47 years under PAP rule
-
05 june 1959,LKY became PM of self -government of Spore.
Notice that there was no Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the line-up. (In 1959, these matters were still in the hands of the British Government.)
many still not happy how spore improved under PAP
for 47 years.
they just think alternative ruling party,more press freedom,
etc then we will forward.
2.western dempcracy will not gurantee u a stable life.
Never mind western laughed we live in a bird cage or hospital.
i feel relived when i reviewed the progress,if any.in our neighbours
and the greatest democracy in the world--India.(Phillippines)Manalo was the second radio journalist to be killed in five days, and the third this year.
---US call the country democratic!?the good governments there force 7 millions people work overseas.
3.let them laugh---Increasingly, people around the world are beginning to laugh at Singapore; they laugh at its Government's petty and self-serving restrictions on what people can and cannot do. But in Singapore, many people are unaware of this because the Government-controlled media feed them a diet of only good news stories.
pl lah.with net in almost every home,how pap control the news?
the control of pron and other web sites are only symbloic.
western media and CSJ PhD really looks down sg people.
jus dunt buy ST and ZAOBAO,go into the net and can get all news.
4.the first thing if CSJ and gangs win more than 10 seats--
apply to migrate,.........
5.if u vote out pap in election some time in the future,
do tell ur grand/kids,no matter how old are they.
see years later, will they priase or scold you,
even u dead or alive.
Will u thanks or scold your grand/parents that they voted
for pap some years ago?ask ur grand/parents which
party they voted for years ago.
6.there is none bonded to save spore from bad government.
dunt play play and vote bad guys to be MP.
sorrp lah,the price will be too high when u know thay are
bad.our son of taiwan --chen sui bian--is a good example.
bad guy as a leader is a disater.
7.
CSJ barked pap in this way and
still survive .
if pap is a party like csj says,csj wil disappear fr spore long ago.
8.see who will have a last laugh.western people never believe
first world country could be so low crime.jus look at Spore
our landed area where the rich stay--main gate always open.
not to mention the rich in 3 rd world country stay in
prison like house---afraid to be kidnapped!
8. June 5, 1959 Sworn in, at age 35, as Prime Minister of Singapore. -
to laugh at us living in a caged bird or a hospital is just a ploy........their dark hearts manifesting their jealousy.......
this hospital is safe at least to say from rabid clowns........ -
I do not agree with all of the government's policies and certainly not all of LKY's ideas. His policy on graduate mothers was particularly daft in my opinion.
However, he has contributed much to the progress of Singapore to where we are today. In 1959 when Singapore obtained self-governance, Ceylon was ahead of us in many respects. In fact, the government sent a team there to learn from them.
Over these 40 years, Singapore has powered ahead into the first world whilst Sri Lanka had regressed to the 1950s. Their hospitals are practising a standard of medicine that a third world nation would be ashamed of. Hospitals that offered open-heart surgery in 1976 now cannot afford proper treatment to cancer patients. In one hospital in Jaffna, less than 1% of cancer patients actually get treatment. These figures were provided by a Sri Lanka academic who now works in the US.
It is for this reason that LKY is held in high regard by Sri Lankans:
http://www.theacademic.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=20335&sid=3dfbad459bc08524e59d87ff356372e6#20335 -
How did the Singapore Flag evolved and what does the symbols mean ?
How close has the POWER OF ONE come near to the ideals of the symbols of the Singapore Flag when exercising its powers that Singaporeans have entrusted to their care ?
The colours of the Singapore flag represent red for brotherhood and equality; white for purity and virtue. The crescent moon originally served as a symbol of assurance to the Malays in 1959 —the year the flag was designed— that Singapore was not a Chinese state. Today it is generally said that the moon signified a young nation rising. The flag was designed initially to have three stars, until leaders such as then Deputy Prime Minister Toh Chin Chye expressed concern that Singapore might be perceived to have associations with the Malayan Communist Party, the flag of which also had three stars. The flag was originally meant to be red as red is a very traditional Chinese color. But because of the fear of Communism in those days, a completely red flag was abandoned.
Jan Oskar Engene, 26 January 1998
Remember that Singapore with its 80% Chinese majority has always been aware of its sensitive positioning with the 15 million Muslims of Malaysia just a few kilometres North and with the 170(?) million of Muslim Indonesians just South. It has always been necessary to soothe and placate. For the home crowd, the crescent was a little bit uneasy and it has always been emphasised that this was not representation of Islam but represent a country on the ascent. These days, the sensitivities and touchiness of the past can be examined more honestly and it is politically correct to say that the crescent was put in to placate the Malays.
Thomas W. Koh, 27 January 1998
From the Expat Singapore website:
For 140 years (1819-1959), the Union Jack flew over Singapore. Then, on 3 December 1959, the National Flag, an important symbol of independence, was unveiled at the installation of the new Head of State, the Yang di-Pertuan Negara. Also unveiled that day were the State Crest and the National Anthem. The flag was conceived and created by a committee headed by the then Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Toh Chin Chye.
The Flag consists of two horizontal halves, red above white. Red symbolises universal brotherhood and equality of men; white, purity and virtue. In the upper left corner, a white crescent moon and five white stars form a circle. The crescent moon represents a young nation on the rise. The five stars stand for Singapore's ideals of democracy, peace, progress, justice and equality
1. RED - Universal brotherhood and equality
On paper they seem to follow the principle of brotherhood and equality, but in its actions there is a certain degree of caution in dealing with a minority SINGAPOREAN ethnic group, as their genuine commitment to Singapore's interest will always be in doubt when the crunch comes.
