What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by balance_else_complacent @ Wed, 14 May 2008 21:35:18 +0800

balance_else_complacent — Wed, 14 May 2008 21:35:18 +0800

hello ray245,

are u home?

you have a missed call.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by balance_else_complacent @ Sun, 11 May 2008 16:11:42 +0800

balance_else_complacent — Sun, 11 May 2008 16:11:42 +0800

Originally posted by ray245:

......

I've yet to see a opposition party that actually have courage to challenge the PAP directly over their own ideas.

There is a difference between having a stronger opposition and having the opposition party be the ruling party.

1st , coud you entertain us by answering:

1. Do you support the idea that World Record pay will attract the best to serve ? If no such pay, does it mean the best will not come and come?

2. Is it true that the incums have the budget to pay millionaires but Opposition does not?

If your answer to '1' is Yes, then you do not need to worry which party rules as they will attract the best talent to serve having the big budget. If your answer is 'No', I shall report to your master. Without the big budget, tell me how can Opposition attract the best? Tell me right here right now. Can big salary buy you Transparency and Honesty? You tell me, I will not tell you for personal salvation reasons.

If your answer to '2' is Yes, then you need not have any doubt that anyone being the ruling will not have the budget to pay the most ambitious. With great amount of money they will work. If your answer is 'No', then no one will believe you anyway.

Tell me also :

1. Why with so many ERP and price hiked ERPs, every morning I experience traffic congestion during peak hours?

2. If I take your bank money and invest but will not tell you how I use it, profit and loss, please tell me its 'A' OKay for you. If so, give me your pin number right here , right now. I mean I encountered a foreign banker asking me that question. I gave him a tight slap on the stop and walked away. ;)

ok for now, I going to see some dogs eating dog biscuits and some I ask to them lick me boots clean clean. the PORE has bred so many poodles. its sad.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Awareness @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:52:07 +0800

Awareness — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:52:07 +0800

Originally posted by 333225520:

They are just ignorant. They read ST and watch local news from local media and is lead to think whatever the gov want them to believe. So what's the different between Singaporean and North Korean?

Thats why there is this wonderful thing called the Internet. No happy with local controlled news? Then read news from other online sources

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by charlize @ Sun, 11 May 2008 12:10:34 +0800

charlize — Sun, 11 May 2008 12:10:34 +0800

If the opposition were ruling Singapore, the ex ruling party will be questioning the new ministers why they are paid million dollar salaries.

They will be questioning why there are so many ERP gantries being set up (with more on the way).

They will be questioning why opposition wards (ie pappy wards) are not entitled to lift upgrading.

Yes, that will be the irony of it all.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by balance_else_complacent @ Sun, 11 May 2008 10:37:12 +0800

balance_else_complacent — Sun, 11 May 2008 10:37:12 +0800

OPPOSITION or PROPOSITION is only a matter of relativity.

Underneath, they are all humans. Humans can be nobel but even nobel people are not saints or gawds. They are not perfect. Can never ever be. scientifically.

To me it does not matter as long as the leader is TRANSPARENT and HONEST to the people and not just on paper but true honesty.

Do not hide from the PEOPLE especially when its them who provide the funding.

Opposition today, Proposition tomorrow.

vice versa.

No issue whatsoever.

Whoever wins, 'talents' will join and 'sacrifice' for world record.

Money can get you all kinds of 'talents'.

Case in point, google started in the garage like IBM. when successful , they get all kinds of talents willing to sacrifice for them and sell their loyalty for money.

But will it buy you HONESTY and TRANSPARENCY which have no price tags?

Enron chief also paid unimaginable numbers. What happened? Who would have thought?

For my personal salvation, I must say yes.

u belif the me or not?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Atobe @ Sun, 11 May 2008 00:18:00 +0800

Atobe — Sun, 11 May 2008 00:18:00 +0800

Originally posted by lionnoisy:

i am sure we dunt have FT problems then.

When opp run,SG will experience No jobs era.

So ,no job,no FT.FT problem job.Good lah.

2.deflation will replce inflation lah.No demand lead to

price decrease.

3.SG dollar will depreciate to 3.0 SG to one US,like in 1960's.

4.wan some more.U die die must try opp run SG>

God bless SG!

With hypocritical Singaporeans boastfully claiming proudly to be noisy for the Singapore Lion - do we need any Alternative Parties to make Singapore a failure ?

With or without the PAP, Singapore and Singaporeans will continue to thrive and be a World Class country as Singapore had been before LKY and his PAP even existed during the Colonial days.

Hong Kong do not have any personality such as LKY and his 1957 Team, nor an interfering autocratic Political Party as the PAP - yet Hong Kong is comparable and even supercede Singapore in its economic, social, judicial, cultural and political standards.

