All out to defame our governement
-
hi all,
thanks for all the posts that make this thread one of the most interesting thread in recent times.
Times are not good, i think all of us do noe, but how are we going to overcome it, there is always 2 choices, one is to escape and the other one is to face the fact.
We are living in a very small country with limited resources, the recent acts of the government policy might not be doing us good. thats y we are discussing the topic here.
But if the thread do sound too harsh for someone out there, i will apologise.
I wish for a better country to live in, everyone have 3 meals, everyone have enough money to spend.
i hope by starting a thread like this will not be make it looks as though i am doing some underhand techniques to win support for the government.. -
When u mention escape, this is precisely what 800 local chose to do each year by chosing to migrate to other countries.Originally posted by citymax:hi all,
thanks for all the posts that make this thread one of the most interesting thread in recent times.
Times are not good, i think all of us do noe, but how are we going to overcome it, there is always 2 choices, one is to escape and the other one is to face the fact.
We are living in a very small country with limited resources, the recent acts of the government policy might not be doing us good. thats y we are discussing the topic here.
But if the thread do sound too harsh for someone out there, i will apologise.
I wish for a better country to live in, everyone have 3 meals, everyone have enough money to spend.
i hope by starting a thread like this will not be make it looks as though i am doing some underhand techniques to win support for the government.. -
Actually escape is a wrong word to use, it's more like solving the problem permanently, once you emigrate, your problems won't come back again to haunt you.Originally posted by will4:When u mention escape, this is precisely what 800 local chose to do each year by chosing to migrate to other countries.
Escape is more like people going to other countries to work for a few years, then come back to face the same problem again. It's only temporary, you are still a citizen of Singapore, once you come back you still face the same bleak circumstances.
A permanent solution would be to emigrate to a better country like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc. -
In these countries the crime rate might be high but takea look at US despite it high crime rate, people still including from here also like to go there.Originally posted by maurizio13:Actually escape is a wrong word to use, it's more like solving the problem permanently, once you emigrate, your problems won't come back again to haunt you.
Escape is more like people going to other countries to work for a few years, then come back to face the same problem again. It's only temporary, you are still a citizen of Singapore, once you come back you still face the same bleak circumstances.
A permanent solution would be to emigrate to a better country like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc.
-
It's a worthwhile trade off, you can live in a safe country like North Korea where crime is virtually non existent, so is civil liberties, but is it a place you want to spend the rest of your life. Crime free does not equate to a meaningful existence.Originally posted by will4:In these countries the crime rate might be high but takea look at US despite it high crime rate, people still including from here also like to go there.
The points put forth by the PAP supporters in here are often narrow minded, they would just accept whatever the ruling elites dish out to them. It's equivalent to tying the nose ring of a bull to a tree, initially the bull will struggle, but after sometime, it realizes that it is not break away, so even if you don't tie the rope too tight, it will not try to struggle. The bull has resigned to fate. -
US can produce talent like nobel prize winners but what about Spore despite producing scholars?
-
Singapore produced alot of deadweight ministers who makes S$2-3 millions a year.Originally posted by will4:US can produce talent like nobel prize winners but what about Spore despite producing scholars?
Singapore is a sinking ship with lots of fat pigs from Manor Farm, the fatter they get the faster the ship sinks. -
I think the present minister like health, defence, foreign affairs n manpower quite capable in running thing but cannot say for the rest.Originally posted by maurizio13:Singapore is a sinking ship with lots of fat pigs from Manor Farm, the fatter they get the faster the ship sinks. -
I think they should benchmark themselves with HK or Korea.Originally posted by maurizio13:Singapore produced alot of deadweight ministers who makes S$2-3 millions a year.
Singapore is a sinking ship with lots of fat pigs from Manor Farm, the fatter they get the faster the ship sinks.
HK can produce many good TVB serial show. -
but by migrating to other country is this the best solution.Originally posted by maurizio13:Actually escape is a wrong word to use, it's more like solving the problem permanently, once you emigrate, your problems won't come back again to haunt you.
