Monday, April 25, 2011

A roof over our head But no food on the table

Selective Enbloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) - this is precisely what ordinary citizens like myself is afraid off. HDB policy is a ticking time bomb waiting to kill us with debt in during our retirement years.

It is reported that HDB is buying back some 34 years old blocks for flats for redevelopment. Just imagine the financial stress that after paying off your housing loan, HDB wants you flat back and force you to buy another one at a higher price ! It will be a downgrading of flat for sure in order not to shoulder heavy housing debt again.

So if the flat is older eg 60 years, its value is lower, then even if we downgrade, we will likely be burden with another heavy HDB loan at this current rate of sky high ridiculous HDB price.

The current HDB policies are NOT popular with us ordinary citizens, regardless of what Mah BT thinks. Asset enhancement means nothing to us who just want a roof over our head and not be inconvenience by this SERS. There is sense of belonging and attachment to our home, neighbours and surrounding - that cannot be compensated by money!

HDB senseless policies will leave old folks with a roof but no food on the table. Since more than 80% of the population is housed in HDB, the consequent is very severe if such senseless policy is to continue.

Mah seems to think there is nothing wrong with the current policy. This is indeed worrying as there is none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Saturday, April 23, 2011

Casino as S'pore Iconic Representation ?

Sydney has it Opera House as its icon. It projects culture and artistic refinement.

We are truly 'unique' as we have MBS as our icon ! What image does a casino projects ?

Granted that MBS stands out in its architectural design, but it cannot escape from its predominant image of a gambling casino.

The fancy name of Integrated Resort is coined to soften the casino's image and to make it more acceptable to build not one, but 2 casinos in our country with a tiny land mass.

If we the citizens find it perfectly acceptable to have a casino as our country's iconic representation, what does it says about our change in value system ?

I would rather have Botanic Garden being our icon, though it is 'outdated'. It projects a wholesome image. It is where families can immerse in nature and our children learn about conservation.

MBS is fast becoming our national icon is contribute by its strategic location granted by the govt. Sad indeed.

Besides, MBS totally block out our scenic coastal view. So we are left 'admiring' an man-made structure instead of beautiful sea view.

Monday, April 18, 2011

PAP's Report Card

We have no idea how PAP comes up with 'good grade' for themselves. Common folks like us with common sense tell us that PAP has failed miserably in their 'exam'. We use realistic and honest grading system to judge their performance. For example :

1) What we see at ground level - elderly folks still working at hawker center cleaning tables and dirty dishes

2) PAP acknowledges that most S'poreans don't have enough for retirement, so we are advised to continue to work forever if we can. Our CPF policies promise heaven but deliver hell.

3) Our transport system cannot cater to the exploding population - it is not only overcrowded, it is becoming unsafe too.

If a governing party cannot even get some of the important basic policies right and implement them well, can they still claim to be doing a good job ? Are they 'A'team? What sort of party will make such claims? A dishonest party!

Why is our current govt behaving like greedy unethical Wall Street bankers? Paid themselves handsomely and still top up with obscene bonus. They are even entitle to pension scheme which they abolished for the civil services.

PM's nonsense

When PM uses so many strong words – we know something is fishy... " honestly report that the PAP has lived up to its responsibilities.. We don't give ourselves our own report card,..I would say: 'We've passed the exam'."

Sorry PM, we disagree with you. PAP has failed miserably for not living up to your responsibility towards us. You have been giving good grades to your own report cards all along. Such an act is dishonest. We do NOT have confident in PAP since you have failed us time and again. We do NOT trust a party that operates without transparency and accountability.

As for the Lift Upgrading Programme – it is the result of short sightedness in past planning that failed to cater to the aging population. You are covering up for past mistake. We the citizens have to bear part of the cost and suffer years of dust, noise and inconveniences.

You have been claiming that we have the best education systems in the world for years. You still need to do more? So what you said in the past is untrue? If we have such great education system, why are you unable to find talent for your team? Why is our youth politically apathetical?

