[redbean]

Time for an Ombudsman

The way the CPF savings are getting further and further away from the people is no laughing matter. The delay in returning the money to the people, the inflating of minimum sums in CPF and Medisave both means that the owners are finding it more and more difficult to get in touch with their hard earned money. And you have jokers ridiculing the people’s stupidity by claiming to be very happy looking at a monthly statement saying how much is in there. In a way it is telling the people to be happy with the piece of paper even if the money is not touchable.

The most distressing part is that the people’s life time saving is now part of the nation’s reserve and can be invested by people who did not need to ask permission from the rightful owners of the money. The smell of blood, sweat and tears are in the CPF money. Who is so irresponsible and outrageous to think that it is ok to take the people’s money to ‘invest’ and claim credit, pay themselves insane bonuses when luck is with them, but if the money is lost, just pat their backside and simply walk away?

The very thought of taking the people’s hard earned money against their interests and will is evil to the core. It is irreprehensible for anyone to think that it is alright without any sense of guilt. It is morally wrong and criminal.

It is time to appoint an ombudsman to look into the people’s life time saving and find ways to return to them while the money is still there. There can never be any good reason, nothing, that can justify depriving the people from their savings.

I say again, anyone with designs on the people’s life savings is evil and wicked. They shall be punished, and it is only a matter of time. If there is no human law to deal with them, they will still have to answer one day. In the mean time, keep playing with the people’s money. There is no where to run from the guilt of conscience.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[redbean]

The indictment of a prime minister
Iceland has taken an unprecedented step to indict its Prime Minister, Geir Haarde, for being the cause of its financial collapse. The charges were ‘intent or gross neglect, mostly violations against the laws of ministerial responsibility.’ According to another law maker, Ath Gislason, Haarde’s great sin was omission. He did nothing and allowed the world financial crisis to hit Iceland to ground zero.
Some law makers were kinder and put the blame squarely on his predecessor, David Oddson. Oddson did something very familiar to countries that are suckers to the flawed American financial system, by allowing the privatization of banks and ‘liberalized banking laws, paying the way for a brief period of prosperity and the bank’s risky and ultimately self destructive behavior.’
What happened in Iceland is a common phenomenon in many western countries, a brief period of ecstasy before doomsday comes. The stock markets too got a small lift, but the collapse is just around the corner. With liberalization, it is like giving a licence to kill to the bankers and big fund operators.
It is so lucky that we have no reason to indict any politician here. They have all done well in their ministries and everything is just fine. Some thought there were a few cases that deserved to be indicted. Some thought the time is not ripe. The financial system and the stock exchange, and the nation’s reserves, are still kicking and looking healthy, just like the housing bubble. Let’s hope that they stay that way and there is no need to indict anyone as the consequences of a bad judgment and decision can be fatally destructive and beyond redemption.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[southernglory1]

Is Singapore a repressive state ?


Is Singapore a repressive state governed by a repressive regime? Or is it somewhere between a pseudo social democratic system and an intolerant fascist regime? To arrive at the answers it is important to read and analyse a speech by Lee Kuan Yew about "REPRESSION" when he spoke to David Marshall, Singapore's first Chief Minister , in the Singapore Legislative Assembly on 4th October, 1956. Even then each and every Singaporean should reflect carefully on the subsequent political scenario when Singapore comes under a very rigid PAP regime and make his or her own conclusion after due reflection and consideration.

Below is an excerpt of Lee Kuan Yew's speech , when he spoke to David Marshall as an opposition PAP member .

" Repression, Sir is a habit that grows. I am told it is like making love - it is always easier the second time! The first time there may be pangs of conscience, a sense of guilt. But once embarked on this course with constant repetition you get more and mor brazen in the attack. All you have to do is to dissolve organisations and societies and banish and detain the key political workers in these societies. Then miraculously everything is tranquil on the surface. Then an intimidated press and the government controlled radio together can regularly sing your praises and slowly and steadily the people are made to forget the evil things that have already been done, or if these things are refeerred to again they're conveniently distorted with impunity, because there will be no opposition to contradict."

Sequel to the above speech after PAP came into power. All prominent credible opposition party leaders were bundled into prison under false or trump up charges. All government departments including the police, military and People's Associations come under PAP's strangle hold. The rest is now history. So what is your conclusion?

Southernglory1

Friday 9th September,2011

[redbean]

Seriously, are opposition MPs a part of the govt?
Parliament is the legislative arm of the govt. Parliament is made of elected representatives of the people from all political parties to discuss national issues and make laws for the country. So, is Parliament a part of the govt? I don’t think anyone will say no. But some may insist that only part of the Parliament forms the govt. The opposition camp is not part of the govt?
Seriously, honestly, administratively, legally, are opposition MPs a part of the govt? We have an obtuse system that the opposition MPs are a small minority and can be easily ignored and dismissed of as not part of the Parliament, or part of the govt. If the representation of both camps is about equal, would anyone dare say that the opposition camps are not part of Parliament, and not part of the govt?
Every MP, no matter which party, sits in Parliament, and has equal rights to speak and vote for a bill. They are also paid by the country’s coffer too. Why are the opposition MPs seen as not part of the govt? Oh the majority party forms the govt so they are the govt, and the minority does not form the govt and thus not the govt nor part of the govt. They are just a part of Parliament which is not the govt of the country, which is part of the legislature, which has the power to make laws, but not the govt.
Very confusing arguments huh?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[southernglory1]

FW: Feedback / Suggestions




To: Mr Gerard Ee
Chairman, Ministerial Salary Review Committee
From: Mr Mike Teo
(55-year old native-born S'pore Citizen, who had completed full- time National Service)
cc: PM Lee Hsien Loong/Other Ministers
Opposition MPs, NCMPs
Political Commentators

Contents
Para 1 --- Quick Background/Summary of the Ministerial Pay Issue and the ensuing Public Anger.
Para 2 --- Suggestions to address/defuse Public Anger.

1 World-Infamous Obscenely-Humongous Million-Dollar PUBLIC SECTOR Salaries in Singapore
1.1 Quotable Quotes:
-- US President Barack Obama (BBC 11 Jul 09):
"...No country is going to create wealth if its leaders exploit the economy to enrich themselves..."
-- From a Financial Times article (TODAY 26 Nov 10):
"...In a society that lacks political checks and balances, such waves of public outrage can develop a force rarely seen in democratic societies..."

1.2 Very Telling PAP Political U-Turns (confirming that PAP has lost its "moral compass"):
THEN (Straits Times 21 August 1989 )
"To build a country, you need passion. If you just do your sums --- plus, minuses, credit, debit --- you are a washout." --- PM Lee Kuan Yew
18 YEARS LATER (Straits Times 5 April 2007 )
When it was put to him that people hoped for leaders who were willing to make sacrifices and who were not there for the money, he (MM Lee Kuan Yew) replied that these were "admirable sentiments but we live in the real world".
NOW (Straits Times 22 May 2011 )
" Politics is not a job or a career promotion. It is a calling to serve the larger good of Singapore." --- PM Lee Hsien Loong

1.3 "Monkey Politics" in Singapore:
PAP say: Pay PEANUTS and you will get CORRUPT Monkeys!
S'pore Voters say: Pay BIG BANANAS but still get INCOMPETENT Chimpanzees !!!
[ Just one example of INCOMPETENCE taken from a long list --- The Mas Selamat Great Escape Monumental Fiasco, which led to Singapore (and its Prime Minister) becoming a laughing stock amongst the International Coalition Against Terrorism ]
"Monkey Antics" of Singapore Political Elite:
I scratch your back, you scratch mine.
I cover your butt, you cover mine.

