What has all the lies got to do
with gracious democratic society based on respect and
tolerance ?
Are these instances - that
you have given - the works of "right minded persons"
?
Com'on la... there r president involved in tis and u r saying
they r not "right minded" persons. If they cannot be trusted, then
u think the man on the streets will be better ? In a society where
many people exist, there is no such thing as everybody being "right
minded". If everybody is right minded, then communism would have
worked
As I have said, do you think
those people - whom you accused of making up all the
lies as stated in your previous post - are all "right
minded persons" ?
Do you seriously think that George
Bush is a "right minded person" ?
What makes you think that
Communism will work only for "right minded people"
?
Is it not to the contrary that
Communism can exist due to stupid people allowing the smarter
autocrats to implement Communism in a make-believe world of a
Classless Society ?
Is it not a fact that the
Communist Autocrat Rulers became an invisible Class that do not
actually exist as a Class in a Classless Communist Society
?
Did you ask 5 times in a row, or
have you succumb to your own assumption in the human propensity to
lie - when this is only your fourth reply to my
responses on this Page 4, dated 11 July 2008 11.13 AM
?
My reply had been given
on the only 3 earlier occasions that you asked
this question - and have been consistently given,
when I had asked if there is any relevance to the matter being
discussed.
Let me check
Please do, and at the same time
read back how the arguments have flowed, and the hip-hop and
flip-flop course that you have taken - and which I had simply
entertained your preferred style, when I could have rein you in a
couple of times.
Your reply clearly disqualify
you from being a CEO - and surely will not help you to be an
entrepreneur.
Were you not comparing China
with Singapore in your previous post ?
How did you brilliantly arrive
at Zimbabwe or Congo ?
Do you think that a CEO being
a shrewd entrepreneur will not hedge his bets if given the right
condition for his investment to be placed in Zimbabwe or Congo
?
There are more then one way to
eat an apple, it depends on how the apple is made to be edible -
and when face with hunger, surely you will know how to remove the
bad parts of the apple before consuming the remaining parts
?
Have u answered the question here ? Nope
Have you been able to perceived
beyond the smartness in the stupidity of your preferred
thought process ?
Did you fail to read the
paragraph which I had mentioned about the "many ways that an apple
can be eaten" ?
Is there any relevance to your
question pertaining to any reasons from me to decide in
favor of investing in Singapore or China ?
Did u answer the question here ? Tat question has nothing to do
with china but only on singapore. U fail to answer in here as
well
As I have stated - is there
any relevance to your question pertaining to any reason for me to
decide in favor of investing in Singapore or China
?
Again your answer is not answering the question. I am talking
about singapore itself
If u r a CEO and u want to invest in singapore, wat
r the reasons tat make singapore shine out ?
Does tis have anything to do with china ? U r not
answering the question
You have already
made up your mind with this reply, why will you persist to prove
others wrong ?
Because u do not believe tat singapore political stability is a
pulling factor for industries to come over. U felt the political
stability does nothing at all in attracting industries over.
Tat obviously is ridiculous and if u persist in tat stand, u
have to justify it. U did not and u just say it as though it is a
wild guess
As I had mentioned
previously, why should Singaopre's political stability be a pulling
factor for a manufacturing business - especially for your printer
business ?
If you insist for my
reply concerning your printer business - try digesting this
fact.
With the high labor costs in
Singapore compared to Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia or even Vietnam
and China - where there are similarly qualified labor at lower
costs, do you seriously intend to invest in manufacturing printers
in Singapore ?
Do you realise that some of the
main printer brands - such as HP, Epson and Canon - are
manufactured in the countries mentioned ?
HP had even migrated the bulk of
their low-end printers manufacturing from its facility in Singapore
to other lower manufacturing cost centers.
Did I mention thailand or indonesia or malaysia ? I am talking
about zimbabwe. Try naming me a printer company in zimbabwe
Did you not asked in your
usual intelligently 'stupid' ways about - "Then wat is
your answer on why u will want to invest in singapore ? A CEO is
a risk taker, but he take calculated risk. He is not a gambler.
Otherwise he might as well invest in zimbabwe or congo."
?
The brilliance in your line
of thought began with your assumption in my earlier statement that
"Singapore is gonna
implode".
