My "2012" take on Sg property Market.
Since dooms-days prophecies and rising housing prices are the "BOOMZ" nowadays, let me present my own prophecies on Sg's housing market in the near future.
I'm certainly not an expert - just a local singaporean undergraduate who is concerned with bread and butter issues and my future (who doesn't?).
I'm could be exposing my ignorance and naivety in the text that is to follow, and I welcome all comments for the purpose of constructive discussion and learning.
Current Situation
- Housing prices have increased and are continuing to increase despite having faced a recession.
- Applications for new houses remain oversubscribed, as seen in latest BTO and sales of balanced flat.
- Rising housing prices does not coincide with matching rising wages. Our wages have stagnated or even cut in face of the recent recession.
- Young Sgreans are getting priced out of the housing market.
Understanding the cause of the situation with the supply/demand model:The Sg economy is highly dependent on external foreign investment and population capita growth. With our limited reproductive capabilities, the influx of foreign talents and non-talents is required to sustain and drive growth. This results in increased demand for living spaces.
When there is demand, there is always a matching supply. Such supply will be catered in the form of private/government households projects. In the meantime, speculators and investors capitalize on the projected high pricings (and hence high returns) in knowing that such supply-demand constraints would fetch. Further "supply-side" factors that further aggravates high pricing come from government policies. Restraining the building of newer flats; low property gain taxes; high approved maximum housing loan % loanable are just some policies which further the cause.
The winners and losers.Who are the real winners? HDB, the bankers, and the speculators. What about household owners who have gained from the increased prices over the past 3 years? While their asset value has increased, they would be unable to capitalize it unless they 1) downgrade to a smaller house, 2) sell their houses and become homeless, emigrate to capitalize their CPF. In reality, such household owners face a nominal asset value increase, not a real value. They are not getting richer, as should they plan to upgrade their houses, they need to pay more to upgrade given similar price increase across the board for all houses.
Who are the losers? First time buyers who are priced out of the market. Couples who have to live with their parents. Later marriages and lower birthrates result. For those who enter the market, they will have a huge serviceable loan to pay over a long time. A longer term implication is that Sgreans will have to work longer, older, harder. Retirement age will have to increase. (They already are) Retirement security is compromised due to the large sums used to service large housing loans. This results in a vicious loop of lower birthrates, decreasing population, increasing grey population, with the economy requiring a constant influx of foreign citizens which drives the loop again and again. If things remain at status quo, we should expect such phenomena to occur.
"2012" type predictionsFor this piece of writing to meet expectations similar to the prophetic 2012 doomsday craze, I'll have to talk about possible externalities that could result in a worse outcome for SG property market and the economy as a whole.
The US economy, which the world is highly dependent on, is walking on a tight rope with many of their fiscal policies of low interest rates, high national deficits, large spendings and their weakening dollar. While it seems like they have gone out of their recession, their recent growth is more of a result of their bailout money reaching the ground and the banks. Toxic assets are still present and unaccounted for (yet). The world does well when the US economy does "well", as witnessed in the dot.com boom and the pre-subprime crash heralded a golden age for Singapore. Any externality that threatens the US economy will threaten the state of Sg's economy as well. A terrorist attack, discovery of more Bernie Madoffs scandals, or when the world gets sick of the US constant printing of money to fuel their consumption are just examples of the tightrope mentioned earlier.
Externalities in the form of natural disasters can be blind-spots we face in SG. Despite having a history of being a sheltered island free from disasters, there have been recent earthquakes that were just too close for comfort. Consider the damage it could bring to a nation full of high-rise buildings should we be hit by a big one. Consider the massive drop in demand of housing in high-rise buildings when people know we are earthquake prone. Consider the implications for foreign investment in a natural-disaster prone area. Then consider the overall outlook of Sg's economy following that.
One more "externality" given our nation history of a one-party state is political stability/change. Changes in the government may not necessarily mean a bad thing. Likewise having a stable one-party government doesn't necessarily mean a good thing, or a stable economy. (Look at recent gigantic losses incurred by GIC/Temasek, town councils and now HDB!) It has to be noted that the cause of this externality is the result of the people of this nation. When people are disgruntled, changes can happen. Just look at what happened to the previous Japanese government.
