these ppl in the goverment can do what they like..sooner or later..the fustrations will mount and they will be led to REVOLUTION!!!!! DOWN WITH PAP AND THE GOVERMENT!!

THEY EVEN MAKE FOREIGNERS BE OFFICERS IN THE ARMY AND MAKE THEM SIGN ON BUT THEIR OWN LOCAL WHO IS LOYAL AND BETTER,THEY REFUSED..

I REST MY CASE…

Are you suggesting that we blame people, people like you and me, instead? People who’s lives are being shaped by systems, policies and procedures and yet being blamed if those systems, policies and procedures fail?

What and whose values are you referring to? Should we just shut up and sit down in a ‘democratic’ country?

Just start from ourselves before expecting other people to do so or putting the blame on the systems.

and the authoritarian style of management, and in schools? We are taught that teachers are always right, parents are always right, top down.

Compare with western culture where children are asked to speak up, challenge, think.

Then we join the army, which further exacerbates the idea of authority. added with a culture of reprimand, no room for failure.

Not surprising we develop a kiasu culture, a culture of covering one’s bottom first, a culture of finger pointing, of not making a decision.

I don’t think our political system is very different from China in many ways. The difference is that the Chinese Communist Party has more political capital.

In China, resources are diverted to grow the big cities, and the development in rural areas is relatively very slow. Even then the government still has the support of many people.

“I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yet, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters – who your neighbor is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think. That’s another problem.”

Guess who said it?

MM Lee (speech at National Day rally 1986, ST, 20 April 1987)

It sums up everything.

I am not so familiar with the system in China, so my comments may not be well informed.

I observe that the election of the leadership of the China Communist Party appears to be democratic. The party cadres elect the leadership at various levels, from the lowest level and they influence the leadership at the top levels.

I think, in such an environment, the wishes of the masses will have a larger impact on the policies and decisions of the top leadership.

There must be several million party cadres in China involved in the election. So, this process does involve the views of many people. It is more representative than the actual system adopted in many other “democratic countries”.

Isn’t China’s political system based on the same concept of “elitist planning”? They recruit the “best” people into the single central command that master-plans for the whole country. Our system is not too different in this aspect.

Decision-making in a less or non-socialist system is usually considered to be more decentralised.

I do not consider the planning system in Singapore to be “socialist planning”. If I have to describe it, I would probably choose “elitist planning”.

Under a socialist planning system, I expect to see the following characteristics:

a) More weight being given to the needs of the people
b) Opportunity for these people to express their views through their elected representatives.

I find the approach now being adopted in America under President Barack Obama to be laudable. He hears the views of many people and summarises them in a strategy. He articulates the strategy and gets the genuine opinion of the people, through the polls. President Obama has been able to win the support of many people to his “socialist policies”.

These policies give more weight to the majority of the people in the lower an middle classes, which have been most squeezed in recent years.

The fear of stepping out of the standard protocol has very much to do with the “socialist culture” of Singapore.

Despite looking like any other capitalist economy, Singapore rely heavily on socialist planning principles. The government makes plans for the economy and social policies, and the people executes them efficiently.

However, this has created a rigid system of top-down decision making and emphasis on accountability even in everyday life. The burden of accountability has become so large that even the rank and file fear to take responsibility for deviating from the written rules.

So the solution really has to come both ways. The government (bosses, supervisors….) has to be willing to let go. The people also has to become less reliant on the government (bosses, supervisor,….) for instructions, solutions, and responsibility. Only then will people dare to have more initiative.

After he was convinced that I was visiting Canada for three weeks of holiday, and to take a cruise to Alaska, he went out of his way to say a few useful things about Canada – just in a few lines of conversation. There was a queue, so this was done while he was processing the passport.

Here is an officer who went beyond his normal responsibility to play his role as a citizen of Canada, giving a welcome to a visitor.

We can encourage our people in Singapore to go beyond their narrow job, and act like a fellow human being.

I would like to call upon readers who believe in the cause to stand up for election ang give us the chance to vote. SGP are said to be politically apathetic, AWARE incident had proved otherwise.

One thing I am not happy with the system, it assumes that everyone is from a reasonably mid-class family. Go army need to buy stuff, sch, need laptop, standing for elections need money….it is as if SGP is a company and not a nation anymore. The voice of the working class is hijacked by the docile NTUC (whose Sec Gen is scholar and never had been a manual worker before). The grassroots activities are taken as apolotical and a mechanism to deliver the message of the Govt. The irony is isn’t the Govt itself a political party? Why is Chiam See Tong and Low Thia Kiang legally elected as MP not made Advisor to GROs? GROs an extension of PAP?

Why is PCF not banned? Don’t they know that psychologically when a young child come to associate PAP (symbol) with power, school and pride…we are rubbing democracy with the wrong message in Singapore?

