First time strike TOTO in my whole life - Ang Bao Draw 2017

First time bought so much TOTO - $228 Ang Bao Pack. And it is also my first time to win TOTO total $120! haha. Recover half the cost. Singapore Big Sweep next month. Haha. Hope to win something. ^^

Rate This Post

Pokemon Go: Completing the Pokedex

Technically I'm done with this game. Getting the other 2 rare pokemons is like winning a lottery and I usually have no luck with that. Not gona be as zealous as before but will still keep a look out for them.

Pokemon Go has indeed helped me to be more familiar and refamiliarise myself with Singapore Terrain and I have become fitter during the process. It motivates me to cycle to Changi Village, Punggol waterway park and East Coast park. Total distance covered walking and cycling on each occassion can be 10-20km or more. I seldom do that nowadays but It is fun wandering around Singapore and talking to strangers. If I have time and the inspiration, I would like to write about my reflection, like human nature, about this game. ^^

N.B: If anyone has not started this game and you like playing treasure hunt, you may like this game too.

Rate This Post

Won $200 in Travel Smart Rewards :))

First time won $200. Every time I miss this $200. Finally!! :))

Join Travel Smart Rewards and stand to win $$ for off-peak trips on MRT/LRT. For people who are interested, you may sign up here: https://travelsmartrewards.sg/r/xBAzSsH9/

Rate This Post

Go away PM Lee!

Can someone more competent please take over PM Lee's job? The current generation will never forget how lousy he is! Please get lost.

Rate This Post

Kae Sim ah.. Singapore

The government blames the citizens for the slower growth.

The citizens blames the government for the social issues incured due to their FT policy.

One side of the "neutral" citizens say the government should not be blamed for the surviving problem they faced in life.

One side of the "neutral" citizens say the citizens should not be blamed for the slowing down the growth.

I look at Singapore.. really kae sim... haiz...

Rate This Post

Some reflections on the future

There are two actions that will appease my anger, annoyance, frustration and disappointment on the current state of this sinkingpore.

1) Change a new PM , a leader with new vision for Singapore leading us to new direction + reshuffle all the ministers in the parliament (be it dismissal, or re-allocation)

OR

2) Have a higher proportion of opposition members in the parliament, 40 to 50% would be reasonable to correct the current state of the island back to a brighter future.

~~

Haiz... I even thinking of going overseas to work for a few years with migration as the last last resort which in the past I never entertained that thought before...

Rate This Post

PAP, from people’s advancement to pro-alien

One of the good articles:

PAP, from people’s advancement to pro-alien

In 1959, the PAP (People’s Action Party) was a achieved people’s advancement in socio-economic development. From 1984 onwards, the PAP regime promoted productivity to rely less on foreign workers. In 1990, the PAP promoted a Next Lap vision with immigration as a complement to make up for falling births.

More fast-track career path elite dominated the regime. They were excited about tapping the supposed talent pool of foreign talent around the world. In early 1993, the pro-PAP mainstream media heaped praise on Mr Sim Wong Hoo. He was perhaps Singapore’s only truly home-grown international entrepreneur.

The fast-trackers wanted to become Mr Sim in the fastest time. Under their unique style, they actively turned the workplace into a mini-United Nations (UN) at all levels. They reasoned if this would enhance Singapore’s global competitiveness and greater pay cheques for everyone, including themselves.

There was a huge increase in SPRs (Singapore Permanent Residencies) and citizenships. The beneficiaries included Temasek Review’s future favourite foreign talent Mr Sinha Shehkar. He became a citizen in 1994 at the age of 25 without having to perform National Service (NS). NS was military conscription or its equivalent for male citizens and certain SPRs.

More foreign students entered into the mainstream higher educational institutes such as NUS (National University of Singapore) and NTU (Nanyang Technological University). They were mainly concentrated in Engineering and Information Technology. Some received financial assistance from the PAP regime.

With the fast trackers’ promotion, these students soon had a rewarding career and SPR without serving NS. Some later assisted the PAP regime to bring in more foreigners between the ages of 21 and 35.

