My Thoughts...

One Country's Misfortune is Another's Political Mileage

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 04:23:00 +0000

There are some quarters in Singapore that would be looking at the unfortunate religious tension in Malaysia as an 'opportunity' instead of the sad social dilemma that it is. Rest assured that the references will be made to highlight how 'good' things are here by comparison.

Now, if only such comparisons can extend to issues like welfare...

...of Road Accidents and the New Year

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:39:00 +0000

I would imagine our multi-million dollar government to approach the current issues somewhat like this...

CNA Teaches You How NOT To Use The Word 'Immolate'

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 23:29:00 +0000

I always thought the word immolate meant to set oneself on fire but apparently Channel NewsAsia knows better. In a report (reproduced below) mildly entitled 'Best friend unable to stop woman from taking own life' - when the fact of the matter is that a desperate old lady who was saddled with debts due to her gambling (addiction?) committed suicide - Shaffiq Alkhatib wows us with his command of the language by bombastically inserting the line "...shortly before she self-immolated".

Unless the poor lady made 'a deliberate and willing sacrifice of herself by fire', it should be just 'immolated' which, at the simplest interpretation, means killing oneself by fire. Mind you though, even using the word 'immolated' is a bit of a stretch as the connotation of the word is that some form of sacrifice was involved - unless the woman was sacrificing herself to the loanshark gods.

Typically, a situation where the word 'self-immolate' would be appropriate is when a devotee sets himself on fire for his god. And whilst we may see people commit suicide by setting themselves on fire, not all is self-immolation. An abused wife who can no longer take the torture and burns herself is different from a wife who burns to exonerate herself from an accusation of adultery (both types of cases do exist in South India).

Well, coming back to the story itself, I wonder why the gambling issue is being glossed over yet again. Whilst CNA focusses on the non-issue of the woman's friend not stopping her from committing suicide, the Straits Times chose to (obediently?) focus on the loanshark problem - i.e. illegal money-lending (where the government doesn't get a cut of the market). At least, Kushwant Singh of the ST had the guts to call it as it is - 'Gambler sets herself ablaze'.

Suicide Note But No Reason?

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:45:00 +0000

In today's issue of TODAY, an article reports on the sad case of a man who committed suicide at home (reproduced below).

source: TODAY

Apparently, a suicide note was found but the report claims that the cause of the suicide is unknown. This is rather confounding as the man admitted to his gambling habit in the suicide note. The fact that any half-wit would naturally make the connection between gambling and money woes, combined with the ease with which the mainstream media here often make ludicrous leaps of logic to make a host of misleading assertions, raises an eyebrow (two even) towards the contradicting headline.

If a suicide note is not to offer some semblance of a reason, then I don't know what is. Quite obviously, the man in this case was a gambler in money trouble, out of a job in these uncertain times - and it is not difficult to make such a suggestion in the report. When one considers how sensationalism drives our mainstream media, it is a surprise that such a suggestive angle was not employed in this article.

On closer inspection though, it seems the fact that a suicide due to gambling would be negative publicity for the soon-to-be-unveiled Integrated Resorts - which would explain the ambiguity in clearly alluding to the cause. Again, we notice selective reporting from the mainstream media that serves propaganda.

On a separate note, the reporter for this story, Ansley Ng, seems to have been watching too much American sports programmes - there is no 'had beat' in British English, only 'had beaten'.

Comic Strips on Singapore Politics

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 09:33:00 +0000

Thought about a few issues that have plagued Singaporeans for years and came up with these...

Article on Speak Good English Not Walking The Talk

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:16:00 +0000

It's always interesting to spot mistakes, but priceless when the context makes them so much worse...

source: Straits Times

advice [ədˈvais] (noun)
suggestions to a person about what he should do

advies نَصِيحَه съвет rada råd der Rat συμβουλή consejo nõu(anne) نصیحت neuvo conseil(s) עֵצָה, ייִעוּץ सलाह savjet tanács nasihat ráð, ráðleggingar consiglio 助言 조언 patarimas padoms; konsultācija pandapat advies råd porada conselho sfat совет rada nasvet savet råd คำแนะนำ öğüt, tavsiye 勸告 порада; консультація نصیحت lời khuyên 劝告
advise [ədˈvaiz] (verb)
1 to give advice to; to recommend adviseer يَنْصَح съветвам radit råde raten συμβουλεύω, συστήνω aconsejar soovitama neuvoa conseiller (de) לְייַעֵץ, לְהַמלִיץ सलाह देना savjetovati tanácsol menasehatkan ráðleggja consigliare 助言する 조언하다 patarti dot padomu; ieteikt nasihat adviseren råde, tilrå radzić aconselhar a sfătui советовать radiť svetovati savetovati råda ให้คำแนะนำ öğüt vermek, tavsiye etmek 勸告 khuyên 劝告
2 (withof) to inform
source: The Free Dictionary

Comic Strips That Make You Think (Hopefully)

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 09:09:00 +0000

Bear with me as I perfect my material and please offer your valued feedback, thanks...

