[Lillie_Steins]

I am with Zeddy on this. We need to gather together as Singaporeans and speak with one voice. I was with disappointed Ravi P, Andrew Loh and Alex Au who have online profile and could have done the discussion as the eyes and years of Singaporeans. Instead they took a stand politically stand because people like Alex have. Huge coterie of foreign friends working and living here.

They are govt critics but will happily attend NGOs parties as celebrities of local flavour.

Yoooz Scroobal, long time no see. I guess this article is a kick in Andrew and Ravi's collective arses. Interesting read, PAP, Australia etc.

http://newasiarepublic.com/?p=39639

Why On|Offline’s discussion of xenophobia is pointless

"The low road is opening the flood gates to cheap foreign labour. These foreigners hail from developing countries. There are two ways to improve output of production, to harness improvement in technology which results in a more efficient production process or increase labour input, especially cheap foreign labour – the more head-counts you have in your labour force, the more output you can produce. Thus, what is the end result of this low road that the PAP government has taken? Simply put, improvements in productivity which can be served by technological progress or a work force skilled and knowledgeable in harnessing new technologies are placed on the sacrificial altar, in favour of a quickfire way to improve production output by opening the flood gates to cheap foreign labour."

"Now, the problem comes about with PAP’s open door policy, which allows foreign nationals (from Southeast Asia and elsewhere) whose knowledge and skill attainment (because their countries are less technologically advanced) are lesser than Singaporeans through our immigration gates, that means we do not screen these foreigners for their qualifications, e.g. those with a degree from a run-of-the-mill institution in China as compared to say an engineering degree from Tsing Hua. This has a detrimental impact on Singapore. Firstly, Singaporeans are displaced from their jobs by cheaper workers, even though, if we assume a local graduate, he would have been more competent knowledge and skills-wise.

With the displacement of the Singapore workforce by workers from less technologically advanced developing nations, we are looking at the “regressive” form of the Solow-Swan model – an exogenous input of labour of lesser skill and knowledge (we made up this part, there is no such Solow model, it is just to highlight the impact of an input of a labour force that is lesser skilled), which means it is less likely we will achieve the level of technological progress and process innovation to create new markets or products, and produce efficiently. Hence, Singapore will not make inroads in terms of productivity."

"Now, the PAP has to go back to the drawing board, maybe even discard its old templates in favour of newer economic plans that benefit Singaporeans. The PAP has to realise by now that if they do not organise an overhaul of their economic plan, there is a last card, and it is going to be a ‘bloody’ scenario for the party. Many readers think that Lim Chong Yah’s prescription on freezing wages for top earners and increasing incomes for the poorest is shock therapy, the one that is reminiscent of the electric shock therapy that they do for depressed patients to reboot their mental circuits according to our good doctor. The shock therapy we are talking about is the sacking of the entire PAP ministerial cabinet during an election, where the PAP now becomes an opposition party. This makes Lim’s prescription look like a mere pin prick. This one is Singapore’s economy rebooting."

[Ifroham4]

Good to have you pop in Bro. Great article. Need more intelligent input from you lot.

Yeah disappointed that they tried to go the politically correct way and be all things to all people. Its time to batten down and call it for what it is. Nothing erratic but a measured discussion on the actual issue. The issue is not foreigners. We started life as trading centre to the world, we have seen all types. Really disppointed with Alex, Andrew and Ravi.

Yoooz Scroobal, long time no see. I guess this article is a kick in Andrew and Ravi's collective arses. Interesting read, PAP, Australia etc.

[Raj_Copi_Jin]

I don't think it was planned. GCT and team in 1995 panicked and decided to keep the GDP going at the rate it was. It was supposed to be quick fix - higher pop, higher consumption, economy revs up etc. After drinking the coolaide, they are drunk on it. I remember GCT when he became PM - soft, consultative, engage the people, open up the society, loosen the controls etc. In 1991, he lost 3 seats plus one already lost. The guy lost face. So he introduced more GRCs, put more MPs into each GRC and they again dominated.

The other thing with technocrats is that they let the numbers do the talking as it is much easier to articulate without their input. So the Arts, history, conservation, etc went out the door. One of the biggest culprit is actually an old -timer Ngiam Tong Dow. He ran MOF as his baby and refused to support anything that does not turn a buck.

The FT influx was planned at least 20-30 years ago. The systematic demolition and upheaval of heart-felt historical buildings and areas was put into place a long time ago. I was warned of this systematic removal of Singaporean-ess about 17 years ago. There will of course be grey areas but the demolition of the national library was the last proof I needed. There was no need to demolish the library but for the sake of building a new country, a rojak country made up of largely 3rd world coolie citizenry and an indigenous population largely fed with fascist ideals.

When you vote in a fascist political party for half a century, you must expect social and economic reforms of mammoth proportions. Fascist are extremist in nature. They never do things bit by bit. It's either one-party rule or the army may have to be called in. It's either total control of the mainstream media and unions or total chaos will reign.

[Peptobismol]

Perhaps this is also timely:

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/07/narc...ence_betw.html

Narcissism: The Difference Between High Achievers and Leaders


A chief executive had a dilemma. After working in a fast-growing company as COO, he accepted an offer from venture capitalists to start his own company. Within five years he had built a new enterprise generating revenues over $300 million and profit margins so high that his company had compiled a substantial cash reserve with which it was poised to go on an acquisition run. His passion, strategic and analytical brilliance, and relentless focus on practical results made him a rare, virtually unstoppable force in industry.

So what was his problem? He was irreplaceable, at least according to his board. It was the board's fundamental responsibility to protect the shareholders' interests with a viable succession plan, and for this they simply had no acceptable answer. They demanded that he find a solution.

He asked me for counsel:

Justin, I have two people on my team that I think can grow into my role. But my board vehemently disagrees and thinks I vastly overestimate their long-term potential to actually run a company. They're both superstars. How do I know which one — or if either one — can make the leap, or whether this is just a pipe dream that's going to waste a lot of time, money, and focus?
It's a good question, one I'm often asked. How do you know when someone can make the leap from high performer to CEO? There is one driving factor that determines the answer: narcissism.

Those selected for development have one universal trait in common: They are by definition high achievers. But there is a difference between those superstar achievers that can make the leap to CEO and those that will implode: To what degree do they feel invigorated by the success and talent of others, and to what degree does the success of others cause an involuntary pinch of insecurity about their own personal inadequacies? Only an individual who feels genuinely invigorated by the growth, development, and success of others can become an effective leader of an enterprise. And it remains the most common obstacle of success for those trying to make that leap.

There is powerful evidence (pdf) that narcissists have difficulty forging long-term relationships. Because narcissists are continuously seeking recognition from others to reinforce their own self-worth, they tend to form new relationships where they can see a positive reflection of themselves in the other person's eye. However, because of their obsession with analyzing events around them to see what they suggest about their own identities, they also exhaust those relationships. In leadership positions, this leaves colleagues feeling like collective efforts are being used to increase a single narcissist leader's ego, rather than a team's shared goals.

Keeping an eye on the high achiever's relationships and self-promotion certainly helps to see if your candidate is a narcissist. The Narcissistic Personality Inventory also has several questions that suggest how to further clarify an individual's level of narcissism, including:

Are the individual's relationships with others based on honest, intimate exchanges, or are they formed using a dynamic that regularly reinforces the narcissist's role as a "hero"?
Does the individual often talk about how his star qualities make him distinct from his peers?
Does he like to be the center of attention?
Does the remark, "I insist on getting the respect that is due me," resonate with his worldview?
If you answered "yes" to many of the questions above, chances are you're describing a high achiever who possesses a costly level of narcissism. But there are ways to help these individuals make the leap from high achievers to leaders.

First, coach them to continuously attribute credit to others for any successful project. Point out how this will produce long-term rewards because others will see that the projects they're responsible for produce successful outcomes. In the end, other talented people will vie to work with them and give them their best, further improving their track records of disseminating success.

Then, press hard against any behaviors that self-aggrandize. Frame the lesson in a language that high achievers can understand: If their intent is to get ahead, self-promotion is likely doing just the opposite over the long term. It is in their self-interest to change.

Individuals with extreme levels of insecurity — those that cannot remain stable while seeing others succeed — will fail in leadership. In these cases, you may need to arrange psychological interventions that get to the root of their insecurities and help them heal if they are to become successful leaders.

While elevated narcissism and self-promotion has been shown to result in quicker promotion early in one's career, its negative impacts are revealed in positions of higher authority. In these positions, blind ambition becomes its own worst enemy. In identifying these traits early and combating them through mentorship, you can transform these high achievers into quality leaders.

[Peptobismol]

I don't think it was planned. GCT and team in 1995 panicked and decided to keep the GDP going at the rate it was. It was supposed to be quick fix - higher pop, higher consumption, economy revs up etc. After drinking the coolaide, they are drunk on it. I remember GCT when he became PM - soft, consultative, engage the people, open up the society, loosen the controls etc. In 1991, he lost 3 seats plus one already lost. The guy lost face. So he introduced more GRCs, put more MPs into each GRC and they again dominated.

The other thing with technocrats is that they let the numbers do the talking as it is much easier to articulate without their input. So the Arts, history, conservation, etc went out the door. One of the biggest culprit is actually an old -timer Ngiam Tong Dow. He ran MOF as his baby and refused to support anything that does not turn a buck.

Ngiam was one of the first actors in the good-cop bad-cop scenarios played by the PAPzis. This guy, for all his complaints acts as director on multiple GLC and Stat boards, committees etc. He is a minion beyond a shadow of a doubt. As for GCT, he is another good cop bad cop joke. He didn't waste any time suing the oppo off their pants.

The planning to remove age-old heritage sites that Singaporeans have a heartfelt attachment to is what I have been pointing to. The heart and soul of the peopl was taken out piecemeal. The GDP is but a veil. The plan was to introduce new voters who were more likely to vote them in.

All totalitarian governments know that they can only rule in such a manner for a limited time as the population grows smarter and more attuned to the shenanigans of such a government. If you were the PAPzi you would know that there is a time limit unless something was done. That thing is to introduce an influx of new voters. Such a policy also helped the PAPzis to enrich themselves through direct rent-seeking opportunities.

[Paul Bunyan]

I wonder how we have come to this.

One fine day we wake up and find that Filipinos have replaced our Eurasians as the fourth race in Singapore. The Malays have no meaningfu part and the Indians as well as Eurasians have lost their hold in the Civil Service Senior ranks amply evidenced by Michael Barr. The majority of Singapore Chinese a slowly but surely finding their retirement rather premature. Singaporean kids are beginning to feel the impact of growing proportion of classmates who are foreigners.

So exactly what are we defending? Any clown with a degree even from a paper mill can land in Singapore and receive a 6 mth visa to look around. Not only are our doors wide open, I think the doors except for the hinges are missing.

So what does this country expect our national servicemen to defend? Surely not a way of life, surely not their jobs. I am sure everyone would be hard pressed to nail down what exactly we need to defend.

Give it some thought. Imagine our aspiration is now winning the SEA Games under 23 football in 2015. And we sent this Arsehole to the the US and the UK for his scholarly pursuit.

If one day, The Pinoys discovered oil in Spratly islands and need Singapore $ to develop and defend?

My Singapore friend in his 50s have enough in his savings not to feel uncomfortable. He is not even worried about CPF and still vote PAP. Seems like he is not the only one with spare millions in the savings and jobless.

[HedgeYourBets]

The FT influx was planned at least 20-30 years ago. The systematic demolition and upheaval of heart-felt historical buildings and areas was put into place a long time ago. I was warned of this systematic removal of Singaporean-ess about 17 years ago. There will of course be grey areas but the demolition of the national library was the last proof I needed. There was no need to demolish the library but for the sake of building a new country, a rojak country made up of largely 3rd world coolie citizenry and an indigenous population largely fed with fascist ideals.

When you vote in a fascist political party for half a century, you must expect social and economic reforms of mammoth proportions. Fascist are extremist in nature. They never do things bit by bit. It's either one-party rule or the army may have to be called in. It's either total control of the mainstream media and unions or total chaos will reign.

I would peg it to 1985, the year of recession caused by one "no hum" person, with the high CPF rates, that started the retrenchment ball rolling, the shelding of staff through attrition without any backups. The year where we were begining to be 'screwed' by influx of 'cheaper, bestets, fastest" labourers from across the causeway, then opening the doors for people from Hong Kong, India, Philippines and so forth, later it became a deluge. We the citizens benefitted very little for this 'open the doors policy', we experienced an extreme struggle to put, food & a roof over our head, make a decent, & even end up loosing our careers ( not jobs) to cheaper alternative. Back in 1985, I told my ex-colleagues of mine, that if they don't be careful they will loose their jobs to these 'newcomers', and they don;t put a stop to the government that is allowing this. They told me I was a habringer of bad tidings, many of these, 'tuck their head' between their legs when they see me.

The organization I worked for in 1985 was unionized, the management in order to cut costs, went to Malaysia to recruit staff for many jobs that can be available to SINgaporeans who were jobless, & were hit by the recession, the complaint was they ask for too much!? The Management promised the 'newcomers" a sponsor for their PR Status, if they signed the dotted line & remain here for five years, even paying them housing allowances. What did the union do? the local complained to Ants Till You C, and their reply was, they can't do anything, but the know how to collect union fees.

If they can't protect their own workers, what is the use of an union? for recreation & F&B only! We have ourselves to be blamed, we have allowed this to happen, from 1985 onwards...the rest is history!

It is not too late to change...we have to protect our RICE BOWLS & our children as well, wake up!

[Drugmachine]

What did the union do? the local complained to Ants Till You C, and their reply was, they can't do anything, but the know how to collect union fees.

they know how to do this:
Sir, member mah?

[9mm_fan]

1985 was the high water mark of this country. It was the year when CPF reached the highest and Singapore was the workers' paradise. Then the whole thing collapsed. Fresh graduates became jobless, Engineers accepted jobs for $500. Malaysians who graduated from NUS and NTU and required to be bonded for 2 years to a Singapore employer were given letters that the bond was waived and they were allowed go back home.

Though the economy was fixed 2 years later, employers tasted the joys of retrenchment described variously as restructuring, realignment etc decided that they will keep doing it. NTUC until 1981 who had as its head Devan Nair no longer had its new head meeting the PM for weekly coffee and tea and lost its influence.

GLC began to flousih and their biggest cost component are wages. MPs who were asked during the 1985 recession to reach out to SME businessmen began to come under their influence. MPs were offered directorship and patronage. Their children got ready made internships.

The word employee or worker were no longer in the vocabulary of the People's Action Party.Soon the acronym PAP was institutionalised.

If 1985 downgraded the value of a worker, 2005 is when a small businessman got raped by rentals.

I would peg it to 1985, the year of recession caused by one "no hum" person, with the high CPF rates, that started the retrenchment ball rolling, the shelding of staff through attrition without any backups. The year where we were begining to be 'screwed' by influx of 'cheaper, bestets, fastest" labourers from across the causeway, then opening the doors for people from Hong Kong, India, Philippines and so forth, later it became a deluge. We the citizens benefitted very little for this 'open the doors policy', we experienced an extreme struggle to put, food & a roof over our head, make a decent, & even end up loosing our careers ( not jobs) to cheaper alternative. Back in 1985, I told my ex-colleagues of mine, that if they don't be careful they will loose their jobs to these 'newcomers', and they don;t put a stop to the government that is allowing this. They told me I was a habringer of bad tidings, many of these, 'tuck their head' between their legs when they see me.

It is not too late to change...we have to protect our RICE BOWLS & our children as well, wake up!

[softy54534]

What irks me is the fact that MPs are allowed to hold onto their day jobs whilst drawing an obscene amount of tax payers' money every month. Not much has been said about this, but if you are representing the people in your constituency, let alone looking after the estate, shouldn't it qualify as gainful full time employment? For many MIW, it's seems like a mere additional source of income which comes with a few hours of obligation which even i wouldn't mind putting up with if the burden so enriches me.

Only WP has done the honorable thing by having a team of full timers.

[HedgeYourBets]

A PAP MP has an army of supporters though the volunteers are pushed forward for publicity. The amount of Stat Board paid staff is immense. PA is fully behind these MPs but not the opposition MPs.

[radikal]

The FT influx was planned at least 20-30 years ago. The systematic demolition and upheaval of heart-felt historical buildings and areas was put into place a long time ago. I was warned of this systematic removal of Singaporean-ess about 17 years ago. There will of course be grey areas but the demolition of the national library was the last proof I needed. There was no need to demolish the library but for the sake of building a new country, a rojak country made up of largely 3rd world coolie citizenry and an indigenous population largely fed with fascist ideals.

When you vote in a fascist political party for half a century, you must expect social and economic reforms of mammoth proportions. Fascist are extremist in nature. They never do things bit by bit. It's either one-party rule or the army may have to be called in. It's either total control of the mainstream media and unions or total chaos will reign.

Have you been to the Gardens by the Bay? Massive attempt to commercialise historicity by simulating images from the past such as Hill Street Police Station, and integrating them into the landscape, so that Sinkies can dine in a place that's filled with nostalgia and sense of the past. How fucked can one get? Demolishing a nations history as encapsulated in actual physical sites, and milking reconstructed images of our memory for all their monetary worth! I was one of the stupid masses that paid the Gardens a visit. Am wondering what's its real purpose (aside from the obvious economic value) in the wider scheme of things.

[Peptobismol]

A PAP MP has an army of supporters though the volunteers are pushed forward for publicity. The amount of Stat Board paid staff is immense. PA is fully behind these MPs but not the opposition MPs.

makes me wonder if the PA would be fully behind the current opposition parties supposing if they held the helm

[doctorzlo]

Have you been to the Gardens by the Bay?

bro,
some one has to pay for the air-con mah

[NeroASERCH]

Citi and even a stint in the US etc. He was also a government regional pupil. He also has experts from UK. The third sibling also has experts bit from OZ. He too has been jobless and had been doing odd tasks. He does not want to say anything to the household but they think he performs as evening secure at a house.

[HedgeYourBets]

I wrote this because I heard a really sad case involving 3 brothers yesterday. The 3 brothers grew up in Redhill in a one room flat. The eldest joined the government department and reached Div 2 status. He is in his mid 50s and still employed. The 2nd brother will turn 50 this year and has remained unemployed for the last 10 years except for short periods of temp employment. He had a impressive career in IT with NCS, Citi and even a stint in the US etc. He was also a govt local scholar. He also has masters from UK. The third brother also has masters bit from OZ. He too has been unemployed and had been doing odd jobs. He does not want to say anything to the family but they think he works as night guard at a condo.

The 2 younger brothers both had their basic degrees in NUS. They look after their elderly mother by renting out the master bedroom to FT.

All 3 served their NS.

Yesterday, I was just chatting with some Yankees about university. Having a college degree, is it that important anymore.

These days, it is tough getting thru colleges. The kids have to take on jobs to pay for daily expenses, but after graduating, cannot find jobs.
The new myths about a college degree opening doors, of a better life. Those graduates are deep in loans without a means of paying off.
Gone.

Perhaps we should return to the basic purpose of university as a research institution and not a teaching institution. With modern internet, TV and media converging technology, you do not need dedicated resources to complete a taught degree programme. In-expensive accredited on-line college-level classes for just-in-time (when you need it) education should be next big thing.

[tgs]

You people gets frustrated with the Pinoys and PRC but didn't we experienced the same think many years ago with the Malaysians who flooded many management positions in the civil service and private sectors?
SIA were long ago dominated by the Malaysians. They even voted a Malaysian as their union chief some time back. I do not know who it is now though.
Between the Malaysians, Pinoys and PRC, I think the Malaysian got the best cut of the meat thanks to LKY.

[TorryJens]

Between the Malaysians, Pinoys and PRC, I think the Malaysian got the best cut of the meat thanks to LKY.

other than 联绑华语, the cross cultural ties between Singaporeans and our kawans up north is bery the bery the kuat. as a matter in fact, without our abangs in the north, Mas Selamat would still be limping around