Escape is more like people going to other countries to work for a few years, then come back to face the same problem again. It's only temporary, you are still a citizen of Singapore, once you come back you still face the same bleak circumstances.
A permanent solution would be to emigrate to a better country like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc.
i have my parents in Singapore, i have my friends in Singapore, i have my relatives in Singapore..
i cant leave all my memories behind, sometimes its always easier to say than doing it. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
u win liao lor, u use the word narrow minded.
It's a worthwhile trade off, you can live in a safe country like North Korea where crime is virtually non existent, so is civil liberties, but is it a place you want to spend the rest of your life. Crime free does not equate to a meaningful existence.
The points put forth by the [b]PAP supporters in here are often narrow minded, they would just accept whatever the ruling elites dish out to them. It's equivalent to tying the nose ring of a bull to a tree, initially the bull will struggle, but after sometime, it realizes that it is not break away, so even if you don't tie the rope too tight, it will not try to struggle. The bull has resigned to fate. [/b]
i think that prove something abt u... -
I did that. I am already opening gateways for my family and relatives to enter another country if they need to.Originally posted by citymax:but by migrating to other country is this the best solution.
i have my parents in Singapore, i have my friends in Singapore, i have my relatives in Singapore..
i cant leave all my memories behind, sometimes its always easier to say than doing it.
If you like Singapore and things are going well in Singapore for you, then stay. If not , then don't - make a choice.
Everyone can do it - they just need to make the choice and it is not an easy choice to make a new base but once you make it , building on it will be easier. -
The problem is in Singapore, with Singapore, about Singapore. By emigrating you just leave Singapore, and all the problems associated with it. What problem have you solved?Originally posted by maurizio13:Actually escape is a wrong word to use, it's more like solving the problem permanently, once you emigrate, your problems won't come back again to haunt you.
Escape is more like people going to other countries to work for a few years, then come back to face the same problem again. It's only temporary, you are still a citizen of Singapore, once you come back you still face the same bleak circumstances.
A permanent solution would be to emigrate to a better country like Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc.
When there are problem in Singapore, you don't want to solve it, you can't solve it so you leave Singapore so that you don't have to face the problem. That is escape! If you come back then you escape temporary, if you leave for good you escape permanently.
Emigration is a choice, not a solution. When you emigrate to oz, nz or wherever, you choose to face new problems in the new country, you don't solve any problem in Singapore, we can't thank you for that. -
Posted from http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/propriety_and_ethics/ministers/ministerial_code/
Did our ministers in charge of regulating the affairs of charitable organizations comply with any of the codes of conduct expected of ministers in the whole NKF saga whether in reporting the incidents to parliament or replies to the media if we are to use the above-stated UK codes as an example.
1.1 Ministers of the Crown are expected to behave according to the highest standards of constitutional and personal conduct in the performance of their duties.
1.2 This Code provides guidance to Ministers on how they should act and arrange their affairs in order to uphold these standards. It lists the principles which may apply in particular situations drawing on past precedent. It applies to all members of the Government (and covers Parliamentary Private Secretaries in section 2).
1.3 Ministers are personally responsible for deciding how to act and conduct themselves in the light of the Code and for justifying their actions and conduct in Parliament. The Code is not a rulebook, and it is not the role of the Secretary of the Cabinet or other officials to enforce it or to investigate Ministers although they may provide Ministers with private advice on matters which it covers.
1.4 Ministers only remain in office for so long as they retain the confidence of the Prime Minister. He is the ultimate judge of the standards of behaviour expected of a Minister and the appropriate consequences of a breach of those standards, although he will not expect to comment on every allegation that is brought to his attention.
