What's PM's LabourDay msg got to do with the aged?
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
The problem with innocuous remarks made is that it sets a trend and tend to cement a particular line of view.
Post by ShutterBug:
Here's an enlightening link
>>> http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/article_A_Nation_Cheated_2.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing I really hate about Chee is that he only has bad things to say about our govt. And he doesn't just say it, he rants. Just puts opposition parties in a bad light. And his sister, with that defiant face and persona, makes me think ten times before I would even vote for her.
While there may be some truths to his argument, there is only so much faith that one may put in a "fanatic democrat" like him.
Looking through the 'enlightening link' proposed by Shutterbug, how did you arrive at your postion of dismissing CSJ views as nothing but rantings ?
Have you completed a review of CSJ presentation of a 'A Nation Cheated' ?
If you have, then anyone in this Speaker's Corner that holds similar persistent negative views will also qualify to be considered by you to be similarly guilty of ranting.
CSJ entry into politics can be considered to be the first Fresh Faced Professionally Qualified Person to enter politics on the side of the Opposition since the 1960s.
His surprise appearance into politics - at the 1992 election - seems to have created an unpleasant surprise to LKY's meticulous plan for LHL's accenssion into local Politics, after the tumultous efforts to remove Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong from the local political scene, and neutralizing JBJ into seeming permanent oblivion.
The immediate actions to neutralize all challengers to LHL's political future demand that all means and methods are to be taken to similarly neutralize the threat posed by CSJ.
The actions taken to discredit CSJ, and nail him into the ground were excessive and intended for a second effect to discourage any other like minded Professionals from taking similar steps as CSJ.
As we have seen, it was not until more then ten years later that we see new fresh professional faces entering Singapore politics - the bulk joining WP.
For the personal persecution that the Ruling Party had directed at CSJ, do you expect anything favorable to be said by CSJ towards the Ruling Party or the Government that they form ? -
Hail ye Honourable ATOBE!!!
-
The unemployment rate up till end-2006 was at 2.5 percent, and if jobs are a plenty, why will there be a sudden spike of 0.4 percent to bring the current unemployment rate to 2.9 percent ?
New retrenchments go unreported, as more factories downsize and relocate operations.
that the typical msg we get from our media. they only publish about the great things the PAP done while mistake go unreported.
the "Sundays Times"often told us the success story of young millionaires. it create the feeling that singaporeans are mostly earning hundred of thousands dollars/mth.
it somehow make me feel, i'm the few ones in singaporean that earn enough to survive. Is that really so?? -
now... if only our ministers read forums...
fact is they just don't have enough contact with people below the middle class group.. i mean come on they are surrounded by elites everywhere, those open dialogue at CCs ain't enough to make a real sound policy.
(just my 2 cents don flame mi am only 17)
singapore will have a better future if we could have more young ppl like you.
ppl like robertteh, atobe provide information, arguement that we would not be able to get from our media. read it, digest it, and diagnose yourself. cast come 5 years time, hopefully you can have a purpose to vote. that is if you have a chance in the " demon cratic"singapore. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
Thanks for your clarification but looking at your referenced site given, the 4% is only applicable to the Medisave, and Retirement Account only and not for the main portion of our money in the CPF Account.
If the bulk of the CPF account holders have a long way to retirement, the CPF amount is still paid 2.5% per annum.
Never have I mentioned anywhere that 4% is for the entire duration. 2.5% is indeed not a relatively high figure too.
Your second referenced site merely described the manner in which the CPF payout is delayed till one reaches 55 years (payout to be completed by age 84 years), and with the amount held in the Retirement Fund to be increased up to a sum of $120,000 gradually by the target date 2013.
That reference was meant to enlighten "countdracula"
there's this nagging suspicion that if everyone were to encash their cpf at the same time, it doesn't have enough to cover all. and they also want us to work, work and work without retirement and straight off to the grave while contributing to the taxes to pay for the salaries....
Any Singaporean that do not has no regular contribution into the CPF can hardly realise anything close to the required amount for Medisave, let alone into the Retirement Fund.