"
2012" implicationsSo we will see the bubble bursting and the economy tanking should such prophecies come true. Those who have speculated in the property market and have failed to get out will be badly burnt. Those servicing huge loans already will continue to have massive liabilities in face of a poor economy, potential job losses, wage cuts, and in worst case scenarios, bankruptcy. "The Lost Decade" in the future could refer to both the Japanese and us.
So what now?So what is the purpose of writing this? Trying to be a Nostradamus? If Nostradamus in his time was a real prophet he would have been living a miserable life, for he was not able to influence the people to prepare for many of his disastrous visions. Being a Singaporean, I'm more interested in the practical considerations, implications and decisions I can make to prepare myself (as a fresh grad), here are some:
1) If you are capable/making good money/born with a silver spoon and thus is able to beat the current status quo, by all means profit from the current situation. Join the speculation, invest in property while expecting possible externalities and get out before they get to you.
2) If you are dead broke (like most of us upon graduating), adopt the asian culture of less consumption and more savings. Be prepared for the worst, for possible retrenchments, wage cuts, career stagnation and etc.
3) Remain viable in not only the SG market, but also to foreign markets. Sgreans may have to look outwards internationally to markets who value their competitive advantage. We have one of the best education system in the world, giving us a strong competitive advantage. And while we may have to be cheaper/better/faster (CBF) locally, we can be more valuable to companies elsewhere in the world. Make full use of our advantage to work in the globalized world.
4) Perhaps look to rentals compared to home ownership when the market is overpriced. It makes economical sense when a product becomes overpriced and when people cannot afford, they look for cheaper alternatives. Granted a rental house/room is not an asset, but it is a tradeoff you will have to make.
5) Make lifestyle changes. Adopt a functional lifestyle, not an excessive one. Curb excessive consumerism which is fueling the capital greed profiteering mechanism which is running the world economy. Practice prudence.
6) Start being a democratic citizen and building a democratic society.
Ending note.Failing to plan is planning to fail. Being able to plan requires one to understand the current situation well and foresee future contingencies in order to manage them successfully. Being a typical kiasu-kiasi-kiapicanto singaporean, its always better to be on the safe side when the shit hits the fan. (its no wonder why there are so few entrepreneurs because sgreans are born to worry about their future and hence they take the safer route).
Again, all comments are welcomed and appreciated. Thanks for reading my rants.
The Computer Age, and its effect on guys.
I have a traditional and conservative view on how guys should be. He should be a breadwinner, own a home of his own, provide for his family, all this on his own merit. A guy should look like a guy, one who is tough, manly, not scrawny and weak. He should, at the very least, lift himself up on the chin up bar. A guy should keep his emotions in check, and not pour them out at all available outlets - facebook, twitter, friends etc. A guy should be able to joke, and take jokes directed at him. A guy should just be a guy, a man.
Now with this computer age coming to its developed stage, there is an apparent correlation with the internet age and the general rising trend of non-manliness I've observed. Here are a couple:
1) Metrosexual guys, or whatever they mean. Spurred by the media, many probably think metrosexual is neat and cool. But I'm spotting guys with lean (really lean) legs on sockless canvas, tote bags slung over their shoulders, hairstyles looking like a korean pop drama queen. I'm not sure why girls dig such fashion sense. Perhaps its a cultural thing, as culture and fashion shifts with time. But in my traditional and conservative view, such fashion deserves no respect from the conventional men our fathers and grandfathers used to be.
2) Emotional guys. We call them 'Emo' in short. Emo - an act of displaying your emotions, or more correctly, your weakness in the public domain. Again girls dig this. They call them SNAGs, they love communicating with them because they are so open with their feelings. With availability of sharing avenues like facebook, blogspot and now twitter, more guys are putting up useless and nonsensical whimpering, that in the real world, no one gives a shit about. Unless what they are sharing is interesting and adds value to others, spare us with the so many lousy emo days they have had, or how bitchy their female bosses were or whatever. As a guy, i just don't wanna hear your emotional problems. They are not my problem, but yours. Solve them, not share them.
3) Physically weak guys. These are guys who can't carry a sack of rice, or climb over a low wall. A guy should keep in shape, stay in shape, and at the very least, perform some functional physical tasks that a biologically born guy is capable of. There is nothing to be admired, really, at guys who just look sloppy and out of shape. Now we have keyboard warriors - guys with strength not in their body but their fingers. A guy should be competent in at least a sport. Again I hold no regards for guys who do not do any sports at all.
