Singapore's future

[Alu862]

The people may not vote rationally. Since when have they voted rationally?

 

[kakowi]

Alu862, from one angle, there is a valid point that the voters do not vote rationally (assuming that 'rationally' has a universal definition) yet from the angle of some voters, they felt that they do not have valid options to vote properly.

Let's take a look at the possible ways a voter may vote:

(1) vote for the PAP because:

(i) i paid $1.5M for my condo, my monthly installments are $7,000 and both of us need our jobs to pay the mortgage, car loan, condo maintenance, children's education, parents' allowances, yearly holidays. I just cannot afford to have the economy destabilized, property values fall and no job to look after my family

(ii) i have political ambitions and decide to side with the winner. Although I can never be Prime Minister but there is a possibility that I can be a Minister in which case I will earn a contract package of $15M and an iron rice bowl, prestige and status. With the ruling party, I cannot lose because they will protect me and build me up

(iii) i sincerely believe that increasing ERP, abolishing estate duty, high ministers' pay are all neccessary and good for the future of singapore. Although I am not earning much yet the amount I earn is enough for me to get by and yet provide for a rainy day. When I see the neighbouring countries I am grateful for this place which I call home. Inflation is just a neccessary evil and the government will take care of it by strengthening the dollar. Besides Ho Ching is doing a great job.

(iv) i am a businessman and i side with the winner. Thus i contribute to government-sponsored events and major charities, making sure that my name is immortalized in the plaque which shows the major donors. I look forward to getting contracts from the ruling party and besides my son just got into the A*Star program and know that cute daughter of that lady MP.

(v) i believe in the PAP and what they stand for. Ideologically they are the best and with 40 years experience behind them, Singapore is in good hands.​

(2) vote for the Opposition because:

(i) I had listed five reasons in an earlier post - 2 primary reasons and 3 secondary reasons.​

Now if you look through those reasons, can you say that voters do not vote rationally?

From any political party's perspective, the issue is how to convince those who voted for the ruling party that an opposition will be helpful to them; and similarly to convince those who voted for the opposition that the ruling party can fulfill all these and more.

I can see clearly that the ruling party tries its best to address the concerns of voters, and i am of the opinion that the opposition tries its best to get the voters to address the opposition's concerns.

 

[zhihau]

on the surface it looks like the econ is good n healthy, $ is rolling, but factually, its quite stagnant when we're just shifting $ from the left pocket to the right pocket, n later from the right pocket to the back pocket, n then later to the breast pocket, n eventually back to the left pocket.

davai davai!

the lack of natural resources had always been a huge stumbling block, and our homeland products are more often a time mere cheaper replicas reverse-engineered from some other technologies.

no doubt we had some brilliant and somewhat innovative ideas along the way, the patents ain't exactly bringing in the dough much as we've expected, as others could also come up with cheaper and better alternatives.

we can't really aim to be the next Phuket or Bali or even Hawaii. we can't really aim to be the next Paris or Tokyo or even St. Petersburg. we will just be Singapore! where our folks will be synonymous with compassion and grace...

i think i'm still dreaming :p

 

[pocoyo]

Singapore has no future.

Second that w/out 2nd thot..

 

[pocoyo]

quite frankly, whoever comes next to take the seat is going to have a splitting headache. as is, if we dont already know/notice, the current run of the mill is basically, digging 1 hole to patch up another. on the surface it looks like the econ is good n healthy, $ is rolling, but factually, its quite stagnant when we're just shifting $ from the left pocket to the right pocket, n later from the right pocket to the back pocket, n then later to the breast pocket, n eventually back to the left pocket.

nt to mention, from time to time, the $ goes out in red packets to be parked elsewhere, in hope that there's going to be any dividends. when there's dividends, they pop the champagne, when the $ is lost, all is quiet n pretend the $ was never there.

n while the $ is spinning in its own confined cycle, time is wasted, without ever having enough to fulfil the rising needs vs the growing population in this already saturated island. hence creating more avenues to enforce expenditure, so to make the GDP look good. all the hype n hoohaa of a prettier city, infrastructures to lure investors to park their $ here hasnt really reached its full effect.

