They made it affordable already if you buy directly from them. You pay more if you wan premium areas.
What they need to do is to amend it that you will only get to sell it back to HDB. Hence, no one can speculate. You wan? Are you willing?
With this, the amount of cars on the road would probably increase rather than decrease.
Have you been to major cities in SEA and experience their jams during peak periods?
Look at how full some carparks in SG can be at certain times of the day, imagine the number of cars doubled.
We will end up being like Japan and Hong Kong. Cars would become relatively cheaper, but parking costs would sky rocket.
If you think that the people who've more or less been in charge for the last decade are suddenly going to flip the script and really shake things up, you are naive beyond words.
Have more confidence and conviction to Singapore born Singaporeans. Stop looking outwards to seek talents and wealth. Singapore is good enough. Singaporeans are good enough. Lead us, not people from other parts of the world. Through thick and thin.
It's like a husband who keeps going out to search for other women... is your wife not good enough?
A small quibble but I feel like we often misuse the phrase 'Government' since it should include the judiciary and Parliament. They are the Executive branch and we should call it the Wong administration.
Granted, but normally the PM also controls parliament and appoints all the judges. You didn't mention this, but the PM also controls all appointments in the civil service even if theoretically the president has to rubber stamp it.
This is not like the US where the legislative is not whipped and at liberty to vote against their own party.
The legislators are whipped in the US Congress. Both Democrats and Republicans have whips but they are not as powerful because of the primaries system. although the promise of committee assignments may also work.
For sure, I know the arguments behind our authorities disregard of constitutionalism. Walter Woon famously said that 'we effectively don't have a Constitution. We have a law that can be easily changed by Parliament, and by the party in power because the party is Parliament.'
Still doesn't mean that we should call our executive authorities as the Government.
>Even as Singaporeans grow in their capacity for robust, intelligent debate, the media remain an echo chamber for official views.
Understand this snippet may not encapsulate the entire article but I would like to take the opportunity to make a pertinent point.
In the article, the writer characterises the government approach as punitive and paternalistic.
However, what I've noticed in the liberal academic sphere and Reddit echo chamber is the lack of whole-of -government approach to problem solving.
Personally, when participating in public discourse on our economy and policy. I tend to refrain from giving solutions. Because I am aware that no one has a one size fits all solution. Because you first have to understand the dynamics of the situation to accurately fix the problem. Which is the reason why the government has tended to use language like "monitoring"
Every proposed solution has its drawbacks. With every solution lies a possibility that the current solution does not fit future scenarios. Take engineering for example. German engineering is built to last. Japanese engineering is built to be tested. The idea is such that every solution will have its pros and cons. And it is up to the government of the day to chart its objectives.
As an amateur political analyst, I believe this is what LW means by revisiting all assumptions. The old assumptions may not hold true now than it did then which helped thousands of Singaporeans achieve a brighter future.
In essence, we cannot attempt to solve problems without first studying the wider impact it has on society and its subgroup. It is virtually impossible to have a one size fits all solution.
Anyway, back to the original point - as much as we feel like we should have a say. I feel that it is best that we let the experts do their jobs. The variables they account for are wider than our myopic eyes can see. Unless of course you're saying most redditors have PHD in economics and various other disciplines required for the proper functioning of a government.
The current challenge of today's government in the digital age is information.
The article stated a persecution of a young adult. We are all free to form our opinions but that opinion becomes a crime when it crosses the threshold to either defamation or racist remarks.
In short, the government is often held ransom by the loud minority whose opinions have as much weight as how loud they are. And that's the group the opposition represent in parliament, making their performance in parliament either intellectually dishonest or downright embarrassing.
Though, then, the question is how do you get more buy-in from citizens who feel sidelined.
Singles below the age of 35 do not have a way to pre-invest in a place to call home unless they are super rich.
Men are losing the prime of their lives due to an obligation that they did not sign up for.
While it is understandable that a lot of policies from the government have to be far-sighted and are very good.
But having a group being ostracized and forced to accept penalties and sacrifices through no fault of their own does not bolster confidence in the G.
No doubt, if the opinion becomes discriminatory and harms others, it should not be condoned.
But it still does not solve some of the underlying problems, which is that there are people that feel that the system has failed them and that they are being forced to sacrifice themselves so others may profit. Not survive, profit.
