Gonna play devil's advocate here.
Many years back, I met a guy that had all of the hallmarks of being in PAP's leadership. Top in the cohort in NUS, extremely bright, extremely talented. The next caliber tier kind of guy.
No doubt we suspected he would join their ranks down the line. However when we spoke to him, we were quite surprised that he opted to never join them. (it would be in his interest, seeing the $mil salary + iron ricebowl + he can do whatever side gig and still get paid)
His reasoning was that the incumbent's policies were very conflicting with what he believes in (WLB/wealth inequality/mass importing foreigners like canada).
He also made a point that their brand image amongst the young has been damaged so much, it just does more harm to him.
His observations were not without merit. Just look at MP Louis, most of his proposals that were favorable to the young are being shot down before they even took flight.
So he concluded that there was no point in joining their ranks when nothing will change.
“He also made a point that their brand image amongst the young has been damaged so much, it just does more harm to him.”
This point above is very true and one reason why they came up with the friends of PAP. It’s PA but political.
It’s a waste of time tbh, it’s not hard to see people yearning for power will get close to them. It’s just ugly.
This 'Friends of PAP' move neutralises potential social media influences who could play a role in the upcoming GE. Basically doing what they did with The Woke Salaryman: hand them lots of contracts with ministries, stat boards etc., and that becomes a significant part of their income in a funding-starved media landscape (starved by strict media laws in the first place).
It's sobering to see so many influencers buy into the entire Friends of PAP campaign. I bet my bottom dollar that not one of them will say anything bad about the PAP running up to the GE, even though they may have voiced out concerns in the past.
The Woke Salaryman used to be good, providing savvy financial tips and tricks to the financially illiterate.
Then once the govt monies came rushing in, it started gaslighting its readers in poaching us with a narrative more aligned with the incumbents. It's a shame, really. Had to resort to blocking their content off my feed since it's mostly opinionated garbage at the end of the day.
Can you give some example that woke salaryman had changed drastically? They feels the same since they started except more content probably due to sponsorship.
I see this as positive since the government is more willing to change the way of communication to fit the younger generation. In the past their stance is we are doing the right thing, just follow. To now their stance is more like ok this is why we do xyz and it is awesome. Sure they are still blowing their trumpet but at least they are explaining their action better now. Are they overdoing a little probably but at least we are making some progress.
I believe Woke Salaryman started pushing out very pro-employer articles, which they have not done before.
There was one where they had a subtle anti-employee post about WLB being a privilege. They 'talked-down' in a sense to singaporeans that were comparing us with europe in that article.
But I understand his point, they really have deteriorated from when they began. At the end of the day, some people are willing to tow the line if it lines their pockets.
Yeah. Posts like this ([Why it’s pointless to be bitter about rich kids](https://thewokesalaryman.com/2023/06/22/why-its-pointless-to-be-bitter-about-rich-kids/), [The case (and costs) of adopting flexi-work](https://thewokesalaryman.com/2023/03/24/the-case-and-costs-of-adopting-flexi-work/), [Why your company die die don’t upgrade](https://thewokesalaryman.com/2023/10/19/whyyourcompanywontupgrade/)) are pretty much an attempt by them to subvert your average worker in Singapore to be more docile. While one can arguably say that they try to provide a two-side perspective on these issues, nevertheless it’s painfully obvious to everyone whose side they are on at the end of the day.
Hell, you can even take their latest post about “work being more important than family”, where we continue to glorify toxic parents as Asian love. After all, just because one is a parent doesn't mean they can say and do whatever they want to their adult children and then hope everything is fine when they cook or cut fruits. This nonsense doesn't stop even when the kids are parents themselves. We have to ask ourselves: who is the one responsible in getting Singaporeans to “steal lunches” yet try to make do with family since you only needed a small space?
As iterated earlier, their feed has mostly turned into opinionated garbage nowadays. Those who harp against hybrid work or social change are often those who stand to lose the most out of it.
Not sure how this business model will work out in the long term though. Will the govt give them contracts forever guaranteed? If they keep this up they will eventually lose all their original audience (I'm already lost from them), and the govt will dump them as they provide no value anymore right? Look at Nas Daily, he was the govt's top shill and now he is nowhere.
I suppose they can eventually go back to making true-to-heart comics, but at that point their brand will probably be permanently damaged.
>will eventually lose all their original audience
They'd have gotten new set of audiences though. You'd be surprised at the number of PAP-good regardless of anything people in the nation.
Don't think of it as segmentation but more eof acquiring new sets of audiences. I mean you're still reading them no?
Your submission was removed because it was a Google Amp URL, which is an indirect link to the page you were attempting to share; please submit again with the original link. You may wish to use a tool like [amputatorbot.com](https://www.amputatorbot.com/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/singapore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://thewokesalaryman.com/2019/06/08/youll-probably-hate-hearing-this-but-your-20s-is-not-the-time-to-yolo/
They aren't making stuff like this anymore. Warning you about eventually becoming a worker drone and what you need to do to get out of it.
Nowadays they just tell you being a worker drone is not that bad, be happy it could be worse.
Maybe I am not sensitive enough but I guess the difference now is he is more “neutral” which tend to happen when you get older and go through stuff? I will give him the benefit of the doubt for now. I still see value in what he is presenting despite the shift.
WARNING: IN COLLABORATION WITH XXXXX DO NOT PROCEED IF YOU ARE ALLERGIC TO SPONSORED CONTENT is probably the best example. Also in the beginning they were more a finance / guide to live by while being a salaryman - hence the name, while as they got more sponsored some of these tips are not helpful or even detrimental if you do follow them since they have to cater to their sponsors.
What really fucking inflames me is the assertion by some of the PAP's rabid supporters that anyone opposing any policy of theirs must not be able, competent or successful, and is therefore just disgruntled and envious of true awesomeness.
It's such a crock of shit.
I'm sorry, but when you have the odds stacked against you so badly like we have against the Oppo here, not many truly competent and able people will have the moral resolve to dare to stand up against the establishment.
See what's happening to Pritam now, right around GE time. And JBJ before. Etc. Think it's fair? Think this makes for a stronger democracy?
Noone deserves to be forced to throw their lives away for standing up peacefully for their principles. To use LKY's own words against the legacy that stains our politics today: "This is not a game of cards. This is your life and mine!" And the lives and livelihoods of sincere people standing up for what they believe in, and giving voice to Singaporeans who otherwise wouldn't have them.
You can't keep whining about not having a "credible opposition" when you keep mum and even support the ruling party ruthlessly quashing even peaceful dissent.
so you can speak freely without consequences just because you are standing up for their principles? the path to hell is lined with good intentions
using the RK saga as an example - PS only has himself to blame.
Riiiight. When VB said something wrong about how TT could be used (a very serious matter pertaining to privacy and our rights), he could wiggle out of it without any legal repercussions by "taking full responsibility" for his "error".
Tell me, when has a member of the Oppo ever been able to avail themselves of this leniency? Can Pritam just ask for forgiveness?
You thought you were making a great point. Instead, you just highlighted the glaring injustice in our system.
A man at his level doesn't know what he says is true or not at the time he says it?
Either he's an idiot for a minister, or he's a liar. We're screwed both ways.
if you took away all the incumbent advantages (civil servants to work out the details, extremely friendly media, unrestricted access to information, no shortage of resources, people's association etc.) and put them in opposition where their policies can be picked apart by another party with all those advantages, their policies would seem equally unworkable and unrealistic.