First Attempt at Creating a Comic Strip

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:56:00 +0000

Discovered a good piece of software today called Bitstrips that facilitates creating comic strips online - including unique characters, and started playing around with. Well, here's introducing the Singapore Skeptic then....

Debuting in a brand new comic strip, the Singapore Skeptic gets a taste of democracy, Singapore style...

Disclaimer: I was more preoccupied with creating the comic strip than thinking of a witty storyline!

Anyway, please provide feedback and share your first impressions with me, thanks.

NTUC: Union or Members’ Club?

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 05:29:00 +0000

trade union
Organization whose membership consists of workers and union leaders, and whose principal purposes are to (1) negotiate wages and working condition terms, (2) regulate relations between workers (its members) and the employer, (3) take collective action to enforce the terms of collective bargaining, (4) raise new demands on behalf of its members, and (5) help settle their grievances. Trade unions are generally classified as: (a) Company union that represents interests of only one firm and may not have any connection with the trade union movement. Also called house union, a company union is often a bogus one and generally illegal. (b) General union that represents workers from several firms from the same industry. Also called industrial union. (c) Craft union that represents skilled workers in a particular field such as carpentry or welding.

Source: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/trade-union.html

The latest furor stems from an annoyed Mr Khoong who wrote in to the Straits Times Forum page to ask for more sensibility on the part of the NTUC in giving out ‘NTUC vouchers’ (I'm assuming this means NTUC FairPrice department store vouchers) to NTUC members who worked at his firm.

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/Story/STIStory_454126.html

Indeed it seems odd that the NTUC, which represents the interests of entire industries, would act in such an alienating way towards some workers. Would not the non-members be in equal difficulty and feel neglected - even though it may be ‘their fault for not becoming a member’? Conversely, when the NTUC calls for workers and employers to be ‘Cheaper, Better & Faster’ does it only address the members then?

In any case, a grand show of (blind) loyalty to the NTUC led an enthusiastic Mdm Chow to reply in today’s Straits Times Forum with a chiding retort extolling the benefits of being an NTUC member.

Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/OnlineStory/STIStory_454743.html

Mdm Chow is indeed right as well that Mr Khong ‘missed the point’ that he ‘would have been better off joining the union from day one’. Indeed, the manner in which the NTUC went about giving out the vouchers seems more for the purpose of ‘punishing’ the non-members for their lack of support than to ‘bring joy’ to members. Why else would they so openly ostracise and belittle some workers when a more discreet process would have resulted in the same level of joy for the recipients whilst avoiding the bad aftertaste for others?

The key to addressing the aforementioned furor seems to lie in understanding what it means to be an NTUC member – it certainly affords many privileges such as shopping discounts, special entertainment packages and occasionally, NTUC FairPrice department store vouchers to supposedly help with financial difficulty. This is not unlike other clubs, societies and organisations which gather groups of people and offer them bulk discounts and privileges of all sort.

What the NTUC does not do though is remonstrate any employer for poor practices, organise large-scale negotiations, draw up firm and specific guidelines that champion workers’ causes, or lobby for widespread change in labour practices. In fact, the description on the website of what the NTUC exactly does is quite vague and generic – except for all the wonderful membership privileges it can offer.

For example, it is comical that ‘What We Do’ according to the NTUC includes what workers ought to be, what government and industry players ought to do and what mindset Singaporeans generally should adopt. The only real commitment on this particular webpage seems to be on improving on their recreational facilities and raising money for charity.

screen capture of http://www.ntuc.org.sg/ntucunions/whatwedo.asp

Legislatively, the Ministry of Manpower (MoM) already handles the whole gamut of labour matters (even mediation), which makes the NTUC’s involvement in shaping the climate for workers largely ceremonial. What we do observe, however, is a top-down approach where the NTUC, helmed by CEO Lim Swee Say (who is also a Minister ‘kosong’), tells workers and employers to be ‘Cheaper, Better & Faster’ and belts out such ‘hits’ as 'Upturn the Downturn' (see below) to placate the increasingly struggling masses.

Meanwhile, suggestions for radical changes are typically met with the reiteration that the system currently in place is the best - instead of any due consideration for the feasibility or potential benefit in implementing such changes (see Halimah Yacob’s reply to ‘Give women the right to ask bosses for flexi-work' for an example).

Thus, the situation needs to be understood in the proper context and where the NTUC’s actions may have seemingly caused non-members unhappiness, this sentiment is in fact unfounded. Taking into consideration that the average member who was a ‘member from day one’ would have paid thousands of dollars in membership fees over the years, receiving a $300 shopping voucher is still a net loss. The non-members in the case cited would have in fact (rightfully) saved those thousands of dollars and spent the money on things they wanted to instead of (being forced into) just buying more groceries and tidbits.