This post may hurt and offend. Call me superficial for judging a book by its cover, but I'll tell you it's reality. People size you up on first sight, and judge you based on the initial 5 seconds. Such sizing up used to occur in the real physical domain. Now, with the accessibility and excess sharing available in the digital world, people are constantly judging you based on the things you share at every opportunity. Take this with a pinch of salt.
Took a dump at 8.22 on 9/8/09
And so, another year has passed and a heightened wave of patriotism overcame me so much that I just couldn't help myself and took a historic dump in the toilet at that historic moment. Yes, I missed the pledge, but surely I can be forgiven by thinking of the actual meaning of it as I cleared my bowels.
"We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion, to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation."The first thing that came to me then was that I, or we citizens, have been made to recite this pledge mindlessly through our primary, secondary and JC days. The issue of countless mindless recitation of such a verse eventually led to my belief of truism in the verse itself. Without truly critically understanding what it really means, and what our society really reflects, the ignorance of mine has certainly clouded my view of the significance of our pledge. Lets take it apart, and review on what the pledge and how our reality bear similarities or differences.
"We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people"The first part starts with an imposing sense of patriotism, in the word We, which we are told to accentuate it with "gusto!". In this sense, those who are born and raised locally can definitely identify it more strongly compared to those who are foreign to our shores. To the influx of foreign talents and workers, and perhaps some permanent residents who have taken up citizenship and residency, does the word "WE" mean the same to them compared to local-born-and-bred singaporeans? In the event of natural or non-natural crisis, local "WE" have no where else to run to, because we have been living on this land for as long as we are conscious. What about the foreigners "WE"? It is thus obvious that there is an apparent gap between the two "WEs". Can we still stand united when such crisis occur? It remains to be seen, and yet history has shown the resilience of Singaporeans in overcoming crisis, but again the past has no correlation to the future, in which unknown challenges looms.
"regardless of race, language or religion"The next part of "regardless of race, language or religion" is perhaps the strongest statement that signify our nation. Having been a regular traveler to our neighbouring Malaysia and having witnessing the racial politics involved, the fact that we live in a multicultural society in relative peace and acceptance is something that we should not take for granted. At least our politicians don't play the racial cardgames, and local policy have shown equality in managing our diverse demographics.
The real challenge in the future, as our dear politicians have pointed out, is the successful integration of the influx of migrant workers with our locals. There has definitely been a growing resentment of this foreign migrants policies, as many singaporeans believe we are shortchanged and competition for jobs become more intense. Yet they have to realise that in light of economic progress, such immigrants are some sort of a 'necessary evil'. The nation has to remain competitive in light of the highly globalized world, where cheap labour can be quickly outsourced to nations with people eager to work and earn. Businesses in this era are highly flexible in relocating their operations in view of manufactoring and labour costs. Thus, it is true that if we do not have migrants who are willing to do cheap labour, businesses would relocate and less jobs will be available for the total pool of population. This also indicates that the implementation of a minimum wage is a double-edge sword, a policy that balances more towards its cons than its benefits. Yes, it's just business, nothing personal. This grim all-out economical progress view that our government take is definitely not personal in nature. Someday sometime, someone will have to review if economic progress and chasing GDP figures is worth it for its citizens or nation in the long run.
"to build a democratic society"Now, any intelligent being worth his salt will understand that our nation is not a true democracy. We are building towards it, and it doesn't really mean we are truly democratic in society at this moment. Democracy, by definition, is a system of government in which the controllers of the government are elected by the population. Well we do have elections, however are our elections fair and square? Have ALL the people voted for those in the government? Have we fully exercised our choice in the manner a democracy demands? Have the election system in place allowed this to occur? Citizens have to start asking these questions. Rather than just mindlessly reciting a pledge at a pre-specified moment, perhaps a critical review on this phrase "build a democratic society" will do more good.
