Awaiting MM Lee to prove his ministers worth millions
-
According to MM Lee his ministers were talents and million-dollar salaries have to be paid to them to retain such talents.
Based on such assumptions, people have been watching and waiting for years for him to prove that his ministers who have left the governmnet service and re-employed by the private sector have gone on to make waves in the private sector with making of the same million-dollar salaries justified by the making of great profits for such companies.
Ex-PM Goh Chok Tong himself was confident to predict that his ex-minister like Dr. Wong would make it big in the private sector. So today we are waiting to see if ex-government ministers like Dr. Wong, Dr. Tan, Mr. Lim, Mr. Yong etc had gone on to make million dollar salaries and successfully manage private sector companies after they left the service or were there merely special posts reserved for them in the GLCs to prove their talents were still wanted.
People will be waiting for Mr. Lim Boon Heng or Dr. Lee Boon Yang to make splash in the private sector to prove their perceived talents as advertised by MM Lee. They have been waiting for quite a while now to see if Mr. Yeo too will turn around private companies like Aztech or FHTK to prove his talents. -
I feel that Mr Lim will make it, i remember when i was still in sec skool when i was still staying at Ghim Moh, every Mon (except PH) he will be there to meet the people, not like some other district, you will only see shadows of the mp of that district.Originally posted by robertteh:People will be waiting for Mr. Lim Boon Heng or Dr. Lee Boon Yang to make splash in the private sector to prove their perceived talents as advertised by MM Lee. They have been waiting for quite a while now to see if Mr. Yeo too will turn around private companies like Aztech or FHTK to prove his talents. -
Some MPs who quit involved in embezzlement when working in private companies. I think money not enough, they still missed the fat salary from being an MP, can take unlimited without restriction.
-
no lah, just a slip of mind. let's move onOriginally posted by sunnytv:Some MPs who quit involved in embezzlement when working in private companies. I think money not enough, they still missed the fat salary from being an MP, can take unlimited without restriction. -
personally i like SM goh. others not really
-
So the subservient State Times will have to report some news like ex-minister Yeo Cheow Tong returning to the private sector and doing well to prove further MM Lee's pet theory that his ministers were full of talents.
What comes across very clearly is that MM Lee's pet theory has not changed a bit that talents were to be found within the narrow confine of exclusive group of academic elites and nowhere else in the little red dot.
So the vintage MM Lee will continue to harp on his pet theory to attract this particular group of talents which to him is too small with big monies like million dollar salaries, big bonuses and life-long pensions.
But despite such extensive casting of net whom has he really attracted . Are they not some greenhorns or some who possess only high academic records. Has he really attracted those with rare passionate convictions advance ideas and entrepreneurship or those with proven practical implementation ability.
Obviously IQ representative of academic talents alone is not necessarily a quality of good leaders. Without EQ, highly qualified elites would be just plain flowers on the wall for decoration.
MM Lee should have found out for himself that if he wanted performance and delivery of result he could not rely on academicians alone.
He should look for the few little Thaksins or Lim Kim Sans who might not be so highly qualified but who are otherwise the rare group with implementation abilities very much harder to find as compared with the educated elites.
So who are the true talents fit to be our new leaders who could lead a more educated people in today's highly competitive globalized environment?
Can we attract them with higher salaries bigger bonuses and life-long pensions as MM Lee has assumed in all his policies?
There is a need to look at other more important factors e.g. environmental factor which may be even more important in attracting talents.
Why is it that MM Lee was unable to find more men with outstanding implementation skills like Lim Kim San or Dr. Goh Keng Swee in the later years from 1970s onwards.
Is it because Singapore does not have any more capable people who could measure up to the calibre of men like Lim Kim San or Dr. Goh Keng Swee.
I would think that not all people will be attracted to million-dollar salaries. Talents do not necessarily draw to monies. It is a two-way process in attracting talents as the talents too will have to decide for themselves whether the prevailing conditions will allow them to contribute their abilities or talents to a job well done.
