Open letter to Prime Minister Lee expressing unhappiness at

• Berries tan

  13 Nov 09, 10:30

  Open letter to Prime Minister Lee expressing unhappiness at his pro-foreigner policy

   

  Originally Posted by TEMASEK REVIEW

  http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11...eading-part-1/
  
  By Tan Keng Leng, Guest Columnist
  
  Mr. Prime Minister,
  
  We are a group of concerned Singaporean netizens, and we are writing in to you to express our unhappiness at the direction the country has been heading towards since the last General Election.
  
  As citizens, it is our birthright to decide the direction we want the country to take, to elect the national leaders who would lead the country in the direction we want, and to voice out our reservations if we are unhappy with the direction the country is headed. And now we strongly believe that the time has come for us to express our unhappiness to the government.
  
  First and foremost, there should be an immediate freeze on the number of foreigners allowed into the country.
  
  The country now has 5,000,000 residents give or take a few thousand, and the social infrastructure is now bursting at the seams.
  
  Before taking in anymore foreigners, the country’s infrastructure such as public transportation should be upgraded at these new arrivals’ cost, not at locals’ expenses; if they want to come here to earn a living, then they should contribute something to improving the country instead of simply taking from it.
  
  We are often told that foreigners are a buffer who will be the first to be retrenched in a recession. How true is that really? If anything, the reverse is true; tens of thousands of locals have lost their jobs, replaced by foreigners.
  
  After all, in a recession, who would the employer retrench, the foreign scholar whose education he paid for, or the local who paid for his own education?
  
  We are also told that it is in the country’s strategic interests that locals should work in such fields such as construction and shipbuilding instead of depending upon foreigners. Why is this so? Aren’t we always being told that foreigners do such jobs locals shun? And there’s a very good reason why locals shun such jobs too: they’re very dangerous, with high industrial accident rates.
  
  Furthermore, why are foreigners employed in such a strategically vital field such as the utilities industry? Can anyone imagine what would happen to the country should disgruntled foreigners decide to shut the country’s waterworks down because Singapore got into a major diplomatic spat with their homeland? The entire country will grind to a halt from lack of freshwater if that should ever happen.
  
  Next, the authorities should take a good hard look at the quality of the so-called foreign “talent” entering the country.
  
  Nobody in his right mind would object to someone of the caliber of Professor Stephen Hawking being given a job as an NUS lecturer. However, it’s entirely another matter altogether when the country takes in foreigners to fill up posts that can easily be done by locals.
  
  Why on Earth should the country take in HR managers from China, Malaysia or India when this is a post that any suitably qualified local can perform
  
  Moreover, there have been many complaints from locals that these foreign managers discriminate against them at work; what guarantees do we have that they don’t discriminate against locals in favor of their own kind?
  
  We are constantly being told that the country’s only resources are its people, so we should all continuously go for upgrading classes, almost always at our own expense.
  
  Even retrenched people for whom cash flow is a major concern are told to upgrade their skills at their own cost to improve their marketability, but what is the use of skills upgrading when all the good jobs are going to foreigners?
  
  Some of our national leaders have said that local professionals should seek their fortunes overseas as there are plenty of vacancies for them overseas, but good jobs available locally should be reserved for the foreigners as otherwise they would not want to come.
  
  In the first place, doesn’t the government always claim that Singapore is a meritocracy? If it truly is one, then why should good jobs be reserved for foreigners, or even elite scholars for that matter?
  
  Shouldn’t everyone compete for jobs on an equal footing instead? And for that matter, why should local professionals look for good jobs overseas so that foreigners can be enticed by good jobs that are reserved for them here?
  
  Why can’t the foreigners seek their good job opportunities elsewhere instead of here? We are often told that we should allow our parents to move in with us to keep the family unit intact; doesn’t forcing us to seek better prospects overseas run contrary to this? Or are we supposed to uproot our parents from their friends and the land they call home to settle someplace they are unfamiliar with?
  
  In the past, the government has often denounced locals who migrate in search of a better life elsewhere as quitters; that being the case aren’t the so-called foreign “talents” that the country is taking in also quitters? And why are our own people who seek greener pastures elsewhere being condemned as quitters when foreign quitters are welcomed with open arms, especially since it is government policies that are driving the locals out of the country?

