Open or Close civil disobedience in Singapore
If the court verdict is any lesser than pronounced it will caused a tsunami shock to Singaporean who are used to any opposition to Singapore PAP government preferred conformist behaviour will be penalised. 😉
This however isn’t the real major social issue.
The real issue are the motivating factors for civil disobedience by masses like in Hong Kong, Paris, UK, Spain, South Korea, Thailand, Myanmar and numerous affected countries.
It is simple, the masses are heavily burdened by the state failure to allocate equitable distribution of income leading to huge and widespread income disparity, many unconscionable and unreasonable direct and indirect taxes shouldering the state expensive and even seen wasteful expenditure like the useless 1 billion national stadium expensive trash centre, expensive faucets for public facilities etc whilst the masses lives in poverty unable to put food on the table. Further, other despicable policies that deprive citizens ownership of their own fund especially when needed for medical expenses, combine with government supported predatory foreigners eating lunch of local natives, and the arrogance of elitist earning millions in the name of serving people with clueless long term planning.
These ain’t all the factors.
But the point is civil disobedience doesn’t arise from youth and people because they are bored and have nothing else better to do.
Understanding the causes tell us if that was Jolovan true intention or not, that is the opening signal that Singapore social “disorder” and “chaos” is already present.
People are predicting PAP government will either lose their mandate to government or a major loss of seats to opposition parties like PSP PV SDP WP.
Is this then the open underground mass civil disobedience ongoing from the last General elections where PAP failed to live up to their promises. Essentially, people are expressing they had enough of PAP government and Singapore rejuvenation and renewal can only happened with new and not so new political leaders from the opposition parties.
by A concerned Singaporean
In July 2018, in order to cool down the hot property market then and to slow down the steep property price rises, the government implemented some property cooling measures which included higher stamp duties and/or additional buyer stamp duty (ABSD)
For Singapore citizens, the additional buyer stamp duty (ABSD) of 12% on second property and escalated 15% on third property have definitely deterred or slowed down the purchase of second or third property since Singapore citizens are mostly salaried employees with limited purchasing power, no to mention the darkening economic outlook and the uncertain employment market.
However, the 20% ABSD (although higher than local buyers) imposed on the foreigners (especially the rich China people in the millions) would hardly deter them. Unlike the majority of Singapore citizens, these foreign buyers are mostly not salaried employees or working class. They have much higher purchasing power than the majority of Singapore citizens.
Unlike Singapore citizens, foreigners can buy second, third or even 10th property at the same ABSD rate (20%) as their first property ie without incremental stamp duty. With a flat ABSD, it would also not deter foreigners from buying the second, third or even 10th property.
Why are local citizens being penalised with escalating ABSD for buying an additional property but not the foreigners?
No wonder property prices continue to rise despite the cooling measures because the foreign buyers’ investment decision is not affected by the higher but flat ABSD.
With the situation in Hong Kong, we all know and expect that more Chinese and Hongkongers would shift or have already shifted their property investments to Singapore. Logically prices should continue to go up, and it did.
Therefore, it is logical to deduce that foreigners are the ones pushing up the local property price increases.
Based on past statistics, cooling measures (except TDSR: total debt servicing ratio) implemented by the government have not reduced property prices. It at most kept the prices increase at a slower rate. Property prices have in fact increased significantly over the last few years despite the various cooling measures.
The cooling measures so far have again proven to be ineffective with the recent frenzy pushing up the prices due mainly to foreign buyers investment trend. It is high time the government implement new and more effective cooling measures.
While higher stamp duty or ABSD for second third property have been effective on local buyers, by increasing the ABSD for first investment and implementing incremental ABSD for subsequent additional property purchases on foreign buyers would not be as effective due to their high investment appetite and purchasing power.
For the foreign buyers, other forms of measures would be needed to arrest the spike in the already high property prices, otherwise private property owners in Singapore would ultimately and mostly be foreigners or rich Singapore businessmen or property developers and remain unaffordable and out of reach for many local citizens.