Potential candidates do not respond lightly to praises from MM Lee or being spotted or invited for tea. Good men will not necessarily measure their calling in monies.
There are many other pertinent factors which MM Lee does not bother with for his own limited purpose. Remember Kong Ming (Zhu Ker Liang) had to be persuaded thrice with great show of deference before he finally accepted the offer of post of state counsellor to Liu Biu.
Real talents also do not work by currying favors of others or superiors. They usually are convicted to their belief or philosophy and will be people who are extremely proactive with independence of thought and actions.
Given our autocracy and self-centred authoritarian rule where one-man ideas is obeyed without question and the way many good and capable people were sidelined, demoted or forced to premature retirement how could he have attracted the true talents from among the very limited talents we have.
Therefore under such circumstances MM Lee will have to offer million-dollar salaries presumably as the only pragmatic solutions to attract talents but has he succeeded in this supreme and all-important task critical to our survival as a little red dot.
Today owing to his own failure in attracting talents what he has attracted might well be the mediocre people who dare not change the autocratic unworkable policies of the past but who would carry out orders or curry favor as the way to gain position of power for their own good.
To attract really good people to govern the country the authoritarian rule has to change. More ground work will have to be done and not just million dollar salaries before true talents could be attracted to come forward to serve.
So who at the end must change? If Singapore is to continue to prosper and talents will come forward there has to be total change of the politics and political environment to welcome and encourage team work and appreciation of excellence.
Today we could see some good men staying low-profile even within the cabinet to avoid getting themselves into trouble.
I am asking only for change or reconsideration of all the hype about attracting talents with money or elitism. There is a need to let good people be identified of those who are truly passionate and working diligently to serve the people to produce the greatest benefits for the greatest number.
If MM Lee insisted his talent hunting was still effective and pragmatic and his million-dollar incentivizing of good people to join as ministers as correct let him first prove that his ex-ministers have indeed the ability to lead in private sector after they left service. -
There is nothing at all for him to prove. All he can do is to "package" the ministers by praising them, playing with words to brainwash people into believing him that his ministers worth millions. A good product in no time will prove to consumers that it is worth the money to continue to buy the same product for consumption. In the case of the ministers, the more they implement policies and act, all we can see is that they are getting worse to worst and nothing they have or have to offer are worthy for the good of the nation.
-
Sir, I see that this is your favourite topic to write.
It is also my favourite to comment as well.
Once and for all, let's settle a very basic question first.
Do you believe money attracts talented people?
Yes or No..?
Do you believe a higher paying rewards would attract more interested people, and more talent?
If you ask this question to people around you, say to conduct a simple survey, what do you think the answers would be?
If you ask this question to HR practioners, pshychologists, organizational experts, or any experts you like, what do you think their answers would be?
In real world practice, day-to-day practice, what do you think about this question yourself?
Well.....
It is fine if you suggest possible improvements, such as getting candidates with more diverse capabilities, improving the political environment, etc, all these are positive ideas. What I dont understand is...why you keep saying that a high pay is bad..???? Where is your logic..??? Have you really immersed yourself so much into deep thought that you forgotten a very simple basic logic? A very basic economic theory? I'm very sure if I dig out my economics textbook, there is an explanation about this. This is a very simple truth. There's no need to contort this truth, it doesn't hold water.
Meat Pao. -
As politicians whose main job is to serve the nation, earning millions and millions of money should be secondary. A passion and love to serve the nation should be the motivating factor for politicians to become gahmen serving the public not MONEY. Understand? Time for supper, please feel free to eat your meat pao.Originally posted by Meat Pao:Sir, I see that this is your favourite topic to write.
It is also my favourite to comment as well.
Once and for all, let's settle a very basic question first.
Do you believe money attracts talented people?
Yes or No..?
Do you believe a higher paying rewards would attract more interested people, and more talent?
If you ask this question to people around you, say to conduct a simple survey, what do you think the answers would be?
