"Less whining, more hard work. I am sick of ppl asking for handout"... sounds familiar?

[satayxp]

Complaining about life being unfair is like complaining about the sky being blue. That's just the way it is. Complaining doesn't do a single thing. Hand outs won't level the playing field simply because mentality and culture counts for more than just opportunities. If I took a kopitiam drinks stall uncle and say, Donald Trump, and gave them each $1m, assuming both are same age and equally intelligent, who do you think will make more? The uncle will take the money and stash it away in some FD collecting 3% p.a. while Mr Trump will most certainly leverage and hedge his bets in real estate and other investments. Because one KNOWS it's possible to make money, having seen it all around him and having done it himself, while the other will just thank his lucky stars for the windfall. There is literally NO WAY to completely even out the playing field.

actually if u see the comic, notice Paula has never asked for handout.
it is Richard who is guarding his entitlement by accusing unnamed ppl of asking for handouts
therein lies the hypocrisy
isnt it obvious wat this is abt?
it is the entitled class that is fear mongering n attacking the "Paula"s who hv never whined despite being dealt a bad hand n has put in more than their fair share for society.

 

[natnai]

actually if u see the comic, notice Paula has never asked for handout.
it is Richard who is guarding his entitlement by accusing unnamed ppl of asking for handouts
therein lies the hypocrisy
isnt it obvious wat this is abt?
it is the entitled class that is fear mongering n attacking the "Paula"s who hv never whined despite being dealt a bad hand n has put in more than their fair share for society.

Ok....so what do you propose then?

 

[satayxp]

Ok....so what do you propose then?

in SG's context?
the problem stems from politics n so the solution lies with politics

 

[boucyfirebal]

life is not so simple.

beside being entrenched does not mean everything. Look at USA, many Hispanic are rising fast despite their background

 

[natnai]

in SG's context?
the problem stems from politics n so the solution lies with politics

That's a bit vague. I mean you see the cause of all this inequality as a result of the rich oppressing the poor... But seriously what do you think needs to change? It's no use making broad statements.

Sent from Xiaomi MI 3W using GAGT

 

[Agravaine]

100% agreed.

They will often ascribe their success completely to some form of hard work, when largely the truth is that they had a certain serendipitious good fortune that crossed their path, allowing them to be propelled forward.

While hard work definitely plays a big part, not acknowledging the presence of chances is ignorant.

Sent from the black sea using GAGT

And even if their success was due entirely to their hard work, and we restrict our discussion to purely in-born hardworking mentality and determination rather than nurture (so that environment, upbringing, and other external factors are excluded), it's still the same story as the family they're born into - something they didn't have a choice over, and can claim no credit to.

 

[blurblur123]

That's a bit vague. I mean you see the cause of all this inequality as a result of the rich oppressing the poor... But seriously what do you think needs to change? It's no use making broad statements.

Sent from Xiaomi MI 3W using GAGT

not everyone is so fortune to have a house at England...


*running away

I know natnai is an elite...

 

[natnai]

And even if their success was due entirely to their hard work, and we restrict our discussion to purely in-born hardworking mentality and determination rather than nurture (so that environment, upbringing, and other external factors are excluded), it's still the same story as the family they're born into - something they didn't have a choice over, and can claim no credit to.

Exactly... Men aren't made equal. If we take this to its logical conclusion then we might as well say we should genetically engineer humans to have equal ability too.

Sent from Xiaomi MI 3W using GAGT

 

[Agravaine]

Exactly... Men aren't made equal. If we take this to its logical conclusion then we might as well say we should genetically engineer humans to have equal ability too.

Sent from Xiaomi MI 3W using GAGT

To me, the logical conclusion is for a government to recognise this and ask itself what it can do to help.

Sure, inequality is a fact of life and there are many things out of our control as individuals, but there are many things a government can do and control, and as much as they are able to, the responsibility is on them to help those in society who lost nature's lottery.

 

[satayxp]

That's a bit vague. I mean you see the cause of all this inequality as a result of the rich oppressing the poor... But seriously what do you think needs to change? It's no use making broad statements.

