What kind of leaders do we want ?
-
goldameir wrote:
It is a system of government based on one man holding the power uttering concepts and assumptions like meritocracy and paying top salaries to top talents while failing to solve real problems/
noped
it showed that he was betrayed
by his junoirs
who are just
too damn greedy
the whole lot of them
so far
only 1 supporter
out of 81 members
how many percent is that?
Such conceptual leadership will always be able to engage in rhetoric to make it look like the leaders are looking after the people with catch phrases like meritocracy. Such concepts allow them to appoint their own connections and people who are of their own kind and dispositions for easy control and to do what they like without accountability.
This system has deteriorated over the years to such an extent that we now see good people leaving leaving only the sycophants and all kinds of "yes" men behind instead of people with workable ideas and implementation ability who are normally not able to work with top-down instructions without questions.
Because such a top-down system, for years we can see that good ministers after one or two terms prefer to leave and retire earlier giving some excuses like not being in good health or giving way to new bloods.
Because of our top-down system, we have missed many years of opportunity to make use of our surpluses and other resourced to solve many real problems like lowering costs of living and practising fair and equitable and accountable distributive leadership.
New ministers continue to practise hypocrisy and rhetorics and talking about past 40 years of achievements instead of solving urgent problems of rich-poor divide or lowering costs of living or being fairer and equitable in election or political renewal.
There is nothing of substance in the ministers' benchmarking of their salaries to the top earners or successful solutions of people's real problems. Every said and presented to the people is based hypocrisy and one-sided presentations.
Goh Chok Tong made Minister Balakrishnan take charge of remaking Singapore in 2002. What have all these durais achieved and have they succeeded in remaking of Singapore?
Without showing us successful remaking and achievements of restructuring of the economy to the value-adding technology application model, yet we are being asked to pay him and such durais higher salaries and more bonuses.
Is is world-class leadership better than Denmark or Finland or Switzerland's and can the ordinary people of Singapore feel successful in whatever they are doing.
If our leaders want to ask for more salaries they have to show us they have solved the people's problems and helped them to add more values for their wages, jobs when unemployed and not give excuses like globalization and threats of China or India.
It is time for ministers to get real and not hide behind all kinds of concepts like talents, meritocracy or globalization to rid themselves of responsibility.
Only then will we people truly respect them as our talents or leaders. Only then should we give our support to pay them higher and higher salaries and bonuses.
If they cannot fulfill such people's aspirations as stated in the foregoing then citizens should ask them to resign and be replaced by foreign talents like Bill Clinton or Kissinger and no less.
We do not need sycophants or durais or those ministers who claim to know so much and yet unable to solve our high-cost and dropping-wage problems or remaking of the economy and still expect us people to quietly swallow their clever self-praise and other hypocrisy. -
haha, I was actually quite shocked when my History teacher told me that Singapore is NOT a democracy. I argued with her for quite a while about me, but then, it kinda struck me. It isn't. It's run like a dictatorship.
If there's one thing I think Singapore should have, it would be more freedom. It's not a matter of who the leaders are. How much power they entitle the people with is a better question.
There have been some pretty bizarre arrests in Singapore before and there have been and still are some very strict laws concerning opposition.
I think it's time that the government stops thinking about itself and starts thinking about the people. It's time its decisions are made for the people's good, as opposed to their own good.
Singaporeans should be given more freedom. -
Good analysis ... Very comprehensive...But wat if the govt challenges u to suggest a better way of doing things?Originally posted by robertteh:It is a system of government based on one man holding the power uttering concepts and assumptions like meritocracy and paying top salaries to top talents while failing to solve real problems/
Such conceptual leadership will always be able to engage in rhetoric to make it look like the leaders are looking after the people with catch phrases like meritocracy. Such concepts allow them to appoint their own connections and people who are of their own kind and dispositions for easy control and to do what they like without accountability.