Do we need more of the PAP style of politics and political interference in the daily life of Singapore and Singaporeans ?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Atobe @ Sun, 11 May 2008 00:11:19 +0800

Atobe — Sun, 11 May 2008 00:11:19 +0800

Originally posted by oxford mushroom:

Is Potong Pasir well run? What's the property prices like there?

What does the property prices at Potong Pasir matter to you ?

It is served by an MRT station along the North-East Line, despite the poor illogical excuse given by the Transport Ministry - that reflect the petty mentality of the MIW Government - in the excuse given that it is uneconomical to open the MRT Station even after it has been built.

Ironically, WP Low Thia Kiang's Hougang Constituency has its property prices comparable - if not higher - than some Constituencies run by the Ruling Political Party.

Do you really believe that property prices in Singapore are affected by the Political Party that is managing it ?

Being a long time resident in the UK, do you believe there is any difference in the property prices in the Constituencies with a Conservative MP when the Labor is in Government, and vice-versa ?

If you wish to lampoon the alternative parties, at least have some depth in your knowledge of local politics.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by lionnoisy @ Sat, 10 May 2008 22:15:13 +0800

lionnoisy — Sat, 10 May 2008 22:15:13 +0800

i am sure we dunt have FT problems then.

When opp run,SG will experience No jobs era.

So ,no job,no FT.FT problem job.Good lah.

2.deflation will replce inflation lah.No demand lead to

price decrease.

3.SG dollar will depreciate to 3.0 SG to one US,like in 1960's.

4.wan some more.U die die must try opp run SG>

God bless SG!

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by 333225520 @ Sat, 10 May 2008 21:37:09 +0800

333225520 — Sat, 10 May 2008 21:37:09 +0800

Originally posted by oxford mushroom:

Is Potong Pasir well run? What's the property prices like there?

With so much "support" from the gov, I consider Potong Pasir as quite well run. Otherwise, why did the resident there continue to vote for Mr Chiam See Tong despite being "marked" by the gov?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by oxford mushroom @ Sat, 10 May 2008 21:11:06 +0800

oxford mushroom — Sat, 10 May 2008 21:11:06 +0800

Originally posted by 333225520:

I am sure the current ruling party is able to manage Singapore successfully with the advice, help of the scholars, etc. Are all the policies thought out by the ministers themselves?

The ministers themselves don't deal with the day to day work, they only set the general direction of the country.

According your logic, no opposition party in the world can ever be able to prove that they are more capable than the ruling party since they never have a chance to run the country. So why the presidential election in America? Has Hillary Clinton or Obama run a country before?

Why are you so sure the opposition can't rule Singapore better? A good leader need not know everything, he just need to be able to use the right people.

Is Potong Pasir well run? What's the property prices like there?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by balance_else_complacent @ Tue, 06 May 2008 21:22:43 +0800

balance_else_complacent — Tue, 06 May 2008 21:22:43 +0800

If OPPOSITION gets power, IF they hire the same talents offering the incumbents the same post, would the PORE be in trouble?

IF in power, OPPOSITION can access so much budget can they hire the best of the best to do the many jobs? Will this lead the PORE to be in trouble?

Ultimately, it depends on the character of the OPPOSITION. One thing for sure, they must not legalise corrupton. ;) not that anyone is doing this right now.

They must not also apply dictatorship style control. Not that anyone is doing that right now.

They must not hide investment failures and boo boos and how money is spent on expense items. Not that anyone is doing like this right now ;)

If someone is lost in the PORE, they must be able to find him in less than 2 months.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by redDUST @ Tue, 06 May 2008 14:13:30 +0800

redDUST — Tue, 06 May 2008 14:13:30 +0800

with so much money at stake which the present government has amass over the years, it will take more than a `david vs goliath' performance to topple the pap. they will guard it with their lives, and more.

and my take is the coffer will be emptied when pap realize that it will not hold power anymore.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Colby @ Tue, 06 May 2008 08:50:16 +0800

Colby — Tue, 06 May 2008 08:50:16 +0800

in North Korean language Tibet is called 서장(西藏,the Chinese way)but in south Korea it's called 티뱃(Tibet,the English way)S.Korea is just a dog feeded by U.S.A.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Poh Ah Pak @ Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:35:19 +0800

Poh Ah Pak — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:35:19 +0800

And with peak oil going on, we HAVE to move on from fossil fuel as a energy source.

See:

http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Peak_Oil___Russia/peak_oil___russia.html

http://www.studien-von-zeitfragen.net/Zeitfragen/Petroleum/petroleum.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdcRX35zQx0&feature=related

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Atobe @ Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:13:39 +0800

Atobe — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 16:13:39 +0800

Originally posted by ray245:

1. Firstly, look at southeast asia as a whole. Countries who have 'fairer' elections. Just because the opposition is given the chance to govern their own country does not mean the countries is in a better shape. Take a look at taiwan as well, the opposition has went into power, yet their economy isn't doing better than it was under the KMT. And the reason the KMT was reelected was due the poor economic performance of the DDP.