1.4 Main Bug-Bear of many Singaporeans is the HIGH COST of LIVING --- arising from high cost of government; high cost of homes (both HDB and private); high cost of healthcare; high cost of transport (both private transport and public transport), etc......
HIGH COST of GOVERNMENT in Little Red Dot Singapore:
(a) A BLOATED CABINET comprising an extravagant entourage of one Prime Minister, one Minister Mentor, two Senior Ministers, two Deputy Prime Ministers --- followed by 15 Ministers, 10 Ministers-of-State --- plus 4Parliamentary Secretaries, 5 CDC Mayors and 82 PAP MPs [ Parliament set-up, prior to 2011 GE ]
(b) A BULGING BLOATED BUREAUCRACY with 9 Organs of State, 15 Ministries and 64 Statutory Boards.
NOTE: The high cost of this Top-Heavy Government is paid for NOT from PAP Party Funds BUT from PUBLIC FUNDS (i.e. the hard-earned monies of S'pore Taxpayer-Voters collected through numerous taxes/dues)

1.5 PAP Government's World-Infamous Double Records:
(a) PM Lee Hsien Loong confirmed as "World's Highest-Paid Politician" by Economist/Financial Times.
(b) All the world's Top 30 highly-paid politicians are found in SINGAPORE (in PM Lee's Cabinet, of course!).

1.6 Singapore's fat-cat ministers getting fatter each year:
BASIC Annual Pay (Source: Straits Times reports)
President's pay: $2.6m(2006) $3.2m(2007) $3.9m(2008)
[ THIS MUCH for a largely ceremonial post (shaking hands, kissing babies, cutting ribbons, opening Keppel Bay bridge, attending charity functions, hosting state dinners ....) ??? ]
PM/MM/SM pay: $2.5m(2006) $3m(2007) $3.8m(2008)
DPM pay: $2m (2006) $2.5m (2007) $3m (2008)
Minister pay: $1.2m(2006) $1.6m(2007) $1.9m(2008)
[ Current MP Allowance (for a part-time job!) = $13,500 per month ]
[ PM Basic Pay = $3.8m per year = $320,000 per month = $10,000 per day ]
[ Minister Basic Pay = $1.9m per year = $160,000 per month = $5,000 per day ]

1.7 Justifiable/Understandable Anger of S'pore Voters:
(a) We, Singaporeans, Not DAFT !!!
Neither are we uncivilised nor barbaric to expect our Politicians/Bureaucrats to work "for free" or to survive on "fresh air and love of the people".
We will readily support adequate/reasonable remunerations.
BUT the above figures are not just humongous but obscenely-humongous salaries, going by both local/international PUBLIC SECTOR standards !!!
(b) How could tiny Singapore's PM be earning six times the pay of the American President and ten times that of the Japanese PM and the Australian PM ???
[ All the latter three Heads of State are governing very big countries with large populations, and very complex political/economic/social issues. ]
If Singapore's PM screw up, only S'poreans will suffer.
But if the American President screw up (and presses the wrong buttons), the whole world (including little red dot Singapore and its entire Lee Family) could go up in nuclear smoke !!!
(c) Are we paying TOO MUCH for TOO LITTLE transparency and accountability ???
Do we really have a "visionary and competent" Government or just "grossly over-paid" Politicians/Bureaucrats ???
With such obscenely-humongous public sector salaries, how can these PAP politicians ever earn the "moral authority" [much less the respect] of S'poreans to govern this tiny island nation ???
[ "People do not always hate the rich. People hate those who are immorally rich."
--- Mr Qiu Liping, professor of social stratification at Shanghai University. MYP 16 Dec 09 ]

1.8 AN IMPORTANT NOTE:
(a) The above-stated mind-boggling SINGLE-DIGIT MILLIONS represent just BASIC Annual Pay i.e excludingmid-year bonus, year-end bonus, Performance Bonus, GDP Bonus, CPF/PENSION and other perks.
TOTAL Annual Pay = (disclosed) BASIC Annual Pay + (undisclosed) bonuses/other perks.
(b) For our political office holders, their Basic Annual Pay are publicly disclosed. However, their undisclosed Total Annual Pay packages have been an endless source of speculation and bottled-up public anger on the Internet.
(c) For Comparison, the 2010 TOTAL Annual Pay packages (as DISCLOSED in published Annual Reports) of the CEOs in various public-listed Temasek-Linked Companies* range from $6.7m to $11.5m.
[ *DBS, Keppel Corp, SembCorp, CapitaLand ]
In 2007, CapitaLand CEO Liew Mun Leong (a former pen-pushing Civil Servant) received a whopping Total Annual Pay of $20.5m --- which led to a public outcry.
(d) Taking the cue from the CEO pay packages of Temasek-linked companies, many netizens have "deduced" that the Total Annual Pay packages of Temasek Holdings CEO Ho Ching and our Cabinet Ministers would likely be in the two-digit millions and upwards of $15m.
But this could mean anything between $15m and $99m --- hence the never-ending and widespread Internet speculation surrounding Ministers' Pay


2 Suggestions to address/defuse Public Anger

2.1 Since 1994 (when the PAP Govt first bull-dozed through Parliament and arm-twisted Singaporeans on the Ministerial Pay Issue), there has been never-ending public consternation over the million-dollar remunerations of our political office holders.
As such remunerations are paid out of public funds, Singapore taxpayer-voters certainly have every right to know the full facts and figures.
Lack of transparency on this rightful public concern will only aggravate the voter disenchantment that turned into a Super-Tsunami Wave of Public Anger during the recent general elections.

2.2 In the private sector, to promote good corporate governance, the Singapore Stock Exchange requires public-listed companies to disclose the Total Annual Pay packages within salary bands for their CEOs and other senior staff.
Our public sector should also follow suit as an act of good political governance.

2.3 Put simply, "TALK IS CHEAP" and S'pore Voters expect nothing less than PM Lee Hsien Loong to "WALK THE TALK" on the following:
(a) his inaugural speech (as PM) calling for "an open and inclusive Singapore".
(b) his brief to the Salary Review Committee to make recommendations which will "help ensure honest and competent government".
[ NOTE: All the three words "open, inclusive, honest" carry this same message --- to "come clean" and "clear the air" once-and-for-all on whether our Cabinet Ministers are really serving the people (as their true masters) or enriching themselves at the expense of the people (as taxpayers). ]

[southernglory1]

Forwarded as received................current affsirs . . .! ! !

Subject : DON'T FOOL AROUND WITH MR ROBERT KUOK, SUGAR KING





A must read!
(not sure who the author is..By 忠政快讯)
Some friends have requested translation for the 忠政快讯's piece on Sugar King Robert Kuok's history.
Thanks to Google translate with some corrections.

Knowledge is empowering. Reading is knowledge.

Recently, the government offended Robert Kuok, as a result, the Malaysian economy suffered a great blow! After the official Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Malaysia, the Najib government now really understands Robert Kuok's influence on China!

In order to benefit their cronies, they arm twisted to swallow up Robert Kuok’s sugar empire. The cronies get richer by 10’s of billions, but it caused a national loss of more than 200 billion! Those who have insider info can only curse: PKHKC it!

Malaysia sugar king was forced to leave Malaysia, but became the world’s sugar king! He bought the world's largest sugar mills in Australia, invested USD10 billion, it is the world's largest sugar cane sugar refining industry, living up to the name of the world’s sugar king.

On the other hand, the Malaysia government benefited cronies at the expense of national interests. For those who have insider info, Kuok offered immense help to the Malaysian government in the past few decades, he has done everything possible; but what the government did was like what you will get when you turn over a pig stomach: faeces. In other words, Najib Government was UNGRATEFUL!

In "Confidential" news about the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Malaysia recently.... it hit a snag with Najib.

