Good day folks. Today i shall enter my reply to kheng meng’s counter on the GE, but before that just some side stuff.

I just returned from an awesome trip to vietnam. I shall elaborate and talk more about this trip at a later posting, i shall just leave it aside for now, just to say its awesome!

During my trip, i learnt of great news that Barack Obama has destroyed and remove the man that is Osama bin laden, the head of al Qaeda, a symbol of terrorism in our world. This marks a great victory for all of humanity and also for Obama. He has achieved what his predecessors cannot and has showed great leadership skills and abilities, proving that he is a worthy president of the most powerful country in the world. His decision against releasing photos of bin laden’s body is also a good one. To release the photos may trivialise the event, turning it into an argument of the usage of violence, instead of the symbolic meaning this was suppose to be. Anyway public opinion of Obama has surged since the news, and we shall celebrate and rejoice.

Lastly i just want to share a GE related posting from my friend Daryl Yong. This is his link on facebook. http://www.facebook.com/notes/daryl-yong/my-thoughts-on-ge2011/10150276681229152   Feel free to share it.

Reply to Counter

Housing

Alright i shall start the reply proper. Here is KM’s link. http://theloneentity.wordpress.com/2011/05/01/general-elections-counter-reply-to-jack/

KM suggest that HDB builds more smaller flats in order to deal with the problem of supply of housing in Singapore. A worthy suggestion, except i have certain issues with it. First of all to build smaller flats for our citizens may suggest that they only deserve to live in smaller flats, which though well designed may still indicate a reduction in the standard of living. Everyone wishes to live in bigger and more spacious homes. I am not suggesting we give everyone what they want, but rather allow the market to decide what kind of flats should be built according to the demand. Secondly, having smaller flats may deter young couples from wanting to expand their family. This is against the government’s plan to increase the fertility rate of our populace.

At the end of the day, we come back to the same board which i have talked about earlier. We have limited land. No matter how innovative or creative or tolerant we can get, whether its building taller buildings or smaller flats, its still the same thing in the end. We face a real shortage of land that cannot be dealt with in the long term using these solutions. Ultimately Singapore can only support a set number of people, and the determination of who should and can stay in Singapore should be based on how valuable that person is to his country.

KM then proceeds to talk about land valuation and how difficult it is to value land. I agree with his assertions and therefore will suggest allowing the market to handle it. The market works effectively in determining the price of land base on demand and supply. Taking into account the price of land of mature estates can give a good estimate of how to charge for land for the new flats. The problem with pegging it to the land it was acquired is a little warped in logic. This is because throughout all this time we can expect the value to have changed quite a bit, especially since the population of our country has increased so dramatically over the past few years. Naturally land will cost much more than the past, and rightly so.

I agree with KM that the valuation of the land should be transparent, but not according to KM’s methods. The question of fairness in pricing is subjective. Pricing ultimately tells us the value of a certain commodity or resource and the best way for that to be accurately reflected is to allow the value mechanism inherent in good and fundamentally sound economic concepts run its natural course. As to whether the price obtain is fair is totally up to a variety of opinions. Pricing has to be accurate before we can even start to debate if it is fair, and even if it is not, proper procedures must be followed to ensure market regulation is controlled so as not to affect the value mechanism.

Assuming that the profits of land is indeed used to pump up our reserves, it is a good thing. Our reserves allow us to help the poor and to run programs that will benefit the society and community. All this assuming that no premium is charged above the market value for land in the first place.

KM again says that there is no relation between the resale and first time buyers market and claims that there is no effect from the actions in either market on one another. I beg to differ from this point of view. As i said in my earlier post, every Singaporean will be at some point a first time buyer, so a huge portion of the resale market maybe from the first time buyers market in the past. Additionally he has also failed to address my example of how people will be willing to sell off their flats cheaply in the resale market in order to earn a quick buck. This will definitely put downward pressure of prices and values of the flats in the resale market.

My argument on MOP remains the same. It maybe used to regulate the market and to keep out unwanted problems, but ultimately we need a stronger and better solution.

I agree to KM’s suggestions with regards to PR housing, just that the problem maybe that it is difficult to find a good balance between how much should be allocated to them. May i also suggest keeping the same market for PRs and locals, except that the PRs have to pay perhaps about 10% above the market rate. This will ensure a value mechanism and at the same time give singaporeans an advantage for pricing, but yet not too strong an advantage so as to remind them to work hard so as not to lose the race. Ultimately the handicap is 10%. This handicap should be kept as small as possible in order to reduce the distortion to market principles.

On the discussion on CPF, the thing is that most Singaporeans have already invested a huge portion of their savings, retirement or otherwise, into their flats, allowing the value to drop is not a good thing. Just to add, i have seen many forum posts on how the value of housing is bullshit because they cannot obtain that value unless they sell their flat, and that is not possible because then they will have to buy another flat. The thing is, although the rise is paper value, there are ways to tap into this value without selling your house. Reverse mortgage is just one example, others include using your house as collateral for loans or as leverage. The number of options can really be huge. The problem is just that many singaporeans lack the financial know how.

