Is new NKF recruiting a more corrupt CEO than Mr. Durai?
-
Is new NKF recruiting a more corrupt CEO than Mr. Durai?
The new NKF chairman Mr. Er told media that NKF the total pay and perks package for new CEO to be capped at S$19, 000 a month.
Mr. Durai earned 2.63 times higher, he is still so corrupt, follow the PAP government logic, the new CEO are definitely entitled much higher pay than Mr. Durai, otherwise the new CEO has all the reasons to be 2.63 times more corrupt, am I right?
The First U.S. Congress voted to pay George Washington a salary of US$25,000 a year (about US$270,000 in 2005 terms) — a significant sum in 1789. Washington, already a successful man, refused to accept his salary. Similarly, John F. Kennedy donated his salary to charities.
Traditionally, the US President is the highest-paid government employee. Consequently, the President's salary serves as a traditional cap for all other federal officials, such as the Chief Justice. A raise for 2001 was approved by Congress and President Bill Clinton in 1999 because other officials who receive annual cost-of-living increases had salaries approaching the President's. Consequently, to raise the salaries of the other federal employees, the President's salary at 2001 is raised from US$200,000 to US$400,000
Do American presidents, and their ministers, have much more power than Singapore ministers? Do they have 100 more opportunities to be corrupt? And why 99% of them are not corrupt?
From the first president George Washington, president Ford, president Kennedy, to the latest president Bush, their families are among the richest families in the world, they are billionaires, why do they give up their family business to take the public position with much lower pay, and why they are not corrupt? -
To be fair Yizhen some of the names you listed down like the Kennedys and Bushes are fuckin' hypocritical corrupted people who take advantage of their position to gain economically. b
However, I do feel strongly that the Govt's paid too well to do almost nothing. -
their pay in their original jobs are also around this level what...so its not that they change job and get a pay boost, please remember. Similar to MP's pay, most MPs are doctors, professors, CEOs, etc....so switching jobs should give about the same pay too...like opportunity costs in ECONS.
-
For CEOs in private sector to get that kind of salaries, many of them are simply bosses who got their own directors to approve the highest possible salaries to themselves to avoid overpaying the taxes. To earn that kind of monies like the ministers are paid $1,500,000.00 - S$1,900,000.00 and a lifetime annuities of about S$1,000,000.00 pa the businesses would have to make huge profits in hundreds of millions. Taking into consideration the lifelong annuities the ministers are easily paid S$2,000,000 - $3,000,000.00. Ask anyone in the private sector this question: how many of such companies can afford to pay their CEO this kind of monies except the MNCs and GLCs who are relying on public monies for such purpose of which monies is no object.
Do anyone of our ministers have tracked records of building up MNCs like Toyota or GM to be truly entitled to this kind of salaries based on substantiated previous companies they were working for before they became the ministers.
After these ministers left the government and took up jobs in the private sector (not GLCs please which is public funded using tax payers monies) have any of these ministers succeeded in turning around ailing MNCs or public listed companies which were not doing well to prove the point that they were highly capable people as presented by MM Lee in Parliament?
There was one of two ex-ministers who after leaving the government was struggling without any headway. So how could the ministers be worth millions if none of them in reality was able to make this kind of money as they are paid. Is it right legally and morally to propose their own pay increases or bonuses under the general company laws or penal code without the sanction by an independent body of some sort in the first place.
If these questions cannot be answered truthfully objectively and accountably how could they have the legal or moral authority to lead the people or look after the interests or welfare of the citizens. -
Originally posted by robertteh:To earn that kind of monies like the ministers are paid $1,500,000.00 - S$1,900,000.00 and a lifetime annuities of about S$1,000,000.00 pa the businesses would have to make huge profits in hundreds of millions. Taking into consideration the lifelong annuities the ministers are easily paid S$2,000,000 - $3,000,000.00.
ahh...we are talking about hundreds of thousands at MOST...and you are talking about millions...
rem. that ministers ONLY get 10k, so 1 year is 10kx12+maybe 3 months = 150k a year. for let's say they stay for 1 term = 5 yrs => 150kx5 = 750k....much less than your MILLIONS??? 
-
Yes, you dare to name 2 most powerful presidents and families as corrupt, and I believe you do not have solid evident of their corruption, otherwise, you can simply sell your good stories to Times or Newyork times, and you will earn quite a lot.Originally posted by Pronewbie:To be fair Yizhen some of the names you listed down like the Kennedys and Bushes are fuckin' hypocritical corrupted people who take advantage of their position to gain economically. b
However, I do feel strongly that the Govt's paid too well to do almost nothing.
The good thing is, you can blame America presidents are corrupt, and such thing never affect America to be the most powerful nation in the world.
The sad thing is, you can not blame any Singapore government officer is corrupt, if you do so, you will be sued.
if Mr. Durai never be so stupid to sue government newspaper, he will never be caught, am I right? Even after he lost the lawsuit, if he and the board do not resign by themselves, just keep the post for a few months, do not allow new member enter the board, the other corrupt issues will never be public, am I right? in my memory, until the day he innitially resign, he still sit side by side with a minister, correct me if I am wrong.
I think Mr. Clinton should migrate to Singapore, if he live here, the Lewinsky case will never be uncovered, am I right? Who can produce solid evident for such case? -
Only God Knows !Originally posted by yizhen:Is new NKF recruiting a more corrupt CEO than Mr. Durai?
The new NKF chairman Mr. Er told media that NKF the total pay and perks package for new CEO to be capped at S$19, 000 a month.
