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
Blow, blow the Wind of Change!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 17, 18, 19  Next
 
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: Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Red Dot’s diplomacy
The govt has been harping on the criticism by Kishore Mahbubani over its hiccup in its relation with China. The angst over the episode is very hard to get over with in several quarters meaning that what Kishore had said must have been painful to the ears of some. Over the last few days the govt has came out very strongly with its principled position diplomacy as if it is some unknown gem that must be displayed for all to see.
The key points were guarding and protecting our national interests and territorial integrity and also punching above our weight. The message, Singapore would walk around with a loudspeaker to make sure everyone heard us, that Singapore is not some little country to be trifled with.
Vivian Balakrishnan even called a townhall meeting and had it broadcasted over the national media about how big Singapore was and is, that we are the champion of small states and the interests of small states and the rule of law. Who is/are the intended audience of this ‘koyok’ selling session? Is Kishore the main target, that he had rubbed people the wrong way and must be put in his place? Or are the audience the neighbouring countries or China, the country that was poked, oops, some denied that we did that, and was not amused?
What did Kishore say that must be straightened out? I heard that Kishore was accused of saying something like being small we must compromise our principles and interests, that we should bend out heads and be kicked around or something like that. I am very sure Kishore did not say such things or implied either. It is an over exaggeration to put words into Kishore’s mouth that as a small state we should not speak up and allow others to trample all over us. Kishore was very outspoken on such issues when he was our rep in the UN and the US.
In Vivian’s townhall speech I got it that it was all about ‘we’ or ‘us’ and our interest, that these should not be compromised, our principles, our integrity. No one can dispute such arguments. Even all the smallest states that have been very quiet in their diplomacy would guard their interests and principles vehemently. And I think all the big powers would also appreciate and would accept such a position of small states. But bully they would if conditions allowed.
In diplomacy it is all about influencing other countries to support one’s position and interest. Every country, big and small, is doing this. Singapore too is doing the same thing. There is nothing wrong with this. What is wrong and unacceptable is to reveal what were said behind closed doors. This is a breach of confidentiality and faith. There is no need to wash such laundry in the open. Behind closed doors, many things would be said, there would be horse trading of all shades and colours. Take your positions or turn down the offers, but there is no need to kpkb in the open about what was spoken. This country or that country wanted us to do this or that. This is bad manners and poor taste in diplomacy!
And in the cause of protecting our principles and interests, it does not mean that we can go around compromising other people’s principles and interests. While we are talking about ‘we and us’ there is a need to know if we have violated or compromise the principles and interests of other parties. A good example is the hosting of American air and naval forces here. There is nothing wrong with that and it is in our national interest to want the Americans to be here. But we need to be careful of what the Americans are doing to others. And we need to be careful in what we said and why the Americans are here for. Telling China that the Americans are invited here to balance their influence is very unfriendly. Some things are left better unsaid. If the Americans are using our facilities to violate, intimidate or threaten the interests of our neighbours or other countries, can we walk around with a halo over our heads and proclaim we are innocent, none of our business, we are not involved?
Every nation state would pursue their national interest at all cost. But while doing so, and it compromises the interest of other states, then it is not so innocent and acceptable by others and one can expect consequences. The Americans’ provocative and belligerent behavior in the South China Sea, and operating from our shores, would not be accepted kindly and would affect our relations with China for sure. Do not do unto others if we don’t want others to do unto us. This must also be a key principle in diplomacy. It cannot be always about ‘we and us’ with no regards to others. This is elementary. This is decency.
_________________
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: Fri Aug 04, 2017 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PAP’s standard on impropriety
Chok Tong’s famous quote that any PAP minister or MP that were accused of impropriety or misconduct must clear his name by suing the accuser or the accusation be deemed to be true. In today’s media, Hsien Loong has added a condition to Chok Tong’s standard of impropriety by saying that any minister accused of improper conduct must clear his name publicly. I quote, ‘Any minster accused of improper conduct must clear his name publicly and “should not allow the allegations to fester and affect the reputation of the Govt.”’
Notice the missing part about suing the accuser. Hsien Loong added, ‘if the allegation is serious, he would expect the minister to take court action for defamation, “unless there are other special considerations….He may also need to render account in Parliament, particularly if the matter concerns his discharge of public duties and is of public interest. These are not mutually exclusive options. In all cases, there must be public accounting.”’
Here is the difference in the two positions. The second position of Hsien Loong is that suing may not be necessary, but public accounting is mandatory with or without suing. His justification or exceptions for not suing is that the party could be family, siblings and may besmirched their parents’ names, and the process may take years , creating distraction and distress to Singaporeans.
Of course Hsien Loong is referring to Lee Kuan Yew’s reputation. The question is whether this ruling is applicable to other ministers and MPs as their parents were not Lee Kuan Yew or Mrs Lee Kuan Yew. Would the ministers and MPs quote this as the new standard and they need not sue their family or siblings when they were accused of impropriety or this is only applicable to Hsien Loong’s case? My reading is that this is for general application to all ministers and MPs or else it would be too stark an exception that would not look too good. It can’t be an exception just for himself.
Also, ministers and MPs that are being accused by their family or siblings could clear their names in Parliament, a public accounting without being sued. Is this the new standard for PAP ministers and MPs to abide by? Also, does it mean that should Hsien Loong’s siblings continue to make allegations against him and immunized from being sued?
_________________
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: Tue Aug 22, 2017 9:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Change is happening inside me
Two things this year prompted me to ask what is happening to me. I did not watch the NDP. And yesterday, 20 Aug, I did not watch Hsien Loong’s National Day Rally Speech as well. Both were events that I hardly missed for the last few decades. Today, I did not even bother to catch up on repeat telecasts or reading the papers to find out what was happening. There was no desire, interest or anticipation of wanting to watch the NDP or wanting to listen to Hsien Loong’s rally speech, like non events, expecting nothing worth spending time on.
Maybe I am getting old, tired, losing interest of what is going on. Maybe becoming apathetic, blasé, nothing matters anymore. I glanced through some comments in the social media that said the speech was banal, missing all the important issues troubling the people. I glanced through the main media only to find that the main issues raised by Hsien Loong were about pre school, diabetes and smart cities. Not that these are unimportant, but definitely not something that I would have written and put much thoughts into them. Ok, I may have written some comments about smart cities and dumb people or smart cities making people stupid, but would not think they are issues that demand much attention when there are many more serious issues that are apparently unsolvable and posing a threat to the good life of Singaporeans.
Maybe these are good reasons why I did not bother to listen to the rally speech. What else is there to interest me to want to waste my little precious time left on? There are so many madnesses in world affairs and domestic issues that would still be stirring inside me, made me feeling unease, to keep me want to question and be concerned about, to want to write about.
Did I miss anything for being tiada apa over the NDP or National Day Rally? Or is there anything important that I have missed?
_________________
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: Mon Oct 02, 2017 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore China relations on the mend?