If you ask this question to HR practioners, pshychologists, organizational experts, or any experts you like, what do you think their answers would be?
In real world practice, day-to-day practice, what do you think about this question yourself?
Well.....
It is fine if you suggest possible improvements, such as getting candidates with more diverse capabilities, improving the political environment, etc, all these are positive ideas. What I dont understand is...why you keep saying that a high pay is bad..???? Where is your logic..??? Have you really immersed yourself so much into deep thought that you forgotten a very simple basic logic? A very basic economic theory? I'm very sure if I dig out my economics textbook, there is an explanation about this. This is a very simple truth. There's no need to contort this truth, it doesn't hold water.
Meat Pao. -
It's all very nice and good, if we live in an ideal world. Maybe not an ideal world even, but an ideal dream.
The idea that politicians should be noble, and willing to sacrifice their own material ambitions to serve the people, yes, of course that is what it should be.
Does it happen? Are human beings like that? Are we ideal creatures?
There are such people, of course, but are their numbers great?
Why dont we stop being too romantic, and come down to earth for a while?
Look at all other countries in the world....look at the history......we humans are not so noble, not in great numbers....we need something that can work. Something that work for our imperfections.....individual incentives, money.
Maybe I ask this question.....as an example.....
Suppose a 'noble' profession, let's say, a teacher.
Noble right?
If tomorrow all teachers salaries are cut by half...and maintained like that for long term....
What do you think about the quality of teachers in Singapore's education system in 10, 20 years will be?
What do you think about young university graduates' interest in applying for a job as a teacher will be? Do you think the amount of interest will be the same like now..?
Do you think the prestige, interest, amount of job application, for a career as a teacher......will be the same like now..?
And as a consequence, do you think the average quality of teachers....will go up...or will go down instead..? And as a result the education quality in the society.....will it benefit or suffer?
Come on....
I dont understand why people keep missing this point. The point that high pay for politicians is absolutely a benefit to Singapore...! It is Singapore's secret weapon. Secret sauce. Only in Singapore this can happen, a visionary and a 'right' approach that works. Unfortunately, this 'plus' just keeps getting attacked by some Singaporeans themselves. Why...?
Meat Pao. -
For ministers who pay themselves world class salary, we deserve nothing less than a world class standard from them. I know you are very pro PAP. Do you pay your maid million of dollars and accept substandard service from her? Most of the time pro PAP forumers don't make much sense in the messages they post.Originally posted by Meat Pao:It's all very nice and good, if we live in an ideal world. Maybe not an ideal world even, but an ideal dream.
The idea that politicians should be noble, and willing to sacrifice their own material ambitions to serve the people, yes, of course that is what it should be.
Does it happen? Are human beings like that? Are we ideal creatures?
There are such people, of course, but are their numbers great?
Why dont we stop being too romantic, and come down to earth for a while?
Look at all other countries in the world....look at the history......we humans are not so noble, not in great numbers....we need something that can work. Something that work for our imperfections.....individual incentives, money.
Maybe I ask this question.....as an example.....
Suppose a 'noble' profession, let's say, a teacher.
Noble right?
If tomorrow all teachers salaries are cut by half...and maintained like that for long term....
What do you think about the quality of teachers in Singapore's education system in 10, 20 years will be?
What do you think about young university graduates' interest in applying for a job as a teacher will be? Do you think the amount of interest will be the same like now..?
Do you think the prestige, interest, amount of job application, for a career as a teacher......will be the same like now..?
And as a consequence, do you think the average quality of teachers....will go up...or will go down instead..? And as a result the education quality in the society.....will it benefit or suffer?
Come on....
I dont understand why people keep missing this point. The point that high pay for politicians is absolutely a benefit to Singapore...! It is Singapore's secret weapon. Only in Singapore this can happen, a visionary and a 'right' approach that works. Unfortunately...this 'plus' just keeps getting attacked..! Why...?
Meat Pao. -
Two issues.
How to attract talents in the private sector who have knowledge of micro-managing to macro-manage the nation?
