What is our ministers' governing philosophy today?
-
47WYL18RW wrote:
Okay, if we want the alternative - it is pragmatism or the ability to make monies and accumulate taxes into surpluses.
WAT IS mORAL AND WAT IS IMMORAL ???????
MORAL TO KILL SOMEONE AND BE FREE OR IMMORAL TO FXXKED 14 YR OF CHILD OR BEATING YOUR MAIL OR NOT GIVING HER FOOD.
Is immorality a sin ????
as morality a god given gift to pap or those do gooders to lead spore to neverneverland.
try explaining moral to a monkl who can fly in bamboo forest.
After many years of pragmatism, then what happened? Did pragmatism produce Swiss Standard of living as promised or has it only created monster ministers who only keep asking for more salary increases?
So how does pragmatism fare as compared with a system centred on democratic socialism - to govern for the greatest good or the greatest number.
Our ministers must have got lost somewhere now with all the education they have received. What is their governing philosophy is morality is not one the key institutional values of the government and nation building?
Are they still governing the country based on some values like "the greatest good of the greatest number?" -
47WYL18RW wrote:
another shitty day in paradise--that's is practical.
there r always theorists and there r the practicalist who do and not speak big words to scare children.
wat is practical in spore is not in Indonesia or PHillippines or keong siak street.
wat is practical to u is not to me.
so--wat is the point.
u eat , sleep, pray, fxxk and the next day do it all over again.
So by being practical or pragmatic according to Singapore context (not Indonesia) it is far better not to be idealistic but for the ministers to continue to fight for their higher pays even after already getting the world's highest salaries by morally wrong benchmarking to do bill collector and policing jobs.
Does it mean that if one has the power it is more practical to use it to gain one's utmost benefits instead of using the power to benefit all to fulfill nation building dreams as idealistically as possible? -
Why would they allow themselves to contest elections ?They say they could have earned more in the private sector den they should go there...Now barely a year after elections they're complaining...
-
you are asking for a universal acceptance of moral authority for civil servant across the world? sprit of public civil servant moral conduct? pls send the request to NMPOriginally posted by robertteh:Okay, if we want the alternative - it is pragmatism or the ability to make monies and accumulate taxes into surpluses.
After many years of pragmatism, then what happened? Did pragmatism produce Swiss Standard of living as promised or has it only created monster ministers who only keep asking for more salary increases?
So how does pragmatism fare as compared with a system centred on democratic socialism - to govern for the greatest good or the greatest number.
Our ministers must have got lost somewhere now with all the education they have received. What is their governing philosophy is morality is not one the key institutional values of the government and nation building?
Are they still governing the country based on some values like "the greatest good of the greatest number?" -
sadly we live in a world of numbers.
there is no one who joins this elite Admin Service for service. It's about renumeration. It's about clout. It's about fame.
In balance, I must say we have a rather concrete government. I'm working with the Cambodians for charity projects and I must say corruption is so bad I'm glad i'm Singaporean.
But then again.. I also believe in the best for Singapore and that there should be a shift in the mentality of top civil servants... -
Question : What is our ministers' governing philosophy today?
Answer : Just like any organised crime syndicate, their philosophy can't be too far off from "let's rob the hell out of 'em and spread the loot amongst ourselves"... -
After turning one big round, it's still about ministers' salaries. Anything that is fresher than the food in the wet market?
-
happidreamer wrote:
Capitalism being left to grow on its own volition and free will resulted in unequal opportunities between the rich and the ordinary citizens.
"The rich in the rich world will get richer - because of favourable capital-labour ratios; and the poor will get poorer - because of unfavourable capital-labour ratios. This is not a situation that is morally, politically or economically sustainable, especially in democracies." - The Straits Times, 20 April 2007
The rich and governing elites will protect themselves against inflations, rising commodity prices and instability of world's geo-political systems but the ordinary citizens will be penalized with rising costs and dropping wages.
So communism has been right except perhaps for its philosophy of violence as it at least seeks to equalize such opportunities between the rich the governing elites and ordinary citizens.