About

I am a Singaporean who cares about social issues in Singapore. I hope to share my views and analysis of the social situation in Singapore to generate healthy and constructive discussion.

My wish is that my fellow Singaporeans will become happier and be able to live their lives with more passion, in a free, just and equal environment – not just one enshrined in our governing principles, but one that is real.

I would like to add that, I am very appreciative of my government’s efforts in bringing Singapore to where it is now, but like what DPM Tharman had said, “As the Republic builds its niche in the sciences, there is now some “catch up to do” in the area of social science and humanities research.

I hope to be able to add to the constructive discussion that is gaining momentum among Singaporeans, to help our government mould Singapore to one that Singaporeans will be proud of, and to live in dignity with.

In case you are wondering, I do not think of myself as a leftist or rightist. I’m not anti-PAP or pro-opposition. I believe in equality and respect, and respect towards the human condition. I will support any governance, policies or programmes that can help us achieve equality and respect for one another, without harming others.

I have also a set up a Facebook page for this blog at: https://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Heart-Truths/185331834935656

Roy

You can also connect with me at: https://www.facebook.com/sexiespider

I also have another blog which talks about my journey as a gay man living in Singapore and how I have learnt to become a stronger person, with more awareness, mindfulness and empathy in my life. You can read about my journey at: http://myrighttolove.com/

59 comments

      • True Singapore

        Roy, whether you are right or wrong abt the CPF issue, the PM should not sue you in the first case. I appal you for speaking up for Singaporean. Hopefully you will not be discourage for that.

  1. Ming

    Very insightful articles on the politics of singapore exploring the PAP’s motives for their actions. I will be following your blog closely.

    I have grown up in Singapore but spending the past 6 years in the UK has allowed me to see Singapore’s changes from an outsider’s point of view. It frustrates me that the ruling party is able to get away with alot of legally aboveboard but ethically ambiguous actions without getting called out.

    Would you then be able to comment on the motives of singaporeans, why do you think that Singaporean people do not speak out more and call the government out on their actions? I know the usual arguments are that people are afraid of punitive actions against them like the defamation suits against Alex Au, however this has not stopped people from speaking out and creating change in other countries, both western and non-western.

    It is my personal belief that more people like you and alex au should speak out and create a culture where it is acceptable to speak out and create change.

    BW,
    Ming

    • My Right to Love

      Hey hi Ming,

      Thank you for your message. Actually, I’ve noticed a lot of blogs have sprung up over the past 6 months. Many people have taken online to express their ideas and analysis. We need a way to consolidate all these blogs :)

      Thank you for your question! The reason is this – it’s subconscious. The policies that have been put in place – the prevention of freedom of speech and expression, peaceful demonstrations, the legal actions – suing or threatening others of defamation, and the shaping of the media discourse – all of these has systematically created a people who have learnt to suppress their thinking and learnt not to develop critical thinking abilities, because of their initial conscious, and then subconscious fear of being marginalized by the government. At the same time, our education system has been geared so much towards towards educating on mathematics and science that it has created a people whose critical thinking skills for other areas were not developed as they learnt to see these thinking areas as not useful for a money-focused life. Because we learn to align ourselves to the economic principles of the PAP, and because we want to become rich, and for the some of Singaporeans who are the newly-rich or getting there, there is a strong want to align yourself to the values of PAP so that you can get ahead with their support – this means you prevent yourself from being critical of them, and you learn to think and act as they do, whether this is conscious or subconscious. This is why if people support PAP, they adopt every viewpoint that PAP puts out. When they disagree with PAP’s policies, it’s a flippant thinking but they continue to say they believe PAP will change, even if they know PAP wont. This duality in their thinking arises from the fact that deep within, they want change, but yet, they want the wealth that aligning with PAP can coffer, so they’ve resisted one impulse over the other. And this is also why for the many of them, when they argue for PAP’s policies and protect PAP’s rationale, they do so not because they believe in PAP. They don’t realise this but they are fighting and protecting their right to make money and their right to wealth. You have to understand that their primary motivations towards aligning themselves with PAP is to make money, so that need to support PAP at all costs – because of their money at stake. They do not need to have a mind of their own but they need to throw their support behind PAP as a brand – and not as a party – so that this brand, they think, will ensure their wealth generation. And this what PAP has done skillfully – to use wealth to tie people to them, which is short-term thinking and myopic, because once these people no longer just pander to money and their minds are awaken, this is when PAP’s power will crumble. These are the people who currently comprise the majority of the 60% of the people who voted for PAP at the last general elections and those who had voted for Tony Tan as president. But you can see that some of them are starting to cross over. There is enough research which shows that when people do not feel that they have enough autonomy, no matter how much money you throw at them, they will feel a sense of emptiness and they won’t be happy – some of them have reached this stage. So, the question now is this – will there be enough people who have awakened who will swing the votes away from PAP and prevent them from forming the next government, and putting in place their designated president, or will there be enough people on the other side who will then push PAP out of power?

      Also, generally, you can see that a lot of people have resorted to complaining. I’ve written about this people, and the question is to ask why – Singaporeans have learnt to complain because you can consider this as a least threatening form of speaking out, without having to feel the consequences. When people realised that they couldn’t speak out, for fear of threats or punishment, they’ve learnt to suppress their urge to speak up. But people being people, we want to speak up – yet the question is, how can we speak up without having to face the consequences? So, we’ve dumbed ourselves down. We speak up without making it sound like the government is wrong or needs to change. We learn to ‘complain’ and point to the mess everywhere, except towards the government. And even when we complain about the government, it’s not about advocating for change, it’s a comment without teeth or grit, but one of dejection and the inability to act on it. And the government is fine with it – complain all you want, and they’ve called it the Singapore culture. As long as people complain, they will continue to mop and stay stagnant in their situation. This will prevent them from realizing their rights and asking for change. You see, to take action, this means we stop just complaining, but turn these complaints into useful action, by rallying ourselves to advocate change. First, institutionally, we feel our hands are tired because of the laws and threat of legal action. Second, we feel that we are not able to change things anyway. In recent times, our complaining behaviour has degenerated further to be one that we’ve learnt to complain about other people. Because we cannot complain about the government, we’ve learnt to direct our attention and anger towards others which are the byproduct of the government’s policies or who we feel are the link between the government’s policies and us. And that’s why people have learnt to get angry and have directed their energies towards the foreigners, for one. Consciously, they feel that the foreigners are stealing our jobs away and they have caused our wages to be depressed – it’s all the foreigners’ fault. But what they do realise is this – the reason why our wages are being depressed is bad government planning and policy making. The government could have created policies which prevented our wages from dropping. But they didn’t want to. It’s not in their interests to – where do their profits come from then? Which is why the government is happy that we are angry with the foreigners. It takes the attention away from our anger with them and it takes away attention from the real problem – that they have created bad policies – that they had not been doing their job. So, the government doesn’t actively try to bridge differences. They want the difference to flourish. And Singaporeans do not break this chain of thinking because subconsciously, they are directing their energies towards what seems most obvious, and second, because consciously, they know they cannot act against the government, or they feel they cannot. This same reasoning applies for when Singaporeans had resisted the building of the nursing homes and dormitories for the foreign labour – we’ve learnt to discriminate against others because it is our coping mechanism towards our inability to act against the government.