Prior to Premier Wen Jiabao's visit to Malaysia, Najib and his cabinet on more than one occasion, hinted that he hoped China will double the amount of palm oil with Malaysia.
We all know that China is the largest consumer of palm oil from Malaysia. Rapid economic rise in the recent years, China became the largest palm oil market for Malaysia, but Malaysia has also strong competition from Indonesia, trying to sell palm oil at lower prices to China and India, diluting the Malaysian market share. This is most worrying for Najib.

Najib hoped to sign new palm oil trading contracts with Premier Wen Jiabao, hopng to more than double the average 10 million tonnes monthly export to China . But Wen Jiabao came to a Malaysia, he told Najib: 'impossible'. It was an utter disappointment.

Najib knows the Chinese market demand. Even to import one million tonnes of palm oil daily, is not a problem. So, where is the problem?

The problem is... Sugar king Kuok did not agree!

Why was Sugar king Kuok able to influence China's decision to buy Malaysian palm oil?

Who has the monopoly of Chinese national oil market? China national oil market leader is "Arowana" cooking oil, accounting for nearly 40%! The Arowana cooking oil boss is Robert Kuok!

Think about it, if Premier Wen Jiabao on behalf of the Chinese government buys Malaysian palm oil, who is going to refine it into cooking oil? Of course, it is the privatized enterprises! With 40% market share, if Arowana cooking oil company refuses the supply, how is the Chinese government going to utilize the supply?

Najib was insensible from the start, and did not know Kuok had such huge influence in China . He had helped cronies, forcing Robert Kuok to give up the Malaysian sugar king throne, and didn’t expect to have such quick retribution

Kuok was forced to leave Malaysia, his heart is of course very unhappy. People of Malaysia must know, during the early days of Malaysia , we did not have aviation professionals, the BN government requested Kuok's father to help set up Malayan Airways.

1970 Malaysian maritime shipping industry was also a vacuum, the Malaysian government sent representatives to Hong Kong to personally plead Kuok’s help. For national development, Kuok put aside the Group's businesses, came back to Malaysia to assist the Government to establish a national maritime shipping industry. This later transformed into MALAYSIA INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING CORPORATION, referred to as MISC.

Robert Kuok was a big help when Malaysia repeatedly faced economic difficulties. Even in MCA Tan Koon Swan’s case, it was Robert Kuok who paid the bail! Malaysia ’s successive governments, from BN to the National Front, owed Robert Kuok a @#!*% of a lot. But the Malaysian Government was ungrateful, using the strong arm twisting excuses to forcefully take over Kuok’s empire. Is this not ungrateful?

When Deng Xiaoping made a comeback in the 70s, and announced China's reform and needed most help from overseas Chinese entrepreneurs; Robert was first to take action to help Deng. Among the other entrepreneurs of Chinese economic miracle are Henry Fok and Li Ka-shing Hong Kong . Malaysian entrepreneur Robert Kuok was the first to respond to Deng Xiaoping in Beijing and built China 's first five-star hotels, Shangri-La!

With over 30 years of deep relationship with the Chinese government and leadership, Kuok has great influence. Najib failed to recognise this. This is why the quote at the start of this post : “For the interests of their cronies, they arm twisted to take over Kuok’s Sugar Empire, cronies got rich by the 10s of billions, but it caused a national loss of more than 200 billions!”

Kuok's sugar empire was eaten by the fat vampire's family abruptly. Imagine, a world renowned international trade business personality, what humiliation he received in return for his single-minded help all this while for his own country & government? And Najib would never think that the consequences of offending the Sugar King will be so very serious.


Right after Sugar King left Malaysia , he immediately announced the acquisition of Australia 's biggest sugar factory. This is the world supplier of raw material for sugar manufacturing. Of course, this includes supplying to the family of the fat vampire woman’s sugar factory in Perlis.

Early this year, Kuok announced plans to invest USD 10 billion in Indonesia for development of the world's largest sugar cane growing areas, as well as advanced refinery. The world economy was facing a downturn, the Malaysian government travelled around the world to solicit investment. How much was Malaysia ’s foreign investment? Kuok’s single investment in Indonesia is equivalent to as USD10 billion dollars! Don’t you want to screw the couple: PKHKC!?

At the moment, Kuok’s take towards China ’s palm oil contract with Malaysia was to remain with the agreed terms. There won’t be any increase. Indonesia has more palm oil than Malaysia . It is cheaper too. Now that Kuok had invested so much money in Indonesia , the Government of Indonesia would have treated him as their God of Wealth. Certainly, open to negotiate anything with him. Moreover, Indonesia has been eyeing to take over the China palm oil supply contract from Malaysia .

The CONSOLATION China gave in return for not increasing the purchase of palm oil was buying frozen durian. Do the Chinese people have the habit of eating durian it? How much time and effort is needed to market frozen durian from Malaysia ? Thai durian may not sell well in China , let alone Malaysia frozen durian?

Business is business, who would supply millions of dollars’ worth of frozen durian into a brand new market with no durian eating habits? Should the Chinese people become non-receptive of it, how do we deal with return goods? A total loss with capital. Is this how to do business?

Earlier this year, when the news hit the papers that Kuok made an announcement to invest USD 10 billion in Indonesia, many criticized Kuok for being unpatriotic, preferring to take so much money into Indonesia instead of Malaysian. What CRAP! You arm-twisted him to take over his empire, forcing the man to leave Malaysia in hurt & humiliation; now that the man ignores the Malaysian market, and you criticize him? Have you guys got balls for brains?

For him to bring his huge investment to Australia & Indonesia instead of Malaysia , who is to be blamed?

Incidentally, Kuok is not just Chinas’ hotelier, king of cooking oil, the world’s sugar King; he is also the patent owner of the Coca-cola soft drink brand in the Chinese market. Kuok is involved in a diversity of businesses in China . He created many job opportunities for China . The Chinese central government and leaders have great respect for him as an entrepreneur. When the man speaks, the weight it carries can be far-reaching.

So far, Kuok is the only man who never accepted any of the titles rolled out for outstanding Malaysians.
Many people address him as “Tan Sri Robert Kuok,” in actual fact, he does not have these titles, he doesn’t need them.
To put the record straight, he is neither “Tan Sri” nor “Dato”.
(… is that right?)

THE MANDARIN VERSION IS BELOW


大马糖王：那鸡吃了一粒糖，却输掉一间厂，吃了一间厂，却輸掉全世界。

最近那鸡政府得罪了郭鹤年，给大马经济带来的打击更加大到吓人！尤其中国温家宝总理来马官访以后，那鸡政府才真正体会到郭鹤年对中国的影响力有多大！

他们为了朋党的利益，硬硬吞掉了郭鹤年的玻璃市糖厂，表面上让朋党发财10几亿，但是却造成了全民损失超过200亿！知道内情的人，又忍不住要开骂PKHKC了！

大马糖王离开大马，变成世界糖王！他在澳洲买下世界最大的糖厂，有出资100亿美金，在耶加达发展世界最大的甘蔗种植计划和发展炼糖工业；世界糖王之名，郭老当仁不让。

反观大马，为了朋党的利益，却牺牲了全民的利益。。。。对于⋯⋯知情者而言，过去几十年来，郭老对大马政府的援手帮忙，真的是仁至义尽；没有想到政府反转猪肚就是屎，只有四个字可以形容那鸡政府：忘恩负义！

有一个《秘闻》，是关于最近中国总理温家宝访马，那鸡碰钉子的。

早在温家宝总理访马之前，那鸡和他的内阁就不止一次放话，说希望中国可以通过这次访马的时候，将购买大马棕油的数额提高一倍。

大家都知道中国是大马棕油最大消费国。经济急速崛起的中国是在近年来成为大马最大的棕油市场，不过我国目前也面对印尼的强力竞争，试图以更低价格出售棕油给中国和印度，分薄大马的市场。这正是那鸡最担心的。

