TR EMERITUS

Many people are indignant that two ministers used, or rather abused, their ministerial positions to rent two black and white bungalows from the government. They criticized the ministers in social media. I hold a different opinion. I think that it is all right for the ministers to rent a bungalow at the market rental (based on the guide rental) and even to have preference in its allocation (i.e. no need for competitive bidding). It is better for our ministers to be living in suitable accommodation that befit their status and office. These bungalows would be quite suitable. The rental that they have to pay is based on the market rental and is not subsidized. It may not have the mark up that comes with competitive bidding, but I think that competitive bidding is not necessary and not appropriate. Like many Singaporeans, I find that the salaries paid to ministers are excessive, but that is a separate issue. Here, we are talking about offering suitable accommodation to ministers at a market rental, and giving them the preference to pick a bungalow of their choice. I know that many people will not agree with my view, but I still want to express what I think is right and proper. It is just an insignificant view.   Tan Kin Lian      Read More →

Expectations that working adults owe parents a monthly allowance need to be changed - CNA online, 23 May 23. The above article is a good article and I agree with most of the points covered. In this commentary, I will share some thoughts. If we remove our westernised appearance and facade, we all share fundamental asian upbringings and asian values and looking after our parents financially in their old age must count as one although I recognise that it is easier said than done for many people. It requires both hands to clap. Let me explain. If children have been properly brought up and not abused, persistently unfairly or harshly treated by their parents when they were little, I believe that most working adults are willing to give their parents some regular money when they started working. Individual circumstances vary, eg, the parents maybe currently working, maybe even earning more and has no immediate need for their children's money or the children's income is unstable etc, however, to give some regular monthly allowance mustn't be construed as owing or alms but a manifestation of our gratefulness for the things that our parents have done and sacrificed for us over our growing up years. That differentiates us from beasts and in time to come, our children having observed our practices are likely to do likewise as well. On the other hand, if, eg, the father is a regular gambler and often gambles away his money, a heavy drinker or womaniser and constantly asking money from his adult working children to fund his indulgence, then a firm no would be warranted. In this time and age when job security is distance, unlike how pap ministars pay themselves, many people's salaries are unable to keep up with the ever rising cost of living and therefore to fulfill filial piety obligations must be exercised with common sense and necessary firmness when needed. Not forgetting also, with fewer siblings to share coupled with a higher cost of living and ever rising, the financial burdens that each working adult faces with regards to giving money to their elderly parents are likely to be heavier and not lighter. On balance, l support working adults giving a regular allowance to their parents but it must be within their means, exercised with flexibility, common sense and common decency. Think.   Simon Lim      Read More →

Back in the days of my first marriage, everyone wanted me to become a teacher. My parents felt that I had an “academic” personality rather than a commercial personality. My then wife and her family kept drilling in the fact that teaching was an “iron rice-bowl,” and then there were people told me that teaching was great because teachers finished work by 12 noon and instead of being stuck with two weeks paid leave like everyone else, teachers had school holidays. I’m reminded of this because this is not the reality of teaching as a career. Let’s start with the working hours. It’s true that the official work day ends at around 12 noon but it also starts at seven in the morning, which means that the official working day is around six-hours, which is nearly the same as any office job. That is before you have factored in things like extra-curricular activities, committee meetings and let’s not forget the marking. When you add up all these things, the working day of a teacher is pretty darn long. As for that great perk of teaching – holidays – some bureaucrats in the Ministry of Education who probably never went near a school since they left, decided that teachers needed to do more and so, more often than not, teachers get called back to do all sorts of things that make bureaucrats behind desk happy. It even reached stage where one of my uncles who was a teacher at the Institute of Technological Education (ITE) found that he had to apply for the standard two weeks of leave like the private sector because holidays for teachers was essentially redundant. It goes without saying that my teaching career was short lived. I took an $800 a month pay cut to return to the private sector. My resentment towards sitting at a desk started when I was faced with the very prospect of having to sit in committee meetings. One of the worst memories was Valentines Day, where the unmarried head of department decided to hold the rest of us, who happened to be married, should stay back for a meeting, which only took five hours. The only person who was let off this marathon meeting was the only other unmarried person in the English department. I bring up this rant about my inglorious days in the school system because it reflects something many simply don’t see when it comes to jobs that are off the beaten path. For those of us in corporate jobs, we tend to look at anyone who isn’t in a job like hours as having it easy. We think of teachers as having lots of free time. We think of construction workers as having it easy because they don’t face office pressures. Most worryingly we look at entrepreneurs and the self-employed and we get the idea that these guys have it good because they don’t work standard hours and somehow end up richer than us, average joes. Success is very attractive. Who doesn’t want to be successful? Whenever we see someone with the signs of success (the right car, the right home etc), we become caught up in the good side of their lives. One of the most prominent examples of our attraction to success was best seen in the 80s and 90s, when boxing was dominated by “Iron Mike Tyson.” Mr. Tyson was the dominant fighter of his generation. He was so dominant in the early part of his career that he had effectively won before setting foot in the ring because he terrified his opponents. One of the most memorable fights was against Michael Spinks, which was lasted all of 93 seconds. For that fight, Mr. Tyson bagged some US$20 million. Couldn’t believe that anyone could earn that much for 93 seconds. Then, my uncle (the one who recently retired from ITE) made the point that the average boxer has to train two hours a day more than what the average person works. That stuck with me and although Mr. Tyson has since retired from boxing, I thought it was worth looking at the way he trained. Thanks to YouTube, I found two videos which talk about the way he trained. To say that it is beyond belief is an understatement. The man woke up at 4am everyday to go for a three to four mile run every day. He did something like 500 push ups a day. I struggle to get 50 done every other day. One of the more interesting videos on the way Mr. Tyson trained can be found in the link below. Note the expression of the guy’s face after going through the calisthenics portion of the day and that’s just a single day. Mr. Tyson trained like that daily. [LINK] Getting up and making yourself train like that requires iron determination and focus. I think about the way I have to push myself to get through my four-minute morning work out or how 5 BX in the army was a challenge. Whatever I went through was nothing compared to what Mr. Tyson went through every day. Sure, he had the hot chicks, great mansions and cars and at one point over US$300 million. That was the good part that everyone saw. We got excited by the way he could demolish people in a matter of seconds and earn millions. Nobody saw the training and the hard work and the type of training he had to go through. Let’s also not forget that for every Mike Tyson, there many more going through this type of training who will never earn a percentage of what he made and many probably end up with severe brain damage. What is true of top-level boxers is also true of entrepreneurs. You may not have to sit in a cubicle for eight-hours a day but you actually have to work very hard just to stay afloat. People won’t see that and should you fail (which is more likely than not), you’ll get a lot of people, including friends and family, take joy in telling you that you made stupid choices. Just like it takes a special something in boxer to get up after he’s taken a beating, an entrepreneur needs to know how to get up from taking a beating. So, just because someone doesn’t go through the same things you do, it doesn’t mean that they have it easy. If anything, they could be going through things you would never want to go through. Always be sympathetic to people struggling to get by.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able to meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.      Read More →