      And this is the primary reason why there continues to be discrimination in Singapore. The government allows it to happen, as what is explained before. Also, because of what was explained much earlier on – there are a group of people who would align themselves to PAP because they fervently want to protect their wealth or their new wealth, they will protect PAP at all costs, but only in name, and in that process, they will discriminate others who do not agree with them. And on both counts, it is very, very sad and deeply unethical that PAP has allowed this to happen, and does not stop it. They do this because it keeps them in power, and it prevents people from finding fault with them. A responsible government should be one which ensure stability in society, among the diversity of its people. Yet, one which allows discrimination to be perpetuated is a vastly irresponsible and selfish government – they’ve tied themselves and their egos to their power for so long, and they are so scared to lose this power, that they’ve allowed the people’s interests to be sacrificed and they’ve allowed the social fabric of Singapore to be torn apart, precisely because of their basic fundamentals of economic growth, and this want to them prevent people from taking it away. They are stuck in their perpetual fears and principles, which has now become a contradiction against the people.

      Then the reason is – can we do anything? It means that we need to start being aware and being critical in our thinking. We have to train ourselves. We have to learn not to take things at face value, and always probe deeper and further – this means that when we read The Straits Times, or the other mainstream media, that we ask – why is the government positioning the information in this way? What are they trying to hide? What is their strategy for using the information in this way? What will be the long term effects that they hoping to have? What will their next step be? How does this information lead on from a previous news? We need to think critically, so that we can formulate a discourse that is not defined by the government, but one that we can see with clarity, which is what the government is really doing.

      Only when we can see clearly, can we learn to appreciate what the government is trying to do, and when we can plan to then challenge the government on equal grounds. What about speaking up? You need to understand how the government uses the fear to prevent people from speaking up. At some point, we need to be prepared that they will use threats against us. Then the question is this – will you speak up for what is right and what is rightfully yours? Will you take a stand because it is about you? The reason why many people do not take a stand is this – we’ve learnt to value stability and we’ve learnt to want to protect the wealth that we have earned. If I speak up, will I still have all this money and wealth? Will I be safe? It’s a decision you have to make. For me, I need to speak up because there are so many people who are disadvantaged and devalued because of the policies that the government has made. Is it right? It’s not and I’m not going to sit there and wait. It’s simply not right. And we need to take a stand.

      The reason why those who are aligned to PAP don’t speak up is because of this – they do not have strong views anyway. They want to protect PAP, but it isn’t ideological. Their strong views are this – I want money. I want to be rich. If they want to speak up and fight, they do not have strong ideological grounds to fight on. Sure, what they would do is when they debate with you, they will get very angry and emotionally charged, then what they do is they push out the arguments that PAP has made and the watch them crumble, as you bring out facts, statistics and clear information and they have nothing to back themselves on, or to stand on. You see, whatever arguments they form, whatever PAP says, they buy unquestioningly. And they aren’t used to people challenging them, because in the past, no one would. But this is no longer ‘in the past’. Because they do not have strong ideological beliefs or their beliefs are formed by arguments formulated by PAP, they’ve learnt to formulate further ‘logical’ reasoning from them. They’ve conjured a whole story around this illusion.

      And this is actually what a lot of Singaporeans have used to do – conjure and live within and illusion that PAP has created. And it’s no longer working. But of course, you might ask – but what if I am the one living in an illusion that I’ve conjured? I don’t know, I could be – but if more and more people are awakening and seeing the truth, I cannot hardly be the one unless our minds are being influenced by some consolidated entity which is changing it – but there’s none. Other than PAP, no one else controls the mind in Singapore. Then where are all these shifts in mind coming from? Well, we are all starting to awake, in our own time and processes. We are beginning to access more information and we are starting to develop our critical thinking abilities. This has helped us make more informed and ‘objective’ decisions which are logical deductions. And we are beginning to see the truth.

      For the next step, how do we gather our thoughts and formulate a systematic manner with which to advocate to the government with. This will be the next phase of the development. We need people to come together to decide to want to change things, and able people who are able to intelligently create systems and discourses which will put us in good stead.

      I would be interested to know what an observer from outside look at the ongoings that are occurring within Singapore! :)

      Thanks for your message!

      Roy

      • Guru-guru

        Sorry folks, due to time constraint that I am in now, just an interim comment to share, if you permit me for the time being, without the benefit of reading lines and lines of comments (I ll return), I some days back re-read an article by Ngiam TD some while ago – he said that the Gov must come out with ‘stategic’ policies to move the country and the country’s economy forward. not ‘tactical’ policies which he cited the Jobs for Credit scheme for example,, in which the PAP gov foots part of the wage bill of employers recently to save jobs and help the companies avoid mass retrenchments.
        The other point, GCT introduced an idea previously while he was PM, he coined the term, insurgents. In fact if I am not wrong, he said, we must act like insurgents, be our ‘own’, which I meant to interpret that we citizens in doing whatever we are doing in our various spheres of livelihood here, do it with the insurgents mindlike – aggressive, purposeful, thorough to achieve qualitative outcomes.

      • MJ Oh

        Thanks Roy for your dedication on topics close to your heart. I have just read your CPF article, you have done much homework and I can sense your sincerity in establishing a reasonable argument against some of the policies. The possible explanations you have suggested may not be complete, which have thwarted your perspective and anxiety. I like particularly like your sentence in your reply of “6 Jan 2013 : Hey hi Ming….We need people to come together to decide to want to change things, and able people who are able to intelligently create systems and discourses which will put us in good stead…” How may I help convey my thoughts to you as I do not facebook and hopeless at tweeting. How about via email – your email address please.

