Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
We only have ourselves to blame
SM Goh remarked that we are losing our best talents.
Interestingly, I was having a discussion with some undergraduate friends earlier this week. The subject came to whether there’s a sense of rooted-ness in Singaporeans. All of us felt that there isn’t much of a sense of belonging in Singapore. I thought that the most striking comment from a friend was regarding how Singapore government will not “take care” of Singaporeans. Singapore has placed a premium on individual effort since independence. The state must avoid the “welfare” model of the West like the plague. My friend’s reasoning was that since the government says it will not “take care” of Singaporeans, she has to take care of herself. And that being the case, whoever offers the best price gets her loyalty because she has to ensure that her future is well-taken care of.
I can’t generalise, but I won’t be surprised if a large number of our best talents are leaving because of pragmatic reasons (i.e. other countries are willing to offer better things than what Singapore can offer). I don’t think people would disagree that Singapore IS a very pragmatic country. And, I think that Singapore is paying the price for being too pragmatic. Alot of things we do in Singapore are based on economic considerations, which is not instrinsically bad. However, the side effect is that by living in such an environment, we end up being pragmatic people. And a truly pragmatic person knows not the ideas of loyalty and allegiance. Whoever gives the best price gets the service.
So what happens is that we try and bring in foreigners to make up the shortfall. Guess what? Foreigners that come are also pragmatic people (see my entry on Singapore as a parking lot). Like migratory birds, they stop in Singapore until the winter in their homeland has passed and they will fly back again. Admittedly, there are some that might stay, but how many such people are there relative to the entire flock? Of course, there’s also the related question of how many of our best and brightest who have flown away will return? Could they be so pragmatic that there’s no possibility of return unless Singapore offers better than what they currently have?
At the end of the day, it could very be that Singapore ends up in a lose-lose situation. If such a thing happens, we only have ourselves to blame.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 17/03/2007 at 3:06 am, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 3 years ago
Who is this “we”, the collective pronoun? Is it the literal “myself and a few other people”, or the “society as a whole”? To what extent do the two “we”s coincide? To what extent *should* they coincide?
about 3 years ago
It’s not a new topic by any stretch. The “brain drain” sitch easily dates back to the early 90s, if not even back to the days of the closure of Nanyang University.
about 3 years ago
I don’t think everyone, and maybe not even a majority, of emigrating Singaporeans are leaving for pragmatic reasons. I have no statistics, but I am not the only person I know who is planning to leave for idealistic reasons — Singapore has no room for people who have aspirations beyond living a comfortable material lifestyle.
Also, not that I think I’m one of them, but the best and brightest people also tend to attach greater importance to ideals than the average person.
In short, I do think we are paying the price for being too pragmatic, but not necessarily because people are too pragmatic to stay in Sg. From what I’ve encountered of life overseas, there are ample pragmatic and idealistic reasons to leave Singapore.
about 3 years ago
The opportunities in Singapore are — let’s face it: limited. The economy is geared towards the average worker (read expendable, and could be done cheaper type).
Talent is overrated in such an economy. Why not let it go somewhere else to develop? Maybe, just maybe it will come back.
about 3 years ago
It is my anecdotal impression that Singapore retains a somewhat colonial attitude, with a tendency to value all things foreign, and to either under appreciate or take for granted what Singaporeans have to offer. This is a tendency that was rather effectively satirized in Jack Neo’s 2002 movie, I Not Stupid. This is but one example of the many things that leads me to feel like a second-class citizen in one’s own country.
What is perhaps most disheartening, is that whenever one speaks of the brain drain in Singapore, there is never talk of how one reverses the trend, but rather the focus is on importing “foreign talent†instead.
It would take significant emotional ties to overcome the allure of career opportunities on a global scale, particularly when the phenomenal pace of redevelopment in Singapore means that the places of one’s youth no longer exist in a familiar form. The overemphasis on economic pragmatism has left our society bereft of the cultural identity of what it means to be Singaporean, beyond our shared love of food and shopping.
