Posted by Gazelle:Yes, now that LV Sands and Genting International both pumped in around S$5 Billion each to build both the IR, how do you think they will recover their investments from ?
If I am not mistaken, LV Sands and Genting International both pump in around S$5b each to build both the IR, and at the same time, I think our government has pocketed close to S$2b for the 2 plot of land. I hope this answer your question on where the money to build a world class city has come from, and your question on who is paying for the reclaimation of the land of that plot size.
How many people from all walks of life - from the uncles and aunties at the Hawker Centres to Kopitiam, or the Heartlands have even sat in the Theatre Halls of the Esplanade ?
The single most expensive investment which our government has made (excluding circle line) in downtown area is probably the Esplanade, at $600m without the cost of land. And even that, it is not catering on the rich and famous, it is for people from all walks of life.
The award of the IR projects are based on a list of criteria that has been well publicised; and also for other reasons that we may very well never know the reasons that Genting can beat Eigth Wonders for the Sentosa IR, considering the visit made by PM Badawi at a critical moment of the bidding process, which is all too much to be a co-incidence.
What our government has created is a enviroment for people to work and live, it doesnt create an enviroment only for super rich can live here. If that was their intention, I would have reason to believe that our government would have awarded the sentosa IR to Eighth Wonders instead of Genting Int. (And please dont say GIL victory was due to political reasons, unless you have hard evidence to support your case)
So you are blaming high property price as a cause for making singaporeans indebted for life, and you link that as a reason for the high bankruptcy rate during the last reccession, BUT you are not against the government and their housing policy?Originally posted by Atobe:No where in my last two response have I even begun to blame the Government for the number of bankruptcies - how did you manage to read this in my last statements and bring this up ?
Since you have brought it up as a question, I shall attempt to give you an answer as to why the Government SHOULD BE BLAMED for the huge number of bankruptcies in Singapoer.
Property market was treated as a casino before the last boom and bust, and the government had the means to control the market and place some dampener on it before the bust. Unfortunately, it refused to recognise its role, as the cabinet ministers (or their spouses on their behalf) are known to be dabbling in the property market as well. Even in the USA, the Federal Reserves and the Government will work in tandem to ensure that property prices are stable and will use the Bank Interest Rates to moderate the market and prevent speculative inflation.
What has our government done ?
In a PriceWaterhouseCoopers 2004 report - (after the last crash in 2002), it mentioned that ''Singapore's GDP per capita of USD24,560 in FY2004 is among the highest in the world, which should put them amongst citizens with the highest buying power. However, the level of personal disposable income is actually lower than perceived due to the high level of indebtedness.''
The report also quote the Singapore Department of Statistcs 2002 Survey that ''the average Singapore household is one of the most indebted in the world. Household debt, as a percentage of personal disposable income, stood at 174% in 2000, higher than countries such as Britain (116%), Japan (100%), and the US (90%). This is due to people chalking up huge amounts for car ownership, private property and club membership. The number of personal bankruptcies has continually reached records levels in recent years.''.
With a car control policy that encourages cars to be scrapped at zero values, and to be changed every ten years; PLUS the high import duties imposed even as other means have already brought car population under control - this only accentuate the debt problem for Singaporeans. Transportation absorb 21% of Singaporean disposable income.
Housing costs could have been made more reasonable without taking away all that Singaporeans have in their CPF, as well as absorbing 22% of their disposable income for housing.
Food is another big ticket item that absorb 21% of the disposable income - with the cost for all these three items being under the direct influence of the Government, whose GLC linked companies have a near monopoly in providing these services, and ringing in bumper profits.
Yes, now that LV Sands and Genting International both pumped in around S$5 Billion each to build both the IR, how do you think they will recover their investments from ?The IR will boost tourism in Singapore and based on the clients in Macau and Australia, the biggest contributor to the casinos will be Maninland Chinese.
A trip there to take photos outside the Esplanade will probably cost a family of five or six at least S$60 - conservatively estimated to cover cost of transport, food and beverages - and not including the prohibitive prices to attend a concert or theatre show.Unlike you atobe, many Singaporeans take public transprt like me
The award of the IR projects are based on a list of criteria that has been well publicised; and also for other reasons that we may very well never know the reasons that Genting can beat Eigth Wonders for the Sentosa IR, considering the visit made by PM Badawi at a critical moment of the bidding process, which is all too much to be a co-incidence.Anyone can speculate. NPNT!
Originally posted by Atobe:I am really surprise that people could actually think that the underlying reasons for the CPF cut and flex wage policy is not about preventing the hollowing out of industry to other developing country, but it is government way of pampering the rich at the expense of the poor.
Have you so quickly forgotten the recommendation of the sub-Committee on Policies Related To Taxation, The CPF System, Wages & Land - Economic Review Committee set up after the 2002 crash ?
Try to absorb some of the following Parliament Debates taken from the Official Report of the Eleventh Parliament - in which a MP was quoted as saying ''I see the two main drivers to this : (1) the nature of work is fast moving away from full-time [b]employment to a contract-based and flexi-time model.... ''
Even a MP from the Ruling Party had also complained about the lack of government intervention to control the Cost of Living in Singapore.
