 |
|
Sunday, January 28, 2007
Yeah, pretty much self-explanatory. This blog is now closed. I'll only be posting comments here, the tagboard or the last post to tie up loose ends, and I expect to be out of the blogosphere by the end of the week.
This isn't a last minute decision but something I've considered for
weeks, even months. For a long while now, my heart simply hasn't been
in it. I had a long chat with KTM over it and he reminded me at the
end of the day to ask myself - what am I doing this for? And more often
than not these days I find myself unable to answer that question.
Once I did this because I wanted to make others aware, to encourage
public discourse, to help people think. Today, I don't feel like you
all need any help from me in that department. I've seen the
blogosphere boom, and there are hundreds and hundreds of bloggers who
now post insightfully, astutely and with thought and passion. The good, the bad and the ugly have all crowded their way into the blogosphere, and I can see this in my readers -- more and more of the latter, perhaps. Most recently some have taken to being impostors, posting under my name. Others accuse me of posting under another name. Then of course, the name-callers and hecklers have never gone away. All this is going on when my identity is public. It puts me in a vulnerable position and makes it almost personal. And so the more I write, these days, the less I feel I'm helping others, and the more I feel I'm hurting myself.
Once, also, I wrote because I had something to say. I stumbled into blogging with passion behind my words. I wrote because I had to write, I couldn't be torn away from my laptop when I was in the middle of an article, I would be composing posts in my head in class, stopping by the computer lab during lunch breaks. These days, I feel physically sick when I visit my own blog. Do I still have something to say? Yes, plenty of things. But I might say them anonymously now, perhaps on some other blog in the future, under some pseudonym. Now I realise the benefits of using a pseudonym; not because of fear of being prosecuted, not so you can say things and 'hide' behind the name, but because when you use a pseudonym, there's just so few other distractions. You can be judged more on what you say, less on why you say it, who you are to say it, etc. You will still be judged, of course, but you can afford to have it matter less.
My closest friends know I've struggled with this decision for a long time, and I've been deferred from making it by their encouragement. But I'm afraid it really is time to hang up my keyboard. I have other meaningful things to concentrate on, things which are in some ways more rewarding, like coaching my debate kids and seeing them through tournament season. Leaving will be difficult -- even writing this post has been difficult -- and I know clicking the 'Publish' button now will be tough. But I think at the end of the day, this really is the right thing to do.
So thank you for your time, and for the 21 months of my blogging career that have been the craziest of my life (particularly the last 8 of them). God Bless.
Regards,
Gayle
Posted at 08:30 am by gaylegoh
Permalink
Thursday, January 25, 2007
Amara Tochi to be Hung at Dawn
" 'We must make exampies. By the sight of the fate inflicted on criminals, we must shock those who might otherwise beterupted to imitate them!' Well; in the first place we deny, the power of the example. We deny, that the sight of executions produces the desired effect. Far from edifying the common people, it demoralizes and ruins their feeling, injuring every virtue... If, notwithstanding all experience, you still hold to the theory of example, then give us back the Sixteenth Century; be in reality formidable: restore to us a variety of suffering; restore us, Farinacci; restore us the sworn torturers; restore us the gibbet, the wheel, the block, the rack, the thumb-screw, the live-burial vault, the burning cauldron; restore us in the streets of Paris, as the most open shop among the rest, the hideous stall of the executioner, constantly full of human flesh; give us back Montfaucon, its caves of bones, its beams, its crooks, its chains, its rows of skeletons; give us back, in its permanence and power, that gigantic outhouse of the Paris executioner! This indeed would be wholesale example, this would be punishment by death, well understood; this would be a system of [p. 25] execution in some proportion--which, while it is horrible, is also terrible!"
- Victor Hugo, Preface, Last Day of A Condemned
In less than eight hours, this young man will be dead:  There is another picture I wanted to use, one which struck me greatly, but I can't seem to upload it -- photobucket.com has not been cooperative. It is of Amara Tochi standing in a foreign airport in front of a departure board showing a list of flights to and from Singapore. He wears a faded purple suit with white pants and looks faintly bewildered. But what really catches my eye are his shoes -- the shiniest pair of shoes I've ever seen. It seems like someone has spent hours on those shoes. And I keep thinking: Amara Tochi, all dressed up for death row.
I find myself overwhelmed by a sense of sadness and waste. I tell myself: he's a stranger, and people die by the second, why should you care so much? And then the answer comes to me, again and again - I care because not enough do. We care because if we don't, who will? Is it not a highest form of tragedy to pass unmourned, to be surrounded, in the last hours, days, weeks, months, years of your existence, by no one who cares? And then to slip away at dawn, the faintest wraith, and to have the world turn tomorrow without you. The barest murmur, the smallest stir, and then it would have been as if Amara Tochi had never existed. And too many of us would rather pretend it to be so. Therefore, I mourn: I mourn because it is all there is left to do, with too few people left to do it.
