SINGAPOREANS DO U WANNA BE LED BY THE NOSE?
-
Qitai,
I am puzzled as to how fast you make a sweeping generalization. I was willing to hear your reply, but a more educated one than "you won't listen anyway." I am seriously most dissappointed, frankly.
the pikamaster -
Because you keep doubting those figures mah. From the look of the several websites pointing to those data, I have enough reason to believe those are unrelated websites. Of course I may be wrong. But I just post what I can find. Anyway, it is not my job to convince you here. I think those figures are believable base on what I have read and I think it is good to share those figures, so I post it loh. But you keep throwing doubts at it without checking if there is any observable reason to doubt it.Originally posted by pikamaster:Qitai,
I am puzzled as to how fast you make a sweeping generalization. I was willing to hear your reply, but a more educated one than "you won't listen anyway." I am seriously most dissappointed, frankly.
the pikamaster
I do not owe anyone to justify those data, okay? This is just something I like to look at in my free time, compare how each country is doing. And I am just sharing those data since I always hear people say Singapore cost of living high etc etc.
If you doubt it, go and study mercer website loh. I already show you the source of those data. What else you expect me to do?
You disappointed, I also bo bian. -
Hahahaha, paperchicken, whether it is just hotair or otherwise, it will not suit your wishful thinking!
The ideas will be released as per normal channels. It is not for individuals to try and "score points".
Of course, people could possibly come up with "similar" ideas, but the occurance of such "coincidences" are just too frequent to start with!
There are many other examples which bears political sensitivity. If you want me to list them all here for everybody to judge, then I would gladly oblige do so.
The fact is, PAP is totally DRY of any creative ideas! Up to the point that it must admit publicly that despite of the million dollar pays, they don't have all the answers and the monopoly over knowledge!
That is why it is only wise for PAP to ask young people to join them, hoping that through their participations, they could gain some creative and new ideas from them.
Say whatever you want, Singapore voters are not that naive and stupid at all.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by paperchicken:Different ppl can come up with the same ideas or similar ideas at the same time. The fact is that you are selfish and narrow-minded and full of hot air and excuses and think too highly of yourself. If you run for elections I will tell people I know not to vote for you. -
I think you are using excuses to cover up for your lack of ideas. You have ample time to bring them up here and win votes yet you dun want to. When election comes you will cry fowl again say campaign time is too short. So many excuses how can you expect to win votes this way?Originally posted by goh meng seng:Hahahaha, paperchicken, whether it is just hotair or otherwise, it will not suit your wishful thinking! The ideas will be released as per normal channels. It is not for individuals to try and "score points".
Of course, people could possibly come up with "similar" ideas, but the occurance of such "coincidences" are just too frequent to start with!
There are many other examples which bears political sensitivity. If you want me to list them all here for everybody to judge, then I would gladly oblige do so.
The fact is, PAP is totally DRY of any creative ideas! Up to the point that it must admit publicly that despite of the million dollar pays, they don't have all the answers and the monopoly over knowledge!
That is why it is only wise for PAP to ask young people to join them, hoping that through their participations, they could gain some creative and new ideas from them.
Say whatever you want, Singapore voters are not that naive and stupid at all.
Goh Meng Seng
-
no of course not, we're just easy to "bribed" and "blackmail"Originally posted by goh meng seng:Say whatever you want, Singapore voters are not that naive and stupid at all.
Goh Meng Seng -
Dear PaperChicken,
If you want to know how many ideas I have personally, please goto googles, do a search on MADCOW in the newsgroup soc.culture.singapore.
Just be patient. The ideas or manifesto of WP is coming up. No hurry.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by paperchicken:I think you are using excuses to cover up for your lack of ideas. You have ample time to bring them up here and win votes yet you dun want to. When election comes you will cry fowl again say campaign time is too short. So many excuses how can you expect to win votes this way? -
Can you create the link here or better still just post your ideas here. I find that you are very evasive and like to beat around the bush. If you want my vote you certainly will not get it. I believe there are others who feel the same way.Originally posted by goh meng seng:Dear PaperChicken,
If you want to know how many ideas I have personally, please goto googles, do a search on MADCOW in the newsgroup soc.culture.singapore.