After Hsien Loong led a high level team of ministers to China and meeting every who's who in China, including Xi Jinping, to mend relations that had gone to an all time low, he and his ministers have been praising how good is Singapore's relations with China. Everything is back to normal, it seems. I also wrote about how China is putting everything aside to start a new relationship with Singapore. It is a rare honour for a head of state, especially from a small little red dot to be allowed to meet so many top Chinese leaders in one trip and when the Chinese leaders were so busy with the Party Congress and the 68th celebration of new China under the CCP rule.

The Chinese have indeed made an exceptionally big effort to accommodate Singapore and wanted relations to improve and move to a higher level. Otherwise Hsien Loong would not be allowed to meet so many of them at such a critical moment. They may not even want to have the visit. The sincerity on the part of China was all there for Hsien Loong to see. If anything that can go wrong after such great effort it is likely to be on the Singapore side. The Singapore media were saying all the good stuff about China and Sino Singapore relations.

Now, could the relations be otherwise, that things did not go that well rather? Here is a post in the statestimesreview quoting a Chinese source that indeed Sino Singapore relations is not what the Singapore side has been saying. It is still NG.

'China’s Defence Ministry today (Sep 2Cool has issued a press statement reiterating their stand that China opposed Singapore conducting joint military operations with Taiwan:

“China is willing to work with Singapore to create favourable conditions to develop an even more mature military relationship. I also want to stress here that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. We resolutely oppose any country having any form of official exchanges with Taiwan or military links.”

The media statement debunks the fake news by Singapore Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen, who called his recent trip to Beijing “successful” suggesting that China has given Singapore the leeway to continue military operations in Taiwan. In an official trip to China last week, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was unable to negotiate an entry into China’s One Belt One Road initiative.'

When a Chinese ministry made such a statement, it means things are not going well. China watchers understood what the Chinese meant when it is an official statement. How could this be when Hsien Loong and his team were also very sincere in wanting to mend relations?

On hindsight, it was clear that Singapore is still adopting an antique strategy of the past, whack first then talk to show that we are tough and not pushovers. At times this would work but doing this to China when it is no longer inferior to the Americans and stating its claim to be the world's number one super power, this kind of strategy is childish at best and stupidity at worst.

How so? Remember the high profile sacking of Professor Huang Jing before the visit to China? Though the ministries still refused to identify who Huang Jing is working for, it is becoming clearer that he is working for China. It would be different if he was working for the Americans. To whack him first and then to visit China to want to mend relations is the stupidest thing to do. How could Singapore think it could get away with such outdated strategy in foreign relations? Punching above your weight, punching China and expecting China to look the other way?

Then there is the training in Taiwan issue. The Chinese had made their stand very clear during the Terrex incident. This is not acceptable. Though the media did not mention anything about this issue being discussed, I bet it was discussed behind closed door. And from this latest statement from the Chinese Defence Ministry, it is quite obvious that Singapore stood firm and want the cake and eat it as well.

The Chinese have deliberated on their discussions with Singapore and is making it public that relations with Singapore are far from being on the mend. It is only the Singapore side that is saying so and thinking it is so. And if this is the case, the doors will be closing on Singapore very fast unless Singapore is able to pull out a miracle in these last hours to make things right.

My reading, Singapore is a principled country and would not bow to pressure and would let its relations with China go down to its ebb. There is always the mighty American Empire to depend on. In the first page of the Sunday Times, 1 Oct, there was a picture of Singapore flag flying with the flags of the US, UK, Australia and New Zealand and with a caption 'Majulah Singapura in Iraq'. Singapore is a core member of the American Empire fighting ISIS. The rest of the European powers have fled this coalition in the Middle East. Singapore remains a staunch supporter and member of the coalition, something to be very proud of, a great honour, to fly the Singapore flag with the Americans, British, Australia and New Zealand side by side, as one of them.

