Opposition candidates disappointing
-
Yes!!! Yes I know. The drivers will be happy but the passengers will not.Originally posted by casino_king:The high fair go to the drivers themselves, please!!!!! -
yeah sought them out and after you find them, you know who comes along and give them a hard time, sue them in court, get people to talk cock about them in the press owned by you know who.... chase them out of the country.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:They would have a higher chance if they try to sought them out
Even solicitor generals, appointed by you know who, the minute he stands for election, he becomes public enemy number one. He has to then become professor in US university because he is hounded like al queda terrorist. -
Some small corrections will be needed, if you will allow the following to be considered :Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Singapore is a small country with limited land space. With cheaper cars, it'll mean more traffic jams. With cheaper public transport, it'll mean less buses, less route, less bus-stops. Will putting in the opposition solve this problem? I sincerely doubt so.
If you've travelled and live in other countries, you'll probably appreciate more of what we have here.
- Beijing's MTR system cost only 3RMB regardless of how many stops you take. But the train is old, dirty and it doesn't go everywhere. Taxi fares aren't cheap also.
- Cars are cheap in US, so are petrol but their taxi fare is much higher than Singapore's and their citizen pays 30% federal tax for this.
Singapore is a small country with limited land space - not unlike any larger cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, Paris, London, Tokyo, New York, Chicago, Hong Kong - each of which can be a 'City State' like Singapore too.
Each of these cities managed the car population to grow without any PUNITIVE financial regulations that pinch on the Car Owner each step of the way towards owning and operating the Car.
In a FULL DEMOCRACY - an Opposition can challenge the INCUMBENT Party in a competition of ideas and solutions, and the best solution that BENEFIT the Electorate will emerge.
Is this the case in Singapore ? Hardly, the Incumbent Ruling Political Party has arrogantly diffused all opposing voices by listening, but push through with their own plans and policies that are already decided before even listening to the voices of the much maligned Singaporean Car Owners.
Can the Beijing MRT be compared to the Singapore MRT ?
Both operate on two different social and political goals, and the conditions of the trains reflect the difference in climatic environment more than the superiority of management standards.
Cars cost less in the USA, but their petrol is cheaper due to a lower Government Tax - a result of the STRONG VOICE of the US Citizens.
The US Citizens pay a higher tax BUT is supported by a larger array of Social Support, Health, and Economic Programs that looks after the US Citizens - can the same be said of the Singapore System ?Originally posted by anonymouscoward:
Why do we compare ourselves with the worst countries ?
Would you rather have the kind of taxi services in China and Philippines when you're most likely to be rip off, verbally abused and may not even reach anywhere near where you want to go?
You need standarized and regulation to provide work-class taxi services. Who else has the muscles to pull this through?
But then again, I agree that while the government has been too focused on making our transportation service a good one, it has failed to make a profitable one for the drivers; and our Union sucks big Harry's balls.
As an extension of your preference, why do we not compare with the taxi services found in South Africa, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan ?
This is a typical practise of the Government aka Ruling Political Party, in comparing with the worst to justify the minimal standard that we already have.
Is Singapore not supposed to be ranked as the First World ?
Should we not be compared to the standards of the other First World but keep our costs lower as we are fortunate to be living in a Third World Region - in which our Singapore Dollar is SUPPOSE to be stronger with a bigger purchase value that help to lower our Costs ?
Was it not the idea of Mr Goh Keng Swee to have Singapore operate on the economic theory of Comparative Advantage - in which we abandon agricultural and primary industries, and concentrate on economic areas in which our limited land size and highly trained population will excel, and leaving the other countries in the region to do what they do best in food production, so that both sides benefit in this mutually economic supporting world ?
Your last statement reflects the current state of affairs in Singapore - and can only lead to a more 'hairy' future. -
You meant "you-know-who" will not do the same to those who volunteered? Come to think of it.. they only did that to a few person.Originally posted by casino_king:yeah sought them out and after you find them, you know who comes along and give them a hard time, sue them in court, get people to talk cock about them in the press owned by you know who.... chase them out of the country.
