I have to agree.

Better hybrids (series) and electric are near.
And practical alternative energy is already possible.

Those oil refinery business, I feel they are in for 2 reasons:
1) short term demand for oil with rise in prices and china/india.

2) demand for plastic products. uses oil too. I think so.

Nevertheless, I do feel our government (and society) lack technology insights.

Those recent solar energy ventures only focus on solar cell manufacturing.

What they didnt realise is that solar cells are too expensive to be useful
and does not solve the energy problem adequately.

Moreover, there are already much better and cost-effective solutions.[/url]

I agree, especially Sg local women.

As if men owe them a living.
Good-looking ones think they really princess, those without looks also jialat.
*shake head*

I had decided not to go after local women anymore.

1.5M is peanuts.
Find bigger white elephants to complain.

When one is poor and cannot survive, its forgivable to be selfish.

But when one is rich and still want more,
without contribution to society, its not forgivable.

In reality, in Sg, the poor donates more to charity than the rich
proportionally.
Another example, only one in top 10 richest in China are into philantrophy.

My view is, selfishness and greed are really the ugly side of mankind.
While Generousity etc bring out the true humane side of man.

Sad to say, I see more of the former, esp Asia.

Well, he is right to say that most are too conservative to accept homosexuality what, just see how people reply to this thread.

Originally posted by hloc:


Why U another of those 'Sith' iszit..... either with you or against you..... GROW UP lah...... there are many ppl incl me who are neither [b]Pro Govt nor Anti Govt......

Please don't have a 'Holier Than Thou' attitude..... there's nothing wrong with other ppl disagreeing with ur view.....[/b]

oh pls. use ur brain.

are u so naive to believe that there is absolutely no pap-sent posters
even after official news announcement sometime back.

wasnt implying anyone....
some people just cant differentiate jokes or read between lines.

If US were to follow Singapore, using top private sector top earners as benchmark,
the US President and VP will probably get over USD100M a year!!!

U can imagine the public backlash.

Hahaa


I think we are now becoming a worldwide political joke!!

Originally posted by icecracko:

It is perfectly alright to peg CEOs pay to their performances, they are expected to deliver tangible results for shareholders. However, to raise ministers' pay to that of the top echelon in the private sector, send out a totally different message.

Will the ministers behave more and more like CEOs? Results becomes more important than the personal welfare of individuals. In private sector, if things are not going well, the CEOs retrench staffs in the interest of the company. If that happens in the country, will the need and welfare of the individuals be ignore? Remember, ministers are dealing with heart-wares. I hope that at the end of the day, it is the conviction to serve the people and not the monetary gains that spurs a person to want to be a minister.
[/quote]

Add to that that in some public-listed companies, CEOs will be asked to leave if they cannot perform up to standard.

[quote]
If the latter is the case, would it not be better to let the person stay in private sector to help contribute to the economy and create jobs for the country? That, to me, is a noble contribution to the country too.

Agree.
If they think they can do better as CEOs or entrepenuers,
they should just join private sector or start more companies like hyflux.


I'm sure they can more for the economy.

Originally posted by Pitot:

come on, afterall its 66.6%

u dont expect everyone here to be pro opposition do you?

Haven't u read the news on what i mentioned???
Other than those 66.6 percent,
the government did indeed send their "public servants" online.??

Its up to us to identify who they are.

Hmm....are u one of them? Ha

Originally posted by antoh:

Our President and Prime Minister has the highest pay in the world.

Each at least 2M

Do not forget our SM and MM!!
Less job yet simliar pay as PM!!

And after PM steps down, he shall become SM too!!!

Hmmm...it seemed to me that some of the posters here are sent by PAP
to "join online forum" to steer public views.

Why aint people reading the headline properly.

Originally posted by Slipshade:

As for the MRT suicide rate, it's just too bad that those people chose to die at the train track. It's the latest trend among suicidals. Really, lots of people die and commit suicide everyday. It's just too bad they choose to make a nuisance of themselves by dying on the tracks. Blame government also no use.

Perhaps u haven't realised, the reasons behind a couple of these MRT suicides
was due to living cost, poor people unable to cope.

and haven't you guys realised, the new workfare scheme was enacted soon after these mrt suicides???

These suicides were really wake up calls to the society and the government.

And an indication that our government was not good enough to deserve pay rise?????

Yet our leaders think they had done a good job,
and still dare to increase their own pay.
Never had anything like this happened in the history of Singapore.

