Skip to main content

小人物的无奈无力 大人物的良知良心


地铁公司被罚2百万元对普通老百姓,小人物来说,也不过是个无奈无力的结局。被罚公司和处罚当局只不过是阴阳两面,正反之间,小人物就算直接受害,造成不便,甚至赔钱打的赶时间之外,还有力气跟地铁公司和当局去理论,谁是谁非吗?

这只能是一场无力的无奈。事实上,很多事情都是如此。如果有一天,公积金局说没钱,淡马锡,政府投资公司说钱回不来,那小人物又能说什么呢?因此,似乎,只能靠国家领袖,大人物的良知良心来听天由命了。而要处处提醒,处处警惕这些领袖,大人物,就有必要制衡他们,监督他们,要他们公开,公平,和凭良心做事。

这点在新加坡看似容易,做起来未必如此。因为,我们离第一世界,除了物质之外,其他的方面的确相去甚远。更何况,第一世界国家,也面对这些棘手的问题。

凭良心做事有时也未必能把事情办好。甚至有时还好心做了坏事。当年,把这样多外国人请进来,就是要把经济快速搞上,当年,统一语文教育,就是要追求经济效率,当年,企业化政府部门,私营化公营事业,就是要提高效率,为何这些好事,今天看来却好像坏事一样,让政府吃了闷亏?

行动党不能理解,为何人民收入增加了,还埋怨它做的不好。掌握了英文英语,可以通行天下,却又怨声连连。在廉洁程度上,我们还名列前茅。在国际知名度上,我们也声誉很高。政治领袖,政府官员也凭良心做事,为何偏偏还被人认为做了坏事呢?

好多事情在还没有发生的时候,样样事情在表面上看起来都是好的。甚至,表面上看起来就是凭良心做事,童叟无欺。但是,有时候,百密一疏,马脚就露出来了。当然,有时候,也安然度过危机,一点事也没有发生,马照跑,舞照跳,高薪照领。

国际金融界最近出了两件大事,表面看来是做好事,是公开公正为小人物,客户,消费者服务,但是,好事的背后,却是贪婪的表现,银行,信用卡公司,利用本身的优势,垄断的地位,把小人物的利益,生存空间压得死死。即使赔钱,难道就能了事了吗?

1.银行操控利率,赚取更多利息。有谁能想到银行有利息赚取,还要赚取更多的利息。

巴克莱就丑闻刊道歉启(早报715日)

2. 信用卡公司,不讲信用,狼狈为奸,赚取更高的手续费。

被美国商会起诉操纵刷卡费 威士和万事达卡等同意以72.5亿美元和(早报715日)

这两件事的处理都是相关的银行和信用卡公司赔出巨款。 地铁公司的两百万罚款,跟这些上亿元的罚款相比,当然是小巫见大巫。这是不是说,地铁公司犯的错其实是很小的?如果再赔多一点,搭客还要担心,要为地铁公司买单,以后搭地铁要多付车资。

事实上,银行和信用卡公司在利率和收费上动手脚,他们动的手脚其实是很小的,不容易被发现。同时,也很可能是小数点后面的几位数。但是,在银行界来说,国际上来来往往的资金,却是个天文数字,小数点后面的数字,就可以让参与的银行赚取很多钱,不然赔款怎么会以亿万元来计算呢?

同样的,信用卡的费用,小数点后面的数字也同样的惊人。想一想,每天有多少人用信用卡交易。这个小小的点数,就让信用卡公司赚取很多的钱。

既然银行,信用卡公司都这么做了。其他有优势,有垄断地位的公司,是否也会做着同样的事情呢? 或许,有些公司也在做,只是没有被人揭发出来。或者,有些是凭良心做事,不参与这些活动。但是,作为小人物,普通人,我们又如何分辨出真和假呢?

-       地铁和巴士的车资,是用良心还是贪心算出来的。
-       水电煤气的计算,又是用哪一个心算出来的。
-       教育费,医药费,组屋售价,又是怎么算出来,有没有良知的考虑。
-       公积金的利息,最低存款的额度,外汇储备的投资回报,又是根据哪一个心来做事。

小人物,普通人,对这些费用,利息,回报,真的是无能为力?政府动不动用最佳的人才管理着这些公司,我们又怎么知道他们是按着什么心呀?只能是无可奈何花落去吗?还是期待有心人士来揭发。还是等着有人良心发现,自我认罪。还是,我们自己吓自己,无中生有?

有好多小小的事情,看似无关痛痒,其实就是病症的象徵。地铁公司的贪心爱财,难道是去年才开始吗?组屋房价高涨,难道是近一两年的事吗?外国人涌入难道是刚刚才开始的事吗?每件事都有一些蛛丝马迹,但是,偏偏行动党政府不把这些问题当成一回事,整天抱着做好事的心理,却不知道,好心却做了坏事。这还不说这个好心,有没有良心良知的成分,有没有把小人物,普通人的利益考虑在内呢?

小人物,普通人其实也是很无奈的。就像一只小小小鸟,想要飞也飞不高,飞不高当然看不远,看不远又怎能看清楚政府的心,到底有没有良心良知呢?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...