Are these actions NOT seen as cutting the options for Singaporeans, while enhancing the economic economic and social environment to woo the Super-Rich to plant their monies here.
Why do you think that this Government is allowing Sentosa Island and the old Keppel Shipyard to be developed into a World Class Private Housing with marinas that allow their yatchs to be moored next to their homes ?
With the IR and these Up-Market Developments, the Government had declared that Singapore shall be the next Monaco to be a playground for the Rich and Famous.
Running out of ideas ? Hardly. Where have you been since the 2002 Crash ?
[/b]
Singaproeans are mostly employed on Work Contracts that are renewalble every three to five years - if you are lucky; since most Singaporeans are currently offered new jobs with only 6 months to 1 year work contract.Why not? I would do that. If I cannot rid myself of a worker that cannot perform, I would be less likely to employ. That is the reason why the French government tried to make it easier for employers to fire young workers. The rigid employment policy there has resulted in the one of highest unemployment rates in the EU despite a flourishing global economy.
Instead of wooing the Super-Rich, why is this Government not helping to create wealthy Singaporeans instead - in a similar way that politics and the laws are drafted in Switzerland that creates and protect the wealth of Swiss Citizens ?Protectionism does not work. Singapore has succeeded through globalisation and we will continue to prosper through the free movement of labour and capital. Protecting the interests of the bumiputras in Malaysia has not worked, even Mahatir admits that.
With the large amount of money spent on reclaiming land from the sea and designated as the New Marina - Downtown Financial District - do you think that the Singapore Government will build low cost HDB units thereOnly you will think of such a daft way to waste money. High asset value individuals bring in jobs and create wealth for local Singaporeans. Monaco has very little in terms of manufacturing but is wealthy by promoting itself as the playground for the rich and famous.
Who has paid for the massive amount spent on land reclamation, and who will be paying for the multi-dolloar spent on infrastructure that include new MRT lines, roads, and utilities ?Who gets to enjoy most the efficient public transport and excellent infrastructure in Singapore?
a MP was quoted as saying ''I see the two main drivers to this : (1) the nature of work is fast moving away from full-time employment to a contract-based and flexi-time model.... ''A flexible wage system encourages employment. As France has demonstrated to us in recent years, the more rigid the system is to try and protect jobs, the less willing employers will be to employ and more unemployment results.
Why do you think that this Government is allowing Sentosa Island and the old Keppel Shipyard to be developed into a World Class Private Housing with marinas that allow their yatchs to be moored next to their homes ?They are the ones who employ Singaporeans. They are the ones who pay the most taxes (and only 40% of Singaporeans pay any taxes at all). They are the ones who will create the buzz that attracts more high asset value individuals like themselves. Having them here will benefit more Singaporeans.
With the IR and these Up-Market Developments, the Government had declared that Singapore shall be the next Monaco to be a playground for the Rich and Famous.
Originally posted by Atobe:Do you think it is feasible for LV Sands and Genting to invest $10b for a 30 years lease, and with the potential of having new player in the market after 10 years if their target customers is Singaporeans?
Yes, now that LV Sands and Genting International both pumped in around S$5 Billion each to build both the IR, how do you think they will recover their investments from ?
Who do you think will be the biggest repeat users to be targetted in their marketing plan ?
How do you think they will price their facilities so as to recover their investment of S$5 Billion in the shortest possible time ?
Do you think that the S$5 Billion dollars are treated as donations by LV Sands and Genting - to be forgotten ?
Originally posted by Atobe:Did you know that on weekdays, there is free concert at the concert hall organized by Esplande during lunch time. Yes, FREE OF CHARGE.
How many people from all walks of life - from the uncles and aunties at the Hawker Centres to Kopitiam, or the Heartlands have even sat in the Theatre Halls of the Esplanade ?
A trip there to take photos outside the Esplanade will probably cost a family of five or six at least S$60 - conservatively estimated to cover cost of transport, food and beverages - and not including the prohibitive prices to attend a concert or theatre show.
With nearly about 64% of our disposable income removed for Housing, Transport and Communication and Food, there remains the other 18% left for Recreation, 4% for Clothing and Footwear, 8% for Education, and 5% for Healthcare - at different quantum of disposable incomes for the various Upper, Middle, and Lower income groups, how many from each of these groups can afford to attend the concerts regularly ?
Originally posted by Atobe:Did PM Badawi visit Singapore prior to the annoucement? I thought the only contact of the politicians was during the annoucement of the Iskandar projects. If you think that it was politcal, then may I ask what did singapore get in return after giving such a lucrative project to Genting? Or are you just doing what everybody is capable of doing, that is SPECULATING without FACTS.
The award of the IR projects are based on a list of criteria that has been well publicised; and also for other reasons that we may very well never know the reasons that Genting can beat Eigth Wonders for the Sentosa IR, considering the visit made by PM Badawi at a critical moment of the bidding process, which is all too much to be a co-incidence.