Just be patient. The ideas or manifesto of WP is coming up. No hurry.
Goh Meng Seng -
Ok lah, not possible to give you everything; even googles doesn't keep archive for a decade.
Just talk about the most recent PM Lee's national rally speech of urging the youth to "take ownership" of Singapore. ACtually, the first time I raise this "ownership" thing was back in 2002, when PM GOH put on the "Stayer and Quitter" labels.
There are two main articles, one in 2002, one in 2003.
Here they are:
In 2002, 29/11:
http://groups.google.com.hk/groups?q=madcow++ownership&hl=zh-
TW&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=3de7a051%40news.starhub.net.sg&rnum=1
Chris, it sometimes bug me!
People claim so loudly that they are "fighting" for the "freedom" of
Singapore... freedom of speech, freedom of going on rally
march....but at
the end of the day, they just want "freedom" for themselves to "screw"
others! To criticise PAP is ok and deem as the "rights" and "freedom"
that
they are "fighting" for; but when it is their turn to be "screwed"
(excuse
my language, I seldom use such unsightly words) and criticized, it is
their
"freedom" to tell people to "shut up"!
This is the whole irony of "Opposition politics" that I don't see eye
to
eye.
The "Power" of people is not getting jailed and bankrupeted but
rather, the
ability to reflect upon oneself.
I have been quite sympathetic towards the various "hardship" that
various
"prominent" opposition members are going through. I could almost
instantly
pointed out the various "unfairness" in treatments towards these
individuals. However, when I sat down and ponder over it since last
election, my religious belief had provided a light to all these
miserable
sufferings. Karma.... the most fundamentals of "cause and effect" is
actually repeatedly effecting sufferings to these individuals. And it
seems
that they are really too absorbed in this cycle of "bad karma"
unknowingly,
so much so that they are all blinded by the "poisons" in their mind.
As for press freedom, I would agree with you that it is the ability to
interpret "news" from different angles that matters. I am no
different from
many people, living under the "proporgandas" mass media for most of my
youth. At one point of time, I even "worship" LKY as a super idol!
It is in the later part of my life, I have learnt to "dissect" News
to see
clearly what it is to tell what exactly it was. It has been clear to
me that
it is the "ANGLE" that makes the critical difference.... even hard
cold
"statistics" could fool you in forming your perspective!
However, I have found out that most Singaporeans, especially the
youth, are
just too "lazy" to "remake" their perceptions or just totally
apathetic
towards current affairs. They would take whatever the newspapers say
as
"Truth" without second thought. Such lacking of "creativity" in
dissection
and reformulating information into different angles and perspectives
is the
direct result of our rigid education system. The ability to
think "twice" or
"thrice" (from different perspectives) about whatever information
given to
you is a very important steps in creative thinking.
Thus to me, it is ironic that our govt is all giving talks
about "creative
thinking", "creativity" but in actual fact, their tight control over
the
media is detrimental to such efforts! Some of my friends in the mass
media
would tell me that the "social spiritual aspiration" of our fellow
Singaporeans are really very low. They score almost nil in having any
concerns of the society as a whole, be it social economic aspect or
just
social justice in perspective. Why is this so? We used to have
a "vibrant"
society with many highly respected people with great aspiration in
maintaining social awareness back in the 50s, 60s or even early 70s!
But all
these people have somehow turned apathetic towards almost everything
that
concerns the society as a whole! If you look at the press and media
back in
50s and 60s, you can find many high quality and inspirational
writtings that
put concerns on the welfare of the society as whole; be it in debates
on
politics, self-rule, independence or otherwise. IN Chinese, this is
termed
as the period of "blossom of hundred flowers". In fact, it is with
such high
quality social awareness and dynamic aspiration towards the social
welfare
that bonded so many people together to contribute towards the
formation of
Nantah. This spirit has since totally demolished, destroyed and
trashed with
the closing of Nantah. The great power of "mobilization" through such
highly
inspirational writtings in the media had been a "miracle" of the past
that
could not be remade at present.
