The comment below came from this website: http://flaneurose.blogspot.com/2010/07/liquidated-parallels-between-wall.html
It makes some insightful comments on why Singapore, increasingly looking like a Wall Street investment bank, is losing its edge.
Investment banks are run by greedy, selfish and often unethical sharks. Singapore is run by greedy, selfish and often unethical scholars who think they're morally superior beings.
"Liquidated - Parallels between Wall Street and the Singapore Civil Service"
by flaneurose
THURSDAY, JULY 8, 2010
I recently finished reading Liquidated by Karen Ho. It wasn't an easy read; in fact I skimmed through large chunks of it. Satyajit Das was right in saying that it reads like a doctoral dissertation.
Still, what struck me were some of the similarities between Wall Street investment bankers and how the Singapore civil service governs the country. Perhaps because I had been reading Constructing Singapore concurrently that the similarities popped right out. The parallels may or may not be spurious though; I'll leave that up to the readers of this post to decide for themselves.
First: Wall Street investment banks like to hire the best students from the best universities. Harvard and Princeton are the main hiring grounds, and potential hires are feted and treated like rock stars. Although I attended a relatively second tier institution in the United States during my time in university, even I felt the lure of the investment banks. All week during career week, students came walking out of the Glass Pavilion (an exhibition space in my school) carrying coveted swag from the banks.
Ho in her book postulates that the reason why Wall Street banks focus their hiring almost exclusively on the top universities is because they in effect leverage on the stellar reputation of top-tier universities to give themselves the sheen of prestige and extraordinary capability. That in turn helps to capture business. e.g. Goldman Sachs hires only the best students from Harvard. If you hire Goldman to represent your corporation, you've got the smartest guys in the room playing on your team.
It's not important that the people the investment banks hire really are individuals of the highest calibre. What's really the most important thing is that the perception that Wall Street investment banks hire only the best legitimizes why they can charge the astronomical fees they charge and how they can get away with the financial equivalent of murder when things fall apart. After all, if the smartest guys couldn't have saved the day, whocouldhaveknown???
In my mind, this doesn't seem so different from how the Singapore government insists on academic excellence in its highly credentialed acolytes, and has metrics like the infamous Current Estimated Potential. It's part of the reason why the government can make the boldfaced claim that we have to pay the highest ministerial salaries in the world to keep the good people we have in government, even if the actual performance of our ministers seems to be mediocre unremarkable.
Second: In her book, Ho talks about the myth of "increasing shareholder value". It's like a religion to investment banker types. Everyone in investment banking drinks the Kool-aid and uses the shareholder value argument to justify all kinds of business actions, such as mergers and acquisitions, even though years of academic research have shown that M&As typically destroy more value than they create. But investment bankers can't just sit on their asses doing nuffin'. Got to git them fees rollin' in.
The irony of course, is that the more bankers talk about creating or increasing shareholder value, the less they actually improve it. The opposite is truer more often than not.
Within the Singapore context, the concept of shareholder value is obviously irrelevant. Instead, here, GDP growth is the overriding concern. And every civil servant in Singapore is subject to what I call the tyranny of KPIs.
With regard to GDP growth, the problem is not growth per se, but the quality and sustainability of that growth. What use is growth if it is goosed by massively unsustainable immigration policies, finanical repression (think forced savings, high residential property prices, and low interest rates paid on depositors' funds) and suppressed wages? Worse, the positive aspects of growth are not spread evenly but accrue to those at the top of the income ladder. Yet we reward our highest civil servants and elected officeholders chiefly on the basis of this number. Is it any wonder that we have achieved spectacular GDP growth, but that the fruit of this Pyrrhic victory is bitter indeed?
As for KPIs, the concept is not unsound in theory, but excessive adherence to KPIs blinds the user to other, less tangible measures of performance. If something cannot or will not be measured, then it can't be important, can it? One is reminded of that story of the man searching for his lost keys beneath the streetlamp on a darkened street.
Like the red herring of shareholder value that bankers put forth, we have ministers and CEOs and other high priests telling us that such and such KPIs have been met or even surpassed. That everything is going according to plan. Yet that fails to assuage the disquietude in so many of us, that there are things happening here which are viscerally wrong. Like income inequality. Housing (un)affordability. Rising costs and the fast fading possibility of a comfortable retirement. Or any retirement for that matter. Of how this Singapore ... this place, just doesn't feel like home anymore.
Third: The investment banking industry has notoriously low job security. Job turnover is tremendous. You would think that investment bankers, hired and fired so easily, would have some empathy for the massive numbers of layoffs they're directly responsible for when they advise their client companies to layoff and outsource operations to cheaper countries. Turns out to be the opposite, according to Ho's research. Apparently, it is precisely because bankers have to hustle all the time in their highly volatile industry that they have precious little sympathy for others who can't do the same. Not being able to scramble when the times call for it is considered by bankers to be a personal failing rather than an unfortunate consequence of circumstances.
The highest levels of government in Singapore operate the same way. It's dog-eat-dog within the Admin Service, as is well known, and everyone there aspires to be the top dog. As a purported meritocracy, it was designed that way. A fall from grace from that height would be ... crushing. As a corollary, our senior commanders in the SAF devote great amounts of energy feathering their own nests and constantly keep half an eye on that coveted ministerial, GLC or statboard position for post retirement.
In such a situation, the problems that ordinary people face become mere abstractions, to be described in clinical terms like "structural unemployment". The same sentiment underlies brazen, clueless and flippant exhortations of workers to work "cheaper, better, faster".
That the highest levels of our government are paid handsomely for their work could in fact, be part of the problem, and it's not just me saying this. Research from Harvard indicates that "The More Leaders Make, the Meaner They Get."
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Singapore's overpaid, increasingly detached elite
The comment below came from this website: http://flaneurose.blogspot.com/2010/07/liquidated-parallels-between-wall.html
It makes some insightful comments on why Singapore, increasingly looking like a Wall Street investment bank, is losing its edge.
Investment banks are run by greedy, selfish and often unethical sharks. Singapore is run by greedy, selfish and often unethical scholars who think they're morally superior beings.
COMMENT by
flaneurose
THURSDAY, JULY 8, 2010
"Liquidated - Parallels between Wall Street and the Singapore Civil Service"
I recently finished reading Liquidated by Karen Ho. It wasn't an easy read; in fact I skimmed through large chunks of it. Satyajit Das was right in saying that it reads like a doctoral dissertation.
Still, what struck me were some of the similarities between Wall Street investment bankers and how the Singapore civil service governs the country. Perhaps because I had been reading Constructing Singapore concurrently that the similarities popped right out. The parallels may or may not be spurious though; I'll leave that up to the readers of this post to decide for themselves.
First: Wall Street investment banks like to hire the best students from the best universities. Harvard and Princeton are the main hiring grounds, and potential hires are feted and treated like rock stars. Although I attended a relatively second tier institution in the United States during my time in university, even I felt the lure of the investment banks. All week during career week, students came walking out of the Glass Pavilion (an exhibition space in my school) carrying coveted swag from the banks.
Ho in her book postulates that the reason why Wall Street banks focus their hiring almost exclusively on the top universities is because they in effect leverage on the stellar reputation of top-tier universities to give themselves the sheen of prestige and extraordinary capability. That in turn helps to capture business. e.g. Goldman Sachs hires only the best students from Harvard. If you hire Goldman to represent your corporation, you've got the smartest guys in the room playing on your team.
It's not important that the people the investment banks hire really are individuals of the highest calibre. What's really the most important thing is that the perception that Wall Street investment banks hire only the best legitimizes why they can charge the astronomical fees they charge and how they can get away with the financial equivalent of murder when things fall apart. After all, if the smartest guys couldn't have saved the day, whocouldhaveknown???
In my mind, this doesn't seem so different from how the Singapore government insists on academic excellence in its highly credentialed acolytes, and has metrics like the infamous Current Estimated Potential. It's part of the reason why the government can make the boldfaced claim that we have to pay the highest ministerial salaries in the world to keep the good people we have in government, even if the actual performance of our ministers seems to be mediocre unremarkable.
Second: In her book, Ho talks about the myth of "increasing shareholder value". It's like a religion to investment banker types. Everyone in investment banking drinks the Kool-aid and uses the shareholder value argument to justify all kinds of business actions, such as mergers and acquisitions, even though years of academic research have shown that M&As typically destroy more value than they create. But investment bankers can't just sit on their asses doing nuffin'. Got to git them fees rollin' in.
The irony of course, is that the more bankers talk about creating or increasing shareholder value, the less they actually improve it. The opposite is truer more often than not.
Within the Singapore context, the concept of shareholder value is obviously irrelevant. Instead, here, GDP growth is the overriding concern. And every civil servant in Singapore is subject to what I call the tyranny of KPIs.
With regard to GDP growth, the problem is not growth per se, but the quality and sustainability of that growth. What use is growth if it is goosed by massively unsustainable immigration policies, finanical repression (think forced savings, high residential property prices, and low interest rates paid on depositors' funds) and suppressed wages? Worse, the positive aspects of growth are not spread evenly but accrue to those at the top of the income ladder. Yet we reward our highest civil servants and elected officeholders chiefly on the basis of this number. Is it any wonder that we have achieved spectacular GDP growth, but that the fruit of this Pyrrhic victory is bitter indeed?