        I clicked on Your Right To Love – browsed thru.. my first open gay friend 1994, broke my heart when at dinner at my place, he shared with my family who his gay partner is and dying of aids – I know this beautiful man too!! remembering how he insisted that I must not share food with him because he must have noticed that I was not aware of his being in his late stage of aids. The loving nature of the gays whom I have encountered prompted me to search for possible answers. It’s a culmination of factors from nature to an individual’s circumstances – if you have not already watched this, here you go
        http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/this-new-film-on-being-gay-and-catholic-just-might-blow-your-mind
        Also, read another book where a not young divorcee, ventured into the gay world and ended up this way. I also noticed that gays do break up in their relationships – divorce. Thus the root of the problem seems to point to the malaise of our times – we are losing fidelity and commitment.

        Thank you and the voices of younger people, like you who are sincere in making this place where we are born and bred, a better place, I am proud of you.

        Graciously,
        MJ

    • Oversea Singaporean

      From 1960 to 1990, Singapore has progress fairly well. Majority has job, house and improved living. Those graduate are able to afford private house, car and good living. Not many of the capable people want to speak out against the ruling party for some of the wrong/unfair policy. If they speak out, they will be under the ‘radar’ of the ruling party. The government will activate the whole structure of the civil service to investigate you. From Traffic Police, Income Tax department, Ministry of Defense on National Service, etc… even the place of your employment(Mr Chee Soon Juan – NUS). These capable people do not want to be prosecute by the government. Because nobody is perfect. Somehow if you make a small mistake like Mr Chee Soon Juan, who claimed over by a few dollars for his taxi-fare on and official trip, he has been sack from the job and prosecuted.

      Forward to 2014, Graduate in Singapore are plenty. The starting pay is $2,500. With this pay you will be in a bad shape to start a family, don’t mention to owe car. Many of these capable people are frustrated with their predicament.. With this environment they cannot go too far. Now and the future, you will have more people penning their frustration.

      Singapore as a country has progressed. The ruling party and the elite has progressed. Mr Lee Hsien Loong salary has increase to S$2.2million dispute that he has done a bad job.

      Why Bad Job?

      1. Fertility rate drop because life is hard.
      2. Older Sporean, 65 above is still working for less then a $1,000 because they have no money to retire.
      3. Housing has gone up sky high. $350,000 for a 1,100sq ft house. $1,500 installment for the next 25years.
      4. Young people, 25years old, cannot afford to buy house. If they do manage to buy, they have to pay until they die.
      5. Public transport are jammed pack
      6. GST at 7% and the money never go to social welfare of underprivileged Singaporean.
      7. Poor and rich gap is too wide. 20% of the elite made more the rest of the 80% Singaporean. And these elitist pay the lowest Tax in the world. When grand mother at 70year older still working making $1000 and she need to pay $65.42 (7% GST)….. this is too much for heinous society
      8. Government fill with elitist do not understand how Sporean feels. Where by Mr Lee Kuan Yew Challenge Mr Low Thia Kiang to move to GRC. When Mr Low move to Aljunied GRC and the favor is on Mr Low side, Mr Lee senior said the voter in Aljunied will repent. But Aljunied and the rest of Sporean celebrate because GST never go up after 2011. HDB is not going up further and getting a flat is much faster now. Thank to the voters of Aljunied. You have done Sporean proud. The Ruling Party is now in a crashed course. Sporean need to learn from Aljunied voter. Made Singapore a better place in 2016!

  2. Ngiam Tee Lim

    Hi Roy,

    It is evident you have a brilliant mind.

    Can you please give me your thoughts on how best to arrest the aged population problem in 2030 with the background now awash by the ill effects of capitalism that have crept insidiously into our life situations? If we make a move, there is strong opposition; but if we stayed put, we will diminish and perish as a nation.

    In my opinion, the adverse ground feel against the government took root from the fact that they feel oppressed by the 1% rich and powerful – it is Singapore’s ‘Arab Spring’ or ‘Occupy Wall Street”. If we look around, it is the same everywhere – UK, EU. It is the business owners, the cruel business managers who are the cause of all this suffering. Often, governments are victims themselves – see how the US Congress deals with the Fed?

    I cannot imagine Singaporeans oppose to the white paper to deal with the impending aged population, which is a certain problem in a few decades from now, just of their opposition to PAP. The aged problem has to be dealt with now and there is no time for delay. So, what can we do?

    Regards,
    Jacob

    • My Right to Love

      Dear Jacob,

      Thank you for your message.

      I think if you look at the foundations of Singapore, they are very strong. We have a strong legal system and framework. And fortunately for now, we continue to have strong business interests and a well-educated group of Singaporeans. If not for these, Singapore would have started going off the radar 5 years ago. We have to thank our founding leaders for this.

      The problem that we have with Singapore now is that we have new leaders who have taken over the system who do not understand the system. They continue to promote the ideals that the initial leaders had put down – such as meritocracy – when their planning fundamentals have already shifted. It began in 2001 when this current group of leaders started shifting their goal posts to grow their wealth. They did this by earning off not only from businesses, but from the people as well. And that’s why rents increased, CPF withdrawals decreased, real wages fell and so on. Thus they developed new principles of the growth of wealth, yet propagating old principles which no longer represent what they truly believe is, which is why you can see a disjoint when they speak of these olden values and you can see that they no longer understand what it means.

      To be fair, across the world, there was a dynamic shift into focusing on growing world economies through a strong focus on capitalism, after the 2001. World economies were shake end by America and governments started becoming capitalists, and also took on the role of earning from their people. This was what happened in Singapore and what shifted.

      Does PAP care about the people? I believe there are PAP politicians who do believe and care for the people, but on the overall, the core management of PAP wants to Singapore’s wealth, so it compromises on their ability to care for Singaporeans, precisely because even if they want to care for Singaporeans, it is in these very areas that they need to take advantage of Singaporeans. Which is why PAP continues to say that it has the backs of Singaporeans or that we are in this together. You see, on one hand, the PAP politicians sincerely believe that they enter politics to help Singaporeans, but on the other, their fundamental ideal to generate wealth prevent them from doing so. They need to overcome this hurdle.

      But the question is, can this hurdle be overcome? There are two fundamental problems with our current batch of leaders. They are people schooled in the new education of Singapore, where they’ve been trained with a one-route mind. Second, they’ve been severely sheltered from the rest of Singaporeans, having grown up in their protracted environment from the rest of Singaporeans. They cannot have a complete grasp of the realities of Singapore and their education doesn’t allow them to see expansively. This is why in the current debate over the population white paper, the current leaders could only focus on the problem at hand – we need more people, instead of realise that they need to look at the evolution of the problem, to understand the state the economy is, how it interacts with the population and their needs, and how we need to reenvision the problem. They are unable to do that, precisely because they are a by-product of the Singapore’s education and its singular focus towards producing workers and managers for the economy.

