The 154th-ranked media...

When I read the letter to the Forum that was published, I was disgusted by the unabashedly apologist tone that this Agung seemed to portray. After reading this article below, I realized that he was very much the victim of misrepresentation editorial failure as well.

From Kaffein-nated

_______________________________________

Quite shocking actually at how much the original letter was changed. I need to verify the original contents from the author though.

But just look at how the contents were twisted! I nearly went into convulsions. And to think ST dared to put the writer's name (Agung Santoso Ongko) at the end of it!

Pay rise for top civil servants timely (ST published forum letter)

I READ with great relief the article about ministers and top civil servants getting a 4-21 per cent pay rise next month (ST, Dec 14).

We can now be assured that only the most competent people will serve the country. With the rise in their remuneration, we have secured their steadfast service, as well as their continued fervour and dedication to fight for our cause. It could not be more timely. When inflation is soaring and some Singaporeans 'can barely stay afloat' (The Sunday Times, Dec 2), we need, more than ever, the best possible team of civil servants to lead us through the difficulties.

We cannot afford to lose them to the private sector, and have to retain them at all costs. This is especially so as these senior civil servants have been in the public sector for so long that they are likely to seek fresh experience in the private sector.

With the festive season coming, I hope that they will not forget to share the joy of receiving with the less fortunate. Therefore, I appeal to them to follow Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's lead in giving to the poor and spreading the blessings.

Writer's clarification:
I'm so glad somebody finally smelt a hint of my original intention for this Forum entry. Honestly, I read with GREAT HORROR the published version of my own e-mail on ST Forum 18/12/2007. Whatever was published on the Forum page on 18/12/2007 may be similar to what I had originally written, but the omissions made by the editors have actually changed its intended meaning altogether. I have reproduced below my original article as I had sent it to the ST editors:

"
I read with great relief the ST article “Ministers, top civil servants to get 4% to 21% pay rise in Jan” published on 13 December 2007. We can now rest doubly assured that only the most competent people will serve the country. With the rise in their remuneration, we have successfully secured their most steadfast service, as well as their continued fervour and dedication in fighting for our cause. Certainly, it cannot be timelier. At this point, when inflation is soaring and some Singaporeans “can barely stay afloat” (The Sunday Times 02 December 2007), we are in dire need, more than ever, for the best possible team of civil servants to lead us through all these difficulties. We cannot afford to lose them to the private sector, and have to fight to retain them at all costs. This is especially so, as these senior civil servants have been dwelling in the public sector for such a long time that they are more likely indeed to seek a fresh experience in the private sector.

With the festive season coming, though, I sincerely hope that they will not forget to share the joy of receiving with the less fortunate in our midst, for the total annual increment that every senior civil servant is set to receive can actually support approximately 1,000 other Singaporeans. Therefore, I appeal to our senior civil servants to follow PM Lee's lead in giving back to the poor and spreading the blessings. What that increase means to you means infinitely more to them.
"

If it has not become apparent to you by now, I had meant this piece to be satirical. And I admit that I may have failed miserably. I admit that it may be my own incompetent, ambiguous writing that has resulted in the gross misunderstanding. It is indeed possible that my vagueness has led to the editors misreading my intentions and viewing all the hyperboles and superlatives as redundant emphasis on my support for the pay rise. I shall, however, leave it to you readers to decide for yourself.

I hope I have made my position clear, though: that I am strongly opposed to the unwise timing of the ministerial pay rise, and that if it happens anyway, I call for those benefiting from it to share with those among us who live on $290 a month, and are saving every single cent just to continue surviving.

- Agung Santoso Ongko

Quite shocking actually at how much the orginal letter was changed. I need to verify the original contents from the author though.

But just look at how the contents were twisted! I nearly went into convulsions. And to think ST dared to put the writer's name (Agung Santoso Ongko) at the end of it!

Pay rise for top civil servants timely (ST published forum letter)

I READ with great relief the article about ministers and top civil servants getting a 4-21 per cent pay rise next month (ST, Dec 14).