2. WHITE - Purity and Virtue
Has the POWER OF ONE been pure and virtuous in their political acts ?
Judging by the ruthless political persecution towards political opponents, the actions can hardly be considered pure nor virtuous.
3. Crescent Moon - Young Nation on the rise
More like the rise of the POWER OF ONE over all in their realm, than the rise of Singaporeans as a Nation.
4. Star #1 - Democracy
A dismal failure in keeping to this symbol - as Democracy is a word not respected by the POWER OF ONE.
5. Star #2 - Peace
Although Peace have been kept internally and externally, the surface is calm under the best of circumstances, but the under water temperature remains brewing to boiling temperatures within the communities, and with our regional neighbors.
6. Star #3 - Progress
Is there any progress, when social development leaves Singaporeans as poor as when we first started out ?
Can there be progress when the Quality of Life require Singaporeans to continue working into their late sixties and seventies ?
Some older Singaporeans may even have to sell their homes, in order to be able to continue to live independently till their twilight years end; while younger Singaporeans will be enslaved to the banking system the moment they graduate until they are into their late fifties.
7. Star #4 - Justice
Can there be Justice when you are considered guilty until you can prove yourself to be innocent ?
Is there Justice, when there is one set of Justice for Political Trials and another
set for Commercial Transactions not affecting the State ?
Can there be Justice, when the court dispenses justice by keeping a close tab on the cost of time, material and labor expended ?
8. Star #5 - Equality
Can Singapore Society achieve 'Equality' when even the most basic National Service to the Nation will see special groups of 'White Horses' taking a different path from those less fortunate ?The Pledge
Has the POWER OF ONE come close to the words that is mechanically recited daily in schools, and recited proudly once a year as a Nation - when the heart will swell, but as the days fade that it will show that cynical actions are clearer than the words spoken and forgotten ?
THE PLEDGE
The Origin
Initially penned by Mr S Rajaratnam in 1966, the Pledge was written against the backdrop of racial riots in the 1950s and 1960s. Mr Rajaratnam revealed that the dream was about building "a Singapore we are proud of". He believed that language, race and religion were divisive factors, but the Pledge emphasizes that these differences can be overcome if Singaporeans cared enough about their country. The draft text was handed to the then Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who polished the text before submitting it to the Cabinet.
OUR PLEDGE
We, the citizens of Singapore,
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society
based on justice and equality
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and
progress for our nation.
AFTER FORTY SEVEN YEARS, how close are we to building a Democratic Society based on Justice and Equality for ALL SINGAPOREANS ?
Is it any wonder that the other thread speaks about - "people worldwide is laughing at sg" ? -
In all fairness, Singapore has achieved much over the last 47 years, unless we use The Perfect yardstick to measure, but that would be pure academic to say the least.
Relative to most, by and large, we have that sense of brotherhood and equality among the different races. Certain degree of caution is sometimes necessary in dealing certain groups of people, either by ethnic group, religion or others. This was first seen in the way the Chinese chauvinists were handled in the 70s. Such caution does not constitute inequality, the lack of it is likely to destroy whatever equality we have.
47 years old is still very young as a country, whether it is run by PAP or not. But I donÂ’t see us changing the crescent into a full moon when we celebrate 100 years national day.
We have had peace so far even when wars were fought nearby in Asia. A few boiling issues are bound to be present here and there with regional neighbors, but did we create the problem? Would we be able to handle should the temperature rises? I think we do. I donÂ’t think any Singaporean feel that war is imminent, even for the near future. Anybody feel any tension among any particular communities within Singapore? I donÂ’t.
On all other issues, we have achieved some, we have failed badly in others, there are still a lot more to do. We are angered by the political character assassination, but we also see now such an attempt backfire as we see more and more young and credible opposition coming forward. To me this is progress already.
But whatever it is, progress or not, democratic or not, are we proud to be a Singaporean?? I met many Burmese, one of them are fighting against their government in BKK, you can criticize their government but they are proud to be Burmese, not Thai, though we canÂ’t tell the diff. I know many Philippino, they are not proud of their government, nor democracy, but you will not have them as friends if you donÂ’t respect The Philippines.
So what if somebody from down under write something to laugh at Singapore, do we agree and laugh at ourself?
The greatest challenge to the Singapore government, remains building a Singapore identity. The greatest failure of some Singaporean, is the lack of self identity, lack of self confidence, not proud to be Singaporean, donÂ’t see future in Singapore, but cannot migrate Â…Â…. CanÂ’t blame all on the government. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
We have done well in some respects, we have failed dismally in others. Unlike you, people who strive to be better will look to address their failures.
many still not happy how spore improved under PAP
for 47 years.
they just think alternative ruling party,more press freedom,
etc then we will forward.2.western dempcracy will not gurantee u a stable life.
India is the greatest democracy in the world. You are indeed living in a little bird cage.
Never mind western laughed we live in a bird cage or hospital.
i feel relived when i reviewed the progress,if any.in our neighbours
and the greatest democracy in the world--India.pl lah.with net in almost every home,how pap control the news?
The control of podcasting and web sites is symbolic of what? Your kkj is it? Lau Lee knows best that control of information = power, and that is why they will continue to try to find new ways to control the flow of information.
the control of pron and other web sites are only symbloic.
western media and CSJ PhD really looks down sg people.
jus dunt buy ST and ZAOBAO,go into the net and can get all news.5.if u vote out pap in election some time in the future,
Is this a trick question or do you just want us to upset our grand/parents by reminding them that they lived their lives in Singapore without ever voting?
do tell ur grand/kids,no matter how old are they.
see years later, will they priase or scold you,
even u dead or alive.
