Latest: At least 9 opposition MPs by next elections!
-
Chia, what to expect from a chup cheng, Indranee Rajah?
I once took the same lift with her. i stared in her eyes with disgust and she saw it and looked paiseh.
-
These PAP mother fuckers, in power for 50 years already.
Addicted to power.
-
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
These PAP mother fuckers, in power for 50 years already.
Addicted to power.
U sure they are only addicted to power? What about money? -
What about money?
That goes without saying.
Pay highest in the world, what else you want?
-
Almost everything they do is mainly for self serving.
Crap, singaporeans are really shortchanged!
-
Originally posted by likedatosocan:
I agree with you on the above.Every eligible voter should vote and get to vote regardless a ward is uncontested.
When there is no opposition party member to compete, the VOTER still should vote to indicate clearly how many of these support the ruling party.
So, to me, it is very clear that even when a ward is uncontested, an Election is about the voters actually VOTING.
Singapore is just too tiny a dot.
Why break it up into smaller bits ?
Since the population is so tiny, the more reason EVERYONE should vote to make the result more CONVINCING.
I feel very sad for singapore and singaporeans who never have voted in their life before. Pathetic.
We can all continue to rant and live on the hot air of frustration and be deluded by fantasies. But sometimes, we really need to wake up and accept facts.
1. Ask yourself why were there walkovers?
Are the opposition so happy with the way the ruling party is running, they feel not needed to stand up and be voted, but instead to snipe from blogs and forums, where their views are not heard, let alone be acted upon on?
Is it so difficult to find 5 or 8 opposition figures in a ward to contest elections? The whiners are so loud, I had thought there ought to be more than 10,000 opposing figures in any ward, or had my presumptions been wrong? They only want to complain, but not serve?
If they truly care about the People, is there a need to fear the ruling party, if they are as principled as they claim themselves to be? Why did MP Chiam and NCMP Sylva served?
Let us all accept the fact that the ruling party has the mandate of the people. Some ask, does cold exists? The answer is no, it is only the absence of heat. Similar logic, does one party rule exist in Singapore? The answer is no, it is only the absence of credible opposition.
Stick to facts and rationality, and you will not be disappointed, and know full well where and who to blame for the dearth of opposition voices in our Parliament. Nothing is fair in politics, and fairness is never a virtue from armchair hypocrite opposition politicians who talk loudly but do not have the heart to serve our people in our legislative council.
It is ridiculous in politics for any country to 'invite' the opposition, and entrench themselves to speak up in parliament, in any country, when they clearly do not have the mandate of the people to serve.
And instead of cherishing this opportunity, they decry the good intentions of the ruling party, further alienating themselves from the minority of people who had hopedfor some credible opposition. Almost like a wish that they do not and have no intention to serve the people.
-
Oops, somebody just posted crap here.
-
Many had complain that SIngapore is run like a corporation, and its legislators paid highly.
Here lies the answer to win an election, if the opposition had even sought to use their brains for once.
Like any business enterprise, the shareholders can determine the renumeration of its executive officers. And since the political office is maligned as ' corporation', then logically we will be the shareholders.
So if the opposition were to offer to keep everything, every foriegn and local policy in place, not temper with it, and in fact will continue its programme, except that these opposition members will do it at a fraction of costs - will not the shareholders be pleased and would safely vote them in, if monetary compensation is as big an issue the minority believes it so?
After all, like all biz, it is the cost and bottomline that matters, if this is the loud and vocal opposition parties to be believed. Or do they have no intention of scraping the million dollar salaries and hunger for it themselves as well?
Or worse still, is it the natural crap habit of the opposition parties to be vocal, brainless and enjoy braying like donkies all day long without furthering and improving the lives of the people one inch?
PS: I only speak out, as is my right, as a voting citizen, unless of course, others from the opposition camp fouly feel I should be denied such right and must remain silent in our republic
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Many had complain that SIngapore is run like a corporation, and its legislators paid highly.
Here lies the answer to win an election, if the opposition had even sought to use their brains for once.
Like any business enterprise, the shareholders can determine the renumeration of its executive officers. And since the political office is maligned as ' corporation', then logically we will be the shareholders.
