Autobiography of Lee Hsien Loong
-
Some people need to go to work even if they are sick. Sick people may need to take MRT to see doctor. There are the old and weak too. Not everybody can be afford to be chauffered around like you.
-
Pardon me, but i believe you have to find out what sophiscation stands for before i can 'EDUCATE' or as u may prefer 'INFORM' you.Originally posted by Atobe:If you cannot appreciate the sophisticated intention of a pun, then nothing can help you understand the deeper use of the English Language.
The feathered kind cannot withstand the abrasions that some four legged animals - such as a lion, who is smarter in playing it cool.
Can you even learn to appreciate and differentiate light humour from abusive and aggressive assault below the belt, before posting your critique of the reply made by others ?
The party that received the comments did not even feel the strength of the supposed "hit below the belt", and did not even bother to respond in the manner that you have taken.
You got to learn to be cooler in order to live up to your preferred name.
And pray tell, does having a nick such as Atobe mean you have to operate like a rigid software program? I'm just glad that your nick is not 'd**khead' which could be more of an ideal self-explanatory nick. -
I hope poor ppl have the brains to squat down and ask for help if they are unwell. If not, the train can go ahead and run them over.Originally posted by paperchicken:Some people need to go to work even if they are sick. Sick people may need to take MRT to see doctor. There are the old and weak too. Not everybody can be afford to be chauffered around like you. -
Not only have you supported the govt blindly, you have adopted their cold and heartless attitude as well.
-
Welcome to the real world! Cold and heartless? Can the govt afford to pay jobless ppl and keep them on fricking pensions till they meet their end? No way! In addition, i am not paying taxes to feed ppl who are jobless and encourage them to be bums.Originally posted by paperchicken:Not only have you supported the govt blindly, you have adopted their cold and heartless attitude as well.
It's time Singaporeans stop whining and moaning, when they get poked up the arse. It's either you getting poked, or you dealing the pokes. And personally, i prefer the latter - cruel or not. -
Singapore has no hope with people like you around. Even Atobe is better than you.Originally posted by cooleo:Welcome to the real world! Cold and heartless? Can the govt afford to pay jobless ppl and keep them on fricking pensions till they meet their end? No way! In addition, i am not paying taxes to feed ppl who are jobless and encourage them to be bums.
It's time Singaporeans stop whining and moaning, when they get poked up the arse. It's either you getting poked, or you dealing the pokes. And personally, i prefer the latter - cruel or not. -
Hah...well as we are talking, he is probably thinking "KNN got to pay taxes to chip in for subsidies towards poor and elderly ppl". The only good thing about Atobe is, he does make a good source for authors writing joke books, most particularly his laughable "sophiscated intention of a pun".Originally posted by paperchicken:Singapore has no hope with people like you around. Even Atobe is better than you. -
Originally posted by cooleo:
How cool of you to avoid responding to my tearing up of your posting of your "Great Brain defending the PAP", and now preferring to expend your energy in a useless pursuit to create diversionary attention after having your pride punctured ?
Pardon me, but i believe you have to find out what sophiscation stands for before i can 'EDUCATE' or as u may prefer 'INFORM' you.
And pray tell, does having a nick such as Atobe mean you have to operate like a rigid software program? I'm just glad that your nick is not 'd**khead' which could be more of an ideal self-explanatory nick.
This will be truly the hallmark of a 'd**khead' - which would be more appropriate for someone, who only look at the world through microscopic lens, and recognise the brain of an ant as a Great Brain.
Quite a novel approach to attain some sophisticated display of rebuttal.
You must put effort to reach the nirvana stage of sophistication. -
Did you miss my post on Page 4, dated 21 August 2004 at 04:26pm, which somehow did not draw your usual diligent response ?
I am repeating it here for your benefit.
Surely, this is more urgent for a rebuttal than the previous odd response that you gave to my post.Originally posted by cooleo:
So finally, after so many postings in all the different threads, the true self in a supposedly 'cooleo' has now revealed his true personna with your opening paragraph.
What kind of rights do Singaporeans deserve? They even need a nanny on standby to watch and make sure they dun fall down mrt platforms. Govt need to shove a pacifier into their mouths when there's a blackout. I'm afraid freedom is something everyone wants, but not necessarily something they can handle.