Will u thanks or scold your grand/parents that they voted
for pap some years ago?ask ur grand/parents which
party they voted for years ago.6.there is none bonded to save spore from bad government.
Spare us your doomsday message. We're not voting in bad people. We're voting for a good system of governance. So that fiascos like NKF hidden from public scrutiny for so long do not arise again.
dunt play play and vote bad guys to be MP.
sorrp lah,the price will be too high when u know thay are
bad.our son of taiwan --chen sui bian--is a good example.
bad guy as a leader is a disater.8.see who will have a last laugh.western people never believe
There's laughter because there are clowns.
first world country could be so low crime.jus look at Spore
our landed area where the rich stay--main gate always open.
not to mention the rich in 3 rd world country stay in
prison like house---afraid to be kidnapped! -
Firstly, my apologies for dissecting your piece so as to address the many interesting points that you have raised and should respectfully be addressed:
Is there a deep sense of brotherhood and equality - similar to the days when different ethnic groups live in the kampong era - where genuine neighborliness exist ? Poverty then was a great social leveller.Originally posted by sgdiehard:In all fairness, Singapore has achieved much over the last 47 years, unless we use The Perfect yardstick to measure, but that would be pure academic to say the least. [/quote]
Does 'The Perfect yardstick' exist ?
We can only measure by our own yardstick of Singaporean experience, in measuring what we have set out to achieve, measure ourselves with the goals that have been set, met or failed.
We did try to attain the Swiss Standard of Living, but how did we fair ?
Surely, using that Yardstick, Singapore is a dismal failure in all aspects of the Swiss Standards of Politics, Democratic Practises, Citizens' Rights and Participation in NATIONAL AFFAIRS, Health, Job Protection, Protecting the Exclusivity of Singapore Citizenship.
Relative to most, by and large, we have that sense of brotherhood and equality among the different races. Certain degree of caution is sometimes necessary in dealing certain groups of people, either by ethnic group, religion or others. This was first seen in the way the Chinese chauvinists were handled in the 70s. Such caution does not constitute inequality, the lack of it is likely to destroy whatever equality we have.
In today's hustle and bustle, chauvinism has taken different forms - as in the insistent projections of ethnic preferences that governs job rulings and social appearance.
There is a false sense of calm and acceptance that is enforced, that do not seem to have allowed social integration to go deeper into the fabric of a common Singaporean identity.
That sense of brotherhood and equality is not reflected in the SAF, nor in the Ministerial appointments, nor in the Government Service - for forty seven years, appointments to some Government agencies avoid some ethnic group - for seemingly obvious reasons.
Does the Government truly believe in putting the best person forward for the task, or is its decision governed by ethnic sensitivities ?
Such questions will have already touched the OB Markers, and a convenient point of closure to any further discussion. Has the real issue been addressed or the situation allowed to simmer ?
[quote]
47 years old is still very young as a country, whether it is run by PAP or not. But I donÂ’t see us changing the crescent into a full moon when we celebrate 100 years national day.
Even in a HUNDRED YEARS, the crescent in our State Flag will never turn into a full moon, as we live in a sea of an ethnic group that will not accept our ethnic differences, and using their standard of measure they will remain envious of our seeming achievements until they are able to attain the same.
The problem has been historical, and we will continue to carry the historical baggage that will always make us the underdog.
We have had peace so far even when wars were fought nearby in Asia. A few boiling issues are bound to be present here and there with regional neighbors, but did we create the problem? Would we be able to handle should the temperature rises? I think we do. I donÂ’t think any Singaporean feel that war is imminent, even for the near future. Anybody feel any tension among any particular communities within Singapore? I donÂ’t.
By your question "Did we create the problem ?" - is already forming a defensive barrier before we will even consider building a bridge to extend a hand of friendship.
During the recent 2006 Elections, "old war horse" Chiam See Tong had questioned the logic of the Ruling Party in making Free Trade Agreement with everyone all over the globe, but have ignored our immediate neighbor - despite having a friendly PM Badawi at the helm.
MM LKY shot this idea down accusing CST of losing sight of history.
In his arrogance, did MM LKY have further second thought that Singapore is already the largest foreign investor in Malaysia, with many Singaporeans owning properties, and that both sides have cross straight family ties amongst all ethnic groups ?
Perhaps you are too isolated in your 'intellectual world' to be able to feel the tension amongst any particular communities within Singapore.
The fact that there is suddenly an exposure of a terrrorist group coming entirely from one ethnic Singaporean community, clearly shows that there is deep set dissatisfaction within that community.
What other dissents remain silently brewing amongst the different ethnic groups ? Can we safely use the crime statistics to reveal any pattern of social symptoms within any ethnic group ?
Each of us will see progress in many different ways, and I can certainly accept your standard of measure.
On all other issues, we have achieved some, we have failed badly in others, there are still a lot more to do. We are angered by the political character assassination, but we also see now such an attempt backfire as we see more and more young and credible opposition coming forward. To me this is progress already.
Unfortunately, progress could have been expedited and Singapore could have accelerrated to a higher level of social well being if the POWER OF ONE is willing to loosen its insistence on being the sole arbitrator of all events and all issues in Singapore.
Having said so much about the Burmese and the Filippinos, surely blaming all on the Government of the POWER OF ONE does not make anyone of us a LESSER PROUD SINGAPOREAN ?
