Blinkymummy

Let Platforms Compete, But Do Not Compromise on Standards of Products/Services

2015-10-08T15:17:00.002+08:00

AirBnB
Uber
RedMart
And the likes of them

SEPARATE THE PLATFORM FROM THE PRODUCTS/ SERVICES

When assessing the problem, i.e. of how these innovations disrupt existing businesses, it is important to separate the competing platform from the products/services they provide.

While we should allow a more efficient platform to compete directly with existing more capital-intensive and clumsy set-ups, the regulation of the quality/standard of the products/services provided by anyone should not change.

Whether it is the Government looking at how to regulate these new animals, or market players thinking about what to do with the new threats, they should only focus on competing at the platform level, and not try to cut corners or reduce protection offered to the consumers.

DO NOT RELAX REGULATION OF PRODUCTS/ SERVICES

Just because you are ordering from a more convenient platform such as Redmart, doesn't mean you are willing to compromise on the quality of foods and goods, right?

Doesn't mean AVA/CASE should bend over backwards and be more lax with Redmart if its goods/foods fall below acceptable (safety/quality) standards, right?

Similarly, for the cab industry, regardless whether Comfort buys or develops a UBER-like platform or becomes a supplier of cabs to UBER or UBER is allowed to continue its operations using private drivers, the protection of passengers should not be compromised.

Above and beyond the physical safety and security of passengers, the insurance protection of passengers needs to be compatible and commensurate with current minimum standards.

Consumers need to be educated about the differences in risk.

The difference between a licensed cab driver and the UBER driver is not just the training course and vocational licence of the former. It is the fact that the cab driver does this for a living and is accountable to his cab company, and so will be much less likely to be behave in a manner which threatens his livelihood.

For AirBnB, I don't see why the entry of a new platform means SINGOV has to review and relax its rules on disallowing short term rental of private homes.

If the rules on short term rental of private homes are relaxed, homeowners will be stuck with having to deal with strangers going in and out of their private estates on a daily basis.

And just in case anyone is under the delusion that the landlord has to be present when the AirBnB guests arrive, please note that in Japan, it is possible to check yourself into such apartments without having to interact with any human being.
This compromises safety and security for everyone else in the estate.

In addition, it is trite that the Management Committee has no real bite when it comes to enforcement of nuisance issues.
With AirBnB guests coming and going daily, the neighbours will not have real peace.

Even if there are legal means through which neighbours can take up issues with the owner of the AirBnB unit, this unit is likely to be owned by a foreigner, who is not in Singapore for you to 'community-mediate' with.

Further, once you start going down that slippery rabbit hole, you will probably end up with hourly rental in private homes near major prostitution/nightclub hubs.
This is not limited to traditional areas such as Geylang.

Think Mount Sophia / Tiong Bahru area.

Such flexibility will take on a life of its own and new hotspots will spring up.
Say around Marina Bay?

So, yes, while I absolutely appreciate the need for new platforms to wake up the idea of sleepy and mammoth products/service providers, I think policy-makers need to divorce the regulation of the platform from the regulation of the products/services.

Oh... and make damn sure 'em bastards pay taxes to us.

My Kid Says... No Rolling in Mud

2015-10-07T13:06:00.001+08:00

The kid was watching Shrek, when she saw Shrek rolling around in the mud.

Kid: Yhew! Mama! I don't want to roll in the mud.

Mama: OK.

Kid: I am not an ogre. I don't want to roll in the mud.

Mama: What if you were a piggy?

Kid: I am not a piggy! I am not an ogre. I don't want to roll in the mud.

Mama: Then what are you?

Kid: I am Singaporean!!

‪#‎Singaporeansdonotrollinmud‬

Closer to 50s, than 20s

2015-09-30T09:09:00.000+08:00

I stepped into a cab last evening.
The 50 year old uncle was blasting canto pop.
It was like we were on our way to Pub 1997.

First, it was Eason Chan, then someone else, then Sammi Cheng...
After the 3rd song, I realised that I knew the order of the songs.
So I asked the uncle what he was using for his music.

Then... I realised that this "uncle" and I used the same Spotify Canto Pop playlist.

Subsequently, a peer reminded me that my age was closer to this uncle than the kids I had been going to school with.

FML.

..........................................

Coincidentally, I had a group chat with my Mummies group over Whatsapp last night.
We had been trying to meet up in person, but haven't been able to do so.

We discussed, inter alia, motherhood, homemaker-hood, our relationships with our kid(s), the fact that we are moving into our 40s next year, what our 30s meant etc.

I am glad to have such friends, who are able to reflect on themselves and help me to reflect upon myself.

Inspiring and Helping Kids of Ex-Offenders

2015-09-29T10:42:00.002+08:00

RE: Less privileged children get driven around in luxury cars

"Underprivileged children and youth whose parents were or are in prison were taken for a spin in sports and luxury cars yesterday morning, as part of a community event organised by the Industrial and Services Co-operative Society (ISCOS), which helps ex-offenders and their families."
..................................

Can you think of more betterer arguments FOR such acts of charity?

1) When was the last time you did anything for charity?

2) Any act of charity is better than no act of charity. This shows that rich people care.

3) These rich guys are using their flashy cars to inspire these poor kids. "If you work very hard like Uncle has, you can drive your own fancy car too! It would be a sign of your personal success!"

4) By giving kids with ex-offender parents a ride in fancy cars, it will help to break the cycle of inter-generational offending. It also extends friendship and support to these ex offenders and their kids.

Uncle, your car is AWESOME!!
Smell that leather! Smells like wealth!
When I grow up, I wanna be just like YOU!!

Lame 'Law School' Arguments

2015-09-28T15:51:00.000+08:00

RE: Working mum to get $1 in maintenance

In a commentary on the appeals court's decision, two Singapore Management University law graduates have suggested that the award of $1 maintenance orders as the default position should be reviewed.

