tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-58907200615821924672024-03-18T23:43:46.404+08:00Singapore 2BThe Singapore to be. Singapore version 2B, not the 1A or A1 version.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger487125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-74601306733017417212024-03-18T22:06:00.004+08:002024-03-18T22:06:36.187+08:00Location. Location. Location<p>One of the conventional wisdom for Singapore's early success was its location.</p><p>"<a href="https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/u.osu.edu/dist/9/1401/files/2014/03/Singapore-o10eml.pdf">Situated at the crossroads" and "gateway to the orient</a>" (so... Singapore is not "orient"?) Singapore's location is key (according to many analyses) to her success.</p><p>I would argue that it may be a necessary but insufficient condition.</p><p>After all, Penang and Malacca have historically been trading centres as well.</p><p>To the south, Bintan and Batam are islands as well placed as Singapore. </p><p>Raffles chose Singapore in part to challenge the Dutch who were in (what is today) Indonesia. </p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>The video below also suggests that Singapore was well-placed to take advantage of the opening up of the Suez Canal.</p><p>But the Suez Canal is thousands of kilometres away, and yes, it did help Singapore.</p><p>But it could've help many other ports and countries as well.</p><p>So why did Singapore prosper, but Penang, Malacca, Bintan and Batam did not?</p><p><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aKuNk5ZRzLg?start=534" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>As a side note, the above video is one of the few videos that understands Singapore's policy on private cars.</p><p>It also understands that pure, unfettered, unregulated capitalism would be a disaster for any society. </p><p>I think this is one of the better explanation of Singapore's success.</p><p>But the other "secret" of Singapore's success, is that "nothing succeeds like success" and we should build on our success:</p><p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/p65fHn98M8Y?si=3AIIzY613M3EHlCB" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>Consider, Singapore has ports. How else can we leverage on it? Bunkering services! We sell fuel to the ships that call at our ports! How else can we leverage on that? Become a Petroleum centre! Then we started refining petroleum. And then petroleum products. And now, Singapore is one of the biggest players in the petroleum industry!</p><p>And we have NO OIL RESERVES!</p><p>Singapore does not sit back and wait for fortune to fall in our laps. Look at how we got Taylor Swift to <a href="https://heresthenews.blogspot.com/2024/03/how-spore-got-taylor-swift-to-perform.html" target="_blank">bring her Eras Tour to Singapore</a>. The word in the region is that Singapore paid Taylor Swift to perform exclusively in Singapore.</p><p>Singapore is bound by confidentiality clauses in the agreement. But the truth is Eras was NOT going to any SE Asian Cities... until Singapore came along and persuaded Swift to perform in Singapore. Why didn't she want to perform in SE Asia? <a href="https://heresthenews.blogspot.com/2024/03/the-real-reason-well-one-major-reason.html" target="_blank">Many reasons</a>.</p><p><u>No Suitable Venue:</u> Eras is an expensive concert to stage, and it will need a large enough venue to make it worth their while. Singapore's National Stadium is one (55,000 - 60,000 capacity). The Philippines have a comparable venue, and Jakarta also has a venue with a huge capacity. Kuala Lumpur and Bangkok does not. </p><p><u>No Supporting Infrastructure:</u> In Singapore, the Stadium MRT Station is right next to the National Stadium. After the concert, <a href="https://heresthenews.blogspot.com/2024/03/foreign-swifties-praise-spores.html" target="_blank">Swifties were AMAZED at the efficiency</a> with which the crowd was dispersed! In Manila and Jakarta, there was gridlocked traffic for the Coldplay concert. Bangkok's traffic is quite bad without the crowd from a concert adding to it.</p><p><u>No Cosmopolitan "vibe":</u> Singapore is modern and cosmopolitan. Strangely, despite our reputation for being a "Fine" country, we have no problems with rock and pop stars strutting their stuff on stage in skimpy costumes. Not so, Malaysia, and Indonesia. <a href="https://youtu.be/pZFBdb2EwGI?si=ddVWzVkKlwRsfdfx" target="_blank">Malaysia has even implemented a "kill switch"</a> provision for any concert so that authorities can terminate a concert if they find the performance too risqué or suggestive.</p><p>The new management of our Sports Hub/National Stadium are not just passive "rent collectors". They are pro-active and hunt down opportunities. That spells good fortune for Singapore.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-27512160947826395312024-03-05T16:35:00.007+08:002024-03-06T22:58:11.279+08:00Did Singapore get Taylor Swift on a Exclusivity contract?<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hwzUsZCNHJ0?si=WMIVWyPRRNSx9ggM" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br />PM Lee answers how SG got Taylor Swift to Singapore. Notice he says "negotiated an arrangement" (0:07) for Swift to perform in Singapore. "And to make Singapore her only stop" (0:10). At about 0:40 PM Lee says "we can't say, 'you will come here only on condition that you will go other places'". Note how uneasy he seems.<div><br /><b>So, did Singapore make Swift sign an exclusive arrangement?</b><br /><div> <span><a name='more'></a></span><br /></div><div>Singapore Math is well-known. So let's do the math. </div><div>Forbes has estimated that Swift will personally earn<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisadellatto/2023/10/13/the-top-earning-summer-concert-tours-2023-taylor-swift-beyonce/?sh=4e32dc7e707c" target="_blank"> US$10m - US$13m PER SHOW.</a> And this checks out with the shows in Singapore. The National Stadium can hold 55,000 people. For ease of computation, say 50,000. IF the average ticket price is (equivalent to) US$200, each show's takings will be 50,000X 200 = US$10m. So it matches Forbes estimates. </div><div><br /></div><div>If the Eras tour goes to Bangkok or Manila, and does 3 shows at each location, Swift would be on track to make about $30m at each venue (using Forbes low estimate). So assuming the plan originally was to tour in two other cities for 3 nights each, Swift would have made US$60 million. But Singapore came along, and offered her US$4 (or less) for an exclusivity clause, and Swift or her business manager snatched the offer as soon as Singapore made it? </div><div>What sort of idiot managers does she have? Since when is getting $4m to forego $60m a GOOD DEAL? </div><div>Because, IMHO, this "exclusivity clause" is a fiction. There is NO exclusivity clause. </div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">(Note: The "source" of this story about an exclusivity clause is the Thai PM. Who claimed that he got the news from AEG, Swift's promoter. I suspect there was something lost in translation,)</span></div><div><br /></div><div>If Singapore wanted Swift exclusively, it would NOT have cost just $4m. or even $24m (6 shows in SG X $4m). Team Taylor would have told Singapore, "We are planning to go to 3 cities/4 cities/5 cities in SE Asia, and you will need to compensate us for NOT going to those cities at $10m per show." And maybe Team Singapore would bargain it down to $7m or $6m per show. And for 3 cities, at 3 shows at each city, the "compensation" would be $54m (9 shows X $6m). Or $90m for 5 cities. </div><div><br /></div><div>No. I suspect Eras Tour was going to completely bypass SE Asia. They had NO PLANS to play in ANY city in SE Asia. Why? That's for<a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2024/03/you-snooze-you-lose.html" target="_blank"> Swift's people to answer.</a> </div><div><br /></div><div>I suspect when KASM spoke to the promoter in early 2023, KASM found out that Eras was NOT coming to SE Asia. The plan was to perform in Australia and Japan. Fans in SE Asia can travel to Australia or Japan to catch the concerts. These places are not that far. </div><div>So KASM called in reinforcements and the big guns (ok, slightly "bigger guns") - STB. And STB offered a grant if Eras would come to Singapore - $4m. (PM Lee has shared, video above, that the fund was from a tourism promotion fund post-COVID.) </div><div>I am sure the promoter had to control himself/herself and try NOT to laugh. $4m? That's how much they spend just for breakfast! </div><div><br /></div><div>But Singapore brought more than just money to the table and offered a complete package of administrative and logistic support. They made it EASY for Eras to come to Singapore. And in the words of Keith Magnus (?), "they offered to bring Asia to Taylor Swift". </div><div>Maybe Singapore's naive earnestness sold the proposal. Maybe Swift took pity on them. Maybe Swift has fond memories of Singapore. Maybe Team Singapore promoted Singapore's infrastructure, connectedness and world class facilities, and the promoter realised that they had overlooked Singapore when they dismissed all of SE Asia as backward and underdeveloped. Maybe, maybe, maybe. </div><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254); color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254); color: #2b00fe;">(And maybe, when the Thai PM asked AEG to bring the Eras Tour to Thailand, AEG tried to explain how Team Singapore had approached them even before the tour started, and before they announced the cities they were touring in, and offered logistical and administrative support, and also $4m, and that Eras had no plans to tour in other SE Asian city. </span></div><div><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254); color: #2b00fe;">And maybe the Thai PM could speak English, or maybe there was a translator, and somehow, the easiest bit got translated - Singapore offered money, Eras won't tour other SE Asian cities - and the Thai PM put two data points together, and came up with the idea that SG signed an exclusive deal with Swift. Who knows?)</span></div><div><br /></div><div>So it was NOT that Singapore was not a good neighbour or a good member of ASEAN. Singapore brought Asia to Taylor Swift and brought the Eras Tour to Singapore. And SE Asia. </div><div><br /></div><div>Otherwise, Swifties would have to travel to Japan or Australia to catch the concert.</div><div><br /></div><div>In the video above, at 0:40, PM Lee says that we cannot force Swift to perform in other cities as a condition of performing in Singapore, or dictate where else she might perform. Which suggests that Singapore negotiated for her to come to Singapore, and only Singapore, because we have no right to make arrangements for other cities. </div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">(I find it interesting that our Ministers used the phrase "Only-in-Singapore" instead of "Singapore exclusively", or "an exclusive agreement". Edwin Tong, the minister who led the delegation to LA, is a lawyer. So he would be very careful with his words, and variation in phrasing could mean different things. )</span></div><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://youtu.be/NSdc55QJS9c?si=TOxMRo2oL1qtxFtT&t=96" target="_blank">In another video,</a> PM Lee hints, "if we had not made such an arrangement, would she have come to someplace else in SE Asia? Maybe. Maybe not." Which hints that Eras had originally planned to skip SE Asia, or had no firm plans to tour in SE Asia. Until Team Singapore approached them.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-63593146845271908312024-03-03T22:39:00.002+08:002024-03-04T10:09:39.105+08:00"You snooze, you lose"<p><br /></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wOK_bzsGoMc?si=s5bhnBzu3ay-3eM5" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p>Taylor Swift's Eras Tour has toured in Japan, and Australia, before the tour came to Singapore.</p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a>The Thai Prime Minister had asked the promoter to bring the tour to Thailand and was told that the Eras Tour would only be coming to Singapore. And that<a href="https://heresthenews.blogspot.com/2024/02/stb-gave-grant-for-taylor-swift.html" target="_blank"> Singapore had an exclusive contract with Swift </a>in this region. <p></p><p>Our news media asked questions and got a "non-answer". MCCY and STB confirmed that a grant was provided (for what, it was not clear) to Swift's Team, and that there was an understanding that it was an "only-in-Singapore" event, which suggests that it might be an "exclusivity clause"?</p><p>But it was not clear if the grant provided was for exclusivity - that the Eras Tour was being paid to tour ONLY in Singapore and not anywhere else in the region, like say Thailand or Philippines or Indonesia.</p><p>But look at the locations in this part of the world that the Tour had chosen - Japan and Australia. Developed countries.</p><p>Singapore was proactive, going to the US to meet potential acts and performers, and offering them a deal, a package. This was in late 2022 and early 2023. Before Swift had announced the international leg of her Eras Tour. It was only after Singapore was announced as a location for the tour that other regional governments sought the tour to perform in their countries.</p><p>Which is probably too late.</p><p>Maybe Japan and Australia was in the original plans only. Only when the Singapore team approached the Eras Tour organisers and offered Singapore as a venue with all the infrastructure and logistic support that Singapore can offer along with our world-class facilities that the organisers saw the possibility of performing in Singapore.</p><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">“KASM (Kallang Alive Sport Management) initiated the idea (for the tour to come to Singapore) and led the discussions... We were the proactive ‘tip of the spear’ for the Government in these discussions that were had,” said KASM chairman Keith Magnus... “If the vision was to be the premier (entertainment and sports) destination, then we needed to be proactive.”</span></blockquote><p>Regardless, the Thai PM's revelation led to outrage from Singapore's neighbours:<b><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xF9QlvQr_mg?si=dk7IRW9haN7AwK-5" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</b></p><p style="text-align: left;"><b>Proactive</b>.</p><p style="text-align: left;">When the Sports Hub was privately run (by Sports Hub Pte Ltd), they were not be able to pro-actively travel to the US to explore possible acts, performances, and events to bring to Singapore. That sort of proactive "marketing" was probably not in their budget or even their business model. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Only a wholly govt-own agency like KASM, with the implicit endorsement of the govt, would be able to proactively seek out opportunities to exploit and when they find one, be able to loop in other relevant govt agencies and ministries to present a comprehensive offer to Team Taylor Swift. </p><p style="text-align: left;">And Singapore was the only stop in SE Asia for the Eras tour. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Did Singapore pay Swift for exclusivity? </p><p style="text-align: left;">And how much does it cost to get exclusivity? </p><p style="text-align: left;">Originally, the rumour was that Swift was paid $3m - $4m per show. So for 6 shows in Singapore, Swift would get $18m to $24m. </p><p style="text-align: left;">Later, Minister Edwin Tong says the figure is not that high. CNA later suggests/guessed that it was $3m-$4m in total. </p><p style="text-align: left;">So, the question you should be asking then is, would Swift forego other tour stops in SE Asia for $4m? How much would she be foregoing if she skip Manila, or Bangkok, or Jakarta?</p><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisadellatto/2023/10/13/the-top-earning-summer-concert-tours-2023-taylor-swift-beyonce/?sh=602e0d5707c6">Forbes</a> reports that at each stop on The Eras Tour, Swift is personally earning between $10 million and $13 million. Again, that figure is per night. </span></blockquote><div><br /></div><div>Now, maybe that figure, $10m - $13m, was the estimate for her North American tour stops. Maybe in SE Asia, the figure would be lower? Cos we poorer? Say... $5m? Per night? So 3 nights each in Jakarta, Manila, Bangkok would be $45m that Swift is foregoing. For a paltry $4m from Singapore? Even the high estimate of $24m would be just half of what the Tour would earn in just 3 other venues.</div><div><br /></div><div>Does not make economic sense!<br /><br />I, therefore, do not believe that Swift was tied to an Exclusivity clause. I believe her original plan was to play Australia and Japan. And that was it. Then Singapore came along and offered "to deliver Asia" to Swift. And the Singapore offer was attractive enough for "Team Taylor" to accept for an initial 3 nights, but those tickets sold so well, they added another 3 nights. <br /><p>And there was another non-financial/non-commercial reason for playing in Singapore:<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/86DHZtP_3us?si=qPhuC9bfrbbixDRC" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>So why didn't Swift want to play in other SE Asian cities like Bangkok, Manila, and Jakarta? </p><p>Who knows?</p><p>Her reasons are for her to reveal. </p><p>But I shall look forward to Minister Edwin Tong's reply in Parliament on Monday (4 Mar 2024) for more details.</p><p><br /></p>From: <a href="https://kol.today247.online/taylor-swifts-singapore-show-will-be-her-only-south-east-asia-stop-revealing-how-super-concerts-can-get-political/" target="_blank">"Taylor Swift’s Singapore show will be her only South-East Asia stop, revealing how super concerts can get political"<br /></a></div><div><br /></div><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div><span style="color: #800180;">The Singapore Tourism Board listed its “strategic location, quality infrastructure, safety, efficiency and diverse cultural offerings” as some of the other reasons why it stands out as a major event location in the region.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">Being able to move large amounts of people in an efficient way is a key focus for the Swift tour, given all the sold-out shows.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: red;">The ease for fans to get to and from Singapore’s stadium complex contrasts with the traffic gridlock that greeted thousands of people trying to attend Coldplay concerts in Manila and Jakarta.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">The Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos Jnr even took a helicopter to one of the Manila shows because the traffic was so bad.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">Zachery Rajendran, an integrated events management specialist at Singaporean educational insтιтute Republic Polytechnic, also says a “stable and safe environment” and “cosmopolitan atmosphere” helped put Singapore above neighbouring countries.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">Last year </span><span style="color: red;">a Malaysian music festival was cancelled</span><span style="color: #800180;"> after two members of British band, The 1975, kissed on stage to make a point about the country’s laws criminalising homoSєxuality.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">And </span><span style="color: red;">in Jakarta, protesters cited Coldplay’s support for LGBT rights to try to have their concert cancelled</span><span style="color: #800180;"> last year, though it went ahead anyway.</span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: red;">In 2012, religious protesters successfully forced Lady Gaga to cancel a planned Jakarta show </span><span style="color: #800180;">due to safety concerns.</span></div></blockquote><div><p><br class="Apple-interchange-newline" /></p><p>Related:</p><p><a href="https://heresthenews.blogspot.com/2024/03/sour-grapes-bilahari-kausikan-applauds.html" target="_blank">"Sour grapes!" says Kausikan</a></p><p><br /></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-60025292937211445532024-02-18T08:18:00.002+08:002024-02-18T08:19:04.818+08:00No need for mandatory vaccination.<p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[From Sept 2021. In draft and not previously published. It is a little incomplete, but I forgot what was the last point I wanted to <span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">make. And it's not really germane at this point in time.]</span></span></p><p>So the Singapore Govt has decided (at this time, end Sept 2021) that there is <a href="https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/no-plans-make-covid-19-vaccine-compulsory-yet-spores-vaccination-rate-already-high-janil" target="_blank">no need to mandate Covid-19 Vaccination</a>. </p><p>Because, we have already achieved more than 80% vaccination rate, and this should be sufficient for herd immunity; this should be sufficient for us to try to live with Covid.</p><p>Because, mandating vaccination to try to force the anti-vaxxers (and yes, I am going to call them "anti-vaxxers", because calling them "vaccine-hesitant" or "vaccine-resistant" is just putting lipstick on a pig. Those that are truly hesitant has had sufficient time to make up their minds, and no, the "time's up" is not of my making or my impatience. The delay in protecting everyone is allowing the virus a chance to mutate with every infection, and with every mutation, there is a chance of a new "variant of concern" to emerge.) to get vaccinated will lead to a battle of wills. </p><p>And at the end of the battle, the anti-vaxxers will still be anti-vaxxers, but at the most, we would have forcibly vaccinated them. For some small increase in community protection. </p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>That we do not, at this time, really need.