But whatever it is, progress or not, democratic or not, are we proud to be a Singaporean?? I met many Burmese, one of them are fighting against their government in BKK, you can criticize their government but they are proud to be Burmese, not Thai, though we canÂ’t tell the diff. I know many Philippino, they are not proud of their government, nor democracy, but you will not have them as friends if you donÂ’t respect The Philippines.
So what if somebody from down under write something to laugh at Singapore, do we agree and laugh at ourself?
The greatest challenge to the Singapore government, remains building a Singapore identity. The greatest failure of some Singaporean, is the lack of self identity, lack of self confidence, not proud to be Singaporean, donÂ’t see future in Singapore, but cannot migrate Â…Â…. CanÂ’t blame all on the government.
What is the 'Singapore Identity' ?
After FORTY SEVEN Years - should we still be asking this question ?
In all my occassional travels abroad I can immediately distinguish the characteristic Singaporean from other Asians; but could hardly differentiate a Singaporean from a Malaysian - (much like your problem in differentiating the Burmese from the Thai).
You have the characteristic reservedly quiet, circumspect Singaporean Lone Traveller, and the loud bargain-hunting, condescending Singaporean Group Traveller.
Why are you unable to recognise your own kind ? -
I think we are doing pretty well....at least there are jobs......
-
Jobs ?..... What jobs ?........ For who ?...... At what entry salary levels ?Originally posted by laoda99:I think we are doing pretty well....at least there are jobs......
Tell that to those who were retrenched in 2002 - 2004, at the age of Forty to Fifty ?
Some who are in their middle-Thirties are already considered too old in their job hunt since the last retrenchment exercise, and are working on short term contract as part time sales attendant for the short duration of the exhibition or fairs; and then it is back on the street, looking at Classified Ads.
What happened to the ideals of a Quality Job for a High Quality Life in Singapore ?
Even when the IR is fully developed, it promises only 30,000 jobs by 2010 - while the present jobless rate is still at 3.5% and with retrenchment still quietly in progress. -
And companies in R&D and biotech industries still cannot find people to fill their jobs. IT comapnies are still looking for software designers and IT consultants for the region...We still have to look to China and India for our PhDs and Masters....Originally posted by Atobe:Jobs ?..... What jobs ?........ For who ?...... At what entry salary levels ?
Tell that to those who were retrenched in 2002 - 2004, at the age of Forty to Fifty ?
Some who are in their middle-Thirties are already considered too old in their job hunt since the last retrenchment exercise, and are working on short term contract as part time sales attendant for the short duration of the exhibition or fairs; and then it is back on the street, looking at Classified Ads.
What happened to the ideals of a Quality Job for a High Quality Life in Singapore ?
Even when the IR is fully developed, it promises only 30,000 jobs by 2010 - while the present jobless rate is still at 3.5% and with retrenchment still quietly in progress.
There are new jobs available...just that Singaporeans cannot fill them. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Don't forget that it is not only PAP that gave Singapore the success. Leaders are there to lead - they carry out what is necessary for a nation to function but you cannot have just one person working - you need the whole team.
05 june 1959,LKY became PM of self -government of Spore.
[b]Notice that there was no Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the line-up. (In 1959, these matters were still in the hands of the British Government.)
many still not happy how spore improved under PAP
for 47 years.
they just think alternative ruling party,more press freedom,
etc then we will forward.
2.western dempcracy will not gurantee u a stable life.
Never mind western laughed we live in a bird cage or hospital.
i feel relived when i reviewed the progress,if any.in our neighbours
and the greatest democracy in the world--India.
pl lah.with net in almost every home,how pap control the news?
the control of pron and other web sites are only symbloic.
western media and CSJ PhD really looks down sg people.
jus dunt buy ST and ZAOBAO,go into the net and can get all news.
4.the first thing if CSJ and gangs win more than 10 seats--
apply to migrate,.........
5.if u vote out pap in election some time in the future,
do tell ur grand/kids,no matter how old are they.
see years later, will they priase or scold you,
even u dead or alive.
Will u thanks or scold your grand/parents that they voted
for pap some years ago?ask ur grand/parents which
party they voted for years ago.
6.there is none bonded to save spore from bad government.
dunt play play and vote bad guys to be MP.
sorrp lah,the price will be too high when u know thay are
bad.our son of taiwan --chen sui bian--is a good example.
bad guy as a leader is a disater.
7.
[b][url=http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/]CSJ barked pap in this way and
still survive .
if pap is a party like csj says,csj wil disappear fr spore long ago.
8.see who will have a last laugh.western people never believe
first world country could be so low crime.jus look at Spore
our landed area where the rich stay--main gate always open.
not to mention the rich in 3 rd world country stay in
prison like house---afraid to be kidnapped!
8. June 5, 1959 Sworn in, at age 35, as Prime Minister of Singapore.[/b]
The people who built up Singapore are our forefathers, our grandparents , and our parents , those who were kids after post war Singapore. They formed the foundation of what Singapore is now , not only LKY . True he might engineered a fast progressive nation but without the people who supported his party and him , where would Singapore be?
Now these people who formed the foundation of singapore is left out to become WHAT? Sweepers, hawker centre cleaners .....just because they are old. Not even a thanks - just told that they are responsible for their finances - go work under the pretext of reskilling while foreigners take jobs away. All I hear is that PAP and LKY built the nation - not even thanking anyone who might have been building the backbone of the current Singapore.
I say that is bull. -
A fair statement would be;
Yes, LKY has done a good job for singapore, but he has also rewarded himself very very very very very handsomely and other member of his family and relatives.
