Pls read Bye Bye Singapore hello China

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 18:05

  The importance of keeping the PAP’s unspoken legacy alive for young Singaporeans

  October 24, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Opinion

  Leave a comment

  From our Correspondent

  [This article was adapted from a reply given to a reader]

  In a previous article posted here recounting the PAP’s flagrant abuse of the GRC system to serve its own partisan interests, we were criticized by a reader for harping on the past without providing any viable ideas for building the future.

  The past is equally as if not more important than the future because without understanding our own history, we will be ignorant about the deficiencies in the present system and hence remain contented with the status quo.

  Only when we look at ourselves from the mirror of history we will realize how much more we need to do to prepare for the future, a future when all Singapore citizens can participate freely in contributing to the nation without the constant fear of reprisals from the ruling party.

  The most important factor to help the opposition make any sort of progress lie in the citizenry.

  An informed, educated, thinking and proactive citizenry is absolutely essential if we want to build a two-party system in Singapore.

  If the citizenry remain ignorant, they will forever be deceived and misled by the lies, spin and propaganda of the state media.

  If the citizenry do not bother to think, then they will never realize the importance of their civil and political rights.

  If the citizenry is not proactive, we will never get young and promising Singaporeans to join opposition politics to contest against the PAP.

  That’s what we have been trying to do – to tackle the root cause of our political malaise. How can we expect the political tsunami of Malaysia to reach our shores when most Singaporeans are disinterested in what is happening to their nation?

  Our site is visited by many secondary and JC school students. Sometimes we received emails from them informing us that they never knew about the PAP’s ugly past from the history books till they read our articles which change their perspective completely.

  Young Singaporeans born in the 1980s and 1990s came to know about Singapore’s post-independent history only through the glasses of the history textooks, journals and media approved by the ruling party. Very few of them had heard of Tan Wah Piow, Francis Seow, Jeyaretnam or Lee Siew Choh.

  So we need to get down to basics, to make sure our young generation do not forget the past, such as the detention of Chia Thye Poh for 32 years without trial, the introduction of the Newspaper Printing Act in 1975 to control the media, the castration of Singapore’s Law Society in 1988 by LKY leading to the exile of Francis Seow and the injustices perpetuated on Tang Liang Hong.

  Only when we have an informed electorate will the opposition even stand any chance of disloging the PAP. The young do not owe any allegiance to the PAP. They will have an open mind to discern the rights and wrongs for themselves. It is our moral responsibility to preserve the truth for posterity.

  In a way, this site will be a barometer of the political awareness of Singaporeans.

  In Malaysia, the alternative news sites are all ranked within the top 100 of their nation’s traffic. Once our alexa rank reach 100 and below, then we can be sure that the new media revolution and the political tsunami which hit Malaysia will arrive here. Right now, our traffic rank is only 945 which is far off from Xiaxue’s blog (197) and Today online (502). With such a pathetic traffic, the impact of the new media will be minimal.

  What does this show? That Singaporeans are still more interested in mundane stuff than politics and current affairs. How can we expect them to lend their support to the opposition when they are not even aware of its existence and relevance in the first place?

  It will take time to inculcate political awareness and knowledge in our youth, but we believe we will succeed eventually because we are on the right side of history.

  As Sun Yat Sen once said during his endeavors to topple the Qing dynasty – those who did not follow the world trends will soon be rendered obsolete and one-party authoritarian states are becoming obsolete just like a century earlier when feudal dynasties are being replaced by modern republics all over in the world.

  Everywhere in Asia, the previously impenetratable walls of repression are showing signs of cracks and are collapsing one by one from South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and now to Japan.

  It is only a matter of time before an Obama emerge in Singapore and kick the PAP out of office like what the DPJ did to LDP, the Japanese version of the PAP. It may take 10 or 50 years, but one day we will be there and our most important task right now is to keep the PAP’s unspoken legacy alive for our young minds for they are the voters of the future.

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 18:18

  中国�士新移民 新加�失业开出租车

  20/08/2009 02:54:00

  字体:

  新加�讯，一�原�中国的拥有美国斯��大学�士学�的男�，曾在新加�科技研究局担任首席研究员，自去年五月份�约被终止�，就一直找�到工作，于是决定转行当出租汽车�机。

  自称蔡明æ�°çš„å�šå£«ï¼Œåœ¨ä»Šå¹´4月6日，以“一个新加å�¡å‡ºç§Ÿæ±½è½¦å�¸æœºçš„日记”为题目，开始在网上写å�šå®¢ã€‚他说，他å�¯èƒ½æ˜¯ä¸–界上唯一拥有斯å�¦ç¦�大学å�šå£«å­¦ä½�的出租汽车å�¸æœºã€‚
  
  原�中国的蔡明�，现在已�是新加�公民了。他是在1990年获得美国���大学分�生物学的�士学�的。他也在�盛顿大学研修了两年的�士�，师从著�的Lee Hartwell教授。他是2001年诺�尔奖获得者。
  
  他声称，他在新加�科技研究局的分�与生物细胞研究院担任16年的首席研究员，�是�在事业颠峰期离开研究工作，过�因为��原因找�到�适的工作。
  
  他说，他是在2007年接到通知，指他的应��约将在2008年5月份被终止。他说，他被逼入窘境，因为这个年龄�然失业，是一场最糟的�梦。
  
  “我一直很努力找工作，寄出无数份履历，包括本地大学ã€�政府机构和ç§�è�¥å…¬å�¸ï¼Œå¤§å¤šæ•°éƒ½çŸ³æ²‰å¤§æµ·ï¼Œå�ªæœ‰å°‘数回应，å�¯æ˜¯å�´æ²¡æœ‰ç»“果。”
  
  �济��，令他更难找到工作。去年11月，也就是离��年�，他决定当出租汽车�机。他去年12月份报读出租汽车�机课程，今年2月份，终于�得执照，并�为新加�地�公�旗的下出租汽车公��机。
  
  这家出租汽车公�已��实蔡明��士是该公�的出租汽车�机。
  
  蔡明�也拒��媒体�露更多。他说，所有他想说的，都在�客中。其他的或许媒体��分�与生物细胞研究院询问。
  
  他在�客中也感谢家人的支�和信任，�断在他身边鼓励他，让他有推动力继续下去。
  
  新加�科技研究局�言人说，更新研究人员的�约有多�因素，包括培训�士生的时间，表现和对研究机构的贡献。而对蔡明�工作的评估，是由外部评估机构科学顾问委员会�进行的，这个委员会�议��和蔡明�续约。
  
  过�，研究院也请�外三�专家�评估蔡明�的工作，三人全部支�委员会的决定。
  
  蔡明�的�事们认为，蔡�士的离开是�幸的，也是很多因素造�的。他们说，蔡�士�苟言笑，但确是一个�明的科学家。
  
  蔡明�之�也是国立大学生物化学系的兼�副教授。这项任命也在去年结�。
  
  蔡明�在星期一的�客中说，他将在出租汽车公�的六个月的�约完��的本月，专注于写作，之�更�新的出租公��，写作的�时也开出租车。

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 18:19

  我们是�？
  
  November 6, 2009 by admin
  Filed under Chinese section
  Leave a comment
  
  张元元事件å�‘生å�Žï¼Œå¼•æ�¥äº†ä¼ ç»Ÿåª’体对新加å�¡æ°‘间的批评声浪。å�„ç§�评论几乎都集中在谴责新加å�¡äºº“狭隘”。其中，è�”å�ˆæ—©æŠ¥è®°è€…明永昌评论é�“：“æ°‘é—´è¦�求海外人æ‰�摒弃他们对原ç±�地的热爱，“èž�å…¥”本地社会的诉求，是å�¦ç¬¦å�ˆå®žé™…或许需è¦�作一番检讨。”（è�”å�ˆæ—©æŠ¥ï¼Œ12-10-2009）
  
  严孟达副总编辑也写é�“：“新国人士å�‘以“èž�å…¥”为准绳，求诸新æ�¥ä¹�到之移民，以致ä¸�å�£æ“�æ–°å¼�英语ä¸�足示其èž�入，ä¸�数典忘宗ä¸�足示其èž�入，ä¸�日日作èž�入状，ä¸�足示其èž�入。èž�入二字几æˆ�ç´§ç®�咒，新之移民颇å�—折腾。”（è�”å�ˆæ—©æŠ¥ï¼Œ17-10-2009，言论版）
  
  但新加å�¡çš„民间真的如此“狭隘”，心里如此的容ä¸�下移民的到æ�¥å�—？
  
  对我们这些独立��长的一代�说，移民一直是我们生活的一部分。我从�学到大学的�学里头，就有许多�自马�西亚的�学。求学过程中�过�自马�西亚的�师和教授的指导。工作中也和�自马�西亚的�事共�奋斗。新加�第一代政府领导人如�进�和拉惹勒�都�自于马�西亚。现任�生部长许文远，国会议员�美花，�样是�自于马�西亚。就连�总统蒂梵那，在新加�独立的时候还继续担任马�西亚的�邦众议员。
  
  对于这些æ�¥è‡ªå¼‚国的å�Œå­¦ï¼Œå�Œäº‹ï¼Œæ”¿åºœå’Œæ°‘间领导人，新加å�¡æ°‘间从æ�¥éƒ½æ²¡æœ‰è¡¨è¾¾è¿‡å��弹的情绪。记忆中也没有什么“新移民”，“è€�移民”的说法，也根本没有所谓“èž�å…¥”的问题。
  
  对于外�移民影�了本地人的就业机会的疑虑，政府也一�的��引入的�会是高素质的人�。客工和学生都无法�为永久居民。当时，�天都有大�的马�西亚客工和学生，白天从长堤彼岸越过海峡到新加�工作，求学，晚上回去。一直到他们在新加�站稳了脚跟，建立了事业，�会得到永久居民的机会。
  
  �以这么说，这样的�自马�西亚的移民在�为永久居民之�就已�在新加�生活和学习过相当长的时间，和新加�人�以说是水乳交�的学习和生活在一起。
  
  说新加å�¡äºº“狭隘”，å��对移民，从何说起？
  
  但从90年代中期开始，政府宽�的移民政策引入了大�的�自中国的移民。�但数�大，而且给予永久居民的速度也相对快了许多。而许多在这个过程中得到永久居民的新移民有许多也很快的�功申请到了公民的身份，�为新加�公民的一员。
  
  以张元元作为一个案例�看，她的学历�是�业专科学校（相等于新加�的ITE），唯一的工作�历就是学�幼儿的�文�师。�是就凭这样的资历，她在短短的两年内就申请到了永久居民。照新加�的国�法，�为永久居民的两年�就�以申请公民。也就是说，一个没有学历没有事业没有特殊技能的张元元，�以在短短的4年内就�为新加�公民，享有和本土公民一模一样的�利和机会。
  
  �时，大�客工被引进到�行�业，也让新加�人�现�但是劳工密集的行业里头需�客工，连超市的收银员，�馆的�务员，都��了和我们�一样的外国人。
  
  很多新加å�¡äººå‡ ä¹Žæ˜¯ä¸€è§‰é†’æ�¥ï¼Œæ‰�忽然å�‘现周围多了这么多“和我们ä¸�一样的人”。有的网民甚至用“æ�¥è‡ªä¸­å›½çš„侵略”æ�¥å½¢å®¹è¿™å¤§é‡�涌入的移民和客工。
  
  虽然政府å�¯ä»¥ç”¨å�„ç§�æ•°æ�®æ�¥è¯´æ˜Žå¼•å…¥å¤–国移民和客工对于ç»�济的好处。但一直没有说明的是 – 引入这大é‡�的移民和劳工，新加å�¡ç¤¾ä¼šæ•´ä½“上è¦�付出什么代价？以新加å�¡è¿™ä¹ˆå°�的人å�£åŸºæ•°ï¼Œæœ‰èƒ½åŠ›åœ¨è¿™ä¹ˆçŸ­çš„时间“消化”这些外æ�¥äººå�£å�—？
  
  到最å�Žï¼Œåˆ°åº•æ˜¯“他们”èž�入了“我们”，还是“我们”å�˜æˆ�了“他们”？
  
  å‰�常任秘书严崇涛投书海峡时报的文章，就很清楚的说明了这ç§�担忧。他写é�“：“我ä¸�æ„¿æ„�æ�žäººå¿§å¤©ï¼Œä½†æˆ‘的一个ä¸�æ–­é‡�å¤�的梦é�¥å°±æ˜¯æˆ‘们会å�˜æˆ�自己土地上的外人”（海峡时报，24-9-2009，《Lest we become strangers in our own land》）。他担忧新加å�¡å�ªä¼šå�˜æˆ�国际人æ‰�的垫脚石，也担心身为移民的家长会建议在新加å�¡å‡ºç”Ÿçš„å„¿å­�在足龄时离开新加å�¡ä»¥é€ƒé�¿å›½æ°‘æœ�役的责任。（We risk having them use us as a stepping stone. Foreign fathers may advise their sons born in Singapore to leave when they reach the national service age of 18.）
  
  年�，�显龙在接�媒体访问的时候就清楚的�到，我们�尽�能的整�和�入新移民到新加�社会（assimilate and integrate)
  
  但一年过去了，这个èž�入的过程看起æ�¥ä¸�是更近，而是更远。新移民里头有人认为“èž�å…¥”根本是个“伪命题”，有人认为å�ªè¦�“èž�å�ˆ”，ä¸�需è¦�“èž�å…¥”。有人认为“å�ªè¦�守法交税就是èž�å…¥”，也有人认为“èž�å…¥”没有标准，谈何èž�入？
  
  更有那ç§�认为本土新加å�¡äººå�ªæ˜¯“å…ˆæ�¥çš„人”，是“è€�移民”，其实和新移民没有什么两样。既然大家都是移民，根本没有必è¦�谈什么“èž�å…¥”。甚至还有人认为新加å�¡çš„文化根基太浅，也没有资格“èž�å…¥”他们的说法。
  
  这�趋势的继续，�能让本土新加�人和新移民之间的隔阂越�越大。以新加�这样的�国，能够承担的起这样的状况�？
  
  新加�人走过了��冲�的过去，和英文社群和�语社群之间的猜忌。一直到今天都还在�心翼翼的维��这个��的语文，��和宗教之间的�感。
  
  但��英文的普�和国民认�的加强，这个民�和宗教之间断层�以说是已���的弥�。新加�人走过了那�因为彼此语文��而�死�相往�的过去，独立�新一代的新加�人基本上都�以跨越��的差异无障�的沟通和生活。
  