Even if one contributes regularly, it may not even be enough too. It doesn't help that many S'poreans have little idea on retirement planning. The govt should start a mass campaign on this. But then again, by doing so, they would expose the inadequacies of the CPF.
Does the government play fair by paying 2.5% to the CPF account (4% for the Medisave), and only paying a full 4% to a Retirement Fund of $120,000 only when we reach 55 years ?
Does the Government play fair, when they get to use cheap CPF funds at below market rate, using our money to build infrastructure, and thereafter charges us atrocious prices for the use of it, and in the process bloat up the National Reserves.
If you look at the nature of my previous post, my "fair" referred to the 4% interest paid to retirement account upon age 55. One will never get a guaranteed rate like that anywhere else in the market. However, I can't say the same for pre-55. It is definitely on the low side. "Fair" also refers to the amounts that members may encash at 55 and the distribution method to reduce the possibilities of one living longer than one's money. -
Originally posted by Atobe:The problem with innocuous remarks made is that it sets a trend and tend to cement a particular line of view.
Looking through the 'enlightening link' proposed by Shutterbug, how did you arrive at your postion of dismissing CSJ views as nothing but rantings ?
Politics is about image and Chee has not played this game within his opponent's boundaries. The way he goes about discrediting the govt (even if he was right), would only further cement his image of a fanatic lunatic. Has he even learned from past lesson not to go around the system? Maybe no one has noticed but I have mentioned a long time ago here in sgforums that Chee is a "martyr born in the wrong era". Therefore, the word "rantings" even if they were not.
Have you completed a review of CSJ presentation of a 'A Nation Cheated' ?
Nope but I may when I can spare the time and heart in future. I have read his "To be free" before and they are in no way fanatic views. He presents reasonable arguments and I have to agree with some truths of his. Compare that with his public image? I can't say the same. I still remember how he hounded Goh Chok Tong in the 2001 elections while the latter was doing a walkabout in Jurong. He lost badly that year. His image has gone down ever since and it does not help that PAP has taken every opportunity to smear his name.
Conclusion? Politics is about image and he has none of that. He's a goner and only his die hard fans would buy his books on sale.
If you have, then anyone in this Speaker's Corner that holds similar persistent negative views will also qualify to be considered by you to be similarly guilty of ranting.
It's just business. Don't take my views too personally.
CSJ entry into politics can be considered to be the first Fresh Faced Professionally Qualified Person to enter politics on the side of the Opposition since the 1960s.
His surprise appearance into politics - at the 1992 election - seems to have created an unpleasant surprise to LKY's meticulous plan for LHL's accenssion into local Politics, after the tumultous efforts to remove Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong from the local political scene, and neutralizing JBJ into seeming permanent oblivion.
The immediate actions to neutralize all challengers to LHL's political future demand that all means and methods are to be taken to similarly neutralize the threat posed by CSJ.
The actions taken to discredit CSJ, and nail him into the ground were excessive and intended for a second effect to discourage any other like minded Professionals from taking similar steps as CSJ.
As we have seen, it was not until more then ten years later that we see new fresh professional faces entering Singapore politics - the bulk joining WP.
For the personal persecution that the Ruling Party had directed at CSJ, do you expect anything favorable to be said by CSJ towards the Ruling Party or the Government that they form ?
Precisely! You hit the nail on the head. The very fact that he has nothing favourable to say only sends the message of bias and a "hard done by" attitude across. Weren't we brought up to always look at both sides of the coin? -
After NKF, the ministers one by one denies problems by making good speeches which sound that there is no problem and everything is being taken care of. (Government misses the opportunity to make charity organization accountable and transparent and upgrade the auditing firms' many "he who pays the pipers calls the tune" self-centred practices)
After Shin Corp, again, ministers and Temasek continue to behave like they have done nothing wrong with good speeches like "it is a long-term investment, every decision made in acquiring the shin corp shares were accountable complying with expert advice". (Government misses the opportunity to upgrade their overseas investment criteria failing to understand people's needs to use surpluss to create job and opportunities for lower income groups over previous losses of taxpayers' monies in similar projects in Suzhou)
After the backfiring on their further attempt to increase their ministers' pays to allow ministers to win first-prize lotteries, ministers and PM Lee continue with making of similar speeches during the labor day to make it look like everything is under control and there is no problem and there is no wrong doing in ministers taking taxpayers' monies (free lunches) without their clear consent.