KM then went on to talk about inheritance. In my opinion, how a person wants to deal with his assets is his business. If he wants to leave it for inheritance then he should have proper planning to ensure that. How can he expect to have his cake and eat it. To conduct reverse mortgage and expect to leave an inheritance?! The number of financial options out there as i said is amazingly huge and i feel that how a person wishes to construct his own financial planning is up to his personal discretion. Ultimately you get to choose your path. Consult an estate planning attorney for more information and advice.

The rise of housing prices in singapore reflects the value of staying in singapore. It is a good sign that People want to stay here and for good reasons. In any good economy one will expect rising housing prices. Of course we need to keep it in check, but once we remove elements of speculation the remaining becomes the intrinsic value which we should not distort too much. This so called illness KM speaks of is inevitable.

Foreign Talent/Workers

NS: the reason why i quoted JFK because it holds deeper meaning than what appears to be on the surface. We cannot and should not impose NS on foreigners because that will be ridiculous. How can we expect others to take care of our national interest? Singapore needs to be protected. This problem can be properly managed by dealing with manpower. Perhaps better management of manpower by the defence department could solve such issues, however NS cannot and should not be removed.

For KM point 3 is the exact point im trying to make about FT/FW in the first place. Because foreigners can ask for lower wages, this will pressure singaporeans to either work harder or more creatively to improve productivity. If KM is just going to focus on the problems on singaporeans then this discussion is not very fair afterall. Foreigners also face problems like adapting to a new life, as well as other personal problems unique to each individual we may not know about.

I am not suggesting that singaporeans are not competing among themselves. My point is very simple. If we want to be world class we need to compete with the world and not just among ourselves. This healthy competition will encourage us to work better and keep us constantly on our feet. I am afraid that protectionistic principles may cause slack to enter and works like a slippery slope where people will keep demanding more of such policies.

Grow and Share

KM is suggesting that it takes a lot of money to invest. This is not true. In fact from Eric Tyson’s book to personal finance, he claims that it is the time that matters more than the capital you have. Starting young at 17 and investing about 1 dollar a day can reap you a very good profit compared to investing much more at a late age at perhaps 40. This is due to the magic of compounding returns. Shrewd investing also helps. I shall not give specifics here, but feel free to check it out. I am against investing on others behalf, especially we are talking about a huge portion of savings and a nationalised program. This is because each investor has different objectives which will be difficult for a national program to address. Also investment managers are expensive, which will reduce returns of investments. People may also demand good returns unreasonably because they don’t know how investing works but simply demand the profits.

Transport

Market distortion is actually market regulation and i support its use. However i believe that it be used as little as possible in order to maintain the value mechanism that distributes resources base on how deserving that person is. Regulation is important because if some people don’t play by the rules, the value mechanism itself will suffer from distortion. This will affect its accuracy. With regards to cars, the COE ensures that our roads will not get congested. If there is no COE, the number of cars in singapore will depend on the global demand and supply, without taking into account any form of land shortage consideration whatsoever, disregarding an important element in ascertaining the cost of driving in singapore. I agree that land supply may not only be affected by Nature, but it is the major element. If singapore was as big as Canada or Russia, maybe the cost of land will be cheaper.

For taxis. KM said that cars stay in CBD all day, whereas taxis go in and out. This may sound like as if it were reducing congestion. However the reality is that most of these cars KM is talking about is parked in the car parks, and not along the roads. Taxis however like to loiter at road sides to solicit business. They also have a habit of stopping illegally at the road side to pick up passengers. This will cause greater congestion. This will also encourage those who already take the MRT to work to take taxis instead due to the lower cost. Private car drivers to work already pay the ERP when entering the CBD. There is no reason why the sudden lack of need to pay ERP will appeal to them, especially since the cost of cars are far more than ERP itself. Moreover they might think it a waste of money since they already own cars.

Electoral Situation

As said i agree with having more voices in politics. However these voices must contain good value and substance. A brief sweep of the current opposition tells me that save for a few good ones, the rest are really just trash. If we allow trash into parliament, they will waste time and effort by talking and adding trash. There is also nothing to say that opposition parties will work together as a unifying voice. Already there are conflicts with regards to which party will contest which constituency. I shall just end this by saying that the time is not yet right to open the gates.

Good day

Recently i received a reply from my army pal kheng meng with regards to my previous posting on the GE. This is my reply to his article before i fly off to vietnam on holiday tomorrow.