  但æ�¥äº†è¿™ä¹ˆå¤šçš„外æ�¥äººå�£ï¼Œå��义上å�˜æˆ�了“我们”的一分å­�，但实际上å�´ä¿�æŒ�了“他们”的对于原ç±�国的热爱和国家认å�Œã€‚有张元元那样，以亮出新加å�¡çš„永久居民身份è¯�æ�¥è¯´æ˜Ž“报效祖国是她的最大心愿”的新移民，也有已ç»�å…¥ç±�了新加å�¡å�´è¿˜æ˜¯è®¤ä¸ºè‡ªå·±“永远是中国人”çš„æ�Žå�¶æ˜Žã€‚（访新加å�¡æ–°ç§»æ°‘“éš�笔å�—æ´‹”网创办者 æ�Žå�¶æ˜Ž(2008-12-24 13:19:41)， 新浪网）。
  
  这些言论和行为，难��会引起本土新加�人的疑虑�？
  
  去年æ�Žæ˜¾é¾™æ€»ç�†åœ¨æŽ¥å�—汤姆森-è·¯é€�集团主办的对è¯�会中就说过，èž�入就是“让他们（新移民）é€�æ¸�接å�—新加å�¡äººçš„价值观和æ€�度，也让他们的下一代在新加å�¡å‡ºç”Ÿï¼Œæˆ�为土生土长的新加å�¡äººã€‚” （总ç�†å…¬ç½²ç½‘ç«™ ï¼� PRIME MINISTER LEE HSIEN LOONG’S DIALOGUE AT THOMSON REUTERS NEWSMAKER EVENT ON 6 MAY 2008）
  
  å�¯æ˜¯åœ¨è¿™è®¸å¤šçš„讨论中，这个“新加å�¡äººçš„æ€�度和价值观“似乎已ç»�å�˜æˆ�了一个ä¸�断在演å�˜çš„å�˜é‡�。éš�ç�€å¤§é‡�的新移民æˆ�为新公民，自然他们也å�¯ä»¥åˆ©ç”¨ä»–们手中的一票è¦�求改å�˜æ–°åŠ å�¡ç¤¾ä¼šåŽŸæœ‰çš„生æ€�，价值观和æ€�度。
  
  会ä¸�会到了æŸ�一天，新加å�¡äººå†�也ä¸�需è¦�强调å�•ä¸€çš„，排他的国家认å�Œï¼Œå†�也ä¸�需è¦�强调永久居民第二代加入国民æœ�役的必è¦�，å†�也ä¸�需è¦�强调“å�Žäºº”å’Œ“中国人”çš„ä¸�å�Œï¼Ÿ
  
  未æ�¥çš„“我们”到底是è°�？我已ç»�无法想象。
  

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 18:42

  Singapore PR complained that its citizens are not “proud” of their country

  November 7, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Top News

  Leave a comment

  From our Correspondent

  In yet another sign that the ruling party is running out of ideas to placate its disaffected and disgruntled citizens, its propagandist mouthpiece – the Straits Times has published another article from a PR blaming Singapore citizens for not being “appreciative” of their country.

  Mr Sam Ahmed began his letter by announcing unashamedly that he is a “new PR”:

  “I REFER to Thursday’s report, ‘Singapore a top choice for migrants. I am a new permanent resident, and this report not only makes me proud, but also affirms my fundamental belief that Singapore is destined to be a global centre from a financial standpoint and a cultural and social perspective.”

  Strangely enough, for a self-proclaimed “new PR”, Mr Sam had the cheek to claim that Singaporeans do not share his “passion” for Singapore:

  “My only beef with Singapore is that its citizens do not necessarily share my passion for this country…..Perhaps Singaporeans should be prouder of their country. Cab drivers complain about everything and university graduates I come across talk of saving up and moving to Spain or Italy.”

  Mr Sam Ahmed should ask the cab drivers why they are so unhappy with the government why university graduates are considering leaving Singapore for good instead of blindly believing the spins, myths and half-truths propagated by the state media.

  He ended his rather one-sided and subjective article with a question on why foreigners from all over the world are still flocking to Singapore:

  “If foreigners from all over the world can see this and are coming to Singapore, why can’t Singaporeans?”

  A key reason is because the ruling party has done a remarkably good job in branding and promoting itself overseas.

  Being a relatively safe, prosperous and affluent country, it is only natural that Singapore is a magnet for foreigners from less developed nations in the region.

  However, Singapore is not an attractive destination at all for the creme la crop in other countries.

  According to a recent Gallup, the top immigration destination for Chinese is the United States, followed by South Korea and France.

  Based on anecdotal evidence, the majority of PRC PRs and citizens in Singapore are from the poorer inland provinces and not the affluent coastal cities like Shanghai, Guangzhou and Beijing.

  Mr Sam Ahmed should walk his talk and take up a Singapore citizenship. Perhaps after living a few years in Singapore, he will come to understand why most Singapore citizens are not passionate about their country.

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 18:47

  Large proportion of new citizens, PRs feel welcomed in Singapore: REACH survey

  September 24, 2009 by Manisha  
  Filed under Top News

  9 Comments

   From our Correspondent

  A survey of new citizens and Permanent Residents has thrown up some positive results. Of the 360 newcomers polled by a work group from government feedback vehicle REACH, close to 78 per cent said they feel welcomed in Singapore. New citizens, who have to pledge their allegiance at such ceremonies have been in the spotlight recently.

  The Singapore government is now focused on getting them to integrate better into society. Of the 360 surveyed, 88 per cent said they don’t have problems communicating with Singaporeans. 95 per cent said they would recommend Singapore as a place to live in and another 91 per cent intend to work here over the next five years. The survey also found that many of them did not have any problems adjusting to Singapore’s political system and the civic rules and regulations in the country.

  Furthermore eight of ten surveyed supported the concept of national service in Singapore. However, some of them came up against some resistance. Dr Terence Chong, REACH Workgroup on Population and Integration, said: “There are still some new citizens who feel that they are unwanted competition in the workplace. They also feel that there are higher expectations placed on them because they are new citizens and PRs and so these needs to be addressed.

   “You need a variety of ways. Education is important. You need to foster a sense of inclusiveness and for new citizens it is important to get them to realise Singapore’s historical heritage and the importance of multiculturalism as well.” The workplace is also the subject of another work group on economic issues. It is urging the government to go easy on withdrawing the fiscal stimulus measures announced in the government’s Budget.

  Dr Chua Hak Bin, REACH Workgroup on Economic and Employment Opportunities, said: “With the recent property measures, there is fear that there would be a double blow if you withdraw a lot of stimulus measures introduced in February and there are already hints that the Jobs Credit scheme would be withdrawn and that’s quite a big component – nearly four billion.

   ”We have to bear in mind that could have a negative impact on the economy, perhaps a gradual withdrawal is in order.” On Tuesday, the government had said that it will announce whether to extend the Jobs Credit scheme next month. Moving forward, REACH has decided to form three new policy work groups to address the dynamic changes in Singapore society.

  They will gather feedback on healthcare, manpower and national integration and present the findings in a year. Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, said: “We owe it to you to respond equally conscientiously to your proposals. We will ask the relevant ministries to say ‘Yes’, ‘No’ or ‘Maybe’ and to give your reasons for the responses. “REACH has evolved beyond merely being a channel for feedback although feedback remains important. Today, REACH is part of the concept of deliberative democracy – a platform for responsible citizens to come together, identify the key issues, analyse data, formulate innovative policy options and ultimately co-create solutions to the many fundamental challenges we face.”

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 18:51

  Rejected ST letter: HDB BULLSHIT REPLIES (under $2m Minister Mah Bow Tan)

  November 14, 2008 by admin · 2 Comments
  Filed under: Voices of the People 

  Rejected ST letter written by Mr David See Leong Kit

  HDB’s reply “Market-based pricing of flats fairer to all” (ST Nov 11) is a good example of the frequent exasperating “half-answer” replies from our public bodies that Forum writers have impatiently tolerated for years.

  It did not address various points I raised in my letters nor Forum writer Tan Kim Chuan’s contention that “the HDB is either over-pricing its flats or is profiteering from the property boom”.

  Our private property market is now facing a downturn. But the HDB resale flat market is still firm due to Permanent Resident buyers pushing up prices.

  Under such a scenario, HDB’s pegging the price of its new flats to the prevailing market price of similar resale flats will result in prices of new flats and resale flats chasing each other in an upward spiral that is detrimental to buyers of both new and resale flats.

  The Total Breakeven Cost of a new flat comprises Construction Cost (CC), Land Cost (LC) and Other Related Cost (ORC).

  Its Pinnacle@Duxton project comprise 1,848 units in 50-storey blocks occupying a very small plot of land.

  From available public tender information, the CC component of each unit is known to be $150,000. It now remains for the HDB to be transparent in disclosing the remaining LC and ORC components so that HDB buyers will know the actual Total Breakeven Cost

  A quick estimate of the LC plus ORC is about $70,000, leading to an estimated Total Breakeven Cost of each new flat to be around $220,000.

  When launched in 2004, average Selling Price was $370,000 (actual range: $288,000 to $450,000), which translates to an average profit to the HDB of $150,000 per unit sold.

  428 unsold units were recently relaunched at average Selling Price of $550,000 (actual range: $450,000 to $645,000), which is $180,000 higher than initial launch prices. This arose from the HDB market-based pricing approach as the prevailing market prices of similar resale flats in the vicinity was in the $593,000 to $670,000 range.

  Applicants of HDB new flats are mostly young Singaporeans wanting to get married, move into their own homes and start a family by producing babies.

  Why then is the HDB not living up to its role as a not-for-profit low-cost public housing developer by passing on to such citizens the economy-of-scale cost savings in its hugh developments through pricing new flats on a cost-based breakeven basis?

  A recent Trade and Industry Ministry reply on the huge electricity price hike had stated that “the Government’s approach is to price goods and services at their full cost”. Why then the double standards in the HDB statement that “the prices of new HDB flats are based on the market prices of resale HDB flats, and not their costs of construction”?

  For the average Singaporean, his HDB flat is the single most expensive purchase item in his lifetime. Thus, it is of utmost urgency for the HDB to clear the air once-and-for-all through providing transparent direct replies to the above two simple questions, and to disclose actual cost figures for its Pinnacle project.

  Source: http://www.sgpolitics.net/?m=200811&paged=4

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 19:00

  Pinoy praised ease of PR application in Singapore

  September 29, 2009 by admin01  
  Filed under Top News

  26 Comments

  From our Correspondent

  A Filipino had lavished generous praise on Singapore for the ease of PR application.

  Writing on a pinoy forum, he described his personal experience of applying for Singapore PR.

  “Today, we completed the formalities for our Singapore Permanent Residence at the ICA building on Lavender St. We first had to go for an X-ray and blood exam to check for Tuberculosis and HIV.  We had the exam done at the Raffles Hospital near Bugis Station a few days before. That took us about half a day.

  Then the formalities stuff at the ICA today also took about half a day.  We didn’t even have the earliest appointment which was at 8:30.  Ours was at 9 am.

  The thing I like about Singapore is the efficiency. From the time we arrived at the Permanent Residence processing area, you take a queue number for the self service kiosk, then just wait for your number to be called.  Everything’s computerized and what’s best is that all the counters are manned!  So there’s really very little waiting time,” he wrote.

  There is a large number of Filipinos working in Singapore mostly as nurses, IT engineers and domestic maids. In recent years, they are found themselves in some jobs usually held by locals such as clinic assistants, tele-marketers and even counter staff at government agencies.

  The post sparked off an active discussion with queries from other Filipinos who are interested to work in Singapore.

  Naveen asked:

  “Can you please let me know if Employment Pass is one of the pre requistie to complete PR formalities? If PR is approved but the applicant has lost job, left singapore, no longer holding valid employment pass, can he re-enter singapore on visit pass and complete the PR formalities?”

  Ramonette, who is working in the Philipines enquired about getting a job in Singapore:

  “I’m currently working here in the philippines as a call center agent and im so much interested to work in Singapore with the same job I have right now, is it easy to look for a job there in singapore? What are the things i need in order to land a job there?

  Another netizen, Saleh added:

  “My LPR application has been granted and I was told to book an appointment with the eappointment system. Could you please let me know that on the average how many days it takes to book an appointment? I mean if I log on today to book an appointment what could be the earliest time (like 2 days, 7 days or more?) that I can get an appointment slot?”

  It appears that many Filipinos are keen to work in Singapore as the wages here are much higher than in their homeland.

  Furthermore, they are highly prized by Singapore employers for their English proficiency.

  According to statistics released by the National Population Secretariat, there are more than 70,000 PRs and 20,000 new citizens in 2008. The number of non-residents had increased from 1.2 million to 1.35 million.

  Singaporeans are becoming increasingly disgruntled at the rising number of foreigners coming to work and live in Singapore.

  Instead of addressing their concerns, the government will be setting up at $10 million community fund to make the newcomers feel “welcomed” in Singapore.

   

  References:

  1. pinoysingapore.into

  2. National Population Secretariat

   

   

   

   

  Foreign workers DO depress local pay at the lower end of the salary scale

  August 27, 2008 by admin · 6 Comments
  Filed under: Current Affairs, Parliament 

  Written by Ng E-Jay
  27 Aug 2008

  The issue of foreign workers depressing local salaries has cropped up again in Parliament. Acting Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong attempted to dismiss this view on Tuesday in his reply to a question from Non-Constituency MP Sylvia Lim.

  Sylvia Lim had reiterated the point that wages for the lowest income earners for the last 10 years had stagnated, due to the presence of foreign workers. (ST, “Simplistic to say foreign workers depress local pay”, 27 Aug).

  Given rapidly rising inflation, it is fair to say that real wages for the bottom earners have even outrightly declined.

  Mr Gan attempted to discredit this idea by stating that foreign workers form a big and growing pool in the services industry, yet wages there are comparatively better.

  He said, “In 2007, total wages went up by 5.9 per cent in the overall economy. Services sector wages went up by 6.5 per cent, and this is a sector with growing numbers of foreign workers in 2007.”

  I think Mr Gan should pay careful attention to what Sylvia Lim was saying. She was referring to wages at the lower end of the pay scale, not to overall wages.

