"Equal Opportunities Commission"
-
It is not theorising when I have provided you with facts or substance to answer to your complacent attitude that that MOM could solve all discrimination problems.Originally posted by paperchicken:you cant prove that a commission is better either. Theorizing is not a good arguement.
All I need to show is facts or evidences that MOM had not been able to legislate or promote non-discrimination in the employment market place. I did just that but you just went on repeating your contention and adding that I am theorizing.
If Hong Kong had such a commission and could help to solve problems why is it theoretical.
Your mind seems prejudiced in your repeat telecasts or propagandas like broken records as someone has eluded to lately todate probably because of your vested interest, background connection or association as simple as that.
-
Nope. I look at problems objectively. If the system in HongKong is so good why is it that they have such a high unemployment rate ?Originally posted by robertteh:It is not theorising when I have provided you with facts or substance to answer to your complacent attitude that that MOM could solve all discrimination problems.
All I need to show is facts or evidences that MOM had not been able to legislate or promote non-discrimination in the employment market place. I did just that but you just went on repeating your contention and adding that I am theorizing.
If Hong Kong had such a commission and could help to solve problems why is it theoretical.
Your mind seems prejudiced in your postings todate probably caused by vested interest, background connection or association as simple as that.
But I think you are right on one point.
Some ppl do have vested interest here.
For example selling a book to ppl who are not interested at all. -
I did not wave my book in front of you but wonder why you keep trailing me on this book. Is it a crime or vested interest to have written a book?Originally posted by paperchicken:Nope. I look at problems objectively. If the system in HongKong is so good why is it that they have such a high unemployment rate ?
But I think you are right on one point.
Some ppl do have vested interest here.
For example selling a book to ppl who are not interested at all. -
With high unemployment rate does not mean that the EOC in Hong Kong is not functioning well.Originally posted by paperchicken:Nope. I look at problems objectively. If the system in HongKong is so good why is it that they have such a high unemployment rate ?
But I think you are right on one point.
Some ppl do have vested interest here.
For example selling a book to ppl who are not interested at all. -
Nobody trail you. You are spamming in every thread here. In evey thread here you try to sell your book thats you vested interest. You accuse other ppl of having a vested interest in the first place. When you point a finger at paperchicken you are actually pointing a finger at yourself.Originally posted by robertteh:I did not wave my book in front of you but wonder why you keep trailing me on this book. Is it a crime or vested interest to have written a book? -
Nope, he didn't mention anything about any book here, it is paperchick start bring in the book here.....Originally posted by papertiger:Nobody trail you. You are spamming in every thread here. In evey thread here you try to sell your book thats you vested interest. You accuse other ppl of having a vested interest in the first place. When you point a finger at paperchicken you are actually pointing a finger at yourself.
BTW, what book is it? (don't tell me!) This is way out of topic, stop mentioning the bl.oody book and get back to the topic plse! -
You are a new comer so you dun know. The points he mention are all from his book and he keeps repeating them again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again ............Originally posted by burntan:Nope, he didn't mention anything about any book here, it is paperchick start bring in the book here.....
BTW, what book is it? (don't tell me!) This is way out of topic, stop mentioning the bl.oody book and get back to the topic plse! -
Well said, I thought I was the only one notices this. I now just ignore any such cheap talkOriginally posted by papertiger:Nobody trail you. You are spamming in every thread here. In evey thread here you try to sell your book thats you vested interest. You accuse other ppl of having a vested interest in the first place. When you point a finger at paperchicken you are actually pointing a finger at yourself. -
I was actually replying to paperchicken objectively and based on factual arguments but he chooses to repeat his trademark denial or accusations of all kinds without offering any facts or logics to support what he had been doing all these while.Originally posted by papertiger:Nobody trail you. You are spamming in every thread here. In evey thread here you try to sell your book thats you vested interest. You accuse other ppl of having a vested interest in the first place. When you point a finger at paperchicken you are actually pointing a finger at yourself.
Then, whenever he is in a jam, a papertiger would come to his rescue to make more accusations which are equally unfounded. This makes me think that paperchicken comes in disguises and uses his various identities to spam.
There is no need to mention any book I have written when I was addresssing this particular topic and I have told paperchicken so and because I did not wave it in front of him to promote it.
If a book has anything to do with any topic here, forumites can see for themselves it has some relevance to accountability and transparency or governance processes as posted in "Definition of True Democracy" not because I wanted to promote it.