Here is his link. http://theloneentity.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/general-elections-2011-my-view/

Housing

In 2008 the world suffered a major financial collapse. America was badly hit. The housing bubble there had burst! The cause of the problem was attributed to banks being allowed to go about giving away loans freely, without a care in the air except with regards to their ludicrously high pay checks. Since then, the states and the world at large have learnt their lesson that too much of anything can potentially be bad. I also believe in a need to regulate any free market. I guess what kheng meng and i disagree is to what extent it has to be regulated. For me, i will try my utter best to restore and protect the inherent value mechanism in a free market, but intervening to ensure that the fundamentals stay sound. Nothing more. Now let’s get down to the issue.

Kheng meng suggested that we build more flats/houses. My reply is that yes we can build more, but not much more. The fact is clear from day one. Singapore is just too small, we have little land. Building taller and underground is again a short term solution. You can only build as low as the ground ends and as tall as perhaps the tallest building in the world, but all of these will cost lots of money.

SDP wants to peg the cost of housing to the cost price, except they have a rather warped idea of what is the cost. When you buy a house, you also buy the land its seating on. This principle is universal, its not just in singapore. The reason is because you are depriving the land of whatever opportunity cost it might have. IE. what it could have been used for otherwise. Most of opposition proposal asks for government to make discounts for the land. The question is that how much discount is a fair one? And if i do give a discount, how can i be sure you won’t start asking for more until it becomes free. Kheng meng claims that its only for first time buyers. But isn’t everyone once a first time buyer? you can’t skip the first time and immediately be 2nd. Essentially this proposal will affect every buyer that still has not bought their flat from now till eternity, and that is a lot of people.

Kheng meng then continue to suggest more short-term solutions like change MOP to 10 years. My question is why not 20, or 30 or maybe 99? This restriction of buying and selling only aims to lock people into their homes. Many people want to upgrade their homes as they pursue their dreams. Sure it will counter speculation, but how can you be sure such a move will not affect these people who really wants to live there. In my opinion the government’s move to restrict each person to 1 property makes more sense because then that will be the only house they can live in, and not bought for investment.

Secondly to lock PRs out of public housing is a rather unfriendly concept. Those PRs may actually be of good use to our country and they need a place to stay. If we want to control the number of PRs it should be at the gate, and not when they are already in the country. This will only make their life difficult. I agree with KM’s last point on renting out the HDB.

I wish to add in certain discoveries i have made with regards to this issue. Singaporeans should not allow their flats to be devalued. There are many questions right now about housing being expensive and wiping out their CPF monies. With the CPF monies gone how do they retire. Well the thing is, the money isn’t gone, its just moved into the house. The house as an asset is a good thing. It allows you to practise this wonderful concept called the reverse mortgage. The reverse mortgage is similar to a loan, except its the bank that is paying you the money. Essentially you are banking on the value of your house to gain a loan. Reverse mortgages are very good for retirees who are asset rich and cash poor. If however their property value tanks, they can no longer use their house as a collateral or leverage, which means this valuable avenue is closed out to them.

Why i think that the opposition’s proposal will affect the resale market. Every house in the resale market comes once from the first-time buyers market. Simple example: if you buy a baseball card that is worth 10$ for 1$ and you are a greedy person, you will not mind selling the card for 8$ in order to get quick cash, and its potentially 200k we are talking about. Of course the opposition can always talk about MOP again, of which i will refer back to the above. MOP locks a person into living in that house. That asset becomes a golden prison ball, you know those huge heavy balls that prevents prisoners from running? its just like that.

KM then ask how long my solution will take to give results. I will be honest and say that it will take a long time, but its the only viable solution. Long term solutions are not easy to achieve i must say. We cannot relinquish our commitment just because its too difficult or people are too urgent. Patience is a virtue.

Foreign talents/workers 

KM points out the fairness issue. The thing is that its incredibly difficult to be absolutely fair. I would just have to say that i hope the quality education that the government’s investment in education and the people’s resolve to work hard will make up for whatever shortcomings. Everyone inevitably suffer from some vicissitudes of fate.

1. CPF. Maybe they can make cpf contributions optional, but that will be to our detriment. You can expect that those of the poor will largely be cut, because the companies aren’t really competing for them. Whereas the rich talents will probably receive more due to companies competing for them. CPF also helps for retirement.

2. For NS, i just can’t help but quote thomas jefferson.

“Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.” – Thomas Jefferson

3. High cost of living. I agree with KM that this is out of our reach. Oil and food reserves are based overseas and not singapore.

KM has not address my argument that if we were to bar foreigners from doing jobs that singaporeans want and can do, won’t singaporeans get lazy/incompetent?

Grow and share

You know what they say. Give a man a fish and he won’t go hungry for a day, teach him to fish, and he won’t go hungry at all for life.

The reason why the growth isn’t trickling down is answered in my first post. The poor are not very financially literate. They rarely invest in stocks and otherwise. If they bought the STI, they might have obtained a 8-10% return. I think that my proposal on a nation wide financial literacy campaign is the best way forward. We need to teach people how to stake a claim for themselves in our economy.