Are you saying that Singaporeans deserve no rights at all, or some kind of diluted rights - just because they are so dependent on the Government for a "nanny on standby to watch and make sure they dun fall down mrt platforms" ?
Why do you think the "Govt need to shove a pacifier into their mouths when there's a blackout" ?
Is the answer not appearing in your "light bulb" that is so defensive of the Government ?
Who has made Singaporeans dependent on the Government entirely on almost everything that is needed for living and working in Singapore ?
From Kindergarten Schools in HDB void decks, to Schools and Universities that are locked in by Government paternerlistic control, daily necessities of food, transport, jobs, health, entertainment, media, security, water, power, sewage, garbage, and all services and sundry that enslave Singaporeans to a system created by a Government to take back from the Citizens the money that has been paid to them.
Even with the declared intention of Privatising such essential services, to create supposedly efficient competition, the new supposedly 'private' companies are no better that the original Government Departments formed into Commercial Entities, each taking on a divided pie, and all reporting to the Temasek Holdings.
So much for your theory of Singaporeans inability to exercise "FREEDOM".
You certainly have been bred for too long in Singapore, and fed the on the kind of fodder by the Rulers in this Singapore version of the Animal Farm.continuing post by cooleo:
You are entitled to your position, and your own point of views, with your own vision of the political situation in Singapore.
And i certainly stick to my guns that the writer i quoted was a remarkable thinker. Strong forceful arguments with great conviction. To sum it up, losers will always be the ones complaining about PAP. Either they can't afford to migrate, or they are too timid to do so. Or maybe they need a step-by-step instruction manual published by PAP to teach them how to migrate?
My grateful thanks for the opportunity of responding to your article about the supposed 'Great Brain' whom you believe have made such a strong defense of the position of the Ruling Party.
Hopefully, it would have counter balanced your posted article with the real life events that had been avoided by your writer, whom you promoted as having such a Great Brain.
It will be interesting if you can unravel my posts that was made in response to that wierd article that you have adopted with such misplaced and ardent passion. -
*sigh... Besides having to 'INFORM' you of the meaning of sophiscation, do i have to go into the area of Economics as well? And i thought shallow does not equate to being stupid, looks like there is a need o reassess this definition.Originally posted by Atobe:Even with the declared intention of Privatising such essential services, to create supposedly efficient competition, the new supposedly 'private' companies are no better that the original Government Departments formed into Commercial Entities, each taking on a divided pie, and all reporting to the Temasek Holdings.
In Economics, there is a market structure known as Natural Monopoly. Since you have proven a lack of competence in finding out the meanings of words you do not understand, i have done the dirty task for you.
Natural Monopoly - in instances where the size of the market allows only one firm of efficient size to exist. In this type of market, competition among firms will lead to each firm producing a small output at very high unit costs. Eventually, it will be very difficult for firms to survive.
(WHO'S NEXT TO ASK SILLY QUESTIONS?! ) -
Atobe, high five
l -
Originally posted by cooleo:
What does this post of yours prove ?
*sigh... Besides having to 'INFORM' you of the meaning of sophiscation, do i have to go into the area of Economics as well? And i thought shallow does not equate to being stupid, looks like there is a need o reassess this definition.
In Economics, there is a market structure known as Natural Monopoly. Since you have proven a lack of competence in finding out the meanings of words you do not understand, i have done the dirty task for you.
Natural Monopoly - in instances where the size of the market allows only one firm of efficient size to exist. In this type of market, competition among firms will lead to each firm producing a small output at very high unit costs. Eventually, it will be very difficult for firms to survive.
(WHO'S NEXT TO ASK SILLY QUESTIONS?! )
That your knowledge of the English Language has improved, or that your knowledge of Economics is great, or that your Psycho-Analysis of your fellow Humans (if you consider yourself of the same species that you deride) to be supremely skillful ?
Unfortunately, it shows your immense shallowness in terms of experience in the real world, and the weak mind that is so gullible that cannot discern facts and propaganda.
