Fines wont cause the crumbling of Singapore. Just dont park illegally
-
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.
Crumbling of Singapore?
- Thread starter TracyTan866
- Start date
Fines wont cause the crumbling of Singapore. Just dont park illegally
Looks like u quite dislike LKY
Hi freedalas. My warm wishes to you and your family in this special day and a peaceful and blessed new year ahead.
I have to admit that I am not comfortable engaging in "hostility", be it in real life or cyberspace. I am also someone who has to account to my actions or what I have expressed or written even if it is in the anonymous world of an internet forum. This is why I have chose to respond to your reply to my earlier post despite loathing how the engagement may lead to. I guess "peace-loving" and mild-mannered people like me should stay as a silent reader in the world of internet.
Regarding your take on our education system, I fully understand where you are coming from. That being said, I do hope that you can also give Countries like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, or even China a consideration as despite their geographical size, their education system is of high level too. Our edge here in Singapore is that we are educated in English, and believe it or not, our education system is world-renowned based on the feedback I received from people overseas over the years. Personally, I have benefited from our education system. My proficiency in both the English and Chinese language alone has given me the edge ahead of my Asian business competitors and peers. Based on my observation, the education system in South East Asia apart from Singapore leave much to be desired and I don't think it is valid for them to use geographical size as an excuse for their shortcomings.
Nice-Gook and you have mentioned about the cluelessness of our government which captures my interest and reminds me of this conversation I had at a gathering with my friends and business associates some time ago. My Singaporean peers and I were lamenting and disgusted about how our government have run out of ideas and have to resort to opening casinos to open new grounds. One of us even commented that the end of Singapore is nearing. My Malaysian friend, however, was complimenting about the progress he has seen in Penang ever since Lim Guan Eng took over. He said in pride about how he can foresee Penang to be the next Singapore under Lim Guan Eng's leadership. He likened Lim Guan Eng's DAP with our PAP leaders. He also went on to chastised the Barisan National and particularly MCA (he is Chinese) for their incompetency in running a Country that is rich in natural resources and yet the Country's progress is nothing in comparison with Singapore. He firmly believed that if every state in Malaysia has a Lim Guan Eng in charge and do away with the bumiputra policies, Malaysia will definitely reached far greater heights than it is today. In the midst of the conversation, a business associate and friend from Canada or Australia commented that Singapore is far from over, looking at how he sees the Country's business environment is continuing to evolve aggressively. He went on to say that Countries such as Singapore will continue to survive and prosper. We grasp what he said when we recognise how Singapore's economy have indeed evolved over the years through industrial centric to financial and then to tech and service centric. Just a thought that I suddenly have after reading the latest posts in this thread and reckon it is apt to share it in here. Nothing scholarly to discuss or debate on...
As for LKY, I'm not a fan of him. In fact, I don't have a good impression of him apart from recognising his intelligence and leadership ability based on what I've read about him (and it is not entirely from the 154th media). I don't like bullies so it is highly likely I will not like him in real life too. Regardless, I still see him as a wise and smart man, therefore I stand by my views about him unless proven otherwise.
There was FAR more manipulation in 1963. LKY arrested the most prominent of his political opponents and locked them up without trial for months, years and in a few cases decades.
Had LKY not arrested most of the BS leadership, he would have lost the election.
What you see in 2011 is mild in comparison.
That's because LKY and his gang which you claim were so respected had jailed most to the opposition and there was nobody left to stand for election.
Google "operation cold store". You need to learn a bit of history about your own country.
In 1968 there was no gerrymandering of election boundaries, no GRC and 86% of the electorate voted for the pap. Only 60% voted for the pap in 2011 after all the pap unfair tactics..so who had more Singaporeans' respect? Team LKY/GKS or Team LHL/TCH?
You're getting very evasive. Instead of beating about the bush, all I'm asking you to do is to point out which of the points in the article are false. If you can't, it simply means that the numbers given the article are correct. They can't be both true and false at the same time.
I need you to respond in a concise and credible manner.
EG :
"25 people bought either a Mercedes-Benz or a BMW for the first 11 months of the year." True or False?
If it's true, then I have to say the country is doing very well thanks to the PAP. If it's false, state your sources and tell me how many Mercs and Beemers were actually sold.
"every four days, someone drove away from the Ferrari showroom with a big smile on his face." True or False?
Go through the article and point out all the false data. I'm not interested in the adjectives such as "affordable" as the interpretation of such words varies from person to person. What is affordable to me may not be affordable to someone else. Just go through the actual numbers and tell me where the SPH has lied.
I am not evasive. You are the one who is evasive... avoiding many of my probing questions in previous postings. Get that squared away and we talk. Until then, I am putting you on my ignore list..hahahaha...bye
Last edited:
In 1968 there was no opposition. The leaders of the opposition parties were behind bars or had fled the country. Those left were too scared to stand for election. Only 7 constituencies were contested.
It was like a football match where one team had 11 players and the other team only had 2. There was no need for gerrymandering or manipulation of election boundaries simply because only a few clowns stood against the PAP.
just create enough carpark n there is no need to park illegally.
