Forum Index
this forum welcomes all forumers who appreciate decent and well thought out views and discussions. all forumers are encouraged to accept that different forumers have different views and often there is no absolutely right or wrong views.
Menu
 Forum IndexHome
FAQFAQ
MemberlistMemberlist
UsergroupsUsergroups
RegisterRegister
ProfileProfile
Log in to check your private messagesMessages
Log inLogin/Out

Quick Search

Advanced Search

Links
mysingaporenews
Singapore River Tour
Singapore Education
Singapore Orchids
littlespeck
ypapforum
Singapore Hosting
Sample Link 2
Sample Link 2

Who's Online
[ Administrator ]
[ Moderator ]


Google Search
Google

http://www.phpbb.com
Just a reminder to infidelity!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 39, 40, 41
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore's lucrative part time jobs



Many graduates from Singapore's world class universities are choosing to work part time in Singapore out of free choice because part time jobs not only give them plenty of freedom but also free time, and some to be their own bosses, driving people around at their own time. Part time jobs have indeed flourished in Singapore at least among Singaporeans as occupation of choice. I am not too sure about non Singaporean locals or foreigners. These are stupid people that want permanent jobs and could not see how good part time jobs are, and how lucrative.

The most lucrative part time job in Singapore of course is being MPs. This job is part time in many ways and still being paid $16,000 a month or thereabout. Ok, ok, for the millionaires, this is peanuts. But this is a handsome sum of money to 90 percent of Singaporeans, highly desirable and admirable. How many Singaporeans could earn this sum of money working full time? Only the millionaire politicians would see this sum no up. And this part time MP job also means attending parliament, a very vital area of an elected MP's responsibility is also part time. Want to attend then attend. If got other more important commitments like an MP's other full time occupation, the latter would take priority because it is full time and MP is part time.

Actually there are many other higher paying part time jobs like directors of company. If a director is being paid $120k a year in director fee, you know how lucrative it is? Company directors are not full time jobs. Board of directors meeting are often held once a month or sometimes once in two or three months. Assuming it is once a month, a $120k director's fee would mean each meeting a company director is paid $10,000, for 1 or 2 hours sitting in the boardroom tweedling his thumbs or having nice snacks and coffee.

And this is not the most lucrative if you know how much the chairman of a company is paid versus that of a company director. Let's say a chairman is paid $2.4m a year, divide that by 12 assuming there were 12 monthly meetings like the directors, it would work out to $200,000 per meeting. Not bad really. And if the company is really big, like a MNC and the chairman is paid $12m a year, it means each meeting he chairs he is being paid $1m for 1 or 2 hours of being there.

How many chairman are full time? Mostly chairman are part time job. See how lucrative part time jobs can be? Ok, Ok, forget about the graduates that ended in part time jobs because the good permanent jobs are filled by foreigners. Not all part time jobs are desirable or lucrative. Only very selective part time jobs are lucrative and highly desirable and enviable. Some people are just so lucky to end up with such cushy and super well paid part time jobs and doing or contributing you know what.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2018 9:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Young men favourable to Police BMWs
Over heard some young men talking about their intent to apply to join the Traffic Police for the simple reason to be able to drive around in BMWs. Driving such nice and high performance cars in this island when car ownership is increasing becoming a dream, the opportunity to drive BMWs is definitely very attractive and alluring. The Police should capitalise on this new acquisition in their recruitment drive for more traffic police officers. They used to be content to drive around in high performance but relatively cheaper Subarus which were great cars to drive. Now with BMWs, it would be ooh la la. And the officers would be very on the ball, driving the BMWs 24/7 on the road. It is like it is a pleasure to work. The person who recommended the BMWs must be rewarded for such a great idea, work with pleasure and pride. But don't get carried away and ask for Ferraris or Lambos.

This is a positive trend for a super rich city state with all the best superstructure and carefully crafted environment. The BMWs, like the expensive office chairs and Brompton bikes costing thousands of dollars would fit in nicely to give a classy and expensive image of economic progress and success.

Just a few decades ago, govt offices were the rundown buildings left behind by the colonial masters and with iron cabinets and aged wooden furniture. Today all govt offices are not only modern and well designed but also sensibly furnished to complete the picture of a first world country. The only outlandish or out of place 'furniture' in this first world city state is the walking populace from the third world and their third world behaviour that are fast catching on with the locals. Many parts of the manicured city states are taking a likeness to third world neglected corners of their countries.

