and less stressful environment. Would it not be better for a family of four living in a 1,500 sq ft flat, where one does not need to knock into each other or against the wall or furniture? Would it not be better if there is more private space for everyone in the homes and outside the homes?

What is so good or great to squeeze with 7m people? What is so good quality to be crammed up in hard concrete and all the artificialities that cost a bomb, like the Avatar Garden? There is nothing better than having more natural space to live and for recreation. It is so silly to reclaim more space only to stuff them up with more people, provide more public transport only to make sure the commuters are packed like sardine again. Whose great idea is this? Better quality of life Ya?

We must be responsible to our future generations by leaving them enough room/space to grow. We cannot be so irresponsible as to build up every inch of land in the island.  The White Paper is to exhaust every land and space we have with more people. The citizens must decide on the number we want and work around it. We should not go the other way, letting the dubious economic growth numbers to dictate our fate and the number of people on this island.

White Paper - The nonsensical arguments so far

We must plan for the worst than to underprovide. This is what Boon Wan said about the 6.9m population projection. I dunno if he knew what he was talking about. He quoted the example of wedding dinner guests and not sure how many would eventually turn up. Hello, the population of a country is not a wedding dinner. The number of people in the country can be calibrated and controlled especially when a big chunk is made up of foreigners. When the number is reaching the target, just turn off the tap. It is so easy, unlike the fertility rate of the citizens, more or less, the govt would have to accept. Is this simple enough illustration to say there is no necessity to plan for the worst when population number is concerned?

Boon Wan also said that he was confident that he would be able to ‘calibrate its plans,…adding that the housing supply will be paced “accordingly, a little bit ahead of demand.’ He should have taught his predecessor this and there would not have been any housing problem today.

The next thing I heard is that Lim Swee Say said that we would not have all the problems associated with the 5.3m population if we have had the national conversation yesterday. This is so as the natcon would have raised the problems of the need to upgrade the infrastructure before the population surged from 4.1m to 5.3m. Uhhhh…., beg your pardon? Did he mean that the govt would only be able to avoid all the overcrowding and lack of infrastructure problem if there was a natcon, and that the govt is incapable of planning ahead, lack of foresight?

I am so terrified. Do we still want to believe that the White Paper is carefully thought out? So scary isn’t it?

Protest at Hong Lim Park on 6.9m population

Protest at Hong Lim Park on 16 Feb (Sat) at 4.30pm  This event is organised by Gilbert Goh of Transitioning.org blog. Please note the change of date as it was supposed to be held this Sat 2 Feb.   Would the Sinkies feel strong enough to make a strong presence for this event?

So far 415 people have voted in the Poll. Please keep it going. 4 more days to go before the poll closes.

And don't forget to click on the advertisers. Cheers.

2030 the Good Year for Sinkies

In the year 2030, with 6.9m rich and prosperous Sinkies, PRs and foreigners, Sin City will be the crown jewel of the world. Sinkies will still be the richest people in the world, enjoying world class facilities and all the material comfort available. All the PRs and foreigners will be living happily and in harmony with the Sinkies, something like the paradise where lions and lambs will eat and play together.

Are there any conditions attached? This is too good to be true. And anything that is too good to be true deserves a second thought. The recent cases of gold trading companies paying out 2% monthly interest and all the great profits of toxic notes and bonds were also too good to be true. What is the catch? Can all the Sinkies be PMETs and earn half a million or more in annual income to live it up with the great life? How much will it cost to buy a HDB flat or a COE? How much will a plate of char kway teow or a ride in a taxi or any form of public transport? What will be the cost of living like for such a grandiose lifestyle? Would it be only for the rich or for the average Sinkies?

I dare not ask about hospitalization and how much the Medisave Minimum Sum would be or the CPF savings. All I know is that nothing is for free. There is no free lunch, even today.

One condition for this happy dream to come true is to continue to vote PAP into power to carry out this plan all the way to 2030.

Is PAP commiting hara kiri?

Shortly after the debacle in Punggol East, the PAP lost no time to push out a very controversial White Paper in favour of a 6.9m population in the island. The negative sentiments and all the problems the people are facing are perceived as caused by the 5.3m population. The people are angry, very angry. Why would the PAP think it appropriate and timely to rush through a White Paper that is going to be badly received by the people? Why the urgency? Is it political naiveity, or are there more extenuating reasons that not pushing out this 6.9m population idea now would lead to some irreparable damages or grave consequences? Or as Vivian Balakrishnan said, ‘we are facing the crisis of our lifetime’?

There is absolutely no reason or urgency for the PAP to discuss this unpopular issue at this juncture. It is political suicide to do so. And the reactions by the people have proven that this is so. A long term projection of the country’s population need not be talked about now, it can be discussed in a more congenial time and conducive environment later.

What can be the compelling reasons for doing so? Is it that the PAP thinks that the people will be happy to go along with this projection? Is it that not doing now, not getting it passed in Parliament now may not be able to do so later on? Or is it that it has already decided and the PAP is just going through the motion of getting it passed in Parliament?

I am still baffled by the decision to push out this White Paper now. I can’t think of a good reason to do so. Is it that a few hundred plane loads of FTs are already in the pipeline and a quick decision is needed to let them in? There is just no sense at all. What is happening?

Ah, maybe the PAP knows best. They know that this is the best way to go forward for the good of the people and country. The people must be mad for not seeing the great benefits of this plan. So just act like deaf frog. Just get it done and the people will appreciate it later. The Govt must lead, make tough decisions, even if they are painful for the people and the people disagree.

