PAP moves to counter criticism of party, govt in cyberspace
-
Some of the problem such as subsidized HDB loan, how come it is so difficult for Sporean to obtain?Originally posted by stupidissmart:Ahh... but u also make the same assumption tat the minister r pretty lousy and can only find a, lets say $2,000 job outside ? Why don't we just see the system instead of the people. Do u agree tat the job of a minister is either equivalent or close to the job of a CEO of a MNC company ? If the pay is lousy, the people who can get $100,000 outside will not join as minister because they r donating a 80% salary donation to the country.
If the pay is equvalent, then it is likely people who have talent to run as CEO will consider joining as minister. At least we can be sure tat there will be more candidates interested than giving 20,000 in the post and thus able to pick the better man for the job. The system can get better qualified people to turn the economy u desire isn't it ? -
You telling me all ministers in other countries who are getting pay around peanut are not as good as local?Originally posted by stupidissmart:
With a lower pay, r we gonna get capable people for the job. I believe more people will apply if the pay is better and a better candidate can be chosen. Notice tat politics is still nevertheless a job. So if u get a $100,000 job now will u go to help gov and take a $20,000 job ? If u have $3000 dollar job now will u get a paycut and apply for a $1500 job to help gov ? [/b][/quote]
Common people will choose the higher pay. Superior people cannot be judge by this manner. Yes, higher pay will give you bigger pool of people for selection, but it does not mean you will sure get good people for the job. You might attract greedy people as well. It takes a wise to know another wise man.
[quote]Originally posted by stupidissmart:Given lesser candidate to choose from, the people chosen is likely not to be capable and the country will implement lousy policy. Then overall the whole country suffers. Ideal and realistic situation differs. -
Some of the problem such as subsidized HDB loan, how come it is so difficult for Sporean to obtain?
I don't understand why u r addressing the question to me... I am not from the gov If I am from the gov I will not be debating in religious topics.
Anyway I try to help u if u want
I do not understand if I get your question correctly
http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10201p.nsf/WPDis/Buying%20A%20New%20HDB%20Flat%20(e-Sales)Policies%20-%20Housing%20Loan%20from%20HDB?OpenDocument&SubMenu=Policies#Eligibility%20Conditions%20for%20Housing%20Loans%20from%20HDB
You can obtain a housing loan from HDB when you and/or the essential occupiers:
(i) have not enjoyed two or more concessionary interest rate mortgage loans previously. This is regardless of whether the previous loans were for buying flats directly from HDB or from the open market;
(ii) have enjoyed one concessionary interest rate mortgage loan and one housing subsidy previously and buying a flat of a type that is bigger than your current flat or the flat you last owned (if you currently do not own an HDB flat);
(iii) have enjoyed one concessionary interest rate mortgage loan and one housing subsidy previously and the property you last disposed off is not a private residential property;
(iv) does not own two or more owner-operated market/hawker stalls or any commercial/industrial property inside or out of Singapore;
(v) own one market/hawker stall or commercial/industrial property and operate the business yourself;
(vi) do not own any private residential property inside or out of Singapore.
so generally if u r a normal guy, u properly can get the loan... -
quote:NKF revealed many malpractices one of which is the claim that it is peanut to pay its CEO S$600,000.00 pa not to mention the several months of bonuses.
It could not be such a pure coincidence that while the ministers were pushing pushing their own salaries from S$600,000.00 for the PM in 1970s t0 S$2,000,000.00 pa by the 11990s today Mr. Durai of NKF has also been pushing up his own salaries with the tacit support of the government patron from S$120,000.00 pa to S$600,000.00 pa during this same period/
This malpractice could have been encouraged by the assumption you have clearly made that in order to encourage good and talented people, government must pay such an amount of salaries to ministers, MPs as and civil servants as to prevent corruption.
Stupidissmart:
If I do not read wrongly, the point above just state tat Durai act in such a way because he is "following" gov lead in pay taking. But then again wat does tis have to do with whether the gov is corrupted or not ? Durai is being sued and charged now isn't it ?
There is a common saying: "monkey sees monkey does." So I cannot accept your contention that NKF wrong doings in self-rewarding themselves was not connected to the government/
If anyone were to question Mr. Durai's peanut pay at that time while Ministers are voting to pay themselves the highest salaries benchmarked against the successful CEOs and entrepreneurs in the private sector, I don't think any one among our civil servants or ministers would ever have the gut to question Mr. Durai's peanut pay.
However in the light of the public outrage, and the mass withdrawal of public donation, government has no alternative but was forced to admit the problem and hence the present court case against durai and the conspiring board.
This is a good evidence to show that the minister in charge has failed in his duty to oversea the charity organization to safeguard against such self-rewards and malpractices.
It is not a case of government taking its own action on wrong doings in NKF but it was a case of being forced by public outrage to do so. I would correct your assumption that government has taken its own actions to correct wrong doings and malpractices.
It may just happen that our investments of public funds in other government agencies and ministries are so as accountable or transparent as the government claims because citizens have no access to information/
Citizens look forward after NKF to ask Temasek and GIC to show us their decision making process in investing public monies in shin corp and global crossing.quote:There are many flaws in such an assumptions which rest essentially on comparison of the highest pays of bosses in the private business world as many of them are capitalist investors who reward themselves highly from their own business profits or own monies which in a down time could turn into quick losses.
The specific benching of ministers' pays against the highest earners in the private business sector is flawed and I do not see how you could explain it is not point by point to what I have posted before on this topic in several posts.
