Anti pap, or genuinely here for country
-
Are the opposition here because they are anti pap or do they truely love their country? I just want to question their motives. Are you here because you love this place or because you hate the current party? How many of you here can give out concrete plans for this country, step by step in detail? How many of you are here simkply because you are discontent. Frankly, Most of the time i just step aside and let all the topics go on. But sometimes, i see the topics as more anti pap then patriotism. I always wanted speakers corner to be one that would benefit the country, not one where people take pot shots and spew discontent. How different would this be as compared to sammyboy if that is the case?Well, i advocate free speech, and i won't close topics this easily. I just want to see how sincere you are to this country.
-
And what is wrong with having anti-PAP sentiments may I ask?What is a Speaker's Corner all about?We might as well be rottweilers. leashed and muzzled.But hey, aren't we close to the dogs now?
-
no, but i ask this question because i want to know whether they are posting here simply becos they are anti pap or because they really want to improve this country. And i dun ask for much, just a mcq question of choice 1 or 2.Originally posted by LazerLordz:And what is wrong with having anti-PAP sentiments may I ask?What is a Speaker's Corner all about?We might as well be rottweilers. leashed and muzzled.But hey, aren't we close to the dogs now? -
It is okay to have anti-PAP sentiments. This is a free country. But to have a Speaker's Corner downgrade to a mug-slinging session of PAP all the time destroys the purpose why this place is set up initially.
I believe what CenturianMBT wants is a place where we can discuss all topics political and not just anti-PAP sentiment topics... it is damn boring you know and intellectually unstimulating
-
First of all, you must be able to differentiate between the country, the govt and the ruling party.
Anti-PAP isn't equating to traitor or "unpatriotic". And the word "opposition" itself has a bad connotation which I never like. I prefer to use "alternative party".
As for what you have said about having "concrete" plans for Singapore, step by step...etc etc. I think you are mistaken; running a country doesn't go like this.
If it is so, then PAP has failed badly. Where is the vision of PAP for Singapore? Any concrete vision? At least I have provided one; the Innovative Economy. Does PAP fulfill its last election promise of "Jobs Jobs Jobs"? No. There are still many jobless, so many that PAP admits that we are most probably going to have a persistent unemployment of 4% or more for the years to come.
And it seems that to the PAP, only cutting wages could save itself as well as the economy. Isit the case around the world? If that is so, countries that have high wages would not be progressing at all! Thus it would seem that PAP is the problem for Singapore's future economic development, if it continues to believe in such uncontested formula.
The Innovative Economy that has been tested successfully in places like Finland and Sweden requires a total revamp of the political culture we have in Singapore. PAP has resisted such a change for whatever reasons and thus become an obstacle to Singapore's economic well-being for the next phase of development. For patriotic reasons, we have to deal with PAP's resistance to reform the political structure first before we could proceed toward our next phase of economic development. So is this considered anti-PAP or patriotism itself?
Goh Meng Seng -
Disclaimer:Take note that i am here to listen to ideas and not mudslinging.Originally posted by goh meng seng:If it is so, then PAP has failed badly. Where is the vision of PAP for Singapore? Any concrete vision? At least I have provided one; the Innovative Economy. Does PAP fulfill its last election promise of "Jobs Jobs Jobs"? No. There are still many jobless, so many that PAP admits that we are most probably going to have a persistent unemployment of 4% or more for the years to come.
And it seems that to the PAP, only cutting wages could save itself as well as the economy. Isit the case around the world? If that is so, countries that have high wages would not be progressing at all! Thus it would seem that PAP is the problem for Singapore's future economic development, if it continues to believe in such uncontested formula.
ok, so as a representitive of your party, what is your party's plans to increase the number of jobs?. -
As far as i know, the "innovative economy" trend has been implemented for the past few years. But how successful it is, we will have to wait and see.But as for the post about governments not working through plans etc. Lets take it this way, i as a potential voter want to see the goals for your party. And i want to see what you can offer to me and how you are going to deliver it to me. I want to see its benefits. Right now you are just a sales man. And a sales man don't sell his products by attacking another company's product only. He must show in depth knowledge of what he is offering.if he can't, his product simply can't sell. So i don't mind you attacking the weak points, but you must proove to us that what you have is something that the other party doesn't have. Now, is that simple enough?