   

• Berries tan

  14 Nov 09, 04:22

  Open letter to Prime Minister Lee expressing unhappiness at his pro-foreigner policy – Foreign scholars (Part 2)

  November 13, 2009 by admin01  

  
  Filed under Opinion

   

  Leave a comment

   

  By Tan Keng Leng, Guest Columnist

   

  We are often told that the secret to the US’ success is its ability to attract the best talents from around the world, but even so, companies there that wish to employ foreigners are first required to prove that no American national is able to perform the job the foreigner is being recruited for.

   

  Another frequent argument given is that foreigners bring in valuable experiences that locals lack. That is true only up to a certain point; a middle-aged foreign professional who has worked in a dozen or more countries certainly would fit this description.

   

  However, a 20-something year old China national who has studied here at taxpayers’ expense since kindergarten up to PhD level definitely does not. Whatever knowledge he/she possesses, he/she studied it here, and whatever experience he/she possesses, he/she gained it here.

   

  So what valuable experience does he/she have to contribute to the betterment of the country? And for that matter, is the country even attracting truly talented foreigners at all? We would like to draw your attention to the following GeBiz tenders below:

   

  

  

  Proposal for 2009 EL Bridging Course (Tanjong Katong Girls’ School)

  Objectives:

   

  To help the foreign scholars develop proficiency and confidence in EL so as to be able to adapt to Secondary 3 lessons in English in the lead up to the ‘O’ Levels.

   

  Desired Outcomes/Deliverables

  1. Increased proficiency and confidence in EL
  2. Cultural awareness
  3. Familiarization with  ‘O’ level syllabus, format of EL paper and standards

   

  Course Outline

  1. Oral communications skills
  2. Reading skills
  3. Writing skills
  4. Grammar Usage
  5. Vocabulary building

   

  Commencement date of course

  Mid November 2009 – End December 2009

  Resources

  1. Set and marked written assignments
  2. Vocabulary building exercises
  3. Grammar teaching
  4. Learning Journeys
  5. Multimedia resources

   

  Details of quote to include:

  Cost per scholar per hour: $6.00 per hour

  Number of hours per course: 250hrs

  Number of scholars: 28 – 34

  Number of students per class: 14-17

   

  Curriculum Vitae of the Course Trainers (please attach)

   

  

  ENGLISH LANGUAGE BRIDGING PROGRAM FOR FOREIGN STUDENTS

  ENTERING SEC 3 IN 2010

   

  SPECIFICATION OF DETAILS OF PROGRAM

   

  1. Target group: 6 students from China
  2. Total number of hours of lessons: 200
  3. Duration of program: November – December 2009 (lessons to be carried out over the 9 weeks in Nov – Dec.)
  4. Program Objectives: The program should amply prepare these foreign students for a smooth transition from a Chinese learning environment to the local education scene by teaching them the essential skills to cope with the Secondary 3 ‘O’ level EL Program.
  5. Qualifications of trainer(s): The trainer(s) must have at least a university degree in English Language / English Literature and some experience teaching English Language in a secondary school or to foreign students. The trainer(s) should be patient and encouraging in guiding these students. It would also be ideal if the trainer(s) is conversant in Mandarin. [The trainer(s) should submit his/her/their curriculum vitae to the school for consideration.]
  6. Program Approach: The program must create a conducive learning environment of diverse learning opportunities to hone speaking, reading, listening, and writing skills in the learners. The learners should also be engaged in a series of writing practices which should be graded and which should consist of constructive feedback on how the learners can improve their language competency. The program must include various forms of formative and summative assessment, such that the students’ learning should culminate in their eventual performance at an end-of-program test.

  Are we the only ones, or have others noticed the contradiction in the tenders as well? We are always being told that Singapore is a meritocracy, and that scholarships are handed out only to the best students. Is this really the case here?

   

  After all, if the PRC students benefiting from these programs are truly of scholarly caliber, then shouldn’t they already be sufficiently proficient in English so as not to require these additional lessons?

   

  Conversely, if they require such extensive English lessons just to keep up with locals as implied by the term “bridging program”, then doesn’t it prove that they are unworthy of their scholarships?