Dear fellow Singaporeans,

It’s a myth that political talent scarce in Singapore. PAP usually will scout for people in the traditional camps. People you need to scout for those “missing” talents. The unfair rule=effective=is a myth.

A Govt can’t do without the support of the people.

A Govt is not the Almighty who are deemed to be so rare that we need to pay them unreasonably exorbitant salary while the citizens though well-qualified need to upgrade constantly formally in their life and accept their fated life as being “not a scholar” not “the talent as defined by the PAP.”

I have no grudges against the ruling Party. Indeed I enjoy the properity brought abt by the PAP governance but I am afraid for the future if we see the continuously arrogant attitude taken by the Govt. we need a counter-ideology any a set of programme for SGP to assure SGP-eans that we are serious with what we are doing and believe me….. we can do it even if it takes time.

Don’t give up.

However, MAS said that the disclosure was “not in any way suggesting that legal action is in their best interest”. MAS advised investors to take independent advice with regard to their particular circumstances.

If the regulator is not willing to take the responsibility of making a judgment on this matter, I wonder how the small investor can decide on this matter? Even if they can find a lawyer willing to give this advice, can the small investor afford the legal fees? Good lawyers are expensive.

It would have been better for the regulator to be pro-active in determining the following:

a) Has Lehman Brothers broken any law in Singapore, which are grounds for legal action to be taken by the authority on behalf of the investing public?

b) Is legal action the best course of action in these circumstances.

I have seen examples of the New York State Attorney General take up these matters on behalf of the investing public.

Why are our regulator and attorney general in Singapore not taking this action? Is this an example of “avoiding responsibility or pushing the responsibility to somebody else?” If the authority adopts this appraoch, it becomes a part of the Singapore culture.

Can you please clarify to the public?

On personal experience (mind you I do not have alot of exp though, but I had my fair share), what I had noticed was that these people believe they’re paid ONLY to do their job, and will not take on any more chores. Also, they will grumble alot when given more than their fair share of work…sure they won’t complain, but over at their level, top or bottom, they complain to each other and compare. And they all want the best salaries pegged to them, so if they feel anywhere underpaid they’ll only do their fair share of work.

Like what Mr. Tan had said, many are unwilling to take on responsibilities, and would shun them if possible. (Oh you guys have seen it in army, nearly every male has) What I believe that’s causing this system is perhaps, not just the education system taught us, but also what our society has been driven in.

Incentives.

They say people will work harder if they gave more incentives. It used to work great, still works sometimes…but looking at it now, people have been exploiting it as well. The thing here driving what I call “lazy people” is that since there’s incentives to be given if you work harder, I’d just do my share of work if there ain’t any.

I mean, just look at the army…I’m sure everyone had their fair share of meeting people whom you think would never survive “outside” once they leave. These people are prime example of “lazy people” I’m talking about. They just do their job scope, and push everything else off if possible. The funniest part is, they think they’re doing a whole lot more than “everyone else” and should deserve higher salaries because “everyone else” has higher salaries as well.

So in the end people who sees these takes it that there’s no point going out of their job scope. Nobody cares about even Going the Extra Centermetre, less the Extra Mile. Nowadays for people it’s “None of my business”, “Nothing to be Gained”, “Don’t trouble me”

I believe, however, that this is a trait that cannot be easily cured. Simply because actually, it’s happening all over the world. The only places that doesn’t seem to have such things happening are companies and organizations that treat their employees like family. Because working hard for family and friends seems more worth it than working for a company itself.

But really, I don’t know. I think I’ve not seen nearly enough to judge the World and Myself. Just my two cents on our bad traits.

Regard,
Random

Six months ago, I tried to top up by EZ Link card at the ATM machine. It did not work. I had to approach the station attendant. He topped up my EZ Link card. I told the attendant that the ATM was not working. His reply, “The machine is under Tansit Link”. He implied that as Transit Link is a different organistation from SMRT, it is not his responsibility. I told him, “Can you tell Transit Link that it is not working?”

Six months later, I tried to top up my EZ Link card at the ATM machine again. Again it is not working. I went to the station attendant one more time to top up my card, and to report that the ATM machine is still now working. I still get the reply, “The ATM machine is under Transit Link”.

It seemed that many passengers must have reported the fault, and that it is not corrected for the past six months.

Why are Singaporeans so focused on only their specific duty? And they do not bother to correct any fault that falls outside of that specific duty?

This behaviour is not only for people at the lower level. I have seen this type of behaviour at senior level, including government ministers. It seems to be a Singapore trait. Each person likes to define his own area of responsibility and his KPI. And will not be bothered to go outside of that area, as it does not add to his own KPI.

What a bad trait!