Random Discourse – Crime Prevention

2 comments

While it maybe true that violent crimes in Singapore such as robbery involving firearms or deaths, or exchange of gunfire in public is almost non-existent, it appears to me that the general low crime rate here has given Singapore citizens and residents a false sense of security. Just like a lack of exposure to germs and virii would result in a low resistance to disease in a person, the lack of exposure to crime has made many Singaporeans increasing complacent and lacking in crime awareness.

Three weeks ago while having coffee at Starbucks at Raffles City with an old friend, a lone teenager left his notebook and mobile phone and just walked off to the counter to get himself another cup of beverage. He was away for a good 10 minutes at least, and everything was left unattended. While I looked around, no one was actually making an effort to keep an eye on his items.

Anyone who has been at the recently renovated Starbucks at Raffles City would know that there is now a barrier that demarcates its premises from the main thoroughfare between the main exit of City Hall MRT Station and Raffles City itself. Technically a thief can inconspicuously walk up, grab the phone or even unplug the notebook and then walk away slowly. No one would have realised that anything was amiss until the owner return to the table to discover his items gone. By then the thief would be gone in any direction. This is not the first time I notice a lone person leaving items unattended and expecting it not to be stolen. When I was in Hangzhou two years ago, the waiters or a kind-hearted patron would have reminded me to take my items with me. Even if I just leave it on the seat beside me while I eat, the waiter would have taken a piece of cloth to cover my items so that they will not attract any attention.

When I mentioned this with another friend a week later during dinner, he pointed out that even senior citizens, those who has gone through more turbulent times, have also lost their crime awareness. He remember a flail old man, after withdrawing some money from an ATM, start counting his stack of $50 notes as he walked away. Is he not aware that someone could have just followed him until he’s some where deserted, then beat him up and take his money? When I was in Malaysia a decade ago, I got a scolding from my Malaysian friend for counting my ringgit notes in his car after I made the exchange at the money changer. His exact word was: “Are you stupid? Keep your money and count discreetly. If someone smashes my windscreen to rob you now, I’ll beat you up after that if we are still alive.”

To add on, I recalled a female blogger complaining online about being stalked and allegedly molested by a stranger on the way to her rented place in Aljunied about a year or so ago. This female blogger has been known to love wearing mini-skirts, and shorts that is not just in name but in fact. If someone is wondering whether I am now suggesting that ‘she deserved it because she dressed like a slut’, my answer is no. As far as I am concerned, when a female dresses to bring attention – regardless whether it is complimentary or unflattering – to herself, it also include undesirable attention from lechers, perverts and sexual predators. It becomes even worse when one is alone in a deserted and dark place where there is no one else to divide the attention.

These examples made me suspect that because so few of us have been victims of crime, we no longer have crime awareness. So I did a quick survey on Plurk to see whether we are that fortunate. Surprisingly, out of the 9 of my friends who responded, only 2 of them have never met with a crime of any sort. The other 7 have met with crime of some sort, from theft of personal items like mobile phones to getting stalked by strangers. One of them even has the most unpleasant experience of witnessing a taxi driver getting beaten up, knowing a friend who is a victim of a hit and run case, losing an expensive flip-up full face helmet and even a pair of stinking old army boots, and accessories getting stolen from his bicycle. In fact, when I was a teenager I was once accused of staring by some hooligans and end up getting accosted before they took the miserable $13 from my wallet as ‘punishment for my audacity’. That’s not mentioning that I had even lost a Siemens S40 Mobile phone while I took a nap! And among all places, that happened in the church bookstore!

Simply put, even when there is a low crime rate in Singapore, it doesn’t mean there is no crime. Above which, I recalled being told that generally crime rate in most cities is the same (around 3%). The reason we believed Singapore is safer is due to an exaggerated exposure of media reports of violent or gruesome crimes in other cities. While 10 people taking a quick survey don’t make convincing statistics, and those friends who responded to my survey may simply be some of the most unfortunate souls in the country, it is my considered opinion that everyone has the same potential of being a victim of crime – in specific crime resulting in some form or harm or loss of possession. There is no reason why we should increase that potential by bringing the attention of criminals upon ourselves. To put it in an analogy, when everyone has the same potential of being hit by lightning, the person who walks in the open or on the ceiling of a building is simply asking for it.

Don’t blame the police for ‘not doing their work’ or the government gahmen for not letting people arm themselves adequately against criminals when one is seemingly oblivious of crime and simply asking for it. Crime prevention is more important than one’s own ability to fight off criminals, or the ability of the police in apprehending them.

