Pls read Bye Bye Singapore hello China

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 13:23

  Tags:

  政府奖学金计划的一个故事

  September 4, 2009 by Lee Chong  
  Filed under Chinese section

  1 Comment

  《译自一篇致陈钦亮的读者留言》

  在一个纯属虚构和�为『万Hub之��的国家，它的政府奖学金计划是如下�作的。政府奖学金计划 (government scholarship) 最明显的目的是选拔�慧的�年人。但该计划的其他目的并�是那么明显的。

  这些�慧的�年人对现有的政治体系造�清晰和实在的��。因此必须有系统地对他们终身『处置 (managed)�和『压制 (neutralized)�。

  用奖学金去鼓励并且诱导这些�慧的�年人集中精神从事学业�特别是科学和工程学。因为这些学科是以事实为根基�它们倾�于孕育更加顺从政府的学生，并且�需�训练他们作批判�的�考(critical thinking)。

  政府�时主动地『整顿(fix)�那些需�作批判��考的学科例如﹕政治学�历�和哲学。通过分派大批的弱等学生去修读这些艺术学科，因而打击这些学科的声誉使��学生欢迎。

  这些领�奖学金的年�学者在毕业��接�政府的�缚�在当�的政府体系之内�务大约八年。

  �管这些学者的能力和天分，政府�他们支付高于市场价格的薪金和迅速�拔他们�任高�。并且鼓励他们结婚和生养许多孩�。

  当这些学者完��务政府的八年�缚期之��他们年介三�出头。此时他们正在担当超乎他们能力的��并且收�无敌的薪金。一方�他们忙于应付妻儿。�一方�侧由于�房和汽车贷款而严�地债�高筑。�时他们也维��一�昂贵的生活方�，例如�常出国远游和身为多间乡�俱�部的会员。如此��，这些学者实在太忙碌以致无暇�考国事的是与�。

  当他们年介四���之时，大约50%至80%的学者将�临事业�滞。就在这时，他们开始醒觉和从新�考。但是为时己晚了。

  他们�到了多数平民百姓的�视和怀疑，这些以�的好高骛远之士(high-fliers)目�己�无处�归。他们尚��还巨大的�房和汽车贷款和维��一�昂贵的生活方�。他们的孩�也在此时想�到美国的顶端大学留学，这将花费一匹为数��的金钱。

  这些学者无处�逃。他们并�拥有在『真实世界�内�以谋生的真正技能。因为在�务政府�期，他们太迅速被��而错过了学习在政府基层如何实际工作去�得�果。�者，在事业�期由于�常轮�政府岗�，他们现在年介四�����现没有基层知识或者专门技能。

  因此这些开始醒觉的学者没有选择，�好闭嘴和顺从政府的政策。他们自已也��了他们在二�三��时曾��视的那些无能的政府雇员一样。

  当他们年介五���之时，这些�学者将轻轻地从政府体系中被�步淘汰，而被调派至对政府无害的『�政府组织(NGOs)�的高层领异�置，使他们��忙碌和令政府�招麻烦。但是甚而这些NGOs也是特别的机构。他们实际上是商业界组织的NGOs和政府本身组织的NGOs。

  [以上的故事纯属虚构，在现实世界从未有这�政府奖学金计划如此�作。]

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 13:26

  八月的�考

  August 9, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Chinese section

  Comments Off

  罗禅�

  我特别喜欢8月。�仅因为岛国8月的��葛分外妖娆，更是因为8月的新加�洋溢�喜气，8月的组屋区�淌�温馨，尤其是家家户户都悬挂了国旗 (national flag)，使绿色的岛国，色彩一下�绚丽起��丰富起��壮观起��

  　　早年，许多国民争先���夜排队索�国庆入场�，为的是到现场去亲身感�一下举国欢腾的气氛。近年�，我国的国庆典礼越办越隆�，越办越精彩，因为是在滨海城的浮动舞�，在潋滟波光之下，��辉煌�别具风情。朋�从海外归�，很想亲临现场观�国庆庆典，于是，我设法打�亲朋戚�中�有多余的入场券或有�预定了附近的酒店�以居高临下，将这一年一度的历�性时刻尽收眼底�一览无�。周边好�有一个预订了酒店，她本是�尼�，在我国安家�户好多年，几乎�年都有雅兴预先订房观�国庆，几�土生土长的朋�对此表示�屑，还说，国庆表演有啥好看，我连电视都是懒得看的�

  　　天渊之别的心æ€�，令我感慨万端……为什么土生土长的本地国民如此ä¸�屑？为什么“新移民”如此热诚？是ä¸�是一切已习以为常？当然，你å�¯ä»¥ç�†è§£ä¸º“新移民”因为“æ–°”所以有热忱，因为有钱有闲所以有雅兴；你也å�¯ä»¥è§£é‡Šä¸ºæœ¬åœŸå›½æ°‘ä¸�看国庆庆典ä¸�等于没有国家æ„�识，但是，让我深æ€�的是，如何衡é‡�一个人的国家æ„�识？犹忆早年家æ¯�在世时，对于国家是忠心耿耿的，ç»�ä¸�会因为政策å�¯èƒ½å��颇，比如æŸ�个地区先翻新ã€�哪里始终没通地é“�而有所抱怨。我想，或许是先辈们ç»�历了建国时期的艰辛与苦难，对于æ�¥ä¹‹ä¸�易的ç¹�è�£ä¸Žç¨³å®šæ‰�é�žå¸¸ç��惜，拳拳的爱国心æ‰�会油然而生的缘故å�§ï¼�å��观太平盛世出生的我们，国家的æ„�识似乎并ä¸�那么强烈，å��倒生出计较之心。

  　　å‰�些年我曾旅居海外，é�žå¸¸ç•™æ�‹å¼‚国的风花雪月四季更迭，沉醉于辽阔的è“�天与é�’é�’的碧è�‰ï¼Œæˆ‘以为我å�¯ä»¥å››æµ·ä¸ºå®¶……然而，在最终å�šåŽ»ç•™çš„抉择时，我ä»�然选择了回归故土。我知é�“，那湛è“�的天空虽然有我自由呼å�¸çš„空间，但é�’é�’的碧è�‰å�´æ²¡æœ‰æˆ‘辛勤的汗水，更没有我赖以扎根的å�šå®žçš„土地。

  　　虽然我们ç»�常教育孩å­�è¦�有国家æ„�识，既然生于斯ã€�长于斯，就è¦�爱于斯ã€�忠于斯，对国家è¦�效忠，è¦�奉献……然而，å‰�些年屡屡å�‘生的精英æ¯�约ä¸�归，甚至还毫ä¸�羞惭地美其å��æ›°è¦�为全人类æœ�务，“å°�红点”ä¸�足以让他“é²²é¹�展翅”，莫é�žæˆ‘们å�ƒæŒ‘万选出的精英心中的首è¦�ä½�ç½®å�ªæ˜¯ä¸ªäººäº‹ä¸šçš„å�‘展而ä¸�是为国效劳和国家å�Œå‘¼å�¸å…±å‘½è¿�？那么，当国家有难时，我们所ç�Œè¾“的爱国æ„�识能å�¦ç»�得起考验？我们的国民能å�¦ä¸‡ä¼—一心，谱写出一曲新时代的《正气歌》？在ç¹�è�£ç››ä¸–我们尚且对国家抱怨这个ä¸�周那个ä¸�全，è¦�是国难当头å�ˆä¼šå¦‚何呢？

  　　国民�识的�输�是刻�地在教�中安�多少百分比的课文，�是举办多少寻�游�活动，或者带年轻人走马看花逛逛牛车水���度�马�文化�，也�是在CME课上完�一个电脑游�。它应该是春风化雨般润物无声的感化，是国家民�历�文化的传承与�陶，是建国44年��行�业丰硕�果的总结与呈现，让年轻人在感染中�到感动，在学习中收获自豪，�有这样，他们�会与国家�甘苦�共患难�共浮沉。

  　　�是8月，一个多彩的8月�亮丽的8月�骄傲自豪的8月，更是一个让人�考的8月，过去的辉煌已�走入历�，明天我们将迎�一个怎样的新加��

  Source: Zaobao.com

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 13:27

  Tags:

  给外国学生奖学金，新加�是得是失？

  August 5, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Chinese section

  4 Comments

  � ��娴

  新学期å�ˆå¼€å§‹äº†ï¼Œæ²‰å¯‚了一个å�‡æœŸçš„æ ¡å›­å�ˆç¹�忙起æ�¥ã€‚笔者作为一å��中国留学生，å�‘现新加å�¡çš„高等院校中有很多拿政府奖学金 (government scholarship) å‰�æ�¥å°±è¯»çš„外国学生。他们有的是教育部直接在中国，å�°åº¦ç­‰å›½å®¶é€‰æ‹”而æ�¥ï¼Œæœ‰äº›æ˜¯è‡ªå·±ç”³è¯·å‰�æ�¥ï¼Œè¿˜æœ‰ä¸€äº›æ˜¯åœ¨æ–°åŠ å�¡å¿µä¸­å­¦å’Œåˆ�级学院的，与本地学生一起å�‚加“A”水准考试而进入本地大学。

  毫无疑问，这些外国留学生作为奖学金得主，必然有�优异的学习�绩和综�能力。他们慕新加�学校的美�而�，增强了新加�学校的整体实力；但毫无疑问也增加了学生之间的竞争，�用了本地学生的部分资�。