[b]
The Innovative Economy that has been tested successfully in places like Finland and Sweden requires a total revamp of the political culture we have in Singapore. PAP has resisted such a change for whatever reasons and thus become an obstacle to Singapore's economic well-being for the next phase of development. For patriotic reasons, we have to deal with PAP's resistance to reform the political structure first before we could proceed toward our next phase of economic development. So is this considered anti-PAP or patriotism itself?
Goh Meng Seng b] -
First of all, as my disclaimer said, I am not a representative of Workers' Party. You mean party member cannot exercise their own freedom of expression? Workers' Party doesn't work that way, sorry to disappoint you.
If you believe in such "formula", then I don't think you understand the problem at all. You call this mudslinging? Then I do not understand what is mudslinging at all.
As I have pointed out, if Finland, from its great depression in 1990 with 18% of unemployment, could bounce back strongly to become the world's number one competitive economy, then there must be something we could learn from them. And I don't think you go by your assertions, "how to create jobs?" kind of question! Anyway, only PAP that is incapable of creative thinking could see things that way.
What they have done back then, is to look at their economic-political-social model, what have they done wrong? It is not about jobs only, it is about the whole system. And they are "proud" people of their own right, very patriotic indeed. And it is precisely due to such patriotism and pride, they are willing to take a hard look at themselves, what's wrong with the whole country and system?
Innovative Economy could not possibly evolve in Finland if they really take your approach "how to create jobs"!
If you still don't really get it, then do some research on Finland.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by CenturionMBT:Disclaimer:Take note that i am here to listen to ideas and not mudslinging.
ok, so as a representitive of your party, what is your party's plans to increase the number of jobs?. -
I am for the betterment of our lot and our country's.
PAP politicians should change their hardened mindset and start putting their ears to the ground. That way, they will get to know how unpopular they have now become.
No amount of criticism will destroy our country more than what the ruling party has already destroyed - political freedom and providing a decent level playing ground for politics.
PAP is denying many Singaporeans right to vote by forming GRCs.
I dare say Singapore politics is NOT 100% democratic.
Political dissent is not neccessary 'hate country'. We disagree to improve our country, not destroy it.
High handed policies have been handed down to us with no regards to our feelings and hardship. Take GST for example - I thought the timing was terribly cruel and insensitive of the government.
The news about opening up and listening to the 65ers is nothing but the usual PAP charades.
The ruling party has lost the faith and trust of many Singaporeans. I am speaking from ground experience.
The great dictator himself recently said , 'very hard to find people he can trust'. Such is the attitude of a senior leader...where is hope that he will listen to his MPs .... or ordinary people for that matter! -
If that is the case,seems like you are not interested in an intellecture debate after all. I say once again, leave the pap factor alone.I am talking about ahat plans do you have for furthur improvements. If this can't be discussed here, thank you for listening. I will keep myself in the sidelines.
-
There was a post of such a title in this forum so this is a duplicate. Just one remark: should anyone of any particular characteristics be more genuine?
When it comes to the crunch will the so-called loyal citisens be more loyal. I thought most of the rich and well to do will be taking the next plane to take refuge in his foeign homes rather than the poorer fellow countryman. Can anyone tell from appearance or manner of writing?
It is too early to tell who are genuinely concerned for the country.
-
I am sorry to say this, but I judge that in terms of 'intellectual debate', your exchange partner provided more of it than you did so far.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:If that is the case,seems like you are not interested in an intellecture debate after all. I say once again, leave the pap factor alone.I am talking about ahat plans do you have for furthur improvements. If this can't be discussed here, thank you for listening. I will keep myself in the sidelines.
Given that PAP is fond of stealing ideas from outside their circle and pass it as their own, I wouldn't encourage GMS to say too much.
