TR EMERITUS

作者:冀居·谢 我们常把“不耐烦”三个字连起来说，很少去思考“耐烦”的意义。其实“耐烦”是一种民主的素养，要管理这么多人，民主政府如果不耐烦，其实也实行不了“民主”制。 李显龙以什么来定义“有人滥用互联网来影响政府决策”呢？哦，原来是“互联网让一些个人或团体有机会利用虚构的身份来制造‘人工草皮’（astroturf）现象，掀起讨论的热潮。”—— 可是用匿名或虚拟的身份来发表意见，这本来就是互联网附带的方便，要不然为什么实名制这么多年来都没人鸟呢？同时，用同样内容的信件不断地投向政府部门或者领导人，以示舆论的铺天盖地，这在邮寄信件的时代已经十分盛行，政府应该重视的，是有许多人同意/认同这样的看法。 此外，政府接受民意是应该重视内容——“这些电邮的论点具说服力，来邮者显然相当熟悉房地产市场的运作”为依据，而不应该去计较发言者的身份，或者官方必须掌握发言者的身份才开始考虑是否“纳谏”？因为在先秦（公元前200年以上）的时代，齐王在接受批评方面，已经明确下令：“能面刺寡人之过者，受上赏；上书谏寡人者，受中赏；能谤讥于市朝，闻寡人之耳者，受下赏。”（《邹忌讽齐王纳谏》）——电邮或者网上论坛是介于“上书谏寡人者”和“能谤讥于市朝”之间，理应受中下赏的。 至于“谏”这种文体，并不是人人能够写就的，学养都要很够，中国历史上出名的谏文，就秦朝李斯的《谏逐客书》和唐朝魏征的《谏太宗十思疏》这两篇而已。能够写到让人感动、认同，并且皇上还要捺着性子笑纳，的确不容易。李显龙苛求批评文章每篇文采都要不一样，实在比古代的皇帝老爷要求还高。 要是这些谏文感动了大多数人，京城人手传阅，而主政者要是咬定“这些电邮的论点相同，风格也一致。加上在结尾的部分会要求政府快速并大幅度地降低房地产价格，否则下次大选他们将不再支持人民行动党政府，并会呼吁朋友们也这么做。……不知道是谁主使的，但它显然不是要为政府提供反馈或交流，可能是为了私利，以匿名的方式尝试向政府施压。”——是要挟皇上的惊天大阴谋，全部捉起来正法算了，那这两篇“反文”就不会被《古文观止》当宝似的收录在里面了。 唉！这样的傻话讲出来有失身份，都不怕笑死人！ 来源：大马论坛  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said during a dialogue organized by REACH last night that a "poor person in Singapore fares much better than the poor in Asia or the West" without substantiating his claims. Outlining his "accomplishments" to help the poor and needy in Singapore, he noted that he has raised the monthly allowance for those on public assistance (PA) steadily and "improved" the delivery of assistance since he took over the ministry in 2005. "I'm confident we've done our duty," he proclaimed. Only Singaporeans who are certified permanently unfit to work and completely destitute with no living relatives can qualify for PA aid which offers a miserly $360 monthly per recipient, hardly enough to survive in Singapore. When asked by MP Lily Neo in 2007 to increase the monthly PA allowance so that its recipients can have three basic meals a day, Minister for Community, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan retorted: “How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?” He added that “one limiting factor must be the sum that we give through public assistance cannot be so generous as to erode the work ethic.” [Source: Channel News Asia, 9 March 2007] The Straits Times reported of late that there were only 11 successful PA applicants between July 2008 and Deccember 2009. MCYS said that the low numbers showed that Singaporeans want to be as “self-reliant” as much as possible. However Dr Vivian has no qualms splurging $10 million dollars of taxpayers' monies on a Community Integration Fund to make the foreigners feel welcomed and accepted in Singapore. Though Singapore is the second richest country in Asia after Japan, Singaporeans enjoy few social welfare benefits from its miserly PAP government which exhorts them to work for as long as they can well into their golden years till they drop dead while being “faster, cheaper and better” at the same time. On the other hand, its cash-flushed sovereign wealth funds are rich enough to fritter billions of dollars of national reserves to bail out ailing U.S. and European banks. Dr Vivian Balakrishnan costs Singapore taxpayers about $1.9 million dollars a year or $5,278 dollars a day. Let us hear from the PA aid recipient below if the PAP has indeed done its "duty" to Singaporeans:   Interview with 75 year old granny abandoned by her 6 children (Part 1)   Interview with 75 year old granny abandoned by her 6 children (Part 2)   EDITORS’ NOTE: Please join our Facebook page here and invite your friends to do so to create awareness of the current affairs affecting Singaporeans.  Read More →

(This article was published in The Star newspaper). As a new population of foreigners settles in, many of Singapore’s own defence-trained talents are moving abroad. By Seah Chiang Nee. Mar 27, 2010 WHILE Singapore is busy attracting talents from abroad, some 4,500 of its own better-educated citizens may be heading for New Zealand. This is the other side of the immigration coin that is costing Singapore more dearly in skill losses than larger nations that are losing talents to it. In a period of just six weeks, New Zealand has succeeded in luring this large number of Singaporeans to sign up to work or settle down there. Such a large number has come as a surprise for two reasons. One is that the New Zealand is not even a top choice and, secondly, Singapore is said to be recovering from the economic crisis. “Yet it has got 4,500 Singaporeans to sign up. Imagine what the response would have been had it been offered by Australia or Britain?” a company executive commented. The under-populated Pacific country with more sheep than people had launched a global drive in January to attract more foreigners to