|
Coffee Shop Talk of a non sexual Nature Visit Sam's Alfresco Heaven. Singapore's best Alfresco Coffee Experience! If you're up to your ears with all this Sex Talk and would like to take a break from it all to discuss other interesting aspects of life in Singapore, pop over and join in the fun. |
|
Thread Tools |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
NKL Debunked FAP Princeling's Accusation of WP, Showed FAP Talking Thru Asses!
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
Issue is why PAP insist on changed position when there was none June 4th, 2014 | Author: Contributions Jurong GRC MP and Minister of State for National Development Desmond Lee. He is the son of former cabinet minister Lee Yock Suan I refer to the 31 May 2014 Straits Times letter “Issue is whether WP changed position on foreign workers” by Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee. Mr Lee argued that in the case of WP, the need for time to master policymaking doesn’t apply to the fundamental principles of honesty and integrity. Mr Lee is mistaken; WP doesn’t need time to master honesty and integrity as it already is head and shoulders above PAP in these areas. Mr Lee questioned whether WP had changed its position on foreign workers and whether it has acknowledged that change. He questioned the honesty, transparency and accountability of Mr Low and his colleagues and referred to PM Lee supposedly pointing out the falseness of Mr Low’s claim that WP had not flip-flopped that was supposedly recorded in parliament reports. Mr Lee is wrong again as parliament reports do not record any flip flop by WP. It is wishful thinking on the part of Mr Lee and PM Lee that WP had flipped flopped because it had not. WP was the first to honestly tell the parliament about the problem of excessive immigration at a time when most PAP members didn’t. This speaks volumes about the honesty of WP vis-a-vis PAP. Subsequently when PAP went into a knee jerk scramble to stranglehold the inflow, WP again honestly told parliament about the problem of such knee jerk reaction. Mr Lee must understand that examples abound where warning about too much first then warning against any sudden change are not at odds with each other. For example: • Warning about the obesity of a man who weighs 300 kg is not at odds with warning him not to shed too much weight too quickly as that might kill him • Warning about the overheating of the engine is not at odds with warning against dousing it with ice cold water to quickly cool it as the sudden and extreme temperature change might stress the engine instead • Warning about the excessive altitude of an airplane is not at odds with warning against too sudden a descent as that might stress the airframe or cause discomfort to the passengers • Warning about the high speed of a car is not at odds with warning against suddenly braking the car as the vehicle behind might not brake in time and end up crashing into the car Hence, WP’s warning about too much at first and too fast later are not at odds with each other, are not flip flops of each other. Mr Lee’s caution about Singapore’s future being dependent on constructive politics, honesty and integrity of politicians should therefore be applied on himself and his party first because insisting there was flip flop when there was none is neither constructive, honest nor exemplificative of integrity. PAP and WP argue over immigration issue I refer too to the 31 May 2014 Straits Times article “PAP and WP argue over immigration issue”. Mr Cedric Foo demanded that Mr Chen Show Mao state whether he would welcome immigrants and whether he would rally Singaporeans to support bringing in immigrants given there will be 900,000 Singaporeans above 65 years old and that families are getting smaller. Mr Foo need not have been so worried. The government has been assuring us time and again that our CPF system is the best in the world and sufficient to meet our retirement needs: • In other words, the CPF system is designed to cater fully for the retirement needs of those who are below middle-income, while at the same time, cater significantly for the retirement needs of the middle income group. Speech by Mr Tan Chuan-Jin Minister of State (Manpower and National Development) At The Retirement Conference “Improving Retirement Security in Singapore” At Hilton Hotel, Singapore On 12 April 2012 At 9:15 am • Ultimately, the CPF allows us to have peace of mind because you do have a constant stream of income at the point of retirement and it ensures that will continue, rather than you having to depend on someone else or the state Straits Times, CPF provides peace of mind: Chuan-Jin, 30 May 2014 • SINGAPORE’S Central Provident Fund (CPF) scheme has been named one of the top 10 pension systems in the world, among the likes of countries such as Denmark and Sweden. Straits Times, CPF scheme among top 10 pension systems in the world, 7 Oct 2013 • Mr Tharman said: “The results of the study are an important validation of the CPF.” Straits Times, CPF provides comfortable post-retirement income: Study, 20 Sep 2012 More importantly, Mr Tan Chuan Jin explained how our CPF system solves the problem of an ageing population and shrinking workforce: • Many countries do the same through a pension system. They collect taxes or get citizens to contribute to a social security fund. This pooled monies is then paid out to citizens who reach a certain age. However, many of these systems are facing challenges, because those who are young are now paying for the old. As most countries age, there are fewer and fewer young people paying for more and more aged people. The status quo cannot hold. Either taxes will have to rise, or old people will get a lower and lower pay-out. The pension payout age is also being