  那么，为外国学生�供��形�的奖学金，对新加��说，究竟是得还是失呢？我认为，是�失大得。

  虽然，招了外国学生，必然给本地学生的�置就少了。难�会有些本地人感到�满。但是外国学生拿了这里的奖学金，对赞助方也有好处。

  首先，大部分奖学金得主�守�议，在新加�公�工作若干年。充分说明新加�的确是一个适宜个人事业�展的国际大都市。�外一些想回中国的学生也都是尽�争�由新加�公�派往中国。如果他们��用，这也有利于新加��业在中国的�展。当然，也有少部分学生没有履行�约，赔了18%�约金。这对赞助商�说，也并没有很大的�失。

  �外，应该注�到的是，这些奖学金得主通常都是攻读�科，工程学，或者计算机（电脑）学的学�。这些学�对数�的�求相当高，而中国，�度，马�西亚等国的学生��在这些方�表现出色，�时本地学生则��商科�文科等方�的深造。等到就业的时候，外国学生相应会从事技术型�业，而管�的岗��然多数为本地人。因此，为这些学院的学生�供奖学金，�引他们�就读，一方�是人尽其�，�一方�也壮大了新加�学校在这方�的实力。留学生和本地学生相辅相�，壮大了学科，也加强了国家人���的组�。

  而且，留学生是新加�教育事业的对外宣传队。就拿我自己�说，�次�期回国，周围邻居，父�的�事都会找机会问我这边的情况。

  ��中国�济的�展，中国�百姓的收入���高，越�越多的中国家长都设法让孩�出国留学。与欧美高昂的费用和显著文化差异相比，新加�和香港是近年�中国学生出国留学的上选。很多中国网站都有留学新加�的窗�广告。总体�看，除了一�部分中国学生是拿奖学金学习，大部分学生是�费�念书的。这就�大的增加了新加�政府的财政收入。

  奖学金，海外分校，交�学习等项目会大大促进新加�和其他亚洲国家（特别是中国和�度）年轻人之间的�谊，�少年轻有为的�年或许将�就�为亚洲�国�展的关键人物，在国际上�手�作。

  许多人知é�“的一个例å­�是沈冰。她是中国大陆的知å��主æŒ�人，当年也是获新加å�¡æ•™è‚²éƒ¨å¥–学金æ�¥å�—大读书，å�Žæ�¥åœ¨ã€Šè�”å�ˆæ—©æŠ¥ã€‹å½“过记者。虽然她å�Žæ�¥æ²¡ç•™åœ¨æ–°åŠ å�¡è€Œæ˜¯å›žå›½å�‘展，表é�¢ä¸Šæ˜¯“å� äº†æ–°åŠ å�¡çš„便宜”，但是我第一次对新加å�¡çš„教育有所了解，正是因为看了她的节目。作为中央电视å�°çš„主æŒ�人，她的影å“�力究竟有多大，è°�å�ˆèƒ½è¯´å¾—清呢？我的一个å�Œå­¦è¯´ä»–们那个城市的市长也是国立大学毕业的，这ç§�政治上的影å“�力也难以估é‡�。这还仅仅是数万中国留学生中的两例，更何况å�°åº¦ã€�马æ�¥è¥¿äºšã€�å�°å°¼ç­‰å›½ä¹Ÿæœ‰è®¸å¤šæ›¾ç»�拿过新加å�¡å¥–学金的学生正在å�‘挥他们的影å“�力

  Source: Zaobao.com

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 13:37

  Tags:

  新加�工人：我们有什么得益？

  May 17, 2009 by Lee Chong  
  Filed under Chinese section

  5 Comments

  Original blog by Lucky Tan HERE

   

  ç»�济好景时，价格上å�‡ï¼Œéƒ¨é•¿å’Œå…¶ä»–精英(elites)è¶�机增加他们自己的薪水高达ä¹�宵云外。 但对新加å�¡å·¥äººæœ‰ä»€ä¹ˆå¾—益呢？在好景和物价高涨时他们己ç»�è¦�挣扎求存，但在ç»�济转å��时他们å�ˆæ��惧失业。 他们为了支付公共房屋而挣扎，担心能ä¸�能适当地退休 (retire)，并且忧虑必须应付上涨的医è�¯ä¿�å�¥è´¹ç”¨ã€‚ 许多新加å�¡äººå¼€å§‹æ€€ç–‘：挣扎究竟是为了什么呢？ 从超级竞争性的学校环境到更富竞争性的工作环境，新加å�¡äººä¸�断地艰苦工作渡过难关，但这å�šè‹¦å·¥ä½œæ˜¯å�¦å¸¦æ�¥æ›´ç¾Žå¥½çš„生活呢？é�¢å¯¹æœ‰é™�的和分é…�基于市场定价的资æº�，例如：土地和ä½�房，竞争的æ„�义是您è¦�更艰苦地工作而获得更少报酬：我们居所的é�¢ç§¯çš„确是ä¸�断收缩，å�³ä½¿è¿™å±…所已消耗了我们收入的更大的百分比(%)作为按æ�­è¿˜æ¬¾ã€‚我的一ä½�朋å�‹åŽ»å¹´é€šçŸ¥æˆ‘他很高兴å�¯ä»¥ ‘最终买到’ (å•Š…è¦�借钱去买？) 他的梦想家居，这是ç»�过了他的8年艰苦工作任è�Œä¸ºä¸€å��工程师。我å�‚观å�Žå¾—悉，这朋å�‹çš„居所还å°�过我父亲购买的第一所4房组屋，而我父亲当时å�ªæ˜¯ä¸€å��技工。我的朋å�‹èº«ä¸ºä¸€ä½�工程师对未æ�¥ä»�然有所盼望，但是在今天新加å�¡çš„ç»�济环境之下，一å��技工å�ˆæœ‰ä½•ç›¼æœ›å‘¢ï¼Ÿ …

  这样挣扎甚而ä¸�会导致工作å�¯ä»¥å¾—到ä¿�障：今年新加å�¡æˆ�为在亚洲表现最å��çš„ç»�济体，眼看失业率高达4.9%。 竞争å�ªå¯¼è‡´æ›´åŠ å¼ºçƒˆçš„竞争…æ›´é‡�压力，上å�‡çš„ä½�房价格和生活费，…过了一会之å�Žæ‚¨æ„Ÿåˆ°æœ‰å¦‚在跑步机(treadmill)上艰苦奔跑，但去ä¸�了任何地方。

  这系统似乎在æŸ�些地方出了错。 整体上，新加å�¡ç»�济在兴旺期间是个制å�šé‡‘钱的机器。 问题是如何分é…�。 在过去二å��年，盈利(profits)作为国民生产总值(GDP)的百分比(%)å·±ç»�增长至破记录的水平，并且å�ŒæœŸé—´æ”¶å…¥å·®è·�(income gap)也迅速增加…这收入差è·�也渗入中产阶级家庭和专业人员。然而领导人还敦促工人更艰苦和更长期地工作，但财富分é…�是这么ä¸�公平，那么我们有什么得益呢？

   

  所有以上境况是ä¸�足为奇的，因为我们的领导人是错误地被鼓励(misincentivised)。 我们的领导人把他们自己的薪金与那些最高收入阶层挂了鈎。试想一想：把现时这个系统维æŒ�下去是符å�ˆä»–们利益的…..，而您则æ¯�一年è¦�更艰苦地挣扎。

  更新：曾阅读一个评论关于PAP领导人怎样使普通人民竞争，而辨解他们的党无需竞争。这�醒了我昨天��BBC采访Stephen S. Roach [注：Morgan Stanley的高级行政人员链接] 的一侧新闻。 他说民主是社会�济�祉(well being)的关键因数，这是由于政治领导人必需�与开放的竞选�能��人民的利益得到照顾。

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 13:41

  Tags:

  亲爱的显龙(一�公开信)

  April 24, 2009 by Lee Chong  
  Filed under Chinese section

  Comments Off

  Original blog by Feed-Me-To-The-Fish HERE

  (译者注: 本文作者笔å��为“拿我去喂鱼” ，æ„�å�³ä»–去世後è¦�海葬。)

   

  亲爱的总�先生，

   

  您曾患有淋巴瘤肿病(lymphoma)，而我则曾�心�病�作和患有心室纤维性乱缩症(ventricular fibrillation)。

  您现时关注您�亲的�康。我以�曾照顾我父亲(如果他今天还活�的�，就象您父亲一样年纪) 直至他由于退化疾病而去世，这使我对生命的脆弱和死亡的必然有了最深刻的�解。

   

  当您在宽大但破旧的Oxley Rise�宅(您的妹妹如此说[阅此文])里长大作为一�总�的儿�时，我与其他8�兄弟�妹在月租$25元的一室寒�里长大作为一�STC (Singapore Traction Company) 巴士售票员的儿�，而且家父�兼�当无牌德士�机，使我家能维�生计。

  您到哈佛和剑桥深造，并且选读任何您想è¦�读的课程，而我最佳的学历å�ªæ˜¯å‰‘桥资深è¯�书(相当于今天的‘O水准’)。

  今天您赚得三百七�万元($3.7 million)是全世界年薪最高的政客(这尚未计算您的陆军准将 (BG) 退休金和国家总�在55�以�的退休金) 。我出�我的技能作为自雇人士(self employed)而�年仅凑得大约$24,000的入�。 我没有退休金，我并且没有资格领�您PAP党在�次竞选和预算案声明时那么�常歌颂的任何津贴或救济金。 ���醒我关于GST回扣，它是令人�心的，因为部分GST也是用了去支付您的薪金。

   

  ��误会，我并�是对我现在的境况有所抱怨。富有和愉快是存在于您的脑袋之中，并�存在于您能��其他人拥有的东西! 我的孩�能照顾他们自己，我和妻��月$2000入�已是足够应付一个简�而舒适的生活了。我和家人己感到上天�佑而满足于我们现有的一切!

  多少�足够呢？

  为了什么�足够呢？
  <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
  <!--[endif]-->

  这就��决于�个人的价值覌�自足感�贪念��力感�和自觉高人一等的作风。能获得6�美囯总统的年薪而感觉良好�？

  请您告诉我� :)
  <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
  <!--[endif]-->

  虽然我们大致年龄相�，但我们的�长背景则�一样。 我猜想我们唯一共�之处是我们都出生于新加�，我们�是新加�人。

  比起您的富裕，我就多么�一�乞儿(pauper)，但我很高兴我�必承担您�负的�责。

  我给您的愿望是上天�佑您能享�身为祖父之�。当我的孩�诞生了�一��孩时，我感到万分的�慰。

  当我们热爱生命，当我们真实地去关心，和自愿如此，而��到��，�力，和��的妨�，我们就永远自由了。 . . . . . . . 我们甚至�以写�客(blog)直到被�为止

  我�切地希望您现在的工作是您热爱的工作，而�是您父亲或其他人强加于你的。
  <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
  <!--[endif]-->

  虽然我从认识您的那些人之中得悉您并�是�您表�上看�的无用 (因您自己支付了���议的薪金，所以人们期待了���议的表现) 和无情，但我�然有我的疑惑。
  <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
  <!--[endif]-->

  从您的优良血统(您爸爸将喜欢å†�笑我这个é’�汉连大学教育也没有[阅此文]) 之å�£ä¸­ï¼Œæˆ‘å�¬æ‚¨è¯´äº†“ç±³ç¼�无蛤”(mee siam mai hum)，和“整肃å��对党并且收买选票”(fix opposition and buy votes) 而感到震惊。 哪个æ�¶é­”使您å�‘表了这些言论？

   

  当Mas Selamat 逃狱时，您沈默了许多天。

  当新加�人�到Lehman的彻底失败和毒性财�产�所伤害时，您沈默了许多天。

  当市镇议会(Town Councils)也为了Lehman而烧伤他们自己时，您沈默了许多天。

  我从未写信给政客特别是部长级高官，我知�我写的东西对他们�说�值一文。 . . �是在原野中�一微�的声音�了。

  然而，在我死于下次心�病�作之�，我现在担当起新加�人的责任而写信给你。

   

  是啊，在我被喂鱼(海葬)之�，我希望作为宇宙上工资最高的总�，您将�件有体�的事，调查一下为什么您的PAP 议员王世丰医生(Dr Ong Seh Hong)在�慈(Ren Ci) 医院�主管(CEO)明义(Ming Yi) 法师的事件中�得这样拖泥带水。

  
  沈默也许是金，但您对最近在新加å�¡å�‘生的关键事件的无言评论，对您的工作并没有帮助。也ä¸�帮助人民“团结å‰�è¿›” (Staying Together Moving Ahead) ，这将使您的PAP竞选宣言å�˜æˆ�笑è¯�。 如果您是困惑ä¸�解而ä¸�知é�“è¦�说些什么è¯�，那么新加å�¡äººä¾¿æƒ³çŸ¥é�“： “他究竟在干什么工作?”

  
  为了所有新加�人能明白此事，请你说一些值得您的薪金和��的�，觧释关于�慈医院和王世丰医生之间的问题。

  å�³ä½¿æ‚¨å°†å‘Šè¯‰æˆ‘们“这事件根本ä¸�是问题，在他清还了贷款之å�Žï¼Œä»–æ‰�æˆ�为比白色更æ´�白的议员”，这比起您å†�次ä¿�æŒ�沈默更好，我们ä»�然ä¹�於一å�¬ã€‚

  
  我们盼望能�到你的回音。

  
  谢谢。
  <!--[if !supportLineBreakNewLine]-->
  <!--[endif]-->

  拿我去喂鱼(笔�)

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 13:42

  Tags:

  铲除新加�人优越感

  April 2, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Chinese section

  3 Comments

  � �永欣

  一å��新加å�¡æœ‹å�‹åœ¨å¹¿å·žå·¥ä½œä¸€å¹´å¤šå�Žå†³å®šè¾žè�Œï¼Œä¸‹å‘¨å›žå›½ã€‚大伙儿决定明晚为她æ�žä¸ªæ¬¢é€�会，主题为“广州”。除了将到粤è�œé¤�馆å�ƒé¥­ï¼Œå¤§å®¶ä¹Ÿå¿…须以广州人的装扮出席，ä¸�这么å�šçš„人将负责“ä¹°å�•”。

  　　我原本�以为�：装扮�广州人？�就穿得跟平时一样？在我的�象中，周围的广州人无论在穿���味等都与自己没有什么差异。

  　　“了解情况”å�Žæ‰�å�‘现，原æ�¥å‘¨å›´çš„新加å�¡æœ‹å�‹å¯¹å¹¿å·žäººçš„å�°è±¡å¾ˆä¸�一样，他们建议，我明晚穿得土气一点，例如：西裤é…�æ�­è¿�动鞋，裤脚折到è†�盖上，穿件颜色抢眼的上衣等，最好是耳朵上放æ�¡é¦™çƒŸã€‚

  　　当然，一切安排纯属好玩，毫无��，主�是想让欢�会更有气氛，让大家看到彼此的装扮�相互嘲讽，放�心情。

  　　å�¯æ˜¯ï¼Œè¿™èƒŒå�Žå�´å‡¸æ˜¾äº†ï¼Œæ— è®ºä¸­å›½ï¼ˆå¹¿å·ž – Guangzhou）这些年æ�¥åœ¨ç¤¾ä¼šå�‘展或文化修养方é�¢å�‘生了多少å�˜åŒ–，很多新加å�¡äººå¯¹ä¸­å›½äººçš„å�°è±¡å�´å§‹ç»ˆå�œç•™åœ¨è¿‡åŽ»çš„年代里，对中国人ä»�存有一ç§�优越感。

  　　试想想，�欢�会的新加�朋�都在广州呆了至少�年以上，有机会近�离了解中国�接触中国人，但最�����那份优越感。我�敢想象，在新加�的一般新加�人对中国人的看法�会如何？

  　　若直接问周围的新加å�¡æœ‹å�‹ï¼Œæ²¡äººä¼šæ‰¿è®¤å¯¹ä¸­å›½äººå­˜æœ‰ä¼˜è¶Šæ„Ÿï¼Œä»–们å��而会表示，自己交了很多中国朋å�‹ï¼Œç”šè‡³è¿žå¥³å�‹ä¹Ÿæ˜¯ä¸­å›½äººã€‚但进一步问下去，就ä¸�难找到这样的例å­�：虽然与中国女å�‹äº¤å¾€äº†ä¸€æ®µæ—¥å­�，å�´æ— æ³•ç¡®å®šå¯¹æ–¹æ˜¯ç»“婚的对象，因为始终过ä¸�了心里的那一关——回到新加å�¡äº²æœ‹æˆšå�‹ä¼šæ€Žä¹ˆæƒ³ï¼Ÿ

  　　�管嘴里怎么�认，优越感还是浮现了。

  　　这�现象让我担忧。中国天天都在大步�进，�济�展�教育�文化�生活环境等领域都如此，尤其在大城市里。新加�人若继续以存有优越感的心�去看待中国人，那么，与中国人的接触就�会维�在最表�的层次，��能建立更深一层的关系和信任。

  新加�毕竟是个�国，�观中国今�将�为超级强国，长远�看，我们需�中国比中国需�我们更多。很多新加�人都是�裔，懂得�语和��方言，与中国人血脉相连，若能与中国人建立起关系和信任，今�在中国无论是投资��商或进行��交�都肯定�有一定的优势，而这个优势也很有�能是新加�未�增长的推动力。

  　　新加�领导人也清楚地�识到这一点，国务资政�作栋上周访问广东与该�领导人会�时，就�三强调，新加�并未自许有什么�教广东的，访问的目的主�是交���，�时也想知�广东还有什么领域想与新加�交�。感觉得到，这些�是客套�，而是�自内心的。

  　　新加å�¡æ”¿åºœè¶�现在还有æ�¡ä»¶å’Œå®žåŠ›æ—¶ï¼Œå¤šä¸Žä¸­å›½æŽ¥è§¦ã€�建立关系ã€�争å�–更多无形利益。风水轮æµ�转，今å�Žå¾ˆæœ‰å�¯èƒ½æ˜¯æ–°åŠ å�¡å€ŸåŠ©åœ¨ä¸­å›½çš„优势æ�¥å�–得增长。现在除了积æž�与中国å�„çœ�份å�ˆä½œï¼Œå»ºç«‹å¤šä¸ªå�Œè¾¹ç»�è´¸ç�†äº‹ä¼šï¼Œä»¥å�Šå…±å�Œå¼€å�‘大型项目如天津生æ€�城和广州知识城外，政府也应该多通过教育和宣传，引导新加å�¡å¹´è½»äººæ”¹å�˜å¯¹ä¸­å›½äººçš„看法，尤其是优越感的心ç�†ï¼Œæ›´å¿…é¡»“铲除”。

  　　新加�年轻人必须懂得如何虚心地与中国人接触，毕竟新加�过去的�就是先辈的，今�的表现则得看我们这一代人。

  　　明天出席欢�会时，我�会刻�装扮，因为广州人的穿�确实就跟我们一样。

  Source: Zaobao.com

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 14:19

  Tags:

  Do more to help Singaporean students

  September 19, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Snippets

  3 Comments

  I REFER to yesterday’s reports, ‘PM signals a slower intake of immigrants’ and ‘A tip to students: Be driven about causes’.

  I am a student at the National University of Singapore. I agree with what Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that bringing in foreigners will help ‘raise our standards and create a stimulating environment’.I enjoy working with people from various cultures, having been exposed to them since Secondary 3, which is when the Ministry of Education brings in scholars from China and Asean.However, at university level, there are sometimes too many foreign students competing for Singaporeans’ space to grow.

  For instance, in a mathematics lecture I attended, almost three-quarters of the class comprised foreigners. During in- lecture quizzes, it was obvious that the foreigners were better than the Singaporeans, and so ’stimulated’ the learning environment.

  However, it has come to a point where the competition has become stifling and stressful. This is because, in most cases, the foreign students have already learnt lower-level maths and science in their home country. Hence, Singaporeans are at a disadvantage in studying the same subject together with them.

  Besides, universities here should give higher priority in offering places to Singaporean students from polytechnics and junior colleges. It is like giving your own children priority in education instead of those of a stranger.

  Why should we give priority to foreign students at the expense of Singaporeans? I feel sorry for Singaporeans who have no university place because of this.

  Singaporeans should be given more opportunities to learn and grow. Otherwise, many of those who cannot secure a place in a university here will go elsewhere.

  Colin Tan

  I REFER to yesterday’s reports, ‘PM signals a slower intake of immigrants’ and ‘A tip to students: Be driven about causes’.

  I am a student at the National University of Singapore. I agree with what Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said that bringing in foreigners will help ‘raise our standards and create a stimulating environment’.I enjoy working with people from various cultures, having been exposed to them since Secondary 3, which is when the Ministry of Education brings in scholars from China and Asean.However, at university level, there are sometimes too many foreign students competing for Singaporeans’ space to grow.

  For instance, in a mathematics lecture I attended, almost three-quarters of the class comprised foreigners. During in- lecture quizzes, it was obvious that the foreigners were better than the Singaporeans, and so ’stimulated’ the learning environment.

  However, it has come to a point where the competition has become stifling and stressful. This is because, in most cases, the foreign students have already learnt lower-level maths and science in their home country. Hence, Singaporeans are at a disadvantage in studying the same subject together with them.

  Besides, universities here should give higher priority in offering places to Singaporean students from polytechnics and junior colleges. It is like giving your own children priority in education instead of those of a stranger.

  Why should we give priority to foreign students at the expense of Singaporeans? I feel sorry for Singaporeans who have no university place because of this.

  Singaporeans should be given more opportunities to learn and grow. Otherwise, many of those who cannot secure a place in a university here will go elsewhere.

  Colin Tan

  Source: ST Forum, 17 Sept 2009

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 14:21

  Tags:

  PR giving out flyers offering to pay “higher price” for HDB flats

  September 18, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Snippets

  21 Comments

  From our Correspondent

  Below is a scanned copy of a flyer emailed to us by a reader:

  Dear admin,

  I live in a HDB flat & I received this piece of note slipped under the door recently.

  I couldn’t paste it on your webpage so I decided to email it to you instead as you may be interested in it.

  I’ve erased the telephone number course I don’t want the person to receive any prank call. I believe this is no fault of the PRs or foreigners but rather the problem lies with the government policies.

  The question is, how can we ever hope to have affordable HDB flats when we have foreigners who are distributing flyers saying they are “willing to give higher price..” to buy the same HDB flats we are living in??

  

  EDITORS’ NOTE:

  With the Singapore government being the largest landlord and property developer at the same time, there is no free market in Singapore as it is able to fix the housing prices as it wishes due to its complete monopoly.

  The prices of HDB flats are rising due to the following artificial factors created by the government:

  1. Constant and ready demand for HDB flats as they are a basic necessity in Singapore. If Singaporeans and PRs do not purchase HDB flats, they will have no where to stay unless they opt for rental.

  2. Increasing demand by allowing an increasing number of foreigners to become PRs and to purchase flats. As PRs usually hold a decent-paying job, they will have few problems paying for a resale flat. Besides, since some may not settle down in Singapore, they do not mind paying more now as they can always sell them at a profit later on when they leave.

  3. Limiting supply by capping the number of new flats built: With few completed subsidized flats in the market, Singaporeans will have no choice but to compete for flats with the PRs in the resale market thereby causing the prices to go up. The number of flats built in the last few years are considerably less than that in the 1990s. (HDB Infoweb)

  4. Complete monopoly over the public housing sector: With virtually no competitors, HDB is able to sell its flats at any prices as it wishes as there is no pressure on them to bring down the prices.

  5. Since there are PRs like the above couple who are willing to “spoil the market” to secure a flat in their desired location, sellers will naturally jack up the COVs to make a “killing”. This will eventually lead to higher COVs in the long run. Already we are seeing ridiculously high COVs like the $70,000 paid for a 3-room resale flat in Toa Payoh (Lianhe Wanbao, 14 September 2009)

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 14:32

  Tags:

  You voted for PAP and…

  August 27, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Snippets

  38 Comments

  By Hardwarezone forumer Ixnay

  You voted for PAP, and you get to pay 7% GST instead of 5%.

  You voted for PAP, and they peg power to the price of oil even when
  80% of Singapore’s power comes from natural gas.

  You voted for PAP and your CPF money gets lock up for another 3 years
  more than the original.

  You voted for PAP, and your ministers demanded a 85% pay raises.

  You voted for PAP, and your job went to a foreigner.

  You voted for PAP, and your neighbors become foreigners.

  You voted for PAP, and your elderly gets to enjoy the dignity of
  employment by cleaning toilets, scavenging trash bins for aluminum
  cans and selling tissue papers.

  You voted for PAP, and your minsters tell you it is your fault that
  Mas Selemat escaped.

  You voted for PAP, and your government would rather lose millions at
  sinking foreign banks rather than to save you from starvation.

  You voted for PAP, and not only do your ministers literally spit on
  you, but their scions tell you to “get out of their elite uncaring
  faces”.

  You voted for PAP, and you are amply rewarded with ERPs at your doorstep.

  You voted for PAP, and Lee Hsien Loong pledged to fix the oppositions.

  You voted for PAP, and you got a Division 3 Prime Minister who needs 2
  mentors to hold his hand.

  You voted for PAP, and you got a large serving of Mee Siam Mai Hum, at
  your own expense.

  You voted for PAP, and your salary stayed stagnant for more than a
  decade while the cost of living shoot sky high.

  You voted for PAP, and you see the foreign kids get a place in school
  while you child get zilch.

  You voted for PAP, and you find that your public transport is no
  longer “public”.

  You voted for PAP, and your ministers want to house 1,500 foreign
  workers right smacked in the middle of a peaceful neighborhood without
  any concerns for you.

  You voted for PAP, and the government readily reward your men with
  more hookers than they can ever poked in Geylang.

  You voted for PAP, and your government happily demands $5000 ang pao
  from you when your maid runaway or get pregnant even though you had
  nothing to do with it.

  You voted for PAP, and your government glorify themselves with Olympic
  sized banners of their ghastly faces to scare away ghosts during the
  Chinese 7th month, courtesy of your S&C contribution to your town
  councils which is suppose to go toward making life in your
  neighborhood better.

  You voted for PAP, and they protect the interests of the petrol
  companies by making you pump 3/4 tank before you cross the causeway.

  You voted for PAP, and they see nothing wrong with fining you for
  driving a foreign registered car into Singapore.

  You voted for PAP, and you discover that world-class super talented
  multi-million dollar minister with all the state resources and
  manpowers cannot even catch a limping man in this tiny island state
  after more than half a year.

  You voted for PAP, and you realise that your MP’s job is not to speak
  out for you in parliament, but to tell you to tighten the belt, bite
  the bullet, eat lesser and work longer.

  You voted for PAP, and your kids have to stay with you till 40 years
  old, as they cannot afford the cheapest “public” housing.

  You voted for PAP, and your government tells you that their
  interpretation of subsidies is the profit that they forgo making,
  instead of actually paying part of the cost.

  You voted for PAP, and everyone in Singapore suddenly got elevated to
  Swiss standard of living, except you, and everyone around you.

  You voted for PAP, and your neighbors can sell your home for you
  (en-block), whether you like it or not.

  You voted for PAP, and your organs automatically belongs to the
  government (HOTA).

  You voted for PAP, and you have to pay administration fee to use your
  own money when you are sick (Medisave).

  You voted for PAP, and your sons get to spend 2 or more years as free
  labour in National Service and 13 more years as reservists, so that
  the foreigners can have a safe country to work in.

  You voted for PAP, and you found out that each of your son is worth
  $30k, because that is what you are going to get if your son die while
  serving the foreigners.

  You voted for PAP, and you get a grand party every year on 9th August
  celebrating more salaries for PAP.Not everyone is invited though, you
  will still have to ballot for it.

  You voted for PAP, and they tell you that there is a corner called
  Hong Lim Park where you can go to talk all you want, other than that,
  shut up unless you have something nice to say.

  You voted for PAP, and you get a world-bottom “nation-building” press
  serving you the latest propagandas, regardless of truth.

  You voted for PAP, and in order to buy a car, you have to first pay
  for a piece of paper that cost more than the car itself.

  You voted for PAP, and you must vote for PAP! You cannot even think
  about not voting for PAP. Because a certain inaccurate old man said
  that he will call in the army if you don’t.

  So vote for PAP. Read the list above again, and vote for PAP. Go
  ahead, vote for PAP. More good years eh? Vote for PAP. For Swiss
  standard of living. Vote for PAP. Mee Siam Mai Hum ok?

  Source: Hardwarezone Forum

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 14:38

  Tags:

  A reply to Mr Harry Ng’s letter to Straits Times Forum

  August 26, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Snippets

  3 Comments

  By Phong Teck on Singapore Enquirer

  I refer to the comments made by Mr. Harry Ng on his letter dated 25 August 2009. (read letter here)

  Unfortunately coming from someone who is neither a citizen nor a person who understand the sacrifices male citizens made for this country, I would suggest his opinion is just doing lip service to what MM Lee and our dear Government has been advertising, Singapore Permanent Residents (PRs) is the way to the future of Singapore, at the expense of Singapore Citizen interest.

  I would like to point out the factual error in his letter dated 25 August 2009.

  Firstly, Mr. Eduard Tay’s Letter pointed out “…a neighbourhood school” he is seeking for his child, not a top school but a school near his residence. Twisting the facts of Mr. Eduard Tay’s letter to give credibility in your arguement seems very superficial.

  Secondly, what sort of benefit can a 6 year old foreigner brings to another 6 year old citizen here in a primary one class??? Intellectual or Cultural exchange?? Isn’t it easier to Google all this online or you must be using a different search engine?? My child studies in a multi-national kindergarten, well I do not see any benefit he gained from his classmates except the occasional swearing words he picks up from his Korean and American classmates??

  Thirdly, give healthy competition to remind the children to constantly upgrading themselves. Getting into a neighborhood school is already tough for Mr. Eduard Tay, let alone talking about giving competition in the school. It is already a tough environment for a primary school kid nowadays and your way to improve their situation is to pile on them with further competition with these PRs. I would suggest you should jog down to the nearest school around your place and observe their studying environment before making such comments.

  Fourthly, if a poor Singaporean Citizen complains about its rich counterpart, its only natural. It happens everywhere in the world, from United States to Japan. However, it is rare for citizens to complain about the equal opportunity handed out in a silver palette to foreigners who don’t contribute to the building of their nation because almost all developed nation recognized the importance of their citizen’s contribution, except ours. Do we see this type of incident happening in United States or Japan??

  What happened to Mr. Jerry Yang in United States can only happen in United States and not anywhere else in the world, not Taiwan. It is totally absurd to make such comparison with the situation in Singapore. Does Mr. Jerry Yang need to serve the mandatory two and the half years National Service like all male citizens in Singapore. For all I know he may have gone to the United States to escape his country’s mandatory National Service.

  Lastly, nearly all of the PRs here are economic migrants who want only the best for themselves and their families. Once they have earned enough, they will return back to where they came from. Only Singapore citizens, who have for generations staying and supporting this nation, will be there when the country is in need. Sadly, our government has forgotten what sacrifices our fathers and forefathers made for this country, instead choosing PRs as the next loyal savior of this country. I can only say fools like you and our government will believe that out of the 100% of these economic migrants, 99% will take up citizenship and save our nation in times of need.

  Source: Singapore Enquirer

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 18:16

  Tags:

  Is the grass really greener on the other side ?

  September 22, 2008 by admin  
  Filed under Archives

  18 Comments

  By Lim Yii Tong, Guest Columnist

  During our usual weekend get-together at my mother-in-law’s place at Yong Peng (Malaysia), there will invariably be heated discussions on politics by relatives from both sides of the causeway.

  The usual Singaporean complaint about rising costs, ERPs and influx of foreigners seems more of a minor irritant than an important concern to the Malaysians.

  “At least your government functions” quipped Chin, my brother-in-law. “Over here, the politicians just talk, NATO only. They have been saying they will renovate the Chinese schools since the 1980s during every election, but once it is over, they disappear as well !”

  Another brother-in-law is trying to get his two kids enrol in a primary school in Singapore. “Never mind what school, as long it is in Singapore, it will surely be better here !”, he acclaimed.

  I almost want to dissuade him from doing so as I am not keen for my kids to be educated in the Singapore school system.

  I am a true blue Singaporean, born here, receive my education from primary to university level here, serve national service, work, married and settled down here in the land of my birth.

  I am in my mid 30s, have 2 wonderful kids (a third one coming in December), earn a comfortable working as a system engineer in an IT consultancy film and lives in a private apartment still being paid for by my CPF – a typical middle class Singaporean.

  Yet, I still do not feel satisfied or secure about my present life. Will I be able to maintain the same standard of living and qualify of life in the future ?

  The Singapore I live in now is so different from the Singapore I grew up in. I received my primary education at a neighborhood school in Toa Payoh, right in the middle of the HDB heartland.

  I had fond memories of the time I spent playing hip-hop, “tor ka” (one-legged catch up), “gor li” (marble), ti-kam and catching frogs and spiders with my friends from all races. There were few foreigners then and life is so much simpler.

  Now, I see mainland Chinese and Indians almost everywhere speaking in their native tongues with an unmistakable foreign accent. My company just employed two Chinese IT engineers. My boss likes them – they are “cheap”, good, doesn’t complain as much as Singaporeans and more importantly, they do not need to serve reservist !

  I can understand the need for us to import more foreigners in to keep Singapore competitive, but not at the expense of citizens who are born and bred here. It is true that we are a land of immigrants. However, we are the descendents of immigrants who have made Singapore our home compared to those foreigners who just come here and make a living.

  During the last economic downturn, a few of my seniors were retrenched with little or no compensation. Their places were replaced by foreigners. I shudder at the thought whether I will end up like them in the future. Why not ? After all, it does make economic sense for the company to recruit a foreign Masters graduate with less pay than a local one. How am I going to start afresh at the age of 40 ? Who is going to employ me ? Can I support my family ?

  There is a new security guard in my office building in his mid-50s. He used to be a Warrant Officer in the SAF. Asked why he has taken up this job, he readily admits given a choice, he rather retire and look after his grandchildren, but at his age, he still have to earn a living to support himself as his children are all tied up with their own families.

  “The government wants us to work till the age of 85 and now wants us to buy what ‘death insurance’ (annuity) ! Who will know when we will kick the bucket !” he laments. When will I ever see my CPF monies ? Do I have to wait till I am 85,  frail, sick and dying before I can “enjoy” the fruits of my years of hard labor?

  My eldest boy is 3 years old currently under the care of my parents. I am still pondering whether to send him to a special school for pre-schoolers where they are given “special” education to give them a headstart to life.

   My neighbour’s child is in such a school. During the weekend, she has to attend “special” arithmetic, piano and ballet classes. A few weeks ago, there is a furore in the papers over the number of Singaporeans who have to pursue their tertiary education overseas because they are not “good” enough for local universities. At a cousin’s convocation at NTU 2 months ago, almost half the cohort of graduates are foreigners.

  Do I really want to send my children to a tough, rigorous and in a way merciless education system where they will be under tremendous stress to perform and excel ? What if they are unable to pursue their interests in life here or their grades are not good enough to qualify for a local university ? Do I have the means to send them overseas for their tertiary education ?

  My wife has been persuading me to emigrate to Australia. Her parents are living in Melbourne and apparently according to her, are enjoying the best years of their lives there. “They don’t have to work at all, healthcare is free and the state government even pays them a monthly stipend ! Now every weekend, they just travel around in the countryside, you know Australia is so huge !”, she will whisper repeatedly like a tape recorder into my ears every night before we sleep. “But the aussie taxes are high too !” I retort. “Yeah, but that is the price to pay for security, my dear, security for the future. And the kids, their education is completely free too, we do not have to worry about anything !”

  Is the grass really greener on the other side ? I keep asking myself. Life is not too bad for me now. To the Malaysians, Singapore is like a paradise. Why should I forsake my land of birth which has nurtured me all these years ?

  Though I have occasional grouses against the government, I must admit that the PAP is a good government which truly take care of its people and have the foresight to plan far ahead into the future when politicians in a neighboring country are still squabbling over who to become the Prime Minister. We Singaporeans do not realize how fortunate we are to have everything running so smoothly in the country.

  While I do not doubt the capability of the government, I have little affliation or feelings for them. I cannot claim I support or love them. The only time I hear about our leaders is from the media when they will exhort Singaporeans to do this or that.  

  I have never voted in my entire life. I do not know which constituency I am in. I can’t even recognize my MPs if I were to meet them down the street. Yet I was told again and again during every election that I gave them the “mandate” to govern my life when I was never given a choice to choose ! Can anybody tell me what is being debated now in Parliament ? Does it matter at all ? Are my opinions ever sought out by the lawmakers ?

  There was a report lately that Singapore has the 2nd highest migration rate (26 per 1,000) in the world after Timor Leste (51 per 1,000). The government doesn’t seem to understand why Singaporeans are leaving in droves. From their speeches, it is obvious they have lost touch completely with the ordinary people on the ground.

  When they keep urging Singaporeans to continue working for as long as they can, they fail to realize that a majority of us just want to retire and enjoy life in our golden years. They harp on how far Singapore has progressed in terms of facts and figures to convince us that Singapore is the place to be – we have the 2nd highest GDP in Asia after Japan, the most business-friendly country, the best judiciary after Hong Kong etc, but these mean little to me and far less to those old folks you encounter picking card boards and cans from the rubbish heap for a living.

  The government cannot blame Singaporeans for being self-centred, unpatriotic and selfish. Human nature is such that we always want the best for ourselves and our familes. Though we live for the 5Cs, we are in fact suckers for 3 simple Ss – serenity, stability and security. A future with little security is a major push factor for many Singaporeans. To those ministers, MPs and top civil servants who are earning an astronomical five to six-figure monthly salary and guaranteed a pension for life upon retirement, it may be too much to ask of them to understand what “security” means for a Singaporean bringing home only a few thousand dollars at the end of the month.

  During my NS days, I was a guards officer. I still feel proud of my guards tag on my No 4 when I go for my reservist training. However, I do not feel my contributions to the nation all these years are recognized at the place where I work. My boss treasures the PRC engineers more because in a way, they are “better qualified” than the locals. After all, Singapore is a meritocracy, it doesn’t matter whether you are a citizen or not, the system rewards those who perform best though these high-flyers may only be making use of Singapore as a transit point to greener pastures.

