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
The Role and Responsibility of a Government.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Aug 28, 2013 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The earnest of govt to want to talk to the people
The Natcon or OSC had run for one full year and 47,000 Singaporeans have been invited to talk to the govt. This is the clearest sign that the govt sees a need to engage the people, to listen to the people, to talk to the people. It also shows that the views of the people are important. The govt is encouraging the people to speak up, share their views and in the making of a Singapore that they want.
No one can doubt the sincerity of the govt for stepping out of their ivory tower to be up close with the people. One group of people that is glaringly missing in this equation is the critics in cyberspace. Somehow the govt does not seem to know that they exist and have a lot of things to say and want to contribute to the making of the future Singapore. Maybe if they shout louder or put up their hands they will be noticed. Stand up to be counted. The govt is talking about an all inclusive society and would have no intention of leaving them out. It must be a case of being in the fringes and difficult to know they are there. But no worry, soon the invitation will come.
The govt is in all earnest trying to get as much feedback and involved as many people in the business of the country. Wait, just wait, be patient. All the right people will be invited to share in the making of the country. Have faith.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Sep 05, 2013 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The cursed Singaporeans
Last night’s Channel News Asia talk programme on whether the govt has alienated the PRs with the recent housing curbs and other measures drew out one important and very basic issue, ie, a roof over the heads of PRs and citizens. Having a roof over the head is so basic that it should be provided by any responsible and thinking govt. There is no need to be a super talent to even think of this. All the participants, locals and foreigners, agreed that a roof is a basic need.
And they also agreed on another point. How could the govt brought in so many people without thinking of the basic infrastructure, especially housing? In whatever forms, housing is a must. And they too agreed it was due to the inept policy of not building. And now we have this very serious problem of housing prices that is going to be a curse to all those with a big housing loan.
In today’s Today paper, the writer, Ku Swee Yong, was talking about buyers taking up $500k loan for a 5 rm resale HDB flat or a $1.3m loan for an EC as if it is a monopoly game. A $1.3m loan over 30 years will come to at least $2m in total payment, just for a few pieces of mortars around a small space. How much do the bricks and cement, some wirings and fittings cost?
This is a general curse on the Sinkies who were made to buy public housing at such prices and to pay using a big chunk of their income, and praying that they would be earning that income for 30 years with both not losing their jobs.
The biggest group that is cursed is those Singaporeans that were barred from buying public housing through all the spurious reasoning. With private properties at more than a million, how could they force citizens to buy private properties and not be allowed to buy public housing that are also not cheap? And when should citizens be made to buy from resale market like PRs and pay another few hundred thousands more for the same flat? Any Singaporean that is not allowed to buy public housing is as good as being cursed when foreigners turned new citizens could do so.
The govt owes every Singaporean a right, yes the right to buy a public housing flat. The govt has a case to answer to these Singaporeans who are disallowed to buy public housing as the problem is caused by under building and nothing else.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Oct 22, 2013 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hsien Loong – Don’t perform will have to go
During an interview with the CNN Hsien Loong said that anyone in his team would have to go if they did not perform. This statement has been quoted by some bloggers as a reason for Boon Wan to go since the MND is losing several billions for building HDB flats for the people. The issue is not that simple as it is made up to be.
How shall a minister’s performance be judged, in particular, like the case of building public flats? Should the measurement be about making profit for the govt or building affordable housing for the people? Or should it be about building enough flats for the people are reasonable prices, not affordable prices, and without having to wait for several years? Or should it be about building enough flats to meet the demands of the people without incurring huge losses.
The above questions are quite straight forward reality. In the current case, the issue is not just about the losses, or is it about the losses? And what is this loss, or is there really a loss? This can only come to light if the details of the costing are laid on the table. Then it could become an issue of productivity, efficiency and taking care of the interests of the people. Or it could become an issue to taking care of the interests of the party.