increased. In Singapore, we have the CPF. Rather than pool all our monies together, every individual saves for his own retirement via his personal individual CPF account. We contribute monthly into the account … We then make sure this CPF account grows at a reasonable interest rate without risk. Mr Tan Chuan Jin, The Truth About Our CPF and the Minimum Sum, 25 May 2014 In other words, what Mr Tan was saying is that since each and every one of us will be paying for our own retirement needs through our individual CPF accounts, we avoid the issue of a shrinking pool of young people supporting a larger pool of aged people faced by other countries. Mr Foo was thus unduly worried about the 900,000 Singaporeans above 65 years and a shrinking workforce, because no matter how many Singaporeans are above 65 years old or how small our workforce is, CPF is the answer. Conversely, if we have to worry about population ageing and a shrinking work force despite our CPF, does it not suggest that CPF was never the silver bullet it is touted to be? Mr Arthur Fong then took issue with Mr Chen’s supposed prevarication on Mr Foo’s question. Actually, if Mr Fong were to view past videos of Mr Chen’s replies in parliament, they have always been slow and deliberative. There is no evidence that Mr Chen’s latest reply was significantly slower than his previous ones. There is no evidence that Mr Chen prevaricated this time. Thank you Ng Kok Lim [1] Straits Times, Issue is whether WP changed position on foreign workers, 31 May 2014, Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee IN THE article (“Exchange raises questions on role of opposition”; Thursday), assistant political editor Robin Chan said some people may see the Workers’ Party (WP) as a “small party that is still growing, still finding its way, and which needs to be given time”, that “the WP cannot yet match the PAP in terms of depth and breadth in policymaking, and perhaps also in vision”, and that “eventually, the WP, to be a truly credible opposition in Parliament, must be held to the high standards of politics that Mr Lee (Hsien Loong) spelt out”. The WP may indeed need time to master the depth and breadth of policymaking, but surely that argument cannot apply to the fundamental principles of honesty and integrity. In Prime Minister Lee’s exchange with Mr Low Thia Khiang in Parliament on Wednesday, the issue was less about the merits of the WP’s foreign worker proposals, and more about whether the WP had changed its position on foreign workers, and if so, whether it had acknowledged and explained this change. In other words, whether Mr Low and his colleagues had been honest, transparent and accountable to Singaporeans. Mr Low maintained that the WP had not flip-flopped. But as PM Lee pointed out, this is false, and the truth is recorded in the Parliamentary Reports. Singapore’s future and well-being depend on political parties practising constructive politics and our politicians upholding honesty and integrity. If a party does not value honesty, transparency and accountability from the very start, it is unlikely to become honest, transparent and accountable one day. [2] Straits Times, PAP and WP argue over immigration issue, 31 May 2014 THE People’s Action Party (PAP) and the Workers’ Party (WP) tussled over immigration again, two days after a fiery debate between their party leaders. Backbenchers sparred over the subject of foreign workers yesterday, albeit on a far less feisty note than the exchanges between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and WP leader Low Thia Khiang on Wednesday. PAP’s Mr Cedric Foo (Pioneer) pressed WP’s Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied GRC) on whether he felt immigrants were necessary to deal with Singapore’s ageing population. This came after Mr Chen’s speech, which focused on successful ageing in Singapore. Replying with pauses in between, Mr Chen said the focus should still be on “the growing of a resident workforce”. He added: “When targets we set for the growth in our resident working population… are not met, then I think at that time foreign workers may be… increased so that we’re on a path to growth as we have planned.” But Mr Foo took issue with this, stressing that he was asking specifically about the flow of immigrants into the country. “There will be 900,000 Singaporeans above the age of 65 and families are getting smaller… we do need immigrants and I’d like Mr Chen’s comment on whether he welcomes immigrants and whether he would rally the support of Singaporeans to bring about these immigrants,” he said. Mr Chen said the WP has “nothing against immigrants coming to Singapore”, but also is in favour of “orderly growth within limits”. Mr Foo pursued his point but this time, Mr Low jumped in and said the WP is “not an anti-immigration party”. He added: “We welcome Jurong GRC MP and Minister of State for National Development Desmond Lee. He is the son of former cabinet minister Lee Yock Suan. foreign talent but talent, real talent, not immigrants who are taking away the jobs of Singaporeans or taking away opportunities that Singaporeans could have been better served.” Mr Low also stressed the need to keep a strong Singapore core. He argued that with immigrants coming in, it would be too simplistic to assume “they will integrate with Singapore and Singaporeans”. Later, PAP’s Mr Arthur Fong (West Coast GRC) hit out at Mr Chen, saying he had “prevaricated on Mr Foo’s question on immigrants”. Mr Chen pointed out that he was himself an immigrant, and said helping older workers stay productive would help to grow Singapore’s workforce and prevent an over-reliance on immigrants and foreign workers. Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com. |
Advert Space Available |
Bookmarks |
|
|