Truthful Reviews:
My Food Sirens II : Obolo

Commentary – The Baby Bonus Scheme Will Only Fail

9 comments

According to news reports, S$230 million in baby bonuses were handed out by the Singaporean government gahmen in 2008, yet there appears to be no corresponding rise in the number of Singaporean babies born. Singapore’s National Population Secretariat statistics revealed there were only 32,423 citizens born last year, just 129 more than in 2003, the year before the government extended the Baby Bonus Scheme to include the first and fourth child.

Many factors have been cited to explain the fall in fertility rate. Some of these factors include: the 2-child policy implemented in our nation’s early years, women being more educated and thus more career minded and not resign to being a mere housewife, materialism in our younger generation resulting in more “double income no kids” couples, and the rising cost of living. To be specific, the main component driving up the cost of living, is the cost of housing and foreigners are the main cause. That being the case, it is thus obvious that the Baby Bonus Scheme is doomed to fail from the beginning. Here’s why I think it is so.

According to the Department of Statistics site, Singapore’s population in 1995 is approximately 3.53 million. If I recalled correctly, that is year I bought a brand new HDB 4-room flat in Jurong West (to be delivered in 1997). A new 4-room flat then is about 98 ~ 102m2, and they go at between roughly $130,000 ~ $165,000 a piece depending on location. Currently I pay about $475 per month to service a 25-year loan at fixed interested rate of 2.6% p.a. (4-room flats built in the 80s can be as large as 130m2, if I am not wrong, and they are even cheaper!)

In 2009, population is approximately 4.99 million – an increase of 41.5% over 14 years. A brand new HDB 4-room flat (at a pathetic 91 ~ 96m2) now goes at $264,000 ~ $322,000 a piece. HDB prices has almost gone up a spectacular 100%. And if that isn’t bad enough, loan periods have now gone up to 30 years, and that amounts to a monthly loan of between $800 to $1,200 depending on the type of interest scheme. The monthly loan is almost 1.68 ~ 2.53 times that of mine, for a smaller flat and a longer term.

Here’s how HDB flat prices are derived. A new one is peg to the prices of private properties via some arcane formula hitherto unknown to the public, while that of resale flat is determined by the latest transaction of flats in the neighbourhood. So, when 95% of Singaporeans own a HDB it is then logical to see they have no part to play in the determining the prices of a new HDB flat. Yet, it would be absurd that 5% of Singaporeans who are private property owners could create so much demand that the price skyrocketed. Even if you think with a rat’s ass, the conclusion is that the culprit are foreigners is pretty obvious.

Now, as the cost of a new flat increases, the prices of resale flats will inevitably follow. No one would want to sell their flats at a loss unless they are forced to by certain circumstances – such as long term loss of job requiring a downgrade, divorce etc. Are Singaporeans to be blamed for the rising cost of resale HDB flats? Again very unlikely, since there are laws that curbs speculation requiring one to occupy a flat for at least 5 years. Furthermore, young couples typically do not have much savings to offer a large COV [Cash Over Valuation] for a resale flat, and Singaporeans are increasingly upset with the ever increasing COV. In other words, that supply of cash has to come somewhere else. Needless to say, the culprit are foreigners again. I recently received a small leaflet in my letterbox where a foreigner offered $50,000 ~ $80,000 depending on the size and renovation condition of the flat.

But why are there so many foreigners here? Well, to make up for the population replacement shortfall, the gahmen has a lax immigration policy. On top of which, to continue attracting foreign investments, Singapore opened its doors with its so-called ‘Foreign Fallen Talent’ policy (In layman terms, this policy is simply this: “Since we can’t swallow the entire pie, we will share this pie with others. If not the guy who is making the pie will take it elsewhere we won’t even have the pie at all”.) All of these are done in the name of ‘sustaining our economic growth’ . It doesn’t matter the influx of foreigners will thus put a strain on our infrastructure from housing to roads and public transport. The gahmen believe that we the citizens can manage on our own and if we can’t then we have either overreached ourselves or we are simply being lazy or just too stupid.

Simply put, the gahmen has failed to address the root of the problem. If one consider the Baby Bonus Scheme, the immigration and ‘Fallen Talent’ policies to be a rower in the same boat, it is as if the Baby Bonus Scheme is rolling the boat one way, and our immigration and ‘Fallen Talent’ policies is rolling it the other way. Is it a wonder why after wasting so much effort and spending several hundred million dollars, we had just merely 129 more new born citizens? The gahmen can throw even more money at this problem and it still won’t be solved.