   

  Moreover, local students who are good in all subjects except for one or two have to undergo additional tuition lessons paid for by their own parents; why then shouldn’t these PRC students have to pay for their own English tuition lessons as well?

   

  Why should we taxpayers have to foot the bill for them, when we would much rather have the money put to much better use by nurturing talented local students to their fullest potential instead?

  Instead of paying for additional English lessons for these PRC nationals, shouldn’t the government provide more bursaries for needy local children?

   

• Berries tan

  14 Nov 09, 05:25

  敢与贫穷命�抗争的20�女孩留学生�转】
  
  
  --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  
  这几天，圆圆的心情�花儿一样�烂。�过几天就�回中国家乡了。
  
  �新加�留学已有三年，这还是第一次回家。�当和妈妈说起回家，妈妈就会说：钱多烧的，那飞机得需�多少钱 。
  
  圆圆是想念妈妈爸爸和�弟弟的。特别是想起中学�期的时候，在冬日里，枕在妈妈的大腿上，暖暖的阳光�过窄 �的窗�照射到炕上，然��慢慢移到脸上，妈妈就用手��撒在眼�上的阳光，娘俩唠�贴心�，心里就涌现出 甜滋滋的笑。
  
  三年�，圆圆以优异的�绩考上了�点大学。入学�久就被新加�国立大学选拔为全�奖学金得主，直接�新加� 读大学。
  
  因此这样温馨的回忆，也足足��整整三年多了。
  
  今年一定�回去，这是一定的。于是�����妈妈的工作，还撒了一些�慌。
  
  其实，这次回家，�告诉妈妈也行，因为圆圆的主�目的并�是看妈妈，但如果�看看爸爸妈妈和弟弟，总觉得心 里会�泪，虽然�能因为花钱会让妈妈生气。这次回去也就两周，花在国内路途的时间就得四天，也挺折腾人的。
  
  下这么大决心�回去，�是一天两天的决定，这个决心已�下了有�年多了。在这一年多时间里，如果没有这个远 方声音，圆圆真�知�自己怎么能挺过�。
  
  一个22�的纯情少女，这是第一次带�一��忑与激动的心情�与一��里之外的陌生男生��。为了这样的� 忑与激动，圆圆在�期里拼命打工，�天打两份工，�留下两周回国。其实飞机票用�了这么多，但�给妈妈�� 飞机票的钱，妈妈�会觉得回�一次�算。
  
  一个22å²�的多情少女，这是第一次得到男生的关心，虽然仅仅是电å­�邮件ã€�声音和网络视频，但对于圆圆æ�¥è¯´è¿™ å·²ç»�足够了。圆圆也期盼ç�€å’Œè¿™é‡Œèº«è¾¹çš„男生谈谈情，说说心里è¯�，哪怕是普通朋å�‹ä¸€æ ·çš„接触也行。但感觉这里 的男生都当她是通明的。圆圆心里也明白，自己没有一件超过å��元钱的衣æœ�；自己的头å�‘也没拉直；自己身上那个 “å±±”呼呼的感觉还没挥去；更有，这两年早出晚归地打工，闷头去学习，也ä¸�能怪男生注æ„�ä¸�到自己 。
  
  但圆圆心里还是在划弧，中国的�学有的还�如自己也能找到男朋�，怎样都是一个罗�一个�的。特别是国内女 �学��与男�亲密快�的照片，圆圆就�感孤独了。是啊，对于多情的少女，有什么比谈谈情说说爱，更让人激 动与�往的呢，有了爱，贫穷根本�算什么。
  
  圆圆试�和国内大学网站的大学生�天，就认识了一�家乡�城大学男生，正在读大四。男孩是学文科的，但和圆 圆�其谈得�。圆圆虽是学�工科的，但读书很多，看问题�但��也有自己的�地。特别是圆圆的声音很美，如 果你�在她眼�，你甚至怀疑这个好�的声音是从收音机里传�的。
  
  为了这个男生，圆圆甚至给自己的�途都规划好了。因为拿奖学金�绑定三年在新加�工作，于是圆圆就设想：第 一年给弟弟挣足学费；第二年给爸妈挣点养�费；第三年给自己攒�妆。
  