      Essentially, the real and much deeper problem is that we need to reform our economy and education system, but more importantly, the inability of our leaders do see this, and yet continue to believe in their decision-making also means that there is an urgent need to reform out political system. But this is something that PAP will not acknowledge, and so Singaporeans need to take the responsibility of reforming our political system, by voting in diverse minds into the government, to overhaul the thinking patterns within governance. This does not suggest PAP isn’t the right government. The government is not about PAP. The government is about putting people in who can represent us and who can think expansively, when needed, to resolve Singapore’s problems, and we owe it to ourselves to do what is right to protect ourselves, our future and our children’s future.

      On how we can resolve our ageing problem, I will suggest this. Currently, we look at our elderly as wealth generating beings. We do not look at them as people. In fact, this is something we do to everyone in Singapore – everyone is a statistic. When we do that, when the government manages Singapore, instead of thinking about their needs as well, the government has a very silo mindset of simply increasing the statistics who work, and thus any statistic which is capable of labour should work. And that’s how the government looks at Singaporeans. This is especially dire for the elderly, because at their old age, they shouldn’t be having to work day in, day out because in your golden years, you should be allowed to finally rest having been made to pander to the capitalistic tendencies of your country for the past 50 or 60 years of your life. They should finally be some respect accorded to you as a person, and not just as an economic node. But yet, the government continues to work them.

      Realistically, for Singapore, the truth is we need more and more workers, but this is if we go down the current path. If indeed we need our older workers to work, the question is how can we ensure that they have a respectable work life? As I’ve discussed in a previous article, more than 90% of the older workers work full time and they work the longest hours of 49 hours. Also, a majority of them work in blue collar occupations. We need to allow them to work respectably. This means that if they have to work, we have to let them work shorter hours and for fewer days. Also, they are currently doing menial jobs. We need to allow them to use technology to make their work easier, or we have to allow them to move into occupations which do not repurpose them into unskilled jobs – because this frame of mind shows precisely that we do not value them, and that’s why we want them to take on the lowest skilled jobs in Singapore.

      And most importantly, because they are in the blue-collar occupations, our older workers are paid the lowest wages. It becomes a chronic issue because they do not have enough savings to retire. They do not have enough in their CPF, Medisave and Medishield, and so forth, which means they are trapped in chronic poverty which our older Singaporeans are stuck in. But did they choose it? The problem is with the system which marginalises them. And this is then, a broader issue which involves thinking about our treatment towards supposed low-skilled workers. Do we think that they are so unimportant that we pay them such a low wage? Do we think that they are so unimportant that we import foreigner workers and pay them to do low wages to do this jobs? So again, the fundamental problem is that this government is capitalistic and our decisions as to how much we should pay low-skilled workers impinges on how little economic value capitalism has accorded their skills, and thus their pay.

      We could go into a further elaboration on this. But put simply, we need to pay the supposed low-skilled workers fairer and more equitable pay, which also respects their role as a person, and not just as a worker. Once we are able to do this, we will be able to protect our older workers, because the very problem that has caused them to have to continue to work will be resolved upstream.

      Which brings us to another issue – how can we simply increase the wages of the supposed low-skilled workers? We can because if you look at the Nordic countries, and even Australia and Canada, people are paid relatively high wages even if they are in supposed low-skilled jobs. Why? First, as described, it’s because we do not treat these workers as just economic nodes without capitalistic purpose, but we treat them as people who need to be respected and protected.

      Second, and this is the inherent problem of Singapore, is that we need to restructure these occupations. Currently, the government talks about raising the productivity of the low-wage earners so that once we do so, we can increase their wages. As I’ve discussed before, this will never happen (not with current mindsets) because our productivity will not improve, because businesses have no impetus to invest in improving productivity, and why – because their profit margin is already so tight, also driven by the high rental that the government has put in place. So again, the government has a role to play in why downstream, productivity won’t improve, and why our low wage earners will continue to earn low wages and why our older workers will continue to work past 65, 67 or 70.

      The government cannot peg wage growth to productive growth. The solution, and this applies to the whole of the Singapore economy, is to restructure and reform our economy and labour market. So, if you look at the previous example again, instead of ‘increasing productivity’ we need to reform the industry. We need to first, accord proper hours and fair wages across the board to any workers, regardless of their age, gender, national identity etc. Then, we need to introduce new ways of working, such as by using technology.

      But it comes to mind – isn’t this what we’ve been talking about? Yes and no. First, the current solutions are framed in terms of increasing productivity. This is a wrong framing. It’s the wrong perspective. We need to look at it as restructuring the job and labour market. Then, what this means is that companies need to have the impetus to do so. And this is where from here, the problems are not currently resolved. This means that the government needs to be targeted in their approach, by working with specific industries to brainstorm how they can restructure these economies, and by investing financially to assist them on making the translation. But more so, and this I would argue is the key fundamental problem in this situation – the government needs to lower rental to reduce costs, so that this frees up the company with some spare cash and breathing space, to kick-start innovation and build momentum.

      Which brings me to this final point – will the government reduce rent? Will the government start treating people not just as workers but as people with rights, dignity and who should be respected in all senses, including their wage remuneration? This government will not because their organizing principles are structured along the lines of wealth generation, one which they undertook more aggressively since 2001, and the limited education that they’ve undergone has prevented them from developing more dynamic solutions to resolve the current deeper impediments that surround our economy. If we want to reform our economy and our labour market, we need to reform the political system in Singapore.

      In order to reform the political system in Singapore, the current government needs to have a change in their mindsets. The question on everyone’s mind is – can they? If we do not think they can, then we need to do what’s right by putting ourselves up, and then by voting ourselves in, so that we can reinvigorate our government with new thinking and new solutions. Thereafter, we need to ensure that all the other estates of governance – President, economy, judiciary, military, media – become independent so that they can become a credible check on the government, keep the government on its toes and allow the government to be kept nimble so that the government will be ensured to always think in dynamic ways to resolve issues in our country.

      This is what I think and believe in. It would also be good to also understand how you might think about this.

      Thanks much!

      Roy

      • Normal Singaporean

        We can increase the pay of blue collar as we like??? where did you learn your economics from or do you even have one?
        inflation? taxes? who the hell is going to invest in Singapore if we start paying each one more than 10k a month?

        You are sounding more and more like chee soon Juan.

      • Oversea Singaporean

        If you get a 21years old China girl to work in a kopitiam for 12hrs for $1,200 a month, no employer will employer Singapore uncles or auntie for $900 a month. If there is a levy for the China girl of $1,200 a month, employer will pay Singapore uncle and auntie for $1,600.

