atans1

Search for “talking cock”

Lim Tean & Quitter living on welfare overseas can’t stop talking cock

In Uncategorized on 27/05/2020 at 9:57 am

Actually its worse, they spread fake news in their attempts to discredit the actions of the PAP govt.

Lim Tean took a swipe at the govt for wasting $ on the NDP packs.

At a time when We are facing the greatest crisis in modern times, why are many millions of dollars being spent on a meaningless fun pack for NDP?

There are many thousands of small and micro-businesses which are hurting and facing financial wipe-out because of this pandemic. There are many self-employed who are struggling to put food on the table. There are many desperately poor who cannot even afford the basic necessities in life.

It is inappropriate and tactless that at a perilous time such as now, this government is still allowing resources to be wasted on such frivolity!

These resources can be much better spent on helping small and micro-businesses, the self-employed and the poor!

Peoples Voice lends its whole-hearted support to the online campaign which has been started, and which has already gathered many supporters who have said they do not wish to receive the fun-pack. We salute these brave Singaporeans who are taking a principled stand.

This is another bad judgment call by an incompetent government made up of weak men and women!

Lim Tean
Peoples Voice Party

He doesn’t tell us that the govt does not spend any money on it, the stuff is sponsored by businesses.

The quitter living on welfare in Finland made the same point as Lim Tean a week ago. When it was pointed out the items were sponsored, he threw smoke by saying that govt spent $ packing it.

Bah, why didn’t he allege this in the first place instead instead of spreading fake news on social media about the govt wasting tax payers money, his original allegation?

With enemies like this, the PAP is fortunate that it doesn’t need ass licking clowns like Yap Kwong Weng (Principal Advisor & Joint Lab Director at KPMG) on its side.

Academic talking cock about the economy

In Economy, Political economy on 28/01/2020 at 9:28 am

Commentary: Is low growth the new normal for Singapore?

Hoon Hian Teck is Professor of Economics at the Singapore Management University. 

A shrinking citizen workforce, the law of diminishing returns to capital, and the time needed to bring about a culture shift towards indigenous innovation all portend low growth for Singapore. Is there any reason to remain optimistic?

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/commentary/low-economic-growth-new-normal-singapore-budget-12261518

He then goes into great detail about the

shrinking citizen workforce, the law of diminishing returns to capital, and the time needed to bring about a culture shift towards indigenous

which inevitably lead to low growth.

I couldn’t disagree with his analysis, even if I tot he overdid the gloom: remember I’m invested in shares here and got landed property here.

He ends his gloomy analysis

IS THERE A CASE FOR OPTIMISM?

A shrinking citizen workforce, the law of diminishing returns to capital, and the time needed to bring about a culture shift towards indigenous innovation all portend low growth for Singapore. Is there any reason to remain optimistic?

The answer is yes. Singapore has been able to achieve domestic social and political consensus to reinvent itself to ride on opportunities thrown up by the global economy, and find new ways of overcoming our constraints.

When it faced a severe recession in 1985, caused in part by wages running ahead of productivity, workers accepted a 15-percentage point cut in employers’ CPF contribution rate, which was gradually restored.

Having recovered, workers’ skills were developed to take advantage of the growing financial sector fuelled by funds flowing into a booming region from 1989 to 1998.

Through government initiatives announced over recent Singapore Budgets, firms have also been encouraged to embrace automation, digitalisation and reskilling, and rely less on foreign labour in a manpower-lean economy.

More recently, bold plans for the Greater Southern Waterfront after the ports are relocated away from Tanjong Pagar to free up valuable land to be redeveloped in the downtown region were announced just last year.

So Singapore can surely find the necessary gumption to reinvent itself again and overcome its constraints.

In a u-turn from the numbers-driven analysis he was using in explaining why the economy was growing slowly, he introduced non-quantitative factors to explain why we’ll soon have strong growth. As an intelligent being would say “Does not compute”. It doesn’t does it?

His concluding optimistic remarks remind me of the use of Deus ex machina. This

is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem in a story is suddenly and abruptly resolved by an unexpected and unlikely occurrence. Wikipedia

I get the impression that he suddenly realised that he doesn’t wanted to be accused by a PAP MP as someone “who does not wish S’pore well”, anti-PAP activists PJ Thum and Kirsten Han were so accused (and rightly so): Kirsten Han trying to defecate herself and PJ out of self-made crater. If he were branded as wishing S’pore ill like them, he could lose his job. They had nothing to lose, unlike him.

So he u-turned and ended up as yet another constructive, nation-building academic PAP running dog (Apologies to the real dogs).

Mean of me to call our academics running dogs (Apologies to the real dogs again)?

BSing academics protected from fake news law?

Local academics propogate fake news?

Fixing the Oppo: Constructive, nation-building media and academics at work

What do you think?

Apologies also to a regular reader who was a head of a department in an atas faculty in NUS. People there don’t need to be PAP running dogs (Apologies to the dogs again) to get ahead. Sheer brain power only.

 

Queen Jos keeps on talking cock

In Economy on 05/12/2019 at 10:37 am

This time on job market.

Queen of sex in small spaces was recently reported as saying

Current downturn unlike previous crises, as job market still holding up

Constructive, nation-building MediaCorp’s freesheet.

The piece went on

The ongoing economic downturn is unlike previous crises that Singapore has gone through — the job market is not as badly affected and there are still good job opportunities in certain sectors, Manpower Minister Josephine Teo said.

Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/current-downturn-unlike-previous-crises-job-market-still-holding-josephine-teo?fbclid=IwAR1Aof8zcQG48EKdg6hozCRnIxVGv_N9aYRS9-B6A34Oe0M13G5LUb0gDRE

Problem with her comments is that under the headline

Singapore property market faces risks from unsold units, uncertain economy: MAS

the equally constructive, nation-building CNA reported

“Ongoing uncertainties in the economic outlook and a softening labour market could negatively affect households’ incomes and their demand for property,” MAS wrote.

Already, hiring sentiment has turned cautious amid the growth slowdown, with fewer job vacancies than unemployed persons. It also noted that the number of workers placed on short work-week or temporary layoff has trended upwards, even as retrenchments remained low.

“Amid the possibility of an extended period of sluggish GDP growth, wage increases are expected to ease, which could weaken households’ debt servicing ability,” MAS said.

Sounds like the central bank disagrees with Queen Jos.

And there’s even worse news for those mortgaged up to their eyeballs fearful of losing their jobs or suffering pay cuts: falling property prices and negative equity

There is also further housing supply coming on stream, even as the stock of launched but unsold units builds up.

Figures from the report showed unsold units from launched projects, excluding executive condominiums, doubled to 4,377 units in the third quarter. This compares with 2,172 units the same period a year ago.

This increase is likely be exacerbated in the medium term, MAS said, as developers redevelop and launch projects on the flurry of en bloc sites sold between 2017 and 2018.

The central bank warned that having more unsold inventory “could place downward pressure on prices in the medium term, if unaccompanied by a corresponding rise in demand”.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/mas-financial-stability-review-property-risks-unsold-homes-12133586

But as I said in TRE cybernuts and central bank singing from the same song sheet the solution is simple:

 [J]ust remove Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) and prices will cheong.

Vote wisely. But the problem is

“Is a coalition that includes Mad Dog, Lim Tean and Meng Seng a better alternative to the 4G?”

Look at Lim Tean’s record. Still no jobs rally after collecting money in 2017 for rally, and no picture, no sound after collecting money to sue CPF yrs ago: Finally Lim Tean called to account on a “broken promise”. To be fair, he did deliver on defamation video two years late. But it was BS.).

Is there really a better alternative to PAP 4G?

Greta Thunberg: Juz another entitled ang moh kid talking cock

In Uncategorized on 23/10/2019 at 5:42 am

Greta Thunberg, the puppet of Woke progressives says that on a finite planet unlimited economic growth is a fairy tale. Juz like that condemn poor Asian kids to servitude to ang mohs isit?

This what a “Climate change is real and a clear and present danger,” conservative adult says:

Is unlimited economic growth a fairy tale?

Mark Carney is asked whether he agrees with Greta Thunberg that on a finite planet unlimited economic growth is a fairy tale.

He says: “I’m afraid I do not agree with that… There is carbon-light growth, there is asset-light growth. If you think about the nature of much of consumption, how it’s shifted over time… towards experiences including virtual entertainment – that’s also growth.”

“So I don’t think they’re exclusive.”

However, he says the market is “pricing the transition” away from carbon as being at least 3.75 degrees, “probably north of 4” degrees in terms of global warming.

“That tells you something in terms of the sum of global climate policy,” Mr Carney says, with the implication being that it is not moving fast enough.

BBC

Why Greta will soon be history

Almost 50 years before Extinction Rebellion, a British-born protest movement, exported its brand of climate activism to the world, young Americans did so on Earth Day, April 22nd 1970. The youth then was more bell-bottomed than nowadays but felt no less “bamboozled and cheated” (as The Economist put it at the time) that their elders were bequeathing them a wrecked planet.Economist

More evidence PAP talking cock on minimum wages

In Economy on 15/06/2018 at 6:57 am

The mounting evidence that minimum wages do not seem to reduce employment

One of these is a study by economists Doruk Cengiz, Arindrajit Dube, Attila Lindner and Ben Zipperer, which looked at state-level evidence and found no negative effect of mandated pay increases on employment. They found that minimum wage hikes tend to decrease the number of jobs just below the new cutoff, but increase the number above the line — implying that the wage hike isn’t killing jobs, but simply giving people raises.

Now, Kevin Rinz and John Voorheis, a pair of researchers from the U.S. Census Bureau, have an even more comprehensive study with even more detailed evidence. Looking at data on individual earners from 1991 through 2013 — a very long time period — the authors take careful account of factors like mobility and transitions into and out of the labor force. They find that minimum-wage increases tend to raise incomes for people at the bottom of the distribution, and that the effect doesn’t fade with time. Meanwhile, they find that the probability of people losing their income entirely — i.e., unemployment or dropping out of the labor force — isn’t significantly affected by minimum-wage increases.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-04-05/supply-and-demand-does-a-poor-job-of-explaining-depressed-wages

Interesting the writer Noah Smith says we should change our standard model of the labour market. Employer market power seems to be the rule, not the exception.

Well in S’pore where employers have have their fill of FTs (They KPKB that govt doesn’t give them the right to bring in more) and you can see why productivity is so bad.

PAP voter cheers on Auntie, says Fu talking cock

In Political governance, Uncategorized on 10/03/2018 at 11:28 am

Here’s two FB posts by a senior lawyer who admitted that he voted for the PAP in past elections

I think that Minister Grace Fu should drop the threat to refer to the Committee of Privileges.

Such a display of arrogance and high-handedness doesn’t impress me, and should not impress Singaporeans.

The facts are this, simply.

The G has said since 2013 that revenues must be raised. I was long aware of PM’s comments at the time. So we know that taxes are going up at some time in the future, but not when.

I was also aware of DPM’s 2015 remarks that the G had enough revenue for the decade. This implied that GST might not need to be raised this decade but it was not a clear, direct and explicit promise not too. Neither was PM’s remarks at the 2017 PAP Convention a categorical promise or confirmation.

The was much discussion in 2017 about an impeding announcement of a GST increase, promoted at least in part by PM’s and Minister Heng’s remarks.

Many economists speculated about the timing of the GST increase. Many of them thought it would be this decade, notwithstanding the G’s earlier comments.

For myself, I was not sure what the G would announce in Budget 2018. I expected an announcement of GST to be raised, but I had no confidence whether it would be after or before 2021.

Does this mean that I thought the G dishonest in its earlier comments?

No, not at all, because while earlier statements were made about having sufficient revenue for the decade, these statements did not amount to a clear promise not to raise the GST in this term of government.

If the G thinks the earlier remarks were clear and categorical, so that citizens could have no doubts, how does it explain why so many reputable economists were willing to entertain thoughts of an increase this decade?

And later

Having read all the transcripts, Minister Fu’s ability to understand the debate seemed dodgy at best. As Bertha has written elsewhere, she seemed out of her depth and one has to say that this impression is not without basis.

For example, she deplored the fact that Sylvia Lim “continued with this accusation” after the G’s explanations but what does the Honourable Minister mean by that? Sylvia said clearly that she can accept, in light of the G’s response as to its intentions, that her suspicions may be wrong, but she simply does not accept that there was no basis for suspicion when originally made.

I rather struggle to see how this position could reasonably found a complaint to the Committee of Privileges except for a hyper-sensitive government – and that should NOT be encouraged.

Minister Fu also failed to give any coherent explanation of how – if the G’s contention that their intentions not to raise taxes this decade has been made clear in numerous statements pre-budget 2018 – that numerous respected economists could have entered and speculated about exactly that possibility.

Her answer was this : “But having said so, after she has brought the matter here, we have laid down the facts to her. And yet she continued to insist on the allegation. This is the difference between what we say in this chamber and what economists, analysts say outside this chamber.”

This answer of course says nothing about whether Minister Fu would claim that the G had previously made its position so clear that entertaining the possibility of an increase this decade was an unreasonable idea. And probably Minister Fu would, with respect, struggle to make a convincing claim here.

Instead, Minister Fu focuses her complaint simply on Sylvia’s (alleged) continued maintenance of her claim despite the G’s response.

But what does this (alleged) continued maintenance consist of?

Sylvia made plain that in light of the G’s insistance on its position, her suspicion might be wrong as a matter of fact (although the true facts are only known to Cabinet).

But she maintains that, when made, the suspicion was not without basis and essentially Minister Fu had no coherent explanation for why that was the case. She simply is unhappy that Sylvia did not withdraw the original allegation or apologise.

But why should Sylvia, unless the G could demonstrate that there was no basis for suspicion when the claim was first made – and here Minister Fu has no explanation (see above). For example, she did not respond to the question of whether all the economists who speculated on a budget increase this decade after after DPM’s 2015 statement and PM’s PAP Convention speech were thinking in an unreasonable way.

So to threaten to refer to the Committee of Privileges in these circumstances simply reflects poorly on Minister Fu, with the greatest of respect.

 

 

Tharman talking cock? Or cracking a joke?

In Political governance, Public Administration on 03/10/2017 at 10:27 am

[R]ecently, a DPM said we are now more tolerant than in the 70s and 80s. I remember participating in a couple of demonstrations in the 70s organised by the student union without asking for permission – how do you square all this?

Tan Tee Seng, Operation Spectrum detainee, on FB

The preceding bit reads

From my perspective, the case is simple – an artist used a performance art to draw attention to a shameful chapter in our historical past, much like a one-man flash mob performance. There were 3 scenes – the first at Hong Lim Park was attended by about 30 – 40 people. Part 2 was in front of the National Gallery and Part 3 was outside the Parliament House (both are public spaces). About 15 odd people saw the performance with a few passers by. After the performance, the artist was arrested – handcuffed and bundled into a police car, some of the audience were told they were “witnesses” to a commission of an offence which the police could not ascertain. Artist was kept 24 hours for his part and may be charged. The “witnesses” may be rounded up later to assist in the “investigation” – all because there was no permission given and yet our constitutional rights provide us the freedom of expression, assembly and speech.

The whole post

 

Related post: Tharman the wannabe comedian

Academic talking cock/ Got such thing as “Malay” race meh?

In Uncategorized on 17/07/2017 at 11:41 am

A really moronic statement from someone who makes moronic statements when he’s trying to justify that the “PAP is always right”

… felt that voters should not be overly-fixated with a candidate’s ethnicity – albeit being an election reserved for a particular race – as it would “detract from the raison d’être of the elected presidency and of the elected president as a symbol of our multiracialism”, as Singapore Management University law don Eugene Tan put it …

Assoc Prof Tan said the reserved election “inevitably puts race up front and centre”. However, it is “imperative that we do not get too hung up over the race” of a presidential hopeful, he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/reserved-presidential-election-casts-spotlight-malayness

WTF. How not to think a lot about racial identity when the election is reserved for a “Malay” president especially given that it seems that being a “Malay” is a cultural issue, not an ethnic (ie racial) issue.

The constructive, nation-building press quotes two experts on “Malayness” who seem to imply that there really isn’t such a thing as a Malay race:

Malay-Muslim self-help group Yayasan Mendaki has a set of criteria for its financial assistance schemes for students administered on behalf of the Government. Among other things, the recipients “must be of Malay descent” as stated in their identity cards. It spells out a list of what it considers to be “Malay descent”, and this includes 22 ethnicities including Acehnese, Javanese, Boyanese, Sumatran, Sundanese and Bugis. Students with “double-barrelled” race are eligible if the first race is listed on the identity cards as Malay, said a Mendaki spokesman. For example, a student who is Malay-Arab would qualify for the schemes but an Arab-Malay student would not, he added.

However, for the Presidential Election, Association of Muslim Professionals chairman Abdul Hamid Abdullah stressed the need for a “wider definition of a Malay” in Singapore’s context. A narrow definition would be restrictive and could disqualify potential candidates who have been “accepted” as a member of the Malay community, he added. “It is better to be inclusive. Otherwise, (it) may lead to divisiveness in the Malay community,” he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/reserved-presidential-election-casts-spotlight-malayness

So my take that Chinese can be Malay is a real possibility isit based on the second expert? Heck, let’s juz say that Indian blood is necessary to be president. Or better still, that from now on, the president must be the result of a mixed marriage. Halimah can set the precedent of the president as a symbol of our multiracialism.

 

Hsien Yang talking cock about “will being final and binding”

In Uncategorized on 16/06/2017 at 11:34 am

If the Lee row goes on, I wouldn’t be surprised if the state decides to ask the courts to rule on the validity of the will. Despite probate having been granted, it’s still possible for the will to be ruled invalid. See below.

I find two things, that don’t look good for the PM’s siblings and their cybernut fans, intriguing.

PM’s siblings have not yet given their statutory declaration, something the cabinet committee has asked for. If by the end of June (Extension of time granted, at their requeset, to give the declarations), they don’t, one is entitled to ask, as Pa would certainly have asked, “Scared is it? Got something to hide is it?”. There are criminal sanctions for giving false declarations. So scared to give declarations isit?

Interesting that a “new” law firm with a connection to one of beneficiaries drew up the “final” will*. Nothing illegal or wrong, but the optics don’t look good. Neither does it smell right. Especially as all previous versions had been drafted by another firm.


*Update at 1.02: Lee Hsien Yang denies that his wife’s firm drew up the “final” will. I suppose he’ll say that they used the language of a previous version.

——————————————————-

In movies and novels, this is a signal to the audience or readers that something’s not right: a famous detective will called in in to establish if there was anything wrong.

Plenty more entertainment to come. And better still, it’s free.

Challenging a will

Under certain circumstances, a will may be treated as invalid by a court. In such cases, a claimant can challenge the validity of the will. If a will is invalidated, the deceased’s assets will not be distributed according to the will, and such assets may instead be distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.

 

Furthermore, if the deceased was under undue influence, the will is also invalid. Undue influence can refer to the unconscientious use of one’s power over another for selfish purposes. For example, coercion, threats, harassments or persistent persuasion may amount to undue influence by one party in causing the testator to err in the making of his will.

On a related note, the lawyer who draws up a defective will which does not reflect the true wishes of the testator, may be liable for negligence to the potential beneficiary. For instance, if the testator instructed his lawyer to make a provision in his will to bequeath $10,000 to his son, and the lawyer negligently failed to do so, the son may be able to sue the lawyer for negligence.

https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/how-do-i-contest-a-will/

Talking cock about Return Our CPF

In CPF, GIC, Temasek on 04/06/2017 at 10:27 am

Cybernuts, from Mad Dog Chee to Philip Ang, regularly point out GIC’s and Temasek’s “losses” as evidence for the real reason why the PAP administration intriduced the “Minimum sum” scheme and CPF Life: Temasek, GIC lost money, resulting in a shortfall of funds if CPF can be withdrawn at 55.

I’ll quote two of the heloos of the cybernuts to show that the state can refund everyone’s outstanding CPF balance.

Uncle Leong, of fake analysis fame, points out

Amount due to CPF members is $324.2 billion

According to the Department of Statistics’ Monthly Digest of Statistics – the Amount Due to (CPF) Members is $324.2 billion as of October, 2016.

(Yes I double checked to confirm that he wasn’t faking this.)

So does state have the $ to refund $325bn ++?

Chris K (no cybernut and an unwilling hero of the cybernuts) recently pointed out on FB that looking at reserves as unencumbered assets – i.e. assets minus liabilities or net assets, a term used by Tharman and in the constitution when calculating the net investment return contribution, the ball park numbers are

MAS: $40bn,

Temasek: $220bn,

GIC: $290bn

And this excludes the past reserves still sitting in the various Fifth Schedule entities like EDB and etc LTA.

Still think got no money to repay yr CPF?

So in an alternative universe when Dr Chee becomes PM later today, with a two-thirds majority in parly, he can tell president Yaacob to allow him to draw on the reserves and return our CPF. He will tell President Halimah

I have the mandate of the people. What do u have? How many S’poreans voted for u? None because u won by default.”

Sign or I’ll pee on u and let the mob into the Istana.

 

She signs and when everyone gets their money back, the lies the cybernuts tell will be exposed.

 

Ex SDP Chairman talking cock on LKY

In Uncategorized on 27/05/2017 at 4:30 am
Mohamed Jufrie Bin Mahmood

MANY THINGS SEEM TO HAVE GONE WRONG SINCE HIS PASSING.

IS IT NOT TIME YET FOR HIM TO RISE FROM THE ASHES?

Ex SDP Chairman talking cock, juz like Dr Chee. LKY was very specific.

Even from my sickbed, even if you are going to lower me to the grave and I feel that something is going wrong, I will get up.

He had to be buried in a grave to return. He was cremated and put in urn. Actually taz why the Russian and other Eastern churches oppose cremation. Cannot rise on the day of judgment.

Maybe his children and the PAP didn’t want him rising from his grave and starting a revolution against the PAP (Shades of Mao) and so cremated him and sealed his remains in an urn making sure super strong industrial glue was used to seal the lid.

Btw, a better way than cremation: dissolving the body in an alkaline solution. More eco friendly. I hope S’pore introduces this. The water used can be recycled via the reservoir.

 

PM talking cock? Impossible to know if trade-offs are reasonable, fair or appropriate

In Political governance, Temasek on 29/06/2014 at 4:49 am

(Or “Shades of Orwell’s Big Brother?”)

Came across this thoughtful piece by Andy Mukherjee over the weekend. It explains clearly the issues and trade-offs Singapore faces in building our ideal society, while ensuring that Singaporeans have jobs and economic opportunities to build better lives and a brighter future.
As the article points out, we do enjoy important advantages compared to other countries, but it will still not be easy. There are serious trade-offs, which we must be willing to acknowledge and address. If we just pretend that everything can be better, and no hard choices are necessary, we will get into trouble. Mukherjee calls this “please-all economics”, and expresses confidence that Singaporeans are too pragmatic to fall for it. We must make sure that he is right. – LHL on FB two weeks ago

Piece PM raving about: http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/breakingviews-singapore-unrest-idINL4N0OQ07F20140612

But if we don’t know how much money we have, and how much are the returns the reserves are making for us, how can we judge if the trade-offs PM and his govt make are the right ones? After all he has as gd as admitted his govt got immigration, welfare, public tpt and public housing policies wrong by changing (sorry tweaking or is it evolving?) these policies.

And these were policies significant numbers (self included, and I note not M’sian new citizen Pussy Cat Lim who confines herself to general banalities) had been warning against for yrs. We were called “noise”, until the govt decided to change these policies.

This is what one LHL said many yrs ago when he was DPM and economic and financial czar:

The Singapore government, May 16, defended the secrecy surrounding its financial reserves of more than US$100 billion, saying it was not in the national interest to disclose details.
The veil of secrecy was necessary to protect the Singapore dollar from speculative attacks, Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in parliament.

“It is not in the people’s interest and the nation’s interest to detail our assets and their yearly returns,” he said.http://www.singapore-window.org/sw01/010516a3.htm

This remains the govt’s stand.

And if I remember correctly, his dad once said that info reserves had to be kept a secret so that S’poreans couldn’t ask for more welfare, which they would if they knew how much money S’pore had. Readers correcting me or referencing the quote appreciated.I can’t find it via my googling.

In this mobile internet age, it is sad and self-defeating that the the PM and the PAP govt (ministers and civil servants) cling to the Leninist system that all information is political and can be designated a “state secret” at any time if the govt decides it does not help to bolster the govt’s or party’s own legitimacy and power.

BTW flaw in AndyM’s analysis which disqualifies from being an unbiased analyst

There is a fifth way which Mr Mukherjee has not considered. It is to reduce and reallocate government expenditures. In particular, the government can consider reduce defence spending so as to increase spending on welfare. This is a classic “Gun vs Butter” resource allocation problem studied in elementary economics. At present, Singapore is spending nearly a quarter of the $57 billion estimated government expenditures for FY2014 on defence alone (23% at $13 billion) … [TRE]

Maybe he aiming to be a PAP minister? He is a FT based here.

He did serious weight-lifting in 2011 at a Temasek briefing:First of all, congratulations on beating the sage of Omaha because [ … ] you seem to have out performed Warren Buffett on every horizon. He was BSing as Temasek and Berskshire cannot be compared ’cause Berkshire is listed, Temasek is not.

And if you think PM’s remarks on trade-offs when juxtaposed with his remarks  on the need for secrecy on reserves are Orwellian, his press secretary’s remarks in relation to Roy Ngerng are even more chilling:

… What is at stake is not any short-term positive or negative impact on the government, but the sort of public debate Singapore should have. When someone makes false and malicious personal allegations that impugn a person’s character or integrity, the victim has the right to vindicate his reputation, whether he is an ordinary citizen or the prime minister. The internet should not be exempt from the laws of defamation. It is perfectly possible to have a free and vigorous debate without defaming anyone, as occurs often in Singapore. Emphasis mine

Foster public debate by suing for defamation? Come on, pull the other leg, it’s got bells on it. I’m reminded of the slogans in 1984:

WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

 

 

 

SIR – I refer to the article “A butterfly on a wheel” (June 13th). You referred to an “alleged ‘serious libel’” by Roy Ngerng. This is not an allegation. Mr Ngerng has publicly admitted accusing Lee Hsien Loong, the prime minister, of criminal misappropriation of pension funds, falsely and completely without foundation. After promising to apologise and to remove the post, Mr Ngerng did the opposite; he actively disseminated the libel further. This was a grave and deliberate defamation, whether it occurred online or in the traditional media being immaterial.

What is at stake is not any short-term positive or negative impact on the government, but the sort of public debate Singapore should have. When someone makes false and malicious personal allegations that impugn a person’s character or integrity, the victim has the right to vindicate his reputation, whether he is an ordinary citizen or the prime minister. The internet should not be exempt from the laws of defamation. It is perfectly possible to have a free and vigorous debate without defaming anyone, as occurs often in Singapore.

Chang Li Lin
Press secretary to the prime minister
Singapore

– See more at: http://www.economist.com/news/letters/21604530-ukraine-singapore-employment-housing-food-trucks-john-birch-society-football-0#sthash.lPfPUP1T.dpuf

 

Jos keeps on talking cock

In Infrastructure, Political governance, Public Administration on 14/01/2014 at 4:52 am

“We cannot have the attitude that everything will be perfect from Day One. If we go in with that attitude, it can only mean that we have to build in a lot of redundancy.” – Josephine Teo, Senior Minister of State for Transport.

As someone who once upon a time reported directly to people who reported directly to LKY and Dr Goh, I can safely say that they all expected things to be perfect from Day 1. So now Ms Teo implying  that because of their exacting standards, they were encouraging inefficiencies and wastefulness?

Even before he is dead, LKY gets slimed? Son should give Jos a tight slap to show his filial piety this CNY. Co-driver too busy looking at bank statements and feeling happy.

Seriously, the govt should stop giving excuses for a simple cock-up: it should simply admit that it was an honest mistake by civil servants who didn’t drive because they couldn’t afford the COEs. Insufficient signs were put up as I explained here and this was a major source of the problem.

(Pic from TRE)

Waz interesting is that even now she refuses to concede that there were insufficient signs:

Q: After the jam, more signs and advertisements on the routes came up. Why not earlier?

I once got a speeding ticket (in Singapore) and was adamant there was no signage (for speed limit). I had driven on this road umpteen times. I thought: “Never mind. Tomorrow I’ll pay attention.” True enough, I saw the sign. Sometimes we don’t notice (the signs) because we don’t need them.

You can always have more (signs and advertisements). But you have to be interested.(http://www.singapolitics.sg/supperclub/josephine-teo-%E2%80%98free-mrt-rides-has-allowed-lifestyle-change%E2%80%99)

Here’s a great comment from TOC’s facebook in response to her remarks about redundancy:

Tremendous time/effort would be incurred when trying to rectify a flawed design/system. Doing it right the first time is critical. A good design is the result of thorough research/ consultation/ brainstorming and that will ensure the success of the project. eg. years ago, woody goh said handicap people should stay away from travelling for safety reason, now we have to retrofit busses/MRT stations for wheel chair access. same for HDB flat, now installing lifts on every floor and the whole project takes decades to complete, what if the HDB architechs had done that in the first place? zero effort for wheel chair access! Our MRT trains adopted designed with 6 carriages while HK MTR already up and running and uses 8 carriages. We could have learnt from HK, instead, we choose ONLY 6 carriages. Now we are flooded with immigrants over crowding the transport system but we are handicapped in increasing the MRT stations capacity by using 8 carriages and must go for the stupid solution of changing the signaling system to cut down only 20 sec peak frequency. using tens of millions and takes 5 years or more to do it. Now who is the stupid one? which way is more cost effective?

BTW, notice that NTUC MPs were, are a bunch of cocks (the exception is Halimah). Think Jos, Lims ( Cheap Zorro, Cry Baby), Hard of hearing Han, Irene the Whiner, Choo the criminal and racist, BG Yeo’s MP from Hell (Cynthia) and NMP Terry Lee.

Related posts:

Jos: Talk Cock Queen

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/jos-too-is-talking-cock/

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/reputations-be-mean-laugh/

Jos: Empress Dowager of Bishan East

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/thanks-jos-for-giving-nishan-east-residents-another-reason-not-to-support-the-pap/

Jos too is talking cock

In Economy, Political governance on 26/10/2012 at 5:42 am

Shouldn’t Jos Teo bitch about the Integrated Programmes that make PSLE such an impt exam today, rather than against employers that offer PSLE leave for their employees, and parents that take time off to coach their kids. In my time, PSLE was important to get into RI, Victoria and Serangoon English: once in if no major balls-up could do PreU in these schools (Integrated Programme is juz modern variant), but if one went to mission primary schools, going to mision secondary schools (and PreU) wasn’t that dependent on PSLE results, unless one was stupid. Things got even better when the govt started NJC.  More places for PreU studies.

But then the cycle turned and now PLSE is the exam to pass.

“We are quite mistaken to behave as if PSLE is THE defining moment in a child’s development.”: Err not all parents can afford to send their kids overseas to make sure they get a good education, if the kids get culled here.