This system has deteriorated over the years to such an extent that we now see good people leaving leaving only the sycophants and all kinds of "yes" men behind instead of people with workable ideas and implementation ability who are normally not able to work with top-down instructions without questions.
Because such a top-down system, for years we can see that good ministers after one or two terms prefer to leave and retire earlier giving some excuses like not being in good health or giving way to new bloods.
Because of our top-down system, we have missed many years of opportunity to make use of our surpluses and other resourced to solve many real problems like lowering costs of living and practising fair and equitable and accountable distributive leadership.
New ministers continue to practise hypocrisy and rhetorics and talking about past 40 years of achievements instead of solving urgent problems of rich-poor divide or lowering costs of living or being fairer and equitable in election or political renewal.
There is nothing of substance in the ministers' benchmarking of their salaries to the top earners or successful solutions of people's real problems. Every said and presented to the people is based hypocrisy and one-sided presentations.
Goh Chok Tong made Minister Balakrishnan take charge of remaking Singapore in 2002. What have all these durais achieved and have they succeeded in remaking of Singapore?
Without showing us successful remaking and achievements of restructuring of the economy to the value-adding technology application model, yet we are being asked to pay him and such durais higher salaries and more bonuses.
Is is world-class leadership better than Denmark or Finland or Switzerland's and can the ordinary people of Singapore feel successful in whatever they are doing.
If our leaders want to ask for more salaries they have to show us they have solved the people's problems and helped them to add more values for their wages, jobs when unemployed and not give excuses like globalization and threats of China or India.
It is time for ministers to get real and not hide behind all kinds of concepts like talents, meritocracy or globalization to rid themselves of responsibility.
Only then will we people truly respect them as our talents or leaders. Only then should we give our support to pay them higher and higher salaries and bonuses.
If they cannot fulfill such people's aspirations as stated in the foregoing then citizens should ask them to resign and be replaced by foreign talents like Bill Clinton or Kissinger and no less.
We do not need sycophants or durais or those ministers who claim to know so much and yet unable to solve our high-cost and dropping-wage problems or remaking of the economy and still expect us people to quietly swallow their clever self-praise and other hypocrisy. -
People who make suggestions or give feedbacks do not necessary have to offer any solutions or take part in their implementation.
If leaders claim to have the talents and worth million-dollar salaries which they say are still not good enough then they must be talented enough to work on suggestions and feedbacks and figure out the root causes of problems and deliver results without all the excuses and denials. -
Is it just the leader or the 1 party system?Originally posted by robertteh:It is a system of government based on one man holding the power uttering concepts and assumptions like meritocracy and paying top salaries to top talents while failing to solve real problems/
Such conceptual leadership will always be able to engage in rhetoric to make it look like the leaders are looking after the people with catch phrases like meritocracy. Such concepts allow them to appoint their own connections and people who are of their own kind and dispositions for easy control and to do what they like without accountability.
This system has deteriorated over the years to such an extent that we now see good people leaving leaving only the sycophants and all kinds of "yes" men behind instead of people with workable ideas and implementation ability who are normally not able to work with top-down instructions without questions.
Because such a top-down system, for years we can see that good ministers after one or two terms prefer to leave and retire earlier giving some excuses like not being in good health or giving way to new bloods.
Because of our top-down system, we have missed many years of opportunity to make use of our surpluses and other resourced to solve many real problems like lowering costs of living and practising fair and equitable and accountable distributive leadership.
New ministers continue to practise hypocrisy and rhetorics and talking about past 40 years of achievements instead of solving urgent problems of rich-poor divide or lowering costs of living or being fairer and equitable in election or political renewal.
There is nothing of substance in the ministers' benchmarking of their salaries to the top earners or successful solutions of people's real problems. Every said and presented to the people is based hypocrisy and one-sided presentations.
Goh Chok Tong made Minister Balakrishnan take charge of remaking Singapore in 2002. What have all these durais achieved and have they succeeded in remaking of Singapore?
