20 years for WorkersÂ’ Party to match PAP?
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Hi,
WP should sit back and watch SDP and PAP fight among themselves and move only when there is something to gain.
[b]Kill with a Borrowed Sword
When you do not have the means to attack your enemy directly, then attack using the strength of another. Trick an ally into attacking him, bribe an official to turn traitor, or use the enemy's own strength against him.
http://www.chinastrategies.com/List.htm#Strategy%203[/b]
Intention understood but sorry, strongly disagree. Personally, I don't support the idea of the party I joined using other parties against the PAP.
Regards -
Originally posted by kramnave:Ok fair enough, i get your point. The statement i made was a sweeping one anyway, tongue-in-cheek.
Regards -
This R. Reagan quote has been posted a few times: The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away.
A man with a good education and a burning desire to serve is all thatÂ’s needed. The people can make their jobs easier by providing support.
Where do you think the scholars were educated? What can the scholars do? TheyÂ’ve either learned and copied policies from the best countries in the world or invite consultants to solve problems.
For over forty years, the govt has not been transparent with the way the countryÂ’s money were spent. By the time the opposition takes over, all they can do is to be busy cleaning up the mess thatÂ’s left behind.
The opposition need twenty years to play catch-up? Better try it in the next GE or be ready to perish. -
agree. the present bunch of scholars can only look at the CPF whenever money are needed or increasing the people's taxes or expenses to solve problems. comparing to the old guards like goh keng swee and alike, the present bunch need to be paid a ransom to be in politics. they seriously lack the passion and compassion to ruleOriginally posted by googoomuck:This R. Reagan quote has been posted a few times: The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away.
A man with a good education and a burning desire to serve is all thatÂ’s needed. The people can make their jobs easier by providing support.
Where do you think the scholars were educated? What can the scholars do? TheyÂ’ve either learned and copied policies from the best countries in the world or invite consultants to solve problems.
For over forty years, the govt has not been transparent with the way the countryÂ’s money were spent. By the time the opposition takes over, all they can do is to be busy cleaning up the mess thatÂ’s left behind.
The opposition need twenty years to play catch-up? Better try it in the next GE or be ready to perish. -
Perish ? I think there is a higher chance of the opposition resembling PAP if it takes over and retains power.Originally posted by googoomuck:This R. Reagan quote has been posted a few times: The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would steal them away.
A man with a good education and a burning desire to serve is all thatÂ’s needed. The people can make their jobs easier by providing support.
Where do you think the scholars were educated? What can the scholars do? TheyÂ’ve either learned and copied policies from the best countries in the world or invite consultants to solve problems.
For over forty years, the govt has not been transparent with the way the countryÂ’s money were spent. By the time the opposition takes over, all they can do is to be busy cleaning up the mess thatÂ’s left behind.
The opposition need twenty years to play catch-up? Better try it in the next GE or be ready to perish. -
therefore a balance like "romance of the 3 kingdom" would be great. for a start, let start with two.Originally posted by kramnave:Perish ? I think there is a higher chance of the opposition resembling PAP if it takes over and retains power.
-
ST Forum 2 Nov 07Disappointed at stated role of Workers' Party
if winning a seat meant becoming an alternative immediately, then SDA could also become one and the former SDP would have been one. It take the future quality opposition canidates to build better trust with the people before a change and Rome wasn't built in a day.
I REFER to the article, 'Greater openness here now, says WP chief' (ST, Nov 1).
While I agree with Mr Low Thia Khiang that the recent robust debate on Section 377A of the Penal Code, a law criminalising gay sex, shows that our society has become more open, I am disappointed with what he said later in the article.
Mr Low said that the opposition lacks the resources to come up with alternatives to government policies, and that the role of the Workers' Party is to revise and improve on policies.
But if the Workers' Party lacks the expertise to formulate good policies, how can we be sure that it is even capable of suggesting sound improvements to existing policies?
Is the Workers' Party merely going to provide token resistance to policies debated in Parliament without bothering to research and suggest concrete alternatives? If so, then the Workers' Party is reneging on its role of being a true opposition party.
I am also deeply disappointed that Mr Low does not think his party is ready to challenge the PAP to be the government in the near future.
I followed the 2006 General Election closely and was under the impression that the Workers' Party wanted to be an alternative government.
An opposition party should earn votes by showing that it is ready to take on national issues. It should not expect the electorate to vote for it based on mere trust that it will somehow find its way, given enough time.
An opposition party that expects support to come first before it delivers is not a true opposition party. A true opposition party must lead by example and show why it deserves the votes.
Ng E-Jay -
Obtuse pious douse furious blaze, oblivious rear in deluge daze.
Regards
(Added to "Empty Clueless Musings") -
Balance is always good for the citizens in the short run because of people power but in the long run, imo there is a high chance that it'll be detrimental to the country.Originally posted by Lin Yu:therefore a balance like "romance of the 3 kingdom" would be great. for a start, let start with two. -
It's difficult for WP to match PAP in terms of candidate calibre simply because PAP currently has the monopoly of recruiting scholars into its ranks. Although WP is gaining popularity while PAP is losing its popularity gradually, WP will never be able to obtain complete information on government data such as CPF, HDB because of PAP's dominating position. It's very hard for WP to formulate any alternative policies to challenge the PAP if it doesn't have full access to those data. However, I admire Mr Low's down-to-ground remarks about his party's political prospects and directions.
-
I'm not sure if I have misunderstood you, but do you mean that democracy is actually detrimental to a country?Originally posted by kramnave:Balance is always good for the citizens in the short run because of people power but in the long run, imo there is a high chance that it'll be detrimental to the country. -
I believe that a balance of power in Singapore will be detrimental in the long run. Where people have to power to choose between Party A and Party B and push it to power, that will never be a good thing here. If that equates to democracy then its detrimental in the long run. Of course you can disagree.Originally posted by LatecomerX:I'm not sure if I have misunderstood you, but do you mean that democracy is actually detrimental to a country?
When such a scenario occurs, any ruling party would spend their time trying to win votes and will try to steer clear of offending voters by implementing unpopular policies which may be for the general good of the country. -
I do not agree.
I believe that a balance of power in Singapore will be detrimental in the long run. Where people have to power to choose between Party A and Party B and push it to power, that will never be a good thing here. If that equates to democracy then its detrimental in the long run. Of course you can disagree.
There should be a certain balance of power in Parliament.
Too dangerous to let a small clique of men to monopolise power in a country.
This sounds like PAP propaganda, which I feel is drivel.
When such a scenario occurs, any ruling party would spend their time trying to win votes and will try to steer clear of offending voters by implementing unpopular policies which may be for the general good of the country. -
If a policy is for the general good, and is seen and felt to be effective, why would it be unpopular?
The favorite line of the PAP, and a favorite excuse. -
All things else being equal, if i impose an additional tax when the economy is good and translate that into workfare bonuses for those "left out" of the growth (low wage workers), generally everybody else would be better off. However that will still be an unpopular policy.Originally posted by LazerLordz:If a policy is for the general good, and is seen and felt to be, why would it be unpopular?