As for KPIs, the concept is not unsound in theory, but excessive adherence to KPIs blinds the user to other, less tangible measures of performance. If something cannot or will not be measured, then it can't be important, can it? One is reminded of that story of the man searching for his lost keys beneath the streetlamp on a darkened street.
Like the red herring of shareholder value that bankers put forth, we have ministers and CEOs and other high priests telling us that such and such KPIs have been met or even surpassed. That everything is going according to plan. Yet that fails to assuage the disquietude in so many of us, that there are things happening here which are viscerally wrong. Like income inequality. Housing (un)affordability. Rising costs and the fast fading possibility of a comfortable retirement. Or any retirement for that matter. Of how this Singapore ... this place, just doesn't feel like home anymore.
Third: The investment banking industry has notoriously low job security. Job turnover is tremendous. You would think that investment bankers, hired and fired so easily, would have some empathy for the massive numbers of layoffs they're directly responsible for when they advise their client companies to layoff and outsource operations to cheaper countries. Turns out to be the opposite, according to Ho's research. Apparently, it is precisely because bankers have to hustle all the time in their highly volatile industry that they have precious little sympathy for others who can't do the same. Not being able to scramble when the times call for it is considered by bankers to be a personal failing rather than an unfortunate consequence of circumstances.
The highest levels of government in Singapore operate the same way. It's dog-eat-dog within the Admin Service, as is well known, and everyone there aspires to be the top dog. As a purported meritocracy, it was designed that way. A fall from grace from that height would be ... crushing. As a corollary, our senior commanders in the SAF devote great amounts of energy feathering their own nests and constantly keep half an eye on that coveted ministerial, GLC or statboard position for post retirement.
In such a situation, the problems that ordinary people face become mere abstractions, to be described in clinical terms like "structural unemployment". The same sentiment underlies brazen, clueless and flippant exhortations of workers to work "cheaper, better, faster".
That the highest levels of our government are paid handsomely for their work could in fact, be part of the problem, and it's not just me saying this. Research from Harvard indicates that "The More Leaders Make, the Meaner They Get."
It makes some insightful comments on why Singapore, increasingly looking like a Wall Street investment bank, is losing its edge.
Investment banks are run by greedy, selfish and often unethical sharks. Singapore is run by greedy, selfish and often unethical scholars who think they're morally superior beings.
COMMENT by
flaneurose
THURSDAY, JULY 8, 2010
"Liquidated - Parallels between Wall Street and the Singapore Civil Service"
I recently finished reading Liquidated by Karen Ho. It wasn't an easy read; in fact I skimmed through large chunks of it. Satyajit Das was right in saying that it reads like a doctoral dissertation.
Still, what struck me were some of the similarities between Wall Street investment bankers and how the Singapore civil service governs the country. Perhaps because I had been reading Constructing Singapore concurrently that the similarities popped right out. The parallels may or may not be spurious though; I'll leave that up to the readers of this post to decide for themselves.
First: Wall Street investment banks like to hire the best students from the best universities. Harvard and Princeton are the main hiring grounds, and potential hires are feted and treated like rock stars. Although I attended a relatively second tier institution in the United States during my time in university, even I felt the lure of the investment banks. All week during career week, students came walking out of the Glass Pavilion (an exhibition space in my school) carrying coveted swag from the banks.
Ho in her book postulates that the reason why Wall Street banks focus their hiring almost exclusively on the top universities is because they in effect leverage on the stellar reputation of top-tier universities to give themselves the sheen of prestige and extraordinary capability. That in turn helps to capture business. e.g. Goldman Sachs hires only the best students from Harvard. If you hire Goldman to represent your corporation, you've got the smartest guys in the room playing on your team.
It's not important that the people the investment banks hire really are individuals of the highest calibre. What's really the most important thing is that the perception that Wall Street investment banks hire only the best legitimizes why they can charge the astronomical fees they charge and how they can get away with the financial equivalent of murder when things fall apart. After all, if the smartest guys couldn't have saved the day, whocouldhaveknown???
In my mind, this doesn't seem so different from how the Singapore government insists on academic excellence in its highly credentialed acolytes, and has metrics like the infamous Current Estimated Potential. It's part of the reason why the government can make the boldfaced claim that we have to pay the highest ministerial salaries in the world to keep the good people we have in government, even if the actual performance of our ministers seems to be mediocre unremarkable.
Second: In her book, Ho talks about the myth of "increasing shareholder value". It's like a religion to investment banker types. Everyone in investment banking drinks the Kool-aid and uses the shareholder value argument to justify all kinds of business actions, such as mergers and acquisitions, even though years of academic research have shown that M&As typically destroy more value than they create. But investment bankers can't just sit on their asses doing nuffin'. Got to git them fees rollin' in.
The irony of course, is that the more bankers talk about creating or increasing shareholder value, the less they actually improve it. The opposite is truer more often than not.
Within the Singapore context, the concept of shareholder value is obviously irrelevant. Instead, here, GDP growth is the overriding concern. And every civil servant in Singapore is subject to what I call the tyranny of KPIs.
With regard to GDP growth, the problem is not growth per se, but the quality and sustainability of that growth. What use is growth if it is goosed by massively unsustainable immigration policies, finanical repression (think forced savings, high residential property prices, and low interest rates paid on depositors' funds) and suppressed wages? Worse, the positive aspects of growth are not spread evenly but accrue to those at the top of the income ladder. Yet we reward our highest civil servants and elected officeholders chiefly on the basis of this number. Is it any wonder that we have achieved spectacular GDP growth, but that the fruit of this Pyrrhic victory is bitter indeed?
As for KPIs, the concept is not unsound in theory, but excessive adherence to KPIs blinds the user to other, less tangible measures of performance. If something cannot or will not be measured, then it can't be important, can it? One is reminded of that story of the man searching for his lost keys beneath the streetlamp on a darkened street.
Like the red herring of shareholder value that bankers put forth, we have ministers and CEOs and other high priests telling us that such and such KPIs have been met or even surpassed. That everything is going according to plan. Yet that fails to assuage the disquietude in so many of us, that there are things happening here which are viscerally wrong. Like income inequality. Housing (un)affordability. Rising costs and the fast fading possibility of a comfortable retirement. Or any retirement for that matter. Of how this Singapore ... this place, just doesn't feel like home anymore.
Third: The investment banking industry has notoriously low job security. Job turnover is tremendous. You would think that investment bankers, hired and fired so easily, would have some empathy for the massive numbers of layoffs they're directly responsible for when they advise their client companies to layoff and outsource operations to cheaper countries. Turns out to be the opposite, according to Ho's research. Apparently, it is precisely because bankers have to hustle all the time in their highly volatile industry that they have precious little sympathy for others who can't do the same. Not being able to scramble when the times call for it is considered by bankers to be a personal failing rather than an unfortunate consequence of circumstances.
The highest levels of government in Singapore operate the same way. It's dog-eat-dog within the Admin Service, as is well known, and everyone there aspires to be the top dog. As a purported meritocracy, it was designed that way. A fall from grace from that height would be ... crushing. As a corollary, our senior commanders in the SAF devote great amounts of energy feathering their own nests and constantly keep half an eye on that coveted ministerial, GLC or statboard position for post retirement.
In such a situation, the problems that ordinary people face become mere abstractions, to be described in clinical terms like "structural unemployment". The same sentiment underlies brazen, clueless and flippant exhortations of workers to work "cheaper, better, faster".
That the highest levels of our government are paid handsomely for their work could in fact, be part of the problem, and it's not just me saying this. Research from Harvard indicates that "The More Leaders Make, the Meaner They Get."
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Singapore's booming community of millionaires, and China's striking workers
Check the Times of London story below on China's striking workers.
Communist one-party-ruled China is doing something unprecedented and unique: It is allowing, even encouraging its workers to organise and strike. It is letting its people demand higher wages and better living conditions. Note the two bold paragraphs.
In contrast, Singapore's one-party feudal system is crushing its people and letting the inequality gap widen.
Companies, in particular MNCs, are still making rich profits. Why is this happening?
In one word: SELFISHNESS.
The political leadership is stacked with selfish greedy leaders, and the business community is just taking the cue. The number of millionaires in Singapore has risen to a record level, which the system is proudly trumpeting. Religion has been hijacked by big churches, temples and mosques led by powerful and rich leaders. There are no honest intellectuals left in this country. When the collective leadership has become this selfish, the system has reached its peak. There are no new ideas because the value system is bankrupt and corrupt.
Singapore is nothing but a money-making machine, each man to look out for himself. It's a very sick place that doesn't know it is sick.
TIMES of London report below, 13 June 2010
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/china/article7149002.ece
Reacting to public opinion, a chorus of editorials and commentaries in the state-controlled press praised the trend towards higher pay. “Analysts ... predict that these actions could ultimately bring an end to cheap labour in China,” said the China Daily in a front-page report.
“The Chinese workforce is no longer infinite,” said Zhang Wenkui at the development and research centre run by the state council, China’s cabinet. “It’s finite. That means walkouts and strikes will be more frequent.”
Independent research for The Sunday Times found an epidemic of strikes and bold wage claims in recent months across manufacturing zones.