Without showing us successful remaking and achievements of restructuring of the economy to the value-adding technology application model, yet we are being asked to pay him and such durais higher salaries and more bonuses.
Is is world-class leadership better than Denmark or Finland or Switzerland's and can the ordinary people of Singapore feel successful in whatever they are doing.
If our leaders want to ask for more salaries they have to show us they have solved the people's problems and helped them to add more values for their wages, jobs when unemployed and not give excuses like globalization and threats of China or India.
It is time for ministers to get real and not hide behind all kinds of concepts like talents, meritocracy or globalization to rid themselves of responsibility.
Only then will we people truly respect them as our talents or leaders. Only then should we give our support to pay them higher and higher salaries and bonuses.
If they cannot fulfill such people's aspirations as stated in the foregoing then citizens should ask them to resign and be replaced by foreign talents like Bill Clinton or Kissinger and no less.
We do not need sycophants or durais or those ministers who claim to know so much and yet unable to solve our high-cost and dropping-wage problems or remaking of the economy and still expect us people to quietly swallow their clever self-praise and other hypocrisy.
3) Current ministry and parliamentary system failure to address a structure problems effectively ?– it is clear that with the current negative reaction by the public the current system is not working, Have the current 1 party government took the easy way out for the structure problems? Have they explore and explore all treatments? Have they done enough review or because it is simply a 1 party system and New blood required to inject alternative view into the parliamentary system? Do we need to reform our Ministry and parliamentary to have a mechanism to create solution?
4) PAP perception and its role in governing Singapore?– With PAP in the 3rd generation of leadership has national building change? Survival of national truly question while we move ahead to build the nation have we forgot why we built the nation in the first place? What is the mission of PAP? What role it perceives itself to believe they are truly here to work for Singaporean and not people work for PAP -
I want a people's leader.
-
Someone that thinks about the welfare of the people instead of their own welfare. Instead of the current lot that says: "What is good for me is good for you wat! What is bad for you is also good for you wat!"Originally posted by Darkness_hacker99:I want a people's leader. 
-
Basically, I'd prefer a government that doesn't make us run the Economic Race for them like NorthPole Sleigh Dogs, to get only food scraps in the end while they reap BILLIONS...
A good and not GREEDY government, will ensure the Ecomic Race benefits the people FIRST, before digging in to fulfil their own needs...and even then, the monetary demands from such Ideal Governments, should not be ATROCIOUSLY over-priced... and are not easily corruptible by WANTS of FINANCIAL REWARDS!!!!
-
So, anyone of you joining opposition party or starting a new one already?
I want to publicly read what you guys have in mind to make things better for everyone.
I wrote a long post elsewhere and i got timeout) so i cut it short here instead.
Those who are very keen on the comings and goings of our gov, join opposition and lash out at them where it really works and hurts. I want to see our mighty SGforumers turn MPs who champion our rights, sincerely.
Otherwise, i'm really tired of people who complain (even if you are entirely right) It's all talk and no action. Not much better than those sitting up there. I dont a change if the next group is going to be as bad as the current one.
For those who think of voting for opposition regardless of calibre, you are shooting yourself in the foot (in the long run). A bickering parliment will just hinder any policy from moving. A government doing nothing will hurt the people the most. They still collect their pay while you will start worrying about receiving yours.
Those who are in the running of businesses, social entreprenuership is the way to go, that and a pro-local hiring policy. The government dont want one, you make your own.
Those with deeper pockets, give direct aid/assistance to the needy via the real charity orgs. You know you are helping those in need your way. But remember dont just do it yourself! Encourage others around you to do it too. Every little rain drops can add up into a thunderstorm. Do your part.
It starts with you. -
excellent. but since one can only be tested on the ground, how do you weigh the performance and commiment of the persons? in the present case, calibre is equated to "education level and the $$$" he "would have received" in the private sectorOriginally posted by CM06:So, anyone of you joining opposition party or starting a new one already?