        If the labour cost is low, the rent will go up. If the labour cost go up, rent will not go up.

  3. Pingback: The Problem with Singapore: Relooking our Governing and Economic Fundamentals | The Heart Truths
  4. T

    Hi! Your blog is insightful and backed with statistical analyses. Keep up the good work. I’ll do my part in sharing it with others as well.

    However, as your blog grows, and I know it will, I hope it will not degenerate into one filled with anti-pap rhetoric, because that is just unproductive. I hope that you will take this to the next level where, we can propose alternative constructive solutions.

    Lets us not blame the incumbents, but move along to bettering our society and lifting all participants in the Singapore Story towards the next millennium!

    Many people speak about voting out the incumbents. But many are also concerned about the calibre of the opposition parties. I do not doubt their loyalties to Singaporeans, but they seem to be unable to attract the qualified professionals and entice them into taking the alternative voice… As you put it, people are unwilling to speak up, lest their current, or anticipated future wealth be jeopardized. In this case, what do you suggest?

    Thanks! And again, great job.

    • T

      Pardon my long-windedness: I’ve been catching up on your past posts n found a partial answer to my question (http://thehearttruths.com/2013/02/05/discussion-on-singapore-population-white-paper-2013-part-7/ )…

      I’m only about 70% convinced. since Singaporeans, being of the cautious nature, mAy not stand up to their new opposition bosses (in the event that a wrong decision is made) and drive the right actions through – its probably how we got to the current situation in the first place!. Perhaps I am being kiasee… Let me continue reading and perhaps I may answer my own question yet again…

      Sorry for taking up comment space… Haha. I realize I can start a conversation with myself.

  5. Citizen

    This is just one of those atypical ‘anti-PAP’ is degenerative. Why is this so? Can’t you annotate that ‘anti PAP’ itself can be positive and a good thing which perhaps only you aren’t able to see and just degrade it as degenerative. People are free to air their views. Everyone has a say and is entitled to, just like you, no difference, am I wrong on this? Why the need to label ‘anti-PAP’ as degenerative rhetoric – which only indicate to me that it is from someone living in glass houses, or ivory towers, engaging in talking talks.

    Next. Why ‘let’s us not blame the incumbents? If one is not to scrutinise and blame them for the mass of wrong doings, then how to call a spade a spade and truly move forward from there?

    One more, “but they seem to be unable to attract the qualified professionals …” – qualified professionals meaning professional politicians, or professionals in their own fields in the private sector but not qualified enough to be opposition politicians as ‘an’ alternative voice”??

    How about giving due credit to the likes of those who won AGRC against ‘all odds’, and a heart-lander, gutsy, hardworking tuition teacher winning PE by-election and also against hugh odds, viz a highly qualified doctor, a professional too.

    • T

      On your first point: every one has a say -yes that’s very true and I agree with you whole heatedly. But let me ask u this – short of risking arrest, what else can we do? The chance to do something legally abt them being in power is already over… The next chance is in 2016, so the way I see it, my proposition is to generate enough interest in Credible solutions that out-trumps those proposed by them. This will show that there are many sources of untapped potential in the citizen core -and I am dammed sure that there are (could come from yourself, the author of the blog, the hawker auntie!). Because if we could identify clear, more effective solutions, and the govt chooses not to listen, then it only bolsters the case for a removal. On the other hand, if they heed our suggestions, then who better, than the ones most familiar with the system, to efficiently implement it?(sadly I say this with the risk of sounding pro-pap, but I am a “means-justifies-the-ends” kinda person.)

      Your second point – indulge me here and allow me to reference the words “anti-pap rhetoric. Is that not what’s been traded on the internet, and on many other blogs? You can say that there are many hiding behind the anonymity of the Internet, but calling names and not identifying the issues, not targeting them and not focusing on resolution, just simply does not help the situation. They may be a spade, but calling a spade a spade, doesn’t exactly generate ideas about new ways to use it. Do note that in my sentence, my main focus is on it being an encouragement to all alternative voices to help in bettering the Singaporean society.

      Your third point – I believe in luck and being in the right place at the right time, largely influences a persons success. and being a professional, hence doesn’t indicate that he/she is the right person for a political position. But, my point of view, in being a qualified doctor, the pap candidate would clearly have been in more stressful situations as compared to a tuition teacher. Now don’t get me wrong here, I never said a tuition teacher is any less hard working than a doctor or would put less effort, or is a less fulfilling or less important role. But in a stressful situation, based on not knowing a person’s character, based on accreditations and work experience, would you trust a tuition teacher or a doctor in making crisis critical decisions? Sadly, as another has commented – this is a chicken and egg problem… Are we Singaporeans willing to risk a 5 year term to try out new opposition candidates in ministerial positions? (Note, this means the opposition parties have to win enough to completely unseat the pap,based on current electoral boundaries) if this is a resounding yes, then lets brace ourselves… But unfortunately I think this is a high personal hurdle for many….

      On your last para, I never said anything abt not giving credit due. I am extremely happy that our opposition party took strides in being the alternative voice. But clearly, Mr Yaw’s handling of his situation was less than satisfactory, at least for me. While I am not a hougang resident, abandoning his constituency and not going public is clearly irresponsible. And don’t get me wrong, I would like to believe that my MPs are beyond reproach, given they have chosen a public career, be it from the pap or opposition. But my point of view is, it is good that we Singaporeans are taking steps to ensure an alternative voice is heard. However, come 2016 and the opposition wins the current 60% majority, Will you trust our current opposition leaders to be ministry heads and PM? Even if you do, will our opposition be able to attract an additional 71 ministers in the span of 4 years, and groom them to be effective leaders of their respective ministries? My concern is that, in 4 years time just to prove a point, i may have contributed in voting in too many opposition leaders without the right credibility. And that is a danger that we may have to fight hard to reverse…

      Perhaps my analyses are myopic and narrow, but as you say, and I fully agree, I am entitled my own view. But I do appreciate your clarification and contribution to helping me improve and for my opinion to evolve.

      Citizen : Thank you for your reply – I am assuming that you are replying to my comment. I apologize if I may have misread your intentions and will appreciate if my can point me to other credible sources like this blog.

  6. Y

    Roy, very insightful and honest comments on our society – the symbiotic nature of Singaporeans’ pursuit of wealth generation and the PAP’s ability to ensure that in the meantime.

    When I asked my colleague what to do with rising HDB prices, he grumbled (the subconscious response to complain that you mentioned). YET, he didn’t want his parent’s HDB flat value to go down at all.

    I think any political change / party will not lead to genuine change if the fundamental ideology of most (not all of course) Singaporeans remain as wealth generation and looking beyond the individual’s needs.