Stupidissmart:-
Do they compared themselves with the highest pays of bosses ? Furthermore the pay for some CEO is fixed and whether the company decline or not, he still get his pay. Doesn't the ministers get a pay cut when the economy is faltering ?
The in-principle concept that we must pay ministers the highest pays to prevent corruption is the same argument that to prevent a murder, we ought to pay potential murderer ransom or blackmail monies.
PM of Malaysia Mr. Balawi in reply to MM Lee's advice to pay their ministers higher salaries was: We believe that ministers must have integrity ...not to ask for such higher pays to which MM Lee could not reply up to today. So your view that ministers must be paid the higher or highest pays to attract talents or prevent corruptions cannot be borne out in practice neither on talents which were not proven to this day nor on integrity issue.quote:They are not entrepreneurs in the private sector who are able to push up their pays by comparing with the highest and not being accountable to their shareholders for lack of performance or mistakes like our ministers such as in NKF or Shin Corp/
NKF is a by-product of our money-worshipping system where on the one hand government believes in no-free lunch but its ministers keep taking monies for themselves against the principle of accountability or good corporate governance.
Stupidissmart:
Lack of performance ? Mistakes ? Whether shin corp, in the long run, will fail is sill not confirmed yet. Overall for the year they still make more profit then the losses so should they get fired for making profit ? NKF has nothing to do with the Gov. It is not even gov linked.
Because of the consequent tax-and-recover system of government adopted by the government, Durai was able to exploit on the ministers need to encourage public donations to take care of medically terminal patients and Durai ended up practically supported by the highest authority to do as he likes with the tacit support of the highest level.
So I cannot agree with your contention that NKF has nothing to do with the government and government should be excused from the wrongs committed with the encouragement of the government at the highest level. (see my other posts on breach of codes of conduct by ministers on this matter)quote:Iaococca is another example of a private sector CEO who understands such a predicament of benefits and reward system. He gave up his CEO pay during the period Chrysler was in financial crisis to show that if he wants to be talented and be paid high salaries he must be answerable for performance.
If our ministers have been promoting themselves as the world's best and deserving to be rewarded the world's highest salaries for bill collections, then you cannot say that they should be exempted from the iaccocca moral and EQ exemplary self-restraints to lead by example.
Stupidissmart:
U see, he is a classic example but u can't expect everyone to follow him. He does not do wat common CEO will do. Mother Teresa went to africa to help the needy so does it means every nuns have to go to africa ?
quote:I am sure I have by now shown you that it is only an assumption that in order to attract talents we must pay the highest salaries equivalent to The bosses of legal firms, stock companies and all the investor category of private sector CEO. There is no end to such comparison as our MM Lee might well next make comparison with salaries of Bill Gates and Sim Wong Hoo who are extremely creative in their entrepreneurship and deserve all their reward whereas public sector employees or public officers are only in charge of passing laws and collecting monies. [/quote]
I am sure no matter how MM Lee will try to argue in an international context he cannot justify his benchmarking of ministers' highest pays to be on par with the highest rewards to any wage earners in the private business sector.
However because the media is under the control of the government there is no option but for the citizens to swallow such a artful one-sided conflict-of-interest wrong doing. -
Common people will choose the higher pay. Superior people cannot be judge by this manner. Yes, higher pay will give you bigger pool of people for selection, but it does not mean you will sure get good people for the job. You might attract greedy people as well. It takes a wise to know another wise man.
Superior man... Tis superior may be morally superior but performance wise it is different. Mother teresa is a superior man who do not care for money but do u think she can be a good president ? U might say greedy people apply for the job but then in the world of capitalism, money is the reason why men work.You telling me all ministers in other countries who are getting pay around peanut are not as good as local?
No, I am just saying u give more money u got more choices. And I also state tat other country got more people compared with singapore. And u can't say if they give more money to the minister there, they won't get better candidate. -
You said you are not the government then are you replying to all these questions in the previous posts.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I don't understand why u r addressing the question to me... I am not from the gov If I am from the gov I will not be debating in religious topics.
Anyway I try to help u if u want
I do not understand if I get your question correctly
http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10201p.nsf/WPDis/Buying%20A%20New%20HDB%20Flat%20(e-Sales)Policies%20-%20Housing%20Loan%20from%20HDB?OpenDocument&SubMenu=Policies#Eligibility%20Conditions%20for%20Housing%20Loans%20from%20HDB
You can obtain a housing loan from HDB when you and/or the essential occupiers:
(i) have not enjoyed two or more concessionary interest rate mortgage loans previously. This is regardless of whether the previous loans were for buying flats directly from HDB or from the open market;
(ii) have enjoyed one concessionary interest rate mortgage loan and one housing subsidy previously and buying a flat of a type that is bigger than your current flat or the flat you last owned (if you currently do not own an HDB flat);
(iii) have enjoyed one concessionary interest rate mortgage loan and one housing subsidy previously and the property you last disposed off is not a private residential property;
(iv) does not own two or more owner-operated market/hawker stalls or any commercial/industrial property inside or out of Singapore;
(v) own one market/hawker stall or commercial/industrial property and operate the business yourself;
(vi) do not own any private residential property inside or out of Singapore.
so generally if u r a normal guy, u properly can get the loan...
If you want to help government to reply to criticism i.e. cyber-counter the public opinions given in the cyberspace why are you shy to admit that you are the government agent sent to counter cyber opinions/
Let us not be dishonest about our intent and stand. I do give my ID in these exchange of views but you dare not reveal yours.