With or without China may not be a real bother. Singapore is now so thick with the Americans that there is nothing to fear, nothing to lose even if relations with China is not doing well.
_________________
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: Fri Oct 06, 2017 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tikam tikam in Parliament
WP’s Sylvia Lim is so lucky. After 3 times of failing to speak in
Parliament this time her bid to speak was balloted. She wanted to ask the
PM on the basis for deciding who should be considered as the first elected
President from which the latest EP election was counted as due this year.
Everyone knows that the first EP was Ong Teng Cheong. Somehow Wee Kim Wee
term as the president was counted as the first EP. Sylvia Lim is asking in
Parliament whether the counting process is a legal matter or a policy
matter.


Is this an important question? It concerns when to hold an election for a
minority EP and the difference is as good as 5 years. And if the question
is so important, why should it be decided on a ballot, like a lucky draw?
It means if Sylvia Lim is unlucky, this question could not be asked for the
next 1000 years.


According to the newly promoted Speaker of Parliament, Tan Chuan Jin,




‘“Just balloted for tomorrow’s adjournment motion (3 Oct 2017). Sylvia
Lim’s motion has been picked. She was present for the draw, as she had been
the previous round. Vikram Nair’s motion would have to be deferred again
for the fourth time. His topic is on the future of NS.




It is important to note that apart from the adjournment motion, we also do
have a Private Member’s Motion that doesn’t require it to be balloted.
Christopher de Souza is in fact tabling one tomorrow and will see quite a
number of MPs speaking on it.




There are various platforms for every individual MPs to surface issues that
concern them. Do make full use of these opportunities.’


I dunno what is the difference between an adjournment motion and a Private
Member’s Motion, but I do know that a MP is a people’s representative and
has all the right to speak in Parliament and this right should not be
curtailed or be subjected to tikam tikam. What is an MP if his right to
speak is not a right but a lucky draw?


Funny isn’t it? First world politics or first world political game aka
tikam tikam.


Now Sylvia Lim must count herself so lucky to be balloted on the third
time. Heng ah! The right to speak in Parliament is like striking lottery.
And to be sure that her question is being put into the ballot box, she had
to be present every time they conduct a ballot. Really BTH. Uniquely
Singapore.


Sylvia Lim’s question on whether the decision on the changed EP for
minority is a policy or a legal matter has been answered by Shanmugam in
Parliament. What came out of Parliament is that the govt can make a policy
decision to override what is in the Constitution. Or the govt, by saying
that it is making a policy decision can interpret the Constitution the way
it thinks will suit the policy decision. Tiok boh? So, what is bigger, a
govt policy or the Constitution?


My layman’s thinking, the Constitution is law, is sacred, cannot anyhow
suka suka interpret to one’s liking. No? The govt is above the Constitution
or the govt’s policy decision is bigger than the Constitution? Like that
can or not? Any big time learned one out there, can enlighten or not? Law
big or policy big?


‘Bo how seow boh kong’ or ‘limpeh kong’ so what you want to do? Singapore’s
lawyers’ thinking and interpretation of the law is world class, super first
class, unbeatable, unchallengable, at least in Singapore.


How many of you want to challenge Shanmugam’s explanation in Parliament? I
am sure no lawyer in Singapore would dare to challenge his interpretation
of the law. Case over. When Shanmugam, the Minister of Law, opens his mouth
to talk about Singapore’s law, ‘bao tiok’ one. Who knows better about the
law of Singapore if not the Minister of Law? Laymen cannot anyhow talk one
talk two because laymen dunno, but the lawyers will know and therefore
agree in silence.


Respect, respect.


PS. The whole truth and nothing but the truth is the advice in the letter
by AGC to the PM.
_________________
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 Dec 09, 2017 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Welcome to the land of the Dabawallas

Aziz Kassim wrote the below article published in the TRE. He called these workers Dabawallas, a termed used in India. In colonial Singapore, a similar term is coolies, the uneducated and unskilled workers selling their labour, sweat and muscle, in exchange for a few cents or a bowl of gruel. Those were the days when Singapore was in the Third World, run by a colonial govt whose interest is in London.
Today, Singapore is supposedly in the First World, the most expensive modern city in the world, run by multi millionaire ministers elected by the people to look after 'their' interests, including providing 'them with decent jobs'. Today, the Dabawallas or coolies are not uneducated and unskilled. They are graduates of our highly rated ITE, trained with technical skills. What is ITE? It’s The End? Oops, it is Institute of Technical Education. The Dabawallas and coolies did not have this privilege to be educated and trained in our ITEs.
The big question, why are the ITE graduates doing unskilled jobs of the Dabawallas and coolies and earning a pittance to survive in this most expensive city in the world? How are they going to bring up a family when they decide to get married and have children?
As Aziz Kassim lamented, are their education and skills so irrelevant that they are unemployable. Some bloggers even commented that some of these Dabawallas or coolies are diploma holders. And we have near full employment, employment 2 million foreigners here, mostly in full time employment, educated and trained in dubious schools or even fake degrees while our modern day Dabawallas or coolies are either temp or contract workers. Who is doing this to our young? Who is condemning our young to be Dabawallas or coolies?
What is happening to Singapore and our children? What is their future going to be like? What is the multimillion dollar ministers going to do to alleviate these people to a higher station in life when they could provide millions of jobs to foreigners here? Or the multimillion dollar ministers think this is the new normal for Singaporeans?

