Punggol East By-Election coming ? MP steps down

[sinoboy]

3Boys:

sinoboy:

[quote=\"3Boys\"]

Please read my post again. The poorer off MUST be looked after. But what is the more effective way of spending the precious dollars? Subsidise public transport for all, including the bank CEO on his way from his Orchard Road condo to his office in Raffles City? Or charge a recoverable rate in fares, affordable to the majority, but GIVE money back to the poor that will cover the fares and MORE?

Let the incumbent worry about that. Meanwhile GIC and Tamasak doing a good job buying up banks and Olum.

You confuse sovereign fund performance with economic policy.[/quote]Don't shoot me down just like that lah. Since you seem to know the difference, do you think our CPF money is involved or not huh?

[MR06]

3Boys:

MR06:

[quote=\"raysusan\"]I am wondering why aim saga is not mentioned during the rally?

With more opp I believe more cans of worms will be open up

It might had been crafted into a nail, it will be the last nail to seal the coffin.

Because the WP are complicit and they know its not a big deal. I'll bet you it gets minimum airtime this bye election.[/quote]Let's see how it pan out.

[Irrelevant]

sinoboy:

Don't shoot me down just like that lah. Since you seem to know the difference, do you think our CPF money is involved or not huh?

If you are keen to understand, pray tell us why you think CPF money is somehow involved?

[Way2GO]

3Boys:

MR06:

[quote=\"raysusan\"]I am wondering why aim saga is not mentioned during the rally?

With more opp I believe more cans of worms will be open up

It might had been crafted into a nail, it will be the last nail to seal the coffin.

Because the WP are complicit and they know its not a big deal. I'll bet you it gets minimum airtime this bye election.[/quote]Complicit in wat way?
Whilst I tend to concur at dis point of d campaign with d view dat AIMgate may not get any airtime in dis BE, it is not for d reason u mentioned.
It is a BIG deal for it raises questions n doubts as to whether it is an isolated case or d practice is extensive.

[3Boys]

sinoboy:

3Boys:

[quote=\"sinoboy\"]

Let the incumbent worry about that. Meanwhile GIC and Tamasak doing a good job buying up banks and Olum.

You confuse sovereign fund performance with economic policy.

Don't shoot me down just like that lah. Since you seem to know the difference, do you think our CPF money is involved or not huh?[/quote]You are distracting from my original reply to the post on MRT fares.

Anyhow.....

You go to work, to earn a living. That's the economic policy, to keep our country productive.

Now with the savings, you want to get more returns on the cash, you invest it, in stocks, bonds, treasury bills, property. Thats the role of the sovereign funds.

With all investments, you will have a balance of lower yield lower risk instruments, and higher risk higher yield instruments. Higher risk means some of those things will go bust. It's the same be it you an individual investor, an investment banker at Morgan Stanley, or a sovereign fund manager for Dubai or Brunei or Singapore. And I don't see that our guys at GiC or Temasek are smarter or better than those at Morgan Stanley or Brunei or Dubai.

They will have their good days and their bad days. The thing that matters is their long term overall performance.

Is CPF money involved? I should hope so! Why would I want to miss out? Most pension funds get into investments in one way or another, unless you are satisfied with 0.5% interest rate in savings account.

[3Boys]

Way2GO:

3Boys:

[quote=\"MR06\"]

It might had been crafted into a nail, it will be the last nail to seal the coffin.

Because the WP are complicit and they know its not a big deal. I'll bet you it gets minimum airtime this bye election.

Complicit in wat way?
Whilst I tend to concur at dis point of d campaign with d view dat AIMgate may not get any airtime in dis BE, it is not for d reason u mentioned.
It is a BIG deal for it raises questions n doubts as to whether it is an isolated case or d practice is extensive.[/quote]W2G, I have covered at great length on this in the other thread. I don't get the sense that WP think this is a big deal at all.

[HVR]

YOUR VIEW: WHAT EXACTLY HAS WP DONE SO FAR?

