Banning plastic

[This post was started in Oct 2017.]

There is another "environmentally conscious" writer advocating the banning of plastic bags. For the sake of the environment.

This is an example of the green movement not taking its own philosophy. Or rather "socially conscious" Singaporeans not being conscious in all other sense of the word.

"Think Global. Act Local."

From the article: "Today this (restricting the use of plastic bags) has become a global practice to save the environment. "

Oh so it's a "Global practice"? Well we should copy them then so we don't appear backward.

"If you cut us, do we not bleed? If you praise us, do we not go crazy?"

From TODAY:

Is this for real? Readers get ‘political’ over Nas Daily’s videos on Singapore

21 September, 2018




National pride. Anti-government sentiments. A population who loves to complain and is ungrateful and negative. Credibility of online content. Freedom of speech. No, it is not Our Singapore Conversation in session, though it might as well be with the range of topics that surfaced after travel vlogger Nuseir Yassin, founder of Nas Daily, hit back sharply at those who questioned why he was "so effusive in his praise" of Singapore in various videos, challenging him to take up citizenship to see what it is like to live here. Mr Yassin labelled his critics "crybabies", sparking a social media storm.

Minister Shanmugam comments on Singaporean "Activists" inviting Mahathir to promote Democracy in S.E. Asia

Minister Shanmugam has "described the whole conduct of the Singaporeans involved as "a little sad" and "a bit regretful". " They had met with Mahathir, and invited "Dr Mahathir to take a leading role in promoting democracy, human rights, freedom of speech in South-east Asia."

Which prompted a whole lot of support and some disagreement from Singaporeans (my impression was that most comments were supportive, but I could be projecting), and this sarcastic comment:

As usual PAP misses the point and the opportunity.
What PAP (and Minister Shanmugam) should point out is how egalitarian SG society and politics are.
In the US for example, you have to be a candidate for President (and eventually POTUS), before you can invite a foreign leader to intervene in your politics and your election.
In Singapore, you don't even need to be a billionaire or a presidential candidate, let alone be President. Or even an MP.

Now THAT'S what I call Free.
Or as Singaporeans would say, "too free, ah?"

Safe City Index - Singapore ranked 2nd

The Safe Cities Index is a report from The Economist Intelligence Unit. The website provides the Executive summary and Introduction, or about 7 pages of the 44 page downloadable report.

[Update: Safe City Index 2021. Singapore is third now. In "Environment Security, Singapore is ranked 37th with a score of 69.9. I guess Singapore is too hot.]

Thoughts on the NDR 2018

I had my wish list for the NDR.

China-US Trade War

For the US-China trade war, one potential PM-to-be had spoken about it. But he was speaking at the American Chamber of Commerce, and his message was for the Americans:

"Your choice of where you put your investment, your choice of where you make those strategic moves for your company, will cumulatively build up a picture of what the US stands for in this region… The choice you will make individually will collectively inform Washington where their priorities will be."

There was no message for Singaporeans.

The better message was from Bilahari Kausikan.  But his message was more on the idea of a Singaporean identity, and the Singapore Reality resisting the imposition of the Chinese (China) framework and identity on Singapore:

Singapore's public transport system among best in the world: McKinsey report

There was a CNA report from McKinsey that ranked Singapore's public transit one of the best in the world.

Immediately, the disgruntled conspiracy theorists suggested that this report was paid for by the Singapore govt.

You know, to make the PAP look good.

This is the summary of the report in a chart form:

 

HIP 2 is not hip and not a real option.

First reaction to the NDR 2018.

Home Improvement Programme 2 is supposed to work hand in hand with VERS. At that time, owners of 70+ year old flats will be offered 3 options.

1) HIP 2. This will cost money. For a flat with "decaying" value. You will also suffer the inconvenience of improvement works.
2) Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme (VERS). This will give owners some benefits.
3) Do nothing, and run out the lease. No costs. No benefit.

Option 1 is to "motivate" owners to choose VERS (option 2).

So faced with the three options, what would you choose? 

Option 1? 

I don't think so.