This should be considered "in an age when women are increasingly financially independent and spouses share familial responsibilities more equally", Ms Beatrice Yeo and Ms Fiona Chew wrote in a commentary published in Singapore Law Watch last week. "Arguably, the award of $1 maintenance simply to preserve the wife's future right to maintenance without further justification might also be said to be out of touch with the realities of today's more gender-equal era."
...............................................

The 2 kids from SMU Law, who wrote the commentary on SLW, are out of touch with the realities of today, and of adult life in general.

Kids with hubris, created by a system filled with kids with hubris.
A problem I observed in law school about law school.

Having been crowned 1st runner-up at some Oxford mooting competition, or getting an A for a law school module, doesn't mean one can analyse real life problems, not to mention understanding what 'public policy' really means.

While such an argument might get you an A or even A+ for being audacious in your assignment/mooting attempt, one must be reminded that it only makes sense in the artificial law school environment. And 'sense' only in the sense of pretentious law school arguments.

In 'reality', where men and women neither enjoy similar remunerations for doing the same job, career advancement prospects with the same qualifications/work efforts, nor share equal child-rearing/home-making expectations/workloads, nor are treated similarly as a single father/mother, it is callous and ignorant to suggest that the wife's future right to maintenance should not be preserved.

This is also partly why I think the law degree in Singapore should only be a post-graduate degree, i.e. the law school candidate should have learnt and been trained in something else apart from law. Such is the American, French etc system, demanding more maturity and breadth, and basically common sense from the law school candidate.

So, girls, go get yourself married, have a kid or two, try establishing a career while balancing a family, marriage/love and sanity, and later perhaps get a divorce or two, look around at real working women from a social class other than those from your privileged class, then re-visit this issue.

In the School of Life, there is no way that the A+ answer is to remove the wife's right to future maintenance.

Note: Removing a wife's right to future maintenance is very different from leaving her right intact, but ordering to pay her only $1 maintenance. Can't just remove all wives' right to maintenance because minority of women make more money than their husbands.

My Kid Says... Blinky 属猫

2015-09-25T09:18:00.001+08:00

Mama: 妈妈属什么?

Kid: Like me!!! 属龙! ROOOAARRR!!

Mama: 外公属什么?

Kid: Wow wow! 狗!

Mama: 对了。很好。

Kid: Blinky 呢? Blinky 属什么? Blinky 属猫吗?

Mama: 十二生肖没有猫啦。Hmmm... Blinky 是 1998年出世的。应该属虎。

Kid: *confused* Blinky 属猫啦! Tiger 属猫吗?还是属虎?

Mama: Erm... Tiger是1999年出世的。它属兔。

Kid: *even more confused and after a long pause* Blinky 属猫。它有whiskers.

‪#‎越教越乱‬

We Are Still... Victorian

2015-09-23T09:30:00.000+08:00

RE: Victorian women forced to give up their babies

"What was essential to Victorian England was that women stayed “pure”

(there was, unsurprisingly, no parallel narrative of a “fallen man”)

and what happened to the mothers who arrived with their babies at the Foundling hospital,

as played out across the art and literature and music of the century,

was to be a lesson to all the rest.

The “fault” was all female;

and for the women who fell,

the drop was very far indeed."

.................................

I was talking to one of the boys in class.

24 years old.
His education profile is outstanding.
RI + RJC + NUS Law.
An excellent product of our meritocratic education system.

But...

His assumption about Kervyn Lim's single motherhood was that she had a kid out of wedlock.
So, together with her modelling pics, that made her bimbotic and unworthy.

So yeah... He may be only 1 person, but certainly an important example of how we are still there...Victorian England...
Right this moment...
More than 100 years and billions of dollars spent on education later.

My Kid says... Littering

2015-09-23T09:29:00.000+08:00

On our way to ballet class, the kid spotted a discarded raisin box lying on the pedestrian pathway.

Kid: Mama, look! Somebody threw the raisin box on the floor. That's wrong.

Mama: Uh huh.

Kid: You must throw it in the dustbin. Cannot throw on the floor. Somebody will scold you.

Mama: Who will scold you?

Yeye: Your parents. Your parents will say,"Don't do that!"

Indoctrination #538 is complete.

The Social Scandal

2015-09-22T08:41:00.002+08:00

RE: The Glass Floor: Brighter, Poorer Youths Will Earn Less Money Than Rich, Unintelligent Kids, Report Finds

""It has long been recognised that there is a glass ceiling in British society that prevents children with potential progressing to the top. This research reveals there is a glass floor that inhibits social mobility as much as the glass ceiling.

"It’s a social scandal that all too often demography is still destiny in Britain. The government should make its core mission the levelling of the playing field so that every child in the country has an equal opportunity to go as far as their abilities can take them."

He added: "Employers also need to step up to the plate by ensuring that internships aren’t simply reserved for those with the right social contacts and that recruitment processes aren’t skewed to favour polish over potential.""
...................................

In this article, they call it the Social Scandal.

This phenomenon has been studied alot.
French intellectual Pierre Bourdieu's classic work "Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste" comes to mind.

This abject lack of social capital and cultural capital.
It hits poorer boys harder than it hits girls.

Girls can always become gold diggers.
There are always insecure rich men and their sons who would fall for 'em working class damsels in distress.

Boys could try to be gold diggers too, but the odds of success are much lower.

Then of course, the larger obstacle is that you see loads of people demonstrating cognitive dissonance, refusing to acknowledge or try to correct this horrible social fact.
Even when they are one of the poorer class, perpetuating their own predicament.

Giving it to the Masses

2015-09-21T10:00:00.001+08:00

RE: Trans fat ban could save 7,200 lives by 2020, says study

"Industrial trans fatty acids are added to some processed foods even though they damage health by increasing levels of LDL, or “bad” cholesterol, and reducing levels of HDL, or “good” cholesterol.

