Ex-ISA detainee issues challenge to Dr Tony Tan

5-minute Management Course

Lesson 1:

A man is getting into the shower just as his wife is finishing up her

shower, when the doorbell rings.

The wife quickly wraps herself in a towel and runs downstairs.

When she opens the door, there stands Bob, the next-door neighbor.

Before she says a word, Bob says, 'I'll give you $800 to drop that

towel.'

After thinking for a moment, the woman drops her towel and stands

naked in front of Bob, after a few seconds, Bob hands her $800 and leaves.

The woman wraps back up in the towel and goes back upstairs.

When she gets to the bathroom, her husband asks, 'Who was that?'

'It was Bob the next door neighbor,' she replies.

'Great,' the husband says, 'did he say anything about the $800 he owes

me?'

Moral of the story:

If you share critical information pertaining to credit and risk with

your shareholders in time, you may be in a position to prevent

avoidable exposure.

Lesson 2:

A priest offered a Nun a lift.

She got in and crossed her legs, forcing her gown to reveal a leg.

The priest nearly had an accident.

After controlling the car, he stealthily slid his hand up her leg.

The nun said, 'Father, remember Psalm 129?'

The priest removed his hand. But, changing gears, he let his hand

slide up her leg again.

The nun once again said, 'Father, remember Psalm 129?'

The priest apologized 'Sorry sister but the flesh is weak.'

Arriving at the convent, the nun sighed heavily and went on her way. 

On his arrival at the church, the priest rushed to look up Psalm 129.

It said, 'Go forth and seek, further up, you will find glory.'

Moral of the story:

If you are not well informed in your job, you might miss a great

opportunity.

Lesson 3:

A sales rep, an administration clerk, and the manager are walking to

lunch when they find an antique oil lamp.

They rub it and a Genie comes out.

The Genie says, 'I'll give each of you just one wish.'

'Me first! Me first!' says the admin clerk. 'I want to be in the

Bahamas, driving a speedboat, without a care in the world.'

Puff! She's gone.

'Me next! Me next!' says the sales rep. 'I want to be in Hawaii ,

relaxing on the beach with my personal masseuse, an endless supply of

Pina Coladas and the love of my life.'

Puff! He's gone.

'OK, you're up,' the Genie says to the manager.

The manager says, 'I want those two back in the office after lunch.'

Moral of the story:

Always let your boss have the first say.

Lesson 4:

An eagle was sitting on a tree resting, doing nothing.

A small rabbit saw the eagle and asked him, 'Can I also sit like you

and

do

nothing?'

The eagle answered: 'Sure, why not.'

So, the rabbit sat on the ground below the eagle and rested. All of a

sudden, a fox appeared, jumped on the rabbit and ate it.

Moral of the story:

To be sitting and doing nothing, you must be sitting very, very high up.

Lesson 5

A turkey was chatting with a bull.

'I would love to be able to get to the top of that tree' sighed the

turkey, 'but I haven't got the energy.'

'Well, why don't you nibble on some of my droppings?' replied the bull.

They're packed with nutrients.'

The turkey pecked at a lump of dung, and found it actually gave him

enough strength to reach the lowest branch of the tree.

The next day, after eating some more dung, he reached the second branch.

Finally after a fourth night, the turkey was proudly perched at the

top of the tree.

He was promptly spotted by a farmer, who shot him out of the tree.

Moral of the story:

Bull Shit might get you to the top, but it won't keep you there..

Lesson 6:

A little bird was flying south for the winter. It was so cold the bird

froze and fell to the ground into a large field.

While he was lying there, a cow came by and dropped some dung on him.

As the frozen bird lay there in the pile of cow dung, he began to

realize how warm he was.

The dung was actually thawing him out!

He lay there all warm and happy, and soon began to sing for joy.

A passing cat heard the bird singing and came to investigate.

Following the sound, the cat discovered the bird under the pile of cow

dung, and promptly dug him out and ate him.

Morals of the story:

(1) Not everyone who shits on you is your enemy.

(2) Not everyone who gets you out of shit is your friend.

(3) And when you're in deep shit, it's best to keep your mouth shut! 

THUS ENDS THE FIVE MINUTE MANAGEMENT COURSE.

Vote For Dr Tan Cheng Bock

>> Don't give away the Fail-Safe key of National Reserve to the Whitest of white haired man that's protecting those white-on-white guys.
>> We need an INDEPENDENT THINKING President to best protect Singaporean Reserves and that man is Dr Tan Cheng Bock!! ....................following video for your viewing pleasures!