The supposed foreign talents had a future exit strategy for themselves and for their sons to legally avoid NS. The PAP regime knew about of NS avoidance but kept quiet as it gradually saw another value for immigrants. More naturalized citizens (about 7000 per year during the 1990s) meant political value.

The PAP regime was upset with certain younger home-grown locals’ interest in a 2 party system since the 1991 GE (General Election). The PAP repackaged itself as a party of both home-grown citizens and foreign immigrants. The fast-trackers wanted to maintain absolute political dominance at home.

After the Asian financial crisis of 1997, 45 year old lesser-educated workers became the 1^st group of locals to lose their jobs. Requests for an immigration slowdown were rejected by the PAP regime. It emphasized retraining for reemployment but it was of limited use so long the massive immigration inflow continued.

During the regular wage rises from 1986 to 1996, many local workers benefited and assumed more good years. Some spent much of their money on eating, drinking and touring. After 1997, no 25-year-old high flyer in the civil bureaucracy wanted to spend much time on 45 year old obese and demoralized ex-workers.

A second elimination wave occurred to 45 year old senior managers from 1999 to 2000. In 1998, PAP legislator and NUS lecturer Dr Tan Boon Wan (http://theonlinecitizen.com/2010/11/immigration-still-an-issue-12-years-on/) asked the Cabinet to define foreign talent in employment and career advancement.

The PAP regime became contradictory. It told locals to aim for high advancement while describing high-aspiring locals as pampered and choosy. It claimed there were chronic shortages of well-paid talents while emphasizing foreigners were brought in for low-paying jobs which locals were said to have avoided.

Nonstop and systematic glorification of foreigners by the PAP shaped the organizational mindset. Foreigners were employed and promoted at all levels, functions and sectors because they were foreigners. The employing organizations saw them as better, faster and sometimes cheaper. Improving productivity was nice but it took time. The massive inflow provided instant solutions.

Younger critics had little effect as they were in the minority in their age group. Many youngsters were still having good careers in both public and private sectors and did not care. Some such as Ms Jessica Tan (Information Technology) and Mr Teo Ser Luck (Logistics) would join the PAP regime.

In 1998, the TFR dropped below 1.5. According to the pro-PAP mainstream media, this was a sign that efforts to increase births had failed. The fast—trackers became more inclined to see immigration not just as a complement but a strategic portfolio. Massive immigration created a vicious cycle with less resident births.

While Dr Tan was voicing his concerns, NUS was planning for the next strategic initiative. In 2000-2001, his big boss,newly-installed Vice-Chancellor and President Professor Shih Choon Fong announced the formation of a NUS global knowledge enterprise. By 2005, NUS no longer resembled Singaporean.

The only barrier left was the 2001 GE. Young PAP leader Dr Vivian Balakrishnan talked about reaching out to the younger generation. Within the wider context, this also included the younger foreign immigrants. The PAP had a massive victory with 75.2% of the valid vote.

During the 2002 National Day rally speech, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong criticized unhappy emigrating locals and described them as quitters. The PAP transformation into the Pro Alien Party was complete.

Grey Hippo

Rate This Post

Less time spent on reflecting God's words

I'm a bit guilty that I have "neglected" God in terms of studying the bible, increasing my knowledge on God's word and Christian affairs though I sometimes still read some Christian related Q&A, articles and occassionally being pulled to engage in some discussions on Christianity issue and so on. I must say that I have put more time thinking on national affairs and my future career that the time spent on reflecting God's words is reduced. But I believe the future will get better and I will be able to put more time to reflect on quiet time.

Rate This Post

I suspect that the concept / ideology of having China as a cheap location for manufacturing will be faced with problem in future as China is no longer a cheap place for living. Moreover, as cost of living increases, the wages of the workers must increase too. This concept or ideology is not sustainable..

Retire on the cheap in China? Not so easy

LEE CHOO KIONG | Thu, Dec 23, 8:33 AM

Dec. 23--HONG KONG -- When street hawker Ng Ching retired 13 years ago, he moved from Hong Kong to southern Chinese province of Guangdong -- where he thought he could stretch what little savings he had, with some help from his relatives there.