  A PRC colleague of mine has got a job in Perth. He just received Singaporean his citizenship last year and now he is making preparations to relocate his entire family to Australia. We got along together quite well. Unlike other foreigners who keep to their own cliques, he mingles around with the locals and appears to be well integrated into our society. Why does he want to leave Singapore after barely settling down here ? “Well, the truth is, Singapore is only a spring board for me. I never want to live here. It’s not too bad a place, but it is too small for me.” he volunteers readily when asked. “Why not you come over to Australia too ? The grass is definitely greener over there.”

  Tell me, is this really true ?

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 18:27

  Tags:

  A minimum wage may bring more pain than relief to low income workers

  December 9, 2008 by admin  
  Filed under Opinion

  2 Comments

  By Fang Zhi Yuan and Lim Yii Tong

  In recent years, there have been calls for the government to impose a minimum wage to help the low income workers who have seen their take home pay remaining stagnant for for over a decade, the latest coming from Mr Tan Kin Lian in a speech made at Hong Lim Park last Saturday.

  A minimum wage is the lowest daily, hourly or monthly wage that employers may legally pay to employees or workers. Equivalently, it is the lowest wage at which workers may sell their labor.

  Supporters of the minimum wage claim that it increases the workers’ earning power and protects them against exploitation by the employers. They argue that the widening income disparity between the rich and the poor in Singapore merits a relook at the minimum wage to prevent the low-income workers from being trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty.

  The government has so far resisted political pressure to set a minimum wage by arguing that it will retard competitiveness and lead to multi-national companies (MNCs) relocating elsewhere to offset rising labor costs, resulting directly in the efflux of precious Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) out of Singapore.

  As a small country heavily dependent on trade and industry, Singapore cannot afford to enact labor laws which contravene principles of free market economy.

  Is the minimum wage really a panacea for all the woes faced by the low income workers ?

  On paper at least, the arguments sound pretty convincing. Low income and unskilled blue collar workers are hardly earning enough money to support a decent standard of living because a free, unregulated labor market has allowed employers the leeway to depress their wages to keep their profit margins high. Setting a minimal wage to offset rising inflation will allow workers to take home more cash.

  Proponents of the minimum wage often forgot the potential repercussions which may arise from it, including the possibility of causing a paradoxical increase in unemployment.

  A classical economics analysis of supply and demand implies that by mandating a price floor above the equilibrium wage, minimum wage laws should cause unemployment.

  This is because a greater number of workers are willing to work at the higher wage while a smaller number of jobs will be available at the higher wage. Companies can be more selective in those whom they employ thus the least skilled and inexperienced will typically be excluded.

  A minimum wage will reduce the profit margin of businesses employing minimum wage workers, thus encouraging a move to businesses that do not employ low-skill workers.

  In response to larger labor costs, businesses will try to compensate for the decrease in profit by simply raising the prices of the goods being sold, thus causing inflation and increasing the costs of goods and services produced hence eroding the gains made by the workers.

  According to Linda Gorman, a senior fellow at the Independence Institute, a free market think tank, there is broad consensus among economists in opposition to minimum wage laws: “Most economists believe that minimum wage laws cause unnecessary hardship for the very own people they are supposed to help.”  (http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/MinimumWages.html)

  In a 1997 response to a request from the Irish National Minimum wage Commission, economists for the Organization for the Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) summarized economic research results on the minimum wage: “If the wage floor set by statutory minimum wages is too high, this may have detrimental effects on employment, especially among young people.” (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, OECD Submission to the Irish National Minimum Wage Commission, Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers no. 28, 1997, p. 15.)

  Sociologist Lewis F. Abbott, has argued that employing companies are economic organizations, not charities or welfare agencies, and that national minimum wage fixing is a comparatively inefficient, costly, and dysfunctional method of raising the living standards of poorer households. (The Effects of Minimum Wage Controls on Incomes and Welfare”, in Abbott, Lewis F. Statutory Minimum Wage Controls: A Critical Review of their Effects on Labour Markets, Employment, and Incomes. Industrial Systems Research Publications, Manchester UK, 2nd. edn. 2000)

  It is far more practical and cost-effective for governments to assist low income workers directly through income tax relief or direct cash subsidies instead of introducing legislation to artifically inflate the minimum wage which will have a detrimental impact on the economy as a whole.

  The Singapore government has put in place several measures to help low income workers:

  1. Income tax reliefs – most low income workers pay little or no income taxes at all.

  2. Workfare bonus and ComCare funds to help retrenched and unemployed workers tide through the period in which they are laid off till they find another job.

  3. Continuous retraining and upgrading of skills to keep Singapore workers competitive and employable in the job market.

  More research needs to be done by the relevant government agencies to determine if these schemes are adequate enough to support needy workers without causing excessive financial hardship to them and to explore other possibilities such as a basic living wage and collective bargaining to be set by the individual industries on their own.

  Given the economic downturn and rampant inflation which has led to a rising cost of living, we are of the view that present schemes may not be sufficient in the long run.

  It is not the duty of the government to make every citizen rich, but it is their responsibility to ensure all Singaporeans are guaranteed a minimal standard of living – a roof over their heads and three basic meals a day. No Singaporean should ever go hungry or sleep in the streets due to extreme poverty.

  Populist calls for a minimum wage in the name of social justice may be appealing to the ears, but in reality are hollow, impractical measures which will bring more pain than relief to the problem it purports to solve.

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 18:37

  Tags:

  Scholar suicide raises serious questions about selection process

  January 19, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Opinion

  7 Comments

  By Fang Zhi Yuan, Senior writer

  The unfortunate suicide of A*Star scholar Mr Lin Zhi Qiang purportedly over rejection of love by a China woman has shocked not only his family and friends who are still coming to terms with his unexpected demise, but also ordinary Singaporeans from all walks of life.

  A*Star stands for the Agency for Science, Technology and Research, a premier research company which is started and funded by the Singapore government in its ambition to make Singapore the research hub of Asia.

  The Singapore government has a long history of awarding scholarships to the creme la crop of junior college students for them to pursue their tertiary education either overseas or at local universitites. Most of them are awarded on the basis of their academic grades in the GCE ‘A’ levels examinations though there have been a shift of late towards non-academic attributes such as creativity and leadership skills.

  The scholarships cover the tuition fees and living expenses of the scholars during their entire course. Upon graduation, they are expected to serve the government agency for a period of 5 to 10 years. Prestigious scholarships include the President scholarship awards, Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) Overseas scholarship award, A*Star, EDB and the Civil Service Overseas Merit award.

  These scholars are groomed to be the future leaders of the organization which sponsored their education. Many move on to become future political leaders of the state. Singapore’s current Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean and Minister in Prime Minister Office Lim Swee Say were all previous SAF scholars.

  Can we trust the scholarship selection process to pick up potential leaders for the future based solely on academic qualifications at a tender age of 18 where few have experienced the vagaries of life ?

  It is a well-known fact that many of these high-flying scholars lead a sheltered life ensconced from the usual struggles, bitterness and dog-fights of everyday life. Most come from well-to-do and middle class families and life was a breeze to them from young.

  With disproportionate attention placed on their academic studies in schools, they may lack critical life skills, experiences and the wisdom called “street-smart” to cope with later challenges and setbacks in life.

  The scholars have their career paths laid down right for them from the very beginning the moment they are selected. As long they do not screw up badly in their careers, almost all of them are guaranteed an iron rice bowl, attractive pay and bonuses and a cosy retirement awaiting them at the end of their working lives. 

  There is an unspoken rule within the armed forces that SAF scholars will usually attain the rank of a least a Colonel. All the top plume jobs such as the Chiefs of the Army, Navy and Airforce are reserved solely for SAF scholars. For commissioned officers who are not scholars, the highest rank they can ever hope to reach in their careers is a Lieutenant-Colonel and very rarely a full Colonel if one is especially outstanding.

  Again in the civil service, the highest posts in the various ministries and statutory boards are all reserved for the scholars and are literally “out of bounds” to the ordinary staff. Meritocracy is practiced discreetly for two different classes of people – the scholars and the non-scholars.

  With few challenges to their positions and so much at stake should they make a mistake, many opt for the safe and tested route of following what was done by their precedessors, leading to an inevitable stagnation within the organization.

  As long things are going well, the glaring deficiencies within the system are well hidden under a veneer of respectability. However when the going gets tough, we will need exceptional leaders who dare to think out of the box and take risks rather than conservatives following strictly according to the rule book.

  Visionaries are not found in the classroom but are nurtured in the school of life where winners are distinguished from the rest of the crowd via natural selection. The movers and shakers of the world are seldom academically gifted scholars. Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, was a Harvard dropout. The inventor of the electric bulb, Thomas Edison, never completed college education and worked as a train conductor and a telegraph operator in his early years. Sim Wong Hoo, the founder and CEO of Creative Technologies is not a graduate either.

  The present “scholar system” has done grave injustices to both the scholars themselves and to those who have failed to qualify for it. To the former, the artifically cloistered environment in which they are put in deprives them of a chance to fulfill their full potential in the outside world. To the latter group, the limits placed on their career advancement does little to recognize or reward their hard work, talents and contributions.

  It is time for the government to relook into its policy of giving out scholarships funded by taxpayers to the most academically gifted students regardless of their socio-economic backgrounds. Only by levelling the playing field between the scholars and the non-scholars will there be real meritocracy in the state bureaucracy instead of a half-baked segmented meritocracy for the two different groups which is the reality on the ground now.