The NTUC should be allowed to behave as the exclusive members-only club that it is and should not be confused with a union that protects or champions any particular cause, or one that ensures that any worker who is suffering is accorded the necessary financial support. Only then can the action of proudly offering some workers vouchers (never mind if they need it or not) whilst overtly ignoring others (even though they may be in real financial hardship) seem not inappropriate at all.

Why Changing Headlines is Bad...

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 05:25:00 +0000

Recently, the Head of Editorial Systems at SPH remarked in an ST blog post that some bloggers "jump up and down ... when an SPH website changes a headline". Well, although I don't have the habit of doing any physical body movments when I'm typing out a blog post, he may have felt that bloggers like me are nitpicking on the ST due to the sheer volume of ridiculous faux pas it makes in spite of it being "the most widely read newspaper in Singapore" that "strives to be an authoritative provider of news and views" - ST's own claims.

True to form, over the last 2 days, the self-censorship over the Minitor's comments continued to bring out the 'headless-chicken' behaviour at ST. A report carried on Friday (6 November 2009) reported on the China Premier's press briefing before his trip to Singapore and was titled "Controversy is 'normal'", referring to Minitor's earlier comments at an event in the US.

However, the same report appears at a different URL with the exact same text but is dated 7 November 2009 and carries the more vague title "MM's remarks normal".

If one were to read the article, however, what is referred to as 'normal' is actually the controversy and furor - not Minitor's remarks. Thus the 'updated' version of the article is incorrectly titled and is plainly misleading - how can this be a 'correction' by any stretch of the imagination? Unless 'correction' is a pseudonym for 'self-censorship'.

THE recent uproar among Chinese netizens over Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's call for the United States to remain engaged in Asia to balance China is 'normal', the Chinese Foreign Ministry said on Friday.

"It is not surprising to see all kinds of comments on his views appearing in the newspapers. That is normal." - Assistant Foreign Minister Hu Zhengyue

Based on the callousness with which the aforementioned Head of Editorial Systems at SPH makes his observation with regard to taking issue with such senseless changes, it would seem that the ST sees this as part of the journalistic process.

The problem is that changing a headline makes it difficult to trace, hard to cite and is just downright unprofessional. Journalists and media organisations who claim to be credible should research the material thoroughly, make a decision on the text and title, and then stick by it. Changing the material after publication (whether online or otherwise) suggests ineptitude at best - something that an "authoritative provider of news and views" should not be.

Remember the friend who keeps changing his handphone number for god-knows-why? Well, it's equally annoying when today's article cannot be located tomorrow because of the title-change. And just as you would want to slap the friend who justifies the change by saying he liked the new phone number better than the former, frustrated readers are metaphorically slapping the ST's unsavoury behaviour by pointing this out on their blogs.

And since ST is now aware of the 'smoke' (i.e. bloggers "jumping up and down") it should consider putting out the proverbial fire by improving its journalistic integrity rather than be "the most widely read newspaper in Singapore" that only knows how to fan away the smoke.

The Evolution of a Straits Times Headline

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 05:11:00 +0000

Recently, there has been some furor over our Minitor's (i.e. short for Minister Mentor) comments:

"The size of China makes it impossible for the rest of Asia, including Japan and India, to match it in weight and capacity in about 20 to 30 years. So we need America to strike a balance."

- MM Lee, 29 October 2009
addressing a "stellar cast of
the US capital's political and business heavyweights
(who) turned out to honour him,
including three US Presidents
who sent messages in writing or via video"

Apparently, The Shangaiist reports that people in China are not thrilled with the allusion and mistrust with condemnation flowing from netizens (harsh) and the mainstream media (mild) in China alike.

Perhaps, Minitor's "surprise that Beijing put on a major military display of home-made weapons at its 60th National Day earlier this month" added fuel to the angry sentiments? Or perhaps it was his observation that a "blue-water fleet with aircraft carriers cannot just be to deter foreign intervention in a conflict between Taiwan and the mainland", addressed to the same crowd at the US-Asean Business Council's 25th anniversary gala dinner, and reported in a separate article entitled "US-China competition yes, but conflict? No".

However, what interests me is the way the headline changed for the first article - which is symptomatic of ST reports these days on sensitive issues. For example, a report on the Malaysian Insider quotes Minitor's words above but attributes the ST headline as "MM Lee urges the US to retain role in Asia to balance China".

But if one were to search for this report, the result is a report mildly titled as "MM calls on US to retain key role in East Asia" - which is only reproduced in full on the PMO's website.

The development of the headline does not end there however, and if you were to visit the ST webpage that carries a snippet of the story now, the headline is a nondescript "MM: US key in East Asia".

Honestly, I have no idea which of these 3 headlines appears in the print edition - please let me know if you do - but the question is whether this is a really necessary exercise. In all 3 cases, the story is exatly the same and the factual accuracy of the headlines remains solid, so why the need to change? This is a question we all need to ask ourselves when reading ST's reports.