IT is precisely the lack of such social awareness and social
participation
that resulted in the "Quitter & Stayer" scenerio. When you do not
have the
sense of "ownership" of this place, there will be nothing left here
to be an
"excuse" for you stay on. Such "ownership" isn't exactly what GCT
perceived
it to be.... ownership of SingTel shares, HDB flats... etc etc. Such
sense
of "ownership" could only be found in the process of social
participation in
all aspects, including politics. The inability of PAP govt to realize
the
importance of diversity in all aspects of social life is a remarkable
oversight on their part!
It is only natural for people to yearn for "social justice" to be in
place.
When what you see are all "tilted" towards one side, such "soccer
game" is
just very boring as the result is so much "predictable"! It is only
when you
have a truly leveled playing field for everyone and the diversity
within the
game, it will make people interested and gains loyalty towards the
game!
Thus it is a grave mistake that PAP govt had chosen to ignore the
committee
on politics in remaking Singapore and just brush away such important
critics
and recommendations that could have change the whole attitude of the
society! PAP govt has been talking about social bonding and social
bonding
without actually knowing what is exactly wrong with our social
bonding.
Social bonding will only come when one feels the sense of "ownership"
towards the society! (Just like the "ownership" the Chinese, who had
contributed, feel towards Nantah) And without a diverse and yet
leveled
playing field, nobody will want to be bother about participating in
events
that could have moulded the society's direction and maturity.
The recent answers by the minister of state Dr. Ho about why political
gathering or rallies are "tightly" controlled, is a gross
demonstration of
the total lack of understanding on what constitute an important role
in
social bonding that would prevent more people from turning
into "quitters"!
All people needs attention; by participating in social gathering such
as
political rallies or gathering will give the people the opportunity of
expressing their needs of attention. By merely approving the license
of such
gathering will show these people that the govt respect their will in
such
social participation. By turning down such requests for fear of some
"bogeyman" theory is really a pathetic move in curbing social
participation
by the people. When these people feel that they are not wanted in
social
participation of any sorts, they will turn pessimistic and the
feeling of
"ownership" of this place call Singapore will disappear! How could
you ever
hope to promote strong social bonding by turning down such functions
that
provide the opportunity for people to groom their social
participation and
thus create social bonding?
If one day, we no longer attract any people to attend even
an "opposition"
party rallies, it would mean that we would be doomed as a Nation!
Such sense
of "ownership" and "social participation" will be lost forever and we
might
have only "zombies" in our homeland.
I feel that PAP govt should be GLAD instead of feeling threaten when
there
is a large crowd attending political social gathering or rallies; it
just
shows that people still CARE about Singapore's politics and social
well
being. There is still a little bit left in sense of "ownership". The
more
you try to curb such social participation, the worst you will get in
loosing
local born Singaporeans.
If there are more and more people who step out and write critics on
govt
policies, PAP govt should not feel offended or defensive about it...
worst,
offensive about it. It is only natural in a democratic society. And
they
should be HAPPY that social awareness (which is linked directly to
social
bonding) is rising and people still care to participate in social
debates!
If there are more and more people who step out to join "Pro-Singapore"
political parties, be it PAP (ruling) or non-ruling parties, PAP govt
should
feel glad about it, not feel threaten by such environment. The more
PAP govt
exerts the elements of "FEAR" into Singaporeans with regards to social
participation as in politics, the more it is working towards breaking
up
social bonding.
So, as usual, I digress.
It seems to me that PAP govt is just in the tunnel of darkness; they
knew
the problems, however, it is ironic that sometimes, they just do the
opposite things to aggreviate the problems
MADCOWOriginally posted by paperchicken:Can you create the link here or better still just post your ideas here. I find that you are very evasive and like to beat around the bush. If you want my vote you certainly will not get it. I believe there are others who feel the same way. -
Second reference:
In 2003, 25/06
http://groups.google.com.hk/groups?q=madcow++ownership&hl=zh-
TW&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=3ef97610%40news.starhub.net.sg&rnum=4
Hello Katami,
You reminds me about Dr. Kevin Tan who has been featured in recent ST
Insight.