On May 14, 5,000 workers at a privatised textile factory at Pingdingshan in Henan province, blocked the gates and posted a slogan reading, “We ask our mother, the Communist party, to give us a bowl of rice to eat.” Police arrested four strike leaders, but faced resolute workers angry about alleged corruption in the privatisation process and poor compensation.
In Yunnan province, a taxi drivers’ strike paralysed the city of Honghe and spread to 13 counties. Again, the causes were complaints about extortionate fees and graft.
The China Management Daily, an influential business newspaper, said: “It’s not only Honda that should panic. China should panic, too.”
“The Honda strike is a milestone in China,” said economic analyst Xu Jianfeng in an online commentary. “For ages the people’s government has forbidden working people to go on strike and forbidden the media from reporting strikes, but this time the government failed to do that.”
Powerful lobbies, led by the ministry of commerce and by exporters, are fighting a rearguard action to stop change. However, the sudden upsurge in labour unrest may subtly have reframed the debate. Economists say rising wages in China will help to spur domestic demand and consumption.
Researchers for The Sunday Times examined wage slips that showed many workers for multinational suppliers have seen no rise in pay for eight years. In the same period, consumer price inflation has eroded earning power in real terms and the proportion of China’s GDP taken by wages has fallen.
So higher pay fulfils two aims of China’s more enlightened policymakers. It will give workers more money to spend on goods, and it should also spur Chinese factories to move up the “value chain” and out of the sweatshop era.
Such Chinese firms face a tough time because, to take one example from the state media, most textile factories are surviving on profit margins of 1% to 2%.
But there is no question that foreign middlemen have room to cut their margins. When The Sunday Times tracked a plastic item that retailed in London for 99p back to its source, it emerged that the cost price at the factory gate was 22p. And when the factory’s raw material costs were stripped out, the Chinese supplier had only 6p to cover wages, operating costs and profit.
“In other words, wages could double and it could be absorbed,” said one British buyer.
Communist one-party-ruled China is doing something unprecedented and unique: It is allowing, even encouraging its workers to organise and strike. It is letting its people demand higher wages and better living conditions. Note the two bold paragraphs.
In contrast, Singapore's one-party feudal system is crushing its people and letting the inequality gap widen.
Companies, in particular MNCs, are still making rich profits. Why is this happening?
In one word: SELFISHNESS.
The political leadership is stacked with selfish greedy leaders, and the business community is just taking the cue. The number of millionaires in Singapore has risen to a record level, which the system is proudly trumpeting. Religion has been hijacked by big churches, temples and mosques led by powerful and rich leaders. There are no honest intellectuals left in this country. When the collective leadership has become this selfish, the system has reached its peak. There are no new ideas because the value system is bankrupt and corrupt.
Singapore is nothing but a money-making machine, each man to look out for himself. It's a very sick place that doesn't know it is sick.
TIMES of London report below, 13 June 2010
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/china/article7149002.ece
Reacting to public opinion, a chorus of editorials and commentaries in the state-controlled press praised the trend towards higher pay. “Analysts ... predict that these actions could ultimately bring an end to cheap labour in China,” said the China Daily in a front-page report.
“The Chinese workforce is no longer infinite,” said Zhang Wenkui at the development and research centre run by the state council, China’s cabinet. “It’s finite. That means walkouts and strikes will be more frequent.”
Independent research for The Sunday Times found an epidemic of strikes and bold wage claims in recent months across manufacturing zones.
On May 14, 5,000 workers at a privatised textile factory at Pingdingshan in Henan province, blocked the gates and posted a slogan reading, “We ask our mother, the Communist party, to give us a bowl of rice to eat.” Police arrested four strike leaders, but faced resolute workers angry about alleged corruption in the privatisation process and poor compensation.
In Yunnan province, a taxi drivers’ strike paralysed the city of Honghe and spread to 13 counties. Again, the causes were complaints about extortionate fees and graft.
The China Management Daily, an influential business newspaper, said: “It’s not only Honda that should panic. China should panic, too.”
“The Honda strike is a milestone in China,” said economic analyst Xu Jianfeng in an online commentary. “For ages the people’s government has forbidden working people to go on strike and forbidden the media from reporting strikes, but this time the government failed to do that.”
Powerful lobbies, led by the ministry of commerce and by exporters, are fighting a rearguard action to stop change. However, the sudden upsurge in labour unrest may subtly have reframed the debate. Economists say rising wages in China will help to spur domestic demand and consumption.
Researchers for The Sunday Times examined wage slips that showed many workers for multinational suppliers have seen no rise in pay for eight years. In the same period, consumer price inflation has eroded earning power in real terms and the proportion of China’s GDP taken by wages has fallen.
So higher pay fulfils two aims of China’s more enlightened policymakers. It will give workers more money to spend on goods, and it should also spur Chinese factories to move up the “value chain” and out of the sweatshop era.
Such Chinese firms face a tough time because, to take one example from the state media, most textile factories are surviving on profit margins of 1% to 2%.
But there is no question that foreign middlemen have room to cut their margins. When The Sunday Times tracked a plastic item that retailed in London for 99p back to its source, it emerged that the cost price at the factory gate was 22p. And when the factory’s raw material costs were stripped out, the Chinese supplier had only 6p to cover wages, operating costs and profit.
“In other words, wages could double and it could be absorbed,” said one British buyer.
Friday, June 11, 2010
The Death of Las Vegas: The Future of Singapore's IRs
Singapore's two Integrated Resorts and casinos have been nothing but trouble since they started operating this year.
The police and courts are spending more time dealing with crimes related to the two casinos. More people are getting sucked into gambling and creating social problems.
Worst, the two projects will simply collapse because they depend on gamblers to throw money away. Singapore will soon be hit by the financial and economic problems affecting the US, Europe and Japan, three of their biggest export markets. Story on Las Vegas rapid collapse below is the future of Singapore's IRs.
June 11 2010
There are quite a few U.S. cities that are complete and utter economic disaster zones in 2010 (Detroit for example), but there is something about the demise of Las Vegas that is absolutely stunning. In recent decades, Las Vegas has become a symbol for the over-the-top affluence and decadence of America. But now it is a microcosm of the economic nightmare that has gripped the entire nation. When the subprime mortgage crisis stuck, no major U.S. city was more devastated than Las Vegas. When the recession went from bad to worse, Americans decided that they really didn't need to gamble so much and casino revenues plummeted. Suddenly unemployment started to increase dramatically in Vegas and even today it continues to soar. Like so many other cities that are highly dependent on tourism and entertainment, Las Vegas has gone from boom to bust. Local officials are hoping that the worst will soon be over, but the truth is that the worst is yet to come. As the U.S. economy continues to unravel, average Americans will be spending what little money they do have to put a roof over their heads and to feed their families. The truth is that the glory days of Las Vegas are over and they are not coming back.
Already, the number of unemployed in Las Vegas is reaching unprecedented levels. Unemployment rates for the state of Nevada and for the city of Las Vegas both set new records during the month of April. In Las Vegas the unemployment rate in April was 14.2%. For the entire state the unemployment rate was 13.7%.
Of course those are just the "official" numbers. We all know that the "real" unemployment numbers are much higher.
For example, the "official" unemployment figure is about 14 percent in the state of Michigan right now. But if you actually believe that 86 percent of able-bodied workers in the state of Michigan are employed, then perhaps you would be interested in an offer to purchase the Golden Gate Bridge as well.
Elliott Parker, an economist at the University of Nevada, Reno says that the record-setting unemployment numbers in Nevada are just part of a larger trend....
"Nevada has been losing jobs since March 2008, and we are continuing to do so."
The police and courts are spending more time dealing with crimes related to the two casinos. More people are getting sucked into gambling and creating social problems.
Worst, the two projects will simply collapse because they depend on gamblers to throw money away. Singapore will soon be hit by the financial and economic problems affecting the US, Europe and Japan, three of their biggest export markets. Story on Las Vegas rapid collapse below is the future of Singapore's IRs.
June 11 2010
There are quite a few U.S. cities that are complete and utter economic disaster zones in 2010 (Detroit for example), but there is something about the demise of Las Vegas that is absolutely stunning. In recent decades, Las Vegas has become a symbol for the over-the-top affluence and decadence of America. But now it is a microcosm of the economic nightmare that has gripped the entire nation. When the subprime mortgage crisis stuck, no major U.S. city was more devastated than Las Vegas. When the recession went from bad to worse, Americans decided that they really didn't need to gamble so much and casino revenues plummeted. Suddenly unemployment started to increase dramatically in Vegas and even today it continues to soar. Like so many other cities that are highly dependent on tourism and entertainment, Las Vegas has gone from boom to bust. Local officials are hoping that the worst will soon be over, but the truth is that the worst is yet to come. As the U.S. economy continues to unravel, average Americans will be spending what little money they do have to put a roof over their heads and to feed their families. The truth is that the glory days of Las Vegas are over and they are not coming back.
Already, the number of unemployed in Las Vegas is reaching unprecedented levels. Unemployment rates for the state of Nevada and for the city of Las Vegas both set new records during the month of April. In Las Vegas the unemployment rate in April was 14.2%. For the entire state the unemployment rate was 13.7%.