To this day, I have not been able to exercise the one right and obligation that is to me the hallmark of citizenship, the right to vote. Is it any wonder then that our disenfranchised, unlamented, and emotionally unanchored diaspora choose to pursue more attractive opportunities abroad?
about 3 years ago
Elia,
We refers to Singapore in general. Of course, one can well argue that no everyone agrees with governmental policies and it’s not right to use the word ‘we’, but Singaporeans elected the government into power, so I suppose the word ‘we’ is accurate enough for use.
The brain drain issue is not new. What is new is perhaps the speed we are losing people now? I have no evidence for this though, but if it ain’t that big of an issue, the government wouldn’t be talking about it.
about 3 years ago
Quitter,
Perhaps there are idealists who want to leave the country for pursuit of their own ideals. That’s pretty normal. What I thought was funny is that the pragmatism that technically solves the problem of “welfarism” ends up coming back to haunt in some cases, like that of my friend who readily said that her loyalty can be bought. It feels so surreal. Remember the progress package?
about 3 years ago
RSE,
Going out for opportunities is not uncommon. China and India are perfect examples where smart people have left their countries in seach of better opportunities. But, these people eventually returned to their motherland. Will the Singaporean diaspora return? I don’t know.
about 3 years ago
mleok,
Indeed, I’ve always been wondering why we are not putting in as much effort to bring back the Singaporean diaspora. Is it because it’s not as cost effective? I have no answers. I think at the end of the day, we have to look hard at ourselves and ask what is it that makes me Singaporean and what binds me to this place? What am I happy about Singapore and what am I not happy about Singapore? Or perhaps, more importantly, can I achieve what I want in Singapore?
about 3 years ago
Actually is kinda sad to see Singapore keep taking in foreigners. Instead of trying to find more ways to make ppl give birth more, we are using the replacement methods. I don’t think foreigners will have much sense of belonging compare to those who grow up in these part of Asia. I really hope that Singaporean with passion can stand up and build a better Singapore instead of just keep on running away and the problem cannot be solved. I really hope that there will be Singaporeans who will come back eventually to help build a better nation as this is where our forefather have build and it will be sad to see that it get destroy some day. Our System got to change. The only way to change is a grow of talented ppl that will stand up against our current policy and join our hands together to make a better Singapore.
about 3 years ago
Worse is if in times of war, who will defend Singapore? If i was an expat, i dun think i want to stay aboard a sinking ship, i will run. Thus in times of trouble it is those who are victims of the system who will be the first ones to give their lives for the system. Michael Moore shows this fact in his film Fareinheight 911, whereby those from the lower strata of society are often the ones who join the army and head for places like Iraq in the name of America.
about 3 years ago
Aaron,
I was taking a rather cynical view along the lines of: the Singapore’s economy doesn’t need(want?) talent (it needs and wants expendable labour) and talent doesn’t need Singapore, so who cares if they leave? Those from China/India eventually return because China/India needs and wants them. Plus, they feel rooted enough to return, the money isn’t that shabby, either.
As long as Singapore competes on cost alone, it will not need talent. Economies where talent is needed compete on value, not cost. Economies that compete on cost however, need numbers. I suspect the government here is more worried about numbers than actual talent. That’s what 6.5 million was about. That’s what the foreign talent policy is about. Number-wise, the Singaporean diaspora offer far less than foreigners, why go all out to bring them back?
about 3 years ago
Not to sound blunt, but the PAP probably couldn’t care less about people who leave Singapore because Singapore does not offer enough protection or welfare. These are not the talented people Goh was talking about – the talented people the PAP wants are the ones who can earn big bucks and don’t need welfare, and in fact PREFER lower personal taxes.