1.5 The Code should be read against the background of the overarching duty on Ministers to comply with the law, including international law and treaty obligations, to uphold the administration of justice and to protect the integrity of public life. They are expected to observe the Seven Principles of Public Life set out in the first report of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, repeated in annex A, and the following principles of Ministerial conduct:
* Ministers must uphold the principle of collective responsibility;
* Ministers have a duty to Parliament to account, and be held to account, for the policies, decisions and actions of their departments and agencies;
* it is of paramount importance that Ministers give accurate and truthful information to Parliament, correcting any inadvertent error at the earliest opportunity. Ministers who knowingly mislead Parliament will be expected to offer their resignation to the Prime Minister;
* Ministers should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public, refusing to provide information only when disclosure would not be in the public interest which should be decided in accordance with the relevant statutes and the Freedom of Information Act 2000;
* Ministers should similarly require civil servants who give evidence before Parliamentary Committees on their behalf and under their direction to be as helpful as possible in providing accurate, truthful and full information in accordance with the duties and responsibilities of civil servants as set out in the Civil Service Code;
* Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or appears to arise, between their public duties and their private interests;
* Ministers should avoid accepting any gift or hospitality which might, or might reasonably appear to, compromise their judgment or place them under an improper obligation;
* Ministers in the House of Commons must keep separate their roles as Minister and constituency Member;
* Ministers must not use government resources for Party political purposes. They must uphold the political impartiality of the Civil Service and not ask civil servants to act in any way which would conflict with the Civil Service Code.
1.6 Ministers must also comply at all times with the requirements which Parliament itself has laid down, including in particular the Codes of Conduct for their respective Houses. For Ministers in the Commons, these are set by the Resolution carried on 19 March 1997 (Official Report columns 1046-47), and for Ministers in the Lords the Resolution can be found in the Official Report of 20 March 1997 column 1057.
Propriety and Ethics Team, Cabinet Office, 70 Whitehall, London SW1A 2AS
If the ministers concerned cannot report facts accurately to parliament what would they be guilty of based on the above-stated codes? -
Sometimes we have to base our decisions not on personal feelings and past emotions, as this is lead to a sub-optimal decision. You just have to weight the cost and benefits of each country.Originally posted by citymax:but by migrating to other country is this the best solution.
i have my parents in Singapore, i have my friends in Singapore, i have my relatives in Singapore..
i cant leave all my memories behind, sometimes its always easier to say than doing it. -
I did not specifically mention you as being narrow minded. Why are you associating yourself with being a narrow minded individual?Originally posted by citymax:u win liao lor, u use the word narrow minded.
i think that prove something abt u...
I think that proves something about you too. -
As you have already defined the problem as being inherent in Singapore. Two ways to solve the problem, either to change the regime or leave Singapore. When you try to change a regime like Aung San Suu Kyi, you end up being thrown in jail endangering your own life as well as your family. Whereas with the option of migration you will only incur monetary cost and social cost (which can be easily overcome with the passage of time).Originally posted by sgdiehard:The problem is in Singapore, with Singapore, about Singapore. By emigrating you just leave Singapore, and all the problems associated with it. What problem have you solved?
When there are problem in Singapore, you don't want to solve it, you can't solve it so you leave Singapore so that you don't have to face the problem. That is escape! If you come back then you escape temporary, if you leave for good you escape permanently.
Emigration is a choice, not a solution. When you emigrate to oz, nz or wherever, you choose to face new problems in the new country, you don't solve any problem in Singapore, we can't thank you for that.
Say if you belong to a group of gangsters that goes around committing robbery and other miscreants; 2 possible solutions exist, one is to leave the group, thus not belonging to the group and solving the problem; or, to change the group. In order to change the group, you need at your personal abilities, do you think you have the ability to change the mindset of the group without putting your life in peril.
A Harvard Law professor and other rich elites with a conscience have attempted to change the political landscape of Singapore, but have failed resulting in their own exile. What makes you think that you have the ability to change a regime which controls (especially the way you think) every aspect of our lives?
By emigrating, the problem still exist, but effectively it has STOPPED being your problem because you disassociate yourself from it. To solve a problem, you have to assess the problem and look at your own personal abilities.