I've known many phliphinos that is pissed at their countries politics, and seek to go to US and etc once they get the chance to do so..so what the use of electing a opposition into power if they cannot do better than the current party?

And the main reason why a opposition party should be elected into power is because the current ruling party performance is weak, NOT because it is too powerful, or simply granting a chance to the opposition. It's to ensure that the weak ruling party can be removed and looks at it's mistake.

We are LUCKY that the PAP mindset isn't about hoarding all the money into the minsters pocket, and their mindset is that they themselves can be even richer if singapore is rich. The failure of most of southeast asia so call 'democracy' should be a key indicator.

The very basic principles of democracy is not to elect people into power. The primary purpose of democracy is governance. To govern the nation FIRST, and give a chance for the general public to make decision SECOND.

And democracy exisit to ensure that good governance takes place, not the other way around.

The PAP runs in election in the first place because they want to RUNS the country better than the british. Why should we expect any less than from the opposition as well?

They need to understand that they NEED to run the country better than the PAP, as compared to showing others we are a so called 'true democracy'. As I have said before, democracy is another system of governance first, granting power to the mass second.

And in a democracy, we cannot expect the majority to make the RIGHT decision. Look at US and their Iraq war for example, when the minority is right instead. Electing a good government ISN'T anything that can be taken for granted. Hence, it is better to elect a opposition party when the ruling party FAILS to manage the country well as compared to giving power to the opposition when the ruling party is running the country rather well.

Even the 'shinning beacon' of democracy, the United states of America has cases where a elected presidents tries to secure power through improper means in the watergate scandal.

2. How to find out when can the opposition runs a country well? Simple, when the elected government FAILS to acheive the stability, economical growth, and meets the expected needs of people's livelihood. That is the signal for us to elect a opposition into power, and see what OTHER ideas can work, ideas that is different from the ruling party.

3. From what I could remeber, basic information like this should be availabe for students to research in libaries and internet as well. And with peak oil going on, we HAVE to move on from fossil fuel as a energy source. We don't need to follow US energy policy you know.

All they need to point out is that oil WILL be used up sooner or later, and actions to change to other energy source should be done quickly. That is one advantage the opposition can used.

But some opposition are so pro-west that they starts to absorb the BAD aspect of the west. Policy that is of more harm to us than good. The west isn't without faults like some people is thinking.

4. This is a hard one, but in my opinion, perhaps the opposition party should call for a televised public debate? With the internet, the average joe will get to know that the opposition challengede the PAP to a debate as compared to the past where people only have access to traditional media.

But at the same time, the goal of the opposition MUST be in the interest of singapore as compared to gaining power for their own polticial party.

If you think that those ideas must be keep to the oppositon party because they don't want the PAP to implement it, are they in the interest of singaporeans?

You do know what the more democratic government in other country is trying to achieve? Cross-party ideas that can be agreed on together in the common interest of singapore. Even IF the opposition is not in power, they must understand they are STILL representing singaporeans.

Ideas should not be keep to themselves because PAP can use it, if they are REALLY concerned about everyone instead of their own party, they DON'T NEED to be afriad to tell it and letting the PAP use it. Because it will in the interest of singaporeans.

1. Firstly, look at southeast asia as a whole. Countries who have 'fairer' elections. Just because the opposition is given the chance to govern their own country does not mean the countries is in a better shape. Take a look at taiwan as well, the opposition has went into power, yet their economy isn't doing better than it was under the KMT. And the reason the KMT was reelected was due the poor economic performance of the DDP.

I've known many phliphinos that is pissed at their countries politics, and seek to go to US and etc once they get the chance to do so..so what the use of electing a opposition into power if they cannot do better than the current party?

Fair elections and failed democracies ? Have you seen some relationship between the two ?

Why will you only look at the South-east Asian countries that have failed democracies ?

Did you not look beyond South-east Asian shores ? Have you not seen successful democracies such as South Korea, Japan, India, and Australia with their successful economies ?

Are you not skewed in using the economic failures of Taiwan as a fallout of the Taiwanese experiment in democratic practices ?

Did you not consider that throughout the two Presidential terms of Chen Shui-bian, he was more interested in pushing ex-President Liu Teng-Hui's agenda of an independent Taiwan more then economic progress for Taiwan ?

After having experienced decades of economic mismangement under Marcos dictatorial rule, the Filipinos are jealously guarding and preserving their new found democracy, and have unfortunately picked on the US political system as their model - which require a mature society to support such a political system.

Can we blame the Philippine economic morass onto a Democratic System that is operated by politicians more interested in the personal benefits from political office than managing the country ?