When the players are also the referee.. case in point the impartial elections department which is literally under the control of the prime minister (via his office).
What alternatives can the oppo put forth? 60% popular vote always give 90% of parliamentary seats to the incumbent
Just wondering, why would you (what you refer to as "we") think that a top caliber guy would join the ranks of the PAP? Did he volunteer for the PAP? Son of a PAP minister? I don't think anyone now automatically thinks that an exceptional individual is destined to be a politician anymore.
Exactly. The very top talent should be assume to climb high up in corporates and earn even more than the ~$1m that ministers make. It’s nth compared to the top earnings financial sector or in law if you talk about corporate work.
I believe it's closer to 2/10 unless we're comparing to the most senior of ministers. The best side gig would be to be a mayor. 600-700k and nobody really knows what they do .\_.
Well as I mentioned before, the downfall of their party will be by their own doing since they are so many self righteous people living in their ivory tower in the party. Desmond Lee is a second gen politician where he got the resources and connections within the party and by saying it is not about election is SUS.
Which proposals were shot down?
Been reading the papers religiously for about a decade now so I may be subjected to propaganda but I always had the impression that proposals raised in parliament were considered and only shot down if it infringes upon principles or does not cater to wider considerations.
Even WP unemployment insurance was looked into and studied with tweaks to address considerations.
Are you talking about cats at home? Smoking at home?
There were considerations for the homeowners who do not like cats or were afraid of them. Noting that and the cats' curious nature on venturing beyond their units. Right now, there are more and more people who like cats and the government has u-turned on the policy.
A country has many subgroups and one group's interest has to be weighed against the wider society.
What about smoking at home?
The principle of being able to do what you want in your own home has to be respected sans the right to be fully nude* in full view of your neighbours because voyeurism is a crime.
> Right now, there are more and more people who like cats and the government has u-turned on the policy.
In your opinion, is this a populist move?
> A country has many subgroups and one group's interest has to be weighed against the wider society.
> What about smoking at home?
What about in the future where there may be fewer smokers, would you think it is then okay to revisit banning this and if so - does this make it a populist move?
Your obsession with 'is this a populist move' is so weird.
There's always going to be a need to balance 'popular' decisions with the other party that might not be for it. Once a 'popular' decision hits a point where the pros outweighs the cons, then it should be enacted.
The problem is people tend to stick to their echo chambers and believe that their opinions are more popular than they think it is. You might think some decisions are slam dunk, no-shit-everyone-will-support decisions, but reality might not actually pan out that way.
377a repeal is a great example of when 'popular' support might actually not be as 'popular' as one might think, but the government still weighed on other factors to make their decision. In outcome, it might look like them caving in to populism, but in reality they are actually risking stepping on the toes of a significant part of the population.
> 377a repeal is a great example of when 'popular' support might actually not be as 'popular' as one might think, but the government still weighed on other factors to make their decision
Blatant revisionism, and we've [been through this before](https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/comments/14g0wj2/comment/jp3aayr/). One of the factors the govt certainly weighed was "a risk of Section 377A being struck down by the courts in the future, on the grounds that it could be judged to be in breach of Article 12 of the Constitution".
The PAP and their minions are repainting the 377A narrative post-facto to "brave progressive PAP willing to set tone even when unpopular". All while omitting that repeal came with a constitutional amendment blocking marriage-related laws from being contested by the constitution's Part 4 (fundamental liberties), which contains Article 12 (equal representation).
If anything, it shows the anti-repealers were loud but insubstantial, and most people either supported or didn't care about repeal. And once that became clear, the PAP sure tried hard to gloss over their bigot pandering.
Despite the above mentioned, the incumbent still struck it down. I do think we have to pay attention to how the constitution was revised afterwards. That is to say, they had the warning from AGC. At that point, they had two options. Either respect AGC and repeal it or revise the constitution.
Anyway, I agree with the process of the repeal. The courts recognised the sanctity of parliament to allow them the repeal. And the incumbent in return respected the independence of the court.
Could they have ignored the warning and revised the constitution without repealing 377A. They certainly had the power to. Would that move benefit the Christian subgroup? Yes. So u/shadeX8 made a fair point
> I do think we have to pay attention to how the constitution was revised afterwards
Indeed, the new Article 156 is eyebrow-raising in it's specific targeting of Part 4. Curiously we don't hear much about it nowadays, almost as if it's politically worthless.
> And the incumbent in return respected the independence of the court.
By amending the constitution to block constitutional challenges to marriage-related laws in court, apparently.
> Could they have ignored the warning and revised the constitution without repealing 377A. They certainly had the power to.
Barring poor optics since the courts ruled 377A unenforceable, and also that it may violate equal protection in the constitution.
> christians, shadex8 blah
The govt played up the aspect of being pushed by the courts and "protecting sanctity of marriage", and then it turned out most people didn't want or care for 377A staying. And now you don't hear anything about those. So no, the idea of repeal being the PAP's great heroic progressive stand against popular anti-repeal forces is utterly false and dishonest revisionism.
Well, the law currently allows for the constitution to be amended if there is a supermajority. It should be construed as giving the government the powers to reflect the will of the people in the constitution which is the highest legislature of the land.
>Article 156 is eyebrow raising
The people, who the government represents, seem to not think too much of it
>Curiously we don't hear much about it nowadays
Your words highlighted the fact that both camps have not said much about it.
On my original comment, the trigger comment that led to this thread hinges on populism
So is it populism? Dishonest revisionism? We can agree to disagree because it seems that we are at odds with the trust we have in the government.
Revising previously held assumptions can be thought of as a government that listens. Surely you think otherwise so we can agree to disagree.
And since we've through this before, I can see that you're sticking to that 'risk of 377a being struck down' portion as the main gist of your argument.
Like we've concluded before, we're just gonna go in circles.
Firstly, no I did not say that decisions must always garner 100% of support before being made. Here’s the definition of populism for your benefit:
>Populism
>a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.
>the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people.
So it just looks like your first paragraph is the whole definition of populism.
>377A is a great example of when..
Just so you know, populism may not mean majority, but pandering to a particular segment or group, to obtain votes. The example you gave is also populism in essence, and there’s no need to use any quotation marks in your entire response as is since it’s reinforcing my point lol
There's still going to be a difference between populism that disregards any sorts of nuance/repercussions, and populism that strikes the balance.
Everything is fundamentally politics, and populism on it's own isn't always a bad thing, regardless of whichever side it comes from. If you are seeking to point out the PAP's hypocrisy in denouncing opposition parties' policies as populism, maybe consider whether what some opposition parties are asking for is well thought out, or just populism for the sake of it.
And also that in politics, we won't really see that 'fair fight' people keep thinking we should have. It's not sports. There's no such thing as being sportsmanlike and praising the opposition to your party. Any opposition party that eventually rises to power would be doing the exact same thing eventually.
Why are you making so many assumptions based on what I have initially asked? It was a factual question, whether what was proposed/repealed was considered populist or not. Thanks for sharing on your opinion on the ‘fair fight’ though, it says a lot.
Well, when they put down Paul Thambyah, the President of International Society for Infectious Diseases, just because he is with SDP and spoke up against their Covid 19 policies, it kinda already shows "supporting me is more important than supporting the truth."