While this government has created an environment for people to work, it also has created an environment where it will provide its own cash register to ring continuously - this is not an altruistic government
Originally posted by Gazelle:If high property prices that lead to an environment of speculative casino mentality is not the responsibility of the government to dampen, whose should it be ?
So you are blaming high property price as a cause for making singaporeans indebted for life, and you link that as a reason for the high bankruptcy rate during the last reccession, BUT you are not against the government and their housing policy?
Yes, SARS came along before the Economy recovered fully from the 1997 economic crash.
You are quoting a report which was made in 2004 which focus on our economy in 2003, which happen to be the peak of the worst recession in Singapore history, thanks to SARS which started from end 2002 throughout 2003. I am sure there are plenty of reports highlighting the state of our economy right now, you might as well read it first before asking what our government has done over the last few years.
Why should you be surprised ?
I am surprise that you have actually highlighted the high level of indebtedness of Singaporeans in 2003, especially from someone who is against property boom.
What makes you believe so strongly that those "caught in the last recession" could still hold on to their property and lasted till this day ?
I thought that a rise in property price will help home owner who were caught in last recession to get out of debt (though downsizing of property and refinancing) faster.
Originally posted by Gazelle:You should be surprised - but not at my presentation - but at the Government position in maintaining the CPF and flex wage policy now that stability is supposed to have set in.
I am really surprise that people could actually think that the underlying reasons for the CPF cut and flex wage policy is not about preventing the hollowing out of industry to other developing country, but it is government way of pampering the rich at the expense of the poor.
And to expect the government to be doing this, during Singapore worst recession??
You should be more discerning with your assessment before making your remarks - unless you are totally consumed by the reasons for having IRs.
There is a contrasting difference between having IRs and being a Monaco.
The only link I know so far is that Singapore is trying to be the next monaco for Formula 1. IF Singapore intention is to be like Monaco, than why are we using Venetian in LV as biz model for both our IRs?
Did our government declare that Singapore is going to be the next Monaco, or it is just another assumption of yours? If you want an example of a country trying to be like monaco, it is Dubai, not Singapore.
Originally posted by Gazelle:Government by the rich for the rich (and raise GST for the poor while they raise their million dollars pay) and now... for the rich foreigner... *sigh*
[b]Wooing the super-rich
What are the positive and negative implications of creating an attractive environment in Singapore for the super-rich? Is there a need for specific steps to ensure that this benefits all Singaporeans?
[/b]
Originally posted by Gazelle:Was the piece of land leased to LV Sands for 30 years only ?
Originally posted by Atobe:
Yes, now that LV Sands and Genting International both pumped in around S$5 Billion each to build both the IR, how do you think they will recover their investments from ?
Who do you think will be the biggest repeat users to be targetted in their marketing plan ?
How do you think they will price their facilities so as to recover their investment of S$5 Billion in the shortest possible time ?
Do you think that the S$5 Billion dollars are treated as donations by LV Sands and Genting - to be forgotten ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do you think it is feasible for LV Sands and Genting to invest $10b for a 30 years lease, and with the potential of having new player in the market after 10 years if their target customers is Singaporeans?
Do you know how much Singaporeans spend a year gambling overseas?
Do you know about the 70/30 business model which our government expecting from the IR operators?
Do you know how much Genting is pledging every year to update the IR?
Originally posted by Atobe:You are certainly very considerate towards the heartlanders in Singapore, who have to toil in the factories, shipyards, or at the hawker centers, the bus and taxi drivers, delivery persons, shop attendants, and the countless others spread across the Singapore island to earn their daily keep.
How many people from all walks of life - from the uncles and aunties at the Hawker Centres to Kopitiam, or the Heartlands have even sat in the Theatre Halls of the Esplanade ?
A trip there to take photos outside the Esplanade will probably cost a family of five or six at least S$60 - conservatively estimated to cover cost of transport, food and beverages - and not including the prohibitive prices to attend a concert or theatre show.
With nearly about 64% of our disposable income removed for Housing, Transport and Communication and Food, there remains the other 18% left for Recreation, 4% for Clothing and Footwear, 8% for Education, and 5% for Healthcare - at different quantum of disposable incomes for the various Upper, Middle, and Lower income groups, how many from each of these groups can afford to attend the concerts regularly ?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[b]Did you know that on weekdays, there is free concert at the concert hall organized by Esplande during lunch time. Yes, FREE OF CHARGE.
Did you know that there is an outdoor stage by the marina that offer shows and performance of free. Yes, FREE of CHARGE, and they are expanding it to make it more comfortable for the audience.
Originally posted by Atobe:Not exactly prior to the announcement but he was in Singapore for a two day visit a month or two after the first IR result was announced.
The award of the IR projects are based on a list of criteria that has been well publicised; and also for other reasons that we may very well never know the reasons that Genting can beat Eigth Wonders for the Sentosa IR, considering the visit made by PM Badawi at a critical moment of the bidding process, which is all too much to be a co-incidence.
