Tuesday, 28 August 2012

国庆群众大会后一章, 迷惑的独眼龙会再度被迷糊吗?


独眼龙近来有些神不守舍,不知高兴好呢还是兴奋好呢,竟然有幸在国庆群众大会上被点名,名满新加坡,在全国人民面前出风头。但是,独眼龙最后想想,总理虽然名字里有个龙字,但是,他又不是独眼龙,他知道独眼龙的苦与乐吗?还是,独眼龙另有其人。

独眼龙开始迷惑了。20年后的新加坡新一章,包容性的未来小红点,可以纾解目前的困境苦境吗?是不是画梅就能止渴呢?自己会不会像庄子的借粮故事中的庄子一样,有一天成了干鱼。家里的孩子,教育问题,房子问题,工作问题,健康问题,独眼龙的眼里只有这些,他能好好的处理这些问题吗?独眼龙不只迷惑,也开始迷糊起来。因为,不知哪位部长,还说有些人有自己的解决方法,不希望政府处处帮忙。因此,政府不会强来,会尊重这些人的意愿。

独眼龙迷糊的自己问自己,我是谁?我是那个不需要帮忙的人吗?还是那个即将成为干鱼的人?人怎么会成为干鱼,独眼龙又再一度陷入迷惑之中。报纸上不是说,我们的人均世界第一,为何自己离这个第一这么远呢?难道自己真的技不如人,还是,老来色退,没人要,因此,才落得如此下场。

迷惑的独眼龙又想起同舟共济,政府应该会考虑到老人过去的贡献,为何一讲到钱,就变成可以共患难,不可以同享福。迷糊又再一次使到独眼龙百思不得其解,过去叫我投你一票,让你过洋人的瑞士生活,怎么自己现在还在过着第三世界的生活,看着人家房价天天涨,自己却安身无处。

独眼龙突然明白,张开口回过神来。总理的龙又不是独眼龙,他怎么会明白我独眼龙的苦与乐呢?慢着,总理不是要跟你和其他的独眼龙对话吗?现在,你可以有机会把心中的迷惑加迷糊,全部一起告诉政府,政府一一替你解码。你尽量的诉尽心中的迷惑迷糊,在全国对话会上,独眼龙们现在可有机会把心声诉说一番。但是,独眼龙又听说,不是所有的意见都能够上报的,独眼龙又迷惑了,这不是迷糊我吗,语言能力不够,思想又不正确,有时又自言自语,有时又像贾宝玉一样,不喜欢圣贤书,喜欢卿卿我我,看来,独眼龙的希望又再一次落空了。

独眼龙本来就没有文化,本来就没有宽容大方之心。一听到保留文化这个旧课题,心里很害怕迷惑,是不是自己的根不够纯正,要加多一些传统,是不是伤得不够,还要加些盐迷糊一下。说到宽容,独眼龙很是迷惑,有些国人,还活在内安法监视之中,不然,就是被告,被说成神经,这些异议人士的待遇,好像比独眼龙还不如。在这里,独眼龙感到欣慰,不过,这种欣慰,也很可能是一种迷糊。

独眼龙又开始迷糊起来。会不会像庄周梦蝶那样,庄子就是美丽的花蝴蝶,美丽的花蝴蝶就是庄子。独眼龙迷惑起来,独眼龙就是政府,政府就是独眼龙。

对,有时,独眼龙看问题更加精准,比如射击,瞄准目标就是要单眼,焦距才会准,这样就会百发百中。这样的单眼,政府很可能不接受,因为,它喜欢顾左右而言它,不喜欢一打就中,不然何来迷惑又迷糊。

独眼龙开始高兴起来,独眼龙就是政府了。这种阿Q精神又再回来了。人家参加革命,阿Q也说自己参加革命。人家说新加坡是世界首富,最健康的国家,阿Q也跟着摇旗呐喊,我是首富,我最健康。但是,阿Q最终还是要面对现实,人家荷包满满,阿Q两手空空。人家生活没问题,阿Q整天为生活而忙,忙与盲,阿Q还是嫌自己的圆圈没画好。

独眼龙变成阿Q了?阿Q还在迷惑迷糊自己的圆圈画的不够圆,就像独眼龙每次投票还嫌自己的XXXX的不够美。独眼龙想想阿Q在被推向刑场时,还不知道生命的即将终结。突然,他想知道X了这么多次,怎么结果还是一样,这不是X的直不直,美不美的问题,而是,X错了格子,看来独眼龙,开始明白迷惑的原因,被人迷糊的结果。次次X闪电,却被闪电打倒在地。下一次,X别人看看,是不是一样被打到地上。

独眼龙无知,不知道“世界上最大的改变之一是科”,“人生最大的资产是教育”。如果,独眼龙拿的是新加坡的人均收入,独眼龙也是买得起这些科技,给孩子最好的教育。独眼龙又再迷惑,为什么,他买不起这些科技,这些教育补习。这样下去,距离不是越拉越大,最后当然是不想也不敢生孩子。独眼龙也迷惑起来,可能他连结婚都成问题。怎么敢想生孩子?