From another angle, we are progressing. At least now you need to get educated and technically trained with a skill to be Dabawallas or coolies. And with the experience as Dabawallas or coolies they can go to neighbouring countries where their skills will be greatly appreciated. Their pay will be raised into millions, in rupiahs, rupees and pesos. Even our graduate drivers will be in high demands in these countries, to drive taxis of course.

What do you think?

Below are some parts of Aziz Kassim's article

Singapore’s Dabawallas – ... A desperate situations, last not least the Dabawalas which hold no futures for youngsters in their career ladders now a starting career for these youngsters.
One would never imagine this is happening in Singapore, yes it is happening in Singapore. Practically everywhere in Singapore you can find them, it is just too many. With Motorbikes, bysicles, electrical bike, young, old and handicaps carrying cooked foods.The shocking and sad part all of them are Singaporean. These show a desperate situations.
Dabawalla, is an old trade of India where Dabawallas earning an average of US $131, usually those of low education...
In Singapore, plying this trade of Dabawalla are Uber, Dolphin , Kangarooo and others. I met few of these Singapore’s Dabawallas; shocking! An average they earn$5 per hour, a miserable amount , worst without taking into consideration the petrol cost.... Are Jobs so scarce for these youth? . I found out most of these are ITE graduates.
Are these people their skills are so irrelevant to the local companies?. Look everywhere, aircon, wiring, starhubs technicians and building industries, all run by foreigners. What is the point of having ITE when local companies prefer to employ foreigners. No wonder the government is expanding the Prison complex....These are one of sad cases where living conditions of Singaporean are slowly deteriorating. The Ministers like an insane preacher, howlings, dont get a degree, jobs might not easy to get but even these poor ITE graduates supposed to be filling for the nation skills worforces they too cant even get a job. .... This Dabawalla thing, something of an eye opener that shows we are going downward hill....
In India , Dabawalla is one of the poverty striken jobs, hence PAP are bringing us to the next level, lol the third world.
Aziz Kassim
_________________
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 Dec 27, 2017 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singaporeans alternative career opportunities
It used to be getting a degree and finding a cosy executive or professional jobs as the career choice. In the early years of our independence, getting a degree would mean a relatively comfortable life afterwards. The pursuit of education was then the right path to a better future, to own the 5Cs. Parents poured in thousands of dollars, hundreds of thousands of dollars, for their children to get that much coveted degree.
While the cost of education has risen to a point when the returns, financially, for the money spent becomes a diminishing return as in economic theory, this did not deter the parents from their hopes of a better life for their children. Why spent so much just to earn so little in a part time job, in contract job, or in driving Uber or Grab taxis? It just doesn’t make sense anymore.
Ministers have chipped in to say a degree cannot be eaten and some even say a degree is not necessary. The young are encouraged to take on skilled jobs, like crane drivers and hawkers. The cosy jobs should go to the foreign talents from the third world armed with fictitious or fake degrees or fake work experience. These are the talents that are deserving of the cosy jobs that Singaporeans are no longer fit to be employed, even if they get their degrees from the two native world class universities. Don’t laugh, when a country is run by silly people this is the end result.
The new graduates and undergraduates understood the new realities and the advices by the ministers. They no longer expect to be employed in the cosy jobs they once longed for. They know that they are not good enough and these jobs are reserved for foreign ‘talents’. There is an article in Channel News Asia highlighting the latest choice of our young undergraduates doing interns, as hawker assistants.
Here is the report, ‘The 'hawker interns' selling prawn mee: Choosing the hawker life over the tried and tested route
Joanne Heng and Chan Kheng Yee were about to graduate from university, and were looking for a full-time job. But a "random" job ad online set them on the path to hawker life.’
The young Singaporeans, the generation XYZ are practical people, just like their parents and grandparents. They are not choosy about the jobs they are doing, as long as there is a job. Now who are the silly guys that said Singaporeans are choosy and difficult to please when jobs are concerned? And these young people are also just as obedient (read dumb) as their parents, and would listen to the wise govt on their career choices and life style. They understood that a degree cannot be eaten. A skilled is more important to get a job. So more and more will be turning to become hawkers, crane drivers and Grab and Uber drivers. They know that they could not compete with the best of the best of foreign fake talents possessing genuine fake and fictitious degrees or degrees from half past six universities.
There is hope, a different kind of hope, and a different kind of future for our young graduates from our world best universities. Their expectations in life are simple, realistic and not over demanding. Any job is better than no job or part time jobs. Did they ever think of the disappointments in their parents, their dreams crashed when after spending thousands of dollars, getting a degree from world best universities, their daft children would end up as hawkers and drivers? Could they feel the pain of their dejected parents, their pride of having children graduated from universities only to become manual workers?
Welcome to the brave new world. The parents should save their money. There is no need to put their children to universities if the expectation is to be hawkers, crane drivers and cab drivers.
PS. If cooking to be a hawker is good enough, they could learn all the tips from their mothers or grandmothers, at home. No need to pay expensive tuition fees and mug for examinations.
Dunno to laugh or to cry. Stupidity has no cure. Oh, this is the kind of things that our reporters and journalists are assigned to write about. So intellectually stimulating. Though they may not get a Pulitzer, there are many prizes that the local media industry could dish out for them to be recognised as best reporters and journalists. This is progress. Our graduates should be encouraged to become hawkers and Uber or Grab drivers. Our reporters can write about them as the new and desirable lifestyles of graduates. It is a dream job to be Grab or Uber drivers and also to be hawkers.
_________________
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 Jan 04, 2018 8:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore China relations
Finally, after avoiding making any comments directly on the strained relations between Singapore and China, Wang Gungwu, the Confucianist gentleman, wrote a piece in the ST on 18 Dec highlighted the 4 major events that were the roots of the problems. What he said were nothing new but a repeat of everything that had been said about the tedious and unnecessary souring of a relationship built and cultivated earnestly by Lee Kuan Yew. Lee Kuan Yew must be turning in his grave seeing his good work being dismantled and dumped as trash into the dustbin by silly politicians with egos bigger than a coconut but intellect the size of a pea.
With all the cock advice to put all the eggs in the American basket and thinking that it was alright to poke at the eyes of China and China would not dare to do anything, things finally came to a rude ending and Hsien Loong had no choice but to make a trip to Beijing in September to make amends. This was a serious effort at the highest level on the Singapore side and everyone hoped that relations would be back to normal. At least that was the picture painted by the Singapore side and the Singapore media. Sino Singapore relations are on the mend and everything will be warm and rosy going forward after Hsien Loong's return.
