ckmpd's news clippings - consolidated

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Linz, on why PRC are Lawless:

"I have been living and working in China for more than 14 years. I am different from most Singaporeans who lived in China because I have a strong desire to integrate into the society and understand the different behaviors of PRC Chinese. In other words, I try not to hold any prejudice against them.

I like to explain to fellow Singaporeans why the behavior of PRC Chinese is different from us. It is erroneous to say that China has no criminal laws or judiciary system during Chairman Mao era. There were criminal law and judiciary system but Chairman Mao withheld the implementation of such laws and system during his reign. Chairman Mao is the architect of great famine and society upheaval in the China, infamous for the start of Cultural Revolution and using it as a cloud to bring down his opponents and strengthen its grip on power. Of course, the accusation for the start of Cultural Revolution went to his wife, Jiang Qing or the gang of 4. In reality, it was Mao who supported this political and social mess in China. Most of us have probably heard of Cultural Revolution but the worst political campaign was actually the Great Leap Forward in the 50s that resulted in more than 20 million Chinese to death. So, why did we hear more about the Cultural Revolution? The reasons wee because those 20 million Chinese who were starved to death in the 50s were farmers and illiterate peasants who were not able to write it down their experience in words, while Cultural Revolution target the literate people in the society. Interestingly, the farmers who were starved to death thought they had to sacrifice for their country. "

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Linz, on why PRC are Lawless:

"PRC Chinese have very poor appreciation of lawful society because the term “lawful society” only began after 1984. When PRC Chinese got into trouble with the law, they like to look for “guanxi” to solve it. They are also limited lawful or legitimate judiciary system to resolve some issues. The judiciary system in China can be quite vague and lost. As a result of this long term exposure, PRC Chinese behave very different from Singaporeans. From the poorly dressed country bumpkins in the early 80s to the rich and decadent status now, PRC Chinese are known for their huge appetite for LV, Gucci, Bentleys and Ferraris. No matter how much they pay cloth themselves with luxury brand or drive the most expensive cars, their behavior, values and mindset is obscenely 3rd world in their eyes of not just Singaporeans.

Most Singaporeans are likely to be disgusted by the behavior of PRC Chinese in Singapore. For example, you may witness spiting; littering or someone cut your queue shamelessly without a word. You may also witness unprecedented level of “Kiasuness” displayed by PRC Chinese, whether in taking free of charge handouts or going to school. The level of selfishness displayed by PRC Chinese can be quite shocking and put our Singaporean standard of “kiasu” or Kiasi” to nothing.

I speak to many PRC Chinese who litter or exhibit selfish behavior without prejudice and draw upon the following conclusion. It is erroneous to say that only uneducated PRC Chinese litter in the public. All educated and non educated PRC Chinese do litter in the public. My hypothesis analysis is based on years of observation and talking with them. So, what is the reason for PRC Chinese who litter?

Supporting reason for littering among PRC Chinese

Educated PRC Chinese:
1. I pay tax and someone will remove the trash from the street.
2. I can’t find the trash bin”. The government should have put more trash bin.

Uneducated PRC Chinese:
1. I need to dispose the trash from my hand.
2. The wind will blow the trash into bush and it will be covered up.

Supporting reason for queue cutting PRC Chinese Educated PRC Chinese:
1. I am sorry, I didn’t see you in the line. (as if they can’t see you).
2. I was here half an hour ago.

Uneducated PRC Chinese:
1. I am in the hurry. Why is it taking such a long time?

How about the books that write China is a country with thousand years of civilization. Well, I can only say that it is a myth. Probably, they have leaders or authors in the past like LKY who put it down in books like from 3rd World to First”. In reality, I mixed with the expatriate communities among Japanese, Taiwanese and Koreans, their countries have better social benefits than us Singaporeans.

I wish Singaporeans have a wonderful experience with native PRC Chinese. Be prepared to witness spiting, littering and your line being cut."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

from TOC:

"This April, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong made waves online when he launched his Facebook page and attracted more than 40,000 fans within days.

By this count, it would seem that the PM himself has not only checked the box, but now sets the gold standard for one of his promises following General Elections 2011 – to engage more online.