But when he returned to Hong Kong last month, the 82-year-old was desperate and destitute, his money long gone.

Mr Ng's dream of spending his retirement years in relatively cheap mainland China -- shared by hundreds of other ordinary Hong Kongers -- had been scuttled by the red-hot Chinese economy leading to soaring prices.

He was among the 100 destitute Hong Kongers who were escorted back to the Chinese city from the mainland by the Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions (FTU) in the first 11 months of this year.

The spokesman for the FTU's mainland consultation services centre told The Straits Times the federation had helped arrange for 110 retirees to return last year and another 90 in 2008.

In the four years from 2004 to 2007, there were only about 40 such cases in all.

"Rapid development, rising standard of living and high inflation are making life difficult for some of the elderly people living on the mainland," said the spokesman.

According to FTU figures, most of those who returned to Hong Kong were more than 75 years old. The oldest was 102.

"The bulk of these people are admitted into nursing homes, mainly because they have been away for a long time and no longer have property, relatives or friends in Hong Kong," the spokesman said.

About 40,000 elderly Hong Kongers in mainland China face the same grim prospect of outlasting their savings, Sing Tao Daily reported.

This problem is the most serious in Shenzhen and Dongguan, the top cities for retirement in Guangdong province for Hong Kongers.

There have been calls for the Hong Kong government to relax some of the conditions to qualify for the Old Age Allowance (OAA). Hong Kongers aged 65 and above receive a cash allowance of HK$1,000 (US$128) a month.

But currently, they must stay in the territory for at least 90 days to qualify.

Although the government is expected to shorten this to 60 days in February next year, critics say it should do away with the minimum residence period instead.

They reason that some senior residents have no choice but to forgo the allowance because of ill health, which prevents them from travelling back, or because they have nowhere to stay in Hong Kong.

Mr Albert Poon, assistant officer at the FTU's centre in Shenzhen, thinks it makes more economic sense for the Hong Kong authorities to give the money with no strings attached so the retirees can continue to live in mainland China.

"If these old folk check into nursing homes in Hong Kong, the government would have to take full responsibility for the monthly fees ranging from HK$8,000 to HK$10,000," he was quoted as saying in the Southern Metropolis Daily.

Most old folks' homes on the mainland charge well under 4,000 yuan (US$602) a month.

The Hong Kong government spent HK$6.32 billion on the OAA in 2009 to 2010, according to figures from its Labour and Welfare Bureau.

More than 500,000 people were under the scheme at the end of September this year.

A 2007 survey conducted by the Census and Statistics Department showed that almost 40,000 OAA recipients lived on the mainland.

Rate This Post

I'm so dreaming of working overseas ....

I'm so dreaming of working overseas and come back once in a while!!! I think it would be beneficial for me (at least two things) and good to see more of the world outside the circumference of the little red dot!

Rate This Post

My first post for the year 2011

I reiterate my stand which I wrote on 19th December:

The current ruling party should change name

If the current policies are the "best" for Singapore, I suggest the name of the current ruling party be changed as it is not consistent with their policies. It really a eye sore to me whenever I see a mismatch. Perhaps a name and logo change would make them more relevant in this latest stage of globalisation if they choose to continue to defend their ideology.

Rate This Post

Singapore is having an identity crisis - a Country? Nation? City? Large organisation (MNC)? Hotel? Island? etc

Very sad to be having lost my identity as a citizen, fulfilled my NS obligation, here as my leaders are confused with the actual status of Singapore. The decades of national identity building has eroded these few years because of the incompetency of our government who still think they are right in their policies. Paying millions dollar to them for lips service only. Haiz... No wonder foreigners are laughing at Sinkaporeans.. lol

Singapore spirit blows hot and cold

Insight Down South
By SEAH CHIANG NEE

If Singaporeans fear they will one day be overwhelmed by migrants in their own land, the statement from a minister that Singapore is not a country, leaves them even more uncertain.

IN THE midst of a historical demographic change, Singapore’s hard-headed government seems less inclined nowadays to talk about national identity than it once was.

