PTUi!!! how on earth can you forget your prediction for TKL during PE2011? PTUI!
TKL losing deposit is within your expectation? PTUI!
Last edited:
-
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.
Stallholders in row with Workers Party town council
- Thread starter tomoko
- Start date
PTUi!!! how on earth can you forget your prediction for TKL during PE2011? PTUI!
TKL losing deposit is within your expectation? PTUI!
I still think it is that mysterious Hawker Association rather than the individual hawker that is stirring stuffs
We should ask TKL if it is within his expectation, that it is within Rabid GohMS's expectation that TKL himself would lose the deposit.
On the contrary, any person who thinks WP is in the wrong in a dispute between WP and NEA, WP is in the wrong in a dispute between WP and hawkers, WP is in the wrong in a dispute between WP and a blogger, WP is in the wrong in a dispute between WP and Eunos residents, WP is in the wrong in a dispute between WP and SDA / RP, WP is in the wrong in a dispute between WP and SDP, is a person who will hardly represent the middle ground.
I will think he is representing himself and probably has some grudge and blind hatred against only WP in particular.
If a person has a dispute with WP and he automatically becomes without reproach, then I should dispute with WP more often to feel like a saint.
Last edited:
hahaha....sweeping statement and allegations.
u mean there were no hawker centres in HG SMC or PP SMC????
did they get victimsed by NEA all these years???
Ambiguity vs Basic Understanding.
If your company is organizing a function and your boss asks you to make arrangement for the food catering, would it be ambiguous to you or your boss that you or the company is expected to pay for the food? From an outsider's perspective, if he sees a person agreeing to make arrangement for the food catering without knowing the whole context of the conversation, it may be ambiguous or he could even conclude that you who agree to make arrangement have to pay for the food.
But the boss should know very well that although he arrows you to make arrangement for the food, the company aka him, will pay for it.
The same applies to NEA-Hawker-WP AHTC saga.
If we do not know the context or the relationship and obligations, such statement made may sound ambiguous or may even make us conclude that the hawkers will pay for the arrangement of scaffolding. But the truth is, AHTC itself has already declared that it knows and understand the rules and obligations for it to pay for everything, including the scaffolding, for the cleaning of hawker centres, including the scaffolding.
So it will be contradictory and wrong for AHTC to claim that after reading NEA's statement that the Hawkers will arrangement for the erection and removal of scaffolding would mean that the Hawkers are going to pay for it! It is just like saying, the boss telling you that since you agree to make arrangement for the food catering, then you should pay for the food! Would you agree to that?
Thus, it is not difficult to conclude that AHTC and WP have tried very hard to throw smokescreen on this one.
Pritam has avoided to answer straight to the question on who pay for the scaffolding last year. If AHTC really knows its obligations and work according to its claim that it has never asked hawkers to pay extra and it will bear full cost of cleaning, it should not have even allowed hawkers to pay for the scaffolding.
Goh Meng Seng
If your company is organizing a function and your boss asks you to make arrangement for the food catering, would it be ambiguous to you or your boss that you or the company is expected to pay for the food? From an outsider's perspective, if he sees a person agreeing to make arrangement for the food catering without knowing the whole context of the conversation, it may be ambiguous or he could even conclude that you who agree to make arrangement have to pay for the food.
But the boss should know very well that although he arrows you to make arrangement for the food, the company aka him, will pay for it.
The same applies to NEA-Hawker-WP AHTC saga.
If we do not know the context or the relationship and obligations, such statement made may sound ambiguous or may even make us conclude that the hawkers will pay for the arrangement of scaffolding. But the truth is, AHTC itself has already declared that it knows and understand the rules and obligations for it to pay for everything, including the scaffolding, for the cleaning of hawker centres, including the scaffolding.
So it will be contradictory and wrong for AHTC to claim that after reading NEA's statement that the Hawkers will arrangement for the erection and removal of scaffolding would mean that the Hawkers are going to pay for it! It is just like saying, the boss telling you that since you agree to make arrangement for the food catering, then you should pay for the food! Would you agree to that?
Thus, it is not difficult to conclude that AHTC and WP have tried very hard to throw smokescreen on this one.
Pritam has avoided to answer straight to the question on who pay for the scaffolding last year. If AHTC really knows its obligations and work according to its claim that it has never asked hawkers to pay extra and it will bear full cost of cleaning, it should not have even allowed hawkers to pay for the scaffolding.
Goh Meng Seng
I know you still hate WP, but don't read too deep into your favourite Chinese tabloid, where you willingly appeared many times.
I would simply say this, NEA is just another political tool for PAP.
