GE2015 TCSS

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Thu, 08 Oct 2015 07:05:51 GMT

limlim — Thu, 08 Oct 2015 07:05:51 GMT

http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/eat-d ... 99135.html

Any comments? Are the concern of the forummer valid or not?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:00:47 GMT

pirated — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 07:00:47 GMT

CSJ has an axe to grind

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 05:26:15 GMT

sushi88 — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 05:26:15 GMT

pirate:
sushi88:
[quote=\"pirate\"]
NCMP got no residents to serve lah. That's why called Non Constituency MP.
They are serving ALL citizen-residents of Singapore, even bigger pool.

I thought NCMP only need to show up in Parliament once in a while and TCSS.

Must serve anyone meh?[/quote]Debating on relevant policies is serving the people what.... It has been proven in the previous tenure, the one who moved any needle was a MP without any constituency. Frankly, if you give this to CSJ, he will grab..he wants to be seen and heard at every opportunity. On this note, I have to say CSJ shows stronger passion in what he believes in.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:50:23 GMT

pirate — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:50:23 GMT

sushi88:
pirate:
[quote=\"pirated\"]If people can do community service to serve the residents why can't NCMP do it ? Must be MP then can do meh ? Convenient reason

NCMP got no residents to serve lah. That's why called Non Constituency MP.

They are serving ALL citizen-residents of Singapore, even bigger pool.[/quote]I thought NCMP only need to show up in Parliament once in a while and TCSS.

Must serve anyone meh?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:44:10 GMT

pirate — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:44:10 GMT

pirated:
pirate:
[quote=\"pirated\"]If people can do community service to serve the residents why can't NCMP do it ? Must be MP then can do meh ? Convenient reason

NCMP got no residents to serve lah. That's why called Non Constituency MP.

She can always serve the punggol east residents just like sitoh did for posting pasir

Walk the talk la[/quote]But Punggol East residents already decided they don't her to serve them. And PA doesn't want her as grassroots advisor either.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:43:57 GMT

limlim — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:43:57 GMT

pirated:

She can always serve the punggol east residents just like sitoh did for posting pasir

Yeah.. there is no need to accept NCMP post to be able to serve the residents.

So serving and accepting NCMP is 2 different things.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:31:14 GMT

pirated — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:31:14 GMT

pirate:
pirated:
If people can do community service to serve the residents why can't NCMP do it ? Must be MP then can do meh ? Convenient reason

NCMP got no residents to serve lah. That's why called Non Constituency MP.

She can always serve the punggol east residents just like sitoh did for posting pasir

Walk the talk la

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:15:49 GMT

sushi88 — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:15:49 GMT

pirate:
pirated:
If people can do community service to serve the residents why can't NCMP do it ? Must be MP then can do meh ? Convenient reason

NCMP got no residents to serve lah. That's why called Non Constituency MP.

They are serving ALL citizen-residents of Singapore, even bigger pool.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:12:50 GMT

limlim — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 04:12:50 GMT

3Boys:
limlim:
[quote=\"3Boys\"]

Did what? Refuse because she wanted to do something else or refuse because she thought NCMP was a mockery of the opposition?

Conflation again?
If she \"refused because she want to do something else\", she should not stand for election in the first place. \"because she wanted to do something else\", even if elected she would not be able to do the job also right?

Clearly the ONLY distinction here affecting her decision is Elected MP vs NCMP. Can't you see?

And therefore, she refused to take up the post of NCMP on the account of the fact that she feels that the voters have not endorsed her work over the last 2.5 years, there is a much reduced stipend, and she wanted to consider her options including whether she take up a job or be a full time mom. Did you even read the papers? Oh wait, you don't, lest it poisons your prejudices with real information.

How does this translate to your insinuation that she had rejected it because she thinks it makes a mockery the opposition? Are you a mind reader?

Election over already, opposition got hammered, let it go and get on with life.[/quote]
She rejects NCMP bcoz she feels it is \"not worth\" it.

Mockery, wayang, are terms I used. You may choose to use other terms.

End of the day, it all boils down to one thing.

NCMP is less worth than MP.

And, what I want to say is, NCMP is no Big deal because Whoever gets it, gets it WITHOUT the mandate of the people. The best loser could simply be that the winner is less liked by the people, and not bcoz the loser is \"better\" than other losers.

Hence, my original comment stands that there is no big deal whether the NCMP goes to ah beng or ah seng but you are the one who get all worked out over the \"potential abuse\" of the \"wayang system\". oh well..

And.. ya you read the papers, so whatever pple said to the papers must be \"real\" What do you expect a politician to tell the paper??????? a politically incorrect answer? Apparently not everyone, esp WP, is as politically \"savvy\" as \"KJ\"..

and apparently najib told the paper that his money is clean.....