And the main reason why a opposition party should be elected into power is because the current ruling party performance is weak, NOT because it is too powerful, or simply granting a chance to the opposition. It's to ensure that the weak ruling party can be removed and looks at it's mistake.

Can there be any Political U-Turn when a single Political Party become too strong for any other Alternative Political Party to take over its place ?

If Thailand did not have an existing democratic system - that was won from the blood shed by the student uprising in the 1980s - the Military would have continued to govern Thailand after the overthrow of ex-Premier Thaksin.

Zimbabwe is a political basket case to study, where a strong man will ruin the country, and will manipulate the political system for his continued political existence - and while Singapore may not be a basket case for now, parallels come close in the manner that has seen the dismantling of the entire institutions of checks and balances.

We are LUCKY that the PAP mindset isn't about hoarding all the money into the minsters pocket, and their mindset is that they themselves can be even richer if singapore is rich. The failure of most of southeast asia so call 'democracy' should be a key indicator.

Are you certain of what you are writing in your opening statement in this paragraph ?

Are Singaporeans richer since Election 2006 that saw PM LHL supposedly ''taking full control'' of politics in Singapore, or have we seen the shrinkage of the size of the Middle Income Group - with many Singaporeans seeing a drop in the Standard of Living after making sacrifices to cope with the ever increasing Cost of Living ?

Is it not characteristic of this Government to be hoarding all the money that sees the Ministers and the PAP members holding Political Offices enriching themselves with million dollar wages that are legitimately taken through unopposed changes to Parliamentary legislations ?

Singaporean workers have seen meagre wage increment that did not even pass the 4 per cent level, and yet we will see Ministerial wages taking a 30 per cent jump even when their wages already exceed the top ranking pay of Presidents and Prime Ministers of First World countries.

With the CPI in 2007 hitting a high of almost 5 per cent and more as the Year 2007 ended, has the 4 per cent wage increases amounted to anything ?

Try visiting the following blog and have a reality check before making sweeping statements.

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/02/13/uniquely-singapore-%E2%80%93-f1-or-f9-income-statistics/

http://yawshinleong.blogspot.com/2006/12/of-wealth-and-income-equity.html

The very basic principles of democracy is not to elect people into power. The primary purpose of democracy is governance. To govern the nation FIRST, and give a chance for the general public to make decision SECOND.

And democracy exisit to ensure that good governance takes place, not the other way around.

Democracy exist to ensure good governance, and can only exist due to the fact that the GENERAL PUBLIC has the opportunity to exercise their POLITICAL RIGHTS.

Democracy can only exist when there is an institutionalised check and balance to ensure that there is no abuse of power assigned to those elected into Public Political Office.

The very basic Principle of Democracy IS TO ELECT people into Political Office and entrusted with the POWERS that come with the Political Appointment.

How did you come to your version of the Principles of Democracy ?

Yes, at least you manage to get it right that the Primary Purpose of Democracy is governance - which I assume you mean to be 'GOOD Governance' and nothing else ?

Can such 'Good Governance' exist when democratic institutions of 'checks and balancing' are systematically dismantled for the sheer convenience of questionable ''effective governance'' ?

The PAP runs in election in the first place because they want to RUNS the country better than the british. Why should we expect any less than from the opposition as well?

Are Singaporeans expecting anything less from the Alternative Parties than what is expected from the PAP ?

Surely, Singaporeans are expecting even higher standards of Democratic Governance from the Alternative Political Parties, after experiencing forty odd years of the PAP autocratic governance ?

You got to try harder to sound seriously convincing if you beleive that ''the PAP runs in election in the first place because they want to RUNS the country better than the British''.

They need to understand that they NEED to run the country better than the PAP, as compared to showing others we are a so called 'true democracy'. As I have said before, democracy is another system of governance first, granting power to the mass second.

What is in the name of any Political System - whether democracy or communism or otherwise ?

Even the Communist Party of China has awakened to the idea that the village commune will also need to allow the villagers to exercise their Political Rights to participate in the Political System of choosing someone to govern their village.

Even the Chinese Communist Party has realised that good governance can only come about when there exist some checks and balance to their system, or there will be rampant corruption that will damage the reputation and legitimacy of the Communist Party to govern China.

And in a democracy, we cannot expect the majority to make the RIGHT decision. Look at US and their Iraq war for example, when the minority is right instead. Electing a good government ISN'T anything that can be taken for granted. Hence, it is better to elect a opposition party when the ruling party FAILS to manage the country well as compared to giving power to the opposition when the ruling party is running the country rather well.

Are you suggesting that the minority is right about the US going into Iraq ?

It seems that you have read recent history in a very odd peculiar way if you believe that the 'minority is right' and that the US is with the majority in going to war in Iraq ?

Did you not realise that more then two third of the World Community was opposed to the US going to war to overthrow Saddam Hussein in the second Iraq War ?