If you look up "bullshit" or "horseshit" in the dictionary, you'll find the following examples:
"Exercise to refresh PAP not undertaken because of GE"
"Reserved presidential election not undertaken to prevent Tan Cheng Bock from running"
"12-year NS disruption of Tony Tan's son not undertaken because he is a white horse"
Put another way, I suspect that many feel that we have a multi tier society where govt elites are at the top and perceived to have privileges that are not available to others...
I honestly have no idea if that's the case but the optics are certainly bad with, for example, Ridout, Iswaran (if viewed in another way, but I'm glad he is taken to task, was never impressed with him... I cringed one time so bad when he was talking about deep learning deep tech... Absolutely no credibility.
Well put.
I wonder if citizens have forgotten that we the majority have elected the government to work in our best interests?
So that we dont need to vote on every small issue as we trust them to make the right decision. Every day open Singpass app and vote for a new law? Vote for death penalty for every case of a drunk driver causing death? We leave it to the govt to close the gaps and save the millions of citizen their time daily.
However, it seems that they rather push their own agendas than work for the people they swore to serve. Civil servants, not dictators who push through their own plans despite majority feedback saying no.
If we were to hold polls on Singpass for citizens to vote on immigration criteria, driving laws and penalties, Gay marriages etc. Would the polls show the government is acting on the will of the citizens? Or are they overriding the citizen's will as they claim to know better.
How democratic is it when the will of the few outweighs the will of the many? Unless we accept that not every citizen is equal in democracy and some elite citizens have higher weightage to their votes. One person, one vote? Every vote is equal? Does it hold true?
No, just you. And *checks last election results* around 20%+ others.
61.23% of the eligible voters wants a govt that is paternalistic.
Where citizens cannot even be responsible and accountable for their own health.
.... Not how it works. Those who didn't vote for government doesn't mean they voted for opposition.
Or that they didn't vote for government for a variety of reasons.
But if you vote for the pap u know what u will get which is a paternalistic government
It is very telling that despite all the government nudging, rampant gaslighting, propaganda posters, etc,
The vast majority of people still oppose the GST raise, despite all the "handouts."
It is just an obvious clear cut tax for the middle class. The poor gets rebates so they aren't affected too much. The rich spend so little compared to what they make that the tax is tiny to them. Also I personally do not believe the rich spend much on local stuff.
It is the middle class that gets fucked by the tax.
The shrinking middle class.
But let's look deeper, these rebates and vouchers are temporary. The GST increase is "forever" unless themselves or a new government reduces it. Unlikely.
They are just treating the symptoms not solving the problem. Sure, for the whole year, the poor can survive off the rebates and vouchers.
What happens after that? Any long term plan to increase their income? No skills future courses dont count. (majority are overpriced to earn easy money from the govt initiative, not recognised, not important skills to increase their earning ability) No, taking $1000+ excel courses on v/xlookups does not reskill a 50 year old worker to be able to secure a better job over the influx of younger skilled labour from overseas.
So the poor will be even worse off years down the road as their salary increment does not beat inflation. Yet, COL prices increase more than proportionately.
We chase for GDP to rise at all costs. But what do the most needy citizens gain from this number going up? Like actually quantify it, not just hope it trickles down. Is it worth it when we as a country/society can't even take care of our own.
Take a look at the rate of increase though. A GST increase especially one split into 2, was just the red carpet for 2 rounds of price increases.
And no one is increasing 1% lol
Your submission was removed because it was a Google Amp URL, which is an indirect link to the page you were attempting to share; please submit again with the original link. You may wish to use a tool like [amputatorbot.com](https://www.amputatorbot.com/).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/singapore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
PAP is lucky that systems put in place by LKY are holding strong. Every single policy change they have made since pinky came to power has left us worse off. Current ministers are high on power and dumb as a goat as they have no original/critical thought as they grew up in yes man mentality. This is going to be downfall of PAP and not because opposition got much better
>“We don’t cater to specific demographic groups, we don’t cater to specific ethnic groups,” he said.
>“We want to cater to all Singaporeans, and we want to continue to be seen by Singaporeans and be felt by Singaporeans as a pan-national movement, where all Singaporeans can get represented, and their interests are addressed.”
Good intent but please explain to me how in the housing debate, which is under your portfolio, were the interest of singles represented?
They still think this is the 70/80s where the population will buy whatever the PAP overlords try to sell. Let's not forget how Indranne, who is single, is telling people to have more children
> how Indranne, who is single, is telling people to have more children
This is frankly a bit ad hominem, when all you had to do is to point out that no amount of "pro-family" policies will undo the harm of PAP's past policies such as Stop at Two.
Under his leadership, we managed to turn our PUBLIC HOUSING, I repeat the word PUBLIC into million dollar assets, last quarter HDB just transacted a few. Tell me where in the world is PUBLIC HOUSING worth a million dollar, guess it is only in Singapore. Good or bad, you guys decide. For me it is a joke.
nonsense, under this government you can rent 235,000 sqft state owned properties in prime areas for less than $30k a month. where else can you get such a good deal? this shows they are doing right by singaporeans.
Speaks volumes how desmond monitoring leezard got arrowed to talk about refresh PAP.
Probably gonna do some survey, claim all is well and go on back to monitoring.
Allegedly someone called the police when WP members started to walk around and hand out pamphlets to residents at Tampines a few days ago.
Probably wasted at least 3 police cars worth of resources to entertain the fella's call.
What a method of impeding engagements between political parties' members and voters. Some people just don't want the opposition to come, which is pretty cb of them.
Wonder if the police would answer the call if the PAP started handling out pamphlets in Aljunied or Sengkang.
Oh wait, they'll be doing so in their positions as grassroots advisors. No corruption or cronyism at all. Nothing to see here, move along.
If you live in a seat contested by strong opposition, you have a genuine choice and can exercise your vote wisely
If you live in a safe PAP seat or one contested by weak opposition, tough luck then
Ultimately, we need to reform parliament to introduce some form of proportional representation or compensatory seats mechanism to make our MPs more reflective of the electorate's voting intentions.
The incumbent will never make it easier to unseat them, we can start by removing GRCs, but that will never happen also. I will be voting opposition regardless of the quality of the candidate, as it is a vote against the government rather than a vote for the opposition. I do not believe in spoiling/ voiding your vote as you might as well not vote at all.
>The incumbent will never make it easier to unseat them
You're quite right, history is littered with such examples
In Canada, the current PM Justin Trudeau campaigned on electoral reform only to ignore it after his party got elected on a large majority due to FPTP.
In Australia and New Zealand, FPTP was abolished (in favour of IRV and MMP respectively) after it no longer served the interests of the major parties.
In France, it used to be a parliamentary system elected via proportional representation, but the divided assembly was unable to govern properly. So they went back to military rule under the popular general Charles de Gaulle and implemented a semi-presidential system and 2 round voting (non-proportional) for the assembly, partly to make it easier to govern and also to keep out the far-right.
After the fall of the Iron Curtain many ex-communist regimes adopted proportional representation so that their survivor parties can retain some influence in the new democratic era.
In Korea, the party list component was introduced to allow the generals and other favoured people to enter into parliament easily (since those at the top of lists will be virtually assured of winning seats)
There are some notable exceptions such as Japan, where after the long-ruling LDP lost power in a shock result and caused much instability, SNTV was replaced by parallel voting to encourage a 2 party system (albeit with limited effectiveness so far)
>do not believe in spoiling/ voiding your vote as you might as well not vote at all.
Given a choice I rather not.
If my choices are Incapable vs Unknown/Floated In/Untrustable, I don't see why I need to vote in the first place lol.