Research by academics at Lancaster, Liverpool and Oxford universities found that an outright ban on trans fats in the whole dietary chain would benefit heart health much more than simply improving food labelling or ending their use in restaurants and fast-food outlets, where they are often used in frying."
........................................

If we ban trans fats in SG, we would probably end up with weird-tasting yet more expensive hawker food, fast food, and no Breadtalk.

All of which, the masses cannot do without.

So let them carry on.
They don't care, we don't care.

My Kid says... Penis

2015-09-20T12:57:00.001+08:00

In a public toilet...
I was struggling to clean the toilet seat as thoroughly as I could, so that the kid could pee.

Mama: Don't touch anything. Hands behind your back. Don't move.

Kid: Mama? Only boys have penis?

Mama: Yes. =_='

Kid: Nooooo... Men also have penis. Only girls and women don't have penis.

Mama: Yes. That's right. =_='''

Kid: Mama?

Mama: Yes?

Kid: *almost shouting* SUPERMAN HAS PENIS, RIGHT?!! SUPERGIRL DOESN'T HAVE PENIS!

Mama: =_='''''''

Understanding the Conservative Core

2015-09-17T09:56:00.000+08:00

RE: Scientists Are Beginning to Figure Out Why Conservatives Are…Conservative
RE: Differences in Conservative and Liberal Brains

See... These studies are examples of good use which our science-based education ought to be put to, i.e. to understand ourselves better.

Though the studies were done on the American populace, one can easily spot the similarities with ours.

Our population is divided,
neither because of an election,
nor a couple of 'opportunistic opposition candidates',
BUT by nature.

And like race, it is involuntary.

Yet, in our very Singaporean way, do we pretend that race is not there?
No. We work with the differences, to ensure equity.

Similarly, good leaders would try to find a balance between the two starkly contrasting political camps, i.e. to include both camps in terms of developing national ideals and policies and instead of focusing on the Conservative majority.
...........................................

Key points of the articles, highlighting the nature of the people from the Conservative camp:

(1) Conservatives have a "negativity bias," meaning that they are physiologically more attuned to negative (threatening, disgusting) stimuli in their environments.

They want to spend more time looking at the negative.

Conservatives and liberals react similarly to positive incentives, but conservatives have greater sensitivity to negative stimuli.

(2) Conservatives are characterized by traits, such as a need for certainty and an intolerance of ambiguity.

They are more sensitive to fear, and feel stronger motivation to preserve purity and cleanliness.

Research consistently finds that conservatism is positively associated with heightened epistemic concerns for order, structure, closure, certainty, consistency, simplicity, and familiarity, as well as existential concerns such as perceptions of danger, sensitivity to threat, and death anxiety.

(3) Conservatism is focused on preventing negative outcomes, while liberalism is focused on advancing positive outcomes.

(4) Conservative statements require more complex social judgments marked by greater cognitive dissonance between self-interest and sense of fairness.

(5) Conservatives rely on quick, efficient, and "low effort" thought processes to yield conservative ideologies, while Liberals rely on effortful and deliberate reasoning to yield liberal ideologies.

(6) Liberals are more open-minded and creative, whereas conservatives are more orderly and better organized.

Meanwhile, when faced with a conflict, liberals are more likely than conservatives to alter their habitual response when cues indicate it is necessary, i.e. conservatives are less dexterous.

(7) Yet, conservatives tend to have a high degree of happiness and life satisfaction, because "successfully monitoring and attending negative features of the environment, as conservatives tend to do, may be just the sort of tractable task…that is more likely to lead to a fulfilling and happy life, than is a constant search for new experience after new experience."

A.W.E.S.O.M.E.!!!
I love science and the stone-faced answers it provides.

Democracy is not Dead, but Something Else Died.

2015-09-16T11:11:00.001+08:00

RE: Eleanor Wong: Liberal reflections on loss and acceptance in GE2015

This is a lovely piece of commentary. Concise. Read it.

Is Democracy Dead?

Many people I know are reeling from the bad taste of 'losing GE2015' to the 70% PAP majority.

With this outcome, they feel that something has died, i.e. there is no democracy in Singapore.

I disagree.

This IS democracy.

Democracy is where people choose their representation in Parliament. And we did.

What Died?

But if Democracy is not dead, then what's this bad taste in the mouth since last Saturday evening?

Firstly, too many people have lapped up flashy misconceptions of what democracy entails. Democracy can be most boring and uninspiring. And in Singapore, most people like that kind of tepid Democracy.

Secondly, if the bad dead taste in the mouth is in fact due to the fact that there is reduced (hope of) pluralism, transparency etc in Parliament, then this is not an indication of any lack of Democracy, but a sub-standard outcome of a Democratic process... and only in the eyes of certain segments of the populace (e.g. mostly in the 30%, but I wouldn't be surprised that even some of those who voted for the PAP can taste it too).

If a 'quality election outcome' was pluralism and demand for higher ideals such as equality and justice, this would only come about if the majority wanted it.

Why can't we have both, i.e. boring stability and invigorating higher ideals?

This attempt to achieve both is known as the phenomenon of 'the PAP moving left'.

Meanwhile, we are told repeatedly that those higher ideals come at a high price, which the opposition parties have no or poor grasp of.

And many of us believe in the legitimacy of those who tell this to us.

Mostly because the majority of us is too insecure, lazy, selfish and tired to figure things out for ourselves.

We don't wanna learn the difference between the Operating Account and the Sinking Fund.

We don't wanna learn about the precise definition of taxes paid and benefits received, yet we wanna hear the good news of getting SGD1.30 back for every SGD1 tax paid for the middle income group.

Just so hard, you know.
The nitty gritties are none of our business.
Our business is to avoid problems.