那鸡希望温家宝总理能够签署一份新的棕油买卖合约，将平均每个月出口到中国的10多万公吨的数量提高一倍。可是温家宝一来到大马，就告诉那鸡，那是不可能的事。那鸡犹如被当头浇了一盘冷水。

那鸡知道中国市场需求量太大了，就算每月进口100万公吨的棕油，也不是问题。那么，问题在哪里？

问题就在：糖王郭鹤年不答应！

为什么糖王郭鹤年能够影响中国购买大马棕油的决定？

中国全国的食油市场是由谁垄断的呢？中国的食油市场老大，是《金龙鱼油》食油；占了全国食油市场将近40%！而金龙鱼油食油的大老板，正是郭鹤年！

想想，温家宝代表中国政府购买大马棕油，回国之后这些棕油交给谁去加工提炼成食油？当然就是民间企业啦！金龙鱼油食油公司不答应吃下这些货的活，你叫中国政府怎样消耗掉？

那鸡从一开始就傻呼呼的，根本不知道郭鹤年在中国竟然有这么大的影响力。他当初帮着朋党逼郭鹤年让出大马糖王宝座的时候，绝对没有想到这么快就得到报应！

郭鹤年被逼离开大马，心里当然非常不爽，要知道大马建国初期连航空业人才也没有，是联盟政府恳求郭鹤年的父亲帮忙设立马来亚航空公司的。

70年代大马海上航运业也真空，是大马政府亲自派代表去香港邀请郭鹤年帮忙，郭鹤年为了国家发展，将自己的集团业务暂时放下，回来大马协助政府设立国家海上航运业，这才有了后来的MALAYSIA INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING COPERATION，简称MISC。

连老马也多次遇到经济商业难题的时候找过郭鹤年帮忙，甚至当年马华的陈群川遇到新泛电官司，无法缴交保释金，都是郭鹤年两肋插刀帮忙搞定的！这表示，大马历任政府，从联盟到国阵，都欠了郭鹤年不少人情。但是大马政府竟然打完斋不要和尚，过桥抽板，硬硬以〈不批准白糖起价〉，〈必须国有化〉等等借口把郭鹤年在大马的基业给吃掉！大家说，这是不是忘恩负义？

70年代邓小平东山再起，宣布中国走改革开放路线的时候，最需要海外华裔企业家鼎力相助；最早坐言起行走进中国帮邓伯伯开拓中国市场创造经济奇迹的大企业家，香港是霍英东和李嘉诚，大马企业家就是郭鹤年第一个响应邓小平，在北京建造中国第一家五星级大酒店：香格里拉大酒店！

凭着过去30多年和中国政府领导层建立的深厚关系，郭鹤年的影响力之大，绝对是那鸡无法想象的。这就是为什么在这个帖子最前面说：他们为了朋党的利益，硬硬吞掉了郭鹤年的玻璃市糖厂，表面上让朋党发财10几亿，但是却造成了全民损失超过200亿！

郭老的糖厂被僵尸肥婆的家族硬生生吃掉，想他老人家叱咤国际商场，几曾受过这么大的屈辱？更何况还是自己一心一意帮助了几十年的祖国政府？而那鸡根本没有想到，他得罪了糖王的后果竟是如此严重。

【吃了一間廠，輸掉全世界。】--名句精华。

糖王这边才离开大马，那边立刻宣布收购澳洲最大的白糖制造厂，制造白糖的某种原料，就是由这家企业供应给全世界糖厂的，当然，包括被僵尸肥婆家族吃掉的玻璃市糖厂。

接着在今年初，郭老再宣布投资100亿美金，在印尼开发世界最大甘蔗种植区，还有先进的炼糖厂。世界经济不景，大马政府周游列国招商，外资来马的总投资额一年才多少亿？郭鹤年单独一人给印尼的单一项目投资就高达100亿美金！各位，看到这里，你会不会很想对那鸡夫妇大骂一句：PKHKC！？（不明PKHKC,哈哈）

现在郭老态度摆到明，中国和大马政府以前签下来的购买棕油合约照跑，但是，想增加购买数量？免谈！印尼的棕油比马来西亚更多，价格更便宜，加上现在他在印尼投资这么多钱，印尼政府当然把他当财神，什么都好谈。更何况印尼一直虎视眈眈，希望能够从大马手中抢走中国的买卖棕油合约。

至于中国购买冷冻榴莲，根本就是在无法得到更多棕油购买的承诺之下，中国给大马的CONSOLATION，安慰奖而已啦！哈哈哈！中国人有吃榴莲的习惯吗？你要花多少时间和心思去推销大马冷冻榴莲？泰国榴莲在中国都未必卖得好，更何况是冷冻榴莲？

在商言商，谁敢一下子将价值数百万美金的冷冻榴莲推进一个完全陌生的市场吗？万一中国人的接受度不足，时间久了面对退货问题，怎么办？血本无归啊！做生意是这样的吗？别傻了！

今年初，当郭老宣布在印尼投资100亿美金的消息见报之后，我看到一些人批评郭老不爱国，宁愿将这么多资金拿去印尼，都不照顾大马人；我就一直为郭老叫屈！你们忘恩负义把人家的基业吞掉，让郭老含恨离开大马；现在看到郭老不鸟大马市场了，你们有资格批评他吗？

追根究底，人家宁愿在澳洲和印尼大量投资，都不看你一言，应该怪谁？

顺便跟大家报告一下：郭鹤年不但是中国的酒店大王，食油大王，世界糖王，他还是coca cola汽水品牌在中国市场的专利权拥有者。他在中国涉及的业务极多而且多元化。为中国制造许多就业机会的商机，是中国中央政府领导人非常敬重的一位企业家。他讲一句话，份量绝对不会比一些外国领导人低。

他也是直到目前为止，唯一一位从来不接受大马皇室授勋的大马大企业家。很多人写他的时候，理所当然地称他《丹斯里郭鹤年》，事实上他并没有这些勋衔，也不稀罕。他不是丹斯里，也不是拿督。
By: 忠政快讯

[redbean]