Transport

KM thinks i am contradicting myself. I think he has misunderstood me. Let me ask you something. Isn’t controlling the supply of COE is the same thing as having the limited land we have to build houses on? The reason why we dun need COE for land is because you CANNOT IMPORT LAND LIKE YOU IMPORT CARS. Our country given its limited land can only support a number of vehicles. The quota of COE reflects that inherent limit. It does not affect the economic cause of demand and supply because this supply control is base on the land, and not base on the value of the vehicle itself. After controlling for land limit, then allow the value mechanism to act so that only the deserving will own the vehicles for whatever value the people aim to use it for. Without capping COE at a limit, there might be a case whereby the number of vehicles surpass the amount our land and roads can support. This is exactly what i meant when what is the point of having cars and roads when you cannot move on it.

KM claims that we should give taxi drivers discounts for ERP because that would drive demand for taxis but does not justify why this should be the case. First of all i am against vehicles and stuff because i believe they destroy the environment. Reducing ERP for taxis will make the place congested because taxis will then make a beeline for it, and even if they get no customers they might just keep going round or park somewhere in it.

I agree with KM’s post on public transport. And i would like to suggest staggering work timings. This will allow people to go to work at different timings. Even better, work from home if possible. A national movement will be a good idea.

Last Thoughts

What KM said about giving the opposition a chance is a good idea. However i still stand by the need for politicians to be elected base on their merit and good ideas and contribution rather than just because they are part of a contingency plan or exit strategy. This will undermine the quality of our future opposition party. What will stop them then from claiming their right for seats in parliament simply by virtue of being the other choice.

Good day

Today i shall be touching on the policies for the upcoming exciting General Elections. The contents, opinions and views are entirely of my own and i welcome discussion of these policies and yonder for the betterment of our nation. For all intents and purposes i am supporting the People’s Action Party. These are the points i shall discuss today.

Policies to discuss

Housing

Foreign Talents/workers

Grow and share

IR

Policies for the poor

Policies for the middle class

Policies for the senior citizens

Transportation policies

Issues to discuss

What we stand to lose

What we could possibly gain

How we should restructure our thinking and mental paradigm

Housing

Housing is one of the hot topic issues in this year’s GE, and for obvious reasons. Housing in singapore is becoming particularly expensive. This can be expected due to our land scarcity hence leading to a lack of supply. Demand for housing has also shot up, due to the increase in our population and of foreign talents/workers coming into our country to live, work and play. Demand and supply controls the pricing for housing, and hence places an inevitable pressure, pushing the prices of housing, even HDBs into the sky.

Now let’s start off with our fundamental human rights.

“Every woman, man, youth and child has the human right to a secure place to live, which is fundamental to living in dignity, to physical and mental health, and to overall quality of life. The human right to housing is explicitly set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and other widely adhered to international human rights treaties and Declarations. Despite widespread recognition of the human right to adequate housing, the UN Centre for Human Settlements estimates that over 1 billion people worldwide live in inadequate housing, and 100 million are homeless.”

Human beings have right to shelter, but as to quality we shall leave it at reasonable. It is absurd to expect a superb standard of living or shelter if one does not shell out more money than just what is given as a right as that would mean a superb standard of living for all. The HDB has been around for a while, and has received global recognition for providing the common folk with a quality standard of shelter and living. This must be attributed to the people who had the foresight and strategic capability to pull this remarkable feat.

Already the government is doing well to cool the market in order to reduce speculation. The remaining prices are simply the indication that prices of homes today simply cannot be as low as in the past. Times have changed, and it is inevitable given the huge population boom that the prices will rise. I believe that the best way to deal with such a problem would be to increase the incomes of the people, thereby allowing them to be able to afford these homes.

The Opposition’s Solution

The workers’ party have introduced a ridiculous proposal of which until now i have no idea how it could possibly work in a fair manner. The party has proposed that Housing prices be pegged at median income levels.

“The Workers’ Party said its proposal to price new flats according to median incomes will have a “minimum impact” on the resale market, because the resale market attracts not just first-time homebuyers.
In addition, new HDB flats are subject to strict criteria before they can be bought and sold, which limits the spill over effect on resale prices.” –CNA

Are they trying to say that the policy they are trying to effect aims to have a “limited” impact? I don’t think it is at all wise to introduce any policy, be it housing or otherwise to an electorate and then say it will have a LIMITED effect or impact. Why not introduce a unique, innovative policy that will have great impact and change the way it works? That is because the current way is possibly the best way it can work. The laws of economics is very clear. Demand and supply. Restriction of buying and selling is a short term strategy, it will not serve a long term problem. People need to have more income to afford more expensive houses. Reducing prices to meet low income is the reverse. These will place no pressure on the incomes of people and where would we be then?