(Government will miss yet another opportunity to upgrade our autocracy and make all decisions truly accountable and for the greatest good of the greatest number.)
In 2006, he has kicked off a campaign to upgrade our retailers' service standards wanting them to be more service-oriented to customers. Now is he willing to or has he set himself as a good example by being more service-oriented to his citizens in handling or relating to their complaints or problems.
Are our ministers not being too talented in denying problems thereby missing so many opportunities in the past in solving real problems?
Citizens will be wondering how come our million-dollar ministers cannot be more humble and less self-centred or legalistic and try to solve problems instead of always staying on the defensive treating complaints as something negative to be put down. -
In Singapore, Labour Day means just that.
Labour.
-
If i were a minister, I wouldn't even bother to read this kind of thread. It just plain criticism on our government policy without an objective insight on the situation involve. Worse still the thread talks about their work longer and retire later policy to CPF money then Swiss standard of living and even NKF and Shin Corp. Why can't you guys simply stick to just one topic and talk about one topic alone. You bring so many things inside, how the hell can a person offers an alternative view?Originally posted by 2e3:now... if only our ministers read forums...
Let look at the work longer and retire later. Most of us here would prefer to retire as early as possible and enjoy life after retirement. But what does this spells to our leaders? It simply says that we are going to get less tax from the people and yet we got to increase our budget for medical care for our elderlys. That will be a strain to our financial budget. Moreover, it also means that there are lesser manpower in the economy making the economy less vibrant. Companies will have to fight over manpower and new industries will find it harder to set up their operation here.
Therefore, our question here should be, how then can our government best deal with the issue of ageing population and not how lousy their policy is. Can you find a better policy than their work longer and retire later policy? Well, just blatantly criticising their policies neither solves the problem nor provide a better solution. -
Originally posted by matleep:
Well, you have a point there...
If i were a minister, I wouldn't even bother to read this kind of thread. It just plain criticism on our government policy without an objective insight on the situation involve. Worse still the thread talks about their work longer and retire later policy to CPF money then Swiss standard of living and even NKF and Shin Corp. [b]Why can't you guys simply stick to just one topic and talk about one topic alone. You bring so many things inside, how the hell can a person offers an alternative view?
Let look at the work longer and retire later. Most of us here would prefer to retire as early as possible and enjoy life after retirement. But what does this spells to our leaders? It simply says that we are going to get less tax from the people and yet we got to increase our budget for medical care for our elderlys. That will be a strain to our financial budget. Moreover, it also means that there are lesser manpower in the economy making the economy less vibrant. Companies will have to fight over manpower and new industries will find it harder to set up their operation here.
Therefore, our question here should be, how then can our government best deal with the issue of ageing population and not how lousy their policy is. Can you find a better policy than their work longer and retire later policy? Well, just blatantly criticising their policies neither solves the problem nor provide a better solution.[/b]
For the millions of dollars salary our government commands, a lot of us are now expecting them to pull more than just a rabbit out of their hats - and we ain't gonna show them new tricks for the price they force us to pay to watch them 'perform'...
-
Ha ha. Then I am afraid you might have to sit through their performance, even if they pull nothing out of their hats.Originally posted by ShutterBug:Well, you have a point there...
For the millions of dollars salary our government commands, a lot of us are now expecting them to pull more than just a rabbit out of their hats - and we ain't gonna show them new tricks for the price they force us to pay to watch them 'perform'... -
Originally posted by matleep:
If the govt does not raise GST (say they wanna help the poor) and increase their salaries the next moment, then we may be happier citizens.