Referendum to sell Singapore
At the rate it is going, in 30 or 50 years time, the original Singaporeans will be a minority in the city state. Either they failed to reproduce or they migrated. We used to be 2m. Now we are nearly 4m with new citizens taking up almost 50% of the population. The number of new citizens will only go up with our addiction for more head counts.
What this means is that whatever the 2m original citizens inherited and owned of this island, they now own half, including half of the reserves. The new citizens are taking half of the original Singaporeans’ share of the country’s wealth, and half of the reserves too.
If the foreigners are allowed to keep pouring into the country, say they formed 80% of the population, it will mean that the original Singaporeans will be left with 20% share of the nation’s wealth. And this does not take into account the land and properties that were sold to the rich foreigners.
The bottom line is that Singaporeans will eventually own less of this island. Yes the foreigners will also be citizens and have the right to a share of the island. This is not unlike a family inheritance. All the children will have an equal share of the family wealth. Then the god sons and god daughters, the adopted children, the children of mistresses, all came and taking an equal share of the wealth. Would that be a desirable and acceptable outcome?
While there is still time, and the wealth and assets are still there, and since they will be distributed to new citizens eventually, with the main beneficiary being the eldest son profiting in the process, would it be better to divide the family wealth equally before it is gone?
When no one cares about ownership or inheritance, when the prodigal sons are selling everything they could sell for their own benefits, for their own good, the rest of the children better insist on a splitting up of the family inheritance fast.
If, hypothetically, the whole island can be sold off as a going concern, like a business, and every citizen gets an equal share of the sales proceed, with new citizens getting a pro rated smaller share, it could be a nice way out. Assuming each citizen can have a share of $3m, at 3m population, the going price is $9 trillion only. Make it $10 trillion with the extra $1 trillion to be share by the new citizens, with a formula for sharing based on their tenure as a citizen. This should make everyone happy. (The actual sales price can be worked out after a full valuation of what the islands and all the assets are worth. It may not take 50 man years to do that.) The final price could be double if there are competitive bids to buy this enterprise by the superpowers.
There are many advantages to such a proposition. Firstly, the country is looking more like a hotel anyway and citizenship or no citizenship is not going to mean anything any more. In fact citizenship is too burdensome, and full of responsibilities and unfairness. Secondly, Singaporeans are calling themselves international citizens and wanted to be international citizens anyway. Thirdly, the world is opening its arms to welcome rich migrants. With the windfall, a family of 4 could be richer by $12m, plus whatever they owned, and they can go anywhere and be welcomed as rich expats. Is that not what everybody wants, money and a good life, instant gratification? Or they can still choose to stay put, as residents here, without being a citizen and with no NS obligation to irritate them. Nice right?
The new owner can run this enterprise whichever way they pleased. They can retain the services of all the civil servants and GLC employees, including the cabinet, to run it as before. Or they can change whoever they want. They can bring in all the talented foreigners, rich, skilled, or whatever, increase the population to any number, let the prices of properties ballooned, and there will be no citizens to feel aggrieved. It is a private enterprise, a hotel, a real business concern.
In the meantime, the rich Singaporeans, with loads of money in their bank accounts, can choose to go anywhere and live happily ever after with their shares of the inheritance.
How about it, a referendum to sell off the country, lock, stock and barrel, for money? No more emotional attachments and kpkb about foreigners, about govt, about prices, about politics, just become rich and happy, as citizens of the world. What option is there anyway? The country is being given away on a silver platter to all the new citizens and is trumpeted as the next good thing to happen. As sure as the sun will rise! It will be gone.
Of course this sounds fictional. But with the entrepreneurial spirit of Uniquely Singapore, could there be a possibility that it could happen?
Or maybe I should question China in everyway like a Westerner and they will respect me more as we share the same values and imaginations about China.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[redbean]

A sheepish smile
That is all I can afford when I read about big burly Caucasians beating up local girls. One girl was slammed against the bus door for talking too loudly, in the opinion of the Caucasian and annoying him. Another woman got her windscreen smashed for honking at another Caucasian man who cut into her path abruptly.
What to do? It happened. Reminds me of colonial Singapore or South Africa. The sheepish Singaporeans deserve every bit of it for worshipping foreign gods. Even the Chinese hawkers have no qualms or reservation to beat up Singaporeans in broad daylight.
Singaporeans have their jobs taken over by foreigners for their own good. Without the foreigners, they will all go hungry and their women will become maids. Better count their blessings and don’t make too much of an issue when foreigners throw them a few punches or knock the daylight out of them.
Got money, go and pay for a lawyer and take the offender to court. If no money, just shut up, or like me, smile sheepishly. It could be worst.
In the olden days, they came with their warships and killed the men, took the women and the country as theirs.
I just need to be extra careful in the presence of foreigners.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[redbean]

Must Chinese Sporeans support China’s rise?
This is the heading of an article by William Choong, a senior writer of ST and published in today’s ST. The gist of his article is that he got screwed by other Chinese for questioning the rise of China and China’s assertiveness as an emerging power. Some even questioned his roots, whether he is a Chinese or perhaps an ang moh or something else.
He claimed that as a journalist, and a Singaporean, it would be foolish to let his race shaped his assessment of global trends. He even quoted LKY’s defence of American presence in the region to balance the rise of China’s military power.
I agree that one should not allow one’s racial origin to colour one’s objectivity. And one should be thinking of one’s national interest and take a position on that ground. But it is altogether a silly thing to take a position without knowing why, without knowing that one is not being objective but trying to impress others as being objective.
The very title of his article is biased and not objective. It is not a matter of supporting China’s rise but a matter of supporting right against wrong, against injustice and inequality. Is China’s rise leading to China bullying the weaker nations, committing aggression and invasion against weak nations, or is China’s rise just a natural and neutral phenomenon of the growing economic and military prowess of a nation? What is wrong if a nation, any nation, becomes strong and powerful? Even with China’s new stature, little silly Asean nations have been arresting Chinese fishermen and threatening to go to war with China. What would it be if China is still a weakling nation? Would that be better?
Likewise, the silly statement that we need the US to balance the rise of China is as good as wisdom from a joker. Why is it that no one ever asked for a stronger country to balance the military might of the US all these years? Why isn’t China’s rise seen as a balance against the US presence and world domination? I am sure the Arab and Muslim world would beg for a stronger country, be it China or anyone else, to stop the oppressive and hegemonic American presence in the Middle East.
Or is it because the American world domination for too long has got stuck in his head, that this is the only normal? Any new power challenging this normal is unacceptable?
I half agree with LKY’s statement that it is Singapore’s national interest that there should be a balance of power in the Pacific. Now what kind of balance of power is he talking about? A mighty America unchallenged and can do what it wants against any nation, conducting espionage and military war games at other nation’s front yard, conducting aerial spying missions against weaker nations at will? Conducting regime change? Or a more balance of power between the Americans and the Chinese when both side would not dare to push the other around at will, like I can slam you and you cannot slam me back?
It is not an issue of supporting or not supporting China’s rise just because one is a Chinese. It is silly to just question and try to discredit China like the West because the West is doing it and saying the same thing. What the West is saying and doing is for their own interests.
Whatever, a Chinese is a bloody Chinese by any name, a Singaporean or an American Chinese, or if you call yourself Ah Choong or William. When China was a beggar of nations, any Chinese will be known as a useless Chink wherever he went, and be spitted upon, even physically abused, not only by the Westerners, but also by the colonized Asians. Pai Hua was common in Southeast Asia. Today, it is not so easy anymore, because there is a strong China. It would be nice if William Choong could be able to ask his grandpa or great grandpa what it was like to be a Chinese when China was the sick man of Asia.
Today, any bloody Chinese of whatever nationality takes it as a natural right that he is somehow seen as nearly equal, and treated slightly better by the Westerners, for granted. Just imagine how he will be treated if China is still the sick man of Asia? Will the Westerners take a bloody Singaporean Chinese with a name like William Choong seriously? Or will there be laughing their guts out at the thought of him and his great articles in questioning China’s intention as a new military power behind his inscrutable face?
Mind you, for many decades, the Chinese all looked alike to the Westerners, no personality, no character, no talent, poor, good only to be cooks and laundry men and inscrutable, with little slit eyes. Yes, they all looked alike, can't distinguish one from another. Sounds familiar?
The rise of China and its progress in all fields have made the Westerners to look at Chinese as a people, from a new angle. William Choong should thank the bloody Commie Chinese for the added respect and standing he is getting from the Westerners and the former colonized people of the world. The Indonesians and Malaysians would not be so ready to pai hua. The Aussies would not bang into him in the streets that often.
There is no need to support the rise of China just because you are Chinese. But you get some additional intangible benefits from it indirectly. Maybe I am wrong. The Westerners will respect me more and see me up if China is still a weak pariah state with its people living in poverty, without ideas and talents. Or maybe I should question China like the West and they will respect me more for seeing the world in their coloured lens, like a Westerner?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[southernglory1]

From:
Subject: RE: Well said...David Marshall.Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 06:06:24 +0000
there is a misalignment between earning private sector pay and not suffering private sector consequences if management decisions do achieve objectives. For example, 50% or more loss in UBS investment.... Uncle Johnny, i think i shall return and run for parliament... good and easy $$

From:
: FW: Well said...David Marshall.Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 14:01:05 +0800






: Fw: Well said...David Marshall.







