Skip to main content

MISSION IMPOSSIBLE FROM FATHER TO SON

MISSION IMPOSSIBLE FROM FATHER TO SON, there is still no satisfactory solution to retirement, housing and education...


[I don’t trade in people’s miseries. My business is the people’s happiness.] #1

In a speech in the Federal Parliament on 27 May 1965, just before Singapore’s independence, Singapore first prime minister made the above speech and championed for a Malaysian Malaysia. Looking back in history, have we narrowed the concept of the failed Malaysian Malaysia into a Singaporean Singapore? Have we ever traded in people’s miseries?
   
49 years later, we are still discussing the problems of miseries and happiness. We still try to find an answer for CPF retirement, health care, housing, education and services to the people despite our huge economic achievement.  We are a first world country in search for a satisfactory balance between miseries and happiness.   

National Day Rally 2014 proves that after more than 50 years of hard work, our mission of nation building and the promise of better life is still a long shot. In fact, it looks more like an impossible mission as the government is still talking about basic CPF problems, education and services to the people.

From the first prime minister to the third prime minister, CPF despite becoming bigger and bigger still remains an unsatisfactory answer for retirement, medical care and housing.  Despite more education opportunities, better international university ranking, and advanced technology for civil  service, the PAP government is still in the dilemma of balancing people’s miseries and happiness. Why?

Are there any statistics comparing the miseries and happiness then and now?

The second prime minister did not answer the question directly. However, he confirmed the issue of miseries and happiness and worried about the gap between the people and the PAP.

[Loosening ties between people and government could pull Singapore apart unless Singaporeans demand as much of themselves as they do of the Government, Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong warned on Saturday. 
Unrealistic demands and frequent criticism of the Government are straining the cohesiveness of the Singapore family, he said.] #2
ESM Goh seems to link the miseries to unrealistic demands and frequent criticism. On the contrary, happy people have realistic demands and praise the PAP government.

Mission impossible or small stream forever

In his Mandarin speech, PM Lee sang a bit of the famous Xinyao song ‘small stream that flows forever’. There is a business and management practice of controlling the market. If you solve the problems or provide the best solutions in one go, you end up making less profit. This is why a good product like Apple can continue to make  profit after Apple 3, 4, 4S, 5….  or Microsoft after her many series of Windows.

Perhaps, the PAP is thinking the same way as they are a good brand and offer a good product. Solving problems in one go will not maximize their election winning opportunities.  By tactically positions the miseries and happiness, they can profit from the imbalance. So, the PAP wants to keep the small stream flowing forever.

In this case, the PAP is trading people’s miseries as well as people’s happiness. We cannot deny there are people really happy about the PAP’s policies of  CPF, housing and education.  Some are really happy as they can take away all their CPF money, capital gains from housing and education if they quite Singapore at the right time right place.

A stream, a trade-off, a business to trade miseries and happiness always exists under the PAP government. They are happily manipulating and controlling the situation. They think they can forever make the stream bigger (up the minimum sum) or smaller (small lump-sum withdrawal), simple (Medisave) or complicated (Medishield) , decentralise (e.g town councils) or centralise (new municipal services).

In NDR 2014, the PAP government is honouring pioneer generation, honouring the first president of the Republic, relaxing the CPF lump-sum withdrawal and increasing the minimum sum, even shifting cultural values. This looks more like a business deal. Are they trading people’s miseries and happiness for a truly Singaporean Singapore?
   
To stop the trading between miseries and happiness, power to the people is the answer. Honouring our pioneers, returning the basic concept of CPF, and Singaporean culture are not tradable.  Long before our independence,  we know these are non-tradable. However, when Singapore concentrates more and more on economic growth, the PAP maximizes, rather than minimizes, the difference between people’s miseries and happiness.
 
Trading people’s miseries and happiness has become the business of the PAP. By making the business problems into a stream, the PAP wants to capitalise it forever. Can a Singaporean Singapore stop them?
#1
http://drm.a2o.nas.sg/DJVUServer/PdfStampServlet?app=stars&filepath=pdfdoc/lky19650527.pdf

#2
http://www.singapolitics.sg/news/loosening-ties-between-people-and-government-worrying-esm

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...