Even Wang Gungwu also has the same impression that things could only be better as the trip by Hsien Loong must have been made with great sincerity to bring relations to an even keel. Apparently from what I have observed, things are getting worst and not better. After relations had hit rock bottom, it could not return to normal just because Hsien Loong made that trip and had a meeting with Xi Jinping. The sincerity to improve relations must be seen to be so and Singapore would have to backup with more friendly gestures towards China. There were some signs of the media publishing more China friendly reports for a while, but somehow, the anti China articles kept coming in greater frequency as before. China could not fail to notice this lack of sincerity to get the relations back to normal, or the back to normal is to continue as before, with more anti China articles by silly academics and foreigners and dumb locals as the norm. Any China watcher could not miss the tone, nuances and the choice of articles and authors that are unfriendly to China being given greater exposure all over again.
Not only words but deeds would be telling of the state of Sino China relations. If my reading is correct, Singapore has taken a hardened path to move away from China and there is no turning back. The biggest pain in the arse in the geopolitical equation in the region is India, the pretentious superpower to be and its hostile and aggressive stance towards anything China. India has been flirting with the Americans, Japan and even Vietnam to be a spoiler in the region against China's interests. India had been involved in bi lateral and multi lateral war games with them around China’s coasts and the enemy is clear as daylight.
Though India is inconsequential to China, it is still an irritant and any country thinking that it was a good idea to invite the Indians to be more involved in the region cannot be seen as being innocent and naive and could not see the part India is playing against China. For Singapore to openly invite India to park its warships in Changi at a time like this is too obvious on the stand of Singapore and its relations with China. No amount of pleas of ignorance would be accepted and forgiven.
The trip by Hsien Loong to Beijing in September is as good as a bad dream, wasted, unnecessary and should not have taken. Singapore's relations with China is far from being on the mend and is fast deteriorating. Well, if that is the intent of Singapore, then there is nothing to cry about. It might as well go that way, quicker, faster and more direct. There is no need to wayang to pretend that Singapore desires to improve its relations with China.
Has Singapore decided to just do it and so be it? The new future of Singapore is to get closer with the pretentious power to be, India. As for the USA, Trump is unpredictable but would not turn away from American supremacy and primacy in this part of the world. In fact Trump has no interest in Singapore and probably Singapore has read this correctly and is not cosying up to Trump. Singapore would never receive the same kind of attention that Obama gave and Hsien Loong would never be able to have the same kind of rapport with Obama in Trump.
Looks like Singapore is going to put all its eggs in the Indian basket. This is my observation. Clever or muddy thinking?
_________________
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 Feb 03, 2018 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore Dilemma – Should Hsien Loong rule to 70 years and beyond?
This is the new twist to the so called Singapore PM succession dilemma. Hsien Loong is now faced with a dilemma, to appoint a successor quickly as prompted by Chok Tong or to continue to rule to 70, thus avoiding the need to quickly appoint someone risking appointing another dud orchestra conductor without the privilege of an apprenticeship. The option for Hsien Loong to rule to 70 looks like the best solution at this moment, a win win formula.
Let’s look at all the good points for such an extension, looking at one side of the coin. The negative side I will leave it to your imagination. One, without having to rush to appoint a crown prince, a PM designate, Hsien Loong would have more time to observe how they perform and their suitability to be the next PM. A mistake would be very costly, the downward spin towards third world would be faster. Two, 70 year old is still very young. Just look at how healthy Chok Tong is and how LKY continued to serve and watch over the govt till past 90 years, age is no problem. Three, Hsien Loong took 14 years to learn to be a PM, Chok Tong needed 6 years to prove his competence, so on the average, the next PM would need about 10 years to learn the ropes. Given this proviso, 70 year is not enough and Hsien Loong should continue beyond 70 to give the next crown prince a fair chance to learn to be competent.
Four, since the current batch of potentials is not looking that promising, for Hsien Loong to go on beyond 70 would allow the 5G to come in and be in the running as well. The pool would thus be bigger, with the ageing 4G and the youngish 5G competing to be the best man. It would only benefit Singapore if the best man wins. Five, with Hsien Loong’s rule confirmed, it would bring in more stability and certainty, and no one can rock the boat, meaning more foreign companies would come to invest here and more good jobs for Singaporeans. And all wild ambitions would not have a chance to surface.
See, there is no dilemma if Hsien Loong would to rule to 70 and beyond, win win all round. Nowadays I got this strange feeling that my observations and analysis are getting wiser and wiser. Simply brilliant. I am sure the 70% would fully agree with my viewpoints.
What do you think?
_________________
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: Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tharman must be on standby and be ready to take over
The 4G young turks are still not sure of themselves and not sure who should be the crown prince to take over the premiership. Hsien Loong said they needed time to feel for each other. The big question is how much time do they have and need to choose a new leader? And the assumption is that the new leader will be better than the two DPMs or other senior ministers today. Is this assumption valid, that the young turks would make better PM than the not too old senior ministers? Is the system of renewal, to appoint young turks to succeed a PM, by passing existing ministers, cast in stone and good for the country?
While some may think that time is on the side of the young turks and they can take their leisure walk pondering and musing who should be the next PM, there is also another saying that time waits for no man. A situation may crop up against the will of man, that a new PM have to be appointed quickly before the young turks knew what is happening, assuming that they are the one to make this decision, the two DPMs would be the natural choice to assume the premiership or like in most cases, be acting premier for the time being. And if historical precedents are to go by, taking the example of Thailand, an acting premier is not going to give up the premiership and would want to continue with the premiership himself.
Should such a situation become a reality, those people that wish to see Tharman as the next PM, and those people that fear Tharman becoming the next PM, would have their wishes and fear fulfilled. In all probabilities, Tharman is the most likely candidate to stand up to the plate when there is uncertainty and a power vacuum. He has crafted a fine image as the most desirable candidate for the next PM. None of the young turks has that credential, no achievement to their credits that can be used to justify their rise to the premiership. Their current position as potential crown prince is based on a system designed by the PAP, not based on merit in the sense that the best man should be the PM, regardless of age or seniority.
Given the current scenario, Tharman should prepare himself just in case. Saying no is one thing, but the forces of nature may push him into the ring despite him saying he is not interested in the job. Many things in life are unpredictable. And Murphy’s Law may prove that it is still relevant and real. Whatever can happen will happened. The longer the young turks dilly dally, the more remote would be their chances of becoming the next PM. It only proves that they are not ready or could not decide who should lead…and the natural choice is….
Singaporeans must brace themselves for an Indian PM if God chooses to dispose the schemes of man.
_________________
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 Feb 08, 2018 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