Geographically, singapore is situated in the middle of the East and the West. After world war2, the world was in the advance of technology development, trading, mass production of electronics, mechanical, re-construction and etc. Singapore situation had the advantage of all the Ocean liners, vessels travelling to the West and East and vice-vesa. Sir Stamford Raffles knew that and had established the trading port hundreds of years ago. On top of this, we have the natural deep port that giant ocean liners were possible to berth for loading and unloading of cargoes.
Many Ocean liners and vessels were also transiting and replendish ration and drinking water here.
Certain big organisations would also prefer to set up their factories here for mass production of parts or goods before sending back or to wherever its destinations due to cheap labour. (in fact, we have to thank all the workers that had been helping and contributed to singapore for their hard labour in building our Nation)
Hence, these had made singapore prosperous and a regional trading centre and a transitional place.
So...if without the God gifted natural deep port and the ideal locality of singapore....lky will not be what he is today.
For God sake! Please don't always thought he was the mighty god that brought singapore to what it is today. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
You are a specialist in the medical field, and will probably limit your understanding and comments to this area of personal interest.
And companies in R&D and biotech industries still cannot find people to fill their jobs. IT comapnies are still looking for software designers and IT consultants for the region...We still have to look to China and India for our PhDs and Masters....
There are new jobs available...just that Singaporeans cannot fill them.
Surely, you will not expect anyone from the 3.5% unemployed to have PhDs and Masters and suitable for the Biotech Industries.
However, I will NOT be surprised if anyone having a Masters in Business or Finance is part of the 3.5% unemployed and needing to switch career at this stage of so called "economic restructuring" - which itself is a totally misleading term that do not describe the actual economic uprooting due to some stubborn arbitrary decision for central planned programs.
Should we be surprised that it takes an Entrepreneurial Foreign Talent to tell the Ministerial Committee that "what maybe the flavor of 2006, may not be the flavor of the year when the IR comes onstream" .
If not for the strength and character of a successful individual - (in the form of the owner of the Las Vegas Sands enterprise), do you think such a comment will be heeded by the POWER OF ONE ?
It takes two comets of equal strength to collide before it can be fused into a spectacular outcome.
Sure there are new jobs available in Singapore and across the Globe, but are there any or enough Singaporean with skills, or qualified training and experience available - all of which have been locked onto some central program that was bulldozed for 47 years based on the arbitrary decision of the POWER OF ONE.
Instead of allowing actual market forces to take place, central guidance has always been the arbiter of events in Singapore.
Where market forces arrange an outcome that displease the POWER OF ONE, it will tweak either the supply or demand end with punitive measures to influence the outcome to its own determined end.
Can this be true Market Force at work to determine the best use of resources ? -
I am not sure I understand what you are talking about. Perhaps you can cite specific examples rather than make sweeping general statements.Originally posted by Atobe:
Where market forces arrange an outcome that displease the POWER OF ONE, it will tweak either the supply or demand end with punitive measures to influence the outcome to its own determined end.
Can this be true Market Force at work to determine the best use of resources ?
As for MBA and the like, for a long time I have been wondering why so many Singaporeans have gone for such general qualifications. Even my lab technicians have MBA! Obviously with so many MBAs around (not to mention the thousands coming from China and India), it will be harder to distinguish oneself. Faced with so many choices, an employer would more likely select an MBA from Wharton, Harvard or Oxford compared to one from NUS, NTU or SIC. And I do not see the government pushing anyone to do MBAs. There are some jobs for MBAs in China, provided you have the language skills and willing to relocate, but there are just too many of such people in Singapore.
Each person must take personal responsibility for one's career. Doctors who were thinking of being diagnostic radiologists would be daft to continue in the same course, in view of the fact that teleradiology has taken away many of their jobs. It should not be any different with any other jobs.
Take a look at your skills and your salary, compare with the skills and salary of your foreign competitors and decide where you stand. Go read this article which describes the sort of jobs that are likely to be outsourced:
http://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedker/y2004iqiiip5-37nv.89no.3.html
For goodness sake, Singaporeans must grow up! Nobody owes us a living. -
SWEEPING STATEMENTS, or FACTS STATED AS IT IS ?
Originally posted by Atobe:
Where market forces arrange an outcome that displease the POWER OF ONE, it will tweak either the supply or demand end with punitive measures to influence the outcome to its own determined end.
Can this be true Market Force at work to determine the best use of resources ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Original response posted by oxford mushroom:
I am not sure I understand what you are talking about. Perhaps you can cite specific examples rather than make sweeping general statements.
For goodness sake, Singaporeans must grow up! Nobody owes us a living.
Sadly, either you are too far away to experience the daily Singaporean grind not to notice, or that your professionalism require you to be more circumspect in your comments about the ways of the POWER OF ONE.
Has the POWER OF ONE ever practice what it preaches, or are they the types that believes in -
"You Do as I Say, but DO NOT do as I do " ?
It declares itself to be a Champion Believer in the Free Market Mechanism, and yet will interfere in the mechanism to ensure that its position is not placed at a disadvantage.
If Free Market Forces is allowed to work its way, why is the ballotting of the COE for all categories of vehicles never conducted in a transparent and open manner ?
Is it odd that each time when a GLC owned Taxi Company require additional or change in its fleet of vehicles, the COE will see a dramatic drop in prices ?
Similarly, why are some tertiary students redirected into faculties of other disciplines, instead of their own choice - even with all things being equal with regards to qualifications, etc. ? Is this not the Master HR Resource management to meet some future industrial or civil requirements ?
Didn't the POWER OF ONE advocate the benefits of FREE MARKET Forces ?