And following the logic of her outburst, wouldn’t the logic of her argument mean that the government is wrong to continue curbing the number of COEs? As even ministers and MAS concede that the rising costs of COEs adds to inflationary pressures, even if ministers are wrong to say that rising COEs don’t affect the cost of living of us plebs (those unable to afford owning cars, and have to use public tpt).

Which brings me to the inflation situation.

Remember me bitching in early August that MTI jnr minister Lee Yi Shyan, and the local media covering him, were misrepresenting the pix on food inflation? I had pointed out that there were reports of rising food prices.

Well now MAS validates what I was saying. MAS warned on Tuesday about upward pressures in imported food prices over the next few months and into early 2013 due to weather-related supply disruptions.

Jos has gd company. And this ST guy should be in line to be a jnr minister.

Note: Last sentence and link to Jos piece added at 9.09am on day of publication.

 

Talking cock Kadir, Hariss?

In Uncategorized on 25/09/2012 at 6:23 am

Waz this rubbish abt wanting to attack when playing away?

“Strikers win games, defenders win trophies,” said a great Arsenal manager who won the double when it meant something.

Hope that these LionsXII guys are playing mind games, not being talk cock artists.

Indonesia: Talking cock is not helpful, helpful

In Indonesia, Infrastructure on 13/06/2012 at 7:32 am

Work on a new deepwater port for container ships on an island between Batam and Bintan is set to begin next year, creating a potential rival to Singapore’s port. The port, on Tanjung Sauh, aims to be a major transshipment center for Indonesia, and is part of the country’s overhaul of its transport infrastructure to cope with growing domestic demand.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/05/21/deepwater-port-near-batam-set-rival-singapore.html

Well in 2005, Indonesia annced a major expansion of the port on Batam. It even awarded a contract to a French company. Err nothing ever happened. Wonder if this time, it will be anything different. And remember that Batam has one unused int’l airport. It was built to rival S’pore’s airport in the late 1970s.

Readers will know I’m bullish on Indonesia. But that is despite, not because, of its officials or the government planning agencies.

But here’s one talking cock project that works: using social media to help farmers get info they need http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18193993

Talking about race: something from the FT

In Uncategorized on 10/08/2019 at 6:54 am

As it’s the day after National Day, let’s return to the issue of race which is the hot topic

Alt media, cybernuts also promoting racial stereotyping and worse

Typical Chinese reaction to “brownface” ad/ Cina also can get upset

Indian lady takes issue with charge that Nets ad was “brownface”.

Brownfacegate: Did you know Shanmugam also said this?

(Btw, racism in the US of A: Why Muslims in USA are right to feel oppressed)


How the concept of a “Malay race” can cause a headache

“Malay race” created by ang mohs, not the Malays

Academic talking cock/ Got such thing as “Malay” race meh?

Watain fans: Muslims cannot be, but can Malays be ?

————————————————-

Charles King, a professor of international affairs and government, in his latest book, Gods of the Upper Air.

traces three main waves of western thought about race. Before the 19th century, academics viewed different races as permanently distinct, akin to separate species. After the work of Charles Darwin introduced the idea of evolution, a second idea gained traction: that humanity was interlinked, but that different societies were evolving at different rates; thus societies were ranked according to how “primitive” they were.

Boas, Mead, Benedict and others initially accepted this evolutionary consensus and went to places such as the Arctic Circle and Samoa, aiming to study “primitive people” and fit them into an evolutionary schema. But after observing different cultures first hand, they realised that it was totally wrong to label other cultures as “primitive”. Different human cultures needed to be valued and studied on their own terms, as part of the “great arc of potential human purposes and motivations”, Benedict wrote. She described this third approach as “the recognition of cultural relativity” — or the idea that different human cultures were valid in their own right, and should be respected.

These ideas were largely drowned out during the second world war, as fascism and nativism held sway. But in the postwar decades, they helped form the bedrock of human rights.

Whatever, ang moh tua kee.

Trebles all round.

 

Tharman talks cock yet again

In Uncategorized on 21/04/2019 at 12:40 pm

In the big IMF/ World Bank pow-pow where central bankers were talking aloud about the dangers of govt’s interfering with their central banks’ independence, our very own Tharman Shanmugaratnam, a deputy prime minister and the chairman of its central bank joined in this concern about independence with, “Populism on the left and the right is also encroaching on central banks.” And the political pressure, “does pose a very real risk of central banks being encouraged, urged and forced into new and much larger quasi-fiscal roles”.

Like real, the fact that he’s both a DPM, and chairman of the central bank shows that there’s no independent central bank here. And he’s trying to join the conversation about central bank independence?

Or is Tharman telling a joke to the ang mohs? He trying out to be the next Joker? Or at least a stand-up comic?

Related posts:

Property: Tharman trying to crack jokes again

Tharman trying to tell jokes again?

Tharman joking again? Or trying to BS us?

PAP’s cock-ups since the 1980s

In Political economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 11/07/2018 at 9:53 am

In Is PAP in “decline and disintegration”? I wrote that PAP was in stagnation phase that began in 1990

A regular reader, a retired NUS professor lists the things the PAP got wrong since the 1984.

[S]everal major PAP blunders started in 1984 during the election campaign of that year

1. elected president: LKY had already reached 60 by that year, and this was then the public sector retirement age; so he had to face the question whether he was stepping down; the thinking at the time was to move to the presidency – under the then constitution, parliament would decide; he being who he is, the position would not be merely ceremonial, but it must be his legal background that made him uncomfortable, and a decision was made to enhance the position; the resulting controversy led to his undertaking not to be the first elected president, Goh Chok Tong’s decision to invent the post of Senior Minister to keep LKY in the cabinet, the elected president Ong Teng Chong’s conflict with cabinet, regular embarrassment about a 3-men committee rejecting candidates causing a no contest, etc

LKY could have just retired in 1990, started a newspaper column (modern idea would be blog), a charity/research foundation, a senate, and he would have remained the most influential person in the country, taking into consideration his son and his 2nd cousin were both in cabinet; it was quite unnecessary for him to feel insecure about his own place in singapore society even if he held no elected office; if he had been a blogger posting articles daily, every important person in singapore, the cabinet ministers especially, would have eagerly read them as soon as they were posted

2. HDB asset enhancement: during the campaign LKY got annoyed by opposition claiming “your HDB apartmen[t] is on 99-year lease; you dont really own it”, and announced “HDB will stop building in opposition districts”; at the time I actually did not understand why that should cause anyone to worry; but the Northeast MRT line provided part of the explanation – no population increase, no new infrastructure; the Mathias Yao–Chee Soon Juan Straits Times Forum series of letters provided some more – poor infrastructure, lower HDB value; with HDB apartments traded on the open market (previous owners are allowed to go back and buy a new apartment from HDB after 5 years).. Soon Permanent Residents, who are not entitled to buy from HDB, buying on the open market caused the HDB asset values to rise beyond affordability

3. CPF: with people living longer, the idea of delaying CPF money return was raised in 1984 and initial reaction was negative; again LKY was annoyed; soon the idea of minimum sum was adopted, later compulsory annuity, which would have been workable if most people can still get a substantial part out in cash at 55; with the weak salary increases in the past decade or so (partly because of foreign labour, e.g., IT used to have highest paid new graduates, before the industry bought in PRCs and Indians) and low interest rate, more and more people found themselves not meeting the minimum sum requirement, and every increase in minimum sum value makes more people angry

2011

[M]uch of PAP’s recent electoral adversity was self inflicted; the major examples I recall

1. James Gomez case 2006: LKY, Wong Kan Seng and George Yeo spent far too much time talking about a minor issue (LHL and GCT both kept quiet – they could afford to); the Aljunied voters punished George Yeo, and WP identified the electorate as vulnerable, put effort into the ground work and won it decisively in 2011

2. Tin Pei Lin case 2011: it was sound strategy to find some younger, especially female, faces, but the party should have made the effort to find someone with a track record as a political operator in her own right, not just a polished presenter with management consultancy experience recommended by a personal connection; I also believe if they introduced her at the end, after people have grown bored with all those familiar CVs of civil servants, generals, professionals, executives, etc, she might have enjoyed a better reception, so they botched the presentation in addition to selection

3. Joo Chiat case 2011: it was also sound strategy to replace old by young, but Charles Chong is older than Chen Soo Sen so the change could not be justified on that ground; Chen also enjoyed certain personal support which did not readily transfer via party loyalty; Workers Party ended with nearly 50%

4. Hougang case 2012: Teo Chee Hean dwelt far too long on Yaw Shin Leong’s personal and business failings, which Yaw’s former supporters preferred not to be reminded of, whereas upbeat talks about the wonderful things PAP would do for Hougang if elected, might have more fully exploited the unexpected opportunity; after the Hougang moralizing, the Palmer case was a particularly hard blow – PAP candidates are like anyone else

[W]hether the party would learn from these mistakes, and whether it would make new ones in 2016, is of course to be seen; given the resources available; it certainly has the potential of doing much better

Looking at the above, one is left wondering why the Oppo parties couldn’t and can’t (WP is expected to lose Aljunied in next GE) make a more serious dent in the PAP’s popularity with 60- 70% of the voters? Only Tan Cheng Bock (ex-PAPpy) can.

Is it repression and fear?

Or is the PAP juz lucky what with the quality of Oppo leaders: clowns like Lim Tean (Lim Tean: A disgraceful chamber of horrors), Goh Meng Seng (Silence of Goh Meng Seng) and Pritam Singh (WP distributing unsafe food (pass expiry date) and getting financial advice of cybernut resulting in having to take down misleading video after Lawrence Wong kicked Bayee’s ass)?

Email yr answers pls.

 

Not talking about race or religion

In Uncategorized on 08/06/2017 at 1:20 pm

When TRE republished this, there was the usual ranting from the cybernuts.

But there was this

opposition dude:
June 6, 2017 at 2:16 pm (Quote)
I never like talking about race or religion, it’s too sensitive a topic.

What I would rather do is continue being on good terms with people of other races and see them as friends. So far this has worked well since I was in primary school up to working life.

For me, it’s always nice to just makan together with other races and just enjoy their company and talking cock with them.

I like him avoid talking about race or religion with people of other races or religions. The problem is that we can stand accused (rightly) of being tolerant rather than accepting of other races or religions.

The accusation does has merit especially if we are from the majority group. But what is the alternative? Let it all hang out like Shrey and gang?

Cock of an ad

In Uncategorized on 31/05/2017 at 1:26 pm

For the last week, I keep getting on my FB wall an ad that begins

Motley Fool Singapore CEO David Kuo has just opened up an extremely limited number of seats to his private, invitation-only investment club, Stock Advisor Gold.

If so limited, why do I see this ad every day?🤣 

Talking cock this fool David Kuo.

LKY talked cock on UBS/ Ang mohs that really invest for long term

In GIC, Hong Kong, Property on 25/05/2017 at 4:26 am

GIC’s sale of at a loss of part of its stake in UBS reminded me that one Harry Lee boasted that S’pore was even more long term than Buffett: it had a 30 yr horizon. Well he said that in 2007 or 2008 after GIC bot UBS and Citi and Temask bot Barclays (sold) amd Merrill Lynch (disappeared), so it turns out he was talking cock: like on being a good friend of China? He was a running dog of the US going by the quality of the US crowd versus that of the PRC crowd at his funeral.

Now this is serious long term

— Jardines (controlling shareholder of Hongkong Land where the land in Central now resides) first bought freehold land in Central in 1901, and

— HSBC has owned its nearby site since 1866.

And that’s nothing. The Duke of Westminster has properties in central London dating from the 17th century.

CPF: The cock that Swee Say talks

In CPF, Financial competency, Financial planning on 25/06/2014 at 4:43 am

The best way for Singaporeans to prepare for retirement is to use less of their Central Provident Fund (CPF) money when they are young. Mr Lim Swee Say, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, said this will ensure the current level of CPF payout can be maintained over time and not be eroded by inflation.

Mr Lim, who is also the labour chief, made that point when speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the closing of the Singapore Model Parliament yesterday. (23 Jan 2014). He later issued a clarification saying “that housing, healthcare and education for the children” were excluded from his spending comments, saying the constructive, nation-building media had misreported him.

Even with the clarification, he was talking rubbish, showing how clueless the nTUC minister was with the life of his ordinary members.

For starters, as TRE pointed out

Using less CPF money means leaving the money with CPF board, which in the case of OA, will earn only 2.5%. Inflation rate for the last few years already exceeded 2.5% (except last year, which barely covered the 2.4% inflation rate) [Link]:

  • 2010 – 2.8%
  • 2011 – 5.2%
  • 2012 – 4.6%
  • 2013 – 2.4%

Next after his clarification that he was talking of CPF spending other than for “housing, healthcare and education for the children”, one is left wondering if he doesn’t realise that other than for these things, CPF cannot be used for other than retirement. Is he so out of touch? Or another example of his special status, like once a month CPF statement?

The more impt issue, if no use CPF, how to afford “affordable” public housing? Public housing is only “affordable” because of 20-yr mortgages that use CPF monies to finance the loans.

At the moment 36% of a S’porean’s wages are locked up in the CPF because of this Hard Truth

[Without the CPF], Singaporeans would buy enormous quantities of clothes, shoes, furniture, television sets, radio, tape recorders, hi-fis, washing machines, motor cars. They would have no substantial or permanent asset to show for it.

  • Asian Wall Street Journal, Oct 21 1985 quoting one LKY.

Our money, but can only be spent on the “right” things: uniquely S’porean.

But it was an ang moh’s idea in the first place: In February 1940, one Keynes published How to Pay for the War. He advocated that interest rates should be kept low and that compulsory saving (thereby deferring pay) should be used as a mechanism to prevent the inflation that occurred during World War One. A portion of everyone’s income would be automatically invested in government bonds. Then, when the war was over, and the economy was in dire need of savings, the money would be released. The plan was too revolutionary for the British government.

In the S’pore version, the payout got deferred and deferred.

“The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday – but never jam to-day.”
“It must come sometimes to ‘jam to-day’,” Alice objected.
“No, it can’t,” said the Queen. “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know.”
“I don’t understand you,” said Alice. “It’s dreadfully confusing!”

(Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There)

Covid-19: We have our FT Indian workers, Poland has its coal miners

In Uncategorized on 09/06/2020 at 1:51 pm

In the past six weeks, Poland has recorded roughly 300-400 new infections a day. 50% of these have come from Silesia, which accounts for just 12% of the population.

Silesia is the heartland of Poland’s coal industry and the narrow shafts are the incubators of Covid-19. They are like our dorms: “crowded and cramped” and hot and humid, great conditions for Covid-19 to incubate and spread.

Btw, remember this description about the places that incubate and spread Covid-19? Ho Ching should have added mines as Poland and South Africa can testify. And let’s face it, she’s talking cock, using her examples one can reasonably say that

“crowded and cramped” conditions of dorms is the cause of dorm outbreaks.

Ho Ching

She had wriiten

We shouldn’t jump to conclusion that “crowded and cramped” conditions of dorms is the cause of dorm outbreaks.

On a cruise ship, passengers have their own individual rooms, with ensuite bathrooms. They have different levels of luxury, some with balconies, others without. Yet, they too have big outbreaks.

Ditto aircraft carriers, where sailors may be famously pampered with on board ice cream machines and other social amenities.

Nursing homes are not cramped too, and prisons are generally designed to keep prisoners sleeping in separate quarters.

Ho Ching quoted in Covid-19: “Well-off” local family living (almost) like manual workers from India

As I’ve written before, since Ho Ching so free, she should go kick ass at Temasek Foundation

Xia suay! Tan Kin Lian has valid point

In Public Administration on 24/04/2020 at 5:23 am

He not always Talk Cock, Sing Song King. I also wonder why the 4G leaders were not looking at the non-dom data only, as we can effectively lock up the dom workers: OK, OK it’s not a PC correct view.

My further tots after TKL’s piece

Bad judgment by ministerial task force

The ministerial task force made a bad judgment. In early April, they panicked and decided to introduce the circuit breaker. They closed down most workplaces (except for the essential ones), food outlets and schools and ordered the people to stay at home for four weeks.

Why was this a bad judgment?

The ministers panicked when they saw the large increase in new cases. The did not realize that this increase was due to the increased testing of the workers living in the dormitories which occurred as part of the contact tracing protocol. As more people are tested, more cases would certainly be detected.

There was no evidence of a large increase in the wider community. If there was an increase, it was small and manageable.

In such a situation, the ministers should just ask for the foreign workers to stop work and stay in the dormitories until they are tested. There is no need to lockdown the entire country.

They could have focused their attention on the real risk, rather than dissipate their resources over locking down the entire country.

The lockdown (or “circuit breaker” that is officially termed) has cost the country over $40 billion in the relief packages. This does not include the real losses suffered by businesses and households. Many families saw their income wiped out by the lockdown measures, and do not receive adequate compensation.

Several hundred thousand families and families were badly affected. The damage to their livelihood is horrendous. It will take several months for the damage to be repaired, even after the lockdown is lifted.

The $40 billion spent on the relief packages could have been used to waive GST for four years. That would have reduce the cost of living for the people. That would have been a better use of the money.

All of these economic harm could have been avoided, if the ministers had made the right judgement.

They should have ordered the workers living in the dormitories to stop work and isolate them from the community until they are tested to be “suitable to work”.

They can monitor the actual spread in the wider community, excluding the cases from the dormitories, to see if a lockdown is necessary.

They could have followed the approach that is successfully adopted in several countries, such as Taiwan, South Korea and Vietnam. These countries strengthen their social distancing measures. They asked their people to wear masks and to keep a safe distance from other people. Some closed schools but some did not.

These countries did not implement a lockdown. They managed to contain the spread of the virus and keep a low death rate.

We should have tried this approach first, before ordering a costly lockdown that had a bad impact on the economy and that may really be unnecessary.

The statistics from the World Health Organization showed that the death rate from the covid-19 is 2 per million in Singapore. It is 128 per million in America and higher in several countries in Europe.

The risk from the covid-19 is clearly much lower in Singapore than in other countries. If our death rate is 50 per million, it would be justified for the ministers to panic and lockdown the country. But it is poor judgement and and hasty for the ministers to introduce a lockdown when the death rate was only 2 per million.

To prepare for the possibility that the situation could get worse and a possible increase in the death rate, the ministers could have taken the following contingency measures:

a) Increase our capacity to treat more severely ill patients. This means more hospital beds, ventilators and hospital doctors and nurses. We can follow other countries in how they expand the capacity quickly.

b) Increase the isolation facilities to quarantine people for 14 or 21 days. These facilities can be set up quickly and do not need a high standard of medical equipment.

c) Arrange to take care of the elderly sick people who live alone and in nursing homes. We can get specially screened care givers to take care of their needs and severely reduce their exposure to the wider community

d) Conduct the covid test on all healthcare workers. This is to protect the health of the hospital workers and the patients. The results of the test can be used to estimate the community spread of the virus, as these workers can be treated as a representative sample of the population. This information is critical for planning the containment measures to be used in the future.

I believe that the first two measures have already been taken by the government. I suggest that they act on the third and fourth measures immediately.

I now come to the next test. Will the ministers extend the circuit breaker for another few weeks, beyond May 4?

It would be unwise and unnecessary to extend the circuit breaker. It would cause greater damage to the livelihoods of the hundreds of thousand of people that have been badly affected now. The damage will extend further and affect to the population at large.

I hope that the ministerial task force will review the situation and take the right decision going forward.


Unlike TKL, I don’t think the 4G leaders panicked. I suspect something about the data scared the hell out of them after their advisers interpreted the data for them.

Maybe asymptomatic cases could be a lot more prevalent?

Or hospital facilities maybe will be overstretched if there’s no lockdown? Remember even if non-dom cases are peanuts, cases grow exponentially. Combine that with the cases among the locked down FTs and “PM, we have a problem.”

Only time will tell if Tan Kin Lian is talking cock on the topic.

Related posts:

Why even with 4G donkeys, PAP will retain power

Is there really a better alternative to PAP 4G?

Xia suay! LKY’s really dishonourable son?

In Uncategorized on 26/02/2020 at 4:26 am

KNN! CCB! Xia suay! Son honour pa like this meh?

When I was a junior officer in the central bank, I was fortunate enough to work for someone who in a previous incarnation was the perm sec in the PMO’s office.

He once told me that LKY, was a stickler for accuracy and the truth. Anyone caught misrepresenting the truth, however innocently, to LKY got terminated ASAP. If LKY tot the person lied, it was terminated with extreme prejudice. 

So I can well imagine LKY’s ashes spinning in his urn (which are on a table in his Oxley Rise house, beside that his wife’s urn) if he knew what Lee Hsien Yang said in his sworn testimony to the disciplinary tribunal investigating his wife’s role in LKY’s final will.

“Statements he made need not be accurate because they were not sworn ones, said Mr Lee Hsien Yang, when asked why his statements on Facebook and in public were at odds with his testimony.”

And

“He said his public statements could be inaccurate because they are not sworn statements and thus he may not look at them carefully,” said the tribunal.

And

“Mr Lee admitted in cross-examination that aspects of the posts could be misleading and inaccurate,” 

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/lee-hsien-yang-statements-were-not-sworn-ones-so-need-not-be-accurate?fbclid=IwAR0bAKpz5yju2y1h4AEXurCUmqhh7EDBIjzsndDYs4-zeRK-xMCCWcsnV_k

Not only would LKY be upset, so would ma. My friend was her pupil in Lee & Lee and said she was a stickler for accuracy and the truth.

Lee Hsien Loong’s Yang’s wife said she looked forward to defending herself in open court. The tribunal’s findings will go before a court made up of three high court judges.

I look forward to learning if the findings of the tribunal about LHY’s integrity are upheld or thrown out by the judges. I once wrote:

 As a son of LKY, Lee Hsien Yang would have learnt the importance of defending his integrity. He could do no less as a son of Harry than to attack his brother’s integrity in return.

Just a tot, maybe, the constructive, nation-building quoted what he said out of context?

Whatever, for the record, I’ve always had a problem with statements uttered by LHY in 2017 on FB about his wife’s role in relation to LKY’s final will. From 2017: Can understand why SD wanted from Hsien Yang and Talking cock about the will.

Posts to show I’m no fan of LKY and his three children (From what I’ve been told of Mrs Lee, I admire her: real MGS girl)

Biblical verses that explain Lees’ row?

White Horses get taste of what Marxist conspirators kanna isit?

Juz move yr ass Dr Lee: Dr Lee trying to have her cake and eat it

Speaking truth to LHY

FamiLee: Karma’s a bitch

PM should have just sat down and shut up not tell his subordinates his concerns.

Big PAP win by PAP

In Uncategorized on 26/01/2020 at 6:49 am

Yesterday, I heard a story that had me laughing. It will drive Mad Dog, Lim Tean, Meng Seng to despair and hopefully commit suicide. We need a credible opposition (Think Wankers, Paul Thamby and TCB), not these cybernut heroes. As Meng Seng said with a straight face, “Keep jesters out of opposition, please.”. He should walk the talk, not juz talk the cock.

I was enquiring yesterday about a married couple who late last year were experiencing marital problems. They had been married for over thirty years.

I was told that they are happily married. They decided to press the restart button.

In particular, the cybernut, cyberwarrior of a husband who is unemployed and destitute had to promise that he wouldn’t rave and rant about the PAP govt in the morning when he drove his wive to work. While the voting record of his wife is unknown (He had kept saying that she always voted for the PAP), she told him that she couldn’t stand his anti-PAP rants every morning. It was not a pleasant start to a working day, she said.

As the alternative was getting kicked out of the their home and depending on the PAP’s govt generosity (He already big user of SingHeath despite claiming like Phillip Ang, another big user and the cybernuts’ go to financial expert despite not knowing of the time calue of money, that it was a scam and expensive), he agreed to stop talking cock. Where are his cybernut pals when he needs financial help?

Why does he uses SingHeath despite saying it’s a scam and expensive? Talking thru gritted teeth “I can’t afford to go private.”. Btw, he says that he should not wait when he uses SingHealth.

Vote wisely.

*

“Black is white, white is black”: Our UK ambassador defends POFMA

In Political governance on 23/12/2019 at 11:18 am

Regular regulars will know that I’m no fan of POFMA (Fake news is in the eyes of the beholder) even though Alex Tan, Brad Bowels and Lim Tean deserve to kanna POFMAed (The last two talk so much cock that even if the authorities wrongly POFMa them, the courts can still find that they deserve to kannna POFMAed for other BS). As to the SDP’s POFMA, if it kanna POFMA, so should the constructive, nation-building ST.

So I had a great laugh when this appeared in the Economist’s letters section: note the implied argument that POFMA is nothing more than “right of reply”. If so why not make “Right of reply” law apply to social media etc, not juz the media? Someone talking cock, me thimks.

Free speech in Singapore

Contrary to your report (“False alarm”, December 7th), our Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act should be looked at in the same context as our belief in the right of reply, which in our view enhances rather than reduces the quality of public discourse, and strengthens and safeguards proper public accountability that must necessarily underpin democracies. Online posts that have been corrected remain available in full, but with links to the government’s response appended. Readers can see both and decide for themselves which is the truth. How does twinning factual replies to falsehoods limit free speech?

You also misrepresented the falsehoods that the government corrected. One post not only accused the government of rigging elections and conspiring to convert Singapore into a Christian theocracy, but also made false claims that it had arrested specific critics. Another did not only question the “investment nous of Singapore’s sovereign-wealth funds”, but based this on false allegations of losses that never occurred. The Economist itself recognises how serious a problem online falsehoods are, for example in “Anglichanka strikes again” (April 21st 2018). Fake stories have influenced British politics, notably in the Brexit campaign. Legislatures around the world have been grappling with this problem.

Singapore, a small English-speaking, multiracial, multi-religious city-state open to the world, is more vulnerable than most to this threat. Having observed in Britain and elsewhere the cost of doing nothing, we decided to act. Singapore’s laws are designed to meet our own context and needs. We have no ambition to set any example for other countries, but neither do we make any apologies for defending our own interests.

Foo Chi Hsia
High commissioner for Singapore
London

Ah well, having to write letters like this is the price of a cushy life funded by us tax payers.

The letter reminds me of Race is BS or “post-truth” at work?

“They wanted facts. Facts! They demanded facts from him, as if facts could explain anything.”
―from LORD JIM (1900) by Joseph Conrad

Ms Foo’s other attempts at comedy and post-truths:

Christmas laughs from our comic lady in London

What next? Senior civil servant saying that those who don’t vote PAP don’t wish S’pore well?

Ang mohs told secret of why PAP wins and wins

Our London ambassador on why Reformasi here is for the deluded

PAP govt speaking? No ler North Korean minister

Economist piece on Amos etc: Dark Side cousin responds

Somehow I’m reminded of

Song of the Witches from Macbeth

Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.
Fillet of a fenny snake,
In the caldron boil and bake;
Eye of newt and toe of frog,
Wool of bat and tongue of dog,
Adder’s fork and blind-worm’s sting,
Lizard’s leg and howlet’s wing,
For a charm of powerful trouble,
Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.
Double, double toil and trouble;
Fire burn and caldron bubble.
Cool it with a baboon’s blood,
Then the charm is firm and good.

SAF can really detect and neutralise drones?

In Malaysia on 18/10/2019 at 5:17 am

After the attack on Saudi oil installations, in what seems to be warning to Tun not to try anything funny (Morocco Mole, Secret Squirrel’s side kick tells me that his second cousin removed working in Tun’s office tells him that arms dealers have promised him Iranian drones that hit the Saudi installations.)

Singapore ‘quite confident’ of detecting and neutralising drones used in Saudi attacks: Ng Eng Hen

Headline from constructive, nation-building CNA

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-confident-detect-neutralise-drones-saudi-arabia-uav-11976108

Is he talking cock?

Because remember the drone intrusion at Chamgi Int’l? Why isn’t Changi Int’l not protected against drone intrusions?/ Paper weapons?

and

But let’s be serious

But it would be a mistake to confuse the use of drones or UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles) in this attack with other incidents where off-the-shelf drones have disrupted airports, football matches or political rallies, says Douglas Barrie, an air power fellow at think tank the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

He says this attack was carried out, in part, by sophisticated UAVs – small, pilotless, winged aircraft – nothing like the quadcopter drones flown in suburban parks.

Instead, they can cover hundreds of kilometres and be pre-programmed to fly around navigation points on the ground, allowing them to approach a target from an unexpected direction.

“The level of complexity in this attack is above anything we’ve seen before. Using a mix of cruise missiles and unmanned air vehicles (UAVs) that arrived all at the same time calls for a serious level of planning and proficiency,” says Mr Barrie.

The attack has raised a question-mark over the quality of the protection available against UAV assaults.

Criticism of Saudi Arabian air defences is wide of the mark, says Mr Barrie. The fact is that complex networks of air defence radars linked to guided missiles and squadrons of advanced fighter jets are not designed to counter this relatively cheap and disposable technology.

“Digital technology has made a huge difference to what smaller UAVs can do. Suddenly you can pack a lot into a UAV, you can almost turn it into a precision guided weapon.”

By programming a UAV to fly around numerous points before arriving at its target it can avoid the obvious directions from which an attack is expected. This may explain why existing radars failed to spot the drone formation which attacked Abqaiq.

Which is why this got rushed into the area

The US Air Force has just taken delivery of Phaser, a microwave-based weapon from defence giant Raytheon. Firing from a disc resembling a giant satellite dish atop a sand-coloured container it wipes out the digital elements inside a drone.

Raytheon cannot say where the rapidly purchased Phaser has been sent, but the Pentagon has stated that it is being deployed overseas.

Perhaps Phaser’s biggest strength is it operates at the speed of light. That is the rate at which it fires out bursts of microwave radiation. And that can bring an approaching UAV down in a split second.

The beam emitted by Phaser is 100 metres broad at a distance of one kilometre. That translates into a lot of dangerous space for an attacking UAV. Targets are tracked by an electro-optical sensor converting images into electronic signals and working in tandem with the microwave beam.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49984415?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology&link_location=live-reporting-story

Alfian is no knight in shining armour fighting the PAP dragon

In Uncategorized on 16/10/2019 at 4:32 am

Or for truth and justice. He’s more like an identity-challenged knight in rusty armour rowing with his enemies (think PAP govt) and his inner demons.

I’m not defending what the PAP minister said about Alfian (Because unlike the constructive, nation-building media I’ve not been paid my 30 pieces of silver, and unlike the PAP IB, I don’t work for free.), but I hope his critics had read some of Alfian’s stuff that the anti-PAP Woke don’t publicise, when criticising the minister. Anti-PAP cybernuts are a different breed of low life: “PAP is always wrong.”

I speak as someone who read some of his stuff years ago. In the poems I read, I sensed his unhappiness about living in a Chinese dominated multi-racial society. He was really not happy that his race was not top dog, like in KL, and he was not getting the goodies like M’sian Malays that he felt he was entitled to. He wanted to live in a multi-racial society where the Malays dominated. I must stress that this is only my reading.

A lawyer and PAP member (who yet again hasn’t been selected to be an MP) seems to share my view, though he put it more menacingly

I find Alfian’s actions anti Singapore. The combination of his poem and his pro Malaysia sentiments reflect a longing for a situation where his race is not the minority.