And so, 70% chose boring stability over higher ideals.

Who Died?

Question:
So, what happens when a significant minority (30%) wants these higher ideals, but does not get it?

Answer:
More and deeper unhappiness with the ruling Government, and also with the other 70% fellow Singaporeans.

Post GE2015, is there a role for Progressives/Liberals in Singapore?

People, like Eleanor Wong, who are more optimistic and constructive, would suggest how else we can reinforce Singapore and her other non-political institutions.
See her last paragraph as quoted below:

"We need to understand what GE2015 tells us. And then we need to be brave enough, Singaporeans, governed and governors together - to imagine a system, perhaps one quite different from any other in the world, that addresses what Singaporeans clearly want, but that also protects our democracy."

Others, seeing the unshakeable solid pro-PAP core, may well divorce themselves from the active citizenry participation process... mentally, emotionally and even physically.

Free to be a Mum - A First World Privilege

2015-09-15T11:05:00.000+08:00

RE: ‘There’s no stigma’: why so many Danish women are opting to become single mothers

The key points of this report:

(1) These Danish women only became single mums because their partners weren't ready.

Being a single mum is tough and is not the preferred default option for most.

But becoming a single mum is better than not being a mum at all.
At the personal level and also at the larger societal level.

Why remain childless simply because the men are not ready?
Men can take their time to sort themselves out.
But meanwhile, the women need to move on.

(2) Children of elective single mums perform slightly better in tests, than other children, i.e. from complete and broken families.

I love this observation. I hope everyone can see how significant and important this is.
It shows that being purposeful, when having children, leads to better parenting outcomes.

This is probably also positively correlated to the higher educational statuses of the single mums.

(3) No stigma about being single mums.

Not from the government, the community, the neighbour, the family.
Not even from the women themselves.

I am so jealous of the real first world.
People in the real first world can progress to exploring other issues and ways of life, instead of always festering in stigma, insecurities imposed by fellow peasants, while being manipulated and exploited by the powerful etc.

GE2015: 10% Swingers & the Anti-PAP Core

2015-09-13T18:23:00.004+08:00

In GE2011, PAP secured 60% of valid votes + lost 1 GRC + lost 2 ministers.

In GE2015, PAP secured 70% of valid votes + gained 1 SMC + lost 1 minister.

We saw a rising PAP tide situation. This +10% in PAP's favour.
So what's up with this +10%?

(A) THE 10% PAP SWING VOTERS

(i) WHO are the 10%?

There is a 'new citizen' theory going around online (See this person's calculations below.)

In gist, the author believes that there is a 14% increase in the total number of new citizens since GE2011.
Hence, the 10% of PAP swing voters are mainly new citizens.
...........................................................
Some Simple Mathematics
----
GE2011 -total vote cast 2,060,373
GE2015 -total vote cast 2,462,926
Net Increase = 402K
----
S'porean Babies born in 1994,1993,1992,1991-- average 50k per year ( official data)

S'porean deaths in last 4 yrs -- average 18,500 per year (official data up to 2013)

Assumption: Singaporeans renounced citizenship --1,500 per year
New S'porean Voters - (50k-18500-1500) × 4 yrs=120K
----
Conclusion: New Citizens: 402k-120k=282K
That is 14% increase
----
So no surprise we see a 10% swing
...........................................................

There are huge problems with this person's calculations.

Firstly, Tanjong Pagar GRC was not part of GE2011. That would account for a difference of around 120,000 voters.

Secondly, the total vote cast in GE2015 was not 2,462,926. It was 2,304,331. That would account for a difference of another 160,000 voters.

So, what is the impact of New Citizens in GE2015?

From official reports (NPTD), about 20k foreigners become new citizens every year for the past few years. Hence, in 4 years, the increase in new citizens should only be around 80k.

Of all the 80k new citizens in the past 4 years, only 60% are old enough to vote. Hence, they only make up 2-3% of all GE2015 voters, and cannot swing the votes that much, even if they are all PAP supporters.

As such, the 10% PAP Swing voters are unlikely to be a new citizens majority.

Those who make up the 10% are really mostly good old fellow Singaporeans.

(ii) WHY did they vote for the PAP?

Some people speculate the 10% swingers are older folks, who have benefited from the Pioneer Generation cards, or young middle income families, who are happy with the additional HDB rebates etc, or the rich who have made a lot from the rise in property prices in past few years.

Some have said that the situations in our neighbouring countries remind us that we need a strong and incorruptible leadership, and so PAP is the default answer.

Or that the haze, airspace squabbles, China's stalling economy etc are here. So, we are afraid. And when we are amidst the unknown, we seek familiarity, i.e. PAP.

There is really no point speculating.

The most direct way of finding out is for IPS to do its post-GE survey and analysis. With a specific focus on these 10% Swingers.

It will be useful to differentiate between the factors leading to a PAP vote which are within and outside of PAP's control.
That would help to assess how 'lucky' PAP has been in this GE, and whether such outcomes can be replicated again.

(B) THE ANTI-PAP CORE

The Anti-PAP core is an interesting phenomenon.
There are 3 groups of Anti-PAP people, making up this core.

(1) HARDCORE ~ As long as I get to vote, I will vote against PAP.

This is evident from the fact that, regardless of the calibre of the opposition candidates fielded, PAP is unable to convince a solid 20% of Singaporeans in every constituency.

(2) PREMIUM ~ If the Opposition contender is premium, I will vote against PAP.

(2a) In general, as long as the PAP faces off with a Premium Party, PAP loses at least another 15%.

This is most evident in GRCs where heavyweight ministers were up against premium opposition teams, e.g. WP or SDP.

E.g. Minister K Shanmugam only managed to secure 67% (less than PAP-average) of the votes when faced with the relatively inexperienced WP team in Nee Soon, whilst say Minister Lim Hng Kiang, who was up against a non-premium opposition party and so hardly said anything this GE, managed 78% in West Coast.