EmptyCage -
I am not here to debate on ideas. Rather, I would like to ask people who say WP and opposition can't offer anything -- what PAP has offered as the government? 3 recessions in 5 years? Is that a good track record? And every election they expect a strong mandate? Even governments in other countries in the world that did better than PAP have to work harder to earn mandate instead of threatening people with their own tax money. And still end up with 80% of the seats the most, not like PAP which get 95% of the seats.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:As far as i know, the "innovative economy" trend has been implemented for the past few years. But how successful it is, we will have to wait and see.But as for the post about governments not working through plans etc. Lets take it this way, i as a potential voter want to see the goals for your party. And i want to see what you can offer to me and how you are going to deliver it to me. I want to see its benefits. Right now you are just a sales man. And a sales man don't sell his products by attacking another company's product only. He must show in depth knowledge of what he is offering.if he can't, his product simply can't sell. So i don't mind you attacking the weak points, but you must proove to us that what you have is something that the other party doesn't have. Now, is that simple enough?
I don't think your 'salesman' example is appropriate. Its not about 2 salesman from 2 companies. To me, a monopoly company is preventing new entrants to the market by legal measures, such as the unlevel playing field like GRCs that prevent smaller players or the PA grassroots that PAP illegitimately use as a party tool. GMS don't even have the chance to be a salesman.
You want an idea from a non-PAP person, how to see jobs created? I will give it to you. Notice how Singaporeans in the working world are usually overworked until they don't have time to start families, yet how come there are unemployed people around. Are companies squeezing the labour market?
I think you are not stupid, you should be able to figure the problem and solution from what I just said.
EmptyCage -
Regarding your question of "what you can offer to me and how you are going to deliver it to me", political leaders/parties will tell voters what they can offer to them but seldom go into how they will deliver.
This is common, you can find that to be true in most US presidental race.
Political leaders are high level managers/administrators who have the feel of the trends, potential issues, future needs etc. They should have vision of how the future will be and what need to be donefor the nation to sail into that future well prepared. They set the directions that steer the country into and then assign the task of "how to get there" to government officials and oversee the progress.
It is perfectly fine if the oppositions do no have the "how", but they must know where they want to go.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:As far as i know, the "innovative economy" trend has been implemented for the past few years. But how successful it is, we will have to wait and see.But as for the post about governments not working through plans etc. Lets take it this way, i as a potential voter want to see the goals for your party. And i want to see what you can offer to me and how you are going to deliver it to me. I want to see its benefits. Right now you are just a sales man. And a sales man don't sell his products by attacking another company's product only. He must show in depth knowledge of what he is offering.if he can't, his product simply can't sell. So i don't mind you attacking the weak points, but you must proove to us that what you have is something that the other party doesn't have. Now, is that simple enough? -
True.But we must truly explore the difference between party and state if we are to be able to reform this nation and find ways to make her strong again.Originally posted by greengoblin:It is okay to have anti-PAP sentiments. This is a free country. But to have a Speaker's Corner downgrade to a mug-slinging session of PAP all the time destroys the purpose why this place is set up initially.
I believe what CenturianMBT wants is a place where we can discuss all topics political and not just anti-PAP sentiment topics... it is damn boring you know and intellectually unstimulating -
+1 agreed, as working man and a potential voter I too want to see what benefits are being offered.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:As far as i know, the "innovative economy" trend has been implemented for the past few years. But how successful it is, we will have to wait and see.But as for the post about governments not working through plans etc. Lets take it this way, i as a potential voter want to see the goals for your party. And i want to see what you can offer to me and how you are going to deliver it to me. I want to see its benefits. Right now you are just a sales man. And a sales man don't sell his products by attacking another company's product only. He must show in depth knowledge of what he is offering.if he can't, his product simply can't sell. So i don't mind you attacking the weak points, but you must proove to us that what you have is something that the other party doesn't have. Now, is that simple enough?
As centurion mentioned I noticed that opposition groups like to "attack another company's product" to score points or to try to sway sentiments. That may have worked in the 40's 50's or even up to the 70's when people were hungry and less educated, not anymore today.