When the people trusted the govt
There was a time when the people trusted the govt. Believe me, this is true, was true, in those days the people totally trusted the govt and would support the govt in many of its hard policies. That is history now, but it is good to reminisce and recollect how and why the people trusted the govt then. Some silly buggers are out there decrying that the older generations were stupid to trust the govt and they are to be blamed for the shit that the new generations and future generations are facing and going to eat going forward. I would say that this blame is partially right in the sense that many of the oldies could not see the change or did see the change but unable to change their mindset to change the govt of today that is very different from the govt of yesterday. The transition was initially slow, and like the proverbial frog, the pioneer generations are slowly being cooked to death.
What kind of govt then that could gain almost absolute trust from the people? In the first place the PM was getting a salary of $7,500 pm or thereabout while a minister was getting $5,000, and MPs were getting very much lesser. And the people could buy HDB flats at really subsidized prices, $6,800 for a 3rm flat, $27,500 for a 5rm flat. Anyone earning a 4 figure salary, ie $1,000pm could buy a simple car that cost $6,000. Anyone earning a 4 figure salary, ie $1,000 or $2,000 could get married and raised a family quite comfortably, even owning a car.
Anyone in the uniformed services, to serve and die for the country, would have priority in getting a subsidized HDB flat. The govt went further, and built flats exclusively for the uniformed services. And more, the most important factor, the govt then trusted Singaporeans and looked after Singaporeans, not looking after foreigners and giving good jobs to foreigners.
Under such circumstances, there was unspoken trust, trust that was given by the people to the govt without being demanded, without being asked. It was voluntary and involuntary trust, at times unquestioned trust.
Today the trust for the govt is in doubt, in question, and they have no clue why the trust was lost. Sure, the income has gone up, people are earning 5 figure salaries. But what can the 5 figure salary buy? Many earning 4 figure salaries are struggling to bring up a family, all in debt for the ‘highly subsidised’ half a million or more HDB flats and cars, expensive medical and education and high cost of living. In fact many could no longer afford to buy a simple car costing more than $100k. And things are spiraling downhill in double speed. Many have to sell their properties to spend their twilight years, not to hand down to their children. And once sold, nothing is left.
Still trying to figure out why the trust is gone? Millionaires, natural aristocrats, immortals have no clue? How about more theatrics?
_________________
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 Apr 07, 2018 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trade war offers great opportunities for Singapore
The trade war between China and the US offers great opportunities for Singapore despite doomsayers saying the contrary. When China cancels all its orders for soya beans and pork and other food stuff, and this could also apply to Boeing aircraft, the American producers and manufacturers would have their hands full of these products that their warehouses could not hold. What are they going to do with all the foodstuff and beans and aircraft? There will be over production, over capacity and over employment that would need to be shed.
Who has the money to buy these excess produce and aircraft? If Singapore is smart, ask for fire sale prices. Make sure they are dirt cheap. The Americans must sell, desperate to sell, and there would not be many buyers with the dole. It will be buyer’s market.
What would Singapore do with the purchases? For aircraft, there is SIA and its subsidiaries to pick them up. SIA then can cancel its orders for Boeings as well. With the fire sales, there is no need to go ahead with the orders at high prices. Sorry Trump, you slapped Singapore with Broadcom, now it is only fair that Singapore strikes back.
Singapore can also quietly negotiate with China, the original buyer of Boeings to offer them at greatly reduced prices and make a commision just by being the middleman. This can also apply to the soya beans, pork and whatever. The real end losers would be the American farmers and Boeings and other American producers. China could pick up the same stuff for a song with Singapore making the money and the Americans making the losses.
Singapore should quickly send a special team to the US to pick up these great bargains that come once in a life time. But don't tell Trump that Singapore is capitalising on the spoils of war. Tell Trump Singapore is there to help. Trade war is good for Singapore. Let them fight and Singapore can pick up the pieces.
What do you think? There are caveats of course. The relations between Singapore and the US and China must be really good, not fake good. And the price must be really dirt cheap for China to want to buy.
Now is saying that trade war is bad?
_________________
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 Jun 07, 2018 8:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is Tuas mega port a white elephant?