  圆圆是想回国生活的。因为她�知，在这里，自己的感情的�陆点在哪儿，看到想到的都是���的渺茫。圆圆的 情感是丰富细腻的，她的心�是�春�康的。她娓娓��的柔声，说到高兴时眼�里泛起的柔光，你会觉得很亲切 ，善良而高尚。但圆圆的身体好��甚�康，看似微胖有点浮肿，脸色也是暗淡的，站久了会头�，更�敢蹲下， �则，站起�会�得�扶桌�。
  
  圆圆�月有500新�的奖学金，�新加�的第一年�实过得很滋润，虽然第一年她就从奖学金里给在家乡县城� 点中学�校读中学的弟弟寄回了5000人民�。但她还是有足够的钱生活，逛逛乌节路，到处走走逛逛。也有心 ��视一下其她时髦�丽的女孩。
  
  家里的�然�故，让这个那时刚刚20�的�春女孩承担了一切。家里在�僻的中国农�，好的年景家里收入也就 4 5�元人民�。因此�里人都说她家祖�冒�气了，养了个这么争气的姑娘，上大学�花钱还给钱，并且�年还能 供弟弟5000人民�，看样�养姑娘�是赔钱的货，她家农�那里�男轻女�其严�。
  
  好景�长，就在两年�，父亲借别人家的�四轮�（一�农�用的机动车）去乡里集市�东西的路上，把别人撞伤 ，车也撞到大树上。几��的修车费是�钱，这被撞伤的人躺在医院里�是个无底洞。圆圆的爸爸妈妈都是�实巴 交的庄稼人，这一辈�也没��过事儿，这次�被撞蒙了，��房��让地。房�都�值一万人民�，这地让出去 �啥呀？看样��能让弟弟退学了，�年��下八�，一万的。想到弟弟那�明伶�的样�，圆圆哭�请妈妈�� 让弟弟退学。其实，圆圆的爸妈何�愿�弟弟退学，那也是�两�养�的��啊�
  
  但此时，圆圆的爸妈真的没招了，该借的都借到了，满算�也就借到一万多�，先给伤人的家属拿去。这以��怎 么办呀？
  
  圆圆用自己那纤细的肩膀把家里所有的担�都扛了过�，她开导妈妈：我已上大二了，现在英文也过关了，我�以 出去打工，这里打工很好赚的。晚上，圆圆哭了�宿，她很茫然很无助，她�知�怎样打工，到哪里 去打工。
  
  圆圆开始到处找临时工作，无论有没有工作，她�月最低都往家汇款2000多人民�。找�到工作的时节，�月 的生活费�留下100新�。她甚至�以一周���包沾白糖，一天�两个大枕头�包。��圆圆找到一个�甜甜 圈�包的工作，离学校�远。晚上下��，��还会把剩余没�出去的甜甜圈�给圆圆，为此她常常��晚饭，下 ��一次�以��多个甜甜圈，剩下的�以�早�。这样圆圆中��以�两元钱的饭�了。
  
  两年时间里，圆圆总共给家里汇了五万多人民�。
  
  圆圆性格是开朗的，ä¹�观的，从ä¸�éš�è—�自己的观点，也愿æ„�è°ˆè¯�。你è¦�是请她去家里å�ƒé¥­ï¼Œå¥¹ä¼šè¯´ï¼šä¸�行呀，æ�¥å›ž 车费四新å¸�，我能å�ƒä¸¤é¡¿é¥­ã€‚这是事实，饭è�œçš„è´¨é‡�å’Œè�¥å…»å¹¶ä¸�é‡�è¦�，é‡�è¦�的是节约æ¯�一个“é“œæ�¿”和时间。她的 学业一直很优秀，å�¦åˆ™å¥–学金被å�–消了，更得ä¸�å�¿å¤±äº†ã€‚
  
  圆圆打工越�越熟练了。这�，这个�期白天在一个公��文员，晚上继续�她的甜甜圈。
  
  �说大四�毕业论文�能忙些，还�找工作什么的，圆圆的压力是�会很大？也许被撞伤的人也康� 许多��
  
  让我们衷心�愿圆圆�康，快�，爱情美满�
  
  
  
  Source: http://www.nanyangpost.com/forum/showthread.php?t=92540
• Berries tan

  14 Nov 09, 05:26

  Singapore to give scholarships to Filipino students for them to contribute to the Philippines’ development
  November 9, 2009 by admin
  Filed under Top News
  
  Leave a comment
  
  From our Correspondent
  
  The Singapore government is offering scholarships to Filipino students to study in its three universities. All courses are open to the scholars, except for medicine and dentistry.
  