Therefore, our question here should be, [b]how then can our government best deal with the issue of ageing population and not how lousy their policy is. Can you find a better policy than their work longer and retire later policy? Well, just blatantly criticising their policies neither solves the problem nor provide a better solution.[/b]
If they give out progress package genuinely for our good instead of buying votes prior to election, then we may appreciate them better.
If they think of how to bridge our income gap instead of theirs, then we may love them more.
Sometimes, it is not a matter of armchair criticism but rather, will the govt listen? If they sincerely want to listen, many of here will not hesitate to offer our constructive views. -
I share your view on this matter. Very often citizens feel let down because the ministers keep practising denials and hypocrisy without solving real problems. NkF problem was brought to their attention but the minister and regulators in charge of overseeing their corporate governance kept denying problems for years until they were exposed by the SPH lawsuit.Originally posted by Rock^Star:If the govt does not raise GST (say they wanna help the poor) and increase their salaries the next moment, then we may be happier citizens.
If they give out progress package genuinely for our good instead of buying votes prior to election, then we may appreciate them better.
If they think of how to bridge our income gap instead of theirs, then we may love them more.
Sometimes, it is not a matter of armchair criticism but rather, will the govt listen? If they sincerely want to listen, many of here will not hesitate to offer our constructive views.
The main cause of our problems is self-centredness and hypocrisy. -
ai yo... sounds like CSJ needs a great PR manager to turn things around....
politics in modern day reeks somewhat of a great marketing campaign... believablity, human-touch, humble etc etc... not rantings and inappropriate behaviour like stalking....
anyway, in singapore, our only "talent" is human assets so our govt always say and thus they always try to encourage employers to keep their older workers by whatever means... retraining older workers who were retrenched for re-entry into the workforce tc... but note that mostly the older workers work in such postings or establishments unlikely to be matching with their previous jobs and salaries.....
so we poor people of the nation must take heart that if we stay a worker, we work till old and get less than peanuts and then we work till death!
so sad... -
Well, and so the main topic gets diverted again. Are we even talking about minister or the flaws of the government here? What we should be looking is the issue brought up here. What is the benefit and doubts about implement this work longer and retire later policy. Can they adequately solve the ageing population issue? Are there any other better policies? And what are the problems with these other policy.Originally posted by robertteh:I share your view on this matter. Very often citizens feel let down because the ministers keep practising denials and hypocrisy without solving real problems. NkF problem was brought to their attention but the minister and regulators in charge of overseeing their corporate governance kept denying problems for years until they were exposed by the SPH lawsuit.
The main cause of our problems is self-centredness and hypocrisy.
Who cares about the government! -
I think since the govt dictates and directs everything that goes about in our nation and our policies... we should very well care about them.Originally posted by matleep:Well, and so the main topic gets diverted again. Are we even talking about minister or the flaws of the government here? What we should be looking is the issue brought up here. What is the benefit and doubts about implement this work longer and retire later policy. Can they adequately solve the ageing population issue? Are there any other better policies? And what are the problems with these other policy.
Who cares about the government!
-
For many years, I for one have posted many topical or constructive suggestions to the feedback unit and ministers on mistakes in their policies or actions ranging from mistakes in narrow-minded meritocracy policy which only benefited certain elites and double-charging on lands and infrastructures by HDB but all the constructive suggestions are simply not heeded.Originally posted by matleep:Well, and so the main topic gets diverted again. Are we even talking about minister or the flaws of the government here? What we should be looking is the issue brought up here. What is the benefit and doubts about implement this work longer and retire later policy. Can they adequately solve the ageing population issue? Are there any other better policies? And what are the problems with these other policy.
Who cares about the government!
Even NKF problems were posted to Feedback Unit but they were simply ignored. Now the latest problem with SGX is also the result of practising a self-centred "government knows best" arrogance.
Even people with all the constructive suggestions and ideas like ex-civil servant Mr. Ngiam Tong Dow or Dr. Toh Chin Chye and ex-president Ong Teng Cheong were ignored by autocracy and self-centredness.
