Reduce the duration of national service and reservist
National Service, or army conscription in Singapore, was first introduced in 1967 due to pressing issues such as national security after Singapore’s “forced” independence in 1965. In 1971, the British completely pulled out of Singapore. It has been 41 years since the introduction of NS.
Since then the world and Asia has changed significantly in terms of security and economic arrangements. But has Singapore’s conscription policy kept up with these changes to reflect and cope with the new geopolitical landscape?
First let us review the service that all able-bodied 18-year-old male Singaporeans have to undergo. Basic Military Training, or BMT, is the “boot camp” for all new recruits. This lasts for three months whereupon the soldier then gets posted out to other units for further specialised training.
The conscripts then serve the remainder of their two-year stint polishing up their combat skills. Following the two years of full-time service, NSmen are required (for up to 40 days a year) to serve in a part-tme capacity until they are 50 years old for commissioned officers and 40 for others.
Reduce the two-year full-time service
In an age where warfare has turned to “smart” technology, is it still logical and necessary for Singapore to insist that its National Servicemen undergo 24 months months of active, full-time service? Such a policy is rare among countries that maintain a conscription policy. Below is a list of countries with periods of full-time conscript service:
1.Austria (6 months)
2.Bolivia (12 months)
3.Brazil (9-12 months)
4.Denmark (4-12 months)
5.Estonia (8-11 months)
6.Finland (6-12 months)
7.Germany (9 months)
8.Greece (12 months)
9.Guatemala (12-24 months)
10.Moldavia (12 months)
11.Mongolia (12 months)
12.Paraguay (12-24 months)
13.Poland (9-12 months)
14.Serbia (6 months)
15.Switzerland (18-21 weeks)
16.Taiwan (12 months)
17.Tunisia (12 months)
18.Turkey (12 months)
19.Ukraine (12 months_
20.Uzbekistan (12 months)
From the above data, it can be seen that for all intents and purposes a conscript army training programme need not be as long as the one we have in Singapore. The more advance countries like Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and Switzerland all have full-time services limited to one year and less.
Even Taiwan, which has an identifiable enemy in the form of China, limits its active service to 12 months. Only countries like South Korea and Israel have conscription periods that are longer than Singapore’s. These countries are, however, in a state of war.
Given the situation in Singapore there is no reason why we cannot employ more efficient training methods and reduce full-time NS from the present two-years to twelve months or less.
Reservist training
The current period of reserve training for NS men of up to 40 years old is also a burden on the servicemen and, by extension, the economy. Not only does the serviceman have to contend with the influx of foreigners, they are disadvantaged in terms of employment, remuneration and promotion when employers compare local men who have to be away for weeks in anyone year with foreign workers who have no such obligation.
The span of a serviceman’s reservist training should not go beyond 30 years of age. Men tend to settle down and start families around this age and job stability and carreer prospects are essential during this period. Unfair competition from foreign nationals would handicap local males and add to their already stressful lifestyles.
In addition, the human body goes into a physical decline after the age of 30. To keep our military personnel in top condition, it makes little sense in keeping men over the age of 30 in the frontline if military conflict does indeed breakout.
Increase volunteer, professional army
To compensate for the decrease in the number of active and reservist NSmen, the Singapore Armed Forces should expand volunteer army recruitment to complement the reduction in the number of conscripts.
In fact, the number of countries that have scrapped conscription are on the rise: Argentina (1994), Belgium (1994), Czech Republic (2004), France (1996), Hungary (2004), Italy (2004), Netherlands (1996), New Zealand (1972), Portugal (2004), and Spain (2001).
While Singapore may not be ready to follow suit, it would be prudent for us to reduce NSmen in favour of a professional military outfit
At the moment, NSmen are exploited for their services to glorify the PAP during National Day parades. The energy and time of these men can be put to more productive use than as entertainment for the PAP regime.
Conscientious objectors
What about people who do not believe that it is right for them to do military service due to moral, religious or ethical grounds? At the moment such conscientious objectors are charged and imprisoned for the length of their service.
In some of the countries that have compulsory military service, there is also a provision for conscientious objectors to serve in non-combat roles. There is an argument that this would open the flood gates for men to opt for non-combat positions. Such a loophole can be plugged by increasing the length of active service by, say, six months. The experiences of other countries like Germany and Sweden have not been negative in this aspect where males try to avoid combat service by claiming to be conscientious objectors.
Tranparency and openness
Obligation in Singapore seems to be a one-way street. While the Government holds the people accountable for their NS liabilities, the Ministry of Defence remains non-transparent and non-accountable in their dealings with the public.
The recent deaths of National Servicemen have opened a can of worms on training safety. In addition, the number of training fatalities and injuries are not made known to the public as a matter-of-course. The Government which compels the people to give their lives for the country are obliged to be absolutely transparent with information pertaining to safety issues. Compensation for deaths and injuries must also be reviewed and revised upwards.
The Government must also not exploit NSmen as cheap labour during major events such as the WB-IMF meeting or, possibly, the upcoming Youth Olympics. In must be remembered that the Enlistment Act was enacted for a specific purpose and any detraction from that purpose must be shunned.
Conclusion
When citizens are forced to serve in the military with the possibility of being killed if called to war, it is imperative that the government is a democratic one where citizens can hold the government accountable for its decisions and actions. Otherwise we may end up in a situation where wars are waged for the ruling elite rather than for the security and sovereignty of the nation.
Better to die than be sick
From: Siansiansian
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:24:38 -0800 (PST)
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: "Better to die than be sick."
If you don't have the money, no hospital here will treat you as
priority. My brother's son was hit by a car few years ago, and he was
admitted to NUH where he was left on the bed for 5 days 5 nights with
his painful broken leg, before he was operated on by a doctor. It is
simply so because my brother is a taxi driver, and he has empty
medisvae account. And his family will be treated at lowest possible
priority when it comes to the medical needs.
It is true that in Singapore you got to be able to work and earn for
yourselves and family. You don't rely on those people who are only
doing wayang shows to sent rice and daily food to your door steps
during their "charity" campaign.
