The times when Shi Huangdi was born was the end of the period of the Warring States in Chinese history. It was the times that wars broke out quite often. His father was named Zichu—the grandson of the emperor Chin Shaodi and also the son of the prince Chin’an’guo. Zichu was sent to the country Zhao as a hostage. At that time, a businessman called Lubuwei saw the special situation of Zichu, so he helped him a lot to make him back to his native country. Lubuwei also provided Zichu with a beauty called Zhaoji to be his wife. Before long she got a son, it is the right person called Yingzheng-the emperor Shi Huangdi.

When Zichu got back to the country Chin, he became the emperor of Chin. He was called the emperor Zhuang Xiangdi and he made Yingzheng to be the prince. The emperor Chinzhuangxiang died in 247 BC and Yingzheng became the emperor who was only 13 years old at that time. In 238 BC he held a coronation and after that time he became the real emperor who could control the whole country. He defeated the army which wanted to overset him and sent his mother into prison. The next year he made the Premier Lubuwei to be a civilian. With the help of Lisi, Weiliao, Wangjian, Mengtian and so on, he chose the right time to attack other countries. The war lasted 10 years from 230-221BC. He annihilated the countries–Han, Zhao, Yan, Wei, Chu and Qi and brought the Warring States which lasted about 100 years to an end. He made himself to be the emperor of the first fuedalism country made up of several peoples in Chinese history.

After he made all parts of China to be a whole country, he called himself “Shi Huangdi”. To make his power more stronger, he made a lot of policies, including consolidating characters, coin and metrology, putting the rule of province and country into use, dividing the whole country into 36 provinces, making country under the control of province and so on. He created several important officials who were under the control of the emperor. All the officials was chosen by the emperor. It was Shi Huangdi who was in charge of the power of the army and politics. From then on during about 2000 years, the results of innovation made a great effect of the feudalism system of China.

2)The First Emperor’s Treatment of his People:
The First Emperor trusted his own judgment, never consulting others, and hence his errors went uncorrected. The Second Emperor carried on in the same manner, never reforming, compounding his misfortune through violence and cruelty. . .

At that time the world was not without men of deep insight and an understanding of change. The reason they did not dare exert their loyalty and correct the errors of the ruler was that Qin’s customs forbade the mentioning of inauspicious matters. Before their words of loyal advice were even out of their mouths, they would have been condemned to execution. This insured that the men of the empire would incline their ears to listen, stand in an attitude of solemn attention, but clamp their mouths shut and never speak out. Therefore when the three rulers strayed from the Way, the loyal ministers did not dare remonstrate, and the men of wisdom did not dare offer counsel. The empire was already in rebellion, but the ruler was never informed of the villainy—how pitiful!. . .

1)About Shihuangdi
The emperor Shi Huangdi(259-210BC), whose family name is Ying and first name is Zheng, is one of the most famous kings in Chinese history. He is also the emperor who created the first feudalism country made up of several peoples.

The times when Shi Huangdi was born was the end of the period of the Warring States in Chinese history. It was the times that wars broke out quite often. His father was named Zichu—the grandson of the emperor Chin Shaodi and also the son of the prince Chin’an’guo. Zichu was sent to the country Zhao as a hostage. At that time, a businessman called Lubuwei saw the special situation of Zichu, so he helped him a lot to make him back to his native country. Lubuwei also provided Zichu with a beauty called Zhaoji to be his wife. Before long she got a son, it is the right person called Yingzheng-the emperor Shi Huangdi.

When Zichu got back to the country Chin, he became the emperor of Chin. He was called the emperor Zhuang Xiangdi and he made Yingzheng to be the prince. The emperor Chinzhuangxiang died in 247 BC and Yingzheng became the emperor who was only 13 years old at that time. In 238 BC he held a coronation and after that time he became the real emperor who could control the whole country. He defeated the army which wanted to overset him and sent his mother into prison. The next year he made the Premier Lubuwei to be a civilian. With the help of Lisi, Weiliao, Wangjian, Mengtian and so on, he chose the right time to attack other countries. The war lasted 10 years from 230-221BC. He annihilated the countries–Han, Zhao, Yan, Wei, Chu and Qi and brought the Warring States which lasted about 100 years to an end. He made himself to be the emperor of the first fuedalism country made up of several peoples in Chinese history.

