Power To The People

LazerLordz SG

Originally posted by BillyBong:
[b]
2) My point is: should we need to keep Big Brother informed?

My question is, if you don't, are you prepared for the consequences like the late Ong Teng Cheong? Are you prepared to risk your career, life and family for such a move?

4) The answer is so simple, it hardly need be said: 'cos we are the ones being paid or left unpaid. The Big Question is: Is there any flaws in the formula itself and in the arguments used to justify the format of the formula?

To address this formula, you have to review it on your own. It isn't enough to just speculate. You have to see it for yourself.

I didn't bother, since it would never have satisfied me anyway.

5) Hmmm... you need to clarify why a private company would work to preserve jobs. No doubt a government might; since it could possibly lose a few election seats if unemployment over-swells. But a private corporation or even a GLC???

Why not? Are you so one-tracked to assume that private corporations would lean on the unethical and unjust simply to churn profits? Who do you think has more to lose should labour unrest spill into frontpage headlines? The employees or the employer? Likewise for GLCs?

7) Give examples of the legitimate conditions and reasons for strikes to occur.

This is obvious. I will just say: one clear example would be open exploitation by the company management.

10) We are here evaluating the necessity and the fairness of current existing laws; we are not discussing the possibilities present in the local context: we are debating on the motion "Does the local context (i.e. the "tripartite" system) justify its existence?".

Were we? i seem to recall we were discussing why demonstrations should or should not be the appropriate way forward. I mean if you are specific.

12) A big MNC will have no qualms; see what Coca-cola was doing to the Indian environment and how Nike treated its Indian and Bangladeshi workers. Big companies aim for profits, because these are its only interests. A smaller company might find it more worthwhile to focus on workers' welfare, though, since it would stand to gain mroe from the increase of a single worker's productivity.

Sure. And i can name you SIA's mishandling of their retrenchment exercise a few years back. And SIA is a GLC.

Smaller companies will not have the resources nor bargaining position to offer better welfare options, period. More than likely, they will not have much better benefits than larger firms. The closest you can come to is the closely knit working conditions they have over larger companies.

13 & 14) The subject is not limited to stuff like annnual leave. I am talking more on the lines of firms sacking or refusing to hire pregnant mothers, firms refusing to beleive in the possibility of bilingualism, firms retrenching workers w/o providing compensation, or compensation that's insufficient for the retrenched worker to survive for any prolonged length of time. These cannot be argued against, 'cos this is an employer's responsibility. Btw, all the above coem from real-life examples in our local newspapers, and are not figments of my imagination.

There have been firms who discontinue expectant mothers for unacceptable reasons and i resent such acts. They are biased and unfeeling. On the other hand, the senior management has to decide productivity on an equal basis. They should not compare pregnant women differently from normal women in their company. In this regard, i believe more can be done to improve the suffrage of working women. Compensation should not be considered as an option, especially after lost of job.

I do not see how bilingualism comes into this picture?

In any case, most of the complaints you get are not from expectant mothers. What you get are the usual: pay too low, so little leave, medical benefits suck, company makes me pay pay pay...etc

We can address those with greater implications separately because they represent a valid view and fundamental human right. But most of the time, the complaints don't reflect this. [/b]

If you have to fear for your career and your way of life to speak your mind, then I'd say leave the fecking island.

Confucian?What bleeding Confucianism?
The last time Confucianism was a way of government in China, she turned her back on the world due to the ill-advised and superstitious acts of the court mandarins in the Ming Dynasty.

BillyBong SG

Brave talk. When faced with that situation, many who sprout intense courage suddenly develop shaky ankles and turn meek. You could push them over with little more than a baby finger.

I'd say let them respond when the time comes. The brave answer may not necessarily be the right one. It's up to you to choose. If you have the courage of your convictions, then make the brave choice.

50 years later people may respect you for your decision to speak up, after you have your pants sued and your life in tatters and roam the streets selling your life story.

I prefer to raise my protests in moderation, offering an unbiased view while toeing the line. As long as it generates interest people will invariably talk about it. That is enough to get big brother's attention sooner or later.

People look at men like Chee Soon Juan and admire him for his bravery. But i prefer to respect others like Catherine Lim who hit the crux of the matter without betraying their hostility.

pikamaster SG

GMS, where are you???

goh meng seng SG

Dear Pikemaster,

I am here, just reading. A bit busy to put up posting right now. Wink

Goh Meng Seng

Cindyfeh SG

Chee Soon Juan = someone who picks up the 5 dollar note on the ground
Catherine Lim = someone who just says, "I wish that 5 dollar note is mine"

There are more and more people who are aware, but sadly, the real action men and women are way too little. Most are just dreaming of the 5 dollar note...

pikamaster SG

Oh,

I was waiting for you to answer my last post to you. Been waiting for a few weeks now...

the (patient) pikamaster

pikamaster SG

GMS,

for ur benefit, here's the post again:-

BillyBong SG

A better comparison of the two:

Chee: One who is 'brave' but lacks the intellectual guile to know how to play poker with the Ruling party.