On Nov 20, 12:08 pm, "truth" wrote:
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11/20/70-year-old-breast-cancer-pat...
> November 20, 2009 by admin
> Filed under Top News
> Leave a comment
> Written by our Correspondent
> A 70 year-old breast cancer patient has chosen to end her life by leaping to
> her death from a HDB flat.
> Madam Chen Baozhu used to sell prawn noodles with her husband Mr Yan Qingji
> in Geylang. They live together with a son who suffers from cerebral palsy.
> Due to their ill-health, they have to stop working and depend on public
> assistance from the government to support themselves. Mr Yan had a stroke
> three months ago and is still recuperating.
> According to her nephew, Madam Chen was worried her medical bills may impose
> a financial burden on the family.
> Mr Yan has been sent to a old folks' home and his son to a nursing home.
> There is nobody else in the family to take care of them.
> As recipients of public assistance, both Mr Yan and Madam Chen would have
> received a monthly allowance of $330 from the state and they do not have to
> pay for their medical bills at government clinics and hospitals.
> Singapore's aging population is a perennial headache for the government
> which is exacerbated by the declining birth rates.
> The government has encouraged Singaporeans to work as long as they can.
> Retirement age is extended to 62 and eventually to 67.
> Immigration is also encouraged as a means to increasing the flagging
> population. 36 per cent of Singapore's population now consists of
> foreigners.
> There are few social welfare benefits for Singapore citizens. CPF, which is
> originally intended as a pension fund is now deemed inadequate to meet the
> retirement needs of Singaporeans.
> Singapore's cash-rich government has so far refrained from expanding the
> social safety net out of fear that it will lead to a crutch mentality among
> the populace.
> "Welfare" is a taboo in Singapore officialdom which has consistently
> exhorted Singaporeans to be self-reliant.
> Singapore's income gap has widened considerably in the last decade. It is
> the second highest among the thirty most developed economies after Hong Kong
> whose result was skewed by the extraordinarily large numbers of
> billionaires.
> MM Lee Kuan Yew brushed aside the widening income gap as an issue of concern
> during a recent forum saying that it "does not matter" for long as the
> government continues to create jobs for Singaporeans.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:24:38 -0800 (PST)
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: "Better to die than be sick."
If you don't have the money, no hospital here will treat you as
priority. My brother's son was hit by a car few years ago, and he was
admitted to NUH where he was left on the bed for 5 days 5 nights with
his painful broken leg, before he was operated on by a doctor. It is
simply so because my brother is a taxi driver, and he has empty
medisvae account. And his family will be treated at lowest possible
priority when it comes to the medical needs.
It is true that in Singapore you got to be able to work and earn for
yourselves and family. You don't rely on those people who are only
doing wayang shows to sent rice and daily food to your door steps
during their "charity" campaign.
On Nov 20, 12:08 pm, "truth"
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> http://www.temasekreview.com/2009/11/20/70-year-old-breast-cancer-pat...
> November 20, 2009 by admin
> Filed under Top News
> Leave a comment
> Written by our Correspondent
> A 70 year-old breast cancer patient has chosen to end her life by leaping to
> her death from a HDB flat.
> Madam Chen Baozhu used to sell prawn noodles with her husband Mr Yan Qingji
> in Geylang. They live together with a son who suffers from cerebral palsy.
> Due to their ill-health, they have to stop working and depend on public
> assistance from the government to support themselves. Mr Yan had a stroke
> three months ago and is still recuperating.
> According to her nephew, Madam Chen was worried her medical bills may impose
> a financial burden on the family.
> Mr Yan has been sent to a old folks' home and his son to a nursing home.
> There is nobody else in the family to take care of them.
> As recipients of public assistance, both Mr Yan and Madam Chen would have
> received a monthly allowance of $330 from the state and they do not have to
> pay for their medical bills at government clinics and hospitals.
> Singapore's aging population is a perennial headache for the government
> which is exacerbated by the declining birth rates.
> The government has encouraged Singaporeans to work as long as they can.
> Retirement age is extended to 62 and eventually to 67.
> Immigration is also encouraged as a means to increasing the flagging
> population. 36 per cent of Singapore's population now consists of
> foreigners.
> There are few social welfare benefits for Singapore citizens. CPF, which is
> originally intended as a pension fund is now deemed inadequate to meet the
> retirement needs of Singaporeans.
> Singapore's cash-rich government has so far refrained from expanding the
> social safety net out of fear that it will lead to a crutch mentality among
> the populace.
> "Welfare" is a taboo in Singapore officialdom which has consistently
> exhorted Singaporeans to be self-reliant.
> Singapore's income gap has widened considerably in the last decade. It is
> the second highest among the thirty most developed economies after Hong Kong
> whose result was skewed by the extraordinarily large numbers of
> billionaires.
> MM Lee Kuan Yew brushed aside the widening income gap as an issue of concern
> during a recent forum saying that it "does not matter" for long as the
> government continues to create jobs for Singaporeans.
Mah Bow Tan contradicts himself on HDB flats
From: "truth"
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:45:06 GMT
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 8:45 pm
Subject: Yet another case of papist leegime cheating Singaporeans
truth comment : they jerked up the cost of land to the hdb just to make hdb
showsa lost to prove their illegitimate claim that they are subsidising
singaporeans. this type of government cannot be trusted. they are using creative accounting to fool the people.
they can also do the same with our wealth. one of these days we will wake up
withour reserves gone and they will reason that it is due to genuine mistakes in
investment decisions. very dangerous don't u think ?
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/11/mahs-explanation-does-not-square-...
Leong Sze Hian
Number of flats sold declined, contradicting Mah's explanation on reasons
for HDB's S$2 billion deficit.
On 7 November, the Minister for National Development, Mr Mah Bow Tan,
explained why the Housing and Development Board has incurred a S$2 billion
loss this year. The loss is twice that of the previous year. According to
Channelnewasia, Mr Mah said:
"It is making a loss and the government gives it grants every year to cover
the losses, mainly because we're giving subsidies to people to buy flats to
make flats affordable to first timers. That is why we're making a loss."
