Cabinet Minister and the 50th Birthday Party

[scroobal]

Sorry missed this.

LHH left the Admin Service early in her career and went into investment banking. The word is that while on internship with an MNC when was in the Admin Service , the company offered to buy her out. This one can survive and I hear she is back in the game.She is also the brains behind her husbands equity fund.

Politically she seemed a bit bur. Could not comprehend the residents anger over workers hostel near their homes and continued to talk to them. For some reason the LHL thought she could save Aljunied and moved her there in 2006 to bolster the team and even appointed her a cabinet minister 2 years later.

what about LHH? is she under any GLC these days?

 

[metalmickey]

Would you not agree that the U.S. is the biggest capitalist economy and has the biggest private sector in the world? In that private sector called Wall St, the last crisis was born out of greed and fear. CEOs reward themselves with fat bonuses and severance packages with public bailout money.

Yet, Obama and the Office of the Presidency does not earn in proportion the kind of obscene salaries that our govt which is the biggest employer by the way, earns.

How's that for "2 which led to 1"? Why isnt the President corrupted by the fat cat pays?

It is funny that what happened in the US private sector can corrupt OUR govt, but does not affect th US own office of the President. Do you know what you are talking about? Non sequitur..you are really a mickey.

The last crisis is not only borne out of greed and fear. People all talk about a "return to normalcy" after this crisis. There is no return to normalcy. There is no way back. The system is utterly and completely broken, and unless it is fixed in some very fundamental way, what follows this is one more crisis after another, each more severe than the last. Since 1995, there has been nothing but an endless string of financial crises all over the world, in case you haven't noticed.

It is not true that the US private sector does not corrupt the US govt. There are all sorts of examples. The Iraq war: not entirely clear why it started, but Dick Cheney was on the board of Halliburton, who earned billions of dollars from supplying the US military for the Iraq war. Also, if you're wondering why bankers didn't go to jail for causing the financial crisis, you could read this.

http://truth-out.org/progressivepic...ns-dc-crony-capitalism-prevails-at-every-turn

The laws that are supposed to police and watchdog the financial institutions are effectively written by the lobbyists representing these financial institutions. You expect me to believe that nothing of that sort is taking place in Singapore?

Put things in context. Obviously it is a real problem when ministers are paid too much money. But it's only the symptom, not the disease. The disease is the corporatist system which is eroding the wealth of the middle class. I don't really care if a few ministers are paid millions. I would prefer that not to happen. But that misses the big picture.

What are the problems in Singapore today?

Land prices are too high, and people can't afford to buy new houses. Those that can afford to do that spend around 50% (some even more) of their paycheck servicing that loan. Problem caused by the private sector. Government's role in this is that they were not effective in preventing this.

Wages driven down into the ground due to the import of cheaper foreign labour. Problem caused by the private sector. Government's role in this is that they were not effective in preventing this.

Economy of Singapore is effectively in control of foreign hands. Government's role in this is that they were not effective in preventing this.

Go ahead and attack the govt all you want. But all I'm saying is - don't give the private sector a free pass. They're the ones who are truly responsible for all your problems. I'm going to make a prediction now. You are going to kick the PAP out of power in 20 years. And you will get your WP cabinet. But they can't solve your problems either because guys like you didn't go after the private sector. Most likely, you'll be quite disappointed with the outcome.

 

[scroobal]

I think you are making this a bit more complicated than it is. Salaries might not be an issue if the government is doing its job. There are clear structural issues like unaffordable housing, underemployment, bleak future in the job space, overcrowding etc.

You are assuming that the PAP will deteriorate in the next 20 years. After a string of poor performances, most organisation tend to wake up. WP needs to do more in terms of quality of candidates and the ability to lead in the public space.

The general consensus is that there will be a split within the governing party and a splinter party is likely to emerge.

Whatever the outcome, its good to see that Singaporeans are no longer subservient to the PAP and are ready to express their concerns. The move to a better form of democracy and the Govt being held accountable on a more timely basis must surely be welcomed.

Go ahead and attack the govt all you want. But all I'm saying is - don't give the private sector a free pass. They're the ones who are truly responsible for all your problems. I'm going to make a prediction now. You are going to kick the PAP out of power in 20 years. And you will get your WP cabinet. But they can't solve your problems either because guys like you didn't go after the private sector. Most likely, you'll be quite disappointed with the outcome.

 

[kingrant]

I think you are going all over the place.