The factors to be used to measure Boon Wan’s performance can be complementary or be in conflict with one another. And different people with different perspectives or vested interests would want to judge his performance according to their own set of good or right factors.
In this case, the loss of several billions is academic, in a way fictitious as it is a matter of right pocket left pocket. That is why Boon Wan could proudly announce it with a blank expression knowing very well it would not affect his performance. If it would, he could easily ask the finance guy to jiggle the factors and numbers to show a profit instead. It is all about what factors to be used for the input.
So, what should be the pertinent factors to be used to judge a minister or Boon Wan to reflect the real performance and the desired results? Should it be the price or the quality of the flats? Should it be the ability to meet the demand and expectation of the people? Should profit be a factor and if so, how should it be measured and what factors should be used to be reasonable?
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Oct 30, 2013 8:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hearing the good stuff
I thought I was dreaming and I had to slap myself a couple of times to confirm that it was 8 am in the morning, bright and clear. I read the news again, the speeches made by Hsien Loong and Tharman, and wow, what were they saying? Let me start by looking at the comments by Hsien Loong first.
In the front page of Today, this is the headline, ‘Immigration policies must be managed in sustainable way: PM’. Have we been doing it in an unsustainable way? This is followed by the first paragraph, ‘Singapore has to manage its immigration policies in a sustainable way, taking into account the political, demographic and economic objectives the country has for the long term, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong told a gathering of business leaders yesterday. While new immigrants have to be integrated into Singapore society and not dilute its values, the country must remain open to talents so as to lift the low birth rate and make Singapore a vibrant economic hub.’ He added that in order to improve the lives of Singaporeans, ‘We don’t think we can do this just by expansion, but we do believe we must do this through economic growth, and upgrading and transforming our economy.’ He justified the need to get talented people from all over the world by saying, ‘Because we’ll need that range of skills and experiences and talents which no society can generate on its own.’
The first thing that came to my mind is the 2 million foreigners in our midst that were brought in during the last ten to fifteen years. Is this number sustainable, can they be integrated into our system without social and political consequences? Would they not dilute our Singaporean core and our core values, culture, work ethics and social norms?
We don’t think we can do this just by expansion? What is the 6.9m all about? And we already have more than 2m foreigners here. Do their talents fit the range of skills and experiences that our society cannot generate on our own? I think we know the answers.
Now what did Tharman said that was so earth shattering? ‘Singapore has to ensure it has a thriving and competitive economy by always looking for opportunities to bring high quality new investments that can create better jobs and ways to take advantage of the rising middle class in Asia.’ Now, how many of the businesses in Changi Business Park are high quality investments and create better jobs for Singaporeans. Really, I don’t know. But I believe everyone who knows knew better. And hardly any of the jobs, good or low paying jobs, went to Singaporeans. We have been taken advantage of instead, providing all the superb infrastructures for low wage businesses employing foreigners instead of Singaporeans.
Where are the quality and productivity growth that benefit Singaporeans ‘especially the average workers and the lower income workers’? All we heard of is Singaporeans having to go for retraining to downgrade their job expectations and be underemployed, sacrificing and wasting their qualifications and experience. Tharman added that Singapore must remain an inclusive society through social policies, not only via economic policies, and we are in it together. The realities on the ground is that Singaporeans have been feeling neglected, alienated, not good enough ship out, or it is their fault, go for more training. Why are the voices of anger and unhappiness growing louder? Why are the Singaporeans feeling like they are strangers in their own homes, in their own countries?
What have all the economic and social policies been doing? Oops, sorry, it was all economic policies before. Going forward we will have more social policies to integrate the Singaporeans with foreigners and new citizens, to improve our Singaporean core. We will have more quality investments providing more quality jobs for Singaporeans and improving productivity. These are the good stuff that I read this morning and I could hardly believe my eyes.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Being pro active or reactive?