How did you so brilliantly come to
this conclusion from what I had originally mentioned in
the simple statement that you had taken the trouble to quote
in your reply on Page 3 dated 10 July 2008 - 10.22 AM ?
Your
reply on the 10 Jul 1.23 am
The pent-up social pressures
may lead to a Krakatoa volcanic outburst, when
social, economic and political stresses takes a bigger toll
out of daily lives of Singaporeans that leads to sudden political
swings that are unpredictable.
Isn't a krakatoa volcanic outburst withing a
society an... implosion ?
Do you know the difference between
an "implosion" and an "explosion" ?
Do volcanoes implode ?
Do you seriously think that Singapore is
politically more stable than China - if you believe that
China's corruption will lead to instability
?"
Following your line of thought, was it a mistake
to entertain your brilliance ?
If u bother to read
the following reply, u will not be confused on the
same reply thread
I think your theory tat
singapore is gonna implode is probably just wild guesses. Lets look
at the situation analytically now without making wild guesses on
the future. In china, there is a high
level of corruption. They can
screw u up big time as they can backtrack on their previous
promises or copy all your design and sell in another name. U
can see such symptoms like opposition favourite example of suzhou
industrial park or the LV factory there. Singapore does not have such signs. In
fact, singapore seemed to favour
companies more than the people... Tat is in a way, political
stability which few countries in the region can
offer.
As said, corruption among the gov
officials is a political stability problem. I never mention they
will collapse under corruption. U R the one tat says tat
and lie tat I said tat.
In your reverse logic approach in
thinking - as evident in your "stupid-is-smart" logic, it will
not be surprising that you will insist in your own preferred way of
nonsensical thought process - which I have to make an attempt to
straighten your flip-flop line of thoughts based on your own
writings as colored.
Based on your present "reasoning"
- how do you propose to link "China's high level of
corruption" with "They can screw up big time" - and
"Singapore does not have such signs" as Singapore
"favor companies more than the people" . Can "tat be
stability" ?
"Stability" against what or to
what end ?
If you believe that India with a
larger population has the larger opportunity to produce a higher
head-count of millionaires - how do you explain that prior to PM Manmohan
Singh plugging India into the Global Economy, there were no
such numbers of millionaires for India to boast about
?
Then can u explain, throughout the many years of democracy in
india, why do they have such an increase only in recent years ? If
democracy is such a miracle. then they should be richer and
stronger than china now.
Did you not read the part that I
had written which mentioned that "India under PM Manmohan Singh
was able to plug itself into the global economy after shedding its
autocratic bureaucracy control of its economy" ?
India may have been experiencing
Democracy since its independence, and it was unfortunate that its
democratic practises was only in its politics, and did not extend
into economics.
Are they not experiencing
Democracy now in all its political, economic, cultural, and slowly
in its social spheres - which has resulted in the Indian talent
being maximised independent from any controls ?
Are you not being petty about
China being left out ?
Is Hong Kong not part of China
?
Hong kong is a city of china. China, like shanghai and beijing
etc have a high number of millionaires themselves but u r not
mentioning it at all. In your article u have referenced, they also
seperate the 2 entities.
Hong Kong surged by more than 9,000 people
to 95,000 last year. The territory was among the fastest-growing
markets in the world for high net-worth individuals, the South
China Morning Post said, quoting the wealth report.
China gained the number two spot with a
20.3 per cent in the number of millionaires to 415,000, the report
said.
Hong kong is part of china but china is not hong kong. Despite u
saying so much thing, in your reply u left out china and tat is a
fact. All those question should be directed back to u.
Hong Kong is a City - and a
Self-Adminitered Region, as much as Singapore is a City and a
Country.
Hong Kong has its own democratic
form of government even as much as it is part of China, but can it
be China - as much as you claim that China is not Hong Kong
?
Surely, with the "smart
intelligence within the stupidity" you should be more able then
anyone to realise your own reverse logic ?
How many of the 66,660
millionaires are home-grown Singaporean, and not some migrant
refugee millionaire escaping from corruption charges in their
countries of origin, and finding the autocratically ruled
environment sufficiently convenient for their own safety
?
The same can be said to hongkong. How many of their millionaires
r not migrant refugees escaping from corruption charges in their
own countries of origin ? U think hong kong is better ?