Shall we continue to list the litany of hipocritical actions by the POWER OF ONE in the FREE MARKET OF COMPETING POLITICAL IDEAS ?
Why patronise Singaporeans with your ending remark ?
Did anyone suggest the World owe us a living ?
Surely, Singaporeans can fend for ourselves better, when the POWER OF ONE stop its self-appointed role of being the Sole Arbiter to all events in Singapore. -
Originally posted by Atobe:Does 'The Perfect yardstick' exist ?
We can only measure by our own yardstick of Singaporean experience, in measuring what we have set out to achieve, measure ourselves with the goals that have been set, met or failed.
We did try to attain the Swiss Standard of Living, but how did we fair ?
Surely, using that Yardstick, Singapore is a dismal failure in all aspects of the Swiss Standards of Politics, Democratic Practises, Citizens' Rights and Participation in NATIONAL AFFAIRS, Health, Job Protection, Protecting the Exclusivity of Singapore Citizenship.
I agree that it is a dismal failure trying to meet Swiss Standard of Living. The Swiss took over 100 yrs to achieve what they are today. GCT also set the target for Singapore soccer team to go into World Cup but I donÂ’t believe we will ever be there.
But we are better today than we were even 20 yrs ago. In some areas we have done well, in other areas we are worse, it is a moving targets as the needs of the people are diff at diff time. But overall we are better, are we not, compared to our parents, or grand parents?
Is there a deep sense of brotherhood and equality - similar to the days when different ethnic groups live in the kampong era - where genuine neighborliness exist ? Poverty then was a great social leveller.
In today's hustle and bustle, chauvinism has taken different forms - as in the insistent projections of ethnic preferences that governs job rulings and social appearance.
There is a false sense of calm and acceptance that is enforced, that do not seem to have allowed social integration to go deeper into the fabric of a common Singaporean identity.
[color=darkred]That sense of brotherhood and equality is not reflected in the SAF, nor in the Ministerial appointments, nor in the Government Service - for forty seven years, appointments to some Government agencies avoid some ethnic group - for seemingly obvious reasons.
Does the Government truly believe in putting the best person forward for the task, or is its decision governed by ethnic sensitivities ?
Such questions will have already touched the OB Markers, and a convenient point of closure to any further discussion. Has the real issue been addressed or the situation allowed to simmer ?
In the kampong era, the sense of brotherhood were much stronger but were within the same ethnic group. Poverty did not prevent the clashes in 1967 and the problem in Malaysia was allowed to spill over and affected us. Today, the identity of Singaporean and the sense of brotherhood are demonstrated outside of Singapore, when we face people of all races in the region. In regional meetings we donÂ’t see Singaporean Malays grouping with the Malaysian Malays, nor the Singaporean Chinese with the Hong Kong Chinese.
Preserving oneÂ’s own ethnic identity and culture is not chauvinism.
The only false sense of calm and acceptance that exist now is that for the new immigrants.
To me ethnic and religious sensitivities are still very important considerations for every aspect of our life here. I can agree that ethnic and religious relationship here continue to require tender care, all “obvious reasons” you mentioned are just some of these tender care. After all, we are still young, aren’t we? but I do not agree that there is any false sense of calm or tension.
Even in a HUNDRED YEARS, the crescent in our State Flag will never turn into a full moon, as we live in a sea of an ethnic group that will not accept our ethnic differences, and using their standard of measure they will remain envious of our seeming achievements until they are able to attain the same.
Should we wait for them to catch up??
The problem has been historical, and we will continue to carry the historical baggage that will always make us the underdog.
By your question "Did we create the problem ?" - is already forming a defensive barrier before we will even consider building a bridge to extend a hand of friendship.
During the recent 2006 Elections, "old war horse" Chiam See Tong had questioned the logic of the Ruling Party in making Free Trade Agreement with everyone all over the globe, but have ignored our immediate neighbor - despite having a friendly PM Badawi at the helm.
MM LKY shot this idea down accusing CST of losing sight of history.
In his arrogance, did MM LKY have further second thought that Singapore is already the largest foreign investor in Malaysia, with many Singaporeans owning properties, and that both sides have cross straight family ties amongst all ethnic groups ?
The fact that we are their largest foreign investor, in business, in properties is a clear action that they came first in our list of priorities. The first regional cooperation was the Johore/Singapore/Bataam triangle, then what happened? We are now working only with Bataam. I am not being defensive but it would be stupid if we do not learn from history.
Perhaps you are too isolated in your 'intellectual world' to be able to feel the tension amongst any particular communities within Singapore.
The fact that there is suddenly an exposure of a terrrorist group coming entirely from one ethnic Singaporean community, clearly shows that there is deep set dissatisfaction within that community.
Did the terrorist group turned terrorist because of their dissatisfaction within the community. The terrorist group that belong to the JI is part of international terrorism. Unhappy with Singapore why want to bomb American embassy?
Each of us will see progress in many different ways, and I can certainly accept your standard of measure.
Unfortunately, progress could have been expedited and Singapore could have accelerrated to a higher level of social well being if the POWER OF ONE is willing to loosen its insistence on being the sole arbitrator of all events and all issues in Singapore.
As a society, consisting of living people, any POWER trying to arbitrarily expedite its progress is equally dangerous as any POWER trying to arbitrate the natural development in all events and all issues. We need to allow the society to grow naturally.
Having said so much about the Burmese and the Filippinos, surely blaming all on the Government of the POWER OF ONE does not make anyone of us a LESSER PROUD SINGAPOREAN ?