</p><p>And the anti-vaxxers will likely find new ways to block the mandate or delay the vaccination, and it would just be a lot of trouble, a lot of work, a lot of tracking, a lot of administrative work, and a lot of logistics, to get them to comply with the mandate, for very little results. </p><p>So we will let them be. </p><p>(Tho<a href="https://admin.todayonline.com/singapore/calls-grow-among-experts-singapore-vaccine-mandate-covid-19-spikes" target="_blank"> some experts think vaccinations should be mandatory.</a> At least for those over 60. And the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-business-science-health-coronavirus-vaccine-95b8d9a432b60fe0e9713adf75dde0ee" target="_blank">US (CDC) has approved booster shots</a> for those over 65, and those with underlying medical conditions, and those in nursing homes.)</p><p><a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2021/08/vaccines-and-conspiracy-theories.html" target="_blank">Previously,</a> I had blogged about how some of the fears about vaccines were distorted or exaggerated or misrepresented. There is is little point in going through the various conspiracy theories, and random accusations thrown without evidence (or with spurious "evidence") at vaccines.</p><p>I would like to take a different approach. </p><p>Not that I think this approach would be any more effective (at persuading the anti-vaxxers). This is not the purpose of this blog piece. </p><p>Rather, I thought I'd try to cover what seems to be the question or issue that is keeping them from vaccination</p><p><br /></p><p><b>The big picture. Or the grand conspiracy.</b></p><p>The grand conspiracy theory is a suspicion that all this is NOT real, and the "pandemic" is just a fake "bogeyman" to scare us into taking the vaccine. </p><p>In Singapore where as of this writing (24/9/2021), there have 70 deaths from Covid. Out of a population of 5.7m people. That's 12 deaths per million people. It is entirely likely that you do not personally know any of the people who have succumbed to the virus.</p><p>With 14,000 cases per million, about 1.4% of people were actually infected. That's 1.4 persons in a hundred. So chances are, you may also not know anyone personally who was infected by the virus. And many of of these patients had mild or even no symptoms. Which further raises (your) suspicion that it is not a real disease. That it is probably the flu in most case, and in some cases serious flu. That is sometimes fatal. <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3293465/#:~:text=The%20World%20Health%20Organization%20(WHO,annually%20(2%E2%80%934)." target="_blank">One 2006 study</a> found that the number of deaths associated with influenza was almost 600 in a year. </p><p>So Singapore's remarkable efforts at preventing infections and deaths from Covid, actually works in favour of this conspiracy theory. </p><p>So, with 70 deaths (so far) over 18 months, it would seem like Covid-19 is only about 1/10 as deadly. </p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[The figure was 76 by end of 26/9.]</span></p><p>Except that with the flu, we do not have measures like wearing masks, circuit-breakers, and vaccinating over 80% of the population.</p><p>If we did not have these safeguards and preventive measures, the death rates from Covid would be a lot higher. Just look at Malaysia (680 deaths per million population), and Indonesia (505 deaths per million population). We could be like them if we did not have proper safeguards and preventative measures. Our death rate from Covid is 10 per million population.</p><p>For a whole year, until late July this year (2021), we had held deaths from Covid-19 to 36. </p><p>Then in late July, one more death. Then a slew of deaths in August. And it's the second half of Sept (as I write this) and total deaths have reached 70 <span style="color: #2b00fe;">[78 as at 26/9] </span>last I checked. More than 30 deaths from Covid-19 in 8 weeks. </p><p>Because of the Delta variant. <span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Assuming all the deaths since late July was due to the Delta variant, it has accounted for 42 deaths as at 26 Sept.]</span></p><p>The Delta variant changes the risk assessment of vaccination and non-vaccination. Or rather, I think it should, but some people are (still) not taking the Delta variant seriously. </p><p>Or still "assessing" the risk by the original Covid. </p><p>And thinking that they can be safe without vaccination?</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Costs/ Follow the money.</b></p><p>If you engage with Anti-vaxxers, one of their main "concern" is the fraud of it all. As I explain above, the chances are, you do not personally know anyone who has gotten sick from Covid-19 (the infection rate by population is less than 2 per 100). This allows anti-vaxxers to claim that Covid-19 is a hoax. It's not real. There is no virus and no pandemic.</p><p>So if there is NO virus, then there is no NEED for a vaccine. </p><p>Which brings us to the second "concern": The vaccine does not (need) to work, and it is just a money-making ploy by the pharmaceutical company. The rapid and miraculous development of the vaccine is also a matter of suspicion - vaccine development usually take years or even decades. And the need for booster shots just add to the "evidence" that this is a money-grab.</p><p>So you (the anti-vaxxer) can convince yourself that this is all a hoax and conspiracy.</p><p>And so, the Anti-vaxxers don't need to worry. </p><p>For now.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p> </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-63996674801726405602024-02-03T14:58:00.003+08:002024-02-06T23:07:02.749+08:00Would China initiate a forceable "reunification" of Taiwan in the near future?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjC2hygQIdcLKLZJoTK4UN_YAfIk-k1hdbaZOLKNuxKEfYLumwIrFT2_L7IIWcwh5HJsykGZgKJG1go4i10yqrbXd3WR6pTqyv-5nXq6PueJg8vkXSXHu0-nJoJofJu5zx73t7GjrxTJUWYXQgHlUijHfMSHKxAx7dzhrxgf7g5e-oMTOfUH5uwnGTsuxxw/s220/Kinmen.gif" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="209" data-original-width="220" height="608" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjC2hygQIdcLKLZJoTK4UN_YAfIk-k1hdbaZOLKNuxKEfYLumwIrFT2_L7IIWcwh5HJsykGZgKJG1go4i10yqrbXd3WR6pTqyv-5nXq6PueJg8vkXSXHu0-nJoJofJu5zx73t7GjrxTJUWYXQgHlUijHfMSHKxAx7dzhrxgf7g5e-oMTOfUH5uwnGTsuxxw/w640-h608/Kinmen.gif" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div><div>1) If China's growth had continued to stay strong,<span style="color: red;"> then China could afford to be patient.</span> China could simply continue to grow, continue to get rich and richer, continue to build up her Navy (and military), and train her Aircraft Carrier crew, and prepare to invade Taiwan in the future. </div><span><a name='more'></a></span><div><br /></div><div>2) BUT China's growth has stalled. China is NOT getting very much richer, very much faster. (It might still get richer, but it would be incremental, and slower).<span style="color: red;"> China's slower growth also means that it is not likely to surpass the US in the near future. </span>Or even any future. Which means that China doesn't have the luxury to be patient. Taiwan is slipping out of her grasp. If Taiwan ever was in China's grasp in the first place. </div><div><br /></div><div>3) Taiwan is IMPORTANT to China, not for their "PR" explanation of "One China", and the importance of "reunification". All that is the dog and pony show. To justify China's invasion of Taiwan. No, the real reason is that China is contained within the First Island Chain that keeps China from surging into the Pacific. China wants to break that chain that includes Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, and Malaysia and Indonesia. China has no hope of turning Japan, the Philippines, Malaysia, or Indonesia to ally with China. Well, China tried with a Duterte Philippines, but that ended with Duterte's term. So that leaves Taiwan. </div><div><br /></div><div>4) <span style="color: red;">Taiwan is therefore vitally important to the US's strategy of the Containment of China within the First Island Chain.</span> So while the US will still play the "Strategic Ambiguity" game as to whether it would (or would not) come to Taiwan's aid in case of an invasion, if there is even a chance of China breaking out of containment, the US will be there. </div><div><br /></div><div>5) China knows this (pt 4 above). It knows US "Strategic Ambiguity" is as bullshit as China's need to reunite Taiwan to restore and complete the One China ('s soul). </div><div><br /></div><div>6) Because time is running out for China (pt 2 above), China may be driven to <span style="color: red;">decide that "it's now or never", and that "there will not be a better time"</span>. And decide to invade Taiwan. Except... </div><div><br /></div><div>7) <span style="color: red;">China has seen how the world responded to Russia's invasion of Ukraine,</span> and China can expect the same. And China is more vulnerable to sanctions. And China is NOT ready to invade Taiwan. Or to face the prospects of debilitating sanctions. </div><div><br /></div><div>8) BUT... <span style="color: red;">War is not always a rational decision</span>. Xi and the CCP, faced with intractable problems domestically - youth unemployment (for graduates who do not want to work in factories for meagre wages), real estate/property development crash, municipal debts, an ageing population, insufficient social security (pension) for the rising numbers of elderly, economic and financial instability, and possibly (in the near future) opposition to Xi's continued leadership (maybe. Not sure how this would work in a communist country like China.) So to flex, Xi might just decide that he needs a military success/achievement (i.e. "to do a Galtieri" like when Argentina invaded the Falklands.) </div><div><br /></div><div>9) Realistically, China (and Xi) would know that <span style="color: red;">taking Taiwan would be a monumental task, and China is unlikely to succeed.</span> Moreover, the US and Japan is likely to intervene, which further reduces the probability of success. And failure would NOT be a flex. </div><div><br /></div><div>10) BUT, <span style="color: red;">there is a face-saving way out. </span>The Kinmen and Matsu islands. Or just the Kinmen Islands. If Xi declares that phase 1 of<span style="color: red;"> the reunification of Taiwan will begin with the taking of the Kinmen islands</span>, just 10 km off the coast of Fujian, it can be easily done. Taiwan would be hard pressed to defend these islands as it is only 10 km from the Chinese coast (well within Artillery range), but more than 100 km from Taiwan. It would be foolish for Taiwan to expend resources to defend or retake these islands, resources that Taiwan will need to defend the main island. So Kinmen could be taken easily. And the US would not be forced to intervene because this does not imperil the First Island Chain. China is still contained. So the US will sit pretty. Taiwan will fume. And Xi would have saved face.</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-40422418519711283492024-01-30T16:42:00.004+08:002024-01-30T16:42:31.762+08:00Tipping PointsThis video suggests that even as the world heats up, it would thaw the permafrost, and that would lead to a tipping point.<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XpqZTqIKMxs?si=f5PAygLE4riOXbT0" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br /> <br />So the world is trying to get to "net zero" when we add zero carbon into the atmosphere, so we do not add to the warming of the earth anymore.<span><a name='more'></a></span><div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9S6Sjg0UmiWxdi8zSX5BcgY-gfws7RtsFkKHfLRXOeMGeJ4paE_M7jHjWR8pZrPwuzjFZO8u2WaX0FMAx1kxGPfOsgz8bE2BUIbqGjYxRPMhHRG-41xFAJKxnxorOeF4wUuZoPALrlOdk2RqgR6OMDxDGqqI-j_D0Y_41cn_fxd5EhftpryGM__2PM27t/s1164/CO2levels.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="781" data-original-width="1164" height="430" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9S6Sjg0UmiWxdi8zSX5BcgY-gfws7RtsFkKHfLRXOeMGeJ4paE_M7jHjWR8pZrPwuzjFZO8u2WaX0FMAx1kxGPfOsgz8bE2BUIbqGjYxRPMhHRG-41xFAJKxnxorOeF4wUuZoPALrlOdk2RqgR6OMDxDGqqI-j_D0Y_41cn_fxd5EhftpryGM__2PM27t/w640-h430/CO2levels.png" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div>From the chart above, we are already passed the "safe level".</div><div><br /></div><div>Which means that we are not keeping to a 1.5 degree increase in global temperature. </div><div><br /></div><div>Which means that permafrost is likely to thaw, and that would add another 60 ppm to the 420 we are currently adding.</div><div><br /></div><div>Which means we are even further from the "safe levels".<br /><br />The developed world (US, and Europe mainly) already has an average carbon footprint of about 14 tonnes. </div><div><br /></div><div>The Chinese averages 8 metric tons per person. </div><div><br /></div><div>India's carbon footprint averages 2.3 tons per person only. </div><div><br /></div><div>But China and India are developing countries, and they aspire to the living standards of the US and Europeans - water heaters, air-conditioning, refrigerators, internet connection, smart phones, and personal motorised transport (whether ICE vehicles of EVs). 40-50 years ago, Beijing's road were clogged with bicycles. Now Beijing , Shanghai, Shenzhen, etc are clogged with motor vehicles. </div><div><br /></div><div>And India hopes to emulate China's growth and economic prosperity. So 1 billion US and European citizens can try to lower their carbon footprint by denying themselves some modern conveniences. </div><div><br /></div><div>Meanwhile 3 billion Chinese and Indians (and a few Africans) are trying to pull themselves out of (energy) poverty... and raising (inadvertently) their carbon footprint. </div><div><br /></div><div>It is not what the developed world can do, but what the developing world is doing or gonna do. </div><div><br /></div><div>And we cannot deny the developing world of the fruits of development. That would be... selfish. And it would mean forcing them to remain underdeveloped, with no heat, no refrigeration, no climate control (even as the world overheats), and no access to the internet? or personal transport? </div><div><br /></div><div>So what do I think? I think we aren't going to keep temperatures to 1.5 degrees increase. We have already exceeded the "safe" level. And with these tipping points, it's going to be beyond our ability to control rising temperatures. </div><div><br /></div><div>What we REALLY need to do is to come up with "Clean", non-carbon polluting energy. Solar is part of the answer (at best), but not the whole answer. We need to offer India and China ways to address their energy poverty that does not increase their carbon emissions. </div><div><br /></div><div>And we need to address the effects of climate change - Save/help the Island nations/communities of Maldives, Seychelles, Fiji, etc. </div><div><br /></div><div>Or we can continue to hope to keep climate change to 1.5 degrees.</div></div><div><br /></div><div>But remember: "Hope" is not a strategy.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-24079500847472180742024-01-27T14:55:00.006+08:002024-01-27T14:55:35.218+08:00SimplyGo and the Singapore Way.<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCdMIDO3_xyaIBn3RFZ0o-MvCHg0HouZf3vVmKFMQK3WEyUguUtszMXIE0xzfOdR-E13sf5XfGDdVmspmxF-3yN9-_6V1gzBis25GafUxnKxrUvF3RvbBv2htxbeYJ8nXweyRTlNapQZAe_tBWwIvve9HJ6MYsQH7WSm26dB-IfT7Prjn4DQ1EZtSt5y6z/s1425/TransitCardsSG.webp" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1425" data-original-width="1140" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiCdMIDO3_xyaIBn3RFZ0o-MvCHg0HouZf3vVmKFMQK3WEyUguUtszMXIE0xzfOdR-E13sf5XfGDdVmspmxF-3yN9-_6V1gzBis25GafUxnKxrUvF3RvbBv2htxbeYJ8nXweyRTlNapQZAe_tBWwIvve9HJ6MYsQH7WSm26dB-IfT7Prjn4DQ1EZtSt5y6z/w512-h640/TransitCardsSG.webp" width="512" /></a></div><br /><p></p><p>So on Jan 9, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) announced that the legacy "EZ-Link" card that many Singaporeans have been using will be phased out. </p><p>From 1st June 2024, only the new SimplyGo card can be used for Public Transport.</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>But that's still months away. And I have seen the SimplyGo Card in action. And I was not impressed.</p><p>With the EZ-Link card, which is a stored value card, when you go exit the bus or train station, it lets you know how much was your fare, and how much you have left in your card.</p><p>With SimplyGo, all you see is the logo: "SimplyGo".</p><p>And LTA was heartened by the fact that about 2/3 of Singaporeans were already using SimplyGo and feedback from these users was that they were quite accepting of the new System.</p><p>It was the "laggards" that were still using the old card-based ticketing system who needed to be prodded to change to the new system.</p><p>But why?</p><p>Firstly, the old system was reaching the end of its life, in terms of technology and infrastructure.</p><p>Secondly, maintaining TWO systems - the old stored value system, and the new SimplyGo cloud-based (?) system was costly, and inefficient.</p><p>Thirdly, we would eventually move over to SimplyGo anyway, so it's just a matter of moving things along faster.</p><p>So, on 9 Jan, LTA informed the laggards that they would have to catch up with technological advancements.</p><p>And that did not go down well with the laggards.</p><p>You see, it all smacks of elitism.</p><p>Why "elitism"?</p><p style="text-align: left;">If you ask a rich person how much money he has in his wallet, he will, at best, give you an estimate - "About $50.*, "Maybe $200". "Around $120". </p><p style="text-align: left;">Go ahead. How much money do you have on your person right now?</p><p style="text-align: left;">But ask a poor person how much he has, he will give you the exact figure. Because a poor person always knows EXACTLY how much he has at all times.</p><p style="text-align: left;"> SimplyGo is Simply Elitist: "You don't need to know how much you spent on public transit. It's public transit. It's nothing. Cos you're rich. You probably pay more for kopi!"</p><p style="text-align: left;">Which is why about a third of the commuters prefer the old EZLink. Because they are poor, or feel poor, or have a poor man's mindset. And they will not willingly change to the "Simply Don't Know, Just Go, OK?" system, or "SimplyGo" in short.</p><p style="text-align: left;">In a more "democratic" country (i.e. "Western" country"), the people will be organising demonstrations and protests in the streets. Maybe even blocking buses from moving.</p><p>In Singapore, there were noises on social media, and the press.</p><p>Meanwhile the Transport Minister had been arrested and charged in court. And he resigned his ministerial post, as well as his MP's seat.</p><p>All this is unrelated to the SimplyGo issue. But... maybe he didn't monitor this project as closely, cos he was busy watching football matches or theatre shows (Kinky boots)?</p><div>OK. But why did I think the govt would step in and reverse this decision?</div><p style="text-align: left;">Because it is a bad, unnecessary decision. Some people say it's because GE is close. But I say, regardless.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Because, I believe it is the Singapore Way for the govt to listen and respond. They do not need demonstrations and protest. They DON'T WANT demonstrations and protest. So in a way, they BETTER respond BEFORE it gets to the demonstrations and protest stage.</p><p style="text-align: left;">Also, the former Transport Minister has resigned after being charged for corruption.<br />So...</p><p style="text-align: left;">Anyway, Chee Hong Tat has taken over and new broom reverse unpopular programme.</p><div>So I need to update the Facebook status I posted on 19 Jan 2024:</div><div><br /></div><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><b>What's the worst job in Singapore, politically?</b><br />Being the Transport Minister.</span> </blockquote><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;">You either get castigated every time the trains breakdown or you're doing really well until you get arrested and charged with corruption!<br />(That's a "Tuck Yew" to whoever's gonna be Transport Minister after this!)<br />PS: About the SimplyGo cards: Tuck Yew, LTA!</span></blockquote><p>Third way being Transport Minister is the worst political job in Singapore:</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: red;">"You get "parachuted in/field promoted to" Transport Minister because your predecessor has been arrested and charged with corruption and has resigned (in disgrace!) leaving a elitist decision fiasco that has exploded leaving you to salvage the pieces and apologise for the "error in judgement" for rushing this project through without considering needs of a significant minority."</span></p></blockquote><p><b>Video: No go for SimplyGo:</b></p><p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7tBbFoxsMRc?si=zrlMrJmP1ioqsNOT" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-12717844132028264152024-01-22T09:21:00.004+08:002024-01-24T22:25:55.971+08:00Taiwan's 2024 Election <p> So Lai of the DPP won the presidency.</p><p>But Parliament is hung. No party has a majority to be able to form the govt. However, the KMT and the TPP could form a<a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2014/04/coalition-govt.html" target="_blank"> coalition govt</a> and leave the DPP as an opposition. President Lai would then be hindered and obstructed, and be unable to make or execute policies.