ST's Typos Get Grander

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:57:00 +0000

I just came back after a week in Phuket to an interesting email from a buddy showing an abysmal error right in the top-middle of Saturday's front page. Unlike previous errors which occurred primarily within the article text, this was in a prominent highlight strip referring to an article inside the paper for that day.

spotted by Mr Lim Wei Teck

Where other mistakes seem to have been a result of logical oversight, this appears to be due to blatant laziness (of writer, editor, intern and even the printing staff) in checking the material.

Perhaps this is the reason (i.e. allowing gross mistakes to run in the paper) why the ST was ranked higher this year (133 from 144 last year) in the Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders?

Well, in any case this speculation is more plausible than Zaqy Mohamad's suggestion that it is "because of the media diversity here, with mainstream media going online (that) creates pressure for media agencies to provide better-quality work." By the way, the index measures the level of press freedom only and not the actual quality of press.

ST's Word of the Day: Refridgerators

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 05:22:00 +0000

I chanced upon a good article entitled Wacky ideas to go green penned by Ms Ho Ai Li, the Taiwan Correspondent to the Straits Times, that discussed the environmental sensitivity of the Taiwanese as compared to Singaporeans. What caught my eye though was the overly-juvenile oversight of spelling 'refrigerators' as 'refridgerators' (see below).

Of course it's obvious that the word 'fridge' interfered with the longer word 'refrigerator' here but still, this is something I would hardly expect from our self-proclaimed 'best-of-the best' ST journalists. In fact, it's rather incredulous how both the writer and editor missed a mistake which we would chide our secondary school students for.

Straits Times and its Stupid Polls

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:25:00 +0000

As usual, another pointless straw poll was conducted and reported in the Straits Times today entitled 'Foreigners welcome, say teens' which comprised asking 100 random (one hopes) youngsters a few questions on their perception of foreigners in Singapore. Then, as if the extremely small number of 100 wasn't already silly enough, this group was inextricably further divided into 2 age groups (13-18 vs 19-24) to arrive at (one can only assume) a positive angle for the story.

Of the innumerable problems with the interpretation of the 'findings', the one that calls for a big fat "what the..." is clearly the age groups selected as categories. The definition of teen (i.e. teenager) is a person in their teens (meaning 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 AND 19, inclusive), so there is no logical reason to separate 19 from the group classified by ST as 'teens'.

original source: Straits Times

Perhaps it is because without this senseless separation of the sample size, the headline would read 'Foreigners NOT welcome, say young Singaporeans'? If we look at the portion circled in red above, not having these silly categories (i.e. 13-18 vs 19-24), causes the findings to show that a clear 38% of respondents felt that immigration rules should be tighter and only 25% wanted to keep them as they are with another 25% wanting them to be relaxed.

Well, going by the way ST's been throwing out these ridiculous polls, I guess it would be alright then to quote TOC's polls which regularly receive 200+ votes each. So, for example, we could say 93% of the blogosphere was not quite impressed with the PAP's National Day Message or 83% of the blogosphere rated MOM's performance as 'poor' or 'bad' (see poll results below).

source: TOC

What an Elaborate Way to Keep us in the Dark, Temasek

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:58:00 +0000

Frankly, it has been super-annoying to make sense of the latest figures from Temasek. A lot of questions and head-scratching has been going on and honestly, I just wanted to ignore all the crap and tried hard to suppress the indignity of being treated a fool by my own government. But thanks to being tagged in a Facebook message (*looks at Seelan*) - the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back - I began making sense of the latest statements from Temasek Holdings (a.k.a. the bermuda triangle of taxpayer money).

What I have gathered is as such:

26 August 2008 - Temasek announces its performance for Financial Year (April 2007 to March 2008) and reports that its portfolio value increased 13% from S$164 billion to S$185 billion (source: Temasek Review 2008 & Temasek Holdings)

August 2008 - Annual Temasek Review defines the VaR as a 'statistical model that estimates the potential loss on a portfolio for a given confidence level ... for a 12-month period at an 84% confidence level (and) is derived using a Monte Carlo simulation based on three years of price data'; and estimates the theorectical figure for 2008 to be S$40 billion - as compared to S$24 billion for 2007 (source: Temasek Review 2008 & Temasek Review 2007)

10 February 2009 - Senior Minister of State for Finance, Lim Hwee Hua reveals in parliament that Temasek's 'net portfolio value at 30 November 2008 was S$127 billion', however AFP's request for confirmation of that figure from Temasek goes unanswered (sources: Singapore Parliament & AFP)

28 May 2009 - Minister for Finance, Tharman Shanmugaratnam corroborates Lim Hwee Hua's version by declaring in parliament that the 'full year accounts to end March 2009 have not been audited, but the picture should not be fundamentally different from what I have described as equity markets globally showed no major change as at end March 2009 compared to end November 2008' (source: Singapore Parliament)

29 July 2009 - CEO of Temasek, Ho Ching shares in a speech at a forum that the estimation of the VaR at S$40 billion 'has turned out to be so, and more' (source: Institute of Policy Studies)

So, essentially, nobody is lying about the figures - but they aren't telling the complete truth either. The 'magical' S$40 billion thrown up yesterday is merely a theoretical figure derived from a (purely) statistical estimation.