In an economy there will always be a private economy and a public sector. It didnt have to mean that what happens in the private sector has always to influence the govt esp in this case we are talking about - the pay of Ministers. There are many countries which are governed well and the Ministers are not paid a fraction of what our Ministers are paid. HK is a good example. Others are the Scandinavian countries famed for IKEA, Nokia etc. Australia, UK are also examples. Where is the corruption you talked of from the private sector?

We have to be clear. It's only this govt of ours, and rightfully we shld hantam them. They can choose not to follow the private sector as others have done, but they allow themselves to be "corrupted" - if there is such a sense. We are decrying they have lost it - this sense of public service.

Ironically, the old guards would have deserved this million dollar salaries but they eschewed it. Now we are rewarding incompetence with millions. This I cannot stand.

Go ahead and attack the govt all you want. But all I'm saying is - don't give the private sector a free pass. They're the ones who are truly responsible for all your problems. I'm going to make a prediction now. You are going to kick the PAP out of power in 20 years. And you will get your WP cabinet. But they can't solve your problems either because guys like you didn't go after the private sector. Most likely, you'll be quite disappointed with the outcome.

 

[metalmickey]

I think you are making this a bit more complicated than it is. Salaries might not be an issue if the government is doing its job. There are clear structural issues like unaffordable housing, underemployment, bleak future in the job space, overcrowding etc.

You are assuming that the PAP will deteriorate in the next 20 years. After a string of poor performances, most organisation tend to wake up. WP needs to do more in terms of quality of candidates and the ability to lead in the public space.

The general consensus is that there will be a split within the governing party and a splinter party is likely to emerge.

Whatever the outcome, its good to see that Singaporeans are no longer subservient to the PAP and are ready to express their concerns. The move to a better form of democracy and the Govt being held accountable on a more timely basis must surely be welcomed.

Let's go through the issues.

Unaffordable housing - caused by property speculators, most of whom are Singaporeans. Banks setting up REITs to dump shit on the younger generation. Government's role in this is that they failed to prevent this, but that is a secondary role.

Underemployment - caused by employers who are always looking for ways to pay workers as little as they can get away with. Government's role in this is that they failed to prevent this, but that is a secondary role.

Overcrowding - the govt has a more direct role in this. But I can't help but notice that it's always the SMEs who are saying, "there aren't enough Singaporeans willing to do this kinds of jobs. We need more S passes. So it's also about the private sector.

I am not assuming that the PAP will deteriorate in the 20 years. Elections are won or lost on ground sentiment, not performance. All the PAP cock ups have taken place over the last 20 years. If they win or lose elections based on performance, they would have been out by now. The PAP can reform and change and improve all they want, but I think right now, their fate is already sealed and they will lose ground no matter how hard they try. It's just a matter of whether the momentum that is going on right now is enough to throw them out of office.

Your prediction that a split will take place in the PAP is not a consensus:
http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2012/11/02/splits-in-the-singapore-elite/

It's not right that the popular rage is directed squarely at the govt. The private sector's role in all this for too long has been understated and it's about time the balance is redressed. It is not that I'm making this too complicated. The solution has to come from both the govt and the private sector. It is not that I'm making this too complicated. It is that many people have this fanciful notion that all the govt has to do is to wake up wave a magic wand and all the structural problems can be solved without people putting massive pressure on corporations - that is way too simplistic.

 

[metalmickey]

Where is the corruption you talked of from the private sector?

http://taxjustice.blogspot.com/2013/03/corruption-in-malaysia-singapore.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/14/us-singapore-tax-idUSBRE89D0GM20121014

And what about the minibonds scandal during the great financial crisis?

Anyway I've been ranting all over this thread about how so much of our problems are tied to the actions of the private sector. I'm not going to repeat myself.

 

[kingrant]

Metal,

Indeed, what we are all saying here - and that includes you - is that the govt screwed up. Therefore they dont deserve the astronomical salaries they get. Period.

You keep saying that the govt cannot keep the private sector at bay, so they cannot governed properly by balancing competitive sectors of society, then they screwed up.

No need to go and change private sector modus operandi. Private sector will always be private sector. A good govt will recognise that and deal with it.

 

[cunnilaubu]

I think you are making this a bit more complicated than it is. Salaries might not be an issue if the government is doing its job. There are clear structural issues like unaffordable housing, underemployment, bleak future in the job space, overcrowding etc.