  According to a Filipino daily – the Global Nation, the Singapore Embassy will be accepting scholarship applications for school year 2010-2011 starting 16 November 2009. (Source: Global Nation)
  
  The scholarship covers three to four years of tertiary study depending on the discipline, return airfare, full tuition and a living allowance of $4,300 per year. It has no bond and scholars do not need to work for the Singapore government.
  
  The scholars will be selected based on their academic merit, leadership qualities and potential to contribute to the Philippines’ development.
  
  Besides the Philipines, the Singapore Ministry of Education as well as its three varsities are known to award various scholarships to bright college students in other countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Myanmar, China and India.
  
  The Schools of Engineering of both NUS and NTU have a sizable proportion of students from India and China. (Your correspondent thought he was in China when he had lunch at the NUS Science Canteen recently after visiting a friend who was warded in NUH)
  
  Each year, there are a number of Singapore students who fail to qualify for the course of their choice in the local universities and have to pursue their tertiary education overseas.
  
  While some local undergraduates have to take up part-time jobs to finance their studies, some foreign students studying in Singapore universities on government scholarships offered by MOE have their tuition fees pay for entirely on top of a monthly allowance. They are often enrolled in courses like engineering, computing and science.
  
  Some of these scholars are guaranteed good-paying jobs upon graduation - they are required to work in approved companies by the Singapore government for between three to eight years.
  
  While other scholarships like the one above do not require the scholars to serve the Singapore government, they are permitted to stay on to work. A number of them take up Singapore PR and citizenship eventually.
  
  In contrast, Singapore graduates have to seek out jobs on their own and are burdened with a hefty study loan to repay at the same time. Singapore males are at the losing end compared to foreigners as they have reservist obligations to fulfill yearly.
  
  First-generation PRs and citizens do not have to serve any form of National Service and they are entitled to the same rights and benefits as Singaporeans, not that they amount to much anyway.
  
  Attached below is a list scholarships offered by local universities and MOE to foreign students:
  
  1. National Technological University
  
  2. National University of Singapore
  
  3. ASEAN scholarships (full tuition fees covered with an annual living allowance of $4,200, no bond required)
  
  4. Goh Keng Swee scholarship for Asian students (full tuition fees covered with annual maintenance allowance and one return economy air passage to home country, required to work for three years in approved company in Singapore – essentially a bond)
  
  5. Singapore Undergraduate Scholarship (tuition fees covered with annual maintenance allowance of $6,000 and one return economy air passage to home country, required to work for six years in sponsoring/approved company in Singapore)
  
  6. Singapore scholarship for foreign students (tuition fees covered with annual maintenance allowance of $4,300 and one return economy air passage to home country, no bond required.)
  
  7. C N Yang International undegraduate scholarships (tuition fees covered with annual maintenance allowance of $8,200, guaranteed place in hall of residence for 4 years, 3 years bond with Singapore government.)
  
  Source: The Temasek Review

• longjiangpass

  10 Jan 10, 10:36

  Ya, you see how proud these Filipinos are now? See what they say in their forum here. Why should our Singapore government be so nice to them when they are going to bite back in the end?

• 4sg

  10 Jan 10, 11:20

  Sorry Sinkies or Sillyporeans, the only way the pinky prince will listen is through the ballot box.   
  
  But given the state of affair as it is now, p p has handed enought citizenships to the FT to vote him and his gang into Office for another term. 
  
  And if this is not enough, he will grease your hands during the coming election so that some blur cocks will continue to vote p p and his gang.

• Medicated Oil

  10 Jan 10, 11:39

  The hard core supporters have already suffered enough through the years under the dragon prince.

  As for the foreigners, they are here to make use of the loopholes of the system so that they can move on to the country of the bald eagle.

  It is the simple minded and short sightedness of the cronies that the dragon prince have employed that have created such disadvantages to the local.

  The cronies are the same gene as the recent glass-root leaders who are all self-serving and self-interest.

  With the candy, the cronies would have left long time ago.

