Hear Ye! Hear Ye!

I’m supposed to be working hard on my Masters thesis, but for the past week, I’ve been spending some time pondering the meaning of death because my wife’s co-supervisor at MIT, Professor David Schauer, suddenly passed away.

I’ve not had the chance to know him very well, but the few times I’ve met him and talked to him, it’s clear as day to me that he’s a wonderful person. He’s soft-spoken, patient, kind and caring towards people. He was due to spend a year in Singapore in a few months, and I was looking forward to knowing him better and showing him around Singapore.

His departure came as a shock to me, although I’m definitely not as badly affected as my wife and the other members of his lab. However, it did make me ponder the meaning of death, a topic in the deepest recesses of my mind in recent times. And, I think I’ve decided what death means to me.

Death is not the mourning of demise, but a celebration of having lived life.

When it’s my turn to leave, I hope people who still remember me will smile, and for those who have to shed tears, let it be tears of joy.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

This blog has not been updated for a while, and I don’t know if I’ll continue to update it with the intensity of the past. It’s a combination of factors for the lack of updates but generally, I guess the fire in the belly has fizzled considerably, perhaps due to age, work, married life, new life interests and other factors that I’m unable to pinpoint.

I guess I’ll probably still write on this blog sporadically. There are many voices these days commenting on the gamut of socio-political-economic issues in Singapore society today that perhaps my views are perhaps unnecessary, except for a niche group of people who bother checking this blog every now and then. Nonetheless, I still want to document my views from time to time, and perhaps some years down the road when I do a proper content analysis of my blog I will be surprised to find out how I’ve changed through the years.

Till the next entry.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

The recent discussions in Parliament had two pretty interesting topics that I’ve been wanting to write about, but I’ve not gotten down to doing so because of the whole JCS debate. The first one is the no-frills HDB flat, which I will address in this entry, and the second is the proclamation that Singaporeans are untalented in procreation, which will be saved for another day.

I don’t quite get why the suggestion of no-frills HDB flats was even brought up in the first place. This suggestion flies directly in the face of what the PAP has been doing for years: upgrading HDB estates to increase their value. Twenty to thirty years ago, HDB flats were indeed almost no-frills until the upgrading frenzy started. If we didn’t have upgrading, there will be plenty of no-frills HDB flats out there on the market.

Besides, HDB has flats available for rent (at hugely subsidised prices) for those who are unable to afford owning their own roof over the head. So, what’s the purpose of having no-frills HDB flats? It doesn’t seem to serve any purpose at all. This is an extremely strange proposition coming from PAP MPs.

It is indeed very interesting to me that some PAP MPs don’t seem to even understand rationale of the policies set by their own political party. Instead of no-frills housing, from a logical standpoint, the government will actually want to INCREASE the frills so that the market value of the HDB goes up. This is because a) the current ruling PAP can use increased values of HDB flats as election propaganda, and b) HDB can pocket more from the sale of a new flat, since the subsidy is pegged to market prices.

I think sometimes, not saying anything is a better option than shooting oneself in the foot. But I must say that this suggestion is a whole lot smarter than suggesting the abolishing of the five day work week because the birthrate has not gone up.

(3 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

I was just reading this website that’s trying to raise awareness of dating violence (http://www.chooselovenotabuse.com/). This whole concept of dating violence, I must admit, is something that’s foreign to me, probably due to my idealistic views of a relationship.

The first thought I had of what constitutes dating violence was physical violence, and as an afterthought, sexual violence. And yes, my immediate mental imagery was that of men as the abusers and women as the victims (looks like I’m not immune to gender stereotyping). Well, perhaps some women might abuse their partners physically, but I’m not quite sure about the sex part… Never mind.

Anyway, it turns out that emotional and psychological abuse are part of dating violence too. I don’t quite get what’s the difference between the two, though. Do our emotions not emerge from our brains as well? Why the different classification? Anyway, I’m digressing. The point here is that dating violence isn’t necessarily restricted to physical or sexual harm.

I don’t understand why would anyone resort to physical or sexual abuse of their partners. If you’re pissed off and need to take things out physically, go pummel a wall or sandbag. If you are not having enough sex, I’m sure there are better options other than forcing yourself on your partner. If you’re the one on the receiving end, I sure you wouldn’t enjoy the experience of being either physically or sexually abused (masochists excluded from my argument).

