• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chee Soon Juan should quit politics

NanoSpeed

Alfrescian
Loyal
Why can't Dr Chee teach in a University, if not local, a foreign University and be a politician at the same time ?

Dr Tambyah is a full-time medical professor in NUH. Many PAP MPs have a full-time job outside Parliament. Mr Low TK runs his own business and helms WP at the same time.

I strongly feel that Dr Chee should start teaching in a University. Even if he is reluctant to move to another country, there are many foreign universities that have tie-up with local private schools.
 

Wunderfool

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Hahaha. Don't fall off your chair. No, it is not another CSJ bashing piece.

The clarity of the mind is very important. A responsible man should protect his immediate family first - mother, wife, and children.

The media have been fixing you. Do not hope that they will stop and you could win*. There are also other uncontrollable factors. So what if you could win? By the next election, you are already 58. How many more years are there left?

Find a lecturing job on politics overseas. There is no shortage of ivy league universities willing to take you in.

Think of the type of education that your 3 children will be getting. Think of their future, their children's future. Think of the dignified lifestyle you and your wife will be leading. Conversely, think of the kind of shitty life you have in Singapore.

You need to sit down and think like a cunning economist or a calculative accountant. Do the pluses and minuses. The choice is clear. Be selfish and protect your family first. That is the hallmark of a good son, husband and father. A good man...credible man should have a sense of pride and not take all the shit hurled at you.

An intelligent man must know when to let go. The staggering no. of Facebook "likes" at 34,419 (as of 14/9/2015) is actually telling you to let go, not soldier on. You should let go at the height of your popularity. Keep the proceeds of your book sales and not squander it on another attempt at politics. The long queues are god's way of telling you to quit politics. Sell your HDB flat now when it is still worth something.

Please don't approach WP! It is silly!

* Expected outcome = probability(positive) + probability(negative)
The equation is very lopsided, made more lopsided by the media/dirty politics. It is stacked against you. It is a sure negative.


What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world , but loses his soul ?

CSJ's heart and soul is to serve the people of Singapore.

Any other occupation will never be able to replace the ambition.
 

kopirui

Alfrescian
Loyal
Why can't Dr Chee teach in a University, if not local, a foreign University and be a politician at the same time ?

Dr Tambyah is a full-time medical professor in NUH. Many PAP MPs have a full-time job outside Parliament. Mr Low TK runs his own business and helms WP at the same time.

I strongly feel that Dr Chee should start teaching in a University. Even if he is reluctant to move to another country, there are many foreign universities that have tie-up with local private schools.

will Tambyah be sacked from his job?
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Why can't Dr Chee teach in a University, if not local, a foreign University and be a politician at the same time ?

Dr Tambyah is a full-time medical professor in NUH. Many PAP MPs have a full-time job outside Parliament. Mr Low TK runs his own business and helms WP at the same time.

I strongly feel that Dr Chee should start teaching in a University. Even if he is reluctant to move to another country, there are many foreign universities that have tie-up with local private schools.

No local universities will dare to hire Dr. Chee. Dr. Tambyah will be gone if he commits one more infraction against the PAP.
 

borom

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Jeremy Chen

I burst out laughing when I got the bulk update on election results (with Aljunied still being recounted)..........
I would like to see the scales fall from their eyes soon.

I'm not sure if you are Jeremy Chen or representing him , but if you have an axe to grind with CSJ, what's the point of disparaging the whole SDP ?

I tried to read Jeremy's blog but the way its written, filled with complicated and technical terms makes it very difficult for an ordinary person to understand. Events were often not arranged in chronological order and unless a person is a close follower of SDP, it will be hard to figure out what comes first.eg it appears that Jeremy joined SDP after CSJ's dismissal from the University-so why bring up the Vasoo incident of 1992 when you knew about it before joining SDP?

I'm NOT a member of any political party but believe that amongst other things "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely "
 

THE_CHANSTER

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
It will also help CSJ a lot if the older voters who remember those old days do not find every opportunity to bring the old things up, like you just did in your comment.

Everyone who stands for public office is required to put themselves up to public scrutiny. You are required to conduct yourself to a different standard than Mr. Joe Bloggs in the street. If you don't believe me, just ask Michael Palmer or Yaw Shin Leong.
Whether PAP or Opposition, you are accountable for your actions and people will be more sympathetic to your cause if you show remorse or even apologise if you've made a mistake and make genuine efforts to improve yourself.