This issue of pay hike rises many other topics.
Its extremely difficult for readers and posters alike to search through one thread's postings.

Mr Moderator. Your job exist to serve the forumites, isnt it??

Don't learn from to be like our "beloved" government???

You cannot do things for ur own convenience sake without consideration for everyone else . Right?

Originally posted by soul_rage:

I agree with marcus, bumming all topics into 1 area will result in less people reading, coz its more scary to go thru a 20+ page thread than individual threads

A for me too
same concern as marcus

I agree.
This issue of pap hike rised many other issues.
Its difficult for readers and posters alike to search through one thread's postings.

Mr Moderator. You cannot do things for ur own convenience but result in everyone else inconvenience.

Just received this from my email:

Parliamentary Speech
11 Apr 2007
Ministers' Pay
By Sylvia Lim, NCMP

In the last 2 days, MPs have covered many aspects of this contentious issue of benchmarking Ministerial pay to the private sector at 2/3M48. The Member for Hougang has comprehensively stated the Workers' Party position on this matter. The gist of our position is that we should instead consider benchmarking based on the remuneration of political office-holders in countries which tick. They generally favour a more moderate use of taxpayers' money for political salaries, and do not seem to have run their countries aground.

Today I would like instead to examine a few points raised by Minister Teo Chee Hean in his reply speech yesterday and also to argue why the benchmark of 2/3M48 for political office will ultimately be against the national interest.
Points raised by Minister Teo on Apr 10

Minister Teo attempted to rebut the Member for Hougang's contention that this debate was a waste of taxpayers' money. He said instead that this was a hallmark of PAP's commitment to transparency.

While I do agree that this is an opportunity to have a public airing, the debate arouses a feeling of deja vu, harking back to the other transparent debate about whether to have casinos in Singapore. The revision was presented in Parliament in a form of Ministerial statement under Standing Order 44 where no vote will be taken. Not one thing said by any MP will change the decision of the government. I would personally very much like to know what each individual Minister feels about taking more than $2m of taxpayers' money home each year, while fellow citizens struggle with rising costs and taxes.


Secondly, Minister Teo mentioned that it was not right to look at how much political leaders elsewhere earn because our Ministers cannot become Ministers in other countries. But the comparison is logical because we are comparing similar skill sets and responsibilities funded by the public. Looking instead at 2/3M48, how valid is it as a measure of a Minister's worth? Is it possible that, in fact, some of our Ministers are doing better in Cabinet than they would have done in their previous careers? Can we say that each and every Minister in Cabinet now would have become a top-earning banker, accountant, lawyer, engineer or CEO? We have seen instances of civil servants and military personnel embark on 2nd careers in the private sector, and find the business world a whole new ball game; and some, in fact, flounder.

Thirdly, Minister attempted to show that Cabinet salaries were not in the rarefied zone of high fliers by plotting a graph of 1,000 residents and Malaysians. Even so, 1,000 out of the resident workforce of about 1.9 m (as at mid 2006, according to Labour Force Survey) is less than 0.1%. To be in this group of 1,000 is already to be in a very privileged few and as far as the public is concerned, is already in the rarefied zone.
Why 2/3M48 is ultimately against the national interest


Economists have noted that globalisation increases income disparity. As such, the top earners' salaries will in all likelihood move up further in the future. A few years from now, 2/3M48 may require us to endorse each Cabinet minister's pay for $3m or $4m annually. As these pay packets are funded from taxes, including poor people paying GST, how far is the government prepared to go with this? Does it have a threshold of unconscionability?


Next, what makes a good Minister? There may be differences of opinion, but fundamentally, political leadership is a different creature from administration. To add value to policy-making, the Minister must play the role of politician – he should understand the public sentiment and aspirations, and be able to front policies and explain things plainly to people. He must lead not just with head but with heart. His ground feel of the needs of the people and understanding of their plight distinguishes him from the professional civil servant who usually focuses more on efficiency and expediency in implementation. To be effective, a Minister's EQ may often be more important than for him to be part of a Mensa club. In fact, he would be better if he was wired differently from the top civil servants, to reduce the mistakes perpetuated by groupthink.


Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew previously justified why it was not feasible to have foreign talent in the political leadership. He said that the political leadership should "have passion, the commitment and share the same dreams as the people". (ST 4 Nov 2006). I agree. The question is: how will 2/3M48 affect empathy, the ability of Ministers to share the same dreams as the people?