Catherine Lim: Her articles hit the ruling party dead centre. If one talks abt dreams, she is one who acts on them. Unafraid to deliver a scathing attack on the ruling party, abeit with appropriate language and wit, without the need to get emotional.

As the saying goes, 'wishing will make it so...'

pikamaster SG

I agree, but one should also realize that Miss Lim's methods are also more passive and sophisticated. Less-educated folk (no offence to anyone here) will not be able to see through her arguments, and so will not understand. I mean, given that she is allowed to be printed in the ST, it shows that the censors have very naively assumed that she praises the Ruling Party after her incident in 1994.

CSJ is much more active, but he is also much less subtle, which makes him incur the MIW's wrath more easily.

SO, both approaches have their good and bad points; I guess we should find somewhere in between: hmmm, is there anything that the MIW in their ivory towers wouldn't understand, but that the common folk would?

the pikamaster

LazerLordz SG

You're right.

Will the ah sohs understand what CL says?But I like the way the censors were toyed because they could not figure out what she was exactly pointing at..

Cindyfeh SG

Another saying goes, "action speaks louder than words".

Most of the self-help gurus teach that "wishing" is just a first step, it is the actions that bring changes.

I don't think with senior Lee's command of english, CL's real meaning slipped his mind. Rather, I agree with other posters that her influence is too limited and out of reach with the masses. Comparatively, though CSJ's words and actions are more blunt, they are easily understood by ordinary citizens and thus post a greater threat.

robertteh SG

It is true that we need more CSJs who are prepared to sacrifice their personal lives for the sake of all. Singaporeans should not be too critical of his performance. Given a chance anyone (remember earlier comments made by MM about wooden GCT) anyone aan contribute in his or her own way. The problem is those who are critical of him may be people afraid of speaking the truths.

BillyBong SG

More importantly, will the Ruling party care what the ah sohs think?

Those they are afraid of most are educated masses who have turned away from their open arms because they know that the govt offers their right hand and takes with their left.

They have easily dealt with those juvenile delinquents (see response to 'seditious' bloggers ) and brute force adversaries (CSJ / JBJ). But it is an increasing number of dissastisfied citizens, aware of the obvious mistakes made by the govt (incidently they practice full deniability the same way as clandestine agencies), yet refuse to take action against their own, whom have been clearly irked that the govt would outrageously shine the dirt on their own boots.

For a govt that prides so much on perfection (make a mistake however small and you get a nice black star next to your name), they seem selective in acting against errant members of their own.

BillyBong SG

If Catherine Lim wrote more articles critical of the Ruling party, one wonders whether her citizenship would get 'downgraded' to PR status. Indeed, we welcome more of her spicy articles in ST. If just a handful could raise talking point abt the ruling party to a fever pitch, imagine the response to a consistent flow of them.

Remember that she does not belong to any political party and hence is in the best position to claim zero political agenda. This position is best reflected by everyone in this forum who represents the people but have 'no strings attached'.

With the govt only too eager to act against 'bluntness', perhaps offering a subtle 'nudge' (to borrow Vivian Balakhrisnan's words) in the right direction may be more prudent and 'face-saving'.

goh meng seng SG

Dear Pikemaster,

I do not have anything more valuable to add. I think we see CiPRi from two different perspective.

Getting Govt funding will be very different. In Singapore's context, many people doesn't understand the difference between Govt and ruling party, especially so with PAP members.You want to get govt funding? You will end up like RCs and CCCs, all have to help PAP MPs or candidates to be (in opposition wards). Then we will lose independence and objectivity altogether.

For example, there are already some research institutes that are funded by govt but did they provide any information for alternative parties other than PAP?

Goh Meng Seng

LazerLordz SG

The first maxim of government is that power comes from the consent of the masses.When the masses speak, better listen up.Power did not drop out from the sky like manna.In our case, it was given to them in 1959.Nothing lasts forever, and that's a natural fact.

Change is a natural process of life.And things pass on, so do groups and ideologies.The intellectual spaces here are like a yawning maw,sometimes it closes its jaws and you can stand on it, but unlike mandatory warning signs at dangerous places. these jaws can open anytime of their owner's choosing.And if you are not geared with quick reflexes, you will be swallowed.

BadzMaro SG

How about those that got thier asses crushed by tanks at TiananMen Sq.

pikamaster SG

GMS,

1) Do we? I reason out CiPRI to be an independent, non-partisan research engine striving to achieve social progress in our nation; isn't that how you view it too, or more specifically, what you told me you intended to make it into?

2) The idea is to see if you can "dupe" the agencies into funding. I'm not promoting this method or anything, just exploring all possible means of funding.

Perhaps you could divide CiPRI into two sections, one more socially-based. Given its current focus on inclusive society and active citizenry, the govt would be more inclined - the NCSS in this case - to fund that section of CiPRI. Then that section can divert a proportion of the funds it receives to its companion/sibling.

But whatever it is, you probably would need some institutional funding if CiPRI is to survive in the long run; that's just being practical, I guess.

3) hmmm .... well ....

the pikamaster

« Previous Page