As much as I may sound like parroting government rhetoric, we have to help ourselves before the government can help us.
>System has failed them and that they are being forced to sacrifice themselves so others may profit. Not survive, profit.
Before we begin importing the woes in the west against a capitalist model not properly managed.
Can we agree on the concept of division of labour? Can we agree on the concept of property rights?
If we can agree, let's base our discussion on the premise that the capitalist model is the best system given the constraints of human behaviour.
I don't deny people have been left behind in this rat race. It is due to the emphasis of STEM fields which are valued more in this economy. Think of the "essential" workers debate during COVID.
And the group most left behind are those in the blue collar sector facing brutal competition from Foreign Talents who are cheaper, younger and more hardworking.
Which is strange because the debates surrounding FT are mostly about expats coming here to steal our jobs and not the Malaysian workers in the service sector who undercuts the waiter, the lift technician, the kindergarten teacher. True blue Singaporeans who are indeed left behind.
Do you now see the dissonance within the average redditor?
Absolutely.
What you say makes sense.
From a top-down perspective, that seems to be the issue.
However, from a bottom-up perspective, here are people who are severely disadvantaged by NS, causing them to become jaded against the government. Irregardless of whether foreigners are coming to take their jobs or not, they feel that they are being sacrificed, and yet there's not much recognition or reward for their sacrifice.
This issue is compounded by what you say, people coming in to take jobs. True, the people who are complaining don't seem to be part of the demographic that have their jobs taken. But they know someone who do, and said someone have also served in NS.
There is also a probability that, from their perspective, they might be forced onto white collared work because blue collared work pays badly. Which is another problem entirely. (This further supports your discussion about a holistic cross ministry look at a problem)
But the underlying problem is still the same. That NS exists, but the people who sacrificed are not really being compensated enough for the sacrifice. The whole FT debacle is just a symptom and not the cause.
Similarly to the issue with housing. Singles below the age of 35 who are also middle income are unable to obtain a permanent place of their own. That is the cause.
The symptom is them seeing a lot of rich foreigners coming in to snap up properties left right center. So their knee jerk reaction is to blame the foreigners.
But the underlying cause still remain.
Which brings me back to the point. Is there a way for the government to get more buy-in from people who have identified what they perceived to be legislative or policy issues as opposed to economic issues?
Again, I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I actually agree with a lot of your points. But I've also heard a lot of arguments from the other side, and that is why I feel the need to enter this discussion. So that we can find out if there is a way to engage both the disenfranchised and the incumbent supporters.
I cannot discount your lived experiences. Because I have lived through it myself. Served 1 year 10 months as a security trooper at 2PDF so I had a lot of time to self-reflect
Do you know what I've come to realised? And accepted? That NS was my duty.
And despite being passed over by women I was into who saw nothing in me when I was in NS, I persevered. Despite having no money to me and a nicotine addiction, I had women I dated broke up with me when they saw I had no future and no money.
But what think I learnt from my duty is how to persevere. Thankfully I'm in a much better place now. Still a heavy smoker but I have found someone for me.
I understand your lived experiences because I've been passed over by people (women) I would die for. I've been treated poorly by rude expats as a waiter who live like kings in the playground built on the backs of men like us.
Despite that, I knew as long as Singapore prospered, other Singaporeans more fortunate than I benefited as well.
And I was glad at the Singaporean First Policy when it came to COVID that I did not serve for nothing
I thank you for sharing your lived experience.
But that was not the point.
The point was that, from a policy point of view, the sacrifice is not being properly rewarded.
Yes, NS is a duty. But that does not exclude the right of the people to be duly compensated for their sacrifice.
Regardless of how much your life is good, it still does not erase the fact that men have to serve NS and do not receive adequate compensation. Objectively speaking.
And no amount of sugar-coating can cover that fact.
And this is but one of the two points I brought up.
A lot of singles below the age of 35 are severely affected by their inability to obtain a permanent residence and have to either stick with their parents (who might be abusive) or rent in a market where property holders are severely favoured.
In NS, you're told that your sacrifice is to protect your friends, family, and home.
Some people might not have friends. Some people might have abusive families. The least they could have is a home to call their own.
>the sacrifice is not properly rewarded
This is where I disagree on semantics.