Of course those are just the "official" numbers. We all know that the "real" unemployment numbers are much higher.
For example, the "official" unemployment figure is about 14 percent in the state of Michigan right now. But if you actually believe that 86 percent of able-bodied workers in the state of Michigan are employed, then perhaps you would be interested in an offer to purchase the Golden Gate Bridge as well.
Elliott Parker, an economist at the University of Nevada, Reno says that the record-setting unemployment numbers in Nevada are just part of a larger trend....
"Nevada has been losing jobs since March 2008, and we are continuing to do so."
Friday, April 2, 2010
Temasek continues to blow our money away on weird projects
Check out the story below from FORTUNE magazine, dated March 26.
Temasek is reported as being ready to "invest" US$1.1 billion on this hare-brained scam. As we all know, Temasek answers to no one. How they waste the people's money is none of your business. The elite runs riot on public resources. The elite will run us all to the ground.
How a big bet on oil went bust
By Adam Lashinsky, senior editor at largeMarch 29, 2010: 10:01 AM ET
http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/26/news/companies/terralliance_tech.fortune/index.htm
(Fortune) -- In the summer of 2008, Erlend Olson thought he had finally hit the jackpot.
A bit player in semiconductors for years, the former NASA engineer had made an improbable metamorphosis into a burgeoning oil-exploration kingpin. His company, Terralliance Technologies, a secretive startup in Newport Beach, Calif., had developed an algorithm for telling petroleum engineers where to drill.
Never mind that Olson was an electrical engineer with no background in oil. He had convinced some of the world's most sophisticated investors, including Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and Kleiner Perkins, that his unconventional approach was legit. Kleiner would go on to bet a whopping $93 million on Terralliance, a sum that may be the storied firm's largest venture investment ever.
Terralliance hadn't found much oil, but its founder and CEO was so adept at locating cash reserves that he believed he was about to close a deal that would seal his company's future -- and his fortune.
He had come to New York that August to negotiate a financing with Temasek, the sovereign wealth fund of Singapore, which Olson had been romancing for months. The price of oil had recently soared to $145 a barrel, and Temasek planned to invest $1.1 billion, valuing Terralliance at more than $4 billion.
A hulking figure with a glassy-eyed intensity, Olson had assured his investors that an infusion of this magnitude could lead quickly to a public offering worth as much as $60 billion. That would make Olson, as he wistfully recalled later, a "three-comma guy."
Olson wasn't alone in counting commas. Kleiner Perkins thought it was on the threshold of its first mega-win since Google's (GOOG, Fortune 500) IPO in 2004. Goldman Sachs, which had been betting shrewdly on plummeting housing prices, envisioned another killing. Passport Capital, a young San Francisco hedge fund, anticipated burnishing its reputation for energy investments. John Fredriksen, a Norwegian supertanker mogul who had lent Terralliance $50 million only months earlier, stood to score a quick hit.
All told, the investors had sunk nearly half-a-billion dollars into Terralliance, an astounding sum given the audacity of the company's aspirations -- and the paucity of its accomplishments.
Why experienced investors pumped so much capital into such a risky venture is just one mystery in the tale of Terralliance, a saga that has not been comprehensively told despite the high profiles of the players involved.
Kleiner Perkins, a firm that loudly promotes its most promising investments, for years didn't list Terralliance on its website and declined multiple requests to comment for this article. Despite interviews with many of the key people involved, it's also not clear what exactly Terralliance's technology purported to do, or how well its investors understood it.
What is certain is that Terralliance's gambit to become a force in oil exploration ended badly. Despite Olson's high expectations, the unraveling began during those August 2008 meetings in New York.
Before taking Temasek's cash, Kleiner and Goldman thought it was important to share concerns they had about Olson. Terralliance's globetrotting CEO may have been an oil industry neophyte, but he had spent like a Saudi prince. His shopping list ran the gamut from oil wells in Turkey and Mozambique to demilitarized Soviet fighter jets.
An auditor had raised red flags about Olson's dealings in the Congo and referred its findings to the U.S. Justice Department for potential anti-bribery-law violations.
As troubling, Terralliance had yet to close its books on 2007. Two lead board members, Joe Lacob of Kleiner Perkins and Joe DiSabato of Goldman, informed Temasek's lead negotiator, Nagi Hamiyeh, that they intended to demote the charismatic but free-spending founder to chief scientist.
It was all too much for someone wielding a city-state's checkbook. Instead of signing on the dotted line, Hamiyeh returned to Singapore. In early 2009 the board fired Olson outright. By then the price of oil had cratered, Temasek's stock market holdings had collapsed, and Terralliance had all but crumbled into a heap of litigation, layoffs, and recriminations.
By the spring Kleiner Perkins was in damage-control mode on Terralliance, even as it was promoting a new thrust into the field of "green" energy. As for Olson, who was out of work and raising new funds to continue his global quest for oil, not adding a comma to his net worth was the least of his worries.
Temasek is reported as being ready to "invest" US$1.1 billion on this hare-brained scam. As we all know, Temasek answers to no one. How they waste the people's money is none of your business. The elite runs riot on public resources. The elite will run us all to the ground.
How a big bet on oil went bust
By Adam Lashinsky, senior editor at largeMarch 29, 2010: 10:01 AM ET
http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/26/news/companies/terralliance_tech.fortune/index.htm
(Fortune) -- In the summer of 2008, Erlend Olson thought he had finally hit the jackpot.
A bit player in semiconductors for years, the former NASA engineer had made an improbable metamorphosis into a burgeoning oil-exploration kingpin. His company, Terralliance Technologies, a secretive startup in Newport Beach, Calif., had developed an algorithm for telling petroleum engineers where to drill.
Never mind that Olson was an electrical engineer with no background in oil. He had convinced some of the world's most sophisticated investors, including Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and Kleiner Perkins, that his unconventional approach was legit. Kleiner would go on to bet a whopping $93 million on Terralliance, a sum that may be the storied firm's largest venture investment ever.
Terralliance hadn't found much oil, but its founder and CEO was so adept at locating cash reserves that he believed he was about to close a deal that would seal his company's future -- and his fortune.
He had come to New York that August to negotiate a financing with Temasek, the sovereign wealth fund of Singapore, which Olson had been romancing for months. The price of oil had recently soared to $145 a barrel, and Temasek planned to invest $1.1 billion, valuing Terralliance at more than $4 billion.
A hulking figure with a glassy-eyed intensity, Olson had assured his investors that an infusion of this magnitude could lead quickly to a public offering worth as much as $60 billion. That would make Olson, as he wistfully recalled later, a "three-comma guy."
Olson wasn't alone in counting commas. Kleiner Perkins thought it was on the threshold of its first mega-win since Google's (GOOG, Fortune 500) IPO in 2004. Goldman Sachs, which had been betting shrewdly on plummeting housing prices, envisioned another killing. Passport Capital, a young San Francisco hedge fund, anticipated burnishing its reputation for energy investments. John Fredriksen, a Norwegian supertanker mogul who had lent Terralliance $50 million only months earlier, stood to score a quick hit.
All told, the investors had sunk nearly half-a-billion dollars into Terralliance, an astounding sum given the audacity of the company's aspirations -- and the paucity of its accomplishments.
Why experienced investors pumped so much capital into such a risky venture is just one mystery in the tale of Terralliance, a saga that has not been comprehensively told despite the high profiles of the players involved.
Kleiner Perkins, a firm that loudly promotes its most promising investments, for years didn't list Terralliance on its website and declined multiple requests to comment for this article. Despite interviews with many of the key people involved, it's also not clear what exactly Terralliance's technology purported to do, or how well its investors understood it.
What is certain is that Terralliance's gambit to become a force in oil exploration ended badly. Despite Olson's high expectations, the unraveling began during those August 2008 meetings in New York.
Before taking Temasek's cash, Kleiner and Goldman thought it was important to share concerns they had about Olson. Terralliance's globetrotting CEO may have been an oil industry neophyte, but he had spent like a Saudi prince. His shopping list ran the gamut from oil wells in Turkey and Mozambique to demilitarized Soviet fighter jets.
An auditor had raised red flags about Olson's dealings in the Congo and referred its findings to the U.S. Justice Department for potential anti-bribery-law violations.
As troubling, Terralliance had yet to close its books on 2007. Two lead board members, Joe Lacob of Kleiner Perkins and Joe DiSabato of Goldman, informed Temasek's lead negotiator, Nagi Hamiyeh, that they intended to demote the charismatic but free-spending founder to chief scientist.
It was all too much for someone wielding a city-state's checkbook. Instead of signing on the dotted line, Hamiyeh returned to Singapore. In early 2009 the board fired Olson outright. By then the price of oil had cratered, Temasek's stock market holdings had collapsed, and Terralliance had all but crumbled into a heap of litigation, layoffs, and recriminations.
By the spring Kleiner Perkins was in damage-control mode on Terralliance, even as it was promoting a new thrust into the field of "green" energy. As for Olson, who was out of work and raising new funds to continue his global quest for oil, not adding a comma to his net worth was the least of his worries.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
The Money Grab Gathers Pace
Connect the dots, people. The elite is in a hurry to grab every bit of loose change before you can even finish counting your fingers. Why the rush? and just look at the size of the money grab. They seem to be running scared, like they need blood for an emergency operation. Is the Singapore economy dying? How sick is it?