Maybe it's a very new thing to some people, but the well-learned ones have heard of guests who will sponsor items for an event he is invited to. For such cases, the guests will revert beforehand. There is no reason why a guest needs to busybodily offer to sponsor something when he does not plan to.
Everything was normal before NEA out of the blue told AHTC that the Hawkers Association will sponsor the scaffolding. Nothing will happen without NEA's extra and wasted effort to add legs to a snake.
I think AHTC's message is clear that they paid for the scaffolding last year. Even the hawkers said they did not have to pay for the scaffolding in the past and AHTC has been under WP for 2 years.
Everyone except one person in the world doesn't dispute that AHTC did not ask hawkers to pay for the scaffolding. When AHTC said they have never asked the hawkers to pay for scaffolding, the hawkers no longer disputed this.
In short there's no ambiguity, just someone's basic understanding of what both sides have written is lacking.
Last edited:
People here are super gullible! 
They actually believe that hawkers WILLINGLY pahy for the scaffolding for past cleaning! LOLx!
Goh Meng Seng
They actually believe that hawkers WILLINGLY pahy for the scaffolding for past cleaning! LOLx!
Goh Meng Seng
May NOT be apparent - WHO knows the PAP could be behind INSTIGATING or PAP supporters 'launching attacks at PAP behest', or PAP could be directly behind some hawkers backsides...
I all along already detected things ARE not so straightforward, more than MEETS the eyes, especially we know who are PAP mouth pieces besides the 'licensed' media. You bet. Remember the coffee-shop owner, PAP crass-roots supporter CHASING AWAY CUSTOMERS in Bishan???
Tell you what, by your twisted logic none in WP is qualified to comment or criticise PAP government because none of them have the experience in running the government... get it?
Think before you start to sprout rubbish.
Goh Meng Seng
Tell me and us. If WP is NOT qualified then the logic is those voters ARE FOOLS enough to have voted WP to speak for them, and to check the PAP?? Which is which? Please enlighten me.
People here are super gullible!
They actually believe that hawkers WILLINGLY pahy for the scaffolding for past cleaning! LOLx!
Goh Meng Seng
No one here. Both AHTC and NEA believed that the hawkers association will sponsor the scaffolding. I don't see what's so "gullible" about that, and this speaks up for NEA too.
Making mistakes aren't end of the world but trying to be smart alec and argue with obvious holes in all argument, will make you look very silly and a big fool in the end.
Goh Meng Seng
Goh Meng Seng
Maybe you can tell us what these loopholes are because we haven't heard any real ones to date despite your efforts to criminalise much non existent stuff.
Not quite sure why there is still so much confusion. It all seems rather clear. To recap
1) For the annual cleaning covered under the S&C, AHPE pays for everything, scafolding included.
2) For additionall cleaning outside of the spring cleaning, the hawkers cover the scafolding while the TC gets the cleaners to clean at no extra charge.
For those who live in wards run by PAP TCs, it is clear that scafolding is not put up every quarter to do cleaning of high places. Why should these hawker centres be special and require cleaning so often? As mentioned previously, the cleaning is heavily subsidised by the S&C of HDB residents. The S&C of HDB residents will have to go up if the hawkers have their way. WP is therefore coreect to stand their ground.
Somewhat coincidentally, the CEO of NEA is leaving. It will be interesting to see where he turns up next and ask why he got such a nice plum position.
1) For the annual cleaning covered under the S&C, AHPE pays for everything, scafolding included.
2) For additionall cleaning outside of the spring cleaning, the hawkers cover the scafolding while the TC gets the cleaners to clean at no extra charge.
For those who live in wards run by PAP TCs, it is clear that scafolding is not put up every quarter to do cleaning of high places. Why should these hawker centres be special and require cleaning so often? As mentioned previously, the cleaning is heavily subsidised by the S&C of HDB residents. The S&C of HDB residents will have to go up if the hawkers have their way. WP is therefore coreect to stand their ground.
Somewhat coincidentally, the CEO of NEA is leaving. It will be interesting to see where he turns up next and ask why he got such a nice plum position.
Last edited:
Gms pap dog
Caught lying and still trying to act blur. You are making yourself looking like an idiot. No one will vote for you again.
You are finish politically.
hahaha....u are obviously another empty vessel with no sense of proportion....
if you take the nos. of HDB units vs nos. of hawker stalls, u really don't know what u are talking about....
go back and do your maths again before mis-using the the word "heavily subsidised"....
Last edited:
Pap dog gms is acting as if his whole cockup and subsequent lying never happen. A shake head snake.
Similar threads