While this government has created an environment for people to work, it also has created an environment where it will provide its own cash register to ring continuously - this is not an altruistic government
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did PM Badawi visit Singapore prior to the annoucement? I thought the only contact of the politicians was during the annoucement of the Iskandar projects. If you think that it was politcal, then may I ask what did singapore get in return after giving such a lucrative project to Genting? Or are you just doing what everybody is capable of doing, that is SPECULATING without FACTS.
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:You are a disappoint for the Government with your view, as their stated main objective is not to promote the Casino but the Family aspects of the entire ''Resort''.
Original post by Atobe:
Yes, now that LV Sands and Genting International both pumped in around S$5 Billion each to build both the IR, how do you think they will recover their investments from ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IR will boost tourism in Singapore and based on the clients in Macau and Australia, the biggest contributor to the casinos will be Maninland Chinese.
A trip there to take photos outside the Esplanade will probably cost a family of five or six at least S$60 - conservatively estimated to cover cost of transport, food and beverages - and not including the prohibitive prices to attend a concert or theatre show.A goofy 'bourgeois' attempting to pass off as an ordinary 'proletariat' ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlike you atobe, many Singaporeans take public transprt like me
[b]The award of the IR projects are based on a list of criteria that has been well publicised; and also for other reasons that we may very well never know the reasons that Genting can beat Eigth Wonders for the Sentosa IR, considering the visit made by PM Badawi at a critical moment of the bidding process, which is all too much to be a co-incidence.Try some transparency with all government practices and not on selective basis that involve foreign interests only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyone can speculate. NPNT!
The fact is that the award did not favour local companies despite their link to the government. It was based on commercial considerations...that's transparency.
Originally posted by Atobe:Did the government forced Singaporeans to speculate in property or was the speculation driven by market force and investor's own greed? I could assure you that once the government intervene, anti-gov camp will start with another thread saying that Singapore is like a nanny state. Am I right?
quote:
If high property prices that lead to an environment of speculative casino mentality is not the responsibility of the government to dampen, whose should it be ?
The Public Housing Policy of this Government is another subject of contention that has been well put forth in other threads - are you not in disagreement ?
Originally posted by Atobe:a) Speculators are speculators, regardless of what the government does, they will still speculate. And FYI, I think the government has already mentioned that they are monitoring the situation and they would do something when its necessary.
quote:
What makes you believe so strongly that those "caught in the last recession" could still hold on to their property and lasted till this day ?
BTW are we on the same frequency ?
My reference of those "caught in the last recession" are those who were speculating in the property markets, while you may have your point that there could well be some others who have purchased their homes at the PEAK of the last property boom and before the last property market crashed.
In any case, if your "referenced group" decide to off-load their property at this time, will the difference in price cover for the high interest rates paid on their home loans that were already based on the previous high price ?
The current pricing must be at least 50% higher than the last purchase price, or else your "referenced group" can hardly breakeven.
The money recovered from the sale of the high priced home will also have to cover for the period of "homelessness"; while a new home has to be considered in this current property BOOM pricing.
Where are you heading to after all is considered ?
Do you think your "referenced group" can still come out ahead ?
[/b]
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Your tone is impetuously arrogant and spoken with a condescending confidence of your own position being permanent.
Post by Atobe:
Singaproeans are mostly employed on Work Contracts that are renewalble every three to five years - if you are lucky; since most Singaporeans are currently offered new jobs with only 6 months to 1 year work contract.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why not? I would do that. If I cannot rid myself of a worker that cannot perform, I would be less likely to employ. That is the reason why the French government tried to make it easier for employers to fire young workers. The rigid employment policy there has resulted in the one of highest unemployment rates in the EU [b]despite a flourishing global economy.
[/b]
Instead of wooing the Super-Rich, why is this Government not helping to create wealthy Singaporeans instead - in a similar way that politics and the laws are drafted in Switzerland that creates and protect the wealth of Swiss Citizens ?Have I begun to discuss about 'Protectionism' ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Protectionism does not work. Singapore has succeeded through globalisation and we will continue to prosper through the free movement of labour and capital. Protecting the interests of the bumiputras in Malaysia has not worked, even Mahatir admits that.
With the large amount of money spent on reclaiming land from the sea and designated as the New Marina - Downtown Financial District - do you think that the Singapore Government will build low cost HDB units there.Daft way to waste money ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only you will think of such a daft way to waste money. High asset value individuals bring in jobs and create wealth for local Singaporeans. Monaco has very little in terms of manufacturing but is wealthy by promoting itself as the playground for the rich and famous.
Who has paid for the massive amount spent on land reclamation, and who will be paying for the multi-dolloar spent on infrastructure that include new MRT lines, roads, and utilities ?Since you claimed to be a frequent dependent on the local public transport, have you not taken advantage of the contribution of the other 99.99% Singaporeans paying for the continued upkeep and operation of the system ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who gets to enjoy most the efficient public transport and excellent infrastructure in Singapore?