- "Temasek is raising billions of dollars through the bond market" (BT, March 24)
Temasek bond issues fire up market, By SIOW LI SEN.
"The local bond market is buzzing - issuance has hit $5 billion even before the quarter has ended, helped in no small way by Temasek's five benchmark issues over the last five months."
- They're holding onto a bigger chunk of your CPF money, and for as long as possible.
On March 12, the ST had this strange story, "CPF Life for those with $60,000 at age 65"
"CPF members with $60,000 in their retirement accounts when they turn 65 will be automatically included in the CPF Life annuity scheme, Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong announced yesterday." This was rushed through Parliament, passed into law one afternoon. There were no previous reports or hint that they were going to impose this new ruling. Nothing leaked about a new rule to hold onto your money at 65. Then, it was announced, and now, everyone is "automatically" a contributor. You have to leave some money in there at 65, and beyond.
- COE prices, sharply higher. http://sg.news.yahoo.com/cna/20100324/tap-561-coes-vehicle-categories-surge-la-231650b.html?printer=1. According to Channel NewsAsia (March 25 2010), COEs for all vehicle categories surged in latest bidding exercise. Prices have shot up by as much as S$14,000 in the latest bidding exercise.
- University fees sharply up. Last month, the three leading Singapore universities, NUS, NTU and SMU, all raised their fees by between 3% and 18% for this year’s students. A month earlier, the polytechnics and technical institutes had announced they would be raising their fees.
- The town councils in Jurong and Aljunied will be raising their service and conservancy charges from April 1, despite their claims to have millions of dollars in surpluses and the fact that Singapore has just suffered its worst recession in 50 years. Some of the other town councils can be expected to follow suit. In 2008, a ST report quoted Khaw Boon Wan, the PAP’s first organising secretary, that its 14 town councils had $2 billion in the sinking funds.
- Temasek setting up a US$3 billion hedgefund called Seatown. Seatown will be doing the gambling to try win back what Temasek lost earlier. another sign of desperation.
Now, for the worst and most painful move yet.
- PM Lee finally emerges from his secret hideout to make this ominous announcement:
“Govt to explore ways to increase use of CPF for buying HDB flats” (Channel News Asia, March 27).
He started off by berating a handful of individuals for selling their HDB flats for a quick profit, and then hinted a very important policy change soon. Sellers may have to return all their profits from the sale of their flats to their CPF accounts. Presently, you get to keep the profits after deducting expenses and the original capital sum which are returned to your CPF account. If PM Lee's hint becomes law, it will be the most drastic money grab in memory. Most people have their wealth stuck in their HDB flats. This means that money is now transferred to the govt. "Your" CPF is really the property of the govt's, or more accutrately, the elite.
The worst of the money grab involves your CPF. That's the people's money, not the PAP's, government's, or even the country's.
Why this desperation? The CPF is the last line of defence. Having lost more than US$100 billion through recklessly gambling away the country's financial reserves, GIC and Temasek are probably in deep trouble, or rather, the country is in deep trouble. The elite refuses to talk about it, and there are now laws or groups that can force them to say anything.
Let's also not forget that the elite just blew $6 billion on that casino, Universal theme park and resort on Sentosa. Another $6 billion will be dumped into the Marina casino. Both will drain the country's finances.
The government has to step in now by using the CPF to support the Singapore currency. Temasek selling bonds is a strange event too. You sell bonds because you need to raise cash. Why is Temasek raising cash? It looks like the elite is imposing capital controls on the people. Singapore is fast sliding down the slippery slope.
- "Temasek is raising billions of dollars through the bond market" (BT, March 24)
Temasek bond issues fire up market, By SIOW LI SEN.
"The local bond market is buzzing - issuance has hit $5 billion even before the quarter has ended, helped in no small way by Temasek's five benchmark issues over the last five months."
- They're holding onto a bigger chunk of your CPF money, and for as long as possible.
On March 12, the ST had this strange story, "CPF Life for those with $60,000 at age 65"
"CPF members with $60,000 in their retirement accounts when they turn 65 will be automatically included in the CPF Life annuity scheme, Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong announced yesterday." This was rushed through Parliament, passed into law one afternoon. There were no previous reports or hint that they were going to impose this new ruling. Nothing leaked about a new rule to hold onto your money at 65. Then, it was announced, and now, everyone is "automatically" a contributor. You have to leave some money in there at 65, and beyond.
- COE prices, sharply higher. http://sg.news.yahoo.com/cna/20100324/tap-561-coes-vehicle-categories-surge-la-231650b.html?printer=1. According to Channel NewsAsia (March 25 2010), COEs for all vehicle categories surged in latest bidding exercise. Prices have shot up by as much as S$14,000 in the latest bidding exercise.
- University fees sharply up. Last month, the three leading Singapore universities, NUS, NTU and SMU, all raised their fees by between 3% and 18% for this year’s students. A month earlier, the polytechnics and technical institutes had announced they would be raising their fees.
- The town councils in Jurong and Aljunied will be raising their service and conservancy charges from April 1, despite their claims to have millions of dollars in surpluses and the fact that Singapore has just suffered its worst recession in 50 years. Some of the other town councils can be expected to follow suit. In 2008, a ST report quoted Khaw Boon Wan, the PAP’s first organising secretary, that its 14 town councils had $2 billion in the sinking funds.
- Temasek setting up a US$3 billion hedgefund called Seatown. Seatown will be doing the gambling to try win back what Temasek lost earlier. another sign of desperation.
Now, for the worst and most painful move yet.
- PM Lee finally emerges from his secret hideout to make this ominous announcement:
“Govt to explore ways to increase use of CPF for buying HDB flats” (Channel News Asia, March 27).
He started off by berating a handful of individuals for selling their HDB flats for a quick profit, and then hinted a very important policy change soon. Sellers may have to return all their profits from the sale of their flats to their CPF accounts. Presently, you get to keep the profits after deducting expenses and the original capital sum which are returned to your CPF account. If PM Lee's hint becomes law, it will be the most drastic money grab in memory. Most people have their wealth stuck in their HDB flats. This means that money is now transferred to the govt. "Your" CPF is really the property of the govt's, or more accutrately, the elite.
The worst of the money grab involves your CPF. That's the people's money, not the PAP's, government's, or even the country's.
Why this desperation? The CPF is the last line of defence. Having lost more than US$100 billion through recklessly gambling away the country's financial reserves, GIC and Temasek are probably in deep trouble, or rather, the country is in deep trouble. The elite refuses to talk about it, and there are now laws or groups that can force them to say anything.
Let's also not forget that the elite just blew $6 billion on that casino, Universal theme park and resort on Sentosa. Another $6 billion will be dumped into the Marina casino. Both will drain the country's finances.
The government has to step in now by using the CPF to support the Singapore currency. Temasek selling bonds is a strange event too. You sell bonds because you need to raise cash. Why is Temasek raising cash? It looks like the elite is imposing capital controls on the people. Singapore is fast sliding down the slippery slope.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
An Outcome of The Elitist Culture
You keep reading about how Singaporeans treat their fellow citizens as second rate objects. How did this come about? When an elitist culture takes hold, people do not treat each other with respect and kindness, but with disdain and as items to be ranked in a social hierarchy.
This elitist attitude has filtered into the mainstream and has become part of the ugly Singaporean culture. Why do we have maids, and why do so many Singaporeans treat them as slaves and servants? Singapore children order their maids around because they see their parents behave as such.
Thus, Singapore bosses, with their access to cheaper foreign labour will not want to cultivate "local talents". These "local talents", on the other hand, do not see the need to be loyal and to stick around and provide long-term service. We end up with a vicious cycle of disloyal and cynical behaviour.
Where do the people learn all this from?
Just check out how our political leaders treat the people with disdain. They demand obedience and good behaviour from everyone, while reserving for themselves a different set of standards. They do not need to explain anything to anyone, and certainly do not need to account for their mistakes. An excellent example of such elitist behaviour is exhibited by Teo Ho Pin, the Mayor of North West District. Several of our town councils have lost a lot of money speculating in Wall Street toxic products. We wonder when he's going to explain, and whether he sees the need to explain anything to anyone.
This elitist attitude has filtered into the mainstream and has become part of the ugly Singaporean culture. Why do we have maids, and why do so many Singaporeans treat them as slaves and servants? Singapore children order their maids around because they see their parents behave as such.
Thus, Singapore bosses, with their access to cheaper foreign labour will not want to cultivate "local talents". These "local talents", on the other hand, do not see the need to be loyal and to stick around and provide long-term service. We end up with a vicious cycle of disloyal and cynical behaviour.
Where do the people learn all this from?