I agree with quitter that idealism is probably a far greater reason why the truly talented leave. These are not the people who leave because the Singapore government does not give enough handouts – these are the people who leave because they are disillusioned with the stifling system, where the government is overly conservative, authoritarian and pragmatic.
It is not just be the government’s fault – Singaporeans in general are a myopic, narrow-minded, uncivilised and overall unattractive lot. It is conceivable why the real talents wouldn’t want to rub shoulders with them. The land size is also a major problem – Singapore is too small and cramped, and people who want their own landed property, with their own gardens, backyards, a stream running behind their house and forests and mountain ranges for them to explore, would probably be attracted to the wide open spaces and charming natural environment in other countries (like Australia).
about 3 years ago
On a personal level, living in Canada for close to 3 years has made me feel more Singaporean than I’ve ever felt before.
So what exactly ties me to my country? It’s a hard question to answer. For sure, food and shopping!
But is that enough for me to go back? Not so much. If I do plan to go home, it’ll be largely due to family commitments.
I don’t know if I’m ready to go back and be told by my country (intrinsically, government) what to do, what not to do. It’s hard for me to feel like a citizen at home when my opinions can’t be heard and I can’t voice my opinions without feeling afraid.
I mean Singapore, or rather, the government (since we only had one) has disappointed me on many levels. From the education system to minority rights to basic freedom of expression.
Of course, all our achievements are due to the efficacy of the PAP. I can’t deny that. But I really think for us to go on further and to achieve all of the government’s rhetoric of becoming a knowledge-based economy, a global hub, a centre for excellence, there needs to be a fundamental change in the way things are run.
For Singapore to truly sustain itself in the next 5o years, we cannot keep looking to the government for answers, but we should instead seize our own initiative and decide for ourselves what we want.
Policies shouldn’t be decrees.
I am almost jealous of the way things are run in Canada, where concerned citizens have the chance to voice their opinions on things like having more cycling lanes, tuition fee hikes, expanding highways, etc…
It may not be the most efficient way to do things and may come in the way of progress. But I think we have come far enough where Singapore can afford some real space for public debate.
It’s depressing when I think about it. Yes, we have a benevolent government who has taken very good care of us, most of the time. I am grateful and proud of what we’ve achieved in such a short span of 40 years.
But isn’t it about time where, perhaps, the government can chill a little bit. And not make me feel like a criminal for having a dissident voice.
I love Singapore for what it is, for what it will become. But I’m just frustrated that I can’t play a part in it.
about 3 years ago
Let me just put it this way. Back in Singapore, I was just any run-of-the-mill teacher who has to churn my pupils through endless worksheets after worksheets. Here in an international school in China, I’m a respected “Foreign Expert” who can teach the way I feel children should be taught.
My wife likes Shanghai. My children loves Shanghai. Here I have western, Malaysian, Singaporean and local friends. The pay I get allows me to live much better than I did back in Singapore. Why should I return?
And I’m NOT even one of those six-figure earning “talents”.
about 3 years ago
Singapore as a global city? I guess that term is has more sinister undertones than I initially expect.
Maybe it’s the unique situation that Singapore has always been and the notion of the government that only the best talents can drive the nation forward. It disappoints me that maybe in the near future, I might not convicted enough to truly call this land I was born in my home.
Is it irrational to suggest that a drizzle of xenophobia can foster nationalism?
I really can’t imagine what the future holds for me… Hmmm…
about 3 years ago
Kev:
So what exactly ties me to my country? It’s a hard question to answer. For sure, food and shopping!
That’s funny, to me. In a weird way—as usual.
I don’t miss food, that’s one. In fact, I can eat bread and butter and plain maggi mee everyday and that’d be fine. (Which I did do last month since I overspent the month before.)
And as for shopping, there were times (and by this I mean a period of several years) that I just. wanted. to. buy. something for ‘retail therapy’.
But I’d not be able to spend that money, even though I badly wanted to spend it.
Why?