For example, even during this election, opposition voters were still criticising Tin Pei Ling over her puerile behaviour over "Kate Spade" handbags and "I don't know what to say!" videos in 2011. Despite this, she put in a lot of effort on the ground to win in MacPherson and ultimately thumped the opposition.

For CSJ to succeed, he needs to demonstrate why he and the SDP would be good for Singapore rather than what is so bad about the PAP.
 

Cosmos10

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Everyone who stands for public office is required to put themselves up to public scrutiny. You are required to conduct yourself to a different standard than Mr. Joe Bloggs in the street. If you don't believe me, just ask Michael Palmer or Yaw Shin Leong.
Whether PAP or Opposition, you are accountable for your actions and people will be more sympathetic to your cause if you show remorse or even apologise if you've made a mistake and make genuine efforts to improve yourself.

For example, even during this election, opposition voters were still criticising Tin Pei Ling over her puerile behaviour over "Kate Spade" handbags and "I don't know what to say!" videos in 2011. Despite this, she put in a lot of effort on the ground to win in MacPherson and ultimately thumped the opposition.

For CSJ to succeed, he needs to demonstrate why he and the SDP would be good for Singapore rather than what is so bad about the PAP.

Sorry, I think you missed my point or I did not write well enough for you to understand my point.

As for your last sentence about "For CSJ to succeed, he needs to demonstrate why he and the SDP would be good for Singapore rather than what is so bad about the PAP", have you thoroughly read the ten alternative policy papers proposed by the SDP on healthcare, population, housing etc. (go read it, they are all available on the SDP website)? and have you heard how and what he hopes to be able to do in details in his 8 speeches during the recent campaign rallies?
 

RandomNexus

Alfrescian
Loyal
Sorry, I think you missed my point or I did not write well enough for you to understand my point.

As for your last sentence about "For CSJ to succeed, he needs to demonstrate why he and the SDP would be good for Singapore rather than what is so bad about the PAP", have you thoroughly read the ten alternative policy papers proposed by the SDP on healthcare, population, housing etc. (go read it, they are all available on the SDP website)? and have you heard how and what he hopes to be able to do in details in his 8 speeches during the recent campaign rallies?

I have read them but still not yet convinced in policy terms about SDP's competence and goodness for this country as a whole. Only thing going for them is that parliament needs some folks to stand to the mighty MIW, and is worth giving them a chance but not at the expense of weakening the government unless they have some credible policy proposals.

This is why I reckon Chanster's last sentence still stands for me.
 

Cosmos10

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I have read them but still not yet convinced in policy terms about SDP's competence and goodness for this country as a whole. Only thing going for them is that parliament needs some folks to stand to the mighty MIW, and is worth giving them a chance but not at the expense of weakening the government unless they have some credible policy proposals.

This is why I reckon Chanster's last sentence still stands for me.

First of all, we all must agree that no policies are cast in stone, whether from the PAP or the SDP (or any other oppo parties), because we live in a changing world with a changing ennvironment.

I am very disappointed that inspite of all their hard work, the SDP is the most misunderstood party.

If you have followed the SDP activities close enough, and even during the campaign speeches, SDP has emphasized that they would like the voters to vote for them (the SDP) because of their alternative (SDP) policies and not because the voters are simply angry and/or against the PAP. CSJ has also fairly and clearly stated to the voters during the campaign that not all of the PAP policies are bad.

The CPF minimum sum scheme: the SDP stand is CPF is the people's own money, it must be returned to the people at age 55, because that was the original agreement, like a contract. For those who do not want to take it out in full at age 55, they can choose to keep it with the CPF. The CPF member has the right to make his own choice to withdraw or to leave it with CPF board.

Population policy for example, SDP stand is it is not against foreigners. But the SDP stand is we should only bring in foreigners to work here only when the employers can show evidence that they have tried but could not find locals to fill those jobs. For immigration, the SDP proposed having a kind of point system, like in Australia, Canada, US, etc points based on age, skills, experience etc

There is also a policy paper on reducing the ministerial salaries.

The health care policy is the most comprehensive, lots of details with the primary goal that BASIC healthcare is a citizen's right. In fact the Government has already quietly adopted some of the SDP's healthcare proposals (without giving credit to the SDP effort!) but not quite enough because the current deductibles are still high.

Then there is the housing policy, the SDP stand is that PUBLIC housing should be priced by taking away land cost. Land cost is the main reason of our expensive PUBLIC house prices.