So if the opposition were to offer to keep everything, every foriegn and local policy in place, not temper with it, and in fact will continue its programme, except that these opposition members will do it at a fraction of costs - will not the shareholders be pleased and would safely vote them in, if monetary compensation is as big an issue the minority believes it so?
After all, like all biz, it is the cost and bottomline that matters, if this is the loud and vocal opposition parties to be believed. Or do they have no intention of scraping the million dollar salaries and hunger for it themselves as well?
Or worse still, is it the natural crap habit of the opposition parties to be vocal, brainless and enjoy braying like donkies all day long without furthering and improving the lives of the people one inch?
Perhaps, but managing a corporate is not about how cheap the mgt cost but how efficient and profitability. Afterall the present mgt is making huge losses and if goes into recievership, will the new mgt want to take up the tab? Think about it.
-
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:
Perhaps, but managing a corporate is not about how cheap the mgt cost but how efficient and profitability. Afterall the present mgt is making huge losses and if goes into recievership, will the new mgt want to take up the tab? Think about it.
Lets place hyperboles aside. How much was exactly the 'loss'. Is there nothing left in our treasury?
No, let us not 'mollycoddle' the opposition parties as well. If they are truly sincere to further and elevate our lives and as principled as they want us to believe, even if we are dead broke and owe billions, they will find a way out .
No excuses, for running a country is NEVER a corporation as many believe. It is the leadership of our lives, precious human lives that holds more value than any money earned, as a society and the elevation of us all, no matter what the circumstances.
If they cannot even understand this simply philosophy, then they have absolutely no right to even think or comment about political leadership, let alone be voted.
-
Or worse still, is it the natural crap habit of the opposition parties to be vocal, brainless and enjoy braying like donkies all day long without furthering and improving the lives of the people one inch?
Misconception No. 5: SDP does not speak on pocket-book issues
http://www.yoursdp.org/index.php/component/content/article
MPs follow SDP's lead
-
It is the leadership of our lives, precious human lives that holds more value than any money earned, as a society and the elevation of us all, no matter what the circumstances.
I don't understand.
Lee Kuan Yew is the leader of my life?
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Lets place hyperboles aside. How much was exactly the 'loss'. Is there nothing left in our treasury?
No, let us not 'mollycoddle' the opposition parties as well. If they are truly sincere to further and elevate our lives and as principled as they want us to believe, even if we are dead broke and owe billions, they will find a way out .
No excuses, for running a country is NEVER a corporation as many believe. It is the leadership of our lives, precious human lives that holds more value than any money earned, as a society and the elevation of us all, no matter what the circumstances.
If they cannot even understand this simply philosophy, then they have absolutely no right to even think or comment about political leadership, let alone be voted.
I only answered your corporate part, not on righteous stand of moral ground.
Leadership is something need to steer the country in a good direction. Judging from the disarray of the citizens and policies, we need a new captain.
-
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:
I only answered your corporate part, not on righteous stand of moral ground.
Leadership is something need to steer the country in a good direction. Judging from the disarray of the citizens and policies, we need a new captain.
Righteous, morals, capabilities and all that is of a higher stand are requirements for able leadership to steer a nation. Anything less and we will all be lead to destruction. Administration of a country is more than running a 'company'. Human lives are at stake, not just money alone.
Disarray is only a perception, but do we need a new captain solely based on your personal perception? Fortunately for you, we are a democracy and votes will be a better judge of such perceptions.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Righteous, morals, capabilities and all that is of a higher stand are requirements for able leadership to steer a nation. Anything less and we will all be lead to destruction. Administration of a country is more than running a 'company'. Human lives are at stake, not just money alone.
Disarray is only a perception, but do we need a new captain solely based on your personal perception? Fortunately for you, we are a democracy and votes will be a better judge of such perceptions.
There is no different between a corporate and a country. Many companies come and go, merge or splits.
Same for this country, from a colony of Straits Settlements to Syonan; to Singapore crown colony; to merge with Malaya to form Malaysia and then split to become a Republic, In between we sold off two subsidaries Christmas Islands and Cocos-Keeling Islands.
I live through all these stages. Changes are inevitable.
-
There is no different between a corporate and a country.
I think a country and corporation are clearly two different things.