He had spend 15 years talking to "air" and what he gets is only
disappointment and inaction from PAP regime. He even got
the "bashing" from
PAP for commenting on the "confusing" elected Presidency.....
His fire has somehow "died" after facing such "inaction" and I think
he
feels that all his "good advices" had fallen on death ears.
We must face the reality of PAP "dictatorship"; a poitical system that
doesn't emcompass healthy competition will only breed arrogance and
monopolistic behaviour from the ruling party. I am just like Dr.
Kevin Tan
and you, believing that by sitting in front of our keyboards, we could
possibly get "somebody" to "listen" to us, and make changes
accordingly. No
doubt, they do once a while, "responded" to our "calling", but you
would
have noticed that such reaction is really very slow and reactive.
There is really no room for non-partisan politics in Singapore. You
want
people (be it Singaporeans or PAP) to take you seriously, you must be
prepared to lay down your life, assets and everything you have, and
stand by
your ideals and words. We are afterall, decent people who think "a
little
more" and have a little more concerns for the well being for a
country call
Singapore. We should stand up as a true warrior to stand by our words
and
ideals.
Political competition will only be good for both PAP and Singapore in
the
long run. I just happen to know the vast pathetic state of affairs
happening
in RCs.... A friend of mine is a member of RC, though he had only
attended
two events in his RC. He had not attended any functions for months but
recently, he still get his "appointment letter" from PAP govt! Why?
It could
only be that PAP govt has really hard time to find young and dedicated
people to join RC! And the situation is "bearable" basically because
there
isn't any "threat" of competition from the opposition camp!
As a member affliated to Workers' Party, I have to encourage my
friend to be
more active in RC activities! Citing the reasons that if young people
don't
come out from their comfortable pigeon hole to take ownership of the
country
right now, there will be a crisis of lineage from the old guard to the
young. If that happens, the social bonding will be adversely
affected. All
this development is really unhealthy for the future development of
Singapore, whereby the sense of belonging and ownership will drop to
the
bottom.
The only way we could "jerk" the PAP govt into more active
recruitment and
actions on the ground is to compete against it.
The recent mass media coverage on Workers' Party renewal process has
created
a healthy "awakening" from the original apathetic lot of
Singaporeans. The
hit rate on Workers' Party website shot up tremendously. This is a
hint that
there is some hope at the end of the tunnel that Singporeans still
care and
bother to find out things more "political". Apart from that, our
recruitment
drive and outreach efforts have been met with overwhelming respnose
from the
ground. It shows that deep down alot of people's heart, they are still
concern about our country's political future.
After having saying that, I think if you really want to contribute
constructively to the development of our country's political future,
you
should make your stand, get yourself involve in partisan politics, be
it PAP
or Workers' Party or otherwise. Some believe they could join PAP and
create
changes from within.... but what we have witnessed so far is that
these
people had been "drown" by PAP instead.
Unfortuntaely, I have heard that SDP is fragmented and their youth
group is
basically "defunct" to a certain extent. SDP is basically dying a slow
death. It is really a pity that SDP, having once been the "strongest"
opposition party when it won three seats in the parliarment, had
deteriorated into such a pathetic state. I think it is time for Dr.
Chee to
rethink his party's overall strategy and political approach; if we
look at
the political era as a market place, obviously, his political
branding and
approach has no "demand" from the "onsumers", Signaporeans at large.
Workers' Party is actively recruiting new blood into its rank and
file. And
I believe with your aspiration of "good" towards Singapore society and
Singaporeans as a whole, Workers' Party's "Pro-Singapore" and
"Pro-Singaporeans" stand will resonate with your ideals well.
If no young ones are to take ownership of Singpapore as a whole,
there will
not be a land call Singapore in essence. If there is no young ones
who are
willing to step forward to join political parties, there will be no
PAP or
other political parties... opposition politics will extinct one day.
MADCOW -
I only see you complaining abt problems. I dont see you offering any solutions or suggestions to solve them. Complaining isnt going to solve anything.