If the size of the market for Electrical Supply allows only ONE firm of efficient size to exist, why do we see ONE Government Owned Electrical Firm transforming and spawning into THREE PRIVATE firms that are ALL Government Linked and with reporting lines back to Temasek Holdings ?
If the size of the market for Water Treatment allows only ONE firm of efficient size to exist, why do we see ONE Government Owned Water Supply Works transforming and spawning into at least four supposedly PRIVATE firms, but funded by Temasek Holdings ?
The same has been done with Garbage Collection Services, and soon more essential services will be PRIVATISED for the SUPPOSED exercise of Government divesting itself of such responsibilities; and SUPPOSEDLY allowing Private Enterprise NEW OPPORTUNITIES.
Will you be gullible enough also to swallow this line - hook, and sinker included ?
Do you not see that with Privatisation, it only means easier justification to make subsequent and regular INCREASES to the CHARGES imposed to pay for such services ?
Surprisingly, you only zero in on one paragraph of my whole post, and will so easily gloat victoriously that you can put me down ?
This reply of yours, and your other postings, certainly will reveal that you are not so formidable in your thought process as you think you are.
Making little pin pricks of responses in support and in defense of the Ruling Party and the Government, without a full piece of clear cut ORIGINAL thinking, will not help you in your public image. -
Thanks, hopefully we are seeing things at the same level of paper thickness or thin-ness, even if viewed from different angles, and written with different instruments.Originally posted by paperchicken:Atobe, high five l -
Once again, you have amazed me with your sudden switch of alliance with someone whom has been criticised by you with the 'sophiscated pun' of "birds of the same feathers flock together".Originally posted by Atobe:Thanks, hopefully we are seeing things at the same level of paper thickness or thin-ness, even if viewed from different angles, and written with different instruments.
It's fairly obvious that your inadequate understanding of the deeper aspects of economics has impaired your ability to argue for your cause convincingly, which is regrettable. Perhaps you may wish to borrow books on economics from the library? -
So, to have a discussion about something that is close to your heart, one must be well-read and certified by some board eh?Whatever happened to getting the feel of issues from the man on the street?Elitist thinking has to go.It will not get anyone far.
-
Originally posted by cooleo:
Once again, you will not address the issues that is central to our on-going unresolved debate, but prefer to deflect attention from the original issues that you have decided to entrench your position in defense of the Ruling Party.
Once again, you have amazed me with your sudden switch of alliance with someone whom has been criticised by you with the 'sophiscated pun' of "birds of the same feathers flock together".
It's fairly obvious that your inadequate understanding of the deeper aspects of economics has impaired your ability to argue for your cause convincingly, which is regrettable. Perhaps you may wish to borrow books on economics from the library?
"Birds of the same feather flocking together" is a straight forward proverb, and is no pun.
Does it reflect your depth of the English Language ?
Unfortunately, economics was one of my major subjects which is dear to my heart.
The issues that were raised in my previous posting - (of the pseudo effort in the government divestment of public companies by PRIVATISATION that led to a proliferation of SUPPOSED PRIVATE COMPANIES) - has no nothing to do with Economic Theories, but more towards POLITICS.
It was a Political Response to the increase in PUBLIC concern towards the dominance of Government in servicing the essential needs of the Public, and also a POLITICAL DECISION to provide a FALSE front of an OPEN and LIBERAL ECONOMY - so as to meet with the terms of the many Free Trade Agreement that are being signed with so many countries.
Time for you to live beyond the walls of ACADEMIA.
Not so formidable in your response, you could do better with more practise. -
Open and liberal economy? Are you living in a fantasy world of Euthopia? Can you name one single country that is totally open and liberal? Even the United States has had its fair share of brickbats against its economic system which was SUPPOSED to be open and liberal.Originally posted by Atobe:Once again, you will not address the issues that is central to our on-going unresolved debate, but prefer to deflect attention from the original issues that you have decided to entrench your position in defense of the Ruling Party.
"Birds of the same feather flocking together" is a straight forward proverb, and is no pun.
Does it reflect your depth of the English Language ?
Unfortunately, economics was one of my major subjects which is dear to my heart.