Well, if the voters think these are not good proposals, they can make their own decision to support or not support the SDP. At least, the voters are presented with a choice instead of just having one set of policies forced down their throats from one single ruling party aka PAP.

Anyway, there is really too much for me to type here, go read them on the SDP website. By giving a summary here, I may end up making mistakes by writing/typing the wrong thing.
 
Last edited:

Dark Knight

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
First of all, we all must agree that no policies are cast in stone, whether from the PAP or the SDP (or any other oppo parties), because we live in a changing world with a changing ennvironment.

I am very disappointed that inspite of all their hard work, the SDP is the most misunderstood party.

If you have followed the SDP activities close enough, and even during the campaign speeches, SDP has emphasized that they would like the voters to vote for them (the SDP) because of their alternative (SDP) policies and not because the voters are simply angry and/or against the PAP. CSJ has also fairly and clearly stated to the voters during the campaign that not all of the PAP policies are bad.

Take for example, the CPF minimum sum scheme, the SDP stand is CPF is the people's own money, it must be returned to the people at age 55, because that was the original agreement, like a contract. For those who do not want to take it out in full at age 55, they can choose to keep it with the CPF. The CPF member has the right to make his own choice to withdraw or to leave it with CPF board.

Population policy for example, SDP stand is it is not against foreigners. But the SDP stand is we should only bring in foreigners to work here only when the employers can show evidence that they have tried but could not find locals to fill those jobs. For immigration, the SDP proposed having a kind of point system, like in Australia, Canada, US, etc points based on age, skills, experience etc

There is also a policy paper on reducing the ministerial salaries.

The health care policy is the most comprehensive, lots of details with the primary goal that BASIC healthcare is a citizen's right. In fact the Government has already quietly adopted some of the SDP's healthcare proposals (without giving credit to the SDP effort!) but not quite enough because the current deductibles are still high.

Then there is the housing policy, the SDP stand is that PUBLIC housing should be priced by taking away land cost. Land cost is the main reason of our expensive PUBLIC house prices.

Well, if the voters think these are not good proposals, they can make their own decision to support or not support the SDP. At least, the voters are presented with a choice instead of just having one set of policies forced down their throats from one single ruling party aka PAP.

Anyway, there is really too much for me to type here, go read them on the SDP website. By giving a summary here, I may end up making mistakes by writing/typing the wrong thing.

I suppose after this GE2015, by now SDP should have already realized that coming out with an extremely good alternative policy on paper is not effective enough to garner support
and votes from the peasant. What the SDP lack of is a strong and sound financial support that can match what the MIW can and has been doing.

Even if SDP can present themselves very well during the rallies, they can't show and demonstrate to the peasants that they have the financial capability to implement them.
Should the day come when SDP managed to get the financial support that can match the MIW, only then they can tilt the political playing field back to equilibrium.
 

Cosmos10

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
I suppose after this GE2015, by now SDP should have already realized that coming out with an extremely good alternative policy on paper is not effective enough to garner support
and votes from the peasant. What the SDP lack of is a strong and sound financial support that can match what the MIW can and has been doing.

Even if SDP can present themselves very well during the rallies, they can't show and demonstrate to the peasants that they have the financial capability to implement them.
Should the day come when SDP managed to get the financial support that can match the MIW, only then they can tilt the political playing field back to equilibrium.

Ok, I am going to call it a nite.

You are right, there is no point working for the peasant. It is a thankless job to be the oppo party in SG.

People deserve the government they vote for. If these "peasants" are so critical of the oppo party, someday, sadly, they will find that there will be no more oppo party left to speak for them and be their voice.
 

RandomNexus

Alfrescian
Loyal
First of all, we all must agree that no policies are cast in stone, whether from the PAP or the SDP (or any other oppo parties), because we live in a changing world with a changing ennvironment.

I am very disappointed that inspite of all their hard work, the SDP is the most misunderstood party.

Cosmos, thank you for your views. I know what you are deriving at. They did try. I am not saying there are no good things coming from them. For eg, the only thing I like is the healthcare paper which says some good things but I am skeptical about the financing portion - I am of the view that Government should play a bigger role in healthcare financing, and since 2011, the Government has reacted in kind as well.

For eg, Paul Tambyah is somebody I like and know. His perspective and approach to healthcare financing comes from dealing with patients and that worldview begins with the patient - not a bad thing. The government's view, unfortunately not so simplistic as Paul claimed, to be totally against patient's interest. That is just political talk. The government is for the patient's interest but it has to balance the costing for it as of now and the future, and also the economic ethos of Singapore.