The report went on:
"Mr Mah said the HBD makes a loss each time it gives out subsidies to
first-timer home buyers, and when it sells flats lower than their cost
price. The reason for the high deficit was because more flats were offered
for sale last year, compared to the year before".
Mr Mah's remarks seem to contradict the statistics provided in the HDB's
latest annual report.
According to the annual report, HDB revealed that "the number of flats sold
under the home ownership scheme this year was 4,738, which was 7,253 less
than last year".
According to its section titled "Key statistics", the "demand for flats" was
9,870 Home Ownership flats for 2008/2009, compared to 12,449 for 2007/2008;
and the "Building statistics - Dwelling units" was 3,154 in 2008 compared to
5,063 in 2007.
All these numbers show that the number of flats sold have declined, rather
than increased.
The number of flats sold under the home ownership scheme declined by 60 per
cent, "Demand for flats" declined by 21 per cent, and "Building statistics -
Dwelling units" declined by 38 per cent, for the last year.
So, how is it possible then that "the reason for the high deficit ($2
billion) was because more flats were offered for sale last year, compared to
the year before", when the HDB statistics show that flats' building, demand
and sales, all declined substantially last year compared to the year before?
Can the Minister clarify his statement on the reasons for the doubling of
the deficit from $1 billion to $2 billion for the last year?
As for Mr Mah's assurance that HDB "sells flats lower than their cost price",
the HDB has not disclosed the breakdown of the cost of building flats,
despite letters to newspaper forums requesting for this information, almost
every year.
The last time this information was disclosed was in 1981, when the then
National Development Minister Mr Teh Cheang Wan, disclosed the land and
construction cost, as well as the subsidy and selling price, of the various
flat types in six districts.
For example, a three-room flat in the central core region, cost $53,700 to
construct and incurred a land cost of $40,000, and sold for $57,100.
--
Picture from Straits Times.
Parliament will sit at 1.30 pm on Monday, 23 November. The following are
some of the questions tabled for the Ministry of National Development:
Mr Chiam See Tong: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what it
costs the government to build a 3-room, 4-room and 5-room HDB flat; (b) what
is the profit margin which HDB adds to the cost for each of these categories
of flats when it sells them to the public; and (c) whether HDB bases the
selling price of flats on the prevailing market price of these flats.
Er Lee Bee Wah: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) how many
new Build-To-Order flats are presently available for selection; and (b) how
do the supply and demand factors influence the cost of these flats.
Mdm Cynthia Phua: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what is
the projected supply and demand of HDB flats in the next 5 years; (b) what
are the parameters that are taken into account in the projection of the
supply and demand of flats; (c) whether the Ministry has considered an
annual buffer number of ready flats and, if so, what is the number and the
parameters in arriving at that number; and (d) what measures will the
Ministry consider in ensuring that first-timers get a new HDB flat within 3
years.
Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: To ask the Minister for National Development
what is the current waiting time and the number/percentage of couples
applying for new HDB flats under the Fiance/Fiancee Scheme.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what is
the total number of permanent residents (PRs) who own HDB flats and the
distribution pattern of PRs in the various public housing estates; (b)
whether his Ministry will ensure that there is a good mix of PRs in the
various housing estates to encourage better integration with Singaporeans;
and (c) whether his Ministry will consider expanding the current policy on
racial mix for HDB flats to include PRs.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) how many
HDB tenants have been evicted from HDB rental flats for the past 12 months
due to illegal sub-letting or inability to pay rental; and (b) what are HDB's
plans to provide alternative housing for such evicted tenants if they are
unable to find alternative accommodation.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: To ask the Minister for National Development whether his
Ministry will review the household income ceiling for rental flats to take
into account inflation and the increased cost of living, before pegging
rental rates at 30% or 50% of the market rate.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 12:45:06 GMT
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 8:45 pm
Subject: Yet another case of papist leegime cheating Singaporeans
truth comment : they jerked up the cost of land to the hdb just to make hdb
showsa lost to prove their illegitimate claim that they are subsidising
singaporeans. this type of government cannot be trusted. they are using creative accounting to fool the people.
they can also do the same with our wealth. one of these days we will wake up
withour reserves gone and they will reason that it is due to genuine mistakes in
investment decisions. very dangerous don't u think ?
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/11/mahs-explanation-does-not-square-...
Leong Sze Hian
Number of flats sold declined, contradicting Mah's explanation on reasons
for HDB's S$2 billion deficit.
On 7 November, the Minister for National Development, Mr Mah Bow Tan,
explained why the Housing and Development Board has incurred a S$2 billion
loss this year. The loss is twice that of the previous year. According to
Channelnewasia, Mr Mah said:
"It is making a loss and the government gives it grants every year to cover
the losses, mainly because we're giving subsidies to people to buy flats to
make flats affordable to first timers. That is why we're making a loss."
The report went on:
"Mr Mah said the HBD makes a loss each time it gives out subsidies to
first-timer home buyers, and when it sells flats lower than their cost
price. The reason for the high deficit was because more flats were offered
for sale last year, compared to the year before".
Mr Mah's remarks seem to contradict the statistics provided in the HDB's
latest annual report.
According to the annual report, HDB revealed that "the number of flats sold
under the home ownership scheme this year was 4,738, which was 7,253 less
than last year".
According to its section titled "Key statistics", the "demand for flats" was
9,870 Home Ownership flats for 2008/2009, compared to 12,449 for 2007/2008;
and the "Building statistics - Dwelling units" was 3,154 in 2008 compared to
5,063 in 2007.
All these numbers show that the number of flats sold have declined, rather
than increased.
The number of flats sold under the home ownership scheme declined by 60 per
cent, "Demand for flats" declined by 21 per cent, and "Building statistics -
Dwelling units" declined by 38 per cent, for the last year.
So, how is it possible then that "the reason for the high deficit ($2
billion) was because more flats were offered for sale last year, compared to
the year before", when the HDB statistics show that flats' building, demand
and sales, all declined substantially last year compared to the year before?