He is one JEW who is NOT (a) $$$$ greedy and what JEWS are infamously for (b) STINGY !
In S'pore, we have S'porean Chinese "jews" among us instead!
they are among us, with all their money pinching habits and their "we are poor" mentality.
how to mix/associate with such......? I keep my distance from such elements. Disgusting !
Cheers from S C .


Well said David Marshall.
So bloody true too what he said.....
That's the reason why we have to Pay & Pay to survive in Singapore.

Subject: Fwd: David Marshall In 1994

David Marshall In 1994 (when PAP ministers started enjoying their high pay schemes):

I've got nothing against money. I'd like to have money myself! I'd like to have a house and a garden and dogs and a car and a chauffeur but, look, I've got a flat. I've got a swimming pool attached to the flat. I've not even got a car but I use taxis. I have a dignified way of life without being wealthy.

I don't see the necessity of owning a Mercedes-Benz and a swimming pool and a couple of mistresses. I think we've got our values all wrong.

You know $ 96,000 a month for a Prime Minister and $ 60,000 a month for a minister. What the hell do you do with all that money? You can't eat it!
What do you do with it ? Your children don't need all that money.

My children have had the best of education. In fact, I'm very proud of them. One of them is a senior registrar to two major hospitals in Oxford. Another of them is a consultant in European law to the Securities and Investment Board in the United Kingdom. They've had their education. There are no complaints.

I never earned $60,000 a month or $90,000 a month. When I was Chief Minister, I earned $8,000 a month.
Look, what is happening today is we are encouraged to and are becoming worshippers of the Golden Calf.

We have lost sight of the joy and excitement of public service, helping our fellow men. The joy and excitement of seeking and understanding the miracle of the living, the duty and the grandeur. We have lost taste for heroic action in the service of our people.

We have become good bourgeois seeking comfort, security. It's like seeking a crystal coffin and being fed by intravenous injections through pipes in the crystal coffin; crystal coffins stuck with certificates of your pragmatic abilities.


It's time we start clean up Singapore politics & get rid of the greedy self-serving politicians.




No virus found in this incoming message.

[redbean]

Sushi any one?
Or would you prefer a half inch thick medium rare Kobe beef, where the cows were fed with beer and given massages under the watchful eyes of their caregivers?
There is now a furore over the dolphins in RWS. And many people are crying foul, for keeping free living dolphins in captivity and putting them under a lot of stress with tough trainings to perform acts to please. And RWS has replied that they are committed to marine conservation and research and the knowledge learnt from the captive dolphins would be used to make life better for the dolphins and marine life. Sound convincing?
I think the Japanese were much better in telling the world that their cullings of tunas and whales were strictly for research as well. And they are killing them by the millions annually. And no one says the Japanese were lying. How’s that compare to the 10 or 20 dolphins in RWS that are kicking and swimming and alive? How’s that compare to the hundreds of dolphins in other parks around the world? Sure some will die naturally, in captivity or in the wild. Nothing beats what Nature makes them to be.
The tunas and whales have an easier time. They need not suffer the pain and stress of training and performing to crowds. They just ended at the dinner table. Oh, training and performing are bad for animals. I will support the banning of all animal shows, including circus and dog shows. The owners and trainers thought it was fun and very clever to make the animals do all those tricks. But the animals were also put through many painful and stressful lessons to learn and practice them.
All animals should be free in their natural environment, not in captivity, not in HDB flats. And also not on the dinner table. Now, what am I ranting about? It is all garbled. I also want to save all the animals and the world. Incidentally, I am half vegetarian. I still eat killed animals on alternate days and cooked vegetables for the other days.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[southernglory1]

GIC, UBS and the Death Spiral of your CPF funds
Posted on September 23, 2011 by kjeyaretnam
Kweku Adoboli the alleged rogue trader at UBS and Nick Leeson, the infamous rogue trader who brought down Barings, both have a strong Singaporean connection. Nick Leeson worked in Singapore while Kweku Adoboli worked for the bank whose largest shareholder is the Singapore government.

Singapore, through GIC, became the largest effective shareholder in UBS when it purchased a 9% stake of mandatory convertible notes in December 2007. The Singaporean government was responding to a call by UBS at the time for a bailout following the subprime crisis. In fact our generous bailout caused UBS which stood for Union Bank of Switzerland, to be given the nickname, “The United Bank of Singapore “in its home country

Kweku Adoboli appears to have lost the Swiss bank an estimated minimum of $2.3 billion. But his losses only represent a fraction of the total losses that GIC has made in UBS so far. UBS was trading at 50 Euros per share at the end of 2007 and just before the latest debacle it was trading around 11 Euros. It had therefore already lost around 80% of its value before he added a further 2% loss to its 2007 market valuation. For GIC it appears this 80% loss probably amounts to S$7-8 billion assuming that the currency purchase was unhedged at the time. That may not seem like a huge amount in the context of GIC’s rumored total assets but we don’t know what percentage it represents of GIC’s equity. As the bonds issued to CPF by GIC have to be repaid it’s conceivable that GIC could end up with negative equity.

Anyway as the largest stakeholder in UBS any loss chalked up to them is going to send shock waves through GIC. And as GIC’s assets are funded through borrowing in Singapore dollars from the CPF, your savings are directly linked to UBS’ fortunes. Furthermore this latest loss comes amid the start of a double dip recession. The rerun of the 2008 financial crisis looks potentially much more worrying this time around because governments appear to have given up on taking steps to offset it and can only repeat the mantra of fiscal austerity. With the latest announcement from the Fed ruling out a new round of quantitative easing, central bankers also appear to have given up on monetary policy.

The UBS losses have even provoked GRC into making a rare public statement resulting in a front page headline in the Financial Times on September 20th.

“Singapore fund hits at UBS ‘lapses’. “

The FT article went on to further quote from GIC’s statement,

“[We] discussed the alleged fraudulent trading that led to the large financial loss for UBS. GIC expressed disappointment and concern at the lapses and urged UBS to take firm action to restore confidence in the bank”.

Fine words indeed but is it not a case of locking the stable door after the horse has bolted? Yes, GIC is now belatedly hitting out at UBS for its lack of controls and lapses but are they just creating a storm in a tea cup to cover up a disastrous investment decision? If GIC is angry with UBS then Singapore citizens should be furious with GIC. As CPF members we the Singaporean citizens should be demanding some answers and explanations from our government.

GIC’s attempt to avoid transparency over its decision to invest in UBS by pinning the losses on a rogue trader, an external event outside of their control, won’t pass muster anyway. In fact there were plenty of warning signs in the public arena that something was seriously amiss at UBS, long before Mr. Kweku Adoboli was uncovered.

In 2008/9 UBS was embroiled in a tax evasion scandal in the United States. The misconduct was so severe that UBS was faced with the loss of their banking license in the US. There are few sanctions harsher than that. The scandal centered on UBS’s wealth management division where employees had been helping US customers to evade taxes. One UBS whistleblower employee even testified to practices such as smuggling diamonds in empty toothpaste tubes! UBS finally kept their license by settling out of court and agreeing to pay US$780 million to the US government in April 2009.

Not long after this in November 2009 the UK’s Financial Services weighed in against UBS. The Authority fined UBS £8 million citing their “inadequate systems and controls” over 6 employees in the wealth management division who had been making unauthorized trades using customers’ money. UBS was also forced to pay out US$42 million to compensate its customers for the losses.

Now in 2011 we are told that GIC expresses “disappointment and concern at lapses”. Seriously guys, where have you been? As a minority stakeholder in a country that represses dissenting views I can do nothing more active than express disappointment. But in 2007 and again in 2010 GIC was the largest single shareholder in UBS and as the largest shareholder they had considerable clout. So the question should be why did GIC make no public effort to improve performance or risk controls over the last 4 years? Why did GIC not go public with their concerns before now as an activist hedge fund or asset manager would have done?