Then I suggest you refer these views you disagree with to the minister who could reply instead of assuming policies and reasoning for the government in your counter posts. If the ministers could reply and substantiate that HDB has not only given a discount but subsidised on public housing truly with accountable facts and figures, I would say that he would be a good talent.
But it looks like for now ministers dare not open up and reply to people's criticism except by proxies like the anonymous cyber-agents.
This fact speaks volumes for the quality of the ministers that we do have.
We would like to see how ministers could come to rebut the people's criticism that it is profiteering on public housing and its transfer to original HDB loan system to the private banker loans is against the spirit of the setting up of public housing authority called HDB.
The about-turn on low cost public housing in order to keep taxing and profiteering has today caused one of the biggest problems ever to citizens in human history. -
It could not be such a pure coincidence that while the ministers were pushing pushing their own salaries from S$600,000.00 for the PM in 1970s t0 S$2,000,000.00 pa by the 11990s today Mr. Durai of NKF has also been pushing up his own salaries with the tacit support of the government patron from S$120,000.00 pa to S$600,000.00 pa during this same period/
I think tat is mere speculation. Just because the gov increase their pay doesn't means durai increases his with the support of the gov. And the patron of NKF is not a gov officer herself, if I catch wat u r trying to say. It is just like saying just because oil price rises that is why durai increase his pay. It is totally mutually independent events. As said, NKF is not a gov linked company. Why do u want to link them together ?There is a common saying: "monkey sees monkey does." So I cannot accept your contention that NKF wrong doings in self-rewarding themselves was not connected to the government/
Neh... these monkeys openly declared their pay raise and never dubiously get back pay. If Durai do tat and openly publicise his pay then he is totally fine.If anyone were to question Mr. Durai's peanut pay at that time while Ministers are voting to pay themselves the highest salaries benchmarked against the successful CEOs and entrepreneurs in the private sector, I don't think any one among our civil servants or ministers would ever have the gut to question Mr. Durai's peanut pay.
Again it is simply assumptions which u match here and there. It never happens and anyone can say watever he likeThis is a good evidence to show that the minister in charge has failed in his duty to oversea the charity organization to safeguard against such self-rewards and malpractices
NKF is not gov linked and they admit they drive out a MOH official in the meetings and keeping her in the dark. DO u want all charity to be run completely by the gov ?It may just happen that our investments of public funds in other government agencies and ministries are so as accountable or transparent as the government claims because citizens have no access to information/
How transparent do u want it to be How transparent r the other countries ?Citizens look forward after NKF to ask Temasek and GIC to show us their decision making process in investing public monies in shin corp and global crossing.
If they ask citizens for opinion before buying shincorp, investors all will be buying shincorp shares, driving up price and singapore can then stop considering the buyout and any decision liao.The specific benching of ministers' pays against the highest earners in the private business sector is flawed and I do not see how you could explain it is not point by point to what I have posted before on this topic in several posts.
I thought it is already donePM of Malaysia Mr. Balawi in reply to MM Lee's advice to pay their ministers higher salaries was: We believe that ministers must have integrity ...not to ask for such higher pays to which MM Lee could not reply up to today.
Wat reply fo u think LKY should answer and not get a potential backlash ? He offer advise, he don't take, tat is it. U think he should argue and force Balawi to accept it ?So your view that ministers must be paid the higher or highest pays to attract talents or prevent corruptions cannot be borne out in practice neither on talents which were not proven to this day nor on integrity issue.
I don't think u have answer why increasing the pay does not ensure more people will become potential candidate and have better people to select.
About corruption, I believe your measures of givng money to murderer is wrong, but preventing people from carrying weopons on the streets, detering murders by giving death sentence and arming police with powers and guns help to reduce murder. With the right measures certain social ills can be diminished. I do not know about u but haven't u heard tat the policemen from the poorer region get less pay and thus r more inclined to be corrupted ?NKF is a by-product of our money-worshipping system where on the one hand government believes in no-free lunch but its ministers keep taking monies for themselves against the principle of accountability or good corporate governance.
Every country worship money, gov get a good pay but why does it means NKF is a by product of such matters If by your theory then all the charity organisation in singapore and all the companies should be corrupted as well. U and I r corrupted as well.
1)NKF corrupted,
2) meritocracy as an objective of the country
3)and gov minister have high pay
all r mutually independent relationshipsBecause of the consequent tax-and-recover system of government adopted by the government, Durai was able to exploit on the ministers need to encourage public donations to take care of medically terminal patients and Durai ended up practically supported by the highest authority to do as he likes with the tacit support of the highest level.
I think tis is groundless accusations as well. All cities collect taxes and all gov encourage people to donate to public donations. So all charity organisation r all corrupted ? And why does gov encouraging people to donate means they r encouraging durai to be corrupted ? It totally made no sense. Again
1) Taxes to the people in the city
2) gov encourage donations
3) Durai corrupted
they all r mutually independent relationship as well. So do u expect gov not to ask for any tax or gov tell people not to donate to charity ?If our ministers have been promoting themselves as the world's best and deserving to be rewarded the world's highest salaries for bill collections, then you cannot say that they should be exempted from the iaccocca moral and EQ exemplary self-restraints to lead by example.
Then why don't u name me a politician who get no pay while he is in office ? If u say tat way, then there r many countries where situation is worse than singapore and they should not get any pay for their whole life. Let me ask u, why don't u work without pay for the gov then ? Tat means u have 0 total income for many years.
BTW chrysler is still losing money and have to consider selling to GM. Big help it does
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world_business/view/259079/1/.html -
I think it's typically arrogant and ignorant of the PAP to send their running dogs to "counter" (aka dismiss) criticism in cyberspace.