PAP will not have our mandate this coming election as you have failed in your responsibility towards us.

What is the point of taking care of our national reserves when folks are suffering? Besides, is it not more prudent to instruct Temasek and GIG to stop taking high risk and gamble away billions of pubic money?

Sunday, April 17, 2011


I refer to Lee Hwai Jiin letter to The Straits Times's Forum on 16 Apr 2011.

Ms Lee argued that NCMPs do not have voting right because they do not represent the electorate since they did not win the majority of votes in their ward during the election.

She has apparently missed the point Workers Party is trying to get across, which is to have opposition MP in parliament instead of NCMPs. PAP is trying to tell us that NCMP is a good alternative to opposition MP. It is not, and therefore flaw.

NCMP is an unfair system PAP introduced to entice those who are 'sitting on the fence' to vote for them, giving voters the wrong impression that NCMPs could represent them. Thus Workers Party is NOT asking for voting rights for NCMP which Ms Lee misinterpreted. Workers Party in fact wants PAP to abolish NCMP system.

Marina Bay Sands

It is disappointing that Marina Bay Sands is becoming an iconic representation of S'pore. The 1st time I heard of such sentiment was at a talk conducted at National Museum. The speaker (whose name I cannot recalled) is a local historical researcher. What he said hit a note in me. Yes, it is indeed sad that a casino becomes S'pore iconic structure.

In The Sunday Times (dd 17/4/11) Mr William Lim, a retired architect and urban theorist expressed the same sentiment. He would rather that Botanic Gardens be chosen as our iconic site.

The trouble is, our shortsighted govt has given a prime and prominent piece of land to build a casino on. It is the 1st thing one sees when approaching by sea. In fact, the Marina Bay Sands totally obstructed the beautiful scenic coastal view.

We are a SMALL city but we have 2 BIG casinos, one of which is becoming a iconic building. Which country or city in the world has a casino as iconic building ? Likely we are the only one. Uniquely S'pore indeed and nothing to be proud about.

PAP terrible decision not only ruined our coastal view but our country reputation as well ! S-i-g-h.....and they claimed to be 'A' team amongst the political parties in S'pore !


I refer to Jolly Wee's feedback in The Sunday Times on 17 Apr 11. Jolly said that netizens lack civility and has taken to ridiculing even the president.

Apparently Jolly has forgotten that MM Lee himself, our respectable 'great' leader is guilty of such folly. He has called our formal ex-president who enjoyed alcoholic drinks names (I shall not mentioned out of respect). He has also used rude names on opposition parties and even us ordinary citizens. Should not our respectable MM lead by example ?

Could Jolly ponder over why netizens are respectful towards our previous presidents like Mr Ong Teng Cheong and Mr Benjamin Sheara ? Why do they only ridicule the current president ?

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Another Senseless CPF Policy

Currently share delisted from SGX brought with CPF fund is still being reflected in the various CPF approved Investment Bank statement (such as OCBC, DBS, etc).

This is an unreasonable CPF policy. Investors have already suffered losses and still have to pay the thrice a year service charges to the bank till they could closed the investment a/c upon reaching 55.

This could be quite a substantial sum as when a share is delisted, it affects a number of investors.

Let us presume a 30 year old investor is affected by a delisted share, he has to continue to pay service charges to the bank 3 times a year for the next 25 years before he could closed his account upon reaching 55 ! This certainly
does not make sense.

The bank could not do anything as it is CPF policy. And likely they are happy for the current senseless policy to continue, since they can continue with the service charge for a counter which is permanently inactive due to the delisting.

Should not CPF Board review their current unreasonable policy ? Not surprising the answer is NO. What they suggestion is even more ridiculous. CPF asked you to buy back the share with cash and further more incur other charges such as CPF administration fee, transfer fee and also the bank charges.

This is what our 'productive and efficient' govt policy offers the public.