He is not a critic. He does not feel he belongs in Singapore.

Ong should add to his statement by using this PAPpy’s turn of phrase. Silly of Ong not to have said this in first place. But then GE coming and he doesn’t want to offend the Malay voters, who are not exactly fans of the PAP govt. Neither does he want Tun to take offence.

Oh, and do realise that Alfian is biting the hand that protects him.

He will have problems if he is a Malay living in M’sia: his preferred country. He’s a self-proclaimed gay, atheist Muslim. That is haram in M’sia and other Muslim countries. In Saudi Arabia he could be executed. In S’pore, minister Shan rightly says that LGBTQs will be protected, like other S’poreans

And remember what happened to Anwar? The authorities tried to destroy his career by portraying him as a homosexual because being gay is haram in Islam.

Doubtless if he was M’sian, he’d be spurning the privileges of being a Malay, and bemoaning that he couldn’t reveal his inner self. He’d be writing about hidden identities, like Oscar Wilde. Or maybe, he’ll be looking at his bank statement and smile.

—————————————-

“Malay race” created by ang mohs, not the Malays

Academic talking cock/ Got such thing as “Malay” race meh?

Watain fans: Muslims cannot be, but can Malays be ?

——————————————————————————-

I’ll end by saying that the the minister roughed up Alfian for wrong reasons, doing no good for his reputation: https://sudhirtv.com/2019/10/14/the-day-singapores-education-minister-lost-some-credibility/?fbclid=IwAR2fHLaLLKIAUmC_BPqWaj6V6VyNOkFd_qGKk3Z1qTQ2sl0TxPiJL0Dxns4.

But I never had a high opinion of him: Ong Ye Kung: “Is he the 4G leader with the killer instinct?”

With US cos like these, Xi can give Trump the finger

In China on 05/09/2019 at 4:02 am

Further to With Apple as a US co, USA doesn’t need enemies, here’s more on US cos who have decided to give Trump, and others who have serious concerns about China — congress, and the defence and security establishments — the bird. The Donald, congress and defence and security establishments think that China is the new USSR and must be contained.

But investments by US companies in China have grown this year despite the worsening trade row. Some American businesses want to benefit from China’s expanding consumer market.

US companies invested US$6.8bn into China in the first half of the year, up 1.5% from the average during the same period over the past two years, according to the Rhodium Group, a consultancy.

Most of the US$6.8bn

went into greenfield projects, such as electric vehicle maker Tesla’s factory in Shanghai, which will be the first wholly foreign-owned auto plant in China. Other large deals included US fund Bain Capital’s $570m investment in data centre provider Beijing Qinhuai.

FT

Btw, this data contradicts China’s official data but the FT says this data is more reliable

And btw2, late last week, The Donald said was ready to use emergency powers to compel US companies to stop doing business with Beijing. But according to the FT, US cos think he’s talking cock.

Here’s why US cos are prepared to put profits before patriotism:

US retailer Costco was forced to close early on its opening day in China, after the store was swamped with shoppers.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49492326

But Grandpa Xi has Chinese cos that are just as unpatriotic as American cos: With cos like these, China doesn’t need enemies like Trump

Indonesian riots prove minister’s point on zero tolerance of racist remarks?

In Indonesia, Political economy, Public Administration on 27/08/2019 at 10:53 am

If a racist rap video was allowed to remain online, it could normalise offensive speech and such attacks against other races could become mainstream, said Law and Home Affairs Minister K Shanmugam.

Speaking at the CNM Leaders Summit organised by the National University of Singapore’s Department of Communications and New Media on Thursday (Aug 22), Mr Shanmugam expanded on why the Government acted to remove the rap video by YouTuber Preetipls and her brother Subhas Nair, which came in response to a controversial “brownface” advertisement.

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/preetipls-subhas-nair-rap-video-normalised-offensive-speech-11834928

Constructive, nation-building CNA

Well the following article from the BBC about violent protests in West Papua province is evidence that he isn’t talking cock about the probability of violence when there’s official tolerance of racist language. Racist taunts aimed at a group of students from West Papua in Java have sparked violent protests in Indonesia’s West Papua.

What happened in Java last weekend

The groundswell of anger that has fuelled the latest demonstrators was sparked by an incident in the Javanese city of Surabaya at the weekend.

After accusing Papuan university students of damaging an Indonesian flag during Independence Day celebrations, nationalist groups surrounded their boarding house and goaded them with racist taunts, calling them “monkeys”, “pigs” and “dogs”.

Police in riot gear then stormed the dormitory to force the students out. Authorities said the students were briefly questioned before being set free.

This resulted in violent protests in West Papua

The area’s largest protests in years saw numerous buildings torched – including a jail and a market – and resulted in the Indonesian government deploying thousands of additional security officers to an area which is already the country’s most heavily militarised.

The internet has also been shut down to “restore security”, according to the Indonesian government.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-49434277

But it’s more than racist taunts. Papuan students in Java, told BBC Indonesian they are often made to feel like second-class citizens.

“I have been turned away from student boarding houses and told that they will not receive boarders who are Papuan students,” said Benfa, a Papua student in Yogyakarta.

“We face discrimination and racism daily,” Aris Yeimo, from the Papuan student union, added.

Coming back to the spark that started the riots (the racial taunts),  a few Indonesian politicians are showing some sensitivity. The governor of East Java province apologised for the racism in Surabaya, and President Joko Widodo announced plans to visit Papua. But better not to have allowed the taunts in the first place?

Related post:

Brownfacegate: Did you know Shanmugam also said this?

Typical Chinese reaction to “brownface” ad/ Cina also can get upset

Brownfacegate: The inside story?

“Licking the ass of the enemy of my enemy”

In Malaysia on 16/12/2018 at 7:00 am

“Licking the ass of the enemy of my enemy” seems to be a favourite pastime of the most nutty cybernuts such as Goh Meng Seng.

When Penang-born Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan on Thursday (Dec 6)
opened his mouth saying

Malaysia should “back off” and leave Singapore’s waters.

and urging

All the jingoism coming only from the PAP government. Can you urge everyone in your group to tell the PAP government to stop their shrill jingoism? We just have to be adults around here.

He’s talking cock because it’s not “shrill jingoism” for the PAP govt to point out that there is an infringement of our sovereignty (all those M’sian vessels intruding intruding and remaining into our territorial waters) and “quietly but firmly stand our ground and stay united as one people” Unless pointing these infringements and “quietly but firmly stand our ground and stay united as one people,” is shrill jingoism”: only an extremely nutty cynernut will beliive this. Btw, this cybernut likes to suggest to people to join oppo parties even though he isn’t a member of any.

Another example of “Licking the ass of the enemy of my enemy”:
Mr Khaw Boon Wan is stoking up nationalistic sentiments when it calls for Singaporeans to stay united and stand our ground.

The danger of flaming nationalist emotions is that we can now see that war is being mentioned loosely.

It is totally unnecessary of Mr Khaw to do so. It is a given that Singaporeans would stand behind the country when the call arises but what Mr Khaw did is nothing more than pure rhetoric.

We are not talking about the Malaysian Naval warships intruding into our (disputed) territorial waters. It’s the Malaysian government vessels for goodness sake.

If the incursion of the vessels into our territorial waters really happened, then rightfully, these acts should be condemned but sort out the transgression by our neighbours amicably.

There is no need to stoke nationalistic sentiments to prove a point nor does it do any good for our bilateral ties.

So Mr Khaw, chill. We are not going to war.

Osman bin Sulaiman

And this is one from ass licker-in-chief Goh Meng Seng who to be far to him was an officer in our Navy when he was doing NS.

The Singapore – Malaysia Territorial Water Dispute

I have refrained from putting up formal position on the current spat and controversy of the territorial water dispute because I want to make I have enough information and research on the whole subject before I formulate my views.

I am First a Singaporean and my loyalty and allegiance will always pledged towards my country, Singapore. I would even lay down my life for my country in whatever ways.

But I am also an opposition politician whose job is to keep the ruling party PAP in checks and balance.

Trust is the enemy of checks. Thus I have little trust in PAP and won’t take every words they say as golden truth without verification or critically examined. That is my job and role as an Opposition politician.

When I read and watch how PAP Ministers put up rally calls of “unity” and such, I get extremely skeptical. As Singaporeans, we will definitely unite and defend our country when we have a JUST cause.

The Trust factor in me deteriorated extremely fast when I read what the Transport Minister put up in his press conference. His rhetorics are actually contradictory to the illustration map which he puts up.

First he claims that our land reclamation did not intrude into Malaysian Territory. But the map he presented demonstrated otherwise. One small part of the Malaysian 1979 territorial claim has been infringed by the reclaimed land at Tuas.

Of course, PAP government’s position is that Singapore does not recognize nor agree to this 1979 unilateral boundary claim made by Malaysia. Thus, to PAP Government, we will disregard the so call infringement of Malaysian Territorial Water.

The map shown by Khaw shows a few important lines. One, is the 1995 boundary border agreed by both Singapore and Malaysia. Beyond that last point of 1995 boundary, the map didn’t show any OFFICIAL boundary but only the 1979 boundary which Singapore had refused to agree to.

The question running through my mind is, where is our Singapore border if there is no Officially agreed border between Singapore and Malaysia?

That set me to the little quest to seek the answer to this mystery.

It is an important question because it would mean totally different things. If Malaysian vessels have intruded into our Territorial Waters which has already been delimit or agreed upon between the countries in 1995, then it would be straight out blatant intrusion of our sovereignty and we Singaporeans have all rights to fight back with all means, without much question.

But if the intrusion of the Malaysian vessels into the water which has no clear boundary set out in any official agreement between the two countries, then the approach would be different.

If there is no officially agreed boundary in that part of water territory, it will bound to have all sorts of conflicting claims. The only way to settle it once and for all, is to take the opportunity to open up talks to formalize the Territorial borders.

It is in our interests to do so, especially when our mega port at Tuas is going to be built and operational in the years to come.

The mega port will need a safe port limit which doesn’t lie in controversial conflicting claims.

If there is a need for talk to finalize the Territorial border in this part of the region, then we must careful not to let irrational nationalistic sentiments to be incited.

No fruitful negotiations can be done or achieved through media or media war of words of rhetoric. Worse still, stoking fervent nationalistic sentiments by making war cries or provocative military moves.

Unless we are bloody sure that we will definitely go to war for reasons of blatant violation of agreed borders, then it would be a good tactic to make such war rally cry.

War should always be the last resort. Singapore can not afford to go to war with anyone too lightly, for issues which doesn’t critically affect our survival. Example, cutting off our water supply or setting up sea and air routes blockade etc. For these issues, we will definitely initiate War.

But if we are not really ready for war, responsible citizens and politicians should not incite unnecessary fervent nationalistic emotions which could hurt our long term relationship with our neighbors.

Malaysia should stop the provocative acts in this disputed water territory by pulling out its vessels and assets while Singapore PAP government should stop the provocative military mobilization and propaganda during this sensitive time. Both government should then start a new fresh round of negotiations and talk to finalize the border along this water territory.

Goh Meng Seng

All I can suggest is that he goes read what the minister said and not he thinks he said.

With enemies like him and the other two, the PAP govt can really afford not to have any friends.

 

 

 

What next? Senior civil servant saying that those who don’t vote PAP don’t wish S’pore well?

In Political economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 23/10/2018 at 10:49 am

In Ang mohs told secret of why PAP wins and wins, I quoted our London ambassador on why the PAP thinks it wins and win.

She also wrote

The alternative—a constant merry-go-round of contending parties—does not necessarily produce better outcomes. Politicians fail to keep the promises they make, the people become disillusioned, and eventually lose faith in democracy. Witness the low voter-turnouts in many Western democracies.

FOO CHI HSIA

Doesn’t this sound as though she’s saying that those of us (self included) who want a viable opposition so that we can have a system whereby power can change hands in a GE are S’poreans who do not wish S’pore well?

Er,tot civil servants cannot engage in politics? And whatever happened to a neutral that our ministers and senior civil servants talk and boast about? They talking cock meh?

Seriously, our ang moh tua kees are forever bitching that civil service is not neutral.

But why should it be neutral?

Given that the PAP has ruled S’pore since 1959 (and first had the voters’ mandate in 1957), how can they expect the civil service to be neutral as it’s expected to be in the Westminster system? They don’t know their UK politcal history.

The UK (where of the Westminster model originated) has had two recent periods where one party ruled for a long period: 1979 — 1997 (Tories) and 1997 — 2010 (Labour). During both periods, the neutrality of the civil service was called in question by serious, fair-minded people, not the usual loonies and fruitcakes i.e. the British version of our cybernuts The complaint made by retired senior servants among others was that civil service was being co-opted by the governing party during both periods: ministers made sure the “right” civil servants were promoted.

Since the PAP has had repeatedly won the mandate (by wide margins) to push around and bully S’poreans, how can the civil service here not not be neutral ? Voters have made the choice: the PAP way or the highway.

And given that we are defacto one-party state, (“Why CCP’s fears are PAP’s fears”Keeping power in a one-party state and Would this happen in a one-party state?) how can any sane, rational voter expect a neutral civil service here?

Ending on the theme of a one-party state, here’s two parting tots to ponder

Communist party theorists have long railed against the danger of “peaceful evolution”, in which Communist rule is slowly undone as democratic ideals, from civil society to the rule of law, seep in through the back door.

FT

Same here?

And if so, Dr Thum Ping Tjin has a point when writing in TOC he cautions against being overly reliant on elections as the sole legitimate tool for political change: “Elections may be free, but not necessarily fair”:

S’pore Unis’ NOT on employability list

In Public Administration on 18/09/2018 at 10:10 am

HK U is no 13 and three Oz unis (5th, 6th and 29th) are on the list.  Several PRC unis too.

Which universities will really impress the boss?

Top 30 for employability

  1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, US
  2. Stanford University, US
  3. University of California, Los Angeles, US
  4. Harvard University, US
  5. University of Sydney, Australia
  6. University of Melbourne, Australia
  7. University of Cambridge, UK
  8. University of California, Berkeley, US
  9. Tsinghua University, China
  10. University of Oxford, UK
  11. New York University, US
  12. University of Toronto, Canada
  13. University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
  14. Yale University, US
  15. ETH Zurich, Switzerland
  16. Princeton University, US
  17. Columbia University, US
  18. University College London, UK
  19. University of Tokyo, Japan
  20. Peking University, China
  21. Cornell University, US
  22. University of Chicago, US
  23. Seoul National University, South Korea
  24. University of Pennsylvania, US
  25. University of Michigan, US
  26. (equal 25th) University of Waterloo, Canada
  27. Fudan University, China
  28. Waseda University, Japan
  29. University of New South Wales, Australia
  30. Ecole Polytechnique, France

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45481996

Ong Yee Kung should stop talking cock about LGBTs being discriminated against and get our unis onto this list. But then this will be really hard work for him and his track record of success is near zero: Our new PM/ Trumpets pls for me.

He prefers to talk cock:

Doublespeak on “Every school a good school”

Minister Ong wants a camel?

Akan datang says minister: Non-grad minister

 

Akan datang says minister: Non-grad minister

In Political governance on 13/09/2018 at 11:31 am

Or is Ong Ye Kung talking a good game i.e. talking cock?

This blog doesn’t think much of Ong Ye Kung (Example Our new PM/ Trumpets pls for me).

But here’s something that he said a few weeks ago that should shut up people like the usual cybernuts and people like P(olitician) Ravi quiet for a second.

They are always KPKBing that non-grad cannot make it to the cabinet (let alone to parly if a PAPpy) so waz point of the govt pushing the line that there’s more to life than being a grad? (Btw, don’t they know that there’s more to life than earning millions as cabinet ministers? But then they are true-blue S’poreans well schooled by the PAP: money talks, BS walks. So unlike PJ Thum and Kirsten Han they mean well for S’pore when they criticise the PAP.)

point out that we don’t have a single non-graduate minister today. Can’t the Government more boldly set the tone?

Ong Ye Kung

“We are products of an education system of the past. But today, you look at the education system, we have students who opt for a more applied pathway through the diploma route. So you look at the students now, they’re making their choices very differently from the past. I think when they grow up, if they have interest in politics, what will be the state of ministers in future. It’s hard to say. I think you’ll get a much more diverse group coming from different pathways. I certainly hope so.”

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/ong-ye-kung-education-minister-on-the-record-10651612

Can believe or not?

 

Not ground sour, juz kopi tiam talk amplified lah

In Internet on 06/09/2018 at 10:55 am

Er but taz missing the point about talking cock.

I’ve said in Smell the smoke? From Indonesia or from the PAP & cybernuts? that I’m not sure if the ground is as sour as Han Fook Kwang makes it sound.

Well I was planning to blog along the lines of the following letter to ST’s Forum: what we are hearing are voices that were once confined to small, disconnected groups. But since it has appeared, I’ll juz copy and paste like our millionaire ministers. Make sure you read a response to this letter I reproduce below. It says that my and letter writer’s point of view is irrelevant, missing the point: we also talking cock.

‘More discontent’ may be due to technology amplifying voices

While editor-at-large Han Fook Kwang presents an interesting take on why there is “more grumbling than usual about issues especially to do with the Government”, I have a different perspective on the matter (Is the ground sour? Time to tackle it; Aug 26).

Hailing from the generation that witnessed life without the convenience of gadgets, I can only conclude that we have to accept the hue and cry from the ground as the new normal.

Previously, when mobile phones and the Internet were virtually unheard of, the chatter of discontent could be heard only in coffee shops or during conversations between family or friends.

However, in the present day, technology has enabled muted voices to be heard through platforms such as social media. The anonymity afforded by such mediums has culminated in a cacophony of outbursts from the ground, which many tend to associate with growing discontent among the people.

The sudden rise in the ubiquity of digital devices has somehow led to the misconception that the conformity and orderliness of the old order have been replaced by the messiness of the new generation.

We have to accept that change and messiness is the new constant.

A FB post commenting on this Forum letter:

The heart of the issue is whether such complaints are valid. And politicians still need to assess the situation for themselves. Is high cost of living a perception or real? What is real problem of HDB 99 yr lease ownership.

Yes technology amplifies but someone still need to deal with it or you can lose a GRC.

Doublespeak on “Every school a good school”

In Public Administration on 02/09/2018 at 11:33 am
“Every school being a good school does not mean every school is the same. If every school is the same, every school can’t be a good school.
Ong Ye Kung
Huh?
And to make “Every school a good school” even more meaningless, it’s an aspiration like the Pledge*:
So when we talk about this aspiration or this vision, of every school is a good school, it is really to say, it is possible at some point, every kid can go to a school that suits him or her best and help him or her achieve the best that he or she can be … And that requires every school to be slightly different, to be strong in different areas that play to the strength of the kid. And for that to happen, choice is important.”
Ong Ye Kung is talking cock thru his ass methinks. Time to move Lawrence Wong, good smoke thrower to MoE? Lawrence Wong: a PM-in-waiting
Here’s an interesting article on Doublespeak
Doublespeak: A Weapon Aimed at the Language

Doublespeak is not language. It is anti-language. The purpose of language is to transfer a truth from one mind to another; the purpose of doublespeak is to transfer a falsehood disguised as a truth.

In “Doublespeak” (Harper & Row), William Lutz undertakes to define, analyze and document the term, observing at the outset that it has nothing to do with bad grammar or syntax.

“It is instead a very conscious use of language as a weapon or tool by those in power to achieve their ends at our expense. While some doublespeak is funny, much of it is frightening.”

Lutz says there are four kinds of doublespeak. The first is the simple euphemism, in which a word is used to soften a cruel reality. This use may be benign, as when we say “passed on” or “sleeping with.” The second is jargon, which is useful within a trade or profession, but which may be used to keep outsiders out. The third is gobbledygook, the use of big words and strings of nouns so beloved by bureaucracy. The fourth is inflated language designed to make the ordinary seem extraordinary.

http://articles.latimes.com/1989-11-02/news/vw-112_1_nuclear-weapons

———————————-

*The Aspiration, not the Pledge
“We, the citizens of Singapore,
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity
and progress for our nation.”

Akan datang: GE in late 2019

In Political governance, Property, Public Administration on 23/08/2018 at 11:07 am
Singapore’s next parliamentary general election must be held by 15 January 2021. According to the Constitution, the Parliament of Singapore’s maximum term is five years from the date of the first sitting of Parliament following a general election, after which it is dissolved by operation of law.

So far the PAP has signaled trice in recent months that an election will be held in late 2019 or early 2020, after the 200th anniversary of Raffles making S’pore British is co-opted by the PAP to propogandise the benefits of PAP rule, (like the 50th anniversary of getting kicked out of M’sia was co-opted in 2015).

First signal: the PAP govt ended the property cycle upswing early. If things had been allowed to run their usual course, we’d have rising property prices in 2019, if not 2020.

With less than a third of collective sale sites sold so far this year and no deal inked since property cooling measures took effect more than a month ago, one property analyst has declared the current cycle of en bloc fever to be over.

More than 30 collective sale sites have failed to secure a buyer since January, according to data from real estate agencies Huttons Asia, Savills and Colliers.

“This cycle has reached its end,” said International Property Advisor’s chief executive Ku Swee Yong.

If that is the case, the current cycle would have lasted about two years – If that is the case, the current cycle would have lasted about two years – beginning with the sale of former Housing and Urban Development Company (HUDC) estate Shunfu Ville – shorter than the three-year run that lasted between 2005 and 2007, he said.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/more-30-en-bloc-tenders-closed-without-buyer-year-none-successful-after-july-cooling

Rising property prices in 2019 would have been problematic for early elections.

Second signal: goodies for my generation

Just as Singaporeans born in 1949 or earlier received the Pioneer Generation Package to cope with healthcare and other expenses, baby boomers born in the 1950s will receive help from the Government.

Called the Merdeka Generation Package, it will cover areas such as outpatient subsidies, Medisave account top-ups, MediShield Life premium subsidies and payouts for long-term care, announced Prime Minister Lee Hsien at the National Day Rally on Sunday (Aug 19).

Third signal: kicking problem of expiring HDB leases (Why 30-year old HDB flats difficult to sell/ Why PAP rule will end in 2029) into the long grass while details will be worked out in the next 20 yrs or so (Taz how confident PAP is of ruling S’pore)

With Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s speech, the Government has laid out a “visible” programme for Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat owners for the future of their homes, said CIMB economist Song Seng Wun, who added that public housing has been the backbone of Singapore’s wealth creation.

Vers, which Mr Lee said would start about 20 years from now, will see residents of precincts that are about 70 years into their 99-year leases voting on whether they would like the Government to buy back the flats. The Government will compensate them — at terms less generous than the Selective Enbloc Redevelopment Scheme (Sers), which is compulsory — and help them get another flat to live in.

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/devils-details-flat-owners-should-not-expect-windfall-new-hdb-scheme-analysts

I hope that the Oppo is better prepared this time to handle the PAP’s handouts of goodies. This was written in Sept 2012: Time for Opposition to rethink assumptions, lest it repents after next GE. But the Oppo fought GE 2015 as though it was GE 2006 and 2011 again. The result PAP got 70% of the popular vote. Of course LKY’s death and the 50th anniversary of independence celebrations helped.

One thing is sure, talk cock sing song Lim Tean is sure to make another video. Which reminds me: if he can make videos of himself talking cock, why can’t he produce the video on how to avoid getting sued for defamation he promised for Sept, then Nov 2017 after raising the money for it? Remind Lim Tean, it’s December

 

New Hope: Getting the cybernuts to sit down and shut up

In Public Administration on 13/08/2018 at 10:21 am

If PM that confident that govt services are that good, in his his NatDay Rally speech he will announce that the govt will be developing anlaunching an app (Designed by one Li?) like this

The Watani app is touted as “a mobile application that enables citizens, residents and visitors to evaluate public services, rate their satisfaction level, and contribute to the ongoing efforts focused on improving public services”.

It seems possible that users of the map-based app will be able to rate its own operator, the National Centre for Measuring the Performance of Public Agencies, as part of a national data-gathering programme to “help decision-makers come to the right choices”.

https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-45097440

Seriously, this app will show that Lim Tean, TOC, TRE, the Indians Idiots (Sorry keep forgeting that Andrew Loh is the token Chinese there now) and other anti-PAP cybernuts are talking cock about bad, detoriating public services.

I for one will rate SingHealth very highly except when it takes 45 minutes after appointed time to see GP (To be fair very rare: nowadays 15 minutes delay is the norm). Or when they screw up the billing but then make things inconvenient for me for not settling “on time”. To be fair, staff don’t order one to pay first before providing service, but the system is designed to inconvenience “defaulters”.

And I’ll rate public tpt pretty high because I use it at non-peak times.

What do you think of the chances of this app appearing here.

 

Meng Seng maturing? Lim Tean going nuts

In Uncategorized on 07/08/2018 at 10:05 am

This blog has always been anti Goh Meng Seng but was initially hopeful of Lim Tean.


Silence of Goh Meng Seng: One of these days, I’ll blog on why if he had had his way on Bishan Park, S’pore wouldn’t have the Bishan otter family that we all love.

Lim Tean: Activist who talks sense

I repented after he raised funds from the public but never delivered on his promises: No, Lim Tean hasn’t absconded

—————————————————–

Well going by what Lim Tean is now saying, it looks like Lim Tean will be joining M Ravi in getting treated for mental health problems. (Fyi, M Ravi is working for Lim Tean, so maybe he infected Lim Tean? Bit him?)

I’m exaggerating?

“Our alliance must strive to form the next Government in the upcoming General Election (GE),” said former National Solidarity Party (NSP) chief Lim Tean, who is seeking to form a new party. Singapore’s next GE must be held by 2021.

Writing on Facebook, Mr Lim added: “The winds of change are here and they have buffeted the world for the past two years… Those who try to suggest that what happened in the West and now Malaysia cannot possibly happen in Singapore are myopic and in denial.”

Who other than cybernuts (think TRE funder and tax dodger Oxygen) thinks that PAP will lose power in next GE? There’s a good chance that Aljunied with repent. And the PAP has handicapped itself by saying GST sure to go up after GE.

Meanwhile,

PPP’s Mr Goh — who has had his fair share of electoral setbacks — said the effort to come together stemmed from the realisation among the smaller opposition parties that they can no longer go it alone.

“If we continue to do things (as we did) in the past, we will not get different results,” he said. “The fact is that our fortunes and destinies are linked… We cannot do without each other.”

He added: “If you don’t try, you won’t know”. “It cannot be worse than the status quo.”

https://www.todayonline.com/big-read/big-read-opposition-parties-banding-together-grand-plan-or-last-throw-dice

So matured, so unlike the Goh Meng Seng that I make fun of regularly.

What next, pigs can fly? He’ll attack the PAP more than he attacks WP?

What’s more for someone who was really unhappy in 2006 GE that Auntie and not him was leading the WP Aljunied GRC team, it’s surprising to hear him disagree

that egos would get in the way.

“If we are all egomaniacs, we won’t be sitting on the same table… All the leaders have their differences in their ideologies, policy-wise and how things should be done, but I do not think they are so egoistic as to say they can do it all by themselves,” he said.

“We understand that we cannot do it alone and we need to unite and depend on each other for our future success.”

Mr Goh, for one, said he has no qualms taking a backseat. “The back-end is as important as the front… I do not see anything bad about that,” he said.

Well let’s see what happens if he’s asked to f-off:

[S]ome may also need to stand down and serve from the backroom if it is for the good of the country.

I believe that the men and women I met yesterday, were more than willing to make way for better men and women who would stand in their place. They have guts. They have put themselves out there.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock

Talk is cheap. And Meng Seng has a history of talking cock.

 

MAS gives finger to CSA’s CEO

In Internet, Public Administration on 25/07/2018 at 11:00 am

Remember CSA’s CEO downplaying the loss of NRIC numbers etc (Is Computer Security Agency CEO talking thru his ass about stolen info?)?

Should you be worried?

In short, not really, said the authorities. CSA chief executive David Koh said the stolen information are “basic demographic data”.

Constructive, nation-building CNA

Well it’s now clear that the central bank for one thinks he’s talking cock

“With immediate effect, all financial institutions should not rely solely on the types of information stolen (name, NRIC number, address, gender, race, and date of birth) for customer verification,” MAS said in a statement.

“Additional information must be used for verification before undertaking transactions for the customer. This may include, for instance, One-Time Password, PIN, biometrics, last transaction date or amount, etc.”

 

 

M’sia undecided on HSR

In Infrastructure, Malaysia on 19/07/2018 at 4:35 am

So how can Tun say S’pore knows what M’sia wants? Senile. Sad.

Malaysia’s Economic Affairs Minister Mohamed Azmin Ali. said that Malaysia has not excluded the possibility of the project continuing, but will not make any suggestions unless there is a consensus from both countries.

https://www.theedgesingapore.com/malaysia-lead-delegation-singapore-discuss-fate-hsr-project

More from Edge.

Malaysia will soon have a discussion with Singapore regarding the high-speed rail (HSR) project, according to Malaysia’s Economic Affairs Minister Mohamed Azmin Ali.

Azmin will be leading a delegation to Singapore for the discussion with Transport Minister Khaw Boon Wan and to safeguard the diplomatic relationship between both countries by the end of the month.

“We are looking at all the available options. The bilateral agreement on the HSR provides for either party to cancel the project. This however, is subjected to the terms and conditions of the agreement,” says Azmin.

He also stressed that any agreements signed must be fair and just to both parties.

Read Najib’s very valid comments on the costings. Minister’s reply shows that M’saian govt talking cock.

Meanwhile, Malaysia’s former prime minister Najib Razak asked in Parliament, “The international open tender only ends on Dec 28, 2018 and both governments would decide on the bids. The total cost of the project is not yet known, but it would competitive. Some countries would give loans at 0% or 0.1%.”

“So how can the government say it would cost RM110 billion, when the tender is not closed?” Najib asked.

Azmin replied saying that these calculations are “just costing” at the meantime and were made by the Finance Ministry, who also found that there were hidden costs in the project, which were not revealed earlier.

Nonetheless, the minister also said that Malaysia has not excluded the possibility of the project continuing, but will not make any suggestions unless there is a consensus from both countries.

Malaysia had previously announced that they intend to cancel the project, but has since brought it back up for review, if the cost is reduced by half.

Still waiting for letter cancelling HSR

In Malaysia on 03/06/2018 at 10:40 am

It’s insulting to Tun to compare him with Lim tean because unlike Lim Tean, Tun is a man of many accomplishments, unlike Lim Tean who only knows how to to talk cock, sing song, and help the PAP by forming yet another new party “People’s Voice”*

But it looks like Tun is talking cock, singing song when it comes to HSR.

As of Friday evening, S’pore was still waiting for official confirmation that M’sia wants to cancel the HSR project, despite Tun saying that M’sia has cancelled the project. It’s been almost a week since he said that.

================

Related posts:

—  Anti-PAP S’poreans sucking up to Tun

— Either Tun or his Cina finance minister is wrong

=============================

Meanwhile S’poreans are still waiting for Lim Tean’s jobs rally and defamation video promised for last September, then last November and for which he raised money from the public: Where’s yr defamation video and jobs rally Lim Tean?