After he made all parts of China to be a whole country, he called himself “Shi Huangdi”. To make his power more stronger, he made a lot of policies, including consolidating characters, coin and metrology, putting the rule of province and country into use, dividing the whole country into 36 provinces, making country under the control of province and so on. He created several important officials who were under the control of the emperor. All the officials was chosen by the emperor. It was Shi Huangdi who was in charge of the power of the army and politics. From then on during about 2000 years, the results of innovation made a great effect of the feudalism system of China.

2)The First Emperor’s Treatment of his People:
The First Emperor trusted his own judgment, never consulting others, and hence his errors went uncorrected. The Second Emperor carried on in the same manner, never reforming, compounding his misfortune through violence and cruelty. . .

At that time the world was not without men of deep insight and an understanding of change. The reason they did not dare exert their loyalty and correct the errors of the ruler was that Qin’s customs forbade the mentioning of inauspicious matters. Before their words of loyal advice were even out of their mouths, they would have been condemned to execution. This insured that the men of the empire would incline their ears to listen, stand in an attitude of solemn attention, but clamp their mouths shut and never speak out. Therefore when the three rulers strayed from the Way, the loyal ministers did not dare remonstrate, and the men of wisdom did not dare offer counsel. The empire was already in rebellion, but the ruler was never informed of the villainy—how pitiful!. . .

But ideally is still the Khang Thow Jee.

2. Stop all upgrading and construction projects and use the intended money to provide subsidies for lower income group people
Tons of subsidies are already there for lower income group. Are you one of them? If yes, please inform me and I can see what I can help.

3. Reduce GST to 5% to stimulate consumer spending.
The reason for being 5% is because I felt anything below 5% would be too much, which may spark further taxes in other forms. Another reason being 5% is easier to calculate.
Why shifting of GST is unwelcome – because businesses and GST registered personnels have alot of additional costs to incur by shifting the GST benchmark

4. Close the income disparity gap. I think the rich are too rich, the poor too poor.
Why so? How?

5. Remove ERP – it’s a stupid invention by some stupid outdated old fashioned people
Not possible, it already have sunk cost. ERP actually WORKS because so many pple are complaining, if pple are not complaining, than it should be worrying!

Once you build a structure atop a foundation, you cannot remove the groundwork.

I don’t know exactly too. I search around and this may be helpful:
http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2008/revenue_expenditure/toc.html

Some interesting facts (see revenue document):
- In FY 2007, income tax (corporate+personal+stat board) made up about 25% of the total revenue.
- Personal income tax actually only contributed to about 9% of the total.
- GST accounts for about 10% of the total.

So the lower income group probably contribute less than 19% of the total revenue. For those who don’t even pay tax, it’s probably less than 10% of the total, i.e. GST only. It might be even much less since they spend less. People who earn more pay more in terms of amount and percentage, and also other types of taxes.

Asking everyone to pay more taxes to fund more social welfare is like pushing for more donations during charity drives. Although it is for a good cause, it gets increasingly harder.

Personally, I think we have to go beyond the goal of increasing the amount of expenditure for social welfare policies by refining these policies to stretch each dollar. This is probably one of the purpose of discussion forums like this.

I don’t know exactly too. I search around and this may resolve all our guesses:
http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2008/revenue_expenditure/toc.html

1) The estimated expenditure for FY 2008 and revised expenditure for FY 2007 is shown in the “Expenditure Estimates” document on page 12. It probably doesn’t show how much goes to people in each tax bracket (and it’s probably impossible to do so)

2) In FY 2007, the revenue document shows that income tax (corporate+personal+stat board) made up about 25% of the total revenue. Personal income tax actually only contributed to about 9% of the total. GST accounts for about 10% of the total.

So the lower income group probably contribute 19% or less of the total revenue, and 10% (i.e. GST) if they don’t pay income tax. They spend less than people in the higher tax bracket, so their contribution to the total revenue is probably even lower. People who earns and spend more pay even more types of taxes.

Asking everyone to pay more taxes to fund more social welfare specifically for this group is a slippery slope. It’s like pushing for more donations during charity drives. Although it is for a good cause, it gets increasingly harder.

Personally, I think we have to go beyond the goal of increasing the amount of expenditure for social welfare policies by refining these policies to stretch each dollar. That’s probably the main purpose of discussion forums like this.

(a) Given that exports account for about 200% of our GDP [1], I believe domestic stimulus is not going be as effective as China (where exports accounts for only about 40%) or the USA

(b) Should we continue to spend or not? My advice is: be prudent but not pessimistic. Continue to spend, but WITHIN your limits.

(c) I think domestic spending helps the local economy somehow, but I don’t really know if it’s significant enough to stimulate growth. But this might be the only thing we can do since we can’t control the global economy. (If SM Goh was trying to mean the same thing, then I think his communication wasn’t clear enough.)