</p><p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FWnUIZXlc44?si=nz1IiEUdMFCly9Bt" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br /></p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>DPP won 51 seats but needed 57 for a majority and to be able to form the govt. KMT got 52 seats, and TPP got 8.</p><p>This means that if the DPP wants to form a coalition govt, it would have to either convince the TPP to work together (51+8=59, enough to form a majority and form the govt), or the KMT. The KMT is unlikely to work with the DPP.</p><p>Iti is more likely that the KMT would join with the TPP (52+8 = 60) to form a coalition govt to try to block the president's policies.</p><p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SVRfcN4XoHQ?si=kmEyMmFQWadtxnc4" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br /></p><p>China is of course NOT HAPPY with the election of DPP's William Lai. He has been called (by China) a "troublemaker", and his reputation is as a "separatist", against reunification (as are probably all DPP leaders, to some degree or other.)</p><p>So some are speculating that his election to President of Taiwan, is more likely to trigger a shooting war with China. </p><p>But <a href="https://heresthenews.blogspot.com/2024/01/us-intel-shows-chinas-army-had-missiles.html" target="_blank">maybe not for a few years</a>.</p><p>China has taken to <a href="https://youtu.be/Ck3W_zyMTZE?si=pOjszKSt9KVXrnoJ&t=23" target="_blank">making blustering threats to Taiwan</a>, and continuing or escalating "grey zone" tactics to pressure Taiwan. China had characterised the Taiwan Election as a choice for peace or for war. Thus when the DPP won,<a href="https://youtu.be/I4DCHseSsHs?si=qrZ5fUt3wvLbmtXy" target="_blank"> countries congratulated William Lai for his victory, infuriating China</a>.</p><p>But China brought this upon themselves. </p><p>By threatening Taiwan with war if Lai/DPP won, China ensured that countries who did not want war (because that would be bad for the WHOLE World - just look at the Russo-Ukraine war.), needed to signal to China that if China starts a shooting war, they would be (or could be) on Taiwan's side, morally, diplomatically, militarily, or economically. </p><p>That China was infuriated (and possibly frustrated) means that the message was received loud and clear.</p><p>China is not likely to start a shooting war because she has seen what the western Democracies have done in terms of acting in unison in military support of Ukraine. She has seen what sanctions have done to Russia, and China is a lot more dependent on the free flow of goods for her economy. Locking Russia out of the world's banking system, and seizing Russia's financial reserves parked overseas have been crippling to Russia and may hurt China just as badly, if China started anything.</p><p>So that's the rational assessment.</p><p>But war and the decision to start one, is seldom rational.</p><p><b>Lai - "lame duck"?</b></p><p>The more interesting and applicable question is, how would <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/taiwans-new-president-faces-tough-time-with-china-pressure-no-parliament-2024-01-14/" target="_blank">Lai's presidency play out, without control of parliament</a>?</p><p>Assuming KMT and TPP form a coalition govt to oppose or obstruct the DPP's plans, Taiwan may be hard-pressed to make any coherent progress in the next 4 years.</p><p>Then again, the collapse of the alliance between the two opposition parties to put up a single presidential candidate against Lai, suggests that the differences between the two parties (KMT & TPP) may be too wide for them to work together. Thus if they do form a coalition govt, it may well implode before the term is up, and then DPP may have a shot at forming a coalition govt with TPP.</p><p>But this is all speculation at this point.</p><p>China will see what Lai says in the months leading up to his Inauguration (May). "China has unlimited patience in promoting peaceful reunification and zero-tolerance for any push for Taiwan independence". So as long as Lai does not push for independence, he would not provoke China. </p><p>Maybe.</p><p><br /><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-57837830386706063472024-01-13T14:51:00.008+08:002024-02-03T14:59:23.432+08:00What if... Malaysia and Singapore goes to war?<div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Edited/Amended in Jan 2024.</span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Yes, it is incongruous that I "refresh" this post just as Johor and Singpaore are looking forward to more cooperation and working towards passport-free travel between Johor and Singapore. But yes, I am hopeful for a "common market" for Johor and Singapore. This post is just a reaction to the video from a few years back.]</span></div><div><br /></div><div>There is this speculative video on YouTube:</div><div><br /></div><div>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y-hrbdsOP-E" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</div><div><br /></div><div>The video assumes that for whatever reason, and in whatever scenario, diplomacy has broken down, and war has been declared. This is an attempt to argue against the assumptions. </div><div><br /></div><h4 style="text-align: left;">1) Singapore is not worth conquering. </h4><div>Most invasions/occupations are for tangible benefits - land, oil, natural resources, etc. Singapore has limited land. Malaysia has LOTS of land (compared to SG). They don't need SG's land. SG has NO NATURAL RESOURCES. No gold. No oil. We even have to import SAND! But, you might say, SG is richer than MY! So wouldn't MY want to take those riches? </div><div><br /></div><div>But... the source of SG's wealth CANNOT be taken. It is intangible. </div><span><a name='more'></a></span><div><br /></div><div>SG is rich because it is well-run, well-organised, well-maintained, and stable. Guess what happens after a war? </div><div>SG is only worth conquering if you can take it almost bloodlessly, or with a minimum of fuss and damage, leaving most of the infrastructure and organisation undamaged. Which is why SG invest in defence - to make it messy. </div><div>SG is a small country and eminently "takeable" in war. Eventually. But the ashes the victor will have will be a pyrrhic victory. </div><div>Well, you may say, maybe THAT is the whole point - destroy SG so that Penang, or Port Klang, or Johor's PTP can become the new shipping hub and enjoy some of the wealth that SG is getting. Sure... shipping companies will shift their operations to the belligerent country that had warred on their previous (peaceful) base of operations. It speaks to the stability and integrity of that country and its ports. No, they would probably shift their operations to Indonesian ports. Or Thai. Or Philippines. </div><div><br /></div><h4 style="text-align: left;">2) BUT... War may not be a rational decision. </h4><div>Even if (1) above is true, couldn't MY invade for other reasons - jealousy, payback (for some imagined or real slight), to put SG in its place ("respect your abang!"), Mahathir got up off the wrong side of the bed...? </div><div>The point is, while there are NO rational reason for Malaysia to invade/try to conquer SG, a prudent defence does not plan based on what the opponent will (reasonably) do, but what it CAN do. Google "<a href="https://sghistoryunauthorised.blogspot.com/2023/11/operasi-pukul-habis-national-day-1991.html" target="_blank">Pukul Habis</a>". </div><div><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HgKMGo5jMlg?si=IamRGGMbqPBUrsst" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</div><div><br /></div><div>In 1991, Malaysia and Indonesia had a joint military exercise involving all three branches of their military. In Johor. Just 20 km (or less) from SG. On SG's 26th National Day. With SG having a new PM (GCT, just took over from LKY). And a lot of the SG military would be tied up with the National Day celebrations. And the Malaysia (and Indonesian) military were massed just 20 km from SG. </div><div>Oh, and in case you don't speak Malay, "Pukul Habis" means "total wipeout". If you were the new PM of SG, and you got this briefing, what would you do? Would you think that MY was planning to invade while you were celebrating your National Day with all your defences down? Oh, just one more thing to consider: Mahathir was the PM of MY at that time. </div><div>Oh, another thing to consider: When a country conducts military exercises, it is courteous to give notice to your neighbours that you are doing so to avoid causing alarm. It is a neighbourly thing to do, and Malaysia prides itself on its manners, courtesy and good neighbourliness. Oh, yeah, my point: they FORGOT to inform SG. </div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div></div><div><b>So how did SG find out?</b> Well, you can't mobilise troops and equipment for a military exercise without being noticed. <span style="color: #2b00fe;">SG would have intelligence agents and source monitoring Malaysia.</span> And also, I think the Indonesians were more courteous. Oh, and a third thing I forgot (or rather, I hope I don't have to spell this out): there have been a few instances in recent history when the start of an invasion began with a so-called "military exercise". (Then, i guess, they "accidentally" cross the border, and "inadvertently" secured some strategic bases, and before you know it, they had "unintentionally" occupied some territory. Just an honest mistake! Any army could make that mistake! Can't it?<span style="color: #2b00fe;"> e.g. Russo-Ukraine war</span>.) </div><h4 style="text-align: left;"><br />3) Peace is the real achievement. </h4><div>It is easy to start a war. But it is difficult to end it. And there are no winners, only losers and worse losers. Singapore's defence strategy is to be so difficult to invade that it is not worth the trouble. And the outcome of war will not prove who is right, only who is left. Oh, and a comment on the video. It's interesting, but it is only one version or one speculation as to the possible strategies and tactics. I would have liked to see some strategic moves. SG is so small, that ANY attack would likely take out some strategic asset. So, the question would be, "what strategic asset in MY would SG target?". Also what would be the opening gambit or pre-emptive strike? The blowing up of the causeway and the second link?</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><h3 style="text-align: left;"><b>Critique of the scenario/Alternative scenario</b></h3><div><br /></div><div>The scenario in the video assumes that SG would take a passive or reactive role.</div><div><br /></div><div>I think not.</div><div><br /></div><div>The best defence is a good offence. Especially, when one does not have "strategic depth". <span style="color: #2b00fe;">Singapore's defence doctrine has always been, fight on their soil. We don't have enough land to fight on. All our land has vital infrastructures or residences. If we have to fight on Singapore soil, we have already lost in some ways.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>Our airforce will need to establish air superiority and complete air dominance. That means taking out any enemy aircraft that is in the air and any time, and extending our air dominance over the WHOLE of Peninsula Malaysia. Eventually, this will mean damaging or<span style="color: red;"> destroying enemy air bases, and suppressing all flights. </span></div><div><br /></div><div>Reinforcements from East Malaysia would have to be repelled and kept out of the fray. </div><div><br /></div><div>Once air superiority or dominance is established, the next objectives would be to pin back their naval forces, and seize strategic assets, or destroy strategic targets. Or targets of national pride. Like the KL twin towers. </div><div><br /></div><div>Or the water treatment plants in Johor. </div><div><br /></div><div>Singapore will not <span style="color: #2b00fe;">start a war. But we intend to finish anything started.</span></div><div><br /></div><div>Malaysia has probably already assessed that Singapore would be a tough nut to crack<a href="https://sghistoryunauthorised.blogspot.com/2023/10/singapores-first-tanks-and-story-behind.html" target="_blank"> <span style="color: #2b00fe;">(since 1969)</span></a>, and that the Malaysian forces may not be able to prevail. That will still their hand.</div><div><br /></div><div>So our defence policy has worked in this case.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Depending on the diplomatic situation, if there is the possibility of Johor taking our side (what with the possibility of greater cooperation), Singapore may want to consider the how to work that in our favour. Realistically, this was a possibility when KL was antagonistic to Johor (i.e. Mahathir was PM and had a beef with the Johor Sultanate). But with an amiable Anwar, and the Johor Sultan taking over the Kingship, it is unlikely. Also unlikely that Malaysia will "test" Singapore belligerently.</span></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-18359719631732782622023-12-30T15:55:00.002+08:002024-02-03T15:00:00.629+08:00US strategy vis-a-vis China<p><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/E5IjZdMpstc?si=H12XuANxL-0pAQEN" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>The video above is a podcast with John Mearsheimer, the guest, explaining why China would not invade Taiwan.</p><p>In the first 2 minutes or so, John has to explain to Lex (the host) what "amphibious operations are difficult" mean. Lex is incredulous, as he asked (0:32) "So geography still has a role to play in the 21st century?"</p><p>Yes, Lex. Geography is still important,</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>But, Lex persists, isn't it "inevitable" that Taiwan will be part of China? After all, China is serious about uniting Taiwan, and has made that a priority concern.</p><p>2:48 - "There is no question that it is a top priority for them and there's no question that they mean it."</p><p>BUT... The US's top priority are,</p><p>a) To support their strategic military alliances in Asia. If the US lets China take Taiwan (without any military assistance from the US), then the other US allies will wonder if the US will be there for them if they are attacked/invaded.</p><p>b) To maintain the First Island Chain that effectively constraints or contains China, and Taiwan is part of that chain.</p><p>The US would like to maintain the first island chain, contain China, BUT not be drawn into a shooting match with China.</p><p>How to do this?</p><p>First, don't provoke China. So Taiwan must not declare independence, because China has already said (committed) to invade Taiwan if Taiwan declares independence!</p><p>Second, let China know that war will not give them what they want. The first way to do this is to be significantly stronger than China, so that China knows that they will lose for sure (and the US will win for sure). But that is no longer the case.</p><p>The next level of deterrence is where there would be no clear winner in a war. And that is probably where US and China are right now.</p><p>The final level of deterrence is where even if China wins, it would be a pyrrhic victory, because the costs of victory, would be so heavy.</p>The US is "offering" the last two options to China now. China is facing a stalemate or a pyrrhic victory at best. Neither of which is of any use to China.<div><br /></div><div>So the way forward for China is to keep growing stronger militarily until they can invade and occupy Taiwan quickly and decisively.</div><div><p>This is easier said than done. China's growth is slowing, and they have lots of domestic issues that will need to be addressed. And some issues are unlikely to be solved easily or at all.</p><p>IF China intends a quick and decisive victory over Taiwan, they will need to build up their amphibious assault crafts - lots of them. In the hundreds or even thousands. And these vessels would be for the sole purpose of invading Taiwan. Or they can also be used to invade Japan or Japanese islands. And the Philippines. And maybe Vietnamese islands.</p><p>In other words, once China builds up their sea lift capacity, and completes (successfully) the invasion of Taiwan, what do they do with all that sea lift capacity? Leave it to rot? Even if that is what they do, would her other neighbours - Japan, and the Philippines for example - believe that they are safe?</p><p>So China, in developing her sea life capacity in order to better invade Taiwan, would alarm her other neighbours, and might also tempt China to resolve some outstanding issues (such as the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands, Paracel Islands, etc) decisively. </p><p>Would China be able to build up a fleet of Amphibious Assault Vessels? Possibly, China can, But at what cost, and can China afford that cost now? And even if China can afford the material costs, would China want to invest in hundreds or even thousands of Amphibious vessels that would be for a single purpose? China has already opted for a compromise, or a more sustainable option - the creation of commercial transport that can be used in a military exercise, blurring the lines between "a civilian ship" and a "warship".</p><p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BGQJLl54Bqw?si=Xd4WKWFnF8WFVoyl" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>These "militarised" ferries, have been built or converted to <a href="https://youtu.be/BGQJLl54Bqw?si=I0M9GBFQwC_Gn2Ia&t=406" target="_blank">military standards</a>. Taiwan estimates that about 40 of these vessels have been modified allowing them to <a href="https://youtu.be/BGQJLl54Bqw?si=WqS46dAsEGjp_sjE&t=569" target="_blank">launch Amphibious Armoured Vehicles</a>,</p><p>However, these are NOT warships and cannot operate in contested waters. They are a compromise solution and can relieve some the of transport burden from Amphibious Assault vessels, leaving those warships to transport troops and tanks up to the beaches (contested waters). However, while 40 or so RORO ferries which have been built to military standards can help, they can only operate behind the front lines, and there are only about 40 of them. China needs like hundreds or even thousands. And be able to operate in contested waters (i.e. up to the beaches), and operate on undeveloped landing spots (like beaches). </p><p>So these are at best a partial and incomplete solution.</p><p>And China is running out of time to invade or reunite Taiwan.</p><p><b>First, its demographics are unfavourable. </b>Its population is ageing fast, and declining by the year. Its urban youth are educated, and single child (because of years of the "one-child policy"). Which means that every one of those single child are potential for a "Saving Private Ryan" movie - The PRC edition! (Just kidding. Xi Jinping doesn't care if any specific Chinese family bloodline dies out.) </p><p><b>Second, its economic growth is slowing.</b> Companies are pulling out of China (to Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, etc). its property and real estate sector are faltering, and pulling down the financial sector, its Belt and Road Initiatives are having <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/28/china-spent-240bn-belt-and-road-debts-between-2008-and-2021" target="_blank">a lot of defaults on loans</a>, and many developments are abandoned as incomplete or unfeasible. China was supposed to surpass the US as the biggest economy within the nest few years. Now, with its growth slowing, it is never going to surpass the US. Or at least not in the foreseeable future. And even if it somehow is able to be as big as the US, it has more than 3 times the population (currently) of the US. Which means on a per capita basis, China is at best a middle income country, and it has grown old before it has grown rich. And it can only grow its military at the cost of ignoring other urgent social expenditure (like social security/pension, aged care, healthcare, etc). </p><p><b>Thirdly, The US alliance</b> of Korea, Japan, and Philippines with the de facto ally of Taiwan, and with Japan militarising and building up it's self-defence force,<b> the US containment strategy and the First Island Chain will only be stronger.</b> Where in the past, China had to only wonder if the US would actively defend Taiwan, now China has to contend with Japan's and possibly Philippines's involvement as well.</p><p>The US is equipping the Philippines, and Japan is re-arming and upgrading, and Japan would soon have two de facto Aircraft Carriers (officially known as "Helicopter Destroyers"). Australia, will soon have nuclear-powered Virginia class submarines. The alliance arrayed against China is getting stronger.</p><p>So China may be growing stronger militarily, and if the US was standing still, that would be a non-moving goal post,</p><p>But the US is building alliances, and China is "helping" the US build alliances by her belligerence towards her neighbours, particularly in her Nine dash lines claims in the South China Sea, and disputes with Vietnam, Philippines, and Japan (Diaoyu/Senkaku islands). China is driving these countries into the arms of the US. These countries also learned the lesson of Ukraine. And realised they need strong military alliance when they are next door to a belligerent China. </p><p>So the world is best served with peace.</p><p><b>China trying to reunite Taiwan by force</b> is not going to do the world, and China, any favours economically. It is in China's interest not to upset the world's peace and stability. And the US has built an alliance around China to contain and dissuade China from doing so.</p><p>China is not content. But if China tries to break the First Island Chain by force, it will find that the cost would be heavy, and success is not assured.