The common future exemplified by Minister Chan looks bleak.

[Confuseous]

I refer to the 23 Nov 2014 Straits Times report “Base S’pore identity on common future: Minister”.

If Minister Chan Chun Sing will not base the Singaporean identity on the past due to difficulty of defining a shared past, can he then define what that supposed “common future” should be that our Singaporean identity will be based on?

Will our common future be $10 XO source chai tau kway or $1.50 hawker centre chai tau kway? The future will be bleak if Singaporeans are forced to keep up with $10 XO source chai tau kway cost of living. Can Singaporeans revert to $1.50 cheap and delicious hawker centre chai tau kway cost of living?

Or will it be kuih lapis social assistance (Straits Times, Tackling poverty the ‘kuih lapis’ way, 15 Nov 2013)? How many layers of kuih lapis must Singaporeans peel before reaching the poverty line? Or peel all 18 layers also won’t see the poverty line?

Or will it be asking less of what the Government can do for us, and more of what we can do for ourselves” (Straits Times, ‘Don’t throw stones… offer better ideas’, 3 Jul 2011)? So in future, Singaporeans have to fry our own chai tau kway even though we have already paid $10 to our XO source chai tau kway ministers?

Or will it be government discussing issues....http://trulysingapore.wordpress.com/2014/11/25/minister-chan-chun-sings-common-singaporean-future/

 

[virus]

I think even local sinkie will shiver at the common selfish, farktard loser identity