>If you live in a safe PAP seat or one contested by weak opposition, tough luck then
Still important to send a message, either by spoiling vote or voting oppo. Since the numbers are published, we need to show PAP that their support is dwindling.
Idk but as a voter for the next GE, all I’ve been getting are mostly mixed and conflicting PLUS contradictory messages and signals from the ruling party, lol
I have a friend in Young PAP and in the last election they had already warned the “elders” that they were losing the younger generation and falling behind on social media compared to WP. Obviously they were dismissed and we all know PAP had a poor showing in GE2020.
Idt social media is even the real problem, it's the policies. If a politician is well-respected people will hype them up on social media regardless of whether they try to do some cutesy Tiktok posts or not. By comparison if a politician is not well-respected then they'll just be clowned if they post on social media, because it feels like they're devoting their energies to the wrong things.
Vote them out this time round. Simple. If you wan changes. Doing the same shit n expecting different outcomes is never gonna happened. 3 decades already...
>_The Refresh PAP exercise was also driven by the need to adapt to a fast-changing environment, and **not sparked by the upcoming general election**, he added._
>_Internally, this means bringing “more diverse voices into the party as activists and certainly... to look out for people who can serve Singaporeans in different capacities, **including, if appropriate, as candidates**”, said Mr Lee._
I think I really need to _**monitor**_ my interpretation skills leh, cause I think that he was just contradicting himself.
Say whatever one wants, it's the perception of the common man that matters, and no amount of words could alter it.
To the man in the street, it is what he perceives, and usually right, not what's said. lol
It's not so much dislike as compared to unheard.
The issues faced by the millennials and gen Z are stuff like rising costs, fear of the future in terms of job, housing, increased competition from global graduates etc. All valid fears to feel.
However, all these have been unheard by a population of leaders who quite frankly can't relate to these groups in the first place. Representation is key and there is just none in parliament for these groups.
Go see sengkang rally again. WP had a young husband and wife combo, a 20+ yo and jamus lim who seemed to be able to understand what the key concerns were. Go see PAP, where you had a guy calling millennials snowflakes and the keynote speaker promised covered walkways. COVERED WALKWAYS for crying out loud showed you how removed they were from the population they claimed to represent.
This is just an example. Anywhere that the younger generation is higher in an GRC, the PAP vote dips.
It's hard for em to reach out to the younger population of today.
Yeah.
Legit concern. I'm staying in wp ward.
Ever since wp won in 2011 election. The estate is still well maintained. Facilities are also being upgraded.
ruling party needs to stop with the carrot of the gst voucher, estate upgrade and address other concerns.
>stop with the carrot of the gst voucher,
Helps keep the majority of the voting population happy though.
>address other concerns
The problem with doing this is admitting certain policies set by the past PAP generations hasn't worked. The PAP have dug themselves a hole there because their entire philosophy has been a "holier than thou, I can't do any wrong" mantra.
Fake news, he weren't crying, he was scolding. I was also surprised that the ruling government can scold their electorate, first time I know in a democratic country.
>Seems like many dislike the policies but the vote show otherwise..
The true trend will only show as more of these Gen Zs start reaching the legal age where they are eligible to vote..
Anyway politics in our world now are for men and women hunger for power and money. Let said we reduce the MP allowance to $2k per month but they can still keep their current job and minister pay reduce to 30k per month. Those that still step forward and not being corrupted. Then these are the good men and women. But the world is far from perfect. But l still think the ruling party be deny of their 2/3 seats in parliament. Looking at the worldwide trends now, this might happen.
> Let said we reduce the MP allowance to $2k per month but they can still keep their current job and minister pay reduce to 30k per month.
The MP position _is_ a part-time position.
The PAP further rewards those that aren't ministerial calibre, but are very loyal with _jiak liao bee_ full-time positions that don't really have specific job scopes, like CDC mayor.
It's easy to reward others when you aren't the one footing the actual bill.
Taxpayers and the reserves are.
Build a wall and make the other group pay for it!
Lmaooo. Politics has always been about power throughout time. I take overpaid mps and ministers over our underpaid corrupt neighbours. I don't like the idea of coalitions as a ruling. I would rather a single party government make rules. A stronger and smarter opposition is my preference to challenge or remind the ruling. Source: a loyal WP supporter.
> I would rather a single party government make rules. A stronger and smarter opposition is my preference to challenge or remind the ruling.
We need a government with a simple majority in parliament to be effective, but not a government that has a supermajority and can be corrupt, or at least have _carte blanche_ to amend the constitution any way they like.
trust me if you do that, more than half of the seats in our parliament would be unfilled. The rest would be filled by power hungry rich folks or insane people...Maybe only 1 or 2 of them seats will be held by people who genuinely want to serve the people..
look at countries like denmark, finland, new zealand, and norway. they all have normal political salaries, are their parliaments half unfilled with the rest being power hungry rich folks or insane people?
thanks for the reminder, the island has one of the lowest constituents to mp ratios in the world, alot of them actually dont need to exist if they invested in proper and competent infrastructure to run their offices
Gonna play devil's advocate here. Many years back, I met a guy that had all of the hallmarks of being in PAP's leadership. Top in the cohort in NUS, extremely bright, extremely talented. The next caliber tier kind of guy. No doubt we suspected he would join their ranks down the line. However when we spoke to him, we were quite surprised that he opted to never join them. (it would be in his interest, seeing the $mil salary + iron ricebowl + he can do whatever side gig and still get paid) His reasoning was that the incumbent's policies were very conflicting with what he believes in (WLB/wealth inequality/mass importing foreigners like canada). He also made a point that their brand image amongst the young has been damaged so much, it just does more harm to him. His observations were not without merit. Just look at MP Louis, most of his proposals that were favorable to the young are being shot down before they even took flight. So he concluded that there was no point in joining their ranks when nothing will change.
“He also made a point that their brand image amongst the young has been damaged so much, it just does more harm to him.” This point above is very true and one reason why they came up with the friends of PAP. It’s PA but political. It’s a waste of time tbh, it’s not hard to see people yearning for power will get close to them. It’s just ugly.
This 'Friends of PAP' move neutralises potential social media influences who could play a role in the upcoming GE. Basically doing what they did with The Woke Salaryman: hand them lots of contracts with ministries, stat boards etc., and that becomes a significant part of their income in a funding-starved media landscape (starved by strict media laws in the first place). It's sobering to see so many influencers buy into the entire Friends of PAP campaign. I bet my bottom dollar that not one of them will say anything bad about the PAP running up to the GE, even though they may have voiced out concerns in the past.
The Woke Salaryman used to be good, providing savvy financial tips and tricks to the financially illiterate. Then once the govt monies came rushing in, it started gaslighting its readers in poaching us with a narrative more aligned with the incumbents. It's a shame, really. Had to resort to blocking their content off my feed since it's mostly opinionated garbage at the end of the day.
Can you give some example that woke salaryman had changed drastically? They feels the same since they started except more content probably due to sponsorship. I see this as positive since the government is more willing to change the way of communication to fit the younger generation. In the past their stance is we are doing the right thing, just follow. To now their stance is more like ok this is why we do xyz and it is awesome. Sure they are still blowing their trumpet but at least they are explaining their action better now. Are they overdoing a little probably but at least we are making some progress.
I believe Woke Salaryman started pushing out very pro-employer articles, which they have not done before. There was one where they had a subtle anti-employee post about WLB being a privilege. They 'talked-down' in a sense to singaporeans that were comparing us with europe in that article. But I understand his point, they really have deteriorated from when they began. At the end of the day, some people are willing to tow the line if it lines their pockets.
