否极泰来 Piji Tailai

  COE, HDB, GST, and the affordability of SG60. COE is certainly not an affordable item for the poor, for the struggling small businesses. There is no alternative, so far, the system is the best we can find with no further improvement. COE is fair. It is based on your affordability.  No money, no COE.  HDB is fair. It is based on your affordability.  High income, no subsidy, no grants. Low income, grants and subsidies will be provided.    For the past 60 years, we see the HDB becoming unaffordable. No more cheap public housing. Yet, the government still claims it is affordable. Maybe to those who have big CPF savings, it is affordable. But if you are earning near to the bottom 20%, you will need grants, subsidy to get over. So, it is still affordable, overall, as the government claims.  GST has no affordable issue. Everyone pays for it.  With discounts, vouchers, subsidies, cheap meals, we temporarily solve the GST problem.   This i...

  禁言毕丹星，有损黄循财形象？ 是时候外国人多了解一点新加坡政治。 新加坡国会里的在野党领袖地位，已经制度化了；已经进入第二届国会任期了。人民行动党如果不了解这个现实，那么，黄循财希望树立的新形象，将继续逗留在过去“霸道总裁”的影子里，无法摆脱。 毕丹星在马来西亚接受访问，就是政治不正确。新加坡政治，应该留在新加坡讨论，不能越界？这是行动党党报的立场，到目前为此，还没有看到黄循财或其他部长，批评毕丹星。党的立场和总理的看法不同？不知道，看来是大事化小，小事化无。 新加坡政治已经进入新的局面。有人形容这是一个半党制，还没有到两党制。长期以来，外国人看新加坡，就只是知道行动党，根本不知道在野党的存在。马来西亚播客，尤其是曾任部长的凯里，访问毕丹星，讨论新加坡政治，工人党的策略，似乎有意无意抬高在野党的地位，让行动党有酸葡萄的感觉。 是时候，外国人需要多了解一点新加坡的政治新格局。如果只是知道支持行动党的那50%，60%新加坡人，很可能没有看透新加坡。行动党往往能够利用心理因素，选区划分胜选，这次的贸易战，更加如此。但是，这未必是新加坡人的真实看法、心理反射。毕丹星只是反映另一种声音，就被认为过界，这个红线的范围似乎和行动党的无所不在相呼应。 不只是外国人需要了解新加坡的在野势力。外国政党也需要了解新加坡在野党的活动。就像本地的外国使节，外来议员，和在野党互动。这些活动将会继续下去，扩大，深入；打压，画红线，过界，反而成了新的政治不正确。

  From Pritam Singh to Cheong Yip Seng. One cannot go international, not even to Malaysia. One wants to make ST international, providing a Singapore narrative? We are in an era of “1.5 party” Singapore. Clearly, the PAP has not recognised the “0.5”.  Only the PAP ministers are allowed to give views in foreign countries, in their official capacities.   We need to get used to the “1.5”.  Foreigners, foreign governments must know the “0.5” in Singapore.  Otherwise, they will miss the thinking of ⅓ Singaporeans, especially the young who are the future of Singapore.   And yet Cheong suggests making the Straits Times international, against the western bias, with the Singapore narrative.  With OB maker in mind,  without the “0.5” input, how accurate will the Singapore narrative be, another PAP thinking?  The PAP does not want the “0.5” to be heard overseas. They are also unwilling to promote Singapore's narrative internationally.  The...