想到这里,独眼龙有些自卑起来。自己,无才无能又无钱,当然,也就是无用的人。在祥龙眼中,有钱有才有能的人,不论内外,都是有用的人。自己没用怎么办?没用就不可以在新加坡生活吗?土生土长,竟然没有容身之地。独眼龙开始哭起来了。自己的的家竟然变成一个不认识的家,连路名都改得不认得了。

被迷糊的独眼龙,一路走一路哭,却遇到很多志同道合的独眼龙,这些无用之人,竟然越聚越多,就像积木一样越积越多。无用的人,无用的积木,竟然能够众志成城,积木成山,到底是有用还是无用,独眼龙又再一度迷惑了。

到底是谁无用,到底是谁有用?

没有无用的独眼龙们,如何突出有用的人来吗?没有无钱的独眼龙们,怎么能突出总理部长的高薪?没有无用的独眼龙们,服务业,酒店,赌场,公共交通,小贩中心,建筑维修,商场等等,如何运作?

想到这里独眼龙又阿Q起来了。有用无用是相对的,你说我独眼龙无用,我就相信自己无用,那不就真的被你迷糊了吗?没有独眼龙们的支持,祥龙也要变成狗熊。原来,有用是搭在在无用身上的。没有无,就生不出有来。

独眼龙开始不迷糊不迷惑了。因为,独眼龙也有用双眼看东西的时候。因为,自己的无用才是有用。因为,有钱有势的人,一旦离开了无用的人,就很可能没有饭吃,没人开车,没人维修,结果有用也变得没有用了,有钱也没有地方花了,酒吧声色场所,赌场,名人嫖妓也没有了。

人家说你是独眼龙,你就相信,人家说你无用,你也相信。这才叫迷惑叫被迷糊。独眼龙细心一想,说我独眼龙的人,很可能本身就是独眼龙,因为,他不了解他所谓“独眼龙”的生活和困境,而用单眼来看问题。独眼龙判断,他才是独眼龙,自己不是,自己是用双眼看东西,怎么会是独眼龙呢?

独眼龙终于明白。不再迷惑,不再被迷糊,他要善用他的XXXX出自己的新篇章

Monday, 27 August 2012

New PAP Chapter or New Singapore Chapter? Who will care more about the future of Singapore?



It looks more like an election speech: give me your ideas and suggestion what you want Singapore to be 20 years later.  If the PAP likes it, they will incorporate the ideas into the strategic plan of Singapore. How wonderful it is! It is like a real Singapore dream. However, from the past experience, most of time no new ideas will be accepted as the PAP thinks they are the best. Perhaps, they are making changes now.  Who knows?

There is no alternative. If you don’t join them, you and your ideas are out.

So, this is the back to square one situation for the past 50 years.

Why can’t we have alternative future plan for Singapore? Why can’t voters vote on the merit of the PAP and alternative chapter?   A new chapter of Singapore story must provide options to let Singaporeans to choose the best. Had PM Lee mentioned the option during his National Day Rally 2012?

Obviously, the answer is NO. He wants you to make contributions to his PAP new chapter. A new Singapore story bases on the old PAP bottle. Can you change the mould?

A National Conservation without a free press is what PM Lee and Heng Swee Keat can offer Singaporeans.  How can you hear and read the alternative plans of Singapore in a NOT free and easy access environment?  Even in the internet and social media, PM Lee had already pre-warned you the negative comments of one-eyed dragon:

“There will be social frictions from time to time. We should deal with these incidents maturely. It’s alright to express disapproval of what happened, it’s necessary even. It’s not alright to be a one-eyed dragon, or to condemn all non-Singaporeans or Singaporeans based on the actions of a few bad apples. Also it’s wrong to slam the shortcomings of others, but ignore our own transgressions.” (NDR 2012)

I wonder whether PM Lee has used the same judgement for the main stream media.   The MSM has consistently targeted certain politicians from the alternative parties for the same reasons stated in the NDR 2012.  

Without a free press, without being given a fair chance to air alternative plans, all of us are one-eyed dragons.  Some even prefer to be one-eyed dragons like the MSM.       

Who will care more about the future of Singapore?

New citizens and PRs will be more concern about the new PAP chapter of Singapore. They have come here because of the PAP government.  The PAP has, in return, painted a beauty picture for them 20 or 30 years later.  If this PAP chapter cannot be materialised, they will have to re-calculate their future plans.

However, it is important they also calculate the alternative plans if they are seriously thinking of sinking their roots here.  20, 30 years later, there is no guarantee the PAP will still be in power in Singapore.  By then, the PAP chapter has gone and they may like or hate the alternative plans of Singapore.  This is an important step for integration into Singapore society.  Without knowing the alternative future plan will make new citizens and PRs one-eyed dragons.    

Not knowing the reality of Singapore politics will be a costly decision for them. They may think that the one-party politics will continue forever, and 20, 30 years later they suddenly realise they are experiencing a different Singapore dream, a different “Hope, Heart and Home”.