If government cannot and does not change such a system of self-centred governance, it cannot convince people to cooperate with their ministers' many policies about creating a cosmopolitan and inclusive society simply because they are practising hypocrisy which the people can see for themselves in their actions.
Actions speak louder. Government must correct all their major past mistakes before trying to tell people how to complain and how to write details of their suggestions to be more pleasing to their senses.
In the face of all these track record of the government in handling complaints and problems, I am sure you will agree that people are being very patient to let government get away with many mistakes and not solve them by resorting to hypocrisy and denials. These are not the hallmark of a talented or world's best government. It will be hypocrisy too for you to pretend these arrogance of the government does not happen and exist only in people's imagination.
Can you therefore speak with moral authority on behalf of government and can you therefore assure that all the constructive suggestions and ideas will not continue to be ignored or brushed aside by ministers or MM Lee due to self-centredness and autocracy and hypocrisy which as I see it is the source and root cause of all our current problems faced by majority of citizens. -
We have a feedback channel in every major stat board, I believe. But 70% of the time wayang only.
I have worked in mindef before and I know it.
This characterizes the Singapore governance. Show that we are open but actually to the contrary. -
Ouch! That stinks! I think same applies in many local companies too.... Preach Open door policy but actually for show only, doors are hardly "opened"....Originally posted by Rock^Star:We have a feedback channel in every major stat board, I believe. But 70% of the time wayang only.
I have worked in mindef before and I know it.
This characterizes the Singapore governance. Show that we are open but actually to the contrary. -
Ha ha! Robertteh is still alive and kicking in this forum, probably to the Feedback Unit as well.Originally posted by robertteh:For many years, I for one have posted many topical or constructive suggestions to the feedback unit and ministers on mistakes in their policies or actions ranging from mistakes in narrow-minded meritocracy policy which only benefited certain elites and double-charging on lands and infrastructures by HDB but all the constructive suggestions are simply not heeded.
Even NKF problems were posted to Feedback Unit but they were simply ignored. Now the latest problem with SGX is also the result of practising a self-centred "government knows best" arrogance.
Even people with all the constructive suggestions and ideas like ex-civil servant Mr. Ngiam Tong Dow or Dr. Toh Chin Chye and ex-president Ong Teng Cheong were ignored by autocracy and self-centredness.
If government cannot and does not change such a system of self-centred governance, it cannot convince people to cooperate with their ministers' many policies about creating a cosmopolitan and inclusive society simply because they are practising hypocrisy which the people can see for themselves in their actions.
Actions speak louder. Government must correct all their major past mistakes before trying to tell people how to complain and how to write details of their suggestions to be more pleasing to their senses.
In the face of all these track record of the government in handling complaints and problems, I am sure you will agree that people are being very patient to let government get away with many mistakes and not solve them by resorting to hypocrisy and denials. These are not the hallmark of a talented or world's best government. It will be hypocrisy too for you to pretend these arrogance of the government does not happen and exist only in people's imagination.
Can you therefore speak with moral authority on behalf of government and can you therefore assure that all the constructive suggestions and ideas will not continue to be ignored or brushed aside by ministers or MM Lee due to self-centredness and autocracy and hypocrisy which as I see it is the source and root cause of all our current problems faced by majority of citizens.
Good work for your suggestions, but seriously don't you get tired of it all?
Why try so hard?
My advice to all would be spend less time in forums and spend more time thinking how to escape from this country! -
Thanks for the effort in responding to each carefully paragraphed points, and for the effort taken with the differentiated colored text.
Your considered explanation are accepted, with exception to the following; then again it is my own position that others and yourself may feel differently.Originally posted by Rock^Star:
Even if 4% is paid on the retirement fund, it is applicable to a smaller portion of the CPF that is required to be further locked up from Age 55 till 84 years.
Originally posted by Atobe:
Does the Government play fair, when they get to use cheap CPF funds at below market rate, using our money to build infrastructure, and thereafter charges us atrocious prices for the use of it, and in the process bloat up the National Reserves.