Yet, the gahmen seemed oblivious to the fact that while housing prices ride the rocket, the pay increment for the Singaporean worker rides the snail. As a result of the triple whammy consisting of the 1998 Asian Currency Crisis, the SARS outbreak in 2003 and the ever increasing competition from China and neighbouring countries, our pay packages have stagnated if not actually reduced. In fact, if a graduate asked for a $2,600 starting pay several months ago, he is considered as being unrealistic. That’s not mentioning that some graduates start working in debt, with at least $20,000 of study loans, and not everyone has rich parents to help pay it off. To make matters worse, the Americans so-called War on Terror, and the seemingly unstoppable bull run of energy prices until 3Q 2008 (read: Crude Oil), further increased our burden in daily living. A lot of these aren’t really noticeable because a lot of statistical wizardry has been introduced to make inflation look lower than it really is. I do not really need to go into detail explaining the meaning of the ‘Consumer Price Index’, right?

With these pressuring us from all sides, few would actually contemplate getting married to start a family, much less having children! In fact, I already envisioned a very bleak future for many Gen-X and post Gen-X Singaporeans. Regardless whether we are going to be a single old kook living alone or a childless old couple 20 ~ 30 years from now, we might simply have to sell off our HDB and go live in an Old Folks Home. The money from the sale of our flat to will then be used to pay for services provided by the home. Hopefully we’ll all die (and not suffer some serious illness) before that money runs out!

It is my opinion that the high cost of living (in the form of high property prices) is simply in itself a invisible and natural economic regulator to our population increase. In fact, I won’t be surprised by statistics showing that fertility rate is inversely proportional to economic growth, and it plunges with an increased influx of foreigners. To fight against the natural population regulator with an artificial rate of increase can only worsen the situation – and that include giving Baby Bonus to single mothers and allowing them to own flats. To put it in an analogy, when the car’s brakes are engaged and yet the driver insist on stepping on the gas, there can be only one end result – the car will break down.

The gahmen must awaken to the fact that ‘sustained economic growth’ is an insane proposition. There will come a time when all of the planet’s resources (discovered or not) will be expended in a not so distant future, and there is only so much we can recycle. With that in mind, even so-called ‘sustainable economic growth’ is impossible. Face it, if we have resources that would last us another 50 years at our current consumption rate, any growth on top of that will only hasten the inevitable.

As such, the gahmen must acknowledge the new reality in which it can no longer justify good governance simply by constant economic growth. It would do better to conserve that money to look after its aging citizens properly and not treat them like mere workers and birth machines of Singapore, Inc. Of course, our present leaders lea-duhs can also can choose to delude themselves that a future of economic contraction will never happen, or it would be someone else’s problem after our life time.

If that is so, I simply hope I won’t be around to suffer the consequences.

Recommended Reads:
Global Voices – Singapore: More Cash ≠ More Babies

Movie – Monty Python’s Life of Brian

Leave a comment

Monty Python’s Life of Brian is an old comedy released in 1979. I was introduced to it by a friend when we were chatting over drinks in a pub after I quoted some lines from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, released in 1975.

I will not go into the details of it since it is an old movie. I had originally considered it a parody of the life of Jesus and somewhat felt the movie seems to make a mockery of Jesus’ ministry and life on earth. However, one could also read it as taking a swipe at the at the people who hear but never listen, and also those used their own agendas and beliefs to supercede Jesus’ teachings. All these was done through the ‘misadventures’ of Brian and it is very well depicted because from that the cast and the producers avoided insulting Jesus himself.

Anyway, no matter how I read the movie, I am not an extremist nor a fanatic so I watched it simply for laughs. It is a good movie to watch to lighten up, but be warned that the ending is rather anti-climatic. I have watched two Monty Python movies so far and in both of them I end up going ”duh?!’ at the end of them.

There’s a part which I watched three times and I laughed so hard till I got stitches. It is a conversation between four Jewish rebels: Stan, Francis, Reg (the leader) and Judith. Calling themselves the People’s Front of Judea, they were trying to define the agenda of their anti-Roman movement in the middle of a Roman Colosseum in Jerusalem, when the conversation took a surprised turn to the one below:

Reg: Furthermore, it is the birthright of every man

Stan: Or woman.

Reg: Why don’t you shut up about women?

Stan: Women have a perfect right to play a part in our movement.

Reg: Why are you always on about women, Stan?

Stan: I want to be one.

Reg: What?

Stan: I want to be a woman. From now on, I want you all to call me “Loretta”.

Reg: What?

Stan: It’s my right as a man.

Judith: Well, why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?

Stan: I want to have babies.

Reg: You want to have babies?!