This is a departure from the earlier post-independence years, when promoting values like patriotism and nation-bonding were top priorities.

Today, they remain important goals but are more discussed among citizens than the policy-makers.

Many Singaporeans are worried about the erosion of national fervour in an island state bloated by the recent arrivals of hundreds of thousands of foreigners.

On the government’s part, priority seems to have shifted – at least for now – from promoting nationalism to persuading Singaporeans “to embrace foreigners”. I suppose there’s a time for everything.

It probably seems untimely for the authorities to preach an intensification of national feelings at a time when so many foreigners – and new migrants – are settling here.

“They are caught in a bind. Harping on national sentiments now could be seen as isolating the new arrivals,” said a neighbourhood doctor.

With its short history, Singapore still needs to continue to build a national identity among Singa­poreans citizens or risk losing its economic achievements, he said.

The question is: How, when citizens may soon become a minority?

Recent conflicting remarks by ministers have not helped to clarify to citizens where they are heading – or indeed if Singapore is a country or merely a global city.

Law (and Home Affairs) Minister K. Shanmugam surprised everyone when he told visiting American lawyers that Singapore was not a country.

He was defending the government’s human rights records. The minister said Singapore was viewed as a deviation from the democratic norm because it was seen primarily as a country.

“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,” he said.

It sparked off a public debate, especially among young national servicemen sworn to defend the nation. Baffled party members sought an explanation.

In an indirect effort to control damage, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said Singapore could not afford to have a ratio of more than 40% foreign workers.

“We felt we are more comfortable with that than thinking we are nothing but a global city. We are also a country,” he said.

In an earlier unrelated event, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that despite its achievements, Singapore was not yet a nation.

“Are we a nation yet? I will not say we are. We’re in transition. Please remember this is an ideal which we may not completely reach, but because we have this ideal, we’ll continue to make progress,” he said.

All this talk has not gone down well with Singaporeans, who find it incomprehensible and reflective of government uncertainty.

Songshus blogged: “From my observation over the last two or three decades, it seems to me that our government is only trying to succeed economically.

“We should also develop on other fronts that would bind our people together, and promote cultural and identity awareness.

“The average Singaporean really does not know what future direction we are heading towards.”

Critics of the government, however, are less surprised.

For years, they have accused the People’s Action Party (PAP) of governing Singapore like a profitable corporation, even paying themselves as Board members.

Increasingly during the past decade, the political leaders had been talking more of Singapore as a global city.

During his recent visit to Moscow, MM Lee said his vision of Singapore was that it would no longer be seen as just an Asian city one day – but as cosmopolitan and connected to the world.

In view of this line of thinking, Shanmugam’s description of his country as a city – not a country – should not be surprising.

The question is: what will happen to the national identity that the PAP had wanted to forge from day one of independence?

Can it work with so many foreigners coming and going as though it were a hotel?

Some analysts noticed that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who faces a tough general election soon, recently talked of wanting to build – not nationalism – but “The Singapore Spirit”.

Not many people remember now, but in 1989, Singapore’s leaders called for a “national ideology” to prevent a “harmful drift towards Westernisation” and promote a national identity.

No one bets it will be revived anytime soon.

While moulding a national identity has not been a popular leadership topic these days, the same cannot be said of Singaporeans. Many are pushing for a stronger rallying effort.

During National Day, another popular discussion centred on the question: “Will the rally make us feel for Singapore again?”

Some Singaporeans believe the country now has an identity crisis as a result of foreign arrivals now making up one third of the population.

Others agree that while it is causing some social dislocation, “we should not blame the whole problem on the government”.

Muhamad Nur appealed to all to treat Singapore as a nation – not just a city. “This is our only solution.”

A visiting student from Switzerland, Christabel, disagreed with those who declared that Singapore has no identity or is a sanitised corporate state.

“Remember as a country, you are only around 40 years old. Identity will come naturally, given more time.”

Rate This Post

The current ruling party should change name

If the current policies are the "best" for Singapore, I suggest the name of the current ruling party be changed as it is not consistent with their policies. It really a eye sore to me whenever I see a mismatch. Perhaps a name and logo change would make them more relevant in this latest stage of globalisation if they choose to continue to defend their ideology.