Just check out how our political leaders treat the people with disdain. They demand obedience and good behaviour from everyone, while reserving for themselves a different set of standards. They do not need to explain anything to anyone, and certainly do not need to account for their mistakes. An excellent example of such elitist behaviour is exhibited by Teo Ho Pin, the Mayor of North West District. Several of our town councils have lost a lot of money speculating in Wall Street toxic products. We wonder when he's going to explain, and whether he sees the need to explain anything to anyone.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
When people dare not speak freely and honestly
Who would dare to give open and honest feedback? He and his father just sued the IHT for a piece that the pair said libelled / defamed them, although it is not clear how or why the piece was libellous. When the powerful no longer wants to hear or listen, and prevents real information from moving up, society starts to rot from within. People resort to poision letters, anonymous writings and online campaigns because they cannot speak freely and openly. PM Lee's complaint about people using the Internet to provide feedback as well as lobby positions is one of Singapore's own unique making. Why should they reveal themselves when he and his supporters will find ways to punish honest feedback?
STRAITS TIMES
March 28, 2010
Yes to feedback, no to pressure campaigns: PM
By Sue-Ann Chia, Senior Political Correspondent
The Government welcomes honest public feedback on policies and issues, but is wary of online campaigns that pressure leaders to take certain actions, said PM Lee Hsien Loong yesterday.
One such campaign took place recently regarding the sizzling property market. A flood of e-mail messages called on the Government to lower property prices, and threatened to withdraw support for the ruling party at the next general election if this was not done.
The e-mail messages, sent to many recipients in and outside government, were 'well-written and cogently argued', obviously by someone with knowledge of the property market, said Mr Lee.
But the identities of the writers proved to be fake. They included names of grassroots leaders purportedly from Yio Chu Kang and Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, but these people did not exist.
In the case of one who did, he was Chinese-educated and could not have written the letter. Said Mr Lee, to laughter: 'We were a bit suspicious, because the language was excellent. There was no use of Singlish.' He was speaking at a dialogue with about 100 active contributors to the Government's feedback arm, Reaching Everyone for Active Citizenry@Home (Reach).
'I do not know who was behind this campaign, but this was clearly not a straightforward effort to give the Government honest feedback. Rather, it was a covert attempt to pressure the Government, perhaps for personal benefit,' he said.
He added: 'We must expect to see such astroturfing campaigns from time to time, and learn to assess online content critically and carefully.'
Astroturfing refers to campaigns where the originators hide behind the scenes so as to give the impression the campaign is spontaneous.
As such campaigns distort the real picture of public sentiment, the volume of e-mail messages sent to the Government on a particular issue cannot be what determines its decision, Mr Lee noted.
He cited the Association of Women for Action and Research leadership tussle last year as another example. He had received many e-mail messages from the opposing camps during that time.
Many of the messages were identical, and obviously cut and pasted from the same template. They marked an organised campaign to lobby the Government to back one side against the other, Mr Lee said.
While highlighting the dark side of the online world, Mr Lee also credited Reach with finding innovative ways to engage Singaporeans online, such as via networking sites Facebook and Twitter. These channels are in addition to offline platforms like face-to-face dialogues.
Last year, Reach received almost 27,000 inputs, mainly from the Internet. There was a 28 per cent jump in online feedback.
The more insightful comments often come from the People's Forum members who give their real names, noted Mr Lee.
'It is not a surprise as contributors who give their true identities and hence have to stand up for their views take more care to make sure their points are factual, well argued and helpful,' he said.
Yesterday, Reach gave out awards to five active contributors who made suggestions on issues ranging from engaging young people to improving the health-care system. 'They have often been critical of government policies. But their well-intended, well-considered, well-expressed views are much appreciated by the Government,' Mr Lee said.
The award recipients were SingTel's senior manager Lim Siang Hwa, 38; relief teacher Soh Yida, 21; engineering consultancy Meinhardt Singapore's senior site quantity surveyor Lai Chee Fan, 60; Thye Hua Kwan Hospital's head of rehabilitation Sinha Shekhar, 40; and retiree Raymond Lo, 71.
'The award recognises the importance of the role ordinary Singaporeans like me play in building our democratic society,' said Mr Lim.
STRAITS TIMES
March 28, 2010
Yes to feedback, no to pressure campaigns: PM
By Sue-Ann Chia, Senior Political Correspondent
The Government welcomes honest public feedback on policies and issues, but is wary of online campaigns that pressure leaders to take certain actions, said PM Lee Hsien Loong yesterday.
One such campaign took place recently regarding the sizzling property market. A flood of e-mail messages called on the Government to lower property prices, and threatened to withdraw support for the ruling party at the next general election if this was not done.
The e-mail messages, sent to many recipients in and outside government, were 'well-written and cogently argued', obviously by someone with knowledge of the property market, said Mr Lee.
But the identities of the writers proved to be fake. They included names of grassroots leaders purportedly from Yio Chu Kang and Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, but these people did not exist.
In the case of one who did, he was Chinese-educated and could not have written the letter. Said Mr Lee, to laughter: 'We were a bit suspicious, because the language was excellent. There was no use of Singlish.' He was speaking at a dialogue with about 100 active contributors to the Government's feedback arm, Reaching Everyone for Active Citizenry@Home (Reach).
'I do not know who was behind this campaign, but this was clearly not a straightforward effort to give the Government honest feedback. Rather, it was a covert attempt to pressure the Government, perhaps for personal benefit,' he said.
He added: 'We must expect to see such astroturfing campaigns from time to time, and learn to assess online content critically and carefully.'
Astroturfing refers to campaigns where the originators hide behind the scenes so as to give the impression the campaign is spontaneous.
As such campaigns distort the real picture of public sentiment, the volume of e-mail messages sent to the Government on a particular issue cannot be what determines its decision, Mr Lee noted.
He cited the Association of Women for Action and Research leadership tussle last year as another example. He had received many e-mail messages from the opposing camps during that time.
Many of the messages were identical, and obviously cut and pasted from the same template. They marked an organised campaign to lobby the Government to back one side against the other, Mr Lee said.
While highlighting the dark side of the online world, Mr Lee also credited Reach with finding innovative ways to engage Singaporeans online, such as via networking sites Facebook and Twitter. These channels are in addition to offline platforms like face-to-face dialogues.
Last year, Reach received almost 27,000 inputs, mainly from the Internet. There was a 28 per cent jump in online feedback.
The more insightful comments often come from the People's Forum members who give their real names, noted Mr Lee.
'It is not a surprise as contributors who give their true identities and hence have to stand up for their views take more care to make sure their points are factual, well argued and helpful,' he said.
Yesterday, Reach gave out awards to five active contributors who made suggestions on issues ranging from engaging young people to improving the health-care system. 'They have often been critical of government policies. But their well-intended, well-considered, well-expressed views are much appreciated by the Government,' Mr Lee said.
The award recipients were SingTel's senior manager Lim Siang Hwa, 38; relief teacher Soh Yida, 21; engineering consultancy Meinhardt Singapore's senior site quantity surveyor Lai Chee Fan, 60; Thye Hua Kwan Hospital's head of rehabilitation Sinha Shekhar, 40; and retiree Raymond Lo, 71.
'The award recognises the importance of the role ordinary Singaporeans like me play in building our democratic society,' said Mr Lim.
Elite likes wasteful sport like motor-racing
Today, they were making a big deal about 'Earth Hour', asking everyone to switch off their lights to "save the planet". At the same time, they're planning to promote motor sports. This is a wasteful sport, only intended for the elite. Get several fast cars and bikes to zoom around the racing track. Waste fuel and create greenhouse gases.
As always, the decadent elite double talks. Say one thing, do the exact opposite. The decadent elite has another important characteristic: they never see the contradiction of their actions vs their word. That's why they stay in power. They're hopelessly hyprocritical. It's in the blood.
---------------------------
Mar 27, 2010
STRAITS TIMES: Promoting racing
Minister says permanent race track key to motorsports' success
By Leonard Lim
SG CHANGI is proposing a year-round calendar of events at the Motorsports Hub to make it a vibrant destination that will appeal to both racing and non-racing fans. Among the top international races it is hoping to bring in are:
MotoGP
Motorcycling's version of Formula One
Japan Super GT Series
A grand touring car series, involving makes like the BMW Z4, Porsche 911 GT3, Subaru Legacy and Mazda RX-7
Formula Nippon
The top level of single-seater racing in Japan
Asia Festival of Speed series
The continent's premier motorsports event, it comprises several series such as Formula BMW Pacific, and moves to different circuits around Asia
THE permanent race track at the Changi Motorsports Hub, which will be ready by late next year, is crucial to Singapore's strategy to promote the sport.
The Formula One night race might be the crown jewel in the country's motorsports calendar, but to Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, it is just the first step.
At a press conference yesterday to announce SG Changi consortium as the winner for the Hub project, he said: 'We want to promote and anchor motorsports in Singapore.'
And to smiles from local racers Ivan Lim and Melvin Choo, and Singapore Motor Sports Association president Tan Teng Lip, he added: 'In order to do that, you need to have a local facility where our own people can gain access to at least an FIA Grade 2 track.'
An International Automobile Federation Grade 2 track can host any motor race except F1.
Dr Balakrishnan pointed to several factors that helped SG Changi trump bids from Sports Services (backed by public-listed Haw Par Corporation) and Singapore Agro Agriculture after a year-long tender process.
They were: An innovative and flexible track design which lets the 3.7km layout be split in half, thus allowing for two races to be staged simultaneously; the quality of the international and local events to be brought in, and the group's financial strength and viability.
