Tag Archives: st: forum

Jul 9 2011

Why do you need to write to the ST Forum just because you are unhappy with the examination dates? And really, the passive aggressiveness is annoying. Schools are only receptive to parents’ feedback when they bend over backwards to accommodate the parents’ request. If not, they’re being unreceptive. Unfortunately, your child is very unlikely to be the only student in the school and so we probably can’t ensure that school revolves around him/her. Sorry.

And maids. Stop acting like they are our property please.

 

May 4 2011

Today’s ST Forum Count (and some thoughts)

Total number of letters: 22, 8 print, 14 online

Pro-PAP: [print] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,

Neutral: [print] 1 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4

Pro-opposition: [print] 0 [online] 1

Non-political: [print] 1*, 2 [online] 1, 2*

Oh boy, I have to quote this from one of today’s letters:

Some (of those who vote the opposition) vote out of self-interest because they believe that by depleting the reserves, chasing foreigners out, killing manufacturing and shrinking our army, the opposition can deliver them HDB flats cheaper and faster, give them better job opportunities and cheaper health care.

blah blah blah

There will always be unwise voters motivated by short-term goodies.

Such a poor summary of the opposition’s stand. And who are the ones offering short-term goodies at the moment?

Here’s another one:

The opposition parties, for so many years, have been selling their policies and ideas as better than those of the People’s Action Party, but I have seen no follow through.

So, instead of always asking the People’s Action Party Government for handouts to help their constituents and lamenting the unfair treatment, why not set up their own opposition investment company (OIC), the equivalent of the Government of Singapore Investment Corp (GIC), though not necessarily in size.

How is this even workable? Whose money do they put into OIC? Are the poor residents in the opposition wards going to have to contribute to this as well on top of paying taxes to the government? And then what? How do you expect the opposition to follow through with anything when they have no place in the current government? Maybe they should go form their own opposition government, the equivalent of the Singapore government, though not necessarily in size. Then they can pass policies and bills and we can see if they are good ones … oh wait …

Not bad ST Forum. I think you’ve outdone yourself today! 12/22 pro-PAP letters. Although I wish you had better quality control.

Standard disclaimer: As stated before, not scientific and contains my own biases. Also, I realise I’ve taken letters that are anti-opposition to mean they are pro-PAP, which to me is quite likely but I also realise that one can be both anti-opposition and anti-PAP.

* Not terribly sure about these two letters. And can we please stop with the “should I vote PAP or should I vote opposition? Only time will tell” sort of letters. I am not sure what benefit they bring.

May 3 2011

Today’s ST Forum Count

Total number of letters: 22; 8 print; 14 online

Pro-PAP: [print] 1, 2, 3 [online] 1, 2, 3

Neutral: [print] 0 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Pro-opposition: [print] 1 [online] 1

Non-political: [print] 1, 2, 3 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4

Lots of pointless letters today – the opposition says this, PAP says this, only the results of the vote will tell. Stop writing letters to state the obvious! Sigh.

Standard disclaimer: As stated before, not scientific and contains my own biases. Also, I realise I’ve taken letters that are anti-opposition to mean they are pro-PAP, which to me is quite likely but I also realise that one can be both anti-opposition and anti-PAP.

May 2 2011

Today’s ST Forum Count

Total number of letters: 19; 6 print; 13 online

Pro-PAP: [print] 1 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4

Neutral(ish): [print] 1, 2 [online] 1, 2

Pro-Opposition: [print] 0 [online] 1

Non-political: [print] 1, 2 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

As stated before, not scientific and contains my own biases. Also, I realise I’ve taken letters that are anti-opposition to mean they are pro-PAP, which to me is quite likely but I also realise that one can be both anti-opposition and anti-PAP.

Apr 30 2011

LOL ST Forum Pt 2

Being ‘elitist’ is more of a behaviour than a state. You could have the world’s riches and not be elitist or you could be poor and yet be elitist. I fear poor Mr Jason Soon does not understand this distinction. Here’s his (not very well-thought out words)

IN PREVIOUS general elections, it was always the People’s Action Party (PAP) fielding well-qualified candidates, who were usually top professionals in their respective fields. The opposition, on the other hand, used to face a problem of attracting qualified candidates.

The opposition used this to whip up sentiments on the ground by labelling the PAP as a party of the elite, who were unable to sufficiently understand the needs of average citizens.

For this general election, the PAP has fielded a slate of candidates coming from diverse backgrounds. Isn’t PAP doing what it thought the people wanted – which is to see some representation from people having similar heartland roots?

However, it appears that whatever the PAP does, a minority group of the electorate remains dissatisfied, and some PAP candidates were criticised by netizens.

I wonder why the opposition is offering a slate of impressive candidates now, especially after it has persistently labelled the PAP as elitist.

Firstly, Mr Soon, find out why people call the PAP candidates elitist. Perhaps they are people who think that the homeless are “homeless-by-choice“. Maybe they are also the people, when confronted with the need for more comprehensive public assistance, immediately respond by asking “How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?“. I suppose it might be that they seem to think that all the needy Singaporeans are lazy and will take advantage of public assistance should we give any, so the best is to not give.

Secondly, Mr Soon should do a little research into what the opposition candidates stand for – are their policies benefiting the rich more than the poor? For example, they may argue that GST should be reduced because they (secretly) want to help the rich. Then, perhaps you’ll be right in calling them elitist.