Because there’s nothing to buy in Singapore:
i) there’s nothing unusual or interesting enough worth the money;
ii) the mildly interesting/unusual stuff are priced sky-high and at the same time, are badly crafted and lack quality (and design) for that kind of price;
iii) as far as things like ‘The Great Singapore Sale’ is concerned, I consider the retailers to be very dishonest: when they discount, it’s not much of a discount and certainly, the quality is just not there either.
In fact, if I do have to go back to Singapore because I can’t get a PR visa in Australia, I plan to take leave every Christmas.
So that I can holiday in Melbourne and shop on Boxing Day sales—up to 80% off for most places.
And the service is much, much better, too.
kh
about 3 years ago
I resonate with some of the prior comments, in particular the sense that when abroad, we are accepted for who we are: holistic individuals with opinions, ideals, and aspirations. We are valued for what we have to offer, and the ideals and goals we passionately pursue, even when they don’t necessarily conform to a narrowly defined notion of economic success.
The government would like our most talented Singaporeans to stay, but only on their terms, and contributing in a manner of their choosing. There is nothing quite like telling our best and brightest that the things they are passionate about are irrelevant and unimportant if our goal is to have them leave for greener pastures.
about 3 years ago
So yes, Singapore is a parking lot, even for many of us locals. And, while many leave due to pragmatic reasons – yes, so we’re brought up to be pragmatic anyway and our loyalty can be bought oh-so-easily, many also prefer to leave on idealistic grounds.
Many who go overseas to live also face unemployment, discrimination and maybe even lower salaries than what they could get in Singapore. So it must be some discontentment with the State which sends them packing, no?
In Singapore, being alternative makes people eye you with suspicion. The narrow-mindedness is everywhere – people have been asking me yet again what i am going to do with an arts degree.
In fact, being alternative goes to the extent that if we spoke up out of concern for our community we would be eyed with suspicion by our political leaders. Do the phrases ‘social unrest’, ‘Sedition Act,’ et cetera sound familiar? Perhaps why people leave is that in Singapore, people don’t feel like humans anymore – just machines. Machines to get good results, earn money, get a job, family, and then die.
Do we want that? I don’t. Singapore has long stopped being a place i would truly call ‘home’ – it’s only home because of my friends and family. Stay in Singapore because it’s, well, Singapore, with economic opportunities and increasing social polarisation?
nuts!
about 3 years ago
Guojun,
The worst is if u say something which is not supportive of the system, ur branded a troublemaker and so on so forth. There is this holier than thou attitude among some groups of people that galls me. In To Kill A Mockingbird, the kids are told its a sin to kill a mocking bird. In Singapore its a sin to raise a concern.
Kev,
I agree with u that a major shift in the social sphere is needed, if singapore wants to truly be global than the leaders have to have the courage to open up. But that will entail a possible loss of power. Will our leaders be that selfless? Only time will tell…
about 3 years ago
Aaron,
Posting what I have said earlier in Mollymeek’s blog:
http://mollymeek.livejournal.com/146419.html?thread=1465075#t1465075
“The MIW has made moves earlier to attract overseas Singaporeans home.
http://takchek.blogspot.com/2006/02/elite-as-elite-does.html
http://takchek.blogspot.com/2007/02/chicago-citylights-ssa-alliance-work.html
Now they are organizing a Singapore day in NYC this April too.
http://takchek.blogspot.com/2007/03/singapore-day-2007-in-nyc.html”
Just that their message isn’t exactly getting across.
about 3 years ago
Actually, the main reason I am not in Singapore is that it’s not challenging enough. There aren’t really any real companies in Singapore and most jobs in Singapore involve either rubbish SMEs that make crap products or government backed GLCs/Research Instituations a.k.a AStar that don’t do anything of importance. Singaporeans who work overseas are not “running away”. Running away has nothing to do with it. It has more to do with working with really smart, brilliant people who are capable of doing real work, not just babble about the useslessness of NS men(Philip Yeo). I am not working in Singapore right now because I don’t want to work with idiots.