SG Changi, which has former owner of Jurong Kart World Thia Yoke Kian as one of four directors, will finance, build and manage the facility for 30 years. The 41ha site near the Singapore Airshow grounds will cost about $330 million - $50million more than originally estimated - because of hikes in construction costs.
The Hub will also include a 1.2km go-karting track, which will allow youngsters to get their first taste of racing. The only operational karting track here presently is the 750m Kartright Speedway in Jurong. F1 stars like Lewis Hamilton all started out in go-karts.
Said Choo, who will make his debut in the Japan Super GT next weekend in Okayama: 'A permanent circuit is the most important step in building a local motorsports scene. I'm sure we'll have our own racing series, which will provide a platform for sponsors to get involved.'
Growing the motorsports industry is also high on the Government's agenda. DrBalakrishnan said: 'It's not just buying and selling cars, but also the technology behind the cars, the way you can modify or use it in ways which are effective and safe.'
The Hub will have space for car workshops and businesses selling equipment like helmets. A grandstand for 20,000 spectators, a three-star hotel, garages and food and beverage outlets will also be catered for.
Construction is expected to begin in about three months, once the requisite paperwork is completed. SG Changi has secured funding in the form of bank loans and equity, said Thia. 'If costs rise, we have secured about 15 per cent more than already budgeted,' he added.
Still, there are worries that the project could be hobbled by delays like the $1.87billion Sports Hub, which lacked funding owing to the financial crisis.
But Dr Balakrishnan noted this was a 'different ball game', with fewer stakeholders, and regulatory and financial complexities. He said: 'I'm hoping that there'll be no undue delays. We'll now help facilitate all their approvals for building permits and the rest of it.'
As always, the decadent elite double talks. Say one thing, do the exact opposite. The decadent elite has another important characteristic: they never see the contradiction of their actions vs their word. That's why they stay in power. They're hopelessly hyprocritical. It's in the blood.
---------------------------
Mar 27, 2010
STRAITS TIMES: Promoting racing
Minister says permanent race track key to motorsports' success
By Leonard Lim
SG CHANGI is proposing a year-round calendar of events at the Motorsports Hub to make it a vibrant destination that will appeal to both racing and non-racing fans. Among the top international races it is hoping to bring in are:
MotoGP
Motorcycling's version of Formula One
Japan Super GT Series
A grand touring car series, involving makes like the BMW Z4, Porsche 911 GT3, Subaru Legacy and Mazda RX-7
Formula Nippon
The top level of single-seater racing in Japan
Asia Festival of Speed series
The continent's premier motorsports event, it comprises several series such as Formula BMW Pacific, and moves to different circuits around Asia
THE permanent race track at the Changi Motorsports Hub, which will be ready by late next year, is crucial to Singapore's strategy to promote the sport.
The Formula One night race might be the crown jewel in the country's motorsports calendar, but to Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, it is just the first step.
At a press conference yesterday to announce SG Changi consortium as the winner for the Hub project, he said: 'We want to promote and anchor motorsports in Singapore.'
And to smiles from local racers Ivan Lim and Melvin Choo, and Singapore Motor Sports Association president Tan Teng Lip, he added: 'In order to do that, you need to have a local facility where our own people can gain access to at least an FIA Grade 2 track.'
An International Automobile Federation Grade 2 track can host any motor race except F1.
Dr Balakrishnan pointed to several factors that helped SG Changi trump bids from Sports Services (backed by public-listed Haw Par Corporation) and Singapore Agro Agriculture after a year-long tender process.
They were: An innovative and flexible track design which lets the 3.7km layout be split in half, thus allowing for two races to be staged simultaneously; the quality of the international and local events to be brought in, and the group's financial strength and viability.
SG Changi, which has former owner of Jurong Kart World Thia Yoke Kian as one of four directors, will finance, build and manage the facility for 30 years. The 41ha site near the Singapore Airshow grounds will cost about $330 million - $50million more than originally estimated - because of hikes in construction costs.
The Hub will also include a 1.2km go-karting track, which will allow youngsters to get their first taste of racing. The only operational karting track here presently is the 750m Kartright Speedway in Jurong. F1 stars like Lewis Hamilton all started out in go-karts.
Said Choo, who will make his debut in the Japan Super GT next weekend in Okayama: 'A permanent circuit is the most important step in building a local motorsports scene. I'm sure we'll have our own racing series, which will provide a platform for sponsors to get involved.'
Growing the motorsports industry is also high on the Government's agenda. DrBalakrishnan said: 'It's not just buying and selling cars, but also the technology behind the cars, the way you can modify or use it in ways which are effective and safe.'
The Hub will have space for car workshops and businesses selling equipment like helmets. A grandstand for 20,000 spectators, a three-star hotel, garages and food and beverage outlets will also be catered for.
Construction is expected to begin in about three months, once the requisite paperwork is completed. SG Changi has secured funding in the form of bank loans and equity, said Thia. 'If costs rise, we have secured about 15 per cent more than already budgeted,' he added.
Still, there are worries that the project could be hobbled by delays like the $1.87billion Sports Hub, which lacked funding owing to the financial crisis.
But Dr Balakrishnan noted this was a 'different ball game', with fewer stakeholders, and regulatory and financial complexities. He said: 'I'm hoping that there'll be no undue delays. We'll now help facilitate all their approvals for building permits and the rest of it.'
Elites' boneheaded understanding of 'competition'
Singapore's elite class has a narrow one-track understanding of competition. They divide themselves arbitrarily into two or three groups, and compete to see who comes out on top. Unfortunately, they don't think of the nation or the people they're supposed to serve. This selfish, narrow competition produces only one result: a race to the bottom as one bunch of scholars competes against another to score points. The end game is about getting promotion and earning big bonuses, and yes, screw the people.
This week, we saw some excellent examples of the stupidity of Singapore's elite class competing against each other in the mistaken notion that it will prove their 'merit'.
1. Sheng Shiong has moved to raise rental of stalls at five wet markets by 30% which they recently bought from the govt for $25million. As various people had warned, it was only a matter of time before the supermarket group would turn the screws on stallholders and, yes, consumers, by raising rents. The government was completely deaf when the people protested the sale, and are are now acting dumb because they pretend not to know and do not want to answer any questions.
2. No World Cup, thanks to the incompetence of SingTel, Starhub and the idiots at the MDA. They succeeded in putting Singapore in a position for FIFA to demand a high fee for telecasts of live matches.
3. The EPL made record profits, thanks to Singtel's willingess to overpay for overseas TV rights for 2010-13. Singapore viewers eneded up paying a huge sum to coninue watching EPL matches. Singtel tried to cast doubts on the accuracy of the reports, but let's face it, who do you trust? Singtel or your rising bills for the right to watch live games?
These are three recent examples of an elite that no longer understands the meaning of service. They live in their own dream world, away from regular people as they're completely sheltered by their high pay and trappings of power. A society goes into decline when its elite becomes increasingly self-serving. We're seeing more and more of this in Singapore's case.
This week, we saw some excellent examples of the stupidity of Singapore's elite class competing against each other in the mistaken notion that it will prove their 'merit'.
1. Sheng Shiong has moved to raise rental of stalls at five wet markets by 30% which they recently bought from the govt for $25million. As various people had warned, it was only a matter of time before the supermarket group would turn the screws on stallholders and, yes, consumers, by raising rents. The government was completely deaf when the people protested the sale, and are are now acting dumb because they pretend not to know and do not want to answer any questions.
2. No World Cup, thanks to the incompetence of SingTel, Starhub and the idiots at the MDA. They succeeded in putting Singapore in a position for FIFA to demand a high fee for telecasts of live matches.
3. The EPL made record profits, thanks to Singtel's willingess to overpay for overseas TV rights for 2010-13. Singapore viewers eneded up paying a huge sum to coninue watching EPL matches. Singtel tried to cast doubts on the accuracy of the reports, but let's face it, who do you trust? Singtel or your rising bills for the right to watch live games?
These are three recent examples of an elite that no longer understands the meaning of service. They live in their own dream world, away from regular people as they're completely sheltered by their high pay and trappings of power. A society goes into decline when its elite becomes increasingly self-serving. We're seeing more and more of this in Singapore's case.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Political reform crucial for Singapore
CATEGORY: Semi-fiction, commentary.
Singapore must take the path of political reform if the country is to achieve full modernisation by the end of this decade.
This, in a gist, is one of the observations - a striking one indeed - made in the 2010 Report on Singapore's Modernisation by the prestigious Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS).
The report generated much discussion and debate among netizens after it was published in late January.
Singapore's remarkable economic success in the past 30 years is well known and well documented. It has given rise to praises from some quarters about the superiority of the 'Singapore model'.
But the CAS report has some sobering reminders.
'Unless Singapore embarks on reform in its basic political system, its chances of achieving full-scale modernisation by the end of this century is next to zero,' the report said.
The author of the report, Professor He Chuanqi, said at its launch in Beijing that given the experience of the modernisation process over the last 300 years, if Singapore followed the same path as others, its chances of achieving modernisation could be as low as 4 per cent. Worse, if it did not wipe out feudalism, the entire modernisation process could be derailed.
He attributed the low probability to various factors: Singapore's docile population, regional imbalances, income disparity, resource depletion, environmental degradation and lagging political reform.