"based on justice and equality"We are building a society based on justice and equality. Justice, as just as the word implies, is not totally black and white. There is justice for the poor, and justice for the rich. There is justice for those in power, and those in not. Ideally, we would want a fair independent judiciary system, in which all of us have equal rights in the face of law. Yet ideals remain as ideals. (Which I'd come to believe it as a truism)
The same goes for "equality". We would like to think all of us are equals at birth, ideally. And with the "meritocratic" society that Singaporeans live in, the notion of achieving success (or failure) based on pure merit alone sounds fair and square. Yet such utopian tautology doesn't really seem to reflect reality, ya? All of us were never equals to begin with. Warren Buffett call this the "luck of ovarian lottery". If you are lucky, you are born in a good family with comfortable finances, you live a comfortable life, get a comfortable education, get into good jobs perhaps by virtue of family connections or what not. If you are unlucky, you are born in a poor family, and you have to work hard to survive, earning your keeps, spending time away from the academic and intellectual pursuits and grades that our country so highly value. So a differential of lifestyle and luck exists between everyone.
Even so, our 'meritocratic' society has given everyone here a chance, regardless of where you were born, what sort of ovarian luck you were given. Study hard, work hard, get good grades, get a scholarship and boom, you are set. Though we often hear of students from poor families scoring excellent grades and obtaining prestigious scholarships, studies have shown that there is a greater, much greater proportion of students from rich and well-to-do families taking a similarly higher proportion of such scholarships as well. (Read Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers for a better understanding in differential outcomes) We are in a way meritocratic in terms of educational context, but the basis of assuming that we are all equals to begin with is flawed.
"achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation."Now for the last part, achieving happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation. Wait... for Whom? For the nation? or for the people? Are we happy as singaporeans? or the nation? Are we prospering and progressing as Singaporeans? or for the nation? It is food for thought. Likewise, is happiness, prosperity and progress for the nation, as the pledge suggests, correlated to the similar happiness, prosperity and progress for its people? For this I am not sure. What I do know, as a personal experience, is that it is not easy making a living in Singapore. Costs of living is high, and is definitely increasing. Stress levels are also high. The people are competitive, perhaps among ourselves as Singaporeans, but not necessarily "market competitive" compared globally. Working hard is definitely a virtue needed to survive here. There is no easy lunch they say. But have we thought carefully and think about perhaps there exists an "easier lunch" elsewhere from Singapore.
Yes I probe questions, and its perhaps philosophical in nature. Till now I've not suggested any feasible improvements that our state can use, for I do not see myself having the capability to think in deeper levels and their implications. But we have to begin somewhere, perhaps by probing with such questions. We can all start by taking a dump and thinking about things, like I did at 8.22pm on 9 August 2009.
Political Apathy
- Sgreans attitude - Blue/Red Pill? - Why so? - The need for - Changing socio-economical climate - Source of inspiration.
A survey conducted by a body affiliated to the government found that:
■ Some 63.4% of Singaporeans knew little or nothing about the Constitution and the organs of state.
■ Two-thirds, or more than 66%, of Singaporeans believed that they had little or no influence at all on national issues.
■ A whopping 92.7% had never given feedback to the Government, and 94.9% had never written letters to a newspaper.
■ And 94.5% don’t know what it’s like to sign a petition.
A story that bemused me in an interesting way. I've kinda got this impression that senior officers in my working environment seem to have the answer, or at least seem to know what they are talking and can offer their take on about any issues at hand. So during lunch with one of my bosses, we spoke about the problems of our society and with politics in general. So instead of the usual 'talking down' to me by him, which has often occurred in our office cubicles with me being the inquisitive one asking about workplace policies, this time it was my turn sharing in a uniquely one-directional conversation. Here I'm, a 20+ yr old junior officer, talking to someone of who is a dad of 2, been working in the system for quite some time, and he had nothing of value to share and discuss.
Now, this is not the interesting part, i thought. The weirder and more significant problem that struck me was that this is exactly the same thing that happens whenever the issue of politics was struck up during conversation over a meal, or just about any other conversations among my peers, of similar age and educational profile. Now, not that I've known myself as an overbearing conversationalist, just one who offers my views strongly in things that i've believed in, the nature of this phenomenon is simply the fact that most singaporeans don't give a flying f* to national politics.
This reminds me of the Matrix (yea how useful, the movie Matrix can be used to describe almost anything that happens in the world). Most singaporeans are still swallowing bitter blue pills (as our government likes to tell us, swallow the bitter pill, fight on despite the gloomy economical climate and tough times, the golden age of singapore is over - in implicit terms,"your degree is worthless, masters are ok, phDs are cool, anything else be prepared to bite more bullets).