Wat a insight there..

 

[PAP_agent]

This is the working plan, as conjured by my masters:

- We can never have democracy in the liberal sense, so we'll continue with one-party state rule

- There will always be rabble who can only be managed by an iron hand, so be it. But among these rabble there are elites and talents. The PAP imperative is to atttract these talent. We tell them: "You don't need to be an oppressed rabble. We need you. Come help us rule this island!" Anyone who is good enough can rise and join us the elite.

- With the elite chosen, we let them decide what's best for the country, and enforce our well-intentioned plans on the rabble.

- With no natural resources we'll always be a 'service nation', trading and providing services to the world. So our best hope is to spot and ride the newest trends to profit from them.

- No comment on how successful this can be. The alternative? Create original industries? We if can't even adapt to existing trends how can we make original stuff??

 

[tonychat]

quite frankly, whoever comes next to take the seat is going to have a splitting headache. as is, if we dont already know/notice, the current run of the mill is basically, digging 1 hole to patch up another. on the surface it looks like the econ is good n healthy, $ is rolling, but factually, its quite stagnant when we're just shifting $ from the left pocket to the right pocket, n later from the right pocket to the back pocket, n then later to the breast pocket, n eventually back to the left pocket.

nt to mention, from time to time, the $ goes out in red packets to be parked elsewhere, in hope that there's going to be any dividends. when there's dividends, they pop the champagne, when the $ is lost, all is quiet n pretend the $ was never there.

It means the sinkie govt is incapable to attracting new investment so they got to resort to these cheapen tricks to sustain the economy. They should ask themselves why investments are not coming in.

 

[kiwibird7]

My opinion is that none of those you mentioned are capable of leading singapore, at this point of their development. For that reason, even though some of them feel that they are capable of overthrowing the ruling party and running singapore, they need to do a reality check with the voters to see if that is really what the voters want.

Take SDP for example. They often talked of civil disobedience.

One question they need to answer for themselves at least, is to which class of voters they are appealing to?

The political spectrum is a bell curve, with perhaps 80% of the voters clustered in the moderate zone. That is why political parties seek to operate in the middle and make coalitions with those who operate at either extremes.

Thus the question is: with SDP operating at an extreme end, how can they reach out to the moderate voters?

And do they know the composition of voters? The newly-minted migrants will be pro-PAP, a very safe bet. Thus the number of votes for the PAP is likely to increase. Especially as some of the people (i do not know if they are opposition but very unlikely to be PAP) called them ah nehs and prc whatever. And they will vote for them?!

And why should there be a revolution? The PAP is doing an adequate job at the moment. Sure there are boo-boos but match against these are the Opposition's paranoia about PAP spies and inability to work together. And incompatible platforms, incoherent policies. And talks about revolution. And assumed premise that the opposition must oppose. A discerning voter may, nay, will think very hard about the situation.

Thus Singapore's future is hopefully not based on revolution but making better what is already a good situation.

My two cents.

The opposition is in a sorry state because they lack a vision or policy that is uniquely different from that of the PAP! eg; Education, Health, Public/private Transportation, CPF, NS conscription, dual citizenship etc.

A note about SG immigrants, many are hesitant to take up citizenship and hence would have no voting rights in SG.

Reasons for not taking up SG citizenship;
1. No dual citizenship allowed, many are not prepared to give up their native citizenship which is a testimony of their confidence in the future of S'pore.
2. The millstone of NS liabilities for their male children.
3. Another great millstone of CPF liabilities which cannot keep up with inflation and a great failure in ensuring old age financial security.

 

[kakowi]

Man has always believe that we are all created equal.

In reality, that is not the case. Some are more talented, scheming, manipulative, kinder, have more integrity, etc than others. That is the case and will always be the case. In the context of politics, some hold leadership better than others although almost ALL believed they are leaders.