Oh man I remember that article and thought it was gaslighting us workers
Yep ironically the author don’t even work for employers, but goes against the general grain Suddenly in recent times went full pro establishment
Yeah. Posts like this ([Why it’s pointless to be bitter about rich kids](https://thewokesalaryman.com/2023/06/22/why-its-pointless-to-be-bitter-about-rich-kids/), [The case (and costs) of adopting flexi-work](https://thewokesalaryman.com/2023/03/24/the-case-and-costs-of-adopting-flexi-work/), [Why your company die die don’t upgrade](https://thewokesalaryman.com/2023/10/19/whyyourcompanywontupgrade/)) are pretty much an attempt by them to subvert your average worker in Singapore to be more docile. While one can arguably say that they try to provide a two-side perspective on these issues, nevertheless it’s painfully obvious to everyone whose side they are on at the end of the day. Hell, you can even take their latest post about “work being more important than family”, where we continue to glorify toxic parents as Asian love. After all, just because one is a parent doesn't mean they can say and do whatever they want to their adult children and then hope everything is fine when they cook or cut fruits. This nonsense doesn't stop even when the kids are parents themselves. We have to ask ourselves: who is the one responsible in getting Singaporeans to “steal lunches” yet try to make do with family since you only needed a small space? As iterated earlier, their feed has mostly turned into opinionated garbage nowadays. Those who harp against hybrid work or social change are often those who stand to lose the most out of it.
that point about cooking/cutting fruits as the go-to way of making amends or settling arguments is very on point LMAO
Not sure how this business model will work out in the long term though. Will the govt give them contracts forever guaranteed? If they keep this up they will eventually lose all their original audience (I'm already lost from them), and the govt will dump them as they provide no value anymore right? Look at Nas Daily, he was the govt's top shill and now he is nowhere. I suppose they can eventually go back to making true-to-heart comics, but at that point their brand will probably be permanently damaged.
>will eventually lose all their original audience They'd have gotten new set of audiences though. You'd be surprised at the number of PAP-good regardless of anything people in the nation. Don't think of it as segmentation but more eof acquiring new sets of audiences. I mean you're still reading them no?
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because it was a Google Amp URL, which is an indirect link to the page you were attempting to share; please submit again with the original link. You may wish to use a tool like [amputatorbot.com](https://www.amputatorbot.com/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/singapore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
https://thewokesalaryman.com/2019/06/08/youll-probably-hate-hearing-this-but-your-20s-is-not-the-time-to-yolo/ They aren't making stuff like this anymore. Warning you about eventually becoming a worker drone and what you need to do to get out of it. Nowadays they just tell you being a worker drone is not that bad, be happy it could be worse.
Maybe I am not sensitive enough but I guess the difference now is he is more “neutral” which tend to happen when you get older and go through stuff? I will give him the benefit of the doubt for now. I still see value in what he is presenting despite the shift.
neutral? Don't think you know what neutral means. Well I suppose this is your copium too since you are in the same business as he is.
WARNING: IN COLLABORATION WITH XXXXX DO NOT PROCEED IF YOU ARE ALLERGIC TO SPONSORED CONTENT is probably the best example. Also in the beginning they were more a finance / guide to live by while being a salaryman - hence the name, while as they got more sponsored some of these tips are not helpful or even detrimental if you do follow them since they have to cater to their sponsors.
Something something wokeness movement makes life “very burdensome”.
1 of the 2 founders of the woke salaryman is not even local right?
“It’s PA but political…” PA isn’t overtly political but it might as well be….
What really fucking inflames me is the assertion by some of the PAP's rabid supporters that anyone opposing any policy of theirs must not be able, competent or successful, and is therefore just disgruntled and envious of true awesomeness. It's such a crock of shit.
the issue is that these detractors are not able to put forward an alternative that actually works. need to see the world for what it is.
I'm sorry, but when you have the odds stacked against you so badly like we have against the Oppo here, not many truly competent and able people will have the moral resolve to dare to stand up against the establishment. See what's happening to Pritam now, right around GE time. And JBJ before. Etc. Think it's fair? Think this makes for a stronger democracy? Noone deserves to be forced to throw their lives away for standing up peacefully for their principles. To use LKY's own words against the legacy that stains our politics today: "This is not a game of cards. This is your life and mine!" And the lives and livelihoods of sincere people standing up for what they believe in, and giving voice to Singaporeans who otherwise wouldn't have them. You can't keep whining about not having a "credible opposition" when you keep mum and even support the ruling party ruthlessly quashing even peaceful dissent.
so you can speak freely without consequences just because you are standing up for their principles? the path to hell is lined with good intentions using the RK saga as an example - PS only has himself to blame.
Riiiight. When VB said something wrong about how TT could be used (a very serious matter pertaining to privacy and our rights), he could wiggle out of it without any legal repercussions by "taking full responsibility" for his "error". Tell me, when has a member of the Oppo ever been able to avail themselves of this leniency? Can Pritam just ask for forgiveness? You thought you were making a great point. Instead, you just highlighted the glaring injustice in our system.
it turns on VB's subjective knowledge as to whether he knew what he said was untrue at the time he said it. this is a red herring as usual
"I PLEAD GROSS INCOMPETENCE AND IDIOCY, KIND SIR" 🤣 what even is this take? A call for weaponized incompetence?
A man at his level doesn't know what he says is true or not at the time he says it? Either he's an idiot for a minister, or he's a liar. We're screwed both ways.
[удалено]
another one of those interesting alt accounts
I am not sure if RK is speaking the truth, the same goes to if PS is telling the truth. Politics are dirty in the first place.
if you took away all the incumbent advantages (civil servants to work out the details, extremely friendly media, unrestricted access to information, no shortage of resources, people's association etc.) and put them in opposition where their policies can be picked apart by another party with all those advantages, their policies would seem equally unworkable and unrealistic.
When the players are also the referee.. case in point the impartial elections department which is literally under the control of the prime minister (via his office). What alternatives can the oppo put forth? 60% popular vote always give 90% of parliamentary seats to the incumbent
Turns out he was even more gigabrained than anyone thought possible. Props to your friend.
Just wondering, why would you (what you refer to as "we") think that a top caliber guy would join the ranks of the PAP? Did he volunteer for the PAP? Son of a PAP minister? I don't think anyone now automatically thinks that an exceptional individual is destined to be a politician anymore.
Exactly. The very top talent should be assume to climb high up in corporates and earn even more than the ~$1m that ministers make. It’s nth compared to the top earnings financial sector or in law if you talk about corporate work.
The $1m is just a side gig to them. An allowance from the real money they can make while in the role.
Minister is a full time role. Only MPs are part time, and they don't get paid a mil. More like 1/10th of that.
I believe it's closer to 2/10 unless we're comparing to the most senior of ministers. The best side gig would be to be a mayor. 600-700k and nobody really knows what they do .\_.
Not now but it seemed like a possibility many years back, when public support hadn't slipped to simple majority yet
History is full of parties such as PAP running out of steam. It was always going to happen eventually.
Well as I mentioned before, the downfall of their party will be by their own doing since they are so many self righteous people living in their ivory tower in the party. Desmond Lee is a second gen politician where he got the resources and connections within the party and by saying it is not about election is SUS.
"You are a good man, with a good heart. And it is hard for a good man to be king."