The capitalist system inherent in our system is what i stand by. We cannot and should not turn socialistic. Dwight David Eisenhower said

“When the shallow critics denounce the profit motive inherent in our system of private enterprise, they ignore the fact that it is an economic support of every human right we possess and without it, all rights would soon disappear”

The rules of economics help apportion our resources to the most deserving, there should not be any excuse for incompetence. Natural itself practises natural selection. Try as you might you cannot escape its jaws. However with a quality system, we can ensure that everyone gets a fair chance, and that no one will live below what we deem reasonable.

Example: A person in Vietnam earns an average of US$50 a month.

Previously he was earning US$20 a month. That shows an increment of US$30 a month after a few years. Not too bad in terms of percentage. Now lets see how this matters to us.

Almost everyone in the world is making money all the time. As they earn they keep or store their money in their bank or home or piggy bank. As the economy improves, their earning power increases and their life get better. Now when we choose to apply downward pressure to housing prices as suppose to upward pressure in incomes, we may one day realise that the pay of that Vietnam worker maybe the same as ours. Perhaps 5000USD? But by then their standard of living will be higher than us due to their abundant land. Inflation of prices is natural in all growing economies. As everyone earns money, the value of housing will inadvertently rise. This is due to the lack of land we have, we cannot go building much more so quickly to arrest demand. The best way forward is to grow our income in real terms and not just in nominal terms. To place pressure on housing prices instead is the wrong method and cannot last the long term.

Some opponents may then argue that since land is limited in Singapore and that the demand is constantly growing, won’t there be a case whereby the land can no longer support the demand? This is true. This will be the time housing will be so expensive that people who cannot afford these homes have to move out of Singapore. To ensure that Singaporeans are not kicked out of their country, certain policies are already being applied. For example, quality education to ensure that we are able to compete well and win the rat race at the end.

However we cannot practise too much protectionism as this will cause the value mechanism inherent in the demand and supply concept to ruin. The incomes given to an employee is after all an indication of his/her productivity or use to that company. By giving huge pays to useless/incompetent workers who are there by virtue of being Singaporean, we face huge perils regarding our future. The value mechanism must stay. Meritocracy will retain the best for us and remove the incompetent or undeserving. Of course we must give every Singaporean a good and fair chance at it. That means a quality education regardless of incomes and also retraining facilities. A continuing education scheme, learning for life scheme should be implemented. We cannot escape the rat race, but we can make it easier for our fellow Singaporeans.

Foreign Talent/Workers

This topic is very hot. I will just put in my views and may add on to it as time passes.

My view is very simple and straightforward. It is based on good fundamental views and logic.

First of all, i do not support at protectionist policy. America at some point practised protectionism and was hurt because of it. If a big country like the states can get hurt, what more of our small dependent country? Foreign workers are necessary and foreign talents bring much needed competition. Simply put, if you are competent, why should you worry.

Many people are making many stupid comments and complaints about their workplace being flooded with Foreign Talents/workers. A few questions. Are you working at an MNC? If you are, what does the word Multi-national mean to you? If you are not working at an MNC, you would probably realise that our country relies heavily on the world at large to survive. There is nothing wrong with employers wanting to create a microcosm of the world at the workplace to simulate and encourage that particular environment. Having a world level workplace ensures that the products and services they provide are in the common interests of the world.

By being protectionistic, MNCs and companies may move out of Singapore. Jobs will be lost, your competition maybe gone, but not because the foreigners are gone, but because you don’t even have a job to compete with or for.

Once again i must implore you to consider well JFK. “ Do not pray for easy lives, pray to be stronger men.”

The only proper way to chase away foreigners is by fair competition. That is to win the competition and to take that job away from the FT who may otherwise be in it. This will keep the people of our country in check and ensure that they will be constantly pressured to better themselves and not get lazy out of a sudden. However some foreigners are always desired to reflect a cosmopolitan and dynamic society. As i always ask my friends, weren’t we once foreigners/immigrants ourselves?

Grow and Share Scheme

The grow and share scheme got me $400 dollars this year. Awesome stuff. However down to business.

The reason why there can be such a scheme at all is due to the growth of our country’s economy. If there is no growth, there cannot be anything to share. Many opposition claim that the gains of economic growth are not flowing down to the rank and file workers. This maybe true, but the situation is improving through such schemes as well as others i will touch on later.

Most importantly, i feel that the reason rank and file workers are not enjoying the gains is because they are not staking a claim in our country’s economy. One way to do this is to buy the STI which would give good returns of possibly 8-10%. Good financial literacy also could help. A nation wide scheme on this could really be useful.

Integrated Resorts

The integrated resorts have really given us much to talk about. For me i feel that it has become a national symbol and an awesome addition to singapore. If not it will be too boring. As to whether it encourages social problems i would just have to say that the problems would have existed with/without the ir. For example if Johor were to create a casino just across the causeway.