-
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:
There is no different between a corporate and a country. Many companies come and go, merge or splits.
Same for this country, from a colony of Straits Settlements to Syonan; to Singapore crown colony; to merge with Malaya to form Malaysia and then split to become a Republic, In between we sold off two subsidaries Christmas Islands and Cocos-Keeling Islands.
I live through all these stages. Changes are inevitable.
I will not attempt to change your perceptions, for it will only be futile and drifting far from our last positions of discussion on the thread. Righteous or corporate animal, there is still no sign of a credible opposition leader.It is my sincere hope as a voting citizen that the opposition parties cease their brayings on the largesse offered by the ruling party, seize the opportunities present and start working for the people instead of for themselves or their ego.
If they fail to accomplish even this simple task, then they should stop harping and start working with the ruling party to elevate our lives instead of causing diversions for notions of 'freedom' that we may not be prepared to accept with responsibility.
-
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:
There is no different between a corporate and a country. Many companies come and go, merge or splits.
Same for this country, from a colony of Straits Settlements to Syonan; to Singapore crown colony; to merge with Malaya to form Malaysia and then split to become a Republic, In between we sold off two subsidaries Christmas Islands and Cocos-Keeling Islands.
I live through all these stages. Changes are inevitable.
This is exactly what the present government is thinking, that's why they are paid like the CEO.
-
Originally posted by Ah Chia:
I think a country and corporation are clearly two different things.
Ok. A country is different from a corporate. A country will not disappear unless something drastic like sinking into the ocean!
Basically the running is the same. A corporate survival depends very much on the person helming it, so does a country. The people of the country or corporate either suffer or enjoy depends very much on the leadership.
-
A corporate survival depends very much on the person helming it, so does a country. The people of the country or corporate either suffer or enjoy depends very much on the leadership.
That is true.
-
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
This is exactly what the present government is thinking, that's why they are paid like the CEO.
I don't mind paying highly for a good CEO if he can turn the corporate into a successful entity for both the board, shareholders and employees.
Sorry not with this current CEO.
He flung. -
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:
I don't mind paying a highly for a good CEO if he can turn the corporate into a successful entity for both the board, shareholders and employees.
Sorry not with this current CEO.
He flung.
I think the CEO has created a good corporate identity, profit for the company, but nothing for the minor shareholders. -
Originally posted by sgdiehard:
I think the CEO has created a good corporate identity, profit for the company, but nothing for the minor shareholders.Modern corporates are a dimunitive of the glory of early times. Now dividends are just a scratch or none, that's where the CEO and board (fat cats) are priortized with shareholders and employees as secondary.
Much the like the our current board and CEO of Singapore Inc.
-
Originally posted by Chew Bakar:
Basically the running is the same. A corporate survival depends very much on the person helming it, so does a country. The people of the country or corporate either suffer or enjoy depends very much on the leadership.
I find such logic incomprehensible if not absurd.
A car's survival depends very much on the person driving it, and so does theoratically a tank. The vehicles' driver and its passengers either suffer or enjoys depends very much on the leadership of the driver.
But is a car - a tank ?
There is more to governance of a country than a corporate entity. Your logic is far too simplistic to support your argument that a country is similar with a corporation. There are similiarities no doubt, but its differences are great and by longer stretches, in terms of diverse aspects of administration.
But of course, you are most free to keep to your perceptions, or proselytize it to others. Not many may be that ignorant though.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I find such logic incomprehensible if not absurd.
A car's survival depends very much on the person driving it, and so does theoratically a tank. The vehicles' driver and its passengers either suffer or enjoys depends very much on the leadership of the driver.
But is a car - a tank ?
There is more to governance of a country than a corporate entity. Your logic is far too simplistic to support your argument that a country is similar with a corporation. There are similiarities no doubt, but its differences are great and by longer stretches, in terms of diverse aspects of administration.
But of course, you are most free to keep to your perceptions, or proselytize it to others. Not many may be that ignorant though.
Sorry, I'm not a mechanic , I leave that to the driver.
Driving a car or tank is a tool just like staple on my desk. Not comparable. Sorry staple or car don't make decision. That why they are called inorganic in corporate.
So are you the car, tank, driver or just a staple on my desk?