Sent from Xiaomi MI 3W using GAGT

1st u must recognise n acknowledge there is a problem
2ndly this is a tcss forum, not the best platform for specifics

in any case we can only talk on broad terms since only the gahmen n the ministries hv access to all the key stats n data.
so u see there alrdy is a problem concerning data.. why is there not a freedom of information act? why isnt the public able to access such data?
only with such info can further discussion be meaningful.
so u see for a start the gahmen in power needs to change the way it governs.. n it wont change until there is political pressure

 

[natnai]

To me, the logical conclusion is for a government to recognise this and ask itself what it can do to help.

Sure, inequality is a fact of life and there are many things out of our control as individuals, but there are many things a government can do and control, and as much as they are able to, the responsibility is on them to help those in society who lost nature's lottery.

I feel that the most/best a government can do is to level or at least try to even out the playing field inter-generationally. The main problem is hoarding...and the consequent inefficient allocation of resources. That will at least ensure that the presently underprivileged won't necessarily be held down by those who are, in a manner of speech, undeserving of their wealth. But it still doesn't resolve fundamental inequalities, which we all have to live with no matter what political system we live in.

One person may be rich by most standards, but he can also then say, well, why aren't I Bill Gates? He's monopolised a disproportionate amount of resources and cornered the tech market for so long that I didn't have the opportunity to compete. And it goes on and on. It's almost like flogging a dead horse.

 

[Kburn85]

Solution is move to aussie. One of the lowest income inequality in the world. Everything done by demand and supply. Blue collar can earn more than white collar. America also same story.

SG artificially repress blue collar wages by allowing free-flow of lowly skilled FW. In the end, nothing of us can last long cos poor workmanship, and all the blue collars squeezed out of jobs and society.

Don't think you white collar can sit there arm chio. White collar becoming the next victim. You take 12 years plus top grades to get into local uni. FT buy SPU cert, he get job ahead of you, he got MBA, you think your NUS big ****? You every year go reservist train to be soldier, he every year upgrading and improving himself. In the end, you clear reservist, he clearing his work onto you when you get back, employers see, who they employ?

SG society is get out of the elites uncaring face one. Who ask you, father is not big shot. If want to blame anyone, blame your parents for not being big shot.

Those can migrate, faster plan, mai tu liao, all the gates closing liao. Plumbers, electrician, welders, engineers, accountants, health sciences all start researching aussie, NZ, canada, america.

 

[natnai]

1st u must recognise n acknowledge there is a problem
2ndly this is a tcss forum, not the best platform for specifics

in any case we can only talk on broad terms since only the gahmen n the ministries hv access to all the key stats n data.
so u see there alrdy is a problem concerning data.. why is there not a freedom of information act? why isnt the public able to access such data?
only with such info can further discussion be meaningful.
so u see for a start the gahmen in power needs to change the way it governs.. n it wont change until there is political pressure

I don't mean it like that. What I mean to say is, if you want to press for a change, then at the very least you need to know what that change is. You need to know what you want to change, otherwise you are then aimlessly knocking your head against a brick wall. Without full access to classified data we can already see what the problems are, even if only on a somewhat superficial level. The crux of the matter is realising what we as a society CAN change, and can do to make things more equitable for all, and what is just a matter of fate, beyond all control.

No point wasting your time trying to effect an impossible change. You knock down those that are presently rich, and others simply take their place and begin hoarding again. So that is not the solution at all. That's exactly what they attempted in the Soviet Union. There will always be that bunch of greedy assholes who will use underhanded means to preserve their power, even from the grave. That's why there is a rule against perpetuity in the law of trusts. That's also why estate tax exists (except in this country). If the presently rich are confident in their own ability, then they should not be afraid of being taxed on inheritance. Most of them will still be left with a substantial amount - substantial enough to give them a lead, but not a lead so big as to be insurmountable even if that person is a complete bum.

 

[fox1]

Next comes a person born with one leg who says it's not fair that you can run fast and walk straight.
So you have to remove one leg to "level the playing field".

Or you can say, life is not fair and not everyone is born equal.