My speculation is that if the value of the losses was less than the November 2008 figure of S$58 billion (S$185 bilion - S$127 billion), Temasek would have used this opportunity to trumpet this positivity. Therefore, the very fact that no actual figure was mentioned and a wholly-theoretical number was relied upon instead (when concrete figures would be available to the CEO by now) suggests that the losses might very well be GREATER than the recorded S$58 billion.

Of course, a nice capital injection from Temasek's only shareholder, the Singapore Minsitry of Finance could mitigate that value nicely, just like it happened in 2008 - '(p)art of the increase in portfolio size came from a net fresh capital injection of S$10 billion from our shareholder as part of its asset allocation rebalancing' (source: Temasek Review 2008) - which would mean the portfolio increase was actually S$164 billion to S$175billion (6.7% growth) + S$10 billion.

Well, I'm waiting for Temasek Review 2009 which should be out sometime next month to get the actual figures - and all the creative accounting it will contain. I'll be sure to keep you all informed on what I find then but in the meanwhile, don't make too much of the magic S$40 billion figure - focus on the S$58 billion instead as it's closer to the truth.

Want to be High-Class, Don't Make Silly Spelling Mistakes NUSS

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 02:06:00 +0000

The other day I received an unsolicited mailer from NUSS (National University of Singapore Society) offering a discount on their Graduate Club membership. First of all, I have no idea why they would send unsolicited mail aimlessly when they are an exclusive club and why they would, of all places, choose to target a block that is predominately filled with 3-room flats.

The price to join was indicated as S$4,000 - apparently this is a bargain compared to their tariff rate of S$10,000 - which I am sure that Singaporeans tightening their belts in this recession like me would be heartened to consider. Unfortunately, the fine print looked at me disgustingly - 'only open to graduates from local & recognised foreign universities', so there was no chance for a pariah like me.

But just as I was about to put the mailer onto my 'recyclable' stack, I realised something rather odd. Apparently, when you are high-class there is a different spelling system and "price incresses" instead of "price increases" (see image below).

Or... it could very well be that a society/club that has no issues with mass-mailing gloss-finished postcard mailers to households who are unlikely to qualify and/or afford their memberships couldn't be bothered to hire a professional proofreader.

Ferguson is a Smooth Operator Indeed

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:47:00 +0000

Whilst reading the news on ESPN Soccernet today, I realised something interesting. David Beckham was a home-grown Manchester United player who was sold to Real Madrid for US$41 million and, at the time, I thought it was quite a gamble to sell the team's talisman and star performer. However, I realise now that Christiano Ronaldo was bought just as Beckham left and was duly given the no. 7 jersey (i.e. direct replacement?) immediately as well.

Now, Ronaldo who was bought for US$20.29 million has been sold for US$132 million - a tremendously handsome profit by any standards - and again, many feel that it is quite a gamble to sell the team's current talisman and star performer. However, on closer inspection, it seems as though Federico Macheda has been earmarked to be the direct replacement for Ronaldo.

By the looks of it, it seems Macheda can easily fill the void and if he rises to the heights of Beckham and Ronaldo, Ferguson - and more so the board of Machester United - can look forward to another windfall in 5 to 6 years' time.

Joke of the Day - Asking Sales Staff to Put Heart into Work

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 04:42:00 +0000

MyPaper published an article yesterday by 'uncle' Geoff Tan who must be either disillusioned or has a mischievous streak. 'Uncle' Tan called on sales staff in Singapore to put heart into their work, even if it goes unseen and I actually laughed out loud at the suggestion - bearing in mind that it is almost impossible to get staff to put in a decent enough effort even with monetary incentives in place.

source: MyPaper

Here was someone who was appealing to service staff's intrinsic motivation to do a good job and serve regardless of recognition - well, good luck with that then. The root of the problem is not whether local service staff want to be intrinsically motivated or not but whether they can afford to be. When the average service industry worker has a mountain of debt to repay and little time outside of work to spend with his or her family, can we really be surprised when staff look irritated the moment shoppers enter 5 minutes before closing time? Contrast that with a foreign worker who would be looking forward to just dinner and bed after work, and the implications are obvious.

The Singapore climate breeds (usually immediate) punitive action against mistakes and nonchalance towards average-to-exemplary performance as a rule of thumb, so this in itself will kill any motivation to get one's hands dirty - let alone putting in any heart. Give our foreign talents 10 years' worth of the Singapore treatment and rest assured they'll give the same suspicious look at a Singapore shopper as to whether there is ITB (i.e. intention to buy).