I don't have the ability to move mountains, but I have the ability to move my luggage. -
Governments have changed through different ways, the rise of a opposition leader, the power of the people, internal strife (normal in coalition government, but there can also be from within the same party), revolution by the military.....but it only involved people of the countries, whether the changes are right or wrong, the process legal or illegal, the people bear the consequences. Iran welcomed a new leader Ayatollah Khomeini; Marcos toppled by the "people's power" of the philippines, Thaksin sent into exile in a military takeover......are the people happier ever after, some are, some are not, but they have to live with it.Originally posted by maurizio13:As you have already defined the problem as being inherent in Singapore. Two ways to solve the problem, either to change the regime or leave Singapore. When you try to change a regime like Aung San Suu Kyi, you end up being thrown in jail endangering your own life as well as your family. Whereas with the option of migration you will only incur monetary cost and social cost (which can be easily overcome with the passage of time).
Say if you belong to a group of gangsters that goes around committing robbery and other miscreants; 2 possible solutions exist, one is to leave the group, thus not belonging to the group and solving the problem; or, to change the group. In order to change the group, you need at your personal abilities, do you think you have the ability to change the mindset of the group without putting your life in peril.
A Harvard Law professor and other rich elites with a conscience have attempted to change the political landscape of Singapore, but have failed resulting in their own exile. What makes you think that you have the ability to change a regime which controls (especially the way you think) every aspect of our lives?
By emigrating, the problem still exist, but effectively it has STOPPED being your problem because you disassociate yourself from it. To solve a problem, you have to assess the problem and look at your own personal abilities.
I don't have the ability to move mountains, but I have the ability to move my luggage.
american cannot go into Iran and support a new leader to topple the islamic government, no matter how evil they say the government is; chinese who left Taiwan and became US citizens cannot go back and vote for Ma Ying Jiu, no matter how corrupt they think ah bian is; Singaporean cannot in anyway have any part in any attempt to change the Thai military government, no matter how illegal they think it is and how much money they lost because of them.....because they ARE FOREIGNERS, changing government is the affair of the citizens, the people of the country.
Foreigners, even if they reside within the country, have no right to meddle, if they have the conscience they think they have.
Foreigners who live outside the countries can criticise the government as much as they like, but they don't have the moral ground to criticise the people of Singapore, whether they are for or against the government, and most Singaporean are in between. People who give up Singapore citizenship are foreigners. The fact that they were here for many years, would hopefully give them the background to comment constructively and criticize relevantly. Many expats live in Singapore for over 10 years, know more about singapore than many singaporeans. They don't going around and say that all Singaporeans are PAP supporters.
The problem in Singapore will have to be faced by Singaporeans, not by foreigners. Foreigners are welcome to give comments and criticism, but don't criticise singaporean for what we do or what we don't do, for in the end, it is we, the Singaporean who have to live with the changes, or the 'no change'.
The present government is a mountain, a damn big mountain, it used to block the tyhoon from hitting my home, its streams used to provide the water we needed, but now mud is flowing down the mountain to contaminate my drinking water, my family is threatened with landslide, we have to do something to the mountain. Move it completely? no, we don't want typhoon to hit us 20 times every year. May be just shaping it is good enough, a lot of work has to be done.
How hard, how long, we don't know, but changkol by changkol, spade by spade, we will move, 'yi gong yi san'? the modern version. All we need and all we have are those with us.. . to those who are only able to move some luggages, von voyage, good luck, but please don't tell us how much to changkol, how to dig, for we don't tell you how far you should go and what you should do in your new home. Thank you. -
Yes indeed...Originally posted by will4:In these countries the crime rate might be high but takea look at US despite it high crime rate, people still including from here also like to go there.
Crime is something you can prevent from happening to you...
Here, in Singapore, you CANNOT do anything and have NO SAY over the kind of Half-Assed and Heartless Policies the government dishes out smilingly...
This is by far worse than City Crime Rates....
With crime, you do your best to keep yourself safe, here, you're TOTALLY under their merciless governing styles! -
i think u nid to read through the post more clearly, did i say u were mentioning that im narrow minded...i juz say u use the word narrow minded...Originally posted by maurizio13:I did not specifically mention you as being narrow minded. Why are you associating yourself with being a narrow minded individual?