It is important all Singaporeans noticed the shortfalls of the NDR 2012: “Not enough attention highlighted the challenges of raising incomes, reducing cost of living and addressing inequalities”.

Bridget Welsh, associate Professor in Political Science at SMU, acknowledged that Lee’s speech was more “big picture” and “future-oriented” and less focused on technocratic solutions.
It also showed “that there is a growing understanding of some of the reasons for angst in Singapore, as ‘anxiety, lack of empathy and displacement’ have been pronounced and growing”, she said.
However, she said it continued a pattern of failing to address the systemic reasons for growing unease and, in some places, anger.
“It revealed the unwillingness to engage in a fundamental paradigm shift, harking back to old standby images of family, education, good behavior and the need to sacrifice,” she said.
“Not enough attention highlighted the challenges of raising incomes, reducing cost of living and addressing inequalities,” she noted. “More attention could have been spent on how to promote stronger social cohesion and integration.” (http://sg.news.yahoo.com/pm-lee-s-ndr-speech-a-break-from-the-past--analysts.html)


Sunday, 26 August 2012

小孩不笨 大人神经 迷惑又迷糊


小孩不笨 大人神经 迷惑又迷糊

小时了了,大未必佳。

这一周的新加坡,的确令人迷惑,小时了了,校规未必最大,因为小孩不笨,可以把学校搞得天翻地覆。大未必佳,迷糊起来,大人可就差劲了,律师公会竟然对准自己人,认为律师神经,要求法庭判决问题律师必须到精神病院看医生,证明身体健康,才可执业。

我们的法规,法律,制度,学校原来可以这么的颠覆。

对小孩放任,放纵。对大人却严加管教,不然就是神经有问题。所以,在新加坡这个世界最富的国家生活,到底是迷惑好一点呢,还是迷迷糊糊好一点呢?但是,我们又是世界上最健康的国家,原本不该有这么多的迷惑和迷糊,但是,偏偏这些事情还是发生,这是有意还是无意呢?

对小孩是有意,对大人是无意?

反正小孩没有投票权,让他和他的父母发发泄,迷惑迷惑一下,不是很好吗?这才显现出新加坡的自由民主,这不伤大雅。大人无意,那是律师公会的事,他们迷糊是他们的事,跟政府无关,政府站在一边看好戏上演,无需对付问题律师,或者严重一点,神经律师。因此,学校可以迷惑,律师大人不可以迷糊。

对小孩是无意,对大人是有意?

小孩童真,为何政府要管这么多,让他自由的发挥,喜欢花大钱理发,那是他的事,家长要迷惑孩子,孩子要搞学校,政府无意插手。大人迷糊就不行了,万一神经起来投错票,那可就把行动党的政权给换掉,这可如何是好。所以,小孩可以迷惑,大人不可以迷糊,需要严正指正。

当然,也可以对小孩大人都有意,也可以随意变通到对小孩大人都不在意。反正,官字有两个口,迷惑迷糊可以倒着说,也可以直着说,行动党建国以来,不也是靠着迷迷糊糊的迷惑,利用各种手段维护自己的政权吗?内安法,选举制度,各种控诉。。。。

国庆群众大会的迷惑迷糊

就像今晚的国庆群众大会,加多三位部长,难道就能把人民从迷糊迷惑中解放出来吗?怕只怕,是越说越迷惑,越辩越迷糊。

新加坡的小孩并不笨,大人也不傻。但是,学校,社会,法规,法律,却利用各种迷迷迷糊糊的迷惑,动不动以钱来压人,动不动以神经来做借口,把整个国家搞到神经兮兮,对行动党不满,就好像是反国家份子一样。对人口政策不满,就是不精忠报国。

难道,我们竟然迷糊到党国不分的地步,迷惑到是非不分的阶段。我们可以继续容忍行动党的包容性增长吗?这个带有迷糊又迷惑的经济增长吗?

明天,当你回味今晚的群众大会的演讲时,你会更加清醒还是更加迷惑又迷糊呢?总理,部长,和你分享的未来新加坡,是不是一个迷迷糊糊的迷惑迷路,还是一条光明大道?

道可道,非常道。名可名,非常名。

Friday, 24 August 2012

In Chinese Singapore is just a kampong!



Po Xian - this is how Singapore is called by some Chinese netizens in the social media. Po is Singapore and Xian is a county. Or in a longer version, Xin Jia Po Xian (新加 Singapore county) and in short Po Xian 坡县.

Do remember the next time you search for Singapore in the Chinese social media or internet, you can use the word Po Xian too. When you see Po Xian, it is Singapore and not a county or small city in China. 

We are a global city with high Gini coefficient and we are aiming and moving towards to be a Mega city by importing even more people. How come our little red dot (still remain a small county and) suddenly becomes a county? As more and more Chinese people knowing Singapore, they need to use a short term or nickname for Singapore. Hence, the birth of Po Xian comes into picture.