Stan: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.

Reg: But you can’t have babies.

Stan: Don’t you oppress me.

Reg: I’m not oppressing you, Stan. You haven’t got a womb! Where is the fetus gonna gestate? You’re gonna keep it in a box?

Judith: Here, I’ve got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans but that he can have the right to have babies?

Francis: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors… for your right to have babies, brother! Sister, Sorry.

Reg: What’s the point?

Francis: What?

Reg: What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he can’t have babies?

Francis: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.

Reg: Symbolic of his struggle against reality.

Why did I find the conversation hilarious at all? Because it would also quite aptly describes the absurdity the argument of some pro-HBT (Homosexual, Bisexual and Transgendered) people and even the HBT’s fight for marriage or civil union. Especially the last remark made by Reg, the leader before the next scene: symbolic of the struggle against reality.

Indeed!! Now remember that the movie was released in 1979. Perhaps it would be indicative that the the generation before Gen-X (mine) maybe the last one with their head screwed on tight, and proper.

Commentary – A Former PR in China’s Parade

4 comments

1st October 2009 marks the 60th anniversary of the People’s Republic of China and it was celebrated with massive parade before Tian-anmen, Beijing. This 4-week old video on Youtube about patriotic Chinese girls of the post-80 generation training for the parade would have been nothing more than that, had it not featured a girl name Zhang Yuanyuan [张元元] who has lived 5 years in Singapore and also a former Permanent Resident (PR).

For some odd reasons this was reported today on the evening tabloid Shin Ming Daily [新明日报] and some of our Members of Parliament (MPs) were interviewed. I can’t for any reason fathom why it warranted that! If this was an attempt by Shin Ming’s editors to inspire national cohesion and patriotism, consider it an epic failure. There are better ways to do that without the need to focus our attention from our troubles on some hapless soul like Zhang, a citizen of China. It is not as if Li Jiawei or Gong Li, who are both Singapore Citizens, participated in the parade and made remarks on being patriotic to China. (Personally speaking, I believe if my grandfather is still alive today, this might have brought some tears to his eyes. After all, it is an unfulfilled dream for him to return to China.)

I believe some of my fellow citizens have something unflattering or unkind to say to (or about) her, but I must remind them that this girl has not said anything critical of our country while she expressed her patriotism to her motherland. Now contrast that with PRs like a Amit Nagpal and Sweta Agarwal, who expected us to treat them like kings and accord them the same rights as our fellow citizens! On top of which, they wanted the best of both worlds – the highly paid job Singapore can offer them and the safety of a foreign passport.

To be frank, Zhang Yuanyuan even deserved some respect when compared with the shameless duo above. There is no reason to be angry with someone who against all counsel, gave up a better and higher paid job here but return home in July last year. While it might have been Chinese propaganda, the article on Shin Ming went further to describe she gave up a S$4000 monthly job here for one that is paid several times less. This is what I would called having a backbone.

At the same time, I cannot say the same for certain foreign bloggers who are studying or working here. One of these bloggers has on several occasions openly remarked that Singapore is not her first choice place to be. Another was even better! She had expressed her loathing of her Indonesian passport (and thus her wish to be a Singapore Citizen) because of the difficulty to obtain a visa to travel elsewhere, and yet criticised our country’s police and judiciary system over the suicide of David Widjaja. Frankly, Singaporeans should be more concerned with such vipers in our brood, than with a former PR who had gone home to pursue her dreams and express her patriotism.

As a true blue Singaporean, born here and raised here (and speaks Singlish proudly), I do not forget I am also a descendant of immigrants from Southern China. As such, for those who leave behind the land of their birth and come to Singapore to participate in our nation building, I am proud to have you a fellow Singaporean. It is not easy to put behind a life you have known and seek out a new one. But for those who are no more than an economic parasite taking advantage of the good pay and employment opportunities Singapore offers, and at the same time believe we are inferior or that you are more talented, expect no hospitality from us when you attempt to lord over us.

You are free to leave anytime. Just don’t come back, ever.

Recommended Reads:
Erniesurn: Singapore is overcrowded
Chinesecraps: 排外

Commentary – Ris Low

5 comments

The one and only time I was told about a Miss Singapore who couldn’t speak proper English, it was by my Secondary 3 English teacher who was then giving us a scolding over the bad English composition we wrote. That was more than 20 years ago.