The fact remains that all these promises to do this or that means nothing to me. Or maybe you say freedom of speech, that means nothing to me too. Does that help me pay my bills? Maybe it does to the younger more impatient and frustrated singaporean looking for someone to blame, to me the young dunno what they want. Maybe thats your real target to rally the impatient young and emotionally frustrated you find in many of these forums.
I want to know what is being offered to me. Instead of finding other peoples faults, improve the wards you represent to the point it is better than what the ruling party is doing now or show me something concrete since you say you and your comrades are selfless, maybe the ruling party have funds to improve their wards and you don't but can't you try personal touch?
During the recent recession were there soup kitchens in your wards, or did WP youths go out of their way on weekends to organise sponsored charity events, were there collection and distribution of food parcels to the needy. Has something been done for the sickly in your wards and elsewhere? In your own small way was every effort done to help improve lives of the people that you want to represent.
Not that PAP did many of these things but word would have gotten around, religious groups and charitable organisations would have known and that would have magnified your humble image many times with the peoples and improved your standing, your efforts though small would have shone brightly and maybe prompted the PAP to 'catch up', forced them to act and take you seriously but as it is you guys didn't do squat! You wasted your time on meaningless countless debates amongst yourselves fearful at the same time the ruling party will steal your ideas and squandered a golden opportunity. How selfless or different are you from the ruling party then?
And now you come here to sgforums the place where I hangout to de-stress and force feed all this crap down my throat and ask me to cast my vote for you. How do you think I will rate you? -
I don't like the PAP but I despise those people who contest policies or actions without, giving solutions, nor backing their statement and arguments with proof, example and statistics.
-
Dear CenturionMBT,
Of course I am interested in this debate! But I think it is very naive for you to "exclude" the PAP factor when it is the problem to be discussed in the very first place!
If you couldn't understand what I am saying, then please read again my posting. PAP is the obstacle that prevented political reform even when the Review 21 Committee has put up such suggestions! How could PAP be "left" alone when it is itself THE PROBLEM?
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by CenturionMBT:If that is the case,seems like you are not interested in an intellecture debate after all. I say once again, leave the pap factor alone.I am talking about ahat plans do you have for furthur improvements. If this can't be discussed here, thank you for listening. I will keep myself in the sidelines. -
If Low Thiang How and Chiam See Tong can win seats and contest against PAP... I dont see PAP as a despot nor as a threat.Originally posted by goh meng seng:Dear CenturionMBT,
Of course I am interested in this debate! But I think it is very naive for you to "exclude" the PAP factor when it is the problem to be discussed in the very first place!
If you couldn't understand what I am saying, then please read again my posting. PAP is the obstacle that prevented political reform even when the Review 21 Committee has put up such suggestions! How could PAP be "left" alone when it is itself THE PROBLEM?
Goh Meng Seng -
Well I choose to view them a disparite entities.
I am Pro- Singapore =/=> I am Pro PAP.
So let's just discuss topics with a rational mind. Opposition members should contribute hteir ideas as to how they can make Singapore better placeBESIDES PAP bashing. Remember, this is a bread and butter issue... ideals won't count in the end if the people's stomachs and basic needs aren't met.Originally posted by LazerLordz:True.But we must truly explore the difference between party and state if we are to be able to reform this nation and find ways to make her strong again. -
Dear Nelstar,
I think you missed the que. It is not about whether PAP is an obstacle to opposition politics, but rather PAP is an obstacle to our progression to the next phase of economic development. That's the basic difference. Political reform is only part of it. It involves more than that.
For example, PAP always talk about "Creative Thinking" or "Creative learning", but does it really knows what it is afterall? Giving strange exam questions to students?
If you visit Finland's Ministry of Education website, you will find a research paper on how the education system should be built to cater to a Innovative Economy. Innovation comes from two sectors, mainly social innovation and technological innovation, both of these are NOT mutually exclusive but takes a double communicative ways i.e. they influence each other in an interactive way. Thus, for the education system, they are aiming for BROADBASED learning, instead of some crazy "Creative Thinking" courses! I bet, they couldn't make a difference about that.
