Presidential Elections 2017

General comments and chit-chat, or tell us how we can improve KiasuParents.com

Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby janet88 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:49 pm

HY continuing to stay in her Yishun 'jumbo flat'....that's the best joke of the day.
can you imagine her poor neighbours having to face the security officers? the corridor will have to be free of slippers, shoe boxes, potted plants lined outside, so that there will be easy access.

janet88
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 38127
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:37 am
Total Likes: 121


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby phtthp » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:21 pm

deleted

phtthp
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 15411
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:04 pm
Total Likes: 81


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby limlim » Thu Sep 14, 2017 8:16 am

树不要皮,必死无疑。
人不要脸,天下无敌。

limlim
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 6815
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 9:43 pm
Total Likes: 103


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby janet88 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:50 am

limlim wrote:树不要皮,必死无疑。
人不要脸,天下无敌。

i find it hard to believe this whole so-called election. from a planned election for singaporeans to choose a president to appointing a president by disqualifying the 2 other candidates :whut:
we the citizens of singapore, have been deprived of a right to vote.

now the next joke, the appointed president of singapore is going to stay in her HDB flat in Yishun jumbo flat.
who calls the shots now? ah gong who paved the way or this newly appointed president?

janet88
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 38127
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:37 am
Total Likes: 121


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby phtthp » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:52 am

above is a grave serious matter ...

Going forward, are our future elections going to be simply walk over, denied the right as a citizen of Sg, ever to vote anymore ?

phtthp
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 15411
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:04 pm
Total Likes: 81



Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby mum_sugoku » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:34 am

BBC's article on why Singaporeans are not happy to get the president "many" wanted:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41237318

...One view is that the government did not trust voters to choose their candidate this time round, despite the fact that it was Mrs Halimah, a former union leader who had broad appeal and was aided by extensive and favourable coverage in Singapore's state-friendly media.
"Singaporeans have always known that our politicians... consider themselves superior beings," said writer Sudhir Thomas Vadaketh. "Now, with this reserved presidency, we have irrefutable proof about just how stupid they think we are."...


There must be good reasons for our ruling politicians to think that we are stupid, I guess.. :evil:

mum_sugoku
BrownBelt
BrownBelt
 
Posts: 538
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 11:21 am
Total Likes: 15


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby pirate » Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:15 pm

mum_sugoku wrote:There must be good reasons for our ruling politicians to think that we are stupid, I guess.. :evil:

But we are stupid. We seem to buy our ruling politicians' argument that a $10m public sector entity (like Parliament or the Auditor General's Office^) is about the same as a $500m private sector entity. We seem to have no issue whatsoever that the private sector eligibility bar is set 50 times higher than the public sector eligibility bar^^, and we are quite happy to call it 'meritocracy". :shrug:

^Parliament's total expenditure for 2017 is projected to be about $40m. The AGO's is about $30m. By way of comparison, a company like Tung Lok Group has total expenditures about $86m and shareholders' equity of only about $15.85m.

^^Article 19(3)(c) of the Constitution further provides that the PEC can also grant an eligibility certificate to somebody who has served in an office in the public sector for 3 years if "the Presidential Elections Committee is satisfied, having regard to the nature of the office and the person’s performance in the office, that the person has experience and ability that is comparable to the experience and ability of a person who satisfies paragraph (a) or (b)". In other words, the disparity does not only apply to the Speaker of Parliament and the Auditor General, but potentially to any person in the public sector who heads an entity the size of Parliament or the AGO. Who knows? Maybe even a school principal or a museum director may qualify.

pirate
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 4235
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 1:09 pm
Total Likes: 166


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby janet88 » Thu Sep 14, 2017 9:13 pm

our beloved LKY's birthday in 2 days' time. he cannot rest in peace knowing what singapore has become, his hard work down the drain.

janet88
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 38127
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:37 am
Total Likes: 121


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby floppy » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:52 am

pirate wrote:
mum_sugoku wrote:There must be good reasons for our ruling politicians to think that we are stupid, I guess.. :evil:

But we are stupid. We seem to buy our ruling politicians' argument that a $10m public sector entity (like Parliament or the Auditor General's Office^) is about the same as a $500m private sector entity. We seem to have no issue whatsoever that the private sector eligibility bar is set 50 times higher than the public sector eligibility bar^^, and we are quite happy to call it 'meritocracy". :shrug:

^Parliament's total expenditure for 2017 is projected to be about $40m. The AGO's is about $30m. By way of comparison, a company like Tung Lok Group has total expenditures about $86m and shareholders' equity of only about $15.85m.

