Presidential Elections 2017

[mum_sugoku]

limlim:

mum_sugoku:

Maid is not the same old maid, restaurant owner is not the same old owner, lawyer is not the same old lawyer; the current ones are from an entirely different generation.

It's the older generation who earned the credit; the current generation are merely here to reap the benefit of (or worse, undoing) their predecessors' hard work.

One thing I have been wondering..

How many of the current leaders are Geppers, how many of them have gone thru tons of tuition and enrichment (and GEP prep classes) to achieve what they achieved today?

Have one ever wondered, how many scholars are engineered, and not gifted.

Look at the decision and choices that leaders made.. are they really talents or can be classified as talents? Can they really solve difficult problems or be relied upon to solve problems?

How many got to where they are w/o tuition or enrichment (or GEP prep), but because they are naturally gifted?

In other words, how many \"talents\" are actually born, and not engineered?

Can engineered talents be trusted to lead in the next generation and make the right decision?

(OT)

I remember that few years ago, our PM welcomed former top civil servant Ngiam Tong Dow's clarification on some comments he (Ngiam) made in an interview in the Singapore Medical Association's newsletter:

http://www.asiaone.com/singapore/ngiam-tong-dow-clarifies-remarks-pm-welcomes-it[quote]...The interview in the September edition of SMA News focused on health care, but was widely circulated online for the comments on politics and the civil service. In the interview, Mr Ngiam said that any minister who wants to disagree with the Prime Minister \"will hesitate when he thinks of his million-dollar salary\", and that the civil service had become tamer, resulting in less contestation of ideas.[/quote]

[jedamum]

limlim:

In other words, how many \"talents\" are actually born, and not engineered?

Can engineered talents be trusted to lead in the next generation and make the right decision?

Engineered same as nurtured?
Is leadership a borned talent or learned through experience/exposure?

[phtthp]

Angelsdontexist:

Madam President, it’s time to move out; either you suffer higher security risks or taxpayers must pay for costlier protection


We get it. Absent an election, the next best way to demonstrate you are the people’s president is by living as they do—in a HDB flat. The only problem? Mdm Halimah Yacob lives in two where most of us only have one. The people are not amused. We know a farce when we see one. 97% of Mdm Halimah’s own race (Malay?) cannot afford to own a jumbo flat or better. The figure is 95% for Indians and 78% for Chinese (General House Survey 2015).

The first farce was the use of unreasonable eligibility criteria to disqualify all other candidates, effectively turning the election into appointment-by-criteria. We, the people, feel we have been robbed of our vote. We wonder if the PAP has pursued its own political interests at the cost of the nation’s founding ideals of meritocracy and multiracialism. And we suspect that Mdm Halimah will be no less pliant that previous appointed presidents, or presidents the PAP supported.

Rather than address those issues, Mdm Halimah now seems intent on perpetuating the farce that she is the people’s president. But her decision to continue living in her jumbo flat is likely to impose significant costs on the very people she claims to be serving.

Living in her HDB flat does not mean that the Istana no longer needs to be maintained. It doesn’t mean that taxpayers no longer have to fund the security services required to protect Mdm Halimah. No, it simply means that the effort must now be doubled. Mdm Halimah’s protection detail must work overtime to secure two instead of one estate.

More at https://www.prolificskins.com/forum/current-affairs/open-letter-dear-halimah-yacob-please-move-out

You had provided a broken link and you had shortened content of the actual message

Here is the correct link :-

https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2017/09/18/madam-president-its-time-to-move-out-either-you-suffer-higher-security-risks-or-taxpayers-must-pay-for-costlier-protection/

[floppy]

Never quite understand the obsession of where the President stays. She prefers to stay in Yishun, so be it.


All these rant about security tight lah, inconvenience lah… Seriously, President stays HDB, must complain is it?

[MyPillow]

floppy:

Never quite understand the obsession of where the President stays. She prefers to stay in Yishun, so be it.


All these rant about security tight lah, inconvenience lah... Seriously, President stays HDB, must complain is it?

people not happy with the increased in security cost , cost more tax payer money ?
actually is peanut cost when it compares to the million dollar annual pay package right :evil:

[floppy]

MyPillow:

floppy:

Never quite understand the obsession of where the President stays. She prefers to stay in Yishun, so be it.


All these rant about security tight lah, inconvenience lah... Seriously, President stays HDB, must complain is it?

people not happy with the increased in security cost , cost more tax payer money ?
actually is peanut cost when it compares to the million dollar annual pay package right :evil:

I could also argue that there isn't an increased in security cost, but in fact, a reduction in overall cost. How so?
Whether the P stays in a HDB flat, a private condominium or a landed property, the cost in providing security services is not something the State can run away from. For a HDB flat, you could argue that besides guarding the P, the rest of the 50+ households also benefited from the extra security provided. Hence, the overall cost is shared by many heads / more people benefit per dollar spent. In a landed property, the number of households / residents per estate is definitely much lower than a few blocks of HDB flats occupying the same footprint.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics

[limlim]

Less cost per pax is still more than zero cost er pax. The 50+ household do not warrant any spending on security cost. They’re not office bearer.

Unless, you put all the Ministers into the same block… now, maybe this can make sense.

[limlim]

Anyway, guess the residents there can freely borrow money from loansharks w/o fear of paint and padlocks at their flat. :evil:

[floppy]

limlim:

Less cost per pax is still more than zero cost er pax. The 50+ household do not warrant any spending on security cost. They're not office bearer.
Unless, you put all the Ministers into the same block.. now, maybe this can make sense.

Anyway, guess the residents there can freely borrow money from loansharks w/o fear of paint and padlocks at their flat. :evil:

It will never be zero cost per pax. The cost incurred for giving protection to the P is more or less the same regardless of where he/she/it is staying.

I would like the P to stay in my condo. I could then urge the MA to stop engaging any security for the property and save residents' $$$. Given that SecCom has an interest in ensuring the P safety, they can do their job and residents can enjoy the added security on tax payers' expense

[mum422]

sian hor, no public holiday for voting day. sigh…