Post by Atobe:Refer to my comments on this topic as indicated in the preceding paragraph.
a MP was quoted as saying ''I see the two main drivers to this : (1) the nature of work is fast moving away from full-time employment to a contract-based and flexi-time model.... ''
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[b]A flexible wage system encourages employment. As France has demonstrated to us in recent years, the more rigid the system is to try and protect jobs, the less willing employers will be to employ and more unemployment results.
Initial contract jobs enables employers to assess if the worker can make it. For the worker who is in demand, it does not matter. My employer offers me permanent employment but I reject it for a yearly contract, so that I can negotiate my salary yearly and the notice period is shorter.
It does not matter whether you have a permanent or yearly contract, as long as your skills are in demand.
Why do you think that this Government is allowing Sentosa Island and the old Keppel Shipyard to be developed into a World Class Private Housing with marinas that allow their yatchs to be moored next to their homes ?Would you like to clarify who are the "They'' that you are referring to ?
With the IR and these Up-Market Developments, the Government had declared that Singapore shall be the next Monaco to be a playground for the Rich and Famous.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are the ones who employ Singaporeans. They are the ones who pay the most taxes (and only 40% of Singaporeans pay any taxes at all). They are the ones who will create the buzz that attracts more high asset value individuals like themselves. Having them here will benefit more Singaporeans.
Originally posted by Atobe:Didnt PM Lee mentioned the increase in employer CPF contribution rate in this year's budget?
[b]You should be surprised - but not at my presentation - but at the Government position in maintaining the CPF and flex wage policy now that stability is supposed to have set in.
We are now into 2007, and the events of hollowing out of the industry had been on-going since the early 1980s, when multi-nationals were already moving aggressively into China and India.
Singapore had more then 20 year headstart to the approaching storm of 1997 - when a combination of factors - crashed the Singapore economy.
What did this bunch of Over-paid Talent do to prepare Singapore during the previous 10 years ?
Were their actions not mere fight-fighting at the expense of Singaporeans ?
Originally posted by Atobe:Obviously you are not aware why MM Lee was at Venetian LV and why he made the comment that Singapore IR should generate 70% of their revenue from non-gaming activities. Again, you are speculating.
You should be more discerning with your assessment before making your remarks - unless you are totally consumed by the reasons for having IRs.
The IRs is disguised as such in order to make the entire project more palatable to conservative Singaporeans, and also to present the old guards from the Ruling Party look less foolish with this U-Turn.
Originally posted by Atobe:If Singapore intention was only to draw rich and famous into Singapore, I dont think our ministers will be busy wasting their time traveling all over the world to establish FTAs, promoting bilateral trade, initiating projects like biopolis etc. All they need to do is to scrap income tax, capital punishment, relax the law on smoking, nudity. And all these could be done with a simple signature above the dotted line.
What do you think this Singapore Government has been working at for the last 10 years - attempting to draw in the Rich and Famous to reside and put their monies in Singapore ?
What do you think are the reasons for the approved projects such - as One Degree 15 at Sentosa Island, and the conversion of prime public property at the previous Keppel Shipyard into a Premier Housing Project - Carribean at Keppel Bay with private access to luxury boats while living in sea front homes - considering that it has been 50 years of Ruling Party policy to level the social advantage for all Singaporeans, with seafront bungalows of the 1950s all eradicated ?
Originally posted by Atobe:You should just give up on trying to link Monaco to Singapore, because if Singapore is like what you say, billionaire Stanley Ho will be major shareholder of Sentosa IR.
Why do you think that there is such a purposeful effort to attract all the Rich and Famous into Singapore with this air of a 'Monaco in the Tropics' ?
In the great IR aka Casino Debate, the effects and life in Monaco (as well as other casino centers) was referred to repeatedly even by MM LKY.
Originally posted by Atobe:The casino license is for 30 years and that is the most important revenue stream for the IR operator. Unless you have reason to believe that Singaporeans are all like sheep and the jackpot machine will be scattered across the island. If not why should we be concern if it is a 30 ot 100 years lease.
[b]
Was the piece of land leased to LV Sands for 30 years only ?
I must have missed that one.
If LV Sands is prepared to place $10 Billions for 30 years - we should all be very concerned. Do you not think so ?
Originally posted by Atobe:1) They are not all classic quartet, and again you have the wrong perception
[b]
You are certainly very considerate towards the heartlanders in Singapore, who have to toil in the factories, shipyards, or at the hawker centers, the bus and taxi drivers, delivery persons, shop attendants, and the countless others spread across the Singapore island to earn their daily keep.
Thank you very much, but how many can take the trouble to head to the Esplanade for a free concert by some Classical Quartet during a 45 minute or 1 hour lunch break ?
Originally posted by Atobe:Atobe, please dont bored us with all this kopitiam talk about Malaysia government's influencing on Sentosa IR bid. Please go read the STB's RFP before telling us all these nonsensical theory.
[b]
Not exactly prior to the announcement but he was in Singapore for a two day visit a month or two after the first IR result was announced.
Co-incidence ?