So, when the video called ‘[SG FAIL] Miss Singapore World 2009 – Ris Low (with subtitles)’ was sent to me via an email,I had originally thought it was a video making fun of her use of Singlish. However, whatever she said was nothing like Singlish and in the end I was quite put off with what I considered her lousy attempt in faking an accent. On top of that, I simply felt that either her comments and responses were shallow, or she simply isn’t an eloquent person. My first impression was that it will be disastrous if she represents Singapore in the Miss World Pageant in South Africa. On second thoughts, my view is that if this interview was done immediately after her win, it is not surprising that she is at a lost of words because of the euphoria she’s feeling at that time.

That was like at least a month ago, because I recalled chatting over this matter over drinks at Helipad with some friends. We unanimously agree that if anyone is to be faulted for Ris Low’s win, it should be the judges. During the chat, a friend pointed out that many of these Singapore girls participated in a pageant without any sponsorship – not until they have won anything! In other words, instead of criticising them, let us give some of these girls credit for their courage, not to mention that the winners mostly achieve their titles at their own expense and time.

I furthered joked that perhaps Singapore should have a ‘Foreign Beauty Talent’ scheme and ‘import’ beauties from Venezuela (a 5-time Miss Universe winning country) just like our female table tennis players who are ‘imported’ from China. I was then told (though I could not verify this) that the Venezuelan beauties are specially groomed for exactly the purpose of winning in beauty pageants. Either way, we laughed about people who asked for Ris Low to be replaced because we felt that beauty pageants are not competitions of eloquence or brains. That’s not mentioning, we aren’t invited as the judges of the Miss World Pageant to decide who is the fairest of them all.

Then came the news of her credit card fraud case. For a moment I suspected that this was a case of mistaken identity (since there was once the New Paper mistook a hit-and-run van driver as an ex-DPM). At some point, I even thought of it as some kind of government gahmen propaganda for the Yellow Ribbon Campaign, until Lee Bee Wah (MP, Ang Mo Kio GRC) said that she should not represent Singapore as a matter of honesty and integrity.

While Ris Low could have won herself some sympathy had she asked for Singaporeans to give her the same chance just like the judge who ruled leniently in her case, she responded that the probation sentence means it would not be a stain. That was not only media suicide, it was completely unwise. Many Singaporeans wasted no time to lambast her for being unrepentant. For Ris Low’s sake, the meaning of probation and acquittance is vastly different. Her claims of compensating her victim from her own pocket money would have made a stronger impact had she not attempted to brush it aside with her earlier comment.

To make matters worse, it was later exposed that she had not revealed her fraud case to ERM World, the organiser of the event. ERM World was given a rude awakening when it discovered this shocking fact on the newspapers. This contradicted her claims that ERM World has prior knowledge of the case and yet permitted her to participate in the pageant. It further reinforced the idea that she is dishonest and without integrity. Had all of the above not happened, it was almost as if there is an evil force that is deliberately setting her up for failure. That’s not mentioning, I had originally thought that if Ris Low was already as famous as Gillian Chung or Britney Spears, or as rich as Paris Hilton, the rest of the world wouldn’t have been so hard on her. In fact, they might even have worship her as an idol just like those tramps.

Just as I thought Singapore can breathe a sigh of relief over the news of her resignation as Miss Singapore World, I was shocked to be informed that someone in the Straits Stooge Times has actually named her photo ‘sg-stupid.jpg’. (The Stooge Times has since been taken down this picture, but I have made a screen capture here.)

To whoever who did this, this is not only just unprofessional, it is also utterly cowardly and completely unoriginal. A staff from CNN has done the same by naming some of George ‘Warmonger’ Bush’s photographs asshole.jpg and moron.jpg before.

Have a heart for the poor girl. While she really had handled it badly, give her credit for standing up to this onslaught from both the traditional and so-called ‘social media’ for almost a month. Whatever mistakes she has made and her bad handling of the matter is her own follies and if anyone would want to call her stupid, at least have the courage to do so in her face. Consider the fact on just almost 2 months this 19 year-old was on the top of the world after her win, and now she is humbled, if not humiliated. Consider how you would feel, if that has happened to you!

On top of that, the Stooge Times should apologise to Ris Low for this fiasco. There is no need to try and hide by taking the picture off the server. This is almost as bad as (if not worse than) the Helpdesk staff of SingNet asking a customer to ‘go to hell’ in an email, or the SBS Transit staff who ‘got stomped’ for sitting on the priority seat on a N-E Line MRT. While SingNet has mentioned that it reserved the right to sue that staff, and SBS Transit has disciplined the staff, I expect no less from the Stooge Times, a paper holding the mantle of our national daily.

However, the Stooge Times can really disappoint me no further ever since the way it handled the AWARE saga.

1 … 42 43 44 45 46 … 186