(2b) In addition, if that Premium Party fields their Premium Candidates, PAP loses another 5%.

We get this from analysing Nee Soon and East Coast GRCs as follows:

Nee Soon was led by Minister K Shanmugam in both GE2011 and GE2015. He faced off with a 'normal' WP team. In GE2015, PAP's score for Nee Soon improved by that +10% PAP swing, which has lifted PAP in general.

But this rising tide of +10% did not rise as much in East Coast GRC.

Because WP fielded a Premium WP team in GE2015 for East Coast, the PAP team was unable to benefit from the full 10% PAP swing. It only managed a +5%.

As such, we can somewhat estimate that, in a rising PAP tide situation, fielding Premium candidates generate a +5% advantage.

Perhaps in a receding PAP tide situation, fielding Premium candidates may generate more than +5%.

(3) GIVE UP ~ If the Opposition contender is lousy, I will spoil my vote.

There are the cute people who can neither bring themselves to support the PAP, nor a lousy team.

This seems to be another 2%.
.............................................

In sum, if PAP had to compete with credible premium opposition candidates in ALL constituencies, instead of only less than half, PAP's real mandate should only be a maximum of 2/3, and probably lower.

So, can we change the outcome of the next GE?

Apart from external factors which neither PAP, Opposition, nor Singaporeans have control over, here are 4 components which everyone can work on.

The PAP Core [60% to 70%]
The 10% Swing
The Premium Opposition Voters [10% to 15%]
The Hardcore Anti-PAP Voters [20%]

With the 'customer' segments outlined... What can be done about them?

Here are some wider questions to think about before we jump into improving each customer segment.

What makes a Premium Opposition Party?
What makes a Premium Opposition Party Premium Candidate?
Are these criteria the same for all parties?
What are voters' expectations of premium parties and candidates?

The supply of premium opposition candidates seems to be a huge obstacle, preventing the expansion of the Anti-PAP core.

If so, should there be a trade off between improving substantive premium of the opposition versus increasing the overall supply of premium candidates?

Which is more beneficial/efficient?

Is it more important to focus on grooming a WP/SDP or simply an Anti-PAP party?
Is it vote-share or seats in Parliament?

2/3 Clear Mandate, but still lost 1 Minister

2015-09-12T02:31:00.000+08:00

The clear mandate is really 2/3.

When challenged by the more credible SDP/WP, PAP gets a max 2/3 of the votes, regardless of calibre of the PAP candidates.

E.g. When challenged by WP, Minister Shanmugam only managed to perform the same as TPL (MacP), Vivian B (Holland-Bt Timah), Yaacob (Jalan Besar) etc.

PAP has improved since GE2011.
PAP wins more votes overall, but still lost 1 Minister.

Now to see if SDP will become NCMP (to add colour to Parliament) and who the next Transport Minister will be.

Holland-Bukit Timah: President's Scholars v 二叔 (2nd Uncle)

2015-09-08T10:37:00.001+08:00

(A) Why is Chee Soon Juan making such a comeback?

He did do some really crazy stuff back in the mid 90s.

I summarise his endearment to Singaporeans simply as follows:

"二叔返来啦！"

*To be read in Cantonese for effect*

CSJ is like that 二叔 (2nd Uncle) we all have in our extended family.

Smart, charming, worked very hard to get his PhD and his former lecturing position at NUS, always have something funny to say that tickles your funny bone.
Was the pride of the family until he got misguided and angsty, and did some crazy-ass shite things when he was younger, i.e. some 20 years ago.

Subsequently, whenever he turned up for family gatherings, he would say or do something inappropriate, offending especially the elders.

But deep down inside, he is endearing to you, because he is family. He is one of the folks.

And, being very smart, 二叔 knows that.

(B) Being Elite (& President's Scholars)

With the above, the pair of President Scholars' in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC is neither doing themselves, nor their GRC mates, nor the PAP any favours by acting the way they do.
If the recent attacking statements, regardless whether they are true, were part of some kind of election strategy, they are not working.

Firstly, most Singaporeans don't mind having members from the elite class as their leaders.
BUT the pre-condition is that the elites must have CLASS.
It is a social contract.
You can be richer/ more powerful than us, but you need to behave in a certain way for us to accept your higher social standing.

Secondly, Singaporeans can tell the difference between 'folksy' and 'folk'.
If you are in the elite class, it is a bad bad mistake to be 'folksy'.
Being 'folksy' is basically a deluded attempt to talk/behave like the folks, in hope that this would appear more convincing to the folks.
This does not work because it is condescending.

Thirdly, it just looks insincere and even psychotic to speak in perfect Mandarin, English whatever in one context, then break into Singlish in another.
Be consistent.
During this election period, Sim Ann has spoken in public on multiple occasions.
From the NUSS Dialogue, to the Nomination Day Debate on Channel 8, to her rallies.

During the NUSS Dialogue, she spoke in proper English and a 'concerned' tone.
During the Nomination Day Debate, she spoke in 演讲比赛 Mandarin, peppering every other sentence with idioms (成语), making everyone present, including the other President Scholar Chan Chun Sing, look like uneducated peasants. Even top PRC politicians, e.g. Xi Jinping, don't speak Mandarin like that in their public speeches.
During her rally (see below), she toned down her Mandarin and incorporated Singlish. No favours won in her favour. People are saying that she must have been drunk.

In fact, this is not the first time that Singaporeans have reacted badly to elites demonstrating the above 3 no-nos at one go.
Remember Kee Chiu?

Lastly, come 11 Sep 2015, PAP will again gain majority in Parliament.
PAP will once again be the top student.

So, all the more, do remember that the top student should not resort to what are seen as cheap tricks (出贱招). This is somewhat related to the first point of Class.