The govt is so quick to call us cowards for supposedly hiding behind internet anonymity.. yet they themselves now employ this "cowardly" method, what's more with 2 layers of anonymity - 1- by replying to its citizens thru 3rd parties, and 2 - disguising these 3rd parties as ordinary netizens. What hypocrisy. What ignorance, for them not to foresee that their half-baked strategy would backfire. Their dogs stick out like sore thumbs with their pro-PAP "templates".
If they agree that the issues we've put forward are such a cause for worry, they should do the right thing any democratic government with an inch of integrity should do - which is to address the citizens directly on a more public platform.. instead of sending their heavenly dogs down to offer us peons a sample of their 'immortal wisdom' while suppressing our voice in the public media. -
You said you are not the government then are you replying to all these questions in the previous posts.
Because simply put I am NOT a gov agent
If you want to help government to reply to criticism i.e. cyber-counter the public opinions given in the cyberspace why are you shy to admit that you are the government agent sent to counter cyber opinions/ If I am a gov agent, I will not post religion sensitive arguments in my other threads. How do u want me to convince u ? I am just pro-minority in a forum. Tat means I like to debate on the unpopular stand in a forum. Furthermore I have been in tis forum for donkey years, and I seldom discuss politics in these last few years. If I am a gov agent why will I wanna do tat ?
Let me ask u a question. Why do u think Pro PAP people must be gov agent ? Do u think there r no pro PAP people in singapore ? How do u tell the difference between a pro PAP person and a cyber cop Let us not be dishonest about our intent and stand. I do give my ID in these exchange of views but you dare not reveal yours.
I be frank with u here tat I post religious sensitive topics and I do not want to get into trouble with the authority on tis. Call me a coward all u want but I post during my free time as a past time, and I do not want to be in trouble for tis.Then I suggest you refer these views you disagree with to the minister who could reply instead of assuming policies and reasoning for the government in your counter posts. If the ministers could reply and substantiate that HDB has not only given a discount but subsidised on public housing truly with accountable facts and figures, I would say that he would be a good talent.
Since I am not an agent, I suggest u ask the minister yourself. I am a person tat goes by logic. If I find a logical flow in the argument, I will not hesistate to list it down. If u find it is logically flawed, u could easily point it outWe would like to see how ministers could come to rebut the people's criticism that it is profiteering on public housing and its transfer to original HDB loan system to the private banker loans is against the spirit of the setting up of public housing authority called HDB.
U can't find minister rebut from me but my logical conclusion is housing is built on land. No land is free in any city. And collecting tax from people having big houses at good location seems to be good for the people. Finally public housing in singapore is still affordable compared with the rest of the world.
The about-turn on low cost public housing in order to keep taxing and profiteering has today caused one of the biggest problems ever to citizens in human history -
Fair enough. I will assume you are independent in your view until proven otherwise. Thanks for clarifications.
-
Originally posted by spinsugar:
No reason why the government should not correct the blatant lies and covert misrepresentations that re rife in cyberspace. What's the matter? Haven't got the guts to face a robust debate and have your arguments torn to shreds?
I think it's typically arrogant and ignorant of the PAP to send their running dogs to "counter" (aka dismiss) criticism in cyberspace.
The govt is so quick to call us cowards for supposedly hiding behind internet anonymity.. yet they themselves now employ this "cowardly" method, what's more with 2 layers of anonymity - 1- by replying to its citizens thru 3rd parties, and 2 - disguising these 3rd parties as ordinary netizens. What hypocrisy. What ignorance, for them not to foresee that their half-baked strategy would backfire. Their dogs stick out like sore thumbs with their pro-PAP "templates".
If they agree that the issues we've put forward are such a cause for worry, they should do the right thing any democratic government with an inch of integrity should do - which is to address the citizens [b]directly on a more public platform.. instead of sending their heavenly dogs down to offer us peons a sample of their 'immortal wisdom' while suppressing our voice in the public media. [/b]
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, even supporters of the government
-
If government is elected to serve the people, is it not duty-bound to tell the truths? So if patient subsidy per donation dollar is inaccurate who is misrepresenting the fact ?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:No reason why the government should not correct the blatant lies and covert misrepresentations that re rife in cyberspace. What's the matter? Haven't got the guts to face a robust debate and have your arguments torn to shreds?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, even supporters of the government
If the facts are not revealed why not accept it is a error of judgment or negligence and why not action be taken on the minister under the codes of conduct for minister for such misrepresentation/
How can people be responsible for misrepresentation when people are asking for the facts to be published in the face of so many years of denial.
Why is MOM not telling it as it is about the extent of unemployment among citizens and why is MOM lumping up figures with the PR in order to muddle the figure.
Why hide the truth from the people when the government often claims it is honest and full of integrity ?
Why tell half-truths like the NKF and why is there a need to counter arguments by citizens as the simplest is to just tell the truths in the first place.
Is HDB subsidizing the prices of low-cost housing or is it just simply giving a discount.
Is the land acquired with people's monies owned by the people and will it not be double-charging by selling these low-cost housing at market prices less a bit of discount which is wrongly misrepresented as subsidy. -
I've noticed you've actually stopped attempting to discuss any solid affairs after the last big trashing Adobe gave you... good, it seems you might have some sense still in you. Unfortunately I do not understand why you insist on trapping yourself with yet another post, ment to be a jab, but ending up putting your own foot into your mouth.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:No reason why the government should not correct the blatant lies and covert misrepresentations that re rife in cyberspace. What's the matter? Haven't got the guts to face a robust debate and have your arguments torn to shreds?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, even supporters of the government
One needs to ask a more relevant question then- is it doing any good or is this just another thing wasting taxpayers time and money better spent on actually bothering to listen for a change and devote some energies there?