Whatever, with enemies like these, the PAP doesn’t need friends.


*The name “People’s Voice” truly reflects the founder’s aim of talking cock, singing song.

Coldstore: Why Harry’s narrative or the highway

In Political governance on 03/04/2018 at 10:44 am

(Or “Why Harry’s Coldstore narrative must be the truth”)

The roughing up of someone who dares to publicly talk about a Coldstore narrative that is different from that of one Harry Lee has cyberspace talking cock and upset*.

Amidst the noise and fury, one important issue in both what constitutes “fake news”, generally,and, in particular, in the ongoing dialogue of the deaf about different Coldstore narratives has been forgotten.

The son of one of the Coldstore detainees recently said:

For some of the matters around national security, race, religion, economic and financial issues, public health issues, by definition that source of truth must be government-backed or state-backed. The most egregious issues, the issues with significant impact, significant impact on our social fabric, on our national security, on our public health, the issues of peace, stability, the facts behind those, if you’re going to have a source of truth, it needs to be state-backed.

Dr. Janil Puthucheary, a Jnr Minister, at the Select Committee hearings on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, 23 March 2018

As S’pore is a de facto one-party state (because the voters regularly agree to it), Harry’s version of ColdStore (Bunch of commie subversives who had to be locked up because they wanted to make S’pore Great for Communism) is the official version. 

And because it is “government-backed or state-backed” it must be the truth going by what the jnr minister said. (And don’t forget that the greatest of the Hard Truths is that “Harry is always right. Harry is never wrong”.)

Related post: Were the Coldstore detainees communists, progressives or leftists?

Coming back to the jnr minister’s comments, looks like he agrees with what a M’sian minister said is “fake news”:

“Any information related to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) that has not been verified by the Government is considered fake news.

Datuk Jailani Johari (pic), the Deputy Communications and Multimedia Minister, explained that fake news is information that is confirmed to be untrue, especially by the authorities or parties related to the news.”

What “fake” news will be allowed

What else does the jnr minister says about “fake news”? Fake news traffickers will be hanged.

But does the jnr minister disagree with the allegations made against his Pa and uncle who were Coldstore detainees, thereby contradicting the official narrative of “Bunch of commie subversives who had to be locked up because they wanted to make S’pore Great for Communism”?


*The grand inquisitor explains why he did what he did

I have been asked why I spent some time asking PJ Thum questions.

PJ’s main point, in his written submission to the Select Committee, was that Mr Lee Kuan Yew was the biggest creator of fake news in Singapore, a liar, and Operation Coldstore was based on falsehoods.

These are serious allegations made in Parliament about our founding PM.

Either they have to be accepted, or shown to be untrue. Keeping quiet about them was not an option.

Thus I told PJ I will ask him questions, on what he had said.

PJ refused to answer many of the questions directly – if a person believes in what he says, and has gone through the documents carefully, then what is the difficulty in answering questions?

It took 5 hours plus to go through the documents and records carefully.

In the end, PJ said that he had not read some of the material published by ex-Communists on what happened in Singapore; that he disregarded the statements made by Chin Peng, the CPM leader; that the way he set out the most important documents (of December 1962) was not accurate; the key meetings of Barisan Socialis showed that they were prepared to use armed struggle to overthrow a Government of Singapore, if necessary; and the British had a honest view, in December 1962, that security action (which was Operation Coldstore), was necessary.

People know me – I am direct, I deal with the facts, and say it as I think it is.

I can see that Sonny Liew is not happy with what happened with PJ. It is quite understandable. Based on what he says, he and PJ are quite close; they work together in a venture. His award winning cartoon, The Art of Charlie Chan Hock Chye, is also based on PJ’s version of history.

I have not met Sonny, but I have to say he is a good cartoonist. He is a talent.

K Shanmugam Sc‘s post

Btw, I agree with the points he makes about Sonny Liew being a good cartoonist and about why he asked the questions he asked. He had every right to beat up PJ Thum. I make no comment on

PJ refused to answer many of the questions directly – if a person believes in what he says, and has gone through the documents carefully, then what is the difficulty in answering questions?

Btw, seems PJ gave as good as he got, so his whining seems strange. But that’s grist for yet another post soon.

How Trump’s trolling works

In Uncategorized on 02/02/2018 at 2:53 pm

Because

For every step that President Trump takes in debasing discourse, his opponents manage to go one step further.

FT columnist


A local ang moh tua kee posted on FB a story about a Muslim Canadian girl who lied about an attack on her. The local ang moh tua kee attacked Trump as a liar.

I commented that the story was not about Trump. She replied that she stood by her comments that Trump lies.

Hours later realising that she could be seen as implying that the gal was right to lie because Trump lies regularly, she said she didn’t condone the gal’s behaviour.

Taz how Trump gets under the skin of those who hate him: especially those who espouse “left-liberalism which celebrates civil rights”.

———————————————–

And

The focus on his ludicrous ego and ignorance may make us feel superior. But that is all it appears to be doing. He will not be toppled by us jeering at a picture of his enormous arse or reports of his word salad on climate change, his links to Russia and his comments about pussy-grabbing. Not as long as he is supported by racists, the far right, Christian fundamentalists, the global business elite and his own party. And he is. It is time to get serious about what drives this presidency. At the moment, the joke is on us.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/jan/29/donald-trump-rethink-our-resistance-ikea-spiked

And as usual the whining liberal from the Grauniad* doesn’t tell us how to fight him because she doesn’t have a clue. Talking cock, singing song like our anti-PAP cybernuts and ang moh tua kees who don’t know that paramactol is available here ot that estate duty has to go up 4000% if it is revived to replace a 2% rise in GST.

Steve Banon’s plan to get Trump elected “was to create such a cacophony of indignation” that the progressives would lose their focus. He was letting Trump be Trump for a strategic reason: to make the progressives angry and so lose focus. It worked then, and it’s working now, even if he’s no longer advising Trump: the progressives are still losing their focus in their indignation and anger.

—————————————–

*The Grauniad is a nickname for the UK national newspaper, the Guardian, because of a now ill-founded reputation for typos. The name was given to it by the satirical magazine Private Eye.

Wikipedia

4000% increase if estate duty replaces GST increase

In Economy on 31/01/2018 at 12:47 pm

There’s a lot to talk in cyberspace of reintroducing estate duty in place of a GST rise.

But none of the people proposing the reintroduction of estate duty seems to have gone thru the numbers.

We had estate duty and it brought in

an estimated S$75 million a year — the average annual amount collected before it was scrapped.

Compare that $75m to the rumoured GST rise expected to bring in $3 billion to $3.6 billion a year.

Experts have said they expect the GST to be raised by 2 percentage points to 9 per cent — translating to additional tax revenue of between S$3 billion to S$3.6 billion a year.

http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/where-spores-additional-tax-revenue-could-come-experts

So do the people who propose the return of estate duty really expect estate duty to be raised from its previous level so that it can replace the GST increase? From $75m to $3bn means a humongous increase: 4000%.

Did they do their sums? Did they analyse where $3bn a year in estate duty can come from? Is it targeted only at the super rich or is it across the board? And, if the latter, will S’poreans want such a high estate duty tax? And if targeted at the super rich, have the proposers taken into account the lumpiness of the tax. When there was such a tax, one year there was a big jump because Khoo Teck Puat died.

Or as usual, are the proposers: juz talking cock and singing song? They only want to show S’poreans that cybernuts don’t do their homework before opening their asses to fart?

There could be a case to revive estate duty as a means of redistributing income, but that is a different story from reviving it and increasing it by 4000% from the previous level to avoid an increase in the GST rate.

 

 

Wah train service so reliable meh between 2012 and 2016?

In Infrastructure on 25/11/2017 at 11:35 am
A usual sane TRE reader posted this in response to my comment that there was only one major cock-up between 2015 and April 2016 On the contrary cybernuts, Desmond did a great job
opposition dude:

Ah Cynical, it’s always interesting to read how you like to whitewash the truth isn’t it?

No major cockups until 2015 you say? Perhaps you aren’t a regular user of the trains and have never been caught in a disruption? What about the frequent disruptions faced by commuters every other month since he took over, all that magically doesn’t count ah? Only major shit like the tunnel “ponding” and the langga at Joo Koon?

Well I asked him

@opposition dude, look forward to u giving me details of disruptions between 2012 and April 2016 based on yr experience …

No picture no sound so far. So can I reasonably assume he was talking cock? What do u think?

Why PM wants a cashless payments system/ Ownself sabo ownself

In Banks, Economy, Political governance on 27/09/2017 at 6:42 am

Why does PM wants a cashless payments system?

Because no-one can hide from Big Brother when the banks are at the centre of the system.

When TRE republished my piece on a TRE appeal on behalf of its longest serving team member, there was this response

oxygen: MY INFORMATION SOURCES ARE RELIABLE – just bring whatever cash you want to donate, fill in a deposit slip of amount and account number of payee and hand it to the bank teller at the counter.

No banker is interested in who is the donor or deposit maker. A can pay C on behalf of B who is short of cash or unable to have funds to settle his/her debt to A. Or X can pay Z $XXX giving the latter a financial loan.

It is none of anybody’s business except as between the transacting parties. No bank ask you why you pay a check to supplier A – Z for what financial obligations. They are not interested to know your business transactions. People gives to charity – nothing wrong with that.

So those who can afford and want to give to charity, just walk into a bank and do it before 30 September.</blockquote

and someone tried it and it worked

Trying it out: This morning I deposited S$50 to the given POSB account over their counter. I handed cash and remain anonymous. I did not give any of my personal details. I got the receipt. But the recipient name is slightly different. I hope it is all in order. I was trying out donation on anonymity basis.

http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/09/20/follow-up-to-tr-emeritus%E2%80%99-in-house-techie-requires-assistance/

So go on – if you are able and incline to contribute to humanitarian cause. It is nobody business if you want to do charity or help someone (can be Ah Kow, Ah Ngeow or Ah Beng or Ah Lian) who haven’t got the time to Q in a banking hall to do charity.

Singapore POSB Account

Payee: Ten Leu-Jiun

A/C No: 193-69702-0

(The last day of payment to this account is 30 September 2017.)

Ownself sabo ownself

Incidentally, no picture, no sound from the PM or his minions on the e payments system proposed by Razer’s CEO https://sg.news.yahoo.com/razer-ceo-submits-two-pronged-e-payment-system-proposal-pm-lee-112133198.html.

PM was talking cock when he was moaning that S’pore was so far behind China in e-payments because it’s his and his administration’s fault.

They are not fighting vested interests i.e. the banks: think transction and merchant fees charged. And the PAP administration’s red line is that banks must be at the heart of the system. This among other things ensures that the authorities have access to information.

But let’s be thankful to the PAP for sticking to the Hard Truth of die die must protect our banks: Cash is king. And anyway I own Haw Par which is a cheap way of buying into UOB.

But don’t try depositing a $1000 bill into any bank account. A few yrs ago, someone gave me a $1000 bill. I gave it to my mum and she decided to put it into my POSB account. Bank wanted me to come down to deposit it. She said I was overseas and so bank reluctantly took the money.

 

PAP beware: PAP and LKY loyalists not the same

In Political governance on 20/09/2017 at 7:16 am

When GCT was talking cock about the moral authority of the PAP administration (OK, OK he used the word “govt”) I couldn’t help but remember a remark that would pls the Oxley Rd hermitess and her younger brudder, and worry PM and the other PAppies, if they had been told about it.

In a closed FB group that my avatar belongs to, someone who could be reliably relied on to parrot the PAP line, was KPKBing about the reserve presidency (even though Hali’s i/c like his said “Indian”). When other members of the group gently pointed out his deviation from the PAP line, he said something to the effect that “I’m the third generation of LKY loyalists, I’m not a PAPpy”.

He got a good number of “Likes”.

Based on PE 2011 and GE 2011 and GE2015, the core PAP vote is around 35%, with the soft PAP vote about 35%.

No wonder PM was so keen to get Hali as president because even a ceremonial president can cause problems. But in so doing, he may have reduced further the die-die must vote PAP voters. Now that is a real problem. When LKY loyalists disagree with the PAPpists, the PAP’s core vote may now be smaller than 35%.

Never mind, expect more goodies using our own money. My hope is the extension of Pioneer Gen healthcare benefits to those in their early sixties.

 

 

Symbolism of Hali’s pix with PM, CJ

In Political governance on 18/09/2017 at 12:56 pm

Shamugam was talking cock on FB.

Image may contain: 6 people, people smiling

Look at the two uniformed Chinese men behind the Chinese PM, Malay (even if her i/c says “Indian”) president and Indian CJ.

Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun

Mao

Without the elected president and if there is a freak result, within two or three years, the army would have to come in and stop it.

Lee Kuan Yew (2006)

Coming back to the minister, I couldn’t help but be reminded of what LKY once said

I have said this on many a previous occasion: that had the mix in Singapore been different, had it been 75% Indians, 15% Malays and the rest Chinese, it would not have worked. Because they believe in the politics of contention, of opposition. But because the culture was such that the populace sought a practical way out of their difficulties, therefore it has worked.

Lee Kuan Yew (1985)

Yikes! Cynical Investor part of PAP IB?

In Uncategorized on 16/07/2017 at 11:20 am

Going by the u/m Chris K will have to unfriend me if he wants to remain friends with Tay Kheng Soon (Future of S’pore), the other unhappy anti-PAP activists (real life or cyber), and the cybernuts. I’m sure Jedi like Terry Xu, Tan Tee Seng and Eric Tan will not respond to my emails.

After all I use repeatedly: “talking cock” and “one party state“. And I regularly rubbish the opposition (here and here ) sowing “dissention, cynicism and suspicion”.

I don’t get credit for dissing PAP meh?

And by implication, TRE is also part of the PAP IB as it regularly uses my pieces and other pieces using “talking cock”, “sham democracy” and “one party state”.

Seriously Tay Kheng Soon is talking cock. He’s almost like Talk Cock, Sing Song King Lee Hsien Yang (Examples below)

Tay Kheng Soon

For the sake of healthy civilised discussion on FB it is necessary to reveal the tactics of the IB. They have names but they may not be real people. How we can tell is the same language they use repeatedly. “talking cock,” “sham democracy,” “one party state.” What is their aim? It is to disrupt civilised discussion to prevent public education. Their aim in this is ultimately to justify dictatorship by muting public voice. They are false democrats themselves. Thus they rubbish the opposition. They sow dissention, cynicism and suspicion. They hunt as a pack of predators. This way they instill fear, fear to respond to their attacks. If we fear them, they think they win. Dont let them!


Lee Hsien Yang talking cock 

Oxleygate: “the curious incident”/ What S’poreans are not focusing on

In Political governance, Public Administration on 14/07/2017 at 10:36 am

“The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

“That was the curious incident.”

The real “scandal” is that DPM Teo and Lawrence Wong did not protect their reputations the PAP way, when the younger Lees defamed them by accusing them of doing their brother’s bidding, not PM not threatening to take legal action against his siblings, but doing a wayang in parly.

ESM Goh said in parly:

[I]t is clear that their goal is to bring Lee Hsien Loong down as PM, regardless of the huge collateral damage suffered by the Government and Singaporeans. It is now no more a cynical parlour game. If the Lee siblings choose to squander the good name and legacy of Lee Kuan Yew, and tear their relationship apart, it is tragic but a family affair. But if in the process of their self destruction, they destroy Singapore too, that is a public affair.

Now isn’t the attempt to destroy S’pore by making allegations against other ministers, not just their brother the PM, a good enough reason for said ministers to have demanded an apology and sued the younger Lees for defamation, if no grovelling apology was made? And what about their personal reputations? Why liddat?

After ESM’s Goh’s speech, Lee Hsien Yang posted

“We are not making a criticism of the Government of Singapore, as we made clear from the beginning. What we have said is that we are disturbed by the character, conduct, motives and leadership of our brother, Lee Hsien Loong.”
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/we-are-not-making-a-criticism-of-the-government-lee-hsien-yang-9006620

————————————————

Talk Cock Sing Song King Lee Hsien Yang talking cock again above. Other examples

Reading Lee Hsien Yang’s repeated “clarifications” on FB to his earlier FB “clarifications” (example on whether his wife’s law firm was used in the final will: he said “No” emphatically, but then went to explain what they did*), I can understand why the committee wants a statutory declaration and I can understand why he hasn’t given one.

Talking cock about the will

Didn’t do his job as executor

—————————————

Huh? I tot the younger Lees were making allegations that the ministerial committee set up to consider the fate of LKY’s house was doing their brother’s bidding, not making independent judgements and findings? That not attacking govt meh?

DPM Teo rightly responded:

“With regard to Dr Lee Wei Ling and Mr Lee Hsien Yang’s allegations against the Ministerial Committee, public agencies and public officers, the Government has already responded comprehensively to all of them in Parliament,”
Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/38-oxley-road-govt-still-has-to-carry-out-responsibilities-for-9009684

This shows that, while the PM may have felt that he could not sue his siblings, DPM Teo or Lawrence Wong should have had no such qualms about suing PM’s siblings for the good of S’pore and their good name. They should have asked the younger Lees to withdraw their allegations against them, and apologise. Failing which, they’d sue the Lees.

While I’ve argued that that the cabinet full of Oxbridge men royally screwed up

Yesterday’s wayang and the preceding Lee family row could have been avoided if PM (from Cambridge) had not have gone to the cabinet about his doubts about the circumstances around the execution of the will and the cabinet committee headed by another Cambridge man had not decided to act on PM’s doubts.

DPM Teo, Lawrence Wong, and, possibly, other ministers should have been prepared to take legal action to protect the reputation of the cabinet and themselves. They didn’t and that me is the real scandal. It now seems that this White Horse and White Mare have privileges not extended to people like Roy Ngerng. Who else does do these privileges extend to?

Even now, the Princess of Oxley Road is attacking Shanmugam, raking over the ashes of her allegation of his conflicts of interest. Shouldn’t he be telling her to “apologise or else”, instead of sitting down and keeping quiet? She that special isit?

Gregory (Scotland Yard detective): “Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?”

Holmes: “To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time.”

Gregory: “The dog did nothing in the night-time.”

Holmes: “That was the curious incident.”

Silver Blaze by  Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

 

 

Empire strikes back delivering mortal blow to Pink Dot?

In Political governance on 16/05/2017 at 4:37 am

Putting Organising Committe’s asses on the line. As my FB avatar put it “Forcing organisers to check ics isit? Then if one FT there, arrest organisers isit?”. (Explanation below for the blur.)

Siew Kum Hong (Remember him?) replied “those are the implied threats”.

But let’s begin at the beginning,

Here I wrote after congragulating the Pink Dot othanisers of getting rid of their ang moh tua kee mentality and trying to raise money from locals only

But the LGBT community should not be taking their pants off and treating themselves to a sexual orgy as a pat on the back. There’s trouble ahead. I’ll talk cock about this some other day.

I never got round to talking cock on the issue, but we now know how the Empire Struck Back

Pink Dot 2017: Foreigners not allowed to attend annual LGBT pride event due to new changes to regulation

My foreboding was because in words of FB comment by someone

“Pink Dot’s success* is an indication that we need to reconsider the traditional approach towards the relationship between the government and civil society, and recognize the importance of civil society in bringing forward meaningful change in a pluralistic world.”

Or as my FB avatar responding to the news that Pink Dot met its funding target*

Well done Pink Dot organisers for getting rid of idea that only ang mohs tua kee. And well done local donors for showing that not all S’poreans are cheap skates. And the LGBT community should get on their knees and thank the PAP. Without the actions of the PAP administration, there would be many S’poreans (self included) who doubted that Pink Dot had local roots. But beware everyone, in a de facto one party state, the ruling party hates other groups that can organise without its co-operation.

As I wrote in Keeping power in a one-party state

Again, while not exactly true here “Fear of competing narratives makes it drive some of China’s brightest and best into exile or jail” the PAP’s fear of competing narratives has stifled society here largely thru self censorship and self blinkered minds.

A successful NGO is a threat to the PAP or the CCP.

( Related post: Would this happen in a one-party state?)

BBC report on the exclusion of FTs: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39916201 and this from 2013 on growing official and community acceptance of LGBTs http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-22088852

————————————–

*In just six weeks, Pink Dot has surpassed its own targets, raising over $201,000 and attracting 103 local sponsors. It was forced to turn to local funding after the government introduced a controversial ban on foreign sponsorship, which threatened the event’s success.

Insulting Trump’s “stupid” supporters is a lose-lose proposition

In Uncategorized on 26/11/2016 at 10:47 am

The extreme ultraliberal left can’t stop insulting the poor whites who voted for Trump. The latest tactic is to sneer at them for making card-carrying liberals richer. Here’s an example Cox: Liberal elite owe gratitude to Trump voters

And our very own liberal tua kee Donald Low keeps doubling down on using the word “stupid” to insult voters who vote against their economic interest.

Well they should stop for the sake of their own reputations.

Now, I’m sure people like Donald Low and Cox are proud to be called “arrogant”.

But would they like to be called “stupid” with evidence supporting the claim?

Stretching the arguments laid out by Cox to their logical conclusion, the extreme ultraliberal liberals are really stupid. They not only didn’t see Trump winning but they should have voted for Trump, not oppose him, given that he’s making them a lot richer relative to the white trash.

They’d argue that there are more important things than material well-being, and that they not are stupid for preferring racial and gender equality, poverty reduction or the right not to get killed by gun-toting white trash.

Well why then are they not willing to concede that the white trash too have good, valid reasons (trying to preserve their towns and societies, fear of terrorism or anger at being sneered and lied to) to vote against their own economic interest?

Seems that for many liberals what is sauce for goose is not sauce for the gander: Do what we tell you to do, not what we do.

One Harry Lee dismissed liberals out of hand as a bunch of wankers, talking cock and singing song. Seems he has a point.

Sad as in the S’pore context, the level of authoritarism  is so extreme that a good strong dose of liberal values would do the body politick, and economy no harm.

Triumphant: What the media “liberal” “experts” are keeping quiet about

In Media on 11/11/2016 at 5:43 am

(And media includes new media)

Trump did a bit better with blacks and Hispanics than Mitt Romney in 2012.

Women didn’t desert though there was a swing to Hilary. Predatory Trump better than a Liar and a Crook.

And while

Mr Trump ran as a champion of the country’s working class, but his support lay predominantly with those earning more than the country’s $56,000 median income. Mrs Clinton won 52:41 among voters earning less than $50,000 a year, according to exit polls. Mr Trump won narrowly among all income groups above that.

FT

The first two points show that the Democrats had a really lousy candidate.

The last point shows that Ariffin Sha is talking cock when he wrote

It’s funny how the people who would be most affected by Trump’s plans are the very people who voted for him. People, especially those who need the most help, do tend to vote against their own interests pretty often.

With deluded, uninformed young ang moh tua kees like him, the PAP is lucky in its enemies. With enemies like Ariffin, who needs friends?

Amos again in the news/ Amos the wise?

In Uncategorized on 18/10/2016 at 4:57 am

Update on 20 October: CAN (a bunch of ang moh tua kees that Amos had dissed for not helping him: see link below) has alleged that he got beaten up in Changi Prison by fellow inmates.) Well, well.

We have also been informed that he has been threatened, slapped on the back and kicked while he was climbing up the stairs. A complaint has been lodged with the Prison Authorities, who had efficiently replied to say they will look into the matter. Amos’ mother has put in an urgent request for Amos to be moved to Home Detention.

Mother Mary’s full of BS. Home Detention so she can clean his ass for him?

Yup, he and she and made their beds, and must lie in the said beds.

————————————–

But first let’s talk about how the alternative media has been covering Amos recently. Huh you may ask? Coverage what coverage? And you are absolutely right.

Amos Yee went to prison on 13 October. Alternative media was silent except for a report by TRE.

Self-proclaimed genius teenage blogger Amos Yee is back in prison and will remain in there for at least the next 4 weeks (after remission).

Amos Yee (Photo: Terry Xu)

The 17-year-old was slapped with 8 charges, which were: 6 charges under section 298, and 2 charges under section 174 of the Penal Code.

It went on to list the charges.

Otherwise this once (and future hero?) of the alternative media, the ang moh tua kees and the cybernuts received no publicity showing that this ang moh kay poh was talking cock

The teenager’s latest trial was closely watched by rights groups, who argue that the case threatens freedom of expression.

Phil Robertson of Human Rights Watch said Singapore now needs to review its approach in dealing with cases like Yee’s, who is likely to benefit from the publicity.

“Every time the authorities go after him, it just adds to his online audience,” said Mr Robertson in an email.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-37505951

The ang moh was talking after he was sentenced to 38 days jail beginning on  Oct 13

Well going by on online buzz about Amos, he’s wrong about. There isn’t any buzz

As I’ve said before “The anti-PAP  caravan moves on”. Amos has had his fifteen minutes of fame. Next celebrity please.

As for the wisdom of Mother Mary’s boy fantastic, a few weeks ago he posted

.
Know what, I am getting sick of my long hair after 2 years, I think I’ll cut it short. Fortunately for me they offer free haircuts in prison

Well maybe he’s learning wisdom (something dad said he lacked): liking what’s going to happen anyway.

Next he’ll embrace going into NS? LOL.

But maybe he was faking his wish to cut his hair. Putting on a brave face. Only time will tell if he’s acquired wisdom or not.

 

Traingate: Only TRE reader sees the big picture

In Infrastructure on 10/07/2016 at 12:19 pm

Everone else is talking cock and singing song. The Oppo parties, anti-PAP cyberwarriors and activists, allied websites and bloggers, and other new media outlets are screaming their heads off over the cracks in PRC-made trains and the failure of SMRT, LTA and the transport ministry (MoT) to tell us about the cracks.

Only a TRE reader asks: Was our Jurong Port’s security compromised?

The report by Hong Kong’s Factwire Agency yesterday on SMRT defective trains certainly created an online furore amongst netizens.

Video footages of the trains being transported in the wee hours of the morning to Jurong Port by now must have been circulated and shared umpteen times on social media.

For most of us, the focus is on the trains that were defective and were transported `covertly’ back to the manufacturer. For those who have completely missed the video (there are a few others), you can click on the link here (credit of icablenews).

Now scroll to 35 second portion of the video.

This is my concern.

A drone was launched and had a bird’s eye view of the trains that were going to be shipped out.

Aerial surveillance by a drone (both daytime and night time) inside our port?

It is also frightening to know that whoever launched the drone over our port knows exactly the spot where the trains were being unloaded. No one actually spotted the drone hovering inside our port?

Our port is supposedly a protected area. Maritime Port Authority (MPA) perhaps can answer this question of whether drones are allowed to hover over our ports.

Now the next question, if indeed the drone was launched `inside’ the port, was our security so laxed that the perpetuator(s) was able to sneak by our the check points without proper security pass and clearance?

Imagine this drone carried explosives and launched by terrorists to crash into our critical facilities within the port.

Food for thought.

JY

*A concern citizen with more than 9 years’s experience working as a risk practitioner.

Shame on TRE* , TO** , the Indian***, TMG, mothership etc.

And shame on the anti-PAP mob who in their hurry to criticise SMRT, LTA and the PAP administration missed this open goal.

New media and anti-PAPpies are guilty of group think, something that they criticise the PAP of. They are just as guilty of gtoup-think.

————————

*OK it did publish the remarks but otherwise its coverage was juz as shirty as the other publications.

**OK Terry’s away and TOC did tell us about the HK report: the other publications were clueless until they read TOC. They didn’t even credit TOC for reporting the news first. Taz new media ethics fot you.

***Politician Ravi needs to  clean up the mess that he inherited ASAP before TISG’s past tarnishes his reputation.

Traingate: Only SGDaily asks the right question

In Infrastructure on 10/07/2016 at 4:42 am

And researched the answer.

Everyone else is talking cock and singing song. The Oppo parties, anti-PAP cyberwarriors and activists, allied websites and bloggers,  and other new media outlets are screaming their heads off over the cracks in PRC-made trains and the failure of SMRT, LTA and the transport ministry (MoT) to tell us about the cracks.

Can the critics answer the following questions:

Has anyone died as a result of the faulty trains?

Has anyone been injured?

And, has SMRT, LTA or the MoT lost money?

So why should the swing voter care?

There’s only one reason why the swing voters and all S’poreans should care about Traingate. But the usual suspects are too clueless to ask the question that will interest the swing voter. The usual suspects all own cars isit? Or they all unemployed isit? So no need to travel during rush hours?

Only SgDaily’s Joel Koh asks: What happens to service reliability and timings?

And better still, he did some research.

He writes: Remember that SMRT announced last year that it would be adding trains to shorten train service intervals. The current move to recall 26 trains removes 11 per cent from the current fleet’s capacity. Should we expect a corresponding decrease in service reliability and a lengthening of service timings?

This means longer waiting times and decreased passenger satisfaction. Perhaps in typical “only hear the good stuff” fashion, LTA has decided to keep mum about this to avoid making a bad situation even worse?

Yet it does get worse. The existing infrastructure may have to bear hidden additional costs because of this recall. With the reduced capacity, existing trains would have to make more trips, ferry more passengers and undergo more wear and tear during this period.

What would be disastrous is if the older trains also start to display similar issues or develop problems as a result of the need to meet this increased load, which could lead to more trains being taken out of service.

Article

Shame on the Oppo parties, anti-PAP cyberwarriors and activists, allied websites and bloggers,  and other new media outlets for not asking this question, resulting in missing an open goal.


To be fair to TeamTRE, after their rant there was this throwaway line which ended the piece

With 26 trains out of service, MRT commuters might want to consider waking up a few hours earlier than usual or bunking in at the office to avoid being late for work as it sure as hell is going to be more crowded than ever.

———————————————————–

Finally, a clarification. He wrote

This piece was inspired by Thoughts of a Cynical Investor. He asks why LTA did not mention how the train recalls will impact MRT train service timings.

Actually my question to SgDaily in an email was more general:

Do SMRT, LTA tell us how train services will be maintained as these trains are repaired.

Got any site, blogger asking?

Don’t see anything on above. LOL

 

 

 

LKY was wrong on service jobs/ Lessons from the Foxes

In Economy on 05/05/2016 at 2:30 pm

I was recently at my barber and it reminded me that LKY was talking cock about service jobs. Many yrs ago he said that service jobs like cutting hair and waiting at tables could not be exported i.e. locals could not lose their jobs doing these things. (He was talking when the disk drive manufacturers were relocating out of S’pore, retrenching workers, and the govt was moving towards creating more service jobs. The move resulted in two casinos. A good thing in my view.)

Well the lady cutting my hair (for $6) is M’sian*. And so was the previous barber I used ($10). And it’s a fact that hair cutters  and dressers in S’pore are from M’sia.

We want services to be cheap and good, and so have to import people willing to work for peanuts (by our standards). The PAP administration is very happy to oblige us by allowing FTs to eat our breakfast, lunch dinner and supper; and all snacks in between..

And now robots will be replacing humans. So FTs will be replaced not by locals, but by robots.

Robots Day 1 chart

True it’s in the US but it’ll come here.

Now to the Foxes. They have a British core: 9 of 23 are British. Better than the core S’poreans in S’pore businesses, NTUC and MoM should note.