LKY had said that Singapore cannot climb back up to where we are today, if ever Singapore should collapse for whatever reasons. Will you wait until the Ruling Party FAIL to produce the goods before preparing an Alternative Political Party to takeover the reins of Government ?

In the British Parliamentary system, and in the US Political System - the Alternative Political Parties are given as much information of Government to be effective in their role of checking on Government policies.

Unfortunately, in Singapore, the Ruling Political Party placed a 'SECRET' stamp on all government publications and policy documents that prevent any loyal Singaporean in the Alternative Political Party to perform the task of ''check and balance''.

Can the Alternative Political Party be in any state of preparedness to takeover when the cards have collapsed ?

Even the 'shinning beacon' of democracy, the United states of America has cases where a elected presidents tries to secure power through improper means in the watergate scandal.

Will you throw the wooden bucket due to one small splinter on its side that happen to prick you ?

If you want to eat fish, be prepared for the bones, will you condemn the entire fish simply because of your own carelessness in choking on the bone ?

2. How to find out when can the opposition runs a country well? Simple, when the elected government FAILS to acheive the stability, economical growth, and meets the expected needs of people's livelihood. That is the signal for us to elect a opposition into power, and see what OTHER ideas can work, ideas that is different from the ruling party.

Given the standard of your thought process that is displayed in this thread, are you able to discern good from bad if the ideas are presented by the Alternative Political Parties ?

With the deliberate moves by the Ruling Political Party to starve the Alternative Political Parties from receiving any financial, moral, intellectual and administrative support - can the Alternative Political Parties be in any position to step into the shoes of Government in the same manner that the Labor or Conservative Parties in UK takeover from each other ?

3. From what I could remeber, basic information like this should be availabe for students to research in libaries and internet as well. And with peak oil going on, we HAVE to move on from fossil fuel as a energy source. We don't need to follow US energy policy you know.

All they need to point out is that oil WILL be used up sooner or later, and actions to change to other energy source should be done quickly. That is one advantage the opposition can used.

Are the Alternative Political Parties in Singapore following US energy policies, or is it the Ruling Political Party that is a loyal supporter of the US policies - energy or political or military ?

Can the existing political system in Singapore support any Alternative Political Parties to put up any paper that will influence a Political System that is totally dominated by the Ruling Political Party, and shut out the system to all other political parties ?

But some opposition are so pro-west that they starts to absorb the BAD aspect of the west. Policy that is of more harm to us than good. The west isn't without faults like some people is thinking.

East or West - which system has ever claimed themselves to be perfect ?

It is the self-serving propaganda spouted by the Ruling Party that claims at different times the GOOD and BAD of both system to suit their 'Flavor of the Month'.

China's Deng Xiao Peng had once said that ''Black or White Cat, both are just as good as long as it catches the mouse'' - can you appreciate the wisdom in such a simple statement ?

4. This is a hard one, but in my opinion, perhaps the opposition party should call for a televised public debate? With the internet, the average joe will get to know that the opposition challengede the PAP to a debate as compared to the past where people only have access to traditional media.

But at the same time, the goal of the opposition MUST be in the interest of singapore as compared to gaining power for their own polticial party.

Tell this to the Ruling Political Party - that the goal ''MUST be in the interest of Singapore as compared to gaining power for their own political party''.

Singapore's Ruling Political Party has never wanted Singaporeans to listen to the other side of the debate, and has avoided public debate that will give the Alternative Political Parties any higher public profile then the limited avenues available.

Public debate has always been held behind closed door, carefully managed with pre-vetted audience, and the entire show meticulously planned and cheographed to the last detail.

This is the Singapore way of debate - even at the level of the National Parliament

If you think that those ideas must be keep to the oppositon party because they don't want the PAP to implement it, are they in the interest of singaporeans?

It is not the Alternative Political Parties are not prepared to share their ideas with the Ruling Political Party in Government, but it is the Ruling Political Party that refuse to accept anyone's ideas as being more superior to them - as it will shoot their reputation full of holes, when unpaid politicians from the Alternative Political Parties can produce better ideas than the over-paid Ministers and their fellow Politicians holding political appointments.

Have you read some of the ideas from Chee Soon Juan in his publications in the early 1990's ?

Those ideas were implemented ten years later - after Year 2000 - and with changes made but never acknowledged.

You do know what the more democratic government in other country is trying to achieve? Cross-party ideas that can be agreed on together in the common interest of singapore. Even IF the opposition is not in power, they must understand they are STILL representing singaporeans.

Ideas should not be keep to themselves because PAP can use it, if they are REALLY concerned about everyone instead of their own party, they DON'T NEED to be afriad to tell it and letting the PAP use it. Because it will in the interest of singaporeans.

Tell this to the Ruling Political Party - enough has been said and repeated since the 1960s - by politicians and from concerned Citizens.