The Tuas mega port is going to cause the govt several billion dollars and the govt is desperate for money, a very strange phenomenon if one is to believe that we have nearly one trillion dollars in reserves. Why would Khaw Boon Wan come out in public to announce that the govt has no money to pay for this port? What is a few billion dollars when you have nearly a trillion dollars stashed away? Quite puzzling indeed. Something fishy is going on.

The Tuas mega port is several times the size of the present port facilities and to build such a big port it means that the govt is anticipating at least a doubling in growth of shipping using the port. Otherwise it would indeed be a white elephant, building for the sake of building to boost up the GDP.

The big question, would there really be a big increase in shipping traffic or a big fall instead. Chinese shipping criss crossing Singapore makes up more than 80% of all shippings through the Straits of Malacca. If the Chinese diverted all their ships to Malacca or elsewhere, the ships calling at Tuas would go down by 80% from the present number. Even with the present capacity it would be over provided and our port would be a white elephant. If Tuas mega port is going to handle only 20% of existing shipping traffic, it would look like a ghost port, and indeed a white elephant.

This likelihood is a great possibility given the Chinese plan to be less dependent on Singapore port and the massive developments of Malacca, Gwadar and ports in Myanmar and the eventuality of a Kra Canal. The fate of Tuas mega port is hanging on a string given the present political equation.

Could Singapore turn the tide and preserve its preeminent position as the main port of call for Chinese shipping and prevent the ships from diverting to other ports? This is the tricky situation Singapore is in today, to build a mega port that could end up as a white elephant and wasting public funds in doing so.

The fate of Tuas mega port and Singapore as a thriving sea port depends on China's shipping policies which ultimately boils down to Singapore's strategic balance between China and the USA. China would want to have as many ports of call as possible to spread out its dependence on anyone port. It wants to have options. All the ports it is building are in countries that are very fickle minded and highly undependable. Malaysia has just made a volte face and threatening to derail everything the Chinese are building, including the Malacca port. This is the treacherous position of China when dealing with equality slippery leaders in the region. The cancellation of Malacca and the rail projects would mean Malaysia is no longer in the BRI and brings hope of Singapore becoming indispensable again.

Not really, as China may find the need to cut the Isthmus of Kra more urgent. What can Singapore do to regain its choice place in the Chinese equation? Ideally, it would be best for Singapore to do its balancing act well, with a real balance between China and the US with the Chinese feeling more secure, that the American threats to their interest in transiting the area within their control or not at the mercy of the Americans and a Singapore that is neutral to both.

A better option would be a more pro China policy, relatively to the US to enhance and encourage Chinese shipping here without having to spend huge funds to build up Malacca port or cutting the Kra Canal. Think about it, what can the Americans offer that China could not offer and who can offer more? The security aspect of American forces to protect Singapore's interest is something China is equally capable of doing today. And everything else the Americans could do or offer, China could offer more. The biggest consumer market in the world, a growing economy to rival the Americans, the factory of the world, the BRI and of course to channel its shipping to Tuas mega port. This last part the Americans could only do a fraction of what the Chinese could offer.