The issues that were raised in my previous posting - (of the pseudo effort in the government divestment of public companies by PRIVATISATION that led to a proliferation of SUPPOSED PRIVATE COMPANIES) - has no nothing to do with Economic Theories, but more towards POLITICS.
It was a Political Response to the increase in PUBLIC concern towards the dominance of Government in servicing the essential needs of the Public, and also a POLITICAL DECISION to provide a FALSE front of an OPEN and LIBERAL ECONOMY - so as to meet with the terms of the many Free Trade Agreement that are being signed with so many countries.
Time for you to live beyond the walls of ACADEMIA.
Not so formidable in your response, you could do better with more practise.
Apparently, holding a subject dearly may not attribute to having a flair for it as shown by you.
The main problem that is bugging you is govt dominance in Singapore, which you wrongly interpret as monpolisation of rights. If you have studied econs, which i hope you have, having a monopoly has its advantages. While not totally perfect, it enables economies of scales. If masking of govt dominance is legal, i don't see why it can't be carried out. As i always say, not everyone can handle the brutal truth even though they may desire it.
And there seems to be a oddly self-appreciating habit on your part to declare yourself a winner at the end of every posting. Not till the fat lady sings anyway. -
I'm questioning whether it was truly a heart attack.Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:hey i was born during that year!
maybe it was my birth that gave her an heart attack! 
which month did she die in? -
it's not funny to makes jokes about dead people. but then, you will probably provide quite a few laughters and jokes during your funeral when the time comes.Originally posted by Lingos:I'm questioning whether it was truly a heart attack. -
sigh...Originally posted by cooleo:it's not funny to makes jokes about dead people. but then, you will probably provide quite a few laughters and jokes during your funeral when the time comes.
now you know why they'll say... when S.H.I.T hits the ceiling, everyone gets it... innocent bystanders are hit by strapnels here...
though certainly a very lively thread... but also a very dangerous one...
its not funny to joke about a dead person? but its funny to joke / "curse" someone to the grave?... Don't get me wrong..."I'm neutral, I'm neutral"... let just try to be a peace-loving bunch... -
So you continue to digress from the main issues, and attempt to lead our attention further away from the rebuttals that you have no answers for, and which you prefer to leave the issue to cool off.
Certainly a cool way to debate - hit someone hard, and when the rebuttal come to prove the emptiness of your attack, you run and will not acknowledge your mistaken position - and create another diversion in an effort to throw attention from the exposure.
This is NOT so cool - leo.Originally posted by cooleo:
While you are very ready to defend the Ruling Party - (THEIR POSITION in claiming Singapore to be a FREE and OPEN Society, and even willingly turn a blind eye to all their attempts to monopolise power and make Singapore a "closed state" and make a mockery of their stated claim) - yet you WILL demand a system to be OPEN and LIBERAL only if it measures TOTALLY OPEN and LIBERAL.
Open and liberal economy? Are you living in a fantasy world of Euthopia? Can you name one single country that is totally open and liberal? Even the United States has had its fair share of brickbats against its economic system which was SUPPOSED to be open and liberal.
To you it is only 100 percent or NOTHING
Yet "NOTHING" will become "SOMETHING" as long as the Ruling Party say it is "SOMETHING", you will happily promote that Singapore is a Free and Open Society just because the Ruling Party say it is.
Sure, no country is TOTALLY OPEN and LIBERAL, but at least all those countries endorsing FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS are working themselves towards this goal.
If you are referring to the East African state of Ethopia, then I will agree with you that one will not find too much of an OPEN or LIBERAL Economy.
Not so sure if Euthopia even exist, probably half-way between Ethopia and Utopia in your warped view of this world.
However, if you are referring to UTOPIA, then that world maybe a reality within this decade, if the pressure and benefits of GLOBALISATION will nudge more governments into an OPEN and LIBERAL trade arrangements.
With your pessimistic views of the future, perhaps you are living in Euthopia; while my optimistic view of the future world may not necessarily be "UTOPIC" in an Utopian world, as time will show you the reality of the Open and Liberal World that the best is yet to be.continuing post by cooleo:
So are you commenting on my ability as a better qualified Economist ?
Apparently, holding a subject dearly may not attribute to having a flair for it as shown by you.Originally posted by cooleo:
Or now are you making comments as a more qualified psychologist ?