The club’s Thai owners, King Power, have spent little on players, but lavishly on coaching, scouting and training facilities.

Must have lessons for S’pore.


*Yes I know there are  locals who will cut hair for $6. But they tend to be druggies who not only look high but are probably high. So I prefer FTs.

Why Dr Chee should not stand in Bukit Batok

In Political governance on 15/03/2016 at 12:43 pm

But first, looks like the NEA did a lousy job of exterminating the Bukit Batok rats and other vermin (remember that there was also a bug infestation). I mean although the SDP contested the ward in the last GE, almost all the zombie parties* (bar the Chiams’ Party) are talking of thinking of standing: NSP, Goh Meng Seng, Ben Pwee, s/o JBJ and Desmond Lim are all pretending that they matter.

Back to the SDP and Dr Chee

When I saw this, I totally agreed with the points raised.

The SDP knows S’poreans’ concerns and has policies to address these concerns; policies that are in the main pretty decent**. And the Wankers Wayang Worthless Party’s  elected MPs showed in the last Parly that all they wanted to be was high paid social workers like PAP MP Kate Spade Tin. She’s their idea of  what an MP should do: keep quiet in Parly, talking cock when opening mouth; the focus is being a $15,000 a month social worker. They are not interested in representing our views. I still have high hopes for Lion Man and his fellow NCMPs.

The problem with the SDP is Dr Chee and his old guard. Through a foul-smelling, poisonous mixture of their own actions (civil disobedience antics, defenestrating Mr Chiam) and their demonisation by the PAP administration and its media allies, Dr Chee and his old guard are not trusted by the swing voters (those who voted for Dr Tan Cheng Bock: The Malay PAPpy that can thrash Dr Tan). Worse, in the eyes of the swing voters, Dr Chee and gang are the SDP. They don’t see that there are now professionals like Dr Tambyah, Chong Wai Fung in the party; professionals that in an early era would have joined the PAP, if they wanted to serve the public. 

But Dr Chee and the old guard control the party, and there is no sign that he or they want to move on. Ah Loong is already talking of a handover and it’s clear that he’s walking the talk, not like dad who talked the talk but didn’t walk the talk, but Ah Loong made him walk the walk in 2011.

It’s clear that Dr Chee sees Bukit Batok as his way into parly, forgetting that in the last GE the SDP in Bukit Batok and other wards had only the support of the  super core anti-PAP vote. Though to be fair other than the WP, all the other Oppo parties had only the vote of nuts who scream “Any donkey so long as not a PAPPy”.

——————

A dogmatic anti-PAP person

He so hates the PAP that even when he uses SingHealth, he KPKBs that he must wait: he expects no waiting at polyclinic. I asked him why he uses SingHealth given his KPKBing and hatred of the PAP administration. He says thru gritted teeth, “Cheap” but quickly adds that PAP made him poor so he kanna use SingHealth. Ftr, he owns a landed property and drives a car: poor indeed.

—–

Uncle Redbean thinks Dr Chee must stand: The SDP has been rewarded with a penalty to convert. Send in the best forward to do a clean job with this gift from heaven. Heaven has finally smiled at Chee Soon Juan, the man that deserves more than anyone to be in Parliament.

Uncle Redbean and Dr Chee will be depending on the “by-election” effect for victory. But I doubt the swing voters (those who voted for Dr Tan Chin Bock in 2011) would vote for him. He’s not an Ah Lian swing voters are willing to trust, nor is the SDP the WP.

Hopefully the SDP will choose someone who doesn’t have the baggage that Dr Chee has; someone who the swing voter can relate to. But don’t hold your breath. Pigs will fly first before Dr Chee sets his ego aside.

————————-

*Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) chief Benjamin Pwee also told Channel NewsAsia he will be contesting the by-election. In GE2015, he ran for a seat in Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC under the banner of the Singapore People’s Party but said he would represent DPP in vying for the SMC seat.

Noting that the electoral boundaries of Bukit Batok SMC lie next to Chua Chu Kang GRC, People’s Power Party’s (PPP) Goh Meng Seng said he will discuss with the SDP if the PPP should run for a Bukit Batok seat when the by-election takes place.

“We will respect SDP’s decision first before we make any decision,” the opposition veteran added.

Singapore Democratic Alliance chairman Desmond Lim said his party would have to meet first to decide on the matter. “We need to call for a CEC meeting to discuss among the members before we are able to make an announcement,” Mr Lim said.

He added that there was “no hurry” to make a decision, as PM Lee has not yet decided when the by-election will be held.

Similarly, National Solidarity Party Secretary-General Lim Tean said:  “We are studying the situation carefully and will make an announcement in due course as to whether we will be contesting the by-election.”

The Reform Party’s Secretary-General Kenneth Jeyaretnam said its Central Executive Committee will meet and decide “in due course”. “We are not ruling out contesting, but it’s too early to make a decision,” he stated.

And “Yes”, that opportunist extraordinaire Tan Jee Say has not yet marked his scent.

**But it wants us to trust our neighbours despite their track record of trying to fix us. And I think its cost estimates of its healthcare system is optimistic.

 

CPF Life payouts: Why liddat?/ Save and save

In CPF on 22/02/2016 at 2:22 pm

Or did I really got my maths, analysis wrong. It’s happened before. Or did I miss the “right” explanation? It’s happened before.

I came across this

in http://www.providend.com/can-we-retire-in-singapore/.

What is interesting is that the increase in the retirement amounts do not lead to a corresponding increase in the monthly payouts.

The Full Retirement Sum is double that of the Basic Retirement Sum. But the monthly payout is between $1,200 (Basic plan) — 1, 300 (Standard plan). If they were in line with the increase in the principal sum, they’d be $1,300 – 1400. There’s a difference of $100 or 7.69  — 7.14% a month.

The Enhancement Retirement Sum is 50% more than the Full Retirement Sum but the monthly payouts is $1750 — 1900 but not $1800 — 1950. A difference of $50 or 2.78 — 2,56% a month.

So where do the missing $50 and $100 notes end up? Annualised and aggregated, the amounts are not “peanuts”. Remember the English saying, “If you look after the pennies, the pounds will look after themselves”? The saying meand that if someone takes care not to waste small amounts of money, they will accumulate capital.

The “pennies” are not going to those on the Full or  Enhancement Retirement Sum schemes.

No I’m not going to allege like Roy, once did, that the PM takes our CPF money. He did later say he was talking cock but still owes PM about $415,000. Never mind, he was a celebrity for two yrs.

I suspect that the pennies are meant to ensure that those who are on the Basic Retirement Sum get $650 — $700.

It’s a bit like progressive taxation, taking from the rich to give to the poor. Bit like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbyYr6L5xQM

Somehow I don’t see Ah Loong wearing green tights.

For the record if either or both CPL Life Basic or Standard pools run out of money, there is no recourse to the state

Our money but CPF Life solvency is our problem

There is a provision in the law governing the CPF Life Plans which states that payouts are contingent on the Plans being solvent. This is because premiums that are paid in to get the annuities are pooled and collectively invested. If the plan you chose doesn’t have enough money to pay out, you die. This is unlike the [Minimum Sum] scheme, where account holders are legally entitled to the monies in their CPF accounts …

(https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/best-cpf-life-plan/)

The government has said the provision on solvency is only a precaution unlikely ever  to be used. If so, why have it? This is a peace of mind issue. It was Gan who made this assurance when he was MoM.

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/cpf-life-what-sucks-which-is-closest-to-minimum-sum-scheme/

No wonder we kanna save and save. To end here’s extract from CNA in early Feb on a Nielson global survey in 4Q 2015

SINGAPOREANS AMONG TOP SAVERS, INVESTORS IN THE WORLD

According to the survey, Singaporeans are joint-sixth in putting their spare cash into savings, sixth for allocating spare cash to invest into shares or mutual funds, and second in the world for placing spare cash into retirement funds.

A total of 64 per cent of Singaporeans will put their money into savings, while 30 per cent have invested in shares and mutual funds. Additionally, 25 per cent will top up their retirement funds to ensure a comfortable retirement.

“Our findings continue to reveal that Singaporeans have displayed a strong desire to ensure financial security through savings and investments regardless of a rainy day,” said Ms Koh. “In addition, Singapore has an aging population and it is a wise choice to plan early for the retirement nest egg.”

Wanted President: Must not embarass the PAP

In Political governance on 21/01/2016 at 1:16 pm

Professor Kishore Mahbubani* believes that we should consider the possibility that a rogue president could be elected, and that we should consider having the president be chosen by Parliament once again (“Let’s talk about policy failures and the elected presidency“.

The assumption is that the elected president can do serious damage to S’pore. The last time a PAP minister addressed the issue before PE 2011, the Pet Minister made it clear that the constitutional position of the president was jaga only. He has very limited powers that he could exercise by himself. And these are of a custodian nature i.e. jada work. So at best a rogue president can embarrass S’pore.

Well, we had one such appointed rogue president, Devan Nair, who behaved inappropriately when drunk in Sarawak. And he was appointed by parliament wasn’t he? Turned out badly didn’t he? A real disgrace to S’pore and S’poreans. Worse, he alleged he was fixed.

(Related post: The other PAP apologist, one Herod Cheng, on the issue of the presidency)

What Kishore and Cheng should tell us is that history shows us is an elected president can embarrass the PAP administration. Think Ong Teng Cheong and the wayang he staged over inmovable state assets to show us he was a good jaga.

That row made Ong Teng Cheong the hero of the anti-PAP nuts. Funny thing is that if he had his way, the reserves cannot ever be touched. Interest, dividends and capital gains would be locked up in the name of capital preservation. And he’s a hero to the anti-PAP mob? They bleat that the PAP steals our CPF. OTC wanted to locked away from use.

So if the two PAP apologists had argued that the elected presidency should be scrapped because a “rogue” president can embarrass the PAP administration, I’d sit down and shut up because they have a point. But they argue this way because it’d mean that they will no longer be able to grovel, “The PAP is always right.”

Seriously, there will be great black comedy when the PM has to explain publicly why an appointed president can be a better protector of reserves and minorities than an elected president can. Didn’t the PAP say only an elected president had the electoral mandate to resist Mad Dog Chee’s plans to squander the reserves if said Mad Dog became PM?

Ownself contradict ownself. Or should it be Ownself argue against Ownself.

The other black comedy will be to see the Worthless Party of very highly paid social workers (Kate Spade Tin is their poster gal: social work more impt than talking cock in parly) sit on their hands leaving Lion Man to savage the PAP. Yes I’m hoping the WP will not castrate Leon the Lion. Rumour has it that he had things he wanted to say about the internal review of the SDH tragedy that was made public but was told to sir down and shut up by the WP leaders. Let’s see if he speaks up when the tragedy is discussed in parly. If he doesn’t, then there’ll be some truth to the rumour of Low muzzling the Lion Man.

————————————-

*He accused a US regulator of being a rogue regulator, after the regulator went after StanChart. Shortly, thereafter StanChart admitted it was a rogue bank.  The PAP apologist looked like a real cock.

Headmaster that blur meh?

In Media, Public Administration on 11/01/2016 at 12:00 pm

Maybe it’s a surprise that we don’t have more PTSD victims like Amos Yee given the logic of this ex-headmaster.

The ex-principal (going for further studies, not kanna fired) of Shuqun Secondary recently responded* to

In September of last year, this video of a bullying incident in Shuqun Secondary School surfaced and soon went viral.

http://theindependent.sg/deliberate-and-irresponsible-reporting-outgoing-shuqun-secondary-principal-takes-tmg-to-task/

In summarry, he blamed new media (and the constructive, nation-building media: the PAPpy friendly ST etc reported the Middle Ground’s story) for blowing up the bullying incident and not telling the truth. The reporting was “deliberate and irresponsible”: this included supposedly “balanced” online and mainstream media who felt right to reproduce the articles choosing to feature sensationalised headlines that gave a wrong impression of the facts.

The problem (i.e. flaw) with his analysis is simple. Until he gave his side of the story, three months after the event, there was only silence from him and the MoE. So how could there be “balance” or “truth” (whatever this is)? Now he and the MOE may have reasonable and legtimate reasons for silence if the decision to keep quiet wasn’t simply an honest mistake**.

Whatever, how can he now blame media (new and constructive, nation-building) of irresponsible behaviour when he was unwilling or unable to say anything at the time the video went viral?  If anyone was “deliberate and irresponsible” (I assume he really meant “deliberately irresponsible”) , it was the silence of theprincipal and perhaps MOE**.

Having been freed from the constraints of his job**, he could (and should) have simply told his side of the story without name-calling or labelling: just give the facts as he saw them. But no, he had to indulge in name-calling and labelling like Amos Yee. And he’s an educated man who held a position of trust and responsibility, not a spoiled kid, whose mother thinks he’s “fantastic”.

As he’s going for further studies, one can only hope that the course includes handling the media in an age of 24/7 news coverage. new media and social media. Pigs will fly first.

Seriously MoE must remind officers not to talk cock because talking cock reflects badly on the eduction service. It must also update its manual on the handling media queries. viral videos etc in an age of 24/7 news coverage. new media and social media. Silence is no longer the default option.

Finally, I can’t stop laughing at this comment by Bertna Henson the editor of TMG NOW he talks….three months later. After a deafening silence, a deadening rant. As always, shoot the messenger, after declining to talk to them. And messengers must always deliver “good news” to be considered “responsible””.

Really people who once lived in glass houses should refrain from throwing stones. She was once a general (paper stormtropper) on the Death Star that is ST. ST was during her time (and still is) very good at shooting nessengers of news that the PAP administration rather not hear.

——-

*Text of FB message

‪#‎howisthisnotbullying‬

Dear friends,

I was the principal of ‪#‎shuqunsecondary‬ from 2012 to 2015.

From 1 Jan 2016, I will be leaving the education service. I am hoping to pursue further studies. Yes, I am doing well. smile emoticon And no, before you ask, I made this decision some time before the “bullying incident” in my school. MOE and the public service is more reasonable and far kinder than most give them credit for.

To assure those of you who are still curious about the follow up to the incident, I thought I would share a picture of the 3 boys involved. The circle time in the picture was taken on the FIRST DAY after all of them returned to school. The “bully” apologised in person and in writing to both victims and to the class. Both victims forgave him and they were friends again within 2 hours. Consequences were meted out to the boy according to our school rules in private and ALL THE PARENTS INVOLVED were satisfied with the actions of the school. The boy will have to face more serious punishment under the law.

More hearteningly, in November, the 3 boys, together with their classmates, initiated and planned their own service learning project during the school’s open house. They baked brownies and made drinks for visitors to showcase the work of our student-run Hideout Cafe. They told me they wanted to make restoration for the bad reputation they had brought to the school. I am very proud of them.

Many ppl who know the truth of the events in my school have asked me why I did not respond more actively to the various reports on the Internet when the incident happened. My answer – I did not want to feed the ongoing media frenzy and help viral irresponsible articles that were being put out by my comments. Sadly, this included supposedly “balanced” online and mainstream media who felt right to reproduce the articles choosing to feature sensationalised headlines that gave a wrong impression of the facts.

Make no mistake – these were deliberate and irresponsible decisions made by the media. For example, an online news website that purports to be a place for “moderate speech and agreeable disagreement” posted an article headlined “the school was aware of the bullying 5 months before the incident”. A close reading of the report itself would have revealed that a single complaint was made to the school and the teacher involved had done the correct thing by warning the aggressor. She was not aware that the bullying resumed a few days later.

The same website chose not to emphasise comments by the mum herself that she appreciated the work that the school had done with her child and the improvements that she had seen in the child over the last 3 years. They ellided over the fact that A FULL WEEKEND separated the incident from the time it was posted on the Internet, during which neither victim mentioned anything to the school nor their parents. The media chose not to mention that both VICTIMS had written to me that they felt sorry for their friend and hoped to see everyone move on. They did not clarify that the online video was NOT posted by any of my school’s students (because we teach them that the correct thing to do if they care for their friends is to raise it to the teachers) but a school leaver from another school who posted it on a gaming site at 9am on a school day. There was no mention that one of the victim’s mum had gone down to the police station ON HER OWN 2 weeks later to withdraw the police report because she felt satisfied with the school’s handling of the incident and that it was a mistake to have gone to the police in the first place.

At the same time, some of the online reports seem to suggest that after one or two meetings with one of the victims in question, the journalist somehow understood and COULD SPEAK FOR the boy’s psychological state, better than the school. By reducing the children to spokespeople for “the broader problem of bullying in schools”, the reports cared nothing for them as people. They mention nothing about how one of the boys dreams of being a top chef, another speaks to his mum in sign language, the last has improved significantly in his reading despite suffering from dyslexia, and all three find EBS difficult. And all this which I know as a Principal is nothing compared to what my teachers know of them, working daily for 9+ hours each day with the boys over the last 3 years and sharing with them the heartache and struggles of their growth.

It is not difficult to see how these biased reports might have fed some of the extreme online vitriol. These included many threats by netizens such as “if i see the boy, I will bash his skull in”, “let me give him a taste of his own medicine.” Instead of trusting the school and the police to investigate and take the right actions, many suggested taking things into their own hands. There were false accusations of gang connections and that the boy was a compulsive bully. Unhappily, there were also derisory comments about the school by people who did not know the first thing about Shuqun Secondary. This was unfair to the 1200 other students, their parents, the committed staff, and the alumni and stakeholders of the school.

As a teachable moment following the incident, my teachers conducted a bully-free lesson with all the students. This is material which we repeat every year as part of our bully-free week where we teach our students about the different forms of bullying including physical, verbal and psycho-social. In her reflection, one of my students mentioned the way that adults were behaving online, that was causing my students being afraid to go out in public in their uniforms after school and to participate in social media. She ended her reflection by asking ” how is this not bullying?” I had no answer for her.

(The same media website compared this case with another case of bullying in a prestigious all-girls’ school that was recently resolved in court and suggested that there was a difference between physical and verbal/psychosocial bullying. We teach our students that these are all forms of bullying that cause suffering in others, and that it does not matter what was the intent behind the action but the act itself).

(An Auckland school principal gave a similar response to cyber-bullies after a similar incident happened in his schoolhttp://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm…)

In ending, my wishes for the new year are –

1) To the media friends especially (some of whom are my relatives, ex-classmates and former students), I would like to urge you to take greater care in your reporting. For each irresponsible journalist and dubious media website, I have met many more considered and enlightened ones, some of whom reported on the many achievements and good stories from my students and staff in the past. While I understand the pressure to attract more views and comments in this age of social media through increasingly sensational reporting, you too have a DUTY OF CARE to your subjects, especially children. You have the power to report the full truth and shape opinion, not just pander to the lowest denominator in the hopes of representing yourself as the mouthpiece of the public. Be mindful of the innocent parties that you might be unintentionally hurting, and the feelings of hatred you might be stoking online. In some cases, it can spill over to real cases of vigilantism, as several cases of adults taking the law into their own hands against children or teenagers have shown in 2015. Sometimes the best thing we can do for the people we care about is to stay quiet and do the deep work to support and help them learn and grow.

2) To the wider and largely well meaning public, be mindful of what u “like” or comment on the Internet. Be aware that what u see or read online often does not constitute the whole truth, and choosing even to click on links (without needing to share) can help to viral these falsehoods. Trust the institutions that we have put in place to do the right things; that is the mark of a civil society.

And if we speak about allowing our children to learn from their mistakes in education, to give the academically weaker students a chance to catch up and succeed, the same grace and patience should be extended to our students when teaching them good character. We can do better as adults to be kinder to one another in real life and on the Internet. Remember, OUR CHILDREN ARE WATCHING AND LEARNING.

3) To my fellow colleagues in Shuqun and elsewhere in the teaching fraternity, those in social services and the police who work daily with these kids – strive on! I have had the privilege of meeting many of you in my years of service. Some have given up higher paying jobs. Others, like me, have studied and taught in “top” schools but chose to work in schools like Shuqun because you want to go to the places of greatest need and believe in the potential of every child of Singapore, not just some. And we live the mission every day, and don’t just talk or write about it.

To encourage you, let me share something that another parent sent me, during those difficult days of September. He was the father of the boy that was hit by one of the victims, in another video that surfaced subsequently. This time the student who had taken the video did the right thing, and brought it to my attention before it went viral so that we could address the matter with those involved. When I met the father, he had complete trust in the school’s handling of the matter. More importantly, because of the close relationship he had with his son, he was confident that his boy would have raised the matter to him if it had affected him. 2 days later, when the video became viral, it was HE who sent me a message of encouragement through my school counsellor – “Tell Mr Chia to take care. I am very impressed by his dedication to the students.”

Thank you Mr Hong , and the many other parents and partners, for renewing our faith and for supporting our teachers as they do the hard work of believing in and helping your children.

Happy New Year.

Chia Hai Siang

P.S. Pls SHARE if you think this will encourage a teacher or a parent.

**MoE officers like all civil servants are not authorised to talk to the media unless expressly authorised.

Related post on why the PAP administration’s PR is so bad

Zorro: Sotong or trying to sotong us over FT, local numbers

In Political economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 24/08/2015 at 4:25 am

Shielding Workers

But first, dare PM, Zorro, Kee Chui or anyone in the PAP or the NTUC dare say they are safeguarding S’poreans’ jobs or wages? (Sorry, the image can’t appear in the post: OK in draft. Go to http://www.theguardian.com/books/gallery/2015/aug/08/the-bodleian-treasures-online-in-pictures and scroll down) (I’ll leave PM’s outrageous attempt at misrepresenting our views on FTs for another day)

Let’s look at the facts of job protection for locals here. I”ll let Manpower Minister (and previously NTUC head) Lim Swee Say speak first.

In an interview last week,  said that the government will hold fast to its goal of having a two-thirds Singaporean core in the economy, and this will be the structure of the country’s workforce in the “medium to long term”. BS

NCMP Yee says Lim talking cock over optimistic view of maintaining 1/3 FTs in “medium to long term” For starters, FT workforce already more than 1/3

On his blog [Link] on 21 Aug, JJ pointed out that former Manpower Minister Tan Chuan-Jin had admitted that the one-third FT target is possible only for this decade, during a Parliamentary debate 2 years ago.

“That I agree with.”

“Whilst doing our own computations for alternative models, we had then studied all the publicly available numbers about population in Singapore. There will be net addition to the local workforce from 2013 till 2020, the end of this decade. This is because there will be more Singaporeans turning of age to be included into the workforce than there are Singaporeans retiring.”

He noted that beyond 2020, in order to get the kind of economic growth the PAP government had wanted in the White Paper, there has to be more addition of foreign labour without any addition of local manpower.

“How much to add will depend on productivity growth, which the government had set a target of 2-3%. Sadly, this productivity growth has been near zero or negative in recent years.”

He therefore questioned Lim’s talk of maintaining the 2:1 ratio of Singaporean to foreign workers in Singapore’s workforce in the “medium to long term”.

“So, Mr Lim’s comments that the two-thirds Singaporean core will be something for the  ‘medium to long term’ is rather puzzling. What is ‘medium to long term’?”

“His predecessor (Tan Chuan-Jin) had already agreed with me that ‘by 2020 our own domestic labour force growth will basically end up at about zero. So whatever growth we have thereafter will largely be foreign labour growth’ and that ‘it (foreign workforce) is really about one-third for this decade until about 2020.”

Worse, the proportion of local work force seems to be decreasing while that of foreign work force is increasing.

“At the point that I had asked the question in March 2013, based on available manpower data of 2012, locals made up 63.0% of the workforce. By 2014, this figure has dropped to 61.9%. It was 62.1% in 2013 (Source: http://stats.mom.gov.sg/Pages/Labour-Force-Summary-Table.aspx).”

Mid 2012 Mid 2013 Mid 2014
Total Workforce (‘000) 3,361.8 3,443.7 3,530.8
Local Workforce (‘000) 2,119.6 2,138.8 2,185.2
% Local 63.0% 62.1% 61.9%

In other words, as of last year, the proportion of foreign workers in our work force was already 38.1%, more than 1/3.

“Is Mr Lim’s definition of long-term up to 2020 only? If it is beyond 2020, how is he going to achieve that because even with a growing local workforce in this current decade, the ratio has been declining well past the two-thirds ratio already while productivity has failed to improve?”

Hear, hear for JJ, This is the kind of questioning I expect when I voted for WP at the last GE.

Back to the interview. Zorro said that the tightening of Singapore’s foreign manpower was not a reaction to past mistakes, but was rather a reflection that realities had changed. The inflow of foreign manpower was a hot topic during the 2011 General Election, and Mr Lim identified the “determination to manage” the growth of the foreign workforce here as the key shift in manpower policy since.

“It’s not so much because the policy of the past was a mistake but rather, we are now having a new stage of growth and therefore we have to pursue a new direction,” he said.

Oh how very convenient that “a new stage of growth” comes at a politically convenient time?

If anyone believes this, they’ll believe anything.

He went on to say, “Every country has to find the right balance … But on the whole, I would say that we have managed the process a lot more effectively compared to some other cities and countries. Through the manpower quota system, we have ensured foreign manpower spread across all sectors and companies.”

Manpower quota system? As TRE pointed out: for foreign PMETs, that is, foreign EP holders, there is no quota imposed in Singapore.

In the US, for example, the congress controlled their H-1B visa (equivalent to Singapore’s EP) for foreigners tightly. The current US law limits to 65,000 the number of foreign nationals who may be issued a H-1B visa each fiscal year. US laws also exempt up to 20,000 foreign nationals holding a master’s or higher degree from US universities from the cap on H-1B visas. In addition, excluded from the ceiling are all H-1B foreign workers who work at universities, non-profit research facilities associated with universities, and government research facilities. Universities can employ an unlimited number of foreign workers as cap-exempt. This also means that contractors working at but not directly employed by the institutions may be exempt from the cap as well. In FY2010, 117,828 H-1B visas were issued by US government. In FY2012, it was 135,991 [Link].

In Singapore, for example, the figures given by the government for the number of EP holders at the end of 2010 and 2011 were 142,000 and 176,000. That means, there is an increase of 34,000 foreign EP holders in Singapore in 2011 [Link]. If we were to add in S-Pass holders, the increase in number of foreign PMETs in 2011 came to 49,000. That’s already almost half of what the whole of US issued in FY2010.

Also, spouses of H-1B visa holder in US are not allowed to work at all. But in Singapore, spouses of EP holders can work through obtaining a Dependant’s Pass [Link].

Coming back to the protection of jobs and wages, it would seem that the PAP and NTUC can safely say that they are protecting FTs jobs and wages here, given the absence of quotas for employment pass holders. What do you think?

SDP’s Dr Paul Tambyah said something recently that deserves to be very widely known. At a recent forum organised by the National University of Singapore Society where representatives from nine opposition parties and the ruling PAP were present, Dr Paul Tambyah said that young local doctors complaining about the hours and working conditions in hospitals, were told that the hospitals could always employ FTs at lower salaries. If our brightest citizens (even straight As can’t get into the local medical schools)  are threatened with FT replacements, what about the Vocational Institutes’ grads?

Yet at the forum Sim Ann representing the PAP said, “We always put SGs front and centre.”

I ask again, “If our brightest and most expensively educated get threatened with being replaced by cheaper FTs, are the Normal streamers safe?”

Degree mills are scams, not unaccredited institutions

In Public Administration on 21/05/2015 at 4:42 am

In response to https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/mom-thinks-we-that-stupid-or-they-really-that-stupid/, a regular reader and most intelligent commenter explained why degree mills are not “unaccredited institutions” as Zorro and the staff at MoM is insisting the are. He says (Emphasis is mine. My comments are within [ ] in normal print):

Aiyah, it is factually wrong to say all degree mills are unaccredited institutions. Why?? Because degree mills are mutually exclusive from all & any educational institutions. You can say that unaccredited institutions are a subset of educational institutions, but it is false to say that degree mills are a subset of educational institutions.

[Zorro and his officials are talking cock, real cock. Meritocracy? What meritocracy?]

Degree mills are scam jobs, pure & simple, just like pyramid schemes. The perpetrators know it and the consumers know it. Any person with average intelligence who participates in it will realise something is not right, even if he benefits. A consumer who pleads innocence and “sincerely believes it is genuine” is merely being disingenuous and acting in self-preservation.

[Heard that IDA about its beloved new citizen Nisha.]

And yeah it’s easier (& cheaper) to fake work experience than fake degrees. In my younger days, I was bumming around doing odd jobs & contract jobs for about 2 years in-between “real jobs”. When I went for job interviews later, I got so fedup with having to explain & justify my 2 years “hole” in my resume that I put in fake work experience with a fake company. And I got a good pal to act as my ex-supervisor in case any prospective company wanted to check. No company ever checked & my pal never got any calls.

Lim Swee Say also says that MOM conducts 100% checks on papers from known unaccredited institutions or degree mills. What about fake degrees obtained from degree mills?? I can get a bona-fide look & feel posh degree scroll + academic transcripts from the University of Sydney by paying some Peenoi degree mill US$350. US$500 if I also want someone to impersonate as my professor with Aussie accent & fake Uni letterheads & fake email account to act as my reference.

[If you think the last two para are rants,

Woman entered Singapore under false identities

She had fled over fake degree, but returned using various passports

She fled the country after being charged in 2002 with using a fake degree to apply for permanent residency. But that did not stop Lin Lifen, 39, from repeatedly coming back to Singapore over the next 12 years using different identities. She is now appealing against a 16-week jail sentence for her offences.

– See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/courts-crime/story/woman-entered-singapore-under-false-identities-20150520#sthash.2Ye39gOg.7aaisx26.dpuf%5D

And all these doesn’t even touch the millions of sub-par & 3rd-rate ahneh, cheena, peenoy, burmese graduates from the mass of “accredited universities” that have so lax academic & ethical standards that you can get 1st class honours 4.0 GPA without studying if you’re willing to prostitute yourself, either with your body or with your money.

[Steady bro, don’t want FT lovers and ang moh tua kees like Kirsten Han and Lynn Lee making police complaints against this blog. LOL]

Amos: A changed boy/ Why M Ravi went “bananas”/ Misreped again and again

In Uncategorized on 30/04/2015 at 5:24 am

Update at 5.30 am 1 May: Not bailed: in remand until Monday https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/04/30/amos-in-remand-again/

(Update at 2.40pm: What can I say? I forgot to check his Facebook page, website before I posted LOL this morning. Let’s hope he doesn’t go to court earting a banana. I’d be a right Charlie ((((((.)

(Update at 4.55pm: Phew he wasn’t eating a banana and was dressed in smart casual. 

And no, I’m not the guy in red who slapped him. Bet you the ang moh tua kees and their cybernut allies will be screaming that he should have had police protection. And that it was all a plot to intimidate him.)

(Update at 5.20pm: Yup, political figures are suggesting that it’s a disgrace it happened outside court. Thinking about it, maybe he needs to be in remand until his trial because his life is in danger?)

Amos Yee will appear in court today for a pre-trial conference.