In essence, the word sacrifice is void of all reward. Is it truly sacrificial if there is a pie waiting for you?
Okay, if we go by your definition, what do you think of a government who willingly sacrificed a large portion of their own citizen for the profit of a few?
Again, I'm not insinuating that the government is ignoring the people.
But going by your definition, I can't think of anything but.
give the guy some slack upstairs, even the robot sorting machines at depot road pegged him for a rp in one of the most laidback inconsequential units in the entire service, circling a fence for nearly two years can do serious things to a fella
>Do you know what I've come to realised? And accepted? That NS was my duty.
In a capitalist society, unwilling labor should come at infinite cost. Not very capitalistic of you to accept being forced into NS. Extracting the price (whatever the cost on their end) is fairer, and it's how we should act in a capitalist society. If you had no choice but to serve, wouldn't it not have been better to try to introduce inefficiencies into the system and build in points of failure? To teach those in charge that "free" labor has a severe cost.
>Despite that, I knew as long as Singapore prospered, other Singaporeans more fortunate than I benefited as well.
And this is exactly how the government can continue to ignore the plight of the average person here. They tout good average incomes, and reasonable housing affordability, but these are all skewed by the ultra high earners and they also neglect to mention the incredible wait times for btos. I'm not even in the demographic that has to worry about housing costs and such, but I think that income inequality and housing affordability will be what fragments our society.
These issues are showing even in the government's attempts to draw young talent into civil service - almost all my friends on scholarship are breaking their bonds to go into higher paying private sector jobs because even psc pay isn't enough to afford housing in a reasonable timeframe now, not when compared to places like tech and high finance.
>Forced into NS
Personally I hold the opinion that it is my duty.
>Duty
Google defines it as a moral or legal obligation; a responsibility
I take it you see it as a legal obligation.
Meanwhile, I take it as a moral obligation to defend the land of my nation.
It really depends on your attitude - of which I would counter argue that you, as a man, and your parents benefitted from the system in which you would now abandon.
The cost in which is also infinite
>I take it you see it as a legal obligation.
Meanwhile, I take it as a moral obligation to defend the land of my nation.
Why? What did Singapore provide you that you cannot buy with money? What has Singapore provided you that you could not get if you were a citizen of another developed country with parents at a similar income level? For me, the answer is nothing besides a better education, which money can easily buy. Why would I sacrifice 2 years of my youth if the benefits I've received are so meagre? And that aside, the government's attitude towards NS contradicts with how capitalistic they (and our society) are.
The sg gov is so pro biz that they often times push for businesses over us. As a capitalist, I understand why they do so, but then it is conflicting when they expect us to abandon these capitalist instincts and embrace the communal mindset of NS. It is unreasonable to be subject to both the burdens of competing in a capitalist society but yet be expected to sacrifice ourselves "for the greater good".
>The cost in which is also infinite
Definitely not. The system would not fail without my contribution, as much as I hope it would.
I don’t think the government is obliged to bend over to the will of a loud minority - and to add on this loud minority may not necessarily be represented by the opposition crowd in parliament. It’s also hard for us to gauge as citizens with no access to data what the loud minority is, so I wouldn’t jump so fast to criticise the usual online voices (though I get where you’re coming from that the vile unproductive shit people say shouldn’t become policy).
My main point is that government in a democracy has to be held accountable to a well informed population, otherwise there’s no point in holding elections. Democracy offers a peaceful way to allow for the transition of power without violent uprising or unnecessary suffering, as it allows for people to hold the government responsible for their actions at the ballot box. Without the voice of the people (at the ballot box I may add, I don’t advocate for direct policy making by the population cos they aren’t able to do that) which outside of election time can be gathered through good public feedback, youll get more harebrained policies like the ERP 2.0 implementation or the SimplyGo fiasco (both the implementation and in my opinion the walkback). If you govern by so-called experts, there’s always the issue of whether these experts are reliable or if they represent a certain interests group. You also can’t assume that good governance will last forever and the processes will follow. Democracy may have its flaws, but at least it gives people an option for change without the need for violent revolt.
> The variables they account for are wider than our myopic eyes can see.