They're hardly probing questions. They're very shallow and irrelevant questions. It's pretty obvious you're too scared to debate with actual facts and figures thrown in.
It's fine to give your opinions but if they aren't backed up with facts and data, they remain just that.. personal opinions. Debates don't work that way. You have to rebut with more than just sweeping statements. Some nitty gritty details are required to back up your claims.
You can't simply dismiss data because it was quoted from SPH. You can attack the credibility of the article though by proving that the numbers were cooked up, inflated, deflated or altered in some way to distort the real picture.
Show me where the numbers have been massaged or manipulated.
Putting me on ignore simply proves you aren't up the task of engaging in a real debate. You're only interested in airing your views and dismissing the views of others that disagree with yours.
why not? can you able sleep at night when knowing that a lot of poor people growing your rice have no proper home.
For me, I will not be able to sleep peacefully, if knowingly I lied that I will not leave any Singaporean behind and yet so many Singaporeans are impoverished by my policies and are suffering. That's why I asked that rhetoric question.
Can you sleep peacefully if you were them?
Last edited:
The floods ARE less serious than most Singaporeans make them out to be. Serious floods are when people have to rescued by helicopters from their roof tops and cars are swept away along with the occupants.
Ponding is the appropriate term. The word "flooding" made the scenario sound a lot worse than it actually was. The SPH has now corrected itself and used the term "ponding" instead.
Do an image search of "Queensland floods" to see what real floods look like.
with competing needs for land, for the present, car parks will not be enough. so how?
Leongsam said:
Don't compare Singapore with countries that have 10 times, 100 times the catchment area of Singapore. Whereas in these countries it is natural geography that causes the flooding, in Singapore, it is man made. The Government admits as much, choked drains, undersized canals etc and they have claimed to do something about it but honestly either the effort is not enough or the solutions are the wrong one. I really hope this idea of building a lake in the Orchard Road area to divert the water takes off. Also there is a need to understand where the flood water actually comes from. I don't think it is all from the Orchard Road area. If any comes from outside the area, this should be diverted off.
Your analogy just don't work. Those people growing our rice are poor not due to any fault of ours, whereas more and more S'poreans are poorer and poorer due to the failed policies of the PAP. So TracyTan asked the right question, if the PAP can sleep peacefully at night?
Hi freedalas. My warm wishes to you and your family in this special day and a peaceful and blessed new year ahead.
I have to admit that I am not comfortable engaging in "hostility", be it in real life or cyberspace. I am also someone who has to account to my actions or what I have expressed or written even if it is in the anonymous world of an internet forum. This is why I have chose to respond to your reply to my earlier post despite loathing how the engagement may lead to. I guess "peace-loving" and mild-mannered people like me should stay as a silent reader in the world of internet.
Thanks, Candide. A very informative post that shows how knowledgable you are. Hence, it would be a waste if you go into a silent mode in this forum. Just from this post of yours, I can conclude you will have lots to contribute to the discussions here.
The extent of each PAP failed policy varies from one another to another. Not all fail with equal misery. Certain policies do have some success while others really fail miserably. I would categorise S'pore education policy as one of achieving a certain amount of success but at the same time had its fair share of failures as well. One is the unnecssary high standard of mandarin demanded of the students. For this, many solid students could not be admitted into local universities here and further studies abroad. And they turned out to highly skilled professionals be they doctors, lawyers or financiers, as good if not better than their cohorts who were able to study locally having scored A+ in Chinese. As many of these stayed on to work in the countries they did their tertiary education, S'pore lost many top brains. The govt has in fact realised this and is trying to reverse things. But it had taken them too long to realise this.
As for LKY, it's quite a sad case actually. Many people believe that his image and reputation would be intact had he leave the political scene when he relinquished his PM post in 1991. Many will remember and hail him. Instead, he chose to stay on, using various strange sounding titles so as to remain in Cabinet, and did so much damage in the last 20 years. What LKY did was simply to reqlinquish a political title, with or without a title, he's still pretty much in charge. He need not actually take part in any cabinet meeting to influence the outcome of any decisions to be taken. He simply had to make known his thoughts before the Cabinet meets to decide and the Cabinet will know what to decide. Give you an example. When NTU President feedback to LKY that many in the alma mater wanted to change NTU back to its original name ie Nanyang University, the told the NTU President that he don't think we should go back to that, but he added that he would leave it to the Cabinet to decide. So you see, he already make known his views, who would dare decide otherwise. If you know people working on the "inside", you will know how he would berate anyone in his sight the moment something goes against what he wants.
Enjoy the holidays and have a good year ahead.
Tracy,
It is not in dispute that there are many more millionaires in SG now. The problem is that income gap is growing and the poor are being left behind by the same policies that allow more elites to flourish.
SG MSM do not print outright lies. What they do is firstly is just to over-play one side of the picture and downplay the other side by quoting irrelevant examples from other countries. If that doesn't work, then use categorization, framing the issue, relabelling, as a means to distraction. Common tactic: lump born and bred Singaporeans together with PRs to make the numbers in employment and housing look good.
Similar threads