</p><p><b>If the US is unable to prevent a war and a shooting war breaks out with China</b>, the US objectives would be, 1) degrade the Chinese navy. 2) reduce China's shipbuilding capacity. This also means ports at Shanghai, Ningpo, Qingdao, Tianjin, Guangzhou, Dalian, Xiamen and Shenzhen. 3) degrade their economic bases - Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, and other cities near the coast, and maybe further like Wuhan and Chongqing. And maybe even the Three Gorges Dam. Certainly, China's 3 aircraft carriers would be legitimate targets, and would affect China's morale if sunk.</p><p><a href="https://youtu.be/FxYwD_n21wI?si=CRlV2y-52w8krPLV" target="_blank">China is too big to invade and conquer.</a> The best the US might do is maybe take and hold Hainan Island as a US military base. This would give the US a means to prevent China's access to the South China Sea, and to monitor Chinese Naval development. It would be a "knot" in the First Island Chain at the "throat" of China. The three objectives are all linked. Chinese Naval power threatens the US Naval dominance. So degrade the Chinese Navy. But China could rebuild their navy, given time and resources, so destroy or degrade their shipbuilding capacity. China can restore these too. So destroy their economic bases so they cannot afford to rebuild, or will take more time to rebuild.</p><p>China must see that if they hope to dominate the world, or at least their immediate neighbourhood by force, the US and her neighbours (who are US Allies) will push back, and China will be alone (like Russia for invading Ukraine), and the sanctions and adverse effects on China, will devastate China's economy and prospects. War will only degrade China's capability and capacity, and reverse China's rise. </p><p>Thus the US hopes to convince China that war will not serve China's purpose.</p><p>But the reality is that China may have other considerations...</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-28821817689675766952023-10-01T13:14:00.003+08:002023-10-01T13:14:21.362+08:00PE2023 results - President Tharman<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0GZZgatn43N420Iw_PKh3NWZBOGTSguFQtZ_SFdOWDkPTjPx-xR8y9jcxJEf21fSejXViMjTPhwfC0GWqBZz_flBG3ezY7mmwmDTqB-b_4pydviebDa6sor9Ce1ivxn1tI3Vw7xAmA09AkE8BRbVEADx-XUHfPVSR2ZBGRaG4BsYcXVBF1-6mh_SSAsyI/s1440/PE2023results.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1143" data-original-width="1440" height="508" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0GZZgatn43N420Iw_PKh3NWZBOGTSguFQtZ_SFdOWDkPTjPx-xR8y9jcxJEf21fSejXViMjTPhwfC0GWqBZz_flBG3ezY7mmwmDTqB-b_4pydviebDa6sor9Ce1ivxn1tI3Vw7xAmA09AkE8BRbVEADx-XUHfPVSR2ZBGRaG4BsYcXVBF1-6mh_SSAsyI/w640-h508/PE2023results.jpeg" width="640" /></a></div><p></p><p>The anti-climatic result of Presidential Election 2023 was a resounding mandate for Tharman Shanmugaratnam.</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>Ng Kok Song was a distant runner-up with 15.72% of the votes (against Tharman's 70.4%)</p><p>Not far behind Ng was Tan Kin Lian with 13.88% of the votes. This was more than the 12.5% of votes that Tan needed to NOT lose his deposit. So this was a better result for him than in 2011 when he forfeited his deposit. </p><p>So what does the result mean?</p><p>[Video: CNA delves into what it means:]<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Dbv7NLhw0c4?si=r8Fjy5wUCSJGi6YR&start=454" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>It is "conventional wisdom" that there is "core" 30% of Singaporeans that are Anti-Establishment, or more bluntly, "Anti-PAP". </p><p>For this 30%, they would basically vote for "anybody except PAP" regardless of the quality, manifesto, or ideals of the opposing candidate. </p><p>Tharman, being from the PAP and a Minister prior to his run for the Presidency, would clearly be seen and identified as "PAP". As such, the core 30% (Anti-PAP) would never vote for him.</p><p>Then George Goh threw in his hat for consideration. As the CEO of Harvey Norman, he was clearly not PAP, and was an immediate contender to take the "anti-establishment" 30%.</p><p>Then Ng Kok Song threw in his name for consideration,</p><p>Then Tan Kin Lian.</p><p>However, George Goh was ruled ineligible, and <a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2023/08/presidential-candidates-and-their.html" target="_blank">the pool of candidates were reduced to 3</a>. </p><p>So the simple expectation is that Tharman would draw the votes of the PAP supporters, and Ng and Tan (and Goh if he had qualified) would get the "Anti-PAP" votes. </p><p>Although Ng claims to be unaffiliated to the govt, the fact that he was formerly the Chief Investment Officer of the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC), and was famously mentioned by Lee Kuan Yew for teaching him meditation, meant that many would see him as "quasi-govt", and not completely "independent" (Where "independent" is broadly defined as anti-establishment/anti-government/anti-PAP.)</p><p>But where George Goh in a one-on-one matchup with Tharman would have picked up the 30% anti-PAP vote, in a three-way fight, with Ng Kok Song as a candidate, the 30% would be split.</p><p>And in the final match-up, Tharman would get most if not all of the pro-PAP votes. The "anybody-but-PAP" bloc would have two candidates to choose from. The extreme anti-PAP would go for Tan as Ng would be considered "tainted" by his association with the govt, and not truly independent.</p><p>But some of the more "conservative" anti-PAP would be leery of Tan, even with the endorsement of former PAP MP Tan Cheng Bock. </p><p>It is clear that those who were going to vote for Tharman would vote for him regardless of who stands against him. He is the establishment choice, the stable choice, and he is quite popular. Many Singaporeans have asked if it were possible for him to be the next PM.</p><p>And the fact that 70% of voters chose him says that most Singaporeans chose stability over delusional faux politics.</p><p>Tan's candidacy did not draw voters from Tharman. He drew voters from Ng. Quite likely, any number of alternative candidates would be splitting the share of 30% of votes. The govt (PAP) would have an implicit candidate. The Candidate would be seen to be pro-establishment, and would have risen from the ranks of the PAP or the Civil Service. And certainly the govt would not present two likely candidates that could split the votes of the majority. Politics in Singapore must be predictable and stable. </p><p>So having Tharman as the candidate, there would be no other "govt endorsed", or "pro-establishment" candidate.</p><p>In a One-on-One match-up between Tharman and Ng (or any other candidate), Tharman would be seen as the "establishment" candidate, and Ng would be the "non-PAP" candidate, and would take the Anti-PAP bloc's votes. He would be seen as associated with the govt, but maybe not. And the anti-PAP voters would go, "no fish, prawns also can". </p><p>So when Tan entered the race, he drew votes away from Ng, not Tharman. In other words, his candidacy was not significant... sort of. Well, we can see from the results, that of the 30% about half (almost 14%) are hard-core anti-PAP who would chose a (now) two-time loser like Tan over the "establishment" candidate.</p><p>And another half (almost 16%) while anti-establishment still wanted someone with the wherewithal to actually BE PRESIDENTIAL. Or at least be able to exercise the role and responsibility of the President.</p><p>In the 2011 Presidential Election, A.K.A. the "Four Tans" Election, Tony Tan (PAP), Tan Cheng Bock (ex-PAP, now Independent), Tan Jee Say (Opposition politician), and Tan Kin Lian (not affiliated to any political party), stood for elections. And you could see that the people were a little confused, and voted (IIRC) 35% for Tony Tan, 34% for Tan Cheng Bock, 20% for Tan Jee Say, and 10% for Tan Kin Lian.</p><p>The difference between Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bock were VERY CLOSE (a few hundred votes, definitely close enough to require a recount). Because BOTH were PAP politicians or ex-PAP. Tony Tan had been (IIRC) Deputy PM at one time, while Tan Cheng Bock was a long-serving PAP MP. And in this it was clear that even within the pro-PAP voters, about half of them were willing to drift from the Establishment, IF they were given a viable option (like Tan Cheng Bock). </p><p>[<b>Correction</b>: I just checked. Tony Tan got 35.2%, Tan Cheng Bock 34.85%, Tan Jee Say 25.04%, and Tan Kin Lian got 4.91%.]</p><p>In that PE, Tony Tan and Tan Cheng Bock vote share totalled... 70%! Which means that the pro-PAP vote was split!</p><p>And the anti-PAP vote totalled... 30%! Almost the same as this election.</p><p>So in 12 years, the Anti-PAP voting bloc remained unchanged.</p><p>So the conventional wisdom is still... wise.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-75349933945121258882023-09-18T16:13:00.002+08:002023-09-20T04:27:23.602+08:00ChatGPT answers: "Which is better? Malaysia's Roti Canai, or Singapore's Roti Prata?"So I read the newsfeed that said Roti Canai is ranked #1 while Prata is ranked #12. So I asked ChatGPT which is better. This was the answer generated:<div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><span style="color: #800180;">The preference between Malaysia's Roti Canai and Singapore's Roti Prata is subjective and can vary from person to person. Both dishes are delicious and have their unique characteristics, but there are some differences between the two:<br /><br /><b>Roti Canai (Malaysia)</b>: Roti Canai is a popular Malaysian flatbread that is known for its flaky and crispy texture. It is made from a dough that typically includes <u>flour, water, and ghee </u>(clarified butter).<br />It is often served with a variety of curries, including chicken curry, dhal (lentil curry), or fish curry.<br />Roti Canai is usually thin and crispy on the outside while soft on the inside. It can be folded or layered before serving.<br /><br /><b>Roti Prata (Singapore)</b>: Roti Prata, also known as Roti Prata in Singapore, is similar to Roti Canai in many ways. It is made from a similar dough of<u> flour, water, and ghee </u>or oil.<br />It is typically thinner than Roti Canai and is often cooked with more oil or ghee on a flat griddle, resulting in a slightly different texture.<br />Roti Prata is often served with various accompaniments, such as curry, sugar, condensed milk, or even ice cream.</span><div><br /><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibibvA-2oBmyjtzkKuAFmC_ADvRWJKQVP3DvzVj2Q8YHf5Bugi_Bl1X2OX_Z35w8ZoWu4lrLs0uOq9mbp773T4mfyshOhyLmBtfm3GXA7XmTDexx7lME3vvqs9VAeLfxbBbPORl4_gUA7vhzKiO_hJkthjqguLN9qhsYnnWt8oQu8WmCLnOxvWGQSjCnYe/s848/roti%20canai%20prata.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="601" data-original-width="848" height="454" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEibibvA-2oBmyjtzkKuAFmC_ADvRWJKQVP3DvzVj2Q8YHf5Bugi_Bl1X2OX_Z35w8ZoWu4lrLs0uOq9mbp773T4mfyshOhyLmBtfm3GXA7XmTDexx7lME3vvqs9VAeLfxbBbPORl4_gUA7vhzKiO_hJkthjqguLN9qhsYnnWt8oQu8WmCLnOxvWGQSjCnYe/w640-h454/roti%20canai%20prata.jpeg" width="640" /></a></div><span><a name='more'></a></span><div><br /><span style="color: #800180;">Ultimately, the choice between Roti Canai and Roti Prata comes down to personal taste. Some people prefer the crispiness of Roti Canai, while others enjoy the thinner and more oily texture of Roti Prata. Additionally, the choice of accompanying curry or other condiments can influence the overall flavor experience.<br /><br />If you have the opportunity, it's worth trying both Roti Canai and Roti Prata to see which one you personally prefer, as taste can be quite subjective, and both dishes have their own unique charm.</span></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><b>[<i>ChatGPT did not want to commit to an answer. Which is correct, because ChatGPT cannot eat or taste food, so should not have an opinion.</i>]</b></span></div><div><br /></div><br />So, TasteAtlas crowned Malaysia's roti canai as the <a href="https://www.tasteatlas.com/breads">best-rated bread in the world</a> (click on "best rated"). Or better than Singapore's Roti Prata. <a href="https://www.tasteatlas.com/best-rated-breads-in-the-world" target="_blank">Here, Roti Canai is ranked 2nd</a>. Singapore's <a href="https://www.tasteatlas.com/50-best-rated-breads-in-the-world" target="_blank">Roti Prata is ranked 11th here</a>. Anyway, ...the point is <span style="color: #ff00fe;">TasteAtlas is not very consistent or coherent </span>about their ranking. But consistently Canai is ranked higher than Prata.<br /><br />The terms roti prata and roti canai are sometimes used interchangeably but are they really the same thing?<br /><br />In a separate article by TasteAtlas on Sept 12 (now they seem a little defensive), they <a href="https://www.tasteatlas.com/no-theyre-not-the-same-roti-prata-vs-roti-canai?fbclid=IwAR2nOZbXRrq098abqmiSqTLauvTGI-60ukEJzPgFwnKygXTRqiXj6cKylvw">clarified that the two dishes are actually not the same</a>. <br /><blockquote><span style="color: #800180;">After TasteAtlas released the ranking of the world's best breads, in which Malaysian roti canai takes the first position (rating 4.9), and Singaporean roti prata ranks twelfth (4.6), many laughed, claiming that it’s the same dish," they shared. Even Wikipedia claims so! Well, it’s not.</span><div><span style="color: #800180;">Although they may appear quite similar at first glance, these culinary delights have their own unique identities, stemming from their distinct origins and preparation methods.</span></div></blockquote><div><b>How are roti prata and roti canai different?</b><br /><blockquote><span style="color: #800180;"><b>Origin</b><br /><br />Roti prata and roti canai both trace their roots back to the Indian subcontinent. Both dishes have their origins in the <a href="https://www.tasteatlas.com/paratha">Indian paratha</a>, a versatile and beloved flatbread. Paratha, a term derived from the Sanskrit words “parat” meaning layers and “atta” referring to wheat flour, is a versatile bread that finds its roots in North India.</span></blockquote><blockquote><span style="color: #800180;">Malaysians, similar to Indians, use the term “roti” as a blanket term for various types of bread, owing to its shared meaning in Sanskrit. The origins of “canai” are a matter of debate: some attribute it to Chennai, while others suggest it originates from the Malay term meaning “to knead.” There is also speculation that it may have derived from “chana,” the North Indian dish featuring chickpeas in gravy, often paired with a similar style of bread. While roti canai is often likened to the paratha, it’s worth noting that this delectable dish is not found in India, even though it bears a resemblance to the Malabar parotta.</span></blockquote><blockquote><span style="color: #800180;">The name “roti prata” is believed to have originated from two languages. “Roti” is a term of Indian origin, derived from Sanskrit, and it broadly refers to bread or flatbread. “Prata” is a Malay word that means “flat” or “thin.” When combined, “roti prata” essentially means “flatbread” or “thin bread.”</span></blockquote><blockquote><span style="color: #800180;"><b>Roti canai: Malaysia’s beloved creation<br /></b><br />Roti canai... is believed to have been introduced to Malaysia by Indian Muslim immigrants who adapted the original paratha to suit local tastes. What sets roti canai apart is its unique preparation method. The dough is kneaded with ghee (clarified butter), resulting in a soft, stretchy texture. The dough is then flattened, folded, and fried to achieve a crispy exterior and a soft, flaky interior. Roti canai is typically served with a variety of curries, making it a popular breakfast or anytime snack in Malaysia. </span></blockquote></div><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px;"><div style="text-align: left;"><b><span style="color: #800180;">Roti prata: Singapore’s take on Indian paratha</span></b></div></blockquote><blockquote><div><span style="color: #800180;">... Singapore’s roti prata shares its roots with roti canai but has developed its own identity over time. The key difference lies in the preparation and texture. Roti prata dough is typically made with a combination of flour, water, sugar, and condensed milk. This results in a slightly sweet taste and a denser, chewier texture compared to roti canai. Roti prata is also known for its paper-thin layers, achieved through skillful stretching and tossing of the dough. It is often served with a variety of savory and sweet accompaniments, making it a versatile choice for breakfast, lunch, or supper.</span></div></blockquote><div><b>Is roti prata really made with condensed milk?<br /></b><br /><a href="https://www.asiaone.com/lifestyle/are-roti-prata-and-roti-canai-same-food-guide-explains-difference-after-suggesting-its" target="_blank">Asiaone</a> has this to say: </div><div><br /></div><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div><span style="color: #800180;">Some Singaporeans reading this may be scratching their heads and wondering if roti prata is really made with condensed milk. </span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">Apparently, it may be. </span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">According to Roots, a Singapore government platform that shares more about our culture and history, the <a href="https://www.roots.gov.sg/en/ich-landing/ich/roti-prata#:~:text=While%20the%20standard%20ingredients%20used,may%20be%20added%20as%20fillings.">standard ingredients used to make roti prata</a> are flour, egg, salt, water, ghee, condensed milk, and sugar. </span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #800180;">Back in 2020, food blogger Dr Leslie Tay, also known as ieatishootipost, tried his hand at <a href="https://ieatishootipost.sg/how-to-make-roti-prata-aka-roti-canai-everything-you-need-to-know/">flipping his own roti prata at home</a> to pass time during the Covid-19 pandemic. </span></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">...he learned that the ingredients used to make prata are plain flour, water, condensed milk, oil or melted butter, salt and an egg. </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">But if you want a "leaner" prata dough (with a crisper texture), you can substitute the condensed milk with sugar instead. </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">He shared that the condensed milk "adds a nice caramel flavour and sweetness to the prata" while tenderising the dough and caramalising the dish. </span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">Leslie also revealed that in a conversation with a past patient, who hails from South India, he learned that while roti prata does exist in India, it's only a small part of South India, predominantly in Chennai.</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">"Over there, this dish is simply called prata. Indian migrants brought this dish to Malaya where it became known as roti prata," he explained.</span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">"The Malaysians, however, named this dish roti canai which means the 'roti' (bread) from Chennai." </span></div></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Tasteatlas summarises the difference:</div><br /><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;"><b>Main differences</b></span><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span><span style="color: #800180;">• Texture: The primary difference between roti prata and roti canai is their texture. Roti canai has a softer, flaky interior with a crispy exterior, whereas roti prata has a denser, chewier texture with paper-thin layers.</span><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span><span style="color: #800180;">• Ingredients: Roti canai uses ghee in its dough, giving it a distinct flavor, while roti prata includes condensed milk and sugar, contributing to its slightly sweet taste.</span><span style="color: #800180;"><br /></span><span style="color: #800180;">• Serving styles: Roti canai is often served with various curries, while roti prata pairs well with both savory and sweet accompaniments, such as dhal (lentil curry) or sugar.</span></blockquote><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><div style="text-align: left;">But I'm not so discerning. As far as I'm concerned, prata and canai are the same. Heck, there are probably more variations between prata by different hawkers as there are between prata and canai!</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"><b><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Sept 20 addendum:</span></b></div><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #2b00fe;">My personal opinion is that to claim that Canai and Prata are distinct and different is to be splitting hairs. And Yahoo News agrees!</span></div><br /><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><b><a href="https://sg.news.yahoo.com/roti-canai-vs-roti-prata-tasteatlas-misleading-malaysians-singaporeans-022814394.html" target="_blank">Roti Canai vs Roti Prata: Is TasteAtlas misleading Malaysians and Singaporeans?</a></b><br /><i>TasteAtlas's list wasn't really the problem, but their accompanying article had gotten some things wrong</i></blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;"> <span style="color: red;">TasteAtlas, a food encyclopaedia based in Croatia</span>, also seems to agree, and thinks there is a big enough difference to rank the two dishes separately with the release of their "100 Best Rated Breads in the World" list on 10 September.</p></blockquote><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;">The list, determined by 9,461 ratings from its audience at the time, <a href="https://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/roti-canai-takes-crown-world-040022884.html">placed Roti Canai from Malaysia at the top</a>, while Roti Prata from Singapore came in at 12th...To accompany this list, <a href="https://www.tasteatlas.com/no-theyre-not-the-same-roti-prata-vs-roti-canai">they even released an article detailing the "differences" between the two dishes</a> as well.