We can now be assured that only the most competent people will serve the country. With the rise in their remuneration, we have secured their steadfast service, as well as their continued fervour and dedication to fight for our cause. It could not be more timely. When inflation is soaring and some Singaporeans 'can barely stay afloat' (The Sunday Times, Dec 2), we need, more than ever, the best possible team of civil servants to lead us through the difficulties.

We cannot afford to lose them to the private sector, and have to retain them at all costs. This is especially so as these senior civil servants have been in the public sector for so long that they are likely to seek fresh experience in the private sector.

With the festive season coming, I hope that they will not forget to share the joy of receiving with the less fortunate. Therefore, I appeal to them to follow Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's lead in giving to the poor and spreading the blessings.

Writer's clarification:
I'm so glad somebody finally smelt a hint of my original intention for this Forum entry. Honestly, I read with GREAT HORROR the published version of my own e-mail on ST Forum 18/12/2007. Whatever was published on the Forum page on 18/12/2007 may be similar to what I had originally written, but the omissions made by the editors have actually changed its intended meaning altogether. I have reproduced below my original article as I had sent it to the ST editors:

"
I read with great relief the ST article “Ministers, top civil servants to get 4% to 21% pay rise in Jan” published on 13 December 2007. We can now rest doubly assured that only the most competent people will serve the country. With the rise in their remuneration, we have successfully secured their most steadfast service, as well as their continued fervour and dedication in fighting for our cause. Certainly, it cannot be timelier. At this point, when inflation is soaring and some Singaporeans “can barely stay afloat” (The Sunday Times 02 December 2007), we are in dire need, more than ever, for the best possible team of civil servants to lead us through all these difficulties. We cannot afford to lose them to the private sector, and have to fight to retain them at all costs. This is especially so, as these senior civil servants have been dwelling in the public sector for such a long time that they are more likely indeed to seek a fresh experience in the private sector.

With the festive season coming, though, I sincerely hope that they will not forget to share the joy of receiving with the less fortunate in our midst, for the total annual increment that every senior civil servant is set to receive can actually support approximately 1,000 other Singaporeans. Therefore, I appeal to our senior civil servants to follow PM Lee's lead in giving back to the poor and spreading the blessings. What that increase means to you means infinitely more to them.
"

If it has not become apparent to you by now, I had meant this piece to be satirical. And I admit that I may have failed miserably. I admit that it may be my own incompetent, ambiguous writing that has resulted in the gross misunderstanding. It is indeed possible that my vagueness has led to the editors misreading my intentions and viewing all the hyperboles and superlatives as redundant emphasis on my support for the pay rise. I shall, however, leave it to you readers to decide for yourself.

I hope I have made my position clear, though: that I am strongly opposed to the unwise timing of the ministerial pay rise, and that if it happens anyway, I call for those benefiting from it to share with those among us who live on $290 a month, and are saving every single cent just to continue surviving.

- Agung Santoso Ongko

The price of citizenship - we've bitten the bullet one time too many.

This is ridiculous. Have Singaporeans all lost their voices?
Put this up for a referendum - at the very least.
What happened to our CPF reserves? As a responsible citizen, I demand the right to know.
If the effective taxation masquerading as CPF has failed as a scheme to cover our retirement, it's high time to come clean.

**********************************

CPF Special, Medisave accounts' interest rates to be modified next year

SINGAPORE : Interest rates for the CPF Special, Medisave and Retirement Accounts will be re-pegged to an appropriate long-term bond rate.

Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen said more details on this will be worked out and announced next month.

He said the new rates will be lower initially than the current rate of 4 percent but it should do better than 4 percent over time.

But as the rates will be pegged to the market, fluctuations can be expected.

Dr Ng was speaking at a news conference to explain the initiatives announced by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong at the National Day Rally.

Giving more details on the compulsory annuities, Dr Ng said only part of the minimum sum from the CPF will be set aside for it.

A major portion of the minimum sum will still be for the members to withdraw when they reach the draw-down age.

Dr Ng said this is to ensure that members are covered even after the age of 85.

He said the aim is to achieve a subsistence payout first - of possibly between S$250 and S$300 per month.