What is the 'Singapore Identity' ?
After FORTY SEVEN Years - should we still be asking this question ?
In all my occassional travels abroad I can immediately distinguish the characteristic Singaporean from other Asians; but could hardly differentiate a Singaporean from a Malaysian - (much like your problem in differentiating the Burmese from the Thai).
You have the characteristic reservedly quiet, circumspect Singaporean Lone Traveller, and the loud bargain-hunting, condescending Singaporean Group Traveller.
Why are you unable to recognise your own kind ?
The point to note is that the Burmese and the Filippinos are proud of themselves even though their government didnÂ’t give them anything. No freedom and democracy for the Burmese, no social welfare nor stability for the Philippinos, they are still proud of themselves!! This just remind me and you that we should not be less proud of a singaporean just because we are not getting what we want.
We shouldnÂ’t be distinguishing people from their look anymore, ethnicity is different from nationality, can you tell the difference between a brit and a yankee? But when they open their mouth, I can tell a Malaysian from a Singaporean from far.
I have no problem recognizing Singaporean, alone or in group. In reality, among people of different nationality and ethnicity, there is one commonality that exist in all group, i.e. there are the good guy, the bad guy, the nice guy, and the AH. -
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
The Swiss took a 100 yrs, while Singapore had also celebrated 150 years since its founding, of which 47 years were in the hands of the POWER OF ONE.
Posted by Atobe:
Does 'The Perfect yardstick' exist ?
We can only measure by our own yardstick of Singaporean experience, in measuring what we have set out to achieve, measure ourselves with the goals that have been set, met or failed.
We did try to attain the Swiss Standard of Living, but how did we fair ?
Surely, using that Yardstick, Singapore is a dismal failure in all aspects of the Swiss Standards of Politics, Democratic Practises, Citizens' Rights and Participation in NATIONAL AFFAIRS, Health, Job Protection, Protecting the Exclusivity of Singapore Citizenship.
I agree that it is a dismal failure trying to meet Swiss Standard of Living. The Swiss took over 100 yrs to achieve what they are today. GCT also set the target for Singapore soccer team to go into World Cup but I donÂ’t believe we will ever be there.
But we are better today than we were even 20 yrs ago. In some areas we have done well, in other areas we are worse, it is a moving targets as the needs of the people are diff at diff time. But overall we are better, are we not, compared to our parents, or grand parents?
Within that half-century rule by the POWER OF ONE, SM GCT had nearly twenty years to implement his Swiss Dream - but what has he to show at the end of his term ?
Even the simplest form of loosening up political participation was unachievable - (Catherine Lim was "threatened" by GCT for her comments), while window-dressing changes were done to showcase to the world investors but not for the aspirations of educated Singaporeans.
The clashes of 1967 ? - or should it be 1964 riots or the May 13, 1969 ?
Is there a deep sense of brotherhood and equality - similar to the days when different ethnic groups live in the kampong era - where genuine neighborliness exist ? Poverty then was a great social leveller.
In today's hustle and bustle, chauvinism has taken different forms - as in the insistent projections of ethnic preferences that governs job rulings and social appearance.
There is a false sense of calm and acceptance that is enforced, that do not seem to have allowed social integration to go deeper into the fabric of a common Singaporean identity.
That sense of brotherhood and equality is not reflected in the SAF, nor in the Ministerial appointments, nor in the Government Service - for forty seven years, appointments to some Government agencies avoid some ethnic group - for seemingly obvious reasons.
Does the Government truly believe in putting the best person forward for the task, or is its decision governed by ethnic sensitivities ?
Such questions will have already touched the OB Markers, and a convenient point of closure to any further discussion. Has the real issue been addressed or the situation allowed to simmer ?
In the kampong era, the sense of brotherhood were much stronger but were within the same ethnic group. Poverty did not prevent the clashes in 1967 and the problem in Malaysia was allowed to spill over and affected us. Today, the identity of Singaporean and the sense of brotherhood are demonstrated outside of Singapore, when we face people of all races in the region. In regional meetings we donÂ’t see Singaporean Malays grouping with the Malaysian Malays, nor the Singaporean Chinese with the Hong Kong Chinese.
Preserving oneÂ’s own ethnic identity and culture is not chauvinism.
The only false sense of calm and acceptance that exist now is that for the new immigrants.
To me ethnic and religious sensitivities are still very important considerations for every aspect of our life here. I can agree that ethnic and religious relationship here continue to require tender care, all “obvious reasons” you mentioned are just some of these tender care. After all, we are still young, aren’t we? but I do not agree that there is any false sense of calm or tension.
The clash was not caused by poverty in Singapore (it was a Malaysian Issue ) , nor can poverty prevent the 1969 clashes; and who would have "allowed" the clashes to spill into Singapore (shown in your statement ) ?
The problem in Malaysia spilled over due to common historical base which the two countries share, and which was a carry over from the very venomous political rivalry for the hearts and minds of the people despite separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
Surely it is politically incorrect for any one in an official delegation to a International Forum, for the different ethnic groups from Singapore to group with there kinfolks from other countries
Why look at the International Stage, have you not read of the concern of the POWER OF ONE that at the Primary, Secondary and Tertiary levels of Singapore Education Centres, the different ethnic groups have no deep understanding nor intermingling with each other.
They tend to group according to their ethnic identity, social integration is merely skin deep.
"Preserving oneÂ’s own ethnic identity and culture is not chauvinism" - unfortunately it becomes OBVIOUS CHAUVINISM when performed aggressively with a consumating push made at the expense of other MINORITY ethnic identities and cultures.