I’ve been told, he’ll no longer be a ya ya papaya eating a banana to show that he doesn’t give a hoot about the law. And no, my source is not my Morocco Mole who once told me that WP would support the PAP’s immigration white paper. https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/wp-will-vote-for-the-white-paper-moley/ 

Seems his parents gamble in refusing to bail him paid-off. His spell in remand has sobered him up considerably.

I also understand that his lawyers will be asking for a postponement of the trial because they want to make representations to the AGC along the lines that he has repented (an apology is being drafted) and that the time spent in remand (four nights and three days) is more than sufficient punishment as a consequence.

Hopefully a fair and reasonable deal can be struck so that the only fruscos will be those ang moh tua kees and their anti-PAP cybernut allies who want him to be martyred for the anti-PAP cause; and those who want him hanged or caned for insulting Harry. All three groups are equally deserving of the scorn of reasonable people.

Though given his past behaviour (before remand to be fair), he could prove today that I’m talking cock about a changed boy. He may decide to revert to a ya ya papaya to secure the approval of the mob, and stick a finger into his parents’, bailor’s and lawyers’ eyes.

But if he remains quai chye, those who saw him as a human rights poster boy because he insulted the memory of one Harry Lee will spin a different tale.

Humans right activist, ISD detainee and 2011 SDP MP candidate wrote on her FB on 23 April : And at the pre trial conference last Friday, he was also handcuffed and led out of Court No. 17 into the holding area for alleged adult offenders. I am told he looked terrified.

So poor Amos spent several days among alleged adult offenders. I am told he is banging the wall and going crazy. He is apparently autistic.

Well going by the way he behaved when he was finally bailed last Tueday, by a Christian, not by a human rights wimp activist or an anti-PAP activist, it doesn’t look as though he was “nuts”or terrified. Here’s him waving.Image result for amos yee + pre-trial conference

Btw, it seems one Ng Kok Lim cannot help but misrepresent me. In his second latest BS* on TRE he claimed I sympathised with Amos Yee, quoting me out of context, and saying I too didn’t help Amos. He conveniently left out the link I put in the article he selective choses quotes from: that he should be caned. Err that sympathy? But then that point disturbs the narrative of the misrepresentation,

*In his latest piece, he shows that he read a lot of my pieces, yet quotes and misrepresents me, Chin Peng and the Plen extensively. (He makes Roy look like a paragon of truth on CPF when it’s a fact that Roy admitted that he lied about PM stealing our CPF**. M Ravi had a problem explaining to the court hearing the case why this admission shouldn’t be taken into account by the judge.)

Yet Ng cannot point to anything I wrote  over the years that called certain leftists “communists” as he alleged when he screamed: CI is making the same unqualified smearing of the Lefitsts by the PAP by labeling them as communists like those in Cuba and so on. Where is CI’s proof that the leftists were actually communists? https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/04/02/seek-truth-from-facts-tre-commentators-dont-misrepresent-me/

I ask him again: Where did I ever call the Coldstore detainees “communists”?

Ng may have wished I called some leftists “communists”, but where’s the proof?

**https://atans1.wordpress.com/2014/08/06/roys-defence-has-me-confused/ Since then I’ve been told that one of the reasons why M Ravi went “bananas” and had to stop practising law, was Roy’s refusal to listen to his advice.

Pinoy and PRC diplomatic behaviour contrasted

In Uncategorized on 09/01/2015 at 4:58 am

(Or “Pinoy Pride at work: OK for Pinoys to threaten, insult S’poreans but not vice versa)

The Filipino embassy told a Filipino nurse to be “extra careful with his social media usage”*, days after the nurse, Edz Ello, made some insulting and threatening comments about S’porean on social media. He has alleged that he did not post the comments, alleging that he was hacked.

An intelligent TRE poster (glad to see more of them posting: too many fools talking cock posting rubbish) pointed out the difference between the official Pinoy response and the official Chinese response when a PRC juz flamed S’poreans:

Sunny Day: During dog incident, one of PRC embassy staff Madam Zhou gave stern rebuke to Sun Xu, had asked him to apologize to Singaporeans, NUS, his teachers and friends and everybody. So contrary to Pinoy govt response. You can be sure that Filipino govt soft action means they don’t disagree with ezo ello totally.

I’d add that China is a regional power and is seen by the US as threatening its regional and global hegemony; yet its officials knows how to behave towards a host country. So unlike the Pinoy officals here, whose country has to run crying and grovelling to the US whenever the Pinoy govt threaten China and get kicked in the face by China for their threats against China. And they still wanted in 2012 Chinese tourists to come gamble in Manila?  Btw, Chinese said the country is not safe.

What accounts for the arrogance of the diplomats and Ello here? They think they own the place juz because they think the first “P” in the “PAP” stands for “Pinoy”?

Whatever it is, we know where people like Ello get their inspiration: their diplomata, who refuse to condemn threatening and insulting behaviour when made by Pinoys but are quick to KPKB about“the few Singaporeans” who have lashed out, and condemned the blog that suggested abusing Filipinos.

“I think it was unfair and racist and discriminatory,” he said, adding that the blogger had still not been identified.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-28953147

(My take on the interview https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/01/01/pinoy-tua-kee-gives-the-finger-to-govt-meng-seng-2/)

Well shouldn’t he condemn the language used in Ello’s Facebook (even if Ello alleged it wasn’t him), by saying that guests must respect their hosts? Instead the embassy merely tells Ello to be “extra careful with his social media usage”: this could simply mean “keep yr threats and insults about S’poreans among the Pinoy community”?

Maybe the diplomats are like this

We Filipinos are famous for being onion-skinned or easily slighted at perceived insults. While it’s perfectly normal for us to taunt and criticize others, we can’t handle the same when it’s being hurled back at us. Incidents showcasing our extra-sensitivity to insults usually involve a foreigner making either a bonafide racist remark or a humorous jab at us Filipinos. True to form, our reactions would range from righteous indignation to excessive grandstanding. While it is alright to feel incensed, throwing a fit in front of the world would inevitably do us no good at all.

http://www.filipiknow.net/negative-traits-of-filipinos/

—-

*The Philippine embassy in Singapore has told a Filipino nurse to be “extra careful with his social media usage”, days after disparaging remarks about Singaporeans appeared on his Facebook account, which he said was hacked.

The Facebook post called Singaporeans “loosers” (losers) and expressed hope that “disators (disasters) will strike Singapore”. The Tan Tock Seng Hospital nurse has reported to the police that his account was hacked.

The Philippine embassy added that it has reiterated its previous advisories on the use of social media.

“Since the matter is under police investigation, the embassy advised the person concerned to cooperate fully with the SPF (Singapore Police Force).”

Tan Tock Seng Hospital has said it is working with the police on the investigation.

ziliang@sph.com.sg

– See more at: http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/more-singapore-stories/story/philippine-embassy-reminds-tan-tock-seng-nurse-watch-his#xtor=CS1-10

 

“News” and “no-news” that annoyed me

In Humour, Malaysia on 07/12/2014 at 4:45 am

Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong has received a “clean bill of health” from his doctor after undergoing surgery for prostate cancer, and is now back at work. (CNA)

You mean he working? Doing what? Talking cock is work?

2 Tampines GRC MP Baey Yam Keng told CNA that even though he gives people the impression that he is a very active and sociable person, he is actually an introvert.

“I think I give people the impression that I’m a very active, sociable person… doing a lot of things. But I’m actually quite an introvert. Really! It’s just that I’m active online so there are certain posts people remember and they form certain impressions about me,” said Mr Baey chuckling.

As TRE pointed out,  netizens have nicknamed him “Selfie King” because of his penchant for taking photos of himself at various events and at every opportunity, posting them online. He frequently makes postings of himself on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook, sometimes multiple times a day.

3 Bit rich, what coming from a M’sian publication that is in same group as NST which promote special rights for the “right” race:.

“What does this policy say to us? That Filipinos can be maids but not servers? Indians are good for being construction coolies but we don’t want to see them as hotel staff? This is why you see Mandarin-speaking servers struggling to pronounce Palak Paneer across the curry houses of Singapore.”

I was juz talking to a retired Bumi financier and he was musing that Bank Negara has never had a Chinese governor, despite many capable deputy Chinese governors.

4 In an interview, PM Lee said that his children “have not yet” expressed an interest to enter politics.

When asked if he would influence or encourage his children to join politics, Mr Lee said, “They will have to make choices.”

“Every child is different. Of course parents would wish for their children to be successful but they all have different natures. Some may be more interested in arts while others could be keen on computing or science. This is something that will have to be developed based on their preferences.” (PM Lee was interviewed by Yang Lan on Beijing Satellite TV while he was in Beijing for the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) summit last month but aired here last Sunday)

So he telling us that he trying to persuade one of his sons to go go into politics? Like the way LKY persuaded him to get into politics? To be fair to him, the rumours are that that his wife has political ambitions for one of her sons. It’s also rumoured that his bro’s wife has political ambitions for one of her sons. Rumours also say that the bros are really relaxed about their sons not wanting to S’pore.

The absence of reports on the following is

Last Saturday was another Return Our CPF gig at Hong Lim Green. The MSM didn’t report it. But neither did TOC, ot TRE or Roy and New Citizen H3. So did anyone turn up?

And still no word from the WP on the arrears issue. Mgt systems must really be lousy.

And I’m surprised Goh Meng Seng is not attacking WP on this issue. But then maybe he focuses only on of inconsequential matters, not serious issues.

Now this had me smiling: Roy says  he is stopping blogging. His verbal diarrhea finally sucumbed to SingHeath’s tablets. (subsidised)?

But then Roy talks cock? Remember his research that PM stole our CPF money? Then he said he was talking rubbish and that the allegation wasn’t true?

Have a gd week.

Btw, if this post sounds familiar it’s ’cause I first posted something similar on Friday. Something went wrong and it disappeared. It ended up between two posts, days ago. So I reposted it with some amendments.

Tan Kuku for tsunami of Jap $ in 2014

In Japan on 10/12/2013 at 5:42 am

When the BOJ under governor Haruhiko Kuroda launched its monetary base-doubling quantitative and and qualitative easing (QQE) policy in April, there were strong expectations that a “tsunami” of Japanese funds would rush into Southeast Asia in search of higher yields.

So far, that has not happened even though Japanese institutional and individual investors are said to be eager to increase their exposure to Southeast Asian markets. A principal reason for their hesitancy, officials say, is Japanese investors’ fear of being exposed to exchange rate risk.

As a result, there is “intense discussion going on now between Japanese and Asean officials on ways to improve and enlarge the (currency) hedging markets” in Asean, according to Iwan Aziz, head of the Office of Regional Economic Integration at the Manila-based Asian Development Bank (ADB).– BT report last week

Well can tan kuku for an agreement. Asean officials more noted for talking cock than doing something, anything.

And anyway, this region will not be flavour of the month early next yr. The West is. Don’t count on a wall of Jap money.

Govt needed NatCon + survey to find these things out?

In Political governance on 23/08/2013 at 4:45 am

The door-to-door survey of 4,000 Singaporeans was conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) between November last year and February. It was carried out to validate the issues brought up in the 660 OSC sessions held over the past year …

[OSC committee Chairman and Education Minister Heng Swee Keat] noted that overall, the participants at the OSC sessions wanted the assurance that housing, healthcare and public transport will remain affordable.

Our Singapore Conversation (OSC) project comes up with these findings?

What a waste of time, effort and our money so that the govt learns that the people are concerned that housing, healthcare and public transport will remain affordable. And that there are concerns about education. If I wanted to be nasty, I would say that SingCon or NatCon shows out of touch the govt is with the rabble masses. But I won’t, but am surprised the usual suspects that love playing the DRUMS didn’t raise this point. They don’t do original insights, is it?

Juz reading the opinions, analysis and comments on the internet and social media would have told the govt the people’s Hard Truths. OK, as the internet and social media are Injun or Taliban or juz plain hostile territory for the PAP, the govt may be forgiven for doubting that new media is reflecting the facts on the ground.

But then, if the grassroot leaders, PAP MPs and the local media had given no-DRUMS feedback to the govt, the govt would have realised that the Injuns did not speak with forked tongues. Instead the govt only found out the truth after talking with selected S’poreans, and conducting a survey to verify what it was told.

It could have saved time, effort and money if it had listened to netizens, and done a survey to verify whether netizens were reflecting reality, or talking cock like the PAP grassroot leqadersand MPs, and the constructive, nation-building media.

And would was a survey necessary to verify what netizens are bitching and bleating about reflected the reality of feelings on the ground, other than to to give the people at a govt related think-tank shumething to do? What about using the ISD?

In M’sia, the Special Branch (The ISD and the Special Branch trace their origins to the Malayan Special Branch) is so gd that a senior DAP official said in a seminar after the 2008 M’sian elections that the officers info on where the DAP would win was very accurate. They were comparing notes before the 2008 election.

My serious point is that the PAP govt has to find out out new methods of reading the tracks on the ground. The old methods no longer work. They should be ditched or modified. This needs to be done both for the good of the PAP and for ordinary S’poreans. The PAP can no longer rely on the so-called grassroot leaders, the local media and MPs. They too are playing the DRUMS that the govt accuses netizens of doing.

One way is to find a way to verify whether the new media is reflecting (for free) the facts on the ground.Maybe because the info is free, is one reason why the govt ignores it? Remember the PAP MP whose words implied that he looked down on others who earned less than serious money?

But the govt should also have to find ways of finding out and double confirming what the middle-class netizens are ignoring, out of ignorance, complacency, arrogance or maliciousness. They too can play the DRUMS as well as the mainstream media, govt and the PAP. Yes, almost everyone in S’pore plays the DRUMS: one man’s Hard Truths are the DRUMS of lesser mortals, and vice-versa.

But let’s not be too hard on the govt for not making the best use of the resources available, or of wasting time, effort and money to find out what S’poreans think. Wayang is now very impt in politics because nowadays  S’poreans, like other people, think better of politicans who “listen” to their opinions, or “feel” their pain. Or least pretend to.

Taz a new Hard Truth. Paternalism is out. As is “Sit down and shut up. We know what is best for you.”

If Animal Farm was written today, Napoleon and the pigs would have to have a “conversation” with the  other animals, and a survey to validate the said conversation, before going ahead and oppressing them.

—-

*PM and the PAP had serious problems in the 2011GE and the recent by-election with the quality of info they were receiving from the grassroot leaders on voter sentiment. After the 2011 GE, he had to defend the said leaders after PAP MPs criticised them.

Why the silence on PM’s latest goof?

In Humour on 01/07/2013 at 5:26 am

(Or “Cyber activists are suicidal? Frus over what?”)

About this time last week, our PM warned that the haze would return “for weeks”. Well since then, conditions are pretty normal for this time of the year. And on Saturday, ST reported NEA as saying the reduction from very high levels of pollution could be due to less fires.

So if one wanted to be mean but factually correct, one could rightly say PM was wrong. And if one wanted to be “P” (political), one could say, “So waz new? He always talking cock”.

(BTW, I owe an apology to the WP town council and the NEA: I had suggested that it didn’t make sense to clean the ceilings at the two hawker cenres because PM said the haze respite was temporary. Guess they knew that PM would be wrong, as usual.)

Seriously, jokes’ aside, why isn’t the “PAP govt is always in the wrong” brigade complaining, especially the “P” ones.

Three reasons: one is that like other S’poreans, they too are relieved, and happy that conditions are back to the usual “moderate” haze for this time of the year.

And maybe, they too are proud that the leaders of this little red dot got the Indons to apologise, and do shumething without returning the so-called ill-gotten gains from Indonesia. Actually this money isn’t ours, Indons still own the money. Convict them in Indon courts, and then can talk about the morality of returning the money.

The third reason is that the more chim and vocal members of “PAP govt is always in the wrong” may be be in shock over two foot shooting (or is it “feet in mouth) accidents, involving three prominent bloggers, in less than five days.

The first was Andrew Loh’s unprovoked rant, full of “dirty” words,against the president of S’pore*. He quickly apologised but one was left wondering why did he get so upset over such a bland, meaningless statement? Because it was bland, meaningless, and late?

The other incident involved minister Shan (the dog and cat lover, weird combi this), Ms Kisten Han and Remy Choo. See here for a good summary (and funny take)  of what happened. To summarise

— Ms Han said in her blog that the minister wanted Mr Choo to convey that Mr Shanmugam would not hesitate to sue those republishing the article; but

— Mr Shanmugam later clarified that this description was inaccurate; then

– in a statement carried on Ms Han’s blog later, Mr Choo said that he was responsible for giving that impression to Miss Han, and that it was incorrect and unfair of him to have done so.

Having read both Remy Choo’s FB comments**, if anyone had to apologise it should not be him. It shld be Ms Kisten Han for rushing into print with her “chim” tots on the dangers of sharing, when the law is pretty clear on the matter: share libelous stuff at yr peril http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22652083.

Surely she must have known that said minister would react aggressively, not that I blame him***. She, at least explained, her motivations on her public FB Wall; motivations which I find very emotional. If I were in close regular contact with her, I’d be afraid, very afraid, lest confidences be spilled.Anyway, if Remy is not upset with her, then taz the end of the matter. He is the “damaged” party.If he has political ambitions to become a MP, he can forget it. His apology would be used against him if he stood, and we all know that our political parties are all Kiasus.

(FTR, I had dealings with Kirsten and Remy a few yrs back. They are “Smarter than the average bear”. BTW, wonder what Yogi would think of Barrie the Bear.  A bear that is S’porean, Canadian, Muslim, and Indon-loving?)

As evidence of this reason, that some bloggers are in shock, juz before the Andrew incident, one or two “P” bloggers were hinting that the masks were issued after the need for them had passed.

Whatever, why the sudden bout of foot shooting or mouths in foots is what I want to know? Both incidents were so unnecessary. There needn’t have to be apologies if these three prominent and leading bloggers had tot before they acted. Are the three bloggers are frus about way things are developing here that they make irrational decisions?

Anyway, let’s not get worked up. “Move on”, as the PAPpies like to say.Not much damage except to the gentlemanly Remy Choo.

But let’s try to learn lessons so as not to repeat these “mistakes”. One lesson is that be aware of one’s emotions: remember Yoda tot the Jedi to be unattached to their emotions, while being aware of them. Wonder if Yoda learnt this from the Buddha?

*When I was first shown the post, I tot Andrew Loh was the victim of a hack, or “an honest” tech mistake where a poster’s comment got merged into his post, or “an honest” editorial cock-up (pressed “publish”, instead of “save”. Believe you mean this can happen. I’ve published when I wanted to save, and save when I wanted to publish.)

**On his public FB wall.

*** I’d be even more aggressive. There are “conventions” on such private conversations and the reporting thereof. The most impt of which is “Everything is not attributable” without the permission of the speaker.

Why Plan “Suffocate S’poreans” failed?

In Humour, Indonesia, Malaysia on 26/06/2013 at 4:55 am

(Or “Why Indonesia apologised?”)

So the Indonesian presisent has apologised to M’sia and S’pore for the haze, despite an official earlier saying that Indonesia would not apologise to S’pore. And the president also admitted that his ministers were talking cock, while doing bugger-all.

So this has worked: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/06/24/haze-what-raffles-would-have-done/?

Seriously, why has Indonesia apologised to this  “little red dot” inhabited by “children”?

My friend in M’sia’s Special Branch told me the following story based on bugs placed in the cabinet room: nothing to do with us “children” it seems.

On Monday, the Indonesia cabinet was briefed on “Operation Smoke Out the Money”. The president and his ministers were told that S’pore was choking in the smoke from Riau and would be soon be very receptive to this call by a fair-minded S’porean-Canadian* to surrender all of its ill-gotten gains from Indonesia, especially as the article was republished in the widely read, influential patriotic and nationalistic TRE, and the very respected, influential SGDaily carried a link to the original article**. My source said that many ministers were heard groaning presumably because they had illicit money in S’pore.

Then an aide came in and said, “Mr President, the dad of S’pore’s PM wants to speak to you.” The ministers clapped.

Then another aide called, “Sir, Najib, Anwar and Tun M are calling, together”. The president said, “How do they know so fast Suharto’s buddy is repenting? And why a joint call?”.One minister said,”Sir, they came together to honour you, the MAN who brought S’pore to its knees!”

The aide said, “Sir, I doubt it. M’sia has declared an emergency in South Johor and schools in KL are closing; all because of the haze. Apparently, Superman*** is blowing the smoke away from S’pore, diverting the smoke into Malaya. S’pore is smoke free! The Malay media is asking, “Why are our Muslim brudders behaving like this? Screwing, smoking us and not the infidels in S’pore? S’pore took their money, not us!”

A third aide came in saying, “Sir, the plantation companies and APRIL are calling. They want to know how much more money yr ministers want them to deposit in the ministers’ S’pore bank accounts?”

The president went, “Oh Riau!”. My SB source says presumably because Riau is now hotter than hell.

And one Christian minister was heard sniggering, “Where are the Islamic superheroes when Muslims need them?”. Ash trays and wine glasses were thrown at him.

*Contrary to TRE posters, Special Branch does not believe he is an Indonesian Quisling, doing it for the money. He is an honest S’porean- Canadian. He sincerely believes that S’pore is screwing Indonesia.

**Only TOC didn’t carry the article.

***I reminded my SB contact of Superman’s Jewish origins: Kal-El (his Krypton name) sounds like the Jewish term for “Voice of God”. My contact laughingly said that LKY chose his friends better than M’sia’s rulers did. He chose Israel and the US to suck up to, M’sia chose Muslim countries and the US as friends.

Covid-19: S’pore better off if Queen Jos was PM?

In Uncategorized on 14/06/2020 at 5:04 am

In a recent article in Covid Economics, an online economics journal, economists double confirmed the impression that countries with female leaders have on average had fewer Covid-19 deaths.

They (Because they are economically illiterate?) systematically locked down their economies more quickly on average than their male counterparts.

Related posts: Queen Jos keeps on talking cock, Hen, JosT, GraceF: Money, money, money and IE S’pore & Jos’ point about perfection

If LKY were alive, PAP govt wouldn’t publicly admit that HDB leases end worth nothing

In Property on 04/12/2019 at 4:16 am

Last Saturday, the “Future Of Singapore” launched its housing policy reforms proposal, with speakers talking about proposed reforms to the Hard Truth that HDB leases are worth zero at the end of 99 years.

This reminded me of something interesting I read recently by someone’s whose views I respect (and better still, enjoy reading) and the title of this piece seems to be something he infers.

But first, let me talk about some related matters before introducing you to the writer and his thoughts.

Our cybernuts love to quote our dearly loved and departed Harry that the value of their HDB “will never go down”. They then KPKB that HDB leases will end worth nothing to the owners at the end of 99 years. They think he the 9th Immortal isit?  Can suka suka change the law isit?

They also say that the HDB problem will be a game changer in the coming GE. The PAP will lose a lot of votes and the Coalition of Spastics win win with this: Election manifesto of Spastics League.

My view has been that for the coming GE (I now think it’ll be in mid 2020. I”ll blog on this soon.), the issue of the ultimate worthlessness of an HDB flat doesn’t matter: Why Oppo cock to think that HDB issues will affect the vote.

It’ll only start mattering in the late 2020s: Why 30-year old HDB flats difficult to sell/ Why PAP rule will end in 2029.

And as Dr Paul Thamby (Mad Dog’s minder and Chairman of the SDP) rightly says, if the PAP govt wants to fix the problem, it’s only an administrative matter. He seems to think somewhere along the line, the PAP govt will extend the leases and in return extract money from the plebs.

———————-

Related post:

————————-

Coming back to the title of this piece and the second paragraph, I enjoy reading Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh even if he tends to go on and on.

In a recent piece comparing S’pore to HK, he has an interesting thought that chimes with the cybernuts views on the HDB problem. He hints that the PAP govt only talked openly about the HDB leases ending worth nothing to the owners at the end of 99 years after Harry’s death because LKY had said of HDB flats:

that their value “will never go down”.

This is what he wrote

Many Singaporeans, meanwhile, may come to believe that their own government—like in Hong Kong, the biggest landowner—has misled their investment decisions. Since independence in 1965 the government has sold public housing with restricted 99-year leases, repeatedly promising, in the words of Lee Kuan Yew, the first prime minister, that their value “will never go down”.

Most assumed the government would reacquire them at fair value. Only recently, following Lee’s death, has it flip-flopped to confirm what some feared: the properties will be worth nothing at the end of their leases. (At which point the government can redevelop the land.)

Put another way, for almost ninety per cent of Singapore’s population, their largest assets and nest eggs, some worth over S$1m (US$740,000), will start to shrink relentlessly to zero at some point during their (or their heirs’) lifetimes.

He then goes on

By contrast those in the upper ten odd per cent, including most politicians and senior civil servants, have wisely purchased freehold homes, many now worth tens of millions of dollars. Their assets will presumably keep appreciating long after their descendants have inherited them (with no estate duties). Singapore appears to have created an intergenerational time bomb of Pikketyan proportions.

https://sudhirtv.com/2019/11/15/a-longform-on-hong-kong-vs-singapore/

Hold yr horses Tommo. Don’t be a cybernut. And anyway, TRE’s cybernut-in-chief thinks S’pore property prices will crash. But Oxygen’s been saying that since he left S’pore decades ago fearing detention. He left S’pore but can’t get S’pore off his mind. He still has a CPF account that he uses to dodge Aussie tax. Talk of being an ingrate. Smart of the PAP to get rid this trash from S’pore.

Seriously, if Tommo is right if Harry were still alive, Larry Wong wouldn’t have dared open his month in 2017. See Fixing Sabo King minister.

And maybe Harry when he was alive, was in private, demanding a technical fix? So that he would not be wrong to say of HDB flats:

that their value “will never go down”.

What do you think?

Final tot: LHY instead of KPKBing that his Tai Kor’s PAP is not their grandfather’s PAP should share with S’poreans what Harry wanted done on the HDB problem: if LKY had any tots on the matter that LHY knows about.

 

Why is China flooding S’pore with its “GPS” devices?

In Public Administration on 29/08/2019 at 10:40 am

The Chinese version of the Global Positioning System, better known as GPS, has overtaken the US original round the world. But kook at the number it has here: why?

Is it because unlike GPS, which only sends signals and cannot identify the location of receivers, BeiDou’s communications with the ground are two-way?

The Chinese version of the Global Positioning System (GPS) has overtaken GPS and the Nikkei Asian Review says

The growth of BeiDou has profound implications and is raising alarm in the US national security establishment. Unlike GPS, which only sends signals and cannot identify the location of receivers, BeiDou’s communications with the ground are two-way. According to Dean Cheng of the Heritage Foundation, the Chinese satellites can jam signals in specific areas and raise capabilities in cyber attacks.

S’poreans should be asking why the PAP govt is allowing this probable threat to national security. Don’t believe me? Mamaland and Japan, both rivals of China, also got a lot of these devices?

But maybe it all has to do with the use of Chinese-made smartphone handsets?

What do you think?

Related posts on how cock is our cyber security:

Memo to Paper General heading Computer Security Agency

MAS gives finger to CSA’s CEO

Infocomm Dysfunctional Authority

Cybersecurity: “Ownself hack ownself”

Why ang moh, Asean telcos love Huawei

And govt wants to encourage fintech?/ PAP is never wrong

 

S’pore: the canary in the coalmine/ Is the ground sweet for the PAP?

In Economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 19/06/2019 at 5:15 am

In Europe once upon a time, every team of coal miners going underground carried a caged canary. If the canary died, they got out ASAP because it meant that there there were poisonous gases that could kill them.

S’pore is the world’s canary when it comes to trade. We suffer earlier than other countries or cities when there’s a global trade slowdown.

As the FT reports,

A trade canary sings — Singapore’s non-oil exports recorded their third consecutive double-digit fall in May, with electronics shipments falling 31.4 per cent (the largest decrease since late 2008) after a 16.3 per cent drop in April.

Marc Ostwald at ADM says the slide in electronics exports sends a “dire signal” as it represents “a generally very reliable proxy for the semiconductor and telecoms sectors worldwide”.

Oxford Economics note that their “coincident and leading global trade indicators are continuing to trend downwards, and the latter has fallen to its lowest level since 2009”.

“While this does not mean that a global recession is around the corner, it suggests that global growth will remain sluggish in the near term and that export-orientated economies will continue to struggle.”

Heng has to do better than talking about cock about natural aristocrats (PAP ministers) partnering us plebs to make S’pore a better place. His 4G team needs 65% of the popular vote: the pass mark for bragging rights that they have the people’s mandate.

What are the headwinds other than a lousy economy going into a GE

— Another reason why ground is not sweet for the PAP.

And there’s the promised 2 percentage points GST rise .coming possibly, when the economy’s in a recession. This when the PAP govt has huge budget surpluses.

But the PAP has a good vote bank because Why S’poreans continue voting for the PAP to have 2/3 of parly seats;  PAP genius at work and Why grumbling about PAP govt, doesn’t mean S’poreans are disaffected and rooting for change.

Where the PAP votes are coming from

 

Terry Xu and cybernuts are really PAPpies

In Internet, Media on 22/05/2019 at 3:02 pm

(Alternative title: “Why TOC and other anti-PAP sites never reported HK MRT trains’ collisions?”)

After I wrote TOC: A lot of bull

(where I reported that Terry had revealed that he employed foreigners to write for TOC because they were cheaper than true blue S’poreans, a lot cheaper)yesterday, I remembered another example where TOC and Terry behaved like PAPpies, not talking about news that diverts from the “right” view. TOC (and to be fair, otheranti-PAP alt media sites) didn’t tell S’poreans that a few months ago there was a very serious incident on HK’s MRT: shumething that never ever happened here.

Two subway trains have collided during a new signal system test in Hong Kong, halting services and threatening travel disruption for millions of commuters.

The incident occurred between the Central and Admiralty stations before the service was open to the public early on Monday morning.

Rail officials warned that repairs were likely to take “quite a long time”.

Network operator Mass Transit Railway (MTR) said sections of the Tsuen Wan Line had been suspended and urged commuters to avoid the route affected and to use other forms of transport if possible.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-47607676

Looks like Terry’s and other anti-PAP types brains are like that of the PAP: when the public doesn’t know a fact, that fact never exists. Their readers will have no doubts that the our MRT system sucks when compared to that of HK’s.

Actually even with this HK cock-up, the HK system is a lot better. So why didn’t the anti-PAP publications not report the accident?

In 2011, I analysed a senior PAPpy’s and his team’s unhappiness with a TOC report.

[T]hey must believe in an 18th century philosophical theory that is now treated as a forerunner of the concept of “subjective idealism”. One Bishop Berkeley argued that there are no material objects, only minds and ideas in those minds. He summarised his theory with the motto “esse est percipi” (“To be is to be perceived”). In modern PR-speak, this translates into,“Perception is reality”, one of the major tenets of the PR and public communication industry.

This theory of “Perception is reality” is best summarised in the following example he gave. If a tree in a forest falls, but no-one sees or hears it fall, has it fallen? Berkeley argues that it has not fallen. It is still standing.

An example in the S’pore context would be that S’poreans were not aware of how close the voting would be on polling day in 1988 in Eunos GRC and in Cheng San GRC in 1991. The mainstream media did not report the sentiment on the ground in these two GRCs, so S’poreans were not aware that many S’poreans were unhappy with the PAP. The unhappiness did not exist because it was not reported.