Private sector economists said the rates could be pegged to government-issued bonds.

"If we peg it to a SGS bond, it will definitely be below the target 4 percent rate. Our thoughts are that, they might be looking at a bond issued by say, Temasek, which has typically in previous years averaged returns more than 4 percent. So we can probably enjoy higher returns in that way," said Alvin Liew, economist at UOB Treasury Research.

Singapore Government Bonds are currently yielding between a modest 3 percent and 4 percent, prompting some analysts to suggest a benchmark that included a guaranteed portion.

Some economists suggested that the government could provide a fixed 1-2 percent base, plus a variable component tied to the Singapore Government Bond yield.

As the rates would be pegged to the market, fluctuations in returns could be expected.

"It is conceivable that CPF members can expect, in the long term, maybe more than 4 percent per annum. On the risk side, if these new rates are variable and it falls below 4 percent, that is a worry for CPF members," said Roy Varghese, Director of Financial Planning, IPAC.

The changes to the CPF interest rates will be effective in 2008.

They will cost the government S$700 million a year, initially.

Meanwhile, the government also wants to provide an "extreme longevity protection" for citizens by making annuities compulsory for those below 50 years old.

Said Dr Ng: "We are basically looking at compulsory annuities to protect members from outliving their retirement savings. Let me first say that we'll consult widely. We do not intend to, when we start this scheme, to put the major proportion of your minimum sum into annuities. That's the first thing that needs to be said.

"In fact, a smaller proportion of your minimum sum will be put into annuities, so the major portion of your minimum sum will still be drawn out, drawn down by members at the draw-down age."

An example of this annuity is that the CPF member pays a basic premium of X dollars which goes into a pool.

That money will be paid out from age 85 - for life.

But if the member doesn't live till 85 years old, the money will then be used to support others in the pool, who are still alive.

It's not determined if the CPF Board or private companies will administer the compulsory annuities scheme.

The Manpower Minister stressed that the basic idea of the compulsory annuities is to insure members for the latter part of their lives, that is after 85 years old.

The aim is to provide a subsistence payout amount first, of possibly between $250 and $300 monthly.

Dr Ng said more details on this scheme will be announced next month.

On the additional one percentage point interest for the first $60,000 in CPF members' combined accounts, Dr Ng said this will be placed in the Special Account and not the Ordinary Account.

He said: "These changes will help Singaporeans work longer, save more, and help give them a peace of mind for their golden years. It will significantly strengthen our economic and social system to better address the ageing population... These new tools, new aspects can be effective, it will give us a lot of hope and optimism as we move forward, even as we age."

Dr Ng said this will give Singapore a more responsive and robust system to address changes as the workforce ages.

The Manpower Minister said the extra one percentage bonus interest will not affect CPF members who are already investing their funds.

He added that "tens of billions" are still available for investing.

The government is not preventing members from investing their CPF funds. - CNA /ls

Man City might be a GLC...

First things first - Manchester City was bought by Thaksin Shinawatra from funds obtained via the sale of his majority stake in Shin Corp - and the blue half of Manchester went on to win against a superior United side against the run of play.

And so since the Thai junta has deemed Thaksin's tax-free sale of Shin Corp illegal and sought is seeking to void the agreement, Manchester City is technically ours!

And the Singapore Government knows it I tell you.

The successful prosecution of Thaksin might cause a reversal of the Shin Corp deal on a technicality (Kularb Kaew was deemed to be an investment vehicle of Temasek Holdings, thereby violating the rule on foreign ownership) . And in return for our investment, could we please have the satellite arm of Shin Corp (for some affordable cable TV competition - you can save your military secrets for yourself) and his Man City please?

After all, they're on top of the Premier League.

Perhaps the following would facilitate the transaction....

********************************************

Sonthi gets military award from Singapore

Singapore (dpa) - The commander-in-chief of the Royal Thai Army, Gen Sonthi Boonyaratglin, received on Friday a prestigious military award from Singapore Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean.