In Chinese communications, it is too common to use a special name or term for a city or a group of people. Like Shanghai, it is called 申城. Perhaps we should ask them to rename Singapore as 坡城,not Po Xian. But we are not as big as Shanghai, so there is a reason for it. We are lucky we can be considered as Po Xian Ren坡县人 or in short 坡人.  Not like the Japanese or the Westerners, they have been named 鬼子 (sons of devils) or 老外 (old western people) respectively.

Should we be angry or humbly accept the fact? We are after all a small city in terms of land area and even with the inflated population.

In 2050 as forecasted many of the top 100 cities are from China and maybe India.  With urbanization in these 2 countries, more and more big cities are emerging and more and more today big cities in the West will become small cities or even counties in future.

There is no way Singapore can be a global big city by population and by land area in future.  Big cities are now using the word "bigger" to describe their cities; for example, Bigger New York, Bigger London, Bigger Tokyo, Bigger Beijing, Bigger Shanghai, Bigger Manila, Bigger Jakarta .... 

We are too small to have the capacity to add the "bigger" in front of Singapore.  Bigger means also nearby areas and population.

A bigger Singapore in theory should include South Johor and Batam/Bintan - a concept of growth triangle.  This, of course, cannot put in practice politically.  It is even difficult to put in practice economically.  Since the launch of the concept of growth triangle in the 1980s, there is no big breakthrough so far.  What we see are some independent developments in these 3 areas?  
  
Look at the case of Hong Kong, a Bigger Hong Kong should include South Guangdong cities but Shenzhen wants to be a Bigger Shenzhen.  With or without Hong Kong, Shenzhen wants to go big.  So, it is even difficult to operate under 1 country 2 systems. Not to mention, the growth triangle involves 3 countries 3 systems.  

This is how the Chinese are thinking. They think of big space, big population, big consumption, big money, big corruption, big business, big guanxi and of course big political power. Some children in their writings write about their ambition that is to be a big corrupted official.  

Not only in terms of area and population, our hungry (attitude as mentioned by PAP government), our spending power, our political drama, our corruption cases, our beauties, and many other aspects are really small. 小巫见大巫 can best describe the case of Singapore as a small county against a giant country - China.

When we are called Po Xian, we have to understand the rational, the reasons behind this, there is no bad or good intention and just their side of story. 

A village life can be better than a city life in Singapore.  This is why we call for kampong spirit and we don’t mind having the kampong life and humanity back again! But can we achieve that under the administration of the money-minded PAP government? 

Wednesday, 22 August 2012

开车不礼貌,社会不优雅是谁的选择?人民还是行动党?


最富裕 最健康 不等于最快乐 最优雅。作为世界上最富裕最健康的国家,新加坡普通老百姓是否有权选择快乐而优雅的生活?我们每天都会遇到开车无理,垃圾随意丢弃,坐车不礼让,社会不优雅的行为,这是我们的选择吗?行动党政府可有让人民做这个选择?吴作栋都做不到的优雅社会,普通人还有这个选择吗?

如果有所选择,你会选择最富裕最健康还是最快乐最优雅呢?新加坡现在有人拥有这个选择了,但不是普通老百姓。我们已经荣升为世界上最富裕和最健康的国家了,因此,有些人可以有所选择要不要做最快乐最优雅的人。

不幸的是,这个选择权可跟投票权不一样。你是新加坡公民,年满21岁,就有投票权。但是,富裕健康和快乐优雅的选择权却不是人人都有。只有一部分人有这个选择的能力,这其中还包括在这里居住经商的外国人。这些人都有能力选择到其他国家去。一旦新加坡不是最富裕最健康的地方,他们都有能力,都可以选择远走高飞。

当然,这也包括世界第一高薪的总理,部长和高官。他们不只有富裕的薪金,同时,也有健全的医药福利。因此,他们和其他国内外的高薪人士,投资家,企业界领导才是新加坡真正的最富裕最健康的人。只有他们才有这个选择权。

普通人嘛,只有望门兴叹。投票权是有,选择生活的权力却没有。怪只怪没有好好利用手中的投票权,把他化为选择权,选择普通人要过的生活。选民把票投给行动党,行动党政府就替你选择了第一富裕第一健康的路。

这么针对富有而健康的人,会不会如吴作栋数年前说过的,眼红他人富有,针对他们,嫉妒他们比你有钱,样样都有 - 钱,健康,旅游,房子,车,金银珠宝。。。。这是要不得的仇富心理啊!

新加坡人怎么变得如此仇富,甚至还不只仇本地富人,连外来人才,外来富人也一起仇起来。这可如何是好,这么下去,如何保住世界第一富裕第一健康的宝座。

有选择权的人未必要选择最快乐最优雅

目前看来,拥有这个选择权的行动党政府领导人,还是要继续选择世界第一富裕第一健康的路线。因为,他们不在乎天长地久,只在乎曾经拥有。现在,坐拥世界第一高薪,健康有所保障,为何要做出改变呢?改变后,人人快乐,人人优雅,领导们却未必能够第一富有第一健康,这怎么划算呢?