Well, it's easy when you're an eagle sitting atop a tree in the jungle to criticise the rats scurrying below for their lack in appreciating the beauty of the clouds and the sky. After all, 'uncle' Tan is 'a senior vice-president of the SPH marketing division and the general manager of SPH NewMedia for Zapcode' - my, my, what a mouthful.

Besides, you just don't doubt a bald guy who comes complete with pony tail and earring, do you?

source: Mobile Marketing Forum

Reading Between the Lines of Local News

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 23:39:00 +0000

I know, I know.... I promised to be more regular and frequent in updating my thoughts here, but projects keep falling on my lap - again, this is not a bad thing and I'm grateful to be gainfully-employed. The training industry is definitely picking up and demand is rather strong - which explains why I am mostly training/lecturing these days instead of writing/editing.

Anyway, I did a quick scan of Singapore-related news on Google News this morning and a meddley of interesting articles with equally-interesting implications caught my eye. I simply had to share my take on these reports - if you could call them that, so here's my round-up of the day:

1) NSF arrested for rash act
ST reports that the driver of the Land Rover which killed another soldier has been arrested. Well, it certainly seems to me that the authorities have quickly arranged for a scapegoat to be slaughtered to appease the public - which leads me to wonder what systemic shortcomings are going to be overlooked until the next time something like this happens.

Source: Left Eye On The Media

2) NUS undergrads cry foul over internship
A simply useless article that tells me that NUS Law students (well, at least one) are a bunch of whining, spoilt brats who's idea of solving a problem is to bitch about it to the press. So SMU has emerged as a credible spoiler of the monopoly that NUS had - tough.

It really begs the question as to the quality of these students (at least this one) in overcoming adversity. In any case, the difference between a 'standard' law firm and a top-tier one is that at the former, you earn something like $3,000 a month doing real work whilst at the latter, you can rub shoulders with high-brow clients and earn (much) more.

The article also hinted at how clueless and out-of-touch people at the top can be when the dean, Tan Cheng Han, addressed how students are 'fixated on getting internships in the large firms' by revealing that "as a law student, I personally did not spend any time as an intern in a Singapore law firm. I valued my precious vacation time and spent it on student activities and sports." I'm sure you did Prof Tan, but when was this?

1987 Singapore and 2009 Singapore are totally different worlds - in case the recession has not (read: never will) hit you.

Source: Cover Browser

3) 7 years jail for $2m theft
I remember being intrigued by this heist - impressive for such an incident to happen in a country predominately full of sheep. Of course, I was relieved to find out that the thief who dared was a Malaysian - which restores my faith in the inactive-by-default Singaporean. It is amazing to me how fast they dealt with the case though - April 12 incident, Jul 9 sentencing - a speed which I have hardly ever seen in our judicial system. In fact, I have personally witnessed the simplest of cases being dragged out for a year instead.

Perhaps the efficiency here has to do with the fact that the guy managed to catch Certis Cisco (which is a 'wholly owned subsidiary of Temasek Holdings', by the way) with its stained underwear around its ankles? What makes the prosecution timeline even more impressive is that the guy initially fled to Malaysia before being caught - overseas fugitive cases should typically take longer to settle/investigate.

Well, when David Rasif is still at large with $12 million in stolen wealth, I am bewildered how the '$2 million man' was quickly despatched to prison. Oh wait, Rasif ran away with some dumb sucker's money, not the government's...

Source: Getty Images

4) Lawyer struck off rolls
Speaking of Rasif, one of his (supposed) partners in crime - another lawyer who is in prison right now, was removed as a practising lawyer in a 10-minute 'hearing' presided by the 'Court of Three Judges'. So, in essence, everyone spent probably hours preparing/organising for what seems to be a pre-arranged decision.

Next time, just send a letter and dispense with the wayang lah, thanks.

Source: Climbing out of the dark

Man-in-the-street Paying Back Temasek Losses?

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 13:03:00 +0000

I called my friend when news broke that civil servants will not be receiving their mid-year bonus and asked him how he was coping. He replied half-jokingly that it was to be expected because the government had to recoup their investment losses somehow. I found that to be an interesting take on things and laughed together with him (me laughing harder of course as he was the one who suffered the real monetary loss).

Shortly thereafter, I learnt about the Medisave Minimum Sum increase which registers the largest jump of $11,000 from the previous year as compared to a relatively modest $4,500 to $6,500 year-on-year increase in each of the preceding 5 years. Was inflation really THAT exceptionally bad in 2008/2009 as compared to 2007/2008?

source: CPF Board

Then today, I learnt that house owners now have to top-up any shortfall into their CPF accounts should they sell their flats below valuation. In a nutshell, what this means is that if you had bought your flat in 1999 for say $300,000 using money from your CPF account, you would technically 'owe' $300,000 + 2.5% CPF Ordinary account interest x 10 years. That works out to $375,000 that needs to be returned to your account (assuming you bought your flat WITHOUT taking any loans). You would therefore need to sell your flat for above $375,000 before you can even think about 'earning' a profit from the sale.

