TR EMERITUS

After being lampooned by Singaporeans for his ridiculous suggestion to scrap the retirement age, PAP strongman Lee Kuan Yew now tried to portray his "soft side" to soothe frayed nerves among his detractors, especially the younger generation. In an interview with New York Times which he recently sued successfully for defamation, Lee claimed that he keeps his wife, Kwa Geok Choo, who suffered from a series of strokes every night. He will tell her about his day's "work" and reads her favorite poems, according to Channel News Asia. At 87 years of age, Lee still holds the position of "Minister Mentor" in the Singapore government, an unique position not found anywhere else in the world. By his admission, though he is not doing much work lately except "forecasting", he is paid more than $3 million dollars  a year, excluding the pension he is entitled to. Lee added that he meditates every night before his sleep to keep his mind peaceful: "The problem is to keep the monkey mind from running off into all kinds of thoughts. A certain tranquillity settles over you. The day's pressures and worries are pushed out. Then there is less problem sleeping." He must be having problems sleeping lately as the next general election draws closer with the increasingly unpopular PAP expected to lose a few more seats including GRC. With public disaffection and disgruntlement against the PAP at an all-time high, the possibility of a "freak" election is becoming very real indeed.   Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →

To be sure, companies and countries must ask themselves why exactly they are considering a foreign hire. Likewise, for any family willing to move many thousands of miles as we did, we also have to ask ourselves, "why Singapore?" If the two answers are compatible, then a deal is reached and foreigner becomes immigrant. Of course, the questions behind the questions are numerous and for a society go a long way in defining the character of that society and economy. But I just wanted to throw in our own experience as to why we decided to come to Singapore. One, we did not come here under some glorified sense of neopatriotism to "help" Singapore. Of course not. Not only would I find that anyone stating that as the reason to be patronizing, it masks the deeper economic reasoning under a morality play , which for a complete stranger would be hard to believe. Two, our decision calculus was based on a array of factors, the weighted average of which had to do with making the best decision for the entire family given multiple objectives and constraints. I was lured by the slick promises of what was supposed to be the first Ivy league style university in Asia. I was lured by applying innovations in my field to an area of the world defined by change and transition. Having lived in Asia before and being partially of Asian descent, I was lured by raising my kids in Asia and the chance to learn Mandarin. I was lured by the direction that Singapore seemed to be heading (or least how it marketed itself). I was lured by a compensation package that was within 10% of that in the US market at the time, but one in which despite our double taxation would be slightly higher than in the US on a nominal and real after-tax basis. Finally, I was lured by a place that seemed to offer the chance to set down roots for a long time as you see research academics crave stability more than money when early in their career. For all these reasons and perhaps a few more and operating on a tiny information set, we took the plunge. Those were the honest reasons why we decided to come to Singapore. For those of you who have taken jobs overseas, I would imagine your decision calculus involved a similar flavour of reasoning. After arriving and working at SMU and in Singapore for a stretch, realize that the foreigner (now self-indentified by the card we hold, P1 pass holder for example) asks him or herself why she wishes to stay, for how long, and a host of other questions. Here, I limit my comments to those with choice rather than those whose will is determined by a company/govt contract. Weighted averages of answers to these self-directed questions then form the basis of the decision calculus for continuing on in Singapore. For me these have been: does Singapore offer a lifestyle I and my family can enjoy? Can I grow here personally, technically, and spiritually? Do my kids have access to high quality and affordable schooling? Was that the nature of that schooling consistent with how I wish to educate my children? Are my kids developing intellectually, psychologically, and athletically? Is life in Singapore bringing the family closer together or pushing us further apart? Has life here enabled us to meet our rolling list of objectives for life here and life overall? Are we building a nest egg for the future (i.e. are we growing our savings/investments in real terms)? Is the increasingly expensive lifestyle in Singapore worth the stress of having to maintain two professional incomes? Am I living a life consistent with my values of community, morals, ethics and responsibilities? Specific to my time as a professor, was SMU and Singapore enabling me to meet my own standards for research, teaching, and innovation, i.e. to be the best professor I could be according to my own definition of the ideal academic? Those who know me know that my decisions taken are based largely on answers to these and perhaps a few other questions. These answers set my off on a near 30 year odyssey once I left my home to live in numerous places in the US and in six countries and led me to live in Singapore for the past seven years. Whether I continue here will depend on those answers, for which money is but one criteria. And whether I stay depends again on whether Singapore itself wishes me to stay. But since I was only today denied PR, I must now think more deeply about my presumptions wrt Singapore and its own objectives for a good piece of advice I would give to anyone is to think hard about committing to a relationship with someone who has expressed no desire to make a commitment to you. Peter Kriz (The above was first posted as a comment on TR Facebook and republished here)  Read More →

For the second time in a week, another PAP leader tried to put the hot topic of "immigration" in "perspective" to manage the expectations of Singaporeans. During a dialogue session with some 400 Singaporeans, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean resorted to rehashing the same old PAP rhetoric that Singaporeans should welcome immigrants because they are descendents of immigrants too. "If we keep out new citizens, draw lines at particular points of time, none of us will be here talking to each other today. This hall will be empty," he said. Though Singaporeans are mostly descendents of immigrants, our forefathers came here when Singapore is still a British colony and not a nation. After fifty years of nation-building, we have developed an unique national identity which is fast being diluted by the relentless influx of foreigners whose culture and mindset don't quite fit into place here. DPM Teo added: "On a more serious note, Singapore needs to attract foreign professionals and allow foreign workers to create a stronger, better Singapore for its citizens." Singaporeans are not adverse to have real foreign talents to complement its workforce, but to the hordes of unskilled foreigners the PAP is mass importing from China and India to compete directly with them. The immigration policy and criteria for granting PRs and citizenships is not transparent too. For example, a former economics professor from SMU who is a graduate from Stanford University was denied Singapore PR in his application while cleaners, construction workers, masseurs and even freelance prostitutes are granted Singapore PR and citizenship by the PAP regime. PAP leaders should stop obfuscating the issue and come clean with their immigration policy - does it really aim to attract foreign talents or new voters to enable the PAP to remain in power for the next fifty years or so.   Please join our Facebook discussion on this article here and invite your friends to do so as well to raise awareness among fellow Singaporeans.  Read More →