If you look at the nature of my previous post, my "fair" referred to the 4% interest paid to retirement account upon age 55. One will never get a guaranteed rate like that anywhere else in the market. However, I can't say the same for pre-55. It is definitely on the low side. "Fair" also refers to the amounts that members may encash at 55 and the distribution method to reduce the possibilities of one living longer than one's money.
The 4% interest that is payable annually on a retirement amount fixxed at a maximum sum of $120,000 for each Singaporean is neglible, when any Fund Manager will be able to multiply this amount at a higher rate of return on a wide array of program.
Is the Government holding back some portion of the profits from the CPF monies that are managed by the Fund Managers ? -
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
There use to be a time when movies were all silent, and one's comprehension were based on the tempo of the accompanying piano and one's interpretation of the actions that one's vision absorbs.
Post by Atobe:
The problem with innocuous remarks made is that it sets a trend and tend to cement a particular line of view.
Looking through the 'enlightening link' proposed by Shutterbug, how did you arrive at your postion of dismissing CSJ views as nothing but rantings ?
Politics is about image and Chee has not played this game within his opponent's boundaries. The way he goes about discrediting the govt (even if he was right), would only further cement his image of a fanatic lunatic. Has he even learned from past lesson not to go around the system? Maybe no one has noticed but I have mentioned a long time ago here in sgforums that Chee is a "martyr born in the wrong era". Therefore, the word "rantings" even if they were not.
With the introduction of sound in movies, the experience demanded by the movie audience became more sophisticated, with the plot becoming more important than simple images.
Adolf Hitler had all the help that public relations had to offer, and he used the media to its fullest effect, and no one seemed to hear the ominous message admidst all the goosestepping hoopla.
In this day and age, as an educated and sophisticated person, will you still be tied to simple images that can be so easily managed and distorted by others ?
In his early political experience, LKY was averse to phototakings, as they never presented him in the most photogenic ways, and he even admitted that he looked like a typical Singaporean ruffian - even a 1950s gangster.
He had the benefit of controlling all print and broadcast media over the last 45 years of absolute power, and every event since then were stage managed, with camera angles and carefully selected photos published.
Can you believe in these events ? The cynics know better - the kopitiam crowd cheered CSJ guts.
On first appearance, politics maybe about image, but I believe that this simplistic criteria alone does an injustice to a more educated and discerning population that is able to judge for itself the message and the messenger, and not simply the appearance of the messenger.
Have you completed a review of CSJ presentation of a 'A Nation Cheated' ?
Nope but I may when I can spare the time and heart in future. I have read his "To be free" before and they are in no way fanatic views. He presents reasonable arguments and I have to agree with some truths of his. Compare that with his public image? I can't say the same. I still remember how he hounded Goh Chok Tong in the 2001 elections while the latter was doing a walkabout in Jurong. He lost badly that year. His image has gone down ever since and it does not help that PAP has taken every opportunity to smear his name.
Conclusion? Politics is about image and he has none of that. He's a goner and only his die hard fans would buy his books on sale.
To your credit, at least you have the courage to say that you have found CSJ's writings to be 'in no way fanatic views'.
CSJ's image in the 2001 election was a single event that one perhaps could call it his fervent desire to have a off-the-cuff debate, when Goh Chok Tong refused to engage CSJ on the issues raised.
Why was the Ruling Party aka the Government avoiding giving a clear response to the public concerning the loan offer - (of $10 Billion ? ) by the Singapore Government to the striken Suharto Government ?
For that single event, the Ruling Party typecast CSJ as the villian gangster 'raping' the chastity of Goh Chok Tong's virginal image. For crying out loud, this is politics as LKY had experienced in the 1950s.
How many photo images of LKY - been published in prints and broadcast 'live' on TV - showed a combative LKY offensive demeanour, talking down to Singaporeans, ALPHA-S and Trade Unions ? Singaporean deferred in silence.