What are your objectives and proposals ?
I dun know whether you like my grilling here.
...... but its for you own good. If you are serious abt running for elections, this forum will be a good training ground. You will have to answer these questions sooner or later. -
Just a teaser on CPF:
http://www.google.com.hk/groups?q=CPF+group:soc.culture.singapore+author:MADCOW&hl=zh-TW&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=3bec146c%40news.starhub.net.sg&rnum=1
PAP Govt, through the civil service and GLCs, are the one who will going to
benefit tremendously by this CPF cut as they employed about 40% of Singapore
workforce.
Due to this simple fact, it will create a depressionary pressure on the
economy if such "savings" are not re-injected into the economy. It would
mean that instead of having budget deficit, PAP govt may just have budget
surplus during economic downturn. Due to the increase in GST, govt revenue
at half time already increased by 5%!
Sometimes it makes one wonder whether such CPF cuts is necessary or not, or
isit for the purpose of saving GLCs from the red, instead of helping to
retain MNCs from relocating?
My guess is that foreign MNCs will sooner or later, shift out of Singapore
and there is nothing we could do to prevent this from happening. Thus
whether such across the board CPF cut is necessary will remain to be seen.
AFter the massive round of "asset enhancement" back in 1990s, we have been
forcefully put on the path of no return. It is impossible to pay for your
mortgage with your CPF in full if the CPF is cut to 30% when they have
increased your contributions to Medisave and Special accounts.
Imagine that a household with total income of $4000 will not be able to pay
their mortgage for a four room flat that cost $200,000 when the 30% CPF will
only puts in less than $700 in ordinary account. This is cost a great middle
class crunch and it will create a deterrence effect to young couples
planning to marry.
The social-economical impact of the 6% cut in CPF will be too wide to be
estimated.
As we are faced with STRUCTURAL economic problems, retaining sectors that
are STRUCTURALLY unsound to our economic model would be unwise. And since it
is "STRUCTURAL" in nature, a blunt and crude method like a cut of 6% of CPF
across the board is not a good method at all. There are still companies
making money and such CPF cut would mean a "windfall" given by Govt at the
expense of the workers.
CPF should not be used as a economic policy instrument at all. It may be
very tempting and easy to use but it is ineffective to address specific
problems happening at specific area.
PAP govt should let the Labour Unions at various economic sectors to play
the important role of managing and fighting for workers' welfare and
preventing them from being "exploited". Allowing companies that are making
money to have a cut on workers' pay, be it CPF or otherwise, is an
exploitation!
That is why I think the Labour Chief should step down as he doesn't know
what he is talking about when he urge for CPF cut, as much as possible!
Employers' and employees' welfare and benefits should be balanced up,
especially so during economic downturn when unscrupulous employers will
always tend to utilize such situation to exploit employees even when they
are making money. The check and balance should be provided by the labour
unions.
Govt is just taking an easier way out for employers to make a statutory cut
on the CPF so that the power of labour unions in exercising checks and
balance would be marginalized. This should not be so.
If the PAP govt really thinks that in some sector, there should be drastic
cut, then let the employer and employee negotiate for it. Even though I
strongly oppose PAP govt using CPF cuts as policy instruments, I think at
the very worst, it should be done in a way that more flexibility should be
exercised so that welfare of workers (especially those in profit making
industries) should be safe guarded.
My proposal would be, take out the six percent and turn it into a variable
component. For civil service and GLCs, this variable component should not be
cut as by doing so, they will put on deflationary pressures on local pte
consumptions and expenditure. For foreign MNCs, let the unions go and
negotiate. That is the best out of the worst thing the govt should do.
MADCOW -
Paperchicken, so what topic do you want? Googles' archives do not contain postings way back to 1997, I think.
So even when I say I have mentioned some of the ideas like what PAP is doing right now, signing FTAs with India, China and USA, or going strongly against the "ASSET ENHANCEMENT SCHEME" way back in 1993/4 during my university time when everybody seems to be so excited about making money from SingTel shares and property market, you will say I bluff, or saying things on hindsight.
