snapp
Arch-Supremacy Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2000
- Messages
- 24,207
- Reaction score
- 13,107
This is a heartfelt message to my fellow Singapore citizens:
DO NOT VOTE "WISELY": A few days ago, I collected my fresh/new Singapore passport, and received my Polling Card. I am proud to be Singaporean. The old passport you see here, and a Singapore flag, has travelled with me to the summits of half a dozen virgin and other other peaks in the past five years and 20 countries in all. I look forward to making a tiny extra contribution tomorrow as a voter. Last week I was a bit conflicted as to whether to vote for a likeable candidate of the Establishment, and reasonably good in municipal matters, versus an untried but sincere one, with no municipal track record. At Mass, I received a copy of Archbishop Goh's letter to Catholics on the elections. He advised us to ask ourselves to answer 8 questions about those running in the elections, and if they passed muster ( see http://www.catholic.org.sg/pastoral-letters/preparing-for-general-election-2015).
Some prayers later, it became clear. Our incumbent party/government, in my opinion, passed three of the questions but have failed in part, or wholly in the other five. Sorry, but three out of eight isnt quite good enough. And when I have seen how some have campaigned; using smears, dirty tactics, dredging up the past, rather than giving us specifics of the future, challenging policies in a way beyond sound bites, my decision is clear. Are we here just to vote for those who can beautify (with our money anyway) our estates and build pretty tiled pavements? Or are we to focus on meatier national issues. And seeing fair play at work.
Specifically, one area I found interesting was the great divide between the extent to which we are helping the poorest and weakest of our nation, and how the ideas of our rulers differ so greatly from others. Read the next bit carefully.
Of the annual income we get from our casinos ( $1.2 billion a year), we spent about$ 6 million; less than 50 cents in a $100, on anti-gambling measures and counselling etc. Before 2010, our hospital bed ratio per thousand ( I think) residents used to be 2.1. After the recent slew of new hospitals, it's gone to 1.7. Go figure our "long term" planning. Our much tooted-about Pioneer Generation package of $800 million a year amounts ot 0.5% of GDP. Defence 4%. One wonders what could be done to our poorest of the poor if we just nudged some of that 4% into healthcare. We have the highest revenue-to wages ( 80:20) ratio in the developed world (60:40 in the rest of the world) - suggesting that one of the reasons why we, and the poorest can't retire well, is that we simply arent being paid well enough for the same output, with corporate profits taking a higher proportion of GDP than it should.
For those still undecided, read Paul Thaler's decision-science thoughts about "why the sandwich is fine but the deal stinks" - we are often fine with a sandwich we buy at the airport. What we hate are the lack of realistic choices, and the overpriced food. This is because of "transaction utility". We're often not just voting for selfish reasons, we want to be happy about our vote. Isn't also sucky that we'd still love to vote a class act candidate like Tharman, but not the vanilla hanger-ons? Isn't it sucky that our GRC system can't save a fine Minister like George Yeo; when we just wanted the other dullards out? Does the present deal stink, just a bit?
So if we, for once every five years get out of our often middle-class, dulled sensitivities; being happily ensconced in our confos, fine-dining, landed homes, airconditioned jobs and cars; and consider for a moment of how our Public Assistance gives nary $400 a month for a family to survive - ask yourself this: Where would the extra money coming from? Answer: No new taxes for most of us- just taxing those ( the top 1%) who make $500K and above an addiitonal 1% will generate $168 million more. Spend more of the casino income, nudge the defence budget; and cut spending to the Peoples Association. NONE of these suggestions have gained any traction with our current govt..
The Titanic was built and steered by professionals with a track record, Noah's ark, by amateurs. Lee Kuan Yew's government came into power with no track record. The greatest economic and social policy thrusts of early post 1965 Singapore was made with significant Opposition in Parliament. Dr Toh Chin Chye of the PAP said " when you have opposition, you have consultation".
I am tired of reading comments that say "vote wisely" when the person posting it obviously means to say "vote PAP" but hasn't the guts to say it. You find none of this in people in the other camp - who often speak with sincerity and conviction. So I say, do not vote "wisely", vote with your heart and conscience; not with your wallet, self-serving needs, and unfounded fears. Vote for people who bring sincerity and conviction into the picture, not the same blather, soundbites, and people who say one thing, but do another.
Do not vote 'wisely'.
Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/do-vote-wisely-david-lim-csp?redirectFromSplash=true
DO NOT VOTE "WISELY": A few days ago, I collected my fresh/new Singapore passport, and received my Polling Card. I am proud to be Singaporean. The old passport you see here, and a Singapore flag, has travelled with me to the summits of half a dozen virgin and other other peaks in the past five years and 20 countries in all. I look forward to making a tiny extra contribution tomorrow as a voter. Last week I was a bit conflicted as to whether to vote for a likeable candidate of the Establishment, and reasonably good in municipal matters, versus an untried but sincere one, with no municipal track record. At Mass, I received a copy of Archbishop Goh's letter to Catholics on the elections. He advised us to ask ourselves to answer 8 questions about those running in the elections, and if they passed muster ( see http://www.catholic.org.sg/pastoral-letters/preparing-for-general-election-2015).
Some prayers later, it became clear. Our incumbent party/government, in my opinion, passed three of the questions but have failed in part, or wholly in the other five. Sorry, but three out of eight isnt quite good enough. And when I have seen how some have campaigned; using smears, dirty tactics, dredging up the past, rather than giving us specifics of the future, challenging policies in a way beyond sound bites, my decision is clear. Are we here just to vote for those who can beautify (with our money anyway) our estates and build pretty tiled pavements? Or are we to focus on meatier national issues. And seeing fair play at work.
Specifically, one area I found interesting was the great divide between the extent to which we are helping the poorest and weakest of our nation, and how the ideas of our rulers differ so greatly from others. Read the next bit carefully.
Of the annual income we get from our casinos ( $1.2 billion a year), we spent about$ 6 million; less than 50 cents in a $100, on anti-gambling measures and counselling etc. Before 2010, our hospital bed ratio per thousand ( I think) residents used to be 2.1. After the recent slew of new hospitals, it's gone to 1.7. Go figure our "long term" planning. Our much tooted-about Pioneer Generation package of $800 million a year amounts ot 0.5% of GDP. Defence 4%. One wonders what could be done to our poorest of the poor if we just nudged some of that 4% into healthcare. We have the highest revenue-to wages ( 80:20) ratio in the developed world (60:40 in the rest of the world) - suggesting that one of the reasons why we, and the poorest can't retire well, is that we simply arent being paid well enough for the same output, with corporate profits taking a higher proportion of GDP than it should.
For those still undecided, read Paul Thaler's decision-science thoughts about "why the sandwich is fine but the deal stinks" - we are often fine with a sandwich we buy at the airport. What we hate are the lack of realistic choices, and the overpriced food. This is because of "transaction utility". We're often not just voting for selfish reasons, we want to be happy about our vote. Isn't also sucky that we'd still love to vote a class act candidate like Tharman, but not the vanilla hanger-ons? Isn't it sucky that our GRC system can't save a fine Minister like George Yeo; when we just wanted the other dullards out? Does the present deal stink, just a bit?
So if we, for once every five years get out of our often middle-class, dulled sensitivities; being happily ensconced in our confos, fine-dining, landed homes, airconditioned jobs and cars; and consider for a moment of how our Public Assistance gives nary $400 a month for a family to survive - ask yourself this: Where would the extra money coming from? Answer: No new taxes for most of us- just taxing those ( the top 1%) who make $500K and above an addiitonal 1% will generate $168 million more. Spend more of the casino income, nudge the defence budget; and cut spending to the Peoples Association. NONE of these suggestions have gained any traction with our current govt..
The Titanic was built and steered by professionals with a track record, Noah's ark, by amateurs. Lee Kuan Yew's government came into power with no track record. The greatest economic and social policy thrusts of early post 1965 Singapore was made with significant Opposition in Parliament. Dr Toh Chin Chye of the PAP said " when you have opposition, you have consultation".
I am tired of reading comments that say "vote wisely" when the person posting it obviously means to say "vote PAP" but hasn't the guts to say it. You find none of this in people in the other camp - who often speak with sincerity and conviction. So I say, do not vote "wisely", vote with your heart and conscience; not with your wallet, self-serving needs, and unfounded fears. Vote for people who bring sincerity and conviction into the picture, not the same blather, soundbites, and people who say one thing, but do another.
Do not vote 'wisely'.
Source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/do-vote-wisely-david-lim-csp?redirectFromSplash=true
