Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
VAT in the UK is not payable for most foods, children's clothing, newspapers and magazines. Whether you pay VAT or not does not depend on whether you are poor, old, a child, homeless etc. The UK VAT is now 20%, it was increased in 2011 and it was reported that the increase in VAT would hit the poorest the hardest.
The rich also buy food, magazines, children's clothing and newspapers so they too benefit from not paying VAT on these items.
So factually your statements about Singapore's GST impact were already wrong when you made a sweeping statement comparing it to the VAT and going on and on about how bad the GST was etc. yet praising the broken down social security system of Europe, UK and US.
As for calling a writer a troll, if the shoes fit, wear it. A person who cheats is a cheat, a person who lies is a liar, it is not name-calling to accurately describe the actions of a person. :imanangel:
I recall when you were previously asked on another thread about whether you were the same as a writer banned by Chief and you did not respond directly to that simple question but were instead quick to say such KSP forumers were calling you names and attacking you. :stompfeet: You wanted them punished i think :mad: And you are doing the same thing here! :rotflmao:
Oh I remember the fun times on those threads and here you are back again. As I said earlier :welcome: We are all friends here :grphug: :rotflmao: :rotflmao:
Now to be fair I should probably look for those threads and tell the KSPs there you are back :rahrah: I do not want them to miss the fun :boogie:
And this time Chief Kiasu please let the troll continue writing, a lot of forumers say they use KSP to destress. They need the comic relief. And of course we never never engage in name calling :rubhands: -
Irrelevant:
We all know the intention, that's why Gahman allows more immigrants. Like I said, I welcome the white paper but they need to work on the problem of GST impacted our own people. Some people think I am a troll by stating the problem but yet welcoming the whitepaper. There should have differentiation in treatment between Singaporean and foreigner
Yeah man and I thought I gave enough clues for the answer.3Boys:
Crazy isn't it.
Imagine such opposition supporters driving future government policies and bringing ruin.
-
AWSP:
:goodpost:
Interesting proposition. We have to agree that we disagree.Just relax:
I don't think there is anything to disagree with what I have said. I have merely stated that the Govt. must continue to be robust and not pander to populist policies based on the people's feedback as that is the slippery road to partisan politics that currently has made many democracies less than efficient. For these other democracies such deficiencies and inefficiencies will not cripple the country. Singapore does not have the luxury of allowing for these inefficiencies or deficiencies as another country or large Chinese, Indian or neighboring ASEAN city could come in to take over the position that Singapore occupies in a certain sector.
First in your model, there is only 3 groups of people - 1) an elite and knows it all government and civil service, 2) an ignorant majority population that is prone to populist \"wrong decision\" and needs to be led and governed to accomodate unpopular measures and 3) a minority who will follow the government as they think that the government are always right and or who aspire to be a member of the elite.
To be brunt, I wish to be no part of such a \"naive model\". Our population has come a long way from the mostly uneducated generation of our fathers' era. We are capable of sound judgement. At least I think I am, being an economist and engineer by training. We are currently blessed with pple like Ngiam Tong Dow, Prof Tommy Koh, Lim Chong Yah, Yeoh Lam Keong, Tan Cheng Bok etc who have voiced their concerns on recent policies. I am not sure which group in your model you belong to. I have faith that the average Singaporean have sound judgement and if the majority are not comfortable with some issues, we need to discuss in ernest where the issue is and address the issue. Now is it me who is naive?
It is a fallacy that democracy breeds inefficiency and we can become a Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia and go into a tailspin.
If you take a cross section snapshot of all the countries in the world and arrange them into democratic/partisan and single party, authoritarian type.
Singapore gravitates towards the group containing North Korean, China, Syria etc which is heavily populated with African countries. Whereas the partisan system government group consists of US, Japan, European countries and of course countries like Philippines and Indonesia and Malaysia bringing up the rear. But we have to take into account that Philippines got rid of Marcos 20 years ago and Indonesia is transforming from the Suharto era of cronyism. The question is which group would you like to see Singapore in?
We are fortunate that we are a miracle thanks to the PAP old guards and excellent technocrats like Goh Keng Swee, S Rajaratnam and Ngiam Tong Dow. But that miracle may likely not last given the statistics. Definitely not with the set of policies in the recent past.
Is Singapore willing to sacrifice the insurance of checks and balances and political development for dubious sake of efficiency as claimed? The scandinavian countries are no better endowed than singapore but they are thriving with bipartisan political system. So is Israel.
If you're interested, you may refer to the research work by MIT Prof - Acemoglu on political institutions and economic growth. -
NSP Calls for National Referendum on White Paper on Population Policy
(http://www.facebook.com/nicoleseahnsp?fref=ts)
9 February 2013
Singapore
Mr Tony Tan Keng Yam
President of Singapore
Dear President
The National Solidarity Party has written to the Prime Minister to urge that a National Referendum be called on the White Paper.
The Parliamentary Debate has now been concluded with the Population White Paper being endorsed by 77 to 13 with one abstention. However, it is clear to many that the vote does not reflect the views of Singaporeans because the PAP Members of Parliament clearly voted along Party lines.
