National conversation: How many PAP/YPAP/PA/RC/NTUC member in the audience?

[watchman8]

anyone sending a simple question to PM office to ask how many of the TV audience are from PAP, YPAP, NTUC, PA, PAP grassroots etc. Preferably someone who already migrated elsewhere ...

Just a simple question, no photo, no nothing. Then see whether got feedback or not. My guess is either no echo, or a super lengthy reply covering their behinds.

[theDoors]

[virus]

unker... i think i got DoS denial of service for spug. cannot post leh. am i strung up for fixing soon?

[theDoors]

unker... i think i got DoS denial of service for spug. cannot post leh. am i strung up for fixing soon?

you are who in spug?

[theDoors]

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fb...type=3&theater

[theDoors]

both statements are true?

[theDoors]

what should one do when you spot PAP members in a non partisan national forum?

1. Pretend that you never see him/her
2. See liao keep quiet
3. Tell you friends
4. Put on your facebook
5. Start a thread in EDMW forum
6. Send the screenshot to international media

but remember you at fault for pointing out the fact they are at the forum

[scroobal]

Here is a simple extrapolation. Tony Tan when ran for the presidency by the end of the campaign had received extensive endorsement across various organisations such as unions, employer federation, clans, etc. The makeup and genesis of these outfits are similar to those that attended this national forum. Yet Tony Tan garnered only 35% and won by less than 0.3% of the votes.

In essence we are dealing with the same and no good will come out of it. When they lose East Coast and another few seats, they will then seek a national truth and reconciliation forum and for what purpose.

Its pointless preaching to the choir. Why bother with the usual 30% which are captive votes.

If the PAP is sincere, they would provide a detailed biodata of all participants and their affliation as well as an attestation of their past and present affliations of them and their immediate families. I can guarantee they will not do it.

Well if the participants are sincere, they will do it on their own to prove non-partisanship. Lets see if they truly care about Singapore. A facebook entry is fine.

[zhihau]

A facebook entry is fine.

bro,
let the next GE be a contest of ideologies, may the best man wins

[Conqueror]

bro,
let the next GE be a contest of ideologies, may the best man wins

Yah, it will still be PAP.

You people aren't prepared for a bigger thing.

[theDoors]

No special invites to PAP, PA, says CNA
Posted on Sep 19, 2012 6:58 PM
Updated: Sep 20, 2012 3:01 PM
By Tessa Wong

http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/no-...ap-pa-says-cna

PM Lee with fellow MP panelists Ms Indranee Rajah and Mdm Intan Azura Mokhtar. Source: MICA

Responding to speculation on the Internet, Channel NewsAsia has said that it did not reserve any seats at its recent forum with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong for members of the People’s Action Party (PAP) or the People’s Association.

Replying to queries from Singapolitics, a spokesman from Mediacorp said: “No, we did not give PAP or the People’s Association a certain number of invites.”

The brief reply did not explain, however, how it actually chose the participants for the forum.

The forum, called A Conversation with PM Lee, was filmed and aired on CNA last Friday.

But more so than any of the questions asked, it was the make-up of the 50-member audience that caught the attention of many netizens.

Many scoured the footage of the televised forum to try and spot PAP members.

Over the weekend, dozens began questioning the authenticity of the forum, posting pictures of some audience members identifying them as PAP or grassroots activists.

The issue picked up steam again on Wednesday when a picture began circulating on social media giving the background of 36 participants. Netizens accused them as being linked to or “friendly with” the PAP.

A CNA article published before the forum said that the 50 audience members were drawn from “various quarters of society, including business leaders, professionals, tertiary students, unionists, non-governmental organisations, social entrepreneurs, new citizens and others”

A check with the attendance sheet distributed to media outlets found that some attended in their capacity as grassroots members.

They include Ms Hamidah Aidillah Mustafa, a grassroots leader from the Keat Hong citizens’ consultative committee (CCC); Mr Tay Xiong Sheng from the Woodlands CCC; Mr Budiman Mohamed Salleh, assistant secretary in the Kaki Bukit CCC; and Mr Daniel Ho, member of the youth executive committee for the Boon Lay Community Centre.