Rate This Post

Unsustainable living

Unsustainable living! Unsustainable living! Unsustainable living!

Unsustainable policies! Unsustainable policies! Unsustainable policies!

I can't believe the most expensive leaders in the world can come out with these policies and continue to defend them. Haiz...

Rate This Post

Future of Singapore children

To a very large extent, I agree with the article below!!! I have lost confidence in my country and with the current leaders. haiz.. How much does lip service worth?

Future of Singapore children

December 17th, 2010 | Author: Contributions

We are a singaporean couple in our 30s and both of us are from top universities in Australia , since graduation we gave been married for quite some time now. We do not have any children at present. For some reasons such as family commitments, relatives from a large extended family, we had to stay put in Singapore for some time.

Some years back, we had contemplated on buying our own HDB home before having children. After observing recent developments in Singapore， we decided that at some point we should just return to Australia permanently, since then we had dropped the idea of having kids. We had a discussion regarding the issue as having kids in Singapore is indeed very disastrous compared to family oriented Australia. We were asked countless times by many of our relatives on why we have no kids . It’s a pleasure and a boon to have children who bring joy to our lives. but reality eventually takes the cake . Many people proudly proclaim their family oriented approach in life but how many of them face the stresses of having to deal with high cost of living and that of the child’s when reality hits them? While the authorities encourage producing more babies, it looks like merely lip service . They do not understand that high cost of living deters many prospective child bearing couples. The incentives such as baby bonus given are lackluster and the system itself is unforgiving to children. Which couple will want a child in a system where one pays school fees that are higher than most first world countries that subsidise education for citizenary , an education system that emphasize on paper grades, unstable economy,low wages , high cost of living and a lack of a comprehensive social safety net?

These are some of the few reasons that we had identified that may hold some worth having stayed and observed education, parenting and family aspects in the Australian and and similar Canadian systems.

1) high cost of education in Singapore relative to wages. Unlike Australia which subsidizes their local students heavily , Singaporeans are paying horrendous amount of fees for tertiary education that is supposed to be subsidized.

2) quality of education . No matter what the marketing machine churns out, singapore’seducation is not that trains students to think out of the box and to solve problems. Both of us, came from Australian universities which train their students from preschool in knowledge based applications and theory, what the Singapore system does is uncreative rote learning which left many singaporeans without the global thinking skill sets required for a knowledge based economy.

Despite statistics that show the Singapore education system as being one of the world’s best, it’s people have not turned out to be Nobel laurettes. The students are bent on getting high grades than actually learning stuff useful to them in a rat race to the top or rather , ironically, to the bottom. Having been a kid myself, I never gained anything from the education system , except stress. If Australia’s education system may not be the best , according to singapore’s “standards” , the country and it’s citizens are ironically doing better with higher productivity and home grown local businesses that compete on the global stage . It’s also a known fact that international rating bodies which rank education systems are not particularly known to take a holistic approach but merely do so from a investor or meritocratic point of view.

3) difficulty in entering universities in a tightly rigid classification method that streams students in a outdated meritocratic system that judges capability with past achievements from paper grades than future critical thinking ability. It does not take into account that people mature and change differently from others at different periods in their lives as I myself, had been a slow learner in school before but had obtained a degree overseas eventually. There is no scope for a well rounded holistic education here. Just a poor imitation of old British style system unlike the Australian and Canadian models. Scandinavian systems included as well.

4) Finally in a system that is unforgiving, a child if drops out of the rat race within a time frame limit , will have his or her future in question and expected to go into a job that pays$800 a month for a living. A situation we do not have in Australia. To further add on, children are being told to study in a rigid system that does not apply to foreigners who will be competing for jobs with our child in the future when companies insult the education system here by employing cheaper foreigners from some unknown university in India or Manila. It seems stress is only for the singapore child and the companies are here to enjoy the first world infrastructure and security without the social responsibility to pay for it.