• Georgetan884

  9 Oct 09, 18:38

  Tags:

  A*Star scholar committed suicide over PRC girl

  January 16, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Top News

  33 Comments

  Translated from Wanbao by Cheng Siew Peng

  An A*Star scholar jumped to his death from 9 storeys after his love was rejected by a China girl. His parents were devastated at the scene. Both the China girl and her boyfriend kneeled down in front of them to beg for forgiveness.

  The A*star scholar Lin Zhi Qiang (25 yr) and his good friend both were going after the same China girl. The China girl eventually chose his friend which devastated Lin. Lin then ran to her place (blk 407, sembawang), hoping to change the girl’s mind, but was rebuffed.  He then jumped down from 9th floor outside the girl’s flat. Lin died immediately.

  According to Lin’s father, when he and his wife heard the news, they went to the girl’s place immediately. She and her boyfriend (Lin’s good friend) were there too. The couple were in tears with heavy heart.

  When the couple saw Lin’s parents, they felt sorry and knelt down in front of the parents and apologized. However, the couple didn’t say anything about the whole incident. Mr Lin asked them what was the cause of his son’s death but the couple kept quiet.

  When the reporter asked Mr Lin if he would forgive the couple, the devastated Mr Lin did not reply.

  Mr Lin said that earlier, he had asked his son to let go. But it was a pity that he son did not which resulted in this tragedy.

  

  Father: “Son never had a girl friend, didn’t expect him to be so stupid”

  The deceased father said his son had never had a girlfriend for the past 25 years. His results were especially good and was a gifted student. The family never expect their most obedient son to break their hearts like this.

  “Zhi Qiang from small till now had never fallen in love. I had never heard him spoke about any girl he liked. If not for last year’s incident in which he fainted and went into coma for 48 hours after being rejected by the China girl, we will never know he had a sweetheart and he loved her so deeply.”

  Mr Lin said he doesn’t know the existence of the China girl except that her son knew her through a mutual friend when he was studying in the United States.

  “From what I know, the China girl and my son’s good friend were from the same university, I didn’t expect that both good friends will end up going after the same girl.”

  Mr Lin believed that the China girl was his son’s first love and he thought after counselling him several times, his son is able to accept the reality of him being rejected. Maybe the trauma was too big for him to bear, leading him to take the wrong step.

  

  From Raffles Institution to Hwa Chong Junior College, academic results had always been excellent

  The deceased is the third child in the family and is the smartest of all the 4 children. Mr Lin said his son was very smart and his academic results had always been excellent from his secondary to junior college days.

  “He was the pride of my family. The two sisters were proud of him too.”

  Mr Lin said his family’s cohesiveness is strong. His eldest daughter who is working as a teacher and youngest son who is studying are currently preparing for Zhi Qiang’s funeral and his second daugther who is working in the United States has already booked a return flight to Singapore to attend her brother’s funeral.

  Source: Lianhe Wanbao

  EDITORS’ NOTE: If you happened to know the deceased or the PRC girl and her boyfriend, please email us at [email protected] to share the story with us. We will pay you an attractive honorarium for the information provided.

• donkhead333

  9 Oct 09, 23:39

  This is silly..committing suicide over this kind of trivial matter..

  Not worthy of a scholarship I would say.

• Mr.Jonathan

  11 Oct 09, 08:19

  What would happen if she visit Singapore in future?

• oic

  11 Oct 09, 10:59

  Can our dear leaders comment on the actions of these ppl given PR by their policies?  Why is it that a certain master race from Asia seems to get Singapore PR so easily, and also treat Singapore PR so shabily?  Are we so hard-up for them?  They appear to me to be a bunch of "blood suckers"!

   

  NS man and NSF who have done NS for the last 40years.  Suckers, suckers!!!

• 4sg

  11 Oct 09, 11:13

  Originally posted by Georgetan884:

  Tags:

  You voted for PAP and…

  August 27, 2009 by admin  
  Filed under Snippets

  38 Comments

  By Hardwarezone forumer Ixnay

  You voted for PAP, and you get to pay 7% GST instead of 5%.

  You voted for PAP, and they peg power to the price of oil even when
  80% of Singapore’s power comes from natural gas.

  You voted for PAP and your CPF money gets lock up for another 3 years
  more than the original.

  You voted for PAP, and your ministers demanded a 85% pay raises.

  You voted for PAP, and your job went to a foreigner.

  You voted for PAP, and your neighbors become foreigners.

  You voted for PAP, and your elderly gets to enjoy the dignity of
  employment by cleaning toilets, scavenging trash bins for aluminum
  cans and selling tissue papers.

  You voted for PAP, and your minsters tell you it is your fault that
  Mas Selemat escaped.

  You voted for PAP, and your government would rather lose millions at
  sinking foreign banks rather than to save you from starvation.

  You voted for PAP, and not only do your ministers literally spit on
  you, but their scions tell you to “get out of their elite uncaring
  faces”.

  You voted for PAP, and you are amply rewarded with ERPs at your doorstep.

  You voted for PAP, and Lee Hsien Loong pledged to fix the oppositions.

  You voted for PAP, and you got a Division 3 Prime Minister who needs 2
  mentors to hold his hand.

  You voted for PAP, and you got a large serving of Mee Siam Mai Hum, at
  your own expense.

  You voted for PAP, and your salary stayed stagnant for more than a
  decade while the cost of living shoot sky high.

  You voted for PAP, and you see the foreign kids get a place in school
  while you child get zilch.

  You voted for PAP, and you find that your public transport is no
  longer “public”.

  You voted for PAP, and your ministers want to house 1,500 foreign
  workers right smacked in the middle of a peaceful neighborhood without
  any concerns for you.

  You voted for PAP, and the government readily reward your men with
  more hookers than they can ever poked in Geylang.

  You voted for PAP, and your government happily demands $5000 ang pao
  from you when your maid runaway or get pregnant even though you had
  nothing to do with it.

  You voted for PAP, and your government glorify themselves with Olympic
  sized banners of their ghastly faces to scare away ghosts during the
  Chinese 7th month, courtesy of your S&C contribution to your town
  councils which is suppose to go toward making life in your
  neighborhood better.

  You voted for PAP, and they protect the interests of the petrol
  companies by making you pump 3/4 tank before you cross the causeway.

  You voted for PAP, and they see nothing wrong with fining you for
  driving a foreign registered car into Singapore.

  You voted for PAP, and you discover that world-class super talented
  multi-million dollar minister with all the state resources and
  manpowers cannot even catch a limping man in this tiny island state
  after more than half a year.

  You voted for PAP, and you realise that your MP’s job is not to speak
  out for you in parliament, but to tell you to tighten the belt, bite
  the bullet, eat lesser and work longer.

  You voted for PAP, and your kids have to stay with you till 40 years
  old, as they cannot afford the cheapest “public” housing.

  You voted for PAP, and your government tells you that their
  interpretation of subsidies is the profit that they forgo making,
  instead of actually paying part of the cost.

  You voted for PAP, and everyone in Singapore suddenly got elevated to
  Swiss standard of living, except you, and everyone around you.

  You voted for PAP, and your neighbors can sell your home for you
  (en-block), whether you like it or not.

  You voted for PAP, and your organs automatically belongs to the
  government (HOTA).

  You voted for PAP, and you have to pay administration fee to use your
  own money when you are sick (Medisave).

  You voted for PAP, and your sons get to spend 2 or more years as free
  labour in National Service and 13 more years as reservists, so that
  the foreigners can have a safe country to work in.

  You voted for PAP, and you found out that each of your son is worth
  $30k, because that is what you are going to get if your son die while
  serving the foreigners.

  You voted for PAP, and you get a grand party every year on 9th August
  celebrating more salaries for PAP.Not everyone is invited though, you
  will still have to ballot for it.

  You voted for PAP, and they tell you that there is a corner called
  Hong Lim Park where you can go to talk all you want, other than that,
  shut up unless you have something nice to say.

  You voted for PAP, and you get a world-bottom “nation-building” press
  serving you the latest propagandas, regardless of truth.

  You voted for PAP, and in order to buy a car, you have to first pay
  for a piece of paper that cost more than the car itself.

  You voted for PAP, and you must vote for PAP! You cannot even think
  about not voting for PAP. Because a certain inaccurate old man said
  that he will call in the army if you don’t.

  So vote for PAP. Read the list above again, and vote for PAP. Go
  ahead, vote for PAP. More good years eh? Vote for PAP. For Swiss
  standard of living. Vote for PAP. Mee Siam Mai Hum ok?

  Source: Hardwarezone Forum

  
  I like this .....

• googoomuck

  11 Oct 09, 11:49

  Heard of a suicide in Clementi.  A SAF senior MO.

  Wan Bao reported it's work pressure.

  Netizens think it's over prc mei mei.

• Rock^Star

  11 Oct 09, 11:52

  the china girl looks like maid material.....lol. why jump over this sort of calibre......

• Berries tan

  14 Oct 09, 16:43

  Help immigrants integrate
  By Ang Yiying and Sue Ann-Chia
  
  
  Mr Charles Chong, MP for the ward which is part of Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, on Monday said he noticed a growing number of new immigrants settling in the neighbourhood since three years ago. -- PHOTO: ZAOBAO
  
  WITH more new immigrants living in Punggol Central, activities were organised by the grassroots network to help them bond with Singaporeans.
  
  A Sengkang Crickets League was set up late last year. A Filipino Community Cultural Group followed soon after.
  
  Mr Charles Chong, MP for the ward which is part of Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, on Monday said he noticed a growing number of new immigrants settling in the neighbourhood since three years ago.
  
  He does not have exact numbers, but during his block visits, up to 10 per cent of residents in some blocks could be permanent residents (PR) or new citizens.
  
  Most of them hail from India, China, Philippines and Myanmar.
  