I don’t believe that having more foreigners and new citizens is to buy votes for the next GE. The PAP cannot be so desperate to take such drastic measures for self preservation. And the people should not take AIM at anything or try to find a reason for it. It is something that will come true in the next 15 to 20 years. Talking about it now or then is just like crystal ball gazing. But implementing it is very serious.

Australia is a continent about the size of the USA. It has a population of less than 22m. And it is very careful not to increase its population and to preserve it as it is for its future generations. We are not even a quarter of Tasmania and we are already 5.3m and wanting to go 7m?

What do you think?

Vivian Balakrishnan: ‘we are facing the crisis of our lifetime’

Hehehe, this is what Minister of Environment and Water Resources said. I am shivering in my pants. Pardon me Sir, excuse me Sir, who created this crisis of a lifetime? This crisis did not happen overnight right? This is the best run country in the world with super talented ministers and paid out of this world salary. How could they manage the country so well into a crisis of our lifetime? Now I am wondering who created this crisis? Who have been running this country for the last four or five decades? Did they not see it coming?

Do the people of this island want the same people who created this crisis to solve this crisis with another set of solutions that would create another bigger crisis in the future? By then I dunno what they will call it, a monumental crisis of several lifetime? Ya?

If there is a need for a natcon, this is it. This is the topic that affects every Sinkies. It can destroy their lives and the lives of their children and their children's children. Let this be the natcon of the people. The people are talking. The people want to tell the govt what is in their heart.

Uproar over 6.9m population

Less than a day after breaking news of the Govt White Paper on a projected 6.9m population in 2030 the internet was buzzing with cries of outrage. 5 articles appeared in TRE alone, 1. White Paper calls for up to 80% increase in foreign population in SG, 2. 7m population and the lack of foresight by Sorry Lee, 3. Govt White Paper plans for 6.9m by 2030, 4. Population White Paper projecting 6.9m. U-turn on influx…., 5. Poly student rebuts NPTD Population White Paper. And there were many articles posted elsewhere with the same view, against the huge population, Lucky Tan, Feedmetothefish, just to name a few. All says it is a crazy idea. Are the Sinkies that daft not to know what is good or bad for them?

The contents of these articles were similar, all were against the 6.9m population as unacceptable. And all received huge numbers of comments sharing the same unhappiness over this projected population in this little island.

What is very clear is that the clever thinkers and planners and the Govt are all marching to a different tune and in a different direction while the people are going the opposite way. Is there a meeting of minds? Nay is being too conservative. While the tone of the Govt is all in favour of this great projection to save Sinkies, and without the increase in population, the island will sink, the future will go kaput, the people disagree and do not think so.

With such a divergence of views, would this paper be pushed through in Parliament and the people just got to live with it? Would the outburst of anger and dismay lead to more serious challenges for the Govt to deal with? Or would the Govt, if it fails to convince the people, will simply ignore the people as lunatics, simple minded folks or daft, and that the Govt knows best and what is being done is for the good of the people? Would the people accept such a fait accompli given the admission of lack of foresight and the huge problems the country and people are facing due to the influx of so many foreigners here?

Are the foreigners the spice or the shit to the Singaporean’s life?

Poll - Do you support the 6.9m population

I have created this Poll on the right. Please vote and also ask your friends to vote. It is a yes or no thing. This is a very serious issue and the more the citizens make their views known to the govt the better. As for the internet brigade, please take it easy on this and don't mess it up with spurious votes as it will also affect you and your family and the future of your children.

Thank you.

PS. And while you are here, please click on some of the advertisements to pay for my breakfast : )
Thanks.

How has Boon Wan fared in solving the housing problem?

After the last GE the PAP took cognition of the housing problem and removed Mah Bow Tan, went in search of a minister that could rectify the problem he had created. Oops, my apologies to Mah Bow Tan, it was never a problem. Only some people saw it as a problem and the govt agreed to do something about it.

Boon Wan was brave enough to volunteer for the job. He was confident enough to take on this daunting task of a huge problem that was really not a problem depending on who you are. Of course he knew, and everyone knew it was a full blown problem and cannot be resolved overnight after so many years of neglect and mismanagement. I would presume, may be wrong, that Boon Wan would want to solve the supply and demand problem to ensure that all Sinkies can afford to buy a HDB flat and that the prices of flats would remain at least stable. And I think if anyone would to want to measure the performance of Boon Wan, these should be the two factors to look at.

Boon Wan started aggressively to ramp up the building or more flats, many more flats. Unfortunately this is not looking good enough as the number of Sinkies wanting to buy HDB flats are still forming a long waiting list and the new flats will take several years to come on line. And also many Sinkies that were unfortunate enough to fall victims to his predecessor’s policies are still unable to buy direct from HDB. They are still cursing at the govt for sure.

The other big problem of course is the price of HDB flats, the resale flats and private properties. Have the prices been stable, or have they shot through the roof, even at greater speed than under Mah Bow Tan’s time and to greater height?

Has Boon Wan solved the housing problem? Or has he revisited the history of HDB and asked why there was no such problem before and the people were happy and grateful for their HDB flats but now the big shit all over the place? Has Boon Wan achieved what he set out to do? Shall he be given a red card or a medal?

Would he do the necessary and do a major change by building public flats for all Sinkies instead of new citizens? Many true blue Sinkies have served NS, fathers, brothers and themselves but not eligible to buy HDB flats because of all the stupid rules and regulations. How could the govt do these to the true and original citizens while making things so good to new citizens at their expense? Pro Sinkies or pro new citizens who are really foreigners?