  Mr Gan also claimed that during a recession, foreign workers would be retrenched faster than Singaporean workers, but his claim has yet to be empirically tested in a real life recession. Talk is cheap.

  Why would there be an incentive for companies to retrench foreigners first during a recession, when there is no legislation governing this aspect of employment, and no monetary incentives awarded for such acts?

  Foreigners, if they are without families in Singapore, would in fact be in a better position to bargain for less pay in exchange for keeping their jobs, as compared to local workers who might have mouths to feed in high-cost Singapore.

  As usual, the government’s obsession with overall statistics clouds the real issue of the poor and lower-income households being the first to bear the brunt of rising inflation and an overly-liberal policy of importing large numbers of foreign workers, many of them unskilled.

  Source: http://www.sgpolitics.net/?m=200808

   

   

   

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 19:07

  “I will not live by fear”: Activist, businesswoman, mother

  July 4, 2008 by admin · 8 Comments
  Filed under: Civil and political rights, Political Discussions, Voices of the People 

  Singapore Democrats interview with activist Jaslyn Go
  03 July 2008

  “I will not live by fear”: Activist, businesswoman, mother

   What prompts a young mother of two to stand up for her rights and the rights of her fellow citizens in a country known for crushing dissent with frightening efficiency? This is a question that many Singaporeans will ask if they met Jaslyn Go Hui Leng.

  This is because Ms Go is one of the 18 Singaporeans charged with taking part in an assembly and procession without a permit on 15 Mar this year.

  That event launched the Tak Boleh Tahan! campaign which is aimed at highlighting the PAP Government’s raising of prices and fees that has thrown hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans into economic disarray and hardship.

  And what will be her answer?

  “I will not live by the fear the PAP seeks to instill in its citizens,” explains Ms Go. “They can try to cripple me with arrest, jail or fine, but they can’t stop me from speaking up.”

  So what does the financial plight of workers have to do with a successful businesswoman who leads a more-than-comfortable lifestyle with her family?

  “I used to be very poor when I was young,” explained Ms Go, “now that I am better off, I hope I can do my part and highlight the plight our elderly and poor in Singapore are going through.”

  “If we continue to allow the PAP to rule with an iron fist, the people’s problems will not be addressed and I fear that the younger generation will suffer more than we are now as the cost of living are skyrocketing and our jobs are being taken over by foreigners.”

  The Singapore Democrats first came to know Ms Go during the vigil outside the Burmese embassy in September 2007. Since then, the vivacious and determined advocate of democracy has been actively helping to promote human rights in Singapore.

  “Prior to the protest, I tried in my own ways to engage the government by writing to my MP, Tanjong Pagar GRC MPs, and the Straits Times. But time and again they refused to reply to me, or publish my letters,” she writes in her blog.

  There is a steely quality about Ms Go that pushes her on. And it is not just starry-eyed ideals that propels the lady’s actions; she makes no bones that she is also doing this for the sake of her two children, aged 3 and 5.

  Children in Singapore have been deprived of quality life which is so stressful even for young children, she points out.

  “Child suicide has been on the rise. The root of the problem lies in the stiff competition that our children are being put through in school,” says Ms Go. “I hope this can be a thing of the past.”

  Asked what she hopes for in the next 5 to 10 years, Ms Go replies that she would like to see elderly folks who have contributed to Singapore’s progress be taken care of by the government and not reduced to collecting cardboard boxes and empty drink cans to eke out a living.

  And how does she think this can be achieved?

  “I hope to see a change in government to a more humane one that puts the country and the citizens first.”

  Ms Go will appear in Subordinate Court 23 together with the other 17 activists.

  Many Singaporeans shy away from engaging in the public process by claiming that they have their families to think about. Such fear is a damning indictment of the PAP. Be that as it may, Ms Go’s example and courage should be a ringing call to citizens of this country to overcome their fearful inertia and become actively involved in matters that concern their everyday lives as well as their future.

  Singaporeans can get involved by taking the first step next Friday, 11 Jul 08. Come down to the Subordinate Courts at 9 am to lend your support to this woman of incredible courage as well as to the other activists who have stood up for justice and democracy in Singapore.

  If Singapore had more committed citizens like Ms Go, this country would be a much better place to live in.

  http://www.sgpolitics.net/

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 19:16

  Point/Counterpoint: Has HDB’s public housing policy been a success?
  June 26, 2008 by admin • 4 Comments
  Filed under: Current Affairs
  
  Point: A cohesive nation, thanks to the HDB
  
  by Betsy Pisik, Straits Times US Bureau
  
  published in the Straits Times, 25 June 2008
  
  (Summary of ST article)
  
  IN SOME countries, an apartment can be the heart of the family, or just a place to store clothes and a bed. In others, it is the unattainable dream, a symbol of security as far away as the moon.
  
  In Singapore, a 48-year-old programme has turned home ownership into a formidable tool to create cohesive communities and fuel economic expansion.
  
  “The housing programme is a key pillar for continued economic growth,” says Mr James Koh Cher Siang, chairman of the Housing Board. “The underlying philosophy is nation-building, to root the population in Singapore and its future.”
  
  That far-reaching vision was honoured by the United Nations on Monday during a day-long celebration of public-service innovations.
  
  In a statement issued in Singapore yesterday, National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan congratulated the HDB and said that the award was “a tribute not just to HDB, but also to the Singapore people because the home-ownership programme is very much a part of our lives today.”
  
  Today, 80 per cent of Singaporeans live in HDB homes, the dream of owning them made possible by a combination of subsidies and access to their Central Provident Fund savings to pay for their flats.
  
  EDITOR’S REMARK: Subsidy?? WHAT subsidy?? A market-based rather than a cost-based subsidy is NO subsidy at all!
  
  
  
  
  Counterpoint: HDB contributing to price spiral
  
  by See Leong Kit
  
  letter to Business Times, 20 June 2008
  
  I REFER to the article “HDB pricing policy limits impact of rising costs” (BT, June 11).
  
  As a 60-year-old Singaporean, I empathise with the growing despair of young couples when it comes to such a basic aspiration as home ownership. Private property is mostly beyond their reach. Even for HDB flats, they are caught between waiting as long as six years for new flats or paying exorbitant prices for resale flats.
  
  In the 1970s, a graduate’s starting pay was around $1,000 per month. Then, in HDB Marine Parade Estate, prices of 3-room, 4-room and 5-room new flats were $17,000, $20,000 and $35,000 respectively. By 1990, the average price of 5-room new flats was $70,000. Such prices then reflected a “cost-based” pricing approach.
  
  Now, graduate starting pay is three times higher than in the 1970s, but prices of new similar HDB flats have gone up 10-30 times.
  
  These massive price hikes are largely due to the HDB switching over to a “market-based” pricing approach, following the 1994 property bull run.
  
  In 2007, the HDB finally confirmed that “the prices of new HDB flats are based on the market prices of resale HDB flats, and not their costs of construction”. In 2000, the total break-even cost for a 5-room new flat was an estimated $120,000.
  
  But, under the market- based pricing approach, the HDB first looks at the prevailing market price of, say, $260,000 of a 5-room resale flat. It will then pick a slightly lower figure of, say, $200,000 as the selling price for the 5-room new flat (despite its $120,000 break-even cost).
  
  HDB will then say the new flat buyer is getting a so-called “market subsidy” of $60,000, arising from the difference between the resale flat market price and new flat selling price.
  There is thus no actual ‘cash subsidy’ given at all.
  
  This market-based pricing approach had resulted in new flat prices and resale flat prices chasing each other in an upward spiral, affecting buyers of both new and resale flats. It has also led to current prices of 4-room new flats varying so much from $200,000 (Sengkang) to $400,000 (Telok Blangah) and a whopping $590,000 (Boon Keng).
  
  HDB is supposed to be a low-cost public housing developer. Why then is it not passing on to flat buyers the economy-of-scale cost savings in its huge developments by pricing its new flats on a cost-based break-even basis?
  
  Source: http://www.sgpolitics.net/?m=200806
  
• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 19:33

  Why NS didn’t make me patriotic

  Thursday, 29 May 2008, 7:00 am | 1,612 views

  Eddie Choo

  Why? Because in NS, it really goes like this: I pretend to be a soldier, and you pretend to treat me like a soldier. NS has become so ritualised that serving the nation has lost its meaning.

  When something becomes a ritual, it loses its meaning, and whatever passion there was is lost, and what you get are the tired faces and the bad-ass attitudes that are commonplace among the guys serving.

  Unless and until the question of purpose and service can be answered, Singaporean men (and some women) will find themselves losing passion for the country they’ve been asked to serve, longing for greener pastures always.

  I don’t exactly know where this story should start. Should I start when I left the camp gate for good on the day I officially achieved Operationally-Ready Date (ORD) status? Or should I start when I began school and my first National Education (NE) lesson?

   

  I guess the only way to truly begin this narrative/commentary is at the hospital, where mothers give birth to their baby boys. The moment a baby boy is born and registered, a chain of paperwork is created for him, culminating in him receiving the conscription letter at 18 and donning the camouflaged green uniform, serving out his time on an offshore island roughly northeast off the coast of Singapore.

  Of course, all this is provided the baby boy is and remains young and healthy right up to the time he enlists to become a citizen soldier for the Republic of Singapore – a soldier who swears that he will protect the President and the Constitution of our Republic.

  Why National Service?

  I mean, any decent Sec 3 student will be able to tell you why Singapore needs National Service (NS). He would need to know that, because it is examinable and part of the Social Studies syllabus. If not, it’s likely he would know anyway, because he’d have been told the reason for it enough times in NE – National Education – lessons that he would be able to answer just as well.

   

  Well, we all know how the story begins. Once upon a time, a prince from some Indonesian kingdom chanced upon a piece of rock, encountered a beast he called “Singa”, and promptly called it Singapura. Fast-forward a few centuries, and a British fella came along, bought this place on behalf of the British East India Company (yes, the very same from Pirates of the Caribbean, no Johnny Depp here, sorry), called this place a colony and set up shop here, for the next one hundred years or so.

   

  Then the British abandoned us (sort of, despite investing in defences as well), and the country’s people suffered under the Japanese Occupation. After the Japanese surrendered, the Brits came back, but didn’t stay for long. Then, for a brief moment, we joined Malaysia; but just as quickly as we came together, we parted. Absorbing the lessons from our history, the leaders then decided that to defend ourselves effectively, we had to have our own military, and since we didn’t have the numbers for a full-time army, we learned from the Israelis, and created a soldier out of every able-bodied man.

   

  A sacrifice of 2 – 3 years of each man’s life, spent in training to be a soldier. Then we release them and let them contribute to the economy as workers, recalling them when we need to.

   

  This is the whole scheme known as National Service.

  With such good intentions, how come NS didn’t make me patriotic?

  Why, because in NS, it really goes like this: I pretend to be a soldier, and you pretend to treat me like a soldier. NS has become so ritualised that serving the nation has lost its meaning. It’s one thing to have parades every 3 months, but having it every other week is senseless. When something becomes a ritual, it loses its meaning, and whatever passion there was is lost, and what you get are the tired faces and the bad-ass attitudes that are commonplace among the guys serving.

  I am not questioning the commitment of military regulars – I merely wish to highlight that sometimes, inevitably, even they might get drawn into this attitude of going through the motions. This is not an issue of complacency or throwing caution to the wind. This is about the nature of military work. Yes, a soldier should behave professionally, but professionalism is hard to come by when being a soldier is a really. boring. job. Just watch Jarhead. Yes, we would all like to be the heroes in Blackhawk Down, but unfortunately, military life is more Jarhead than anything that exciting. And then sometimes you encounter the military professionals who serve in the military not out of a sense of duty or patriotism, but for the need of money.

  What exactly are we defending?

  Sure, we are all here to ‘defend the nation’, but then, ever so often, the question comes to mind: what exactly are we defending? I don’t think anyone has ever sufficiently answered that question. Sure, we say we are “protecting our way of life” and “keeping our families safe”, but at the core of it, what are we really doing? I mean, if war comes, I think most people would have already sent their families away on any available flight to anywhere. Other families would be safe overseas, and might even have had the time to transfer their assets overseas to begin anew. So, with our families safe, would there be anything left to defend?

   

  Would we be left to defend those who couldn’t manage to buy the tickets in time? Does that mean that the rich would have had priority in getting out? If only the rich get to survive, then would we still be committed to this nation’s defence? If there was a threat of mass military desertion, would the state actually hold our families hostage to force us to stay here and fight? Of course, if it comes to that, we would take up arms, but with a heavy heart. Even if we won the war, we’d have lost any loyalty and love for this country, and it wouldn’t be worth staying here at all.

   

  For me, I would rather be a second-class citizen elsewhere than be treated like collateral here. But of course, this is only a hypothetical scenario – a gedanken (“thought”) experiment. Whether such a scenario plays out remains to be seen.

   

  What other options are there? Are we defending our multi-racial society? That might actually be something worth defending. But then again, around the world, there are so many cosmopolitan global cities which are melting pots of various ethnicities., where an industrious and innovative Singaporean would be welcomed. Of course, these other places might never be as efficient and effective as Singapore, but if we could live reasonably well, why not? So why, then, would any Singaporean stay to defend our unique, multi-racial way of life?

  A question of purpose and service

  So let’s consider the question again. What is it about Singapore that we are actually defending? If the values that we are defending are not unique to Singapore, then what is left? A happy island, by virtue of geography and geology?

   

  As it is, the importance of NS is inscribed into nearly every Singaporean’s heart – from National Education in school to the hard, physical tests at Pulau Tekong. It isn’t as if NS is pointless – we still need to guard against conventional military threats or terrorists – but security alone can’t be the be-all and end-all of National Service.

  Because at its core, National Service is about defending what is dear to us, and from there, deriving meaning and passion to the things that we do when we fulfil our NS duties. But if NS brings boredom and disillusionment, then the hearts of Singaporeans will be drawn elsewhere, and the hearts of those that stay will be conflicted over whether this nation deserves their defence.

   

  Unless and until the question of purpose and service can be answered, Singaporean men (and some women) will find themselves losing passion for the country they’ve been asked to serve, longing for greener pastures always.

  About the author:

  Eddie Choo, 20, served as a Field Engineer Pioneer during his National Service. He is waiting to study Chemistry at NUS.
  ———–

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 19:51

  Why we employ FT? Support LHL policy !!

  ---

  What is wrong to employ FT? there is nothing but good point than getting a singaporean.
  
  1. They not leave by 6pm on the dot. I no need to refer to the clock if it 6pm just by looking at the seat of the singapore. While for FT, as they go back home also face the small room that they rent, they rather work in office to past time. Even its action, they also put in effort to action in front of boss, Singaporean just do not care.
  
  2. They do not treat employer like a baby ATM machine. They never tell you when to eat " red egg " and will give you a surpise by telling you that they r having a baby when the stomach cannot hide. Even they had make plan to resign after the birth, they will tell u how much they love the company and will die for the company if given the chance. Even during their maternity leave, they will tell u how much they want to come back to work. The best is that you keep the job vacent for them for 3 month and when they back to work, they will pass you their resignation letter with the red egg. As employer , due to the labour law, we had to " happyily " thank them for their hardwork in the company. my friend had the honor to have a admin girl having baby for 2 year in a row, that position is always vacent for her to come back if she like.
  If it a FT, we will just ask her to fly kite back in home town.
  
  3. FT levy is very welcome by employer than the horrible CPF!! The higher the salary, the higher the % from employer. For FT, all Levy settle all. No need to argue.
  
  4. FT listen and treat employer like god. cos they know that if they cannot perform , they will be broom away. Singaporean employer need to treat them like god. a fresh grad will ask for 2k with Zero experience under their belt.
  
  
  of course, i refering to part of the "special" singaporean that i encounter.

   

   

  Source: http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?t=38336

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 19:57

  The thoughts of an NSman to a friend

  Monday, 12 November 2007, 3:12 pm | 142 views

   

  By Eddie Choo

  There is the dreary boredom that saps the life out of us, the hours merely standing and waiting for things to happen, where the only thing that keeps us sane is that far-off hope that everything is going to be over soon – that being a lie we have to convince ourselves of in order to keep going.

   

  All that I’ve experienced can’t be put neatly into words, words simply fail to describe the fullness of our NS experience. These are the endless days in bunk, training under the hot sun, full of perspiration – there are the endless nights digging holes in the ground, filling up sandbags, walking with our gear, under the moonlight, the stars, or the clouds. There is still so much to write about. So many words to say that can’t be spoken.

   

  But all of these, all of these will end, and then finally, the joyous daybreak of freedom from the endless nights of oppression.

   

  And after that, onward to my dreams. Everytime I think about this, I feel a lot happier. I’m still wondering if I should be a chemist or a writer , or perhaps I should do both. But on another level, I’m thinking about life-work, the stuff you do that defines your life, who you are, more than anything else. Do you think of this?

   

  We all know the truth, that Singapore is really too small for our dreams.

   

  But even that is peripheral to the goal we have to simply make life better for the people around us, our community, and even beyond, to the world.

   

  Maybe I’m too stuck on all these, but I can’t think of another way to live my life.

   

  Then there are those who live each day getting by on what they have. Our friends who strive to make a career, climbing the ladder of success, who participate in this endless rat race striving for fame, wealth and a comfortable life. Well, if they are smart enough, if they are talented enough, if they are hardworking enough, they’ll get to where they want to be.

   

  But I do hope you understand why I’m telling you all these – the rat race is for them, not for you. Their means – this rat race that consumes their soul, if for their end. And what is their end? That’s the thing, they have no real ends. I hope eventually you’ll find an end worth your life, and join not their race, but your own.

   

  I guess these sort of things might be too young for us who are just only starting our lives to understand, but I hope its not too late for you to sidestep this trap that so many others have fallen into.

   

  Eddie wrote this as an afterthought to a friend.

   

• Berries tan

  10 Nov 09, 20:11

  To walk the fire

  Wednesday, 6 August 2008, 9:03 pm | 2,458 views

  Benjamin Cheah / Senior Writer

  It goes against ethical principles of reciprocity to demand so much from servicemen, and giving so little in return — especially since many servicemen would not willingly serve their country in the military

  The burden of the Full-time National Serviceman is a heavy one. Usually called up against his will, he is thrown head-first into a new, unfriendly world, with neither rule book nor directions, separated from his loved ones, loses two years of work experience and education to his female and foreign peers.

  He is expected to fight, kill and die for his country when deemed adequately trained — a country that he may not even acknowledge.

  When he completes his service, he is ejected into the civilian world two years older, and armed with mainly irrelevant skills, much of his equipment, a Certificate of Service, the recognition to be called up again for In-Camp Training (ICT) until he has fully discharged his National Service liability at the age of 40 or 50 – and a duty to take up arms if needed. For all the personal hardships incurred, one would expect, even demand, that the NSF is adequately compensated.

  But he is not.

  Disadvantaged as a serviceman

  The Full-time National Serviceman is severely disadvantaged compared to his female and foreign peers. The NSF spends two years of his life training and preparing for war, and is expected to be called up for in-camp training for at least twenty years after his Operationally Ready Date (ORD). In those two years, female and foreign youths his age would have gained a considerable advantage over him in terms of work experience and/or education in a tertiary institute. Their employers, further, need not worry about losing experienced and competent staff to the SAF every time an ICT cycle begins.

   

  Allow me to illustrate this difference. As an administrative support assistant, I work about 288 days a year, not including half- or full weekends when I do need to return to the office for work, and have to stay in camp during the working week. In that time, I am expected to do the work of at least two men, more often three, liaising with civilians and superiors, keeping track of dozens of pieces of paper as they move around Singapore, understand and tolerate the inner workings of the SAF’s online infrastructure, and other administrative work. For this, I earn an “allowance” of S$16.67 a day; I can only hope that this will one day increase to about S$20. Admittedly, this is only a rough guide; it is rather difficult to calculate an NSF’s allowance by day, because it is pro-rated.

   

  Now consider my friend. She is a temporary staff in her job description, but is effectively a clerk. She works from 8 to 5 on weekdays, just helps out whenever she is needed, and her job scope does not require her to effectively look after the needs of over a hundred people at the same time. She may take leave any time she chooses, and quit when she wants to. She also gets to enter university, and the working world, two years before I do. For all this, she is paid S$54.27 a day — over two and a half times of my maximum allowance.

   

  Of course, the difference in salary/allowance is not as dramatic as it appears to be. My meals in camp are free of charge; her meals are not. Unlike her, I can make transport, medical, dental and food claims to blunt the cost of making certain payments. I also need not pay for medical treatment at government hospitals and polyclinics. Most noticeably, I have a legal duty to my country; she does not.

   

  Moral duty of the State

  The State, too, has a duty to National Servicemen – a moral duty. It takes away the sons of Singapore, most of them against their will, and prepares and demands them to provide for the common defence. This unwilling sacrifice makes the burdens of service even heavier, and more acute. It goes against ethical principles of reciprocity to demand so much from servicemen, and giving so little in return — especially since many servicemen would not willingly serve their country in the military, as seen in the relatively few numbers of recruits who wish to sign on in every intake. The above-mentioned benefits do not completely discharge the State of its duties, for the above-mentioned reasons.

   

  The greatest complaint National Servicemen have about NS is that it is an artificial barrier to entry into tertiary education and jobs. NSFs must wait for two years before they can matriculate into universities; eligible females and foreigners may do so when the next term begins. Employers could well favour foreigners and local women to Singaporean men, because the last are obliged to turn up for in-camp training, which will disrupt work inside the company.

   

  Levelling the field

  The very least the Government can do to even the odds is to provide NSFs with an end-of-service gratuity. This gratuity will be paid in one lump sum, following an NSF’s ORD. The actual amount will be tied directly to his rank; vocation; rating in his Certificate of Service; participation in operations and exercises; and participation in national events such as the National Day Parade.

  For example, a full lieutenant in the Guards who has earned a double “Outstanding” rating may be entitled to $20,000, while a lance corporal who served as a clerk and has been rated as “good” may receive $5,000. The principle behind the gratuity is to allow the serviceman to make up for the two years he has lost to his peers, by helping to defray the costs of the first two years of higher education, making up for any difference in pay when he enters the work force, and so on. More importantly, it demonstrates to the serviceman that the SAF cares about the future of its servicemen, shoring up the faith of the soldier in the institution.

   

  In addition, it goes without saying that being a soldier is one of the more dangerous occupations in the world. Death and injury can come in many forms: a hostile bullet, an accidental fall, and everything and anything in between. Most soldiers around the world know and accept these risks. But not the average Singaporean soldier; he is a conscript, and would, if given a choice, most probably not face this danger.

   

  Yet the State will nevertheless place the trained children of Singapore on the frontlines, often without giving them a chance to object or a way to prevent a mobilisation. This much is understandable, because should Singapore go to war, Singapore’s survival is at stake. But asking NSFs to straddle the line of fire when diplomacy fails will redouble their existing burdens, and rightly so. Should the sons of Singapore perish in war, then who shall take care of their families? The answer is the State, through the Singapore Armed Forces. It is the only ethical answer, for it is the State that has sent them to die. Yet, all the SAF is obligated to provide are funeral wreaths and letters of condolences. Currently, it is up to the serviceman to take up life insurance, and pay for it from his own allowance.

   

  Mandatory life insurance for servicemen

  Because of this, I further propose that NSFs will be placed on a mandatory life insurance policy. Currently Aviva has a virtual monopoly on life insurance for National Servicemen, because they offer the best rates for soldiers who are wounded, maimed, or killed in the line of duty or in accidents. What the SAF can do is to place all NSFs on a basic life insurance policy with Aviva, and foot the bill. The policy will last for two years, because it covers the period of time in which an NSF is most likely to be injured, namely during training while serving his National Service. Servicemen who wish to extend the policy, or opt for premium plans, will make up the difference through their allowance. The policy may also be further amended to meet the contingencies of Operations Other than War, such as overseas humanitarian missions, In-Camp Training, and the outbreak of war.

   

  These, I believe, are just the bare minimum. More can be done. The families of servicemen may, for example, be awarded additional subsidies for health care, to compensate for any loss of income, real or potential. The cap of claims of all sorts may be raised. Allowances may be revised upwards, or perhaps even tied to a benchmark of certain jobs in the private sector. The State needs to understand that the average NSF is bearing a huge burden on his shoulders against his will; in a rich country like Singapore, it is not out of the question for the SAF to lighten this burden through financial schemes.

   

  Mindef is able

  Certainly the SAF should not be constrained by budget. For FY2008, the Ministry of Defence has been allocated $10.8 billion – which is one-third of the entire national budget. Those monies should be sufficient to fund the above-mentioned schemes, in addition to paying for the daily costs of running the military. In addition, the military has initiated cost-cutting measures, ranging from mandating the temperatures of air-conditioning units to bidding procedures for outside contractors. Should there still be not enough money, the Government can always dip into its budget surpluses and readjust the following year’s budget accordingly. The Government, after all, did run up a budget surplus of about 6.4 billion dollars for FY2007, and keeps boasting of its strong economic policies.

   

  Ultimately, it must be remembered that most NSFs do not have a reason to walk the fire for Singapore. They may fight for home, friends and family, but not for a country they are not rooted in. Given this mindset, it is the responsibility of the State to look after the citizens who might one day have to die for it. At the barest minimum, the SAF can help to even the playing field through end-of-service gratuities, and look after the needs of servicemen by introducing mandatory free life insurance schemes. The SAF could further expand this, by reviewing and improving the welfare scheme it has set aside for NSFs.

   

  After all, should the government not adequately compensate a conscript for his services, especially if unwillingly given, then the government should not count on that conscript to feel obligated to fight for it. Or even remain in Singapore.

  ———

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 04:15

  Why we need immigrants

  SINGAPORE will go the way of the dinosaurs, without the influx of permanent residents and new citizens, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong warned on Saturday night.
  
  Making a compelling case for the need to take in more new immigrants, he trotted out various sets of figures to drive home the stark reality Singapore is facing: 'In the last 10 years, the number of people aged 65 and above has grown by about 100,000 while the number of children aged below 15 had shrunk by about 50,000.'
  
  And despite all the efforts to encourage marriage and procreation, the total fertility rate climbed only marginally from 1.26 in 2004 to 1.28 last year - far short of the 2.1 needed to replace father and mother. In absolute terms, Singapore needs about 60,000 babies per year, but last year only 32,400 citizen babies were added.
  
  Calling this an 'unsustainable demographic structure,' SM Goh told residents and grassroots leaders at a Deepa Thirunal event at the Braddell Heights Community Club: 'If we do not take in any more new immigrants, our population will begin to shrink in 2020. That is only 11 years away!
  
  'To sustain our present standard of living, we need to top up our population with immigrants, particularly those with skills, entrepreneurial drive and talent. Without them... our growth rate would be easily 1 to 2 percentage points lower.
  
  'Without the foreign workforce, our flats and MRT will not be built, our buses will come to a standstill, our healthcare services will degrade, and many investors, including Singaporean ones, will uproot and go where talent is abundant. Instead of sacrificing just 1-2 percentage points of growth, our economy will shrink, and our quality of life decline.'
  