The Meritorious Service Medal was awarded to Gen Sonthi in recognition of his contributions toward enhancing the strong ties between the Singapore and Thai armies, the defence ministry said in a statement.

"The two armies engage in a wide spectrum of activities," ranging from bilateral exercises to regular professional exchanges and attendance at each other's courses, boosting the comradeship between the officers and men, it added.

Gen Sonthi led a coup on September 19, 2006, overthrowing the elected government of then prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Gen Sonthi, who was scheduled to call on Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong later Friday, has met with Teo and other military officials during his visit which started on Thursday.

Bangkok Post

HAHA!

AsiaOne's Faux Pas - A Picture Speaks 1.94 million words.

Before amendment to website






After amendment






Forget it. The damage has already been done. And backdated.

Our women as maids.

"To build a country, you need passion. If you just do your sums - plus, minuses, credit, debit - you are a washout." - Lee Kuan Yew, Straits Times, 21 Aug 89


"If you are going to quarrel about S$46 million – up or down another S$10 to S$20 million – I say you don't have a sense of proportion." - Lee Kuan Yew, Channel NewsAsia, 4 Apr 07
___________________________________________


He said tat it was an 'absurdity' for people to quarrel over whether ministers collectively should be paid $10 million or $20 million more when there is so much at stake.

'the cure to all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government. ' 'you get tat alternative and you'll never put Singapore together again.' MM LEE said.

___________________________________________

Singapore's GDP is a mere US$116,775m, whereas US's GDP is US$12,455,825m. So should US president be paid 107 times more than him because he's a custodian of a trillion dollars worth of assets?

Food for thought. Think carefully. For the next 5 LONG years

Analytical Skills 101 - Twisting statements to your own warped agenda

Aussies Will Make S'pore Fail, Says Lee Kuan Yew

MELBOURNE, March 28 (Bernama) -- Singapore would hit rock bottom if it was run by Australians, former Singapore Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew said on Wednesday.

Lee, 83, in Australia to receive an honorary doctorate from the Australian National University in Canberra, made the comments to reporters after the ceremony.

A handful of protesters waved placards outside the award ceremony, saying Lee was an opponent of democracy and the rule of law, the Australian Associated Press said in a report from Canberra.

Lee said he was accustomed to hostile receptions on overseas visits.

"It's not going to change me and I'm not going to change you," he said.

Lee said both Australia and Singapore prospered under their own style of government but Australia's method would fail in Singapore.

"We're going to prosper, you're going to prosper, if I allow you to run my country, it will spiral downwards and hit rock bottom," he told reporters.

Lee also defended the comments he made years ago in which he described Australians as "the poor white trash of Asia."

He said he made the comments in the heat of an argument but said at that time they were probably warranted.

"Perhaps, at that time it was warranted," he added.

-- BERNAMA

_____________________________________

Compare the crap above to this more objective article...

Hostile welcome for Lee Kuan Yew

Craig Skehan
March 28, 2007

Protesters and a fiery exchange with reporters marred a ceremony honouring Singapore's founding prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew, at the Australian University in Canberra today.

The university stirred up controversy by bestowing an honorary law doctorate on Mr Lee, who governed the tiny city state for decades with an iron hand, delivering prosperity but restricting civil liberities.

Mr Lee led Singapore to independence and served as its first prime minister, being regularly re-elected until 1990.

About 150 protesters chanted anti-Lee slogans and waved placards that described him as a "dictator''.

A group of law students said they had also briefed a senior barrister to mount a court challenge against the awarding of the doctorate on the ground that the ANU's own procedures weren't followed.

During the cermony inside ANU's University House, Mr Lee was praised for bringing financial success and stability to Singapore.

However, many seats in the auditorium were vacant because of a boycott by some university staff.

Wearing an academic cap and red gown, Mr Lee, 83, delivered a speech in which he declared that Australia and Singapore shared a common strategic outlook.

Later, Mr Lee had a hostile encounter with waiting reporters.

"If I allowed you to run my country, we would spiral down to rock bottom,'' a defiant Mr Lee told the journalists.

Many years ago Mr Lee once warned Australians that they were risk of becoming "white trash'' in Asia.