But at least one forum participant has rebutted netizens’ accusations.

In a comment on PM Lee’s Facebook page, Mr Chin Yen, the managing director of PulseMetrics, said he was not there to “wayang”. Wayang means performance or movie in Malay; in colloquial terms, it means simply to put up a performance.

“I didn't go to sing praises and I raised points which I thought were important for Singapore's future. Both points that I spoke about touched on a need to change direction, and one of them confronted a central tenet of PAP's philosophy,” he said.

He added that in the post-forum reception, many participants stayed behind to exchange views and ideas, and that he found that his fellow audience members came from “diverse backgrounds”.

Netizens had also taken issue with a graphic depicting the audience’s response to a quick poll done during the forum.

The audience was asked whether they thought unwed people should have children. Fifty-four per cent said no, while 46 per cent said yes.

Though the results were close, the graphic showed the “no” bar as more than twice as long as the “yes” bar, prompting PM Lee to note during the taping: “Which is quite close, I think the graph doesn’t quite show it.”

CNA explained on its Facebook page that this was caused by a technical glitch and it had corrected the error for the telecast.

[theDoors]

The real National Conversation � Editorial � TR EMERITUS

Mindshare, a global media and marketing services company, conducted an anonymous survey involving over 2000 respondents early this year to find out about Singaporeans’ confidence in the future of Singapore.

The results have not been too optimistic:



In the survey:

• 65% said they don’t think they will be able to retire comfortably in Singapore
Most Singaporeans have less than minimum sum in CPF on retirement – HSBC survey

• 72% feel that the medical costs are getting too high
Singapore govt only pays US$825 out of the average US$2,273 (i.e, 36.3%) health spending per person, making it the most stingy govt among the first world economies. Hence, Singapore’s private spending on healthcare as a percentage of total health spending is the highest among the first world economies at 63.7% (‘PM: Raise individual’s Medisave contributions to cope with healthcare costs‘).

• 73% think that public housing prices are getting out of control
The HDB Resale Price Index (RPI) rose two percent to a new record high of 197.9, according to HDB’s flash estimates for the 3Q of 2012 (‘HDB resale prices hit all-time high‘).

• 75% said they should not be spending their entire working life paying off their housing loans
E.g. if a couple take a 35 year loan at 30 years old, they will only be able to pay off their mortgage right at retirement age of 65, thereby working their entire life to pay off their housing loan.

• 62% believe that Singapore leaders are paid too much these days
It’s not just our political leaders are the most highly paid in the world even after their so-called ‘pay cuts’ following GE 2011, our civil servants are also paid very highly. For example, the salary of the ex-permanent secretary in the French cooking saga is more than the U.S. President Obama’s (‘Perm Sec who went to France to learn cooking retires as millionaire‘).

• 69% think too many foreign workers are taking up job opportunities in Singapore today
To make things worse, some of the foreign managers are currently hiring their own kinds, directly discriminating Singaporeans.

• 73% said Singaporeans should be granted priority in employment
Singaporeans in Singapore today are not granted any priority in employment. It is very possible for a company in Singapore to employ 100% foreigners to work in the company since there is no quota limit for employment pass holders.
In other countries, they have labour laws to protect their citizens and put the interest of their citizens first. For example, in the U.S., employers must “attest” to protect U.S. workers [Link] so as to ensure that foreign workers do not displace or adversely affect wages or working conditions of U.S. workers. Failure to do so will render the employer liable

Singapore's emigration conundrum

Published October 06, 2012
Singapore's emigration conundrum
By
Joyce Hooi

In Singapore's Consumer Price Index last year, the cost of housing rose 8.3 per cent year on year, a rate of increase bested only by that of the cost of transport - another national bugbear - at 11.9 per cent -PHOTO: FILE PHOTO

IN the anonymous freedom of surveys, away from the glare of the National Conversation, more than half of us apparently do not want to be here - "here" in the geographical sense of the word (Singapore) instead of the existential, even though the two concepts have lately coiled themselves around each other in this country.