因此,行动党政府虽然有选择权,可以让人民过着优雅生活,快乐生活,但最后,还是选择自己的富裕和健康。吴作栋的优雅美景,20年前贵为一国总理的理想,到最后还是选择财富之路。吴作栋做不到的事,普通老百姓能够做得到吗?行动党的现实,压倒了吴作栋的理想,也压倒了快乐优雅的生活。

所以,仔细想一下,我们是否因为吴作栋的优雅说辞,而把选票错投给行动党,而让行动党坐拥这个选择富裕健康和快乐优雅的权力。当然,行动党政府自然的选择了财富和本身的健康。拥有投票权的普通人,却白白失掉了自由选择生活方向,选择优雅快乐社会的权力。

20年的优雅变数和幻觉

20年前的优雅美景,竟然是一个变数,一个幻觉。但是,这个优雅也真够厉害的,竟然让行动党的江山,顺顺利利安安稳稳的过了人民的选择一关,大选连连胜利。

万没想到的是,行动党政府竟然埋怨起自己种的瓜。既然没有播下优雅的种子,为何还要期待优雅的果实呢?

开车无理,社会不优雅是谁的选择

《外交部长兼律政部长尚穆根,昨天在面簿留言表示,我国路上越来越多不安全驾驶的情况。尚穆根在面簿留言说,他和妻子昨天外出,由妻子负责开车,他则坐在乘客座。他表示,在往返目的地的途中,发生了3起事故。》(Omy.sg 21 Aug 2012

这位部长也真可爱,公路上不礼让,整个社会不文雅,垃圾到处有,坐车不礼貌,不排队,小贩中心不干净,等等,难道是现在才发生的事吗?吴作栋有先见之明,早早提出优雅社会的理想,怪只怪行动党政府太爱人才和财富了,没有选择优雅社会。

到底吴作栋在位总理14年,是不是做着总理的工作?为何自己的理想竟然不能实现,反而让功利主义抬头,使到现在全国人民不快乐不优雅。

如果这位部长是坐在官车上,有交警开道,他会发现这个新加坡普通老百姓都知道的秘密吗?看来,还有好多老百姓的公开秘密,行动党政府还不知道。是不是太过注重新加坡世界第一的富裕和健康,本身的富裕健康,而忽视老百姓的富裕健康,快乐和优雅。

普通老百姓已经开始知道如何运用投票权,做出选择,他们现在要把行动党政府的选择权收回,不让政府继续走世界第一富裕健康之路。因为这富裕健康离普通人越来越远。人民要自己选择过优雅快乐的生活,而不是少部分人才能得到的世界第一富裕健康。

化投票权为普通老百姓的选择权 - 选择生活的权力,才是新加坡的建国富强之路。快乐优雅的人民会不健康不富裕吗?

Monday, 20 August 2012

From white only to rich only – results of high Gini coefficient


From White only to Rich only same old distribution problem 


https://encrypted-tbn2.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRs3jmk_HdhUbT988TUPg6K31AX0j4ThooXgf4hXtdqx88o7Fe0

Is high Gini coefficient led to the unfortunate deaths of miners in South Africa? Is high Gini coefficient only happened in global cities? Think about the recent South Africa worst shooting and killing of miners, can we learn a lesson from the crash between police and striking miners?   

Gini coefficient in South Africa is one of the highest in the world. And SA is a country with plenty of natural resources; she is not a global city.   So, Gini is a concern to us and it not only happens to global cities like New York, London or Hong Kong as suggested by Singapore ministers.

Gini is an indicator of wealth distribution.  High Gini means unequal distribution of wealth towards a small group of people. Even rich in natural resources, SA has a very high Gini.

“The other social problem is inequality. South Africa has a very high Gini coefficient of 0.69, we seek to reduce that to 0.60 by 2030,” the minister said.“Our approach to tackling poverty and inequality is premised on faster and more inclusive economic growth,”http://www.coastweek.com/xin_170812_06.htm

The above is stated in a report “National Development Plan 2030” by the South Africa’s National Planning Commission (NPC) last week, just few hours before the crash, to President Jacob Zuma for review.

Global city or not it is a distribution problem

High Gini coefficient is not only limited to global cities.  Our government wants to justify it as a concentration of people in a city rather than the fair distribution issue. Not to forget there are ‘occupy’ movements in major world cities that crying for fair distribution of wealth and high pay of executives.    

The explanations, by Singapore government, below is just an excuse to move the focus point to global city.  Even this is a global city problem; we still need to solve it.  Otherwise, the price of non-action is too high as happens in South Africa.    

Josephine Teo: Singapore's Gini coefficient is high because we are a global cityhttp://singaporenewsalternative.blogspot.sg/2012/08/josephine-teo-singapores-gini.html

"We have a higher Gini coefficient in Singapore compared to most larger countries, because we are a global city. Hong Kong, London, the key American cities, and the leading Chinese and Indian cities in fact have somewhat higher inequality than Singapore. But we cannot resign ourselves to widening inequality. Unlike these other cities, we are a country. We have to try to contain inequality, and ameliorate its effects on our society."http://app.mof.gov.sg/newsroom_details.aspx?type=media&cmpar_year=2012&news_sid=20120121608784777037

Non-action of government and union

Blaming the high Gini coefficient due to global city in fact is a show of non-action of government and NTUC in Singapore. The low wage workers and families in Singapore have suffered from no increase in real income for more than 10 years. This directly affects and contributes to the high Gini in our little red dot.   