 打油诗大意如下：“等等等，等什么？陈清木最好。本地人，好过外

­国人。CPF上大学，星期天和公共假日停车免烦恼。医院三号房（­C级病房），又便宜又好。跛脚残废的，走路方便不怕跌倒。小孩念­书厉害不厉害都好。等等等，等什么？陈清木最好。人品正直又有趣­，又不怕PAP。等等等，等什么？陈清木最好。哎呀，新加坡人，­你还在等什么？你要记得我们的陈医生。”

Dr. Lily Neo vs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan

Parliament No:	11
Session No:	1
Volume No:	82
Sitting No:	20
Sitting Date:	2007-03-09
Section Name:	BUDGET
Title:	HEAD I - MINISTRY OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, YOUTH AND SPORTS

 <<< below is an extracted record from parliamentary debate >>>

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar):
Mr Chairman, the Minister yesterday announced that PA allowance would be increased by $30 a month, from $260 to $290. The Minister did not answer my two questions on whether PA allowance commensurates with inflation and whether there has been a study done to ascertain whether PA allowance serves the needs of the recipients.

Sir, my single constituents told me that they needed to skip one meal a day to live on the $260 per month. And now, MCYS is going to give them $1 more a day. But, Sir, $1 a day will not be able to buy them one meal a day in any hawker centre.


Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
When we did this review of the Public Assistance rates, we took into account both the impact of inflation since the last review as well as the impact of the GST increase. There will always be arguments about whether a sum that we have decided is enough or not. As I said yesterday, frankly, one limiting factor must be that the sum that we give through Public Assistance cannot be so generous as to erode the work ethic. As I said again yesterday, if you take a family with three children, the amount they can receive from Public Assistance - I do not have the exact figure now - I think exceeds $900. At that level, you are getting dangerously close to the earnings of a low-wage worker.

Having said that, I think there will always be unique circumstances when some families find that that sum is not enough. And that is where the community and grassroots organisations have to come in and look for those mitigating or exceptional circumstances and more help is necessary. So the key point is that as far as the entitlement portion is concerned, I will admit that that is set low. But have flexibility, have organisations and individuals who are able to assess special needs of special families and then respond accordingly. That is the system which we have.


The alternative is to set the entitlement at a very high level. But once you do that, I think you would not have only 3,000 families on Public Assistance, you will see many multiples of families.


Dr Lily Neo:
Sir, the Minister said that the increment was done in such a way so as not to take away the work ethic. Surely, this argument cannot be applied to PA allowance recipients because this is a group of people that can never work either due to poor health, old age or disability. Therefore, this work ethic concept does not work. The other point is that the Minister said that this group of people can depend on grassroots organisations and others. Am I to understand that MCYS cannot provide adequately for the most vulnerable group of our society and that PA recipients must go and seek help from others? He said yesterday that in this globalisation, he would ensure that increasing number of Singaporeans would not feel left out and that he would provide more assistance to the poor to cope with the higher cost of living. May I ask him: should providing three meals a day not be a priority of his promise?


Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
I take the Member's point that for Public Assistance, we have fairly strict criteria. But having said that, I am still not willing to go to the other extreme and say that since we have got strict criteria, we can afford to be generous. This is the same point that Mr Seah Kian Peng raised yesterday. I have sympathy for that point, but I would still appeal to Members of this House to exercise caution.


Her second question was: why must they go and seek help? Why must they ask for it? I would like to remind her again of my speech yesterday when I said that if it is going to be low on entitlement and high on flexibility, then we do want some effort to be exerted on the part of the recipients. Yes, we do want them to go and ask for help. But I also said yesterday that, let us not get too carried away and reach a stage where if someone does not know or does not want to ask for help, we ignore that person. I have also asked the community organisations, neighbours, voluntary welfare organisations and the rest of us, if we see someone who needs more help, enquire about that person and organise the help.

Let us talk about meals since the Member has phrased her question specifically about three square meals. You and I, in fact, all of us, know that there are programmes for meals at home. There are organisations which specifically bring bread and rations, many of which are bought from FairPrice, gratitude to Mr Seah as well. But there are schemes like this. That allows me to say with a clear conscience to both the PAP and the Opposition MPs that nobody in Singapore needs to starve, nobody needs to be deprived of healthcare, and nobody needs to be deprived of a roof over his or her head. If someone indeed is so destitute and is starving, we have other means and other safety nets for them. We can bring them to the Pelangi Home, and I would invite all of you to come to Pelangi Home and see the standard of care, the facilities, the food and the way we look after them.