The main problem that is bugging you is govt dominance in Singapore, which you wrongly interpret as monpolisation of rights. If you have studied econs, which i hope you have, having a monopoly has its advantages. While not totally perfect, it enables economies of scales. If masking of govt dominance is legal, i don't see why it can't be carried out. As i always say, not everyone can handle the brutal truth even though they may desire it.
Can you handle the brutal truth yourself, or do you prefer to mask the truth when you become impotent and numb to the monopolistic power that dominate your little and incapable life, and hence prefer to ride with the strength of the dominating power waves that come your way ?
Are you waiting to be spotted, and in the process hope to earn a retainer place in the monopoly ?
Based on your comments, you certainly have warped the "principles of economies of scale" to justify the present situation in Singapore.
You refused to address the critical remarks made to your post, which YOU had asked why Singaporeans are so dependent on the Government, and why Singaporeans need pacifiers to be put into their mouths when experiencing a blackout; yet you remain around to continue to push your ideas - that it is justifiable for the Singapore Government's monopolistic policy to achieve economies of scale ?
Have you not been informed by your idolised Ruling Party that despite the original government's position of monopolising the essential services, they NOW believe that it is best to allow such essential services to be PRIVATISED.
What do we see now? Shall it be repeated again, for your benefit ?
The critical Electrical Power Generating Service is now split into THREE PRIVATE ENTERPRISES.
Are they PRIVATE ENTERPRISE or are they AGAIN owned by the GOVERNMENT owned TEMASEK Holdings ?
Time has changed and the single wolf has been transformed into three wily foxes, all with the same genetic code.
Are you living in Singapore, Ethopia, Euthopia, or Utopia ?
Does it not sink into your thought process, or are you simply blinded by the flashy White of the Ruling Party, so much so that you do not see the Red lighting striking from out of the Blue circling sky above you ?Originally posted by cooleo:
Now you are slowly learning to psycho-analyse my personna from the format and style of my posting.
And there seems to be a oddly self-appreciating habit on your part to declare yourself a winner at the end of every posting. Not till the fat lady sings anyway.
But you still have not perfected the art of appreciation of the style and subtleties of verbal combat, and remain anchored in the crude battle of merely winning and losing.
How do you come to this conclusion that I always conclude my post in DECLARING MYSELF (??) as a winner ?
Did I end my post with "Sorry mate, I win, you lose" ?
Did I end my post with any sarcasm 
?
You are certainly reacting in a very wierd manner as you make a frantic search to make up a reply. Quite a different performance of your usual confident position that you so solidly displayed in your attacks towards the posts made by others.
Did I declare or hint myself as a winner again with the ending paragraph ?
It is merely a statement of your very odd response with each effort to make a sensible reply to each of my response, and with you continuing to avoid the main issues brought up in each of my response, and only picking on small issues. -
A case of pot calling kettle black? Despite your incessant rantings of avoidance of issues, i felt that i have addressed them well. Well may not be that good since u possess such a program-like mentality like an Atobe program, that u will probably hang if made to think otherwise.Originally posted by Atobe:So you continue to digress from the main issues, and attempt to lead our attention further away from the rebuttals that you have no answers for, and which you prefer to leave the issue to cool off.
Certainly a cool way to debate - hit someone hard, and when the rebuttal come to prove the emptiness of your attack, you run and will not acknowledge your mistaken position - and create another diversion in an effort to throw attention from the exposure.
This is NOT so cool - leo.
Now you are slowly learning to psycho-analyse my personna from the format and style of my posting.
But you still have not perfected the art of appreciation of the style and subtleties of verbal combat, and remain anchored in the crude battle of merely winning and losing.
How do you come to this conclusion that I always conclude my post in DECLARING MYSELF (??) as a winner ?
Did I end my post with "Sorry mate, I win, you lose" ?
Did I end my post with any sarcasm ?
You are certainly reacting in a very wierd manner as you make a frantic search to make up a reply. Quite a different performance of your usual confident position that you so solidly displayed in your attacks towards the posts made by others.
Did I declare or hint myself as a winner again with the ending paragraph ?