  Every one tried to milk the system dry during their term of service.

  So, you will get more rats and more crimes in the near future.

  There are still some naive forumers who keep hoping that some dark knight will come forward to save them through the election.

  This will never happened and that is why the cronies are so confident.

  Just look at the Japanese occupation for reference.

• charlize

  10 Jan 10, 19:39

  These letters were really sent?

   

  Or just hypothetically "sent" via venting in the forums?

   

  Anyway, I think not much difference even if the top officials do read it.

   

  Probably deleted from their emails the next minute.  

• ztreyier

  10 Jan 10, 19:42

  As long as PAP doesn't suffer a defeat in elections, they will never care about public opinion.

• Fugazzi

  10 Jan 10, 21:55

  Yes, Singaporeans have been for much too long deluding themselves they have a responsible, accountable and transparent govt. It is a myth - the reality is that it stinks from all quarters! If they really listened and not hear they would have made a big difference to many lives and Singaporeans would be proud of them as a government or what-have-u.

  The undoing of Singaporeans is the fact that we are mired with a leadership that purports to be a democracy but in reality it is far from it. It is a pseudo-democracy and it is in actuality a dictatorship.
  Also, the incumbent ruling party keep harping on this: that other models or so-called political models is unsuited for Singapore and it must be discouraged at any cost – is utter rubbish and crap! Beware, it is a ploy to stay in power and the rationalize and argument put forth is at best hollow and dubious. Citizens ought to be able to decide and it is thro wise voting. To be dictated to as to what is 'good' for the citizens is not being democratic but telling people that u are not wise, u are immature - 'let me decide'. They have decided enough and ENOUGH IS ENOUGH lar.

  Is not this being enslaved to a system (one-party state) that is choking us in many ways.

  This bullshit about 'Swiss standards' or 'good' years - aiyoh, what an insult! Why is there no longer this mention of attaining Swiss standards. 'It was talking cock' during elections.

  
  Frankly, today Singaporeans are in a relatively unfavorable state in many ways – eg, high cost of living has been oversold as high standard of livng, subsidized HDB flats though claimed to be offered at reasonable prices is in fact most likely untrue and no independent source(s) have yet verified or HDB has never till today released the actual costing or how they came about with this pricing.
  One can add on – medical, transport – all one way traffice. Who are these people who sit in committees or bodies that make recommendations or … people who are yes-man/woman.
  Why? Simply, one-party system is in the favour of the ruling party or govt. It is NEVER AND WILL NEVER be transparent or accoutable to the people(citizens).
  Does Singapore ministries or govt depts have an OMBUDSMEN? Do we have checks n balances? Who is checking whom? Imagine an independent organisation or an oppostion party - it would make a BIG difference.
  These are questions that Singaporeans need to seriously consdier when they vote and not be simply be swayed by short-term money handouts or rebates. All of us know , ti will eventaully be included (hidden) though in price escalation/increases in medical,tranport, …. add on
  Also, the FT (foreign 'talent' in quotes cos they defined and decided which seems so shallow) policy is not in the favour of SIngaporeans but to the advantage of the govt. Do other countries allow foreigners to take up PR/citizenship so VERY easily and facilitate them and what is worse is that Singaporeans who were born here and in some ways directy/indirectly conytributed to the country have to COMPETE for jobs, schools and who knows what else is to come. Utter shame that it has come to this.
  The benefit to the citizens is a mere trickle effect. It is more of a political tool to leverage (and benefit) during elections. Singaporeans have been sacrificed and are being used as pawns for political expediency.
  By ignoring the realities we are unwittingly perpetuating' tyranny'. The crime of 'tyranny' would persist as long as we are complicit and stay non-chalant to this charade.

  Singaporeans, need to wake up and disallow these state of affairs to persist and seriously consider a two-party system or multi-party system.

  Vote and vote for a CHANGE, BIG changes.

   

• Fantagf

  10 Jan 10, 22:02

  Dear pm lhl

  Please do us all a favour, please step down asap.   REason:  ever since you become pm, life has been tough and it is not getting better, it has gotten from worse to worst.

  Please be kind to us, please step down to allow us happiness.

• zenden9

  10 Jan 10, 22:08

  Next year is 2011... One more year to go.