Nobody likes the top student, who is gonna ace the exam anyway, telling others that he didn't study for the exam, no need to study this and that for the exam, hiding library books / mugger notes etc.

But people are more likely to understand why the last kid in class needs to peep at others' answers, and may even willingly share their answers with him.
......................................

Sim Ann's '出 pattern' statement starts at around 1:25 in this vid.

Vivian B's 'back-stab mentors' statement starts at around 0:38 in this vid.

Believe Me! Everything is Awesome!!

2015-09-05T08:21:00.000+08:00

Certain election speeches, manifesto and supporters' justifications remind me of Everything is Awesome...
Especially the red bits of the lyrics.

"Everything Is Awesome!!!"
(feat. The Lonely Island)

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of a team
Everything is awesome when we're living our dream

Everything is better when we stick together
Side by side, you and I gonna win forever, let's party forever
We're the same, I'm like you, you're like me, we're all working in harmony

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of a team
Everything is awesome when we're living our dream

(Wooo)
3, 2, 1. Go

Have you heard the news, everyone's talking
Life is good 'cause everything's awesome
Lost my job, it's a new opportunity
More free time for my awesome community

I feel more awesome than an awesome possum
Dip my body in chocolate frostin'
Three years later, wash off the frostin'
Smellin' like a blossom, everything is awesome
Stepped in mud, got new brown shoes
It's awesome to win, and it's awesome to lose (it's awesome to lose)

Everything is better when we stick together
Side by side, you and I, gonna win forever, let's party forever
We're the same, I'm like you, you're like me, we're all working in harmony

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of a team
Everything is awesome when we're living our dream

Blue skies, bouncy springs
We just named two awesome things
A Nobel prize, a piece of string
You know what's awesome? EVERYTHING!

Dogs with fleas, allergies,
A book of Greek antiquities
Brand new pants, a very old vest
Awesome items are the best

Trees, frogs, clogs
They're awesome
Rocks, clocks, and socks
They're awesome
Figs, and jigs, and twigs
That's awesome
Everything you see, or think, or say
Is awesome

Everything is awesome
Everything is cool when you're part of a team
Everything is awesome when we're living our dream

Son of Coffeeshop Runner v Daughter of Coffeeshop Owner

2015-09-03T11:05:00.000+08:00

While I read Bernard Chen's life story, then realised that he was to be fielded in MacPherson and up against Tin Pei Ling, the stark contrast between the two candidates' backgrounds made me laugh and cry.

Their stories explain the theory of cumulative inequalities so well.

(A) We are all familiar with TPL.

Life has dealt TPL a good set of cards.

In a nutshell, TPL is the only daughter of coffee shop owners. Her arguably upper middle class family, with its concentrated resources, afforded her a stable environment to blossom in. She did well enough to move from Crescent Girls to Hwa Chong, then to NUS.

Later, because of the opportunities she has been blessed with, she met and secured her future husband, the director of the department in a government ministry during her internship. By then, he had already been PPS to Prime Minister Lee. Today, he is one of the top officers in the elite Administrative Service.

As such, in terms of household status, TPL is within the top few % in Singapore, even without taking her MP allowance into consideration. She exists amongst the elite.

In GE2011, TPL was fielded in Marine Parade GRC, even though voters couldn't tell why she should be fielded. PM Lee tried to speak up for her, saying that because she had helped out at her parents' coffee shop, that she knew poverty. O_o

Despite making a false declaration in her nomination form, she was not penalised, and was allowed to carry on with her GE2011 campaign.

Upon 'winning' GE2011, she quit her job to 'dedicate her time' to MacPherson.

However, as I have put forth earlier, a MP without a day job does not mean that the MP is spending all his/her time as MP.

He/she may be doing other stuff which are not uploaded to Facebook for your reading convenience and his/her political convenience.

E.g. TPL was pregnant for the past 10 months.
E.g. TPL completed a Masters from 2013 to 2015.

I am told that this Executive Masters programme admits executives with substantial years of experience (TPL only has 4 years of work experience at point of application), and costs around SGD185,000 (the price of a 3-room BTO HDB flat in a mature estate).

In summary, Lady Luck smiles upon TPL... alot.

(B) What about Bernard Chen?

Bernard, on the other hand, is the son of a coffee shop runner and a part-time cleaner.

Life has dealt him a lousy set of cards.
He is a Male Chinese Singaporean from a lower income family. And he ain't pretty.
In sum, he has very very limited options.

When you are not privileged, you cannot afford to make mistakes.

In a competitive society, such as Singapore, how does someone like Bernard navigate his way out of his social class?

Answer: You just have to work doubly or triply harder than anyone else.

Even then, sometimes you see fruits, sometimes you don't.

Though Bernard made it to junior college from his neighbourhood secondary school, he did badly for his A levels at Tampines Junior College.

So he went to Poly.

He then worked very hard and started to do well.

Bernard later gained entry into NUS Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, and majored in history. While he studied and graduated with honours, he also took on the role of President of the NUS History Society, and was the Leader of the Opposition in Singapore's Model Parliament in 2013.

He then obtained a Tan Kah Kee Foundation Scholarship to read a Masters in Global and Imperial History at St. Catherine's College, Oxford University. I've been told that this scholarship does not cover all the costs. So he's had to find other sources of funding.

Bernard is not just a geek.

Parallel to his studies, Bernard was the Legislative Assistant for Low Thia Khiang from 2010 to 2012, then Legislative Assistant for Muhamad Faisal bin Abdul Manap at Kaki Bukit (Aljunied) from 2012 till now.

Yes...

After all that, a good story would be that Bernard's luck has now changed.
That he now works in a MNC/bank, draws a great salary, and is able to provide for his parents and sister comfortably.

But the theory of cumulative inequality says, amongst others,

Social systems generate inequality, which is manifested over the life course through demographic and developmental processes.
Disadvantage increases exposure to risk, but advantage increases exposure to opportunity.