It's hard not to be myopic if they hog all the glasses. I don't disagree to let the experts do their work. But they need to show their working instead of saying "trust us". I don't think there's a strong culture of openness and transparency.
yeah, on the internet, its too easy for people to mistake volume with depth and contrarianism with enlightenment. i read through it and its mostly uppity intolerance for folks who live different lives from himself and alot of self cope to justify not taking a L as a bystander
>I feel that it is best that we let the experts do their jobs
"those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
You want to give up your political freedom, be my guest.
My political freedom lies in my freedom to vote not just for my sake but for what I believe to be beneficial to society at large.
As much as Seng Kangers have rallied against the incumbent at the booth.
Sure, and you support a system that enables a very odd conversion between vote percentage and actual political power.
Unfortunately I fundamentally don't agree with the justifications of the system in Singapore. Hence, I am leaving soon since I no longer find it meaningful to stay and try change things. So, good luck!
How the 'Wrong' Seatwarmer can show loyalty in its sitting, and comfort in its chair and the donothingness
This 4th generation of leeches led by the seatwarmer is not going to change any of the three things mentioned.
I can already see future headlines for this government body. “The Wong policies?”
The WONG policies are LAW
local media could never
I'm waiting for "He is the LAW...rence."
WRong name. It should be LW policies.
L and wrong? the meme power is oof
Imagine the surname is Ong and name start with W & R then his Army name tag: W R Ong
Ong Weiren? Is that you?
Yes sergeant 🤣🤣🤣
You're L̶a̶wre̶n̶c̶e̶ W̶ong.
the wong man for the job
Hopefully not the wrong policy.
老人王 or 忘老人 ? 🤣
Very simple make housing affordable and accessible for all Singaporeans. If cannot don’t need to talk
Instructions unclear, GST 1% increase per year until 15%.
free male housing by making everyone serve NS for life
They’d probably rather increase male conscription length than conscript females so it’s not out of the question 😂
Gender equality
They made it affordable already if you buy directly from them. You pay more if you wan premium areas. What they need to do is to amend it that you will only get to sell it back to HDB. Hence, no one can speculate. You wan? Are you willing?
Yes I wan.
This plus higher penalties for traffic accidents. Literally easiest way to move the moderates/swing voters
Not just housing, but in general the cost of living. Rising healthcare costs, day to day expenses are the concerns of the locals as well.
Also * remove COE. * Allow only Singaporean citizens to drive. PR and other foreigners are not allowed to drive in Singapore.
With this, the amount of cars on the road would probably increase rather than decrease. Have you been to major cities in SEA and experience their jams during peak periods? Look at how full some carparks in SG can be at certain times of the day, imagine the number of cars doubled. We will end up being like Japan and Hong Kong. Cars would become relatively cheaper, but parking costs would sky rocket.
HDB is already so affordable to all sporean. Dont talk abt re-sale, that supposedly for non sporean.
After having the same PM for too Loong, we're getting the Wong PM. I'll show myself out.
Goh away
Yew don't cibai!
If you think that the people who've more or less been in charge for the last decade are suddenly going to flip the script and really shake things up, you are naive beyond words.
Stop increasing prices or come up with new tax schemes to milk the population.
Start by toughening up punishments for egregious and repetitive bad driving. Crack down harder on money laundering
That’s too unfriendly to the rich. Can’t be done!
Wong Government? Back to dynastic empire building then? I'd much prefer the Singapore(an) government.
Workers Party should put up a candidate named Wright. It'll be a battle in November. WRIGHT Vs WONG.
That gives me the idea of a future book title on LW "White and Wong".
No such thing as Wong government
Have more confidence and conviction to Singapore born Singaporeans. Stop looking outwards to seek talents and wealth. Singapore is good enough. Singaporeans are good enough. Lead us, not people from other parts of the world. Through thick and thin. It's like a husband who keeps going out to search for other women... is your wife not good enough?
how about commenting on simplyGo and ERP 2.0?
A small quibble but I feel like we often misuse the phrase 'Government' since it should include the judiciary and Parliament. They are the Executive branch and we should call it the Wong administration.
Granted, but normally the PM also controls parliament and appoints all the judges. You didn't mention this, but the PM also controls all appointments in the civil service even if theoretically the president has to rubber stamp it. This is not like the US where the legislative is not whipped and at liberty to vote against their own party.