Can the Minister clarify his statement on the reasons for the doubling of
the deficit from $1 billion to $2 billion for the last year?
As for Mr Mah's assurance that HDB "sells flats lower than their cost price",
the HDB has not disclosed the breakdown of the cost of building flats,
despite letters to newspaper forums requesting for this information, almost
every year.
The last time this information was disclosed was in 1981, when the then
National Development Minister Mr Teh Cheang Wan, disclosed the land and
construction cost, as well as the subsidy and selling price, of the various
flat types in six districts.
For example, a three-room flat in the central core region, cost $53,700 to
construct and incurred a land cost of $40,000, and sold for $57,100.
--
Picture from Straits Times.
Parliament will sit at 1.30 pm on Monday, 23 November. The following are
some of the questions tabled for the Ministry of National Development:
Mr Chiam See Tong: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what it
costs the government to build a 3-room, 4-room and 5-room HDB flat; (b) what
is the profit margin which HDB adds to the cost for each of these categories
of flats when it sells them to the public; and (c) whether HDB bases the
selling price of flats on the prevailing market price of these flats.
Er Lee Bee Wah: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) how many
new Build-To-Order flats are presently available for selection; and (b) how
do the supply and demand factors influence the cost of these flats.
Mdm Cynthia Phua: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what is
the projected supply and demand of HDB flats in the next 5 years; (b) what
are the parameters that are taken into account in the projection of the
supply and demand of flats; (c) whether the Ministry has considered an
annual buffer number of ready flats and, if so, what is the number and the
parameters in arriving at that number; and (d) what measures will the
Ministry consider in ensuring that first-timers get a new HDB flat within 3
years.
Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: To ask the Minister for National Development
what is the current waiting time and the number/percentage of couples
applying for new HDB flats under the Fiance/Fiancee Scheme.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) what is
the total number of permanent residents (PRs) who own HDB flats and the
distribution pattern of PRs in the various public housing estates; (b)
whether his Ministry will ensure that there is a good mix of PRs in the
various housing estates to encourage better integration with Singaporeans;
and (c) whether his Ministry will consider expanding the current policy on
racial mix for HDB flats to include PRs.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) how many
HDB tenants have been evicted from HDB rental flats for the past 12 months
due to illegal sub-letting or inability to pay rental; and (b) what are HDB's
plans to provide alternative housing for such evicted tenants if they are
unable to find alternative accommodation.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan: To ask the Minister for National Development whether his
Ministry will review the household income ceiling for rental flats to take
into account inflation and the increased cost of living, before pegging
rental rates at 30% or 50% of the market rate.
Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim bullshit
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 03:36:05 GMT
Local: Sun, Nov 22 2009 11:36 am
Subject: Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim bullshit
This Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim, the Environment and Water Resource Minister
is also bullshitting. During the Geylang food poisoning he bullshit. During
the
2006 flood, he bullshit about once in 50 years event to justify his
incompetence.
Now 2009 he again used this once in 50 years event to bullshit. He is
useless. Absolutely incompetent. He should be sacked.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Every 5 years we get those "once in 50 years" floods....
The previous one being in 2006. The minister said:
"You can't design for rainfall of this level, it is just too huge. The thing
we can accept is that we can only design our canal of a certain size, and at
the end of the day, we have to live with some of these occurrences which
occur once in 50 years or so".
-Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Environment and Water Resources Minister, 2006.[Link]
.
Looks like we don't pay our ministers enough to create a different excuse
when these things happen.
"Yesterday's event, I was told by the PUB, occurs once every 50 years"
- Environment and Water Resources Minister Yaacob Ibrahim, 20 Nov 2009[Link]
.
I was caught in a flood at Bukit Timah in 1988. It took 5 hours for the
water to subside before I could get out of the bus I was on to go home. Al
Gore said in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, that Singapore will be
underwater in a few decades. I wonder if the future minister will say "Sorry
guys, it is just a once in a 3000 year event" as all of us drown in our HDB
flats.
Local: Sun, Nov 22 2009 11:36 am
Subject: Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim bullshit
This Dr. Yaacob Ibrahim, the Environment and Water Resource Minister
is also bullshitting. During the Geylang food poisoning he bullshit. During
the
2006 flood, he bullshit about once in 50 years event to justify his
incompetence.
Now 2009 he again used this once in 50 years event to bullshit. He is
useless. Absolutely incompetent. He should be sacked.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Every 5 years we get those "once in 50 years" floods....
The previous one being in 2006. The minister said:
"You can't design for rainfall of this level, it is just too huge. The thing
we can accept is that we can only design our canal of a certain size, and at
the end of the day, we have to live with some of these occurrences which
occur once in 50 years or so".
-Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Environment and Water Resources Minister, 2006.[Link]
.
Looks like we don't pay our ministers enough to create a different excuse
when these things happen.
"Yesterday's event, I was told by the PUB, occurs once every 50 years"
- Environment and Water Resources Minister Yaacob Ibrahim, 20 Nov 2009[Link]
.
I was caught in a flood at Bukit Timah in 1988. It took 5 hours for the
water to subside before I could get out of the bus I was on to go home. Al
Gore said in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, that Singapore will be
underwater in a few decades. I wonder if the future minister will say "Sorry
guys, it is just a once in a 3000 year event" as all of us drown in our HDB
flats.
Law Minister explain why he said Singapore is a city
From: "truth"
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 08:47:32 GMT
Local: Sun, Nov 22 2009 4:47 pm
Subject: papist nincompoops prepared to destroy Singapore to defend pap dominance
truth comment: this asshole shanmugan said singapore is not a country. these
papist nincompoops willingly sacrifice singapore to defend and prolong the
pap dictatorship in Singapore. this is outrageous and singaporeans must
punish them
for their extremely destructive selfishness.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
'Interesting,' says law minister of student's query
By Elysa Chen
THE question popped up during the tea break of a dialogue session that Law Minister K Shanmugam had with 200 Ngee Ann Polytechnic students last week.
Describing the query as 'interesting', the minister expanded on his answer when the dialogue session resumed.
The question was from student Mel-Travis Loke Yong Chin, 17, who had, together with a few friends, approached Mr Shanmugam during the tea break. They were hoping to understand the minister's comments to 200 lawyers from the New York State Bar Association recently.
In particular, the students asked the minister to explain his abbreviated comment that Singapore is a city, not a country.
Explaining, Mr Shanmugam said: 'I made two speeches to the New York Bar...
'I made it clear that we are a sovereign state, with all the attributes of a sovereign state. We are a country in the legal sense.'
Explaining that political differences are shaped by economic conditions, geography and history, he said it would be more accurate to analyse Singapore's politics by referring to politics in larger US cities, like New York, Chicago and San Francisco.
This is because Singapore does not have a large geographical land mass or different histories for different regions within the same country, which could lead to different political ideologies.
Mr Shanmugam was asked at the US session if it was true that the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP) hold on power for decades could be one reason why the opposition was unable to survive or win cases in courts.
In his reply, he defended Singapore's status as a democracy during the PAP's 50-year dominance by comparing Singapore to Chicago and San Francisco, where Democrat mayors have won since 1931 and 1964, respectively.
He also pointed out the dominance of Democrats in New York City's city council, where they hold 45 out of 48 seats.
Mr Shanmugam, who was basing his comments on arguments by Mr Bryan Caplan, an American economist, said Singapore was viewed as a deviation from the democratic norm because it was seen primarily as a country.
He added: 'This is where most people make a mistake... I have tried to explain that we are different. We are a city. We are not a country.'
Travis, a year-one diploma student in banking and financial services, said later: 'We often refer to Singapore in National Day songs as a country.
'As the song goes, "This is my country, this is my flag." So, we were scrutinising the words 'city' and 'country', and trying to understand why he made the distinction.'
To shed further light on the issue, Mr Shanmugam gave the example of how New York people are interested in international trade as opposed to those in a state in the mid-west of America, who would be focused on farming and would not be interested in free trade.
He said: 'So... a party that is focused on farming and protecting farmers will do well in a farming area, but may not do well in a city area.
Urban interests
'A party that is focused on urban interests, or interests which urban voters are interested in or focused on, will do well there but may not in a farming area.'
Mr Shanmugam said that in Singapore, whether you are born in Jurong or Changi or Sembawang or in the south, there are no big differences in climate, geography or economic interests.
We go to similar schools and live in similar places - 70 to 80 per cent of our population live in public housing.
He said: 'Our economic interests and the type of society we want to see, it's similar.
'So my point was that you cannot take Singapore and compare it with a big country with huge geographical and historical differences, then it gets distorted. What we have to do is compare it with other big cities.
'And if you compare us with cities in the US or other countries, you will find similarities - people tend to vote in a certain pattern because their interests are similar.'
Travis said he was never puzzled by Mr Shanmugam's comment, as Singapore was often referred to as a garden city.
'I thought he cleared the doubts my friends had in a tactful way,' the student added.
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 08:47:32 GMT
Local: Sun, Nov 22 2009 4:47 pm
Subject: papist nincompoops prepared to destroy Singapore to defend pap dominance
truth comment: this asshole shanmugan said singapore is not a country. these
papist nincompoops willingly sacrifice singapore to defend and prolong the
pap dictatorship in Singapore. this is outrageous and singaporeans must
punish them
for their extremely destructive selfishness.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
'Interesting,' says law minister of student's query
By Elysa Chen
THE question popped up during the tea break of a dialogue session that Law Minister K Shanmugam had with 200 Ngee Ann Polytechnic students last week.
Describing the query as 'interesting', the minister expanded on his answer when the dialogue session resumed.
The question was from student Mel-Travis Loke Yong Chin, 17, who had, together with a few friends, approached Mr Shanmugam during the tea break. They were hoping to understand the minister's comments to 200 lawyers from the New York State Bar Association recently.
In particular, the students asked the minister to explain his abbreviated comment that Singapore is a city, not a country.
Explaining, Mr Shanmugam said: 'I made two speeches to the New York Bar...
'I made it clear that we are a sovereign state, with all the attributes of a sovereign state. We are a country in the legal sense.'
Explaining that political differences are shaped by economic conditions, geography and history, he said it would be more accurate to analyse Singapore's politics by referring to politics in larger US cities, like New York, Chicago and San Francisco.
This is because Singapore does not have a large geographical land mass or different histories for different regions within the same country, which could lead to different political ideologies.
Mr Shanmugam was asked at the US session if it was true that the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP) hold on power for decades could be one reason why the opposition was unable to survive or win cases in courts.
In his reply, he defended Singapore's status as a democracy during the PAP's 50-year dominance by comparing Singapore to Chicago and San Francisco, where Democrat mayors have won since 1931 and 1964, respectively.
He also pointed out the dominance of Democrats in New York City's city council, where they hold 45 out of 48 seats.
Mr Shanmugam, who was basing his comments on arguments by Mr Bryan Caplan, an American economist, said Singapore was viewed as a deviation from the democratic norm because it was seen primarily as a country.
He added: 'This is where most people make a mistake... I have tried to explain that we are different. We are a city. We are not a country.'
Travis, a year-one diploma student in banking and financial services, said later: 'We often refer to Singapore in National Day songs as a country.
'As the song goes, "This is my country, this is my flag." So, we were scrutinising the words 'city' and 'country', and trying to understand why he made the distinction.'
To shed further light on the issue, Mr Shanmugam gave the example of how New York people are interested in international trade as opposed to those in a state in the mid-west of America, who would be focused on farming and would not be interested in free trade.
He said: 'So... a party that is focused on farming and protecting farmers will do well in a farming area, but may not do well in a city area.
Urban interests
'A party that is focused on urban interests, or interests which urban voters are interested in or focused on, will do well there but may not in a farming area.'
Mr Shanmugam said that in Singapore, whether you are born in Jurong or Changi or Sembawang or in the south, there are no big differences in climate, geography or economic interests.