The PAP believe themselves to be the only legitimate Representative of Singapore and Singaporeans, and all others - who dare to challenge their position - are charlatans to this exclusive role that can only be monopolised by them alone.

Can any idea from any Singaporeans be more superior than that coming from the minds of the over paid politicians from the Ruling Political Party ?

Can any good idea come from any other Singaporeans when the idea is driven home that talent is limited in Singapore ?

According to the POWER of ONE, talent can only exist when cultivated and cloned through the political process of the Ruling Political Party - under the watchful eyes of the POWER of ONE.

What is being sought is a cloned idea from a clone - not from talented Singaporeans, who can think out of the box.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by t_a_s @ Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:07:00 +0800

t_a_s — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 14:07:00 +0800

It is best to have a 2 party system. Like in Taiwan or USA. Masia is working towards it, singapore can not be controlled forever by pap. Oppositions should be given a chance to rule the country. Like Penang, opposition has no experience but they are given the chance.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Genie99a @ Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:47:50 +0800

Genie99a — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:47:50 +0800

Originally posted by ray245:

Oh realy? SO indepedence is SOOO damn important that people's standard of living does not matter at all? Look at all the former british colonies in africa, is independence good for them?

Can you say that indepedence for those colonies is a better thing?

And moreover, don't forget what did the british government FAILED to do for singapore, it is singaporeans who started industrialization programs, singaporeans who build the HDB flats to solve the hosing issues in singapore, not the british.

In my opinion, the PAP do a better job of managing singapore's economy than the british.

I wouldn't say independence would guarantee a better result but it is the right thing to do.

It's always better to govern yourself than to have others do it for you. (Similar to having the freedom to do what you want when you approach adulthood)

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by Uncle Ver SG @ Wed, 09 Apr 2008 06:54:07 +0800

Uncle Ver SG — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 06:54:07 +0800

"We are LUCKY that the PAP mindset isn't about hoarding all the money into the minsters pocket, and their mindset is that they themselves can be even richer if singapore is rich. The failure of most of southeast asia so call 'democracy' should be a key indicator."

Developed countries GDP are much larger and their ministers are not paid even close to what the PAP are paid. This is ridiculous.

"Ideas should not be keep to themselves because PAP can use it, if they are REALLY concerned about everyone instead of their own party, they DON'T NEED to be afriad to tell it and letting the PAP use it. Because it will in the interest of singaporeans."

In the private sector, there are copyrights to patents to innovation etc. Why should anyone propose an idea, let the PAP steal it and claim the credit for themselves? If a person is able to come with beneficial ideas for Singapore, he/she should come forward and join the opposition. Similarly if a party is able to govern well and lead and abolish the for show NSF SAF and scholars who cannot make it in the real world, tell me why not?

The only problem with the opposition is the ability to recruit candidates who are willing and able.

"Even the 'shinning beacon' of democracy, the United states of America has cases where a elected presidents tries to secure power through improper means in the watergate scandal."

Please wikipedia Watergate. The check and balance in that case was a free press, does Singapore have one?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by ray245 @ Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:59:30 +0800

ray245 — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 02:59:30 +0800

Originally posted by 333225520:

1. When Singapore become independent, even LKY himself was not confident of Singapore future. But didn't they succeed because they were given a chance? Why the double standard for the opposition now?

2. "But don't expect to vote the opposition into ruling singapore for the sake of simply giving the opposition a chance". So if we don't vote more opposition into the parliament, how are you able to judge that whether the opposition is indeed capable enough?

3. In order to propose any realistic idea, you need to have all the statistic first. For example, you posted the question "how singapore can resolve the upcoming energy crisis, like using what kind of energy source to replace fossil fuels, and natural gas". To tackle this question, the opposition need statistic like the energy consumption by Singapore over the years, energy usage over different sector, etc. These information is readily available to PAP but are they available to the opposition?

And even if the opposition do propose an out of the world solution, with only 2 votes (and each from different opposition party) in parliament, they are basically at the mercy of PAP.

4. Even If PAP used the opposition ideas, how should the opposition voice out to the public that it is their idea? The local media will NEVER publish it and it is illegal to stage a protest. The opposition are limited to their own newsletter and website to reach out to the public.

And democracy exisit to ensure that good governance takes place, not the other way around.

The PAP runs in election in the first place because they want to RUNS the country better than the british. Why should we expect any less than from the opposition as well?

They need to understand that they NEED to run the country better than the PAP, as compared to showing others we are a so called 'true democracy'. As I have said before, democracy is another system of governance first, granting power to the mass second.

And in a democracy, we cannot expect the majority to make the RIGHT decision. Look at US and their Iraq war for example, when the minority is right instead. Electing a good government ISN'T anything that can be taken for granted. Hence, it is better to elect a opposition party when the ruling party FAILS to manage the country well as compared to giving power to the opposition when the ruling party is running the country rather well.