Overall here, SDP totally disagrees and in my view, does not consider enough the economic situation Singapore is in and also the future burdens it may place on the next generations. The taxation picture is very key - if we are to raise taxation rates highly for the rich, we have to understand it will affect the economic competitiveness of this country of which we are fully dependent upon. The next phase of Singapore's economic growth is focused on developing Singapore as a hub for key biz growth to keep us ahead of neighbours. There are zero natural resources in this country and tapping on economic surpluses is just not wise though tempting and easy for opposition to propose. Singapore needs substantially these economic surpluses to generate returns.

A lot of lay folks do not understand the strategic economic vulnerabilities of this country and regard this government as constantly using scare tactics. Every decade, the economic strategy of Singapore has actually evolved and changed to keep itself ahead and they are simply very aware and competent to keep adjusting. The day they fail to adjust will spell doom for this country. To its credit, it has done amazingly well and I am aware it is no easy feat. If you ask what is next new thing for the next decade, it is still an open question. Can someone come out with a new solution instead of just saying "spend and spend"?

All opposition parties esp SDP spent most of the time tackling the easier part of policy making - the distribution of returns for social and infrastructure building. This is by far the easier question to answer and convenient to blame the government. To their credit, I do think these areas are important but since 2011, the government has co-opted much of these proposals. Now the opposition in order to differentiate itself, pushes for more !

It is easy to criticise the 6.9 million population proposal but do you not know that this country faces critical manpower shortages, and if we are to grow, we need foreign labour to grow and generate economic returns, and that in return, generate employment for everybody. It is so easy to criticise that companies want foreigners more than locals, yet in my interactions with local companies, many find it hard to employ Singaporeans. We can slow down and have zero economic growth - but this does not make sense at all. It will effects on us. Wages will be stagnant and it is the very thing the government policies get criticised again - both ways in contradiction terms, the opposition is gunning after them to slow economy growth by restricting manpower growth and at the same time, accusing them for not doing enough for wage growth. It is either done through lack of understanding, lack of competence or being purely opportunistic.

Also it is far better that Singaporeans advance themselves to go for higher-skilled jobs than to compete with foreigners. I believe strongly about the market competition is essential instead of the socialist impetus of favouring local labour as in the long run, such a stand will diminish the motivation drives to improve. Lack of competition is not good for Singapore. To the opposition, they will say "oh the government favours foreigners over local labour" and that is a simplistic 'lie'.

I am just citing some examples not wishing to go into details. Opposition parties should spend time to propose how to generate economic growth than to tackle the simpler questions which ultimately lead it to keep blaming the government.

The government is not dumb - it has to focus on generating economic growth, that means it needs labour and it needs to increase productivity which some opposition demands but productivity is something that is very difficult though not impossible to increase. Do opposition parties have better ideas? SDP suggests that all maids should be paid competitive rates for eg, and it just does not make sense to me and they accuse owners' tax levies as a way for a greedy government to make money. Taxes that the government generate as income goes back to fund expenditures for the nation. How else do we get better roads, hospitals etc when we cut down on revenue collection aka tax? Does it mean government has to raise funds from other sources? Money does not just fall from the sky. There is a need to examine everything holistically and not just paint "half truths".

For this very reason, when I look as a whole the opposition agenda, it is still opportunistic and still has not answered many questions better than those which the government folks have considered.

This is not to say opposition has no value. I recognise they work under severe resource constraints. This is why I have not expected too much from them. On an objective front, looking at both sides, I will say opposition still got a long way to go to match PAP in terms of policy making. SDP has a good start and I hope they improve but resources are against them. They have to improve and if the election is about whether a government will be formed or weakened in the process, I have to select the option of having a stronger government for the sake of this country.
 
Last edited:

Cosmos10

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Cosmos, thank you for your views. I know what you are deriving at. They did try. I am not saying there are no good things coming from them. For eg, the only thing I like is the healthcare paper which says some good things but I am skeptical about the financing portion - I am of the view that Government should play a bigger role in healthcare financing, and since 2011, the Government has reacted in kind as well.

For eg, Paul Tambyah is somebody I like and know. His perspective and approach to healthcare financing comes from dealing with patients and that worldview begins with the patient - not a bad thing. The government's view, unfortunately not so simplistic as Paul claimed, to be totally against patient's interest. That is just political talk. The government is for the patient's interest but it has to balance the costing for it as of now and the future, and also the economic ethos of Singapore.