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/08/01/%E2%80%9Clittle-disappointment%E2%80%9D-tony-tan-to-toc/

In Silence of SMRT, LTA & MoT explained,I wrote the following about Traingate

SMRT, the LTA and MoT kept quiet because they like Bishop Berkeley believe that “Perception is reality”. So long as the public did not know that there were cracks in the 26 China-made trains, and that the trains had been returned for repairs, there were no train cracks. There were no cracked trains because If a tree in a forest falls, but no-one sees or hears it fall, has it fallen? Berkeley argues that it has not fallen. It is still standing.

What they still don’t realise that in this age of social media and the internet where many people walk around with smartphone cameras, If a tree in a forest falls, someone will see it or hear it fall. And tell others about the falling tree, after taking a selfie beside the fallen tree.

This being the case, disclosure of problems or cock-ups, not cover-ups or silence should be the best (and default) policy for the authorities and corporations They should assume that news of the cock-up or problem will become public knowledge and that by disclosing, the news agenda can, hopefully, be controlled..

But in one-party states, silence or cover-up are the default options, not disclosure. And this is the weakness of one-party states where people carry smartphone cameras. The one-party state will, in time, be undermined.

Ban smartphone cameras PAP? After all internet access for public servants will soon be restricted in this wired, connected nation.

Today the PAP and the constructive, nation-building media believe that if it isn’t reported, a fact doesn’t exist.

Sad that ), and other anti-PAP paper warriors believe the same.

The PAP has won.

 

 

 

Even PAP voters don’t trust the PAP to tell the truth

In Political governance, Public Administration on 16/07/2018 at 11:19 am

A recent comment on TRE set me thinking

NotMyProblem:
July 8, 2018 at 11:30 am (Quote)
Keep information in the dark reminds me of my schooling days.
When I had a “F” for my examination, I would not dare to show to my parents.
But when I had an “A”, the first thing I would do was flashing my result to the whole family.
Do you think this is similar with PAP’s result?
PAP being such an arrogant govt, do you think it would hide something that was good? Don’t you see the amount of skeletons in the closets which required so many million dollars Ministers to keep them hidden.

Many people vote for the PAP because they are happy, or least contented, with the results as they perceive them of the PAP govt’s policies: PAP has lost “output legitimacy”

But talk to them about whether they trust the PAP govt to tell the truth about anything and their attitude can be summed up by the above quote, in particular

When I had a “F” for my examination, I would not dare to show to my parents.
But when I had an “A”, the first thing I would do was flashing my result to the whole family.
Do you think this is similar with PAP’s result?

The PAP’s “need to know” attitude, trumpeting of successes and stifling of criticism no matter how reasonable, makes even PAP voters wonder about what we are not being told.

Why do you think the PAP until very recently had to resort to sue and sue? (Why PAP (and PMs) sue and sue). They know the trust factor is not high despite 70% voting for the continuance of a one-party state.

The bottom line for the PAP govt especially the 4th generation ministers is that they should

— realise that the PAP is in the stagnation phase (Is PAP in “decline and disintegration”?);

— stop talking cock about Hard Truths and how great is the system Harry created; and

— start fixing the flaws in the system starting with the MRT system: Public tpt: PAP ahead of the curve and flew off the rails? Related: PAP’s cock-ups since the 1980s.

They shouldn’t expect their clownish and nuttyenemies like Lim Tean (Lim Tean: A disgraceful chamber of horrors) and Meng Seng (Silence of Goh Meng Seng) to continue helping them keep the 70% onside.

 

 

 

Coldstore: FT minister thinks Pa rightly detained

In Uncategorized on 18/05/2018 at 10:56 am

At least that’s the reasonable conclusion one can draw from his remarks to ST.

In an interview with ST (‘Facts, falsehoods, feedback – Janil has firm grasp of them all’, 7 May), the new Senior Minister of State for Communications and Information Janil Puthucheary said

he believes there were national security reasons for the Coldstore arrests and detentions.

“I think that is a reasonable conclusion to come to, that there were indeed national security considerations,” he said.

So, Puthucheary agrees that there were good grounds for interning his father and uncle without trial, since his father and uncle (and others) were considered to be “dangerous communists” ready to overthrow the government through violence.

All this reminds me of what Jesus told Peter

I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.

When the ST reporter asked him about his father’s case, talked using both sides of his mouth, he said “I am quite comfortable talking about it but I don’t see that it is in any way relevant.”

He’ll be a full cabinet minister soon.

For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Btw, looks I was wrong when I wrote this: FT jnr minister disagrees that “Pa” was a justly detained commie?

 

Auntie’s behaviour: Why PAP can hang her

In Uncategorized on 15/03/2018 at 10:06 am

If they want to. But will they dare?

But first, Grace Fu is that cock meh that she had to take advice from AG?

The law is simple. Parliament decides what is parliamentary privilege.

The Court of Appeal in 1988 upheld the ruling by the Parliamentary Committee on Privileges by against one JBJ on the ground that Parliament was empowered by the Constitution to decide on what was covered by parliamentary privilege and to punish an MP if the Committee held that the MP had abused his or her privilege or were in contempt of the Committee or Parliament.

Therefore, it was up to the Committee and not the Courts to decide whether JBJ was covered by parliamentary privilege.

Parliament is judge, jury and executioner, the court effectively said, reflecting the common law position that is is still applicable in the UK.


Is this what AG advise?

Secret Squirrel and Morocco Mole claim to have seen AG’s advice on the matter.

They claim that AG referred to the Court of Appeal ruling in 1988 upholding the ruling by the Parliamentary Committee on Privileges by against one JBJ. The CA said that Parliament was empowered by the Constitution to decide on what was covered by parliamentary privilege and to punish MPs if the Committee held that such MPs had abused their privilege or were in contempt of the Committee or Parliament.

That the AG said is the law of the land. Well at least that’s what Secret Squirrel and Morocco Mole said the AG said.

——————————-

And because Parliament is judge, jury and executioner, therein lies the political danger for the PAP if the PAP decides to “fix” Auntie because if even a PAP voter cheers on Auntie, says Fu talking cock, there’ll be many more S’poreans (many not anti-PAP) that will agree with this anti-PAP cybernut

HarderTruths:

Does anyone remember JBJ and CST plus Amos. It does not matter what you do, as longas you stand up to these bunch of bullies you are done for.

if Auntie kanna whack by the Parliamentary Committee on Privileges.

Tan Cheng Bock, as usual, gets it about right. He posted on FB

BE GRACIOUS IN PARLIAMENT

Having watched the video on the GST debate, I felt the PAP ministers especially Shanmugam were brow beating MP Sylvia Lim by demanding an apology for asking whether the government postponed the GST hike because of negative public feedback. Many people perceive this brow beating as arrogance. I remember our former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew once told all PAP MPs in 1988 “Any show of arrogance or indifference by any MP or Minister will erode confidence in him and, later, in the government.”

Instead of getting upset, the Ministers should be thankful Sylvia Lim gave them an opportunity to explain. If the government’s position is ‘no’ then just say no and let’s just stop at that. No need to get defensive. As PM Lee Hsien Loong rightly said at the close of the Oxley Road debate: “If MPs believe that something is wrong, it’s an MP’s job to pursue the facts and make these allegations in their own name, decide whether something seems to be wrong, and if you think something is wrong, even if you’re not fully sure, then come to this House, confront the Government, ask for explanations and answers.” I enclose a video clip of Sylvia Lim quoting PM Lee.

PM Lee was echoing the view of our former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew who said “All MPs new and old, should speak out. You have to speak up and bring out the grapevine criticism in the coffee shops and hawker centres. It is damaging for the government not to openly refute it with facts and argument. By bringing up apparently embarrassing issues, you help the government openly state the facts and explain the reasons for our policies and so continue to hold the ground.”

So be gracious, no need to over-react or ask for any apology for bringing out “grapevine criticism” or “apparently embarrassing issues” in Parliament.

Sad that I can’t call him “My president”. For that blame Goh Meng Seng and Tan Kin Lian

Goh Meng Seng, our very own Wu Sangui

Remember he was

the guy who helped (Was he paid? Or did he do it out of the goodness of his heart because he loved the PAP?) the PAP’s preferred candidate to win in PE 2011 by

— persuading TKL to run;

— then running a shambolic campaign for TLK;

— and then saying he had to go to HK for a job interview,

Meng Seng wants us to kowtow to Xi

Why do we keep getting mediocre ministers?

In Political governance on 12/03/2018 at 10:56 am

I mean what accounts for people like Kee Chui (Kidding me? Kee Chui potential PM? He from RI?), Ong Ye Kung (Ong Ye Kung: A study in failure) and Grace Fu (“Getting AG advice leh” after Auntie kicked her ass) getting into the cabinet?


disGrace Fu

When TRE used PAP voter cheers on Auntie, says Fu talking cock there were two good responses

opposition dude:
So disGrace didn’t get the sorry she wanted and is feeling pretty malu by now. How can a respectable minister not even get an apology out of a mere MP right? What will voters think of her as a minister now?

Face is very important to the PAP you know. I wouldn’t be surprised if she is already working on something else to one up Sylvia in the next parliamentary session. I don’t think she will just let it rest like that.

And

grace will be promoted soon?:

where will grace find herself. promoted or demoted?
put in a position where she can do lesser damage to the PAP’s brand?

or even damage to Singapore. we can now see that grace do not possess the qualities to represent SG to deal with foreign governments.

sinkies are now just waiting for LHL to make his announcement.
is he making last minute changes? LOL!

———————————————————

In an FT article on the role that managers played in the continuing productivity problems the UK faces (Sounds familiar?), the writer made three observations

— “Mediocre management is often the product of a flawed business model.”

—  Mediocre management “is at least in part, reflect policy failings.”

— “All too often we remain loath to trace persistent managerial weaknesses back to root causes.”‘

Well the PAP’s business model of “We will grow the economy and voters will have the good things in life. In return, voters will vote for S’pore remaining a de-facto one-party state.” is flawed.

Once upon a time (in the days of Harry and his thugs) growing the economy, most probably resulted in S’poreans’ material prosperity improving. This usually happens in the early stages of economic development. But as the economy matures, this link is usually weakened. Today? Not any more, as strong GDP growth no longer benefits ordinary S’poreans as the GDP growth in the late 90s, noughties and beyond shows (Still expect world topping salaries isit?).

S’poreans are also realising that giving the PAP such concentrated power since 1959 has resulted in the PAP’s leaders being detached from reality. PM admitted in 2011 that the anger on the ground shocked the PAP MPs. They had been assured by their PA grassroot leaders, that the unhappiness voiced in cyberspace was just “noise”. It didn’t reflect reality. Well it did.

As to “policy failings”, think failures like getting S’pore to breed like rabbits (Pandas’ birth rates in the wild are better than ours or so I’ve been told: remember they are still in danger of extinction), immigration (PM that stupid meh?) and all the “transformative” economic plans (Heng, can be PM meh?) starting from the one by one Lee Hsien Loong in the 80s. At least he couldn’t copy, cut and paste from earlier reports (seems Dr Goh made him think) but all other subsequent ministers copied, cuy and pasted from lee.

But remember the FT writer wrote

All too often we remain loath to trace persistent managerial weaknesses back to root causes.

What is the root cause of mediocre ministers?

Us the voters.

Why do 60-70% of the voters consistently vote for the PAP, thereby enabling the PAP to have over two-thirds of parly seats, thereby enabling the PAP to suka suka change the constitution? Example:Why PAP thinks we need a Malay president?

And its not only the 60-70% who enable mediocrity.

In 2011, the 30% who consistently vote for any clown (Think Goh Meng Seng or Tan Kin Lian or Lim Tean) so long as it’s not a PAP monkey, missed the opportunity to cock a snook at the PAP in the presidential election. Instead they voted for two RI opportunists, thereby allowing the PAP’s prefered candidate to win. Half of the voters who usually vote PAP voted for Tan Cheng Bock but the anti-PAP voters prefered the Mad Dog Chee’s preferred candidate or Goh Meng Seng’s buddy, Tan Kin Lian.

As has often been said

Voters deserve the government they get.

It’s the fault of S’porean voters that we get mediocre ministers.

Whatever, with enemies like Mad Dog, Tan Jee Say, Goh Meng Seng and Tan Kin Lian, the PAP can get away with ministers like Kee Chui, Ong and disGrace Fu.

 

GST: Even economists tot GST could go up

In Economy, Political governance, Public Administration on 11/03/2018 at 10:44 am

I quoted a senior lawyer

If the G thinks the earlier remarks were clear and categorical, so that citizens could have no doubts, how does it explain why so many reputable economists were willing to entertain thoughts of an increase this decade?

PAP voter cheers on Auntie, says Fu talking cock 

A pal of mine posted on the FB post where this quote originally appeared

The economists even factored in an increase in their analysis of GDP growth. Btw, I’m one who tot that GST would not go up this yr because it would contradict what Tharman said in 2015 and because it would make no sense effectively “locking up” the increase for 2018- 2020 because there’ll be a new govt by 2021.

The retired GIC Chief Economist waded in

…my respected economist friends were similarly unsure if GST would be raised this time after attending pre budget MOF briefings, even with Minister Heng.

Here’s what the constructive, nation-building rag of MediaCorp had to say about the economists changing their forecasts after the Budget speech

The Budget’s one-off cash handouts and delay in the goods and services tax (GST) hike, which will kick in sometime between 2021 and 2025, prompted Credit Suisse to raise its 2018 economic growth forecast for Singapore from 3 per cent to 3.3 per cent.

Taken together, these would boost growth domestic product (GDP) as well as private consumption, the bank said in a research note, as it raised its private consumption growth forecast to 3.6 per cent, up from 2.9 per cent.

Credit Suisse economist Michael Wan said the bank had previously factored in a 2-percentage point GST hike for its macro forecasts. “We, together with most other economists, were forecasting GST rates to rise this year,” wrote

Mr Wan, who described Monday’s announcement on the delayed GST increase as among the “surprises” of Budget 2018.

Other economists who had expected a GST hike to be implemented either this year or next agreed that the delay would bring a “minor boost” to consumption spending. Nevertheless, they left their GDP forecasts unchanged.

Commenting on the Credit Suisse report, Mr Bernard Aw, principal economist at IHS Markit, said consumers are expected to bring forward “large purchases” ahead of the GST hike.

UOB economist Francis Tan said he is keeping to his earlier forecast of 2.8 per cent GDP growth this year, which was based on a 1 percentage point GST hike this year. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that the delay of the GST hike “provides some upside”. He added: “Whenever there is a higher tax, people reduce their purchases.”

Maybank Kim Eng economist Chua Hak Bin is also maintaining his 2018 GDP forecast at 2.8 per cent, as he had expected the GST hike to be implemented next year. Private consumption is expected to improve from last year but it is unlikely to exceed 3 per cent this year, he said. “The jobs market looks to be improving and that will support consumer spending,” he added.

Both Mr Tan and Mr Chua, however, did not think that the impact of the hongbao handouts would be significant enough to lift GDP growth. Some Singaporeans may choose to save the money instead of spending it, Mr Tan noted. “In that aspect, these are not material handouts,” he said.

The reason I quoted so extensively is to show that “after attending pre budget MOF briefings, even with Minister Heng” the economists felt it necessary to factor in a GST rise in their forecasts.

 

Connecting SMRT failures, 4th gen ministers & change of PM

In Economy, Political governance on 22/01/2018 at 8:16 am

This headline

All EWL stations to see early closures, late openings on weekends and select weekdays in March

(CNA)

reminded me of the failure of the PAP administration to ensure that the trains run on time*. I mean even that incompetent World War II dictator, Mussolini, ensured that Italian trains ran on time.

This failure is more significant than just the loss of output legitimacy (PAP has lost “output legitimacy”) because the PAP is talking about a change of leaders and the importance of trust.

People would also give their trust when they see the Government has been “responsible, anticipates and are responsive in meeting their needs” and there is an overall improvement in their lives, Mr Chan said.

The minister added: “Some policies take longer to bring forth results and the population may feel impatient.

“Each generation of leaders would therefore need to be consultative yet nimble in meeting these needs while managing finite resources responsibly. These are important so that we do not face a trust deficit, and run the risk of citizens disconnecting with or being disenfranchised by the government.”

Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/chan-chun-sing-lays-out-key-leadership-qualities-needed-for-9852508

The problem for Kee Chui and other potential PMs is that the trust (partly based on output legitimacy”) S’poreans have for the PAP leaders is based on Harry, Dr Goh and gang did. The PAP has been living on (literally withdrawing yearlymillions of dollars) the trust in the bank trust account that these guys put in.

But the fourth generation ministers have not put much trust in the trust bank (OK, OK, same for GCT and Ah Loong and their gangs but that’s another story).

In fact, they could have cost losses to the bank account

— a possible future PM,  Ong Ye Kung, can be blamed for three problems: low productivity, labour unhappiness and SMRT breakdowns.

— Heng, the probable next PM, is linked to the minibond and DBS HN5 note losses (He was MD of the central bank at the time: Helping retail investors: the HK way and the S’pore way).

And worse, there’s not that much left in the bank account after the SMRT cock-ups and PE 2017 fiasco.

True, the 4th gen ministers have avoided getting involved in the SMRT mess. But that shows that they were not trusted to get involved in such an important matter affecting the lives of ordinary S’poreans.

Trust? What trust, Kee Chui?

What’s more, in a one-party state, the party in charge can’t be seen to incompetent, and the SMRT fiascos clearly show that there’s something wrong with the way the PAP does things. So that’s yet another problem for the 4th gen team.

But then could the failings of the 4th generation leaders be the excuse for the 3rd gen leaders in the cabinet to skip a generation and bring in a young, IT savvy guy as the PM in waiting? Names please on a post card?

————————————–

*SMRT said on Friday (Jan 19) that its board has confidence in the company’s management team and the ongoing efforts to enhance management, operational and maintenance capabilities.

CNA

The report went on

A Straits Times report on Thursday said that Mr Nathan has resigned and is serving out his notice. It also said that “observers are expecting chief executive Desmond Kuek to step down as well”. It did not specify which observers it was referring to or why they expect this to happen.

SMRT has been under pressure from the public and the government in recent months after a series of high-profile incidents, including the train collision at Joo Koon station in November which left more than 30 people injured, and the flooding of a section of a tunnel in October which caused prolonged delays.

 

WP Low’s anointed one

In Uncategorized on 06/11/2017 at 5:21 am

But first, we got a real bunch of “expert” cocks

Workers’ Party (WP) chief Low Thia Khiang’s decision to step down as secretary-general by next year took many political analysts by surprise, given that he managed to stave off a leadership challenge by fellow Member of Parliament Chen Show Mao just last year.

And

Associate Professor Eugene Tan from the Singapore Management University (SMU) said there had been no indication that Mr Low, who would have led the party for 17 years before he steps down, was going to make such an announcement.

Read more at http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/low-thia-khiang-s-decision-a-boost-to-party-renewal-that-will-9375578

Well since earlier this year, I had it from Morocco Mole‘s twin brother that Low and Auntie would not be contesting the next GE. And it wouldn’t have been a secret if Morocco Mole’s twin brother knew about it. It was something the WP cadres were openly talking about among themselves, even if they were not posting about in on FB

These experts have no contacts among WP cadres isit?

Well we now know that Low will not be contesting for the post of Secretary-General in the next Central Executive Committee (CEC) Elections. TOC reported that “He said that he is confident that the party has a new generation of capable leaders who are ready to take the helm.”

Assoc Prof Eugene Tan is talking via his ass when he “says the front-runners at the moment are Ms Lim and Mr Singh”. It’s not an open race but a wayang like the selection of Hali. There’s a Daulphin in place and neither Auntie or her bayee is the anointed one. Nor is Lion Man: Leon the Lion. Like in the PAP, WP leader must be Chinese. And in WP’s case, Teochew.

I had been told by Morocco Mole’s twin brother that NCMP Dennis Tan had been chosen by Low to take his place. He’s an “Executive Council Member and Vice Chair, Media Team” of the Wankers’ Party.

wpmp_profile2_dennis

But he’s no wanker. He’s from RI and is a shipping lawyer in DennisMathiew where he’s a partner. In the last GE he did pretty well in Fengshan SMC, winning 43% of the votes.

He walks the ground assidiously. In 2016

having covered every block and house in the single-member constituency of Fengshan on foot, is just getting started after walking it two times.

https://mothership.sg/2016/03/workers-partys-first-time-ncmp-dennis-tan-is-an-overachieving-underdog/

I’ll say this for him: unlike Gerald Giam (Remember him?), he didn’t go AWOL or MIA after the GE like what Gerald did after GE2011 in East Coast GRC. When Gerald Giam started working the ground in Bedok in preparation for GE2015, the HDB estate (the heart of East Coast GRC) had changed a lot since he stopped walking the ground after GE2011. He and his team needed a map of the area.

 

Why there’ll be no presidential election

In Political governance, Public Administration on 04/09/2017 at 9:02 am

The short answer is that ST Editor said so leh.

Warren Fernandez said (among many other things about why the presidency sucks: really he did) yesterday that Eddie Teo and his committee should accept that there is only one candidate who qualifies under the present rules spelt out by Parliament. I’m sure he is channeling the views of the ruling party on this matter.

Image result

What a polite way of saying the next elected president will be chosen by a “walk-over”.

Seriously, why would the PAP go thru the wayang of wanting an unelected elected president?

A fanboy of Hali

Many good friends and those who have worked with her testify for her character. Thus, it is not difficult to place increased weightage for her to lead as President”

unwittingly gave the answer away when he asked people to vote for her.

He posted on FB

The true test, against all comments posted on and offline regarding how the system discriminates positively in a meritocratic society with a pledge that has the phrase ” regardless of race, language or religion”, will be when she becomes President and has to exercise her independent judgment and call for action against the ruling G of the day for matters concerning Singaporeans and their reserves and related matters.
The support for her will not just be for the “now” but when she calls differently from the ruling party. How many will stand stand up independently and vote with her in agreement.

This reasoning is precisely why there’ll be a walkover. An unelected elected president has no mandate from the voters.

The PM of the day can sneer at her and ask, “Mandate? What mandate?” if she disagrees with something that the govt of the day wants done and in an area where she has “custodial” powers. In an alternative universe, PM Mad Dog will threaten to pee on her if she refuses to sign a law returning our CPF.


Ownself check ownself check ownself: Paradox of the PAP presidency.

———————————————

Think Ong Teng Cheong. In any row with LKY’s govt, he could (and may have) said, “I won a presidential election. I got mandate”. It seems this attitude really got LKY really upset resulting in “you know what happened” after Ong died. Since then, the PAP administration has only once allowed a presidential election.

It would be even more wary after its preferred candidate won by only 3,000 votes thanks to two opportunistic clowns from RI. They didn’t even get 30 pieces of silver each, though TKL’s campaign manager, Goh Meng Seng, is alleged, to have asked TKL for 15 pieces of silver. TKL is alleged to have responded, “WTF. I lost my deposit because of u.”

Another reason that there’ll be a walkover is so that those who voted for Tan Cheng Bock and the clowns can’t give the finger to the PAP. Remember they constituted 65% of the vote in the last PE and many of those who voted for the opportunistic RI clowns have repented. Many even deny they voted for Jee Say or TKL. They get upset when I produce evidence of what they told me before the vote.

Here’s the reason why the PAP wants the president to be compliant kaki lang: When a ceremonial president goes “rogue”

After OTC’s term of office, the PAP realised that they had a problem. In the old days LKY would have found an excuse to revert to old system, while he retot the issue of how to protect the reserves. Instead he and PAP resorted to short-term fixes and things nearly went wrong for the PAP in 2011 (See above). Reserved presidency is another first-aid job. 

One day, hopefully soon, the edifice of the “elected” presidency will be like the MRT system: systematic long overdue long-term repairs must be made because things are going badly wrong

Btw, I wrote this in March 2016 about Hali: Malay PAPpy that can thrash Chin Bock and later (May 2016) Halimah deserves better. But she’d rather look at her monthly bank statement and be happy. Maybe she’s thinking of buying an entire HDB floor on her retirement, given that she has a supersized unit now?

Continue to Pak PAP, but not Pak Halimah

In Political governance on 02/08/2017 at 6:56 am

Yesterday, I promised to explain why this is unfair to Hali and her mum and the Malay community.

(Terry Lim’s photos)

The cybernut who did the above, conveniently left out the inconvenient fact that none of the three “Indian” PAPpies had the misfortune of their “Indian” father dying when they were young children.

Halimah had the misfortune (OK, OK, it later turned out to be a winning lottery ticket) of her Indian-Muslim dad dying when she was eight. It was her widowed Malay mum that then brought Halimah (and her siblings) up with the support of her Malay relatives and the wider Malay community.

Halimah was not brought up in the Indian-Muslim community as an Indian-Muslim; but among the Malays as a Malay. No racists, the Malays: if a widowed Malay mother in a mixed race marriage wants to bring up her children as Malays, they support her. Truly tolerant, truly S’poreans. Really Mendaki should reflect this tolerant attitude: not that only i/c matters (See above link) as to who is a Malay.

And as I’ve written before, when she was NUS Law school, she was tot of as a Malay. Even then she wore a tudung, which then wasn’t hip. Btw, an Indian who knows the other female PAPpy Indian says she only started wearing saris when she became a junior minister.

A senior lawyer posted on FB that “the test in the Presidential Elections Act is not a race test, it’s a community acceptance test”. He’s right but the PM framed the need and importance of a Malay president in racial terms: “multi-racialism” to be precise.

So

S’poreans are right to ask to be talking about the issue because the next presidency is reserved for a Malay.  And one of the candidates is “Pakistani” (i/c says so leh) and the other while his i/c says “Malay” has Malays complaining that he’s really Indian because he can’t speak proper Malay.

The view among S’poreans of all races that what is on one’s i/c is a lot of bull* when it comes to whether someone is a Malay is becoming a major problem for the PAP.

By playing the “race” card albeit in the name of “multi-racialism”, the PM created a rod for his back and that of the PAP.

Image may contain: 2 people, people smiling, text

So let us continue to “Pak PM, Pak PAP” on the unreality of Muslim-Indians becoming Malays when the presidency is reserved for a Malay. Good clean fun. And best of all, the PAPpies started the conversation, not us.

But let’s remember Hali’s a decent person that could (and should) have become president on her own merits. She doesn’t really deserve this rubbish both from the PAP and the cybernuts, even though as a PAP Speaker she’s crying all the way to the bank. Wonder if she too has a monthly CPF statement, like Zorro Lim?

———————————-

*Even PAP MP Zainal Sapari says i/c is irrelevant in deciding whether one is a Malay. He’s not expected to stand at next GE.

 

Man PAP trying to persuade to be president?

In Political governance on 01/08/2017 at 4:47 am

But first, I saw this on FB

(Terry Lim’s photos)

(Btw, I’ll explain why it’s unfair to Hali and more importantly her Malay mum.)

Back to the 73-year-old man who the PAP wants to do NS.

Usually reliable sources say that the PAP is trying very hard to persuade Abdullah bin Tarmugi to stand as president. He’s reluctant because despite being only in his early 70s, he has heart problems. This is PAP’s Plan B.

Halimah (Plan A but in abeyance) will now only stand if Tamugi can’t be persuaded to do NS. So she’s not really BSing that she hasn’t made up her mind. The PAP hasn’t decided to go ahead with her coronation because the issue of who is a Malay is a major topic of discussion among the 60- 70% that regularly vote for the PAP. That the 30% are talking about it too is irrelevant.

S’poreans are right to ask to be talking about the issue because the next presidency is reserved for a Malay.  And one of the candidates is “Pakistani” (i/c says so) and the other while his i/c says “Malay” has Malays complaining that he’s really Indian because he can’t speak proper Malay.

The view among S’poreans of all races that what is on one’s i/c is a lot of bull* when it comes to whether someone is a Malay is becoming a major problem for the PAP.

This is especially because Mendaki’s position is that if i/c doesn’t say “Malay” there’ll be no help for the Muslim supplicant, even if the entire kampung swears that said supplicant is really a Malay.

Malay-Muslim self-help group Yayasan Mendaki has a set of criteria for its financial assistance schemes for students administered on behalf of the Government. Among other things, the recipients “must be of Malay descent” as stated in their identity cards. It spells out a list of what it considers to be “Malay descent”, and this includes 22 ethnicities including Acehnese, Javanese, Boyanese, Sumatran, Sundanese and Bugis. Students with “double-barrelled” race are eligible if the first race is listed on the identity cards as Malay, said a Mendaki spokesman. For example, a student who is Malay-Arab would qualify for the schemes but an Arab-Malay student would not, he added.

(CNA)

Tamugi’s i/c says “Malay” and so that fact alone will kick into the long grass for the next 30 years the lethal bomb that what the i/c says is irrelevant in deciding who is a Malay.

Better still he’s from RI and played rugby for RI at scrum half.

Even better still, his mum was Chinese and his wife is Chinese. So while he may be the token Malay president that the PAP wants to hoist on us, he can be the second multi-racial president, after Sheares.


*Even PAP MP Zainal Sapari says i/c is irrelevant in deciding whether one is a Malay. He’s not expected to stand at next GE.

M Ravi: Money talks BS walks

In Uncategorized on 23/07/2017 at 10:28 am

Update: $6,011 has been received (as of 2.23 p.m. 22 July) to help M Ravi to set aside the foreclosure of his HDB flat

Here I reported that Uncle Leong had asked for donations to help Ravi pay off the arrears on his HDB mortgage

Please help M Ravi as he may become homeless, when he comes out of the hospital.

I would like to appeal to 7,452 Singaporeans to give $1 to POSB Savings Account 032-00582-9 (account of 73 year old L. F. Violet Netto who is the joint owner of the HDB flat).

Glad to know that his supporters are not the same people who refuse to help TRE and a publisher who wants to “Make S’pore Literature Great”. But I wonder about those who were egging him on on FB? Were they among the donors?

Here’s what Amos Yee (Remember him?) thinks of those who talk cock, sing song but who are unwilling to help with cold hard cash:

Interesting that Amos has denounced his activist “supporters”; denouncing them for talking the talk but not walking the talk: the activist friends would have happily let him rot in remand, while pontificating to society on the harm that being in remand would do him.

It’s nice to know that not all S’poreans are as cheapskates as the TRE cybernuts and the ang moh tua kees.

Let’s salute the real S’poreans. They realise that in S’pore, superheroes need to pay their bills.

But will Ravi thank the donors? He was planning to challenge the legality of the mortgage, arguing that the constitution allowed him to default on his mortgage. His grandfather wrote the constitution  isit? Juz like parly belongs to his grandfather?

 

PM did the honourable thing by not challenging will

In Uncategorized on 18/06/2017 at 5:38 am

His brudder has said that if he had doubts, PM should have challenged probate. He added that the hearing could be conducted in private so it would still be a private matter.

Yah right: the public would still know that the Lees were rowing.

And as I pointed out here:  If a will is invalidated, the deceased’s assets will not be distributed according to the will, and such assets may instead be distributed according to the Intestate Succession Act.