about 3 years ago
Aaron,
My Rooted- ness was more established towards the homeland whereby i was brought up and the sense of belonging rather than “welfare” model. The reason that i understand why the government of Singapore is not pampering and feeding us like some other countries are giving pensions is already explained by the parliament. If there are lazy people, there should be poor people. I have noticed bums on the streets in US that really rely on help that comes from tax. They rather live on the streets than in a home because in that way they will get more $ from begging and the government. In Singapore, we cannot have such a society, if not the working population is going to have a heavy burden.
I was being brought up in US since 16 till 20, when i was attending a college there and i was also concurrently awarded with a PR. But my heart still stays with Singapore. Maybe i was not pragmatic in this sense. I came back to Singapore to serve my NS and decided to stay here until i decide to further my studies.(might be local). I dejected my friends from US, by turning down an internship which offers a remuneration much higher that what i’m offered as a job here. Of course then again, i might not be the best talents. But it is still contribution.
Regards.
about 3 years ago
Truthhurts,
I agree that welfarism isn’t good. I’m not trying to promote welfarism. In fact, I oppose that kind of thought. I just found it interesting that there are people who become so self-reliant as a result of our meritocracy policy to the extent that notions of loyalty and allegiance cuts no ice with them. Thankfully, you are not one of them.
about 3 years ago
At the end of day, what will happen to those “stayers” who cannot afford to leave and make “the best of it”? You can say we can try to change the system, but can we really do that in this generation. We are squeezed left and right for “economical reasons”. Not everyone is a high flyer. Many felt trapped in this system – free but not really free.
Again, I do not think that we should start comparing with other countries. We are born here and most will die here. Can you imagine that as a citizen of Singapore, we are placed in parking lots where our leaders are resting in their balcony having their tea parties.
To them: you may break my pocket, you will not break my soul. I will wait for that day to see you become humble.
Let’s not kid ourselves, I believe that they know about the pains we are going through, we know they know. It is the bloody “BIG picture” that they have but I do not know if the picture is a “personal” or national kind.
Aaron, life goes on and as for the rest of us, we will make the “best of it”. We will wait…
about 3 years ago
Well, Aaron, the real problem with your comment is that it doesn’t reflect the fact that it works both ways. Apart from the people who leave, there are the people who choose Singapore for pragmatic reasons also. So there is no real net effect. It’s not something to complain about. It’s nobody’s fault, just a global exercise of free will.
It’s a mistake to assume that the people who come into Singapore are any less loyal than the people who leave. They won’t have an incentive to be, that is agreed, but you could have said the same thing about the Mayflower’s passengers.
Perhaps the best thing to do is to let everybody who wants to leave do so, settle down happily, and forge new loyalties. It might yet bode well for world peace. Or polarise it beyond imagination and spark the next world war. I don’t give an airborne fornication either way. It certainly beats sitting around and moping about issues that aren’t worth our time.
about 3 years ago
Palisade,
I don’t assume that people who come into Singapore are less loyal. I’ve spoken to and heard for myself from a number of foreigners on how Singapore is just a pit stop. I don’t blame them because that’s the most logical thing for them to do. However, is it the most logical thing for Singapore to invest so heavily in foreign talent? What are the ‘returns’ on investment? At least from what I’m hearing, the ‘returns’ don’t seem to be justifying the investment. I could be wrong of course, and I hope to be wrong because if I’m right, it’s Singapore that suffers and as a Singaporean, I don’t want that.
about 3 years ago
Dear Aaron Ng:
It’s a combination of cracks in our system and also the limited nature of our Singaporean sphere that has resulted in the vast exodus of talents (in this case, it’s no fault of the system but rather geographical and size limitations).