Anyway, it was probably incorrectly for me to say that \"at least one did\", bcoz their real intention nobody knows. But what I wanted to say is at least one rejects the NCMP, that is the crux of the matter. Whether they agree with me or not.. no one really knows.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 03:36:37 GMT

pirate — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 03:36:37 GMT

pirated:
If people can do community service to serve the residents why can't NCMP do it ? Must be MP then can do meh ? Convenient reason

NCMP got no residents to serve lah. That's why called Non Constituency MP.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 03:25:23 GMT

sushi88 — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 03:25:23 GMT

The NCMP role is a manageable role financially with 3-days-work a month and an allowance of $2k+ plus a full time job outside. The main reason is her priority has changed because financials is not the biggest issue, she is even willing to be SAHM.

Instead, this NCMP option brings out the truth in people who really want to serve the people or just for the power and attractive allowance to let them remain in service.

Actually I am curious what TPL would have done…but we will never know.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:08:59 GMT

3Boys — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:08:59 GMT

limlim:
3Boys:

Did what? Refuse because she wanted to do something else or refuse because she thought NCMP was a mockery of the opposition?

Conflation again?
If she \"refused because she want to do something else\", she should not stand for election in the first place. \"because she wanted to do something else\", even if elected she would not be able to do the job also right?

Clearly the ONLY distinction here affecting her decision is Elected MP vs NCMP. Can't you see?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:08:49 GMT

pirated — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:08:49 GMT

If people can do community service to serve the residents why can’t NCMP do it ? Must be MP then can do meh ? Convenient reason

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:03:07 GMT

limlim — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 02:03:07 GMT

3Boys:
limlim:
[quote=\"Sun_2010\"]
If the opposition genuinely feel that, then they should refuse it.
Apparently they dont agree with your view point
Well.. at least one did.

Did what? Refuse because she wanted to do something else or refuse because she thought NCMP was a mockery of the opposition?

Conflation again?[/quote]If she \"refused because she want to do something else\", she should not stand for election in the first place. \"because she wanted to do something else\", even if elected she would not be able to do the job also right?

Clearly the ONLY distinction here affecting her decision is Elected MP vs NCMP. Can't you see?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 23:11:52 GMT

3Boys — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 23:11:52 GMT

limlim:
Sun_2010:

If the opposition genuinely feel that, then they should refuse it.
Apparently they dont agree with your view point
Well.. at least one did.

Did what? Refuse because she wanted to do something else or refuse because she thought NCMP was a mockery of the opposition?

Conflation again?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:43:43 GMT

limlim — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 09:43:43 GMT

Sun_2010:
limlim:

NCMP is nothing but \"handouts\" by the ruling party to make a mockery of the opposition.
If the opposition genuinely feel that, then they should refuse it.
Apparently they dont agree with your view point

Well.. at least one did.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 08:07:27 GMT

pirated — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 08:07:27 GMT

If candidates are credible, u get credible electorate. U got incredible electorate from incredible candidates

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:04:26 GMT

pirate — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 07:04:26 GMT

Don’t know what the big deal is. PAP want to retain the power to decide, so they will just have to decide. Whether they decide that the decision should be a principled one or willy-nilly one is really up to them. Either way the voters will still vote the way they vote, no?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 06:49:56 GMT

Sun_2010 — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 06:49:56 GMT

limlim:

NCMP is nothing but \"handouts\" by the ruling party to make a mockery of the opposition.

If the opposition genuinely feel that, then they should refuse it.
Apparently they dont agree with your view point

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:55:22 GMT

pirated — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:55:22 GMT

3Boys:
pirate:
[quote=\"3Boys\"]
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Do or don't what?

It's impossible for me to answer to your paraphrasing of my words because they were addressed to lim2 in the context of his condemnation of the NCMP scheme, and of course you may have a different view on the issue from either of us and I'll just end up tied in knots trying to answer to 2 differing perspectives.[/quote]U got the idea.

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:53:47 GMT

3Boys — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:53:47 GMT

pirate:
3Boys:

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Do or don't what?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:18:07 GMT

pirate — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 05:18:07 GMT

3Boys:

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Do or don't what?

Reply to GE2015 TCSS on Tue, 06 Oct 2015 04:53:43 GMT

3Boys — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 04:53:43 GMT

limlim:
3Boys:

There is a real moral hazard that people don't see. The whole point of NCMP is that the next best losers get offered, i.e. they had the highest vote shares from the ELECTORATE amongst those who lost.
Wrong. The electorate has spoken. The losers were rejected by the voters, nothing more.

NCMP is nothing but \"handouts\" by the ruling party to make a mockery of the opposition.
3Boys:
It's not willy-nilly for political parties to work out amongst themselves WHO should take those slots. What if RP were to find some deep pockets to pay off WP, SDP, SDA, then nominate Roy Ngerng to be the NCMP? There is so much latitude for abuse, but people paint it as if the PAP are being the bad actors here.
There is no talk of \"integrity\" for the losers to be in parliament in the first place. The electorate doesn't want you. Get lost. As simple as that.

Abuse? Yah.. abuse of a wayang system.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't.