Even the 'shinning beacon' of democracy, the United states of America has cases where a elected presidents tries to secure power through improper means in the watergate scandal.

All they need to point out is that oil WILL be used up sooner or later, and actions to change to other energy source should be done quickly. That is one advantage the opposition can used.

But some opposition are so pro-west that they starts to absorb the BAD aspect of the west. Policy that is of more harm to us than good. The west isn't without faults like some people is thinking.

But at the same time, the goal of the opposition MUST be in the interest of singapore as compared to gaining power for their own polticial party.

If you think that those ideas must be keep to the oppositon party because they don't want the PAP to implement it, are they in the interest of singaporeans?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by 333225520 @ Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:19:43 +0800

333225520 — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:19:43 +0800

Originally posted by ray245:

Oh realy? SO indepedence is SOOO damn important that people's standard of living does not matter at all? Look at all the former british colonies in africa, is independence good for them?

Can you say that indepedence for those colonies is a better thing?

And moreover, don't forget what did the british government FAILED to do for singapore, it is singaporeans who started industrialization programs, singaporeans who build the HDB flats to solve the hosing issues in singapore, not the british.

In my opinion, the PAP do a better job of managing singapore's economy than the british.

So you are saying that opposition DON'T need to manage singapore better than the PAP?

Hey, I'm all for supporting the idea that the opposition needs to have a voice strong enough to challenge the PAP. But don't expect to vote the opposition into ruling singapore for the sake of simply giving the opposition a chance.

They need to prove that they can propose ideas that PAP ignore, that it can be better for singapore in general like economics.

How do the PAP prove to singaporeans that they can manage singapore better than the british? They propose the plans they are going to carry out.

In the past elections, I've yet to see any opposition party that really talks about managing singapore in general, and not just the GRC. The opposition needs to be daring enough to challenge the PAP DIRECTLY for the power and control of the government.

In my opinion, the current opposition parties isn't any better than the PAP. I want to see opposition parties that can really talk about new ideas that improve the ecnomic sistuation of singaporeans, from the lower class income people all the way to the higher class income people like the bussinessman and etc.

I want to hear about how singapore can resolve the upcoming energy crisis, like using what kind of energy source to replace fossil fuels, and natural gas.

Perhaps nuclear power for example?

The opposition don't DARE to voice their ideas because they are scared that their ideas will be taken up by the PAP. And when the PAP adopted thier ideas, they never voice out to the general public that it is THEIR ideas in the first place.

When their ideas used by the PAP works, they can used that as proof that the ideas are feasible, and defend their ideas.

I've yet to see a opposition party that actually have courage to challenge the PAP directly over their own ideas.

There is a difference between having a stronger opposition and having the opposition party be the ruling party.

1. When Singapore become independent, even LKY himself was not confident of Singapore future. But didn't they succeed because they were given a chance? Why the double standard for the opposition now?

2. "But don't expect to vote the opposition into ruling singapore for the sake of simply giving the opposition a chance". So if we don't vote more opposition into the parliament, how are you able to judge that whether the opposition is indeed capable enough?

3. In order to propose any realistic idea, you need to have all the statistic first. For example, you posted the question "how singapore can resolve the upcoming energy crisis, like using what kind of energy source to replace fossil fuels, and natural gas". To tackle this question, the opposition need statistic like the energy consumption by Singapore over the years, energy usage over different sector, etc. These information is readily available to PAP but are they available to the opposition?

And even if the opposition do propose an out of the world solution, with only 2 votes (and each from different opposition party) in parliament, they are basically at the mercy of PAP.

4. Even If PAP used the opposition ideas, how should the opposition voice out to the public that it is their idea? The local media will NEVER publish it and it is illegal to stage a protest. The opposition are limited to their own newsletter and website to reach out to the public.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by ray245 @ Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:24:49 +0800

ray245 — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 13:24:49 +0800

Originally posted by rooki:

Congratulations, you're a total asswipe.

Hey, the British ruled Singapore so well for almost 150 years, why bother about merger/independence? Any contending political party must prove itself to be better than the British before they can even be allowed to lay their hands on Singapore. How would they prove themselves without giving them a chance? Oh, I dunno...maybe create their own chances like the Japanese? Yeah, that must be it.

Sheesh. Get back to IMH where you belong.

Oh realy? SO indepedence is SOOO damn important that people's standard of living does not matter at all? Look at all the former british colonies in africa, is independence good for them?

Can you say that indepedence for those colonies is a better thing?

And moreover, don't forget what did the british government FAILED to do for singapore, it is singaporeans who started industrialization programs, singaporeans who build the HDB flats to solve the hosing issues in singapore, not the british.

In my opinion, the PAP do a better job of managing singapore's economy than the british.