As for psychological/emotional violence, this is a little tricky. Being humans, we do get upset and say hurtful things or carry out actions that might wound our partners psychologically and emotionally. I am guilty of inflicting psychological/emotional hurt sometimes. I definitely need to continue working on that to be, in the words of Robbie Williams, a better man. But I guess the occasional outburst is pretty normal; it becomes dangerous only when the psychological/emotional hurting becomes pathological.

If you’ve been physically or sexually abused by your partner, I think it’s clearly time to seek help. As for psychological or emotional abuse, this is going to be a harder call. I don’t know where the line is drawn for non-physical forms of dating violence. I believe different people have different thresholds and definitions of psychological/emotional abuse. Nonetheless, it’s perhaps a good idea to read up a little on dating violence. You might never know when the information could come in handy.

Anyway, for all of you who are attached or married, have a great Valentine’s Day. If you are in a long-distance relationship as I am now, I feel your pain. I’ve held out fine on my own for a few months but my walls are crumbling. When you are with someone for a long time, their absence is like having a heart or lung missing (not that I know what it feels like to be literally having a missing heart or lung; it’s a figure of speech).

So if you’re spending your Valentine’s Day this year with your significant other by your side, take a moment to cherish the fact that she’s with you now. Even though videoconferencing technology is cheap and easily accessible these days, it still remains a poor substitute. Nothing beats having your loved one by your side. Enjoy your Valentine’s Day while I stare into tonight’s sky wondering if my wife is looking at the same moon on the other side of the globe at the same time.

(1 votes, average: 5 out of 5)

 Loading ...

Plenty of smart people (unlike me) have been posting comments online about the JCS and it’s fascinating to read all the comments. Unfortunately, it does makes the head ache and the eyes hurt after a while.

While I think the JCS is worthy of a shot, I am not unaware of its problems. I don’t think anyone, the government included, can say confidently that the JCS is a cure-all for the recession. It’s just that it’s about the only option left to try and limit the damage. If this doesn’t work, then there’s no choice but to give direct or indirect monetary relief to people who need help while we wait out the storm.

Of course, the price tag of the JCS is uncomfortably large to some people. I don’t disagree with that. We can let retrenchments continue, divide the money among all Singaporeans and end up with more than a thousand dollar angpow each for the whole year. Is that necessarily a better option? I would think yes it’s a damn good option if I still have a job. If I don’t, how long can that money last? Again, I have no definite answer to this issue, although my personal preference is to keep as many jobs as possible, but that’s because I would prefer to have a salary than unemployment handouts.

The criticisms of JCS being a blunt tool is clearly a valid one. Some companies will indeed keep the JCS monies for their own benefit instead of using it to prevent retrenchments. However, giving money directly to people also has its own set of problems too. As much as one can argue companies might hoard the JCS monies, someone else can argue that people might splurge unemployment assistance on a holiday. We just can’t predict behaviour.

The bottom line is there will be pain in this recession no matter what the government tries to do. I sure that is something everyone can agree with. What people cannot agree with is how to go around tackling the issue. I wish there exists a depressionomics SOP to tell us step by step how to climb out of the hole and people won’t have to argue but unfortunately, I don’t think such a thing exists.

This will be my last comment on the JCS. If the JCS fails to work, I will be the first to admit my folly in believing it will at least work somewhat and hope that people will be as zealous in accepting human error as dishing out criticisms.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

The Kway Teow Man has posted, in my opinion, the best analysis of the Jobs Credit scheme. He is all for Jobs Credit (as I am), and he explains in a very easy to understand way why Jobs Credit is a viable scheme. It’s something extremely worth reading, although it is insanely long.

If you have already made up your mind that the Jobs Credit is a piece of thrash, then don’t bother reading because you won’t be able to appreciate the arguments. The PAP doesn’t get things right all the time, but the Jobs Credit Scheme is a pretty decent piece of policy in my opinion, and it doesn’t deserve the brickbats that have been hurled at it.

And if your instinct is to call me a PAP Youth member after reading this entry, please save your time. You are not the first, and you won’t be the last, and I don’t care. I don’t live in pigeon holes, unlike you.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Wow, this is big news, despite the interestingly lukewarm writing from the State’s Times, I mean, Straits Times.

I’ve been wondering when the axe is going to fall because so many high profile CEOs all over the world have been chopped from their positions. I don’t believe Temasek is ever going to give a reason for Ho Ching’s departure, but I think performance is probably a big push factor.