 

[satayxp]

I don't mean it like that. What I mean to say is, if you want to press for a change, then at the very least you need to know what that change is. You need to know what you want to change, otherwise you are then aimlessly knocking your head against a brick wall. Without full access to classified data we can already see what the problems are, even if only on a somewhat superficial level. The crux of the matter is realising what we as a society CAN change, and can do to make things more equitable for all, and what is just a matter of fate, beyond all control.

No point wasting your time trying to effect an impossible change. You knock down those that are presently rich, and others simply take their place and begin hoarding again. So that is not the solution at all. That's exactly what they attempted in the Soviet Union. There will always be that bunch of greedy assholes who will use underhanded means to preserve their power, even from the grave. That's why there is a rule against perpetuity in the law of trusts. That's also why estate tax exists (except in this country). If the presently rich are confident in their own ability, then they should not be afraid of being taxed on inheritance. Most of them will still be left with a substantial amount - substantial enough to give them a lead, but not a lead so big as to be insurmountable even if that person is a complete bum.

oh it is clear as sky wat the change is n how it can be achieved.
see wat happend when oppo capture a GRC? lol
suddenly the ruling gahmen wants a national conversation with sgians, suddenly all matters r up for discussion... hdb, public transport, NS, CPF, etc etc became topics of discussion.


but whether the eventual changes r enough are of cos a diff story, so the struggle continues ~

 

[natnai]

And I mean...this kind of social change is really nearly impossible to achieve, because you would have to change very fundamental aspects of the free market economy and capitalism. It's not like having estate tax will magically make all the problems go away. It'll help, but it's just _one_ little change. You've then got to examine the entire legislative and legal system. First you have to make limited liability and corporations go away, because the corporation limited by shares is the number one vehicle of exploitation.

Just think about it - you have a non-physical entity, sanctioned AND protected by the state. Better still, this entity shields the people behind it, who do nothing more than put their money together and wait for more to come in by paying workers less than their labour is worth. It's a license to take risks on society's account, and if it ends up costing society much more than what the shareholders bet, it's ok, the shareholders don't pick up that tab - they walk away, because of limited liability. That's a fundamental aspect of capitalism. If you pay a worker exactly the value of his labour, then the capitalist would not profit at all.

It's a rabbit hole, and it goes really deep. I suspect nobody actually knows how deep it REALLY goes, and I doubt anybody ever will. So really, the point I'm trying to make is that all this is just conjecture. Perhaps there can really be no meaningful change at all, in which case everyone, rich or poor, is better served thinking about how to improve their own circumstances, since anything else would just be a waste of time and effort.

This is a pretty good video illustrating the fundamental problems with capitalism:

And once you watch this, maybe it'll be clearer why it's damn near impossible. The problems we face in Singapore as a result of the PAP's (perceived) unequal hand, well, they exist all over the world, in so-called social democracies like the UK and Canada. It's the same old ****, it just looks different, because Westerners have a habit of rolling turds in glitter. Still a turd at the end of the day. Still stinks like a turd.

 

[satayxp]

And I mean...this kind of social change is really nearly impossible to achieve, because you would have to change very fundamental aspects of the free market economy and capitalism. It's not like having estate tax will magically make all the problems go away. It'll help, but it's just _one_ little change. You've then got to examine the entire legislative and legal system. First you have to make limited liability and corporations go away, because the corporation limited by shares is the number one vehicle of exploitation.

Just think about it - you have a non-physical entity, sanctioned AND protected by the state. Better still, this entity shields the people behind it, who do nothing more than put their money together and wait for more to come in by paying workers less than their labour is worth. It's a license to take risks on society's account, and if it ends up costing society much more than what the shareholders bet, it's ok, the shareholders don't pick up that tab - they walk away, because of limited liability. That's a fundamental aspect of capitalism. If you pay a worker exactly the value of his labour, then the capitalist would not profit at all.

It's a rabbit hole, and it goes really deep. I suspect nobody actually knows how deep it REALLY goes, and I doubt anybody ever will. So really, the point I'm trying to make is that all this is just conjecture. Perhaps there can really be no meaningful change at all, in which case everyone, rich or poor, is better served thinking about how to improve their own circumstances, since anything else would just be a waste of time and effort.