It may be that as a public entity they were sensitive to charges of political interference and the kind of backlash they saw when they bought Shin Corp in Thailand. If this is the case it simply strengthens the argument against having a sovereign wealth fund in the first place.

The real question is what were GIC doing investing in a deal whose implicit risk they appear not to have understood and via an instrument they shouldn’t have touched with a barge pole? Certainly if reports on Bloomberg are true then they made the decision to invest with unnecessary haste and little due diligence.

Mandatory convertible bonds are instruments which have to be converted into shares of the underlying equity on maturity. They are aptly known as “death spiral” bonds in the investment industry. This is because they represent an inevitable large dilution of the outstanding equity of the company issuing the bonds. The coupon may seem juicy but it stems from the fact that the investor has sold a put on the shares to the issuer. If the option was stripped out and sold separately it would undoubtedly look cheap at the price GIC sold it, particularly as UBS had inside information about the true state of the bank.

Ironically UBS knows about the risks of death spiral” bonds. They themselves lost a lot of money in 1997 from buying mandatory convertible bonds issued by Japanese banks. In this case the banks’ equity prices promptly traded down towards the mandatory conversion price, set roughly 50% below where the equity was trading prior to the issue. Had UBS learnt something from that experience? As far as I’m aware they only started to issue their own death spiral bonds after their fingers were burnt by the Japanese.

The only other major stakeholder in the UBS bonds at that time was an unnamed Middle Eastern investor in Abu Dhabi who bought a $2 billion stake. But then he probably had money to burn, literally, as he would be investing oil derived revenue and not the savings of his hard working citizens.

In any event the bail out by GIC didn’t change UBS’ fortunes. The losses were so severe that by 2008 they looked set to go bust until this time the Swiss government stepped in with an emergency rights issue in October of that year. Had they not done so GIC would have lost all their money. In 2009 the Swiss government sold its own stake, at a healthy profit I might add. Yes, the Swiss government was prudent enough to get out at the height of the market but GIC held on! I fear that MM Lee thinks he is Warren Buffet who famously holds positions for 30 years.

We can only speculate as to why MM Lee felt that we needed to use our pensions to bail out a foreign bank especially at a time when the industry was already reeling from the subprime crisis. At the time, as Chairman of GIC, he was quoted in a Bloomberg interview in April 2008 saying

“The franchise of the banks, the expertise that they have, under proper leadership, they will be able to recover and rise again. Will there be another Swiss bank like UBS for wealth management? I doubt it, we doubt it, that is why we invested in it.”

Clearly the salesmen’s patter got the better of the Chairman of GIC, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, and of the investment committee at GIC when they took the decision to invest in December 2007. Or the GIC decision makers were so blinded by the thought of the enormous returns they were going to make that they were unable to look at the downside risks.

But GIC did have the benefit of hindsight and experience when they made their statement on September 20th which continues with a chilling echo of MM Lees naïve views of 2008, “GIC’s view of UBS’s fundamental strength as a well capitalized bank with a strong private wealth management franchise remains unchanged,”

When GIC talks about a strong wealth management franchise they are singling UBS out as a brand consistently capable of making money through wealth management. I agree that smuggling diamonds out in toothpaste tubes is a strong way to generate wealth for your clients and if it weren’t illegal, I too would love a piece of that franchise.

It would be an interesting academic exercise to see what lessons both Temasek and GIC have learnt from the previous crisis, if the consequences were not so serious for Singaporeans. Judging by GIC’s statement above we must presume they have learnt very little.

The UBS debacle is an illustration of how the concentration of the power to make such large investment decisions in the hands of a few individuals is so dangerous. Particularly as there appears to be no accountability for those investment decisions later as there would be if Temasek or GIC were in the private sector. Let’s not forget that it is our money the managers are playing with. If this were a hedge fund or conventional asset manager that had performed poorly, then we, the ultimate owners of these assets, could take them away and give them to another manager. Unfortunately we do not have that option.

Tony Tan our (35%) elected President was deputy Chairman of GIC at that time so clearly there is a potential conflict of interest here and we should expect no efforts at improving transparency or oversight from that quarter. This is the reason why I have called for Temasek and GIC to be privatized and listed so that we can gain some much needed transparency and can become the majority shareholders in our own assets.

So to answer MM Lee’s questions, “Will there be another bank like UBS for wealth management?” Will there never be employees making unauthorized trades with clients’ money? Will there never be another rogue trader? I doubt it, we doubt it, that is why Singaporeans need greater control over their investments.
GIC,UBS &

[redbean]

Ethnic pride ethnic shame
Singaporean Chinese are different. They are not the same as the China Chinese or the Malaysian Chinese or Taiwan Chinese or any Chinese around the world. But some bear a very dominant trait in hating anything Chinese, dismissing anything Chinese, finding Chinese disgusting and something to be dissociated with. They see China Chinese as the lepers of the world, the rogue nation that meant no good but harm to the world. To this group of Singaporean Chinese, the China Chinese are the pariahs, the untouchables.
They forgot that they are Chinese too. They may call themselves Singaporeans or international citizens, citizens of the world, but they cannot hide the fact that they are the same disgusting Chinese that they detest and hate. There is no ethnic identity or pride in who they really are. They may harbour thoughts of dying their hair blond, bleaching their skin white, and adopt all mannerism of the westerners.
Can anyone be respected when he can’t even respect himself, his own identity and his own ethnicity? Such people will only be regarded as outcasts by their own ethnic groups, and be sneered at by those they hoped to be and wanted to be. The very basis of respectability is to respect yourself, your own ethnicity, be it Malay, Indian, Eurasian or Chinese. Only by respecting self can one earn respect from others.
I am a Singaporean Chinese. I do not hate nor despise the Chinese. Neither do I adore or idolize them. I do not prejudge them. I look at them as another people, to be respected or to be dissociated from, by their acts, by rights or wrongs that they do. Not simply because they are China Chinese. This applies to all other races. The 1.5b people cannot be simply grouped into one, one type, one kind, one behavior, bad and nothing good. They are a sea of humanity, with good and bad and ugly, just like us, just like every ethnic group.
But we have some very different Singaporean Chinese that have stereotyped the China Chinese, China, as simply of one kind, bad, bad intent, bad in everything. How their mindset gets to this level, with deep seated perversion of thoughts and thinking process is difficult to fathom. Our education system does not teach them to hate their ancestors, their breed or their ethnicity. How did they grow up to become thus? Yes, the Singaporean Chinese is different from all other Chinese, but some are much more different. To this group, they take pride in hating China and anything Chinese.
If they cannot see anything good in their own ethnicity, can others see anything good in them?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.

[southernglory1]

Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
The minister of education talks about teaching pupils and students on character building and learning right values. It all must start with PAP ministers and MPs. Do they all have what needs to be called good character? Do they themselves have right moral values? Pupils, students, teachers and the public at large will always watch at how the PAP ministers and MPs conduct themselves. So far they have nothing to show exemplary good character or exemplary right values. Labelling Singaporeans who disagree with PAP policies as daft is outright show of arrogance and disrespect. Arresting, imprisoning and bankrupting opposition leaders is totally unacceptable and clearly shows the bad and negative side of warped sadistic characters. When politicians taking advantage of the people and the country to pay themselves high insane stratospheric salaries they have lost the high moral ground to talk about character building and learning right values. No one can believe them any more. People have come to know that they are just simply selfish, self satisfying, self aggrandizing and self important and all these personify their disastrous self egos. They are there to serve the money and not the people. That's the reason why the people are suffering and are so unhappy. If they don't change , come 2016 will change for them.

