“不要当我是白痴！！” [Don’t take me for an idiot!!] – This was the comment my friend made on MSN when I showed him the letter from the HDB about the ‘massive subsidies and losses’ the HDB incurred.
The comment made me realized that I am not angry with the Tali-PAP for failing Singapore and Singaporeans – because no one could say that in all honesty – but I am angry they have taken us for idiots over a number of things. For e.g.
- Mini$terial Pay – You need high pay to attract top talents and to prevent corruption.
What is really laughable is that it is telling us, that until you pay me this amount of money, don’t expect any integrity from me. And by what measure are they talents? Have any of these Singaporean ‘Top Talents’ face the baptism of fire from foreign ones?
When Ng Eng
HenEng tells us he earns more as a surgeon, can he say that there won’t be foreigners out there who can do his job for cheaper and better? - HDB Subsidies – It is not right to say we make a profit because you must consider the cost of the land and based on that we have made a loss and indeed, we are ‘really’ subsidising you.
Why can’t they just honestly admit, they did make a profit when anyone with a properly developed brain could figure out that the losses are simply just a paper loss and not a real one because the land still belongs to the gover-min?
The HDB could have come up with a better excuse – and even tell a few white lies – to justify those profits and the people will still be happy. In other words, 如果你骗得了我是你本事。 [Ｉf you can bluff me, then you are too good for me.]
- 7% GST – We are raising GST so that we can close the rich-poor gap and help the poor with the extra collected tax.
But, do you not know that while 2% for $500 and 2% for $5000 make a difference in value, not every $500 means the same thing to different people?
Someone in my office said this, “This is rubbish. A person earning $2000 and spent every cent will not have a heavier burden but what does that mean to a person who earns $20,000 and only spend $5000 every month? He wouldn’t even feel a pinch!!” * sigh *
What is even sadder is when the gover-min has taken us for idiots, even the public transport operators are doing the same. For e.g.
- Packed MRT Trains – Look, you guys don’t know that in Tokyo, New York and London, theirs were even worse!
But hey, what about the train frequency of those subways there? Do commuters also stand all the way even when they consciously try to avoid the rush hours by going back late? And just how many years old are their subway, man?!
- Public transport subsidies – We cannot increase subsidies for senior citizens and extend them to poly students because that would increase the burden of other full fare paying passengers because this is a cross-subsidy system.
Oh really? Then why not remove ALL subsidies – not for senior citizens – but for the JC students? I certainly could use fewer fare hikes!!
Sad isn’t it? And because we continually accept these shits without pointing them out for what they are, even some expatriates take us for idiots!
The arguments of some of these expatriates complaining about the intended gover-min cut of their subsidies says a lot. Just look at some of their lame arguments so far:
- Sacrifices – We left the land of our birth to come build your nation.
Really? Why Singapore and not Congo or any other place with medium to intense political turmoil? If Singapore hasn’t got more to offer than home, will they really consider us? And what about the sacrifices Singaporeans had to make simply for being Singaporeans? And what sacrifices are these expatriates really making compared to the poor Bengladeshi workers or Filipinas who left their families at home?
- Cost – We are already paying a lot more than you guys do simply for not being a citizen – kids’ education, housing and taxes.
But hey, they probably earn the equivalent in Singapore dollars what they would have earn back home. In other words, if they are earning €10,000 in Europe, it would be at least S$20,000 here. And that’s probably not including housing allowances which maybe another S$2,000 more.
Thus, even paying market rate for housing, they are actually enjoying a higher living standard dollar for dollar. And even if they are paying more taxes for their income, Singapore has one of the lowest income tax rates in the world.
And I really wonder would they be better off staying home, or better off here?
- We’ll go elswhere – One of the chow ang-moh bitch who wrote to the papers left us this parting shot.
Frankly, Singapore didn’t come all the way from 1965 until today relying on foreign talents. If the bitch think Singapore would sink if they go, they are always free to go. In fact, the very narrow-mindedness they are displaying says a lot about just how talented they are. It would be of no great loss to us if they leave Singapore. Singapore can do better with talented and yet broad-minded individuals. It also tells us that all that claims about costs and sacrifices are empty, because what they are really looking out for is just another better deal.
In other words, they would leave Singapore once another location offers a better deal, even if Singapore does not implement a ‘Singaporean First’ policy. And the fact is, no one is not welcoming foreigners to work here nor are they asking to take all the subsidies away. That would be rude and unbecoming. The Singaporean gover-min is only giving a bit more recognition to its people than to their guests. And I am quite sure I will treat my nephew better than I would treat your kid, because my nephew is family, and it doesn’t at all mean I don’t welcome your kid at all!
And isn’t it sad everyone takes us for idiots? It is even sadder that none of us knows how to put it across to them, even in a nice way:
Stop your bullshit!! Enough is enough, already!!
But just a voice is not yet enough because the Tali-PAP claims they are giving us a voice through feedback channels, and well, fake MPs called NMPs. What is really important would be to have more opposition in Parliament to check the Tali-PAP.
Anyway, my friend pointed out that even if the HDB said it paid ‘market value’ for the land, it remains questionable how the value of the land is derived. Take for e.g. Seng kang, when there was no development originally and the land might as well have worth… ZERO.
One good way to have a opposition to represent our voice in Parliament. I am one of the 33.4%