This means that the challenge had been successful, there would have been no reversion to the previous will (Version 6). Instead of Harry’s (and indirectly his wife’s) wishes on how the assets of the estate should be distributed, the assets of the estate would be mechanically according to the Intestate Succession Act. Like that why bother with a will in the first place?

This would really be the act of a dishonourable son.

 

Paradox of the PAP presidency

In Political governance on 13/06/2017 at 7:20 am

I pointed out  here that our CPF could be returned tomorrow (if the govt of the day was willing to do so).

I also said that in an alternative universe when Dr Chee became PM, with a two-thirds majority in parly, he could tell president Yaacob to allow him to draw on the reserves and return our CPF. He would tell President Halimah

I have the mandate of the people. What do u have? How many S’poreans voted for u? None because u won by default.”

Sign or I’ll pee on u and let the mob into the Istana.

Seriously, this is the paradox. How can a president that entered office via a walk-over have the moral authority to resist a newly elected govt that is different from the one that “chose” the “right’ president?

Where does the will of people reside?

Ownself fix ownself

I commend this post where a law professor points out that Nathan was never elected”: he was an unelected president, same like Devan Nair etc. Only Ong Teng Cheong (another cybernut hero) was the real deal.  Within is a video where he points out that the presidency is problematic for the PAP when the PAP is the govt in power. Watch the video to understand how “Ownself sabo ownself”.

This post on the presidential council describes how the PAP tries to solve the problem posed by the professor.

“Oh! What A Tangled Web We Weave” which continues “When First We Practice To Deceive”.

Really? “Singapore Says Asian Growth Helps Offset U.S. Trade Threat”

In Economy on 07/02/2017 at 4:31 am

(Or “EDB does alternative facts”)

“A lot of our manufacturing here is to address the needs and opportunities in Asia.”

“Singapore Says Asian Growth Helps Offset U.S. Trade Threat” 

Erm. A lot of the opportunities and needs in Asia come about as a result from the ultimately exporting to the US of A.

Here’s a chart from the Bloomberg article

Juz google “Export data” and

— China’s main export partners are the United States (18% of total exports), Hong Kong (15%), the European Union (16%, of which Germany, the UK and the Netherlands account for 3% each), ASEAN countries (12%, of which Vietnam accounts for 3%), Japan (6%) and South Korea (4%)

— Malaysia’s main export partners are: Singapore (14%), China (13%), European Union (10%), Japan (9.5%), the United States (9.4%) and Thailand (6%).

Need I say more?

But there’s more: the chart below (courtesy of Chris K) shows that we are among those countries that will suffer the most from the imposition of a US border tax. But we’ll be happy that M’sia will be more badly affected. As will Thailand and Vietnam.

Image may contain: text

Again the effects on big exporters to the US like China and M’sia will also affect their trade with us.

So what cock is the chairman of the EDB talking? And what weed is he smoking?

Finally remember when reading the u/m from EDB remember what I said recently about FDI numbers: FDI does not always result in new physical investments, with new jobs to match it. Often FDI is the transfer intangible assets for the purpose of lowering corporate tax.

Investment commitment levels in Singapore are expected to be similar to those seen in 2016 amid uncertainties in the global economic environment, the Economic Development Board (EDB) said on Thursday (Feb 2).

At its 2016 Year-in-Review press conference, EDB said it will seek to consolidate Singapore’s position as a high value manufacturing base by capturing opportunities in advanced manufacturing. It will do this by anchoring lead adopters of advanced manufacturing in Singapore, while building up an ecosystem of suppliers and enablers to develop technologies and solutions, the agency added.

And

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/singapore/2017-investments-likely-to-remain-similar-to-last-year-s-edb/3486220.html

Btw, maybe FDI levels are projected to remain static because MNCs are expected to cut back their use of tax havens following public outrage in the West after revelations of the tricks (not all legal) they use to mininise tax?

Luxembourg is already expecting this and if it happens there, it’ll happen here. Remember Oz miners are on the rack after it was revealed that they use S’pore to minise taxes on their exports of minerals from Oz?

The difference between “alternative news” and “fake news”

In Media on 24/01/2017 at 5:30 pm

The “We love Hilary. Trump sucks” equates the term “alternative news” (used by Trump’s right hand woman when talking about the size of the inauguration crowd) with “fake news”. They have a point on the issue of the size of the crowds going by the photos.

But isn’t this a good example of the proper use of the term “alternative news”?

Mr Spicer said it was “unquestionable” that Mr Trump’s inauguration “was the most watched” ever.

Although Ronald Reagan’s was top in terms of television figures, attracting 41.8 million viewers, Mr Spicer pointed out that the 30.6 million who tuned in to see Mr Trump take the oath of office did not include the millions who watched the ceremony online.

(Extract from a BBC report)

The usual suspects are dissing this argument but really I can’t follow what they are trying to say. All I know is that they are not calling this “fake news” and this I suspect makes them madder.

The Trumpeters are telling a lot of lies but the “We love Hilary” MSM (because they are so emotional that Trump Triumphant cocked a snook at them and won) are letting the Trumpeters get away with murder.

From NYT Dealbook on another reason ehy MSM is so upset:

DRIVEN TO DISTRACTION
Breaking down the stage after President-elect Donald J. Trump’s news conference on Wednesday. As new would-be scandals rapidly follow older ones, many fail to gain traction.

Trump Shows How to Smother a Scandal: With a Bigger Story

As one would-be controversy rapidly succeeds another, it’s clear that there’s only so much the news media and the public can focus on at once.

Hard truth about the FT “terrorists”/ Indi overtaking TRE?

In Uncategorized on 28/01/2016 at 10:35 am

But first, let’s remember that the authorities tell us that they were not planning attacks, bombings here but back home. This means they were here to earn a living, not plant bombs etc. Really good guest workers, not like some PRC rats who came here to strike or chear S’poreans  or the Indian rat who took citizenship  but with the inyent of making sure his son avoids NS while working here.

Even more to the point, the ISA (detention without trial) was used, not the criminal law statutes.

But to be fair to the authorities, “they could have easily changed their minds and attacked Singapore”, Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam (aka the Minister for pets) said in a Facebook post.

But do the Bangladeshi authorities regard them as dangerous?

Bangladesh authorities say 14 of its nationals deported from Singapore are being held over links to a group blamed for attacking secular writers.

The men were part of a larger group of 26 construction workers who were expelled from Singapore last year for supporting armed jihadist ideology.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35379056

So the others deported (12 out of the 26) were released? Yes.

The other 12 men, who returned on different dates, have been allowed to go back to their families as detectives “did not find their links with militancy in primary investigation”, Mashrukure Rahman, deputy commissioner (South Division) of Detective Branch at Dhaka Metropolitan Police, told The Daily Star on Wednesday (Jan 20).

Nonetheless, they are still “under close observation”, he added in the report.

Whatever, it’s clear that the Bangladeshi authorities don’t agree with S’pore’s perception that these 12 guys are very dangerous.

But then it’s hard to disagree with the administration and 70% of the voters that “Better safe than sorry”. Of course the anti-PAP cybernuts of TRELand (a tiny minority* among the 30%ers would disagree cheering on this view:  http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/01/were-the-27-arrested-bangladeshis-terrorists/

——————–

*And getting smaller if the Indian’s Independent’s claims are to be believed: the Indian Indi claims it gets more views than TRE. Sounds like Indian PM talking his usual cock. 

 

 

 

 

Herod Cheng signposts PAP’s “fixing” plans

In Political governance on 18/01/2016 at 11:36 am

(Explanation for those who never had the benefit of Sunday school: Herod was the ruler of Judea at the time of the birth of Jesus, who orders the Massacre of the Innocents i.e. babies)

Will the rules change so that Dr Tan Cheng Bock cannot, or will not be eligible to stand in the next PE due later this yr? Is PM fixing the Oppo, something he “promised” to do in 2006 but was silent on in 2011 and 2015 because he could see the swing voters didn’t like the Oppo being “fixed’: but he now thinks he has a mandate of 70% to do so?

These tots crossed my mind when I read on CNA that

The Government will look into whether Singapore’s political system can be improved, to ensure the nation has capable and honest leadership in the long term, President Tony Tan Keng Yam said in his opening address to Singapore’s 13th Parliament.

“Our political system has delivered stability and progress for Singapore. But this system must be refreshed from time to time, as our circumstances change,” Dr Tan said on Friday, Jan 15

Shortly after the speech Herod Cheng, the PAP’s sinister clown in residence, suggested changes that would ensure that S’pore remains a de facto one party state, forever and a day.. My comments on his rant are in [ ] and in normal font.

CHANGES TO THE POLITICAL SYSTEM – PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS

The one thing that stood out in yesterday’s Presidential Address was the remarks about possible changes to Singapore’s political system.

As I have argued before, whilst the PAP still has its 2/3 majority [Hello, no faith that in next GE PAP will retain this majority? Call yr self a PAP bootlicker? Only hard core TRE nuts believe that the PAP will lose this majority in next GE], it needs to implement constitutional changes to safeguard the future of Singapore, and ensure we avoid the degeneration that Western political systems (and those who have adopted them) have seen. [Last time I looked, the West is in pretty good shape and China, the great Asian exemplar is in a mess. I mean Europe hasn’t imploded despite the Eurozone crisis and the influx of unwanted and unwelcomed immigrants. And the US is the hegemon. So what cock you cock talking?]

Our own system is also largely based on the Westminster system, although we have important aspects that now differ. For example, LKY changed our system to prevent elected members from changing parties and still retaining their seats. More now needs to be done to ensure that we improve on our system even more to ensure the stability of our system. [Well Bukit Brown is a pretty tranquil place, if you like stagnation.]

Some changes I would like to see:

1) Elected Presidency – As I have argued, the elected presidency has become a proxy for partisan politics. Short of scrapping it, at the very least the bar needs to be raised to prevent unqualified populists from degrading the office of the Presidency. [You got explanation for PAP to explain why a nominated president can be a better protector of reserves and minorities than an elected president isit? Didn’t PAP say only elected president had mandate to resist Mad Dog Chee’s plans to squander the reserves? Seriously if the PAP tries to revert to a nominated presidency, it’ll be really great black comedy to see how they argue against themselves. Ownself contradict ownself.]

He also wants more NMPs [God forbid if they are baby killers and morons and PAP fan boys or gals.]

I think better to more deeply entrench the NMP system by increasing the numbers and making their term the same as elected MPs, instead of the half-terms currently. NMPs of the second session always see their terms cut short. The last cohort only served for a year as elections were called early.

Both an Upper House and the NMP scheme function on the same principle – non-elected voices are needed to check populism and politicking amongst professional politicians.

As lessons from the West has shown, countries with unelected legislators like the UK are less likely to go down the populist route as it acts as a brake on demagoguery. [Last time I looked, the UK’s House of Lords was a cesspool of scroungers who were making claims for work they didn’t do.]

Amos: Only mum is still a fan

In Uncategorized on 22/05/2015 at 4:41 am

Reading Amos’s Facebook page is not only a barrel of laughs, but it also shows that he lives in a different universe.

Example 1: He calls Vincent Law a coward for not responding to his allegations*. What he doesn’t realise is that Vincent has won in the court of public opinion: no need to respond.

Example 2: He produces “evidence” about the “emotional abuse” that he got from Vincent. Evidence? What evidence?

Example 3: He claims that people are convinced by his diatribes.

Never mind, more evidence to throw Amos into Arkham (where those of Batman’s enemies considered to be mentally ill are confined) and throw away the key. I’m sure the PAP, their supporters and the anti-PAP activists will be happy.

Seriously, can anyone be surprised that the Community Action Network’ (made up of Shelley Thio, Rachel Zeng, Jennifer Teo, Woon Tien Wei, Terry Xu, Roy Ngerng, Martyn See, Jolovan Wham, Lynn Lee, Kirsten Han and another**) has decided to keep quiet? As have the individuals?

“Given the rhetoric against Yee, and the numerous threats to his safety, he should have been “committed to a place of safety or a place of temporary care and protection” under the Children and Young Persons Act. Instead, he is now back in remand, over his failure to abide by his bail conditions.

CAN believes that the conditions imposed on Yee are unnecessarily onerous. Apart from having to report to his Investigating Officer every day, he is also barred from posting anything online. This curtailment of Yee’s right to express himself doesn’t just infringe on his constitutional rights as a citizen, it is also disproportionate to the charges he is currently facing.” 

Given his antics of defaming his ex-bailor they should be repenting of their words publicly.

As should s/0 JBJ, Andrew Loh, Maruah and a drug mule groupie who were all defending Amos’s right to insult Harry.

https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/05/03/amos-even-dumber-comments-parental-responsibility/

They should have the balls to apologise to S’poreans for supporting Amos, and for blaming society for Amos’s antics.

Interesting that Amos has denounced his activist “supporters”; denouncing them for talking the talk but not walking the talk: the activist friends would have happily let him rot in remand, while pontificating to society on the harm that being in remand would do him.

Something I had pointed out at the time: https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/04/22/amos-talk-is-cheap-very-cheap-harry-really-needs-no-monument/

On this denouncement, he is right. At least he has learnt that the likes of Andrew Loh, Kirsten Han, Lynn Lee, Roy and s/o JBJ are talk cock sing song artistes, with their anti-PAP agenda. Never mind, he still has mummy who thinks he’s fantastic https://atans1.wordpress.com/2015/05/13/amos-mummys-pet/. She even defends his lying as “as a need to”. Huh?

He was being used. Amos Yee, master manipulator was been had. Master manipulator? What master manipulator?

Coming back to fact that that he lives in a different universe.Maybe the cybernuts that infest TRE should invite him into their world, now that they’ve thrown out one Goh Meng Seng from cybernut land even though he was a founder member of the place. But Amos is likely to decline as Roy is a cybernut hero and he has fallen out with Roy. Seems Roy not happy with his “molest” comment about Vincent Law.
*If he didn’t defame Vincent Law and flip flop on apologies (After all he did write: I am extremely remorseful for the turmoil that I have caused to Vincent and his family, for the allegations towards him that he molested me,), he has really valid points about Vincent’s behaviour, if Amos’s allegations are true. I’d be pretty annoyed if I had been Amos, assuming he’s telling the truth. As it is I can understand why he preferred to remain in remand, assuming he isn’t lying.

All those cavaets above are to emphasie that Amos is as credible to me as the cybernuts that infest TRE.

**At least Vincent Law tried.

Much ado about urns/ Where to buy in NE

In Property on 07/01/2015 at 4:27 am

Three pieces follow.

The first is from those KPKBing about the urns. My comments are interspersed. The other is a response from an intelligent TRE poster (Yup they do exist, though they are jeered by the rabble). The third tells of a better buy in the NE (Thanks for telling me about the area).

It’s all about “living environment”?/ Talking self-serving cock

The Singapore Mass Media has put up very negative report on us trying to portray us as some petty people who only care about our flat value and that is why we reject the columbarium. That is far from the truth.[Will say that wouldn’t they?]

I hereby represent the hundreds of affected stakeholders to put up the following statement:

1) We are unhappy and felt aggrieved by HDB’s misrepresentation by way of omission of material fact in their sale brochures. We reiterate that there was absolutely NO MENTION of columbarium in the sale brochures while the stated “Ancillary Service” phrase is so general that anyone who read that would have misconstrued as something else. Such definition can only be found in URA website and not HDB website at all. Any ordinary man would not have known how to get access to the details at all.

2) We are against such sales tactic as we should be treated fairly to be given FULL DISCLOSURE of information by the seller, HDB before we chose to buy the flat. We should have the right to make INFORMED choices and not short-changed with such omission of critical material information by HDB.

3) We are also very concerned about how HDB allowing a private commercial entity owned by a foreign public listed company to bid for the land gazetted for religious purposes. It is totally inappropriate for a commercial entity to make money out of any religion.

[Come on , tell us something new.]

4) According to High Court ruling, any entity that advance religion cause, should be subjected to Charity Act and put under the supervision of Commissioner of Charities. Apparently HDB has not made appropriate screening prior to the award of this land, which is meant for religious use, to a commercial entity.[What has this to do with the price of eggs?]

5) Commercial business should be restricted to land meant for commercial purposes, like industrial park. Land meant for religious purposes should be reserved to religious organizations registered in Singapore. This is to protect the interests of religious organizations as commercial entities would have more financial muscles to outbid them. It is totally unfair to these religious organizations which are Non-Profit Organizations to compete with Profit-oriented commercial entities in bidding for such limited land slated for religious purposes. [Gd point except that in traditional Chinese religion, there is no governing religious authority.]

6) Most of us are buying a flat as a HOME, not for property speculation. Thus, property resale value is least of our concern. Our main concern is the conduciveness of our living environment for our families. Thus the Main Stream Media has put up a totally misrepresentation of our plight and this is really a double whammy to us.[Come on, tell the truth. You are concerned about resale because a high-rise block containing urns does not affect the “living environment”. And you guys objected to a kindergarten. And are likely to object to an old folks recreation centre according to yr MP. You people think you are scholae Eng is it?] What we want is just a fair deal for our choice of home and we plead to the Main Stream Media not to put a double stabbing into our hearts and dignity by such grossly misreporting. [Nope MSM is right to slime you guys]

7) We are all law abiding citizens and we expect the Rule of Law to be adhered by the very institutions which are supposedly tasked to uphold the law and justice for citizens.

8) We sincerely hope that the relevant authorities, including the Ministry of Development, HDB and URA to look into the matter as soon as possible.

Thank you.

On Behalf of
Stakeholders, BTO Buyers.

An intelligent TRE poster responds

fernfoliage:

Addressing the points raised by the original poster.

1) You should have read the fine prints and clarify whatever you are not sure. Ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law.

2) What “such sales tactic”? You were INFORMED but when did not understand the information, you did not seek clarifications.

3) to 5)
Remember those days when the govt was in charge of everything and took care of everyone from cradle to grave? Well, you guys complained, criticised, condemned, cursed and swore at the govt at the slightest mistake it made. Now that the govt passes everything to the private sector, you guys complain about profit-making, commercialization. If the govt does not do it, the private sector also not allowed to do it, who will? Will you?

6) and 7) If you sincerely believe in what you have written, then just let the columbarium be. It is for the good of everyone, living and dead. Not only the healthy living but the sicked, the aged and the dead too have their rightful places in this country.

Rating: -70 (from 80 votes)
Best place in NE
Soccerbetting2:

Give up the Sengkang west way BTO flat loh . Buy the resale HDB nearest at Punggol loh .

Punggol going to have some more amenities coming up like all the coney island supposed to opened up this year . Wonder what is taking so long for them to open up Coney island situated at end of Punggol Road . A big shopping centre will opened by year 2017 at Punggol Central near the waterway . Another Safra will be opening think between year 2016/17 . Punggol has other facilities like golf driving range , supermarkets, a small Punggol Plaza, restaurants dining ,yacht club area …..etc. With a seaside view to provide for , certainly can consider .

 Rating: +22 (from 22 votes)

PM is clueless about the WP & PAP

In Political governance on 02/06/2014 at 4:45 am

Sun Tzu said, If you know the enemy and know yourself you need not fear the results of a hundred battles.

Going by what he said last week, when and Low Thia Khiang engaged in a jaw-jaw in Parliament  on constructive politics, WP’s stand on major policy issues and the role of the opposition in parliament, PM doesn’t know the enemy and the PAP. So how can he fix anyone?

He said:

It’s an eloquent explanation for why the WP has been inarticulate, about many things. In a serious parliament, the Government presents its policies. The Opposition presents its alternatives. The WP may not have alternatives on every issue; it may not have a full range of all the complexities of designing an HDB scheme or MediShield scheme. You do have a responsibility to say which direction are we going. And that direction has to be set clearly – not to explain to the PAP, but to explain to Singaporeans what you stand for.

Err except that in a parliamentary democracy (I’m assuming S’pore is one, not a defacto one-party state), the opposition spends most of its time after losing a general election criticising the govt, and its policies. It only starts proposing alternatives maybe one yr before the next general election; and that only because it wants to present itself as a credible alternative to the govt.

Now the WP has made it clear that it isn’t ready for power and will at best be part of Team PAP if the PAP doesn’t win a parly majority. Nothing about teaming up with the other opposition parties.

So there really isn’t the need of presenting alternatives. And our PM should know it, and he should know that S’poreans know this too. The WP is uniquely S’porean: it doesn’t want to be the driver. It’s happy being a self-appointed co-driver.

And the following show that a Catholic High, NJC boy has problems understanding the principles of Tao that Low is using https://atans1.wordpress.com/2013/07/25/low-shows-the-usefulness-of-non-action/ (’cause dad’s a legalist? https://atans1.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/lao-tse-and-hard-truths/):

I hope he takes an equally reasonable approach when it comes to election rallies because the WP approach has been to be extremely reasonable – indeed low profile – in Parliament but come election time to turn into tigers and heroes.

It’s an eloquent explanation for why the WP has been inarticulate, about many things. In a serious parliament, the Government presents its policies. The Opposition presents its alternatives. The WP may not have alternatives on every issue; it may not have a full range of all the complexities of designing an HDB scheme or MediShield scheme. You do have a responsibility to say which direction are we going. And that direction has to be set clearly – not to explain to the PAP, but to explain to Singaporeans what you stand for.

And

[A]fter all this complicated explanation, I don’t know whether Mr Low Thia Khiang still stands by what was said in Parliament in the White Paper debate last year… But after telling me you can massage this and some people can do (with) less and others will need more – that’s easy to say, who’s going to do the massaging? Of course, the Government. And that, is the mark of a sub-standard Opposition.”

If PM doesn’t understand that WP Low is a follower of Lao Tze, then the PAP is in trouble.

And it’s not that PM understands himself or the PAP.

It’s a bit rich for PM to say:

I think the record will speak for itself, when we make a shift we acknowledge a shift. When the WP changes position they pretend they haven’t – that is the difference.

And

We have to call a spade a spade. If we have changed position and your previous position was wrong, say so. If you hold by your position, have your guts to reaffirm it and take the consequences. But to weasel away, play with words, avoid the issue and then claim to be responsible, that is what we fear can drive Singapore’s politics into the same place where many other countries have gone.

As Lao Tze WP Low said

Talking about the WP flip-flopping on foreign workers issue… In any case, I also noted that when the PAP has to make a policy U-turn, they call it policy shift. I don’t know whether that is a shift or it’s a flip-flop.

He could have highlighted other PAP semantics like “evolving” (public tpt sys policies are “evolving”) or “moving on” (“Let’s forget the cock-up. This is an order”)?”

But Low was talking rubbish when he said, This is the mark of a responsible Opposition not to jam up the Government; allowing the Government – after giving our view, debating it – allowing the Government to move forward, not to jam up the Government. It is a mark of a responsible Government and a mark of first world Parliament”.

WP can’t jam up anything. The PAP’s majority (more than two-thirds) means it can do what it likes. And there’s nothing the WP can do about it. So long as the PAP has a two-thirds majority in parliament, it can do what it likes.

—-

*Lee Hsien Loong and Workers’ Party chief Low Thia Khiang engaged in a verbal sparing in Parliament on 28 May on constructive politics, WP’s stand on the big issues as well as the role of opposition in parliament.

S$, Baht & Rupiah looking gd

In Currencies, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia on 13/02/2014 at 4:43 am

Given that a senior cabinet minister and NTUC chief, and a jnr minister from NTUC is giving the PAP govt a bad name, maybe it’s time to remind S’poreans that the PAP govt is not all full of NTUC clowns. On Tueday I reported that Khaw and MoM Tan had the developers concerned, and today I’ll remind S’poreans that PM’s economic team (headed by Tharman) are keeping int’l investors onside (too bad about TOC, TRe readers, but then they can take comfort that locals like me too like a strong S$.)

(4 Feb) – Recent alarmist commentary may have stirred up concerns about Singapore’s economy, but in the midst of the emerging market rout, safe-haven seekers’ faith appeared unshaken as they scooped up its currency.

“We have noted its safe-haven status within the Asian region is getting stronger in past years. So when you have a broad risk off, in general the Singapore dollar will outperform,” said Ju Wang, senior foreign-exchange strategist at HSBC.

Earlier this week, global markets largely sold off, but the Singapore dollar strengthened, with the U.S. dollar fetching as little as 1.2666 on Tuesday, compared with around 1.2790 Friday. Against the currency of its neighbor Malaysia, the Singapore dollar has touched its highest level since 1998.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101390521

But To be sure, it isn’t clear the Sing’s climb is sustainable or would withstand a more extended market rout.

“When people want to take money off the table, the safe-haven tag may not be helpful,” Song said. “We can’t avoid spillover from contagion in Southeast Asia.”

Now that would have TOC, TRE readers happy, ’cause they can blame it on the govt.

BTW, here’s an interesting article on the flows in and out of Indonesia and the other Fragile Five. http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2014/02/emerging-markets. Actually the rupiah has done relatively better than most other emerging markets currencies against the US$. So has the the Thai baht despite the political problems.

But the currencies of  Thailand Indonesia, M’sia  and the Philippines have fared worse against Japan’s yen than they have against the US dollar. This means that Japanese financial ,institutions may slow down their investments in the region: investing here could be like catching a falling knife. So, they’ll likely wait.

 

Zorro & PA make PM look stupid, cheap-skate, ill-mannered & ungracious

In Political governance on 12/02/2014 at 4:50 am

(Or “PA trying to show that it is no PAP stooge?”)

Tot Cheap, Cheapo Quick Zorro is a minister in PMO, the deputy chairman of the PA,  and that PA and the PAP are one and the same? Think again, with people like Zorro and other senior PA managerss, who needs enemies, the PM (and chairman of PA) must be wondering. PM may also be wondering if Zorro and other clowns manager at PA are trying to fix him or that they showing S’poreans that they are not part of the PAP machine.

Still laughing at Zorro Lim’s explanation of why ex-presidential TCB was “un-invited” from an Istana function organised by the PA. And at his petulance in being upset that Dr Tan made the un-invitation public*:  Mr Tan Cheng Bock is just informing his followers and friends on facebook.
Cannot meh? (TRE reader)

Wouldn’t it have been easier (i.e. less damaging to PM, Zorro personally, the govt, the PAP and the PA) once the balls-up was discovered for Lim to say to his staff, “As our sister Jos said We cannot have the attitude that everything will be perfect from Day One: but more careful. Make sure the correct list is used next yr. As for this year, let the invitations stand. Order more food. No budget? Juz cut activities in WP areas. Make the residents there repent. We don’t want PAP voters and neutral S’poreans to think we are ill-mannered: badly brought up by our parents.”

Instead, he called all those wrongly invited to dis-invite them (Wonder how many? Any Oppo GE 2011 canidates? Think Ben Pwee and SDP’s Dr Ang). Surely on a cost-benefit analysis, this was a waste of his valuable time**? Particularly given the PR damage if this dis-invitation was made public? In the age of social media, disclosure must be presumed.

As it is, one TRE reader voiced what is on many minds (self-included)

I think the whole episode of “uninviting Lim Cheng Bock came out badly” in the eyes of many Singaporeans. It showed clearly as long as someone is against the PAP, they do not deserve to be a Singaporean, notwithstanding his or her past contributions to nation building. At least I view it this way as a Singaporean from this episode. Because Tan Cheng Bock, an ex PAP member dared to stand up against the current PAP policies, it seems he is more an outlaw today, and whatever credit he chalked up in sacrificing his youthful years in nation building became a zero and does not deserve any recognition at all***.

He or she goes on to make some very valid points:

Secondly, with Lim Swee Say’s explanation, it also reflected badly on the PA as an organization. It looks like in coming up with the first list of invitees, they did not even know exactly what criteria to use to come up with the selected people for the Istana Party. All these days with the PM loudspeaking his sincere wish to recognize the first generation people who contributed to our nation building, it looks like at the end the selection was morely likely based on a preferred list, which is not surprising at all. Woe betide once again!

Thirdly, Lim Swee Say came across as unconvincing at all, especially when he is also the Labour Chief who needs to have a heart full of empathy in the first place. But by executing the order to uninvite a fellow Singaporean who was already invited, it just reflects clearly that our leadership is uncompassionate and also unkind. Even if the case was not about Tan Cheng Bock per se, but if any ordinary Singaporean who got invited to the Istana to be informed later that he was univited because of an error, have the government given any thought on how the affected person would feel. He or she could have already announced to all the friends that he was invited by the PM for the Istana Party.***

Given the above logic, Tan Cheng Bock has every right to make a comment on how he really felt about the matter. Does Lim Swee Say expect Tan Cheng Bock to challenge the decree when it was announced to him over the phone? Cheng Bock has to accept it as a gentleman but does it mean he has bought into the explanation which is a lousy one in the first place. So my advice to Swee Say, just shut up!

And it’s not only netizens. This appeared in MediaCorp’s freesheet:

Aileen Tan Ai Ker

Published: 10 February, 4:06 AM

I refer to the report “Cheng Bock invited to Istana party ‘by mistake’” (Feb 8). Invitations are traditionally, even now, sent because the host wishes to have the company of the guest.

No one sends an invitation and retracts it, especially after it has been accepted. This is unacceptable in any culture, by any social standard. It is a question of “face” and emotional quotient. Similarly, a guest should have basic, reasonable emotional intelligence to decline an invitation if he or she feels awkward or is on unfriendly terms with the host.

In this instance, former Member of Parliament and presidential candidate Tan Cheng Bock received and accepted the invitation.

The People’s Association (PA) should have been sensitive and exercised discretion to host him and those guests whom they considered were invited by mistake.

An old invitation list was used, despite today’s database management technology. It would have been smarter to bear the brunt of this and be graceful. The cost of hosting them would probably have been negligible.

Instead, the episode reflects badly on the PA, which deals with the grassroots and Singaporeans in general.

We expect more sensitivity than a simple apology after making a mistake. EQ training might help prevent a repeat.

Update: Related article: http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/02/08/pap-in-stage-3-to-4-of-decline/

—-

*He implies that since Dr Tan accepted the dis-invitation, he should juz sit down and shut up. A TRE reader pointed out: Mr Lim SS, Dr Tan may accept your explanation. He may not necessarily agree with or support your explanation. He has not explicitly say that he agrees with your explanation. Example : I may accept the price of NTUC goods/products however I may not support it. So Dr Tan has the rights to provide his side of the story. Remember he has his grassroots supporters to explain to. So if you have nothing to hide, Mr Lim why be do defensive.

**Remember he needs time to read his specially prepared monthly CPF statement, and to borrow toothpicks from a certain place.

***It is not about the invite – it is about some small- minded people who felt threatened by his presence. By 0.35 % margin! Dr. Tan will be the one sending out the list. Now he is pariah!

Shame on the PAP. (Another TRE reader)

****But the important things is this – if an invitation has been extended, you honour it and follow through with it. And if you have to have a longer guest list and cater more food as a result of this, then so be it. Making things right in situations like this is to honour what the Government has done. Updating the list and uninviting people is not making things right, and in fact is not right and making things worse.

It is disappointing that you would stand by and approve of this kind of conduct. Is this the ethos PA goes by?

Don’t highly qualified people in the civil service understand what it means to do the right thing in human relationships? (Yet another TRE reader)