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...

  工人党没有抱负、志向低，还是向新加坡的政治现实妥协？ 马来西亚比较开明的前部长凯里，在新加坡大选后，在他的播客中，表示工人党野心太小，志向不高，只要30%议席，根本没有组织政府的企图心。过后，工人党秘书长毕丹星，再上节目，进一步说明立场。 自从一党独大以来，从来就没有一个在野党，竞选超过一半议席。 反而，还想利用补选策略胜出。从早期的竞选不到一半议席，一直发展到竞选全部议席，对于选民来说，已经是很大的突破。不过，在凯里看来，我们的政治好像还处于幼儿园。 凯里也提到，在野党没有组成联盟，一起对抗行动党。这也是政治现实，在野党里，人人都要当老大，人人都自认比其他人聪明，更加能够打倒行动党。你看看选前的两个小党联盟，就明白了。比较大的三个政党，也一样无法妥协，或者不愿协商。 问题是，新加坡选民会不会认同凯里的说法？组成强大联盟，对抗行动党？ 新加坡的整套政治教育，就是无人可以取代行动党 。这点国阵就做不到。大马选民认为国阵可以被取代，这就给其他政治联盟带来希望。而这个过程，以安华作为例子，也斗争了好多年。如果追溯到1987年的巫统大分裂，时间更加长。 新加坡政治，其实没有什么大风暴 。或许，这是评论家说的顺利的权力转移，从第一到第四代。 凯里如果拿马来西亚的政治标准来看新加坡，那很可能就是不了解新加坡，对于政治的现实看不清楚。就如他在上一次大选，形象好，高人气，也无法胜选。 那么，新加坡人是否要等到行动党大分裂后，才有机会变天？没有人知道。不过，从今年大选成绩看，这条路似乎很遥远、漫长。因为，得票率已经告诉了一切。如何把行动党得票率降低，降到像国阵那样不到50%。因此，只能是潜移默化，年轻人带头慢慢的认定国会制衡的重要性。一种质量的提升？

  One divided country fighting another divided country… self destruction? One is not a stable country where the prime minister is under investigation for corruption, except maybe the military.  The population is also divided by negotiation or non-negotiation, war or no war.  The other one has not been stable since the fall of the Shah.  Internal conflicts, mistrust, foreign and internal actors are all over the country, non-stop.   Both have a long history. Will they cut short their history by self destruction themselves?  Perhaps yes. Perhaps No.  Big brothers, who have their own internal problems, are watching.  They are calculating how to benefit from the act of self destruction.  Interesting to watch but sad to see the ending - no winners!          Have they ever considered their people's welfare?

  大选的正能量？现象？趋势？(5/5) 大选成绩：老的满意，少的不满·。 习惯性投票的过去，现在，未来？ 调查显示，56%的人满意大选结果。比行动党的65.57%得票率低。满意者来自老一辈，而不满意者属于年轻一代。这是不是与习惯性投票有关？老一辈只想找闪电，找不到可能乱画成了废票。年轻一代，目标清晰，会分辨，和老一辈的养成习惯投票不同。 支持行动党的人为何，不对大选成绩给予更加高的满意度？让满意度拉高到60%以上？看来，支持者只在乎寻找闪电，而不在乎满意度。习惯性投票的心态，对于行动党短期有利，长期不乐观。随着习惯投票给行动党的选民老去，而年轻一代逐渐成为主流选民，行动党的基本票源，会出现根本性变化。 与其说，年轻人不满大选成绩，不如说行动党对于基本的生活费，以及相关的组屋价格，医药，就业机会，消费税等，提供不了满意的解决方案。这些课题，不容易解决，一时之间也解决不了，甚至，到了下一次大选，问题依然存在。几十年累积下来的贫富不均问题，不是一个五年就能解决的。 从老一辈习惯性寻找闪电，到年轻一代习惯性的要有选择，新加坡的选举氛围、气候，已经进入了另一个阶段。外面的世界加速变化，内部的政治，经济，人口，社会，文化，也在进行潜移默化的改变。行动党需要适应；在野党，两党制，多党制，也不是完全没有机会。你准备好了吗？

  Votes and Confidence Salary and Dignity  Same thinking in a different way? From salary to vote, new KPI.  You need a strong mandate, high vote share, then you can stand tall with confidence when facing foreign leaders. Few years back, Lim Wee Kiak compared salary and dignity.   “If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister’s ideas and proposals, hence a reasonable payout will help to maintain abit of dignity.”  On 27 May, the Straits Times’s headline: Strong mandate from GE2025 boosts Singapore’s standing: PM Wong.   “Had he been re-elected with a reduced mandate, PM Wong said, perceptions of Singapore among foreign leaders would have been different.” Representing a country and representing a ministry depend very much on how high votes you get and how high salary ...