Thus in running a country, it is a good step to call upon the talented to help in administering the country. In this way, the hope rests with the best people. Thus such a call by the PAP is a reasonable one.

The questions are therefore:

(1) are the people running this country the best there is?

(2) have the people running this country started to call themselves 'elites' 'get off my uncaring face' and the people they are supposed to serve, 'retards' 'peasants'? If so, then their belief in their talent has been infused with the love of money and a disdain of people they are supposed to serve.

(3) can we influence the process? How? We are not living in the age of asian dynasties where the ordinary people can influence the process through revolutions. Nor in totalitarian regimes where we must do subversive work. We are living in a country which has perhaps, relatively speaking, the cleanest election record amongst developing countries. The answer lies in our single vote. The pivotal point is the vote.

Thus in response to the question by PAP_agent, there is a fundamental need to talk about the essence of our vote and how we can use it to create the future we want so that all can live in prosperity, talented with the poor, rich with the disabled.

It is not for the voter to tell the political leaders how to strategise. But it is for the voter to continually remind the political leaders that their right to rule lies in the democratic process of election. Then that will continually ensure that the strategies that are formulated will, in the majority, be that of a love for the country, service to the people rather than love for themselves and service to themselves.

 

[kakowi]

The opposition is in a sorry state because they lack a vision or policy that is uniquely different from that of the PAP! eg; Education, Health, Public/private Transportation, CPF, NS conscription, dual citizenship etc.
.....

With no intent to offend, I want to say I cannot disagree more with that statement.

For me, I would say that the opposition is in such a sorry state because they assume that whatever they say, the voters will agree with them.

If they lose, it is because the voters are afraid of the PAP.

Thus they are absolved of all blame. The fault lies with the chicken-hearted voters and the PAP.

Then in looking for solutions, they felt they must reinvent the wheel and say impressive things so that the voters will say - these are men of creditability.​

Thus the opposition lost for 40 years and in my view, will continue to spend their days in the wilderness until they truly understand the voters: their universal and unifying need, their fears and greed which obstruct them, their opinions of the political parties and their idea of a representative government.

In this, the political parties need to do a gentle education process to tell the voters what the opposition means, what it can do and what it cannot do. And how the things they can do will benefit them greatly and immensely, ensuring their prosperity, dignity and ability to live comfortably in the years to come. Without them, they cannot have these. With them, they can. The PAP sells this message very well. The opposition doesn't.

 

[Alu862]

Face it, Chee has no plan for Singapore. The most he has is to have the minimunm wage. That's fine, but that's not all there is to the economy. He recently posted a article from Bloomberg on the SG $ falling in value. I ask the SDP--so what is you post this information that investors can get on Bloomberg? What is your solution/plan? Do you have any idea on how to control the economy besides protesting?

WP: 2006 Manifesto is the best they produced, but it is the only thingthey produced. It is outdated. As is their stagnant website.

SDA--Chiam goes, the whole alliance will go. unless their is a clone of Chiam to hold on to PP. Even then, what does the SDA say about our foreign and domestic policies?

NSP--huh?

RP--Hi JBJ.

 

[leetahbar]

if there is a revolution in singapore who will come into power? Cs? Ltk? Cst? Sebastian teo? Jbj?

qoute:

If an orchestra can play even if u put a dummy as maestro

- unquote

ANSWER: it makes no difference who the MAESTRO is. it's the muscians who are playing the scores or the peasants who are the really running the country.