    Leo Tolstoy said that everyone wants to change the world, but no one wants to change themselves.

    I hope the gradual awakening includes a change in the heart towards one that cares about everyone in our community.

  7. Dennis

    I m new here, came across your blog via the link provided in Jeraldine Phneah’s article in TOC. Your post on economy growth and wage growth is very good analysis and broken down to help layman understand and decipher the codes behind all these govt talk. Thanks.

  8. Q

    I am appreciative of your concerns but im afraid many of your “statistics” are not significant and mislead many readers. Also, I was expecting to see your credentials under “About” but was left disappointed.

    • Roy Ngerng

      Hi Q,

      Thank you for your comment.

      I will leave it to discerning readers to come to their own informed opinions of the articles and statistics.

      Very interesting that you would selectively choose to leave a comment here. Interesting.

      Roy

  9. MN Azhar

    Hi,

    Do you have any thoughts on this video by an American Venture Capitalist Nick Hanauer?

    Banned TED Talk: Nick Hanauer “Rich people don’t create jobs”

  10. Kimberly

    You have spend time and effort compiling all these hard truth. Its time, for people to see and choose what they deem right for the people, if we are the richest country to live in , why are we trying so hard to meet ends meet.

    Don’t stop writing. :) Its time people break free from oppression. We need Singapore to protect and care about the well being of its people. Its time the Garment gives back for all the contribution of the people.

    We need more people like you to open the eyes of the people.

    JIA YOU!

  11. Kimberly

    Use me as a case study, I’m in my late 20′s . I’ve just gotten my BTO at pasir ris for $340k. I have to pay probably about 30 years of my life to be able to finish paying this debt of mine. Lets say my average income is about averagely 3k (not the exact amount) as a diploma executive. After CPF, its $2400. I have to commit to insurance $200, Pay my bike installment $380 (COE for Bike is so high i had to to at least 9k for a motorcycle) Monthly Expenses for ERP $6 a day (Average amount) $150 a month. Bike Parking $50 a month (season & outdoor) , I have to give my mum allowance of $200. Monthly Utility bills $150-$200 and also cash overlay for monthly installment. How about food? Which is averagely $500/ month Which is averagely $16 a day if you mix cheap coffee shop food and occasionally restaurant dining. Which gives me a balance of $520. I have not had a kid yet. I’m so worried to have one, why? How the hell can i afford one? with only an extra of $500 a month, i have not even count in the cost of toiletries , and some essentials, I just have enough to pay my loans to get by in Singapore. And I’m so call earning an average amount a month.

    This is not comfortable living. I really cant imagine how so many Singaporeans who is earning less then 2k survive in this place. And I really don;t see how the garment see that we are able to survive on such pathetic amount a month.

    They cant see it?They ignore and act blur to the struggles and cry of the people. Our PM even after a pay cut, earns 2.2 million a year. Which comes down to 183 k a month. (–_–) How about our politicians? fresh graduate , in politician averagely 10-15k a month? Such a huge difference.

    I want a change, I want to live comfortably in the place i call home, not worrying day and night, will have enough if I’m out of job right now, there is no financial freedom, and its quite frustrating.

    I want to be able to pay my education with CPF funds, and do not have to put back the amount in cash( which is so lame, cause the money belongs to us.) I want to be able to have children, and be able to have more subsidy bringing them up comfortably. I would like to be able to use my cpf monthly to buy necessities for renovation, such as a kitchen. and lighting. why don’t they have renovation schemes where we can use CPF to pay for such things? I now have to take a bank loan, to be able to pay for my basic renovation. You cant expect me to move in and use candles right?

    I want to be able to see my money for retirement which, is almost impossible unless i migrate and take our all my CPF money. See…. that is one reason why so many people are looking for greener pastures elsewhere. What kind of future can i expect for my children. If I’m struggling so hard to get by, what more my children?

    We are the richest country now, should not the people share the riches? I always ask myself, what benefits do i get as a Singaporean? Besides the safe and ” prosperous” environment.

    If we are employers, we can only get back so little a month.

    After CPF and also the high cost of living. We are not complaining because we have nothing to do.
    We are complaining because we are frustrated.

    This comment is to share my thoughts of an individual Singaporean, getting by with just enough.

    • Cecilia

      Kimberly,

      everyone has to work hard for the (comfortable) life they want. Not sure why you think your income is going to stagnate or not grow in the future. Surely even if you migrate, these good things you (or everyone else) wish for has to be from your own willingness to strive. I would say, $3k is still a good start though not comfortable. Maybe your husband’s contribution (somehow not mentioned) should help? By the way even if the PM or politicians takes home less pay, it is not going to suddenly change things. It may give you a little satisfaction that perhaps they are not better off, but let’s not harp on such things, since they distract you from thinking about your OWN efforts to change your OWN life.

      I will however agree that the government can seriously do more to provide opportunities to earn better wages and bring down housing costs.

  12. Johnny Ho

    Have you ever stopped to think , putting aside your anger with the government because homosexual sex is against the law, and ask yourself do you have another alternative besides CPF to pay for my HDB flat which I cannot afford without using CPF go pay for it ? Being gay surely you don’t have any reason go worry about the future of Singaporeans. So you can afford to complain about something as useful to us as our CPF savings. In fact it is ridiculous start complaining about CPF scheme when it has worked so well for over 40 years. CPF has withstood the test, so much so that other countries like China is using it for some of its states.

  13. Glock Tan

    Roy, I just read most of your well written article “When The PAP Started Turning Against Singaporeans Traced”

    Its Dr Toh Chin Chye not Mr Toh Chin Chye. He was a great man.

  14. chanel Discount

    chanel Handbags Canada
    Thank you for the auspicious writeup. It in fact
    was a amusement account it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you!
    By the way, how can we communicate?

  15. Abdul

    Let us not assume again and again. Are u assuming Mr Roy is writing all these because he is a gay? The issues brought up like CPF has got nothing to do with being gay or guy, Rebut with logic, not brush off ideas by character assassination,

  16. Jass

    Who cares if he is gay. Private life should stay in the private realm and we stick to discussing issues. You think the PAP faithful have no gays or adulterers or people with sexual skeletons in their closets?

    Kimberly, life on 3,000 a month is very hard. I have relatives who have to survive on half that, and it is a grind.