Goh Meng Seng -
Ok, Paperchicken, you want some real stuff on views from WP, here is one on CPF:
http://www.wp.org.sg/news/hammer_online/04_cpf.htm
Actually there are more views and ideas that WP has given; you will need to do a little research. You could search through the parliament's archives of speeches given by Mr. Low Thia Kiang or Mr. Chiam See Tong or Steve Chia.
You could also read our past hammer issues in the following links:
http://www.wp.org.sg/news/hammer_online.htm
These are past, published ideas, I don't mind sharing with you. But for new ideas, please wait for our manifesto.
Goh Meng Seng -
There are a few hot topics around what your opinion on :Originally posted by goh meng seng:Ok, Paperchicken, you want some real stuff on views from WP, here is one on CPF:
http://www.wp.org.sg/news/hammer_online/04_cpf.htm
Actually there are more views and ideas that WP has given; you will need to do a little research. You could search through the parliament's archives of speeches given by Mr. Low Thia Kiang or Mr. Chiam See Tong or Steve Chia.
You could also read our past hammer issues in the following links:
http://www.wp.org.sg/news/hammer_online.htm
These are past, published ideas, I don't mind sharing with you. But for new ideas, please wait for our manifesto.
Goh Meng Seng
1 Are the actions of CJS harmful to Singapore ? Do you support him ?
2 MRT accidents. Do you think the authorities are indifferent. If you are an MP what will you do.
3 Nail on walls at void decks.
4 Accountability of charity orgs such as NKF.
5 Media Merger. -
Actually i dont think we are so easily "bribed" or "blackmail",if let say all Singaporeans have the opportunity to have a full scale of voting during the election,the result maybe very different.But of coz,the PAP didnt play gentleman at all,during the last few election,the keep changing the rules like from a "single participant district",they change into must have a "group of different representatives district".Knowing fully well that opposition might not have enough ppl to compete with them.They also raised the election fees to make things even harder for opposition to gather enough funds.Those PAP are disgusting and despicable!Originally posted by oldbreadstinks:no of course not, we're just easy to "bribed" and "blackmail"
Usually for Singaporeans if we are 21 yrs old we can vote already right?But do u believe it or not,i am now 32 yrs old but i have "Never make a single vote" during the last few election becoz my district is "walk over" without any challenge!!!If the situation remain like that,then i doubt that even if i am 50 or 60 yrs old,i might not have a chance to even "cast a single vote" in a election to execise the right of my citizenship!!! -
If you stay in SMC you will get a chance to vote every time.Originally posted by drawer:Actually i dont think we are so easily "bribed" or "blackmail",if let say all Singaporeans have the opportunity to have a full scale of voting during the election,the result maybe very different.But of coz,the PAP didnt play gentleman at all,during the last few election,the keep changing the rules like from a "single participant district",they change into must have a "group of different representatives district".Knowing fully well that opposition might not have enough ppl to compete with them.They also raised the election fees to make things even harder for opposition to gather enough funds.Those PAP are disgusting and despicable!
Usually for Singaporeans if we are 21 yrs old we can vote already right?But do u believe it or not,i am now 32 yrs old but i have "Never make a single vote" during the last few election becoz my district is "walk over" without any challenge!!!If the situation remain like that,then i doubt that even if i am 50 or 60 yrs old,i might not have a chance to even "cast a single vote" in a election to execise the right of my citizenship!!! -
I will be voting for the first time at the next GE haha
and it certainly won't be a walkover, coz its Hougang... well, unless "they" cut Hougang away again 
-
Dear Paperchicken,
You only see what you wish to see.
There are many "suggestions" in my postings already, just that you chose not to see then.
You want people to take ownership? The only way is active social, political participations. This is said way back in 2002, before PAP says anything about opening up, letting civic and civil groups more room to play around with, urging young Singaporeans to come forward to participate in Nation building...etc etc.
If this is not enough, then I don't know whether there is half a stamp in your eyes.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by paperchicken:I only see you complaining abt problems. I dont see you offering any solutions or suggestions to solve them. Complaining isnt going to solve anything.