It is merely a statement of your very odd response with each effort to make a sensible reply to each of my response, and with you continuing to avoid the main issues brought up in each of my response, and only picking on small issues.
Talking bout avoidance of issues, you are as faulty as a poorly-implemented program. Can Singaporeans handle the brutal truth? Like i said, Utopia is a desirable state, but in realistic context, it does not work. Assuming how things could be better without govt dominance? Prove it. Talk is cheap, and so far you have proven it time and again.
And to think that every posting u make, i have to endure something so uncool in your self-proclaimed 'SOPHISCATED' intention of a pun, which you have relished from delight in using excessively. -
Originally posted by cooleo:
How clever of you to adopt this line of counter-attack?
A case of pot calling kettle black? Despite your incessant rantings of avoidance of issues, i felt that i have addressed them well. Well may not be that good since u possess such a program-like mentality like an Atobe program, that u will probably hang if made to think otherwise.
Talking bout avoidance of issues, you are as faulty as a poorly-implemented program. Can Singaporeans handle the brutal truth? Like i said, Utopia is a desirable state, but in realistic context, it does not work. Assuming how things could be better without govt dominance? Prove it. Talk is cheap, and so far you have proven it time and again.
And to think that every posting u make, i have to endure something so uncool in your self-proclaimed 'SOPHISCATED' intention of a pun, which you have relished from delight in using excessively.
You "felt" that you have addresed them (the issues) well, and I am repeated "a program-like mentality like a Atobe program" concerning your avoidance ?
How clever clever when you refused to reply to the core issues - which basically you have no answers for), but pick on new peripheral and insignificants matters of each new reply from me - (in order not to embarass yourself of being deflated).
If you believe that my retorts are program-lime, it will at least show my consistency and persistence in reminding you that you have again avoided the core issues - which also shows your similar consistency in happily hitting and running from the brutal truth of having your wierd adoration of the Ruling Party being deflated.
Now with this reply, you do not wish to submit any further rebuttal to my previous posts that debunk your concept of MONOPOLY, and prefer to again attack me on peripheral issues ?
What about a reply to your accusation that I have gloated with victory at the end of each posting ?
How about all the other questions that concerning Ethopia, Euthopia and Utopia ? -
Firstly, based on my assumption that u have studied Economics, i am pretty sure that u know what a monopoly stands for. Whether it is a masked monopoly in the form of 'privatisation' or not is not the crux of the matter. The intention is to let ppl have this perception that the market is not being monopolised, even though it may have been, due to the natural monopoly market structure. I believe this is the 2nd time that i have tried to explain this simple concept to you. But like i said, a program can be irritatingly rigid and uncompromising at times. It's either 100% correct or 100% wrong for you.Originally posted by Atobe:How clever of you to adopt this line of counter-attack?
You "felt" that you have addresed them (the issues) well, and I am repeated "a program-like mentality like a Atobe program" concerning your avoidance ?
How clever clever when you refused to reply to the core issues - which basically you have no answers for), but pick on new peripheral and insignificants matters of each new reply from me - (in order not to embarass yourself of being deflated).
If you believe that my retorts are program-lime, it will at least show my consistency and persistence in reminding you that you have again avoided the core issues - which also shows your similar consistency in happily hitting and running from the brutal truth of having your wierd adoration of the Ruling Party being deflated.
Now with this reply, you do not wish to submit any further rebuttal to my previous posts that debunk your concept of MONOPOLY, and prefer to again attack me on peripheral issues ?
What about a reply to your accusation that I have gloated with victory at the end of each posting ?
How about all the other questions that concerning Ethopia, Euthopia and Utopia ?
And u seem to contradict yourself by firstly urging me to rebutt what u have countered, and then going on to request that i respond to accusations of gloatings and what not. Typical opposition characteristic indeed. -
Atobe Atobe...i really do pity u...pls accept my deepest condolence. U really have the strength to go on. Salute u. Just a gentle reminder, there are just too many incorigible ppl in this forum who wants to claim to be the most intellectual soul. Things that are way far from the original topic are incessantly brought in too. suddenly got economics, monopoly...haizzz Gambatte kudasai. Watashiwa antani shinji steru !