This is a pretty good video illustrating the fundamental problems with capitalism:

And once you watch this, maybe it'll be clearer why it's damn near impossible. The problems we face in Singapore as a result of the PAP's (perceived) unequal hand, well, they exist all over the world, in so-called social democracies like the UK and Canada. It's the same old ****, it just looks different, because Westerners have a habit of rolling turds in glitter. Still a turd at the end of the day. Still stinks like a turd.

so u throw out the baby with the bath water?
so make the little change n take it from there.. a step at a time
no one expects Rome to be built in one day.. heck if u can change things overnight or build a high rise overnight den i worry abt how stable it is.
i also prefer to deal with reality n not get mired by many of these conspiracy theories tat serve no real purpose other den fear monger n paralyse.

 

[Lexmerc]

oh it is clear as sky wat the change is n how it can be achieved.
see wat happend when oppo capture a GRC? lol
suddenly the ruling gahmen wants a national conversation with sgians, suddenly all matters r up for discussion... hdb, public transport, NS, CPF, etc etc became topics of discussion.


but whether the eventual changes r enough are of cos a diff story, so the struggle continues ~

If we want to put it into this context, I think we can also say S'pore as a rich nation is obliged to help out the poorer ones. If that is the case, we should have opened our arms wide for the Rohingyas.

The oppos was smart enough to know which ground to contest on and when to capture and enter into a GRC fight. Should the poor be able to do this, no one will say anything either. Odds are definitely against them, but its not till like as though they don't have a chance to flip over in life. Richness is after all relative.

 

[Bonadaly]

And I mean...this kind of social change is really nearly impossible to achieve, because you would have to change very fundamental aspects of the free market economy and capitalism. It's not like having estate tax will magically make all the problems go away. It'll help, but it's just _one_ little change. You've then got to examine the entire legislative and legal system. First you have to make limited liability and corporations go away, because the corporation limited by shares is the number one vehicle of exploitation.

Just think about it - you have a non-physical entity, sanctioned AND protected by the state. Better still, this entity shields the people behind it, who do nothing more than put their money together and wait for more to come in by paying workers less than their labour is worth. It's a license to take risks on society's account, and if it ends up costing society much more than what the shareholders bet, it's ok, the shareholders don't pick up that tab - they walk away, because of limited liability. That's a fundamental aspect of capitalism. If you pay a worker exactly the value of his labour, then the capitalist would not profit at all.

It's a rabbit hole, and it goes really deep. I suspect nobody actually knows how deep it REALLY goes, and I doubt anybody ever will. So really, the point I'm trying to make is that all this is just conjecture. Perhaps there can really be no meaningful change at all, in which case everyone, rich or poor, is better served thinking about how to improve their own circumstances, since anything else would just be a waste of time and effort.

This is a pretty good video illustrating the fundamental problems with capitalism:

And once you watch this, maybe it'll be clearer why it's damn near impossible. The problems we face in Singapore as a result of the PAP's (perceived) unequal hand, well, they exist all over the world, in so-called social democracies like the UK and Canada. It's the same old ****, it just looks different, because Westerners have a habit of rolling turds in glitter. Still a turd at the end of the day. Still stinks like a turd.

Even charities or "consumer responsibility" to environment and poor people is a new ideology.

 

[Lexmerc]

When technology can take over the labour, and the rich do not want to share their produce, u will very quickly see the poor rise up and throw them out of their corporations.

Fortunately or unfortunately, not every single poor peeps will think in this manner. You need numbers for that to happen, and that requires huge coordination on the poor people part. Just look at s'pore politics, its so loop-sided is because ppl would not want to risk and shake whatever foundation they have built, they don't trust a new establishment.

Similarly, the poor can attempt to rock the boat, but would life be better for them? The poor may end up being the bigger loser in this case, the rich still have their gold of mountain to fall back on. Nothing being loss on their part.

Odds are really extremely stacked against the poor, and I think its really the responsibility of the poor to have the intelligence to know how to step out of that cycle.