I’m not about to give my 2 cents worth on how lousy Ho Ching’s performance has been because I am not qualified to. I don’t even manage a tiny minuscule of the money she manages. However, it is a fact that under her charge, Temasek has had a few high profile missteps, and I don’t think anyone in Singapore is immune from having to answer for missteps, especially big ones.

Perhaps there is one exception: the GIC chairman.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

I just read NCMP Sylvia Lim’s suggestion on providing temporary financial relief to those who have been retrenched but yet to find a new job.

The ‘Job Seeker Allowance’ proposal she has put forth is reasonable because of the proposed safeguards to prevent abuse. And, it comes at a fraction of the cost of the Jobs Credit Scheme. Too bad she got shot down by the PAP folks who probably don’t want her to gain any political points, even though it’s a reasonable solution.

Come on, PAP. Sylvia Lim is essentially suggesting aiding people who are trying to help themselves. What is there to disagree with? She’s not advocating giving free money to lazy bums. The PAP doesn’t want to develop a crutch mentality amongst Singaporeans, right? So what’s the problem with Sylvia Lim’s suggestion, other than the fact she’s from the Worker’s Party?

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Lui Tuck Yew has made it clear that he’s disappointed with some of the callous online responses towards the burning of MP Seng Han Thong. He said this episode shows that it is ‘quite apparent the Internet is not an effective self-regulated regime as some may have touted it to be‘.

Ok, he has a point about those morons who actually gloated over the episode. If one is unhappy about something, there are civilised ways to resolve issues. However, I have absolutely no idea how he comes to the conclusion that the Internet is ineffective at self-regulation based on this issue. What exactly is his benchmark for ‘effective self-regulation’? A online lynch mob going after these morons?

Seriously, while the comments of some online idiots get publicity, the question is, how many of them are actually taken seriously? I think Singaporeans in general have enough brains to tell whether what they are reading was written by a nutcase. I think the folks in government should get the whole magic bullet assumption out of their head. It doesn’t mean if I read a few nutcases praising the attack on MP Seng I will also start praising the attack. It also doesn’t mean that if I don’t say anything, I am agreeing with these nutcases. It could well be that to me, these morons are not even worth my time to respond to them.

The bottomline is that in any democratic space, there are are all kinds of people with all kinds of ideas and opinions. There will always be people on the extremes but I don’t think these extremists will gain much traction with most people. Give them the chance to let off some steam. Sure, we can regulate and try and prevent such things from being said but this will merely drive the extremists underground and off the radar. That would be far more dangerous because they’ll only mix with their own ilk and who knows how much more radical these extremists will become.

I certainly don’t hope that the government doesn’t start deeming it necessary to intervene in the online space.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...

Poor WP MP Low Thia Kiang got verbally roughed up by six PAP MPs yesterday in a discussion on the new Job Credit scheme.

I sympathise with Low because I think he was unfairly attacked. However, Low seemed to have set himself up for attack by being so skeptical of the Job Credit scheme. I think he could have at least given the scheme some due credit. The scheme WILL work for some companies.

I think problem with Low’s argument is that he was not comparing apples with apples. It seems to me the Job Credit scheme was never designed to save jobs for companies that are on the verge of collapse. The scheme is meant to help sound companies lower their costs so that they can continue operating even when demand has dropped significantly. Of course, such sound companies are, in Low’s jargon, already ‘profitable companies’ that doesn’t need help.

Instead of attacking the Job Credit scheme, Low could have proposed something else to help companies that are in dire straits. That would have been more constructive and prevented the PAP MPs from hounding him like a pack of wolves. However, with the Job Credit scheme, I think the government has already made up its mind on which companies are worth helping. These companies are those with the ability to weather the storm.

It is hard to fault the logic on the government because it doesn’t quite make sense to put unsound companies on life support when the same amount of resources could be put to better use with a sound company. The problem is, should the government make decisions on which company to help based on such cold, hard logic? The people who are employed in unsound companies are clearly no less worthy of help than people who are employed in sound companies.

It’s a tough choice to make. Logically speaking, I agree with the approach the government has taken but I think the government could also offer plans to help workers in unsound companies who are in danger of retrenchment. For example, the Job Credit scheme can be extended to sound companies that are willing to take over workers from unsound companies. The notion of saving jobs should not be restricted to jobs currently in a company.

Ultimately, this global recession is nasty business and there really isn’t a perfect solution. For now, I think the current Budget is sufficiently good. We don’t know the actual effects of the proposals until they have been executed so I prefer to wait and see. I do hope that the government will have off-Budget measures to plug any gaps if such gaps surface later.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading ...