[CONSOLIDATED] Singapore General Election 2025 Discussion Thread

Top 4 agendas?

  • Immigration influx

    Votes: 469 54.8%
  • Cost of living/inflation

    Votes: 708 82.7%
  • Housing

    Votes: 384 44.9%
  • Lack of opposition in parliament

    Votes: 269 31.4%
  • Uncontested policy making by gahmen

    Votes: 343 40.1%
  • Lack of clear distinction between citizens/PR/permit workers

    Votes: 231 27.0%
  • Widening income gap

    Votes: 263 30.7%
  • Unemployment/Lack of opportunities for citizens

    Votes: 393 45.9%

  • Total voters
    856

Ethan_

Great Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
62,094
Reaction score
9,984
the young generation gets more informed and vote more wisely. only the boomers continue to vote for them becos they tax the young heavily and give money to the old and the old is happy
Think actually its not really tax the young give to the old. Local already have alot of money to start with, the huge surplus and reserves. But its just local pattern to never lugi, whatever it give to the people, it will take back even more from the people. Cannot tax the old much anymore. Thus tax the young more lor. :s22:
 

Ethan_

Great Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
62,094
Reaction score
9,984
actually he raises a valid point.

The Government is correct to say that they;re accumulating $$$ for future generations. The sus part (which the Government left out) is them accumulating $$$ in perpetuity with no one getting hold of the $$$?
Think perhaps one question is, who is that mysterious 'future generation'. For the way local do it, making it difficult for people to get marry and have kids. More people are not marrying and even if marry also don't want have kids. Where is that future generation. Their own elites and those foreigners probably. Why does it have to concern the people alot then, leaving the money for others. :s22:
 

Eliwood

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
7,655
Reaction score
3,185
Think actually its not really tax the young give to the old. Local already have alot of money to start with, the huge surplus and reserves. But its just local pattern to never lugi, whatever it give to the people, it will take back even more from the people. Cannot tax the old much anymore. Thus tax the young more lor. :s22:

Think perhaps one question is, who is that mysterious 'future generation'. For the way local do it, making it difficult for people to get marry and have kids. More people are not marrying and even if marry also don't want have kids. Where is that future generation. Their own elites and those foreigners probably. Why does it have to concern the people alot then, leaving the money for others. :s22:

Ya this is true. Sinkie dun wan to lugi by leaving money for others. Govt is a reflection of the ppl lol.

So PAP is actually doing what most Sinkies want. I also prefer my tax dollars going into reserves instead of being used to give handouts to ppl other than me.
 

Shion

Senior Mentor
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
361,411
Reaction score
112,405

Former NMP Raj Joshua Thomas joining PAP, is 'prepared' to answer call to run if needed​

He explains why he quit being an NMP, and why it was done in the interest of the NMP scheme.

image


Former Nominated Members of Parliament Raj Joshua Thomas and Syed Harun Alhabsyi made headlines recently after they resigned abruptly from their roles on Feb. 14, 2025.

The timing of the pair's resignation sparked speculation that they might be fielded as candidates for the 2025 General Election, which must be held by November.

In a conversation on Mothership's podcast, "Mothership Podcast with XQ", Thomas talked about his plans after his resignation.

Edit.00_00_01_13.Still002.jpg
Watch the podcast episode below.

For one, he confirmed that he has indeed applied for membership with the PAP.

When asked if he was ready to run, Thomas said he was "prepared" to answer the call if needed—whether it be for running in the upcoming General Election, or anything else he is called upon to help the country.

Here's an excerpt from our conversation with Thomas.

1. Why did you quit as an NMP?​

"I've been an NMP for four years...and I found during this period that a lot of PAP policies and the way that they did things, it made a lot of sense.

There was an innate logic to it. It looked at things (in the) long term. And one of the things that I truly appreciated was that the PAP government was prepared to take certain actions, even if there was a political cost to it — so if you look at the Allianz matter, for example

There was some discussion, casually, at first about possibly joining the party.

And eventually, when I felt that, yes, that was something that I was prepared to do, that that I could serve in that way and contribute in that way, then I felt I had to resign because I would no longer be able to discharge my NMP duties in a neutral and independent manner, as was required of me."

2. Some say that you're not treating the role of NMP seriously. What is your response to that?​

"No, I think on the contrary, when you are in that position as an NMP...you need to be neutral. You need to be non-partisan. And the moment that you feel that you are, you should leave the position.

And that's what I did. The purpose of doing that was precisely to preserve the institution of the NMP, an institution that I continue to have a lot of respect for.

Can you imagine if I had, instead of resigning, just masqueraded? Joined a party and masqueraded, contributing behind the scenes in some way or another, and I continue to give speeches as if I was a neutral NMP. I don't think that would be a tenable situation."

3. The timing of your resignation is a bit sus. GE is round the corner. Are you trying to run as a PAP candidate?​

"I think I'll just put it this way: When you know, you know.

When you look at what you can do in a political party—and it's so for any political party—there are many roles that you can play: adviser, grassroots activists...there are many roles that party members play.

So I think we should not be so fixated—I know it is election season now—but maybe we don't have to be so fixated about whether one is going to run or not."

4. So are you running in GE2025?​

"This is determined by, of course, the secretary-general of the party, the Prime Minister.

You join a party, you contribute in the way that you can contribute best. And if you are called upon to serve in one capacity or another, then you do so because you've made that commitment.

So this is the preserve of the Prime Minister and we will leave it to him."

5. Why would you align yourself with the PAP? Did you consider the Opposition?​

"I mean, honestly, this was not something that I went out and sought.

I did not go to the Opposition and say, 'Hey, do you want me to join you or any other party?'

I think it is something that evolves over time, as you realise that you are more comfortable with each other, and that your views and your values align.

And then I think, naturally, some of these questions may arise, and it naturally did not arise with any of the opposition parties."

6. What do you bring to that Singapore political landscape that no one else can bring?​

"I have had a bit of a unique career path. I started off in the civil service, and then I went on to become a lawyer in a big law firm. Then I left legal practice to go into the security industry.

I've been in government, and I've been in law, which is a very different industry from the security industry. So I think what I bring is really that very diverse experience...I think my experience has allowed me to see a whole wide range of Singapore society.

Now I've got a few years of experience in Parliament, so I understand the parliamentary process. So, I think I've got a very unique background and set of experiences that allows me to understand the situation. I can also look at what are the legal considerations, and I can also look at what are the considerations of businesses. So I think this helps me to form a very holistic view and understanding of policies and of bills that may arise."

Check out the video podcast episode here:



Top image: Andrew Koay



NMP scheme shld be scrapped...
 

Philipkee

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Messages
26,552
Reaction score
15,676
Think actually its not really tax the young give to the old. Local already have alot of money to start with, the huge surplus and reserves. But its just local pattern to never lugi, whatever it give to the people, it will take back even more from the people. Cannot tax the old much anymore. Thus tax the young more lor. :s22:
True
 

Shion

Senior Mentor
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
361,411
Reaction score
112,405
For me personally.
49 (PAP) so they still have the majority
25 (WP) as they are the most organised opposition party
15 (PSP) 1 last hurrah for TCB + Hazel Poa/LMW rewarded for their effort
8 (SDP) so CSJ/Paul Tambyah finally get inside parliament.

Btw, heard there might be a coalition between SDA and WP for the Punggol GRC.
https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...gi-grc-in-talks-with-workers-party-on-punggol

i will be surprised if wp works with sda to contest there
 

Shion

Senior Mentor
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
361,411
Reaction score
112,405
Recently various towns are having $1 promotion.

$1 for 30 eggs, $1 for a carton of drinks, $1 for kitchen towel etc......

Aunties Uncles so happy $1 for 30 eggs, keep praising PAP. But they forgotten the inflation and GST caused the eggs to increase from $4-$5 to now about $7 for 30 eggs.

This $1 deal ONLY is for BEFORE ELECTION.

nee soon also have too. $1 exchange $20 worth of items.
 

Philipkee

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Messages
26,552
Reaction score
15,676
Think perhaps one question is, who is that mysterious 'future generation'. For the way local do it, making it difficult for people to get marry and have kids. More people are not marrying and even if marry also don't want have kids. Where is that future generation. Their own elites and those foreigners probably. Why does it have to concern the people alot then, leaving the money for others. :s22:
Actually I think it’s the same when we save for a “rainy day”. This rainy day is mysterious. We have saved a lot and we keep saving but the rainy day never comes

When it does come, we are glad we have the savings. But until it comes, it’s just a mysterious concept
 

Ethan_

Great Supremacy Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
62,094
Reaction score
9,984
Actually I think it’s the same when we save for a “rainy day”. This rainy day is mysterious. We have saved a lot and we keep saving but the rainy day never comes

When it does come, we are glad we have the savings. But until it comes, it’s just a mysterious concept
Think its different bah. People save cause they know its save for themselves. But incumbent saving for so called future generation when more and more don't have any future generation to talk about, so its very mysterious lor. Why does it concern those who don't have any. Their own survival is at stake, would rather local use it on them instead.
 

CaptchaCheebeh

Master Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2012
Messages
2,505
Reaction score
1,766
A good government with a clear and strong mandate is able to plan for the long-term, and efficiently push forward policies that benefit Singaporeans.

A bad government with a clear and strong mandate will also be able to move quickly, but to pass laws and implement policies to rob and oppress their true blue citizens more easily.

If you are certain that PAP is filled with good actors, then go ahead and give them a strong mandate, rather than to impede their progress. But if you are in doubt about whether your ruling overlords are good or scumbags, it's better to vote in some checks and balance to "paralyze" them, thereby reducing the amount of potential damage they can do to you.
 

Philipkee

High Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2013
Messages
26,552
Reaction score
15,676
Think its different bah. People save cause they know its save for themselves. But incumbent saving for so called future generation when more and more don't have any future generation to talk about, so its very mysterious lor. Why does it concern those who don't have any. Their own survival is at stake, would rather local use it on them instead.
Not really. People say they save for themselves but when the need comes, they are hesitant to unlock the savings saying not the time now.

And it’s not that we don’t have a future generation. We have a declining TFR and not a non existent TFR. There is still a future generation

Also, can we say that the previous Pap did not really save for the future generation when they gave cheap HDB to boomers and now we are facing the price and complaining? So now if we ask the govt not to save for future generation but spend on us we will earn the ire of the next generation just like how we feel towards the previous generation?

Remember. There is a declining future generation but it’s still there. Saying don’t save for future generations is just selfish. As it is, a lot of debts of today will have to be borne by the future generation. For example, as we are an aging population, I foresee the next generation will be tax burdened more to cover our medical expenses when we are old and not able to pay taxes anymore
 

Shion

Senior Mentor
Joined
Oct 24, 2008
Messages
361,411
Reaction score
112,405
if the system can paralyze so easily, the system is flawed in the first place
 

Eliwood

Supremacy Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
7,655
Reaction score
3,185
Not really. People say they save for themselves but when the need comes, they are hesitant to unlock the savings saying not the time now.

And it’s not that we don’t have a future generation. We have a declining TFR and not a non existent TFR. There is still a future generation

Also, can we say that the previous Pap did not really save for the future generation when they gave cheap HDB to boomers and now we are facing the price and complaining? So now if we ask the govt not to save for future generation but spend on us we will earn the ire of the next generation just like how we feel towards the previous generation?

Remember. There is a declining future generation but it’s still there. Saying don’t save for future generations is just selfish. As it is, a lot of debts of today will have to be borne by the future generation. For example, as we are an aging population, I foresee the next generation will be tax burdened more to cover our medical expenses when we are old and not able to pay taxes anymore

Bbfa no future generation lar. That is wat he meant, HE does not have future generation lol.
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards, Terms of Service and Member T&Cs for more information.
Top