  Beyond just sustaining the quality of life here, immigrants enrich the society, said Mr Goh, adding:' Immigrants inject a certain vitality and diversity to our society, adding vibrancy to our economy, and broadening our horizons in other fields like the arts, music, sports, and philanthropy.'
  
  http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_451508.html

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 04:16

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 04:16

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 04:20

  Originally posted by Berries tan:

   

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 04:34

  �资政：她�新加�公民 张元元报效祖国没有错

  October 29, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Chinese section

  Leave a comment

  �永欣 from Lianhe Zaobao

  �年国庆，政府都会邀请�有其他国家永久居民�的新加�人回��加庆�活动，包括出席国庆晚宴�念信约和唱国歌，那些国家�会因此而�议这群新加�人。这也是新加�人应�有的心�，新加�人必须�识到新加�永久居民�是公民，它�是�为新加�公民�的一步。

  国务资政å�´ä½œæ ‹æ˜¨å¤©åœ¨ç¦�建çœ� (Fujian province) 泉州市永春县å�´å²­æ�‘的祖乡探亲å�‚观å�ŽæŽ¥å�—本地媒体访问时，谈å�Šè¿‘日在新加å�¡é—¹å¾—沸沸扬扬的张元元“报效祖国”事件。

  �资政认为，张元元的选择没有错，身为一�中国年轻人，能够�加祖国60周年国庆的检阅礼是�为光�的事。更何况，张元元�是新加�永久居民，还�是新加�公民。

  现年29å²�的张元元在23å²�时离开北京到新加å�¡å­¦ä¹ ï¼Œä¸‰å¹´å�Žç”³è¯·æˆ�为永久居民，两年å�Žå›žåŒ—京，其å�Žæ¯…然报å��å�‚加了中国60周年国庆阅兵的女民兵方队，接 å�—“党和人民的检阅”，结果æˆ�为中国官方媒体努力打造的“爱国女海归”典型。有关报é�“被一些眼尖的新加å�¡äººå�‘现，由此在我国è¡�生一场质疑新移民认å�Œæ„Ÿçš„热 议。

  �资政说，更应该关注的是，如何�引这些永久居民�为新加�公民。当然，如果一个人�为了新加�公民，他自然就�应该�加其他国家的国庆检阅礼。

  他也说，新移民�便�为了新加�公民，也��味�他们必须与原属国家切断关系。新加�是个�国，历�较短，若与原属国家切断关系将�味�失去自己的文化和根，新公民将感到若有所失。因此，他鼓励新公民与原属国家尽����系，但�记得自己已是新加�人。

  å�´èµ„政表示，新加å�¡è¦�建立的是一个å�«æœ‰åŽŸå±žå›½å®¶æˆ�分的独有新加å�¡æ–‡åŒ–。他举例说，跟其他新加å�¡äººè®²ç¦�建è¯�时，他会说“我è¦�å�ƒroti（é�¢åŒ…）”ã€�“我去 巴刹”ã€�“你讲simi（什么）”，这些新加å�¡å¼�çš„ç¦�建è¯�å�ªæœ‰æ–°åŠ å�¡äººå�¬å¾—懂，ä¸�过，无论如何，中国的ç¦�建人还是能了解一二，毕竟里头的è¯�汇ä»�有很多是相 å�Œçš„。

  å�´èµ„政昨天是第一次回到å�´å²­æ�‘的祖乡，他告诉记者，回祖乡探访å�‚观的原因之一，是因为新加å�¡è¿‘日掀起了一股针对新移民的热烈讨论，他觉得此行有助于把这个课题概念化。“当然，这也因为我的祖乡刚好是在å‰�往泉州的路上。” – Zaobao.com

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  哀兵政策

  November 4, 2009 by Lee Chong  
  Filed under Chinese section

  Leave a comment

  作者:冀居·è°¢

  大选的脚步近了，ä¸�是因为行动党开了党大会，宣布已ç»�找到许多精英候选人或者第四代领导ç�­å­�å·²ç»�æˆ�型，而是第一波的主打——哀兵政策。

  è¦�化上新妆之å‰�，一定è¦�把这三几年æ�¥å�„路人马涂上的è€�粉都铲下æ�¥ï¼Œæ‰�会让新上的胭脂看æ�¥ç²‰å«©ã€�粉嫩的。所以æ�¢å¤�素颜的方法就是用哀兵政策。所谓“哀兵必胜”出自《è€�å­�》第六å��ä¹�章：“祸莫大于轻敌，轻敌几丧å�¾å®�，故抗兵相加，哀者胜矣。” 王弼注：“哀者必相惜，而ä¸�趣利é�¿å®³ï¼Œæ•…必胜。”任继愈注：“å�Žé�‚è°“å› å�—压而悲愤的一方，定能克敌制胜。 ”——打的是“人心å�¯ç”¨”的心ç�†æˆ˜ã€‚

  行动党å�‘æ�¥äºˆäººéª„傲ã€�蛮横ã€�唯利是图的形象，如今è¦�争å�–民心，当然è¦�扮出谦虚ã€�éš�æ—¶å�—æ•™ã€�为人民æœ�务的形象，第一：“æ�Žæ€»ç�†ã€�æ�Žèµ„政与å�´èµ„政å�Œå£°å‘Šè¯«è¡ŒåŠ¨å…šå…šå‘˜ï¼Œä¸–上没任何政党能永远执政。”，其二：“HDBäº�æ�Ÿå€�增达21亿。”

  �一�新闻��相信任�也�信，因为去年房地产��，马�山把手头上积压多年的一万多间滞销租屋买个精光，还大展拳脚今年起准备建新的，怎么HDB在 2008/2009财政年度会��呢？原�波东巴西败将马�山长久心里就有个阴影，深怕大选一�，��演当年詹时中算组屋�本，结果算一算就把他拉下马 了。所以�到大选，他就先�个哀兵政策：看�HDB建广��万间，是为了天下寒士尽欢颜，我们�但没有赚钱还�钱咧。

  è¯�说“公民在线”有个财ç»�专家å�«å�šæ¢�实轩，他在看了整份报告之å�Žï¼Œå°±è§‰å¾—是作å�‡ã€‚因为HDB怎么讲也是国è�¥å»ºç­‘商，是以买å�–为其主è¦�业务，但是æ¢�实轩看了报告之å�Žï¼Œæœ€å¤§çš„疑问乃是：为何在这份报表里，没有把售å�–租屋的所得当æˆ�收入呢？当然还有其他的细节问题，有兴趣者å�¯ä»¥ 点击这里看原文。一个商家如果在报税的时候，ä¸�报门市的è�¥æ”¶ï¼Œå²‚ä¸�是有作å�‡é€ƒç¨Žä¹‹å«Œï¼Ÿ

  这是马å®�山第二次踩线，刚刚过去让PAPå�Žæ¸¯è´¥å°†åˆ˜é”¡æ˜Žå®£å¸ƒè¯¥åŒºçš„电梯翻新，就è¿�å��了“市镇ç�†äº‹ä¼šæ³•ä»¤”。而他们辩解的时候，丢弃å�‘æ�¥å¯»æ‰¾æ³•æº�çš„å�šæ³•ï¼Œè€Œç§°ä¹ æƒ¯ä¸Šæ˜¯è®©è¯¥åŒºçš„“顾问”宣布云云。其实深究下去，一个区的“顾问”怎么ä¸�是该区的民选议员呢？ä¸�管是è°�委任“顾问”，为何èˆ�大多数，而就少数人支æŒ�的败将呢？难é�“就因为他投é� çš„是执政党？

  å�¯æ˜¯è¿™æ ·çš„事情最多让你在网络闹两天就没事了，因为主æµ�媒体并没有人敢深究这件事。所以《新报》å‰�总编辑，现å�—æ´‹ç�†å·¥å¤§å­¦é»„金辉传播与信æ�¯å­¦é™¢äºšæ´²è®°è€…研究学院院长巴基（PN Balji）认为，“ 许多本地ä¼�业å�³ä½¿æ›¾å‡ºçŽ°ç–�æ¼�ã€�大é‡�è£�员，或是æœ�务素质欠佳等，事过境è¿�å�Žï¼Œè¿™äº›ä¼�业ä»�能维æŒ�其声誉，原因在于它们的资金雄厚ã€�本地消费者别无选择ã€�国人是å�¥å¿˜çš„，以å�Šåª’体所扮演的角色。……媒体å�šå®ˆæ•™è‚²ã€�娱ä¹�和传达信æ�¯çš„使命，但在æ�­å�‘ä¼�业丑闻方é�¢è¿˜å�šå¾—ä¸�足，这样将惠å�Šä¼�业以å�Šæ”¿åºœçš„声誉。”

  所以新闻自由索引排�是�常��的一件事，没有独立�考的媒体人，人们就�知�什么是对�什么是错；�现和挖掘问题基本上还是知识分�的责任，接下去讨论�判断对错�是一般市民能力范围内的事。当然，你�以�出1001��由说��管制的舆论就如脱缰的野马，到时跳入一间陶瓷店，�砸破的东西�多了。�是�管 脱缰的马有多野，释放的�是它的本性。然而行礼如仪的仗马�是连本性都丢失了，就如去势的太监，会生出很多怪异行为的。

  自称伯ä¹�其实是对马的最大迫害，庄å­�曰：“马，蹄å�¯ä»¥è·µéœœé›ªï¼Œæ¯›å�¯ä»¥å¾¡é£Žå¯’。é¾�è�‰é¥®æ°´ï¼Œç¿˜è¶³è€Œé™†ï¼Œæ­¤é©¬ä¹‹çœŸæ€§ä¹Ÿï¼›è™½æœ‰ä¹‰å�°è·¯å¯�，无所用之。å�Šè‡³ä¼¯ä¹�，曰：‘我善治马。’烧之，剔之，刻之，雒之，连之以ç¾�馽，编之以皂栈，马之死者å��二ã€�三矣；饥之，渴之，驰之，骤之，整之，é½�之，å‰�有橛饰之患，而å�Žæœ‰éž­ç­–之å¨�，而马之死者已过å�ŠçŸ£ã€‚……然且世世称之曰‘伯ä¹�善治马而陶匠善治埴木’，此亦治天下者之过也ï¼�”

  如Balji所说，没有媒体的竭诚è�Œå®ˆï¼Œ“治天下者之过”永远也没人知é�“，shitï¼�

  ��：大马论�

  Source: http://www.temasekreview.com

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  新加�警告：毫�犹豫对付网上煽动者

  ---

  新加�警方：网上�毒言论得负刑责
  
  新加�讯，新加���早报�引新加�警方说，在互�网上蓄�对他人作出�实指责的网民，都�能�除刑事责任。如果有人确实触犯法律，警方必将彻查。
  
  上个月，新加�国会议员�汉通�到纵�烧伤�，网上出现很多��善的言论。这�为昨天新加�国会的一项讨论内容。
  
  è�”å�ˆæ—©æŠ¥æ�´å¼•è­¦å¯Ÿéƒ¨é˜Ÿè¡ŒåŠ¨å±€å±€é•¿é»„å®�冠助ç�†è­¦å¯Ÿæ€»ç›‘å�—询时说：“在网络空间里作出的任何ä¸�当行为，都是è¦�é�¢å¯¹çŽ°å®žå�Žæžœçš„。包括对别人形æˆ�困扰或对个人ã€�团体ã€�社区甚至整个社会造æˆ�å�±å®³çš„行为或言论，å�ªè¦�是è¿�法的，无论是出现在网络空间或是现实世界里，警方都将展开调查。”
  
  黄�冠所举出的例�，包括过去曾有�表�端��主义言论的网民和�客�到调查和起诉。
  
  他说：”在互è�”网上作出è¿�法行为者，都ä¸�能å…�除刑事责任。”
  
  è�”å�ˆæ—©æŠ¥è¯´ï¼š“最近从人民行动党议员所管ç�†çš„市镇ç�†äº‹ä¼šå› æŠ•èµ„金èž�结构产å“�è’™å�—äº�æ�Ÿï¼›æ�¨åŽ�港区议员æˆ�汉通在社区活动上被è€�汉放ç�«çƒ§ä¼¤ï¼›åˆ°å¸¸ä»»ç§˜ä¹¦é™ˆè�£é¡ºæ�ºçœ·åˆ°å·´é»Žè‘—å��烹饪学校度过五周奢侈学习之旅等事件，都有网民和å�šå®¢åœ¨äº’è�”网上ä¸�顾å�Žæžœï¼Œé²�莽地å�‘表毫无事实根æ�®çš„言论去攻击他们，甚至有人æ��造谣言指放ç�«çƒ§è®®å‘˜è€�汉是因付ä¸�起购屋分期付款，组屋被建屋å�‘展局收回，æ‰�放ç�«çƒ§äººä»¥æ³„愤。”
  
  报�说，对于这类匿�在网上造谣中伤公务人员和国会议员的网民�客，警方的�度是�能姑�，必会对触犯法律者展开调查。
  
  新加�电视�的中文新闻则报�说，新加�新闻通讯�艺术部�高级政务部长�德耀在国会上，以网民在网上谈论��港区议员�汉通被人放�烧伤的事件为例指出，互�网并�是一个能有效自行管制的平�。
  
  报�说，互�网上有�少网民讨论��港区议员�汉通烧伤的事件，少数人表示�情，而大部分的评语是没有益处的。
  
  å�•å¾·è€€è¯´ï¼š“好一些是冷酷的，一å°�部分则简直无法让人接å�—，令人失望。”
  
  �德耀认为，网民在驳斥一些�好言论的方�，�得并�足够。
  
  他说，“这是一个迈å�‘高度自制的好机会，它å�¯ä»¥æ˜¯ä¸€ä¸ªæº�起的例å­�，是塑造一个更负责任ã€�更能自行管制平å�°çš„第一步。”
  
  �德耀说，�建立一个负责任的网络世界，需�政府�网民等�方的�作。�客和网主需�建立公信力，而网民也应该�助建立起一些�能让人接�的网上行为标准。
  
  海峡时报网站报�说，�德耀是在回答白沙榜鹅集选区议员刘梦�质询时，作上述回应。
  
  刘梦�指出，网上出现针对�汉通�烧伤事件的调查，出现了很�公平的现象。
  
  调查问，�更值得�情：�汉通还是施暴者王家财。王家财获得了200票，而�汉通获得56票。

   

  Source: http://www.nanyangpost.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47107

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 05:03

  新加�人�中国的移民潮？

  ---

  å�—洋视界编译，新加å�¡å…¬æ°‘网站“淡马锡评论”刊载一篇文章，讨论正显出端倪的新加å�¡äººç§»æ°‘中国的情形。尽管文章显示其对政府的ä¸�满，但其中涉å�Šçš„事实陈述部分，颇具震撼力。
  
  文章从正在展开激烈辩论的中国�新加�居民张元元�加中国国庆阅兵事件谈起。
  
  当张元元在接å�—中央电视å�°è®¿é—®æ—¶ï¼Œå¥¹éª„傲地以æµ�利的å�Žè¯­è¯´ï¼š“报效祖国是我最大的心愿”。她ç�¿çƒ‚的笑容溢满了å±�幕。
  
  文章指出，在新加�，你难以看到新加�人以如此的信心，对媒体公开表达对自己国家感到骄傲。
  
  作者写é�“：“我一é��å�ˆä¸€é��地看ç�€è¿™æ®µè§†é¢‘，我ç¦�ä¸�ä½�è¦�赞美，张元元那溢满快ä¹�和骄傲ã€�充满身份认å�Œå’Œçˆ±å›½æƒ…绪的脸庞，这很少出现在新加å�¡äººä¸­çš„脸庞。”
  
