TR EMERITUS

Despite rising disgruntlement among Singaporeans at the relentless influx of foreigners, the PAP is going to bring in more foreigners to meet the "demands" of the "booming" economy. According to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, the rise in the number of foreign workers was "inevitable" due to the strong growth of the Singapore economy. "It cannot be helped because with the market so tight, if we don't allow the foreign workers in, you are going to have overheating," PM Lee was quoted as saying in the Straits Times. Due to the PAP's pro-foreigner and ultra liberal immigration policies, foreigners now make up 36 percent of Singapore's population. Of the remaining 64 percent who are citizens, an increasing number are born overseas. A Wall Street Journal article in January this year wrote that the influx of cheap foreigner workers into Singapore has depressed the wages of ordinary Singapore workers, increased the cost of living and led to an overall decline in the quality of life. Singaporeans are also complaining about the rising number of foreigners living in their midst which makes them feel like "strangers" in their own country. PM Lee claimed that the PAP is "managing" the number of foreign workers by "calibrating" their levies to "moderate" the inflow. "'But even with that, I would imagine there would be more than 100,000 extra foreign workers this year. I cannot see it otherwise. We have to accept that," he added. Foreign workers help to reduce labor costs, thereby inflating GDP growth figures artificially in the process. A certain percentage of the PAP ministers' multi-million pay is pegged to GDP growth - the higher the growth rates, the more money they bring home. PAP ministers are expected to receive a hefty 8.8 percent or more pay hike at the end of the year. Unfortunately, the median salary of the average Singapore worker remains at a miserly $2,400 monthly while the cost of living, especially that of public housing has sky-rocketed.     Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

Singapore's multi-millionaire PAP ministers, who are already the highest paid political leaders in the world, can expect a massive pay rise at the end of the year on the back of a strong economy. The Ministry of Finance upgraded its 2010 economic forecast today to an unbelievable 13 to 15 percent. An unknown percentage of the pay of PAP ministers is pegged to GDP growth - the higher the growth figures, the more money they bring home. The economic forecast at the beginning of the year is between 4 to 6 percent. Then TODAY reported that PAP ministers can expect to receive a hefty 8.8 percent pay hike in 2010. Since the growth rates have more than doubled now, PAP ministers can expect a windfall at the end of the year. Though the figures have been impressive, the gains from Singapore's economic growth have yet to filtered down to the ordinary Singaporeans in the street. The median monthly salary of the average Singapore worker has remained stagnant at $2,400 due to the relentless influx of cheap foreign workers while the cost of living, especially that of public housing has ballooned. With the elections around the corner, the state media has been churning out propaganda daily to paint a rosy picture on the ground. Unfortunately, with Europe heading into a crisis now, Singapore's economic "revival" may be short-lived and we may be in for a double-dip recession pretty soon after the PAP ministers take home their "Ang Pow" money from Singaporeans of course.     Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →

Let us cross-examined CNA’s quote of fare change justification. “Under the new system, about two-thirds of commuters will pay less. Those who make single or short trips may lose out. The new calculation method removes the “transfer penalty”, which is the amount commuters pay each time they make transfers during a single journey. The authorities have said the aim is to provide for a fairer way of calculating fares.” http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1068811/1/.html It says only about one-third of the customers pay more since two-thirds are allegedly paying less – was this a train ACCIDENT or was it a planned outcome. If it was a planned outcome, why did they as a listed business expended so much effort and how did they planned for a revenue loss for so much efforts expended on discovery how to help the customers save fare. SMRT must be an ardent “charity” organisation to have planned so hard for this outcome which angered commuters – LOSE LOSE OUTCOME FOR CUSTOMERS AND SMRT unless customers are the only ones in the blind. But look at this comment – it is PROFUNDITY TO ME at casual read -”Those who make single or short trips may lose out”. The logic is perverse of my comprehension. Short trips customers lose out is probably something which SMRT is aware of its intended outcome in this changed fare structure. But “single trips” include BOTH SHORT TRIPS AND LONG TRIPS. That comment is carefully silent on single trips include long trips – it was a void of leaving angry customers to fill in the blank of truth or falsehood of incomplete public declaration. So did long trips (single also) lose out as well in tuth known to SMRT? Or they don’t know and yet claims that more 2/3 of the customers pay less??. Given the long trips available on a single track, let say from Sengkang to Harbourfront and Jurong West line – who needs to make a lot of short trips to reach destinations when we can switch at interchange without SMRT knowing? The reasonable conclusion available is that LONG TRIPS ALSO PAYS MORE. So how did LHH concludes that two-thirds are paying LESS????? I failed my maths and also failed my kindergarten leaving examination. Please forgive my poverty of intellect and profound stupidity if I am wrong here. Can someone explains the seemingly SELF-CONTRADICTION LOGIC IN CNA’S QUOTE OF “Those who make single or short trips may lose out”???? The logic and the maths don’t add up. My thoughts are that it could be “long trips and short trips all pay more” and the extrapolation is that more than two-thirds of the customers pay a lot more and a few of the remaining pay less. The logic of the CNA quote left me to puzzle if the order is muddled up into chaos leaving the truth to be then conveniently “explained otherwise” contrary of factual reality in the momentary confusion of public mind. UNLESS OF COURSE, SMRT DECIDED THAT THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT APPLICATION OF THE FAME “CHEAPER,FASTER AND BETTER” MANTRA. Given the overcrowding and the need to invest in technology upgrade and adding more carriage, SMRT might actually need less money and less fare from its customers to “improve” that service in the cover “long-term” consideration as a public charity???. I am still WONDERING in deep silly thoughts.   Jane Doe     Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans. Please use our online web form to contact us.  Read More →