How to prevent outflow of talents from the public sector into the flourishing private sector?
-
No.....it is one thing to be dissatisfied with them....but to ask for a lower pay for them, you will end up with even lower quality, and you will have even more dissatisfaction.Originally posted by qlqq9:For ministers who pay themselves world class salary, we deserve nothing less than a world class standard from them. I know you are very pro PAP. Do you pay your maid million of dollars and accept substandard service from her? Most of the time pro PAP forumers don't make much sense in the messages they post.
That is why I said to the Robertteh, it's good he has suggestions on how to improve the quality, like getting candidates with more diverse capabilities.....improving political climate to create more condusive environment for them the grow, etc, all these are good, but NOT by cutting salary.
Lets use the example of maid then.....
If your household pay maids 1000 per month, alot right.....? but you are dissatisfied, then next year you recruit maids with only 500 per month.......what do you think the quality will be like? You will be even more dissatisfied.
For 1000 per month u can get maids with several years of work experience, know how to cook, and can speak English. But you are dissatisfied because maybe they are lazy, always miss your schedules. So instead of training them to be more punctual, next year you recruit maids with $500, people who have no work experience, cannot cook, cannot speak English.
You will be even more dissatisfied with this lower quality.
I hope you get what I mean.
Instead of cutting the salary to 500, solution should be on punctuality training.
Dissatisfaction with the quality of ministers, politicians, it is one thing. But how can the solution be by cutting salary..? It's not logical. You will end up with worse quality.
I'm not saying these because I'm pro-PAP or anti-PAP. I am pro-logic. We must think about whats good for society.
Meat Pao. -
or you can use Rawls principles of justice...Originally posted by Meat Pao:No.....it is one thing to be dissatisfied with them....but to ask for a lower pay for them, you will end up with even lower quality, and you will have even more dissatisfaction.
That is why I said to the Robertteh, it's good he has suggestions on how to improve the quality, like getting candidates with more diverse capabilities.....improving political climate to create more condusive environment for them the grow, etc, all these are good, but NOT by cutting salary.
Lets use the example of maid then.....
If your household pay maids 1000 per month, alot right.....? but you are dissatisfied, then next year you recruit maids with only 500 per month.......what do you think the quality will be like? You will be even more dissatisfied.
For 1000 per month u can get maids with several years of work experience, know how to cook, and can speak English. But you are dissatisfied because maybe they are lazy, always miss your schedules. So instead of training them to be more punctual, next year you recruit maids with $500, people who have no work experience, cannot cook, cannot speak English.
You will be even more dissatisfied with this lower quality.
I hope you get what I mean.
Instead of cutting the salary to $500, solution should be on punctuality training.
Dissatisfaction with the quality of ministers, politicians, it is one thing. But how can the solution be by cutting salary..? It's not logical. You will end up with worse quality.
Meat Pao. -
who?Originally posted by sunnytv:Some MPs who quit involved in embezzlement when working in private companies. I think money not enough, they still missed the fat salary from being an MP, can take unlimited without restriction. -
Lest one forgets, MM Lee was not that great a talent when he started. He acquired certain talents from the ground up - ground zero.Originally posted by Meat Pao:Sir, I see that this is your favourite topic to write.
It is also my favourite to comment as well.
Once and for all, let's settle a very basic question first.
Do you believe money attracts talented people?
Yes or No..?
Do you believe a higher paying rewards would attract more interested people, and more talent?
If you ask this question to people around you, say to conduct a simple survey, what do you think the answers would be?
If you ask this question to HR practioners, pshychologists, organizational experts, or any experts you like, what do you think their answers would be?
In real world practice, day-to-day practice, what do you think about this question yourself?
Well.....
