Originally posted by snow leopard:
1) Protectionism is good for Singapore's future and it
promotes investment like IRs
SL : a good example of protectionism at work is an ex-PM protecting
the position of PM for this son.
G : I am not sure if you could call that as protestionism, however
are you suggesting that protectionism is good for Singapore?
SL : what then would you call it? nepotism?
G : The question you should be answering is, IS protectionism good
for Singapore, and is Singapore IR an example of protectionism when
none of the winners are Singapore companies.
2) Open economy is bad for Singapore and its
people
SL : why do you say that?
G : Ask Soul_Rage
SL : nothing is ever absolutely good or bad. workfare, which the
govt recently implemented, is a form of protectionism. would you
say workfare is bad? you wouldn't. hence there needs to be a
balance, a balance between staying competitive and ensuring that
those who cannot keep up, stay afloat.
G : Could you offer Singapore an alternative to prosperous like we
did in the past 45 years without having an open economy?
3) There is a 80/20 rule in income
distribution
SL : could you illustrate?
G : Ask Soul_Rage
SL : why ask him when you are the one making that statement?
G : I didnt, I am just highlight the BS that he is contributing to
this forum.
4) If SIA doest threat you well, you should consider
leaving the country.
SL : if you don't treat SIA well, old man will kick you out
G : You miss the point
SL : no i didn't, i hit the nail on its head. if you don't treat
SIA well, old man will kick you out.
G : As a consumer, do we need to always fly with SIA? Could you
tell us what do you mean by treating SIA well and what you mean
that the old man will kick me out?
5) Local and foreign companies offer the same benefits to
Singapore's future and economy
SL : foreign companies do not have vested interests and many have
voted with their feet already that led to widespread
retrenchments.
G : You have to ask Soul_rage why he said that.
SL : not true. when we merely work for MNCs, we do not develop our
own brand / technology which in the long run is what differentiates
a truly first world nation from one that relies on first world
nations
G : thats what I thought too, but according to Soul_Rage, there is
not difference.
6) All casino gaming operators can operate world class IR
by themselves
SL : world class IR like world class public transportation that
receives so many complains all the time?
G : Again you are missing the point, Soul_rage is suggesting that
as a gaming operator, by default you will be able to operate and
run business such as Universal Studio, Dreamworks, MICE, Sperm
whale aquarium, without the need of having partners.
SL : show me the exact words that soul rage used that suggested
what you suggested. if you can't, you are putting words into his
mouth.
G : Soul_Rage In the IR tender,
the govt DID give the tender to foreign companies. Why is that so?
Its because none of our companies here have the experience of
running a casino or such a huge resort, thus its reasonable for the
govt to give this to the foreign company experienced in such a
project
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=250502&page=2
By saying that, he is claiming that Genting won because they are
capable for running the whole IR by themselves and the reason why
Keppeland and Capitaland lost is because they have never run an IR
because despite the fact that they are partnering companies like
MGM, Kerzner,
7) Singapore employer are suckers for more expensive Indian
FT
SL : singapore govt is sucker for indians
G : Why? Can you support your claim?
SL : i quote you "i) Singapore employer are suckers for more
expensive Indian FT". your statement supports my claim.
G : Like I said again, whatever you see here, are just BS coming
from soul_rage, and thank you very much for questioning them.
Government should not outsource project to
overseas companies even if it is better value for
money.
SL : govt should outsource itself, since its menial jobs (including
writing forums during office hours) can be done at a fraction of
the millions of dollars it now costs us.
G : You mean Singapore should be run by another country?
SL : no, i mean singapore should be run by singaporeans who
genuinely have singaporeans at heart and not hanker over million
dollar salaries doing menial jobs like writing forums during office
hours.
G : This has no relationship to how the government handle its
projects.
9) S-league foreign footballers are all highly educated
individual
SL : nobody watches S-league
G : That not what we are asking and again you miss the point.
SL : so my answer "nobody watches S-league" points squarely to the
irrelelvance of your point.
G: We have foreign footballers who are playing for S-League and
have been offered citizenship because of their talent in sport.
Hence do you think it is right to say that all FT are highly
educated? Are you sure that nobody watches S-League? Are those
people seating in the stadium ghost or something?
10) You need to be highly educated to be consider a
talent.
SL : isn't that the govt's elitist policy for the last 40
years?
G : Are you sure?
SL: yes
G : Are you also saying that those badminton player from China who
have become Singaporeans are highly educated?
11) Income gap = living standard
SL : income gap = widening living standards
G : You could be right, but thats not what soul_rage said
SL : soul rage said the exact same thing i said
G: Really, mind showing me where you get that from?
12) Singapore government is pro rich people, not pro
business
SL : it is pro rich people's business
G : is rich peoples business not business? Or are you commenting
for the sake of commenting?
SL : rich people's business is rich people's business. why do you
care?
G : Could you give us some example of rich peoples business?