  17. jo wang

    Mr Roy thank you for your blog it is most unfortunate that again the govt chooses to silence the concerned Singaporean by method of defamation suits. I would like to private message you but I am unsure how. Unfortunately I do not have the bravery nor intelligence to write a blog myself, nor do I have many social ties to people and have little wish for an audience given I am such a loner. I would just like to help you in your predicament. And if you would PM me and allow me to provide you with my email then I could communicate with you in a more private mater as I am very much a private person who simply wishes the best for our fellow human beings regardless of nationality, race, language, sexual orientation or religion or lack of. Best wishes God bless…

  18. SAD ROY

    Roy

    I am So sad by your one-sided comments on your blog
    There is always a choice in LIFE. Go live elsewhere . Give up your citizenship
    The World Does not need you hang around and complain
    Get a Real Job. Add Value. Stop bitching and moaning
    From your name, I Am sure you are not local from your ancestors sounding
    You are a real ungrateful dog..
    Roy the DOG, ” ZHOU GOU” WOOF WOOF
    All your comments are unprodound and really waste of breath!!!

    • Vincent

      @the above commenter: You are the sad one here. All you know is resorting to name-calling and using uncilvilised childish words without any substance whatsoever. Now who’s the dog here? You are so pathetic even North Korea wouldn’t want you as a slave.

  19. Jamie Lim

    Hey Roy, great job on your article. Im representing SPAM media, and we would really like to do a video interview with you.
    Is it possible for us to liaise via Email?
    It would be a pleasure to hear from you.

    Best Wishes,
    Jamie Lim

    Ps. Keep writing !!:)

  20. Battleship Bismarck

    Roy, although I have never read much regarding CPF and all the finance mumbo-jumbo, but I can clearly differentiate between right and wrong. The only thing necessary for Evil to triumph, is for good men to do nothing. But not this time – because you are not alone in stopping Evil; too long I have seen such atrocities being committed on a daily basis, while so much has been in denial, that almost every Singapore citizen can no longer discern the truth from lies.

    You are that light at the end of the tunnel. And I will do whatever it takes to keep your flame burning strong and bright.

    Son Of Singapore, I will stand side-by-side with you, and will watch your back as you watch mine.

  21. cm8402009

    criminal misappropriation may not be accurate

    more like cbt (criminal breach of trust) since we entrusted cpf with our money.

    cbt as a public servant = life imprisonment

    - i am not accusing any one of any thing, but just to point out the legal aspect of your topic

  22. strawberry symphony

    Hi Roy, I left you a message on FB but since we are not connected as friends, the mail could be dropped off elsewhere other than your inbox. Please check your FB mails under the heading “OTHERS”. I think it is crucial that you read the message as it may concern the donations received.

  23. Al

    Hi Roy,
    Some of your insights are interesting however, having lived overseas and in many countries myself, I can tell you that the statistics you provide are usually flawed for 2 reasons:
    1/ you never check your sources and who is behind them. Many of the statistics you quote are issued by people with a political agenda and therefore the figures are tricked. Did you ever wondered why the EIU cited Singapore and Paris as the 2 most expensive cities in the world, made their comparison in US Dollar only and choose criteria that ensured that British and American cities look good in their tally? Or why UBS’s, the big Swiss bank, purchasing power index places Zurich as the most affordable city in the world to live in ? Think about it.
    2/ You don’t provide or have the full view of what’s going on in each country and nobody does. You often quote nordic countries or Australia for their high relative wages for instance, but forget to mention that they have the highest income tax rates in the world and an astrnomical cost of living… Moreover, if you live in most of the developed world, the social system is also dysfunctioning. It may be good in addressing some issues but will fail in others, and this is becasue each country is unique, with its own set of assets and challenges. So comparing Singapore with countries as varied as the USA, the UK, Norway, Australia or Malaysia, doesn’t really make sense. An example? In your now famous CPF article, you were comparing the CPF contribution rate with the rest of contribution rates in the world, but the data just doesn’t add up! You showed Singapore with a rate of 37% and, say, France with less than 20%… when France doesn’t have anything like CPF… Singapore’s CPF rationale is about the people saving money for themselves, on an account they can actually check, while in France it’s simply a retirement levy, i.e. it’s a TAX… this money is paid and lost to he who pays it! Over there, the government just gives 1 credit point on a sort of scorecard in exchange of your payment. After 42 to 45 years of labour (depending on your birth date and job), your scorecard is finally completed and then only are you entitled to a Government’s pension, paid quarterly till you die. In 2014, this pension averages Eur1,200 a month… for over 42 years of levy. In the meantime, the system is still running out of money due to population ageing and has caused that country to build a gigantic debt burden which will have to be settled by future generations. Finally, the 37% contribution rate in Singapore is not fully borne by employees, whereas the rates you quoted for France is the employee retirement tax rate only and the employer’s share is even higher. So this is a concrete example showing that you just can’t compare data bwetween so many countries like that.

    I’m an attentive reader of your blog, and in substance I usually agree with you, but you should defend the merit of your views based on their own human, philosophical and ethical merit and logic instead.

    Overall, I agree with you that Singapore has reached a point of its developement now where it can afford to shift its development paradigm, from a purely output-oriented model to a more distributive one. This will come at a cost though. Higher income tax, GST and/or lower reserves. the debate should focus on what option the people of Singapore prefer and feel is most suitable for them, and not so much in comparison to the rest of the world. However, let’s bear in mind that this planet being overwhelmingly a capitalist one, Singapore has to remain competitive so it must keep the money flowing into the system by reamining an atttractive place to do to business, not just for foreign companies, but also for local ones. Singapore does not want to be the next Japan.

    Point taken too that thanks to Singapore’s forefathers, the country has built tremendously strong foundations in so many areas, so it can afford to take a step back and think of the society that it wants to build for tomorrow. This should start, indeed, with the government not thinking of its own people purely as statistics, especially macro-economic ones.

    Finally, in one of your comments you said that the current political apathy of many singaporeans is due to the education system and the fact that it has been focusing on sciences, mathematics and technology, to the detriment of the development of a critical mindset. I agree with this view. Thankfully, many young Singaporeans travel around nowadays, and bring back new ideas and new perspectives. This is also why bringing foreigners into Singapore can help develop the country in a more human way. Those foreigners go back home and they spread the word about the goods and the wrongs of Singapore. This should also influence decision-makers in Singapore if they want the country to retain the good reputation that it has carefully accumulated.

    Cheers,

    Alex

    PS: please do not give in to a mere anti-PAP rethoric as this is not productive. Saying things like “Why do you think this and that is not working? – Because of the PAP’s policies” does not prove anything to your point and you are just attracting unwanted attention.

  24. Janet

    Hi Roy,

    I am not sure you are aware of how our CPF funds can disappear after our death.

    Please pick up a nomination form from the CPF Board and study it carefully, particularly a note that CPF will not disclose the particulars of nominees or provide a statement of the funds distributed to the nominees.