Mr. Durai earned 2.63 times higher, he is still so corrupt, follow the PAP government logic, the new CEO are definitely entitled much higher pay than Mr. Durai, otherwise the new CEO has all the reasons to be 2.63 times more corrupt, am I right?
The First U.S. Congress voted to pay George Washington a salary of US$25,000 a year (about US$270,000 in 2005 terms) — a significant sum in 1789. Washington, already a successful man, refused to accept his salary. Similarly, John F. Kennedy donated his salary to charities.
Traditionally, the US President is the highest-paid government employee. Consequently, the President's salary serves as a traditional cap for all other federal officials, such as the Chief Justice. A raise for 2001 was approved by Congress and President Bill Clinton in 1999 because other officials who receive annual cost-of-living increases had salaries approaching the President's. Consequently, to raise the salaries of the other federal employees, the President's salary at 2001 is raised from US$200,000 to US$400,000
Do American presidents, and their ministers, have much more power than Singapore ministers? Do they have 100 more opportunities to be corrupt? And why 99% of them are not corrupt?
From the first president George Washington, president Ford, president Kennedy, to the latest president Bush, their families are among the richest families in the world, they are billionaires, why do they give up their family business to take the public position with much lower pay, and why they are not corrupt? -
This kind of charitable organisation must be managed by people with a compassionate heart. They work for the objective to benefit the society, the needies and not the pay. Why did Duari fall prey to greed? He manage it as if its his business.
-
I guessed it is diifcult for people especially in high position stay on the right track.Originally posted by Archie_boy:This kind of charitable organisation must be managed by people with a compassionate heart. They work for the objective to benefit the society, the needies and not the pay. Why did Duari fall prey to greed? He manage it as if its his business. -
If that's the case, your go run NKF
Whole day say what they do is wrong -
It seems you fail to get the simple point of the post:Originally posted by sbst275:If that's the case, your go run NKF
Whole day say what they do is wrong
1: New NKF is doing the right thing.
2: PAP is doing the wrong thing. -
Everything say they doing the wrong thingOriginally posted by yizhen:It seems you fail to get the simple point of the post:
1: New NKF is doing the right thing.
2: PAP is doing the wrong thing.
Ever wonder why the opp aren't interested in forming the next govt? Cos they aren't willing to be under fire
Like in their manifesto, saying on a panel to review how justified are the fee hike? They go slam the hike, next time if they get power, any hike I will slam them... Simple as that -
Yes..yes..yes...the ministers are not worth of a prick....as they claimed.Originally posted by robertteh:For CEOs in private sector to get that kind of salaries, many of them are simply bosses who got their own directors to approve the highest possible salaries to themselves to avoid overpaying the taxes. To earn that kind of monies like the ministers are paid $1,500,000.00 - S$1,900,000.00 and a lifetime annuities of about S$1,000,000.00 pa the businesses would have to make huge profits in hundreds of millions. Taking into consideration the lifelong annuities the ministers are easily paid S$2,000,000 - $3,000,000.00. Ask anyone in the private sector this question: how many of such companies can afford to pay their CEO this kind of monies except the MNCs and GLCs who are relying on public monies for such purpose of which monies is no object.
Do anyone of our ministers have tracked records of building up MNCs like Toyota or GM to be truly entitled to this kind of salaries based on substantiated previous companies they were working for before they became the ministers.
After these ministers left the government and took up jobs in the private sector (not GLCs please which is public funded using tax payers monies) have any of these ministers succeeded in turning around ailing MNCs or public listed companies which were not doing well to prove the point that they were highly capable people as presented by MM Lee in Parliament?
There was one of two ex-ministers who after leaving the government was struggling without any headway. So how could the ministers be worth millions if none of them in reality was able to make this kind of money as they are paid. Is it right legally and morally to propose their own pay increases or bonuses under the general company laws or penal code without the sanction by an independent body of some sort in the first place.
If these questions cannot be answered truthfully objectively and accountably how could they have the legal or moral authority to lead the people or look after the interests or welfare of the citizens.
-
the scions of these powerful families dont need the presidential pay..they're rich enough. when your family is worth billions it doesnt matter if the government pays u $1 or $100,000 a month.Originally posted by yizhen:Is new NKF recruiting a more corrupt CEO than Mr. Durai?
The new NKF chairman Mr. Er told media that NKF the total pay and perks package for new CEO to be capped at S$19, 000 a month.
Mr. Durai earned 2.63 times higher, he is still so corrupt, follow the PAP government logic, the new CEO are definitely entitled much higher pay than Mr. Durai, otherwise the new CEO has all the reasons to be 2.63 times more corrupt, am I right?
The First U.S. Congress voted to pay George Washington a salary of US$25,000 a year (about US$270,000 in 2005 terms) — a significant sum in 1789. Washington, already a successful man, refused to accept his salary. Similarly, John F. Kennedy donated his salary to charities.
Traditionally, the US President is the highest-paid government employee. Consequently, the President's salary serves as a traditional cap for all other federal officials, such as the Chief Justice. A raise for 2001 was approved by Congress and President Bill Clinton in 1999 because other officials who receive annual cost-of-living increases had salaries approaching the President's. Consequently, to raise the salaries of the other federal employees, the President's salary at 2001 is raised from US$200,000 to US$400,000
Do American presidents, and their ministers, have much more power than Singapore ministers? Do they have 100 more opportunities to be corrupt? And why 99% of them are not corrupt?
From the first president George Washington, president Ford, president Kennedy, to the latest president Bush, their families are among the richest families in the world, they are billionaires, why do they give up their family business to take the public position with much lower pay, and why they are not corrupt? -
