• 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?

Nice-Gook

Alfrescian
Loyal
I agree with you totally regarding the distribution of wealth to achieve an equitable state. But I wish to point out one area where there should be equality and that in the non-quantitative distribution of human rights. Certain non-quantitative rights of a citizen should be given out equally regardless of wealth and social standing.T

Agreed.I am just being technical about what is a welfare state.In fact,no government on this earth can claim to be in governance without a care for welfare.Hence,it's a question of degree.Oil rich countries like Brunei for example is a mecca of a welfare sate where almost everything is free,...education,health care and ziltch taxation but lacks in the area of human rights.

I am glad you pointed out about human rights because even in communism,the very advocate of absolute welfare state,human rights takes a great beatings and cannot be said to be any better than neo capitalism per ce.But the presumption is human rights must precedes in order to have any form of democracy itself.By the fact that each man or woman has the right to vote.But that right to vote as human rights is just being circumvented as what PAP had done now.By undermining all our independent institutions...blurring the line between executives power and political power,and muzzling the inquiring independent press.In short, PAP had made a mockery of democracy by duplicity.
 

TracyTan866

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Agreed.I am just being technical about what is a welfare state.In fact,no government on this earth can claim to be in governance without a care for welfare.Hence,it's a question of degree.Oil rich countries like Brunei for example is a mecca of a welfare sate where almost everything is free,...education,health care and ziltch taxation but lacks in the area of human rights.

I am glad you pointed out about human rights because even in communism,the very advocate of absolute welfare state,human rights takes a great beatings and cannot be said to be any better than neo capitalism per ce.But the presumption is human rights must precedes in order to have any form of democracy itself.By the fact that each man or woman has the right to vote.But that right to vote as human rights is just being circumvented as what PAP had done now.By undermining all our independent institutions...blurring the line between executives power and political power,and muzzling the inquiring independent press.In short, PAP had made a mockery of democracy by duplicity.

The pap is not functioning as what a govt shd..It's functioning as a Corporation Management Board and treating Singaporeans as factors of production
 

Nice-Gook

Alfrescian
Loyal
The pap is not functioning as what a govt shd..It's functioning as a Corporation Management Board and treating Singaporeans as factors of production

Correction.All corporate board are accountable.To it's shareholders,to the governing bodies and more.Even in a public listed corporation,all I have do is to own1 share and I can attend it's general meeting and put it's chairman under my scrutiny.Not to mention no corporate company however filthy rich can act suka suka.Because it becomes answerable to the community it lives among.

Not PAP.. None of the company it own,as our trustee, is accountable.Not even to the parliament.PAP is functioning above law.
 

jw5

Moderator
Moderator
Loyal
I agree with you totally regarding the distribution of wealth to achieve an equitable state. But I wish to point out one area where there should be equality and that in the non-quantitative distribution of human rights. Certain non-quantitative rights of a citizen should be given out equally regardless of wealth and social standing.T

Absolutely.......................................
Now when can we receive the results of PT's earth shattering research?
 
Last edited:

TracyTan866

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Correction.All corporate board are accountable.To it's shareholders,to the governing bodies and more.Even in a public listed corporation,all I have do is to own1 share and I can attend it's general meeting and put it's chairman under my scrutiny.Not to mention no corporate company however filthy rich can act suka suka.Because it becomes answerable to the community it lives among.

Not PAP.. None of the company it own,as our trustee, is accountable.Not even to the parliament.PAP is functioning above law.

Very true..they manage SG like a company but they dont answer to the shareholders...so must sack the board as soon as possible for dereliction of duty and responsibility
 

freedalas

Alfrescian
Loyal
The ball is in MCYS's court..Let's see whether CCS makes a difference to the poor as he claimed that he was from the poor.