    I just found out after a friend’s mother passed away.

    She was the only person nominated by her late mother as the sole beneficiary of all her remaining CPF funds, but the CPF Board refused to confirm that she was the sole nominee and refused to give her a statement of her late mother’s CPF balances on the ground that all such information are strictly confidential.

    When pressed further, the Branch Manager said that in many cases, the shares amongst the siblings were not equal and so disclosing the details would result in disputes, and so the CPF Board was merely protecting the family.

    To a suggestion that if a rich man passed away and his wife was given only a fraction of this man’s CPF balances, while the bulk of funds could have been distributed to some unknown persons such as the man’s girl friends, mistresses, etc., he said it was perfectly possible.

    Think carefully. When we die, the bulk of our money could have gone into someone’s pockets without our knowledge and we are unable to find out where it goes and are unable to do anything about it. Isn’t this far worse than the minimum sum or CPF Life?

    I salute you for your courage to speak up while most can only grumble at the coffee shop. Three cheers for Roy.

  25. Yolanda

    The “Yin” clan relatives from Chaozhou, China, who share the same family name as yours, hope you can join the QQ group 363071811. Then you can chat with them, or get the information about some ancestor-memorial activities! Thanks!

  26. ESTAR

    Do you want to voice up about over paying reservist ? I know a person who earns 20K however going back reservist as a cook… another one earns 10K going back as a security guard… don’t u think this is a better fight?

    • landragon123

      No rich men will back Roy up for if it a RICH man, He can just said to ROY, I will pay everything for you, just gets your facts right and give LHL a good fight. Ravi will be the star but at this moment he have to be very careful for the new president of the Law Society may try to cancel Ravi License to practice like what the last president tried to do but instead got himself sacked, AM I right, pleas correct me when I make mistakes as I wrote all from memories by reading the news and listen to TV news but many are only half reported when it is something not to the advantage of the PAP.

  27. Goh

    Roy, do u like to be a motivational speaker now that you have more free time on your hands? i’m not sure honglim is such a great place. Pls drop me an email to discuss. Looking fwd to hearing from you

  28. pinky

    Use the influence you are gaining wisely Roy.Do not get FIXED.End the hypocrisy and steer our country’s values in the correct direction where it used to be.never give up.

  29. Pingback: #ReturnOurCPF: 12 July 2014 | 4.00pm | Hong Lim Park. See You There! - www.hardwarezone.com.sg
  30. landragon123

    High Roy, my respect to you having the guts to take on our sick and cancel PM. I will not respect him as he is never a good PM from the day he took office. He done made sins and the 1st are the 2 Casinos. Than washing the ROADS and corridoors when we have draught but he turn down the water in the public toilets to a drip and shout in advestisements to wash you hand with soap.
    For last few years when 7 persons dies of Dengue, postal are everywhere to fight Dengue. Health inspectors came to my home to look at the toilet and more inspectors were at the drains and inspections covers looking for mosquitos. Please, during the draught where is the water to bleed the mosquitos? How much monies have you wasted to get those layman never work in health works before just to spray insecticide into the DRY drain and I asked them ‘ what are your doing” We are paid to waste your monies as LHL thinks we are very RICH so getting good for nothing people to do jobs for the good for nothing PM? Please correct me if I am wrong.
    There give SMRT $1 Billion to get new buses but SMRT said it needed drivers for the buses and he agrees to pay for the drivers.
    Now, are there public company or private company, According to ACRA there are Private Listed Company BUT government give them money to waste on stupid things and I called them Singapore Most Retarded Teams,
    I AM sure a train have only one moving part and that is the wheel and I told them to change all the wheel of a train at on go. There went to and tried to change the TRACK and it cracked soon after, Than there are changing the Sleepers which are non moving part and a permanent part which is only change when necessary. I told them to ask Malayan Railway which operated the train for 100 over years, DO there changed the Sleepers?
    I also ask them to ask Virgin Train owns by Richard Benson and it was awarded the best train for 2 years.
    Than went the elevators break down the down time were 2 to 3 weeks and I told them to give me their job and it will be a 1 to 2 days job. There are a few hundred of these similar elevators and just bring the one back to workshop to repair and bring the repaired on to install.
    These are some more stupid things there are doing now, Cleaners are now mopping floor at the MRT and Buses Interchanges. New securities are now in place at buses interchanges and there told me is to catch terrorist But for the last 20 overs years, HAVE we caught a TERRORIST? NONE, the terrorists or claims to be terrorists were all caught by Malaysia and Indonesia and handed to Singapore for safe keeping as if there are in Indonesia or Malaysia, their governments have to feed them. Singapore are such a laughing stork to keep the so called terrorist and the majorities are MUSLIMS? AM I right???
    Sorry I have my jobs to do and please read my blog landragon123 or Patrick Boo FB and I do not hide behind a rag or cover to tell Singaporean in particular and the world at large what is so sick about own present government short comings in almost all fields. Please visit http://www.idragon111.com

    • Theophilus

      Hi Roy
      I am a Singaporean currently residing overseas due to certain unforeseen circumstances. But I am very much aware of what is happening in Singapore and pay particular attention to what you and Hui Hui have been doing at Hong Lim Park. Great job! Really admire you guys for your courage and noble character for standing up for Singaporeans and doing what is right. I would like to contribute and do my part in this mission even though I am overseas. I am a writer and effectively bilingual. I am thinking of writing a science fiction novel that reflects on what our government has been doing to Singapore and all the various thoughts and opinions of Singaporeans with regards to the political situation at hand. I will publish the novel on my own and then you guys can either sell it during your Hong Lim protests to earn some money to sponsor your efforts or give it away free. That is up to you to decide. The purpose? It is to inspire Singaporeans to really think about what is going on around them and awaken them to the truth. This could be another way to spread your message and cause among Singaporeans to educate them to see the real truth. I realised that you can really draw and since you are currently jobless and have more time on your hands, I was just toying with the idea of me coming up with the storyline while you produce the artwork to produce a graphic novel which is easier to read when compared to a normal novel. What do you think of the above mentioned ideas? Do you think they are workable? I would appreciate it if you can get back to me via my email. Thank you so much.

    • landragon123

      The lawyers that can help will be someone like Ravi or near as only BiBOLA sufferers dare to take on our IMH government. What I AM saying is when you are mad like my wife like to call me, THAN you are better than a Bibola who is not mad but the IMH persuade we are mad and examine by those DOGS who are more mad than US. There lock me up for 5 days and billed for 8 days as the Cashier like the 8 DAYS magazine too much and mistype???

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s