There are more then meets the eye if you learn to read between the lines in what is said and not said by some government leaders on both sides of the Causeway.
Only those who are ignorantly self-centered will ask - ''What did Singapore get in return ?'' - when Temasek was given the opportunity to buy a stake in Telekom Malaysia, as well as the Singapore GIC were given official blessing to participate in some prime projects owned by the Malaysian Government.
Yes, after 5 years of CPF stagnation and lower wages being forced onto the Singapore Workforce.Originally posted by Gazelle:
Originally posted by Atobe:
You should be surprised - but not at my presentation - but at the Government position in maintaining the CPF and flex wage policy now that stability is supposed to have set in.
We are now into 2007, and the events of hollowing out of the industry had been on-going since the early 1980s, when multi-nationals were already moving aggressively into China and India.
Singapore had more then 20 year headstart to the approaching storm of 1997 - when a combination of factors - crashed the Singapore economy.
What did this bunch of Over-paid Talent do to prepare Singapore during the previous 10 years ?
Were their actions not mere fight-fighting at the expense of Singaporeans ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Didnt PM Lee mentioned the increase in employer CPF contribution rate in this year's budget?
Do we need to find it amazing that it takes so little imagination for the unthinking to believe everything said by a politician on its face value ?
You must be kidding me. Could you tell me which major MNC company has actually left Singapore and invest aggressively in China during the 80s? Big multinational companies only started to move in aggressively during the late 90s when China was about to join WTO, and their government privatising the state owned companies. I think the amount of FDI in china during the 80s and 90s is less than wat Singapore is attracting today.
(Would appreciate if you could get your facts right before using it as an arguement) [/quote]
Have you so quickly forgotten the mass retrenchment of workers from the Electronic and IT sectors, when their factories move to China ?
With Singapore's Talented Leaders creation of Suzhou Industrial Park - to teach China how to operate a modern industrial park - that end up attracting Singaporean and Foreign Factories to relocate to China, do you think that Singaporean Workers stand to benefit from this SIP ?
Get my facts straight ? Or have you soft in your head and need to be reminded of these events, and need spoon feeding to prop up your thinking abilities ? You are beginning to test my patience.What rubbish are you creating with this tape recorder like propaganda nonsense ?
When the currency crisis hit Thailand in 97, most regional currency and economy collapse and Singapore didnt ran into a recession until about 2000/1, and we didnt have to borrow any money from IMF or worldbank or impose any capital control to stablish our currency. Our government defended it very well.
Is this not something the government has done in preparation to support the economy? Or are you saying that Singapore, as a open economy that has billions dollars of bilateral trade with indonesia and Malaysia should escape the Asia recession if we have a strong government?
If your over paid talented Pets had an iota of business acumen of George Soros, they would have foreseen the dangers of a financial meltdown, and would have prepared Singapore better, instead of managing the fallout of a fire storm that had all the early warning signs ignored.
If you believe that Singapore did not run into recession until 4 years after 1997 financial meltdown, then either you must have been over-stuffed with the propaganda fed to you, or that you are one of the over-paid looneys that claim to be talented and insist on extracting the high pay from taxxes foreced onto poor Singaporeans.
Can you appreciate that when the currency crisis hit Thailand in 1997, Singapore already had to adjust our own exchange rate on par with the rapidly depreciating regional currencies so as to stay competitive ?
By 1998, wages and operating costs had to be drastically adjusted so as to enhance the effects of a lower Singapore exchange rate, and make Singapore as competitive as the other neighboring countries affected by the financial meltdown, causing a draconian change to their economic status. (This is a report from research to the Financial Crisis of 1997 by an ISEAS Assoc Senior Fellow - which I differ to some of the views written ) .
The supposedly preparatory works that this government has done - as you have claimed - is nothing more then a reaction to crisis events that have passed. Nothing was ever done in anticipation of what possibly can happen - which speaks much of the kind of over inflated hype about the talents that your Pets possessed.
Have your Talented Pets the foresight and instinct for troubles that spell opportunity which George Soros possessed ?
Without a nose for sensing rough seas ahead, your useless talents could not even manage the ''Rising Costs and Dipping Wages'' that is affecting Singaporeans for TEN Years - since 1997.
[quote]
You should be more discerning with your assessment before making your remarks - unless you are totally consumed by the reasons for having IRs.
The IRs is disguised as such in order to make the entire project more palatable to conservative Singaporeans, and also to present the old guards from the Ruling Party look less foolish with this U-Turn.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Obviously you are not aware why MM Lee was at Venetian LV and why he made the comment that Singapore IR should generate 70% of their revenue from non-gaming activities. Again, you are speculating.
Have they not already tried with nudity in allowing the ''Crazy Horse'' to exist in Singapore but failed miserably ?
What do you think this Singapore Government has been working at for the last 10 years - attempting to draw in the Rich and Famous to reside and put their monies in Singapore ?