It seems to me that not too long back another smaller organization relied on false document to skew public opinion as well... how did that turn out now?
Worse... what if they are like you? Now that would be an abuse of time and resources.
If all the dice were unloaded and the playing field leveled... do you seriously think that the government can "tear" any of the opposition's arguments to shreds? More importantly... is the government the only one around with valid views on how to run a country in here?
People would do good to seperate the wheat from the chaff in cyberspace, but it seems you utterly forget to apply this principle to your pet organization... one wonders how much chaff you are spreading in here.
With people like you... is it any suprise there is this "insurgency"? -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Is this not ironical that you should make such a pompous statement; and made with such a condescending tone ?
No reason why the government should not correct the blatant lies and covert misrepresentations that re rife in cyberspace. What's the matter? Haven't got the guts to face a robust debate and have your arguments torn to shreds?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, even supporters of the government
Have you not considered that your opinions and your stand have consistently been proven to be hollow, and have been torn to shreds countless times in this sgForums - not only from my singular efforts ?
While you accuse CSJ to be a masochist - when he has a cause to be one, what could possibly be your reason to continously return to be bashed for your foolishness ?
Yet, you dare to make your usual pompous claim that
" blatant lies and covert misrepresentations ...... re rife in cyberspace " ?
It seems that those blatant lies and covert misrepresentations are those coming from the likes of you and others who are hopelessly defending this Government in cyberspace.
The one who have no guts to face the evidence that you have asked for, and have a robust debate seems to be you. -
Zap wrote:
It retreated against Port Pelepas. It retreated against challenges from Souzhou local authority. It retreated against Taiwan.
gahmen take and take from own people
give the money to temasek to play play
now the thai general take everything they buy in thailand
gahmen lan lan already liow hor.
even sand also cannot get from indonesia
because gahmen cbm say indonesia make smoke
see or not
help people for what
tsunami people let them die lah
now lan lan already
Why ? Because its presumably good and invincible mighty reasoning and ability simply cannot stand up to test by a larger humanity.
Why because their over-pervasive legalistic wrangling against its own citizens like ignoring them and doing as they like irrespective of wrongs do not and cannot work as well in the outer world.
The presumed ability, leadership or talents became hollow hypocrisy the moment they got tested outside the red dot where all rationality of laws and power to reason instantly end in dismal rejection by bigger forces.
That is why they cannot understand why Mahathir and Sonthi do not accept their reign of legalistic wrangling ending up compromising or coming down from the high horse. -
Why is MOM not telling it as it is about the extent of unemployment among citizens and why is MOM lumping up figures with the PR in order to muddle the figure.
Do we need the figure to be so detailed ? I have checked germany, france etc other country and they also never break down the figures for PR and citizens. BTW which country do breakdown their unemployment rate to citizen and PR ?
Next shouldn't we might as well ask the different races unemployment rate, or the age group of the unemployement, the qualifications, their religion etc. We do it for all the statistic release like housing or income etc. Tis makes it it become too complicated and costly to be reproduced.
Furthermore, u may get the statistic u want if u ask the relevant departmentIs HDB subsidizing the prices of low-cost housing or is it just simply giving a discount.
Tat depend on how u view the land costIs the land acquired with people's monies owned by the people and will it not be double-charging by selling these low-cost housing at market prices less a bit of discount which is wrongly misrepresented as subsidy.
Land is owned by the people means Gov own the land. But land is not free and it is used to gather tax for running the country. The tax goes to budget and goes to the people. Otherwise it becomes an unfair society where the people get the biggest land at the best location for free while the one having small land at lousy location get no renumeration or justiceIt retreated against Port Pelepas. It retreated against challenges from Souzhou local authority. It retreated against Taiwan.
Another way is simply because singapore is a country tat depend on diplomancy and they do not want to permanently sour relationship by verbal assaulting other nation. Do u personally encourage the gov to quarrel badly with china over suzhou, attack taiwan without stopping, not giving any face to malaysia and thailand and have relationships becoming permanently soured ? Giving way is not a sign of weakness, but could be a sign for strength.
Why ? Because its presumably good and invincible mighty reasoning and ability simply cannot stand up to test by a larger humanity.
Why because their over-pervasive legalistic wrangling against its own citizens like ignoring them and doing as they like irrespective of wrongs do not and cannot work as well in the outer world.
The presumed ability, leadership or talents became hollow hypocrisy the moment they got tested outside the red dot where all rationality of laws and power to reason instantly end in dismal rejection by bigger forces.
That is why they cannot understand why Mahathir and Sonthi do not accept their reign of legalistic wrangling ending up compromising or coming down from the high horse. -
quote:Why is MOM not telling it as it is about the extent of unemployment among citizens and why is MOM lumping up figures with the PR in order to muddle the figure.
Yes, if the government is honest and wants to show the real figures of direct job creation by the policy to allow foreigners to come in and take over citizens' jobs claiming that this is good for the economy.
Stupidissmart
Do we need the figure to be so detailed ? I have checked germany, france etc other country and they also never break down the figures for PR and citizens. BTW which country do breakdown their unemployment rate to citizen and PR ?