Questioned about this today he said he had made the comment at different time in Australia's history.

"Now you have changed,'' he said pointing to Australia's former discriminatory immigration policies which were still in place in the 1960s.

Foreign Minister Alexander Downer this week acknowledged there had been international concern about human rights issues in Singapore but he praised Mr Lee as a "great regional leader".

"The fact is in the overall sense, Singapore has been a spectacular success," Mr Downer said.

The Sydney Morning Herald

____________________________

For a more pro-Singapore stance, one can always read Today (which I consider a better expression of independent journalistic opinion as compared to the Staid Times)

Channel 8 News

146th media. Can't fault 'em.

The Republic of Potong Pasir

Wait longer for upgrading funds

'Naive' Opposition MPs 'misheard' PAP's message

Loh Chee Kong
cheekong@mediacorp.com.sg

IT'S been more than six months since the General Election but Opposition MP Chiam See Tong has not forgotten the multi-million-dollar carrot offered by the People's Action Party (PAP).

.

Yesterday, the Potong Pasir MP tabled a question in Parliament asking if the Government was willing to release 45 per cent of the $80 million it had promised for the upgrading of Housing Board estates in his constituency, since PAP candidate Sitoh Yih Pin had won 45 per cent of the vote.

.

However, even with the help of fellow Opposition MP Low Thia Khiang, Mr Chiam got nowhere with his request.

.

Saying that she was "puzzled" by his request, Minister of State for National Development Grace Fu asked: "Does it mean that he should share his chair with Mr Sitoh, 55 per cent to 45 per cent, in this Parliament? And if we take the logic further, does it mean that he should also share his MP allowance with Mr Sitoh?"

.

Since residents in Potong Pasir did not elect Mr Sitoh, "they should not stand to benefit from any surpluses that are generated", she said.

.

But who approved such requests from PAP candidates, Mr Chiam asked.

.

Mr Low, Hougang MP and Workers' Party chief, then leapt to Mr Chiam's support.

.

"The surpluses are generated by the PAP and the people have no part in it?" he asked. "And don't forget, the people in Potong Pasir and Hougang also pay taxes and the Goods and Services Tax. Your justification's logic is selfish and partisan."

.

Mr Low said his Town Council had submitted a $140-million upgrading proposal to the Ministry of National Development (MND) and he was still waiting for a reply.

.

Hearing this, Mr Mah criticised Mr Chiam and Mr Low for their "selective hearing". He said it was made clear during the elections that the upgrading packages would be implemented only if the PAP candidates in the two Opposition wards were elected.

.

The two Opposition MPs were "very naive" for "only going for the good parts", he added.

.

"If you go on the Workers' Party's platform, you are not going to have enough money for upgrading, education, healthcare, and so on. When you vote for the PAP, you are not just voting for the goodies, for the package. You are also voting for all the parts of the package that comes together," he said.

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/154695.asp



























We, the citizens of Singapore
pledge ourselves as one united people,
regardless of race, language or religion,
to build a democratic society,
based on justice and equality,
so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and
progress for our nation.
__________________________________________

Selective democracy, I say.

Econs 101

I remember a time in JC when Miss Leong taught us that the Value-Added Tax, or GST as it is known here, was a regressive tax.

A regressive tax places proportionately more of a burden on those with lower incomes. Regressive taxes, as opposed to progressive taxes, are more burdensome on lower-income individuals than on higher-income individuals and corporations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regressive_tax

And that a Government is of the people, by the people, FOR THE PEOPLE.

Dear Sirs, please do reconsider this act. Stop telling us that the GST here is one of the lowest in the world. Ditto transport fees.

More on WSM

Read this blog... Where I've gotten these extracts from.

Rafflesians' response to WSM:

i was a top student from RJC. just graduated a few years ago. most pple that i know in RJC were just too full of themselves. they thought that since they are from RJC, they are the smartest in Singapore. unfortunately, many of my RJC frens have low EQ and common sense. most only know how to memorise and practise questions, and possess very weak critical thinking skills.