Preventing racial enclaves forming has been a corner stone of our social harmony policy to avoid racial clashes like those happened in our past. This policy has been in force in the allocation of HDB flats to the citizens for years. Given an estimate ratio of 75/15/8/2 among the races, the distribution of ethnic groups in the housing estates is more or less in accordance with this formula.

Boon Wan has said that he is now studying the distribution of foreigners in HDB estates as the percentage in some blocks is as high as 9% or even 18%. Foo Mee Har had raised this as a concern early in the year and suggested a 10% cap to prevent tension among foreigners and locals. Boon Wan is still studying and will come out with the magic number in due course. Did they know that this will happen when HDB relax the policy on subletting to foreigners? Would they have thought about it earlier and come out with some numbers by being proactive?

The presence of huge numbers of foreigners and their peculiar customs could be uncomfortable and irritating. So too would our lifestyle be to them. The worse aspect is the security of the family members, the oldies, the young and the womenfolk in the presence of strange foreigners. We have just read a case of a foreigner that was driven into desperation to commit daylight robbery in Geylang. When they are comfortable, things may be peaceful. But things can get ugly when some of them got into drugs or gambling debt and would do anything to save themselves.

The other bigger problem is the enclaves of foreigners in private estates and condominiums. Is it acceptable to have foreigners forming a majority in private developments or even taking over the whole estate? Anyone thinking about this? Any proactive bugger starting to scratch his head? Or would they wait for something painful to happen before they put on their thinking cap?
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Dec 25, 2013 9:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Our Immigration Act to protect Singaporeans
‘WHEN I was pursuing my undergraduate studies in the United States, a Taiwanese classmate of mine was deported at the border when she entered Vancouver ("Law allows minister to decide who is deported"; Sunday)
It turned out she had been in the US under a wrong classification of student visa. She was not given any due process, much less time to return to her residence to pack, but was immediately ushered into a plane and repatriated….
Singapore's Immigration Act serves to protect its citizens….
Security is important in Singapore. While we can empathise with those who were repatriated, we must stand by our Immigration Act as our safety comes first.’
The above is a letter in the ST online by a Juliana Ang. The USA is a big country that professes an open door to immigrants. But it also has a strict immigration law to decide who it wants and who it does not want.
We too have our own Immigration Act that is under attack for deporting some foreign workers that were involved directly or indirectly in the recent Little India riot. Some corners are demanding that the 53 that were deported must be given the right to defend themselves under our law.
Actually, what is the farce about deporting 53 foreigners that were found undesirable to our social security and safety? Actually, what is the purpose of an Immigration law when millions were let in indiscriminately under the least scrutiny? Our Immigration Act is a farce for sure, but not for deporting 53 undesirables, but for letting in millions that included many undesirables, fakes and trouble makers, people who discriminate, exploit, assault and cheat our law abiding citizens of jobs and a decent life.
53 may have been deported, but how many thousands or millions will be let in tomorrow? What is the real farce?
The real farce is that our Immigration law, if there is, is there to protect foreigners more than the citizens. Foreigners are here to compete with citizens unfairly, often by fraud and deceit over many areas of enterprise. If the Immigration Act is to protect citizens, it should give good jobs to citizens first, or citizens should have the first right of refusal. Only jobs that citizens do not want or cannot do should go to foreigners. If not it is a betrayal of the interests and rights of the citizens. Our Immigration Act is as good as no Immigration Act. Not forgetting allowing the world’s rich to buy up the few properties in the island and pushing the prices beyond the average citizens.
Our Immigration Act should not just protect the social security and physical safety of the citizens but also the jobs, rights and well being of citizens over foreigners.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What would PAP be fighting and defending?
The PAP came out of a convention with a new resolution and a new resolve to fight for what they believed in. This was to be the news of the day but eclipsed by the Little India riot. Everyone’s attention was diverted to the violence on the streets and this great convention just disappeared into thin air without attracting any interest other than Chan Chun Sing wanting to take the war to every corner of the island. That was the juicy bit that still lingers in the air. The only article on this convention came from Dr Wong Wee Nam but still did not catch too much of an attention when there were so many exciting news event to capture the emotions of the people.
What was the convention all about? Other than the airy ideas of a 6 point resolution which was a brush up of the original resolution, the PAP made a war cry that they would defend what they believe in, their positions and policies. What are these beliefs in concrete terms?
Is the PAP going to defend the high influx of foreigners and the 6.9m population target in 2030?
Is the PAP going to defend the high cost of living, high property prices, high medical fees, high education fees?
Is the PAP going to defend the lost of jobs by local PMEs and being replaced by foreigners?
Is the PAP going to defend the ultra high ministerial pay system that is hanging like a giant millstone on the neck of an albatross?
Is the PAP going to defend the big numbers of scholarships given to foreigners?
Is the PAP going to defend the big numbers of FTs in high places, like CEOs and professorship/lecturers in the academia?
Is the PAP going to defend the diminishing Singaporean core by bringing in more foreigners and issuing them with citizenships?
Is the PAP still going to deprive true blue citizens from buying a HDB flat with all its nonsensical rulings?
How would all the above fit into the 6 point resolution? Or is the 6 point resolution another airy idealistic aspiration to be spoken and forgotten. What is real in the resolution that benefits the true blue Singaporeans? It is very important to use the term true blue as there are many new citizens conveniently given the pink ic to reap the fruits that our parents and forefathers have planted without sweating the small stuff, and got the gall to claim credit for everything here.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deport the undesirables as a deterrent
