This year, the opposition in Singapore sure do have a really good line up! um not THAT good, but at least heaploads better than 4years ago. This year, we have also seen 2 really young candidates take on the fire from the media, Nicole Seah and Tin Pei Ling. posted a short post on TPL already..but i wont post one about nicole because i seriously cant be bothered to.

My view on her? She is sure is a down-to-mars candidate. Sure sounds really firm in whatever she says! but all that appears in front me, is fluff. In her rally speech, she keeps asking the people, "whose money are they using?! your money!" (like duhhhh) and like sriously.. politicians get their salary from the taxation of the people.. Name me a government who doesnt do that. The fact is that the people are given the avenue to voice their opinions-in a "constructive" manner in today's society. And the voting of her in would gurantee a larger voice of the people..? i see no logic in that. Moreover, when she is voted in, there are surely agendas that the opposition would want to push, henceforth raising the possibility of the neglecting of the people. Ultimately, does the opposition really ahev the resources to effectively sustain the policies that they want to introduce? such as minimum wage and the provision of housing at base cost? In my opinion, the opposition just seems to be shooting down the government's policies, just for the sake of doing so, instead of seriously considering and targeting the logic that is behind those policies. All they have done is come up with some reasons on why the policies are ineffective, give lame examples of individuals who suffer from those policies then introduce their counter policy. on the brighter side, they do have the PEEL structure! :D

Anyway, in this highly competitive world we live in today, and given that Singapore is an export driven economy, i will not take any chances in giving the opposition a chance to lead the country, knowing that they do not have the resources to sustain those haphazard policies of theirs. The creation of minimum wage would definitely lead to high unemployment and even possibly a drop in productivity as complacency arises within the workforce. If they change housing prices to be sold at base cost price, then what you will end up with is everyone flocking over and settling down in Singapore, which includes foreign workers and talents. Housing development blocks will be built at the towering heights of those above 50 storeys...? clearly there would be overcrowding. Doesnt this just go to show how illogical the opposition can be? if you want to tear down other people's policies and gain the support of the people, then explain it in a logical manner. not in some shit manner like "i represent the people's voice!"

With the strengthening of the lefts in todays society, schizocracy may seem detrimental to the country as a whole, but at least their fight against the government sends the normative signal of the increasing importance of the government's accountability to the people. This in turn puts constant pressure on the government to continue to fufill its role to the people as well as to be the moral compass. As the leaders of the country, they are the ones with the hindsight all thanks to the amount of "advisors" that they have.

In any case, politics sure has become an entertainment spectacle, with an increasing number of people voting for the politicians whom they think are the most entertaining and those who can "click" with the people best. Instead of the politicians who can create real policies that can bring about real benefits to real people, what people might be voting for are politicians who bring in policies that sounds good, looks good but are neither feasible nor sustainable. People out there, im not trying to convince you to vote for the government or the opposition, but rather, know the rationale of the general elections and vote for those whom you think can deliver their promises.

Vote for the politicians who can maintain or improve singapore's competitiveness :)

if i can vote, im for PAP.

In the defence against income inequality that the opposition keeps banking on, doesnt that also mean that it is better to revert back to the old days, say two decades ago? assuming that technology remains the same. or ceteris paribus. only income changes. during that time, our income gap is reeeeealy teeeny weeeny, but i would rather not revert back. let me tell ya why. Every policy has its downsides and upsides, nothing is perfect, give and take. Yes there is a widening income gap, no doubt, its bound to happen as the more capable are usually the richer ones and they are able to remain competitive in the barbaric world economy. However, have you ever considered the LEVEL of income that our country is able to enjoy? We may have a widening income gap however, we are able to enjoy higher incomes as well as a stronger currency. We are now able to afford more items, increase consumption so much more than ever. Within the first two quarters of 2010, Singapore's real GDP rose to an approximate of 20%. 1990, real GDP=66,778million
2010, real GDP=309,400million
Our income increased, in fact the number increased fivefold. Then now you may question that i am not comparing by the rates of growth. Singapore is one of the fastest growing economies. case in point, world economic forum: global competitiveness index 2009, Singapore ranked 3 out of 133 countries. The opposition prefers the old times of smaller income gap? i dont know. but i what i know, is that i prefer our current situation that we live in today, having effectively six times the amount of salary we once had.

i just dont buy the entertaintment tactics by the opposition, i believe in the implementation of good and sound policies, thats why i am going with PAP.

Labels: newspaper article reply