Besides increasing stamp duties and ABSD, other more effective measures targetting at the main culprits ie the foreign buyers could include the following:
1) Foreigners and PRs can only buy properties which are priced above $3 million. This will prevent foreigners/PRs entering the lower /mass market segment (which majority salaried Singapore citizens would enter) and pushing up the prices there.
I would include PRs because these are basically foreigners who can quite easily get PR status in Singapore.
2) Foreigners and PRs must take loans from banks to buy properties. This would not only boost the Singapore banking business, but the bank can also conduct a more thorough AML (anti-money laundering) screening on the foreigners.
3) To impose a non-occupancy tax on unoccupied or untenanted property to prevent property speculation; this can also increase government tax revenue.
4) Any resale by the foreign owners/PRs can only be made to Singapore citizens.
I hope our government will seriously consider the above measures so that owning private property will not become an unattainable aspiration of Singaporeans due to the huge influx of foreigners!
The AIM saga , evil & greed of PAP exposed… WP got sabotaged when they won 7 Management Pte Ltd in 2010.
This, especially after the next tender for the development of the software required firms to have S$1.5 million in paid-up capital before they could bid.
AIM, a company run by former PAP MPs, had a paid-up capital of S$2 when it bought over the software.
The company paid S$140,000 for the software which cost town councils about S$24 million to develop.
AIM then leased the software to all PAP town councils for a fee, but declined to lease it to the Workers’ Party in 2011 after it won in Aljunied GRC and took over the then-Aljunied Town Council,
As a result, the WP needing to develop its own town council management software and import data of all residents into its own system.
Strangely enough, the last tender for the development of town council management software for all PAP town councils in 2013 was much stricter with firms.
The tender required firms to have an annual turnover of at least S$10 million and a paid-up capital of at least S$1.5 million, under the S9 financial grade of the government supplier registration guidelines.
AIM, which had a paid-up capital of S$2, did not take part in the 2013 tender.
NEC Asia Pacific subsequently won the tender to develop a new computer system for the 14 PAP town councils.
It clinched the 7-year contract for S$16.8 million.
Questions continue to be raised as to whether the sale of the town council management software to AIM in 2010 was against the public interest, and why the company’s S$2 paid-up capital status did not raise any red flags.
When queried about the matter, then-Minister for National Development Khaw Boon Want said on 13 May 2013 that AIM was “not any ordinary $2 company. It was set up by the PAP…That is the difference between AIM and any other “$2 company.”
A check with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority of Singapore shows that the AIM has been de-registered, with its last Annual General Meeting (yearly gathering of shareholders) held in May 2015.
At the time when it acquired the town council software, AIM was run by 3 directors who were former PAP MPs and its mailing address was the same address as the PAP’s headquarters in Bedok.
It employed 2 part-time staff, and oddly enough for a computer programming and consultancy company did not have its own website.
WP is only liable for not discharging their duties properly for AHTC, the rest still talk of evidence, Kannan Ramesh still has not proven without a doubt, the issue of liabilities for damages suffered by AHTC and the % of liabilities still has not been substantiated, how can they close the case just like that? Contributed by Oogle.
I have a question and it is bothering me. Could somebody kindly explain and educate me. I thank you in advance.
High Court judge, Kannan Ramesh, found WP MPs, Low TK, Sylvia Lim and Pritam Singh guilty and liable for damages suffered by AHTC.
In the words of the learned judge, the defendants breached their fiduciary duties, care and skill to AHTC. “When people are put in charge of a town council, they enter into a relationship of trust and confidence. This, in turn, means that they have fiduciary duties to the town council”. Mr Kannan Ramesh went further, “So, this duty requires town councillors to serve the interest of their town council with single minded loyalty and for the proper purpose”.
Although no 2 cases are exactly the same and AMK town council’s former general manager, Victor Wong, has pleaded guilty to his corruption charges for being on the take for about 2 years, between the two cases, there are plenty of similarities.
It is easy to push the blame to Victor Wong, argue and conclude that he has been punished but Victor Wong was never an elected Member of Parliament. I repeat. Victor Wong was never an elected member of Parliament for AMK GRC.