But one wonders if he is engaging the online community, or merely engaging online. Has he fully exploited a highly interactive platform, or is he (or the Prime Minister's Office) still using it as an information/ ideology dissemination tool?

It is clear that PM is receiving a mass influx of comments on various issues. Nobody is expecting the PMO to handle all of them, so he was right in making a clarification post to say he has forwarded these citizen concerns to his Ministers – a positive step forward, as it (minimally and finally) acknowledges that online comments can be valid.

But one critical aspect of online engagement is transparency – at least in terms of the willingness to close the feedback loop. Not all of his Ministers are as willing to engage online. What have they done with these comments, and does having PM as mediator help facilitate the resolution of these issues?"

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Benjamin Cheah:

"In its election manifesto, the SPP wanted to raise six issues for national dialogue: cost of living, influx of foreigners, public transport, public housing ageing population and public accountability"

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Subra:

"One of the more fascinating developments that has taken place after the last General Elections in May 2011 is that more and more people are coming forward to express their personal views publicly and in doing so more of them are willing to express views that may not be in keeping with the official policy line of the ruling PAP."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Subra:

"as we 'celebrate' the 1st anniversary of the 'new normal', we have good reason to believe that the soul of our nation is gradually heading in the right direction. The most important thing about this development is that it is people-driven and not fed to the people by the state. Let the ideas flow from the many good minds that we have in our midst and let us recreate our soul."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Subra:

"It is good to see that well-reasoned dissenting voices are surfacing more and more. This bodes well in the next phase of our nation's development. As we engage more openly in debate and consider and reconsider policy position more rigourously, we stand to benefit as a nation. It may not work out too well for the PAP as more reasoned dissent from the established views will undermine the PAP's stranglehold on information. But, we must be under no illusions that the nation is more important than a political party. Our country needs this type of open intellectual debate on policy matters. "

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Anonymous:

"One by one, the once loyal supporters of the establishment seem to recognize that the days of the old man is numbered, and the best way to redeem themselves and to reduce the backlash of the public is to speak out before the old man passed away. In this way, they hope to leave a good name for themselves just like ex-president Ong Teng Cheong.
How is it that more and more PAP unknown now coming out suddenly,putting their jobs and reputation to speak out. Did they know of what we did not know of the old man's condition ? "

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Subra:

"Many Singaporeans cast away their fear at the ballot box last year. Many more were willing to show their disagreement at the Presidential Election as well (resulting in an 'unpopularly' elected President). The fear that a large segment of the population chose to jettison at the elections was a powerful signal indeed. That must have surely emboldened many public figures to come forward and express their personal disagreements with the official policy position. "

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Prata Job:

"One year after the GE and promise of good times ahead, the PAP is still doing a shit job of most things. The optimistic exception for the moment is housing as Khaw Boon Wan is cranking up supply with new flats etc and cooling demand with ABSD. Right on top of my complaint list, the MRT system is literally falling apart, and PAP is going to give bus companies a jab to improve the public transport system. I don't know whether the jab is in the arm is to boost the bus companies or a jab into the eyes of taxpayers"

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Prata Job:

"Transport is the main pain in the ass and don't get me foaming at mouth about COE yet, not foreigners, not healthcare with means testing, not the cost of new flats. The government is still not deregulating public transport and allowing the re-entry of small private (pirate-like) bus companies to compete and complement the existing MRT and bus systems. Instead, they want to use taxpayers money and hand it over to shareholders of SMRT and SBS, no doubt some of them are retail investors like some of us but so what it just does not make sense. IMHO, now that is the ultimate PAP-fuck-you-you-voted-for-us salute. They want to show they are doing something, but in the end it still stinks because they are doing a shitty job of it."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Lye Khuen Way:

"I have to agree with you that the “noises” coming out from both the Govt and the elites so far do not constitute a real paradigm shift.
It is however, comforting to note that Prof Lim and Prof Tommy Koh have put up their hands, sort of. These two gentlmen are not your usual Establishment elites. They command respect from many, far and wide.
Yes, we may have to wait many more years to conclusively say if the PAP
did transform or not post-GE2011."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Simple:

"I see Lim Swee Say’s fixed sum increment to be a palliative move in an attempt to sweep Prof Liom Chong Yah’s proposal under the carpet. It must be to appease rumblings on the ground on his initial rejection of Prof Yah’s because as labour chief his initial response ought to have been in advocacy of labour interest and rights rather than taking side with the employer group. You must know that Lim SS is a harfcore stalwart of the establishment and his labour union responsibilty to workers has always played second fiddle to his position as a cabinet minister of the government which is in fact the largest employer in the country."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Chow:

"I would like to be optimistic and believe that even if they do not wish to change their ideology, they at least acknowledge that others have opinions that deserve to be voiced. That in itself is a good thing.