Those who are very keen on the comings and goings of our gov, join opposition and lash out at them where it really works and hurts. I want to see our mighty SGforumers turn MPs who champion our rights, sincerely.
Otherwise, i'm really tired of people who complain (even if you are entirely right) It's all talk and no action. Not much better than those sitting up there. I dont a change if the next group is going to be as bad as the current one.
For those who think of voting for opposition regardless of calibre, you are shooting yourself in the foot (in the long run). A bickering parliment will just hinder any policy from moving. A government doing nothing will hurt the people the most. They still collect their pay while you will start worrying about receiving yours.
It starts with you. -
Politics are secondary to me. Like i said, i want to see people like robertteh, he engages us pretty well. Talk is one thing of course.
See how well they run the estate is another. I dont mean perks or *mrt stations openings* heh. Look at Chiam, i'm, really impress by his little estate. It's pretty well run even though it's not as "upgraded" cause i do walk around there since i live nearby. That's good. If the residents like the way you run the estate, you have done a good job.
More so, if you cant run an estate well, how much better can you do with a country? Not to drift away from your questions but i find this of lower priority than what each individual is willing to contribute. -
Dun think many will.Originally posted by CM06:So, anyone of you joining opposition party or starting a new one already?
............
............i'm really tired of people who complain (even if you are entirely right) It's all talk and no action. ..................
For those who think of voting for opposition regardless of calibre, you are shooting yourself in the foot (in the long run). ..............
...........
Those with deeper pockets, give direct aid/assistance to the needy via the real charity orgs. You know you are helping those in need your way. But remember dont just do it yourself! Encourage others around you to do it too. Every little rain drops can add up into a thunderstorm. Do your part.
It starts with you.
This is reality, sgporeans are all talk and no action. I think even the fieriest forumer here wun take any action, unless he/she is foreigner converted to PR/citizen.
Fully agreeded. Although many are shooting the ruling party, there are opposition leaders who oppose for personal reasons/glory. Think there will be more parties in the next election oppositing pap, but they're doing it for the money.
Many people donate and help other people too. My friend earns $5k a month. He donates $2 to CADC. He's happy.
Guess what you said is too idealistic. Idealistic stuff never/rarely happens.
-
Joining the opposition and contesting in criminal-orchaestrated elections a viable solution to the problem? That's no different from suggesting pitting an average joe against Maurice Greene in a 100m sprint - with Greene given a further headstart by starting at the 50m mark. That, in essence, is the sort of suggestion you're putting forth - try telling me you'd back the average joe to upset the odds...Originally posted by CM06:So, anyone of you joining opposition party or starting a new one already?
I want to publicly read what you guys have in mind to make things better for everyone.
I wrote a long post elsewhere and i got timeout) so i cut it short here instead.
Those who are very keen on the comings and goings of our gov, join opposition and lash out at them where it really works and hurts. I want to see our mighty SGforumers turn MPs who champion our rights, sincerely.
Otherwise, i'm really tired of people who complain (even if you are entirely right) It's all talk and no action. Not much better than those sitting up there. I dont a change if the next group is going to be as bad as the current one.
For those who think of voting for opposition regardless of calibre, you are shooting yourself in the foot (in the long run). A bickering parliment will just hinder any policy from moving. A government doing nothing will hurt the people the most. They still collect their pay while you will start worrying about receiving yours.
Those who are in the running of businesses, social entreprenuership is the way to go, that and a pro-local hiring policy. The government dont want one, you make your own.
Those with deeper pockets, give direct aid/assistance to the needy via the real charity orgs. You know you are helping those in need your way. But remember dont just do it yourself! Encourage others around you to do it too. Every little rain drops can add up into a thunderstorm. Do your part.
It starts with you.