 

[suteerak1099]

The people may not vote rationally. Since when have they voted rationally?

sometimes, i think voters assume putting a cross on the undesired logo = striking them off... without realising that its factually voting in favor of the party

 

[suteerak1099]

davai davai!

the lack of natural resources had always been a huge stumbling block, and our homeland products are more often a time mere cheaper replicas reverse-engineered from some other technologies.

no doubt we had some brilliant and somewhat innovative ideas along the way, the patents ain't exactly bringing in the dough much as we've expected, as others could also come up with cheaper and better alternatives.

we can't really aim to be the next Phuket or Bali or even Hawaii. we can't really aim to be the next Paris or Tokyo or even St. Petersburg. we will just be Singapore! where our folks will be synonymous with compassion and grace...

i think i'm still dreaming :p

the only island we can mimic... alcatrez

 

[suteerak1099]

It means the sinkie govt is incapable to attracting new investment so they got to resort to these cheapen tricks to sustain the economy. They should ask themselves why investments are not coming in.

there've been many news n media coverage about our ministers going out in full force, visiting n building networks w middle eastern countries... talks about collaborations n stuff. there was also some ground breaking ceremony.... bt to date... no more news of those developments.

ministers also going all out to push n peddle our water desalination biz, public transportation consultation services, health-care protocol... etc to neighboring/ developing countries as well. bt quite honestly, no govt in the right frame of mind would admit to being inferior, nor would like to be advised how they manage their country.

there was once, when they said if we're stayers or quitters. now, they wanna promote our skilled expertise abroad. so, which is which? ppl start doing the cha-cha at the immigration borders? 1 foot in, 1 foot out?

 

[suteerak1099]

in the past, they foretold that only 1 generation needed to sacrifice, in order to ensure better days for the generations to come. 43yrs since our independence;

1819-1940's: migrants b4 the WWII had their hands in laying the bricks for our early developments
1930's-50's: migrants witnessed our independence, gritted their teeth thru the hardship to rebuild a nation
1940's-60's: migrants among the pioneers to move out of slumps n into affordable public housing (HDB)
1950's-70's: migrant decendants flooded the workforce, exploiting all there was to be explored in the industries
1960's-80's: migrant decendants witnessed land reclamation, establishment of MRT, newtowns sprouting (they call them heartland)

1990's onwards; talks & speculations, hoax of wanting to make this island the leading nation in almost every industry under the sun. after the millenium, ¾ of the speculations of wanting to make happen remain castles in the air, pending to be materialized

21st century, lacking of manpower to fulfill workforce requirements, expansions & globalization facilitated more FTs & PDMM entering our borders, the vacuum for labor quickly satisfied by cheaper FTs... while we wait for the reverse effects of dragon babies flooding for job-seek in 3-5yrs time.

(in total, i'd like to know how many generations n counting, needs to sacrifice further?)

we can have a future... n that's to have a "reset button"

 

[kiwibird7]

With no intent to offend, I want to say I cannot disagree more with that statement.

For me, I would say that the opposition is in such a sorry state because they assume that whatever they say, the voters will agree with them.

If they lose, it is because the voters are afraid of the PAP.

Thus they are absolved of all blame. The fault lies with the chicken-hearted voters and the PAP.

Then in looking for solutions, they felt they must reinvent the wheel and say impressive things so that the voters will say - these are men of creditability.​

Thus the opposition lost for 40 years and in my view, will continue to spend their days in the wilderness until they truly understand the voters: their universal and unifying need, their fears and greed which obstruct them, their opinions of the political parties and their idea of a representative government.

In this, the political parties need to do a gentle education process to tell the voters what the opposition means, what it can do and what it cannot do. And how the things they can do will benefit them greatly and immensely, ensuring their prosperity, dignity and ability to live comfortably in the years to come. Without them, they cannot have these. With them, they can. The PAP sells this message very well. The opposition doesn't.

How can the opposition parties in S'pore educate the voters when they themselves are totally clueless as to what is the function and purpose of an opposition, that is to eventually take over as govt and steer the country in a different direction?

What is the point of voting in an opposition if they are going to do exactly the same thing as what the PAP has been doing all this while?

The opposition has failed miserably in offering any concrete alternative policies that are markedly different to what the PAP has been offering with regards to security in old age, a complete well rounded educational system(eg social graces, culture, sports etc), quality of life (that goes beyond material needs), NS policy, healthcare concerns etc which are all directly responsible for a loss of confidence evident from the ever growing numbers of disillusioned S'poreans emigrating and even renouncing their citizenship.

