I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen OZ poverty with my own eyes. It was often lying there in the gutter in full view of the public.
-
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.
Paul Cheung speaks out against the FT Policy
- Thread starter aurvandil
- Start date
I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen OZ poverty with my own eyes. It was often lying there in the gutter in full view of the public.
hahaha......u are becumming kuku also.....never believe everything you see....
this is a not a joke.
cum 2016 when the opp parties win the GE....sinkiland will be a paradise and the doors to all foreigners will be closed...
don't say i never tip you in advance hor.
Last edited:
Exactly. And of course there are destitutes in every country and we fully recognise that. We are not that naive not to know. The issue is to what extent the govt is willing to help these people. A govt that boasts continuously how well it has govern the country by stating GDP and officical reserves growth figures and yet render practically negligible help to the lowest denominators who are just as much a citizen of this nation as anyone. A govt that chooses only to highlight their achievements (if u can call it that in the first instance) and camoflauges their failings. So forummers like us want to balance that out by posting the results of the failed policies herel. And this is where we're coming from. So what's wrong with that? Why is it necessary for Leongsam and his clones to immediately put down what we post just because it highlights the negative side of the PAP? Leongsam doesn't realise that it doesn't do his forum any good to post the successes so claimed by the PAP because it's already all over in the mainstream media. Why inundate forummers with these again? And that's why I said and I repeat here, if Leongsam wants to be good forum host, he has to maintain neutrality instead of shooting down every post that highlight PAP's failings.
It is my job to present a balanced picture of Singapore. Anyone who knew nothing about the country and started reading the contents of this forum would get the mistaken idea that Singapore was some sort of shit hole with a cruel dictator at the helm. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The Singapore government has done wonders for the people of Singapore and the majority of Singaporeans appreciate what the PAP stands for. That's the reason why they have been returned with an overwhelming majority in every election since 1963.
Without myself and a few others presenting a positive image of the country, this forum would give a lopsided view of the real situation.
Appreciate your efforts. The PAP has done well in many areas post industrialization. So has communist China and Vietnam after opening the doors to foreign direct investments to industrialize and integrate into the global economy. I hope you realise that post industrialization, in today's words, post globalization, political parties that brought their country prosperity have benefited their population regardless of their ideological inclinations.
Some of us here argue that more can be done in other areas, for instance social security and cushioning the impact of globalization. That is where opinions diverge. 60% voted for their own interests or see what you have observed. 40% saw that the system has been inadequate, and some of us here try to explain where it would be better to do more. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is a worthy aspiration which should not be completely abandoned.
While Sam may be right on a number of issues, he is only right when looking at matters from a micro level, one person at a time. But from a political and policy perspective, given a macro view, Sam's views can be easily seen to be short-sighted and even frivolous and will eventually lead to the downfall of any society. All societies in history have fallen when the better-off relieve themselves from acknowledging the social and economic contribution of the middle and lower income groups. It is by accepting the lesser in society that makes a nation great and stable. There is sufficient money for everyone in Singapore. Even the well-off who have siphoned off large sums of money by being lazy and simply enriching themselves through fascistic policies have earned sufficient to last a few generations.
But wealth and power is a drug. And when lazy people who have no idea how to create true economic wealth indulge themselves to riches then the only expected end-result is a pool of dumb and lazy drugged out group of people who behave worse as a group or even individually when compared to the lesser-offs in society.
Sam incorrectly assumes that all those rich people have gotten rich by working hard and or being smart. In Singapore's context, this is far from the truth. We have a large number of lazy and dumb rich bastards and these people will corrupt society and further enslave the community.
But wealth and power is a drug. And when lazy people who have no idea how to create true economic wealth indulge themselves to riches then the only expected end-result is a pool of dumb and lazy drugged out group of people who behave worse as a group or even individually when compared to the lesser-offs in society.
Sam incorrectly assumes that all those rich people have gotten rich by working hard and or being smart. In Singapore's context, this is far from the truth. We have a large number of lazy and dumb rich bastards and these people will corrupt society and further enslave the community.
In other words capitalism, like feudalism, transfers privileges from the economically successful to their children. The difference between the 99 percentile and the 99.99 percentile can be wider than that of the bottom 25% with the to 1%. Sam as depicted is probably at least in the top 10%, and unlikely to be representative of the dynastic wealth transfer and special privileges that occurs at the very top. I, like any other peasant, can overlook the wealth transfer of the business elites and the privileges of political office holders, but... but once enough people are doing badly, envy and hate can set in. This is what a smart, forward-looking government should preempt by throwing a bone or two once in a while. Let's not be mistaken, I like my "growth dividends", but circumstances may develop over the next few years which will call for more than that.
I couldn't have said it better.
Great and noble. I say this of the business, political and bureaucratic elite in Singapore. Many fail to understand and practice noblesse oblige. It is a sad and sorry state of affairs we have in SG, being run by vulgar and uncultured louts who cannot inspire people to greatness beyond that of one's own pocketbook.
I couldn't have said it better.