Consequently, if you sell your flat for anything less than this value, you can't even dream of seeing anything in cash - everything goes into the CPF account. Apparently, when you sell below the valuation (valuers are HDB appointed and IRAS licensed, by the way), you are obligated to top-up the difference between sale price and valuation back into your CPF account as well. This was reportedly 'enforced loosely' - until now.

When sale prices are naturally heading southward and people in difficulty are finding themselves forced to sell their flats cheaply to save themselves, it is a mystery to me why the authorities would put such folks in a catch-22 situation - if they keep the flat, they wouldn't be able to service the loans; and they can't sell their flat either because they would be obligated to come up with cash to make up the difference (which they obviously don't have).

Any which way I look at this, it seems as though only the CPF/HDB coffers will benefit - if the top-up is made, the actual financial loss of the sale is borne by the house owner (who forks it all out in cash), and if there is a default in the housing loan repayment, HDB can simply repossess the flat and resell it for a (handsome) profit.

So, that brings me to ask the question, "who stands to benefit the most" and the answer seems to be an obvious CPF/HDB/Civil Service which invariably leads back to the same coffers (more or less) - Ministry of Finance, which in turn finances Temasek Holdings.

In any case, it sure doesn't look as though the man in the street is in anyway a better position to deal with the current difficult financial situation - in fact, it just got worse.

Uniquely Singapore: One Low IQ Boy vs Two Low EQ MPs

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 07 May 2009 14:20:00 +0000

It's a bad time for Singapore and Singaporeans, no doubt; everybody's tightening their belts - not to mention those who have no metaphorical belts to tighten in the first place. And just to break the monotony of the current recession, we have the Ultimate Fighter (Singapore version) to enjoy.

In one corner we have a disgruntled, physically and mentally troubled youth who is in the midst of seeing his mother suffer physically, financially and emotionally. And in the other corner, two well-fed politicians who could hardly comprehend what life is like for a truly-poor person. A match certainly heading for catastrophe, one would imagine.

Round 1 - Fight!

The young man can no longer stand seeing his mother almost-grovelling to survive - over several months and being rejected unceremoniously at that, duly loses his cool and acts rashly by throwing a chair at a door. Minions being minions, overreact, restrain the youth and call in the Police. The Police seeing a politician in power being involved decide to throw out commonsense, and err on the side of absolute application of the law - they track down the young man to his home and arrest him.

The politican does nothing (although a mere, "it's ok, let's forget about it" from her would have ended the incident right there and then) and possibly feels that the youth deserved what he got.

Round 2 - Apology? No Thanks!

Being poor and legally-helpless, the young man subsequently writes a rudimentary apology (which exemplifies his 'low IQ') to another politician delivered by his mother. This politician (exemplifying her low EQ) simply waves away the apology and practically declares he deserves his present predicament - in not so many words.

Now the youth faces possible jail time, has no way of paying any fine if imposed, and will have an even harder time getting a job (which is what MP Cynthia Phua claims she was trying to do in the first place). The mother will have yet another added problem weighing down on her - as if she doesn't have enough as it is.

MP Lim Hwee Hua feels the 'violence' "is not justifiable in any circumstance" but the probable fact that she has not suffered extreme financial difficulty herself disqualifies her from making that very judgement call. Perhaps in an ideal world; perhaps high atop an ivory tower, that statement may hold true - not in this case.

An educated person with access to the internet can blog about his or her frustrations; a healthy person may choose to vent it out on a soccer field or basketball court. This young man probably did not have these options and it was nothing more than an outburst aimed at no one - I dare say he probably chose an area where he would specifically not harm anyone with his actions.

At the end of the day, the boy can say his low IQ is a disability. Can the politicians say the same of their obviously-low EQ?

No prizes for guessing the winner(s)

Note: BTW, what's up with SPH's reporting? In the TNP report, it says the boy will be reporting back to the Police but in the ST report (another here), it says he will be attending court (both giving 12th May as the date). Also, in case the above links expire, a version of the TNP report is being carried by Singapore Enquirer.

Man Utd One Game Short of Maximum for Season

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 06 May 2009 03:48:00 +0000

Yesterday, Man Utd beat Arsenal 3-1 to reach the finals of the Champions League Competition. And with it winning all the other possible trophies save the FA Cup, it would have played a total of 66 games between August and May at the season's end - which works out to something like 1 game every 4.5 days.

If it had reached the FA Cup finals, this total would have been 67 - the maximum possible number of games for a Premier League club to play in one season. Contrast that figure with a club like Hull City which played about 45 games this season, and one can see the demands required of the top flight club. In fact, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal have all played less than 60 games this season.

As a fan, it is great to be abe to see the club I support in action so often and I am amazed at the fitness and discipline it would take as a club to achieve this feat.

New And Old Citizens The Same?