5) we do not want our children to grow up in an education system that seems to be more tailored towards creating people who want to be rewarded with capitalistic benefits detached from society rather than thinking individuals that can improve the lives of others around them . It also seems that if a Singaporean did his or her education on Australia or overseas, they can’t accept the fact that one who was rejected by a singapore university has gained admission in overseas first world universities by a whole lot of discriminating local Uni grads that think too highly of themselves compared to people who have graduated from 100 year old overseas universities with a wealth of knowledge rooted in history and culture . It’s obvious that if one has been doing something for 100 years, they are pretty good at it. Besides that point, local unis will not be where they are without the template provided by the western education system and it’s state universities .

6) if it’s a male child , it’s obvious that he will be at a disadvantage due to NS liabilities. NS is for a good cause but it does not compensate a male for the sacrifices in terms of job opportunities or housing.

7) due to longer working hours eating up in valuable family time, today’s parents are vastly different to that of yesteryears , they do not have the time to spend with their kids who tend to be lonely and mix with bad company. In a first world country with a third world work structure that does not allow for work , life balance it’s expected that there will be moreproblems in teen delinquency, school dropout rate. The same situation can be found inAustralia but due to other different reasons as well. The Aussie kids do not have to worry about social security, job opportunities dropping out of the rat race or low wages.

We are unsure where Singapore is headed in the future, despite assurances that “singaporeans come first” , judging from past promises , we do not have confidence in the future and the system for us, especially for our child, if we were to have one, .In the future, there is no gurantee that we can send our own children like ourselves for overseas studies at the rate cost of living is escalating in Singapore . Till we see a system that takes the local society’s well being into consideration , we just want to end our generation here. We do not want another generation to suffer , worst of all, more than we did. As the Australians put it , we do not want our child to be in a system that is made by ”obligatories” that rely on the servtitude of others but yet provide a unfair playing ground .We shall be back in Australia to start a family. We want our children to be like the free children of Australia as children they meant to be, free and easy.

.

Local couple

Rate This Post

Very disappointed with Singaporeans

Very the disappointed with Singaporeans. Compete talent, no talent. Compete sport, no talent in sport. Compete academic, even lose to PRC. Compete with whatever things, we are nothing yet our leaders keep boasting we are world class country. Really a tragedy of our own system. Maybe Singaporeans good at wayang. Sometimes, I secretly feel ashame to be Singaporean :p

Rate This Post

Something that I am grateful to our government

I thank the government for bringing the whole world in front of my footstep so that I can see the world without crossing borders and learn from them what is lacking of us.

I thank the government for bringing the whole world in front of my footstep so that by their presence, we know what our weaknesses are as our weaknesses are magnified.

I thank the government for bringing the whole world in front of my footstep so that with their presence, our system weaknesses are exposed and exploited, and that our leaders know what to correct.

I thank the government for bringing the whole world in front of my footstep so that in the midst of their presence, we heard feedback regarding our social and political flaws/issues which most native Singaporeans are either lazy to find out or indifference about it.

Without them, I would still be the ignorance Singaporean I used to be.

Those are my true experiences. But in the process, I have made many (good) friends as well. They are quite nice and interesting, and I hope to keep in touch with them for as long as possible.

I sincerely thank the government for all they have done for Singaporeans. 用心良苦。

Rate This Post

21世纪社会走向与危机 （唐崇荣牧师）- Q&A

Part 1:

http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/TBNAfRQGRss/

Part 2:

http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/7rqwTL48uS4/

Rate This Post

康德说 。。

1. 康德说证明上帝的存在很难很难，但是证明上帝不存在更难更难。。

2. 康德年老的时候写了一封信给他最好的同学：“其实我这一生只要明白的事只有四样 - 1）我是谁 2）我可以知什么东西 3）我应当做什么 4）我做人有什么盼望”

蛮有趣的问题。。

Rate This Post

耶稣是谁（唐崇荣牧师）- Q&A

One of his rallies (Q&A) on 耶稣是谁. Not sure which location it is. Does not look like in Singapore.

http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/BFkkvWe_Cpo/isRenhe=1

Rate This Post