Even solicitor generals, appointed by you know who, the minute he stands for election, he becomes public enemy number one. He has to then become proffessor in US university because he is hounded like al queda terrorist.
The person wouldn't worry if the guy has nothing to hide, pays his tax on time, doesn't lie blatantly or make false accusations. -
You need only to do it to one or two and the rest will get the message.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:You meant "you-know-who" will not do the same to those who volunteered? Come to think of it.. they only did that to a few person.
The person wouldn't worry if the guy has nothing to hide, pays his tax on time, doesn't lie blatantly or make false accusations.
That is why I say anybody who dare to stand as oppo and even if he comes in slippers, we must give him the vote for his courage and sacrifice if not for anything else. You dare to do it? no? well neither do I.
People who dare to put in their names are my heroes. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
That's why they have massive traffic jams in the City. Their citizens can live in the suburbs and drive out of the city after work.. Where do you suggest we drive our cars to?
[b]
Singapore is a small country with limited land space - not unlike any larger cities such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, Paris, London, Tokyo, New York, Chicago, Hong Kong - each of which can be a 'City State' like Singapore too.
You sure they do? I thought they don't managed the car population.
Each of these cities managed the car population to grow without any PUNITIVE financial regulations that pinch on the Car Owner each step of the way towards owning and operating the Car.
This I agree
In a FULL DEMOCRACY - an Opposition can challenge the INCUMBENT Party in a competition of ideas and solutions, and the best solution that BENEFIT the Electorate will emerge.
Is this the case in Singapore ? Hardly, the Incumbent Ruling Political Party has arrogantly diffused all opposing voices by listening, but push through with their own plans and policies that are already decided before even listening to the voices of the much maligned Singaporean Car Owners.
This I disagree
Both operate on two different social and political goals, and the conditions of the trains reflect the difference in climatic environment more than the superiority of management standards.
Because that's what will happen to us if you remove the regulations. Chaos thrive in the absence of law
Why do we compare ourselves with the worst countries ?
We should actually.
As an extension of your preference, why do we not compare with the taxi services found in South Africa, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan ?
This, I fully agree.
Was it not the idea of Mr Goh Keng Swee to have Singapore operate on the economic theory of Comparative Advantage - in which we abandon agricultural and primary industries, and concentrate on economic areas in which our limited land size and highly trained population will excel, and leaving the other countries in the region to do what they do best in food production, so that both sides benefit in this mutually economic supporting world ?
Your last statement reflects the current state of affairs in Singapore - and can only lead to a more 'hairy' future. -
Yes.. and any "IDIOT" will be your hero as long as they dare to brave the ruling party.Originally posted by casino_king:You need only to do it to one or two and the rest will get the message.
That is why I say anybody who dare to stand as oppo and even if he comes in slippers, we must give him the vote for his courage and sacrifice if not for anything else. You dare to do it? no? well neither do I.
People who dare to put in their names are my heroes.
I respect those people who brave the ruling party too. But I respect them because they make logical and well prepared argument, oppose only when they should and carry themselves with dignity and pride. -
As long as good people are prevented by devious means, you are just playing into you know who's evil plans if you play like that. You cannot play by the rules when other people are cheating.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Yes.. and any "IDIOT" will be your hero as long as they dare to brave the ruling party.
I respect those people who brave the ruling party too. But I respect them because they make logical and well prepared argument, oppose only when they should and carry themselves with dignity and pride. -
Brother.. you seriously need to re-examine your stand. I believe more opposition is good for the public but it'll only work if we have good opposition candidates.Originally posted by casino_king:As long as good people are prevented by devious means, you are just playing into you know who's evil plans if you play like that. You cannot play by the rules when other people are cheating.
What the point of having opposition who'll stir sh*t for no valid reason? There's nothing worst than the blind leading the blind.
Take CSJ... why did people vote for PAP? Because he is an idiot. The wrong candidate will only lead to people being disillusion about the opposition and voting for the PAP instead. Simply because they do not believe the opposition is credible enough. And it affects not only him but his party.