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 03:30:00 +0000

Don't be mistaken that there has been nothing to write over the past month that I've been missing. On the contrary, it was frustrating to see so much happen yet not have the time to pen down my thoughts.

Well, today I read about how we should learn from Western culture and adopt their hospitality practices to welcome and integrate our foreigners (TODAY article). What raised my brow was that this advice (decree?) was offered by our Minitor (Minister+Mentor - to save space) who, at one point in time deemed western (specifically American) cultural influences as 'decadent' - as described in the excerpt below from the book Cultural Politics and Asian Values: The Tepid War by none other than Dr Michael Barr (bio with picture) who has written extensively on our founding father.

Personally, I feel a tad annoyed with the suggestion that, "There is no difference between race, religion, new or old citizens." Really? How about the 2 years and annual 14-day-disruption-to-lifestyle that 'old' male citizens have to sacrifice serving National Service? Now, I'd call that one helluva big difference, wouldn't you? A difference that can be markedly witnessed when 'old citizens' apply for jobs, no doubt.

And what's up with referring to natural-born-Singaporeans as 'old citizens' anyway? First of all, many will just assume it's in reference to senior citizens which would add unnecessary confusion. Second, the connotation is that existing Singaporeans are no longer relevant or useful - not unlike how our elderly Singaporeans are typically referred to (and treated).

Granted, the Minitor (for clarification: pronounced as 'Mini-taur') was addressing a largely China-based crowd at an event for a niche audience and made these remarks in Mandarin - so it could have been coined for the target audience or the meaning may have been lost in the translation. Nevertheless, it is disappointing to read such labelling of those who call this place home (in good times and bad, mind you) and makes me as an 'old citizen' upset yet again for being Singaporean (through no fault of mine).

Uniquely Singapore, I hear you say?

VS
In come the new...................and out go the old?

sources: (left) daylife & (right) flickr

Study Finds Older Men Have Stupid Children: New Insult Is Born

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 04:08:00 +0000

11 Mar 2009 - Medical News Today reports that a study (quoted below) has discovered a link between the age of the father and the intelligence of the child. The study concludes that the older the father, the lower the standard of a child's (up to 7 years) performance on cognitive tests.

"Advanced Paternal Age Is Associated with Impaired Neurocognitive Outcomes during Infancy and Childhood."
Saha S, Barnett AG, Foldi C, Burne TH, Eyles DW, Buka SL, McGrath JJ.
PLoS Medicine Vol. 6, No. 3, e40. Published online March 10, 2009 doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000040

Bullies the world over rejoiced today as the potential for creative and novel snide remarks dawned upon them. For example, the incompetent colleague can be issued with a, "I see that your father must be about 200 years older than you" to put the point across - with scientific evidence that qualifies the statement, to boot. Similarly, for the moron who couldn't care less about others, a quip of "it must have been difficult to be born to a senior citizen" will hit the nail on the head.

Practitioners of sarcasm advised though to wait until the results of the study have propogated well into the homes of the intended recipients before employing such comments. And for those who cannot wait, it would be wise to include a link to this study and report for the intended target to refer to when making such retorts.

It remains to be seen how well this vein of insult will take to the masses, but with the clear advantage of being able to insult both the target AND his/her father at one go, observers believe it could very well be a winner.

source: Malice4U

Does 'Not Unhappy' = Happy?

noreply@blogger.com (Ganga) — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 02:41:00 +0000

With all the internet chatter among Singaporeans on how train commuters have to constantly enjoy the whiffs emanating from fellow passengers' armpits on a regular basis - so much so that one can recognise and identify a fellow commuter by smell (are you nodding your head? Eww!) - I was surprised to read the headlines '90% of Singaporeans happy with level of graciousness' (carried in TODAY as well) and '1 out of 10 Singaporeans unhappy with current level of graciousness' in today's local news.

source: IMETRO

If the reports are to be believed only a mere 1 in 10 Singaporeans are unhappy with the standard of graciousness and CNA goes as far as making it sound as if the other 9 declared that they were happy. But in actual fact, the survey conducted by don't-know-who which was commissioned by the Singapore Kindness Movement, polled only 502 Singaporeans (nationality by whose definition?) and only half of them actually said they were happy. So, apart from the 50-odd folks who plainly said they were unhappy, there were about 200 who DID NOT SAY whether they were happy or unhappy.

So it is misleading to suggest '90% are happy', isn't it? Once again, we get a lesson in how to have fun with statistics by using a sample size that is 0.0125% of the population and making incredible assumptions to make an erronous sweeping statement.

The reports also indicate that those polled ranked Singapore fifth in a list but stops short of letting us know exactly how many were in the list of choices. For a 500-respondent survey, I wouldn't be surprised if the list only had 5 options to begin with - i.e. Singapore is placed last! Let's see if more information comes along - perhaps the Singapore Kindness Movement will publish the exact/full survey findings on its website (Note: link may be broken/down).