We go to similar schools and live in similar places - 70 to 80 per cent of our population live in public housing.
He said: 'Our economic interests and the type of society we want to see, it's similar.
'So my point was that you cannot take Singapore and compare it with a big country with huge geographical and historical differences, then it gets distorted. What we have to do is compare it with other big cities.
'And if you compare us with cities in the US or other countries, you will find similarities - people tend to vote in a certain pattern because their interests are similar.'
Travis said he was never puzzled by Mr Shanmugam's comment, as Singapore was often referred to as a garden city.
'I thought he cleared the doubts my friends had in a tactful way,' the student added.
LKY's Mistake
From: Siansiansian
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:20:09 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sun, Nov 22 2009 12:20 pm
Subject: Re: LKY's Mistake
On Nov 21, 11:05 pm, NotMyProblem wrote:
> LKY made mistake on "stop at two" policy. He made mistake in the Suzhou
> Project. He made mistake in mandarin education. Maybe he also made
> mistake in "National Service".
> NS was supposed to maintain a cheap armed forces, but now it is a place
> to keep our high paying scholars.
Because of his mistake on discrimnating Chinese Education in the 60s
70s, he has made life difficult for tens of thousands of Chinese
stream students who were filtered out of the main stream in their
careers. Many of those Nata graduates had since migrated and created
their own shining careers overseas, from UK to US, Canada, China and
Malaysia.
However, I'm glad he has admitted his mistakes.
From: "truth"
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:29:47 GMT
Local: Sat, Nov 21 2009 11:29 pm
Subject: Re: LKY's Mistake
Thru NS he screwed the male Singaporeans.
They are paid pittance and their career disrupted thru
reservist training.
NSmen must now fuck him back.
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 20:20:09 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sun, Nov 22 2009 12:20 pm
Subject: Re: LKY's Mistake
On Nov 21, 11:05 pm, NotMyProblem
> LKY made mistake on "stop at two" policy. He made mistake in the Suzhou
> Project. He made mistake in mandarin education. Maybe he also made
> mistake in "National Service".
> NS was supposed to maintain a cheap armed forces, but now it is a place
> to keep our high paying scholars.
Because of his mistake on discrimnating Chinese Education in the 60s
70s, he has made life difficult for tens of thousands of Chinese
stream students who were filtered out of the main stream in their
careers. Many of those Nata graduates had since migrated and created
their own shining careers overseas, from UK to US, Canada, China and
Malaysia.
However, I'm glad he has admitted his mistakes.
From: "truth"
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:29:47 GMT
Local: Sat, Nov 21 2009 11:29 pm
Subject: Re: LKY's Mistake
Thru NS he screwed the male Singaporeans.
They are paid pittance and their career disrupted thru
reservist training.
NSmen must now fuck him back.
Shanmugam 's prudent management
From: Rainbow 虹
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:54:04 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sat, Nov 21 2009 10:54 pm
Subject: Re: Shanmugam standard=lost of $100billions = prudend management.
All they need to do is to increase taxes after taxes.
Recently they increase property tax by approx. $100 per HDB flat,
assuming there are 900,000 units available,
they will scoop up 900,000x $100= $90,000,000 every years.
So this is how they can make up the losses easily by asking us to pay
for their mistakes.
I am sure there will be more increases in other taxes akan datang..
On Nov 21, 10:27 pm, "truth" wrote:
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> This bloody asshole also claimed that Singapore has rule of
> law and that there are check and balances in the ISA.
> This man is absurd.
> He is talking thru his asshole.
> "truth" wrote in message
> news:1MSNm.56483$ze1.37421@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >I have never seen another more ridiculous minsters than this
> > Shanmugam, the "Law" minister.
> > He claimed that Singapore financial management is prudent.
> > This after Temasek and GIC just burnt away $100 billions of
> > our wealth.
> > Singaporeans, fuck the pap hard in the coming GE will u ?
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 06:54:04 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sat, Nov 21 2009 10:54 pm
Subject: Re: Shanmugam standard=lost of $100billions = prudend management.
All they need to do is to increase taxes after taxes.
Recently they increase property tax by approx. $100 per HDB flat,
assuming there are 900,000 units available,
they will scoop up 900,000x $100= $90,000,000 every years.
So this is how they can make up the losses easily by asking us to pay
for their mistakes.
I am sure there will be more increases in other taxes akan datang..
On Nov 21, 10:27 pm, "truth"
- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
> This bloody asshole also claimed that Singapore has rule of
> law and that there are check and balances in the ISA.
> This man is absurd.
> He is talking thru his asshole.
> "truth"
> news:1MSNm.56483$ze1.37421@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >I have never seen another more ridiculous minsters than this
> > Shanmugam, the "Law" minister.
> > He claimed that Singapore financial management is prudent.
> > This after Temasek and GIC just burnt away $100 billions of
> > our wealth.
> > Singaporeans, fuck the pap hard in the coming GE will u ?
Singaporeans are squeezed out in their own country
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:01:08 GMT
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 12:01 pm
Subject: Singaporeans are squeezed out in their own country
http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/
Friday, November 20, 2009
Some Singaporeans become a minority in Singapore......
"When I go for a function and I see only expat Indians and no Singaporean
Indians, I feel uncomfortable - like the future is being taken over by
expats. What will happen in 15 or 20 years' time, when my children start
work?' -Mr K. Varatharaju.
Straits Times [Link]
Actually Mr. Varatharaju does not need to wait until his children start
work. It is already happening.
An increasing number of companies in Singapore now do not even want
applications from Singaporeans let alone older Singaporeans:
I don't blame these companies or foreign individuals at all for the current
situation. Companies want foreign workers for various reasons - no in-camp
disruptions, can easily hire and fire, bigger pool of younger workers,
sometimes lower wages etc. Companies are profit seeking entities, they do
not exist to maximise the social or economic benefits for Singaporeans.