A more favourable foreign policy towards China would hook up Singapore to the world's biggest growth engine in the 21st Century versus a dying evil Empire. What is there to lose for redefining its foreign policies towards China?

There is hope that Tuas mega port would not be a white elephant if Singapore plays its cards right. And there is certain death if it does not change its one sided pro American or anti China policies. Start by clearing the swamp in the main media from publishing anti China and biased American views against China. Singapore still has an outside chance to save its position as a vital sea port of call for Chinese shipping. Remember, without the 80% of ships calling here, Singapore is dead duck
_________________
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 Jun 17, 2018 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore turning into a rubbish dump
When a country is silly enough to bring in all the rubbish and rejects of third world countries and called them talents to replace the highly educated Singaporeans from world best universities, you know that something is very sick.

Once all the Singaporeans are replaced by the rubbish or have to work and report to the rubbish, you can bet that Singapore will turn into a rubbish dump.

The transition is rapid and before you know it, Singapore the rubbish dump would become a reality.

Singapore is becoming a country that does not believe in its people but in the rubbish third world rejects they brought in by the plane loads to replace its very own people whose parents built the Singapore of today. The rubbish from the third world will inherit the Singapore built by the early Singaporeans and turn it into another rubbish third world country, knowing what these third world rubbish's capabilities are, con, cheat, bluff, lie to get what they want.

The day to a Rubbish Singapore is around the corner. You can see it everywhere, read it everywhere, there is no hiding. You can even smell it.
_________________
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: Tue Jun 26, 2018 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

My Singapore News


Is this a third world country? Is this a country suffering from abject poverty? This is a recent picture taken by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan when he visited North Korea in June 2018. Have you be duped by the western media?
































































6/26/2018




The indignity of being overpaid in million dollar salaries



There was a time when earning a million dollar salary was something to be proud of. Oops, actually it is still something to be proud of anytime and anywhere if one can earn such money as salary. And it is also right to say that dignity comes with such a salary. But a high salary is not necessarily equated with dignity. Donald Trump, the President of USA gets a US$1 salary a year as a token. Is his dignity diminished or lesser than those who earned more then him? Nay. Xi Jinping, the President of PRC earns less than $30,000 a year. Anyone earning more than him would dare to claim that he has bigger dignity than Xi or Trump? Nay.

Dignity is not the money you are earning, but the value or worth of the person, what is he contributing, able to contribute to country, organisation or society. The indignity part comes when one is earning ridiculous salary and contributing nothing.

The million dollar, oops, multi million dollar salaries of Singapore's politicians is becoming a joke and the talk in town. No one has anything good to say about this indiscretionary abuse of public money to pay such humongous salary that it is becoming so glaringly clear that it is not right. People who are being paid in the millions but are seen to be contributing nothing or contributing foolishly with silly ideas would never have the dignity associated with the million dollar salary. What they have is indignity and disdain. Instead of the awe and respect they should be receiving, people would be shaking their heads in disbelief when they appeared. And many smug and unceremoniously remarks would be uttered at the indignity of such million dollar salary recipients. They have become walking exhibits of ridiculous and pompous duds. There is no dignity.

Below are a few of the remarks copied from comments in the TRE in an article posted by Phillip Ang on ministerial salary. This is what some people are saying and ridiculing the ministers for the million dollar salary that no longer makes sense and deemed inappropriate and senseless. What dignity can one talk about when the reverse is the reality? I could have copied more of the unsavoury and spicy comments about the indignity of being paid multi million dollar salary when one is undeserving.



oxygen:


June 22, 2018 at 1:34 pm (Quote)
FOR A LONG LONG TIME IMMEMORIAL, Ministerial pay was a SCAM – benchmarked to top private sector earners. The top private sector earners are a ROTATING POOL including businessmen or CEO’s of privately-owned business who have built their family business for decades.
IT IS A SURE-WIN BET of no risks and WORST STILL NO PERFORMANCE relevance. In private sector, if no performance, your family business KAPUT.
So how can ministerial pay be benchmarked to private sector earnings of any descript? It is RIDICULOUS TO ABSURDITY.



John Richards:


June 22, 2018 at 11:54 am (Quote)
And I don’t understand why our multi-millionaire Ministers need to be paid hefty and ridiculous bonuses. Bonuses should be scrapped for Ministers. It’s merely a way to enrich themselves while leaving us clueless as to how much they are actually paid per year.

tremendous:

June 22, 2018 at 8:49 am (Quote)


If we count the total package as is always done in hr, it will not be just $1.1m. It’s not just the ministers but also board chairmen and perm secs. What exactly are their contributions or failed performances for the amounts they make ? Being a leader in the team that cannot solve transport woes ? Being the chairman of a losing sovereign fund ? Or being a board director who failed in oversight of corruption ?



LIONS:


June 22, 2018 at 11:39 pm (Quote)


even in PRIVATE SECTOR, a guy running a big bank such as JP MORGAN would logically be paid much more than a bloke running a smallish outfit by and large.
are the PAP folks telling us and the whole world that RUNNING SG is manifolds harder than for the POTUS to run THE MIGHTY USA or that IT IS EASIER for xi jin ping to govern CHINA?
perhaps the PM should compare his pay to that of the PM of PAPUA NEW GUINEA???
_________________
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 ... , 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 18 of 19

 
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