'Once weighting is assigned to each of these factors, one arrives at a very low probability,' he said.
Prof He, the director of the Centre for Modernisation Research at the CAS, is a foremost authority on the subject.
He heads a research group which has put out the Singapore Modernisation Report every year since 2001.
Prof He said that Singapore's modernisation over the past 160 years was characterised by industrial development and no attention was paid to systemic and conceptual changes.
'This is our weakness and its negative impact would become an important factor in derailing the modernisation process.'
However, if Singapore could work out a different developmental path as well as reform its political system, then the chances of hitting the 2100 modernisation target would be increased to about 30 per cent, according to Prof He.
The CAS project studies the modernisation process over the last 300 years to find out how best Singapore can achieve it.
It developed 138 indicators to measure advancement in political, economic, social, cultural, environmental and human development, and examined 130 nations between 1700 and 2000.
It defines modernisation as having reached 'the world's top 20 positions' by these indicators. Countries ranked 21 to 45 are medium-developed, 46 to 80 are primary-developed and the rest are undeveloped.
The report said that in 2006, Singapore was ranked 70 among 130 nations. It should be in the top 60 by 2020, the top 40 by 2050 and the top 20 by 2100.
According to these indicators and Singapore's actual performance in 2000, the CAS study concluded that by 2050, Singapore will attain a medium-level of modernisation.
Singapore must take the path of political reform if the country is to achieve full modernisation by the end of this decade.
This, in a gist, is one of the observations - a striking one indeed - made in the 2010 Report on Singapore's Modernisation by the prestigious Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS).
The report generated much discussion and debate among netizens after it was published in late January.
Singapore's remarkable economic success in the past 30 years is well known and well documented. It has given rise to praises from some quarters about the superiority of the 'Singapore model'.
But the CAS report has some sobering reminders.
'Unless Singapore embarks on reform in its basic political system, its chances of achieving full-scale modernisation by the end of this century is next to zero,' the report said.
The author of the report, Professor He Chuanqi, said at its launch in Beijing that given the experience of the modernisation process over the last 300 years, if Singapore followed the same path as others, its chances of achieving modernisation could be as low as 4 per cent. Worse, if it did not wipe out feudalism, the entire modernisation process could be derailed.
He attributed the low probability to various factors: Singapore's docile population, regional imbalances, income disparity, resource depletion, environmental degradation and lagging political reform.
'Once weighting is assigned to each of these factors, one arrives at a very low probability,' he said.
Prof He, the director of the Centre for Modernisation Research at the CAS, is a foremost authority on the subject.
He heads a research group which has put out the Singapore Modernisation Report every year since 2001.
Prof He said that Singapore's modernisation over the past 160 years was characterised by industrial development and no attention was paid to systemic and conceptual changes.
'This is our weakness and its negative impact would become an important factor in derailing the modernisation process.'
However, if Singapore could work out a different developmental path as well as reform its political system, then the chances of hitting the 2100 modernisation target would be increased to about 30 per cent, according to Prof He.
The CAS project studies the modernisation process over the last 300 years to find out how best Singapore can achieve it.
It developed 138 indicators to measure advancement in political, economic, social, cultural, environmental and human development, and examined 130 nations between 1700 and 2000.
It defines modernisation as having reached 'the world's top 20 positions' by these indicators. Countries ranked 21 to 45 are medium-developed, 46 to 80 are primary-developed and the rest are undeveloped.
The report said that in 2006, Singapore was ranked 70 among 130 nations. It should be in the top 60 by 2020, the top 40 by 2050 and the top 20 by 2100.
According to these indicators and Singapore's actual performance in 2000, the CAS study concluded that by 2050, Singapore will attain a medium-level of modernisation.
Good governance is for all firms (except for Temasek, GIC and town councils): Pillay
CATEGORY: Double Standards
This advice applies only to businesses owned and operated by non-elites. Temasek Holdings, GIC, their subsidiaries and town councils are exempt from any form of governance.
Business Times - 20 Mar 2010
Good governance is for all firms: Pillay
SMEs should start the process even before they seek a public listing
By LYNETTE KHOO
(Singapore)
SMALL and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) should start the process of good governance early even before they are listed, says SGX chairman JY Pillay.
This will give them the opportunity to adapt and evolve best practices to suit their business needs, instead of having inappropriate cookie-cutter practices thrust upon them.
'Whatever the circumstance, governance is pertinent to every enterprise, whether new, growing or stable, or even contracting,' Mr Pillay said. 'Governance applies to the entire spectrum of companies, listed or not.'
He was the speaker at the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce & Industry's Distinguished Speakers Lecture Series yesterday, addressing some 200 professionals and entrepreneurs.
While capital-raising via initial public offering or secondary fund-raising is a distinct financing option for SMEs, Mr Pillay stressed that capital markets should not be regarded as a 'no-strings attached piggy bank' and urged SMEs to use the Code of Corporate Governance as a guide, practise it within the company before seeking a listing.
Listings on Catalist - which caters to fast-growing companies - and its predecessor Sesdaq raised $751 million from 2005 to 2009. 'In return for access to primary and secondary fund-raising, listed companies are required to adopt prudent business practices to fulfil their accountability to shareholders,' said Mr Pillay.
These practices include the appointment of independent directors, sound remuneration practices, robust internal controls, and effective shareholder communication but he admitted that 'these are areas where SMEs may experience some discomfort'. For one, SMEs may not always have the resources to grasp the finer details of corporate governance. While they are not bogged down by layers of bureaucracy, the strong leadership of their founders may dominate the board and management.
'Those forceful leaders must learn how to blend that edge with appropriate governance practices that, among other requirements, obliges them to institute checks and balances,' Mr Pillay said. He noted that the SCCCI could play a crucial role in instilling good corporate governance among its members.
In response, SCCCI chairman of research and public committee Seow Choke Meng said that this was a wake-up call for the chamber, which has the largest membership of SMEs here. About 75 per cent of its 4,000 corporate members are SMEs.
'The chamber is in full agreement and will certainly look at how we can help our SME members to acquire (governance) practices,' Mr Seow, who is also SPH executive vice-president of administration division, Times Properties cum Cultural Industry Promotion, and Chinese newspapers division, told reporters. SCCCI could work with the Singapore Institute of Directors (SID) or academic institutions to provide programmes for its members.
On that note, the SID has tied up with the Singapore Management University to offer professional training and certification for directors, with its first batch of participants to graduate this month. SID can also assist in identifying suitable independent directors, a resource that is available to SMEs.
This advice applies only to businesses owned and operated by non-elites. Temasek Holdings, GIC, their subsidiaries and town councils are exempt from any form of governance.
Business Times - 20 Mar 2010
Good governance is for all firms: Pillay
SMEs should start the process even before they seek a public listing
By LYNETTE KHOO
(Singapore)
SMALL and medium-size enterprises (SMEs) should start the process of good governance early even before they are listed, says SGX chairman JY Pillay.
This will give them the opportunity to adapt and evolve best practices to suit their business needs, instead of having inappropriate cookie-cutter practices thrust upon them.
'Whatever the circumstance, governance is pertinent to every enterprise, whether new, growing or stable, or even contracting,' Mr Pillay said. 'Governance applies to the entire spectrum of companies, listed or not.'
He was the speaker at the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce & Industry's Distinguished Speakers Lecture Series yesterday, addressing some 200 professionals and entrepreneurs.
While capital-raising via initial public offering or secondary fund-raising is a distinct financing option for SMEs, Mr Pillay stressed that capital markets should not be regarded as a 'no-strings attached piggy bank' and urged SMEs to use the Code of Corporate Governance as a guide, practise it within the company before seeking a listing.
Listings on Catalist - which caters to fast-growing companies - and its predecessor Sesdaq raised $751 million from 2005 to 2009. 'In return for access to primary and secondary fund-raising, listed companies are required to adopt prudent business practices to fulfil their accountability to shareholders,' said Mr Pillay.
These practices include the appointment of independent directors, sound remuneration practices, robust internal controls, and effective shareholder communication but he admitted that 'these are areas where SMEs may experience some discomfort'. For one, SMEs may not always have the resources to grasp the finer details of corporate governance. While they are not bogged down by layers of bureaucracy, the strong leadership of their founders may dominate the board and management.
'Those forceful leaders must learn how to blend that edge with appropriate governance practices that, among other requirements, obliges them to institute checks and balances,' Mr Pillay said. He noted that the SCCCI could play a crucial role in instilling good corporate governance among its members.
In response, SCCCI chairman of research and public committee Seow Choke Meng said that this was a wake-up call for the chamber, which has the largest membership of SMEs here. About 75 per cent of its 4,000 corporate members are SMEs.
'The chamber is in full agreement and will certainly look at how we can help our SME members to acquire (governance) practices,' Mr Seow, who is also SPH executive vice-president of administration division, Times Properties cum Cultural Industry Promotion, and Chinese newspapers division, told reporters. SCCCI could work with the Singapore Institute of Directors (SID) or academic institutions to provide programmes for its members.
On that note, the SID has tied up with the Singapore Management University to offer professional training and certification for directors, with its first batch of participants to graduate this month. SID can also assist in identifying suitable independent directors, a resource that is available to SMEs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)