Someone else was suppose to take care of that equation. You cannot blame
foreigners because they are here to seek a better life for themselves just
as we do for ourselves. Once there is a large pool of, say, mainland
Chinese, in the company it makes less sense to hire Singaporeans because the
cultural and language differences will make management difficult. There is
no shortage of almost any kind of skill you can get from China and India so
you can guess what will happen to the Singaporean worker in the long run if
the PAP keeps its policies.
posted by LuckySingaporean
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 12:01 pm
Subject: Singaporeans are squeezed out in their own country
http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/
Friday, November 20, 2009
Some Singaporeans become a minority in Singapore......
"When I go for a function and I see only expat Indians and no Singaporean
Indians, I feel uncomfortable - like the future is being taken over by
expats. What will happen in 15 or 20 years' time, when my children start
work?' -Mr K. Varatharaju.
Straits Times [Link]
Actually Mr. Varatharaju does not need to wait until his children start
work. It is already happening.
An increasing number of companies in Singapore now do not even want
applications from Singaporeans let alone older Singaporeans:
I don't blame these companies or foreign individuals at all for the current
situation. Companies want foreign workers for various reasons - no in-camp
disruptions, can easily hire and fire, bigger pool of younger workers,
sometimes lower wages etc. Companies are profit seeking entities, they do
not exist to maximise the social or economic benefits for Singaporeans.
Someone else was suppose to take care of that equation. You cannot blame
foreigners because they are here to seek a better life for themselves just
as we do for ourselves. Once there is a large pool of, say, mainland
Chinese, in the company it makes less sense to hire Singaporeans because the
cultural and language differences will make management difficult. There is
no shortage of almost any kind of skill you can get from China and India so
you can guess what will happen to the Singaporean worker in the long run if
the PAP keeps its policies.
posted by LuckySingaporean
World condemns Singapore dictatorship
From: "truth"
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:06:11 GMT
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 12:06 pm
Subject: World condemns Singapore dictatorship
From the Committee to Protect Journalists' website:
New York, November 19, 2009-The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns
the Singapore government's refusal to renew British freelance journalist
Benjamin Bland's work visa and his application to cover the recently
concluded Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit meeting. Bland was
reporting on the summit for the U.K.'sDaily Telegraph newspaper.
Bland's visa renewal application was rejected without explanation by the
Manpower Ministry on October 1, according to Bland. When the reporter
inquired why the government refused, the ministry's senior assistant
director, Yeo Kim Huat, told him on October 15 that, after internal
discussions, officials decided that they could not disclose their reasons
for the rejection.
After Bland's work visa expired on October 20, he received a 30-day social
visit pass that stipulated he not work, practice any occupation, or threaten
the well-being and security of Singapore at the risk of arrest and immediate
deportation. The British High Commission asked the Ministry of Information,
Communication, and Arts about Bland's declined request for accreditation at
the APEC meeting, but did not receive a reply, the journalist said.
"The refusal to renew freelance journalist Benjamin Bland's press
credentials again shows the Singapore government's intolerance of
independent and critical reporting," said Shawn W. Crispin, CPJ's Southeast
Asia representative. "Bland is the latest on a long list of foreign
journalists who have been targeted by the government for their news
coverage."
Bland left Singapore to return to his native U.K. on November 14. While
based in Singapore, he reported for a wide range of international and local
publications, including The Economist, Daily Telegraph, Financial Times
weekend magazine, Monocle, Far Eastern Economic Review, Asia Sentinel, as
well as Singapore's Straits Times and Business Times. He also maintained a
blog, The Asia File, which featured occasional critical commentary on
Singapore, including an entry on official secrecy over death penalty
statistics and a reposting of one of his Economist articles on the island
state's controversial efforts to import sand from regional countries for
land reclamation projects.
"The impression I got was that the government wanted to force me out of
Singapore without attracting adverse publicity by dragging out the process
and not giving me any explanation," Bland wrote CPJ in an e-mail. "I feared
that if I spoke out or wrote about my case before leaving Singapore I would
be arrested."
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 04:06:11 GMT
Local: Fri, Nov 20 2009 12:06 pm
Subject: World condemns Singapore dictatorship
From the Committee to Protect Journalists' website:
New York, November 19, 2009-The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns
the Singapore government's refusal to renew British freelance journalist
Benjamin Bland's work visa and his application to cover the recently
concluded Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit meeting. Bland was
reporting on the summit for the U.K.'sDaily Telegraph newspaper.
Bland's visa renewal application was rejected without explanation by the
Manpower Ministry on October 1, according to Bland. When the reporter
inquired why the government refused, the ministry's senior assistant
director, Yeo Kim Huat, told him on October 15 that, after internal
discussions, officials decided that they could not disclose their reasons
for the rejection.
After Bland's work visa expired on October 20, he received a 30-day social
visit pass that stipulated he not work, practice any occupation, or threaten
the well-being and security of Singapore at the risk of arrest and immediate
deportation. The British High Commission asked the Ministry of Information,
Communication, and Arts about Bland's declined request for accreditation at
the APEC meeting, but did not receive a reply, the journalist said.
"The refusal to renew freelance journalist Benjamin Bland's press
credentials again shows the Singapore government's intolerance of
independent and critical reporting," said Shawn W. Crispin, CPJ's Southeast
Asia representative. "Bland is the latest on a long list of foreign
journalists who have been targeted by the government for their news
coverage."
Bland left Singapore to return to his native U.K. on November 14. While
based in Singapore, he reported for a wide range of international and local
publications, including The Economist, Daily Telegraph, Financial Times
weekend magazine, Monocle, Far Eastern Economic Review, Asia Sentinel, as
well as Singapore's Straits Times and Business Times. He also maintained a
blog, The Asia File, which featured occasional critical commentary on
Singapore, including an entry on official secrecy over death penalty
statistics and a reposting of one of his Economist articles on the island
state's controversial efforts to import sand from regional countries for
land reclamation projects.
"The impression I got was that the government wanted to force me out of
Singapore without attracting adverse publicity by dragging out the process
and not giving me any explanation," Bland wrote CPJ in an e-mail. "I feared
that if I spoke out or wrote about my case before leaving Singapore I would
be arrested."