  文章说，如果新加�人对自己的国家有�矛盾的情感，他们的身份认��机，就会被近年�外国人的大��入而加剧。
  
  他说，在过去，很多中国人急于抓�以新加�为家的机会，但��中国影�力日增，他们很多人就更愿�待在中国。
  
  和本地生长在多元��社会的�人��，中国大陆人永远�会适应新加�人的生活方�，�管政府砸下多少钱，或祈求他们留下。
  
  那些促使他们留在新加�的推动力，已���具有，中国的主�城市正在蓬勃�展。
  
  北京�上海�广州和深圳，现在的生活水平和新加�类似，这就是为什么你在新加�难以看到�自这些城市的中国人拿新加�的永久居民或公民。
  
  而�时，我们看到了大��自较穷的内陆�份的中国人，河��湖��辽��河北和黑龙江。
  
  具有讽刺�味的是，由于中国�为了�济�动机，年轻的新加�人蜂拥�往中国，而我们�以二�的中国人�替代他们。
  
  中国人中最优秀的一�将�会�我们新加�，因为他们的国家会留�他们，或者他们�寻求更好的地方如澳洲�加拿大或美国。
  
  中国日报最近报�，大约有2万�新加�人现在在中国众多的�资�业工作。这些新加�人以�会回�新加��，这是一个很大的问�。
  
  现在的中国给新加�人�供了无�的机会实现自己的目标。中国的生活�本低廉�文化也和新加�类似。
  
  雪上加霜的是，中国现在是退休人士安度晚年的热门地点，因为新加�的退休�开支实在太大。
  
  上个月，我去东莞，�到一�60�的�新加�的公务员。他�掉了新加�的政府组屋��，在东莞郊区买了一个500平米的平房。他的妻�两年去世，他的两个�女在新加�有自己的家庭。他现在和一�24�的情妇一起生活。
  
  根�他的说法，越�越多的新加�男人�现中国女人和中国的美妙。
  
  “我们æ�¥å¾—太晚了，”ä»–é�—憾地说：“å�°æ¹¾äººå’Œé¦™æ¸¯äººæ¯”我们先æ�¥ã€‚你看这里，10å¹´å‰�这里还是æ�‘庄，现在æˆ�了都市，å†�过10年，东莞就赶上新加å�¡äº†ã€‚”
  
  对于那些负担得起的人�说，中国确实是地�上的天堂。除了东莞，大�的新加�人�在深圳�广州和�海。未�这个数字还会增加。
  
  追求更好的生活是人性的一部分，没有人愿�一直工作到风烛残年，�养活自己，还房屋贷款。��希望尽早退休享�生活？
  
  ��越�越多新加�人�往中国等地，政府�能继续引进中国人�维��群比例，新加�最�是�会�为中国的二��份？
  
  编译者注，本文暂作为张元元事件的跟帖，适当时候将移为主帖。

   

   

   

   

  新加�政府出钱教外劳英语 网民�满

  ---

  �洋视界新加�讯，新加�宣布将拨出1000万新元，�助新移民和外劳和新加�社会��，其中一个举措就是教外劳学英语。但是，这项举措�到了新加�网民的�满，他们认为纳税人的钱�应该用在这里。
  
  在总ç�†æ�Žæ˜¾é¾™å�‘表谈è¯�呼å��å��助新移民和新加å�¡ç¤¾ä¼šèž�å�ˆä¹‹å�Žï¼Œæ”¿åºœä¸»å¯¼çš„“国家èž�å�ˆç�†äº‹ä¼š”表示，推出1000万新元的资金，未æ�¥ä¸‰å¹´å��助社区举办å�„类活动，包括文化讲座ã€�社交郊游等，以å��助新移民和新加å�¡äººæ›´å¤šåœ°æŽ¥è§¦ã€‚
  
  这项å��为“社区èž�å�ˆåŸºé‡‘”将会为这些活动支付多达80%的费用。
  
  此外，基金也将为新移民�供基本英语课程，改善他们的语言问题，以方便和新加�人接触。此外，也为新移民�供课程，让他们了解新加�的历�胜迹和习俗等。
  
  其中为外劳�供英语课程的计划将于明年三月起展开。�总教育中心将和外劳中心�作，先期从酒店业展开。
  
  但是，这些举措似乎迎�新加�网民的�满。在英文海峡时报有关新闻的网民留言中，大部分表示�赞�政府的这项�法。
  
  一些网民认为，这些钱是纳税人的钱，用æ�¥èµ„助外国人，与ç�†ä¸�符。有人写é�“：“外劳å�˜å¾—是第一ä½�的，新加å�¡äººæ˜¯ç¬¬äºŒä½�的。”
  
  有的网民说，政府在引进新移民的时候，应该确�他们能懂得基本的英语。他们举例说，一些西方国家在接纳新移民的时候，�进行英语考试。
  
  对于举办å�„类活动å��助新移民，一ä½�网å�‹è¯´ï¼Œè¿™å�ªæ˜¯“美丽的罗曼蒂克的想法”。
  
  他说，å�Žäººæ–°å¹´å’Œå›½åº†äººï¼Œä»–去å�‚加社区è�”络所举办的活动。一些新移民å‰�æ�¥å�‚加，他们ä¸�是è¦�æ�¥“èž�å�ˆ”，而是æ�¥æ‹¿å…�费的礼包。他们拿了礼包å�Žï¼Œäººå°±ä¸�è§�了。
  
  “我们能期望新加å�¡äººåœ¨ä¸€è¾¹çœ‹ç�€ä»–们这么å�šå�—？”
  
  他说，这1000万元这么用，对新加�人是�公平的。
  
  还有一�网民甚至质疑新加�政府推出的��技能课程中，有大��自中国的永久居民上课。
  
  他说：“为什么我们è¦�为他们培训付钱，然å�Žæ�¥å’Œæˆ‘们竞争，然å�Žè¯´æˆ‘们必须对他们好一点，ä¸�然他们ä¸�会待在这里。”

   

  Source: http://www.nanyangpost.com/forum/showthread.php?t=112064

   

   

   

   

   

  新加å�¡æ¬²ä¸Šæµ·“抢人” å�Šå¯¼ä½“业首当其冲

  October 27, 2009 by Lee Chong  
  Filed under Chinese section

  Leave a comment

  作者：王如晨《第一财�日报》

  27/10/09

  金èž�å�±æœºä»¥æ�¥çš„产业å�˜å±€æ­£ä¿ƒä½¿“人æ‰�战”å�‡æ¸©ã€‚最新的一个例è¯�是，新加å�¡æ”¿åºœä¸“程æ�¥ä¸­å›½æ‹›æ�½å�Šå¯¼ä½“等行业的人æ‰�。

  CBN记者获悉，新加å�¡ç»�济å�‘展局 (Economic Development Board) 与人力部的è�”盟组织“è�”系新加å�¡”近日正在以上海为核心的å�Žä¸œé«˜æ ¡å®£è®²ï¼Œä¸ºè¯¥å›½å�Šå¯¼ä½“ã€�æ•°ç �ã€�动漫等行业进行推广，招募人力。一ä½�å�‚加了推广活动的上海æŸ�è‘—å��通信芯片公å�¸å·¥ç¨‹å¸ˆç§°ï¼Œåº”募者众。

  è¿™ä¸�由让人想起2004年的一幕。那年，也是新加å�¡æ�¥ä¸­å›½“挖人”，仅中芯一家就被挖走160人，包括80å��熟练工程师和80å��一般æ“�作员工。中芯总è£�å¼ æ±�京事å�Žç›´é™ˆï¼Œè¿™å¯¹ä¸­èŠ¯å›½é™…æ�¥è¯´æ˜¯ä¸€ä¸ªå¤±è´¥ã€‚

  猎头��新加�

  “è�”系新加å�¡”的主è¦�è�Œè´£æ˜¯ï¼Œå�¸å¼•å›½é™…人æ‰�到新加å�¡å·¥ä½œã€�投资å�Šç”Ÿæ´»ã€‚它在亚洲ã€�欧洲ã€�北美都设有办事处，在中国è�˜æœ‰åŒ—京ã€�上海两个区域主任。

  在�日的一场宣讲会上，该机构带�两�在新加�工作的中国人。一��自英飞凌公�，�一��自高通公�。他们现身说法，大讲在新加�工作�生活如何美好。

  英飞凌系统与固件开���许冰涛说，他15年�便去了新加�，此�任�IBM中国。他�陈，在IBM，他当�拿2000多元，当年已是高薪，但新加�方�大约开出了6�的数字。

  �过，他说，�引他的还有新加��人社会下的中西文化氛围�全�视野，以�有利于孩�教育的�语体制等。

  “这个多元化社会确实很å�¸å¼•æˆ‘，当然我也喜欢å°�试新东西，这是一个好玩的国家。”新加å�¡é«˜é€šæµ‹è¯•å·¥ç¨‹å¸ˆé«˜å¼ºåˆ™å¦‚此表示。他刚去两年。

  æ�®“è�”系新加å�¡”中国区域主任柯志声介ç»�，目å‰�几乎所有著å��å�Šå¯¼ä½“ä¼�业都在新加å�¡è®¾ç«‹äº†ç ”å�‘中心，大约有40家。而且，还有è�”电ã€�英特尔ã€�特许等14家å�Šå¯¼ä½“工厂ã€�20家å°�装测试工厂。许冰涛表示，从产业群è�šæ•ˆåº”看，全ç�ƒè¿˜æ²¡æœ‰å“ªä¸ªåŒºåŸŸèƒ½åƒ�新加å�¡è¿™æ ·å®Œæ•´è€Œç´§å¯†ã€‚

  留在中国的�由

  é�¢å¯¹å›½é™…å�Œè¡Œçš„æ­£é�¢ç«žäº‰ï¼Œå¼ æ±�京们当然ä¸�甘心å�šæ–°åŠ å�¡å�Šå¯¼ä½“ä¼�业的“培训机构”。

  中芯CFOå�´æ›¼å®�å�¦é™ˆï¼Œè¿‡åŽ»å‡ å¹´ï¼Œå…¬å�¸ç¡®æœ‰å‘˜å·¥æµ�失，去年英特尔还挖走ä¸�少人。但最新的趋势是，他们正从新加å�¡å�Šå…¶ä»–地方“陆续回æ�¥”。

  她说，中芯目å‰�开出的薪水确实ä¸�是行业最高，新员工对此确实æ•�感，但æˆ�熟员工ã€�中高层人æ‰�的心ç�†å¹¶ä¸�一样。“高薪越æ�¥è¶Šä¸�是唯一(的决定因素)，它ä¸�太å�¯èƒ½ä¸€ç›´æŒ�续。”å�´æ›¼å®�说，公å�¸ä¸€å¹´æ�¥æ��高了研å�‘的投入，对于人力培养也制定了相关的措施。

  中芯逻辑产�研�主管俎永熙表示，在一个�长型公�获得�就感�最��。他说，�将迎�10周年的中芯，已是中国�导体产业�展的主力。

  �曼�与俎永熙都是中芯�立之�进�的。他们认为新加��行�中国招募，效应已大�如�。背�原因是，中国正�为全��导体产业转移的中心，市场�研��生产环节都正处于布局高峰期，对人�的�纳力度更大。

  “我们也有软实力。”俎永熙说，过去几年，中国地方政府在ä½�房ã€�员工å­�女入学å�Šå…¶ä»–补贴上å�‡æœ‰ä¼˜æƒ æ”¿ç­–。

  å�Šå¯¼ä½“调研机构isuppli高级分æž�师顾文军则认为，中国å�Šå¯¼ä½“产业还没有走出“两头在外”模å¼�，长远看，新加å�¡çš„动作，å��而是中国的机会，å�Šå¯¼ä½“人æ‰�应该走出去，然å�Ž“å��哺”中国。

  ��：凤凰网财�

   

   

   

   

  新加�激辩外�人�问题

  ---

  �洋视界新加�讯，�济�景气使得新加�的失业率�高，也�度将新加�究竟需�多少外劳或外�人�的争议�级。但新加�政府则表示，这需�平衡处�。
  
  海峡时报报�说，昨天举行的一场社区对�会，外国人和新加�人的激辩�为主调，辩论�方都感到�满。
  
  一些新加�人质疑新加�是�需�外劳，称新加�没有外劳也会生存。其中有人甚至呼�政府，�止�出工作准�。
  
  �一方�，一�永久居民则表示，他和新加�人一样缴税，�应获得相�的待�。一�雇主则宣称，他喜欢外劳，并抱怨本地员工的�动率太高。
  
  新加�人力部长颜金勇出席了这场由丹绒巴葛集选区的这个社区对�会。
  
  在回应时，颜金勇强调，新加�引入外�人士促进新加��济�展和��新加�人饭碗之间，需��得平衡。
  
  他说：“外国人(对新加å�¡)是é‡�è¦�的，但我们还需è¦�设法让新加å�¡äººæœ‰ç«žäº‰åŠ›ã€‚”
  
  在对�会结��，颜金勇告诉传媒，对于这一个�时的对�会上出现的紧张，他感到�惊讶。但他指出，�显龙总�之�已�对这些问题作了分�。
  
  “这些情绪还会继续存在，这在ç»�济衰退时期更加çª�出，因为新加å�¡äººå�—到了影å“�。”
  
  在对è¯�会上，一å��新加å�¡äººè¯´ï¼Œå¥¹åœ¨ç»�济衰退时一直在找工作。“为什么ä¸�能å�œæ­¢å�‘出工作准è¯�，这样就能让新加å�¡äººèŽ·å¾—工作机会。”
  
  

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 05:21

  新加�的五大政治风险

  ---

  这是路�社今天整�出�的新加�的五大政治风险。虽然新加�一直被认为是亚洲投资风险最�的�济体。但下列政治风险还是值得关注。
  
  我先把英文版贴在这里供大家讨论。中文编译版���供。
  
  FACTBOX-Five political risks to watch in Singapore
  
  Singapore is widely seen as one of Asia's least risky investment destinations, a key ingredient in its success as a regional trade and investment hub.
  
  Following is a summary of key Singapore risks to watch:
  
  * SECURITY
  
  Militants have long had Singapore in their sights -- a Jemaah Islamiyah plot for multiple attacks was uncovered in December 2001. Internal security and policing are far ahead of neighbouring states, but the escape of al Qaeda-linked militant Mas Selamat Kastari from prison was a lapse that showed security is not infallible. The port remains a key potential target, and an attack on it could cause global disruption. There is also the risk Singapore will see the emergence of more home-grown militants who would be better able to evade internal security.
  