There are many books or websites quoted in this forum as well. The matter should therefore rest there unless the paper is keen on spamming here to serve his vested hidden interest, in which event, it will be up to the moderator to decide what to do. -
Diehard, be less of a diehard sometime. Be objective since I have addressed your repeated points bu showing you I am being objective. Can't you learn that many of the existing policies did not work and need to be changed to meet new situations of competitiveness and a younger educated workforce.Originally posted by sgdiehard:Well said, I thought I was the only one notices this. I now just ignore any such cheap talk
If you mind is so made up that you would slam everyone who give alternative views and suggestions without facts and substantiation, it will again for the moderators or others to judge whether you are doing the right things for Singaporeans here. -
Frens help each other wat and we are not the only ones who notice. sgDiehard agree also.Originally posted by robertteh:I was actually replying to paperchicken objectively and based on factual arguments but he chooses to repeat his trademark denial or accusations of all kinds without offering any facts or logics to support what he had been doing all these while.
Then, whenever he is in a jam, a papertiger would come to his rescue to make more accusations which are equally unfounded. This makes me think that paperchicken comes in disguises and uses his various identities to spam.
There is no need to mention any book I have written when I was addresssing this particular topic and I have told paperchicken so and because I did not wave it in front of him to promote it.
If a book has anything to do with any topic here, forumites can see for themselves it has some relevance to accountability and transparency or governance processes as posted in "Definition of True Democracy" not because I wanted to promote it.
There are many books or websites quoted in this forum as well. The matter should therefore rest there unless the paper is keen on spamming here to serve his vested hidden interest, in which event, it will be up to the moderator to decide what to do.
And I think quoting passages from your book is your trademark.
If I want to spam I could have create 1001 nicks to spam.
When lousy points are raise wat do you expect me to say ?
When you point finger at other ppl you didnt realise that you are actually pointing a finger at yourself. -
It's to encourage responsible investment.MNCs which are here for the short-term and are out to exploit labour would find it hard to work, and given that the establishment encourages a low labour wage policy, such an EOC might not be a reality anytime soon.But it is a good idea and a much-needed one.Originally posted by InnoHippo:it is nice to have .....
but can scare investors away
-
MNCs are driven by profits not politics. Otherwise they would not set up factories in places like India and China where labour is cheap but working conditions are poor.Originally posted by LazerLordz:It's to encourage responsible investment.MNCs which are here for the short-term and are out to exploit labour would find it hard to work, and given that the establishment encourages a low labour wage policy, such an EOC might not be a reality anytime soon.But it is a good idea and a much-needed one. -
I never believe that all existing policies work well and need no changes. I believe many policies do not work well and therefore need to be changed. I also believe that some policies worked well in the past but may not work well in the future and therefore a second look is needed to see if change needed. In reality there are many policies that must be changed but cannot change because good alternatives not there yet. It is a fact of life that new policies will have some side effects. It is also unavoidable that the implementation process itself will result in pains and discomfort, to say the least.Originally posted by robertteh:Diehard, be less of a diehard sometime. Be objective since I have addressed your repeated points bu showing you I am being objective. Can't you learn that many of the existing policies did not work and need to be changed to meet new situations of competitiveness and a younger educated workforce.
If you mind is so made up that you would slam everyone who give alternative views and suggestions without facts and substantiation, it will again for the moderators or others to judge whether you are doing the right things for Singaporeans here.
But who is to say what will be changed, who decide which new policies to adopt, who will endure the suffering resulting from changes, who stand to benefit the most from these changes?
Everybody can say what should be changed, give whatever ideas you can come up with. But only singaporean can decide which new policies to adopt! those with no stake in singapore and those who are all ready to flee to their second home in Perth or LA are only welcomed to give yr ideas, but singaporean decide, because singaporean are the ones who will have to endure the discomfort associated with the changes and we may not even be the ones who directly benefit from such changes as, in reality, no policies will benefit everybody in singapore no matter how well it is intended to be. Finally, it will be extremely naive to think that all foreign bodies are independent and no foreign powers are likely to benefit from changes in singapore, especially changes resulting in instability and chaos.
Many singaporean are already complaining there PAP depend too much on facts and figures and thus losing their feel for people. Do you think any views or suggestion with facts must be accepted just because you have facts and substantiation?
Politicians in singapore must know how to manage industries and economics, handle defence and foreign relation, sensitive to race and religions, but most importantly, they must win the heart of the people. Politicians who do not identify with the people and not prepared to walk the talk, have no credibility with the people. Academic debates are meant for classrooms and talks on politics alone remain cheap talks. Nin Beh never study a lot, last time pon-ten too much, cannot debate well, figures to me is 36-24-36. But I know I have the right to say what is good for me. PAP's elitism already sucks, now those who claim anti PAP also think they know and I don't know what is good for me. Need moderator to judge if I (singaporean) am doing the right thing to me (singaporean)? WTF! go fly kites or go sell your books