OBAMA VISITS THE DICTATOR
From: "Jam"
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:55:50 +0800
Local: Sat, Nov 14 2009 10:55 pm
Subject: OBAMA VISITS THE DICTATOR
Hello Black Ass! Please be warned...
1) No chewing gum, Fine $500
2) No eating or drinking in MRT, Fine $500
3) No Kangaroo T Shirts, Penalty: 14 days Jail
4) Do not sleep on Park bench. Fine $500
5) Do not spit if you smell a rotten ass. Fine $500
6) Gathering of more than four is ILLEGAL. Fine $1000
7) Do not speak without a Licence; Penalty: Fine and Jail.
8) Cannot order Mee Siam mai Hum: Fine $250
9) Do not go to Istana, KEMPETAI with samurai swords lives there!
Now the GOOD news.....
10) Stay alive by eating more Indian curry. Cures your cancer!
11) Eat Char Kway Teow. Since you President, you will get FREE extra egg!
12) Eat more Durian! Our Malaysian friend will be happy.
13) Drink our NEWATER to prevent dehydration. It is "purified" from Olivia's
toilet bowl.
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:55:50 +0800
Local: Sat, Nov 14 2009 10:55 pm
Subject: OBAMA VISITS THE DICTATOR
Hello Black Ass! Please be warned...
1) No chewing gum, Fine $500
2) No eating or drinking in MRT, Fine $500
3) No Kangaroo T Shirts, Penalty: 14 days Jail
4) Do not sleep on Park bench. Fine $500
5) Do not spit if you smell a rotten ass. Fine $500
6) Gathering of more than four is ILLEGAL. Fine $1000
7) Do not speak without a Licence; Penalty: Fine and Jail.
8) Cannot order Mee Siam mai Hum: Fine $250
9) Do not go to Istana, KEMPETAI with samurai swords lives there!
Now the GOOD news.....
10) Stay alive by eating more Indian curry. Cures your cancer!
11) Eat Char Kway Teow. Since you President, you will get FREE extra egg!
12) Eat more Durian! Our Malaysian friend will be happy.
13) Drink our NEWATER to prevent dehydration. It is "purified" from Olivia's
toilet bowl.
NO apology from CEO on KK Hospital drug overdose
From: "truth"
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 09:47:12 GMT
Local: Sun, Nov 15 2009 5:47 pm
Subject: NO apology from CEO on KKH unbelievable drug overdose fiasco
Where is the CEO of KKH ? Why is she hiding from
the public ?
This culture of the Singapore establishments sucks.
The big people take all the credit and multi$million pay
while the small people do all the works and take all the
blame for the mistakes.
What kind of absurdly irresponsible system is this ?
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 09:47:12 GMT
Local: Sun, Nov 15 2009 5:47 pm
Subject: NO apology from CEO on KKH unbelievable drug overdose fiasco
Where is the CEO of KKH ? Why is she hiding from
the public ?
This culture of the Singapore establishments sucks.
The big people take all the credit and multi$million pay
while the small people do all the works and take all the
blame for the mistakes.
What kind of absurdly irresponsible system is this ?
MM Lee: Chinese not interested in democracy
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:05:41 -0800 (PST)
Local: Mon, Nov 16 2009 10:05 am
Subject: Re: MM Lee: Chinese not interested in democracy
On Nov 15, 6:53 pm, Teshan wrote:
> On Nov 15, 5:48 pm, "truth" wrote:
> > Singaporeans are not interested in Lee Kuan Yew anymore.
> > He is history. He has way exceeded his used by date.
> > He is more suitable for the dustbin of history.
> > "RichAsianKid" wrote in message
> >news:hdniuh$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> > > Deeper question is why should anyone value mediocrity.
> > > Don't say it's merely some practical device...:)
> I am glad the great leader spoke out on behalf of 1.3B Chinese who are
> incapable of speaking for themselves. Finally they have a voice to
> rely on.
One can also say he is glad that the great leader could serve as the
eyes
ears of the westerners who were brainwashed by their so called "free
press."
Sorry to inform you this kind of comment does not add to the
discussion. If you
think MM Lee is mistaken, you should just say so and present some
evidence to
support your view.
Siansian:
China indeed does not need democracy for only as long as the CCP is
doing a good jobs like what they have been doing thus far. CCP must
continue their effort to eliminate corruption by those who corrupt by
abusing the Authority of CCP Governance, otherwise, the wave of
democracy will surely be the next force to overthorw the regimes. CCP
must also continue to address the problem of widening income gaps. I
have strong belief, China will do much better than Singapore,
Local: Mon, Nov 16 2009 10:05 am
Subject: Re: MM Lee: Chinese not interested in democracy
On Nov 15, 6:53 pm, Teshan
> On Nov 15, 5:48 pm, "truth"
> > Singaporeans are not interested in Lee Kuan Yew anymore.
> > He is history. He has way exceeded his used by date.
> > He is more suitable for the dustbin of history.
> > "RichAsianKid"
> >news:hdniuh$96f$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> > > Deeper question is why should anyone value mediocrity.
> > > Don't say it's merely some practical device...:)
> I am glad the great leader spoke out on behalf of 1.3B Chinese who are
> incapable of speaking for themselves. Finally they have a voice to
> rely on.
One can also say he is glad that the great leader could serve as the
eyes
ears of the westerners who were brainwashed by their so called "free
press."
Sorry to inform you this kind of comment does not add to the
discussion. If you
think MM Lee is mistaken, you should just say so and present some
evidence to
support your view.
Siansian:
China indeed does not need democracy for only as long as the CCP is
doing a good jobs like what they have been doing thus far. CCP must
continue their effort to eliminate corruption by those who corrupt by
abusing the Authority of CCP Governance, otherwise, the wave of
democracy will surely be the next force to overthorw the regimes. CCP
must also continue to address the problem of widening income gaps. I
have strong belief, China will do much better than Singapore,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Search This Blog