Bernard now works as a researcher with the Ang Chin Moh Foundation, studying the problems and sustainability of the funeral industry in Singapore.

While drafting this post, I got really frustrated with Bernard's life story.
I need a happy ending, dammit!

But does Bernard give up?

Apart from his day job and time spent in WP, Bernard also excels in National Service.
In his latest reservist stint at 742 SIR in early August this year, he was awarded the Commanding Officer's Coin for exceptional performance.

(C) Inequality Can Be Corrected

Some people have been impressed with TPL's work in MacPherson in the past few years. I shan't go into her 'achievements', and how valid they are.

But most importantly, lest we forget, TPL was given a chance BEFORE she had proven herself to the voters. She was given a chance because of her good fortune in life.

I think she has had her go at it, and that's mighty enough.

On the other hand, Bernard has proven that, even without the best of support/resources, he doesn't give up. I am sure he can connect with the folks (because he is 'em folk), set up a fund, look out for estate problems, attend all Parliament sessions, speak out for residents etc.

He just needs a chance.

And this inequality can be corrected. YOU can correct this.

In GE2015, give Bernard a chance, so that he can speak in Parliament on behalf of all those who have been dealt with bad cards, and are struggling to get out of it.


Name	Bernard Chen Jiaxi 陈家喜	Tin Pei Ling陈佩玲
Political Party	Workers' Party (WP)	People’s Action Party (PAP)
Contesting For	MacPherson SMC	MacPherson SMC
Ethnicity	Chinese	Chinese
Age	29	32
Marital Status	Single	Married since 2009. Husband is Ng How Yue, 45 Former Principal Private Secretary to Prime Minister of Singapore, Current Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Law
Occupation	Researcher	N.A.
Education	Pasir Ris Secondary School Tampines Junior College Temasek Polytechnic Diploma in Leisure and Resort Management National University of Singapore B.Soc.Sci(Hons), History University of Oxford Masters in Global and Imperial History	Crescent Girls’ School Hwa Chong Junior College National University of Singapore B.Soc.Sci, Psychology Booth Chicago School of Business Executive Masters of Business Administration
Family Background	Child of coffeeshop runner and part-time cleaner. Has a sister.	Only child of coffeeshop owners
Sob story	Refer to above.	During her university days, she had to take a semester off to manage the coffee shop as Father had taken ill.

The Difference between how the Privileged and Unprivileged Participate in Politics

2015-09-02T09:43:00.003+08:00

This is an 18-minute film about Chee Soon Juan's family, and not as much about him.

I teared as I watched his Taiwanese wife talk rather candidly about her life, especially the dream she recalled. 陪着走远路的梦.

I also like the part where the son brushed his mother's hair as the interview was going on. No one looked awkward. Just a fidgety kid listening in to his parents' conversation.

CSJ's political techniques aside, his choice of life partner is awesome.

How many highly-educated and beautiful Singaporean women can be such a devoted wife and mother under these very difficult circumstances?

An example I can think of is Mrs Lina Chiam, who is carrying on her husband's political work. To be technically accurate, Mrs Chiam was... Malaysian, i.e. not born and bred in Singapore either. So yeah... still no Singaporean example.

Meanwhile, you have TPL taking every opportunity to remind everyone that:

(1) I just gave birth LEH LEH LEH!!

(2) I gave up my job to be "full time MP" LEH LEH LEH!

(But I did spend the past 2 years reading a masters degree and the past 10 months being pregnant la.)

(3) I support single mums and their children LEH LEH LEH!!

(But I only said this AFTER PAP Minister-in-charge of this issue, Tan Chuan Jin, made a statement stating that he was sympathetic towards single mums and their kids' plight.)

On the issue of single mums, Kervyn Lim has revealed that she is a single mum.

Finally! A real single mum championing for single mums, and not some privileged tai tai exploiting the single mum and kids issue for political posturing.

The Next Transport Minister - Use it Strategically

2015-08-31T10:56:00.004+08:00

With WP and the opposition parties gaining momentum, PAP could put forth a deal with Singaporean voters:

"In GE2015,

if you give PAP all seats in Parliament,
except for Aljunied GRC,

Low Thia Kiang will be appointed as
the Minister of Transport in the post-GE2015 Cabinet."

The fact remains that the Transport portfolio is one of the harder ones.
We must be reminded that the Transport portfolio is bigger than just train issues.
Regardless, the public/personal transport issues have the most direct impact on voters.

There are bound to be more breakdowns because (i) the East-West MRT lines are 30 years old, and (ii) there are more and more train lines added to our public transport system.

So, put the opposition camp to the real test. Don't just quarrel at the town council level.

Depending on how voters view ideal roles for opposition candidates (e.g. voters only want opposition as opposition MP voices in Parliament and never to be given power in Cabinet), PAP may just win back all the seats with this strategy.

And even if the votes do not work out, then there is always the option of making Josephine Teo the next Minister of Transport in a low-back black dress, like the one she wore to and was crying so much in especially when the cameras panned to her, at the most sombre event of the year and probably in the last 50 years, i.e. the LKY funeral procession.

The above strategy would be a Win-Win for all, wouldn't it?

Everyone is covered up to the neck in this photograph,
except for Josephine Teo.

Who, with a modicum of sense of propriety, wears a LOW BACK DRESS to a funeral,
not to mention a STATE FUNERAL?

This is neither a Dinner & Dance, nor some Tatler event.

Show some respect for the event, and restraint on the need for attention, please.

St Nicks 学妹s in Politics

2015-08-29T12:21:00.000+08:00

Amidst the ongoing election fever, I got very excited about 2 people.

(A) Sun Xue Ling 孙雪玲

(B) He Ting Ru 何廷儒

This is because they are both my 学妹s from St Nicks.