Similarly, the political development and the relationship between ruling party and union in South Africa, especially their non-action and protection of self-interest, have led to the high Gini and crashes between miners and police.   

This strike was sparked by a demand for better wages. And - armed with spears and machetes - strikers were in no mood for compromise.But it goes much deeper than that. The traditional union in the area, the NUM, is a key ally of the African National Congress. Their backing is critical for President Jacob Zuma in his fight to retain his position in the ANC's party elections this December.Miners accuse their leaders of abandoning their grassroots concerns, focussing instead on politics. So they turned to an alternative union to fight their corner. But - as so often happens in South Africa - this dispute turned violent. Two police had been killed earlier in the week.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19292909

End of Apartheid has not solved the distribution problem


From white only during the Apartheid time, the development in South Africa after Apartheid seems to suggest the country is going towards another ‘only’ – rich only due to the high Gini.    
From white only to rich only, it still goes back to the old question and problem – distribution of wealth in a country. In the past, the white took the major share of wealth and resources. Now, the rich replaces the white and commands and controls majority of wealth and resources.   

The Singapore government’s attitudes towards high Gini is an indication that they want to maintain the high Gini.  And due to our global city status as explained by ministers, we cannot do much just like many other leading world cities are not able to solve the Gini problem.

Is this a good excuse? Will the widening rich-poor gap in Singapore lead to more unhappy crashes (not necessary violent ones, can be a change of government) in Singapore?  Is there room for dialogue if the government is adopting this attitude and approach?


Sunday, 19 August 2012

新加坡启示录:从种族隔离的黑白对抗到贫富对抗



贫富不均,基尼指数加剧,导致流血事件的发生。
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR2UdECEbfGPWnHQMo4qDAuLxttnYSa4m9bqCBEF_WaHLhVmIiEVlHoHv7H



南非在 18年前脱离种族隔离,结束黑人和白人的对抗后,今天,仍然不能脱离对抗的命运。黑人当家做主,社会问题仍在,贫穷问题没法解决,贫富距离进一步的加大,对抗仍然继续下去,只是由黑白,变成贫富罢了!

回想起种族隔离的黑白对抗,还不也是一种贫富对抗吗!

1978年作为例子,当年南非有19百万黑人,450万白人。土地的分配却是87%为白人拥有,黑人只得13%。国民收入75%去了白人,黑人只得少于20%。其他方面的分配,如医生,婴儿死亡率,教育,等等都是极度不公平。(见下表)




黑人当家,贫富依旧

到了黑人当家做主后,黑白间的距离淡化了,取而代之的是贫富不均。投资者,部分黑人,却取代了白人的位置,成为少数的富人,因此,新的对抗产生了。黑白的距离转化成贫富的距离,对抗的双方不同,但是问题依然在。今天的南非是世界上贫富距离最高的国家之一。

在本星期三(815日)呈给南非总统的一份报告书中,就说明南非的基尼(Gini)指数高达0.69。报告书希望在2030年把它降到0.60. #1 隔不了多久,南非在种族隔离后,黑人当家后,最严重的冲突流血事件就发生了。这是巧合吗?还是几十年来累积下来的怨恨,无法解决的贫富悬殊的突发?

包容性增长,包含解决基尼贫富不均

很巧的是,这份报告书也提到包容性的经济增长,希望通过快和包容性增长来解决贫穷和不公平。我们的包容性增长有提到这个问题吗?

更巧的是我们的财政部长和一位政务部长#2都认为,新加坡高的基尼指数是因为我们是一个国际城市。那么南非是一个城市还是一个国家?
好像南非这样的资源大国,也一样出现很高的基尼指数。人家说要降低基尼指数,我们却无动于衷。或许,我们感觉良好,不需要大惊小怪。看来我们还在找借口来加剧贫富的距离。没有从南非的教训中学习。

资源分配不均,基尼就高

南非的自然资源在贫富不均的分配下,在以前是被白人拿走。现在呢!是被富人拿走。那么,新加坡没有自然资源,如何出现贫富不均呢?想想看,我们的资源,不就是人力资源吗?这是我们一直强调的,我们没有其他资源,只有人,因此,增加人,就是增加资源。所以,行动党政府一直在强调人的重要性,本国人不生,就进口。

但是,新加坡利用人创造出来的财富,并没有公平分配。富人在造富的过程中,获得很大的利益,而贫穷人,则分得很少,这就导致基尼指数很高。基尼指数高的论题和说法,行动党政府并没有否定。它只是说问题没有这么严重,这是城市地区的普遍问题。现在,南非(甚至俄罗斯,巴西)这样的资源大国也出现问题,我们又做何解释呢?

南非的问题和我们有无相似之处?