Take Steve Chia... I still wonder how his nudist hobby will affect him in election.
Next thing you know, you vote for a idiot who happens to have a fetish for child pronography.... then you can forget about any opposition party.
Let's assume for one once that the TV crew goes to your estate and you proudly proclaim that you'll vote for any "IDIOT" as long as he is an opposition. I guarantee you, you'll scare the sh*t out of your neighbours that they'll all vote for PAP. -
Who decided he didn't pay his tax or make false accusations?Originally posted by anonymouscoward:You meant "you-know-who" will not do the same to those who volunteered? Come to think of it.. they only did that to a few person.
The person wouldn't worry if the guy has nothing to hide, pays his tax on time, doesn't lie blatantly or make false accusations.
I'm more open on this.If you were to see his credentials and ability, you would understand why the old man felt threatened.. -
You are talking nonsense here. As long as we have dishonorable people in power, no good person will be able to stand. History will loook back and decide that "you know what country" was governed by a bunch of dishonorable people who did "you know what" to stay in power.Originally posted by anonymouscoward:Brother.. you seriously need to re-examine your stand. I believe more opposition is good for the public but it'll only work if we have good opposition candidates.. -
Originally posted by exkiwi:
They have no choice, public transport is inefficient and land is huge
they do, they can drive their own cars while public transportation is second choice. on the other hand, we have no choice but to take public transportation while driving becomes a luxury. their public transportation isn't inefficient, their subways are just as good as ours, though not as new given they had them much earlier than us. what's your problem with huge? daily commuting is primarily within cities. you don't find many people driving from New York to Chicago to work every day do you?
Those who did pay by the nose. Without car they will be crippled.
what? westerners pay through their noses for cars? first time i hear anybody say this. is it because ang mohs have bigger noses that they pay a lot more thru their noses? exactly, what is a necessity to them is a luxury to us. what is affordable to most of them is unreachable by many here.
Yes, over there the fuel price increase almost everyday. Their government realise they can't afford to subsidise anymore.
their fuel price increase, ours have remained stagnant? so their govt has been subsidising until they can't afford to anymore. ours? no subsidies since day one.
What's the problem of increase fuel prices and pass on to consumers? It happens everywhere in capitalism market.
exactly, it happens everywhere so your claim that fuel price is increasing elsewhere is merely the same thing as fuel price is increasing here.
At least in Singapore, the fares is affordable and you get World Class transportation system.
and elsewhere public transportation is unafforable? and what do you have to give up in return for our world class system? individual wish for car ownership? and is ours the only world class system? japan, hong kong, taiwan have second class systems?
Even with their government subsidise, the fare is still higher than Singapore.
for a tourist perhaps but not for the locals who have yearly passes that work out just the same.
Do you want an inefficient subsidise public transportation or an efficient public own transportation?
before you ask this question you should ask yourself given the monopoly it has, the huge customer base it enjoys because nobody can afford cars, is the local public transportation as efficient as it ought or should be?
Over there, ratepayers that don't drive (poor folks) subsides those that drives (apparently more well-off).
that's a bit far fetched. please quantify your statement.
You call this fair? In Singapore, you don't pay a single cents if you don't drive. The public transport system is good enough. If you chose to drive, you pay. Fair isn't it?
any different elsewhere?
Please quantify your statement.
simple. monopoly means only bread crumbs left for any aspiring local entrepreneur ...
Wrong! they influence lawmaker and exploit law to drive out small local players.
examples? there are volumes of anti-trust cases in US and Europe ... small players are well protected and where the industry structure allows, thrives on fair competition. our anti-trust laws have only just started, even then, i don't think it would touch the GLCs ...
ha! over there, you pay 50% to the government before you collect your cheque. On top of that, you pay 12% to 20% (depending on countries) of GST and many other taxes. Basically, your disposal income is about 30% of your pay. Whereas Singapore enjoy one of the lowest tax in developed world.
you sure are good at bullshit, hope you're not another salman. heard from a friend who rented a stall from a food court owned by a GLC, the rental was so high his daily earnings couldn't even cover rental, let alone supplies and he had to wind up his business in the end. in his case, 100% of the money he earned went to the govt. what about taxi drivers? easily 50% of their daily takings go straight to govt owned cab companies.