Last week Dudley Au, a senior gentleman, wrote in a forum letter in the Today paper calling for deterrence against crime. He was referring to the rioting in Little India and how important it is to make sure that the perpetrators and potential rioters would think very hard should they want to riot again. Singapore has done well in the past by using deterrence effectively to keep criminals and violators of the law at bay by strong punishment as a statement.
Death penalty for kidnapping and for drug smuggling were made very clear that there is no chance for ignorance. At one time long hair was not welcomed to the island and posters were put up at entry points to get the message across.
The need for deterrence to stop foreigners from turning this island into a wild wild west or a 3rd World lawless country is becoming more urgent with the high numbers of foreigners here. The Little India riot just broke the camel’s back. The govt has been very tolerant of the mischiefs committed by foreigners to the extent of being too soft to the ire of the citizens. Rude and hooligan behaviours of angmohs and other foreigners thumping down the law abiding citizens were often reported but taken too lightly.
It is time to put the message across that foreigners are here as our guests and at our pleasure. Misbehaviour, rude behaviour, criminal activities etc are not acceptable and foreigners exhibiting such unruly and unacceptable behaviour will be ruled as underdesirables and will be deported immediately, without going to the courts of law in light cases, while serious offenders will be charged in court and subsequently deported in serious cases. Cases like foreign cyclists taunting and threatening law abiding Singaporeans are cases that deserved deportation. The govt cannot be seen as a lame duck or tacitly supporting such wild and uncivilised behavior of foreigners against the citizens.
Sign boards on the deportation of undesirables shall be prominently displayed at entry points like those long hair posters of the past. Let there be no mistakes that foreigners can shit on the citizens or behave like hooligans and thugs here, and definitely will be dealt with serious in criminal cases. We have millions queueing to come here and throwing out a few pariahs will not affect the attractiveness of this paradise island for making a fortune and a good life.
We need this deterrence to ensure law and order and safety of the citizens. We do not want to become another 3rd World with 3ed World normals. 3rd World normals are just not acceptable here.
Seriously, will the govt even dare to consider such measures against the angmohs? The days of caning Michael Fay is over. We don’t have anyone strong enough to talk to the angmohs as equals and to treat them as equals and the bad as bad. Our ministers even have to make callings on the foreigners instead of summoning them to wait outside his office.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Jan 30, 2014 8:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The govt owes Sinkies a level playing field
We have been flooded with 2 million foreigners working here. We know of how these foreigners and foreign companies screwed Sinkies by discriminatory hiring practices, hiring foreigners and their own kinds. Some blatantly refused to hire Sinkies and got away with it.
We also know that many of these foreigners came with fake qualifications and CVs. The number in very conservative estimate can be easily 20% and could go to 50% or more.
The consequences of the above, many Sinkies lost their jobs and opportunities to higher appointments to these foreigners not because they were not good, but simply cheated or discriminated. The govt owes the Sinkies, jobless, underemployed and those employed a level playing field in employment and advancement opportunities, for the jobless to be employed, for the underemployed to be gainfully employed, for those employed to be appropriately employed according to their worth.
The govt also owes all Sinkies to ensure that the professionals in all fields that Sinkies paid for their services are genuinely qualified and not quacks. The consequences of having unqualified or fake professionals in these responsible jobs are not only about jobs but about safety and lives.
The off the cuff number is simply too large for comfort. It is not only disgraceful but criminal to let these fraudulent practices to continue unabated with the foreigners laughing at our idiocy, from the top to the bottom.
There must be immediate actions taken to rid the country of these pests. The people demand a level playing field and fair opportunities, not a fake one. It is inexcusable even for a single day of delays. It does not take 56 man years to clear up the shit and get rid of the worms and maggots in the system.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Spirit of Citizenship
Below are 4 key points on citizenship mentioned by Obama in his State of the Union Address to the Americans.
‘After all, that’s the spirit that has always moved this nation forward. It’s the spirit of citizenship – the recognition that through hard work and responsibility, we can pursue our individual dreams, but still come together as one American family to make sure the next generation can pursue its dreams as well.
Citizenship means standing up for everyone’s right to vote…. It should be the power of our vote, not the size of our bank account,that drives our democracy.
Citizenship means standing up for the lives that gun violence steals from us each day. (Gun is not too relevant in the Sinkie context, but more about public security and safety when rioting is becoming a new reality.)
Citizenship demands a sense of common cause; participation in the hard work of self-government; an obligation to serve to our communities. And I know this chamber agrees that few Americans give more to their country than our diplomats and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces.’
We do talk about citizenship but our citizenship is being violated by the large numbers of foreigners here. We even corrupted the value of our citizenship with PRs lumped together as locals as if they are citizens. We corrupted out thinking, the thinking of the young on what citizenship means and why PRs and foreigners are not one of us. We have 2 million foreigners gainfully employed here in top jobs that rightfully should go to the locals. Unfortunately our system has failed the citizens badly that many top jobs, I mean govt and govt linked companies’ jobs, happily given to foreigners with the bull excuse that no citizen is deemed fit to take those jobs.
We must thank those exceptionally talented Sinkies to take on 5 or 10 or 20 jobs or else they will all go to foreigners too as no Sinkies are good enough to wear those hats. Sinkies must be very grateful to these super talented individuals. May they be blessed by the horse.
What is wrong with our citizenship when so many foreigners are having a party here while Sinkies are under employed or unemployed? Is our citizenship means giving way to foreigners, foreigners come first because they are good, because they have great CVs and certificates that no one bothers to check for their authenticity?
What is wrong with our citizenship and the aspirations of the citizens to pursue their dreams? Not good enough so conveniently raise the foreigners to high pedestals to fulfil their dreams.
Where is the wisdom of statesmanship?
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Managed Meritocracy is the way to go