Coalition governments are commonplace in just about every first world countriy and true democracy. If nothing, it at least serves the fundamental check-and-balance process which is so critical to sustaining a democratic constitution. If voting for inept opposition - especially in a situation where they are not even coming anywhere close to forming their own government with a majority - is akin to shooting yourself in the foot, keep the tyrants in power then and accept the status quo of not having checks-and-balances. Perhaps, it might even be worthwhile paying multi-million dollar paychecks to such "capable" leaders who have yet to even prove their mettle of being able to run coalition governments... -
think ur history teacher gave u a very good lesson.Originally posted by da-cheese-freakk:haha, I was actually quite shocked when my History teacher told me that Singapore is NOT a democracy. I argued with her for quite a while about me, but then, it kinda struck me. It isn't. It's run like a dictatorship.
If there's one thing I think Singapore should have, it would be more freedom. It's not a matter of who the leaders are. How much power they entitle the people with is a better question.
There have been some pretty bizarre arrests in Singapore before and there have been and still are some very strict laws concerning opposition.
I think it's time that the government stops thinking about itself and starts thinking about the people. It's time its decisions are made for the people's good, as opposed to their own good.
Singaporeans should be given more freedom.
now we have one more thinking young man who do not simply accept watever our poor-earning ministers tell him. -
It will remain one until people start to realise individual efforts count. An idea will never be substantial unless it becomes a creation. Hence, my line of putting your best foot forward.Originally posted by airgrinder:Dun think many will.
This is reality, sgporeans are all talk and no action. I think even the fieriest forumer here wun take any action, unless he/she is foreigner converted to PR/citizen.
Fully agreeded. Although many are shooting the ruling party, there are opposition leaders who oppose for personal reasons/glory. Think there will be more parties in the next election oppositing pap, but they're doing it for the money.
Many people donate and help other people too. My friend earns $5k a month. He donates $2 to CADC. He's happy.
Guess what you said is too idealistic. Idealistic stuff never/rarely happens.
To Walesa, everything(govt types) has pros and cons, you cant have one without the other. Some work better here and others there. The problem here i forsee is the lack of willingness for our citizens to be willing to be part of politics. Standing by the side and pointing fingers is a way easier thing to do apparently.
The heavy lid on a pot of soup only stays there because the soup aint hot enough to blow it away. -
There's a thin line between pragmatism and idealism - if what you were saying held true, is it also true then that North Koreans suffer the fate they do because they choose not to do anything about their government?Originally posted by CM06:To Walesa, everything(govt types) has pros and cons, you cant have one without the other. Some work better here and others there. The problem here i forsee is the lack of willingness for our citizens to be willing to be part of politics. Standing by the side and pointing fingers is a way easier thing to do apparently.
The heavy lid on a pot of soup only stays there because the soup aint hot enough to blow it away. -
We arent North Koreans so dont use them to compare with what i said. Heh.
I'm not talking ideas, i hope people will take action! Those who want and can please do!
Dont tell me if you go and buy food supplies now and hand them to sharity or salvation army, you wont directly help some needy family in Singapore.
Frankly, i rather look and tend my own backyard than worry about something further north of sushi and kimchi. -
The logic doesn't deviate whether we're North Koreans or not. Continue living in your myopic landscape if you think otherwise.Originally posted by CM06:We arent North Koreans so dont use them to compare with what i said. Heh.
I'm not talking ideas, i hope people will take action! Those who want and can please do!
Dont tell me if you go and buy food supplies now and hand them to sharity or salvation army, you wont directly help some needy family in Singapore.
Frankly, i rather look and tend my own backyard than worry about something further north of sushi and kimchi.
Try advocating a good reason for an individual to exercise his/her social obligation to help the needy with money paid out of his/her own pockets when there's no social security for one to fall back on should he/she ever be confronted with a crisis of his/her own. Behind most societies where volunteerism thrive stems a culture where people find it right to help the less fortunate because their cultures provide them with some form of tangible social security that ensures their basic welfare is looked after. The fact that this society has a problem with the dearth of volunteers and social workers already tells a tale on its own - and no, this isn't a problem endemic of first-world countries...