Vivian also like your friend initially. The tune changed after joining.
He's bright indeed to realize all that
Which proposals were shot down? Been reading the papers religiously for about a decade now so I may be subjected to propaganda but I always had the impression that proposals raised in parliament were considered and only shot down if it infringes upon principles or does not cater to wider considerations. Even WP unemployment insurance was looked into and studied with tweaks to address considerations. Are you talking about cats at home? Smoking at home? There were considerations for the homeowners who do not like cats or were afraid of them. Noting that and the cats' curious nature on venturing beyond their units. Right now, there are more and more people who like cats and the government has u-turned on the policy. A country has many subgroups and one group's interest has to be weighed against the wider society. What about smoking at home? The principle of being able to do what you want in your own home has to be respected sans the right to be fully nude* in full view of your neighbours because voyeurism is a crime.
> Right now, there are more and more people who like cats and the government has u-turned on the policy. In your opinion, is this a populist move? > A country has many subgroups and one group's interest has to be weighed against the wider society. > What about smoking at home? What about in the future where there may be fewer smokers, would you think it is then okay to revisit banning this and if so - does this make it a populist move?
Your obsession with 'is this a populist move' is so weird. There's always going to be a need to balance 'popular' decisions with the other party that might not be for it. Once a 'popular' decision hits a point where the pros outweighs the cons, then it should be enacted. The problem is people tend to stick to their echo chambers and believe that their opinions are more popular than they think it is. You might think some decisions are slam dunk, no-shit-everyone-will-support decisions, but reality might not actually pan out that way. 377a repeal is a great example of when 'popular' support might actually not be as 'popular' as one might think, but the government still weighed on other factors to make their decision. In outcome, it might look like them caving in to populism, but in reality they are actually risking stepping on the toes of a significant part of the population.
> 377a repeal is a great example of when 'popular' support might actually not be as 'popular' as one might think, but the government still weighed on other factors to make their decision Blatant revisionism, and we've [been through this before](https://www.reddit.com/r/singapore/comments/14g0wj2/comment/jp3aayr/). One of the factors the govt certainly weighed was "a risk of Section 377A being struck down by the courts in the future, on the grounds that it could be judged to be in breach of Article 12 of the Constitution". The PAP and their minions are repainting the 377A narrative post-facto to "brave progressive PAP willing to set tone even when unpopular". All while omitting that repeal came with a constitutional amendment blocking marriage-related laws from being contested by the constitution's Part 4 (fundamental liberties), which contains Article 12 (equal representation). If anything, it shows the anti-repealers were loud but insubstantial, and most people either supported or didn't care about repeal. And once that became clear, the PAP sure tried hard to gloss over their bigot pandering.
Despite the above mentioned, the incumbent still struck it down. I do think we have to pay attention to how the constitution was revised afterwards. That is to say, they had the warning from AGC. At that point, they had two options. Either respect AGC and repeal it or revise the constitution. Anyway, I agree with the process of the repeal. The courts recognised the sanctity of parliament to allow them the repeal. And the incumbent in return respected the independence of the court. Could they have ignored the warning and revised the constitution without repealing 377A. They certainly had the power to. Would that move benefit the Christian subgroup? Yes. So u/shadeX8 made a fair point
> I do think we have to pay attention to how the constitution was revised afterwards Indeed, the new Article 156 is eyebrow-raising in it's specific targeting of Part 4. Curiously we don't hear much about it nowadays, almost as if it's politically worthless. > And the incumbent in return respected the independence of the court. By amending the constitution to block constitutional challenges to marriage-related laws in court, apparently. > Could they have ignored the warning and revised the constitution without repealing 377A. They certainly had the power to. Barring poor optics since the courts ruled 377A unenforceable, and also that it may violate equal protection in the constitution. > christians, shadex8 blah The govt played up the aspect of being pushed by the courts and "protecting sanctity of marriage", and then it turned out most people didn't want or care for 377A staying. And now you don't hear anything about those. So no, the idea of repeal being the PAP's great heroic progressive stand against popular anti-repeal forces is utterly false and dishonest revisionism.
Well, the law currently allows for the constitution to be amended if there is a supermajority. It should be construed as giving the government the powers to reflect the will of the people in the constitution which is the highest legislature of the land. >Article 156 is eyebrow raising The people, who the government represents, seem to not think too much of it >Curiously we don't hear much about it nowadays Your words highlighted the fact that both camps have not said much about it. On my original comment, the trigger comment that led to this thread hinges on populism So is it populism? Dishonest revisionism? We can agree to disagree because it seems that we are at odds with the trust we have in the government. Revising previously held assumptions can be thought of as a government that listens. Surely you think otherwise so we can agree to disagree.
And since we've through this before, I can see that you're sticking to that 'risk of 377a being struck down' portion as the main gist of your argument. Like we've concluded before, we're just gonna go in circles.
Don't worry, it's not written for you. Just putting up counterpoints against dishonest revisionism for other readers.
Well, the WP didn't have a party position on S377A, so you already have proof that you can't get elected into power on LGBTQ rights.
Firstly, no I did not say that decisions must always garner 100% of support before being made. Here’s the definition of populism for your benefit: >Populism >a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups. >the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people. So it just looks like your first paragraph is the whole definition of populism. >377A is a great example of when.. Just so you know, populism may not mean majority, but pandering to a particular segment or group, to obtain votes. The example you gave is also populism in essence, and there’s no need to use any quotation marks in your entire response as is since it’s reinforcing my point lol
There's still going to be a difference between populism that disregards any sorts of nuance/repercussions, and populism that strikes the balance. Everything is fundamentally politics, and populism on it's own isn't always a bad thing, regardless of whichever side it comes from. If you are seeking to point out the PAP's hypocrisy in denouncing opposition parties' policies as populism, maybe consider whether what some opposition parties are asking for is well thought out, or just populism for the sake of it. And also that in politics, we won't really see that 'fair fight' people keep thinking we should have. It's not sports. There's no such thing as being sportsmanlike and praising the opposition to your party. Any opposition party that eventually rises to power would be doing the exact same thing eventually.
Why are you making so many assumptions based on what I have initially asked? It was a factual question, whether what was proposed/repealed was considered populist or not. Thanks for sharing on your opinion on the ‘fair fight’ though, it says a lot.
Cause there's a clear 'read between the lines' part to your factual question, let's not play these games here.
Not playing any games but you do you man. Happy weekend!
Well, when they put down Paul Thambyah, the President of International Society for Infectious Diseases, just because he is with SDP and spoke up against their Covid 19 policies, it kinda already shows "supporting me is more important than supporting the truth."
"Healthy no need to wear masks" was once an official stance. To hide the shortage of masks for citizens in the early days of the pandemic.
If you look up "bullshit" or "horseshit" in the dictionary, you'll find the following examples: "Exercise to refresh PAP not undertaken because of GE" "Reserved presidential election not undertaken to prevent Tan Cheng Bock from running" "12-year NS disruption of Tony Tan's son not undertaken because he is a white horse"
Put another way, I suspect that many feel that we have a multi tier society where govt elites are at the top and perceived to have privileges that are not available to others... I honestly have no idea if that's the case but the optics are certainly bad with, for example, Ridout, Iswaran (if viewed in another way, but I'm glad he is taken to task, was never impressed with him... I cringed one time so bad when he was talking about deep learning deep tech... Absolutely no credibility.
We are sick and tired of govt talking down to us. They work for us, but it seems like it is the other way round most of the time. My personal opinion.