So, please do not run away with the misconception that Singapore is a cold, heartless place where, because we are so strict on criteria and entitlements, people are starving, freezing and denied the dignities of life. All I am asking Members is just to bear these principles in mind. Entitlements will always be low, ie, the person has to ask you for help and not bang on your table for help. We will always need the many- helping-hands model, not because the Government is broke. We can always do more and we can always raise GST further. But that is not the tone of the society that we are trying to create. We are saying that, yes, there will always be problems in society and it cannot be only the Government to do it because, if you want the Government to do it all, it means higher taxes and a large bureaucracy. As we can see in many other countries who have created elaborate welfare-states based on the best of intentions and the softest of hearts, such systems ultimately failed, they are not efficient and they are going to run out of money. We will see that happen in our lifetime, but we will make sure that that does not happen in Singapore.

As the Minister for MCYS, those are the dilemmas and the trade-offs that I have to make.


2.30 pm


Dr Lily Neo:
Sir, I want to check with the Minister again on the strict criteria on the entitlement for PA recipients. May I ask him what is his definition of "subsistence living"? Am I correct to say that, out of $260 per month for PA recipients, $100 goes to rental, power supply and S&C, and leaving them with only $5 a day to live on? Am I correct to say that any basic meal in any hawker centre is already $2.50 to $3.00 per meal? Therefore, is it too much to ask for just three meals a day as an entitlement for the PA recipients?

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?

Dr Lily Neo: It is cheaper to cook for one person.

Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
It is cheaper to cook for one person.
The point I was trying to make is that every family will have different needs and preferences. I am not by any stretch of the imagination claiming that what we are offering as public assistance is a generous package. I am not saying that. But what I am saying is that it is enough, by and large, for most families to get by and, for those who have needs over and beyond that, there are other means to do so. If every one was starving on this amount that we are giving and is totally devoid of any other sources of help, Pelangi Home would be overcrowded, and I would be building many, many more Pelangi Homes. So, in the end, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Yes, any one of us, if we search hard enough, may be able to find a family or people who need additional help. But I would also say that any one of us, if we really put our minds to it, is capable of finding those additional sources of help. What I am designing is a system in which public assistance can and should be complemented by other sources of help. I think we can continue arguing this and we can continue finetuning the exact amount that is needed. But let us just bear in mind the fact that the system is set up with a certain amount of tension, and it is a healthy tension.

In fact, I cannot resist saying that I am very disappointed that in the whole debate on MCYS, the Opposition MPs have not participated in this, and I have actually faced real probing questions more from the PAP MPs and the Nominated MPs. Perhaps, they totally agree with my policies, philosophy and programmes.

Next Likely Presidency Candidate -Ms Chan Heng Chee

She is very eloquent but is Singapore ready for a woman president?

How to secure our future — Ngiam Tong Dow - dated 29th Jan 2011

* Ngiam Tong Dow is the former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Finance and the Prime Minister’s Office. He recently published Dynamics of the Singapore Success Story, a collection of his speeches, interviews, and articles delivered and written between 2004 and 2010.

How to secure our future — Ngiam Tong Dow January 29, 2011JAN 29 — It amuses me whenever well-meaning friends declare that Singapore, a little red dot on the world map, punches above its weight. Though I hail from St Andrew’s School, where boxing is almost a religion, I fail to figure out how a lightweight boxer, even if he were a Muhammad Ali, can floor a heavyweight.

As someone born and bred in Singapore, I often ask myself these two
questions: How do we secure our economic future? How do we secure our political future?

To me, the road ahead to secure our economic future is reasonably clear.
Since the 1960s, we have moved from a labour-intensive to a skill-based economy. Unemployment dropped from over 10 per cent to the full employment frictional unemployment rate of 3 per cent currently. So why do we worry about our economic future?

The great challenge is that we will soon be reaching the limits of our skill-based model of growth, and the only way is up. Mountaineers will tell you that when climbing a rock face, you cannot lose your nerve. If you look down, you will fall off the cliff. We have to move rapidly from a skill- to a knowledge-based economy.

Nothing stands still. China and India are rapidly catching up with the United States, Japan and Europe in the automotive industry. The manufacture of motor cars is basically skill-based. Japan and China are embarking on the design and production of commercial passenger aircraft. But it will take them considerably more time to succeed and compete with Boeing and Airbus. In particular, the design and production of the aircraft engine requires very much higher degrees of knowledge than the car engine.

In the last 10 years, I have heard more and more arguments from earnest young economists that Singapore should revert to being a pure service economy as we were a hundred years ago. We should just forget about manufacturing because it is too much hard work and we seek to be a wealth management centre.

I beg to disagree. First, I would like to point out that world scale wealth management centres like London, New York, Tokyo, and soon Shanghai, have taken over a century to become what they are today. More critically, they serve continental-size economies.