Next shouldn't we might as well ask the different races unemployment rate, or the age group of the unemployement, the qualifications, their religion etc. We do it for all the statistic release like housing or income etc. Tis makes it it become too complicated and costly to be reproduced.
Furthermore, u may get the statistic u want if u ask the relevant department Rolling Eyes
If government cannot give such a direct job creation and could only give a total job creation, obviously it shows that the jobs filled by foreigners who also were given pr are too insignificant.
If government claims that the policy to allow foreigners to come in and take over any mundane jobs will help our economy to grow they must still look after our people's jobs to avoid unscrupulous employers replacing locals with foreigners for the slightest saving in wage costs.
There is a deliberate attempt to conceal the true picture of direct job creation as a result of allowing liberally the foreigners to lower costs to the employers.
It would seem that the government is always more ready to sacrifice the interest of the people when the people need the government most - securing employment opportunities when unemployed.quote:Is HDB subsidizing the prices of low-cost housing or is it just simply giving a discount.
It has been a subject of queries by the people as published in many letters to the Straits Times' forum page and HDB simply was lost for words - giving a discount to the market price and calling such discount subsidy to public housing. It is sheer dishonesty to say that HDB has subsidised its sale of flats in this manner.
Stupidissmart:
Tat depend on how u view the land cost
The worse is when the lands were originally owned by people through people's taxes which paid for their acquisition under special powers provided by the Land Acquisition Act for public use and public housing.
It is pure chicanery to tell the people, that HDB had paid the SLA for the lands when such lands were originally acquired for or within the ratio reserved for low-cost public housing period.
It seems that up to now, minister Mah has not been able to rebut people's view that the lands were already owned and paid for and acquired for public housing using taxpayers' monies and when it comes to selling flats built on such lands, the flats should not have been priced at market price with a small discount which was falsely claimed as subsidy.quote:Is the land acquired with people's monies owned by the people and will it not be double-charging by selling these low-cost housing at market prices less a bit of discount which is wrongly misrepresented as subsidy.
Government is elected to represent the people and not for its own sake. So it is wrong to say that government could do what it likes and charge the fullest market price it likes for lands which were owned and paid for by the people for public housing.
Stupidissmart:
Land is owned by the people means Gov own the land. But land is not free and it is used to gather tax for running the country. The tax goes to budget and goes to the people. Otherwise it becomes an unfair society where the people get the biggest land at the best location for free while the one having small land at lousy location get no renumeration or justice
If people use the land for certain other use like building a shopping centre for the purpose of private business, it is true that we can say that government owns the land and government has to sell such lands for such purposes at the fullest market price.
HDB has lost its original objective and became a profiteering private developer and committed serious wrong against the people.quote:It retreated against Port Pelepas. It retreated against challenges from Souzhou local authority. It retreated against Taiwan.
Such consistent behaviour of the government in giving in to bigger forces outside in conducting diplomatic relations while continuously acting against the interests of its own citizens to claim as success is generally known as :"Big fish eats small fish and small fish eats shrimps as characterized or admitted by MM Lee the man responsible for all such so-called no-free lunch talk-down attitude adopted by the ministers towards its own people.
Why ? Because its presumably good and invincible mighty reasoning and ability simply cannot stand up to test by a larger humanity.
Why because their over-pervasive legalistic wrangling against its own citizens like ignoring them and doing as they like irrespective of wrongs do not and cannot work as well in the outer world.
The presumed ability, leadership or talents became hollow hypocrisy the moment they got tested outside the red dot where all rationality of laws and power to reason instantly end in dismal rejection by bigger forces.
That is why they cannot understand why Mahathir and Sonthi do not accept their reign of legalistic wrangling ending up compromising or coming down from the high horse.
Stupidismsart:
Another way is simply because singapore is a country tat depend on diplomancy and they do not want to permanently sour relationship by verbal assaulting other nation. Do u personally encourage the gov to quarrel badly with china over suzhou, attack taiwan without stopping, not giving any face to malaysia and thailand and have relationships becoming permanently soured ? Giving way is not a sign of weakness, but could be a sign for strength.
No wonder Singapore has lost its competitiveness and taken many years to recover from recessions. It is time to re-examine such fundamental "government must succeed and people can be sacrificed for government's own narrow NKF practices."
Many talented citizens have migrated to other countries to seek better use of their talent.
This is a serious social problem which has been caused by self-centredness on the part of government which still has not solved the unemployment or restructured the economy. All its claims of success is purely presentations of falsehood and hypocrisy. -
Someone actually came up with some interesting points on the net.
Effiencency.
> The $100,000 that a Singapore Minister is paid in ONE MONTH is what a
> typical experienced middle-age Singapore manager will earn in an ENTIRE
> YEAR!
> Nearly half-a-million (some 400,000) S'poreans even earn less than $1,500
> per month.
http://groups.google.com.sg/group/soc.culture.singapore/msg/2b4dead75e79327b?&hl=en
8 Ministers of State (Junior Ministers):
-- Salary range around $1m to $1.5m per year.
5 Parliamentary Secretaries & 1 Political Secretary:
-- Yatiman Yusof, Mohamed Maidin, Hawazi Daipi, Maliki Osman, Koo Tsai Kee.
Political Secretary Tang Guan Seng has been around for umpteen years!
-- Salary around $1m per year. Hardly any Ah Kow, Ahmad or Ali know what
the heck they actually do !!!
82 PAP Members of Parliament:
-- Likewise, what do this whole bunch "actually" do to "justify" their
MP Allowance of $11,900 per month (on top of their regular day job)???