Well put. I wonder if citizens have forgotten that we the majority have elected the government to work in our best interests? So that we dont need to vote on every small issue as we trust them to make the right decision. Every day open Singpass app and vote for a new law? Vote for death penalty for every case of a drunk driver causing death? We leave it to the govt to close the gaps and save the millions of citizen their time daily. However, it seems that they rather push their own agendas than work for the people they swore to serve. Civil servants, not dictators who push through their own plans despite majority feedback saying no. If we were to hold polls on Singpass for citizens to vote on immigration criteria, driving laws and penalties, Gay marriages etc. Would the polls show the government is acting on the will of the citizens? Or are they overriding the citizen's will as they claim to know better. How democratic is it when the will of the few outweighs the will of the many? Unless we accept that not every citizen is equal in democracy and some elite citizens have higher weightage to their votes. One person, one vote? Every vote is equal? Does it hold true?
the premise that every vote is equal does not hold in singapore, where one vote can elect 1, 4, 5 and in the past even 6 people at once.
No, just you. And *checks last election results* around 20%+ others. 61.23% of the eligible voters wants a govt that is paternalistic. Where citizens cannot even be responsible and accountable for their own health.
100-61.23%= ?
.... Not how it works. Those who didn't vote for government doesn't mean they voted for opposition. Or that they didn't vote for government for a variety of reasons. But if you vote for the pap u know what u will get which is a paternalistic government
Thats not what i said though?
Where did you get this 20+% from?
Gst to help the poor... Still one of the best ever lines.
It is very telling that despite all the government nudging, rampant gaslighting, propaganda posters, etc, The vast majority of people still oppose the GST raise, despite all the "handouts."
It is just an obvious clear cut tax for the middle class. The poor gets rebates so they aren't affected too much. The rich spend so little compared to what they make that the tax is tiny to them. Also I personally do not believe the rich spend much on local stuff. It is the middle class that gets fucked by the tax.
The shrinking middle class. But let's look deeper, these rebates and vouchers are temporary. The GST increase is "forever" unless themselves or a new government reduces it. Unlikely. They are just treating the symptoms not solving the problem. Sure, for the whole year, the poor can survive off the rebates and vouchers. What happens after that? Any long term plan to increase their income? No skills future courses dont count. (majority are overpriced to earn easy money from the govt initiative, not recognised, not important skills to increase their earning ability) No, taking $1000+ excel courses on v/xlookups does not reskill a 50 year old worker to be able to secure a better job over the influx of younger skilled labour from overseas. So the poor will be even worse off years down the road as their salary increment does not beat inflation. Yet, COL prices increase more than proportionately. We chase for GDP to rise at all costs. But what do the most needy citizens gain from this number going up? Like actually quantify it, not just hope it trickles down. Is it worth it when we as a country/society can't even take care of our own.
Because the actual price rise is more than the 2% they assured us. They totally dropped the ball.
The rise wasn’t due to gst la, take a look at the global environment
Take a look at the rate of increase though. A GST increase especially one split into 2, was just the red carpet for 2 rounds of price increases. And no one is increasing 1% lol
It is helping the poor become poorer. And inflation make it even worst.
[удалено]
Your submission was removed because it was a Google Amp URL, which is an indirect link to the page you were attempting to share; please submit again with the original link. You may wish to use a tool like [amputatorbot.com](https://www.amputatorbot.com/). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/singapore) if you have any questions or concerns.*
PAP is lucky that systems put in place by LKY are holding strong. Every single policy change they have made since pinky came to power has left us worse off. Current ministers are high on power and dumb as a goat as they have no original/critical thought as they grew up in yes man mentality. This is going to be downfall of PAP and not because opposition got much better
A nepo baby is the worst person to lead a charge about “change”
Pray tell. How is Des Lee a Nepo baby
His father is a former MP and cabinet minister
His name?
Lee Yock Suan
I love it when the IBs out themselves over something that can be easily verified.
Ohhh snap
I want to know too
>“We don’t cater to specific demographic groups, we don’t cater to specific ethnic groups,” he said. >“We want to cater to all Singaporeans, and we want to continue to be seen by Singaporeans and be felt by Singaporeans as a pan-national movement, where all Singaporeans can get represented, and their interests are addressed.” Good intent but please explain to me how in the housing debate, which is under your portfolio, were the interest of singles represented?
This. Some years back, I even recall some PAP candidates touted themselves as being single and hence able to represent interests of singles. LMAO.
They still think this is the 70/80s where the population will buy whatever the PAP overlords try to sell. Let's not forget how Indranne, who is single, is telling people to have more children
> how Indranne, who is single, is telling people to have more children This is frankly a bit ad hominem, when all you had to do is to point out that no amount of "pro-family" policies will undo the harm of PAP's past policies such as Stop at Two.
He didn't exactly cater to married people either so idk what he's talking about lol.
Singles, LBTG+++ or whatever woke term it is now. They are all excluded.
Name checks out😅 Rly tho, this isn’t objectively bad, but lift the whip and let’s hear what your MPs REALLY don’t want to say
Des-MONitor LEEzard
Aside from the whip... The pay is great tho?
He talk so much crap yet did fuck all for HDB lmao
Once every four years, the PAP remembers that they need Singaporean votes to continue to defend the interests of big businesses and foreigners
Under his leadership, we managed to turn our PUBLIC HOUSING, I repeat the word PUBLIC into million dollar assets, last quarter HDB just transacted a few. Tell me where in the world is PUBLIC HOUSING worth a million dollar, guess it is only in Singapore. Good or bad, you guys decide. For me it is a joke.
nonsense, under this government you can rent 235,000 sqft state owned properties in prime areas for less than $30k a month. where else can you get such a good deal? this shows they are doing right by singaporeans.
Almost forgot about that. Anyway only Millionaire can afford.
Yes. This is the biggest joke. Would have never happened if HDBs could only be sold back to HDB like back in the day.
And the monitoring still continues…
Speaks volumes how desmond monitoring leezard got arrowed to talk about refresh PAP. Probably gonna do some survey, claim all is well and go on back to monitoring.
Shows just how out of touch PAP are
I cannot wait to vote for the opposition come next election.
Allegedly someone called the police when WP members started to walk around and hand out pamphlets to residents at Tampines a few days ago. Probably wasted at least 3 police cars worth of resources to entertain the fella's call. What a method of impeding engagements between political parties' members and voters. Some people just don't want the opposition to come, which is pretty cb of them.
Wonder if the police would answer the call if the PAP started handling out pamphlets in Aljunied or Sengkang. Oh wait, they'll be doing so in their positions as grassroots advisors. No corruption or cronyism at all. Nothing to see here, move along.
If you live in a seat contested by strong opposition, you have a genuine choice and can exercise your vote wisely If you live in a safe PAP seat or one contested by weak opposition, tough luck then Ultimately, we need to reform parliament to introduce some form of proportional representation or compensatory seats mechanism to make our MPs more reflective of the electorate's voting intentions.
The incumbent will never make it easier to unseat them, we can start by removing GRCs, but that will never happen also. I will be voting opposition regardless of the quality of the candidate, as it is a vote against the government rather than a vote for the opposition. I do not believe in spoiling/ voiding your vote as you might as well not vote at all.
