Skip to main content

Racing, hunting and chasing money but this money is not your grandfather’s money.


 $$$
         The five colors blind the eyes of man; 
The five musical notes deafen the ears of man; 
          The five flavors dull the taste of man; 
          Horse-racing, hunting and chasing madden the minds of man; 
         Rare, valuable goods keep their owners awake at night.
        Therefore the Sage: 
       Provides for the belly and not the eye. 
       Hence, he rejects the one and accepts the other.

Chapter 12 The Senses, Dao De Jing translation by Lin Yutang  http://terebess.hu/english/tao/yutang.html$$$

Easy money likes colours; musical notes and flavours can make you lose your senses.  Suddenly there are so many donations, and it makes one feel like winning a lottery and forgetting the source and duty.  The money now becomes their own property and they feel like they can spend it likes their grandfather’s money.    

However, charity money or donation is not your grandfather’s money. When organisations are trusted to collect this money or donation, they have to remind themselves no matter what methods they use, whether racing, hunting or chasing, this money is not their money.  They cannot use the money likes their grandfather’s money.  

Unfortunately, there are too many instances that the charity money and donations have been misused likes the grandfather’s money. And the reason for such a misfortune is always lack of ‘check and balance’, ‘accountability’, ‘transparency’ and ‘"poor corporate governance’, etc.

What do you think? We may have to ask who allows charity bodies or religious groups to use public/members’ money like their grandfather’s money in the first place.  If there is no ‘check and balance’, ‘accountability’, ‘transparency’ and ‘corporate governance’, then how do they get their registration approved?

Perhaps, the PAP government is using the same standard and criteria for themselves. The criticism for the lack of check, accountability, transparency or governance is also applicable to the PAP – the questions of CPF money, reserves, GIC and Temasek.  Have we received any satisfactory answers to these questions?  Even our President has to refer to the Monetary Authority of Singapore whether he has approved a loan to the International Monetary Fund.    

Trust and transfer of duty

Under the no welfare policy, the PAP government has actively promoted charity groups to take up social activities to help the needy, poor and disadvantaged persons. Hence, religion, clan, association and other self-help groups have actively engaged in these activities with encouragement of the government.  

So, you can see donations to charity everyway.  With the support and approval from the government, these groups are trustworthy organisations.  With no threat to the government, in the eyes of the PAP, they are more reliable, more trusted to carry out the duty of caring for the poor, sick and needy citizens.  The government even co-funds the activities or gives tax relief to donations to these organisations.    

No only supporting them in fundraising, in donation campaign, the government even encourages social enterprises - doing business for the good of the society not purely for profit.   
So, there are more monies for ‘racing, hunting and chasing’ from charity to social enterprises.  When the government gives them the ‘trust’ status and transfer the duty of caring to charity organisations and social enterprises, they find the difficulties in checking them.

This is because the PAP finds the same difficulties in checking themselves.   The more money they have, they are more likely to lose their senses of colours, musical notes and flavours in the money world.

The recent cases of breach of trust and abusing trusted money are not isolated incidents.  They are the reflections of our society and our country.   So, how can we find our way of heaven? Chapter 81 of Dao De Jing may provide the answer.  

81.  The Way of Heaven

True words are not fine-sounding;     Fine-sounding words are not true.  A good man does not argue;     he who argues is not a good man.  the wise one does not know many things;     He who knows many things is not wise.The Sage does not accumulate (for himself).     He lives for other people,     And grows richer himself;     He gives to other people,     And has greater abundance.The Tao of Heaven     Blesses, but does not harm.  The Way of the Sage     Accomplishes, but does not contend.

Translation by Lin Yutanghttp://terebess.hu/english/tao/yutang.html

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 ...

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...

对话一定要有共识吗?还是求取多元性来丰富自我?

全国对话喊到现在还一直高喊全国要有共识,尤其是全国对话的结果就是要寻求新加坡人的共识。不然,行动党就会说,我国的政治将会出现分裂,新加坡就变成一个不团结的国家。 全国对话一定要取得共识吗?文明对话的目的难道就是为了取得全国共识吗?如果是共识,那就一定有取舍。是不是说强势的人就领头共识,而落势的就落得一无所有。这不又走回老路,一条行动党独大的旧政治框框吗?看来,行动党对于过去,仍然依依不舍,行动党的共识,就是国家的共识,新加坡人的共识。 对话是要加深双方的了解,尊敬并且互相学习,吸取对方的优点,填补自己的缺点。这就是多元性的好处。然而全国对话的结果,如果只是强求共识,而忽略多元性和不同的意见,甚至否定他人的意见,那么,这个共识,是否具建设性,破坏性,还是分裂性,那就很难说了。 行动党似乎忘记了多元性。文明的对话并不是要把自己的 意见,信仰和理念强加给对方。即使这些意见,信仰和理念都是好的,善的。但是,对方未必会欣赏,未必会接受。因此,对话的结果应该是吸取对方的意见,改进自己的治国方针,然后,交给人民去决定,而这个决定也不过是大多数人的共识,而不可能是全国人民百分百的共识。 (乐观的看,行动党的全国对话,也不过是改进自己的治国方针,通过自己的小圈圈,自我讨论,研究,更新和改良行动党的政治策略,然后,在下一次大选时,拿出来让选民决定。因此,所谓的共识,在全国人民还没有决定前,仍然不是全国大多数人的共识。很可惜,行动党原本应该通过全国对话这个平台,吸收更多对手的意见,不同的观点,将它们纳入自己的政治策略中,然后在大选中让选民选择这个纳入反对意见的新政纲。可惜的是,行动党没有这个雅量,也或许根本看不起反对的意见。因此,它只能企图通过全国对话,硬要说这是全国共识。所以,充其量这只能说是行动党小圈圈的改良版政治策略,绝对不能说是全国共识。) ‘己所不欲,忽施于人’我们不喜欢的,不要强加他人身上。同样的,我们喜欢的,也不可以强加于他人身上。例如,有些人不喜欢吃有些食物,我们却很喜欢吃这类食物,但是,我们要尊重个人的喜好,不要强迫他人接受我们的建议。了解了这点,下一回提供食物时,就会通过多些选择,而不是只提供自己喜欢的食物。这点一般新加坡人都有这个敏感度,我们会了解马来族的要求,尽量避免他们敏感的食物。 为何行动党过去能够了解国人...