(d) I think the intention to help the lower income group tide over the economy crisis is a good one. Lowering GST across the board is one way. Alternatively, we can provide more food vouchers or subsidies specifically to the lower income group. The former is simpler to implement but does not target only the lower income group. The latter is more complicated but less wasteful (for the the goal of social welfare, not stimulate economy)

(e) Personally, rather than reducing taxes across the broad, I prefer reducing taxes for businesses, especially businesses that exports goods and services. Ultimately, exports account for about 200% of our GDP. And I believe this is more effective at keeping jobs for most of us. We can even take this opportunity to reduce taxes for new businesses to start growing the domestic sector. Again, without detail statistics, I can’t possibly even make any calculated guess.

(f) Nobody likes taxes, but ultimately it is taxes that fund most if not all of the social welfare. Once personal taxes is reduced significantly, it is very difficult to raise it again. People who are contributing most to tax benefit least from it.

[1] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2798.htm (exports= $313 bil, GDP=$168bil)

I prefer to withhold judgment on this matter. If this is an appropriate measure, after considering all factors, then the decision maker may accept it . My task is to get views on whether it really helps.

Some people said that if GST is reduced, the retailers will up their prices to make up the difference. Some may do, but their business will drop. The customers will buy from other retailers. There is still a competitive market out there.

I have considered the other factors for boosting the economy. It seems that reducing GST is a more effective tool.

Malaysia had reduced their employee CPF contribution. I personally like this idea. If I had to take a pay cut, at least I can bring home a little bit more cash.

It would be great if some of you. Perhaps CEO, landser and some of the other seniors can come and join us for dinner to discuss this matter further.

If we sit down in one table. Many things can happen based on past history. If we dont. All this will just be hot air.

I can easily make the arrangements. What do you say? A round of golf?

Pls consider this Teo and do send my warmest regards to CEO and gang.

He should join us for cycling. Tell him, we miss him dearly. And his absence is greatly felt by every single one of us.

SD

How are you Teo? Long time no see. I remember you from the IS. Interesting story. Thanks.

Cooperatives are businesses. They are NOT charities. They range in size from small eat-as-you-pay frontages (as you mentioned) to mega Fortune 500 companies. In many ways, they’re like any other business, but I agree they do have charitable elements; but in several important ways they are unique and different; for one the folk who use them; be it to get lower priced goods and services are SHAREHOLDERS rather than just passive consumers; so there is a big conceptual distinction.

RSP is a contentious issue with any retail enterprise. I understand Teo, completely. But it’s not a big deal. I see this as a solvable problem bc one can always go around it with a link point system or something that exchanges equal or comparable value; I don’t consider that the main issue. Really, I don’t.

The main issue is as with any business is being able to get a decent margin by competing with the big boys like giant, shing seong and NTUC; those guys have economy of scale; so when they buy lets say; tin curry; they do so by the container loads and that simply means; they get a bulk discounts and that may even negate the whole idea of a cooperative.

So research and primary data is key here; otherwise we may just be talking blue sky projections here.

But as I said Teo, I need time to revert to you and the others on the details of how this whole plan may be a recession buster; I still believe the best way to cut this recession is by putting food and basic commodities on a strategic footing; I don’t like the current system; as its too laden with criteria’s and paperwork. In fact, I have just seen the pre-qualifying documentation today and its more like an application form to be an astronaut in NASA. So I seriously have grave reservations that the current scheme to alleviate poverty will even be able to work. I really do.

I will probably post in on this thread in 3 to 4 weeks time; as its quiet leceh for me to gut out so many personal references; by that time, this thread would probably slip over the horizon, but if you and others are interested; do check periodically.

Thanks and Happy New Year and do send my warmest regards to your two year old.

SD

Co-ops sounds very good. I used to eat frequently in this eatery when I was in the states that used to harvest and cook their own organic food. It worked on a honor system. You can pay as much as you like. For some reason the owners didnt seem to have trouble despite having to regularly balance the hubris between clients who didnt pay alot and those who did. They seemed for the most part satisfied. Dont have any idea how they managed to juggle that hubris.

Just to tag on further on what one poster said here. I believe it was kelly. How do you propose to iron out the problem with rsp? And would what you propose be under the charities act by any chance?

One final word, if you find it claustrophobic here. Maybe you sound consider visiting the ypap site and bringing along all your friends. I am very sure a cool room can be arranged where all of you will feel most welcomed.