They are sludging through the system that IS created by national policies. How so? These policies occur in our daily lives, in the systems we live in: education structure, nature of job openings, economic measures like tax, wages, CPF and so on and so forth. And while we are living in this system and working our ways through it (with a little grumbles and complains), we have never considered the WhoWhatWhenWhereWhy and How this system is created.
Why so? Why are Sgreans so apathetic? Is it because they are born apathetic, or they are made this way? (back to the nature vs nurture argument). I guess the answer should be kinda obvious, unless some scientist proves us wrong with the existence of 'apathetic genes', in which we singaporeans seem to have alot of.
In my experience, from young, we are inprinted with the idea of intense competition, especially in education. We work hard with TYSs, repeated end of year papers, and always seek for answers that will always be provided. We are told to score and do well, else our future will be bleak. (and likwise, i'm sure most parents in singapore tell that to their kids). Our governemnt continues its increasing foreign talent importing policies, tells us they need to because our birth rates are low and there are jobs that singaporeans won't want to do. With regards to the last issue, the question to ask is really, is it true that singaporeans do not want to do the jobs as stated? Or is it that these jobs are not wanted by singaporeans because of other factors, such as the incessant reflection of how these jobs are despised and not taken up by singaporeans, causing an effect by stating the phenomenon? And the result of all these policies have caused issues like 'lack of creativity' due to our education nature, 'brain drain', 'exploitation of foreign workers', 'inflation', 'academic inflation' and a whole host of issues that if you open your eyes they would be as easy to spot.
The point is, our behaviours, conscious or unconscious experience is a function of this system that is created. We are the way we are, because of the environment we live in. Parents tell their kids to buck up because in reality thats what they need to do! We are apathetic towards politics because we have so much else that concerns us at a livelihood manner before we can think about what causes these concerns at depth.
Its like we are little Neos, needing a miracle help from the system to feed us the much needed red pills before we can wake up and be aware of things, the matrix that we live in, and how to enact REAL changes from within. For that, we have to understand our own political climate and then come to the realization of our our seemingly innocuous "apathetic" nature of political awareness have led us down to our daily life experiences. Things like national policy affect the very ways of life of society. Grave as it might sound, it is indeed serious. And if we do not care about policy making at the national level, we can also forget about voicing out issues that may produce concerns, and we might as well don't bother making changes at the citizenship level with regards to issues that affect our livelihood.
Well it has been a rambling of sorts, but to conclude, we citizens have to take a stakeholder approach towards national building and policy making. We have to stop being singaporeans only on NDP. We are the ones working the ground, knowing what is going on, feeling the economic and social effects of our environment that shape us, and I believe we jolly well know what what kind of environment we want ourselves and our kids to live in, and we can produce change at the grassroots. Taking ownership is the first step I ask for, and being politically aware is just a subsequent consequence of that attitude.
A lighter moment
Reminiscing one of the funnier and enlightening moments during my previous vacation attachment. Was working in a small department of 6, in which 5 of them are married with kids ranging from toddlers to late teens. Managed to had a lighter and funnier moment with the 2IC, who was about to celebrate his 20++ yrs of marriage/wedding anniversary and he gave me a golden advice:
Him: "Leslie, next time when you get married, try to make things easier for yourself."
Me: " (in my mind: WTF are u talking about). Huh? "
Him: "See.... My anniversary is on Christmas day. I never forget about our wedding anniversary date. Only sometimes the number of years, but at least my wife doesn't nag or scold me if i forget the date!"
*the group of married men in my department laughs and cheers, saluting this little piece of wisdom being imparted to a rookie young man.
------------------------------------
Golden advice indeed.
I've always wondered whats with the fascination by the female species on celebrating special occasions on a anniversary basis. I'm not a big fan of celebrating at a glorious level, throwing parties and such. IMHO, such glorious celebration should only take place if the occasion really means something. Like if you have ED for the past 30 yrs and you get cured in your coming bday. Now thats significant and life changing and certainly deserves celebration.
Bdays aren't top of my list. Turning 24, 30, 40 or 50 or 69 the next day certainly doesn't mean anything significant. You are still yourself before your bday, and you will certainly still be the same you after your bday, so what is the big deal with celebrating them? For milestones sake, sure, though to me it feels a little shallow. Getting friends and acquaintances to celebrate and the next day everyone goes on with their lives. I've known of ppl who attend others bday parties religiously, in so with hope that their own bday parties will be properly reciprocated. What bollocks?