The Population White Paper will affect Singaporeans - for better or worse - for the next 20 years and beyond. All Singaporeans have the right to decide how their future is shaped. The future of this country is something that all Singaporeans have a stake in. It is only right that they should have a say in it as well.
In announcing your intention to run in the last Presidential Election, you had said, 'I believe that the next President of Singapore may have to make very significant decisions that will affect the security and well‐being of all Singaporeans.' One very significant decision you could make with the well-being of the citizens of Singapore in mind would be to ask the Government of Singapore to hold a National Referendum on the White Paper.
We hope that the President will act in the interest of the citizens of Singapore and ask the Government of the People's Action Party to listen to the people whose lives will be irrevocably changed by the decisions that their elected leaders make on their behalf.
Thank you.
Hazel Poa
Secretary-General
National Solidarity Party
NB:
A separate letter calling for the national referendum was also sent to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. -
Singaporean national referendum, 1962
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singaporean_national_referendum,_1962)
The Singapore National Referendum of 1962, or also commonly referred to as the Merger Referendum of Singapore was the first and only referendum to date held in Singapore on September 1, 1962. It called for people to vote on the terms of merger with Malaysia. Some of the options ultimately had to deal with questions of national identity, and such questions would come to be cited even years after the merger, as well as after the subsequent separation.
There was no option to vote against the merger among the three options presented to the people (ironically, separation is exactly what would happen three years later):
Option A: All Singapore citizens would automatically become citizens of Malaysia, and Singapore would retain a degree of autonomy and state power, such as over labour and education. Singapore would also get to keep its language policies, such as to retain using all four major languages, English, Mandarin, Malay and Tamil.
Option B: Singapore would become a federal state like that of the other eleven states, with no more autonomy than the other states would, thus ceding control over issues such as labour and education policies to the federal government in Kuala Lumpur. This also meant that there would be less multilingualism - only English and Malay would be used for official purposes, and possibly education. Only those born in Singapore or descended from the Singapore-born would become citizens of Malaysia. There would also be proportionate representation in Parliament from Singapore.
Option
Singapore would enter on terms no less favourable than the Borneo territories, Sabah and Sarawak, both of whom were also discussing merger with Malaysia. This was to ensure that Malaysia would not discriminate along racial lines, as that would mean discriminating against Sabah and Sarawak, which were predominantly Bumiputra as well.
Option A received the majority of the vote at 71.1%, more than the two thirds which was required for constitutional reform. The supposedly pro-communist Barisan Sosialis were strongly against the idea of referendum, as the move was seen by them as one that would result in their suppression. The Barisan Socialis called for a boycott of the referendum, telling their supporters to submit blank votes in protest of the \"rigged\" referendum. 26% of the votes were left blank as a result. This move had been anticipated by the ruling PAP government, as seen by the insertion of a clause that stated that all blank would be counted as a vote for the option that wins the most votes.
The media campaign fielded by both sides was extremely heated, many of the leaders on both sides broadcast radio shows in several languages. The voter turnout was extensive, around 624,000 had been eligible to vote, and around 561,000 voters turned up, which yielded a turnout of 90%.
The PAP was not legally obliged to call for a referendum, but did so to secure the mandate of the people. However, the Barisan Sosialis, a left-wing socialist party consisting of former PAP members with communist sympathies alleged that the people did not support merger. Lee Kuan Yew declared the people did. The referendum did not have an option of objecting to the idea of merger because no one had legitimately raised the issue in the Legislative Assembly before then. However, the methods had been debatable. The referendum was therefore called to resolve the issue as an effort to decide objectively which option the people backed. The legitimacy of the referendum is often challenged by Singaporean left-wing supporters, due to the lack of an option to vote against the merger.
Backed by the official mandate, Singapore entered into merger with Malaya on September 16, 1963, marking the birth of Malaysia.
Option A: Flag of Singapore - 71.1%
Option B: Flag of Penang - 1.7%
Option Badges of North Borneo and Sarawak - 1.7%
Blank (treated as A) - 25.8% -
concern2:
Although the call for a National Referendum may be meant for a good intent, it should be understood that in the Singapore context a referendum can only be called in very limited circumstances. A referendum is called to answer a single question of great significance to the people such as for eg the 1962(?) referendum as to whether to join Malaysia.NSP Calls for National Referendum on White Paper on Population Policy
(http://www.facebook.com/nicoleseahnsp?fref=ts)
9 February 2013
Singapore
Mr Tony Tan Keng Yam
President of Singapore
Dear President
The National Solidarity Party has written to the Prime Minister to urge that a National Referendum be called on the White Paper.
The Parliamentary Debate has now been concluded with the Population White Paper being endorsed by 77 to 13 with one abstention. However, it is clear to many that the vote does not reflect the views of Singaporeans because the PAP Members of Parliament clearly voted along Party lines.
The Population White Paper will affect Singaporeans - for better or worse - for the next 20 years and beyond. All Singaporeans have the right to decide how their future is shaped. The future of this country is something that all Singaporeans have a stake in. It is only right that they should have a say in it as well.