What is the problem with you? Why would you want to see our government fail elsewhere? Afterall, their success will benefits us all. In business, sometime you pay a price to learn. The game is not over yet. It is not how you start, but how you end. Bare that in mind.
i have no problems, do you? i didn't say i wish to see the govt fail elsewhere, on the contrary i said i wish to see the govt succeed elsewhere since you said anyone (including the govt) can succeed anywhere else.
somehow their success has been mostly local successes, built upon monopolistic rules and regulations that benefit themselves at the detriment of individual entreprises. paying a price to learn is well and good, but please do so with your own money and not the people's money.
yes the game is not over yet, and if you continue to play the way you have always been playing, someday there will be serious unrest ... -
Originally posted by anonymouscoward:
Singapore is a small country with limited land space. With cheaper cars, it'll mean more traffic jams. With cheaper public transport, it'll mean less buses, less route, less bus-stops.
so there is a trade off. for the smooth functioning of local transportation, individual desire for car ownership has been sacrificed. what are we getting in return for that sacrifice? shouldn't we deserve the best services possible at the best prices? why do we have to put up with waits, squeeziness, long journeys with no seats and incessant price hikes knowing all this while they're making handsome profits out of us?
Will putting in the opposition solve this problem? I sincerely doubt so.
will the opposition ever have the chance to take over? even if they're voted in will the transportation companies function very differently? if they wouldn't, then what is the cause for worry? if they would, then it shows there is too much political influence on supposedly independent public services that are supposed to continue to function regardless of govt changes.
- Beijing's MTR system cost only 3RMB regardless of how many stops you take. But the train is old, dirty and it doesn't go everywhere. Taxi fares aren't cheap also.
what about japan's, hong kong's and taiwan's? how do their systems compare to ours?
- Cars are cheap in US, so are petrol but their taxi fare is much higher than Singapore's and their citizen pays 30% federal tax for this.
US enjoys one of the lowest gasoline prices in the world if i'm not mistaken and if they can drive themselves around, who needs taxis? their citizens pay 30% tax for many other things and they certainly earn much higher wages that more than compensate for higher taxes. -
The Opposition cannot expect to be elected if Singaporeans do not see a cogent argument in support of their policies. For example, I have carefully read the WP manifesto on healthcare and I have raised various questions:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=177110&page=0
I have yet to hear anything from the WP that will assuage my doubts. Hopefully I will hear more when the campaign speeches begin but it is strange that they have not made use of Sgforum to make clear theor policies (maybe they cannot????).
For better or worse, I know the PAP's stand and I can see where KBW is leading us. THe WP is still an unknown creature to me with regard to their healthcare policies.....people might be tempted to elect the devil they know.. -
well i do know that the PAP isn't doing an exactly very good job. soi'm guessing getting in some opposition will exert pressure and push for changes and consistent improvements.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The Opposition cannot expect to be elected if Singaporeans do not see a cogent argument in support of their policies. For example, I have carefully read the WP manifesto on healthcare and I have raised various questions:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=177110&page=0
I have yet to hear anything from the WP that will assuage my doubts. Hopefully I will hear more when the campaign speeches begin but it is strange that they have not made use of Sgforum to make clear theor policies (maybe they cannot????).
For better or worse, I know the PAP's stand and I can see where KBW is leading us. THe WP is still an unknown creature to me with regard to their healthcare policies.....people might be tempted to elect the devil they know..
of course pple do have doubts about the opposition too, but then are you going to let your fear of the new paralyse you so that you only embrace the old?? afterall while you have doubts, the are still unknown. -
Really? I'm talking nonsense? Wow... do you think the majority of Singaporeans will agree with me or with your "even if it means voting for idiots"?Originally posted by casino_king:You are talking nonsense here. As long as we have dishonorable people in power, no good person will be able to stand. History will loook back and decide that "you know what country" was governed by a bunch of dishonorable people who did "you know what" to stay in power.