work, study or settle down there. Between end-January and mid-March, some 4,500 Singaporeans had registered – a whooping 78% of the total world responses. This is roughly 12% of the 39,000 babies born here annually. It does not necessarily mean that all will go, let alone be given PR there, but even if the majority does, the loss to this small city will be substantial. The outflow of people has long upset leaders like its founding leader Lee Kuan Yew, who once openly wept when he spoke about the subject. Some 1,000 of Singapore’s highly-educated youths are giving up their citizenship every year to settle elsewhere. In addition, about 1,000 Singaporeans a month have been applying for a Certificate of No Criminal Conviction, which is a prerequisite to getting PR overseas. In 2002, Singapore was ranked as having the second highest migration rate in the world (next to East Timor) – 26.11 migrants per 1,000 citizens. This would have meant that some 20,640 of its 3 million people were emigrating at the time, an informed source estimated. (As a percentage this figure would have dropped significantly because of the large foreign intake pushing the population to five million.) While hundreds of thousands of foreigners are making a beeline for Singapore – Southeast Asia’s richest city – an opposite flow is also happening. It is losing its skilled professionals and graduates – a declining force that has undergone military training to defend the nation – to bigger nations at a worrying rate. The New Zealand blow is particularly heavy because, until now, it has relatively limited appeal for Singaporeans compared with Australia, Britain, Canada or the US. Its economic growth is lower and so are job opportunities, yet we are facing a possible deluge. For example, only 114 Singaporeans went as permanent residency (PR), and 245 had permits to work in New Zealand last year. Total PRs in the past 10 years was 2,484. For many years, the republic has been trumpeting its success in attracting skilled foreigners. Less heralded compared to its immigration success is its own brain drain. As I was writing this, a news headline read: “Singapore retains its top spot for Asian expats to live in.” It is apparently a game others are playing just as effectively. A New Zealand government message beamed here says: “We are looking for young Singaporeans interested in the challenge, experiences and fun of living in a country that offers you brilliant work and study experiences plus a relaxed lifestyle!” It offers people a nine-to-five working day, four weeks of paid leave a year, and cheaper housing, things that are attractive to people here. It is not alone. Canada has also been head-hunting Singaporeans with some success. Some 26,100 Singaporeans have applied for economic visa, for skilled workers and business class, Canada announced. The family category is excluded, but is estimated to number another 40,000. About 150,000 Singaporeans are today studying or living overseas, according to officials. Last year, 2,703 Singaporeans emigrated to Australia, and about 1,000 each to Canada and the US, according to news reports. More than 10,000 Singaporeans are living in Hong Kong. The future can expect no let-down. Almost one in four top students in Singapore end up working overseas, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. A recent survey of teenagers said 53% would want to move abroad if they had the chance. There is hardly a middle class family that does not know someone who has emigrated. One blogger wrote recently: “I have had friends leaving Singapore over the years but last week was the first time I had to say farewell to two who are going off for good – one for New Zealand, the other for Australia.” Some Malaysians are puzzled by this phenomenon. “Singapore is one of the most competitive economies in the world and it strives constantly to be a great global city with gleaming towers ...,” one said. “It is a great city to work in and is attracting expatriates from all over the globe,” he said. Yet many of its own youths are abandoning it. Critics say there are several reasons for the exodus, including high stress level, a high cost of living (one of the world’s 10 most expensive cities), over-crowdedness and too much government control. Singapore is losing the flower of its youth. Many who are seeking opportunities abroad are young people. “Some of my young friends have left. “They go early because they fear that once they hit 40, their chances of being accepted by a developed country may drop,” a surfer said. Source: http://www.littlespeck.com/content/people/CTrendsPeople-100327.htm  Read More →