<br />In it, they state that the ingredients for both the dishes are different. [See above.] </blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;"> <b>No, they are not.</b></p></blockquote><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;">As far as the Canai and Prata-loving Malaysian and Singaporean co-writing this article are concerned, releasing the misinformed article together with the list only misleads their audience about the controversy surrounding the food rankings and how these two food items are made.<br />There are big reasons why people are up in arms over the silly rank placements, because the two dishes are literally the same thing flipped differently at the end of the day...<br />So here we are, writing an article with actual facts on how the name "Roti Canai" and "Roti Prata" came about, together with recipes from both countries to show case how they're made, and with input from chefs to explain the actual "differences", if there are any to begin with.</blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;"> <b>A brief history on the origins of Roti Canai and Roti Prata</b></p></blockquote><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;">These two <a href="https://malaysia.news.yahoo.com/10-must-try-roti-canai-120058146.html">circular, crispy flatbreads</a> have long been a staple snack, breakfast item, lunch, dinner, and late-night curry accompaniment for people of all ethnicities in Malaysia and Singapore.<br />According to <a href="https://eresources.nlb.gov.sg/infopedia/articles/SIP_869_2005-01-11.html">origin articles from both sides of the causeway, </a>the two cherished South Asian flatbreads share a <a href="https://www.slurrp.com/article/the-origin-of-roti-canai-the-malaysian-flatbread-1645444010374">common historical origin rooted in India's paratha and parotta traditions</a>.<br />They arrived in Malaysia and Singapore during the 19th century, courtesy of Indian immigrants, predominantly from <span style="color: red;">Tamil Nadu</span>. These pioneers skilfully adapted their traditional recipes to accommodate local ingredients and preferences.<br />Roti Prata emerged as a culinary gem in Singapore, bearing a name derived from the Sanskrit word "paratha," blended with the multicultural linguistic environment.<br />In contrast, Malaysia, particularly in Penang and the north, welcomed "parotta" as "Roti Canai". The origin of the term "Canai" is a subject of debate. Some suggest it may have its roots in Chennai, while others believe it is linked to a Malay word meaning "to knead."<br /></blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;"> ...<span style="color: red;">At their core, both Roti Canai and Roti Prata share a common doughy ancestry.</span> The dough is typically crafted from a blend of wheat flour, water, and a touch of fat or oil.</p></blockquote><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><a href="https://www.kuali.com/recipe/finger-food/roti-canai/">According to recipes from both countries</a>, a ratio of <a href="https://ieatishootipost.sg/how-to-make-roti-prata-aka-roti-canai-everything-you-need-to-know/">ghee and condensed milk are also thrown into the mix</a>. It is not exclusive to either country, as TasteAtlas claims.<br /><span style="color: red;">Ghee is not exclusive to Roti Canai, and condensed milk is not exclusive to Roti Prata. </span>They both use them...<br /></blockquote><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0 0 0 40px; padding: 0px;"><p style="text-align: left;"> In fact, <span style="color: red;">it really depends on the chef on how crispy or chewy they want their Roti to be.</span></p></blockquote><blockquote style="border: medium; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;">It's the art of stretching, flipping, and folding this dough repeatedly that gives these flatbreads their distinct flaky and crispy texture. This practice really is the spectacle of any kind or Prata or Canai making, and is the main reason why there is a possible variance between the two dishes.<br /><span style="color: red;">Both versions can also come in multiple variants</span> of stuffing besides the original famously known as 'roti kosong' (empty), like egg, cheese, onions and some even go as far as durian.</blockquote><div class="caas-body-wrapper" style="text-align: left;"><div class="caas-body-content"></div></div><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Thank you Yahoo News for being the voice of common sense!</span><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">As someone who grew up with Prata - my father used to take the family out for movies (Hoover theatre on Balestier) and then on the way home, we would stop by the Prata stall opposite Bidadari Cemetery, where he would order several pieces of prata - kosong, as well as egg. Sometimes, there would be murtabak!</span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">But prata has also changed over the years. </span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Kosong prata also used to be square or rectangular. But as the size shrunk (due to costs), the dough for kosong got smaller and unable to consistently make a square, let along a rectangle. So the chef adapted, and swirled the folded dough into circles/round shapes.</span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">To this day, if I find a stall that makes kosong square, it becomes my favourite prata stall.</span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">As it is, if I want my squarish prata, I have to order Onion (no egg) prata. </span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">And the reason I want it squarish is because it is more crispy that way.]</span><br /><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2228; font-family: "YahooSans VF", "Yahoo Sans", YahooSans, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 18.005px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-color: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><br /></span></div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-51844518963929526552023-09-08T23:58:00.003+08:002023-10-29T13:19:33.139+08:00ChatGPT answers: "How does Singapore's Hainanese Chicken Rice Compare with Hainan's Wenchang Chicken?"<i>I asked ChatGPT to compare Singapore's Hainanese Chicken Rice with the Original Hainan Wenchang Chicken, and this was it's answer (after the video):</i><br /><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OpVRdpADu8A?si=76L5khZE-SHBys2F&start=454" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Video: Andong visits Wenchang, Hainan to try the original Wenchang Chicken, then drops in on Singapore to try Singapore's Hainanese Chicken Rice.</span><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span><a name='more'></a></span></span><br />"Singapore's Hainanese Chicken Rice and Hainan's Wenchang Chicken are both popular dishes that originate from Hainan Province in China, but they have some key differences in terms of preparation, flavor, and presentation. Here's a comparison of the two:<br /><br /><b>Chicken Preparation:</b><div><u>Hainanese Chicken Rice (Singapore)</u>: In Singapore's Hainanese Chicken Rice, the chicken is usually poached in a flavorful broth made with ginger, garlic, and sometimes pandan leaves. After poaching, it's immediately dunked in ice water to stop the cooking process, resulting in tender and slightly gelatinous skin.<br /><u>Wenchang Chicken (Hainan, China)</u>: Wenchang Chicken, on the other hand, is typically prepared by boiling the chicken in plain water, seasoned only with salt and sometimes a dash of sesame oil. This method retains the natural flavors of the chicken.<br /><br /><b>Rice:</b></div><div><u>Hainanese Chicken Rice (Singapore)</u>: The rice served with Singapore's Hainanese Chicken is fragrant and flavorful. It's cooked in the chicken broth, often with additional ingredients like ginger and garlic, which infuse it with a rich, aromatic taste.<br /><u>Wenchang Chicken (Hainan, China)</u>: Wenchang Chicken is traditionally served with plain, steamed white rice. The focus here is on the simplicity of the chicken's flavor.<br /><br /><b>Sauces:</b></div><div><u>Hainanese Chicken Rice (Singapore)</u>: It is typically served with three dipping sauces: chili sauce, ginger paste, and dark soy sauce. These sauces add layers of flavor and spice to the dish.<br /><u>Wenchang Chicken (Hainan, China)</u>: In Hainan, Wenchang Chicken is often served with a simple sauce made from ginger, garlic, and vinegar. It's not as spicy or complex as the sauces used in Singaporean Hainanese Chicken Rice.<br /><br /><b>Presentation</b>:</div><div><u>Hainanese Chicken Rice (Singapore)</u>: In Singapore, Hainanese Chicken Rice is often presented with the chicken sliced and arranged neatly on a plate, with the rice served on the side. The sauces are usually served in small bowls.<br /><u>Wenchang Chicken (Hainan, China)</u>: In Hainan, Wenchang Chicken is typically served as a whole chicken, either chopped into smaller pieces or left whole and presented with the sauce and plain rice. The focus is on the simplicity and natural flavors of the chicken.<br /><br />In summary, while both dishes share their origins in Hainan, they have evolved differently in terms of preparation, flavors, and presentation. Singapore's Hainanese Chicken Rice is known for its fragrant rice and flavorful dipping sauces, while Hainan's Wenchang Chicken emphasizes the natural taste of the chicken with a simpler approach to seasoning and presentation. Your preference may depend on whether you prefer a more complex, aromatic dish or a simpler, more natural chicken flavor."</div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[<b>Oct 29 edit/addendum</b>:</span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Since publishing this post, I have continued investigating and researching this topic, and have come to this conclusion: Wenchang Chicken refers to the way the Chicken is raised and bred and fed. Not the way the chicken is prepared. Wenchang Chicken are mostly/sort of "free range" chicken fed on coconut flesh (?) mainly, and reared to 90 days. </span></div>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aZ1rD7CcbvQ?si=qo0kIhH4zC0tHEnh" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">Wenchang chicken can be prepared in many ways. For example, simple boiling like ChatGPT suggests (above) or salt-baked, or as in the video above, stewed in coconut milk (?), or stir-fried. </span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">So "Wenchang chicken" does not have a prescribed preparation method, like "Hainanese Chicken Rice" would. Saying a chicken is a "Wenchang Chicken" is similar in implication as saying a chicken is a "Kampong Chicken". And (coincidentally?) the skin of Wenchang chicken and Kampong chicken tends to be (?) yellowish. ]</span></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></div><div><br /></div><div></div></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-84297104062052523292023-08-29T18:22:00.003+08:002023-09-08T15:11:49.739+08:00What if...<p>To be honest, I have not really considered or wondered about the outcome of the PE2023.</p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMBiMosy0gr8CiUwZlpoAPLBf3YRSQCPr98PrWt2G2HZODxl3ndd_ZmjebpG-l7-Mzgcl8_qEDwH8XSUQA1liVBZz1BgxWldbe_cQdzDvcmeXkss2qP_X4si7TqsU78R88CLn_gJFq7WxSR56X-rvKIfKXdn4M8vIWSvL3evEWin8uJ6ehRijamBhjCpzM/s621/PE23%20candidates.png" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="331" data-original-width="621" height="342" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMBiMosy0gr8CiUwZlpoAPLBf3YRSQCPr98PrWt2G2HZODxl3ndd_ZmjebpG-l7-Mzgcl8_qEDwH8XSUQA1liVBZz1BgxWldbe_cQdzDvcmeXkss2qP_X4si7TqsU78R88CLn_gJFq7WxSR56X-rvKIfKXdn4M8vIWSvL3evEWin8uJ6ehRijamBhjCpzM/w640-h342/PE23%20candidates.png" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Presidential Candidates 2023</td></tr></tbody></table><br /><div><br /></div><div>It really doesn't matter which of these become POTROS.</div><p>Simply because in the day-to-day running of Singapore, POTROS has no role. </p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>So if for example, POTROS is under the impression that he can make significant policy for Singaporeans, he would be mistaken.</p><p>The most the President can do, is to hold up legislation that requires his assent.</p><p>So if, for example, MND tables a motion to incorporate the Standard, Plus and Premium BTO scheme, and Parliament passes the law, POTROS can refuse to assent to the bill, passing it into law.</p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[This is just an example. Based on what PM said at NDR 2023. I DO NOT KNOW if it needs parliamentary endorsement.]</span></p><p>POTROS is not able to, for example, unilaterally abolish s377A of the Penal Code, or abolish the Death Penalty, or legalise the sale of chewing gum. </p><p>Nor can POTROS reduce or abolish GST, the COE scheme, or decommission the Public Transport Council. Nor affect CPF contribution rates, nor affect the retirement age, nor allow full withdrawal of one's CPF balance at age 55, or do away with the restrictions on the Special Account or in any way affect the operations of the CPF Board.</p><p>So... What if...</p><h4 style="text-align: left;">Tan Kin Lian is President</h4><p>To be honest, I have NO IDEA what is his campaign promise, or what he hopes to do. In the forum, he mentioned including care for the very old (above 80 yrs old) with the President's Charity.</p><p>He had ran for President in 2011 and lost so badly that he forfeited his deposit. Now he wants to try again. And now he has the endorsement of Tan Cheng Bock, a former PAP MP and later opposition politician, and also former presidential candidate in 2011 (a close runner up). If Tan Cheng Bock's supporters vote for him, he should not lose his deposit. </p><p>As President, he might be deluded enough to try to be "independent" and may try to throw his weight around. He may challenge Parliament to show his independence, but eventually, he may learn that he has no room to manoeuvre. And then he will settle down.</p><p></p><h4 style="text-align: left;"><br />Ng Kok Song<br /></h4>Also wants to care for the elderly, sick, and poor, and also their care-givers, and volunteers. He is seen as a "pro-establishment" candidate, being the Chief Investment Officer of GIC and tied to various govt and pseudo-govt organisation. He is also known as the man who taught Lee Kuan Yew meditation. <p></p><p>As one who has worked with or within the govt, he should know and is unlikely to exceed the boundaries of his role. </p><p><br /></p><h4 style="text-align: left;">Tharman Shanmugaratnam</h4><p>He had said that the role of the President was as a unifying symbol and to "uplift people" (whatever that means). </p><p>As a former Minister in the PAP govt, and an MP, he would be aware of the role of the President in the legislative process, and would know that the President has no political role. </p><p>He is seen as the most "establishment" candidate, most unlikely to rock the boat, and most unlikely to have delusions about the role of the President. </p><p>Singaporeans had indicated that they would have liked him to be the next Prime Minister of Singapore, but he is too old (born 1957, 66 yrs old in 2023), and would have to start looking for a successor immediately. As it is, the previous PM-designate, Heng Swee Keat, had asked to be taken off consideration as the next PM because he felt he was too old and would not have enough time to be a good PM before having to find a successor. He was born 1961, and is now (2023) 62 yrs old. Younger than Tharman.</p><p>However, there is some anti-establishment feeling and resistance to voting Tharman as President. </p><p>For some reason, Singaporeans feel like the President should be non-establishment (if not outright anti-establishment). And by "establishment" they mean "PAP".</p><p>Which is stupid. </p><p>The President acts as the "goalkeeper", and we want the goalkeeper to help the other team score?</p><p><br /></p><p>Video: About the Elected Presidency - by Walter Woon.<br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wKZTbCUHsSc?si=OmgPy78PiScOk4pf" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-47100721210264679232023-08-25T17:03:00.006+08:002023-08-25T17:03:31.385+08:00President of The Republic of Singapore (POTROS) Election 2023<p>And so we find ourselves with three candidates for POTROS. I know. We don't call our President, POTROS for short, like the US calls theirs POTUS (President of the United States). But we are the country that LOVES acronyms - CPF, HDB, PIE, BTO, CTE, COE, MOE, CMPD, CPIB, etc.</p><p>So why not POTROS?</p><p>But I digress. </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://media.nedigital.sg/fairprice/fpol/media/images/product/XL/13046061_XL1_20230110.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="800" data-original-width="800" height="640" src="https://media.nedigital.sg/fairprice/fpol/media/images/product/XL/13046061_XL1_20230110.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><span><a name='more'></a><br /></span><div><span>Of the three candidates, one is at risk of making a donation to Singapore by forfeiting his deposit as he had done previously.</span></div><div><span><br /></span></div><div>My summary of the <a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2023/08/presidential-candidates-and-their.html" target="_blank">reasons to vote for them have been posted earlier</a>.</div><div><br /></div><div>But the real reason to vote for any of them is whether they would work within the framework of Singapore's political and governance structure.</div><div><br /></div><div>What is the role of the President, and how does he (or she) work with the Government?</div><div><br /></div><div>Unfortunately, by making the President an Elected position, it has unfortunately politicised the position of POTROS, and some candidates have sort to carve out a political role for the President.</div><div><br /></div><div>There is no such role. </div><div><br /></div><div>But it does not stop the deluded, and the delusional from their aspiration.</div><div><br /></div><div>And for them to try to entice the voters to vote for them under wrong pretences. </div><div><br /></div><div>I have not bothered to listen to the candidates' "politicking" or their campaigns, or their promises. </div><div><br /></div><div>The elected president simply needs to work within the constitution and within their powers as granted by the legal framework. </div><div><br /></div><div>All other extraneous "promises" are just so much hot air. </div><div><br /></div><div>And in fact the more extraneous promises are made, the less likely I will vote for that candidate because those mendacious promises show either a misunderstanding of the role of POTROS, or an unmitigated willingness to delude and mislead voters for the purpose of winning the election.</div><div><br /></div><div>If the election does not really matter, I would vote for the candidate that might result in an Istana Wedding, if for no other reason than to see how the Istana staff execute that event. It may well be fantastic.</div><div><br /></div><div>Otherwise, I should vote responsibly.</div><div><span><br /></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-24920438490514052752023-08-24T13:04:00.002+08:002023-08-24T13:04:40.504+08:00 Presidential Candidates, and their respective campaigns in brief:<p><b>1) Tan Kin Lian</b> - "Vote for him so he doesn't lose his deposit!"</p><b>2) Ng Kok Song</b> - "Vote for him so we can have an Istana Wedding!"<div><br /><b>3) Tharman Shanmugaratnam</b> - "Vote for him so another Indian Minister can stay in a Govt bungalow... for free! (making him luckier than Vivian and Shanmugam!)"</div><div><br /></div><div><img alt="Ah Huat Instant Traditional Black Coffee - Kopi O Kosong | NTUC FairPrice" height="640" src="https://media.nedigital.sg/fairprice/fpol/media/images/product/XL/13046061_XL1_20230110.jpg" width="640" /></div><div>Kopi-O Kok Song - a meme from social media associated (by netizens) with one of the candidates.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-41018686643573705432023-06-13T20:12:00.008+08:002023-06-13T20:12:59.784+08:00Why Tharman is standing for Election as President of Singapore<p> <img alt="SM Tharman Shanmugaratnam to contest Singapore's upcoming Presidential Election, intends to resign from Cabinet" height="479" src="https://onecms-res.cloudinary.com/image/upload/s--EUs3tZiY--/f_auto,q_auto/c_fill,g_auto,h_622,w_830/v1/mediacorp/tdy/image/2023/06/08/20150814_dw_ministertharmaness10_1.jpg?itok=Zuqz-S_h" width="640" /></p><p>1) If he wins, he will move into the Istana... A government Bungalow. </p><p>2) As President, he will stay there... Rent-free!</p><p>3) The other two Indian Ministers have to pay rent for the Government Bungalows at Ridout Road.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-12089123396392513972023-04-08T19:29:00.006+08:002023-08-27T20:03:14.880+08:00"Rules Set you Free!"<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AGkAyZ3tlj4?start=591" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p>This is a video interview of a Spanish woman who is living in Singapore:</p><p><span style="color: #800180;"><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;">TIMESTAMPS:
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=0s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">00:00</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> INTRO
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=49s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">00:49</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> What does Ana miss in Singapore?