Someone who would choose idiots to be their leaders can't be too far from the idiots themselves. Don't you agree? -
Originally posted by snow leopard:
my dad used to run a bus transportation business.. trust me, it's not easy. economics teaches us that when somebody gains, somebody must lose. you cannot take care of every and single individual needs but if the transportation suffers from a lack for profitability, the whole system will collapse.
shouldn't we deserve the best services possible at the best prices? why do we have to put up with waits, squeeziness, long journeys with no seats and incessant price hikes knowing all this while they're making handsome profits out of us?
that being said. I do agree that there is much room for improvements.
logically speaking, it shouldn't. but if the opposition tries to keep it's promise; then they will screw with the public transportation system
if they would, then it shows there is too much political influence on supposedly independent public services that are supposed to continue to function regardless of govt changes.
and what about them? their public transportation cost are not so far off from ours. some more expensive, some cheaper. but they have a larger population to compensate due economies of scale.
what about japan's, hong kong's and taiwan's? how do their systems compare to ours?
wrong again. they do not earn higher wages compared to Singaporeans. after 30% federal tax and about 10-15% state tax, they probably earn the same as any Singaporean dollar-to-dollar. sometimes less.
US enjoys one of the lowest gasoline prices in the world if i'm not mistaken and if they can drive themselves around, who needs taxis? their citizens pay 30% tax for many other things and they certainly earn much higher wages that more than compensate for higher taxes.
an average IT engineer earns between US65k-US90k. After tax, that's US40k-65k. Not much difference from an average IT engineer in Singapore.
would you like to pay 40% tax? -
hi anonymous coward!Originally posted by anonymouscoward:I cannot but totally agree that Singapore needs alternative voices to represent the people and to keep checks and balances in place for the rogue policies our government passes. Too many a times have we seen the government fail to remember that they are elected by the people for the people. Keeping investments and keeping Singapore's economy is one thing. Doing it at the expense of the citizens is another.
That being said; standing up to be counted, volunteering and putting in your own money can be at best, valued as courage and a true passion for the good of the people. It doesn't mean anyone who volunteers has the capacity to handle the role and responsibility.
While the incumbent PAP has not done everything right, they have brought Singapore to where it is today. That's their credibility. The opposition has nothing to show except for their credentials. And their credentials, for the majority, fail to show that they have the experience or the capability to live up to the expectation.
True that we do not know much about PAP candidates but we all know that PAP will not put any Tom, Dick or Harry into the election simply because they volunteer. I believe if we were to disect any PAP candidates and pit them against the opposition, even the lesser of them would have come with substantial background and experiences to show that they can do the job better.
My suggestion to the opposition is simple. Rather wait for people to volunteer; they need to actively court potential candidates that could bring credibility to their party. Successful business, experienced managers, self-made millionaires, union leaders etcÂ…
Many would like to see more opposition in the government. But I believe majority will not want to put Singapore's future at risk simply for the sake of seeing more opposition. Studies have shown that most Singaporeans would like to see more opposition but they would still like PAP to run the show. Isn't that what the opposition resign to last election? Have they examine why so?
Put yourself in a position that you are going to war. Would you follow a ruthless commando or a logistic clerk?
(the portions of my post are numbered according to the paragraph order in ur post)
1) agree wholeheartedly.
2) Hmm ... tt's usually a chicken-and-egg qn.
3) The *unique* problem we have in verifying tt statement is that the same party has rremained in power for so long, tt they have actually undergone at least 2 major membership overhauls. THe very original 1965-1980 membership brought Singapore to where it is today, not so for the other 2. In fact, I would say that the current incumbents have not shown very much credibility in how they conduct their affairs, political or economic.
4) I would put forward that vision is more important than background and experiences. Everything changes so quickly nowadays that background becomes totally worthless within 5 yrs. Plus, your statement seems to implicitly assume that the opposition put any Tom, Dick and Harry into elections, which I believe is an unfair assumption to make.