What do you think are the reasons for the approved projects such - as One Degree 15 at Sentosa Island, and the conversion of prime public property at the previous Keppel Shipyard into a Premier Housing Project - Carribean at Keppel Bay with private access to luxury boats while living in sea front homes - considering that it has been 50 years of Ruling Party policy to level the social advantage for all Singaporeans, with seafront bungalows of the 1950s all eradicated ?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If Singapore intention was only to draw rich and famous into Singapore, I dont think our ministers will be busy wasting their time traveling all over the world to establish FTAs, promoting bilateral trade, initiating projects like biopolis etc. All they need to do is to scrap income tax, capital punishment, relax the law on smoking, nudity. And all these could be done with a simple signature above the dotted line.
This is where the problem lie with your kind of mindless lines; and I am not surprised that with the familiarity that you have of your Talented Poodles, you will similarly possessed the same kind of condescending attitude towards others.
If you dont know by now, the government is trying to establish Singapore as a finacial hub for wealth management and that is why more and more rich people will be coming to our shore. To you it might be bad because you couldnt afford to buy yourself a seafront bunglow, but to other Singaporeans, they see load of opportunities as private bankers and they will be one that eventually will be living in million dollar apartment which whinners could only dream of. [/quote]
Yes, by your standards of stupidity - i am more stupider than you can ever be; and you are a joke with the views that you have.
If this Government is as talented as they claim to be, why are they shooting arrows aimlessly into selected corners of the dark yonder with all these hopeful speculative new territories.
It is the renegading of an unpopular Principle that was forced down the People's throats in the 1960s, based on VALUES espoused by the same Government that will now hypocritically advocate that the values of the social levelling policies - of the 1960s through 1970s - can now be debunked.
What relevance is that concerning my ability to afford a seafront bungalow got to do with other Singaporeans seeing loads of opportunities as private bankers ?
Are you not again expertly gerrymeandering and creating another new point of contention ?
There are thousands of Singaporeans who have lost sea front properties without any compensation from this Government, who will now reap in BILLIONS from the sale of reclaimed land, for others to build their sea front properties.
How many Singaporeans from a TOTAL POPULATION of Citizens and PRs can become Private Bankers ?
Is your Talented Government only capable in creating wealth to only a limited number of Singaporean Citizens and PRs to become rich as Private Bankers, and neglect the larger majority ?
Why do you think that there is such a purposeful effort to attract all the Rich and Famous into Singapore with this air of a 'Monaco in the Tropics' ?
In the great IR aka Casino Debate, the effects and life in Monaco (as well as other casino centers) was referred to repeatedly even by MM LKY.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------You should just give up on trying to link Monaco to Singapore, because if Singapore is like what you say, billionaire Stanley Ho will be major shareholder of Sentosa IR.
If the free concerts are not the usual classic quartet - more often then not, can you say what is more frequently held in the open ?Originally posted by Gazelle:
Originally posted by Atobe:
Was the piece of land leased to LV Sands for 30 years only ?
I must have missed that one.
If LV Sands is prepared to place $10 Billions for 30 years - we should all be very concerned. Do you not think so ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[b]The casino license is for 30 years and that is the most important revenue stream for the IR operator. Unless you have reason to believe that Singaporeans are all like sheep and the jackpot machine will be scattered across the island. If not why should we be concern if it is a 30 ot 100 years lease. [/quote]
Unfortunately, that is the view of your myopia being led to see what your retard brain wishes to see - and the views simply show an impetuous child insisting his views are that of an adult.
Are there any reasons not to believe that some Singaporeans are not like sheep following blindly a wolf pretending to be the Shepherd ?
Have you been so purposefully blind not to believe that the Jackpot machines are not already scattered across the Singapore Island - in all the Private Country Clubs, Swimming or Recreational Clubs, as well as Marinas and Sports Associations ?
Obviously your immodest display of financial expertise seems to have been deflated as quickly as your wind is broken - if you believe that there is no difference between 30 or 100 years in the lease available to LV Sands to recover their $5 Billion investment.
[quote]
You are certainly very considerate towards the heartlanders in Singapore, who have to toil in the factories, shipyards, or at the hawker centers, the bus and taxi drivers, delivery persons, shop attendants, and the countless others spread across the Singapore island to earn their daily keep.
Thank you very much, but how many can take the trouble to head to the Esplanade for a free concert by some Classical Quartet during a 45 minute or 1 hour lunch break ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1) They are not all classic quartet, and again you have the wrong perception
2) If heartlanders can travel miles to eat Char Kway Teow, I am sure they will be able to find time to watch a free performance at the esplanate theater if they want to.
Anyway I dont think it is necessary to talk about how people find time to watch free performance at esplanade, all I want to say is that your perception of our government doing everything for the rich is wrong.
I am surprised that with so much nonsense sprouted in your statements you will find mine to be nonsensical ?
Not exactly prior to the announcement but he was in Singapore for a two day visit a month or two after the first IR result was announced.
Co-incidence ?
There are more then meets the eye if you learn to read between the lines in what is said and not said by some government leaders on both sides of the Causeway.