我们在1959年自治,1965年独立。在这之前,英国人不是拥有资源的便利吗?我们把他们赶走后,把经济搞上,开始的时候,大家都没有很多钱,过后就不同了。现在就连部长也要世界第一的薪金水准。

以前是英国人把资源,财富拿走。南非的情形是白人把财富拿走。今天的南非和新加坡一样,在南非,富人把资源拿走。在新加坡,富人把人力资源生产出来的财富拿走。因此,两个国家都出现很高的基尼指数。
以下是世界各地的基尼指数的情形:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c5/GINIretouchedcolors.png/800px-GINIretouchedcolors.png

南非的工会和我们的工会比较

根据英国广播公司#3和美国有线网的报道,南非的矿工原本的工会和执政党关系密切,在为会员争取利益时,未必尽心尽力。因此,转而向另一个工会求助。政党政治,工会利益的冲突,再加上加薪要求未能获得解决,导致局势不可收拾。但是,导火线还是贫富不均,工人的所得太低了,因为,他们已经好几年没有加薪了。

这是不是有些像我们的工会,在过去几年我们的工会,是否有尽心尽力为工友争取利益,大家有目共睹。我们的低薪工友,不是十几年,没有获得实际的工资增长吗?他们是不是和南非政府,南非工会做着同样的事情?

令人担心的是,这样的结果,会不会和南非贫富冲突产生异曲同工的结局?

南非从种族隔离时代的白人专有专用,到今天是否发展到“富人专有专用”的地步,虽然还没有到这个地步,但是,流血事件的发生,不正代表,这个国家正向这个方向发展,我们能不加以警惕吗?借鉴吗?

#1
“The other social problem is inequality. South Africa has a very high Gini coefficient of 0.69, we seek to reduce that to 0.60 by 2030,” the minister said.
“Our approach to tackling poverty and inequality is premised on faster and more inclusive economic growth,”

#2

"We have a higher Gini coefficient in Singapore compared to most larger countries, because we are a global city. Hong Kong, London, the key American cities, and the leading Chinese and Indian cities in fact have somewhat higher inequality than Singapore. But we cannot resign ourselves to widening inequality. Unlike these other cities, we are a country. We have to try to contain inequality, and ameliorate its effects on our society."

#3
This strike was sparked by a demand for better wages. And - armed with spears and machetes - strikers were in no mood for compromise.
But it goes much deeper than that. The traditional union in the area, the NUM, is a key ally of the African National Congress. Their backing is critical for President Jacob Zuma in his fight to retain his position in the ANC's party elections this December.
Miners accuse their leaders of abandoning their grassroots concerns, focussing instead on politics. So they turned to an alternative union to fight their corner. But - as so often happens in South Africa - this dispute turned violent. Two police had been killed earlier in the week.

Friday, 17 August 2012

When our maids are richer than our poor …..



In this richest nation in the world, our low income needy families have to seek assistance from the government to employ a maid.  At the same time, our maids, with higher starting pay, will likely to have more savings than our low income families.       

Is this a happy dilemma? Is this an unavoidable dilemma?

Some may argue that our poor and low income families are luckier than their American counterparts.  These Americans have no subsidy at all, not to mention a maid grant.  So, in Singapore, the government does help the poor and low income families.  However, it also proves that it is very difficult to uplift the livelihood of lower 20% of the families in Singapore. Otherwise, a pragmatic PAP government, whose principle is against welfare state, will not adopt this last resort to help the needy families.

The government is now caught between the rich and the poor, successful and not successful persons, the Haves and the Have Nots.   They are balancing it and monitoring it with the hope that they can influence their votes in the next election.   

Here are the headlines:



It is not sure whether the government knows the maids will have higher salary in advance or not and the maid grants are just to cover the increase.  Earlier in the years, the Indonesian government had indicated their intention and some maid agents had implemented this already. So, the maid grants are only a cushion. Have the grants really solved the problems of needy families?   

The higher salary shows that the Indonesian government wants to protect their maids by imposing a higher minimum salary and off day compensation.  They are doing this for the welfare of their workers, however, in Singapore; we leave the market forces to decide the wages of our local workers even though their income cannot meet their end needs.  

We may complain and comment the Indonesian government is corrupt, inefficient, and slow in action.  However, in some ways, they are moving faster than us and possibly in the right direction.

We are the richest in the world, but certainly not our low income families.  As we say we must respect our maids with dignity, so do the poor and needy in Singapore.

Wednesday, 15 August 2012

调整修正,不是新加坡的变法图强。



新加坡变法图强?如何个“强”法?看来只有在精神上提高,在精神文明上装备自己,才能站得高,望得远。新加坡已经是世界首富#1,再富下去,也是首富,为何不在精神上加把劲呢!
       