[ SM Goh recently defended the $11,900 per month as "fair". Luckily (for
him), he didn't say the amount is "peanuts" !!! ]
-- They only show their faces mostly near a General Election.
-- They hardly bother to attend our infrequent Parliament sittings
(convenient lame excuse --- business commitments). But when either MM Lee
or PM Lee speak in Parliament, they were "somehow" able to attend! Some
were even caught napping on televised Parliament sessions!
-- At most, they hold weekly Meet-the-People sessions on resident's
problems dealing with bird-brained civil servants.
[Note: if our highly-paid civil servants have been doing a proper job, such
sessions would be unnecessay!].
At say, three hours per weekly session, these MPs are being paid close to
$1,000 per hour!
-- They also get to hold Directorships in many companies (mostly
govt-linked companies), collecting easy "side income" from numerous
director's fees. -
Our increasing cost of education:
5.3 Increasing Cost of Education
http://groups.google.com.sg/group/soc.culture.singapore/msg/2b4dead75e79327b?&hl=en
(a) Why such costly/posh educational institutions (sinking so much monies
into brick and cement???):
--- $435m SMU new City Campus in Bras Basah area.
--- $322m Republic Polytechnic new Woodlands Campus (latest amongst 5
Polytechnics).
Designed by a famous Japanese architect (expensive Foreign Talent! Singapore
architects not good enough?)
--- $370m new ITE College East Campus (near Singapore Expo).
A really ULTRA-POSH "mega-campus" (for hands-on technical education???).
Hold on -- another two more such mega-campus coming up (Central Campus and
West Campus) !!!
(b) See how, in tiny red dot Singapore, the 4 Universities
(NUS,NTU,SMU,UniSIM) and 5 Polytechnics try to "outdo each other" in
offering "duplicating courses" and resorting to costly Press/TV
advertising campaigns?
The students will, of course, have to pay for all these costs !!!
(b) What the heck is going on ???
First, Golden Taps at the NKF (National Kachang Foundation?)
Next, Golden Chairs at the NTU (Nanyang Technological University) !!!
News report on NTU Business School buying as many as 300 top-end
"ergonomic" Herman Miller office chairs costing $2,200 each (when chairs
costing $300 to $400 are just as good and lasting !!!)
(c) "University fees have increased by an annual average of 5% since 1990
and they have gone up every year, Mr Tharman said" (BT 2 Mar 06).
Mr Tharman, we all know that already. But why are you not telling the
people the detailed numbers of Govt bursaries/scholarships generously
given out to Foreign Students (most of whom are "making use" of Singapore as
a "stepping stone") ???
(d) $1m --- Consulting Fee which the MOE will pay an External Consultant
to review teacher's pay and career structure (annouced recently [clever
timing!] as yet another Big Election Carrot).
MOE has been around for donkey years, and has a massive Personnel Division
headed by 1 Director, 3 Deputy Directors and 12 Department Heads.
And yet have to pay so much in consulting fee to external consultants ???
Why can't they do most of the work with so much in-house resources ??? -
How the government is spending our hard-earned money:
9 Incredibly Stupid Spending of the People's Hard-Earned Monies
http://groups.google.com.sg/group/soc.culture.singapore/msg/2b4dead75e79327b?&hl=en
9.1 $600m --- Amount earmarked for Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) to make
the lifts stop at every floor.
This is proof of yet another HDB Monumental Screw-Up.
In the original design/construction of HDB flats, the lift equipment and
lift shaft are already provided for.
So it would be easy and hardly costly to leave "doorway holes" in the brick
walls of the lift shaft --- so that the lifts can stop at every floor!
BUT HDB did not do so in the very first place (being stupidly penny-wise but
pound-foolish).
SO NOW the HDB is trying to "remedy" their past Monumental Mistake by
spending $600m of the people's hard-earned monies ( IN ADDITION to making
the people suffer all these years without the lifts stopping at every floor
!!!)
WHY, OH WHY must our people Pay And Pay (PAP) for all these Monumental
Blunders of our Highly-Paid Public Officials ???
[ HDB Minister-IN-CHARGE = Mah Bow Tan ]
9.2 $160m --- National Parks Board's Giant 2006 Election Carrot to
"spoil" the "unspoilt beauty" of East Coast Park !!!
[ NPB Minister-IN-CHARGE = Mah Bow Tan ]
9.3 $246m --- 2006 Total Expenditure Budget of the People's Association (a
statutory board under MCYS).
PAP politicians may deny it like hell, but smart S'poreans know very well
the PA has been used to "politicise" the grassroots movement to favour the
PAP.
$500,000 --- PA's "Image Revamp" spending this year in getting Public
Relations company Burson-Marsteller and Dick Lee to "rebrand itself to
appeal to the young".
If young S'poreans are not interested in the PA's programmes:
(i) a Good Govt will close down the PA and help save $246m for taxpayers
(ii) whereas a Dud Govt will spend another $500,000 to keep it afloat at all
costs (perhaps to save the job of loyal civil servant-cum-PA CEO Tan Boon
Huat?)
[ PA Minister-IN-CHARGE = Dr Vivian Balakrishnan ]
[ PA Chairman Lee Hsien Loong/ Dy Chairman Wong Kan Seng/ Members Mah Bow
Tan, Lim Swee Say ]
9.4 $400,000 2005 URA Marina Bay "Branding" Exercise:
URA's highly-paid civil servants allowing themselves to be CONNED by
Foreign CONsultants on the latest management buzzword of "branding".
Ended up spending this sum to re-brand Marina Bay as ......Marina Bay
!!!!!! WHAT THE HECK !!!