Thirdly, Mr Soon should learn that just because it looks like a duck, it may not actually be a duck. It would have to talk like a duck too. A little more thought, a little more analysis – always a good thing.

*********

Why does it seem like the ST Forum gets more annoying as the elections draw closer? How many people have to write in to tell us to think carefully before we vote?

Let’s do a count:

30 April 2011

17 letters in total; 9 in the forum; 8 in the forum online

Pro-PAP letters: [print] 1, 2, 3, 4 [online] 1, 2, 3, 4

Neutral: [print] 1, 2, 3, 4 [online] 1, 2

Pro-opposition: [print] 0 [online] 1, 2

Notes: I did not count the one which was just a small quote and neutral includes those which didn’t seem related to the elections at all. Lastly, this is completely unscientific and probably contain my biases.

Apr 26 2011

LOL ST Forum

Snippets from the day’s ST Forum (no, can’t be bothered to comment and yes, taken out of context – go read the ST forum for the context):

I would prefer a few good opposition MPs than many who are merely interested in the glamour of being in the opposition in Parliament. – Madam Ho Lei Gi

Such Parliaments (first world parliaments) are making many First World countries bankrupt. Most First World countries are heavily in debt, if not yet bankrupt. They also suffer from high unemployment and high taxes.  -Tan Keng Soon

 

Feb 28 2011

Thank You

I want to thank Madam Phyllis Cheong who in today’s ST Forum wrote:

Given that these lessons are over and beyond what is expected of teachers within the normal school hours, I can only offer my respect, gratitude and appreciation to all teachers who work towards improving the standards of their schools, and giving the less affluent children a fairer fighting chance.

Whether or not you believe in extra lessons, I’m glad there are people out there who realise that teachers are as taxed as the students.

Feb 15 2011

What’s Wrong With Selling Ice-Cream?

I’ve been away a bit, mainly because I didn’t want to fill this blog with moanings about my life so yeah. Anyway, let’s moan about other people and how we don’t think about the implication of our words.

Here’s from today’s ST Forum (all round best place to get annoyed):

I remember wanting to be an ice-cream vendor when I was seven. Imagine what would have happened if my parents were to let me pursue this dream. Children are rarely able to think for themselves or their future and thus, parents who want the best for their children need to enforce rules so that they are socialised to become successful individuals in society.

Now I bet if you ask Ms Leong, she’ll tell you she has nothing against ice-cream vendors. Still, from her words, you can tell that she doesn’t exactly see ice-cream vendors as successful individuals. I guess only certain occupations can result in successful individuals.

Dec 17 2010

Thanks for the generalisation

French story isn’t only about money

MADAM Lee Meng Fern focused on the monetary costs in raising a child and thinks that the ‘French way’ would boost the birth rate. (‘The cost of having a child’; Dec 9).

I disagree. Raising children requires much more than financial capability. Children need time, love and attention, all of which are in short supply in high-stress Singapore.

France has a higher birth rate than other European countries because it has a comparatively larger Muslim population. Even in Singapore, the birth rate for the Muslims is higher than for other religions and races.

My view is that this is because their religion truly embraces children, and believe that children are a gift from god.

My Malay friends and colleagues also have a more relaxed and less uptight attitude towards child rearing.

Their attitude is an added advantage, one which I sometimes envy.

It is extremely stressful when parents feel obliged to send their children for enrichment classes, music and sports lessons so that their kids do not lose out.

Juggling schoolwork, all these activities, and our own work to earn money to pay for all these takes a lot out of parents.

Doling out money and free childcare will not induce couples to have more children.

How else does one explain earlier occasions when some in our parents’ generation braved the strong disincentives for breaching Singapore’s stop-at- two policy and had more children?

They were courageous and wanted children for the sake of having children.

Lynne Tan (Ms)

Way to simplify a complex issue.

Nov 5 2010

Men are victims too!

Poor men. Life is so unfair. How is it that women get all sorts of protection like the Women’s Charter? Men need protection too from how unfairly life treats them – unequal wages, disproportionate number of women in politics and other leadership positions, judgement on ability made based on looks, inability to say no to sex within a marriage and so on. What we need is a men’s charter to protect them from all the conniving, cunning, heartless women out there.

I REFER to the reports (‘Making defaulters pay’, Nov 1; and ‘Judge throws out ‘secret wife’ case’, Oct 27). The Women’s Charter rightfully accords protection to women against irresponsible men and ensures financial support for them and their children after a divorce.

But what if a woman deceitfully enters into a marriage with a hidden agenda. Is there any legal recourse for the husband concerned to protect himself?

There are women who do not take the marriage vows seriously, but see it as a legitimate means to circumvent immigration rules to gain residency status or as a quick way to escape poverty. With more Singaporean men marrying foreign wives, cases of abuse of this nature will rise.

Women who are out to exploit the marriage process may, after a few years of matrimonial life, either initiate a divorce or behave unreasonably so that their husbands would have little choice but to opt for a divorce.

Under such circumstances, through no fault of theirs, ex-husbands will be required by law to continue to maintain their ex-wives and divide matrimonial assets.

The Women’s Charter, in its current form, does not distinguish between women who faithfully carried out their roles as wives/mothers and those who entered into a marriage with the wrong intent and abused the marriage system for their selfish gains.

Unless appropriate provisions to deal with such abuses are added to the Women’s Charter, they will become more prevalent. We need to send out a strong signal to all that marriages have to be taken seriously as a long-term commitment and not be exploited for one’s short-term, selfish gains.

Oo Choon Peng