严格的说,行动党变法求存,根本就不叫变法。收集民意,听听意见,对谈反馈,这根本就不是要做出改变,而是为了求存,而做出的表面功夫。说到底,这只是行动党的问题,行动党政府为了延续政权所做的最后努力 政策调整,不是改变。说的不雅一点,就是要保住行动党达官贵人的饭碗。

那么,新加坡是不是到了变法图强的地步?行动党当然认为不需要,只要做出调整就可以了。行动党本身的调整,是否能够调整全国,整合整个新加坡。它的调整能否团结全国人民?看来很难,为何人民不挂国旗;奥运得奖也不同声庆祝;叫你说标准英语华语你不说,要说“新语”;叫你结婚早生贵子,你不听;组屋价格合理,你不信。。。。

因此,只有跳出行动党的圈圈,以新加坡全体人民的利益着想,以人民的利益再出发,来改变,来增强精神文明。吴作栋20年前就倡导优雅社会,在追求首富地位,荣升首富后,我们还记得优雅多一点,还是金钱多一点?我们住的房子,普通的动不动几十上百万,我们的精神文明也有跟上吗?

变法,法制和法的诠释

那么,行动党有可能变法吗?首先,先说这个“法”,行动党如何跨过自己的保护网:内安法,新闻广播管制,选举制度,淡马锡,新加坡政府投资公司,公积金,等等。它会取消,废除这些法令,这些管制吗?因此,它连这个最基本的改变都做不到。李显龙就是做不到蒋经国的改变,他只能做出调整,可惜调整不是变法。所以,行动党做出的调整,也就是求存的策略。

新加坡有可能变法图强吗?“强”字又做何解释?如何个“强”法?行动党的调整,不等同于新加坡的变法。就像庆祝国庆一样,执政党,在野党一起庆祝,但是,国庆庆典上,就只有看到白衣白裤的队伍,即使他们穿上红衣红裤,那也是行动党的调整,不是新加坡的改变。在精神上,要吗就执政党,在野党一视同仁,都有份参加,不然,大家都不参加。

从第三世界走到第一世界国家,白衣白裤已经不能代表新加坡全体人民,为何行动党的思维,仍然逗留在50,60年代。行动党如果真的要做到求存,那就不是思维的调整,而是思维的改变,突破。又说回蒋经国,李显龙有这个高度和格局吗?

新加坡在人均收入上再大幅度提高,只会加深贫富的距离,增加有和没有之间的误解,在这样的基础上,想要凝聚国人一条心,谈何容易?

商鞅变法,法律公平,管制严厉,连他本身最后也难逃劫数,命丧在自己建立起来的法制之下。但是,这个法制在他死后,并没有被严格遵守。虽然秦帝国最终统一中国,其命运也延续不久,最终还是要亡国。

这使人想起外交部长兼律政部长尚穆根的话,他说法律再严格,最终还是有人会贪污。新加坡像其他社会一样,总会有人贪污。无论制定什么法律,总有人会走漏洞,被诱惑。从古至今,不论什么社会,都无法做到每个人都是‘干净’的。#2

所以,新加坡的法律,即使再严格下去,也无法避免有人贪污,有人爱色,有人爱财,更有人要财色兼收。这当然不是优雅社会,而是欠缺一种精神文明。

选择性办案?自我感觉良好?

行动党不只是在变法上做不到,人民对它在诠释法律的问题上,也有所疑虑。从内安法的利用,诽谤官司,再到最近的名人嫖妓,名医飞车,律师公会罗生门,都令人联想到选择性办案的可能性。军中有白马,政府也承认,联想下去,什么都有可能。

在《尚穆根列举六案说明吴志良循例受刑 整形医生案引爆舌战》的报道中#3,我们看到行动党政府的自我感觉良好,尚穆根为政府打下一个良好的结局和退场。但是,人们心目中的那把尺,怎么衡量那就不知道了。报道也没有提,只好各自解读了。幸好,行动党现在还有一个尚穆根这样的资深大律师做律政部长,如果将来连这样的人才都找不到,那就很难堪了。

名人嫖妓,名医飞车,高官性贪污,的确看到行动党政府的调整和修正(以前作风)主义。政府当然觉得自己现在开放多了,没有偏袒任何人,事实上,这不正表达了我们社会的不完整,和有所欠缺。就正如尚穆根说的,“无法做到每个人都是‘干净’的。”

既然如此,政府何以以‘完人’的法律,自认的‘完人’领导,‘完人’的制度,来管理不是‘完人’的大多数。现在,是时候,不是‘完人’的大多数,要向行动党说不的时候了。
这就是新加坡变法图强。

而这个变法图强,就是要从选票上开始做起。行动党在经济金钱物质的麻醉下,不可能变法,只有调整,但是,调整能够改变新加坡人的精神吗?

#1

#2
“Like in all societies, and in Singapore as well, there have always been people who have been corrupt. There will always be people who will be corrupt,” Mr Shanmugam said.

Speaking at a National Day celebration dinner in Chong Pang on Saturday, Mr Shanmugam said that Singapore cannot completely eradicate fraud and bad conduct, even though it has created a system that is very clean and efficient by international standards.

“There will be people who, whatever rules you put in, they will look to find a way around the rules and they will fall for temptation. There is no society in the world, in the past or the present, where every person is totally clean,” he added

#3