Do you think that Hong Kong
has such liberal policies to attract Foreign Talents in the numbers
that Singapore is desiring to have ?
According to a February 2007 Report – at the close of 2006, there
were 1,910 applications received, with reported personal assets
amounting to an average of $3.24 million per applicant.
With your tremendous ability in
being smart within an envelope of stupidity, can you figure out the
percentage of migrants in the size of millionaires from amongst the
native Hongkongers ?
If it seems that I am "not
inside the gov organisation itself " - are you claiming that
you are a member of the A-Team ?
I am not in the government service but I have families members
working in places like MOE and police. I think it is either your
wild guessing or black and white thinking tat conclude I should be
from the "A- Team"
So you have been fed with
regurgitated facts, processed by others, and handed from hand to
mouth that you obviously will be prepared to swallow, digest and
expect others to believe the same ?
That is the intelligence in your
logic of being "stupid-is-smart".
If LKY had listened and conducted
a more honest Referendum before joing Malaysia, will Singapore be
burdened with the baggage of failed relationship ?
If LKY had listened to more
intelligent reasonings, will Singapore have faced the population
problems faced today, forcing him to even admit his mistake made in
the Family Planning schemes that were so aggressively pushed for
too long a period ?
As said, complaints r heeded, staff r invited for suggestions,
implementation had followed and international criticism have been
applied here and there. WHen they say singaporean r not creative
enough, they changed the whole syllabus.
Is this another of your flip-flop
approach - from entertaining "public complaints" to
entertaining "staff suggestions" ?
This must be the
creativity achieved by changing the "whole syllabus" to
achieve a result that produced some talent with the ability
of "smartness in the stupidity" ?
I think u have mistaken "listening" to "decision". As a prime
minister, he can listen to advises but he acts in the way he think
it is right. Just like the casino decision. LHL can listen to
feedback and advises but he acts wat he thinks it right. During tat
time, does anybody know wat is gonna happen in the future ? U only
have the benefit of hindsight now then u make comment based on past
decisions.
Have I made the mistake, or was it
your intelligence with your "smart-is-stupid" reading ability in
what has been written to arrive at your conclusion ?
Is it not obvious that "listening
" is different from "decision" ?
Are we disputing the difference in
"listening" from "decision" or did you not claim that
"complaints r heeded, staff r
invited for suggestions, implementation had followed and
international criticism have been applied here and
there" - have you decided to back
track "into smartness or into being stupid" ?
If tat is the case, if a democractic country like america listen
to others, they would not attack Iraq. Does democracy make any
difference ? Nope.
Was it the USA that decided to
attack Iraq, or was it George Bush and Dick Cheney - both ignoring
World opinions to pursue their agenda ?
If South Koreans did not protest
in the manner that they did, would the US Beef issue have been
decidedly aborted ?
Six months in Europe ?
You have barely scratched the
surface to even have enough time to start an affair
Then wat about u ? Care to tell us wat experiences u have ?
With your decided position in
being "stupid-is-smart" - would it make any difference to show who
can spit the furthest, or would it be a matter if the spit can
douse the flame without knocking the candle off its stand
?
Why do you look at things only in
"black and white" - that restrict your thought process to conclude
that by implying ministerial pay is too high - will mean that their
pay should be reduced substantially ?
Even if the ministerial pay is
reduced, it will be substantially higher than the highest paid
local Singaporean CEO working for GLCs - prior to their wages
being pegged to the Executives working for Western
Multi-nationals.
I think u r really out just to confuse people. U feel tat their
pay is too high, then your ideal state of situation should be that
they keep their wage ? If it is too high, your ideal remedy will be
to lower their pay isn't it ? Reducing to the "highest paid local
singaporean CEO working for GLC" is still reducing their pay
substantially. Otherwise wat is your other possibilities ? U say it
is black and white thinking, then state me another possible
outcome.
Furthermore, why does it have to be pegged to something 10 years
ago ? Do u think the minister have a problem trying to find a job
as a CEO working for western multi-national ? So u r advising they
should get a pay cut to come and work in politics ?
It is obvious that your 6 months
stay overseas - for education, or for leisure - has not done much
to your reading-and-comprehension abilities despite the acclaimed
basic schooling in Singapore education system.
Try reading again the text that
you have so diligently quoted from my last response, but prefer to
read it with your perverse logic.