Would they be thinking of Harley Davidson to replace the current batch of Japanese bikes for the mobile traffic police? If they do that, the Police Recruitment office would have a long queue of applicants waiting to join the force.

Nice. Singapore is living up to it as a rich nation. Got money must spend. If not like CPF, keep long long for what, keep until mati? Luckily got smart govt to teach the people to spend by having more compulsory insurance schemes. Don't spend also cannot.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My heart is in India
An Indian national working for state bank DBS has just been arrested for defacing the Singapore flag. According to state media Straits Times, Avijit Das Patnaik posted a photo of the Singapore flag being ripped apart to reveal the India national flag on Tuesday (Aug 14).

Avijit, who have held the Singapore permanent residency for over a decade, wrote “Phir bhi dil hai…”, which translates to “Still my heart is…” on the post to express his patriotism for his motherland India.

The above is posted in thestatestimes. I cannot blame the Indian national, a local, yes a local, for having his heart in India. In this sense I am proud of him, for he knows where his patriotism should lie, a proud national of India. If he is to say his heart is in Singapore because Singapore brought him here, gave him a good job and good pay, then he is nothing better than a lying mercenary that would betray his country for money.

Every citizen of any country must be proud of his own country and his heart must be in his own country. I can't say that for the daft Singaporeans. Their hearts are always somewhere else and bringing foreigners to take over their country does not mean anything to them. They either don't mind and are clueless about what it means when their country is taken over by foreigners. Maybe they will know when the day comes when they are driven out of their country as boat people, stateless.

Now some are very proud to call the foreigners locals, when these foreigners' hearts are in their motherland. This point is double confirm by the above incident.

PS. Any foreigner that showed disrespect to the Singapore flag and anything Singapore must be sent home.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Aug 25, 2018 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Electricity tariff in Singapore versus oil price

Hsien Loong startled the audience of his National Day speech asking the people to ‘kee chiu’ if they think electricity tariff is lower than 10 years ago. Many got it wrong, believing that electricity today is higher instead of lower. He then showed two graphs, one on electricity tariff and another on oil price to show the complementarity of the movements of the two items. When oil price is up, tariff is up. The audience was astonished that electricity price today was lower than 10 years ago. Hsien Loong supplement his discovery with this statement:
‘”Describing the issue of electricity tariffs as “more complicated”, he noted that the current rate of 23.65 cents/kwh is more affordable than it was in the third quarter of 2008 at 25.07 cents/kwh.
’––Singapore’s electricity tariffs are dependent on the fluctuations in oil prices as the nation uses natural gas – all imported – to generate almost all of its electricity, he explained.’ Yahoo News
Many in the audience or watching the TV must be amazed for seeing that electricity tariff has actually gone down and their perception was wrong, that electricity price is high. Here are the two charts. For charts please refer to same article in mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg

For flashing the two charts in a speech and giving the audience very little time to ponder and understand what they were shown is a clever way of getting one’s point across. Now we have a bit more time reading the charts and see what they meant and whether they really made sense. Yes, the tariff is lower today, 23.65 cents against 25.07 cents. What about the relative oil prices for the respective time? I could not figure out the scale of the above oil price chart. To me the numbers were funny. Below is a 10 year oil price chart by Macrotrends.net. Please refer to mysingaporenews.blogspot.sg for chart. Oil price peaked in 2008 to US$140 per barrel and hit a low of US$30 in 2009 and below US$30 in 2015.