Only those who are ignorantly self-centered will ask - ''What did Singapore get in return ?'' - when Temasek was given the opportunity to buy a stake in Telekom Malaysia, as well as the Singapore GIC were given official blessing to participate in some prime projects owned by the Malaysian Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Atobe, please dont bored us with all this kopitiam talk about Malaysia government's influencing on Sentosa IR bid. Please go read the STB's RFP before telling us all these nonsensical theory.
Telekom Malaysia? Didnt Temasek just sold off this state in the company recently? Whats is your new theory for that?
Employment, stock market, property market are wealth that the government has created for Singapore. And guess, what come next year, we will have F1 at our footsteps, and that is a perks we have for being a Singaporeans. (Please dont come whining about oh this is another thing for the rich and not for the poor and because poor people will never get rich. (That to me a obsolute rubbish)Originally posted by Atobe:Yes, after 5 years of CPF stagnation and lower wages being forced onto the Singapore Workforce.
Is there any choice for PM Lee not to increase employer's CPF contribution rate, when his hands are tied concerning Workers' Wages that continue to be kept as low as is possible.
The question remains - despite your gerrymeandering from one point to another - What wealth has this Government created for Singaporeans ?.
[/color]
You insisted that the aggressive investment into China by MNCs actually started in the 80s and blaming our government for not doing enough to prevent this from happening during the 2000/1 recession.Originally posted by Atobe:Have you so quickly forgotten the mass retrenchment of workers from the Electronic and IT sectors, when their factories move to China ?
With Singapore's Talented Leaders creation of Suzhou Industrial Park - to teach China how to operate a modern industrial park - that end up attracting Singaporean and Foreign Factories to relocate to China, do you think that Singaporean Workers stand to benefit from this SIP ?
Get my facts straight ? Or have you soft in your head and need to be reminded of these events, and need spoon feeding to prop up your thinking abilities ? You are beginning to test my patience.
[/i]
1) Again you just demostrated that you are ignorant about how Singapore economy function. Singapore has anticipated that such things will happen, and that is the reason why Singapore currency DID NOT COLLAPSE.Originally posted by Atobe:What rubbish are you creating with this tape recorder like propaganda nonsense ?
If your over paid talented Pets had an iota of business acumen of George Soros, they would have foreseen the dangers of a financial meltdown, and would have prepared Singapore better, instead of managing the fallout of a fire storm that had all the early warning signs ignored.
If you believe that Singapore did not run into recession until 4 years after 1997 financial meltdown, then either you must have been over-stuffed with the propaganda fed to you, or that you are one of the over-paid looneys that claim to be talented and insist on extracting the high pay from taxxes foreced onto poor Singaporeans.
Can you appreciate that when the currency crisis hit Thailand in 1997, Singapore already had to adjust our own exchange rate on par with the rapidly depreciating regional currencies so as to stay competitive ?
By 1998, wages and operating costs had to be drastically adjusted so as to enhance the effects of a lower Singapore exchange rate, and make Singapore as competitive as the other neighboring countries affected by the financial meltdown, causing a draconian change to their economic status. (This is a report from research to the Financial Crisis of 1997 by an ISEAS Assoc Senior Fellow - which I differ to some of the views written ) .
The supposedly preparatory works that this government has done - as you have claimed - is nothing more then a reaction to crisis events that have passed. Nothing was ever done in anticipation of what possibly can happen - which speaks much of the kind of over inflated hype about the talents that your Pets possessed.
Have your Talented Pets the foresight and instinct for troubles that spell opportunity which George Soros possessed ?
Without a nose for sensing rough seas ahead, your useless talents could not even manage the ''Rising Costs and Dipping Wages'' that is affecting Singaporeans for TEN Years - since 1997.
[/color]
You dont need to be a genius or someone trying to be too smart to judge if the IR operator is capable of delivering the 70/30 business model for their IR. If you think the IR bid is driven by politics, then could you explain why non of the GLCs was awarded the projects?Originally posted by Atobe:Do we need to find it amazing that it takes so little imagination for the unthinking to believe everything said by a politician on its face value ?
Robert Ingersoll said : "In the republic of mediocrity, genius is dangerous''
Originally posted by Gazelle:I suppose you got rich being employed with a low salary compared to the government's high wages for the Civil Servants - and of course the Cabinet Minister's wages ?
Employment, stock market, property market are wealth that the government has created for Singapore. And guess, what come next year, we will have F1 at our footsteps, and that is a perks we have for being a Singaporeans. (Please dont come whining about oh this is another thing for the rich and not for the poor and because poor people will never get rich. (That to me a obsolute rubbish)
My intention was never to waste me time to convince you that Singapore government is good, all I want is to highlight how negative and senseless a crybaby you are.
Originally posted by Gazelle:The recession in 2000/1 ?
You insisted that the aggressive investment into China by MNCs actually started in the [b]80s and blaming our government for not doing enough to prevent this from happening during the 2000/1 recession.
My question to you is tell me which MNCs has actually left Singapore for China during the 80s?
Please read my question carefully and dont just selectively and conveniently ignoring the nonsense you have posted.
[/b]