Cracks in the Singapore system includes the exclusion of a few Singaporeans who feel unappreciated by the system. They may be talented in their own ways, but it’s the system that throws them out. I have discussed at length the aspects of the system, which acts as push factors in my blog.
http://socrates-reincarnated.blogspot.com/2007/03/of-migrants-and-stayers.html
Secondly, the limited Singaporean sphere is no fault of the system per se. It is the limitation of our size, geography and climate. Take for example a budding Winter Olympian. Would he find Singapore a playground for his talents? I think not. The same goes for a budding nuclear physicist or a rocket scientist. Having a nuclear plant is too hazardous for Singapore, and Singapore is too small for the building of a rocket launch facility (if there is a failure in the rocket, the population will be at risk), hence the absence of rocket and nuclear industries. Isn’t it little wonder that people aspiring to work in these industries end up finding their playground elsewhere?
I wrote a follow-up on this topic in my blog.
http://socrates-reincarnated.blogspot.com/2007/03/of-migrants-and-stayers.html
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 3 years ago
Hi Dr Dee,
I read your entry, and I suppose that the 4 issues you highlighted are all relevant points. It just suddenly struck me that there’s something about what SM Goh said.
“These are bright young people, children of very well educated Singaporeans.”
Gosh, I must have been sleeping to let this statement slip by me. Does it mean that the remaining population cannot do as well? For the Chinese population in Singapore, most of our forefathers were poor people seeking a better life. They were not the educated mandarins. Yet, we still managed to succeed. I just realised that the government is back to the same assumption as during the graduate mother policy period. Geez, and I thought we were past that stage.
Maybe another entry is necessary on this.
about 3 years ago
Let me just say that, in my opinion, the politicians in Singapore have never had any heart about taking care of the citizens.
Most of them are just f**king bootlickers, just look at the recent so-called budget debate. What debate was there?? Just praises and praises of how good and generous the gov is despite the fact that the GST will increase 40%!!! Ya helping the poor indeed.
These overpaid politician shouldn’t be surprise that the citizens are leaving, I mean what the hell do they expect when they run a country like as though it’s the Lee Inc. where subjects are on their own once they are no longer productive.
Jimmy
about 3 years ago
I just realised that Zyberzitizen has already written on the topic of clever people having well-educated parents.
http://zyberzitizen.wordpress.com/2007/03/16/very-well-educated-singaporeans-bright-young-people/
about 3 years ago
Dear Aaron Ng:
It depends on the definition of talent, but I would think the government defined it according to the lines of the graduate mother scheme, which you have so rightly brought up.
Just reading the phrase “These are bright young people, children of very well educated Singaporeans.†tells the line of our government’s thinking. There lies the implicit conclusion that parents are so well-educated, so kids are academic elites too. Yes, the government still clings on to the essence of the graduate mother’s scheme.
Does that mean if we lose a Beethoven or Vladimir Horowitz reincarnate born to blue collar workers, the government will not classify this as brain drain? After all, musical intelligence is considered a component of multiple intelligences.
It’s too premature to associate academic achievement with the word talent. People do well academically because they may be exam smart. To even associate good academic achievements with the word talent is considered an attempt to vulgarize the latter.
Talent is defined by performance markers, not A grades on academic transcripts. A talented fund manager has an impressive port folio to back himself up, as is a sportsmen with a sporting track record to back himself up.
Last but not least, our government’s fixation with associating the word “talent” with academic achievement, and of course, with children of educated elites is nothing more than what I call “a patronization of patriachism”. Don’t ask me to elaborate on that. Anyway, you would have guessed what I meant.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 3 years ago
Don’t expect the government to take care of you, that shouldn’t determine your affection towards Singapore anyway.
I have met people from really messed up nations with ever-changing governments who still bear deep love for their nation (due to their cultural history, their roots, their relationships)
pragmatism and practicality has always been some sort of source of pride for Singaporeans.
Things like loyalty and love are all impractical things (why should I take care of my family or friends?)