To follow up on what fellow Rafflesian, Gene, said above, I would like to emphasise that the majority of us from RJC are not like Shu Min. In fact, few of us sympathise with her current “plight” (not that she is taking it badly, she was in fact laughing and mocking at the responses on various websites). What had happened also did not surprise us because she is well known in school to have an inflated sense of superiority and low tolerance of the pedestrian and the uncultured. But please remember that one WSM does not make RJC. The rest of us from RJC should not be impeached because of her.

I'm a classmate of SM in RGS and RJC. Many of us don't know her well because she does move around in her own exclusive circle of the smart and well-connected. And yes, she is conceited, overbearing and thinks that she and her clique own the world. But, I do think some of the comments here are excessive, even unreasonable. You can fault her character and her worldview, but is there a need to descend to vulgarity?

As a Rafflesian, I am saddened that our good name has been smeared by the poison pen of one elistist female. The saddest part of this episode is that she reminds me of the remark made by newbie Michael Palmer, "Before I joined the grassroots organisation, I never knew there were poor people in developed countries". Where does the PAP find such freaks? They are no better than the Hitler Youth, and our country can only be the worse because of them.

___________________________

And her dad's (MP Wee's) response?

To summarize: I should not have said what I did about people's inability to take the brutal truth and strong language.

His full 'apology' can be found here.

___________________________

Life in black and white.

From opposite sides of this divide.

Elitism

An economist(to-be)'s view.

Behold the future.

Some of us have read the commentary, Future of Singapore, by Derek Wee, a 35 year old Singaporean. The commentary has made its rounds in cyberspace and is reproduced below for those who might not have come across it yet.

The purpose of this thread is to highlight a response to Derek Wee's commentary from a very bright RJC girl. The response is taken from her blog. She shares the same surname as Derek. Her academic achievements are impressive. She was from the elite gifted program at RGS who went on to top Singapore in the GCE 'O'-levels in 2004. She also won the Prime Minister's Book Prize for purportedly being effectively bilingual in Chinese and English (even though she often expresses her disdain for the Chinese language). And she is fluent in French. Her dad is one of the men-in-white. Naturally, hers is a highly affluent and privileged background. And without doubt too, hers is the perfect pedigree for joining the ranks of the highest echelons of the government.

Reproduced below are firstly, Ms Wee's response to Derek Wee's commentary and secondly, the original commentary by Derek Wee.

*************************
From Ms Wee's blog:

http://www.suchvividnothing.blogspot.com/

Thursday, October 19, 2006

mom's friend sent her some blog post by some bleeding stupid 40-year old singaporean called derek wee (WHY do all the idiots have my surname why?!) whining about how singapore is such an insecure place, how old ppl (ie, 40 and above) fear for their jobs, how the pool of foreign "talent" (dismissively chucked between inverted commas) is really a tsunami that will consume us all (no actually he didn't say that, he probably said Fouren Talern Bery Bad.), how the reason why no one wants kids is that they're a liability in this world of fragile ricebowls, how the government really needs to save us from inevitable doom but they aren't because they are stick-shoved-up-ass elites who have no idea how the world works, yadayadayadayada.

i am inclined - too much, perhaps - to dismiss such people as crackpots. stupid crackpots. the sadder class. too often singaporeans - both the neighborhood poor and the red-taloned socialites - kid themselves into believing that our society, like most others, is compartmentalized by breeding. ridiculous. we are a tyranny of the capable and the clever, and the only other class is the complement.

sad derek attracted more than 50 comments praising him for his poignant views, joining him in a chorus of complaints that climax at the accusation of lack of press freedom because his all-too-true views had been rejected by the straits times forum. while i tend to gripe about how we only have one functioning newspaper too, i think the main reason for its lack of publication was that his incensed diatribe was written in pathetic little scraps that passed off as sentences, with poor spelling and no grammar.

derek, derek, derek darling, how can you expect to have an iron ricebowl or a solid future if you cannot spell?