Overall here, SDP totally disagrees and in my view, does not consider enough the economic situation Singapore is in and also the future burdens it may place on the next generations. The taxation picture is very key - if we are to raise taxation rates highly for the rich, we have to understand it will affect the economic competitiveness of this country of which we are fully dependent upon. The next phase of Singapore's economic growth is focused on developing Singapore as a hub for key biz growth to keep us ahead of neighbours. There are zero natural resources in this country and tapping on economic surpluses is just not wise though tempting and easy for opposition to propose. Singapore needs substantially these economic surpluses to generate returns.

A lot of lay folks do not understand the strategic economic vulnerabilities of this country and regard this government as constantly using scare tactics. Every decade, the economic strategy of Singapore has actually evolved and changed to keep itself ahead and they are simply very aware and competent to keep adjusting. The day they fail to adjust will spell doom for this country. To its credit, it has done amazingly well and I am aware it is no easy feat. If you ask what is next new thing for the next decade, it is still an open question. Can someone come out with a new solution instead of just saying "spend and spend"?

All opposition parties esp SDP spent most of the time tackling the easier part of policy making - the distribution of returns for social and infrastructure building. This is by far the easier question to answer and convenient to blame the government. To their credit, I do think these areas are important but since 2011, the government has co-opted much of these proposals. Now the opposition in order to differentiate itself, pushes for more !

It is easy to criticise the 6.9 million population proposal but do you not know that this country faces critical manpower shortages, and if we are to grow, we need foreign labour to grow and generate economic returns, and that in return, generate employment for everybody. It is so easy to criticise that companies want foreigners more than locals, yet in my interactions with local companies, many find it hard to employ Singaporeans. We can slow down and have zero economic growth - but this does not make sense at all. It will effects on us.

Also it is far better that Singaporeans advance themselves to go for higher-skilled jobs than to compete with foreigners. I believe strongly about the market competition is essential instead of the socialist impetus of favouring local labour as in the long run, such a stand will diminish the motivation drives to improve. Lack of competition is not good for Singapore. To the opposition, they will say "oh the government favours foreigners over local labour" and that is a simplistic lie.

I am just citing some examples not wishing to go into details. Opposition parties should spend time to propose how to generate economic growth than to tackle the simpler questions which ultimately lead it to keep blaming the government.

The government is not dumb - it has to focus on generating economic growth, that means it needs labour and it needs to increase productivity which some opposition but productivity is something very difficult though not impossible to increase. Do opposition parties have better ideas?

For this very reason, when I look as a whole the opposition agenda, it is still opportunistic and still has not answered many questions better than those which the government folks have considered.

This is not to say opposition has no value. I recognise they work under severe resource constraints. This is why I have not expected too much from them. On an objective front, looking at both sides, I will say opposition still got a long way to go to match PAP in terms of policy making. SDP has a good start and I hope they improve but resources are against them. They have to improve and if the election is about whether a government will be formed or weakened in the process, I have to select the option of having a stronger government for the sake of this country.

RNexus, I was about to sign off.

But I will just reply quickly that in the end, until there is a level playing field like in most developed countries where statistics are transparent, there is only so much an oppo party can do.

BTW, there is also an SDP economic paper too. No time to go into details here.
 

GoldenDragon

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
But I will just reply quickly that in the end, until there is a level playing field like in most developed countries where statistics are transparent, there is only so much an oppo party can do..

Interesting read. Just one comment. Dont expect any govt to level the playing field. Why should they?
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
RNexus, I was about to sign off.

But I will just reply quickly that in the end, until there is a level playing field like in most developed countries where statistics are transparent, there is only so much an oppo party can do.

BTW, there is also an SDP economic paper too. No time to go into details here.

PAP will not give up power ...that's why Elections Department is under PMO. This is to ensure that the victor will always be the PAP. 80 percent sinkees can vote against the PAP, yet the PAP will win. Because the PM runs the elections. He, alone, will decide how many seats to concede to the Opposition.

Until the Elections Department is independent of the government, you can forget about fair elections. The head of the Elections Department should be appointed by a panel comprising of the the top 5 political parties with the ruling party and the other parties each having equal number of representatives. In the event of a tie, the President will make the call. The head of Elections Department will serve a term of 10 years and his term is renewable for another 10 years and can only be terminated by the panel.
 
Top