Even LHL's sheepish grinning demeanour as he speaks to the NTUC crowd at the recent May Day rally - talking on a wide range of subject - was offensive when one remembers the same grinning face having been given a raise 5 years ago, and getting another hefty raise recently.
Fortunately, for the Ruling Party, these uncomplementary pictures never get to be seen again - btw, did you notice that at the end of the NTUC Rally, some cheerleader led the crowd in 'Merdeka NTUC' that receive a chorus of spontaneous response, but when 'Merdeka PAP' was called, the sound bite fade softer and the commentator's voice was turned on loud. I wonder why ?
None taken - especially when sensible.
If you have, then anyone in this Speaker's Corner that holds similar persistent negative views will also qualify to be considered by you to be similarly guilty of ranting.
It's just business. Don't take my views too personally. -
continuation
Were we brought up to always look at both sides of the coin ?
CSJ entry into politics can be considered to be the first Fresh Faced Professionally Qualified Person to enter politics on the side of the Opposition since the 1960s.
His surprise appearance into politics - at the 1992 election - seems to have created an unpleasant surprise to LKY's meticulous plan for LHL's accenssion into local Politics, after the tumultous efforts to remove Francis Seow and Tang Liang Hong from the local political scene, and neutralizing JBJ into seeming permanent oblivion.
The immediate actions to neutralize all challengers to LHL's political future demand that all means and methods are to be taken to similarly neutralize the threat posed by CSJ.
The actions taken to discredit CSJ, and nail him into the ground were excessive and intended for a second effect to discourage any other like minded Professionals from taking similar steps as CSJ.
As we have seen, it was not until more then ten years later that we see new fresh professional faces entering Singapore politics - the bulk joining WP.
For the personal persecution that the Ruling Party had directed at CSJ, do you expect anything favorable to be said by CSJ towards the Ruling Party or the Government that they form ?
Precisely! You hit the nail on the head. The very fact that he has nothing favourable to say only sends the message of bias and a "hard done by" attitude across. Weren't we brought up to always look at both sides of the coin?
For more then 45 years, I always thought that in Singapore there is only one side of the coin, one way of looking at things.
NO U-TURN.
Where did you come from ?
It is rare that someone is prepared to look at both sides of the coin.
Have you tried to understand CSJ's background, his family, his upbringing - why he would have given up a stable job as a lecturer in NUS, and went against his faculty head - (a diehard PAP hatchet man) - to enter politics on the side of the Opposition, when he was offered to join the Ruling Party ?
Was he ALREADY attempting to be a martyr at the time when he entered politics ?
All this is a matter of perception - yours - as you placed more weight on images than on the strength of the person, his message, and his willingness to stand-by his words and his actions.
Can the same be said of any of the Members of Parliament willing to stand on the conviction of their views, and go against the Party Whip, and truly represent the position of their Constituents who elect them into Parliament ?
Or have they sold their soul to represent their Political Party and not the Constituents, and renegading on the promise of defending the Constitution and Singaporeans in Parliament ?
The Constitution has been raped a thousand times over with new amendments that make nonsense of the original text and meaning of the Singapore Constitution - and all made to the benefit of ensuring that the incumbent Ruling Party will retain the political status quo in perpetuity.
CSJ refused to play by the rules dictated and set by the Ruling Party, as these make nonsense to what is already spelled clearly in the Singapore Constitution.
Will you fight a war by the rules of engagement set out by the enemy ?
Will you fight Al Qaeda and the JI Groups on their ground rules ? -
Does anybody find it bizzare that some see the raising of the retirement age a thing to be celebrated?
-
The only person celebrating is LKY in his capacity as MM and earning a take home pay of $2 Million annually ON TOP of his pension since he reach the age of 55 years.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:Does anybody find it bizzare that some see the raising of the retirement age a thing to be celebrated?
MM is paid his pension and drawing a salary.
Who will not celebrate the raising the retirement age under such circumstance ?
It is like a guaranteed Sweep Stake First Prize Win every year - even as one is paid a pension.