  Key issues to watch:
  
  -- Assessments of strength and tactics of Jemaah Islamiyah and its offshoots. Most analysts believe the main JI movement has abandoned attacks on civilian targets, while the a violent splinter group was badly weakened after the death of its leader Noordin Mohammad Top. If this changes, the threat could rise.
  
  * POLITICAL CHANGE
  
  As Singapore evolves, calls for a more open political system with greater diversity of views are likely to intensify. Singapore's restrictions on opposition activity and freedom of speech will also come under increasing scrutiny. Markets will be watching whether the ruling People's Action Party can manage the transition to greater openness smoothly, and find the appropriate balance between greater openness and continued stability.
  
  Key issues to watch:
  
  -- Any sign of growing social pressure for political change.
  
  -- Government response to pressure for change. The government says it will amend the constitution ahead of the next general elections in early 2010, to allow more opposition representation. But the change is not expected to have a significant impact.
  
  * CORRUPTION AND LACK OF TRANSPARENCY
  
  Preferential treatment shown to government-linked firms is a source of resentment and may deter some foreign investment. And while Singapore is regularly rated as one of the least corrupt countries in the world, there are concerns over the stunted nature of political debate, and a lack of transparency in some areas -- including the collapse of the plan to install Chip Goodyear to run Temasek in place of the prime minister's wife.
  
  Key issues to watch:
  
  -- Corruption rankings. Any sign that Singapore is slipping in global corruption rankings would dent the investment attractiveness of the city state.
  
  -- Government policies. Long-term investors will be watching for any trend towards greater or less transparency.
  
  * RELATIONS WITH NEIGHBOURS
  
  Singapore-bashing is a sure-fire way to win political capital in many regional countries. Relations with Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand in particular are often thorny, and are further complicated by Singapore's heavy investment in regional economies and its reliance on neighbours for some key resources. As the debacle over the purchase of Thailand's Shin Corp showed, careful management of relations with neighbours is necessary not just for Singapore's security but also for its economic prosperity.
  
  Key issues to watch:
  
  -- Any signs of a fresh flare-up in tension with Singapore's unruly neighbours.
  
  * DEMOGRAPHICS AND RACE RELATIONS
  
  Singapore saw deadly race riots in the 1950s and 1960s, and while considerable progress has been made in achieving racial harmony, some tensions remain. The issue is complicated by demographic issues -- the majority Chinese population is growing at a lower rate than minority Malays and Indians due to different birth rates, and the government has made repeated efforts to encourage citizens to have more children. Labour shortages mean the country has to rely on immigrant workers for many jobs.
  
  Key issues to watch:
  
  -- Any sharp rise of racial tensions or unrest. This is considered extremely unlikely.

  Source: http://www.nanyangpost.com/forum/showthread.php?t=117179

   

   

   

  �光耀警告：关闭外�人�大门是�险的

  ---

  新加�讯，新加��总��内�资政�光耀星期四警告新加�人，关闭外�人�的大门是�险的。
  
  �光耀在一个演讲中说，没有了�过良好教育的外国居民，新加�就会�临�济下滑的�险，这是因为劳动力�够。
  
  他说，外�移民弥补了新加�生育率低造�的人��足。
  
  æ�Žå…‰è€€ä»¥æ—¥æœ¬ç™½å�‘人å�£ä¸ºä¾‹å­�说，“他们拒ç»�接å�—移民，所以他们的ç»�济没有力，也缺ä¹�活力。”
  
  �过，�光耀也�新加�人��，新加�政府�常清楚��护新加�人的利益。
  
  他在丹绒巴葛集选区的国庆晚宴上告诉700�基层领袖和居民，外国居民的数�将会得到�心的控制，以维�新加�的�质和价值。
  
  �光耀在演讲中也指出，虽然中英�语的人��以有�于和中国打交�，但这并��牺牲英语，英语�然是所有新加�人的共�语言。
  
  目�，新加�有大约168万外国人。
  
  �光耀说，其中70%是临时居�在新加�的，他们�有的是需�更新的签�，主�是就业准��S-准�和工作准�。其余的是永久居民。
  
  外国人太多导致了新加�人的�满。
  
  “有人抱怨说，新公民和永久居民抢走了我们工人的饭碗，甚至售货员æœ�务员ä¸�会å�¬è®²è‹±è¯­ã€‚”
  
  但æ�Žå…‰è€€è¯´ï¼š“我们å�ªæŽ¥å�—那些能æ��å�‡æ–°åŠ å�¡äººæŠ€èƒ½æ°´å¹³çš„移民。”“他们必须有技能，至少是中学和高等教育的人。”
  
  此外，�光耀也指出，新公民和永久居民和本地人的整�是一个挑战。这个过程的快慢，�决于本土新加�人的开放程度，以�新公民适应并�为新加�社会一部分的�愿。

   

   

   

  中国外劳进军新加��度�社区

  18/10/2009 13:26:00

  字体:

  新加å�¡è®¯ï¼Œæ–°åŠ å�¡æ˜ŸæœŸå¤©æ—¶æŠ¥ä»Šå¤©æŠ¥é�“，新加å�¡å�°æ—�社区“å°�å�°åº¦”，越æ�¥è¶Šå¤šçš„é¤�厅è�˜è¯·æ�¥è‡ªä¸­å›½çš„外劳，主è¦�是因为新加å�¡çš„外劳政策所致。

  报é�“说，在“å°�å�°åº¦”地区的15家é¤�馆中，看到了11å��中国外劳在工作。
  
  �馆��说，这些中国外劳通常从事清�工作，由于语言问题，他们无法担任�务员。这些中国外劳�有工作准�，�天平�工作10�时，月薪为1000新元左�。
  
  之所以请中国外劳而�请�度外劳，是因为新加�政府的政策所致。
  
  因为新加�政府规定，新加��务行业�能从几个��地�请�有工作准�的外劳。这些国家和地区包括马�西亚�香港�澳门�韩国��湾和中国大陆。
  
  新加å�¡æ˜¯åœ¨ä¸¤å¹´å‰�å…�许中国外劳在本地æœ�务业工作的。因此，“å°�å�°åº¦”çš„é¤�馆也开始雇用中国ç±�的清æ´�员工。
  
  在实龙岗��素食�厅的37�的安巴拉干说，新加�人也�愿�在本地的�度�厅打工。他的�厅中的六�员工都是兼�的。因此，当政府�许中国外劳加入�务业�，他�请了两�中国外劳从事清洗碗碟和清�工作。
  
  新加��度�厅��会会长尚穆根说，�会的�员�馆其实是希望�请�度外劳，但政府规定，�自�度的员工�能�有S准�或就业准��能工作。这�味�，�请�度外劳支付的薪金，�月至少需�1800新元。
  
  因此，除了�请�自�度的厨师外，�请�务工，�能�请�自中国的外劳。
  
  本身有���厅的尚穆根说，他的顾客对中国外劳还是能接�的。但也有顾客质疑，为何�把��留给本地的��人士。
  
  �访的中国外劳表示，�是他们自己选择到�度�厅工作的，而是劳务代�安排他们去的。
  
  �自�林的28�的常�说，他在尚穆根的�厅工作了两年了。他承认，语言问题和��的文化背景，使他难以和�事沟通，他�时也�适应��的食物。
  
  但是，也有中国外劳则刻苦学习，适应这样的工作环境。
  
  �自�建的23�的林俊雄，两年�就在实利基路的�度�厅打工。他开始学些淡米尔语，现在�以从事收银工作，甚至也�以为顾客��度煎饼。
  
  这�说淡米尔语的中国外劳引起了很多人的好奇，纷纷��购买食物。

   

   

   

   

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 05:39

  Whose future is “shining”, really?

  Friday, 27 June 2008, 5:00 pm | 3,661 views

  Andrew Loh

  Ministers scheduled to be given a third pay hike this year

  If you ask me, the future is really shining for us… We will survive; this is a red dot, which we can make redder and brighter. (MM Lee, 2006)

  We are into a period of good economic growth and social development… If there are no wars or oil crises, this golden period can stretch out over many years… (Singapore in a golden period, says MM Lee, 2007),

   

  Mdm Soh (not her real name) is more than 70 years old and has been working as an office cleaner for more than a year. Her daily routine starts at 7am and ends at 5pm, which means she puts in 10 hours of work, including a one hour lunch break. She works five and a half days per week – 55 hours in all.

   

  She is paid $650 per month.

   

  $2.95 per hour.

   

  In January 2008, the Minister for Health, in advocating for the implementation of means testing starting at the median income, cited the figure of $2,170 for full-time employed residents. Mdm Soh clearly is not in this income bracket, even though she works full time.

  Mdm Soh says that she started work when she was 10 years old, doing various jobs over the years. Although she finds life tough with the current rate of record inflation, she declines help from her children. “They also have their families,” she says. “I’ll just make do with what I have. I don’t go out except for work and maybe once in a while I buy a little 4D”, she says in Teochew, referring to the lottery. She quickly adds that she spends “at the most just one dollar’s worth” on the lottery.

   

  The elites – a third pay hike

   

  At the other end of the spectrum, top Government ministers had their salaries increased twice in 2007, the second one in December of that year. According to a Straits Times report:

  Under the revised salary package announced by the Public Service Division (PSD) on Thursday, ministers at the starting grade will take home $1.94 million next year – an increase of 21 per cent over this year’s $1.6 million.

   

  Also in the same report:

   

  With the pay revision, the annual salary for President SR Nathan will go up from $3.1 million this year to $3.87 million in 2008, the Prime Minister’s from $3.09 million to $3.76 million, ministers and senior permanent secretaries, from $1.593 million to $1.94 million, entry superscale grade Admin officers, from $384,000 to $398,000 and MPs, from $216,300 to $225,000.

   

  The Prime Minister’s salary was increased by $670,000 per year. That is about $55,833 per month. The PM’s salary is currently $3.76m per year ($313,333 per month).

   

  According to the Reuters news report, “Singapore’s economic boom widens income gap” (9 November, 2007):

   

  “The proportion of Singapore residents earning less than S$1,000 (US$690) a month rose to 18 percent last year, from 16 percent in 2002, central bank data released late last month show… and Singapore’s Gini coefficient, a measure of income inequality, has worsened from 42.5 in 1998 to 47.2 in 2006, and is now in league with the Philippines (46.1) and Guatemala (48.3), and worse than China (44.7), data from Singapore’s Household Survey and the World Bank show”.

   

  The Government is expected to announce a third salary increase for civil servants, including ministers, later this year, as part of a three-step effort to close the gap in the benchmark for ministers’ salaries. This was explained by Minister in Charge of the Civil Service, Teo Chee Hean, on the 9^th of April, 2007:

   

  Salaries at the MR4 Grade are currently at 55% of the benchmark. Given the large gap, it is not realistic to close the gap fully in one go. Instead, we will close half of the current gap, that is, from 55% of the benchmark, to 77% of the benchmark by the end of this year.

   

  This will be effected in two steps – one step now, and another step at the end of this year. Next year, we aim to close half of the remaining gap, bringing salaries to 88% of the benchmark by end-2008.

   

  (Sprinter)

  What is the Government doing about the income gap for ordinary Singaporeans, especially the poor? It prefers to take a “targeted approach”, giving periodic handouts and assistance and schemes like the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS). The Government has dismissed suggestions for the institution of a minimum wage and has also regularly warned that “subsidies will not solve Singapore’s problems”.

  (Lee Kuan Yew)

  Give our elderly a sense of peace and security

  Yet, with the anticipated third increase in ministers’ salaries, which is already the highest in the world, Singaporeans are beginning to wonder if only the top few are reaping the rewards of the hard work which everyone had put in during the boom times.

  As was asked in an earlier article on TOC, “Why have Singaporeans, with one of the highest savings rates in the world, become so dependent on government handouts to even just get by?” With regards to the latest handout as reported by Channel NewsAsia, Over 780,000 households to receive $134m of utility rebates, one wonders why such a huge number of Singaporean households need such handouts to pay their utilities.

   

  Have Singaporeans, consistently ranked one of the hardest-working and overworked, suddenly become beggars with hands extended towards the Government all the time, even as they continue to strive and compete with foreigners?

   

  Perhaps it is time to seriously consider a more institutionalised approach to closing the income gap, such as having a minimum wage policy, and give Singaporeans, especially the working elderly such as Mdm Soh, a sense of security and peace in their twilight years. This is more pertinent now as the Government is also encouraging Singaporeans to work for as long as one can. Minister Lim Boon Heng even urged Singaporeans not to think of retiring (Channel NewsAsia).

   

  To have someone like Mdm Soh work for $2.95 an hour is, in all honesty, quite shameful for a country which regularly trumpets its economic achievements. But more importantly, it says something about how we value those who have given practically their entire lives helping Singapore become this “world-class” city which the Government now boasts about.

   

  While chatting with Mdm Soh, she was very anxious not to be seen talking to me too long. “I have to get back to work, or else my boss will be looking for me”, she would periodically say. I could not help but wonder: Are our elderly so frightened of not being able to find jobs that they would accept any jobs offered to them, even if they do not pay them fairly?

   

  As former NTUC Income CEO Tan Kin Lian said here:

  I believe that local workers deserve to have an adequate salary for a hard day’s work. This salary has to be commensurate with the cost of living. It should be adequate for a worker to feed a family, at least in a frugal way. The worker should not be expected to work for 12 hours a day, and still not earn enough for the family.

   

  Indeed, our elderly who put in full-time work should not be struggling to keep up, or made to work for less than what would be minimum wage, all in the name of “globalisation” or “competition”.

   

  Otherwise, ministers should be prepared for a severe backlash if and when they increase their own salaries later this year – the third time in two years – by millions of dollars again.

   

  It seems that this “golden era” which MM Lee declared we are in is only for a select group – and we also wonder whose future it is that is “really shining”.

   

  Source: http://theonlinecitizen.com

   

   

   

   

  ST Forum 4 April 2008
  Elderly toilet cleaners a sad reflection of society here
  
  Recently, I was at a toilet in a shopping centre when I noticed an elderly woman with a bent and crooked back trying to clean the floor while fashionable young women applied their lipsticks and checked their hairdos in the mirror.
  