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=80s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">01:20</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> How to make friends in a new country
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=144s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">02:24</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Getting PR after 1 year
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=287s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">04:47</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Social circle in Singapore
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=400s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">06:40</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Expat Life in Singapore
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=504s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">08:24</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Kindness of Singaporeans
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=591s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">09:51</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Crazy driving in Singapore
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=697s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">11:37</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> What foreigners should know about Singapore
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=911s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">15:11</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Rules in Singapore
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=994s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">16:34</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> Europe VS Singapore
</span><span class="yt-core-attributed-string--link-inherit-color" face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); border: 0px; font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; margin: 0px; orphans: 2; padding: 0px; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"><a class="yt-core-attributed-string__link yt-core-attributed-string__link--display-type yt-core-attributed-string__link--call-to-action-color" force-new-state="true" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGkAyZ3tlj4&t=1113s" rel="nofollow" style="display: inline; text-decoration: none;" tabindex="0" target="">18:33</a></span><span face="Roboto, Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.1); font-size: 14px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; white-space: pre-wrap; widows: 2;"> About domestic helpers</span></span></p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p><b>Singapore just works</b></p><p>I was struck by her comment starting from @11:58 in the video. "The one thing that I will miss about Singapore... is the peace of mind". </p><p>She goes on to elaborate that "peace of mind" was because Singapore is efficient, that Singapore "just works". And she goes on to attribute that to Singapore's fairness and rules (from 15:11). That the rules are in place for EVERYONE, and that is why it is fair, and it works, and that we do not have to scheme and connive and cut corners (like in Russia, or Spain, or Italy, from 13:44) to ensure that we get what we want earlier or faster. We will get it fast. Because Singapore is efficient. And the rules are for everyone, and the rules are fair.</p><p>She is amazed that Tax Returns can be submitted in 10 minutes!</p><p>Peace of mind.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>Becoming too Singaporean</b></p><p>BUT...</p><p>@15:04 she says, "Singapore Grows in you. And that makes you totally unadapted to live anywhere else" - because you come to expect that Singapore Efficiency, that Singapore Fairness of Rules, that simple peace of mind from following the rules.</p><p>Yes. That is the hazard of living in Singapore, and becoming too "Singaporean".</p><p><br /></p><p><b>"They turn into Monsters!"</b></p><p>@8:33 She speaks of the kindness of Singaporeans. And how that "kindness" simply disappears when they drive (@9:52), and <a href="https://youtu.be/cUTWDhWrnDU" target="_blank">"they turn into Monsters"</a>.</p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mwPSIb3kt_4?start=26" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p>As a Singaporean, I would like to believe that things are changing for the better. Slowly. Maybe. I still would not drive on Singapore roads because I don't trust Singapore drivers NOT to be monsters. So... I guess I'm not putting my money where my mouth is, am I?</p>Spiderman's Uncle Ben told him, "with great power comes great responsibility". If drivers listened to Uncle Ben, they would recognise their great responsibility while driving a car with great power.<br />However, I think most Singaporeans subscribe to the "With great vulnerability, comes great responsibility" doctrine. If you get hit by a car, you will suffer. So it's YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to look out for traffic.<br /><br />I think the "Great Vulnerability" doctrine is a natural doctrine. The "Great Power & Responsibility" doctrine is higher, civilised principle that we Singaporeans have to first recognise and then maybe aspire to, before we can achieve it. I think (or hope) that as more Singaporeans travel and are exposed to other cultures, with more civilised behaviour, we will assimilate these behaviours and values for ourselves. But that would be a slow process. So for now, watch out for traffic!<br /><br /><br /><b>Domestic help</b><br /><br />Ana speaks with empathy about foreign domestic help - about women who have to leave their home, and work for strangers in a strange land, just to provide for their families back home. And they choose this because staying at home with their family would be worse, in terms of poverty and privation. This way, they can offer their families some hope.<div><br /></div><div>This is a complex and complicated issue. </div><div><br /></div><div>Maybe it is a form of slavery. Or exploitation. </div><div><br /></div><div>Or maybe it is simply a way of moving labour where it is needed. </div><div><br /></div><div>But yes, the employer of foreign help needs to remember the dignity of the person they have hired.<br /><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[<b>20th April Addendum</b>:</span></p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">There are horror stories of how Singapore <span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">employers mistreat and abuse foreign maids. </span></span></p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">And then there is this story about foreign, possibly illegal farmworkers:</span></span></p><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/41vETgarh_8" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">Yes. This is me trying to "what about" this issue. The mistreatment farmworkers get in the US can be worse than the abuse foreign maids suffer in Singapore. Sometimes.</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">This isn't about how much worse the abuse is in the US or in Singapore, but that it occurs, and it occurs because of the power disparity between employer and foreign workers. </span></span></p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">Yes, this is a sad attempt to say, "yeah well, maybe SOME Singaporeans mistreat our foreign workers, but so does the US, and some European countries too!"</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);">Yes, we are all guilty, and we can all do better.]</span></span></p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(43, 0, 254);"><br /></span></span></p></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-92064811866034416412023-03-17T23:25:00.008+08:002023-04-20T09:20:55.513+08:00Comment: What is wrong with the banks (Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, Silvergate Bank) and now Credit Suisse?<p>And of course, as with all these international financial issues, if you are a Singaporean with a bank account, you will want to know: 1) Does this affect me? and 2) Should I be worried?</p><p>The sort of good news is, you need not worry. </p><p>Maybe.</p><p>This video provides a clear explanation.</p><p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2f8O3LyXhMU" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>
</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>In summary,</p><p>1) During low interests rates, low investment environment, Banks invested in safe secure, low interest securities like T-bills for the long term (to get better interest rates).</p><p>2) For banks in niche markets (like Crypto, or Tech start-ups), their customers in the last few years were cash strapped and had to draw on their case reserves in the banks. These customers made huge withdrawals that the banks had not anticipated.</p><p>3) To keep enough cash on hand to meet this demand, the banks sold off their long term T-bills. But because on the last 12 months or so, interest rates have risen as the govt tried to tame inflation, the low interest T-bills could only be sold at a huge discount and this meant that the banks liquidating their T-bills made a huge loss.</p><p>4) In compliance with reporting requirements, the banks reported their losses, and this worried their depositors, who made a run on the bank to withdraw their funds, which led to the banks having to liquidate even more investments at a loss to meet depositors' demand.</p><p>5) This was not sustainable, and so the bank collapsed.</p><p>The latest development is that First Republic Bank (US), received $30 billion is a "Bank Rescue" by the biggest US Banks to ensure that First Republic is able to meet possible depositors' demands."<span style="color: red;">...the banks saw saving First Republic as ultimately in their best interests, rather than risk a widening panic that might engulf more of them".</span></p><p>If you search YouTube for explanations and someone to blame for this banking crisis, you may find one or more of the following explanations or blames.</p><p><b>The watering down of the Dodd-Frank Act.</b> In 2010, two years after the 2008 financial crisis, the Dodd-Frank Act was passed that required banks with $50b to $250b in deposits to submit to a more stringent stress test regularly to ensure that these banks are able to meet financial stresses. However, in 2018, Trump signed a bill rescinding the requirement for regular stress-test. If the Dodd-Frank Act had still applied to SVB, perhaps its weakness could have been caught earlier and rectified?</p><p><b>Venture-Capitalists such as <a href="https://youtu.be/w7QF8By3ftY?t=169" target="_blank">Peter Thiel advised his clients to withdraw their funds from SVB,</a></b> which they did. To the tune of $42 billion in deposits. About a quarter of SVB's deposit. This run on the bank did not help. If influential leaders did not stoke the fears of depositors, would the bank run have occurred? The Banking system depends on Trust. The banks do not have 100% of deposits on hand sitting idly in the bank, waiting to be withdrawn on demand. Banks would be investing these deposits, some in long term safe investments that are less liquid, and some in short term, higher interest yielding, more liquid, but possible more risky investments. A lack of trust call by influential market leaders is an irresponsible move which can undermined even a sound bank or banking system.</p><p>But, <b>did the banks take on too much unwarranted risks</b>? In the low interest rate environment of the early part of the pandemic, when there were fewer investment opportunities, and lower yields, banks were hard pressed to find viable, safe, investment vehicles for their funds. Silicon Valley Bank in particular were focused on servicing the Tech sector, and prior to the pandemic, their deposits grew - very fast, as Venture Capitalists poured their funds into tech start-ups in the low-interest environment (they had no alternative investments that offered better returns). So these tech start-ups were flushed with cash and deposited their millions (and even billions) into SVB, growing SVB. SVB then had the problem of finding investment channels for these funds. They settled on long term, low interest, safe Treasury Bills. However, when funding for start-ups dried up in the higher interest rate environment (VCs could get better returns from other investments and abandoned Start-ups), the start-ups experienced a cash crunch and had to draw down on their cash reserves specifically in SVB. But SVB did not anticipate this, and their investments were in long-term, low interest T-bills that have lost value in the current high interest environment, and they did not have the cash on hand to meet the depositors' demands. </p><p><b>So, would this affect Singapore?</b> There are still ripples and reverberations from these bank collapse - even Credit Suisse, and First Republic. But, Singapore does not have a bank that specialises in tech start-ups, so the specific conditions leading to an unusually large withdrawal of deposits from a bank is not likely to occur with Singapore Banks. Secondly, Singapore banks are not deregulated, so banks have to comply with rules for keeping X% of funds available for immediate withdrawal. Such funds are not earning interests so banks will typically, keep this reserve as low as possible. This also means that if there is a bank run, and banks are unable to meet the demand, the govt will most likely backstop the bank to assure depositors. Most likely, because the reserve ratio was set by the govt.</p><p><b>[19 Mar append/amendment:</b></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><h1 style="background-color: white; font-family: Georgia; font-size: 24px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; letter-spacing: 0em; line-height: 34px; margin-top: 0px; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><a href="https://link.morningbrew.com/click/30873753.1932735/aHR0cHM6Ly9saW5rcy5tb3JuaW5nYnJldy5jb20vYy8zUjU_bWlkPTIzYjJjZTBhNWNhYzFlMDkzZDNmMDI1YWRhYmQ2OGU4JmNpZD0zMDg3Mzc1My4xOTMyNzM1/610dec5b4c8aa464e01e082fB973b9088" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="border-bottom-style: none; outline-color: var(--bold-outline-color); outline-style: solid; outline-width: 0px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #800180;">The easy-money era may be over for startups</span></a></h1><p><span class="yiv6341071531source" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; display: inline-block; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; line-height: 16px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 5px; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><small><em><span style="color: #800180;">Silicon Valley/HBO via Giphy</span></em></small></span></p><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;">Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse is <a class="yiv6341071531link" href="https://link.morningbrew.com/click/30873753.1932735/aHR0cHM6Ly9saW5rcy5tb3JuaW5nYnJldy5jb20vYy8zUjY_bWlkPTIzYjJjZTBhNWNhYzFlMDkzZDNmMDI1YWRhYmQ2OGU4JmNpZD0zMDg3Mzc1My4xOTMyNzM1/610dec5b4c8aa464e01e082fBc81358a0" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="border-bottom-color: rgb(28, 127, 242); border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 2px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">dragging down</a> startups’ futures with it, like the Scar to their Mufasa. And when the founders of young companies catch their breath from the initial chaos, they’ll be confronted with a harsh reality: The days of easily securing bank loans while looking out over the Pride Lands are over.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;"><strong>The gist: </strong>The version of Silicon Valley Bank that now exists after regulators stepped in can give startups their money back, but </span><span style="color: red;">not the services they’ve come to rely on.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><h2 style="font-family: Georgia; font-size: 18px; letter-spacing: 0em; line-height: 34px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;">SVB was rooted deep into the startup ecosystem</span></h2></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: red;">SVB was relatively small—it had 40,000 customers compared to JPMorgan Chase’s 66 million</span><span style="color: #800180;">—but it claimed to bank nearly half of all US tech and life sciences startups last year, including household names like Etsy, Roblox, and Roku. The cultural cachet of having a relationship with SVB as a venture-backed startup was like sporting a New Yorker tote at Whole Foods.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;">But the reason its loss will leave such a gaping hole in the startup community isn’t that it was cool to name-drop at a networking event. Because the bank was created in 1983 specifically to cater to venture-backed startups, it helped them in ways that most banks can’t—or won’t.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><strong style="color: #800180;">SVB was known for super-chill loans:</strong><span style="color: #800180;"> </span><span style="color: red;">SVB would offer loans to startups <a class="yiv6341071531link" href="https://link.morningbrew.com/click/30873753.1932735/aHR0cHM6Ly9saW5rcy5tb3JuaW5nYnJldy5jb20vYy8zUjc_bWlkPTIzYjJjZTBhNWNhYzFlMDkzZDNmMDI1YWRhYmQ2OGU4JmNpZD0zMDg3Mzc1My4xOTMyNzM1/610dec5b4c8aa464e01e082fB9daa7454" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="border-bottom-color: rgb(28, 127, 242); border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 2px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">more readily</a> than large banks, basing the loans on a company’s ability to raise venture capital funds,</span><span style="color: #800180;"> not to turn a profit. SVB was also known for being flexible—even if startups breached their loan terms.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: red;">“They were the easiest money for an unprofitable, early stage to midstage tech company,” </span><span style="color: #800180;">Irving Investors founder Jeremy Abelson told The Information.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;"><strong>Plus, it had a personalized touch:</strong> Even small startups received hand-holding services, such as guidance on how to set up their financial infrastructure. Its bankers personally called startups when they secured their first rounds of funding, according to The Information.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><h2 style="font-family: Georgia; font-size: 18px; letter-spacing: 0em; line-height: 34px; margin-top: 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;">Now, startups might have to deal with big-league banks</span></h2></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;">Several founders who previously banked with SVB told Bloomberg that they’re <a class="yiv6341071531link" href="https://link.morningbrew.com/click/30873753.1932735/aHR0cHM6Ly9saW5rcy5tb3JuaW5nYnJldy5jb20vYy8zUjg_bWlkPTIzYjJjZTBhNWNhYzFlMDkzZDNmMDI1YWRhYmQ2OGU4JmNpZD0zMDg3Mzc1My4xOTMyNzM1/610dec5b4c8aa464e01e082fB56d42fce" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="border-bottom-color: rgb(28, 127, 242); border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 2px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">moving their money</a> to Chase and Bank of America, banks considered “too big to fail.”</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;">Startups’ experience at big banks won’t be like their time at SVB. Not only is Jamie Dimon unlikely to call a startup to congratulate them on their Series A, but big banks are also expected to be more tight-fisted with their loans. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a regulator that oversees large US banks, <a class="yiv6341071531link" href="https://link.morningbrew.com/click/30873753.1932735/aHR0cHM6Ly9saW5rcy5tb3JuaW5nYnJldy5jb20vYy8zUjk_bWlkPTIzYjJjZTBhNWNhYzFlMDkzZDNmMDI1YWRhYmQ2OGU4JmNpZD0zMDg3Mzc1My4xOTMyNzM1/610dec5b4c8aa464e01e082fBbeb58412" rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" style="border-bottom-color: rgb(28, 127, 242); border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-width: 2px; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">disapproves</a> of loans to companies that are further out than one year from profitability, according to Crunchbase.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: red;">The loss of SVB is therefore expected to have a chilling effect on loans to venture-backed startups, </span><span style="color: #800180;">aka “venture debt,” which SVB handed out more of than any other bank.</span></p></div><div style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"><p style="line-height: 22px; margin: 13px 0px;"><span style="color: #800180;"><strong>Zoom out:</strong> While on the surface, less money flowing to startups = bad, some think SVB’s collapse could be a net-positive reckoning for the startup community. Loans from SVB may have been <em>too</em> easy to procure, leading to reckless spending. </span><span style="color: red;">“I think we all would be better off burning a lot less cash,”</span><span style="color: #800180;"> Chris Herndon, founder of SVB-banked startup The Guild, told The Information.—<em>JW </em>]</span></p></div></blockquote><p><span face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #353535; font-size: 16px; font-variant-ligatures: normal; orphans: 2; text-decoration-thickness: initial; widows: 2;"></span></p><p><b>[20 Mar update: <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/ubs-agrees-buy-credit-suisse-swiss-assisted-bid-calm-markets-3358511" target="_blank">UBS takes over troubled Credit Suisse</a>.</b></p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><span style="color: #800180;">BERN: UBS will take over its <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/business/switzerland-ubs-offers-buy-credit-suisse-1-billion-report-3358186">troubled Swiss rival Credit Suisse</a> for US$3.23 billion following crunch talks on Sunday (Mar 19) aimed at stopping the stricken bank from triggering a wider international banking crisis.<br />The government said the deal involving Switzerland's biggest bank taking over the second-largest, was vital to prevent irreparable economic turmoil spreading throughout the country and beyond...]</span></blockquote><p style="text-align: left;"><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4zpLe4AKssk" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p><br /></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WowVQ4rhbt8" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">20 April Video - why SVB is not like other banks:</span></p>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fx2uIXqr7Oc?start=43" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p><span style="color: #2b00fe;"><br /></span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-48272310280798070112023-02-27T14:55:00.001+08:002023-03-06T21:24:56.969+08:00Singapore to acquire 8 more F-35B fighter jets, growing fleet to 12<br /><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JyzgmYKSaDQ" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<br /><br /><br /><i>The Singapore Armed Forces will also upgrade its training with virtual reality technology and a new digital range, as part of its 2040 vision.