Source: the real Singapore

Opposition rallies are interesting even when you are not voting. In any case, the WP’s rally in Punggol was quite subdued and the theme was surprisingly low key. Mr Low’s statements earlier on Saturday set the stage and the tone. Essentially, WP is asking Singaporeans to continue voting for them so they can ensure that the PAP government performs. They acknowledged the PAP improvements made but attributed this to WP’s presence in Parliament – essentially claiming credit for what the government has done since GE2011. Here is what I am wondering: What exactly has WP done thus far? Many Singaporeans, including PAP supporters, accept that having good opposition parliamentarians could be constructive. But we need them to perform their roles vis-à-vis the government like those in parliamentary systems. It should never be about form, rhetoric and or just being present, pursuing an endless battle of words. This opposition role requires them to challenge, offer alternatives and solutions like a shadow government. This would then sharpen policy-making and allow Singaporeans to consider other possible options. WP started off very confidently when they tabled their concept for the white paper on Ministerial Pay. It was a great effort. But their alternative pay package which was pegged to civil service MX9 Superscale grade was in fact more attractive than what the ministerial salary review committee offered. WP left much in doubt as to how their formula was calculated. Since then, no further position on this subject has been offered. Subsequent debates on other matters have gone tactical with details glossed over, claiming they do not have access to information. One wonders if it is a matter of investing time and effort in research. So what exactly is WP’s goal? They have claimed to be the “ co-driver” to slap the “driver” if the latter falls asleep. But to date, there does not appear to be any need to awake the alert driver or to take over driving. The reality is that the government has responded with solutions by themselves by initiating a range of measures and being on the ground to resolve issues. Although some of the government solutions, such as reducing FW/FTs, property cooling measures, COE, release of lands and building of ECs have been less than effective, the reality is that there are no easy solutions. The WP did not even raise these concerns. When they did, they griped, and are likely to do so again in subsequent rallies, but they offer no solutions, advice or scrutiny. In the end, the PAP government is answerable to the electorate and not the WP. We need a skilful driver who knows the direction where we are heading, not a passenger who pretends to be a co-driver.

[Way2GO]

3Boys:

Is CPF money involved? I should hope so! Why would I want to miss out?

d CPF was never meant to be gambled in high-risk investments, only safe government bonds n other low-risk instruments!
When did d diversification to high-risk instruments occur?
d gahmen has never publicly admitted to using CPF funds for these investments.

[3Boys]

Irrelevant:

3Boys:

Heck, I voted opposition last time.

Me too. Just like kamon, when I think about the lack of checks and balances and the potential abuses of power, the logical conclusion is to have more opposition in the parliament.

3Boys:

What's in the WP manifesto?

2), 2), 2).......mostly.

My sentiments exactly! Not just WP, any other party is guilty of the same. Unfortunately, the impact of having more opposition appears to be a race to the bottom, i.e. the opposition and ruling party will out-compete each other to \"buy\" more votes.

Do I vote for higher taxes and more largesse?

We are already in a death spiral to the bottom.

I am pessimistic about Singapore, sadly.

[pirate]

Show me how you will spend it properly to assist those in need and I will support higher taxes - the burden of which will, incidentally, fall more on the likes of me.


Somebody mentioned populism. Yes, that’s the problem I see with the current PAP since GE2011. This is what I meant by firefighting. Where is the vision? Where is the leadership?

I did not suggest BTO priority for families with children way back in 1998. I take 3Boys’ word that it was floated way back in 1998. In that case, somebody really deserves a tight slap because it took them 15 years. Hellooo?! How many 15 years do we have? Our kids are practically grown up in 15 years. What has that got to do with spending more money?

7m population by 20xx? I have no problem with that. I have every confidence that Singapore can comfortably hold 7m people. But not if we cram all the financial and commercial sectors into Raffles Place/Shenton Way/Marina! And certainly not if we refuse to build infrastructure ahead of demand.

The WP currently has a vision for Singapore. The vision is a PAP run government with checks and balances against its excesses and inadequacies. Is it a great vision? Is it ideal? No. But it is still better than the alternative vision of a PAP run government without any checks and balances. Certainly not when they have like about 3 or 4 good cabinet ministers, and the rest are just ‘D/E borderline pass’.