I advocate the celebration of impracticality as a starting point.
about 3 years ago
quitter and Bill: I don’t really think that it is idealism that causes people to leave – true idealists would stay and try to change the system and the country.
about 3 years ago
And, Amanda…
trying to change would probably bring a lot of trouble onto you first. It’s difficult to change a closed mind – and opening that closed mind is the first big change.
about 3 years ago
I’m a quitter. For now at least anyway. And the main reason is that I want to feel that if I screw up it’s for my own choices; I want to feel there’s room for dynamism, for giving things a shot and just seeing how they end up and not always, to use a bridge analogy, bidding for the safest contract. There isn’t the room to do that in Singapore; there isn’t the social leeway to take punts without scorn, to experiment, to learn by doing instead of by received wisdom. It’s too small mentally and culturally — people are too ready to pass judgment on any tentatively expressed or explored difference. I can’t do with always playing it safe. I need to live amongst people who understand that the reasons for living can be more important than life itself.
about 3 years ago
“I can’t generalise, but I won’t be surprised if a large number of our best talents are leaving because of pragmatic reasons (i.e. other countries are willing to offer better things than what Singapore can offer). I don’t think people would disagree that Singapore IS a very pragmatic country. And, I think that Singapore is paying the price for being too pragmatic.”
Aaron:
Just to clarify things: do you believe that the reason why bright skilled well-educated young Singaporeans are leaving in droves is that the country is too pragmatic? Or if the emphasis on the pragmatic aspects of life is reduced, more bright skilled well-educated young Singaporeans will return?
In other words, if Singapore becomes less pragmatic, then more bright skilled well-educated young Singaporeans will come back to Singapore? If so, how do we be less pragmatic?
about 3 years ago
I totally agree, which is why I said that staying and trying to change things would be the idealistic thing to do, as opposed to leaving.
about 3 years ago
We are run like Sparta, not Athens.
And now, we lack the will to change as well as correct mistakes. Opportunity cost is very high. To me, we started the entropy when streaming was reinforced and exacerbated by stuff like ranking. We atrophied even further when we started believing in our laurels and promoting world-classdom in every sphere, World Cup 2010, Boston of the East, PS21, S21 … basically it was never bottom up. The music was bad, the dancing was also bad.
about 3 years ago
to add on to pragmatism…. as a 3rd party:
We might not as well not do NS and null the idea of citizenship on the identify card.
There can’t be leadership without follower-ship of hearts and minds (note the sequence, it is never reversed) in the context of any group – country, organization, family or football team.
btw, where was it the post here or elsewhere about the mistaken notion of ‘meritocracy’ – the Lord Young context?
Dun mean to sound idealistic but I tink there is such a ting called ‘sweet spot’.
about 3 years ago
Dear all:
You should read this Newsweek piece by Fareed Zakaria.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663340/site/newsweek/
Yours sincerely,
Dr Dee
about 3 years ago
Dee
country got too captivated by ranking just they got captivated in recent years by outsourcing.
when you want to compare too much, you are too insecure and dun have your own intel.
ranking is not about benchmarking or even calibrating.
about 3 years ago
Trouble is we are not clear on the motivation and purpose.
about 3 years ago
Don’t be silly. Goh Chok Tong wasn’t thinking of all you people here when he made that remark. His “losing local talent” spiel was merely a prelude to Lee Hsien Loong’s anticipated announcement to increase ministerial salaries.
The PAP government is getting pretty good at subliminal messaging. All their unpopular policy announcements are preceded by weeks and months of ministerial pep talks, alarmist pronouncements, staged debates, etc, to condition/hoodwink/bully the general public into compliance.
The underlying message this time is that unless you give Lee Hsien Loong what he wants, the entire cabinet and all their superscale minions will migrate en masse to Australia.
The “local talents” are the ones who are about to receive a humongous pay raise at taxpayers’ expense — so unless you happen to be one of them, don’t get all excited.