Oil price in 2008 was $140 per barrel against $60 per barrel today. If electricity tariff is to fluctuate in sync with oil price, when the oil price is halved, should not the electricity tariff be halved as well or somewhere near there? The 23.65/25.07 numbers showed that electricity tariff has fallen by 1.42 cents or 5.66%! Should it not be bigger for the 80/140 or 57% difference in price of oil? The latter is the percentage of change when oil price fell from $140 to $60.
Yes they both swing in the same direction but the quantum is vastly different. Does it make sense that one changed by 57% and one by 1.42%?
What is the problem with the numbers? What is the problem with the charts? Should the people be happy that electricity prices have fallen by 1.42%? Or should it go down by a bigger percentage? Why is the fall so miniscule?
The above chart shows the prices of oil over the last 10 years. The chart Hsien Loong presented showed the prices of electricity of the same period but the fluctuation is not more than 5 cents each way.[img][/img]
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2018 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lawrence Wong – factually, legally wrong
‘It is "factually and legally wrong" to claim that Housing Board flat buyers do not own their flats and are merely renting them, said Minister of National Development Lawrence Wong.
That is because all buyers of leasehold properties - whether public or private - enjoy ownership rights over their properties during the period of the lease.
"They can also sell their properties and benefit from any upside, or rent it out if they choose to," he said at the Peak Forum for property industry professionals at HDB Hub on Tuesday (Sept 4)….
Mr Wong added that the Government welcomes all feedback and views on public housing, especially as the topic is one that Singaporeans care deeply about.
"But the debate must always be based on facts, not misinformation and half-truths," he said.
He did not name any commentators but The Straits Times had published a commentary on Aug 14 by International Property Advisor chief executive Ku Swee Yong, who recommended "that we be honest with ourselves and recognise that we are merely lessees who rent the HDB flats for their terms".’ Asia One
The controversy over whether HDB flat owners are lessees or tenants of rental flats continues. The people are increasingly taking the view that they are not owners of HDB flats but tenants on long rentals. The govt is very annoyed by this interpretation and insists that the HDB flat owners are owners but on a 99 year lease. This controversy is starting to sound funny if not of the legal implications like property tax and freedom to do what they want with their flats if they are the owners.
The govt is taking the high ground that it is agreeable to a public debate by the debate must be based on facts, not misinformation and half truths. In the above quote, Ku Swee Yong was quoted to say this, ‘that we be honest with ourselves and recognise that we are merely lessees who rent the HDB flats for their terms’, implying that this is either not facts, or misinformation or half truths or a combination of all three. I dunno which is which as the person quoting it would have his own interpretation and so would anyone reading it. There must be some misgivings on the govt’s part, or is it Asia One for quoting Ku Swee Yong. Now, what is the problem with this statement?
What about this statement by Lawrence Wong, ‘That is because all buyers of leasehold properties - whether public or private - enjoy ownership rights over their properties during the period of the lease.
"They can also sell their properties and benefit from any upside, or rent it out if they choose to.’
Are these statements facts, misinformation or half truths? Are public leasehold properties the same as private leasehold properties? Off hand I could point out a few differences. 1. The cost of the land is different in the sense that private leasehold lands are bought at market price. Some public leasehold lands are acquired under different sets of rules and prices. 2. There are many conditions attached to public leasehold properties that are absent in private leasehold properties. 3. The paying of a sales levy instead of the full sales price that means profits from price appreciation will be taken away by the govt. 4. No collective sales. 5. Cannot remortgage except under HDB terms. 6. No commercial loans after 60 years. 7. Stringent HDB rules on subletting. 8. Basically no full ownership rights. (. Time restriction on resale of flats after 5 years.
So, are public leasehold properties the same as private leasehold properties? Are the statements full facts, not misinformation or half truths?
When one is talking about facts and truths, one must be talking about apple and comparing apple with apples not apples with oranges. Tiok boh?
KNN, everyone claiming to be telling the truth, nothing but the truth, not half truth. Can anyone tell me who is telling the truth and who is telling half truth?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Give Mr Bean new life in Red Dot
There was news that Rowan Atkinson was thinking of retiring Mr Bean a few years back. Not sure if this is the end of Mr Bean. During an interview with the Daily Telegraph, he gave this replied. 'Atkinson told the Daily Telegraph's Review. "Apart from the fact that your physical ability starts to decline, I also think someone in their 50s being childlike becomes a little sad. You've got to be careful."' I think this is good advice for anyone above 50 to act childish or talk childishly. Anyway this is not my point. I was thinking of getting Mr Bean to produce a movie on Mas Selamat's childish escape from a high security prison. This movie would endear every Singaporean to it as the memory has been forever etched deeply in the psyche of every Singaporeans that lived through that hilarious episode of our history.

Below is a draft of my script for this movie, titled 'Mr Bean's Escape from Blue House'.

Scene 1. Mr Bean, the terrorist, is happily daydreaming of his success as a terrorist and being rewarded high heavens until the knocking at the door, at 3am woke him up. And a few men in dark glasses, in the wee hours, in dark suit and take him away.

Scene 2. Mr Bean, the terrorist, is taken on a tour of Blue House by men and women wearing dark glasses to impress on him how secured and heavily guarded is the Blue House, the patrols, guards, electric fence, cctvs etc etc. And this privilege knowledge is replayed in Mr Bean's head as he dry run his escape plan.

Scene 3. Mr Bean's family members visit him and under the watchful eyes of men and women in dark glasses, he manages to slip his escape plan to them. This part requires special talent from Mr Bean's arsenal of childish but effective tricks.

Scene 4. Mr Bean is led to the toilet by women in dark glass for a pee. This is followed up by his contortionist act of squeezing through the toilet window. But before that he would have to lay his carpet of toilet rolls nicely to break his fall.

Scene 5. Mr Bean is out of the toilet and out of sight of the men and women in dark glasses. He also changes into dark suits and put on dark glasses and walked out of the Blue House in style. But before that he laid a series of traces leading to the high security fence, attaching a piece of his prison wear on the fence to lead the men in dark glasses to go astray, thinking that he climbed over the fence.

Scene 6. Out on a limb, he continued to leave clues that he had taken a path into the nearby jungle before taking a lift from his friends waiting nearby. This would be followed by a mad scramble by the men and women in dark glasses running all over the jungle.

Scene 7. Mr Bean enjoying his pop corn watching TV in his sister's flat while the security forces were combing all the tourist sites and parks looking for him.

Scene 8. Mr Bean, now acting as the minister in charge with a little makeover, appeared on TV to make his famous assessment of his whereabout, something like, 'He is either in the island or he is out of the island.'

Scene 9. This is the interesting part with Mr Bean planning his escape to Malaysia. Several scenarios can be worked on like how he swims across the Singapore Straits, aided by his limping leg that actually became a super rudder or tail fin. Or he could be seen testing on different kinds of gear, plastic bags, drink bottles, oil drums or simply hanging on to a coconut trunk.

Scene 10. He abandons all the childish plans to swim across the Straits and confidently walks through the customs at the Causeway, wearing dark glasses and in dark suits.

Scene 11. How Mr Bean is enjoying his new freedom in a kampong but feeling dull with an unexciting life doing nothing. Then he hatches a plan to inform the Malaysian Police for a deal to hand him back to the men and women in dark glasses so that he could continue to enjoy his pleasant stay at the Blue House in Mount Pleasant. The End.

Actually there are many scripts for a Singapore version of Mr Bean or Missy Bean with Michelle Chong as the Singapore version of Mr Bean. It could be made into a serial with so many wonderful ideas coming from the political scene. Things like how Missy Bean buys a flat with a $1000 pay, how she looks so dignified when she struck Toto, or how she exercises picking cardboards and pushing makeshift carts, or how she sneers at the 3rd, 4th or 5th raters by not wanting to join the opposition when invited, or trying to explain how GST is to help the poor, or why CPF is not your money and it is good to put more money into the CPF, safe forever. And her favourite, how to be a foreign talent and survives in this island that is so welcoming of foreign talents like maids and construction workers, how she takes a Grab taxi driven by her employer.....

There are just so many humorous things for Missy Bean in Red Dot to act on. I am sure all of you would have even better ideas and better scripts for Missy Bean.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Contemplating on the security risks and threats of having too many foreigners



The full impact of having too many foreigners in a little island with only 3m citizens has yet to be felt by the owners of this island. But all the signs are there and more and more people are feeling the heat but could not do anything about it while the advocates of this policy continue to do as they pleased, to bring in more and more foreigners into a land scarce piece of rock.

I am wondering what would the people responsible for the security and safety and national interest of this island be thinking about this. Would they or have they done a risk analysis on this conscious policy to flood the island with so many foreigners?

The problems or consequences can be viewed from a few perspective.

1. How would so many foreigners affect the country as a whole, the citizens, and what level or percentage would be tolerable and manageable? The problem with this question is that it is complicated by the fact that foreigners could become instant citizens and counted as Singaporeans overnight, or be counted under the gray term called 'locals' and people may be misled to what they are, whether they are ducks or chicken.

2. The same questions can also be viewed at the level of a ministry, stats board, a GLC or corporation or company. What is tolerable, how many are tolerable, and what are the risks?

3. Going down the line, the risks and threats of having too many, how many foreigners, in a dept or section, unit of an organisation? Imagine the damage they could do, unhindered, unchecked, operating without being watched by Singaporeans, to the organisations and country?

4. What about their big presence, absolute majority or dominating majority in highly sensitive depts or units like finance, IT etc where they could cause untold damage and security concern if they turn bad?

5. What kind of security vetting and clearance are done on foreigners holding highly sensitive appointments in the country, ministries, stats boards, GLCs and corporations? Do they go through the same stringent security screening, and being a foreign import, how reliable are the vetting done on them and their backgrounds? There are many non govt corporations that should also require security screening and vetting.

6. Have the over representation of foreigners of untold backgrounds posed a security and safety risk to our country and national interest?

7. Is there anyone or organisation working on this, like the high powered Select Committee on fake news? Which of these poses a higher security and safety risk to the country?

Or is everyone and resources spent on witch hunting on lying academics or the opposition leaders? What are the real security and safety risks facing the nation and people that have been forgotten and letting wrong priorities set the agenda?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13855
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Nov 14, 2018 8:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tan Bah Bah – talking sense and nonsense
Desinicise Singapore, speak Bahasa and be more Asean, this is the heading of a ‘sense and nonsense’ post by Tan Bah Bah in theindependent. I am not sure whether he is saying he is talking sense or nonsense. The gist of his article is that Singapore must speak more Bahasa and be more like Asean. I am not sure if Asean means more Bahasa from Singapore’s frog in the well perspective or a baba’s perspective. Out of the 10 countries in Asean, only 3 countries speak Bahasa, ie Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. There are Vietnam, Thailand, Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia and the Philippines that have their own national languages and are proud of their own languages and cultures. Would they want to speak more Bahasa to be more Asean, presuming that Bahasa is Asean?
Historically, the development of civilization is about survival of the fittest. When the Mongols and Manchus conquered and ruled over China, they tried to impose their culture and language on the Chinese. They failed and eventually embraced the Chinese culture and language. What is the moral of these two stories?
When the Europeans invaded and conquered North America, they did not try to be more Red Indians and to speak more Red Indian language. They made their languages, especially English the lingua franca of the USA. OK, this story is quite different as they terminated and ‘genocided’ the Red Indians to near extinction and became irrelevant as a civilization.
The rest of the world, especially the third world less developed countries, embraced English with gusto. Singapore is an exception as the migrants have very shallow roots and are very willing to discard their own culture and language, especially the babas, to take on a different personality and identity. The fact that China and the Chinese Civilisation were in eclipse, conquered and devastated by the West, with China becoming a bankrupt and pariah country, helped these babas to want to dissociate themselves from being Chinese more willingly, just like duckweeds. Duckweeds have short roots and would change their roots quite easily.
The English language triumphed and became the major commercial and national language in Singapore and also in India and many other countries. There is no denying that the Europeans, represented by the English Empire and the English language, were superior, modern and advanced in areas of science and technology, the arts, medicine, in govt etc etc. A useful and progressive language would always be attractive to the progressive who want to learn a foreign language. But many newly independent countries proud of their own nationalities and cultures, chose to abandon the English language to promote the use of their own languages. That is why within Asean, every state has its own national language while English is still promoted in some way as an international language of commerce.
Would the rest of the Asean countries be willing to want to learn a third language like the Bahasa for greater Asean identity? Would they be willing to put in the effort and would they be able to cope with this additional task of learning another language that is less functional and not really a commercial regional language, definitely not an international language? Singaporeans, the Chinese and especially the babas, could not even cope with learning the Chinese language that is culturally and intrinsically Chinese, but they could cope with Bahasa just to be more Asean from the perspective of a frog in a well?
By the way, Singapore has been trying to be more Asean at least in the choice of a national dress. Ong Teng Chuan tried to introduce the orchid shirt but it faded away. Singapore’s national dress is the national dress of Asean. Wherever our leaders go, they will wear the national dress of that particular Asean country. When they visit Malaysia and Indonesia, they will wear batik. When they visit the Philippines, Vietnam, Myanmar, Thailand etc, they would choose their respective national dress. This is Singapore’s first step to desinicise and become more Asean.
Is Tan Bah Bah’s proposal making sense or is he talking nonsense?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 39, 40, 41
Page 41 of 41

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Hosted by Vodien Internet Solutions