We should put the notion of high salary for capable political leaders behind us. This flaw policy initiated by LKY had bred 2 generations of self-serving incompetent "leaders" who has led Singapore to our current problems.

Political leaders should be people with passions to serve the people and give the majority a better life. Not those thinking of how to fatten their own kitties.

 

[enterprise2]

We should put the notion of high salary for capable political leaders behind us. This flaw policy initiated by LKY had bred 2 generations of self-serving incompetent "leaders" who has led Singapore to our current problems.

Political leaders should be people with passions to serve the people and give the majority a better life. Not those thinking of how to fatten their own kitties.

The way I read the situation is that the garment does not accept the system is wrong or flawed, but individual ministers may have made mistakes or proven unsuitable for office. So the question is not whether ministers should be paid astronomical salaries but rather how to u ensure they meet their KPIs or make the right strategies.

 

[metalmickey]

The way I read the situation is that the garment does not accept the system is wrong or flawed, but individual ministers may have made mistakes or proven unsuitable for office. So the question is not whether ministers should be paid astronomical salaries but rather how to u ensure they meet their KPIs or make the right strategies.

Came across an interesting article the other day.

http://www.npr.org/2012/11/01/164096479/ricks-firing-generals-to-fight-better-wars

During WWII, the US military used to fire a lot of their generals for screwing up. Around the time of the Vietnam War, they stopped firing generals. Guess which war they had the better generals?

It isn't really that hard. You don't really have to be that rigorous in the selection process. Once you have a million dollar salary in place, people will always come forward. You don't have to teach them or tell them what to do. It's very simple. All you have to do is to fire them and kick them out of the cabinet if they fuck up.

Problem is that they're not really doing it now. Why? Because over the last 20 years, the PAP has always valued loyalty over performance. That's why it's always the same few people running everything, being rotated from left to right and back again to left. Because they only want people with a proven track record of not having a mind of their own to run things.

 

[metalmickey]

Metal,

Indeed, what we are all saying here - and that includes you - is that the govt screwed up. Therefore they dont deserve the astronomical salaries they get. Period.

You keep saying that the govt cannot keep the private sector at bay, so they cannot governed properly by balancing competitive sectors of society, then they screwed up.

No need to go and change private sector modus operandi. Private sector will always be private sector. A good govt will recognise that and deal with it.

People have their way of doing things. If mine differs from yours there's no reason for you to stop me from doing what I'm going to do. The government that you think of as being almighty against corporate power is not actually that almighty. Things have fundamentally changed since the Asian financial crisis of the 90s. Corporations flexed their muscle. If MNCs want to leave, they'll leave and the jobs leave with them. There needs to be another dimension of resistance, and that should come from the people. Otherwise a lot of them just come and set up shop here rubbing their hands in glee at how fuckable we are. It was a strategic error of our govt that other than MNCs and GLCs there is no strong third pillar of our economy.

Government regulation of the private sector is about changing the private sector modus operandi. Otherwise it's not regulation.

 

[kingrant]

It's not about stopping you from doing things. By all means, tilt at yr windmills. Governing a country and running a private corporation are two different animals. We shouldnt be imposing one over the other . Governing a country I am sure you can see is larger, much larger, than running a profit enterprise.

Once you mix the two, as we now have, everyone is screwed except those in power and connected.

People have their way of doing things. If mine differs from yours there's no reason for you to stop me from doing what I'm going to do. The government that you think of as being almighty against corporate power is not actually that almighty. Things have fundamentally changed since the Asian financial crisis of the 90s. Corporations flexed their muscle. If MNCs want to leave, they'll leave and the jobs leave with them. There needs to be another dimension of resistance, and that should come from the people. Otherwise a lot of them just come and set up shop here rubbing their hands in glee at how fuckable we are. It was a strategic error of our govt that other than MNCs and GLCs there is no strong third pillar of our economy.

Government regulation of the private sector is about changing the private sector modus operandi. Otherwise it's not regulation.

 

[metalmickey]

It's not about stopping you from doing things. By all means, tilt at yr windmills. Governing a country and running a private corporation are two different animals. We shouldnt be imposing one over the other . Governing a country I am sure you can see is larger, much larger, than running a profit enterprise.

Once you mix the two, as we now have, everyone is screwed except those in power and connected.

No, it is not true that we shouldn't be imposing one upon another. Governments are supposed to rein in corporate power. And if I have to say one more time why corporations are responsible for a lot of the problems we have today, I would be wasting my breath.