Let's hope for now the PAP ministers and MPs will have genuine pride to serve the people and the country and not master Money. They must be sincere and not seen to serve in a perfunctory and condescending manner.

SG

[southernglory1]

Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 10:47 pm Post subject: PAP maintains power through the insidious education system.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Singapore education system is a great failure . It is only a success in so far as it is to build up an elitist class to serve PAP and to preserve and maintain a corrupted elitist class in power in perpetuity. In India they are trying to break down the caste system which is cruel and wrong . But here in Singapore, PAP has been systematically building a society class system which will eventually reflect that of the evil Indian caste system. The PAP discriminatory class system starts from toddlers play centres and kindergartens. Then the evil system takes a more pronounced form from primary 1 to primary 5 where the pupils are sieved in exams and graded in top down classes according to the results in their examinations. The evil sieving system is accentuated in Primary Six when pupils have to sit for the do or die PSLE - Primary School Leaving Examination. Then it is fine tuned in secondary schools where the best or cream of those who passed the School Certificate Leaving Examination are put in the best junior colleges and eventually in the best reserve faculties in the universities. These so called cream of the best in the universities will eventually be picked to serve the government with incredible high salaries or to serve in government related companies. Finally many of these priviledge young men will be inducted as PAP party members to serve the interest of the Party and the elitist class and thus preserve and maintain power of the elitist in perpetuity.

However the PAP does not realise that the system has an intrinsically and cumulative build in downside perspective which will eventually not only destroy PAP from the inside but also the country or city state as a whole. The evil and negative aspect or perspective of the system is well discussed in the article below entitled The Great Sieving Machine.

Southernglory1
- Hide quoted text -



















----- Forwarded Message -----
Subject: PSLE : The Great Sieving Machine....




PSLE : The Great Sieving Machine....
For parents with children that are 12 year old this must be a period of anxiety as the PSLE starts this week.

When I took the PLSE many years ago, students only had pass/fail results. There was no score. The better students were broadly identified as belonging to the top 8% - I was not one of them and it didn't really matter. Many of the students in the top 8% chose to go to average secondary schools so you get a mix of good and bad students in the same secondary school - you sometimes have both good and not so good students in the same class. Today we differentiate primary school right down to the fine resolution of 1 in 300 points. You pass by a tuition center these days and you will notice they put up a list of top students - score of 280 for the top student...anything below 250 and you won't get on anybody's list. Competition starts young and differentiation starts young. Using their PSLE and reference entrance score from past years students usually choose the best ranked secondary school possible with their score. In the secondary school the students will again be sorted .with the best students going to the best class and so on. By the time the student walks into his first class in secondary school - every thing is sorted out based on PLSE scores. You have the best class in the best school and the bottom class in the worst secondary school. Other than differentiation using PSLE scores, we have NUS High which picks out gifted students so they can get out of the regular system and be educated in NUS High for direct entry into NUS.

What we have done is intensify the competition between people at an early age and accentuate the difference in outcomes for these people - the NUS High gives the best training and highest quality of education to those who make it there and neighborhood schools typically get the average teachers teaching unmotivated students who discourage each other from doing well.

Our current president, Dr. Tony Tan, completel his primary school education 60 years ago chose to go to a lesser known less prestigious secondary school called St Patrick's Secondary School rather than Raffles Institution like the rest of the presidential candidates. I thought that was a selling point he could have used in his campaign because he would have mixed, mingled and made friends with children who later move on to various strata of our society. We did not have so much differentiation of children at a young age and in a typical secondary school you would find a good mix of students. Today's system is completely different.

Our education system has turned into the great sieve machine and it sorts students obsessively. Once every few years we get 12 year old children leaving the exam hall crying because the maths paper is so difficult they couldn't do many of the difficult questions[Link] - if you pick up a PSLE maths paper, I think many of you will be baffled by the some of the questions. All this to try to differentiate between students so some will get A* and others just A.

We should really roll back to the basics and ask ourselves what is the purpose of an education system? Is the main purpose just to sort students based on exam scores? What happened to the joys of learning? What happens to childhood and friendship? Is it healthy to put students through such intense competition at such a young age? What does such a system achieve at the end of the day?

Strangely, after putting our own children through such a tough education system, the govt is very happy to have foreigners from England, Australia and Phillipines take up some our best jobs. It looks like the tough education system does not give you too much of an edge when you join the workforce. Based on what was reported in WikiLeaks, the govt does not even encourage all Singaporeans to reach their full academic potential if they are able to get degrees. So what does all this energy and time spent on doing well for exams achieve for our society as a whole? For individuals it is very clear, you try to beat the others to get into better schools and later on scholarships that lead to opportunities in govt and SAF. But collectively will our society do better with such a system when it comes to differentiating oiurselves from economic competitors and giving our people a better quality of life?

Many Singaporeans being in this type of system for so long can't even imagine that there other forms of education system that work well. If I suggest we go back to the system of my time when students are just award a pass grade instead when they clear their PSLE exams, I'm sure many parents will say that system is no good because it doesn't help their children get ahead of others and secure the best secondary schools and so on. Singaporeans have come to believe competition is inevitable and intense competition is unavoidable.

To understand the alternatives, we have to look at systems that work well and are at the other end of the spectrum.

"The basic compulsory educational systemin Finlandis the nine-year comprehensive school(Finnishperuskoulu, Swedishgrundskola, "basic school"), for which school attendance is mandatory (homeschoolingis allowed, but rare). There are no "gifted" programs, and the more able children are expected to help those who are slower to catch on." - Wikipedia, Finland's Education System[Link]

The number one education system in the world is the Finnish education system - an egalitarian system in which tremendous effort to taken to provide high quality pre-school to everyone. Contrast that with Singapore's approach where pre-school is not compulsory and poor students skip pre-school while richer parents send their children for pre-school that cost $20K per annum. Our govt's idea of levelling the playing field is to give some poor students 1 month of pre-school that cost their parents $10 (read Stark contrast between pre-school.education of the rich and the poor...). Richer Singaporeans would even buy property next to a prestigious primary school known for training students to get good results so their children have better odds of getting into these schools.

"The Fins adamantly oppose any form of divisions or ranking, and 'advanced' or 'elite' divisions are major taboos. Separation into different classes is also not practiced in the system. Heidi, a 28 year-old employee at the University of Helsinki, recalls that she was good at math in primary and middle school, but the teacher never praised her work in front of anyone else, only stealthily handing her more advanced texts to read on her own." - Secrets to Finland's World Topping Education System

In Singapore's elitist system where the best resources are allocated to the best exam-scoring students who later on secure the precious prestigious overseas scholarships and later on the best jobs and opportunities in the SAF and civil service. This system elevate the importance of exams over learning, amplify the inequality in our society and emphasizes competition over co-operation.

The strength of a society is build on the arms of the strong pulling up the weak so that no one is left behind. Children at 12 should have a childhood spending time making friends, cultivating the love of learning, learning to help one another and building core values....much of these important developments fall into the background when young children believe that they are better than someone else because he scored 10 marks higher for the PSLE. All the energy we spend to sort our students then later allocating disproportionate resources to a small number identified as the elite weakens what can really make us competitive - a cohesive workforce able to work closely as a team and not individuals perpetually trying to get ahead by breaking away from others. The one reason the MOE gives for all this sorting and sieving is they want to best develop each student based on their ability. If you believe that you have to believe that neighborhood schools like Bedok Green Secondary have better teachers than ACS(I) or Raffles Institution because they have weaker students that need better teachers to guide. The Finnish approach is to put everyone in the same school and teach the material at a pace that everyone can learn and give additional attention to those who are slower. If we want a cohesive society, we have to start with the young and teach them that to work to help each rather than against each other.

Posting Time6:07 AM
Posted byLucky Tan40 comments