Just like the phrase Guided Democracy, what Singapore needs is Managed Meritocracy and not Meritocrazy as it is being practised. The whole basis of Managed Meritocracy is about country and citizens. The country and citizens must be the main priorities in the practice of meritocracy. It cannot be a blind meritocracy. It cannot be a colourless meritocracy, irrespective of nationalities. It must be a meritocracy with nationality, Singaporeans, sitting on top of the agenda.

An idiotic and mindless meritocrazy that sells out the citizens in favour of foreigners is unacceptable and a betrayal of the citizenry. This point must be foremost in the minds of the leaders. The citizens are the masters of this island and own this place. No one can give their birthrights and privileges to have a good life here to foreigners at their expense.

Any politician that threatens to replace the citizens with foreigners on the ground that the foreigner is ‘better’ than the citizens is standing on weak sand. It cannot be and must not be and must not be allowed to continue. If this kind of argument is the new truth, then it is a matter of time that the whole citizen population would be replaced by foreigners.

What we need is Managed Meritocracy. This is a Meritocracy that places the interest of Singaporeans ahead of foreigners. All things being equal, the Singaporeans must be considered first. Even when things are not equal, especially in top jobs or good jobs, the Singaporeans must still be considered first unless the having of a foreigner is a no choice option, unless the foreigner is going to bring the moon and the stars to put on the table. We know that many foreigners are not able to do so and what they are doing are nothing better than what a citizen can do in their places but still given the jobs. In many cases there is nothing spectacular that the foreigners can do that the Singaporeans cannot do except they looked like our colonial masters or some 3rd world novelties.

For the good of people and nation, Meritocracy must be managed or else it is at best just a dangerous kind of Meritocrazy.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Mar 13, 2014 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Water rationing, a wake up call for Sinkies
A Christopher Teo Kian Lam wrote to the ST forumer on the dry spell and how water rationing would be a wake up call to Sinkies who still treat the water supply as a God given right. They need a taste of what water rationing is like to take water conservation seriously. He said, ‘Do we need our reservoirs’s water levels to deplete further, or wait for a NEWater or desalination plant to malfunction under the increased production, before reality sets in?’
I agree with him the Sinkies must not waste water unnecessarily. But who is the real culprit in excessive water consumption? Wait till the population hits 6.9m, another 1.5m people in the island, then you won’t need a dry spell to ration water. You may have to ration water daily throughout the year.
Do we really have enough water sources to feed the need of 6.9m or more? Maybe the wake up shall be addressed to the govt. Do we need 6.9m population to feel the squeeze on our water supply? At the moment we have just about enough for 5.4m people and this applies to many other facilities and infrastructure. Can we really cope with 6.9m? Maybe we can, and by then, we will have to live with ERP on our water supply as well.
Is this dry spell a wake up call on the Govt to think thrice about the 6.9m population rather than on the Sinkies?
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yang Yin’s case has proven CPF policies are right
Say what you want, look at it this way, Yang Yin has proven that it is right to assume that those above 55 years, or in the particular case above 80, cannot be trusted with their money. Just a bit of give and take, maybe 65 or 75 years would be just right. The second point that has been proven is that it is not only the men that cannot be trusted with their money. No need to go to Batam or Bintan. They can fly here from China or anywhere to take good care of our oldies … money.
Come to think of it, there is a lot of wisdom in the govt’s policies on the CPF. Give the govt a Tiger. Whatever came out with this idea deserves a good bonus. Keep them tight, don’t let the oldies have a free hand in their money. They would squander it, if not will be cheated of it. Some will get dementia through no fault of theirs and lose their money too.
It is action time. How to protect the rich oldies from losing their monies or being cheated of their monies? Should they be sent to a holiday camp for oldies so that they will not be in harm’s way? Should their money be put in a trust of sort and then a stipend be given to them ala the CPF formula? If there is a need to protect the oldies from losing their CPF monies which in most cases are less than a peanut, the multi million dollar assets and cash of these oldies demand more attention to keep the huge sums of money safe and sound, and to keep the poachers and looters away.
What do you think? Tiok boh?
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Sep 28, 2014 8:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