  'They are usually very happy to be here and have settled in well,' said Mr Chong, who added a quip: 'When you ask Singaporean residents for feedback, they will complain that they have to wait more than 15 minutes for the bus. But when you ask new immigrants, they are happy that the bus comes before 30 minutes.'
  
  He was giving an update on key programmes in the constituency, ahead of a ministerial visit by Law Minister and Second Home Affairs Minister K. Shanmugam next month.
  
  Among them are initiatives to help locals and foreigners integrate.
  
  Noting that some of the overseas Indians were playing cricket almost every weekend, it prompted the grassroots to set up a Sengkang Crickets League.
  
  Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_390666.html

  
  
• Berries tan

  14 Oct 09, 16:56

  Free and uneasy - Free food at Singapore Buddhist Lodge but officials mourn wastage
  
  By Kelvin Chng and Ho Lian-Yi
  June 09, 2009
  
  DON'T get China national Huang Danghe, 36, started on the food he gets at his workers' hostel. 'I give them $140 a month for lodgings, they give me rubbish to eat,' he said.
  
  
  FROM ALL WALKS OF LIFE: The lunchtime crowd attracts mainly foreign workers but others also turn up for the free food. TNP PICTURES: KELVIN CHNG
  
  It is lunchtime on a Thursday at the soup kitchen in Singapore Buddhist Lodge, which gives out free vegetarian meals and Mr Huang is relishing his meal.
  
  'Here, I can choose. (At the hostel), I can't even recognise what they put in the soup,' he said, in Mandarin.
  
  Ever since the recession hit - and thanks to publicity from previous newspaper reports - the Lodge has become a much busier place, said its president, Mr Lee Bock Guan, 64.
  
  From 1,100 hungry people on weekdays, it now has close to 1,600 to feed. Weekends see a surge from 4,000 to 6,000.
  
  Many are foreign workers like Mr Huang.
  
  As it is, the Lodge at the quiet Kim Yam Road, near River Valley Road, already spends $7 million a year on its various charitable endeavours.
  
  
  FREE: The Lodge does not allow anyone to pack and take away the free food but looks like the herbal tea is too good to resist.
  
  But its popularity with workers has also incurred the wrath of hawkers.
  
  'A lot of them call and scold us, saying we affect their business. One woman was very fierce,' he said.
  
  But he is quick to point out that it is not only the poor who eat here. It also attracts devotees, the rich and the curious.
  
  Mr Lee has no problems with people who do not donate after eating, even if they are well-to-do.
  
  It is the rude, unappreciative and ungrateful that upset him. 'Some even want to choose what rice to eat - some say they only eat AAA rice,' he said.
  
  One wasteful visitor took a plateful of fruits, ate half, and threw away the rest.
  
  Such wastage angers Mr Lee because he knows of donors, such as older folk, who take public transport from afar just to donate a bag of rice to the Lodge.
  
  
  A man enjoys the vegetarian food provided.
  
  But he also has heartwarming stories.
  
  He has seen former frequent visitors climb out of poverty and start donating after becoming businessmen or restaurant owners.
  
  Even the recent newspaper report of a mysterious donor who gives $40,000 to $50,000 every month is not unusual.
  
  The biggest sum they have ever received is a cheque for $5 million.
  
  He also often receives lawyer letters from people bequeathing property to them.
  
  But some of those who enjoy the free food don't seem to understand the sacrifices others make so they can have a meal.
  
  Source: http://tnp.sg/news/story/0,4136,204477,00.html?

  
  
• Berries tan

  14 Oct 09, 17:14

  Save skilled jobs for locals
  
  
  Mr Low Thia Khiang (left) urged the Government to state clearly that it will guard the interests of Singaporean workers first. -- ST FILE PHOTO
  
  OPPOSITION leader Low Thia Khiang (Hougang) wants the Government to reserve for Singaporeans some skilled jobs, such as those of safety managers, crane operators and tractor drivers.
  
  He also urged the Government to state clearly that it will guard the interests of Singaporean workers first.
  
  Mr Low was one of five MPs who spoke on Singapore's reliance on foreign labour during Monday's debate on the President's Address.
  
  He said in Mandarin: 'Singaporeans are asking what is the point of being Singaporean.'
  
  Those who have contributed to nation-building resent the fact that as they grow older, they are seen as less tough and more choosy about jobs than foreigners. The Government also gives the impression that it favours foreign talent, he added.
  
  Mr Yeo Guat Kwang (Aljunied GRC) urged bosses in the service sector to hire more Singaporeans, especially retrenched workers who have been retrained for such jobs.
  
  Labour MP Halimah Yacob (Jurong GRC) was typically wary of the foreign worker quota, asking that it be reviewed. 'There are so many foreign workers even in the services sector that Singaporeans are beginning to feel squeezed out.'
  
  She warned that if foreign workers crowded out Singaporeans in a sector, Singaporeans may lose the skills to work in that sector.
  
  Nominated MP Gautam Banerjee, however, urged MPs and bosses to resist the 'nationalistic mindset' of saving jobs for Singaporeans or laying off foreigners first, regardless of merit. 'Getting rid of foreign talent may be an immediate way to improve your bottom line. But it will be disastrous in the long run, especially if it is done indiscriminately,' he warned.
  
  Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_381762.html

  
  
• Berries tan

  14 Oct 09, 17:40

  He immigrated at 88

  ---

  When retiree Teh Wan Boon applied to become a Singapore permanent resident four years ago at the age of 88, he was possibly the oldest person to ever do so.
  
  'Singapore is safe,' says the grandfather of nine, who lived in Kluang, Johor, before he immigrated here. He also liked the 'environment and good sanitation' here.
  
  'I know that I cannot adapt to the climate in other countries. I will have no trouble integrating in Singapore,' he adds.
  
  Born in Kuala Lumpur, the former English teacher and owner of rubber and oil palm plantations moved to Singapore six years ago with his wife, Madam Gan Geok Mui, 86. She is also a permanent resident.
  
  The couple, who have been married for 68 years, live in a 3 1/2-storey bungalow off Holland Road with their eldest son, a civil servant, and his family.
  
  They have five children - two living in Singapore, three in Canada, Australia and the United States.
  
  In his younger years, Mr Teh often travelled to Singapore for work. But it has taken him this long to apply for permanent residence.
  
  'I was over 80 years old when I moved here, and I didn't know I could apply to be a PR as I was not contributing to the economy,' he says.
  
  Read the full story and more in The Sunday Times today
  
  Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking...ry_365629.html
• Berries tan

  14 Oct 09, 17:46

  Old and new citizens do not get equal chance in Singapore

  ---

  http://wayangparty.com/?p=7665
  
  By Eugene Yeo
  
  Singapore is a meritocracy that does not distinguish between old or new citizens, said Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
  
  Whether it comes to the giving out of jobs or business contracts or scholarships, whoever excels will be rewarded, he stressed yesterday at the launch of a new feature section in Chinese-language newspaper Lianhe Zaobao. (read article here)
  
  While few can refute MM Lee’s claims that Singapore is a meritocracy, whether there is a level playing field for both old and new citizens is a different matter altogether.
  
  Native-born Singaporeans are more than willing to compete with new citizens on an equal footing, however the increasing odds stacked against us is fuelling resentment and disgruntlement on the ground.
  
  I fear for is future generations of Singaporeans who may struggle to achieve the same standard of living as their parents.
  
  During my time when there were less foreigners, the starting pay of an university graduate is $S2,000. A 5 room HDB flat in Bishan cost less than S$100,000.
  
  Nowadays, fresh graduates are finding it difficult to secure a stable, long-term job saved for those in Medicine and Law. Even engineers are being crowded out by the influx of Chinese and Indian engineers.
  
  The salary of the Singapore worker, especially that of the lower income group has remained relatively stagnant for the last few years and being outpaced by the cost of living. Our purchasing power has been eroded to the extent that many are barely making ends meet let alone save enough for retirement.
  
  The reservist obligation of Singapore males is a bane to us. How can we compete with new citizens who do not have to take 14 days off each year to serve national service?
  
  There are many worthy Singaporeans who are denied a place in local universities because their grades were not deemed good enough. Yet we have many foreign students from the region who are being sponsored by our government to study in Singapore. Their tution fees are entirely covered on top of a generous monthly allowance and they are guaranteed a job upon graduation.
  
  A place in our universities occupied by a foreigner is one denied to a local Singaporean who may have to pursue his/her tertiary education overseas or give it up completely.
  
  Are our Singaporean students of inferior quality compared to let’s say, second-rate Chinese students? The top students in China do not come to Singapore. They are either sent to prestigious universities in the West or to the elite Chinese universities like Qinghua and Fudan.
  
  I recognize the need for Singapore to increase its population via immigration. What I can’t reconcile with is the government’s blatant neglect for local Singaporeans. Much more can be done to develop the human capital we already have.
  
  Singapore’s low birth rate is further exacerbated by a brain drain which is getting worse with each passing year. Can the number of new citizens made up for the loss of native Singaporeans to other countries? I seriously doubt so.
  
  Without a core nucleus of locals to retain the unique Singapore identity, we are no different from a hotel where people come in and go. New citizens have little sense of belonging to Singapore and they can always change their citizenship again should they don’t like it here.
  
  The United States became a great nation of what it is today through opening its doors to immigration. Many immigrants who set up their homes in the U.S. stayed there for good and few natives renounced their American citizenship.
  
  It is pointless to dish our PRs and citizenships to foreigners like some freebies while local Singaporeans are leaving for greener pastures elsewhere at an alarming rate.
  
  Foreigners who are contemplating to emigrate here will think: if Singapore’s governance is so open, transparent and fair as boasted by MM Lee, why are we having one of the highest emigration rates in the world?