I think that proves something about you too. 
i think u dun nid to prove anything liao,coz u are one. -
Well, you have to understand the word "associating" first to understand the sentence. When you associate yourself with a group of murderers, does it make you a murderer? It just means connecting to the word, you obviously connect with the word because of your reaction to it. No sane person would admit that they are stupid, just as no sane person would admit that they are narrow minded, even though they are.Originally posted by citymax:i think u nid to read through the post more clearly, did i say u were mentioning that im narrow minded...i juz say u use the word narrow minded...
i think u dun nid to prove anything liao,coz u are one.
There are lots of path a person could choose to take, but choosing a particular path with no strong reasons, just because it has worked in the past and you "think" that it will continue to work in the future, is proof of a person's narrow mindedness, because he/she cannot forsee all the other better paths.
The maximum point of a outcome is 100, but why would someone continue to stay at the 50 region. This is the same reason why the people of North Korea chose to remain marxist, or maybe it's because they don't have a choice.
Asking someone not to explain his point, is equivalent to a person encountering different paths along the road, instead of having an unbias view on all the roads, reading the different road signs then choosing his path. He chooses not to read the road signs, to take the straight and narrow path, the path that he has been on since the beginning of his journey.
You know something about the straight and narrow path?
If you keep walking on a straight line, you will end up at your starting point some point in time. -
Well, your analogy is equivalent to French Revolution, rest assured that with the powers dissipated to the people, more people will be happier as a result of it, instead of having the power concentrated only at the top. Where self center monarchies adopt laws that favour their own self being and not the populace.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Governments have changed through different ways, the rise of a opposition leader, the power of the people, internal strife (normal in coalition government, but there can also be from within the same party), revolution by the military.....but it only involved people of the countries, whether the changes are right or wrong, the process legal or illegal, the people bear the consequences. Iran welcomed a new leader Ayatollah Khomeini; Marcos toppled by the "people's power" of the philippines, Thaksin sent into exile in a military takeover......are the people happier ever after, some are, some are not, but they have to live with it.
american cannot go into Iran and support a new leader to topple the islamic government, no matter how evil they say the government is; chinese who left Taiwan and became US citizens cannot go back and vote for Ma Ying Jiu, no matter how corrupt they think ah bian is; Singaporean cannot in anyway have any part in any attempt to change the Thai military government, no matter how illegal they think it is and how much money they lost because of them.....because they ARE FOREIGNERS, changing government is the affair of the citizens, the people of the country.
Foreigners, even if they reside within the country, have no right to meddle, if they have the conscience they think they have.
Foreigners who live outside the countries can criticise the government as much as they like, but they don't have the moral ground to criticise the people of Singapore, whether they are for or against the government, and most Singaporean are in between. People who give up Singapore citizenship are foreigners. The fact that they were here for many years, would hopefully give them the background to comment constructively and criticize relevantly. Many expats live in Singapore for over 10 years, know more about singapore than many singaporeans. They don't going around and say that all Singaporeans are PAP supporters.
The problem in Singapore will have to be faced by Singaporeans, not by foreigners. Foreigners are welcome to give comments and criticism, but don't criticise singaporean for what we do or what we don't do, for in the end, it is we, the Singaporean who have to live with the changes, or the 'no change'.
The present government is a mountain, a damn big mountain, it used to block the tyhoon from hitting my home, its streams used to provide the water we needed, but now mud is flowing down the mountain to contaminate my drinking water, my family is threatened with landslide, we have to do something to the mountain. Move it completely? no, we don't want typhoon to hit us 20 times every year. May be just shaping it is good enough, a lot of work has to be done.
How hard, how long, we don't know, but changkol by changkol, spade by spade, we will move, 'yi gong yi san'? the modern version. All we need and all we have are those with us.. . to those who are only able to move some luggages, von voyage, good luck, but please don't tell us how much to changkol, how to dig, for we don't tell you how far you should go and what you should do in your new home. Thank you.
Mountain protects you from typhoon? Some mountains are more of an inconvenience, protecting you from some ficticious typhoon when there is no supposed typhoon to begin with. Anyway, there are no typhoons in Singapore. You might as well associate mountains with avalanches, volcanic erruptions and landslides, which causes us more hindrance than good.