</i><div><br />Davina Tham</div><div><br />24 Feb 2023 </div><div><br /></div><div><br />SINGAPORE: The Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) will acquire another eight F-35B fighter jets, growing its incoming fleet of the fifth-generation fighters to 12.<br /><br />Singapore will take delivery of the eight jets from US manufacturer Lockheed Martin "by the end of the decade", Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen said in Parliament on Friday (Feb 24).<br /><br />In 2019, Singapore announced the acquisition of an <span style="color: red;">initial four F-35Bs, which are on track for delivery by 2026. The purchase was worth an estimated US$2.75 billion</span>, according to a US government press release.</div><span><a name='more'></a></span><div><br />That deal included an option for eight more F-35 jets. Dr Ng on Friday said the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) had decided to exercise the option for the F-35B variant after an extensive evaluation.<br /><br />"MINDEF and the SAF have concluded that the F-35 is the best choice to meet our defence needs now and in the future," he told Parliament.<br /><br />The Defence Ministry has the largest estimated expenditure among the ministries for the 2023 financial year, at S$17.98 billion. This is a 5.6 per cent increase from FY2022. Almost all the money, or about S$17.04 billion, will go to the SAF.<br /><br /><span style="color: red;">MINDEF does not give detailed cost figures for the acquisition of planes, submarines and Army platforms as these can provide an indication of capabilities.</span><br /><br />Dr Ng attributed the increased spending to heightened inflationary pressures, catching up on projects disrupted by the pandemic, and building up the SAF's ability to counter non-traditional threats.<br /><br />Describing a backdrop of intensifying global competition, he noted that Asian countries were upsizing their militaries, especially in north-east Asia, and this "can spell trouble ahead".<br /><br />Yet outside of Parliament, "some political personalities" have pushed for a reduction in defence spending, he said.<br /><br />"To them, I say – don't sacrifice a strong defence for Singapore at the altar of political expediency. It may win some support, but it risks losing Singapore in that self-interest.<br /><br />"We must never forget that defence is a long-term business. For the SAF, major systems and platforms take 10 to 15 years to conceptualise, build and integrate into our fighting force."<br /><br />As part of the SAF's transformation into a next-generation defence force by 2040, Dr Ng also announced that it would invest in training upgrades, including the<span style="color: red;"> use of realistic virtual reality simulators and a new digital range.</span><br /><br /><br />CYBER THREATS PICKED UP<br /><br />Dr Ng also revealed that the SAF's <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-armed-forces-saf-digital-intelligence-service-inauguration-parade-3028641">Digital and Intelligence Service (DIS)</a> had already picked up cyber attacks since it was formally established last October.<br /><br /><span style="color: red;">"Digital threats in (the) cyber arena are pervasive daily, literally tens if not hundreds of thousands.<br /></span><br />"What our cyber agencies are more concerned with are external and orchestrated attacks by non-state and state actors" such as terrorist organisations, he said.<br /><br />"The DIS has picked up some entities and is monitoring them for their activities. That's as much as I can say," the minister said.<br /><br />The DIS was set up as the fourth service of the SAF to integrate its capabilities in dealing with a spectrum of external threats, including those in the digital domain.<br /><br />It provides accurate, relevant and timely early warning and operational intelligence, and advances C4 (command, control, communications, computers) connectivity for the SAF to operate as a "networked" force.</div><div><br /></div><div><br />"GAME-CHANGING" FIGHTER JET<br /><br />After Singapore's initial F-35 purchase in 2020, a team comprising members of the RSAF and Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) were given exclusive, users-only access to F-35 information and facilities to <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/rsaf-f-35-fighter-jet-singapore-defence-australia-exercise-pitch-black-2911941">make further evaluations</a>.<br /><br />MINDEF said it focused on three key areas in its evaluation: How to harness the full suite of F-35 capabilities to enhance its operational edge, how to integrate the F-35 with the rest of the SAF's warfighting systems, and the jet's engineering and maintenance requirements.<br /><br />The evaluation involved training and professional exchanges with other F-35 users, including the use of high-fidelity simulators. There were also in-depth technical discussions with the F-35 manufacturer and other users, and participation in F-35 conferences and focused study opportunities.<br /><br />In an interview with the media, Colonel Daxson Yap, head of RSAF's Air Plans Department said the air force had "at least 10" F-35 training opportunities and exchanges in the last few years.<br /><br />For example, last year's <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/mindef-rsaf-f35-fighter-jet-australia-exercise-pitch-black-darwin-2909146">Exercise Pitch Black</a> in Darwin, Australia saw the RSAF fly alongside the United States Marine Corps' F-35Bs and <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/first-look-rsaf-upcoming-f-35-fighter-gets-refuelled-mid-air-2915171">refuel one of the fighters in mid-air</a>.<br /><br />The team also visited Lockheed Martin's production line in Texas in July last year, where they attended a training session with United States Air Force F-35 instructors, tried an F-35 simulator and sat in a powered-on F-35.<br /><br />Explaining how the F-35B would work with the rest of the SAF's warfighting systems, COL Yap said the fighter's individual capabilities will multiply the effectiveness of other aircraft deployed alongside it. He described the advanced sensor suite in particular as "game-changing".<br /><br />"In the air domain,<span style="color: red;"> combat effectiveness is a function of teamwork,</span>" he said. "Where the<span style="color: red;"> F-35 excels is not just in being able to collect, fuse and share information, but that actually multiplies the capability of platforms that it operates with."</span><br /><br />In that regard, the high-fidelity simulators were a "very accurate replica" of the F-35 platform's capabilities, which were "best trained and stress-tested and maximised in simulators", he said.<br /><br />COL Yap added that exercising the option for the eight F-35Bs at this time served to leverage economies of scale from the current pipeline of orders, as well as hedge supply chain risks.<br /><br />The F-35Bs will replace the RSAF's <a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/rsaf-f-16-least-another-decade-f-25-developments-air-force-chief-2496586">ageing fleet of F-16s</a>, which will be retired from the mid-2030s. In 2015, the US State Department approved the sale of upgrades to Singapore for 60 F-16 jets, at an estimated cost of US$130 million.<br /><br />Asked how many F-35s it would take to replace the F-16s, COL Yap said the RSAF takes a long-term view on defence procurements and that any acquisition would have to meet its needs while being prudent and cost-effective.</div><div><br /></div><div><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[The F-35 is not and should not be a one for one replacement of the F-16s. The role of the F-35 is different from the F-16 because the F-35 has a different advantages and capabilities. The ability of the F-35 to have a "God's Eye view" of the battle space, fuse and share information with other combat assets, and their stealth ability means that the F-35 is not intended to engage in direct attack, except when it is deployed on "Wild Weasel" assignments for SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defences). So we would not need to replace the 60 F-16s with 60 F-35. We could, but it would be extravagant. The 12 we have ordered could be supplemented with either more F-15s in the role of a "missile truck" or with "Loyal Wingman" (or similar) drones or UCAV under the command of the manned F-35.]</span><br /><br />Singapore is one of four countries in the Indo-Pacific region to acquire F-35s, along with Australia, Japan and South Korea, according to defence intelligence agency Janes. It reported last December that <span style="color: red;">Thailand has also expressed interest in having at least 12 F-35As.</span><br /><br /><br />TRAINING UPGRADES<br /><br />Dr Ng also announced that the SAF will embark on training upgrades, including an additional 20 per cent of live training to be replaced by simulation training.<br /><br />The DIS will also transform the existing Cyber Test and Evaluation Centre into a bigger digital range, which will be completed in 2026.<br /><br />MINDEF said the range will be able to simulate a wider set of sophisticated environments, allowing realistic training for a growing digital workforce.<br /><br />It will also enable the SAF to conduct joint training with other national agencies like the Cyber Security Agency (CSA), and host bilateral and multilateral exercises.<br /><br />Dr Ng said that the DIS will also establish a Digital Ops-Tech Centre run by software engineers and data scientists to provide in-house software development for the SAF. It will be operational from 2024.<br /><br />Phase one of SAFTI City will be completed in 2024. The training ground will consist of more than 60 new buildings including high-rise and low-rise buildings, a bus interchange and an underground MRT station.<br /><br /></div><div><br /></div><div>LESSONS FROM UKRAINE<br /><br />As the only war in which modern state-on-state warfare has been fought in recent years, MINDEF and the SAF have been watching the war in Ukraine "very, very closely", said Dr Ng.<br /><br />While there were military lessons to be learnt, even more important was seeing how "ordinary citizens make the crucial difference".<br /><br />He cited examples of the Ukrainian people improvising to block Russian military trucks, donating batteries to power drone operations and providing crowd-sourced military intelligence.<br /><br />"Passion, grit, bravery, innovation, even pure genius in the face of overwhelming adversity," he said.<br /><br />"If the war has taught us anything, it must be that weaponry and fighting platforms are important, but ultimately, it's the fighting spirit of the people that will decide if they end up subjugated or sovereign."</div><div><br /><i>Source: CNA/dv(rj)</i></div><div><i><br />
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1lCOgFPtaZ4" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><i><br /></i></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-82140882423792999612023-02-18T05:24:00.003+08:002023-04-07T12:14:02.884+08:00Secrets of Singapore's Success - Part 1<p>Ask most Singaporeans about the one critical factor for Singapore's success, and many (if not all) would probably answer: Lee Kuan Yew.</p><p>But THAT is a simplified answer for a complex answer. Because LKY did a lot of things. </p><p>The reason people asks for the "Secrets to Singapore's Success" is because they (might) want to replicate Singapore's success. "LKY" is not a good answer, because they can't have LKY. </p><p>Not because we are selfish and don't want to share LKY. But because he's dead.</p><p>Anyway, someone asked our Ambassador-at-large, Tommy Koh (formerly our representative at the UN) what was the secret of Singapore's success.</p><p>He diplomatically sidestepped the question, then<a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2021/05/singapores-success-50-shades-of-great.html" target="_blank"> asked 50 of Singapore's leaders</a> in the civil service, past and present, for their take on it, compiled their essays into a book, and made bank!</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>I am not Tommy Koh and I don't have access to 50 great movers, shakers, and thinkers of Singapore.</p><p>So think of this as a thoughtful Singaporean's Man on the Street answer to a question a visitor (say, Tourist) might ask.</p><p><br /></p><p><b>1) Leadership and Integrity</b></p><p>Incorruptible leadership and integrity is I think the first critical factor (and somewhat generalises the "Lee Kuan Yew" answer. We were blessed with leaders in the first generation (the 60s and 70s) who were men of integrity, honestly, sincerity, and who were <a href="https://youtu.be/vNQXLhIcPrc?t=62" target="_blank">genuinely committed to the prosperity and development of Singapore, and not out to enrich themselves</a> and pillage the country of its wealth.</p><p>But, you may ask, how do we ensure that we have incorruptible leaders of integrity, sincerity, honesty and who genuinely have the interest of our country at heart?</p><p>Luck of the draw. </p><p>We were<a href="https://sghistoryunauthorised.blogspot.com/2022/09/why-lee-kuan-yew-sg-history.html" target="_blank"> just incredibly lucky.</a></p><p>Okay. (says the sceptical tourist), you were lucky to have the first generation of leaders who were men of integrity and committed to the development of Singapore and Singaporeans. But Lee Kuan Yew stepped down in 1990, and his successor, Goh Chok Tong, handed over to the current PM, Lee Hsien Loong in 2004. The People's Action Party (PAP) has governed Singapore since 1959, from self-government as a British Colony to an independent state in the Federation of Malaya, and eventually as a sovereign, independent nation-city island state.</p><p>Through 60+ years, the PAP won elections and governed Singapore continuously. The original leaders have all passed away, and Singapore is now looking for the Fourth Generation of leaders and their 4th Prime Minister. </p><p>If the first PM was a man of integrity and honesty, and Singapore had simply been lucky to have someone like Lee Kuan Yew, was the second and third PM also simply luck?</p><p>And will the eventual 4th PM also be chosen as a matter of luck?</p><p>And the answer is, no.</p><p>We were lucky to have true leaders in the first generation. And we were also lucky that the first generation of leaders also instituted a leadership "programme" to seek out potential leaders, test them in positions of leadership, groom those with promising qualities, and eventually elevate them to ministerial positions (testing them again) and finally selecting the best to lead the team.</p><p>Take Mah Bow Tan, for example. When he was first fielded as a candidate, it was up against Chiam See Tong in Potong Pasir. Mah was a sterling PAP candidate. His scholastic achievement was top tier. Lee Kuan Yew came out to bat for him in the hustings. Lee famously (or infamously) compared Mah's sterling scholarship against Chiam's "late bloomer" record. While Mah was an "A" scholar, Chiam only got his Law degree when he was 40. Lee pointed this out to make the case that the PAP had a process of selecting only the brightest minds to lead Singapore.</p><p>(Unfortunately, for Mah, the voters of Potong Pasir interpreted Lee's endorsement as more "elitist", and saw Chiam's perseverance and persistence to be more in line with the Everyman's struggle, and voted accordingly.)</p><p>Mah would "ride the coattails" into parliament under the <a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/p/politics.html" target="_blank">Group Representative Constituency (GRC) scheme</a> where voters would vote for a team of MPs, ostensibly to ensure minority representation, but perhaps to ensure that MPs who are seen as representative of the people who are "easy wins" could also bring under their wings, the less personable "policy wonks" that the PAP need to actually come up with the policies to run the country. At the same time, internally, the PAP machinery would nurture and guide the policy wonks to be more personable, approachable, and ultimately, electable on their own rights.</p><p>By the time Mah stepped down from politics, he was seen as a veteran politicians with credibility and standing.</p><p>--------</p><p>In handing over power, Lee Kuan Yew set the example by letting the second generation ministers choose the "first among equals" to be their prime minister. </p><p><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/29brBUSHgYA?start=1370" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>And then the third generation chose theirs.</p><p>And now the fourth generation of leaders will choose their future Prime Minister, and the older generation of leaders will deferentially stay out of the process. They chose Heng Swee Keat to be the PM-designate. And so the matter was settled. </p><p>Except that the hand over of the PMship was delayed by the Pandemic - PM Lee did not feel it right to hand over leadership in the midst of a crisis, so he intended to maintain the status quo until after the pandemic. So he stayed as PM, and is now 70 years old.</p><p>Meanwhile Heng Swee Keat, the PM-to-be had reached 61 years of age (as of April 2022). A year earlier (around his 60th birthday), he had considered his age, and asked the PAP leadership to withdraw him from consideration as the next PM. The reason was his age. At 60 then, and with no idea (then) as to when the pandemic would be contained enough for leadership to pass onto the next generation, Heng would be close to his mid-60s, and he would immediately have to consider whom to succeed him. As such he said that he would prefer a younger candidate be considered so that the new PM-designate would have a longer "runway" to get things done.</p><p>The former PM, Goh Chok Tong, commended Heng, “<a href="https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/goh-chok-tong-standing-tall-dpm-heng-selflessness-hiccup-1347706" target="_blank">He has put the interests of Singapore first</a>," adding, </p><blockquote>“I commend DPM Heng Swee Keat for his self-sacrifice in stepping aside as leader of the 4G. It takes courage and selflessness to do this when one is only a step away from being prime minister."</blockquote><p>Courage. Selflessness. Self-sacrifice.</p><p>Or did Heng chicken out when he faced the daunting task of leading Singapore?</p><p>Sixty or even sixty-five isn't old in politics. many world leaders are older, or seek office when they are in the 60s, 70s, or even 80s.</p><p>So 60+ isn't old. Look at Biden.</p><p>Unless you're in Singapore. </p><p>Our 3rd PM has been actively seeking his successor for the last 5+ years, thwarted by the pandemic in the last 3 years.</p><p>So Heng's decision was not... helpful for succession. But may be better for Singapore's long-term leadership.</p><p>As of this writing (Feb 2023) the PM-designate is Lawrence Wong. And the signs are he would be taking over in due course.</p><p>The PAP's usual practice is for the current PM to hand over to the new PM while he still has at least 2 years of the current term, to prove himself, and to establish his leadership before the nation goes to the polls. </p><p>The last General Election was in 2020. The next election can be called within the next two years.</p><p>It's about time.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-61606817607690477412023-01-07T00:51:00.002+08:002023-01-07T00:51:16.064+08:00 What makes Singaporeans happy (from 2010)Jan 7, 2010 <br /><br /><i>By Tambyah Siok Kuan & Tan Soo Jiuan, For The Straits Times <br /></i><br />THE media gives some insight into what makes Singaporeans happy or upset. <br /><br />Singaporeans are happy when the Government rolls out a family-friendly Budget. Singaporeans are annoyed by service staff who are not passionate about their work or cannot speak English well. Depending on the performance of their investments, Singaporeans may love or loathe coffee shop talk about the stock and property markets. <span><a name='more'></a></span><div><br />These snapshots motivated us to study three things Singaporeans consider when they evaluate their quality of life: happiness, enjoyment and achievement. In a recently published book that we wrote, The Wellbeing of Singaporeans, we reported that more than one in four Singaporeans (27.5 per cent) are very happy with their life and about half (51.1 per cent) are quite happy while less than 1 in 100 (0.9 per cent) are very unhappy. <span style="color: red;">Singles are the happiest lot while the middle-income group is the least happy. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Yay! Singles!]</span><br /><br />But what makes Singaporeans happy? We found five contributing factors: <span style="color: red;">fluency in English, satisfaction with personal life (for example, standard of living and health), satisfaction with interpersonal life (for example, friendships and family life), pride in being a Singaporean, and the perception of how the Government deals with ethnic diversity. </span><br /><br />Singaporeans who are more fluent in English reported more happiness. In Singapore, those who speak English better tend to be more educated and hold higher-paying jobs. This is consistent with other analyses in our book showing that Singaporeans who are highly educated with medium to high levels of incomes are the happiest.<br /><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Yay! Fluent English speakers!]</span><br /><br />While financial resources are important, Singaporeans also found happiness in relationships with those close to them. Satisfaction with personal and interpersonal lives is associated with more happiness. <br /><br />In addition, Singaporeans' happiness has a broader social dimension: national pride and the performance of the Government. The prouder Singaporeans are of their nation, the happier they are.<br /><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Yay! Patriots!]</span><br /><br />The Government's role in ensuring that the different ethnic groups co-exist harmoniously also affects happiness. The more Singaporeans perceive the Government to have been effective in dealing with ethnic diversity, the happier they are.<br /><br />Apart from happiness, enjoyment of life also contributes to quality of life. More than one in 10 Singaporeans (11.5 per cent) never or rarely enjoy life. <span style="color: red;">We observed that low-income Singaporeans enjoy life the most while the highly educated enjoy life the least. </span>Satisfaction with personal life, satisfaction with interpersonal life, and national pride also affected Singaporeans' enjoyment of life. <br /><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[So if you're rich and not enjoying life, you know what to do. Give me your money.]<br /></span><br />Finally, do Singaporeans think that they have achieved the most out of life? Almost one in four Singaporeans (23.9 per cent) feels that he or she has accomplished nothing or very little in life.<br /><br />Ironically, it is the low-income earners who feel they have accomplished much while the high-income group feels exactly the opposite. We found that the higher the household income, the more a Singaporean feels that he or she has not achieved much in life. Perhaps such families have expectations that are so high that their members feel that they have not accomplished much. Alternatively, they may feel that they have not pushed themselves to their limits because their lives have been comfortable thus far. <br /><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[That explains a lot!]</span><br /><br />As with happiness and enjoyment, personal life satisfaction and national pride affect one's sense of achievement. But what's interesting is that the perception of the quality of public services also matters. Singaporeans who believe that the Government is doing a good job in providing public services also tend to feel that they have accomplished much in life.<br /><br /><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[What about top civil servants? If they believe the govt (i.e. the civil servants) are doing a good job, then they should have a sense of accomplishment. But as they are high income earners they should feel that they have not accomplished much, so the govt is not doing a good job, then they don't deserve their salary and they should commit suicide or something!]</span><br /><br />What do these findings tell us about Singaporeans? While they are generally a happy lot, more can be done to help them appreciate their own achievements and to find more enjoyment in life. Perhaps they have forgotten how to savour simple pleasures.<br /><br />They may also be setting themselves up for disappointment by imposing unrealistically high expectations on themselves. A balance must be struck between setting and striving towards standards of achievement and ensuring personal well-being in other areas of one's life. </div><div><br /><br /><i>The writers are professors in the Department of Marketing at the National University of Singapore Business School. They specialise in quality of life and lifestyle studies. </i></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-59936559838349703762022-09-15T00:06:00.010+08:002022-11-07T09:45:00.458+08:00Lee Kuan Yew and the American Society of Newspaper Editors - Press Freedoms and the Role of the Press in context.<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RVlbyN-COTE" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