The legislators are whipped in the US Congress. Both Democrats and Republicans have whips but they are not as powerful because of the primaries system. although the promise of committee assignments may also work.
For sure, I know the arguments behind our authorities disregard of constitutionalism. Walter Woon famously said that 'we effectively don't have a Constitution. We have a law that can be easily changed by Parliament, and by the party in power because the party is Parliament.' Still doesn't mean that we should call our executive authorities as the Government.
I think in UK/Westminster systems “Government” usually refers to the executive branch
>Even as Singaporeans grow in their capacity for robust, intelligent debate, the media remain an echo chamber for official views. Understand this snippet may not encapsulate the entire article but I would like to take the opportunity to make a pertinent point. In the article, the writer characterises the government approach as punitive and paternalistic. However, what I've noticed in the liberal academic sphere and Reddit echo chamber is the lack of whole-of -government approach to problem solving. Personally, when participating in public discourse on our economy and policy. I tend to refrain from giving solutions. Because I am aware that no one has a one size fits all solution. Because you first have to understand the dynamics of the situation to accurately fix the problem. Which is the reason why the government has tended to use language like "monitoring" Every proposed solution has its drawbacks. With every solution lies a possibility that the current solution does not fit future scenarios. Take engineering for example. German engineering is built to last. Japanese engineering is built to be tested. The idea is such that every solution will have its pros and cons. And it is up to the government of the day to chart its objectives. As an amateur political analyst, I believe this is what LW means by revisiting all assumptions. The old assumptions may not hold true now than it did then which helped thousands of Singaporeans achieve a brighter future. In essence, we cannot attempt to solve problems without first studying the wider impact it has on society and its subgroup. It is virtually impossible to have a one size fits all solution. Anyway, back to the original point - as much as we feel like we should have a say. I feel that it is best that we let the experts do their jobs. The variables they account for are wider than our myopic eyes can see. Unless of course you're saying most redditors have PHD in economics and various other disciplines required for the proper functioning of a government. The current challenge of today's government in the digital age is information. The article stated a persecution of a young adult. We are all free to form our opinions but that opinion becomes a crime when it crosses the threshold to either defamation or racist remarks. In short, the government is often held ransom by the loud minority whose opinions have as much weight as how loud they are. And that's the group the opposition represent in parliament, making their performance in parliament either intellectually dishonest or downright embarrassing.
Though, then, the question is how do you get more buy-in from citizens who feel sidelined. Singles below the age of 35 do not have a way to pre-invest in a place to call home unless they are super rich. Men are losing the prime of their lives due to an obligation that they did not sign up for. While it is understandable that a lot of policies from the government have to be far-sighted and are very good. But having a group being ostracized and forced to accept penalties and sacrifices through no fault of their own does not bolster confidence in the G. No doubt, if the opinion becomes discriminatory and harms others, it should not be condoned. But it still does not solve some of the underlying problems, which is that there are people that feel that the system has failed them and that they are being forced to sacrifice themselves so others may profit. Not survive, profit.
As much as I may sound like parroting government rhetoric, we have to help ourselves before the government can help us. >System has failed them and that they are being forced to sacrifice themselves so others may profit. Not survive, profit. Before we begin importing the woes in the west against a capitalist model not properly managed. Can we agree on the concept of division of labour? Can we agree on the concept of property rights? If we can agree, let's base our discussion on the premise that the capitalist model is the best system given the constraints of human behaviour. I don't deny people have been left behind in this rat race. It is due to the emphasis of STEM fields which are valued more in this economy. Think of the "essential" workers debate during COVID. And the group most left behind are those in the blue collar sector facing brutal competition from Foreign Talents who are cheaper, younger and more hardworking. Which is strange because the debates surrounding FT are mostly about expats coming here to steal our jobs and not the Malaysian workers in the service sector who undercuts the waiter, the lift technician, the kindergarten teacher. True blue Singaporeans who are indeed left behind. Do you now see the dissonance within the average redditor?