  I hope more contender can really form up and challenge all GRC area. I sure all local citizen will give their best choice of candidate.

• ztreyier

  10 Jan 10, 22:11

  Originally posted by Fugazzi:

  Yes, Singaporeans have been for much too long deluding themselves they have a responsible, accountable and transparent govt. It is a myth - the reality is that it stinks from all quarters! If they really listened and not hear they would have made a big difference to many lives and Singaporeans would be proud of them as a government or what-have-u.

  The undoing of Singaporeans is the fact that we are mired with a leadership that purports to be a democracy but in reality it is far from it. It is a pseudo-democracy and it is in actuality a dictatorship.
  Also, the incumbent ruling party keep harping on this: that other models or so-called political models is unsuited for Singapore and it must be discouraged at any cost – is utter rubbish and crap! Beware, it is a ploy to stay in power and the rationalize and argument put forth is at best hollow and dubious. Citizens ought to be able to decide and it is thro wise voting. To be dictated to as to what is 'good' for the citizens is not being democratic but telling people that u are not wise, u are immature - 'let me decide'. They have decided enough and ENOUGH IS ENOUGH lar.

  Is not this being enslaved to a system (one-party state) that is choking us in many ways.

  This bullshit about 'Swiss standards' or 'good' years - aiyoh, what an insult! Why is there no longer this mention of attaining Swiss standards. 'It was talking cock' during elections.

  
  Frankly, today Singaporeans are in a relatively unfavorable state in many ways – eg, high cost of living has been oversold as high standard of livng, subsidized HDB flats though claimed to be offered at reasonable prices is in fact most likely untrue and no independent source(s) have yet verified or HDB has never till today released the actual costing or how they came about with this pricing.
  One can add on – medical, transport – all one way traffice. Who are these people who sit in committees or bodies that make recommendations or … people who are yes-man/woman.
  Why? Simply, one-party system is in the favour of the ruling party or govt. It is NEVER AND WILL NEVER be transparent or accoutable to the people(citizens).
  Does Singapore ministries or govt depts have an OMBUDSMEN? Do we have checks n balances? Who is checking whom? Imagine an independent organisation or an oppostion party - it would make a BIG difference.
  These are questions that Singaporeans need to seriously consdier when they vote and not be simply be swayed by short-term money handouts or rebates. All of us know , ti will eventaully be included (hidden) though in price escalation/increases in medical,tranport, …. add on
  Also, the FT (foreign 'talent' in quotes cos they defined and decided which seems so shallow) policy is not in the favour of SIngaporeans but to the advantage of the govt. Do other countries allow foreigners to take up PR/citizenship so VERY easily and facilitate them and what is worse is that Singaporeans who were born here and in some ways directy/indirectly conytributed to the country have to COMPETE for jobs, schools and who knows what else is to come. Utter shame that it has come to this.
  The benefit to the citizens is a mere trickle effect. It is more of a political tool to leverage (and benefit) during elections. Singaporeans have been sacrificed and are being used as pawns for political expediency.
  By ignoring the realities we are unwittingly perpetuating' tyranny'. The crime of 'tyranny' would persist as long as we are complicit and stay non-chalant to this charade.

  Singaporeans, need to wake up and disallow these state of affairs to persist and seriously consider a two-party system or multi-party system.

  Vote and vote for a CHANGE, BIG changes.

  You have a clear mind about PAP. You don't have any sort of illusions about PAP.
  

  That is good. What influenced you to have such level of clarity about PAP Fugazzi? Some people who dislike PAP still have illusions. They think that if we vote in some opposition, that will be okay or PAP voter percentage should drop.

  That is naive.

  That is like saying give a verbal warning to a spammer on sgforums and the spammer will stop spamming.

  The only way is to destroy the spammer.

• 4sg

  10 Jan 10, 22:28

  Originally posted by Fugazzi:

  Yes, Singaporeans have been for much too long deluding themselves they have a responsible, accountable and transparent govt. It is a myth - the reality is that it stinks from all quarters! If they really listened and not hear they would have made a big difference to many lives and Singaporeans would be proud of them as a government or what-have-u.