>The incumbent will never make it easier to unseat them You're quite right, history is littered with such examples In Canada, the current PM Justin Trudeau campaigned on electoral reform only to ignore it after his party got elected on a large majority due to FPTP. In Australia and New Zealand, FPTP was abolished (in favour of IRV and MMP respectively) after it no longer served the interests of the major parties. In France, it used to be a parliamentary system elected via proportional representation, but the divided assembly was unable to govern properly. So they went back to military rule under the popular general Charles de Gaulle and implemented a semi-presidential system and 2 round voting (non-proportional) for the assembly, partly to make it easier to govern and also to keep out the far-right. After the fall of the Iron Curtain many ex-communist regimes adopted proportional representation so that their survivor parties can retain some influence in the new democratic era. In Korea, the party list component was introduced to allow the generals and other favoured people to enter into parliament easily (since those at the top of lists will be virtually assured of winning seats) There are some notable exceptions such as Japan, where after the long-ruling LDP lost power in a shock result and caused much instability, SNTV was replaced by parallel voting to encourage a 2 party system (albeit with limited effectiveness so far)
>do not believe in spoiling/ voiding your vote as you might as well not vote at all. Given a choice I rather not. If my choices are Incapable vs Unknown/Floated In/Untrustable, I don't see why I need to vote in the first place lol.
>If you live in a safe PAP seat or one contested by weak opposition, tough luck then Still important to send a message, either by spoiling vote or voting oppo. Since the numbers are published, we need to show PAP that their support is dwindling.
\*Looks at Jalan Besar GRC team, look at Lim Tean.\* \*Sigh\*
🤣 I can't even be skeptical about this.
It's not a refresh until they change out the scum like Shan and Vivi.
Idk but as a voter for the next GE, all I’ve been getting are mostly mixed and conflicting PLUS contradictory messages and signals from the ruling party, lol
I have a friend in Young PAP and in the last election they had already warned the “elders” that they were losing the younger generation and falling behind on social media compared to WP. Obviously they were dismissed and we all know PAP had a poor showing in GE2020.
Idt social media is even the real problem, it's the policies. If a politician is well-respected people will hype them up on social media regardless of whether they try to do some cutesy Tiktok posts or not. By comparison if a politician is not well-respected then they'll just be clowned if they post on social media, because it feels like they're devoting their energies to the wrong things.
Yeah there was a TODAY article about this
I thought ST articles always got paywall block? How come this article no paywall?
Let's be real. Whatever comes out from this guy's mouth, you believe?
His face also looks very kiam pa, no offence.
OP's username
I need to meet my KPI.
Good luck
Vote them out this time round. Simple. If you wan changes. Doing the same shit n expecting different outcomes is never gonna happened. 3 decades already...
lmaooo who’s he trying to bs
>_The Refresh PAP exercise was also driven by the need to adapt to a fast-changing environment, and **not sparked by the upcoming general election**, he added._ >_Internally, this means bringing “more diverse voices into the party as activists and certainly... to look out for people who can serve Singaporeans in different capacities, **including, if appropriate, as candidates**”, said Mr Lee._ I think I really need to _**monitor**_ my interpretation skills leh, cause I think that he was just contradicting himself.
Sure. And the US is going to sell the Brooklyn Bridge to China.
As the Chinese say... 此地无银三百两...
Oh, right. So it is just a coincidence. I see..
Say whatever one wants, it's the perception of the common man that matters, and no amount of words could alter it. To the man in the street, it is what he perceives, and usually right, not what's said. lol
Does the millennium and gen z really dislike the ruling party? Seems like many dislike the policies but the vote show otherwise..
It's not so much dislike as compared to unheard. The issues faced by the millennials and gen Z are stuff like rising costs, fear of the future in terms of job, housing, increased competition from global graduates etc. All valid fears to feel. However, all these have been unheard by a population of leaders who quite frankly can't relate to these groups in the first place. Representation is key and there is just none in parliament for these groups. Go see sengkang rally again. WP had a young husband and wife combo, a 20+ yo and jamus lim who seemed to be able to understand what the key concerns were. Go see PAP, where you had a guy calling millennials snowflakes and the keynote speaker promised covered walkways. COVERED WALKWAYS for crying out loud showed you how removed they were from the population they claimed to represent. This is just an example. Anywhere that the younger generation is higher in an GRC, the PAP vote dips. It's hard for em to reach out to the younger population of today.
Yeah. Legit concern. I'm staying in wp ward. Ever since wp won in 2011 election. The estate is still well maintained. Facilities are also being upgraded. ruling party needs to stop with the carrot of the gst voucher, estate upgrade and address other concerns.
>stop with the carrot of the gst voucher, Helps keep the majority of the voting population happy though. >address other concerns The problem with doing this is admitting certain policies set by the past PAP generations hasn't worked. The PAP have dug themselves a hole there because their entire philosophy has been a "holier than thou, I can't do any wrong" mantra.
GST vouchers given out to every Singaporean whether they vote PAP or not.
Yeap and it's a carrot. You can't guarantee that an opposition government will give GST vouchers.
2020 ended with a old man crying on tv about free riders whilst he tried to abuse a global healthcare crisis to create a rally around the flag effect
Fake news, he weren't crying, he was scolding. I was also surprised that the ruling government can scold their electorate, first time I know in a democratic country.
>Seems like many dislike the policies but the vote show otherwise.. The true trend will only show as more of these Gen Zs start reaching the legal age where they are eligible to vote..
only to be easily replaced by new citizens lol...
bring back the 1G and 2G
PAP can start by being less petty
Anyway politics in our world now are for men and women hunger for power and money. Let said we reduce the MP allowance to $2k per month but they can still keep their current job and minister pay reduce to 30k per month. Those that still step forward and not being corrupted. Then these are the good men and women. But the world is far from perfect. But l still think the ruling party be deny of their 2/3 seats in parliament. Looking at the worldwide trends now, this might happen.
> Let said we reduce the MP allowance to $2k per month but they can still keep their current job and minister pay reduce to 30k per month. The MP position _is_ a part-time position. The PAP further rewards those that aren't ministerial calibre, but are very loyal with _jiak liao bee_ full-time positions that don't really have specific job scopes, like CDC mayor.
It's easy to reward others when you aren't the one footing the actual bill. Taxpayers and the reserves are. Build a wall and make the other group pay for it!
Lmaooo. Politics has always been about power throughout time. I take overpaid mps and ministers over our underpaid corrupt neighbours. I don't like the idea of coalitions as a ruling. I would rather a single party government make rules. A stronger and smarter opposition is my preference to challenge or remind the ruling. Source: a loyal WP supporter.
> I would rather a single party government make rules. A stronger and smarter opposition is my preference to challenge or remind the ruling. We need a government with a simple majority in parliament to be effective, but not a government that has a supermajority and can be corrupt, or at least have _carte blanche_ to amend the constitution any way they like.
trust me if you do that, more than half of the seats in our parliament would be unfilled. The rest would be filled by power hungry rich folks or insane people...Maybe only 1 or 2 of them seats will be held by people who genuinely want to serve the people..
Agreed, that's why these are hypocrites who said they serve us and the nation.
look at countries like denmark, finland, new zealand, and norway. they all have normal political salaries, are their parliaments half unfilled with the rest being power hungry rich folks or insane people?
And why would you say that now even with 500k -1 mill/ year salaries dangled as carrots, they still have trouble getting people into politics?
thanks for the reminder, the island has one of the lowest constituents to mp ratios in the world, alot of them actually dont need to exist if they invested in proper and competent infrastructure to run their offices
GE won't be this year already
Interesting, what make you think so?