If you know something about geology, mountains form by volcanic erruptions or continental land mass colliding with one another (in the case of India). The height of the mountain don't stay the same, it can gain in height with time. I hope you enjoy yourself digging this himalayan of a mountain. Some mountains like the himalayan can never be moved, if you didn't realise already. Only other logical solution is move yourself instead of the mountain.
Well, I am not telling you how far to dig with your shovel, I am just explaining to you the foolhardiness of moving the Himalayan. If you choose to dig the Himalayan, be my guest.
I don't mind you telling me what is in store in my new home. I am open to opinions, I do not limit myself to one particular line of reasoning. I like more opinions, so that I can look at the different perspectives before I make my decision.
"Nevertheless, certain areas (such as the Himalayas) are not in isostatic equilibrium, which has forced researchers to identify other reasons to explain their topographic heights (in the case of the Himalayas, by proposing that their elevation is being "propped-up" by the force of the impacting Indian plate)." -
Originally posted by maurizio13:Well, your analogy is equivalent to French Revolution, rest assured that with the powers dissipated to the people, more people will be happier as a result of it, instead of having the power concentrated only at the top. Where self center monarchies adopt laws that favour their own self being and not the populace.
Mountain protects you from typhoon? Some mountains are more of an inconvenience, protecting you from some ficticious typhoon when there is no supposed typhoon to begin with. Anyway, there are no typhoons in Singapore. You might as well associate mountains with avalanches, volcanic erruptions and landslides, which causes us more hindrance than good.
If you know something about geology, mountains form by volcanic erruptions or continental land mass colliding with one another (in the case of India). The height of the mountain don't stay the same, it can gain in height with time. I hope you enjoy yourself digging this himalayan of a mountain. Some mountains like the himalayan can never be moved, if you didn't realise already. Only other logical solution is move yourself instead of the mountain.
Well, I am not telling you how far to dig with your shovel, I am just explaining to you the foolhardiness of moving the Himalayan. If you choose to dig the Himalayan, be my guest.
I don't mind you telling me what is in store in my new home. I am open to opinions, I do not limit myself to one particular line of reasoning. I like more opinions, so that I can look at the different perspectives before I make my decision.
"Nevertheless, certain areas (such as the Himalayas) are not in isostatic equilibrium, which has forced researchers to identify other reasons to explain their topographic heights (in the case of the Himalayas, by proposing that their elevation is being "propped-up" by the force of the impacting Indian plate)." of course there are no typhoons in Singapore, neither can himalayan mountain sits on a small island like Singapore. But in using mountains as anology to governments, you really think the PAP government is the Himalaya, or just that in contrast to the Himalaya, you are very tiny? Whether it is the great respect you have for the government or the self realisation that you are too small in comparison, I think you should really move, and leave the shaping of mountain to Singaporeans.
Have fun in searching for your new home, but the difficult part is to convince your wife of your choice. No sarcasm, this is my experience in Singapore. Have a good day. -
If that is a dig at overseas Singporeans.......I laugh at your ignorance. As long as I have the valid pink IC and a Singaporean passport ...I have the right to comment. It is not meddling.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Governments have changed through different ways, the rise of a opposition leader, the power of the people, internal strife (normal in coalition government, but there can also be from within the same party), revolution by the military.....but it only involved people of the countries, whether the changes are right or wrong, the process legal or illegal, the people bear the consequences. Iran welcomed a new leader Ayatollah Khomeini; Marcos toppled by the "people's power" of the philippines, Thaksin sent into exile in a military takeover......are the people happier ever after, some are, some are not, but they have to live with it.
american cannot go into Iran and support a new leader to topple the islamic government, no matter how evil they say the government is; chinese who left Taiwan and became US citizens cannot go back and vote for Ma Ying Jiu, no matter how corrupt they think ah bian is; Singaporean cannot in anyway have any part in any attempt to change the Thai military government, no matter how illegal they think it is and how much money they lost because of them.....because they ARE FOREIGNERS, changing government is the affair of the citizens, the people of the country.
Foreigners, even if they reside within the country, have no right to meddle, if they have the conscience they think they have.