  The undoing of Singaporeans is the fact that we are mired with a leadership that purports to be a democracy but in reality it is far from it. It is a pseudo-democracy and it is in actuality a dictatorship.
  Also, the incumbent ruling party keep harping on this: that other models or so-called political models is unsuited for Singapore and it must be discouraged at any cost – is utter rubbish and crap! Beware, it is a ploy to stay in power and the rationalize and argument put forth is at best hollow and dubious. Citizens ought to be able to decide and it is thro wise voting. To be dictated to as to what is 'good' for the citizens is not being democratic but telling people that u are not wise, u are immature - 'let me decide'. They have decided enough and ENOUGH IS ENOUGH lar.

  Is not this being enslaved to a system (one-party state) that is choking us in many ways.

  This bullshit about 'Swiss standards' or 'good' years - aiyoh, what an insult! Why is there no longer this mention of attaining Swiss standards. 'It was talking cock' during elections.

  
  Frankly, today Singaporeans are in a relatively unfavorable state in many ways – eg, high cost of living has been oversold as high standard of livng, subsidized HDB flats though claimed to be offered at reasonable prices is in fact most likely untrue and no independent source(s) have yet verified or HDB has never till today released the actual costing or how they came about with this pricing.
  One can add on – medical, transport – all one way traffice. Who are these people who sit in committees or bodies that make recommendations or … people who are yes-man/woman.
  Why? Simply, one-party system is in the favour of the ruling party or govt. It is NEVER AND WILL NEVER be transparent or accoutable to the people(citizens).
  Does Singapore ministries or govt depts have an OMBUDSMEN? Do we have checks n balances? Who is checking whom? Imagine an independent organisation or an oppostion party - it would make a BIG difference.
  These are questions that Singaporeans need to seriously consdier when they vote and not be simply be swayed by short-term money handouts or rebates. All of us know , ti will eventaully be included (hidden) though in price escalation/increases in medical,tranport, …. add on
  Also, the FT (foreign 'talent' in quotes cos they defined and decided which seems so shallow) policy is not in the favour of SIngaporeans but to the advantage of the govt. Do other countries allow foreigners to take up PR/citizenship so VERY easily and facilitate them and what is worse is that Singaporeans who were born here and in some ways directy/indirectly conytributed to the country have to COMPETE for jobs, schools and who knows what else is to come. Utter shame that it has come to this.
  The benefit to the citizens is a mere trickle effect. It is more of a political tool to leverage (and benefit) during elections. Singaporeans have been sacrificed and are being used as pawns for political expediency.
  By ignoring the realities we are unwittingly perpetuating' tyranny'. The crime of 'tyranny' would persist as long as we are complicit and stay non-chalant to this charade.

  Singaporeans, need to wake up and disallow these state of affairs to persist and seriously consider a two-party system or multi-party system.

  Vote and vote for a CHANGE, BIG changes.

   

  We started with a social contract with PAP. We scratched PAP's back and PAP scratched our backs.
  
  Along the way, PAP realized that the scratching need not go both ways, PAP only need to ensure we continue to scratch its back - enough.
  
  Just see how Lim Sway Sway talked in Insead can make one's blood boil - businessmen first, 20% foreigners as union members, no to retrenchment of foreigners as a first resort and blah blah.    

• Fugazzi

  10 Jan 10, 23:45

  ztreyier

   cos they are no longer leaders but pretending to be one now. honestly - 10 or 15 years ago  PAP was a party that was trustworthy and sincere. They were not perfect but they were listening and were willing to talk to citizens of all levels. Now they talk down, dictate and arrogate ability and moreover assume that only they are clever. Well, cleverness is not intelligence lar. It is their elitism - their nemesis

   

  Today, sadly it is simply a 'wayang party' (i borrowed this) - which i interpret as no longer trustworthy, reliable and simply out of touch with the common man. When one alienates the masses and try to hoodwink by short-sighted policies/legislation or .... n suppress the lies by controlled propaganda,the truth of ... will sooner or later surface.

  What goes up must come down.

  The inexorable slide is happening on the slippery side of truth! 

   

  PS:  one need not rely or trust the mainstream media - in many ways one can be the media

• charlize

  11 Jan 10, 10:17

  These days, the government will say they favour citizens 1 year before elections.

   

  And after the elections, go back to favouring foreigners until the next election.

   

  It's a cycle.