It'd never been easy to get more people on board for social and volunteer work, but thankfully the number has increased, albeit slowly. What we do is instead of asking friends, relatives, business associates, ex-colleagues to jump straight into action, we would invite them along to our visits to the families being cared for. Many of them are moved to tears when they see the conditions these families are living under and some can hardly suppressed their rage at the govt when they find out these people can't qualify for any govt help because of the impossible conditions to be fulfilled and all the overly daunting red tape and paperwork. They will also learn first hand from these families that they are not sitting at home waiting for manna to fall from the skies. Most do odd jobs here and there, now and then, to supplement. Through such visits, many do join as volunteers as they now realise that if better-off S'poreans do not help our fellow citizens who are in very much worse shape than us, no one would as the PAP simply don't care under the guise of turning S'pore into a welfare state. And as I posted earlier, many of them who were PAP supporters in the past, voted against the PAP in the last GE after having seen for themselves the inhumane treatment by the PAP of its own citizens and instead care so much for foreigners. And I told Leongsam, for this particular post, I am not here to win a debate with him on political idealogies etc but to simply raise awareness of the plight many S'poreans who do suffer very much day to day but kept away from the public news by the state controlled media.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
some can hardly suppressed their rage at the govt when they find out these people can't qualify for any govt help because of the impossible conditions to be fulfilled and all the overly daunting red tape and paperwork.

The PAP is doing the right thing in making it almost impossible to qualify for assistance. If the process was easy and straightforward with no stringent checks, half of Singapore would be on welfare as sinkies have no qualms about lying, cheating, pushing, shoving and conning when it comes to getting something for nothing.

You can't blame the PAP for having to make the process so laborious. They're forced to do so because they know that Singaporeans are inherently dishonest. The blame for having to impose a host of red tape therefore falls squarely on ordinary Singaporeans and not the ruling party.

Remember this : http://www.atimes.com/se-asia/BB12Ae01.html

If that was just for a doll probably worth less than a dollar, imagine what Sinkies would do to get their hands on a $100 per month freebie.
 

freedalas

Alfrescian
Loyal
The PAP is doing the right thing in making it almost impossible to qualify for assistance. if the process was easy and straightforward with no stringent checks, half of Singapore would be on welfare as sinkies have no qualms about lying, cheating, pushing, shoving and conning when it comes to getting something for nothing.

Really, don't the supposedly A Team has its disposal a bunch of actuaries and statisticians to work out something to pre-empt these. At the moment, the base-line is set so overly low, that one would be nearly dead before he can qualify. Moving that line just up a little would cover half of S'pore. Think before you post lah.
 

Fook Seng

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Leongsam said:
The PAP is doing the right thing in making it almost impossible to qualify for assistance. If the process was easy and straightforward with no stringent checks, half of Singapore would be on welfare as sinkies have no qualms about lying, cheating, pushing, shoving and conning when it comes to getting something for nothing.

You can't blame the PAP for having to make the process so laborious. They're forced to do so because they know that Singaporeans are inherently dishonest. The blame for having to impose a host of red tape therefore falls squarely on ordinary Singaporeans and not the ruling party.

PAP has managed to put so many kinks in the works as to render the assistance programme irrelevant.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
At the moment, the base-line is set so overly low, that one would be nearly dead before he can qualify.

That's actually a good strategy as it means that the taxpayer only has to subsidise these individuals for a short period of time before they expire. If they were still alive and kicking, the subsidies might have to go on for years and years.
 

Leongsam

High Order Twit / Low SES subject
Admin
Asset
PAP has managed to put so many kinks in the works as to render the assistance programme irrelevant.

There you go.. a pre-emptive move to save the taxpayer a lot of money. Credit goes to the scholars who developed the necessary stringent checks.
 

freedalas

Alfrescian
Loyal
That's actually a good strategy as it means that the taxpayer only has to subsidise these individuals for a short period of time before they expire. If they were still alive and kicking, the subsidies might have to go on for years and years.

Hey, Leongsam, thanks very much! Didn't know I could find an ally in you to expose the evil intentions of the PAP with its policies on helping the poor. Now forummers will know how poisonous the PAP is. Great post, man!
 
Top