What are your objectives and proposals ?
I dun know whether you like my grilling here.
...... but its for you own good. If you are serious abt running for elections, this forum will be a good training ground. You will have to answer these questions sooner or later. -
Dear Paperchicken,
As far as I am concerned, my mission here is to dispel ill-conceived perceptions people like you have against opposition party members.
You claim we don't have ideas, but have you done any research before you utter these words? I have just given you the links, and here is a more important link to Singapore parliament house whereh you could search and see for yourselves, the numerous ideas, suggestions and speeches made by opposition MPs. Compare the average 270 speeches to some PAP MPs who only make only a few speeches during their term of office! Here is the link:
http://www.parliament.gov.sg/parlweb/hansard_search_latest.jsp
But I will still oblige you with my little PERSONAL view on the selected topics. I will start with Dr. Chee's issue.
First and foremost, I am not a fan of Dr. Chee, else I wouldn't be in Workers' Party instead of SDP now. I do not subscribe to his confrontational approach, which is doing more harm than good to alternative politics. But before anyone writes him off, have you read his various books? "Dare to Challenge"? Here again, we are forming our perceptions and likings, subject to the manipulations of local Mass Media. Just like our mass media seldom report on Opposition MPs' speeches, giving people the impression that they did not have ideas or any "worthy contributions", but the fact is, they have contributed much more than any PAP MPs. You will have to do your own research to find out the truth.
If you are asking me the question of "harm", then I would ask you back, what "harm" are you talking about? Embarrassing us or our court, internationally? This is just like asking whether we should blame the one who pointed out our mistakes to the world to know, instead of blaming ourselves for the mistakes made. Yes, he has caused embarrassment to us, as a country. But where does the actual harm lies? So far, neither the court nor the CJ has replied with respect to his claim of unfair treatment. Why?
Yes, he should be blamed for the embarrassment we suffered, but not the "harm".
If you are referring to the ST's article, SDP Destination Unknown, then I refer to my views posted in YPAP forum:
http://www.youngpap.org.sg/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=3326
"I think this Ernest Chee has big political ambition. Don't know his age or eight characters, else can do a bit of calculations on him!
SDP, though has very much neglected its ground work and being distracted by bad publicity brought about by Dr. Chee, has somehow complemented what is lacking in local alternative politics. The exposure to the international community may be a necessary move in the later stage of development. However, Dr. Chee has jumped the gun. The timing is not right, just yet. I think we shouldn't jump the gun and write down SDP totally at this stage.
There is a subtle political motive in having this article published in ST at this particular timing. Have you ever wonder why the initial request of bringing forward the trial dates have been "reversed" at the last minute? The trial cannot be "more important" than official business and there isn't really a necessity to change official arrangement just to fit the trial. It could have been postponed to later dates if both parties are busy during the original trial dates! (instead of bringing forward to 26 Aug).
The timing is one of political considerations. The new PM is going to give a great speech of "Ownership", "Inclusive" society on 22 Aug; how could there be suddenly a law suit against a political rival right after such speech of "Inclusiveness"? Obviously, the timing is not right to bring forward to 26 Aug.
They should have done away with the law suit altogether, just to keep the promising speech of the new PM alive, entrenched in Singaporeans' heart. That would be the greatest convincing move to show Singaporeans that the new PM means it when he talks about inclusiveness, accompanied by this act of goodwill and tolerance. This would be something like what the new PM over the causeway has done, letting Anwar free as a man, in a National recouncilation effort, showing to the world and Malaysians that this new PM is a man of his own, living out of the shadow of the ex PM Mahathir.
But alas, they have to do it to show consistence to past practices. But to "minimize" this negative impact on the new PM, something must be shown to "justify" this move. Thus, showing Dr. Chee as an opposition leader "not worthy" to lead the once glorious SDP and how his leadership could have brought upon a weakening of SDP, is the best way to "subtlely justify" such demolition of him in this defamation suit.