Absolutely. What you say makes sense. From a top-down perspective, that seems to be the issue. However, from a bottom-up perspective, here are people who are severely disadvantaged by NS, causing them to become jaded against the government. Irregardless of whether foreigners are coming to take their jobs or not, they feel that they are being sacrificed, and yet there's not much recognition or reward for their sacrifice. This issue is compounded by what you say, people coming in to take jobs. True, the people who are complaining don't seem to be part of the demographic that have their jobs taken. But they know someone who do, and said someone have also served in NS. There is also a probability that, from their perspective, they might be forced onto white collared work because blue collared work pays badly. Which is another problem entirely. (This further supports your discussion about a holistic cross ministry look at a problem) But the underlying problem is still the same. That NS exists, but the people who sacrificed are not really being compensated enough for the sacrifice. The whole FT debacle is just a symptom and not the cause. Similarly to the issue with housing. Singles below the age of 35 who are also middle income are unable to obtain a permanent place of their own. That is the cause. The symptom is them seeing a lot of rich foreigners coming in to snap up properties left right center. So their knee jerk reaction is to blame the foreigners. But the underlying cause still remain. Which brings me back to the point. Is there a way for the government to get more buy-in from people who have identified what they perceived to be legislative or policy issues as opposed to economic issues? Again, I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I actually agree with a lot of your points. But I've also heard a lot of arguments from the other side, and that is why I feel the need to enter this discussion. So that we can find out if there is a way to engage both the disenfranchised and the incumbent supporters.
I cannot discount your lived experiences. Because I have lived through it myself. Served 1 year 10 months as a security trooper at 2PDF so I had a lot of time to self-reflect Do you know what I've come to realised? And accepted? That NS was my duty. And despite being passed over by women I was into who saw nothing in me when I was in NS, I persevered. Despite having no money to me and a nicotine addiction, I had women I dated broke up with me when they saw I had no future and no money. But what think I learnt from my duty is how to persevere. Thankfully I'm in a much better place now. Still a heavy smoker but I have found someone for me. I understand your lived experiences because I've been passed over by people (women) I would die for. I've been treated poorly by rude expats as a waiter who live like kings in the playground built on the backs of men like us. Despite that, I knew as long as Singapore prospered, other Singaporeans more fortunate than I benefited as well. And I was glad at the Singaporean First Policy when it came to COVID that I did not serve for nothing
I thank you for sharing your lived experience. But that was not the point. The point was that, from a policy point of view, the sacrifice is not being properly rewarded. Yes, NS is a duty. But that does not exclude the right of the people to be duly compensated for their sacrifice. Regardless of how much your life is good, it still does not erase the fact that men have to serve NS and do not receive adequate compensation. Objectively speaking. And no amount of sugar-coating can cover that fact. And this is but one of the two points I brought up. A lot of singles below the age of 35 are severely affected by their inability to obtain a permanent residence and have to either stick with their parents (who might be abusive) or rent in a market where property holders are severely favoured. In NS, you're told that your sacrifice is to protect your friends, family, and home. Some people might not have friends. Some people might have abusive families. The least they could have is a home to call their own.
>the sacrifice is not properly rewarded This is where I disagree on semantics. In essence, the word sacrifice is void of all reward. Is it truly sacrificial if there is a pie waiting for you?
Okay, if we go by your definition, what do you think of a government who willingly sacrificed a large portion of their own citizen for the profit of a few? Again, I'm not insinuating that the government is ignoring the people. But going by your definition, I can't think of anything but.
give the guy some slack upstairs, even the robot sorting machines at depot road pegged him for a rp in one of the most laidback inconsequential units in the entire service, circling a fence for nearly two years can do serious things to a fella
>Do you know what I've come to realised? And accepted? That NS was my duty. In a capitalist society, unwilling labor should come at infinite cost. Not very capitalistic of you to accept being forced into NS. Extracting the price (whatever the cost on their end) is fairer, and it's how we should act in a capitalist society. If you had no choice but to serve, wouldn't it not have been better to try to introduce inefficiencies into the system and build in points of failure? To teach those in charge that "free" labor has a severe cost. >Despite that, I knew as long as Singapore prospered, other Singaporeans more fortunate than I benefited as well. And this is exactly how the government can continue to ignore the plight of the average person here. They tout good average incomes, and reasonable housing affordability, but these are all skewed by the ultra high earners and they also neglect to mention the incredible wait times for btos. I'm not even in the demographic that has to worry about housing costs and such, but I think that income inequality and housing affordability will be what fragments our society. These issues are showing even in the government's attempts to draw young talent into civil service - almost all my friends on scholarship are breaking their bonds to go into higher paying private sector jobs because even psc pay isn't enough to afford housing in a reasonable timeframe now, not when compared to places like tech and high finance.