Anyway lesson learnt from this wise man and his advice for guys : plan your special days in advance and make things easier for yourself...e.g. if you are starting out, your monthiversary date..if you gonna plant your first kiss on your girl, your first kisserversary date...if you gonna hit home run....your first homerun date...if you gonna propose....your proposal date...and if you gonna ROM...your ROM date and if you gonna get married, plan your marriage date. To make things easier, just try to do them all in the same day, like...erm...Vday. This way, you get high benefit with lower costs. And when dementia or the effect of "just being a guy" sets in, you don't forget such important dates because its stated explicitly in your default calender.
P.S. GF is going to complain about this when she sees this.
AWARE Fiasco...Issues to ponder
Cliffnotes: (google wayangparty / the online citizen for more background information)
AWARE is a secular women right's organisation. Among other fronts that they push further for women rights, they have also adopted a neutral stance towards homosexuality in Singapore.
Meanwhile, pastors and high ranking church people from CHURCH OF OUR SAVIOR (COOS), decided that homosexuality is an act against the teachings of their God, and planted the seeds for a management coup d'etat (though it was constitutional) of AWARE so that they can change the direction of a secular organisation into one that is anti-homosexual.
------------------------------------------------------
Issues and implications to ponder:
1) Fanatics, whose religion allowed them to have a higher moral standing, decide to impose their discriminatory views onto a secular organisation by taking over the management on a constitutional basis.
Granted it was a constitutional takeover, why can't the Church simply start a new organisation and fight for their own cause? Why is there the need to take over a secular organisation that represents the multi-religious, multi-racial woman demographic in SG? Can't they mind their own business?
The pastor actually said "It’s not a crusade against the people but there’s a line that God has drawn for us, and we don’t want our nation crossing that line."
Apparently he has forgotten that he is just a pastor of a church (not the Prime-minister nor the Prime-minister's father whom have the actual capacity to make such statements) and should not have made such a daring blanket statement concerning the nation crossing that line.
And which LINE? Who drew the line? JESUS? Would the Gods of other religions , e.g. Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and atheism have drawn different lines? And who is to say whose line is BETTER than the other line?2) If such a management takeover for the sake of furthering a cause of a religion is condoned and accepted by the public, what sort of message does it imply?
That if another pastor in another church dislikes a national or organisational policy that does not fit into their God's doctrine, they should actively campaign aganist them and if possible, take over the organisation and impose their views on their freewill?
Will we become a christian state? And for "God's sake", why do christians always need others to see things in their shoe, evangelising, preaching, and now imposing?
------------------------------------------------------------
There are some personal reflections and takeaways with regards to this issue.
Firstly, homosexuals are here to stay. They have always been around in history, in the present, and also in the future with or without any religious, social, genetical, governmental (and what not) interference. Heck, talking about sexual abuse of altar boys, there are even homo pastors, bishops and cardinals!
No matter how negative or distasteful the presence of such beings appear to anti-homosexual religious fanatics, they have to realise homos are humans afterall, and have equal living rights amongst us. Furthermore, living in multiracial and religious inclusive society, we have to make sense of our living environment and develop an awareness (not tolerance though, as the word implies I hate what you are doing, but I'm going to take it in my stride and not make a big fuss about it) towards the sensitivity of such issues. Ain't Christianity all about preaching of love towards humanity? Where is the humanity when there is so much hatred in condemning homosexuals to hell when they are just like normal people? Love the hypocrisy.
Secondly, issues like this with a religious background can have drastic implications on a plural society. It is making people who are at first sensitively aware of religious differences into one that is more of quiet tolerance, and in the worst case, developing a disdain. The Church of our Savior has certainly done itself no favours as an ambassador of whatever god they pray to. Even some christians have publicly condemned such actions taken by the Church. I can forsee certain government intervention being taken should there be any threats occuring to our pluralistic society.
Lastly, to end with a quote:
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion, it is called Religion."-- Robert M. Pirsig
I've always maintained that the world will be better off without any religion. The only good thing I can take out from having religions is the good values they impart to followers. These similar values can also be learnt and assimilated on my own without the help of any religions at all - it is simply called being a HUMAN. It doesnt take much common sense to know what being a Human means. The world can be better off with a bit more humanity versus "My God is better than your God, and my Line is bigger and wider and nicer than your freaking line."