OPG? Only heard of OPM

I confess that I have not heard of this OPG. I thought it would be something like Other People’s God, Other People’s Govt, Other People’s Gas, or something like that. Actually this is an official public institution to protect the people, to look after the welfare of the people. It is called Office of Public Guardian.

The OPG has lodged a police report against Yang Yin after the news broke of the tour guide boasting after increasing his wealth to $50 million on line, and this is after he obtained a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) to take charge of Madam Chung Khin Chun’s assets. ‘We reported this to the Commercial Affairs Department highlighting our concern of possible financial abuse.’ Public Guardian Daniel Koh said.

Now that the OPG has come into the picture, Madam Chung’s asset could be safer from her guardian holding the LPA. Thank God we have such an institution to protect the people. Maybe the OPG can do something to protect the oldies’ CPF money as well if they go and complain of being robbed.

Daniel Koh also mentioned that the LPA scheme was launched only 4 years ago and there had been no problems until this Yang Yin’s case. And he assured the public that ‘there are enough safeguards to prevent abuse of the LPA scheme. Not only do LPAs have to be certified by experts – such as a doctor or a lawyer – and approved by the OPG, but the body also has the powers to investigate complaints of abuse.’

Daniel Koh ‘also made it plain that the onus was on LPA applicants to make sure they pick a trustworthy guardian – it is not the OPG’s responsibility to judge “the quality” of the decision’. In the Yang Yin’s case, presumably he had gone throw the whole process, the LPA was certified by a doctor or a lawyer, or could it be both, and then approved by the OPG. And no one can blame the OPG as it is not its ‘responsibility to judge the quality of the decision of an LPA applicant. But they could investigate when things go wrong and they are investigating now. Good work OPG. OPG has also sent its staff to visit Madam Chung and found her well.

I think the OPG would have a lot of investigation to do when more oldies got cheated of their CPF monies and start to complain. Anyway good to know that there is an OPG institution to protect the people.
_________________
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: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2015 8:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

America, you have it!
The Federal Court of the USA has thrown out the craps of protecting the country and allowing the intelligence agencies and the White House to cheat on the American people and to enforce draconian laws to imprison the American people. The Patriots Act, the secrecy acts of all kinds that the Bush Administration passed to check, monitor and spy on every American citizen has been challenged by the independent judiciary.
The courts cited Edward Snowden’s act as a revelation of the abuses of power by the President and his administration, hiding under the cry of patriotism, national security, veil of secrecy and using the intelligence services to infringe the rights of privacy of its citizens, to threaten its citizens with the weight of the law to keep them under surveillance and in compliance.
The comprehensive surveillance power of the intelligence agencies have overstepped their roles and their privileged status and have become the enemy of the people instead of protecting the people. When state agencies abused their power against the citizens of the state, they must be checked. It is lucky and fortuitous that the American legal system is above the politicians, cannot be manipulated and abused by the politicians to do the becks and calls of the politicians against the people.
There is law in America. There is justice for the people against the terrorism of the state and its insidious perpetrators that used the state machinery to victimize the people like Edward Snowden and the general public. State terrorism against the people would not be accepted and allowed to be practiced freely under the guise of national security and secrecy.
The American judicial system and the separation of power of the state is a shining beacon to the corrupt world, to uphold justice and to protect the citizens from the tyranny of the state, from being bullied by the state and their enforcement officers, the police, the intelligence services and the courts of law.
_________________
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, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 9 of 10

 
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