<p>"Press Freedom" is one of the go-to criticism of Singapore. <a href="https://rsf.org/en/index?year=2022" target="_blank">Reporters without Borders rank Singapore 139 </a>(out of 180 states) in 2022 - just above Somalia, and below United Arab Emirates. This is an improvement! Previously, Singapore was ranked 160th! Surprisingly, UAE (ranked 1 position above Singapore has 2 journalist currently in prison. Singapore, being 1 position below UAE must be worst right? So... 3 journalists in prison? Nope. 0. Somalia has 1 media worker in prison... So... who knows how Reporters without borders rank these things. Without borders, without boundaries, and without logic, perhaps?</p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>Anyway, in the mid-1980s, Singapore had a series of incidents where the Singapore Govt clashed with foreign press, specifically, Time magazine, Asian Wall Street Journal, Far East Economic Review, and Asiaweek. In the introduction by Norman Pearlstein, Head of the American Society of Newspaper Editors International Communications Committee, Singapore's "sins" were summarised.</p><p>At about 2:39 in the video, Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore is introduced with this litany of "sins":</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><p>- Oct 1986, Singapore cut Time Magazine's circulation to 2000 (from 18,000) for refusing to print in full a rebuttal from the Singapore about political dissent.</p><p>- Asian Wall Street Journal restricted to 400 from 5000 copies. </p><p>- December 1987, Asia Week</p><p>- Far East Economic Review also gazetted and sued. FEER withdrew from Singapore.</p></blockquote><p>Lee Kuan Yew's reply or speech begins at 7:40.</p><p>Lee challenges the assumption that a free press is a universal standard of excellence. The Press in the US enjoys unparalleled freedom, and maybe it is what the US needs. Maybe being the Fourth Estate in the US is the best or correct role for the press. But the universality of that role in ALL societies and communities is not proven.</p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[This is cultural chauvinism.]</span></p><p>Lee covered the BBC in Singapore, and how the British acted to stop the Chinese press in Singapore from promoting the politics of the Malayan Communist Party in Singapore and Malaya. Singapore does not have a "history of a freewheeling rambunctious press" freely espousing competing ideas in the marketplace of ideas. The US believes that the press should be free to choose to "publish whatever it wants, however irresponsible or biased its action may seem to be, because the marketplace of ideas will sort out the irresponsible from the responsible and rewards the latter." </p><p>The press in other countries have a different role from the US model of the Fourth Estate. This roles grew out of their history, their experiences, their political system and their national temperament. Their roles are equally valid for their context. </p><p>The uncontrolled competition in the marketplace of ideas have sabotaged young democracies such as Sri Lanka and India where sectorial differences were magnified and emphasised, dividing the people, rather than bringing them together.</p><p>Singapore does not have one press. it has four, in four languages. The English press promoted the values and position of the colonial government (in the past). The Chinese press promoted Chinese language, culture and chauvinism. The Malay press agitated for Malay rights and privileges, and promoted Malay Nationalism. The Tamil press maintain ties of the local Tamil community with the mother country, Tamil Nadu.</p><p>We have NEVER been one community. The British kept the segments separate. It is the task of the government to try to create enough shared values in <a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2015/08/being-singaporean.html" target="_blank">a single national identity</a>. It is a gradual and long-term project. </p><p>English as a "stepmother tongue" and it has helped to create a shared value. </p><p>Lee then recounted the "Jungle Girl" story in the 1950s - known to us as the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Hertogh" target="_blank">Maria Hertogh </a>incident - as an example of how an innocuous (but insensitive) human interest story could spark a riot. </p><p>In 1986, Malaysian protest against Singapore for the visit by <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaim_Herzog" target="_blank">President Herzog of Israel </a>to Singapore. Malays in Singapore saw the protests in Malaysia, and this set off similar protests in Singapore. </p><p>Foreign press in Singapore are free to report on events in Singapore to their audience in the West. If they get facts wrong, Singapore will reply, rebut and attempt to correct them. But it does not matter to Singapore what their ideological slant may be. </p><p>BUT... up to the 1970s, Singaporeans were mainly Chinese-educated. The English-language press had few readers and little impact. Up till then, it was the HK-based, Chinese language pro-Communist press that was the problem. </p><p>Singapore banned all those newspapers.</p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[And you don't see the ASNE or Reporters without Borders harping on this. Cos... not English?]</span></p><p>In the 1980s, things changed - from a mainly Chinese-educated majority to an English-educated majority.</p><p>English carries with it a cultural baggage from the British and the American civilisation. But Singapore cannot model itself on America - it does not have the historical, cultural or economic base for an American approach to life and politics.</p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[And with Donald Trump, Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Tucker Carlson, Glenn Beck, I'm not sure the US also can afford this "marketplace of ideas" approach. ]</span></p><p>At about this time, journals based in HK started to report Singapore TO Singaporeans. This was a new kind of press. This was an offshore Singapore press with Western correspondents, reporting Singapore as a Singapore newspaper for Singaporeans. They are Singapore press, but based off-shore. Their journalists take up issues, debating them, and taking sides. </p><p>Singapore is different from HK, Taiwan, or South Korea. Those are homogeneous people of a homogeneous culture, and none of them can be penetrated by English language press like Singapore. </p><p>Lee then gave examples of Singapore's readership of various journals compared to readership in other countries. And explain why Singapore and Singaporeans are more susceptible to influence by these English foreign press.</p><p>Singapore's domestic debates are a matter for Singaporeans to discuss and decide. We cannot allow American press to play a role where they have no stake in the outcome.</p><p>Singapore and Malaysia ban each other's newspapers to reduce our inter-communal conflicts.</p><p>The FCC of the US does not allow non-citizens to own TV stations in the US. Only US citizens can control a business that influences American Public Opinion. </p><p>So Rupert Murdoch had to first take up US citizenship before he could buy the TV stations of Metro Media Group.</p><p>If a "mighty nation of 250 million American" finds such a safeguard necessary to protect its people, what more a young nation with 2.5 million people?</p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[At this point, LKY wondered aloud if perhaps he might required foreign editors or newspaper owners to take up Singapore Citizenship first.]</span></p><p>Final example: South Africa was covertly trying to buy the Washington Star in 1976 to "soft-sell" Apartheid. When the story broke, there was outrage and the sale fell through. If the marketplace of ideas allow irresponsible and responsible ideas to compete and Apartheid is "patently abhorrent", and the marketplace of ideas will sort the good from the bad and reward the good, why be outraged?</p><p>---------</p><p>Q&A - <a href="https://youtu.be/RVlbyN-COTE?t=2932" target="_blank">the third question</a> about the usefulness of the term "Third World" was a shot from left field. But Lee answers the question contemplatively, reflectively, and maybe even wistfully. Worth watching his response although he spends about a minute or so playing for time while he gathers his thoughts (because he was all ready for questions about Singapore (and him) not being friendly to foreign press, then this question about whether 'Third World" is an oversimplification. From 50:15 he speaks more to the point.</p><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><p><span style="color: #800180; font-size: medium;"><i>"Yes we are all human beings... we have different histories, we have different perceptions of what our futures are going to be, for the few days that I am here, I watch your television, I read your newspapers, I may even beguiled into believing that your issues which capture the headlines in the nightly TV news will determine the fate of the world. But I have to shake myself, and remind myself that, yes, what America does in the Presidential Elections is going to determine what her policies will be on free trade, or protectionism, on providing security for Asia, and the Pacific region, polices towards Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, but ultimately, you are the largest single factor, but you are not the total equation. It is also what the Russians/ the Soviet Union is going to do, what kind of China is going to emerge, what the Japanese will do in reaction or in response to the measures which will be taken to make them come back into trade balance with the US, whether their security arrangements with the US will endure beyond the year 2000, if not what takes its place, how much a burden-sharing can there be when they can only go as far as one maybe one and half percent of GNP for defence, and if they go beyond that, they'll have the rest of Asia alarmed. So it's going to be a very different world. You can recover your elan, you can stand tall, you can make new breakthroughs into space and high technology. I have to remember that my neighbours are still in the paddy fields, that I am in Southeast Asia, that even a few high-rise buildings in Singapore can become a kind of an affront to rice field cultures. And therefore it requires a different presentation of our relationship and our role in the region. So if you ask me can you classify them into first, second, and third worlds, I say yes, for the sake of simplification but if you want to be accurate, there are many more worlds than three or four."</i></span></p><p><span style="color: #800180; font-size: medium;"><i>"I meet leaders from many countries, from time to time in many conferences, and when I meet the Leader from Uganda I know that I am meeting somebody whose world has collapsed, and may not be put together again for another hundred years."</i></span></p><p><span style="color: #800180; font-size: medium;"><i>"We are not the same... and probably never will be."</i></span></p></blockquote><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-19767043319923455152022-08-30T23:58:00.007+08:002023-09-01T01:14:57.599+08:00New American Century<p>With the fall the of the Soviet Union, the US became the sole superpower and without a rival to compete and challenge the US started to reduce its military investments... until Sept 11 2001.</p><p>NATO was losing relevance, Trump was trying to extricate the US from its commitments to NATO, and so were other members of NATO... until Feb 24, 2022.</p><p><a href="https://youtu.be/DAUUTomXr68" target="_blank">[Video: Can the US continue to be the Police of the World - Visual Politics EN]<br /></a>
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DAUUTomXr68" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></p><span><a name='more'></a></span><p>In the meantime, many "prophets" predicted the end of "Pax Americana" and the "Rise of the Asian Century", China's Rise, and subsequently, the "Rise of the Pacific Century" when China would surpass the US and be the new world leader.</p><p><a href="https://youtu.be/HEdw6Ef9rs4?si=Mlqs4aBQBKI6NaEQ" target="_blank">Except that it may not.</a> Or won't. </p><p>Certainly, a selective understanding of world events would point to a declining US -- The 2008 global financial crash sparked off by the sub-prime mortgage collapse in the US; US withdrawal from and the complete collapse of the US-installed government in Afghanistan, as well as the election of Donald Trump and his actions/inaction (on ameliorating climate change, support for NATO, pandemic response, and China relations).</p><p>And a cursory understanding (or buy-in) of the Chinese narrative (propaganda?) of their "achievements" might suggest that China is approaching, or achieving the "Pacific Century" - GDP growth, military strength particularly naval assets and having<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-navy-growth-and-search-for-overseas-bases-worries-us-2022-6" target="_blank"> the second largest carrier fleet </a>after the US. </p><p>But about a year ago, this blog was already sceptical of <a href="https://singapore2b.blogspot.com/2021/10/on-china-and-pacific-century.html" target="_blank">China's Rise and the Pacific Century</a>. </p><p>Part of the reason, a major part of the reason for scepticism was <a href="https://youtu.be/y87R3Lp0jd0?t=141" target="_blank">China's belligerent bullying behaviour</a>. A rising power would not feel insecure, and does not need to bully, does not need to threaten or coerce. China's bullying belied her insecurity, and suggested that her rise, was not as assured (as we might think), that the basis of (the belief in) her rise was arguable at best, and possibly illusory.</p><p>What the US had done for the last 30 years, in the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union and the US's position as the sole Superpower, was to lead the world in a Pax Americana - a peace enforced by the US sole superpower status. </p><p>China and her apologists will attempt to paint the US "dominance" as "imperialism", or new-colonialism, or western arrogance or chauvinism.</p><p>China's pursuit of "superpower" status seems more suspect. I do not believe that they would act as the world's police. Witness Russia invasion of Ukraine. Rather than criticise the aggressor, China chose to be officially neutral, while expressing empathy for Russia's pretext for invasion. China's partiality can be understood as being in line with China's (or Xi's) stated intent to take Taiwan by force if necessary. </p><p>China's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" points to an inclination towards belligerence, rather than diplomacy. Even when diplomacy or at least diplomatic language is called for, China plays to her domestic audience, rather than meet her obligations (and expectations?) as a member of the international community. </p><p>Which is not to say that the US ALWAYS act on principle. The recent "reset" to US-Saudi Arabia relations even though <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2022/07/15/politics/biden-west-bank-saudi-arabia-day-3/index.html" target="_blank">Biden affirmed his belief that Crown Prince Mohd bin Salman was responsible </a>for the murder of Khashoggi, is evidence that political expediency would trump moral principles. Biden was hoping that Saudi Arabia could help with the high fuel prices at the pump.</p><p>The reality of politics and international relations is that no country can afford to act always in accordance to strict principles. Diplomacy and negotiations invariably requires some give and take, some compromise, some concessions. </p><p>At 15:30 the video summarises the situation: </p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="color: #800180; font-size: medium;">"Put another way: The United States is improving its alliances both in the Pacific, and the Atlantic. Meanwhile, the rest of the powers that could confront it, China and Russia, are scaring their neighbours off."</span></p><p>It may all come down to who scares you and who offers a friendly hand. If China was trying to win friends and influence people with the Belt and Road Initiative, it was not an unqualified success. It was sometimes met with suspicion, and where it was welcomed, it was often by corrupt or corruptible political leaders. To be fair, China's BRI was not "debt trap diplomacy". (Much of the BRI terms often required work to be done by China or Chinese companies using Chinese materials and equipment. In other words, China loan money to countries so that they could buy Chinese equipment, material and use Chinese companies to build BRI infrastructures. The BRI was not about impoverishing countries and putting them in a debt trap. It was simply to continue to grow the Chinese economy - provide sales and jobs for Chinese companies so that they can continue to show a profit. China had already built all the high speed rails that China could possibly need and quite a few that it does not need. Now it had to go to other countries to continue to grow!)</p><p>And Russia had to invade Ukraine. Not that Russia was in the contention to replace the US as World Police. And (almost) the whole world sanctioned Russia - banking sanctions, trade sanctions, even businesses pulled out of Russia. The "special military action" that was going to take a few days -- two weeks, tops! -- is now in the 6th month. Ukraine may not win eventually (or it might!), but every day Russia is getting weaker.</p><p>And China... is in an unenviable position. </p><p>Russia is their ally, both on the principle that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" (Russia oppose the US), and the principle that when faced with a strong opponent, you would want as many friends as you can find. But Russia is weakening every day they are engaged in Ukraine. Maybe they will win in the end, but they will be diminished, and what is the worth of a diminished Russia to China?</p><p>And China does not have a bright future. Their ascendency over the last 4 decades has been on the back of a demographic dividend -- their huge population of working age adults.</p><p>Which they undermined with their one-child policy, which has prematurely aged their society, and sabotaged their population pyramid. China's population will decline within the next 2 decades. And before their population decline in numbers it will age.</p><p>China will grow old before it grows rich. And then it will be faced with an aged population that will need aged care, but there will not be enough young people to support them in their old age.</p><p>And these are just the obvious problems. </p><p>So China cannot challenge the US as a superpower, let alone take over as World Police, if China even has the slightest inclination to do so.</p>Can the US continue to be the Police of the World? There is a need for it (or some country) to perform that function (and it has the assets and logistics, and organisation, and ideological inclination to do so.) But the main threat is whether the US will descend into a second Civil War that will serve to draw the attention and focus of the US govt. Yes, there is a a need for the US to continue to be the Police of the World. The question is would the US be able to if its own house is not in order. We shall see after 2025.<div><br /></div><div><br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5890720061582192467.post-22140391346456427622022-07-20T18:32:00.008+08:002022-07-20T18:38:04.541+08:00COE hits $114k (in open Category -- 20th July 2022)!<p><br />
<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yudOC6ImEvw" title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe>
</p><p>COE - the world's best voluntary taxation system. </p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[Taxes are usually mandatory. You cannot CHOOSE not to pay it. COE is VOLUNTARY. *I* don't pay COE, because I CHOOSE not to own a car.]</span></p><p><span></span></p><a name='more'></a><p></p><p>And after you managed to get a vehicle with your (voluntary) overly high bid on the COE, you may find that the only way to pay for your overpriced car is to (voluntarily) become a Private Hire Vehicle (Grab) driver. </p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[And while people make the case for why you don't actually OWN your HDB flat but only "lease" it from the govt for 99 years (or less) and so is NOT an investment, no one makes the argument that the COE allows you to ONLY temporarily own a car for 10 years in Singapore. I guess no one needs to be reminded of this fact. If you're spending money on a car (and COE), you know it's not an investment.]</span></p><p>So someone who has paid a lot of money (voluntarily) for his vehicle, will then have to drive around people who did not (voluntarily) pay the govt for the right to "own" a car. </p><p>I think it is a lovely system to get the (relatively) rich(er) people to serve the (relatively) poorer people. </p><p>Only in Singapore!</p><p><span style="color: #2b00fe;">[I guess one way to look at it is the (relatively) richer Singaporeans (they are "rich" enough to buy a car, and "rich" enough to voluntarily pay the COE tax to the govt) are serving the "poorer" Singaporeans (who can't afford to choose to pay COE) IF they (the richer Singaporeans) voluntarily become PHV drivers. That's some kind of social equalisation, right?] </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0