A Mindshare survey carried out early this year found that 56 per cent of the 2,000-odd polled agreed or strongly agreed that, "given a choice, I would like to migrate".

It is tempting to dismiss an amorphous and ill-defined wish in the carnival land of surveys that allow for split-second whimsy, especially when it's not clear if people have in mind leaving for the short term or emigrating - a permanent kind of departure.

Brenda Yeoh, a migration specialist and dean of the National University of Singapore's (NUS) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS), is not surprised by the figure but is hardly alarmed, especially if the direr of the two possibilities - emigration - is considered.

[theDoors]

Inferring from the Presidential election results, Only 35.19% of Singaporeans supports the PAP/YPAP/PA/RC/NTUC consensus

Tony Tan wins Singapore Presidential Election 2011 by narrow margin - �Singapore News - XinMSN News

Dr Tony Tan is the next president of Singapore.

After a tight race and a recount of votes, the Elections Department has confirmed him as the winner of the presidential election.

Announcing the results, the Returning Officer Yam Ah Mee said the local votes counted are conclusive and that the overseas votes will not affect the results of the election.

5,504 Singaporeans have registered as overseas voters and their votes will be counted on Tuesday, August 30.

Dr Tony Tan beat his closest rival, Dr Tan Cheng Bock by a margin of 7,269 votes

The winning margin was about 0.34 percent of the vote

Dr Tony Tan had 744,397 votes or 35.19% of the valid vote

[virus]

no amount of support from any conversation can truly displace a public referendum. anything short of referendum is faux straw poll polarised for political agenda.

[liongsum]

Here is a simple extrapolation. Tony Tan when ran for the presidency by the end of the campaign had received extensive endorsement across various organisations such as unions, employer federation, clans, etc. The makeup and genesis of these outfits are similar to those that attended this national forum. Yet Tony Tan garnered only 35% and won by less than 0.3% of the votes.

In essence we are dealing with the same and no good will come out of it. When they lose East Coast and another few seats, they will then seek a national truth and reconciliation forum and for what purpose.

Its pointless preaching to the choir. Why bother with the usual 30% which are captive votes.

If the PAP is sincere, they would provide a detailed biodata of all participants and their affliation as well as an attestation of their past and present affliations of them and their immediate families. I can guarantee they will not do it.

Well if the participants are sincere, they will do it on their own to prove non-partisanship. Lets see if they truly care about Singapore. A facebook entry is fine.

This is all talk.
Of very little significance.
It's action that counts.
Already, there are policy changes galore, eg the building frenzy.
So 2016 might not be so cozy for oppo.

I would love to see what the oppo will do to ameliorate the exploitation of the poor.
The crux of the matter is that even the middle class revels in exploiting the poor.
Now, I have often heard people say they would rather eat at hawker centres than cook themselves.
Little did they realise (nor care) that the prices there are kept low because of import of cleaners and dishwashers.
When we stop this, there will be less crowds at MRTs and buses.
Local cleaners will get higher pay, but hawkers fare rises.
Then the middle class must be prepared to cook at home, and they will scream.

Oppo will not get my vote unless they tell us their idea to overcome this, and a few other things.
So far, I have seen no engagement.
And I am worried, because they seem to be content to wait for failure, to win.

[sense]

Very interesting exposé. Some of you would be great PIs, if you are not at this moment.

[Fook Seng]

Now, I have often heard people say they would rather eat at hawker centres than cook themselves.
Little did they realise (nor care) that the prices there are kept low because of import of cleaners and dishwashers

You really think the cost of cleaners forms a significant part of the hawker's cost. I would like to see the calculation.

[Bigfuck]

You really think the cost of cleaners forms a significant part of the hawker's cost. I would like to see the calculation.

Take the tender sum. Look at how much the aunties are paid then you know the corruption monies involved.

[Dreamer1]

@Liongsum,

You mean you prefer the devil you have known since 1 June 1959,serious?

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

Even the moderator appears to hv indirect pap links...sharon tong's bro is edwin tong

both statements are true?