In announcing your intention to run in the last Presidential Election, you had said, 'I believe that the next President of Singapore may have to make very significant decisions that will affect the security and well‐being of all Singaporeans.' One very significant decision you could make with the well-being of the citizens of Singapore in mind would be to ask the Government of Singapore to hold a National Referendum on the White Paper.
We hope that the President will act in the interest of the citizens of Singapore and ask the Government of the People's Action Party to listen to the people whose lives will be irrevocably changed by the decisions that their elected leaders make on their behalf.
Thank you.
Hazel Poa
Secretary-General
National Solidarity Party
NB:
A separate letter calling for the national referendum was also sent to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
The White Paper sets out a road map and so a referendum is not appropriate as there are many policy issues intertwined in the White Paper. It is not a simple yes or no answer that the people are asked to give on the White Paper
You cannot simply say YES to the White Paper which contains policies to increase healthcare and transportation infrastructure and say NO to the White Paper on policies to increase the number of foreigners allowed to become PRs and citizens. A referendum does not work that way.
If a series of policy issues are intertwined then you cannot use a referndum as it will result in a situation of confusion.
For eg YES to increased baby bonus but NO to priority housing for young families; (although the policies complement each other)
YES to increase in MRT infrastructure but NO to lowering COE quotas (although the policies complement each other)
How do u formulate a sensible question on the White Paper that the electorate can answer?
If you vote NO to the White Paper are you saying no to having more doctors and nurses for an aging population? Or just NO to more foreigners coming to Singapore to live? The NO does not answer a question of fundamental importance for Singaporeans. -
Just relax:
:celebrate: Huat Ah! - Thanks for being the first to reply to my post since the start of CNY
Although the call for a National Referendum may be meant for a good intent, it should be understood that in the Singapore context a referendum can only be called in very limited circumstances. A referendum is called to answer a single question of great significance to the people such as for eg the 1962(?) referendum as to whether to join Malaysia.concern2:
NSP Calls for National Referendum on White Paper on Population Policy
(http://www.facebook.com/nicoleseahnsp?fref=ts)
9 February 2013
Singapore
Mr Tony Tan Keng Yam
President of Singapore
Dear President
The National Solidarity Party has written to the Prime Minister to urge that a National Referendum be called on the White Paper.
The Parliamentary Debate has now been concluded with the Population White Paper being endorsed by 77 to 13 with one abstention. However, it is clear to many that the vote does not reflect the views of Singaporeans because the PAP Members of Parliament clearly voted along Party lines.
The Population White Paper will affect Singaporeans - for better or worse - for the next 20 years and beyond. All Singaporeans have the right to decide how their future is shaped. The future of this country is something that all Singaporeans have a stake in. It is only right that they should have a say in it as well.
In announcing your intention to run in the last Presidential Election, you had said, 'I believe that the next President of Singapore may have to make very significant decisions that will affect the security and well‐being of all Singaporeans.' One very significant decision you could make with the well-being of the citizens of Singapore in mind would be to ask the Government of Singapore to hold a National Referendum on the White Paper.
We hope that the President will act in the interest of the citizens of Singapore and ask the Government of the People's Action Party to listen to the people whose lives will be irrevocably changed by the decisions that their elected leaders make on their behalf.
Thank you.
Hazel Poa
Secretary-General
National Solidarity Party
NB:
A separate letter calling for the national referendum was also sent to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
The White Paper sets out a road map and so a referendum is not appropriate as there are many policy issues intertwined in the White Paper. It is not a simple yes or no answer that the people are asked to give on the White Paper
You cannot simply say YES to the White Paper which contains policies to increase healthcare and transportation infrastructure and say NO to the White Paper on policies to increase the number of foreigners allowed to become PRs and citizens. A referendum does not work that way.
If a series of policy issues are intertwined then you cannot use a referndum as it will result in a situation of confusion.
For eg YES to increased baby bonus but NO to priority housing for young families; (although the policies complement each other)
YES to increase in MRT infrastructure but NO to lowering COE quotas (although the policies complement each other)
How do u formulate a sensible question on the White Paper that the electorate can answer?
If you vote NO to the White Paper are you saying no to having more doctors and nurses for an aging population? Or just NO to more foreigners coming to Singapore to live? The NO does not answer a question of fundamental importance for Singaporeans.
With every turn of events, I learn something new!
Now.. :rubhands: Formulating the NR would be interesting and challenging.. -
To concern2
I respectfully accept your thanks and humbly offer my own :celebrate: -
Just relax:
:hi5: I like to think that for every bad news, there would always be good news too!To concern2
I respectfully accept your thanks and humbly offer my own :celebrate: Can hear lion dance outside. So nice! Hope you enjoy the festive too!
-
As our 1st newly elected PM, Mr Lee said during his rally speech in June 1959
\"We have no personal future apart from your future.
Your joys and sorrows are ours.
We share the same future, be it good, indifferent or bad.
And so it is our duty to see that it is a bright and cheerful future.\"
From Singaporean's current perspective, I wonder... how many % they think is this quote applicable in today's context :siam:
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login