Chauvinism exist when one Singaporean ethnic group is suspectfully disadvantaged, and alternative Singaporean ethnic groups are found to be more assuring, and are preferred to fill the sensitive positions of administration.
The superficial expressions at public gatherings hide the fact of deep seated "UNSPOKEN" unease towards the unfathomable minds of our own minority ethnic group - whose faith require them to place their God, their faith and their Religious Ties before all else.
The present calm and tolerance of the status quo is artificially imposed by the draconian law in place, and does not reflect the disquiet behind close doors.
There is no display of any natural integration of different ethnic groups at the neighborhood level without official sponsorship of organised community events. -
continuation:
No, we should help them to develop, and work with them to bring them up to our level as best as their society can cope with the speed of change.
Even in a HUNDRED YEARS, the crescent in our State Flag will never turn into a full moon, as we live in a sea of an ethnic group that will not accept our ethnic differences, and using their standard of measure they will remain envious of our seeming achievements until they are able to attain the same.
Should we wait for them to catch up??
This is to nullify the envy factor, and to increase the feeling of A Shared Future.
The problem has been historical, and we will continue to carry the historical baggage that will always make us the underdog.
By your question "Did we create the problem ?" - is already forming a defensive barrier before we will even consider building a bridge to extend a hand of friendship.
During the recent 2006 Elections, "old war horse" Chiam See Tong had questioned the logic of the Ruling Party in making Free Trade Agreement with everyone all over the globe, but have ignored our immediate neighbor - despite having a friendly PM Badawi at the helm.
MM LKY shot this idea down accusing CST of losing sight of history.
In his arrogance, did MM LKY have further second thought that Singapore is already the largest foreign investor in Malaysia, with many Singaporeans owning properties, and that both sides have cross straight family ties amongst all ethnic groups ?
The fact that we are their largest foreign investor, in business, in properties is a clear action that they came first in our list of priorities. The first regional cooperation was the Johore/Singapore/Bataam triangle, then what happened? We are now working only with Bataam. I am not being defensive but it would be stupid if we do not learn from history.
Mahathir is gone, into History.
It is Badawi now at the helm.
Should we not attempt to build ‘bridge’ – even place a plank for starters – to help Badawi overcome his political challenges, and in turn benefiting ourselves and starting a new chapter in an otherwise thorny relationship ?
Are you suggesting that a “Society of Living People” can be a danger to itself – for the POWER that it has to determine its own good ?
Perhaps you are too isolated in your 'intellectual world' to be able to feel the tension amongst any particular communities within Singapore.
The fact that there is suddenly an exposure of a terrrorist group coming entirely from one ethnic Singaporean community, clearly shows that there is deep set dissatisfaction within that community.
Did the terrorist group turned terrorist because of their dissatisfaction within the community. The terrorist group that belong to the JI is part of international terrorism. Unhappy with Singapore why want to bomb American embassy?
Each of us will see progress in many different ways, and I can certainly accept your standard of measure.
Unfortunately, progress could have been expedited and Singapore could have accelerrated to a higher level of social well being if the POWER OF ONE is willing to loosen its insistence on being the sole arbitrator of all events and all issues in Singapore.
As a society, consisting of living people, any POWER trying to arbitrarily expedite its progress is equally dangerous as any POWER trying to arbitrate the natural development in all events and all issues. We need to allow the society to grow naturally.
How did you so cleverly equate a “Society of Living People” forming a Community -with a “Group of People” forming a Society – as in a Political Party ?
How can a Society grow naturally – if devoid of living people ?
Can a Society of Living People (i.e. a Community) wielding POWER to determine its own growth be a danger to itself; when it is certain that a “Group of People” forming a political society to hold MONOPOLISTIC POWER can be a bigger danger ?
This much I can agree with you, that we should be no less PROUD of ourselves as Singaporeans – despite all our gripes against the shortcomings of the present Singapore in the hands of the POWER OF ONE.
Having said so much about the Burmese and the Filippinos, surely blaming all on the Government of the POWER OF ONE does not make anyone of us a LESSER PROUD SINGAPOREAN ?
What is the 'Singapore Identity' ?
After FORTY SEVEN Years - should we still be asking this question ?
In all my occassional travels abroad I can immediately distinguish the characteristic Singaporean from other Asians; but could hardly differentiate a Singaporean from a Malaysian - (much like your problem in differentiating the Burmese from the Thai).
You have the characteristic reservedly quiet, circumspect Singaporean Lone Traveller, and the loud bargain-hunting, condescending Singaporean Group Traveller.
Why are you unable to recognise your own kind ?
The point to note is that the Burmese and the Filippinos are proud of themselves even though their government didnÂ’t give them anything. No freedom and democracy for the Burmese, no social welfare nor stability for the Philippinos, they are still proud of themselves!! This just remind me and you that we should not be less proud of a singaporean just because we are not getting what we want.
We shouldnÂ’t be distinguishing people from their look anymore, ethnicity is different from nationality, can you tell the difference between a brit and a yankee? But when they open their mouth, I can tell a Malaysian from a Singaporean from far.
I have no problem recognizing Singaporean, alone or in group. In reality, among people of different nationality and ethnicity, there is one commonality that exist in all group, i.e. there are the good guy, the bad guy, the nice guy, and the AH.
No one should doubt our loyalty, nor our intent, nor our stand – whether our gripes are pronounced for local consumption, or spoken unashamedly on the international stage.
It is ridiculous to hide the flaws of the Singapore System from the World Stage, as no country is perfect.