Enjoy your sojourn being a samaritan nonetheless... -
Im already a registered youth member of a particular opposition in sg ...For some purposes i cant name ... Gonna play a big part in next election...Originally posted by CM06:So, anyone of you joining opposition party or starting a new one already?
I want to publicly read what you guys have in mind to make things better for everyone.
I wrote a long post elsewhere and i got timeout) so i cut it short here instead.
Those who are very keen on the comings and goings of our gov, join opposition and lash out at them where it really works and hurts. I want to see our mighty SGforumers turn MPs who champion our rights, sincerely.
Otherwise, i'm really tired of people who complain (even if you are entirely right) It's all talk and no action. Not much better than those sitting up there. I dont a change if the next group is going to be as bad as the current one.
For those who think of voting for opposition regardless of calibre, you are shooting yourself in the foot (in the long run). A bickering parliment will just hinder any policy from moving. A government doing nothing will hurt the people the most. They still collect their pay while you will start worrying about receiving yours.
Those who are in the running of businesses, social entreprenuership is the way to go, that and a pro-local hiring policy. The government dont want one, you make your own.
Those with deeper pockets, give direct aid/assistance to the needy via the real charity orgs. You know you are helping those in need your way. But remember dont just do it yourself! Encourage others around you to do it too. Every little rain drops can add up into a thunderstorm. Do your part.
It starts with you.
-
To walesa:
Hey, i dont like it when you start attacking me personally. It's not myopic. It's a different level of looking at things.
Some people are better at macro stuff draws the big arrows(govt,mncs, gen,) some people are better with the micro stuff. It's to each his/her own.
The government can only implement things at a macro level. Monitoring it at a micro level is not sustainable nor effective. Imagine how many ENV people you must hire to effectively have 100% enforcement of non-smoking at X location. It's aint going to work but does that mean you should not implement such a law?
Micro level is for the worker bees to work. I'm sure i cant handle macro stuff at my current situation so i go low, down and slow. Hence, my stance of doing what you can.
I dont like to keep defending myself when i do not see what's so bad about my opinion at it's core. You can say you dont want to do it. I dont see a harm if others end up doing though.
Besides just attacking my view, what's your suggestion of improvement or.. alternatives?
To Trump_Card:
Congratulations! I hope to hear your views. Perhaps via PM if you want. I'm open to your ideas. Looking forward to more action. -
It's not attacking - that's my opinion and if you don't like it, tough. Just as you're entitled to regard many in this forum as "all-talk-and-no-action", that's your prerogative.Originally posted by CM06:To walesa:
Hey, i dont like it when you start attacking me personally. It's not myopic. It's a different level of looking at things.
Some people are better at macro stuff draws the big arrows(govt,mncs, gen,) some people are better with the micro stuff. It's to each his/her own.
The government can only implement things at a macro level. Monitoring it at a micro level is not sustainable nor effective. Imagine how many ENV people you must hire to effectively have 100% enforcement of non-smoking at X location. It's aint going to work but does that mean you should not implement such a law?
Micro level is for the worker bees to work. I'm sure i cant handle macro stuff at my current situation so i go low, down and slow. Hence, my stance of doing what you can.
I dont like to keep defending myself when i do not see what's so bad about my opinion at it's core. You can say you dont want to do it. I dont see a harm if others end up doing though.
Besides just attacking my view, what's your suggestion of improvement or.. alternatives?
Look, it's not hard for the criminals to justify anything at all - even if they decide to legalise rape and murder tomorrow, it still wouldn't be frowned upon by everyone (at least, not rapists and murderers). There's always going to be a group, however marginalised they may otherwise be, whom you could use to justify any policy.
The suggestion and alternative lies not in working within the framework of the existing system as you seem to deem it to be the case - at least, that's my view. If suggestions and alternatives are not going to bring about effective changes that significantly address the problems that currently exist, I certainly don't regard such actions - be they at the micro or macro level - as worthy efforts.