And inorder to social innovation to evolve, the political culture as well as the cultural setup (which both are influencing each other in an interactive manner too) will have to be liberalized. For example, Starbucks or Coffee Bean is a form of "social innovation" which may or may not require high tech innovations. It is an innovtaion on lifestyle, both a cultural as well as a social framework. Same for bubble tea culture.
I am not that concerned about PAP "stealing" this idea but I bet they will not want to formulate any concrete steps towards a vision of Innovative Economy, because they are not ready to reform themselves politically.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by Nelstar:If Low Thiang How and Chiam See Tong can win seats and contest against PAP... I dont see PAP as a despot nor as a threat. -
Whether PAP is an obstacle to our progression to our next phase is still unknown.Originally posted by goh meng seng:Dear Nelstar,
I think you missed the que. It is not about whether PAP is an obstacle to opposition politics, but rather PAP is an obstacle to our progression to the next phase of economic development. That's the basic difference. Political reform is only part of it. It involves more than that.
For example, PAP always talk about "Creative Thinking" or "Creative learning", but does it really knows what it is afterall? Giving strange exam questions to students?
If you visit Finland's Ministry of Education website, you will find a research paper on how the education system should be built to cater to a Innovative Economy. Innovation comes from two sectors, mainly social innovation and technological innovation, both of these are NOT mutually exclusive but takes a double communicative ways i.e. they influence each other in an interactive way. Thus, for the education system, they are aiming for BROADBASED learning, instead of some crazy "Creative Thinking" courses! I bet, they couldn't make a difference about that.
And inorder to social innovation to evolve, the political culture as well as the cultural setup (which both are influencing each other in an interactive manner too) will have to be liberalized. For example, Starbucks or Coffee Bean is a form of "social innovation" which may or may not require high tech innovations. It is an innovtaion on lifestyle, both a cultural as well as a social framework. Same for bubble tea culture.
I am not that concerned about PAP "stealing" this idea but I bet they will not want to formulate any concrete steps towards a vision of Innovative Economy, because they are not ready to reform themselves politically.
Goh Meng Seng
Don't be absurd.
Whether they are ready to reform or not is not seen yet.
All these are your judgement.
And the issue here should be how we should go about helping our country. Not bashing PAP as if you know everyone inside there and their thoughts.
It darn ridiculously funny. -
Dear Nelstar,
Hahaha.. that's the original question!
PAP has demonstrated its unwillingness to a political reform, first by saying Singapore needs remaking, but PAP doesn't need remaking but only refreshing. Isn't this evident enough?
Secondly, it has rejected suggestions and calls for political reform in Singapore! This is NOT personal judgment but all demonstrated by PAP's own doings!
And it is obvious that such resistance to reform has becoming a big obstacle to our next progression... another example how theie inept thinking process has stopped us from evolving into a more matured economy--- the over emphasis on low wage high tech! It is always the workers' fault for economic recession and thus need to cut CPF and wages! Why isit so? They claimed they have gone through the review committee to come up with such suggestions; then I say, why US and European countries could continue to progress and develop economically when they have higher wages than everybody else?
It would mean that we are NOT progressive enough to aim for a better situation for Singapore! We are actually comparing ourselves to places like China while we should be aiming for Swiss standards of living! That's pretty ironic! Even the Chinese are not taking India or Singapore as "competitor"; they are taking the Japanese as their real competitors! That's progressive thinking!
Thus, with this in view, it is quite clear that PAP is an obstacle to Singapore's progression, no doubt about that. Such mindset alone is self deflating and self defeating. It is NOT progressive at all!
How to talk about helping Singapore without talking about THE PROBLEM, PAP? I find it quite amusing for anyone to suggest that.
Goh Meng SengOriginally posted by Nelstar:Whether PAP is an obstacle to our progression to our next phase is still unknown.
Don't be absurd.
Whether they are ready to reform or not is not seen yet.
All these are your judgement.
And the issue here should be how we should go about helping our country. Not bashing PAP as if you know everyone inside there and their thoughts.
It darn ridiculously funny. -
I don't know about the opposition. But I don't trust GMS at all. And this feeling grows each day I see him post. I only see him bash PAP and brag how good he is.