[ URA Minister-IN-CHARGE = Mah Bow Tan ]
9.5 $150,000 North-East CDC "Dare To Dream Fund" providing repeated
sponsorships in public funds to "self-styled adventurer" Khoo Swee Chiow.
An angry ST Forum writer wrote " Why should good money be given to a person
for his self-glorification? What does his being underwater for 212 hours
and 30 minutes do for Singapore?".
[ North-East CDC Mayor = Zainul Abidin Rasheed ]
9.6 $250,000 Said to be the cost of 2005 LTA "Image Survey":
Next, it is the LTA's turn to "throw public monies to the wind" by
hiring an (expensive) American Public Relations firm to conduct an "image
survey" to find out what the people "think" of the LTA after the Nicoll
Highway collapse !!!
What a Big Bunch of Bird-Brained Bureaucratic Buffoons !!!
[ LTA Minister-IN-CHARGE = Yeo Cheow Tong ]
9.7 $200,000 --- what LTA spent in 2005 to "save a matured Angsana tree"
located right in the middle of a road (outside Raffles Junior College) ---
resulting in several traffic near-accidents!
Which is more important --- saving human lives or saving a tree???
9.8 $125m --- Cost of LTA Expressway Monitoring & Advisory System (EMAS).
The Electronic Road Signboards were completed in March 1998 but plug was
pulled in October 2003.
LTA did not bother to explain why (as if the public have no right to know
!!!).
9.9 $40.3m --- Contracted Cost of LTA "high-tech/
state-of-the-art/real-time" information on bus arrivals.
In 2003, just months before the project completion, LTA terminated its
contract with Stratech Systems because of software and integration problems.
LTA reportedly face $4m in claims, but refused to disclose how much of the
$40.3m has been paid to Stratech Systems (as if taxpayer-citizens have no
right to know !!!) -
Another blundering experiment that LTA carried out was to add a digital count-down timer during the "Red" and "Green" cycles of traffic light controlled junctions.
The brilliant part of the design was that whether it was "Red" or "Green" light status, the digital count-down timer was constantly displaying in bright "RED" LED lights.
The test was cancelled with LTA saying that the "count-down timer" was too confusing, which was a blatant lie - as the test was designed to fail.
In Malaysia, Vietnam and even in Myanmar - the traffic lights with countdown timers will show the correct colors in sync with the "Red" or "Green" light status.
Our LTA should learn something from these supposedly more backward ASEAN countries.
How much did LTA spend on this experiment before scrapping it as failure due to their own brilliant intelligence ? -
truthbedamn wrote:
Let me ask you and all in the pap this question: between the need to serve the people and the pragmatism of taking unpopular measures non-stop of one kind or another which increase costs of living and divide society into elites rich and the struggling humanity of today, what should a wise leader have done, in the face of our current and previous difficulties especially when a leader should claim to be a great leader who has succeeded in transforming our swamp land from third to first world.
Given the interminable stream of gripes from people who don't know how to count their blessings, my wish is for Singapore to be reduced to a swamp under the leadership of the ilk of roberttehkh and for its men and women to be despatched as prostitutes to the four corners of the earth!
Shouldn't a wise leader have governed with truths, justice, and equity ?
No matter how dire are our circumstances, shouldn't a wise leader still possess and practise these foregoing desirable and relevant and prerequisite in governing our country?
Tell me, you and all pap members : between the choice of taking unpopular measures like taxing and recovering costs to the fullest to increase government surpluses and claim superficial credit for such surpluses and that of looking after people's needs based on truths and justice, which course of action will you choose?
Is it right and equitable to govern the country then with measures to stay in power in the name of meritocracy which only benefited a few connections for one's own sake or in the name of avoiding welfarism which actually drive up the costs of living and cause our gradual loss of economic competitiveness.
Is it not worse to damn the truths and then look the other way and say, well that is life - big eats small, take me on if you can? -
I smell an attempt to manage the views here by a few newcomers.
Please lah, why work for people who ask you to be a spindoctor. -
This spin-doctor phrase sounds a bit dismissive as if someone has been unhappy with NKF revelations.Originally posted by LazerLordz:I smell an attempt to manage the views here by a few newcomers.
Please lah, why work for people who ask you to be a spindoctor. -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
your post makes me laugh really..did you really wrote that or did you just cut and pasted that from someone else posts? becasue seems to me you probably didn;t really read it well enough to understand what you are writing afteralll??!!
Ahh... but u also make the same assumption tat the minister r pretty lousy and can only find a, lets say $2,000 job outside ? Why don't we just see the system instead of the people. Do u agree tat the job of a minister is either equivalent or close to the job of a CEO of a MNC company ? If the pay is lousy, the people who can get $100,000 outside will not join as minister because they r donating a 80% salary donation to the country. Rolling Eyes If the pay is equvalent, then it is likely people who have talent to run as CEO will consider joining as minister. At least we can be sure tat there will be more candidates interested than giving 20,000 in the post and thus able to pick the better man for the job. The system can get better qualified people to turn the economy u desire isn't it ?
Firstly - when you talk about the serving the country etc.. like a Minister, do you really take into account 80% of what you are gonna be paid for? becasue that seems to be what you are implying right there?
Secondly - Why would you want someone whos a CEO of a company to run a country? In other words, you mean managing a company is the same as managing a country??
Thirdly, The system works to better turn around the economy, for whom actually does the system work for? Hmm..let me see.. a CEO of a company is being elected as a Minister..no guessing what system he implements works better for..