Singapore as an aspiring regional financial centre serves at best South-east Asia. In unstable times, Asian tycoons may migrate to the safe haven of Singapore where the rule of law applies more rigorously than in their home countries. But can we count on this narrow slice of international finance to secure our economic future?

We should not lose our nerve and revert to the old low-wage, low-skill industrial structure. The knowledge-based Jurong Petrochemical Complex continues to grow. Pharmaceutical companies continue to expand. They do so because Singapore offers not only skills but also knowledge-rich analytical minds.

To sum up, Singapore will secure its economic future if we persevere in the acquisition of knowledge. Knowledge is multifaceted. We need to remember that competition in a global knowledge-based world is all about knowledge not just skills and definitely not brawn. I have elaborated on different kinds of knowledge in my recent book Dynamics of the Singapore Success Story.

DANGEROUS SOCIO-POLITICAL FUTURE

I hope I am wrong but the rapid increase of permanent residents (PRs) over the last three years seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to our falling birth rates. Our population planners need to remember our failed experiments in social engineering, namely “the stop at two” and the “graduate mother”

population policies.

I hope that they are not unwittingly embarking on what I term political re-engineering. Social engineering is fraught with risk. Political re-engineering is positively dangerous.

If we continue to admit permanent residents at the average annual rate of 50,000 as we have done over the last three years, it must surely change our political landscape. Most of the PRs who come from China and India will soon be pressing for citizenship and the vote. The recent rapid intake of PRs is disruptive and, to say the least, distracts us from our quest to be “One People, One Nation, One Singapore”.

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew in his epochal book Hard Truths has said that Singapore is a nation in the making. I cannot agree with him more. It may take us a hundred years to be “One People”. This is infinitely better than being diminished to being a stranger in our own land.

As a Singapore born and bred Singaporean, I hope that the pre-1965 generation like mine who urge caution will not be dismissed as born losers.
— Today

THINK!
LHL need to;
(1) step out of the shadow of LKY and recreate Singapore

(2) revamp his cabinet of YES men. Sack all the grassroots leaders that had been giving all the wrong info of the ground.........however, the faults still with the ministers for not walking the ground but enjoying on their laurel.
(3) LHL must start to surround himself with eagles not YES men(chickens). If he surround himself with chickens, he only hear chicken talks.......then EAGLES are all on the opposing side. PAP will surely fail. LHL most important job is to manage EAGLES not play with chickens!

Lastly, through this GE2011, I'd learned that many of my polytechnics, army and university buddies are also supporting the oppositions (eagles) because we could all see very clearly the mistakes, arrogance, non-accountability and the greed of blind pursuit of GDP growth for personal gain (8 months bonus=S$2.5m for LHL alone). And all my friends are well educated, well traveled, successful in their careers and staying in private housing. We just felt the nationalistic responsibility to stand up for the less fortunate and most important for Singapore, the country that we love.

PAP -Perfectly Arrogant Party

Just received a very interesting poem dedicated to MM Lee by an unknown writer.  

============================================

Hey, buddy!

Let me tell you truly

I realized lately

That I also dislike PAP

It is really a Perfectly Arrogant Party

They have turned our country

Into their company

Everything is about money

COE, COV, GST, ERP

Extraordinary charges aplenty 

A tiny dot with 30 ministers drawing the world's highest political salary

Paid millions of dollars annually

Yet they are still greedy

Always chasing after GDP

Making S’poreans live miserably

People say, S’poreans are lucky

For our country is corruption free

But when it is ruled by only one party

Can we really trust there is total honesty?

Remember, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”

Kiasu and kiasi, PAP came up with the GRC

So that more MIW can enter by the back door to become MP

Mistakes after mistakes due to incompetency and complacency

Yet there is no accountability

All because they need not answer to anybody

Only a small country but foreigners there are so many

Government welcomes any Tom, Dick or Harry

And proudly call all of them FT

Giving away PR papers so freely

Hoping they will become citizens and vote for the PAP

Companies happily tell S’poreans to accept low salary

For they have cheap foreigners available readily

FT also took away S’poreans places in the universities

Even in sports we are represented by FT

To win glory for our country shamelessly

Exploiting the government stupidity

Many foreigners become PR just to buy flats by HDB

Resale flats have sky-rocketed due to pro-foreigners policy

So high is the value of COV

That young ordinary S’poreans have delayed starting up a family

S’pore uniquely

A paradise it will be

If you have ‘guan xi’ with the PAP

Never mind you and me or how many are unhappy

Someone already told us we can always go and die in JB

Very sadly, this is no longer my once beloved country

It is now no more than just a money making company

Written in dedication to MM LKY

================================================