5) Hmmm.... guess tt's an issue for the opposition. But I would argue tt Singapore's greatest threat would be PAP complacence.
6) logistic clerk. But you are in danger of stereotyping yet again.
Cheers,
the pikamaster (who hopes WP will contest in AMK) -
Couldn't agree with you more. The new batch of younger MPs are a total disappointment. As smart as they are, they cannot answer any field question with eloquence and intelligence when they are not prepared before hand; giving stupid analogy, dry humour and high-handed answers. Their ideas and policies are pathetic.Originally posted by pikamaster:we have in verifying tt statement is that the same party has rremained in power for so long, tt they have actually undergone at least 2 major membership overhauls. THe very original 1965-1980 membership brought Singapore to where it is today, not so for the other 2. In fact, I would say that the current incumbents have not shown very much credibility in how they conduct their affairs, political or economic.
The legacy stops somewhere around the lines of TCH... those after are simply a disappointment.
AnonymousCoward
[hoping to see good opposition candidates in East Coast GRC] -
My random thoughts on this topic:
I have never voted, but I must question the maturity of Singaporean voters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an example --- a comment found on James GomezÂ’s blog (Jan 06 Archives):
http://jamesgomeznews.blogspot.com
Anonymous said...
If I vote for the opposition and they win, my upgrading will be stopped.
So it is only logical for me to vote for the PAP. Yes, I have a choice, my choice is the PAP because I want my estate to be upgraded....and so do the majority of Singaporeans.
The PAP can put up any clown and I'll vote for him. What matters most is my upgrading.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAP currently holds 82 out of 84 seats, opposition have only 2 seats in parliament.
What are the dangers and benefits of having more opposition members?
What are the dangers and benefits of having no alternative political voices at all?
SingaporeÂ’s golden age happened when people and govt worked hand in hand together to build a better future.Right now, I detect an ever widening chasm between our PAP politicians and the general working class population.
My point is that votersÂ’ mentality must change if they want to have a strong alternative. I am now all ready to support these alternative voices for the simple reason that they are so weak. Hopefully, once they grow more organized, the snowball effect will be there to attract more talented people into their fold.
Performance wise, I think things will average out regardless of political afflictions – there will always be those who stand out and those who fall behind. The difference is that a lively political arena will spark social activism that will eventually bind Singaporeans to their homeland. At the very least, the general population will get exposed to alternatives that help them better manage their future by being able to see the problem from different angles. -
Originally posted by anonymouscoward:
my dad used to run a bus transportation business.. trust me, it's not easy. economics teaches us that when somebody gains, somebody must lose. you cannot take care of every and single individual needs but if the transportation suffers from a lack for profitability, the whole system will collapse.
but why must it always be us lose and they win? we are not asking for subsidies, which we never get anyway. all we're asking is for a public service to deliver the best it can. the fact that they're always earning handsome profits every year means they can afford to do more to address waiting, squeeziness and no seat problems but would not because bottomline counts more than service to the people.
logically speaking, it shouldn't. but if the opposition tries to keep it's promise; then they will screw with the public transportation system
but what did the opposition promise? to improve the system, not screw it up.
and what about them? their public transportation cost are not so far off from ours. some more expensive, some cheaper. but they have a larger population to compensate due economies of scale.
their public transportation costs are not far off from ours, yet their cars are so much more affordable than ours. if they can keep costs on par with us without jacking up car prices, are we not being overcharged here?
when we talk about public transportation, we're talking about the buses and trains we take everyday to work, school, play ... so even for a more populous country like japan, people don't travel from tokyo to osaka everyday for work. tokyo has its own public transportation system. osaka has its own. each city has its own system much like a city like ours. so there's no economies of scale on a national level to speak of when it comes to public transportation, only at the city level ...
wrong again. they do not earn higher wages compared to Singaporeans. after 30% federal tax and about 10-15% state tax, they probably earn the same as any Singaporean dollar-to-dollar. sometimes less.
an average IT engineer earns between US65k-US90k. After tax, that's US40k-65k. Not much difference from an average IT engineer in Singapore.