In short, S'poreans who vote with their feet have long given up on the future of S'pore as well as any hope of any changes either by the PAP or any other party in this generation or even in the next.

The only message the PAP is selling is: without them, S'pore is finished (KAPUT) and the rest of the KIASU S'porean voters buy into that including the opposition parties who still fight elections on the by-election effect.

S'pore emigrants have instead taken upon themselves to choose the life and policies that are suited to them in those host countries they have pre-selected to emigrate to and build their future generations from there.

 

[zhihau]

... the only island we can mimic ...

how many inmates do we exactly need?

 

[kakowi]

How can the opposition parties in S'pore educate the voters when they themselves are totally clueless as to what is the function and purpose of an opposition, that is to eventually take over as govt and steer the country in a different direction?

What is the point of voting in an opposition if they are going to do exactly the same thing as what the PAP has been doing all this while?

The opposition has failed miserably in offering any concrete alternative policies that are markedly different to what the PAP has been offering with regards to security in old age, a complete well rounded educational system(eg social graces, culture, sports etc), quality of life (that goes beyond material needs), NS policy, healthcare concerns etc which are all directly responsible for a loss of confidence evident from the ever growing numbers of disillusioned S'poreans emigrating and even renouncing their citizenship.
....
QUOTE]

Once upon a time, an inventor discovered the perfect mousetrap. The customers applauded.

Since then every other inventor felt that the only way to get the customers to applaud is to present alternative and better mousetraps. They describe their technology in great detail, their advantages and point out why the others are inferior.

Their minds are so caught up in this that they failed to see that what the customers really wanted is a land free of mice.

 

[silverfox@]

How can the opposition parties in S'pore educate the voters when they themselves are totally clueless as to what is the function and purpose of an opposition, that is to eventually take over as govt and steer the country in a different direction?

What is the point of voting in an opposition if they are going to do exactly the same thing as what the PAP has been doing all this while?

The opposition has failed miserably in offering any concrete alternative policies that are markedly different to what the PAP has been offering with regards to security in old age, a complete well rounded educational system(eg social graces, culture, sports etc), quality of life (that goes beyond material needs), NS policy, healthcare concerns etc which are all directly responsible for a loss of confidence evident from the ever growing numbers of disillusioned S'poreans emigrating and even renouncing their citizenship.

There are many people who are clamouring for opposition. To me, my view is I don't care is PAP or opposition, but a party that can really deliver. The most important thing is being able to deliver. Detractors will say opposition are not given a chance to win.
To me, I put it as they are not capable enough to win, so why should they be given the chance? If unable to win, means not able to convince, thus how can people trust them when the opposition can't even convince the people. There is no level playing field, whether in politics or real life corporate. You got to make use of what you have. If the opposition are rich n powerful and able to convince people, they will wipe out PAP votes. But the truth is they aren't and this is also 1 big factor why people are not convinced by them.
Look at Potong Pasir, Hougang, if they can be convinced by CST and LTK, I will be convinced too if able opposition can convince the wards.
The sad truth is not much CST or LTK.

We have to vote for smart opposition, but if the opposition are not that capable, don't think we should vote blindly on a less than viable alternative, just because I want an alternative voice. Certain decisions have to be made for the greater good of everyone not for the satisfaction of the minority.

The only message the PAP is selling is: without them, S'pore is finished (KAPUT) and the rest of the KIASU S'porean voters buy into that including the opposition parties who still fight elections on the by-election effect.

S'pore emigrants have instead taken upon themselves to choose the life and policies that are suited to them in those host countries they have pre-selected to emigrate to and build their future generations from there.

If the current crop of opposition(, and I mean current, not future), more people will migrate rather than the numbers we see.

Once upon a time, an inventor discovered the perfect mousetrap. The customers applauded.

Since then every other inventor felt that the only way to get the customers to applaud is to present alternative and better mousetraps. They describe their technology in great detail, their advantages and point out why the others are inferior.

Their minds are so caught up in this that they failed to see that what the customers really wanted is a land free of mice.

I like this story.