Great and noble. I say this of the business, political and bureaucratic elite in Singapore. Many fail to understand and practice noblesse oblige. It is a sad and sorry state of affairs we have in SG, being run by vulgar and uncultured louts who cannot inspire people to greatness beyond that of one's own pocketbook.
This category exist in every society. Some are born into positions of privilege. Others gain success by hanging on to the coat tails of the right people. It is hardly a uniquely Singaporean situation.
And besides the scenario isn't confined to politics either. "Sucking up to the boss" occurs in even the smallest of organisations and the wrong people are promoted as a result. Those who are passed over have two choices.... they can sit down and moan and whine about how unfair life is or they can get off their asses and do something about it. All I'm trying to do is to suggest the latter course of action.
Life has never been fair and it still won't be even if the PAP is deposed of and all guilty members have been drawn and quartered.
This is a very interesting discussion, and managed to get me to register an account to join in.
A few things regarding the maid issue. I think the percentage of households with maids is an even worse economic indicator than income inequality and the Gini coefficient. The reason why there are many maids in Singapore but practically none in Oz/Aus is because the latter has minimum wage legislation, and because of that, most households in Oz/Aus cannot afford to hire a live-in maid 24/7 at those rates. Furthermore, with minimum wages, most households do not need to hire maids because small families can survive with single income, allowing the other parent to stay at home and take care of the children.
There's one thing I'd like to ask you, Sam. Do you think a person from a low-income family in Singapore has a better chance of success than a person from a low-income family in Australia? This seems to be the more relevant question that has unfortunately been cast aside in the discussion about jealousy and income inequality.
A few things regarding the maid issue. I think the percentage of households with maids is an even worse economic indicator than income inequality and the Gini coefficient. The reason why there are many maids in Singapore but practically none in Oz/Aus is because the latter has minimum wage legislation, and because of that, most households in Oz/Aus cannot afford to hire a live-in maid 24/7 at those rates. Furthermore, with minimum wages, most households do not need to hire maids because small families can survive with single income, allowing the other parent to stay at home and take care of the children.
There's one thing I'd like to ask you, Sam. Do you think a person from a low-income family in Singapore has a better chance of success than a person from a low-income family in Australia? This seems to be the more relevant question that has unfortunately been cast aside in the discussion about jealousy and income inequality.
Capitalism is the best system for modern, progressive societies. Do not be confused with fascist ideals that have infiltrated capitalism with capitalism that is imbued in true democracy. The issues in the west are due to fascist ideals masquerading as capitalist societies. The use of mainstream media to confuse and hide real issues is quite a recent phomenon in the west. Politics in the west has in the recent past been controlled by an elite group. However, unlike the PAP, who are through and through fascists, the western power elite do not outright and overtly share their ideals on elitism. It is done in a less obvious manner and only in certain areas of policy-making.
The PAP on the other hand espouses fascist ideals in almost all areas of policy-making. From education, NS, housing, employment, CPF, medical care, taxation (including estate duties which were removed), media etc - all these areas have major policies that are skewed heavily towards either protecting the rights or enhancing the wealth of the elite group while at the same time either neglecting or burdening the middle and lower income group.
It is in the interest of elites to minimize the rise of the middle income group. The middle income group is usually the largest in any developed society. As a group, they provide themselves as formidable foe against the smaller elite group both from a financial point of view as well as from the sheer number within their group. What is happening in the west is the elite group squeezing the wealth out of the middle income to lessen their political clout and to prevent this group for creating a formidable political force.
What is happening in Singapore for the past 20 years, more so in the past 10 years, is the same. The PAP and its elite force have implemented policies aimed at decreasing the wealth of the middle income while at the same time increasing the number of elites in society.
I am certain that should the PAP lose power in a GE, life will be better for Singaporeans and true economic growth can be had. IMO, the PAP is a fascist political party and hence its ideals can only be helpful and sustainable for a short period of time. The PAP, as a fascist political party has outlasts its usefullness to Singapore and Singaporeans. Instead of opening itself up to a more open system of governance and inclusive policies, they have actually regressed to even more fascistic ideals in the past 20 years.
What every society should do is to ensure that those that are willing to work a decent and honest job should be paid sufficiently such that housing, food and other necessities are within their reach and that their children have good opportunity at socio-economic upward mobility. In Singapore, we have regressed to the point where a peon is paid so low that the individual is barely surviving and many necessities are outside of their reach.
While a peon doesn not add much directly to economic value, we should not discount the fact that such role is required in our society. It's a job that is neccesary helps other areas in our business society to operate efficiently. Therefore, we should not begrudge such individuals an income that should be commensurate with such a job but more so to provide an income that provides sufficiently for their families.
From a purely economic point of view, it is better that $1,000 of additional income be paid to each of ten peons than for a single sum of $10,000 be paid to a single boss. The individualissed $1,000 will be spent and actually push the GDP upwards while at the same time increase GNP and any 'happiness index' while the $10,000 paid singularly to the boss will very likely be spent short of its full amount. However, polocies at play here strongly support the latter activity. We have a poorly managed economy that is supported by a poorly managed education system resulting in a situation where instead of being a people blessed with a strategic grographical location for international sea trade, we have a government that wants a majority of its people to work till their deaths with no promise of retirement.