The way to solve a problem is not to avoid the problem but to deal with it headon. Just because there is a possibility of gambling addiction does not mean we should close out casinos directly. The thing is learning to deal with such vicissitudes.

Other than that, proper checks will ensure that more benefits rather than problems will come from the IRs.

Policies for the poor, middle class and senior citizens

Our country has a few safety nets in place to ensure that those who fall through the cracks will have a chance at coming back strong. Policies include things like workfare, WDA retraining, financial aid, educational bursaries, pocket money fund, etc. etc.

I shall not elaborate too much. I feel that the government has more or less got it covered, but of course there is no too much for these schemes. We can never do too much for the under-privileged, however our fundamentals are sound and we can go far with them.

Why a minimum wage cannot work

Recently there have been discussions on minimum wage. My stand is clear that it will not work.

First of all a minimum wage cannot be too low as that will defeat the purpose. The minimum wage aims to destroy the economic element of demand and supply which attributes value to resources, hence how can one even purport to say that they will adjust the min wage according to the health of the economy when you deny its usefulness? Such artificial adjustment will spoil the mechanism and problems will arise. For example, a minimum wage that is high will pose costs to a company. That company may end up moving off to another country, hence taking the many jobs away from Singapore. In my opinion, i’d rather have a low paying job than none at all. Most people only think of the benefits they stand to gain, but not consider that their gain is at the expense of their friends. Furthermore what can such a policy aim to achieve? And at what costs?

Today as we enter more volatile and tumultuous times, we can expect inflation and health of economy to change very quickly and often. Adjusting the min wage many times will cost admin charges and companies may struggle to keep up to date. These charges and wasted time could have been used to increase the incomes of the general population. The minimum wage also as an inevitable element of causing people to slack. They know that they can do so as their pay will by law, not drop below a certain level. This will reduce productivity! The best way forward to raise the income of the poor is still to elevate their productivity and hence their incomes. Such a rise is intrinsic, not artificial. It shows personal improvement and will bring great satisfaction to any a worker’s life, rather than know that someone had to pass a law to do the same, and that anyone regardless of how hardworking they were to have benefited. Don’t even get me started on the slippery slope theory.

As far as senior citizens are concerned, i understand that the old in singapore are generally cash or asset rich. Most issues deal with quality of retirement life. Such issues are not pressing and hence i shall leave comments to a future opportunity.

Transport

i will not discuss ERP, COE and issues pertaining to the same. I find the arguments against their existence pathetic and downright absurd. These policies are here to ensure that congestion do not occur. If one is not convince, just go to Vietnam to take a look. What is the point of having roads or vehicles when you cannot move on it…..

I shall deal with public transport. Public transport has recently started to gain a reputation of being expensive. I would like to say that this rise is again inevitable. This is due to the world’s supply of oil. Oil supplies in the world are limited and with libya going to war, the instabilities have caused the price hike of oil. The price hike hence cannot be avoided. Other than that i do agree that there could possibly be more trains during peak hours. I do however applaud the transport ministry’s efforts to continue to build mrt lines all over the country and maybe someday most of us will take the public transport than private vehicles and be proud of it. Cheers!

The Electorate

I do not really know the current demographics of this electorate. However i do believe there are a number of GEN Y young voters and first time voters out there. This group of voters together with some old timers maybe tired of the PAP and may want to ‘try’ something different. I would usually applaud such courage, however this is not a ‘change i can believe in’ like in the American 2008 elections. In fact, i do believe that the change maybe to our detriment.

What we stand to lose

I see some young voters claiming that they have nothing to lose this election. Apparently so spoilt and naive our fellow Singaporeans are! They were probably brought up in our booming years and have started to take everything we have for granted. We are a first world country, we do stand to lose alot. Especially when we have absolutely no idea what the opposition will really do. Im not imploring us to not be adventurous, however the risks we take must be intelligent ones. We have to test the water, before taking the plunge. We have too much to lose.

We stand to lose our secure state. We do not live in a country whereby we have to hear gun shots ringing out in the streets at night as we try desperately hard to sleep.

We stand to lose our prosperity. When the opponents say that even during economic growth the income isn’t shared, you can be damn sure that no sharing can even happen when we have no growth. Bad policies without foresight may cost us that economic growth we so badly need to increase our income.

We stand to lose our image as an open and dynamic society. Today, besides the slight tone that we are harbouring a ‘benevolent dictatorship’, the world community at large embraces us. We are very welcomed in international communities, our leaders are respected and asked for advice. Foreigners hold their international conferences and gatherings in singapore because they know we welcome them. All this can go down the drain if we screw up our diplomatic or foreign policies.