So you are saying that opposition DON'T need to manage singapore better than the PAP?

Hey, I'm all for supporting the idea that the opposition needs to have a voice strong enough to challenge the PAP. But don't expect to vote the opposition into ruling singapore for the sake of simply giving the opposition a chance.

They need to prove that they can propose ideas that PAP ignore, that it can be better for singapore in general like economics.

How do the PAP prove to singaporeans that they can manage singapore better than the british? They propose the plans they are going to carry out.

In the past elections, I've yet to see any opposition party that really talks about managing singapore in general, and not just the GRC. The opposition needs to be daring enough to challenge the PAP DIRECTLY for the power and control of the government.

In my opinion, the current opposition parties isn't any better than the PAP. I want to see opposition parties that can really talk about new ideas that improve the ecnomic sistuation of singaporeans, from the lower class income people all the way to the higher class income people like the bussinessman and etc.

I want to hear about how singapore can resolve the upcoming energy crisis, like using what kind of energy source to replace fossil fuels, and natural gas.

Perhaps nuclear power for example?

The opposition don't DARE to voice their ideas because they are scared that their ideas will be taken up by the PAP. And when the PAP adopted thier ideas, they never voice out to the general public that it is THEIR ideas in the first place.

When their ideas used by the PAP works, they can used that as proof that the ideas are feasible, and defend their ideas.

I've yet to see a opposition party that actually have courage to challenge the PAP directly over their own ideas.

There is a difference between having a stronger opposition and having the opposition party be the ruling party.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by rooki @ Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:26:56 +0800

rooki — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 08:26:56 +0800

Originally posted by ray245:

-Snipped nonsense-

Congratulations, you're a total asswipe.

Hey, the British ruled Singapore so well for almost 150 years, why bother about merger/independence? Any contending political party must prove itself to be better than the British before they can even be allowed to lay their hands on Singapore. How would they prove themselves without giving them a chance? Oh, I dunno...maybe create their own chances like the Japanese? Yeah, that must be it.

Sheesh. Get back to IMH where you belong.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by 333225520 @ Wed, 26 Mar 2008 06:45:29 +0800

333225520 — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 06:45:29 +0800

The current ruling party is able to use the GRC election model to "smuggle blood" to the parliment. Therefore, these people have more chance to expose themselve and prove their ability to the rest of the Singaporean.

On the other hand, even if there are good people in the opposition, how do you expect to know whether they are indeed capable?

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by 333225520 @ Wed, 26 Mar 2008 06:38:02 +0800

333225520 — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 06:38:02 +0800

Originally posted by ray245:

Hardly. But the people managing the scholars, SAF and police will disappear and be replaced with new ones.

Just because the infrastructure is in place does NOT mean the management will remain the same. And it is the management that counts.

Poor management can destroy the infrastructure (but I'm NOT saying the opposition will do that). And that is how many past empires has fallen, they starts to weaken from within.

I want to see a opposition that can manage singapore BETTER than the PAP, not a opposition that sit in the parliment just to show that we are democratic enough.

If the opposition cannot run singapore better than the PAP, then they should be a opposition and NOT a ruling party.

Ruling a country is different from voicing out what is wrong and correct.

In politics, the ability to rule a country must be the first priority.

I am sure the current ruling party is able to manage Singapore successfully with the advice, help of the scholars, etc. Are all the policies thought out by the ministers themselves?

The ministers themselves don't deal with the day to day work, they only set the general direction of the country.

According your logic, no opposition party in the world can ever be able to prove that they are more capable than the ruling party since they never have a chance to run the country. So why the presidential election in America? Has Hillary Clinton or Obama run a country before?

Why are you so sure the opposition can't rule Singapore better? A good leader need not know everything, he just need to be able to use the right people.

What if S'pore is run by the opposition? replied by ray245 @ Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:55:50 +0800

ray245 — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:55:50 +0800

Originally posted by 333225520:

Even if Singapore is run by the opposition, it doesn't mean that all the scholars, SAF, police will suddenly disappear. So you expect if the oppostion take over, all hell will break lose? Don't be stupid.

Hardly. But the people managing the scholars, SAF and police will disappear and be replaced with new ones.

Just because the infrastructure is in place does NOT mean the management will remain the same. And it is the management that counts.

Poor management can destroy the infrastructure (but I'm NOT saying the opposition will do that). And that is how many past empires has fallen, they starts to weaken from within.

I want to see a opposition that can manage singapore BETTER than the PAP, not a opposition that sit in the parliment just to show that we are democratic enough.

If the opposition cannot run singapore better than the PAP, then they should be a opposition and NOT a ruling party.

Ruling a country is different from voicing out what is wrong and correct.

In politics, the ability to rule a country must be the first priority.

Recent Posts in 'What if S'pore is run by the opposition?' | sgForums.com