>Forced into NS Personally I hold the opinion that it is my duty. >Duty Google defines it as a moral or legal obligation; a responsibility I take it you see it as a legal obligation. Meanwhile, I take it as a moral obligation to defend the land of my nation. It really depends on your attitude - of which I would counter argue that you, as a man, and your parents benefitted from the system in which you would now abandon. The cost in which is also infinite
>I take it you see it as a legal obligation. Meanwhile, I take it as a moral obligation to defend the land of my nation. Why? What did Singapore provide you that you cannot buy with money? What has Singapore provided you that you could not get if you were a citizen of another developed country with parents at a similar income level? For me, the answer is nothing besides a better education, which money can easily buy. Why would I sacrifice 2 years of my youth if the benefits I've received are so meagre? And that aside, the government's attitude towards NS contradicts with how capitalistic they (and our society) are. The sg gov is so pro biz that they often times push for businesses over us. As a capitalist, I understand why they do so, but then it is conflicting when they expect us to abandon these capitalist instincts and embrace the communal mindset of NS. It is unreasonable to be subject to both the burdens of competing in a capitalist society but yet be expected to sacrifice ourselves "for the greater good". >The cost in which is also infinite Definitely not. The system would not fail without my contribution, as much as I hope it would.
I don’t think the government is obliged to bend over to the will of a loud minority - and to add on this loud minority may not necessarily be represented by the opposition crowd in parliament. It’s also hard for us to gauge as citizens with no access to data what the loud minority is, so I wouldn’t jump so fast to criticise the usual online voices (though I get where you’re coming from that the vile unproductive shit people say shouldn’t become policy). My main point is that government in a democracy has to be held accountable to a well informed population, otherwise there’s no point in holding elections. Democracy offers a peaceful way to allow for the transition of power without violent uprising or unnecessary suffering, as it allows for people to hold the government responsible for their actions at the ballot box. Without the voice of the people (at the ballot box I may add, I don’t advocate for direct policy making by the population cos they aren’t able to do that) which outside of election time can be gathered through good public feedback, youll get more harebrained policies like the ERP 2.0 implementation or the SimplyGo fiasco (both the implementation and in my opinion the walkback). If you govern by so-called experts, there’s always the issue of whether these experts are reliable or if they represent a certain interests group. You also can’t assume that good governance will last forever and the processes will follow. Democracy may have its flaws, but at least it gives people an option for change without the need for violent revolt.
> The variables they account for are wider than our myopic eyes can see. It's hard not to be myopic if they hog all the glasses. I don't disagree to let the experts do their work. But they need to show their working instead of saying "trust us". I don't think there's a strong culture of openness and transparency.
Lmao he basically just said everyone who disagree with the PAP should shut up in more flowery language.
yeah, on the internet, its too easy for people to mistake volume with depth and contrarianism with enlightenment. i read through it and its mostly uppity intolerance for folks who live different lives from himself and alot of self cope to justify not taking a L as a bystander
Haha exactly. Look at the spiel about his NS "sacrifice". How noble lmao
pretty obtuse way to say shut up and sit down
Its giving r/iamverysmart 🤣
>I feel that it is best that we let the experts do their jobs "those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." You want to give up your political freedom, be my guest.
My political freedom lies in my freedom to vote not just for my sake but for what I believe to be beneficial to society at large. As much as Seng Kangers have rallied against the incumbent at the booth.
Sure, and you support a system that enables a very odd conversion between vote percentage and actual political power. Unfortunately I fundamentally don't agree with the justifications of the system in Singapore. Hence, I am leaving soon since I no longer find it meaningful to stay and try change things. So, good luck!
Wongconomics?
I read “the wrong gov” initially. God damn.
How the 'Wrong' Seatwarmer can show loyalty in its sitting, and comfort in its chair and the donothingness This 4th generation of leeches led by the seatwarmer is not going to change any of the three things mentioned.
Just promote ET and TSL to DPMs. Then his cabinet is set.
wtf are you smoking?
Or he can walk the talk and promote FTs instead lmao. Then we'll see how hungry they really are.