Finally, politicians from my alma mater. It's about time.

加油！
Show them how to do it without being kayu or fake.

Make us proud. Make 校长 proud!

#iduncarewhichparty #SNGSftw

A MP without a day job... and the MP's job.

2015-08-28T10:49:00.000+08:00

RE: Don’t be seduced by notion politicians can work without incentives: Vivian

(A) A MP Without a Day Job

I have noticed this unhealthy assumption going around, even amidst highly-educated (supposedly-thinking) Singaporeans, that a MP without a day job automatically means that the MP is treating his/her MP duties as 'full-time'.

This assumption is just plain wrong.

A MP without a day job is NOT a full-time MP.

A MP without a day job is simply... a MP without a day job.

One should not jump to the conclusion that this MP, without a day job, would be spending all his/her waking hours in his/her ward.

The MP without a day job could be spending time on other things like completing a 2-year masters, having kids, taking care of kids, involved in his/her hobbies, whatever he/she chooses to do etc, but just not reported on Facebook for your reading and her political convenience.

One also should not conclude that the MP is spending a lot of time in his/her ward just because he/she uploads a lot of photos on his/her Facebook account.

Have you wondered why some MPs have so many pictures of them at work in the ward?
Many of such photos are posed for. Selfies, taken by 3rd parties etc.
And if the pics are taken by 3rd parties, it means time and effort need to be spent on arranging for whoever to take the pic, then send it to the MP for uploading etc.
Yes, it is easy to take pics and upload onto Facebook these days, but so many pics?!

If a MP truly works his/her ward daily, there is no need to take and upload photos 'all the time' as proof of work, right?

(B) Part-Time MPs & What is the MP's Job?

The other type of MP >>> those with a day job.

Some people complain that this means they are merely part-time MPs. That they do not serve the residents fully. So they do not deserve the full MP allowance of SGD16k per month.

See... To begin with... What is 'serve'?
We have not even begun to settle on the core duties of MPs.

(i) Some say MPs are estate managers.
But they don't really manage the estates, right? Town council does that.

When MPs announce $XXXmil plan for upgrading/improving this and that, they are not really the ones who came up with the plan. Neither are the MPs gonna find money to finance the project, nor carry out the project. The stat boards do that.

(ii) Other say MPs are law-makers.
But really, many many rules and regulations are not made in Parliament.

Even for those which are tabled in Parliament, we very seldom see or hear disagreements from the majority. That's not really law-making, but more law-endorsing.

(iii) MPs as help-givers
At the meet the people sessions (MPS), which are held once a week, residents ask the MP for help. Help for financial problems, help for getting into trouble with the law/government, help to appeal to the government for something.

Sometimes, the help is direct. E.g. vouchers are given.
Other times, help is indirect or can be impotent. E.g. MP writes a letter to a government agency to appeal for something. Not all MPs' letters carry significant weight.

In general, I would say that the MP gets more out of the MPS, than the residents do, i.e. not all residents' requests for help are met, but the MP certainly gains insight on problems faced by residents.

The issue here is how much time and energy should a MP devote to MPS?

I have seen some MPs announcing on Facebook that their MPS last night was held past mid-night. I think such comments are self-gratifying.

If the demand for MPS is high, it is the MP's job to hold more sessions, and not squeeze everyone into 1 session per week, making people wait past midnight, then showing it off on Facebook.

(iv) A taken-for-granted definition is that MPs represent residents in Parliament and whatever.

This is different from the law-maker point.
The law-maker definition of MPs does NOT require MPs to put forth representative views in Parliament when 'making law'.

If MPs are meant to represent us in Parliament, the logical outcome is that MPs would conduct town hall meetings (or some kind of gathering of views from residents) before EACH Parliament session, to formally gather views from residents on the issues / proposed laws tabled, then present them in Parliament.

If not, when voters give the MP a mandate, it becomes a mandate where the MP can say what he wants or what he thinks voters want, and not what the voters really want, in Parliament.

If representation is the definition of MPs, then MPs would be required to spend a lot of time and energy on ward matters. It would likely require them to either hold day job which they have full control over, or have no day job at all.

But since the current definition of a MP's core duties is so loose, then there is no need for MPs to be full-time at all.

Lee Pei Fen for MP

2015-08-27T11:05:00.001+08:00

Apart from Wang Lei, Low Ling Ling etc, Lee Pei Fen is a familiar Gen Y face in the Getai circuit.

She can speak Mandarin, Hokkien and other dialects fluently. Of course, she can speak English too. She has tertiary education.

She is a Gen Y pursuing her passion through her own ability.

Her singing voice is awesome.
Her compere skills are outstanding.
She is a ball of energy.

Most significantly, she has been leveraged upon by both the government (see Pioneer Card vid etc) and civil society to channel important (policy) issues to the folks.

She is likeable. Her sphere of influence is significant. She gets the folks' attention. She gets the message across to them.

Contrast this to politicians who try to be 'folksy' with the folks.
Who cannot speak or sing in dialect/Mandarin properly, but die-die must put on an act of effort, especially during major events and election periods.
Or pretend to be 'chummy' with residents. Hugging and posing for photos so as to upload onto Facebook.

Why so 勉强?
Just get Lee Pei Fen to run for MP.

Why choose 'folksy' over real folks?

Is it that hard to stomach a getai singer being in Parliament?

Her full-time job is already connecting with the folks.

But yes, we will find it hard to stomach, because we are silly unthinking snobs.

挪威的森林

2015-08-25T13:36:00.001+08:00

Come... It is only Tuesday...
Let my favourite Taiwanese old Beng slow-rock us through the day...

妳說真心總是可以從頭　
真愛總是可以長久　
為何妳的眼神還有孤獨時的落寞
是否我只是妳一種寄託　
填滿妳感情的缺口　
心中那片森林何時能讓我停留