It is fine if you suggest possible improvements, such as getting candidates with more diverse capabilities, improving the political environment, etc, all these are positive ideas. What I dont understand is...why you keep saying that a high pay is bad..???? Where is your logic..??? Have you really immersed yourself so much into deep thought that you forgotten a very simple basic logic? A very basic economic theory? I'm very sure if I dig out my economics textbook, there is an explanation about this. This is a very simple truth. There's no need to contort this truth, it doesn't hold water.
Meat Pao.
Today, he does not appear to let anyone else work the way up and insisted to find ready champions like David Beckhams or Tiger Woods who asked for millions who might not necessarily deliver.
How is he going to recognize passions, commitments and create conditions within his government to allow the good and committed winners to come up in the rank and not suppress the little Lim Kim Sans or Thaksins all over the place because of his preconceived bias for ready status or paper qualification. How is he going to create a less oppressive governing system to encourage growth of team work and collective management excellence. He needs to think total and create a total management excellence so that it is possible for grooming and spotting all the true talents as an integral part of the whole process of talent hunting and talent grooming.
For years now he has been over-relying on getting ready champions which exist for their own particular one-time one-off performance in the past not not necessarily guaranteeing future success.
He himself was a little short on implementing ability as well unlike his Lim Kim San or Dr. Goh Keng Swee or Ong Teng Cheong so really he should change and make way for a more rounded and team work collective leadership one which will truly lead a more highly educated people today.
Assumptions which were relied on in the past has not worked and unless he himself change people will be misled by pure assumptions not proven. -
The jinx gang is paid world class salary now but they are giving substandard performance. Meat pao, just admit it lah you are so damn pro PAP to the extent that you can turn a blind eye to their faults. So I don't see any good to discuss with you for you have such one track mind.Originally posted by Meat Pao:No.....it is one thing to be dissatisfied with them....but to ask for a lower pay for them, you will end up with even lower quality, and you will have even more dissatisfaction.
That is why I said to the Robertteh, it's good he has suggestions on how to improve the quality, like getting candidates with more diverse capabilities.....improving political climate to create more condusive environment for them the grow, etc, all these are good, but NOT by cutting salary.
Lets use the example of maid then.....
If your household pay maids 1000 per month, alot right.....? but you are dissatisfied, then next year you recruit maids with only 500 per month.......what do you think the quality will be like? You will be even more dissatisfied.
For 1000 per month u can get maids with several years of work experience, know how to cook, and can speak English. But you are dissatisfied because maybe they are lazy, always miss your schedules. So instead of training them to be more punctual, next year you recruit maids with $500, people who have no work experience, cannot cook, cannot speak English.
You will be even more dissatisfied with this lower quality.
I hope you get what I mean.
Instead of cutting the salary to 500, solution should be on punctuality training.
Dissatisfaction with the quality of ministers, politicians, it is one thing. But how can the solution be by cutting salary..? It's not logical. You will end up with worse quality.
I'm not saying these because I'm pro-PAP or anti-PAP. I am pro-logic. We must think about whats good for society.
Meat Pao. -
When that day comes, Kim Jong Il will be next in line for the Nobel Peace Prize.Originally posted by robertteh:According to MM Lee his ministers were talents and million-dollar salaries have to be paid to them to retain such talents.
Based on such assumptions, people have been watching and waiting for years for him to prove that his ministers who have left the governmnet service and re-employed by the private sector have gone on to make waves in the private sector with making of the same million-dollar salaries justified by the making of great profits for such companies.
Ex-PM Goh Chok Tong himself was confident to predict that his ex-minister like Dr. Wong would make it big in the private sector. So today we are waiting to see if ex-government ministers like Dr. Wong, Dr. Tan, Mr. Lim, Mr. Yong etc had gone on to make million dollar salaries and successfully manage private sector companies after they left the service or were there merely special posts reserved for them in the GLCs to prove their talents were still wanted.
People will be waiting for Mr. Lim Boon Heng or Dr. Lee Boon Yang to make splash in the private sector to prove their perceived talents as advertised by MM Lee. They have been waiting for quite a while now to see if Mr. Yeo too will turn around private companies like Aztech or FHTK to prove his talents.