How we should restructure our thinking and mental paradigm

I am not going to deny that our gains could be that we experience a different form of government. Different but competent and successful. In fact, many changes in governance in history have proven to be positive. However one must always bear good caution in his choices. Even as we take risks, they must be intelligent ones, and they have to be done in a manner that we risk losing as little as possible. A freak election result can destroy all these. If everyone were to vote the opposition because he/she taught that the incumbent PAP were ever strong and had a continuing stream of supporters for it maybe wrong, and if that is so, we will have to deal with such consequences that may not have been our prior intent. Every vote is an important decision and a sign of good mandate. Do not think selfishly, think for the betterment of yourself in the long term, for your future offspring, for the country. Voting is a national duty, and of every national duty, it is important to heed JFK’s advice :” Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.”

*more will be added as time passes.

Good day

It has been a while since i last updated. Pardon my absence, i have been busy.

Anyway certain updates.

1. I have applied to Tembusu College at NUS at have been accepted into the 2nd round of interviews! Hope i get in!

2. I have tried the new game Crysis 2. Really awesome stuff here. Managed to complete the single player. Multiplayer sucks.

3. The Royal Wedding. I am very much into the royal family, and such an event is a rather big deal for me. I have often referred to the language English as the language of the queen. This is due to my utmost respect for the queen and the royal family. Now the future king of England is about to get married and it would be a momentous occasion that we should never forget. The Royal family still remains relevant today and represents a symbol of hope and perfection for everyone of their fairy tale dreams. Kate also really looks like a darling princess. Hope it will be an awesome union. Cheers!!

4. Lastly the General Elections are coming up and is expected to be somewhere in May/June. Anyhow i cannot vote for the comrades which sucks, but i shall be giving my input on the hot topics in the following posts should i have the time. (after i come up with the list of topics itself).

5. O before i forget i have recently started playing the stocks simulator to further my interests in investing. I have decided to post my portfolio here for easy reference. Any comments will be greatly appreciated.

Stock Portfolio

		Symbol	Description	Qty	Purchase Price	Current Price	Total Value	Today’s Change	Total Gain/Loss
	Sell	BOOM	DYNAMIC MATERIALS CORP	100	$25.42	$29.07	$2,907.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	$365.00 (14.36 %)
	Sell	ACAS	AMERICAN CAPITAL	260	$9.59	$10.12	$2,631.20	$0.00(0.00 %)	$137.80 (5.53 %)
	Sell	GE	GENERAL ELECTRIC	125	$19.81	$20.34	$2,542.50	$0.00(0.00 %)	$66.25 (2.68 %)
	Sell	ARR	ARMOUR RESIDENTIAL REIT	330	$7.47	$7.67	$2,531.10	$0.00(0.00 %)	$66.00 (2.68 %)
	Sell	IPSU	IMPERIAL SUGAR	200	$12.36	$13.36	$2,672.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	$200.00 (8.09 %)
	Sell	SU	SUNCOR ENERGY	60	$44.75	$45.28	$2,716.80	$0.00(0.00 %)	$31.80 (1.18 %)
	Sell	PBCT	PEOPLE’S UNITED FINANCIAL	195	$12.69	$12.69	$2,474.55	$0.00(0.00 %)	$0.00 (0.00 %)
	Sell	OHI	OMEGA HEALTHCARE INVTRS	110	$22.29	$22.51	$2,476.10	$0.00(0.00 %)	$24.20 (0.99 %)
	Sell	LINC	LINCOLN EDUCATIONAL SVCS	150	$16.36	$16.36	$2,454.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	$0.00 (0.00 %)
	Sell	HTCH	HUTCHINSON TECHNOLOGY	860	$2.85	$2.76	$2,373.60	$0.00(0.00 %)	-$77.40 (-3.16 %)
	Sell	RJF	RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL	65	$37.93	$38.62	$2,510.30	$0.00(0.00 %)	$44.85 (1.82 %)
	Sell	VPU	VANGUARD UTILITIES INDEX FUN	35	$68.15	$69.58	$2,435.30	$0.00(0.00 %)	$50.05 (2.10 %)
	Sell	ILF	ISHARES S&P LATIN AMERICA 40	190	$52.18	$54.61	$10,375.90	$0.00(0.00 %)	$461.70 (4.66 %)
	Sell	CRIC	CHINA REAL ESTATE INFO CO ADR	980	$7.56	$7.92	$7,761.60	$0.00(0.00 %)	$352.80 (4.76 %)
	Sell	IFN	INDIA FUND	230	$32.28	$33.27	$7,652.10	$0.00(0.00 %)	$227.70 (3.07 %)
	Sell	IIF	MORGAN STANLEY INDIA INVESTM	320	$23.58	$24.17	$7,734.40	$0.00(0.00 %)	$188.80 (2.50 %)
	Sell	SGF	SINGAPORE FUND	170	$14.42	$14.65	$2,490.50	$0.00(0.00 %)	$39.10 (1.60 %)
	Sell	VNM	MARKET VECTORS VIETNAM ETF	100	$23.69	$23.75	$2,375.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	$6.00 (0.25 %)
	Sell	IF	INDONESIA FUND	190	$13.09	$13.37	$2,540.30	$0.00(0.00 %)	$53.20 (2.14 %)
	Sell	IDX	MARKET VECTORS INDONESIA ETF	80	$29.02	$30.39	$2,431.20	$0.00(0.00 %)	$109.60 (4.72 %)
	Sell	AIA	ISHARES S&P ASIA 50 INDEX FU	100	$46.32	$48.41	$4,841.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	$209.00 (4.51 %)
	Sell	EWY	ISHARES MSCI SOUTH KOREA IND	40	$62.25	$65.74	$2,629.60	$0.00(0.00 %)	$139.60 (5.61 %)
	Sell	EWJ	ISHARES MSCI JAPAN INDEX	480	$10.36	$10.30	$4,944.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	-$28.80 (-0.58 %)
	Sell	VOOV	VANGUARD S&P 500 VALUE INDEX	80	$60.12	$60.97	$4,877.44	$0.00(0.00 %)	$67.84 (1.41 %)
	Sell	CHINA	CDC CORPORATION CL A	2680	$2.80	$2.55	$6,834.00	$0.00(0.00 %)	-$670.00 (-8.93 %)
	Sell	BRK.B	BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY B	39	$84.21	$83.68	$3,263.52	$0.00(0.00 %)	-$20.67 (-0.63 %)
Total:							$101,475.01	$0.00(0.00 %)	$2,044.42 (2.06 %)