I don’t think they are willing to change too much of their ‘Republican-esque’ ideology, but I believe that they are not above adopting, on the quiet, better ideas that may come out from time to time. Whatever the case is, it is likely that they have (i.e either the PAP themselves or feedback from the Civil Service) realized that to make Singapore the way they want it to go, they have to allow people to speak up and be unafraid to do so. This is unavoidable because if they want the massive importation of migrants here, all hailing from nations with different expectations of government, they have to allow something of this sort"

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Alf:

"I’m not sure that there’s really cracks starting to show, but the Min Wage / Lim Chong Yah affair shows the power of a few influential insiders who, if they tap the pulse of the general population, can decisively change the language and parameters of the debate. Not 2 years ago the PAP would be loudly proclaiming that inequality was unavoidable and we shouldn’t focus on it; that minimum wage was completely out of the question – now they have done full 180 on the former and are fighting for their cabinet positions on the latter.

If LCY ran for president he would probably win after this, him and TCB are the first of extremely senior figures who found that they have nothing to lose by speaking out, but a whole lot to gain. The middle ranking establishment figures are unlikely to stand up yet because they will end up like Hazel Poa / Tony Tan (the younger) which is a much more shaky position."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Tan Jee Say:

"I gave 4 reasons why it is necessary and urgent to have a change of government:
1. PAP has become incompetent and is seriously lacking in accountability for major and repeated lapses in the provision and administration of essential public services;
2. Government policies are divisive as they seriously widen the income gap between the rich and poor; allowing the 2 casinos against strong objections from large sections of the population, divide the people further;
3. PAP ministers are self-centred and are more interested in paying themselves high salaries than in raising the wages of lowly paid Singaporeans; and
4. Recent events have raised questions about standards of behaviour of public officials"

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Tan Jee Say:

"We need new leaders with a different vision to take Singapore forward. Singaporeans who are concerned and serious about Singapore's future, should organise themselves and provide an alternative government. Serious opposition parties have a duty to take the lead. There are about a dozen to 15 outstanding individuals spread among the various opposition parties who could form a formidable team. We need more of such individuals in substantial numbers. If we can double the number to at least 25 to 30, we will raise the confidence level of the electorate. I would urge serious-minded Singaporeans to join and strengthen our ranks."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Star Wars:

"It had its struggles in the early years– PAP was even in the Opposition for a while– but when it overcame its initial problems, boy did they have a good run! From 1972 to 2011, they won GE after GE, they got away with landslide victories, they had practically no problems (ie opposition) to fix.

Now PAP’s problems are coming with increasing frequency. They are wearing out, they are obsolete, votes now cost too much and support for their old ways of thinking isn’t as great from new voters.

2016 will be key to determining if PAP will sink in the bathtub or climb out of it to another new bathtub."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Z:

"u’v summed up aptly why this place has a lot wrong with it.
basically, no one’s stepping back to think – about anything.
it’s all down to numbers, which have nothing to do with life.

the worst part is because spore is so intent with continuing
down this path, with no one seeing how badly things have gone
wrong, things will get MUCH worse before they start to get
better. frankly, the end of the world, skedded for dec 21 this
year, sounds like a rather good respite and a new beginning."

 

[ckmpd]

Re: Crumbling of Singapore?

From Dr Chan Joon Yee:
"Look at some of the O Level people who are now in the 50s and 60s. Many of then write very well in English or Chinese. The same O Level finisher (who can’t get into JC) today is in a totally different league. Relentless tutoring and crafty examination techniques have dragged these people to a level which is actually beyond them. It’s like bombarding the nucleus of an atom with neutrons and protons to create an artificial element. The latter can’t be stable. It rapidly disintegrates when exposed to the environment."