^^Article 19(3)(c) of the Constitution further provides that the PEC can also grant an eligibility certificate to somebody who has served in an office in the public sector for 3 years if "the Presidential Elections Committee is satisfied, having regard to the nature of the office and the person’s performance in the office, that the person has experience and ability that is comparable to the experience and ability of a person who satisfies paragraph (a) or (b)". In other words, the disparity does not only apply to the Speaker of Parliament and the Auditor General, but potentially to any person in the public sector who heads an entity the size of Parliament or the AGO. Who knows? Maybe even a school principal or a museum director may qualify.


Elections after elections prove that we are stupid.

We buy the argument that Party P candidates are better because the others cannot make it. Nevermind the fact that it was never explained what "better" means because their achievements (if any) were never highlighted. It's ok, we buy the story hook, line and sinker because they were never wrong (even though they had been wrong on many, many occasions - but that's a fine print).

Thus, it's natural that in a PE, the same folks would try to hard sell to us that candidate H is better even though we can see it's a real stretch to spin it. Achievements? Err... and she is not even a newbie but a veteran of multiple elections. Experience in handling money? Err... 20m vs 200m - no horse run but the 200m thoroughbred is disqualified.

We will continue to be stupid because it's in our DNA. Three years later, we will forget that this episode existed and we will just go back to status quo, only to complain a few years later why shit happens again.

floppy
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:48 pm
Total Likes: 94


Re: Presidential Elections 2017

Postby floppy » Fri Sep 15, 2017 8:52 am

pirate wrote:
mum_sugoku wrote:There must be good reasons for our ruling politicians to think that we are stupid, I guess.. :evil:

But we are stupid. We seem to buy our ruling politicians' argument that a $10m public sector entity (like Parliament or the Auditor General's Office^) is about the same as a $500m private sector entity. We seem to have no issue whatsoever that the private sector eligibility bar is set 50 times higher than the public sector eligibility bar^^, and we are quite happy to call it 'meritocracy". :shrug:

^Parliament's total expenditure for 2017 is projected to be about $40m. The AGO's is about $30m. By way of comparison, a company like Tung Lok Group has total expenditures about $86m and shareholders' equity of only about $15.85m.

^^Article 19(3)(c) of the Constitution further provides that the PEC can also grant an eligibility certificate to somebody who has served in an office in the public sector for 3 years if "the Presidential Elections Committee is satisfied, having regard to the nature of the office and the person’s performance in the office, that the person has experience and ability that is comparable to the experience and ability of a person who satisfies paragraph (a) or (b)". In other words, the disparity does not only apply to the Speaker of Parliament and the Auditor General, but potentially to any person in the public sector who heads an entity the size of Parliament or the AGO. Who knows? Maybe even a school principal or a museum director may qualify.


Elections after elections prove that we are stupid.

We buy the argument that Party P candidates are better because the others cannot make it. Nevermind the fact that it was never explained what "better" means because their achievements (if any) were never highlighted. It's ok, we buy the story hook, line and sinker because they were never wrong (even though they had been wrong on many, many occasions - but that's a fine print).

Thus, it's natural that in a PE, the same folks would try to hard sell to us that candidate H is better even though we can see it's a real stretch to spin it. Achievements? Err... and she is not even a newbie but a veteran of multiple elections. Experience in handling money? Err... 20m vs 200m - no horse run but the 200m wild horses are disqualified because they are not thoroughbred.

We will continue to be stupid because it's in our DNA. Three years later, we will forget that this episode existed and we will just go back to status quo, only to complain a few years later why shit happens again.

Until we learn to question and ask questions about our MPs / candidates (on both sides of the aisle), we will continue to be thought of as being stupid.

floppy
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
 
Posts: 4286
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 3:48 pm
Total Likes: 94


PreviousNext

Return to Recess Time