Ministers are currently drawing $1.2m a year which divided by 12 is about $100,000 per month. How does it compare with the average person?

According to the Report on the Labour Force in Singapore 2006, the median gross monthly income of workers in full-time employment is $2,170. In other words, a worker takes a month to earn what a Minister earns in half a day! For university graduates, the median gross monthly income is $4,450. This would take the Minister one day to earn.

As you move the salaries up to 88% of the benchmark, we will find that the average worker's monthly pay will be earned by a Minister in 2-3 hours. Does the Cabinet not feel a tinge of discomfort drawing taxpayers' money at such rate? At such rates, can Ministers and Singaporeans share the same dreams?

Another reality is that our leaders may face problems in marshalling the people to make sacrifices for the country.

About 4 years ago, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan told the House that his son had asked whether one should be prepared to die for Singapore. This sparked off a heated public debate. The cynics invariably linked this question to Ministerial salaries. To quote a member of the public, and I paraphrase: "Who are we trying to kid? Before we start talking about dying for Singapore, let us look at our leaders. We are told that we cannot get good leaders unless we pay top dollar, so why expect more from the rest of us"?

Citizens should be able to look to leaders for moral leadership and inspiration. If what they perceive are mercenaries at the helm, then asking them to make sacrifices will be met with cynicism and indifference. This will not bode well for Singapore's future. What will happen when crunch time comes? Is this a time bomb planted for the future of Singapore?
Salaries and Nation Building


If we are seriously unable to interest good people into public office, we must ask why other countries can do it and we cannot. Is it just money, or the fact that we have not invested in creating a culture of high public-spiritedness?


In some countries, there are young people aspire to hold public office. SM Goh had previously said that we could not expect to behave like people in other countries because we are a young nation and people still see things in material terms. How sad. After 41 years of nationhood, national service and national day parades, what do we teach our children? Do we judge a person's worth by his salary? If so, we have wasted millions of tax dollars on these nation-building efforts, which have truly been in vain!


Public service must remain a noble undertaking for which people are prepared to make sacrifices in exchange for the benevolent power to improve the lives of others. If we corrupt this by money, we can be efficient but never a country of high ideals. As such, I cannot agree with the Members who see political office as yet another career choice. It must be more than a job, and the holder must be able to think of others besides himself.

In the popular American comic strip, the Wizard of Id, there was a public address by the King to his subjects from the royal balcony. The King began: "Remember the Golden Rule!" One of the subjects called back: "What's that?" Back came the royal reply: "Whoever has the gold makes the rules!"

If the gold is the taxpayers' money, then Singapore is not that far from the Kingdom of Id!

And it does not matter what transparency the government has claimed in this attempt to justify the pay hike.

Do not forget these top 33 cities' MPs are paid many times less than Singapore's.

I think our PM should get replace our MPs with cheaper and better foreigners.

I'm sure we can attract talents very easily:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070410/pl_afp/ussingaporegovernment_070410224859

Since we pay so well,
do you think we should attract foreign talents to run our government?
I'm sure we will rank higher!!!



I think we should replace our MPs with cheaper and better foreigners.

I'm sure we can attract talents very easily:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070410/pl_afp/ussingaporegovernment_070410224859

By placing importance on high pay, such mentality will only propagate down the society to look at money for everything only.

I came across maggots in Oreo biscuits before too.
From vending machine when i OT one time. WTF.

After such high pay hike, I do not foresee any more payrise for 5 years also.
When was the last one huh??

Or, by saying such, does he mean there will be more payrise soon??

One thing I want to add:

By placing importance on high pay, such mentality will only propagate down the society to think for themselves only.

On the other hand, if they can set example by accepting lower pay,
im sure they can inspire even more people work hard for the country.

After such high pay hike, I do not foresee any more payrise for 5 years also.
When was the last one huh??

Or, by saying such, does he mean there will be more payrise soon??

One thing I want to add:


By placing importance on high pay, such mentality it will only propagate down the society to think for themselves only.

On the other hand, if they can set example by accepting lower pay,
im sure they can inspire even more people work hard for the country.

One reason we are up there is because we have lower labor cost.
which is partly due to to easy access to china and india imports.

This is good.
He brought out a couple of valid points.

-With current pay benchmarking, Government always get top pay irregardless of performance, while European MPs get pay penalisation if not up to standard.

-MPs has high-job security while private sectors do not.

-Singapore ranks 34 in quality of life in 2006.

etc etc

Makes me sick and wanna leave the country.