The minimum wage in Canada doesn't prevent the Canadians from having live in maids. The Canadians pay the minimum wage and the maid pays for her food, board and lodging. The net amount is similar to what Singaporeans pay.
There are no live in maids in Australia because there is no category of visas which allows for this sort of arrangement.
The fact that no Singaporeans need to work as maids speaks volumes. If income inequality was really that bad, young Singapore girls would be working as maids in the homes of the rich. This was the case in the 50s and 60s before the PAP made lives better for everyone.
People from low income families in Singapore have a much higher chance of being successful because they realise that there is no free lunch and that if they want to succeed in life, they'll have to work hard to lift themselves out of poverty.
In Australia, children from low income households learn early in life that they don't need to work in order to receive a weekly cheque. The motivation to work is taken away and what OZ ends up with is 3 generations of lazy good-for-nothing layabouts all living under one roof, drinking beer, smoking weed while being funded by hardworking tax payers.
Guess I should have clarified myself. Without going into psychology and mindsets, if two people born in low-income households put in the same amount of effort, one in Singapore, and one in Australia, which one is more likely to succeed in life?
As an aside, I'm not really nitpicking anything here, I'm genuinely interested in a comparison of the lives of people in Singapore and Australia. I myself am working in a small cafe in Australia and earning much more than what I would have earned working in similar conditions in Singapore.
As an aside, I'm not really nitpicking anything here, I'm genuinely interested in a comparison of the lives of people in Singapore and Australia. I myself am working in a small cafe in Australia and earning much more than what I would have earned working in similar conditions in Singapore.
I guess it would have to boil down to what exactly you mean by "succeed in life".
A plumber would be better off in Australia. Someone who chose a career in the financial sector would probably be better off in Singapore.
It's impossible to make a direct comparison because each country has its strengths and weaknesses. The problem with the majority of the bunch here is that they're complaining about all the wrong things.
I could come up with a list of complaints about life in Singapore longer than my arm but it would have nothing to do with the performance of the government. It would be all about Singapore's location, its limitations, its long term viability, its lack of language skills and so on.
If you are born into an under-privileged family in Singapore, you will be worse off than someone with similar upbringing in Australia. In Singapore, from birth until NS, there are policies in place to ensure that you are treated as a second class citizen. Your education will involve sub-standard teachers. Your parents lack of ability in paying for tuition will set you back terribly. Up until secondary school, you will have suffered mal-nutrition as studies have shown that middle and lower income students are malnourished.
When you head into NS, there will be others who will be classed as White Horses and they are accorded better privileges than you. When you start working, you will be paying astronomical prices for a home that you don't actually own. The price is many times more than the cost of building the home. You will be paying for this home for the rest of your life. You will be constantly worried that you may lose your job as more and more foreigners enter into the job market. Just as Suckone Singh, aged 45 heads back to India after 15 years in Singapore, he is replaced Suckanother One Singh, a 27 year-old graduate with 6 years of experience willing to accept a pay lower than you.
Regardless of the first class education that you were told you received in JC or NUS, you somehow fail to be better than a graduate from a 3rd world country.
Tharman recently mentioned that a study done showed that the upward mobility of low income Singaporeans are quite pathetic. This is from the horse's own mouth. What is surprising is that they pretend they didn't that this is happening in our backyward, in a country where they have created all the necessary policies to create such a scenario. Either you should be scared that we have such people creating policies with such disastrous policies without knowing the consequences when they made those policies OR you accept that such policies are to be expected from a fascist political party.
Either way you are screwed.
Your option is either to migrate or do your best to vote out fascism in favour of a true democracy based on capitalist principles.
What a load of crock. My family was extremely poor when I was young. However, that didn't stop myself and my siblings from getting an excellent education without the need for any private tutors which we couldn't have afforded anyway. In fact, when I was doing my A levels, I actually GAVE tuition in order save money for my University Education. I was earning $200 per month which was good money at the time.
When I was in primary school I wasn't starving and I wasn't malnourished either. Helping to wash cars after school at the service station round the corner earned me more than enough for 4 healthy meals a day.
All it takes to succeed in either OZ or Singapore is a work ethic. You don't need to come from a privileged family.
SAM LEONG! It is now 2012! :*:
What year are you tokking about? Please wake up. The studies relating to malnourished Singaporean teenagers and the lack of upward mobility among the lower income in Singapore were all committed very recently.
What year are you tokking about? Please wake up. The studies relating to malnourished Singaporean teenagers and the lack of upward mobility among the lower income in Singapore were all committed very recently.
Why can't students give private tuition nowadays? Is it against the law?
Some can and some can't. Not all that can, want to and not all that want to, can. So how? Your car-cleaning days are over. Those have been taken over by Banglas. Working in fastfood restaurants is also difficult as a large number are FT/FW.
Similar threads