All those 6 AMK GRC members of Parliament, namely, Lee Hsien Loong, Koh Poh Koon, Ang Hin Kee, Darryl David, Gan Thiam Poh and Intan Azura Mokhtar were totally sleeping on their jobs for about 2 years that resulted in their town council’s funds being lost through Victor Wong’s corrupt behaviours. Isn’t what happened at AMK GRC also a breach of fiduciary duties by all the 6 pap members of Parliament at the highest level at AMK GRC and a lack of care and skill too? Under their watch, like in the AHTC’s case, public funds have been lost. Shouldn’t steps also need to be instituted to recover the monies due to the residents of AMK GRC from them too? Think.
I thank you all for reading my post again.
Singapore could be heading for a recession after it reported a big drop in economic activity in the second quarter!
Because of the US-China trade war, Singapore has slashed its forecast for 2019 GDP growth to between 0% – 1%. This is the weakest since 2009!
Leading Asia Economist Sian Fenner of Oxford Economist even forecast Singapore might head towards a technical recession as early as Q3!
With almost all countries in the last few months busy slashing interest rates to save their economies, a worldwide recession seems a great possibility.
Despite Lee Hsien Loong’s and Heng Swee Keat’s claims of grandiose visions, it is clear that the new Singapore economy looks very much like the old one of the last twenty years. There has been no productivity transformation. The only thing that has changed is that the external environment, which provided a huge tail-wind and allowed the PAP to falsely claim credit for a bogus economic miracle fuelled by cheap foreign labour, is now working in reverse. The only question is if Singaporeans will wise up to this fact in time for the next election.
I have upgraded my iPhone 5S from iOS 11 to iOS 12 to test out the improved iOS. After upgrading to iOS it is locked by a 6 digit pin which only Apple knows how to unlock. So essentially all upgrades are not free and have to be paid. I do not mind paying $70 to iStudio at City Square Mall to resolve this issue. But later I discovered that my old Apple ID has not been cleared and there is no way you can key in a new Apple ID unless you pay them an additional $50. Imagine all the dirty tactics employed by Apple when they used layers and layers of security to hold you to ransom. When you buy an Apple product, never upgrade your OS as everything is not free, and every layer of security you ask them to unlock is also not free, no wonder Apple can make billions when they hold everyone to ransom, not paying for research and development to create a better product.
Contributed by Oogle.
PS : I want to highlight that the 6 digit pin is not setup by Apple but from my previous iOS 11 but I find it stupid to link your previous Apple ID and password or you never access iCloud or setup anything at all. I need to hack my old account to retrieve the password or the phone is as good as spoilt and cannot use. I resolved everything in 1 hour.
Professor Tommy Koh echoed a common adage that Singapore is a first world country with third world citizens, noting that Singaporeans lack the civic-mindedness of citizens from an advanced country.
In a dialogue session with Bloomberg News editor-in-chief John Micklethwait at the Singapore Bicentennial Conference organised by the Institute of Policy Studies, Prof Koh spoke on several topics from the issues of class in Singapore society to his hopes for the new generation of political leaders in Singapore.
One of the things Prof Koh called for is the implementation of a poverty line in Singapore and for the wages of workers to be raised, noting the wide pay gap between top executives of a company and its employees.
When asked whether there is an alternative to capitalism, the 82-year old said it would be more prudent to consider what kind of capital works for Singapore.
He then talked about moral capitalism, explaining how in this model, companies hold themselves accountable not only to shareholders but to society at large. Companies in a moral capitalism will care for the environment and take good care of their workers while championing diversity and equality, said Prof Koh.
Later on, Prof Koh expounded on the 4th Generation (4G) leadership we’ve heard so much about in recent months. Specifically, he asserted that the priorities of this new leadership should be to maintain racial and religious harmony in Singapore and increase equality in local society with the aim of making it a classless one.
Prof Koh also touched on the country’s aversion to criticism. Specifically, he voiced his hopes that the 4G leaders will welcome criticism from critics who love Singapore.
He explained that the contestation of ideas is a necessary part of democracy, adding that the administration should not blacklist critics simply for criticising the government or holding dissenting views.
He went on to say that Singapore has become more cautious and conservative over the years, but asserted that the new leadership should have courage and not be intimidated by foes within and outside the country.