Your point is that governing a country is larger than running a corporation is irrelevant. I am not talking about government having some say in "a" corporation. Regulation means that government has a say in all corporations. They are supposed to have a say in the running of all corporations that operate in Singapore. That's what laws are for. They are supposed to mix. The issue is how they are mixing. The government should be acting to constrain corporate power. Right now the problem is that the government and corporations are ganging up to screw Singaporeans.

If you think about it, corporations are more fearsome and tyrannical than our government. If you don't like our government, you can always vote them out. If you don't like a big corporation - what can you do? Do you not realise that the Economic Development Board is just the government going around with a begging bowl and pleading with everybody to set up shop in Singapore?

I just feel that Singaporeans' attitude towards corporate power is the same as their attitude towards the PAP 20 years ago: they are screwing me, and I am loving it.

 

[GoldenDragon]

Why did you cook up such an unbelievable story that no one can verify?

Why unbelievable bro? Must everthing be verified? We can always choose not to believe. The reason why scroobal left out the name of the cabinet minister, imo, is to protect his source or his own identity.

If I have to guess, that cabinet minister could be VB.

 

[kingrant]

What, you're a Communist? you sound more naive than I think.

The government should be acting to constrain corporate power. Right now the problem is that the government and corporations are ganging up to screw Singaporeans.

 

[metalmickey]

What, you're a Communist? you sound more naive than I think.

Anyway, this debate is one that will never end. It takes place in all the democratic parliaments, all the political science departments of universities. Basically you are a free marketer, and anybody who doesn't agree with you is a communist.

If capitalism was such a great system, communism would never have taken place. No doubt the way that it worked out in practice made it worse than capitalism, but they were right that it had to be changed, and that the govt should be given more power to control private corporations. There are socialist countries who managed this more effectively, in Germany and Scandinavia.

You are the one who's being naive about how corporations operate.

 

[kingrant]

If communism is so great, China and Russia would still remain as communist centrally planned economy, which you want, isnt it?.

Anyway, this debate is one that will never end. It takes place in all the democratic parliaments, all the political science departments of universities. Basically you are a free marketer, and anybody who doesn't agree with you is a communist.

If capitalism was such a great system, communism would never have taken place. No doubt the way that it worked out in practice made it worse than capitalism, but they were right that it had to be changed, and that the govt should be given more power to control private corporations. There are socialist countries who managed this more effectively, in Germany and Scandinavia.

You are the one who's being naive about how corporations operate.

 

[metalmickey]

If communism is so great, China and Russia would still remain as communist centrally planned economy, which you want, isnt it?.

1. China is still, to some extent, a centrally planned economy. I read somewhere that it's still 50% state owned enterprises.
2. Russia was better off under communism. In the 90s, the life expectancy dropped by around 10 years. As of today, much of the economy is in the hands of a few billionaires. That's free market for you, baby!
3. Where did I say that communism was great?
4. No mention of Sweden / Norway / Denmark?
5. The person who said "Where is the corruption you talked of from the private sector?" just called me naive.
6. We're rehashing debates that have taken place elsewhere, and where the people have better things to say than you or I. Anybody wants to follow up, go to the library and read. That's all.

 

[kingrant]

Cool it bro.

Exactly, you are rehashing debates that have taken place elsewhere, and you are still debating...Dont think anyone here is really interested in an academic argument with you. I am not. You sound laboured. Take a rest. Whether you win or I win, the world will still be here, and fat cats will still skin you.

Bon vivre!

1. China is still, to some extent, a centrally planned economy. I read somewhere that it's still 50% state owned enterprises.
2. Russia was better off under communism. In the 90s, the life expectancy dropped by around 10 years. As of today, much of the economy is in the hands of a few billionaires. That's free market for you, baby!
3. Where did I say that communism was great?
4. No mention of Sweden / Norway / Denmark?
5. The person who said "Where is the corruption you talked of from the private sector?" just called me naive.
6. We're rehashing debates that have taken place elsewhere, and where the people have better things to say than you or I. Anybody wants to follow up, go to the library and read. That's all.

 

[enterprise2]

The debate about communism and democracy is now merely academic and we should leave all the arguements behind in the 80s and 90s. Nowadays nobody gives a shit...whether u in Russia, China, Vietnam...etc. But if u in a dictatorship and oppressing people like Syria or Iran....then u will be treated like a pariah and u should be.