Trying to make common sense in current issues. (Non Sequitur)
Just trying to make some sense in latest happenings and current affairs in our tiny beautiful island. Singaporeans are generally apathetic to general current affairs and political news. This isn't surprising as we have many daily survival issues to contend with, before we can exercise our common sense on what is really happening on the ground. Lets see.
Ren Ci CEO Monk gone amok. Political/Journalistic/Management Implications.Apparently doing charity is all about filling the pockets of the head honcho before the beans are spilled. I thought TT Durai was the man, now this monk (someone who should espouse the values of the religion he preaches) tops the chart. Details of this fiasco aside, some key issues arises:
1) What is the management committee doing? A news report said they trusted their head monk and allowed him to set his own salary. Okay, so they run on the basis of 'trust'. This was the same basis used when our national reserves were tapped for our 'Resilience Package'. When questioned on the process of approval, I quote our Finance Minister
“I’m not sure why it is relevant. At the end of the day, this is a system that is different from Norway and Australia, where as much detail as possible is provided. This is a system that relies on trust in the individuals who are in charge including those appointed to the CPA and the Elected President. Do you
trust them? Have they made decisions wisely? Has the government been acting responsibly?”
Where was the accounting, check and balances, transparency? The word 'trust' is a big word to use, and has big implications. When things go wrong, where does the fault lie? Is it the management fault for trusting someone whom they thought would not abuse their authority? Or is it a systems failure for not implementing proper check and balances to prevent such cases from happening? I thank God (I'm an atheist, but I can't find anyone to give thanks) that this time it was a Charity Organisation that screwed up. I do hope nothing of this sort happens for our National Corporation. Just because of the word "TRUST".
2) I got news that headhoncho monk approved a $60k loan to a PAP MP thru CNA's online website. The title listed in the website changed from "Ming Yi approves $60,000 loan to MP Ong Seh Hong" to "Former RenCi CEO Ming Yi approves several loans to staff" a few hours after this news clipping was released online. It doesn't take an idiot to figure out what our local media is doing.
The irony of this issue was that I was watching the news reporting on Mediacorp News Award ceremony which awarded prizes and recognition for the great journalistic content of the media. I quote their Chairman Ho Kwon Ping,
“In understanding the spirit of the times, we stand united not as a single MediaCorp but as professionals dedicated to the task of making this crazy world more understandable to our audience."
I'm sure our journalistic standards are up there among the best, and the efforts of the editors in making this RenCi news report more understandable to the international and local readers alike should be applauded.
New Creation Church Pastor earns $500k/annum. God is the new first class honoursOh my GOD! If I knew believing in certain unproven assertions from a Bible and then charismatically preaching to others would secure me such a comfortable salary, I should have gone to seminary schools instead of slaving it out in NUS currently. Cut to the crap, here are some common sense issues that we should all think about:
1) Why is the pastor paid so much. Isn't a pastor one who should adopt the very core values that the religion teaches? I don't think the peeps who wrote the bible said it is okay to pay yourself so well from the many donations made by altruistic (if not blind) followers of the church. Besides, does a pastor need so much? Drive a big car, live in a big house, indulge in luxuries while providing religious and spiritual comfort to believers? A pastor is the embodiment of the religion, an ambassador of good teachings for God's sake!
2) Is there a need for mega classy-extravagant church? Is there justification for the amazing amounts of donation - $19 million worth on one Sunday ? Why do the followers of the Church donate so much? Do they know where the money is going? Into the pockets of their pastor? Into the senseless building of high-class luxury style church so that they can feel cool and hip when they confess their sins on a weekly affair? Into buying a nicer lot with more amenities in Heaven? Or just because you believe in God and you just know you should give your money to him. For God's sake, there are so many people in the world who could make better use with that sum of money. People are dying of poverty, lack of food, healthcare and medicine. I seriously implore these kind-altrustic-classy church-goers to get a sense of proportion (a term so strongly used by our ahkong you know who) and make sense of their donations, and what they are actually donating for.
Granted, I'm not a follower of the church, and can never understand fully their actions for amassing such huge sums for a church. But even if I am, I should be exercising due common sense in making such donation decisions, especially with the integrity of altruistic organisations being thoroughly questioned in the light of the NKF and RenCi saga.
There are more issues to contend with, and I guess that is the new direction for this blog. Making common sense out of daily issues.