would you like to pay 40% tax?
wrong? seems like you just proved me right. i said they earn much higher salaries that more than compensate for their higher taxes. their US65K-US90K is much higher than our average SGD35K-50K. their higher incomes therefore more than compensate for their higher taxes so that their take home of US40K-65K is still higher than our SGD35K-50K while our SGD35K-50K has to be further discounted for CPF.
so i don't mind paying 40% tax provided i'm getting the salaries they're getting in the US ...
the important thing is, despite similar disposable incomes (higher actually), they don't have to "pay thru their noses" to own cars ... that's something we don't have. are we being short changed? -
Originally posted by exkiwi:
A side effect of ERP system is that it is an enormous revenue generator
Do you have better suggestion to control traffic congestion?
If u want a solution, u can go to the car forum n they have more solutions than me on this. Or u just 1 2 argue with me?
U need to bear in mind that Singapore is a small dot too.....
For car ownership, why are you comparing us with countries with huge dot?
Have I been comparing with countries with huge dots?
but we also offer unbeatable ministerial pay
How about unbeatable ministerial wealth in other countries where their pay is lesser than you?
What do u mean?
Cannot just compare from an angle only.
Car ownership in singapore are the most expensive in the world!
The fact is with that kind of price, Singaporean can still afford to own car.
I have said need to look at different angle, but i didn't know u can only look at one angle. ok, ok, our taxi fares are cheap
Our taxi fare is not as expensive as some countries, but yet, guess who is earning the bulk of the revenue? I suspect taxi fare increase in the future liao
The fact is our taxi fare is cheap.
Also the fact that car ownership in singapore are expensive. -
Originally posted by ObviousMan:
wonderful and lovely ... i can't say it any better ...
My random thoughts on this topic:
I have never voted, but I must question the maturity of Singaporean voters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an example --- a comment found on James GomezÂ’s blog (Jan 06 Archives):
http://jamesgomeznews.blogspot.com
Anonymous said...
If I vote for the opposition and they win, my upgrading will be stopped.
So it is only logical for me to vote for the PAP. Yes, I have a choice, my choice is the PAP because I want my estate to be upgraded....and so do the majority of Singaporeans.
The PAP can put up any clown and I'll vote for him. What matters most is my upgrading.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAP currently holds 82 out of 84 seats, opposition have only 2 seats in parliament.
[b]What are the dangers and benefits of having more opposition members?
What are the dangers and benefits of having no alternative political voices at all?
SingaporeÂ’s golden age happened when people and govt worked hand in hand together to build a better future.Right now, I detect an ever widening chasm between our PAP politicians and the general working class population.
My point is that votersÂ’ mentality must change if they want to have a strong alternative. I am now all ready to support these alternative voices for the simple reason that they are so weak. Hopefully, once they grow more organized, the snowball effect will be there to attract more talented people into their fold.
Performance wise, I think things will average out regardless of political afflictions – there will always be those who stand out and those who fall behind. The difference is that a lively political arena will spark social activism that will eventually bind Singaporeans to their homeland. At the very least, the general population will get exposed to alternatives that help them better manage their future by being able to see the problem from different angles.
[/b] -
If Singapore's prosperity goes down the drain due to successive unchallenged PAP rule, what do I say to my kids and grandkids?
That we had our chance and we screwed it up?Sorry won't even cut it.Which is why we must always maintain an alternative platform at all times. -
[quote]Originally posted by ObviousMan:
[b]My random thoughts on this topic:
I have never voted, but I must question the maturity of Singaporean voters.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an example --- a comment found on James GomezÂ’s blog (Jan 06 Archives):
http://jamesgomeznews.blogspot.com
Anonymous said...
If I vote for the opposition and they win, my upgrading will be stopped.
So it is only logical for me to vote for the PAP. Yes, I have a choice, my choice is the PAP because I want my estate to be upgraded....and so do the majority of Singaporeans.
The PAP can put up any clown and I'll vote for him. What matters most is my upgrading.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How naive. Did potong Pasir had his rubbish stack 3 storey high like they described?