if you're not good enough, life will kick you in the balls. that's just how things go. there's no point in lambasting the government for making our society one that is, i quote, "far too survival of fittest". it's the same everywhere. yes discrimination exists, and it is sad, but most of the time if people would prefer hiring other people over you, it's because they're better. it's so sad when people like old derek lament the kind of world that singapore will be if we make it so uncertain. go be friggin communist, if uncertainty of success offends you so much - you will certainly be poor and miserable. unless you are an arm-twisting commie bully, which, given your whiny middle-class undereducated penchant, i doubt.

then again, it's easy for me to say. my future isn't certain but i guess right now it's a lot brighter than most people's. derek will read this and brand me as an 18-year old elite, one of the sinners who will inherit the country and run his stock to the gutter. go ahead. the world is about winners and losers. it's only sad when people who could be winners are marginalised and oppressed. is dear derek starving? has dear derek been denied an education? has dear derek been forced into child prostitution? has dear derek had his clan massacred by the government?

i should think not. dear derek is one of many wretched, undermotivated, overassuming leeches in our country, and in this world. one of those who would prefer to be unemployed and wax lyrical about how his myriad talents are being abandoned for the foreigner's, instead of earning a decent, stable living as a sales assistant. it's not even about being a road sweeper. these ****bags don't want anything without "manager" and a name card.

please, get out of my elite uncaring face.

posted at 12:08 PM

*******************************

Derek Wee's original commentary which prompted Ms Wee's response above.

By Derek Wee
Oct 12, 2006

When I read the Straits Times article (dated 24 Sep) on PM Lee calling the young to be committed and make a difference to Singapore, I have so much thought about the issue.

I am 35 years old, graduated from University and gainfully employed in a multinational company. But I cannot help but feel insecure over the future of Singapore. Lets face it, it's not uncommon to hear, "when you are above 40, you are over the hill".

The government has been stressing on re-training, skills upgrading and re-adapt. The fact is, no matter how well qualified or adaptable one is, once you hit the magical 40, employers will say, "you are simply too old".

We have been focusing our resources and problem solving on low unskilled labour. But in reality, our managerial positions and skilled labour force are actually fast losing its competitiveness.

I travel around the region frequently for the past 10 years. It didn't take me long to realise how far our neighbours have come over the past decade.

They have quality skilled workers, and are less expensive. When I work with them, their analytical skills are equally good, if not better than us.

It's not new anymore. Taxi drivers are fast becoming "too early to retire, too old to work" segment of the society. I like to talk to taxi drivers whenever I am heading for the airport.

There was this driver. Eloquent and well read. He was an export manager for 12 years with an MNC. Retrenched at 40 years old. He had been searching for a job since his retrenchment.

Although he was willing to lower his pay expectations, employers were not willing to lower their prejudice. He was deemed too old. I wouldn't be surprised if we have another No. 1; having the most highly educated taxi drivers in the world.

On PM Lee calling the young to be committed and make a difference. Look around us. How dedicated can we be to Singapore when we can visualise what's in store for us after we turned 40? Then again, how committed are employers to us? But we can't blame them. They have bottom lines & shareholders' gain to answer to.

Onus is really on the government to revamp the society. A society that is not a pressure cooker. A society that does not mirror so perfectly, what survival of the fittest is.

But a society, where it's people can be committed, do their best and not having to fear whether they will still wake up employed tomorrow. Sadly, Singapore does not offer such luxuries and security anymore.

On the issue of babies. The government encourages us to pro-create. The next generation is essential in sustaining our competitive edge. Then again, the current market condition is such that our future has become uncertain. There is no more joy in having babies anymore; they have become more of a liability. It's really a chicken and egg issue.

Many of my peers, bright and well educated have packed up and left. It's what MM Goh called "quitters". It's sad but true, Singapore no longer is a place where one can hope to work hard their lives and retire graciously. It's really the push factor.

A future is something we sweat it out, build and call our own. Unfortunately, people like me, mid 30's going on 40's, staying put by choice or otherwise, we can't help but feel what lies ahead is really a gamble.

To PM Lee and the Ministers, we are on a different platform. Until you truly understand our insecurity, the future of Singapore to me remains a question mark.