Foreigners who live outside the countries can criticise the government as much as they like, but they don't have the moral ground to criticise the people of Singapore, whether they are for or against the government, and most Singaporean are in between. People who give up Singapore citizenship are foreigners. The fact that they were here for many years, would hopefully give them the background to comment constructively and criticize relevantly. Many expats live in Singapore for over 10 years, know more about singapore than many singaporeans. They don't going around and say that all Singaporeans are PAP supporters.
The problem in Singapore will have to be faced by Singaporeans, not by foreigners. Foreigners are welcome to give comments and criticism, but don't criticise singaporean for what we do or what we don't do, for in the end, it is we, the Singaporean who have to live with the changes, or the 'no change'.
The present government is a mountain, a damn big mountain, it used to block the tyhoon from hitting my home, its streams used to provide the water we needed, but now mud is flowing down the mountain to contaminate my drinking water, my family is threatened with landslide, we have to do something to the mountain. Move it completely? no, we don't want typhoon to hit us 20 times every year. May be just shaping it is good enough, a lot of work has to be done.
How hard, how long, we don't know, but changkol by changkol, spade by spade, we will move, 'yi gong yi san'? the modern version. All we need and all we have are those with us.. . to those who are only able to move some luggages, von voyage, good luck, but please don't tell us how much to changkol, how to dig, for we don't tell you how far you should go and what you should do in your new home. Thank you.
There are overseas Singaporeans who did well overseas and came back to contribute in Singapore. Don't diss overseas Singaporeans. You don't have a right to tell us that we do not belong. Only time when I stop criticising Singapore is when I gave up all hope on her and decided to surrender my citizenship. At the moment , she is not beyond all hope yet so I still hold hope and citizenship. -
Well, since you used an analogy, I thought I used another analogy to counter your analogy.Originally posted by sgdiehard: of course there are no typhoons in Singapore, neither can himalayan mountain sits on a small island like Singapore. But in using mountains as anology to governments, you really think the PAP government is the Himalaya, or just that in contrast to the Himalaya, you are very tiny? Whether it is the great respect you have for the government or the self realisation that you are too small in comparison, I think you should really move, and leave the shaping of mountain to Singaporeans.
Have fun in searching for your new home, but the difficult part is to convince your wife of your choice. No sarcasm, this is my experience in Singapore. Have a good day.
Let's face it, the party is too entrenched in the system and dislodging it would be hard. They control the media, which is a strong medium to control the thoughts of Singaporeans. Just yesterday, they try to use propaganda to influence the migration of citizens again. They got some lady (supposedly from Hong Kong) to talk about the problems with her migration to Canada (I think). Obviously, it's a lame attempt of theirs to influence the decisions of Singaporeans. You know why it's pure propaganda? It's because they present a one sided view, from a person who dislike migrating to a new country. Why didn't they present the other view? People who actually enjoyed living in their new country. When you want to provide an unbias picture, you should always provide the pros and the cons, not a one sided view.
They know the migration of citizens is increasing, the smarts who have the ability are moving on, while Singapore gets stuck with rejects like gazelles, lions and mushrooms. There might be a potential brain drain problem, ultimately Singapore is going to end up with fewer intellectuals and will have to rely on FTs to manage the economy.
Do I think the regime will change it's self serving policies? Nope. Why? The old man has already said, we will do whatever we want to, we don't need your consensus, you guys can talk all you want, but we are not going to listen.
If you run a huge corporation, you would need to know the consensus with the lower rung workers. Imagine, your worker assembling an aircraft, he tells you that there's a problem with a bolt not being able to withstand the load. You dismiss his complains. Finally your aircraft starts crashing, your company goes out of business, the management and workers loses their jobs.
Governing is alot like the senses of a person. The brain being the government and all other body parts your workers. You accidentally put your hand on a hot stove, the pain receptors passes the message to your brain, you immediately move your hand away from the stove. In our case, the hand is on the hot stove right now, but the brain is under narcotics, so your hand is staying where it is on the hot stove.
Good luck to whatever life you have here. I already know what's in store here, but do you know what's in store in other countries?. I only got one thing to say, been here, done that. Other opportunities exist elsewhere.