Good day

Today i shall talk and write about something that i have come across rather frequently these days, i found these issues from the local forums and i believe that it is a good and interesting thing to think and discuss.

I noticed that there have been some cases where by some singaporean chinese(the race) for example speaks english(the language of the queen) to another chinese(race), and instead of getting a proper reply, he is ridiculed just because he did not use chinese(the language). I shall use the brackets for clarity in discussion.

Now i am sure most of you would know and realise that in singapore there is a huge and considerable number of people who prefer to speak english than their mother tongue. Im pretty sure its not just in our country, but for discussion we shall just stick local for now.

First of all, i claim that the ridicule is in question, and is also downright absurd. Does a person who looks and probably IS chinese(the race), from a logical and reasonable perspective, under any circumstances, should and must speak that language? Absolutely not. Let me give you an example. I take a puppy, and put it among a pack of little wolves. When the dog grows up i can expect it to behave like a wolf, not so much like a dog. It very much is the same with what languages people speak. People speak to survive, hence it is not surprising that given that the language of administration and instruction in singapore is english, many people would be more accustomed to using that language. A person’s looks does not determine the language he is trained in, but the environment he is living in does!!

I do not see what is so embarrassing or disgraceful even of such a state of affairs. Of course it would be good if we can master several languages and probably have a choice of being an international translator as one of our career advancement choices. But that is rather difficult and hard. If you were to ask me, I’d prefer the language of the queen any day.

If the current environmental situations were to change, and chinese were more useful, i’d bet most people would switch to chinese regardless of what race they were. There is absolutely no logical and reasonable link between the race and language in today’s time and age.

Some detractors also claim that we need to get in touch with our language in order to stay in touch with our cultures. That is simply traditional thinking. it no longer has to be this way. I have seen cultures being shared from all over the world. Good cultures are accepted, while bad ones are thrown away. Society has to decide which cultures they should allow to let live on, and those that should be thrown away because they are not good for us. Only through this constant process of renewing and reinventing our cultures can we improve upon ourselves and our way of life. If we hold on too tightly or root ourselves too deeply into the ground, it will prevent us from taking flight! Change is constant, and nothing is immune to it, so i’d say embrace it to better the days that are to come. 

So remember, the next time you are approached by this untactful and unsound manner of confrontation, just smile and say :” I’m proud of it, because I know how to survive.”

Team Fortress 2

Recently i started playing this game called team fortress 2 to kill some time, its really fun, class based fps game. try it out sometime. Just to test the photo capabilities of this site, im gonna upload some pictures.

The photos on top are of the 9 classes, except they are the female version, the male version is the norm. these are fan creations from other artists.

Besides tf2 there are really alot of other stuff i can talk about, but i want to get straight to writing on real issues. So i shall leave the rest for next time or never.

ORD

Hello guys

Finally 2 years have gone by since i last suspended/closed my blog due to my NS commitments. Now that I’m about to ORD, it is time i reopen my blog and start writing again, training up and getting ready for my new life and all that. Just so happen windows was porting the blogs over to wordpress, so i get to start all new!! Now i shall try my best to write in this blog ASAP, probably at least once a week to keep my readers updated and my writing skills well polish!! As usual all comments welcomed!!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!