The perception projected is this, "Dr. Chee has brought disaster to the once glorious SDP, he deserves no sympathy even as an opposition leader if he is to be bankrupted by the two ex-PM". Of course, to make the article "looks" neutral, one sentence mentioned good about Workers' Party will do the trick. This is why the author did not go further than that one sentence!
Look beyond the words, even beyond the "between the lines".
Goh Meng Seng "
I think we should give a fair assessment to a contraversial person like Dr. Chee, always bearing in mind that most of the "negativity" has been projected by local mass media. IT is up to each and everyone of us to really do indepth research on Dr. Chee, going through his works and books, to understand him more, before we pass comments or judgments.
This is not to say I support him, or vice versa. But to me, politics is about perceptions. And I am very wary about perception projected by our local mass media.
Goh Meng Seng -
To Goh Meng Seng
As far as I am concerned, your presence here has to reinforced ill-conceived perceptions people like us have against opposition party members.
There are good opposition members like Low and Chiam and Slyvia Lim. There are also petty opposition members who go around blowing their own trumpet and claiming their ability to lead.
If you want to win votes and support here speak up and let us know whats your stand on various issues. Stop being so evasive. Stop hiding behind your party. Speak for yourself. -
Dear Paperchicken,
I couldn't believe you! Who is being evasive? I have finished answering the first questin, so? I have already shown you where to get info on what Workers' Party views...
Just admit it, you are just plain bias. Couldn't take the fact gracefully. If you got any strong comments about my opinion on Dr. Chee, so spew it out!
You are just chanting your ill-conceived perception again and again, without able to put any value to it! I am really amused.
I will be answering your second question tomorrow. I thought I could do it one at the time, giving you some time to respond but I am truly mistaken. You don't have anything in your head at all to comment!
Keep chanting your sutra for the moment. I will post again tomorrow.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by paperchicken:To Goh Meng Seng
As far as I am concerned, your presence here has to reinforced ill-conceived perceptions people like us have against opposition party members.
There are good opposition members like Low and Chiam and Slyvia Lim. There are also petty opposition members who go around blowing their own trumpet and claiming their ability to lead.
If you want to win votes and support here speak up and let us know whats your stand on various issues. Stop being so evasive. Stop hiding behind your party. Speak for yourself. -
If you are really going to run for election. You must remember one thing. The voter is always right. Never criticise your voter. Second thing always be humble.
You say ppl are plain bias. If Low or Chiam or Slyvia Lim contest in the election ppl will support them because they already have a track record ppl know who they are.
You are just a newcomer a nobody yet you go around bragging about your "bright ideas".
You complain that the media is biased. Well you have an opportunity to voice your views why arent you taking it.
Dun waste you time at sammyboy type of forums. Those ppl are anti-govt they will vote for you. If you really want to win you have to get the vote of the middle ground here.
If you want ppl to respect you, you have to earn it.
If you cant step out of your comfort zone you will never make any progress. -
ermm...u dont expect me to move from AMK to SMC lor,me bo money leh.Originally posted by papertiger:If you stay in SMC you will get a chance to vote every time. -
Tell Goh Meng Seng to contest in AMK.Originally posted by drawer:ermm...u dont expect me to move from AMK to SMC lor,me bo money leh. -
I suggest a few policies for whoever who wants to be a politician
1. Job protection for all Singaporeans - old and young . No foreigners are to take a job a Singaporean cannot do unless ur talking about employing an nobel prize for economics winner etc. Restrict sponsorship/scholarship of 10 top foreigners per year.
2. Reduce the number of ministries and ministers . Reduce the pay of the ministers to maybe standard rates comparable with most countries...which would make it around 200k /annum.
3. No mayors - waste of money . We have MPs already in each constituent. They do the job of the mayors.
4.All money remaining from cutting minister's pay and mayor's jobs - goes to essential needs such as attracting companies to the region , healthcare , education
5. Reduce streaming to secondary 2 - if they can do it ...they do express /normal/gifted . Allow students to jump the grades or train them in uni type of subjects if they have capabilities to do so . Allow students to take part in vacation workplace attachments to see how working life is,so that would be a replacement for those who don't want ECAS .
Just some suggestions.....only ...for those potential politicians.