  I find this scene to be a sad reflection of society here, one that is played out daily in numerous shopping centres.
  
  During the course of my travels through China, from rural Yunnan to cosmopolitan Shanghai, I never once encountered an elderly toilet cleaner. This is perhaps because in China, it is considered a stain on the family honour if your mother, grandmother or aunt has to clean toilets to support herself, so the elderly are usually supported by the family network.

  
  The situation is the same in the Philippines.

  
  Singapore seems unique in having the highest density of elderly toilet cleaners in the world, surely not an accolade to be proud of.

  
  Although cleaning toilets is easy to learn, it is far from pleasant, given the bad toilet habits of Singaporeans.

  
  Besides this, it is a job that may be hazardous for the elderly, who are more likely to suffer serious fractures should they slip on the wet toilet floor.

  To resolve this situation, perhaps the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports and the Ministry of Manpower can work together to consider the following suggestions:

  ·                  Survey these elderly cleaners to find out more about their financial and social situation, to see what sort of aid can be provided.

  ·                  Devise incentives for the proprietors of food outlets, supermarkets and childcare centres to employ these elderly folk in the preparation or packing of food instead.

  ·                  Increase the wages of toilet cleaners as unpleasant jobs should command a higher wage so that younger people would want to take them up.

  ·                  Allow foreign workers to do the job.

  
  Encourage students in schools to empathise with toilet cleaners and practise good toilet habits by periodically making them clean school toilets.

  
  Dr Anne Chong Su Yan

  Posted by LuckySingaporean

   

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 06:08

  Why we employ FT? Support LHL policy !!

  ---

  Why we employ FT? Support LHL policy !!
  
  What is wrong to employ FT? there is nothing but good point than getting a singaporean.
  
  1. They not leave by 6pm on the dot. I no need to refer to the clock if it 6pm just by looking at the seat of the singapore. While for FT, as they go back home also face the small room that they rent, they rather work in office to past time. Even its action, they also put in effort to action in front of boss, Singaporean just do not care.
  
  2. They do not treat employer like a baby ATM machine. They never tell you when to eat " red egg " and will give you a surpise by telling you that they r having a baby when the stomach cannot hide. Even they had make plan to resign after the birth, they will tell u how much they love the company and will die for the company if given the chance. Even during their maternity leave, they will tell u how much they want to come back to work. The best is that you keep the job vacent for them for 3 month and when they back to work, they will pass you their resignation letter with the red egg. As employer , due to the labour law, we had to " happyily " thank them for their hardwork in the company. my friend had the honor to have a admin girl having baby for 2 year in a row, that position is always vacent for her to come back if she like.
  
  If it a FT, we will just ask her to fly kite back in home town.
  
  3. FT levy is very welcome by employer than the horrible CPF!! The higher the salary, the higher the % from employer. For FT, all Levy settle all. No need to argue.
  
  4. FT listen and treat employer like god. cos they know that if they cannot perform , they will be broom away. Singaporean employer need to treat them like god. a fresh grad will ask for 2k with Zero experience under their belt.
  
  
  of course, i refering to part of the "special" singaporean that i encounter.

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 08:07

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 08:12

  The fear of the opposition

  Wednesday, 29 October 2008, 10:37 am | 3,149 views

  Gerald Giam / Senior Writer

  I happened to sit next to an older relative at a wedding dinner recently, when our conversation turned to politics.

  My relative wondered why I had not followed my parents to Australia, and mused that he was considering moving there too. When I asked why, he cited the fear of political instability in Singapore.

  That remark surprised me since Singapore is seen by many to be one of the most politically stable countries in Asia. We have had no change of government – violent or otherwise – since 1959.

  When probed further, my uncle said he feared the opposition taking over in a freak election. I assured him that given the current state of the opposition, the PAP government will not be under any threat of losing an election within his lifetime. More importantly, I told him I trust Singapore voters to be wise enough not to vote a lousy party into power.

  He countered by pointing out that even when the opposition had fielded “criminals” and slipper-wearing candidates, they were still able to garner 20 to 30% of the vote.

  I explained, from my limited knowledge of electoral sociology, that in every election, there will be at least 20% of voters who are hardcore oppositionists and will vote for anyone who ran against the ruling party candidate. In Sembawang GRC where I live, 23% still voted for the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) team sans party chief Chee Soon Juan, even though it was running against a relatively strong PAP team helmed by the likable and Chinese-speaking Health Minister, Khaw Boon Wan. That was the largest margin of victory for the PAP in that election.

  However the gulf between 23% and 50% — the latter being the percentage necessary to win a seat outright — is huge. Even in the most closely contested constituency of Aljunied GRC in the 2006 General Election, the PAP’s 55% win against the Workers’ Party would be considered a landslide in most other democracies. Consider the UK’s Labour Party, which won the 2005 election with just 35% of the popular vote. Put in this perspective, the PAP’s 66.6% overall percentage in 2006 was a blowout victory.

  My uncle admires the PAP for what they have achieved, not just for Singapore, but for him personally. Growing up in a one-room flat, and now living in a private apartment, he has seen a dramatic improvement in his standard of living over the past 40 years. He reserved stinging criticism for some of his peers who “live in bungalows” and are still so ungrateful as to grumble about the government.

  I cautioned him that past performance is no guarantee of future success, as investors always say. Just because the PAP has governed well in the past, does not mean that it will continue to do so for eternity. My uncle agreed that no country has had a particular party govern forever.

  In the short term however, he was supremely confident that the PAP’s recruitment process will ensure that only top-notch candidates are presented in each election. In contrast, he said, the opposition was happy to take anyone who had a degree and was willing to pay the election deposit, even if they had no “track record”.

  “What is your definition of a track record?” I asked him. Many of the new PAP MPs don’t exactly have a very long resume either. Nevertheless, he was sure that with the many interviews they had undergone with party leaders, coupled with the background checks, PAP candidates would definitely meet the necessary criteria for political leadership.

  I asked him if he would consider voting for a non-PAP candidate if he or she were more “qualified” than the PAP candidate.

  After initially saying he would, he later reasoned that it would be impossible for an opposition candidate to be as qualified as his PAP opponent. Firstly, the PAP’s recruitment process would throw up only the best men in the country. Secondly, anyone worth their salt, who genuinely desired to serve the people and make Singapore a better place would join the PAP instead of the opposition.

  He was of the view that a capable person would be “out of his mind” to join the opposition, and that people who joined the opposition did so only out of self-interest or ulterior motives. Why else would someone want to oppose such an “excellent” government? Apparently, joining the opposition in and of itself indicated a character flaw.

  He dismissed the possibility that some principled individuals joined the opposition because they could not see themselves joining the PAP due to fundamental disagreements with the latter’s style of governance. He also did not see the price many opposition members paid for their political beliefs as worthy of much respect.

  Our heated discussion went on and on. In the end it was time to go home and we had to agree to disagree.

  What the opposition fails to see

  While I was slightly dismayed to hear these words from an educated senior citizen like my uncle, I have no doubt that he represents a significant constituency of citizens who have a “rags-to-riches” story to tell.

  His point of view is particularly instructive for our opposition.

  From my past conversations with many opposition members, I get the sense that many of them joined because they felt a need to “check” the ruling party — nothing else.

  And many of them think that just because they are not the PAP, and they shake a few hands and show up on Nomination Day, voters will choose them over their rivals.

  This is a recipe for defeat — again and again, election after election.

  What they fail to see is that the “swing” voters (i.e., those who may vote either way on Polling Day and who effectively decide the outcome of an election) are largely voting for a party to form the Government, not individuals who merely snap at the heels of the PAP behemoth.

  Therefore, to win their vote, the opposition parties have to prove to these voters that they are competent and honest enough to lead the whole country, not just their ward, and will not end up flushing half a century of progress down the drain.

  The opposition has two crutches that it always falls back on: One, that the unlevel political playing field created by the PAP makes it impossible to mount any significant challenge to it; and two, that good people do not step forward to join their parties.

  These are both true to a great extent, but it should not stop the opposition parties from improving themselves internally, so as to present a more professional face to the voting public.

  People want to hear different, and better ideas from the opposition on how to run the country, not just gripes about every little fault of the PAP.

  It is not unusual that many Singaporeans hold the opposition to a higher standard than they do for the ruling party. After all, the opposition has no track record of successfully running a nation, and therefore has to prove they are twice as good as their PAP opponents before they will earn the vote.

  It is my hope that our opposition will shift to a higher gear soon, and that more good men and women will join them. The next election is due by November 2011. With the economy heading south, it is likely that the Prime Minister will call for an election much earlier than that (since a poor economy generally favours the PAP over the opposition).

  Time is running out, and the people’s hopes are slowly getting dashed. Can the opposition turn things around and dispel people’s fear of their success?

  ———–

   

   

• Berries tan

  11 Nov 09, 09:23

  转帖：中国人看新加�人（Author：�韦�）

  ---

  其实å‰�å�Žä¸�到15年，中国人看新加å�¡äººï¼Œå�°è±¡æœ‰äº†å¾ˆå¤§è½¬å�˜ã€‚10å¹´å‰�中国人å�¬åˆ°“新加å�¡”，脸上会有股很感兴趣的表情，跟ç�€ä¼šå¸¦ç‚¹ç¾¡æ…•è¯´ï¼š“你们人民素质高。”
  
  è¿™“素质高”，除了是新加å�¡äººçˆ±å¹²å‡€ï¼Œè¿˜åŒ…括æ€�度文明，办事有效率，英语了得。
  
  但最近几回，ç�«è½¦ä¸Šé�‡è¿‡äº›æ�žå¤–贸的中国人，在他们以为我å�ªæ˜¯å�—方人的情况下，就好几次å�¬åˆ°ä»–们对新加å�¡äºº“耳目一新”的看法。
  
  尤其是从上海回北京那次，�上一个国际会计公�的�员，他就对最近领导�请一家新加�会计公��监察数个项目的�作，感到很�以为然。
  
  他说，“开始我也以为新加å�¡å…¬å�¸æœ‰å¤šèƒ½è€�，看下去也ä¸�过尔尔，他们样样事情就是按照模å¼�进行，还真ä¸�会转弯。而且他们总是嫌这个嫌那个，以为懂英文就是处于一个高角度，其实就那两下å­�的死学问。英语也ä¸�è§�得真有规范水平。”
  
  å�ˆä¸€å›žå�¬åˆ°åŒ—京人说：“ä¸�知é�“他们是å�¦çœŸçš„没趣，还是他们å�ªæ‡‚得计算和到办公室去上ç�­ã€‚他们给人感觉åƒ�是没劲，什么都ä¸�懂，既æ�¥ä¸­å›½å�šç”Ÿæ„�，连湖å�—æ²³å�—是两个地方的认识都没有。”
  
  在一些中国人眼里，新加å�¡äººå¥½åƒ�å�˜äº†ï¼Œå�˜å¾—跟他们“久闻大å��”çš„è´§ä¸�对办。但更悲哀是事实上就根本没å�˜è¿‡ï¼Œæ–°åŠ å�¡äººæ²¡å�˜ï¼Œæ˜¯ä¸­å›½äººçš„眼界ä¸�å†�是å��å¹´å‰�的眼界，把新加å�¡äººçžªä¹…了，真相也就越瞪越大白。如今的新加å�¡äººï¼Œå·²ä¸�是从å‰�那个亚洲神è¯�里的角色。
  
  因怕蛇而�绳
  
  新加�人，就是个普通的海外�人。新加�人他概�过太多有关在中国�生�的负�信�，常常显得因怕蛇而�绳，也似乎对样样事情更容易起疑心，因此办事显得拘谨，�够�活，相处起�，时有别扭。
  
  新加å�¡äººæ˜¯ä¸€å��“应该论”。这个应该这样，那个应该那样。å�ªè¦�原本应该那样的以ä¸�应该那样的情况出现，他就阵脚乱了，几乎ä¸�懂如何应付，这包括在处ç�†å•†åŠ¡ï¼Œå¾…人接物，甚至平日的社交生活方é�¢ï¼Œç”šè‡³å�œä¸€éƒ¨è½¦ï¼ŒåŽ»ç¼´ä¸€ä¸ªä»€ä¹ˆè´¹ç”¨ç­‰ç­‰ã€‚新加å�¡äººå¸¸å¸¸éƒ½ä¼šä»¥ä»–自己社会上那ç§�ç§�çš„“习惯法”æ�¥å†³å®šä»–人应该拥有的水平。
  
  新加�人没有很好的方�感。在上海,北京,深圳这些城市还勉强足以应付，但跟他讨论中国的�个�县市场，他就有点茫然，地图在他��打开他也无法设想�离。地�感�足，会直接影�一个人的胸怀和眼界，但他并�知�自己有这方�的弱点。
  
  新加å�¡äººä¹Ÿæ²¡æœ‰å®�观的时代感。他对中国的认识å�ªæ˜¯“ç»�济起飞å�Žçš„中国概况”。他ä¸�能ç�†è§£ä¹Ÿæ²¡æœ‰æ¸ é�“去ç�†è§£ä¸­å›½äººçš„现时心æ€�。他以为所有的历å�²å�ªä¸�过是一ç§�过程。他的历å�²æ„Ÿå�‘æ�¥å°±ä¸�强，ä¸�看é‡�如何摘å�–历å�²ä¸­çš„ç»�验，也ä¸�会明白历å�²å¯¹æ—¶ä»£çš„æ„�义。
  
  新加�人也许是个很好的员工，但�懂得分�时机。他�大看书报，尤其是中文书报，所以在中国�生�，他看得并�远。
  
  新加�人也许是一个生命很�调的人。�懂得�生�，�想��生�，也�会�生�，生活视点竟是难以想�的狭窄。他�介��观文化演出，但从�没想过�如何�作深入些欣�。
  
  �上新加�人有兴趣的场�,他会站在��留影纪念，但�愿�进入背景的本质里去看看。他的生活几乎是分了点项��次进行的，因此他挺没趣，没�题，没劲，上���人开会就白纸黑字�开会通告，下�就回家上网。
  
  新加�人以为陌生的大城市治安都会有点问题，也许10点钟就乖乖上床�觉会比较�险。新加�人跟今天接触��断扩宽�眼界开阔了的中国人，真是太�一样。
  
  How to break the ice? �如新加�人本身内容�足，冰�化了也�一定有利于�象，冰�了就一滩水。