Afterall, just as governments don't reason with terrorists, playing a game by its rules with the odds stacked against you isn't exactly the way to go towards redressing the imbalance which currently exists. -
That is the scary part isn't it? When people refuse to think and blindly become cheerleaders... oh I forget, the reason is because they are paid so much to be dishonorable...Originally posted by walesa:There's always going to be a group, however marginalised they may otherwise be, whom you could use to justify any policy. -
Hey Trump_card here has done it. That's admirable.
It's never a dead end to what we can do i suppose.
Keep moving forward (i know disney is so going to kill me meh)
And you are right i was being too sensitive, bad me.
You are right about doing something as an individual aint going to change much.
Somehow, do you agree we need leaders who are willing to change the political landscape against the odds? It's a two way thing, the top cant move if the bottom doesnt either. Legislation and laws build the framework, but the people are the heart of it all.
What i stress on individual effort wont change lives in the big picture. It never will. Just like how we are but a dot on the world map. I just want to emphasise, what you do on a personal level can go a long way if you try.
It's myopic to say help this certain family who's in need.
It will not change the fact "lack of welfare / govt support for the needy/social security"
It will however, make life easier, for that family. That's one less family who suffers. That's what i mean. You change the lives of people whom you can.
Would it make you a hero? Definitely not, but you have made a significant difference to lives of a few. Temporary or not.
If every one contribute their own way, those who can push for legislation changes will aid this movement further on a higher scale. -
It's a two-way thing only if it functions that way - legislation and laws build framework and function only if the judiciary and legislative branches of government do not interfere with each other's work and operate independently in the manner stipulated in the constitution. Theoretically, it's a noble concept - in practice, it's nothing but a shambles.Originally posted by CM06:You are right about doing something as an individual aint going to change much.
Somehow, do you agree we need leaders who are willing to change the political landscape against the odds? It's a two way thing, the top cant move if the bottom doesnt either. Legislation and laws build the framework, but the people are the heart of it all.
What i stress on individual effort wont change lives in the big picture. It never will. Just like how we are but a dot on the world map. I just want to emphasise, what you do on a personal level can go a long way if you try.
If this society were an accurate reflection of "the people being the heart of the government", then it must be a desperate reflection of what humanity has to offer a democracy.
Noble goal of yours - why don't you try feeding the poor in some third world countries whose needs are more dire than those less privileged in this society? That way, you're actually making strides towards eradicating global poverty and not just alleviating the predicaments confronting the "less fortunate"! No doubt what you're doing would help make some people's lives more bearable, but just how productive is such help? For how long can you help others? It just ain't a worthy pursuit in my view. Afterall, isn't giving money to a gambler to pay off his debts also a form of help?Originally posted by CM06:It's myopic to say help this certain family who's in need.
It will not change the fact "lack of welfare / govt support for the needy/social security"
It will however, make life easier, for that family. That's one less family who suffers. That's what i mean. You change the lives of people whom you can.
Would it make you a hero? Definitely not, but you have made a significant difference to lives of a few. Temporary or not.
If every one contribute their own way, those who can push for legislation changes will aid this movement further on a higher scale.
To take this argument further, there're tonnes of desperate people on the planet (be they the terminally ill or just financially broke), so if you're speaking as a philanthropist, you might want to tell me who you'd like to help and how effectively you could actually contribute at the micro level in the prolonged period...
If everyone contributing "their own way" were that effective in eradicating societies of its social ills, there'd be world peace. -
I wont go global in aid. It's not about helping the starving out there. It's about help those around you.
Dont forget, help those in your immediate back yard give way better results in the long run. Afterall this is about domestic issues isnt it? We arent criticising how badly foreign govts are running life badly for their citizens. Let them fight their own battles.
If you talk about helping gamblers, personally i wouldnt. It's exactly it being a personal effort that i believe gives you the freedom of choice to do what you
want and who you want to help.
And ...no we cannot eradicate everything. Just do what you want and how. I'm offering my opinion on how it can be done.