Those of you who are not familiar with the case: Amara Tochi is a man who will be hung tomorrow, at dawn, for the possession of diamorphine on his person. The Nigerian President has asked for clemency on his behalf to no avail. I wrote an article for The New Paper on the subject, but it was not published. I'm upset, not surprised. Here it is, below:
On the 27th of November, 2004, Amara Tochi arrived at Changi Airport. A 19-year-old Nigerian, he hoped to play football for Singapore. First, however, he had to deliver some capsules to a man in Singapore. According to Tochi, his soccer manager, Smith, had asked him to deliver the capsules, which he claimed contained herbal medicine.
Of course, the capsules did not contain medicine. Instead, they contained substantial amounts of diamorphine.
And so, a hair's breadth from three years later, on the 26th of January, Tochi will not be playing football for our beloved country. Instead, he will be hung at the break of dawn.
There will be some mention of it in the newspapers; those who know him will grieve; several letters of outrage will be written, and then the affair will slowly fade from public memory. He will have become just another young man sentenced to death in our city-state, internationally renowned for having the highest estimated per-capita executions in the world.
The death sentence has been accepted by most of us as a part and parcel of being Singaporean. Journalist William Gibson once called us 'Disneyland with the death penalty'. For a country which exacts this penalty so often, we are remarkably, and blissfully, unaffected by it.
Yet this particular case more than others caught my attention, for a simple reason: Amara Tochi was sentenced to death for drug trafficking. Yet he might not have even known that he possessed drugs on his person.
In fact, Justice Kan noted in his findings that "there was no direct evidence that he knew the capsules contained diamorphine. There was nothing to suggest that Smith had told him they contained diamorphine, or that he had found that out on his own".
That leads us to a troublesome and haunting question: can you be sentenced to death for drug trafficking without even knowing you were in possession of drugs?
Curious as it seems, yes - and that is exactly what is happening here.
Part III of the Misuse of Drugs Act states that anyone found in possession of more than a specified amount of a certain drug "shall be presumed to have had that drug in possession for the purpose of trafficking unless it is proved that his possession of that drug was not for that purpose".
If I were permitted to paraphrase this, it would resoundingly say: "Guilty until proven innocent."
The death penalty itself is a practice which should be scrutinized. A life is not to be taken lightly - and some would argue, not at all. But assuming it is in place, then the question of how and when it is implemented becomes all the more crucial.
Perhaps it is time to re-look that implementation. To be sure, it will make things harder for our judicial system to convict and sentence potential drug-traffickers.
But then again, it should never be easy to kill a man.
We can do very little for Amara Tochi now. In fact, he might have more to offer than we could ever offer him. In his death, he could make us take a good hard look at the mirror and ask ourselves a few long overdue questions.
Early tomorrow morning I will observe one minute of silence for Amara Tochi. I hope you will, too, spare a thought for a newly-dead man.
Posted at 11:19 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
There was no censorship on the BlogTV episode aired tonight despite the fact that we touched on some sensitive issues such as opposition parties and new media, the question of whether or not BG Yeo is simply reiterating the party manifesto on his blog, and whether or not we can trust politicians if they act one way in private and another in public. I hope this helps in some way to ease the paranoia people have about every single media release in Singapore. I think May 2006 brought out the ugliest in the mainstream media but it is not monolithic and there are some people who are certainly trying to push the envelope. The BlogTV crew, many journalists, etc. I've pretty much said my piece on the matter in the post before last, about meeting George Yeo. Just one thing -- a lot of people seem to be taking it as though I am insulting Mr. Wang or being judgmental about him. Nope. Never my intention. His post just set me articulating something I've thought for a very long time regarding the dynamic between blogosphere and mainstream media. I stumbled over a post by KTM a few minutes ago which interestingly touched on something very similar, also with reference to Mr. Wang's post. He says pretty much the same thing only better. Not so longwinded as I know I am :) No doubt there will be a slew of comments going on about how this is tokenistic, I'm being fooled, blindsided, wool over my eyes, ignorant, or most commonly, naiive and publicity-seeking. All I can ask is that you first pause to think about what I'm saying and ask yourself -- what is our best chance of achieving some manner of progress and openness? Entrenching the divide between "Us" and "Them" in a form of self-censorship by typecasting the media in a certain light and shunning them altogether, or to select our opportunities and take them on, speaking where we may speak, believing in the validity of our opinions? By doing the former, we reify our helplessness -- we think of it as absolute, and hence act like it is absolute. This makes it absolute and is at the end of the day our worst enemy. But hey, I'm done with this topic :) Just think about it. Now...time to move on.
Additional reading from bloggers that both agree and disagree: Two Steps from Twilight (attacks my position quite vitriolically)Kway Teow Man (is also disappointed at bloggers' preference not to engage)Rambling Librarian (another blogger who declined a slot on the show, explaining his personal reasons - link was broken but is now fixed)
Posted at 11:36 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
I did an interview with Ken Kwek of the Straits Times towards the end of last year I believe, which was meant to be used for one of the Friday People & Politics sections. Ken e-mailed me yesterday to tell me that editorial decisions had left the article out, citing space constraints. He also enclosed the article within the e-mail and graciously permitted it to be published here as well. In my personal capacity I can only speculate as to why it had been left out -- time constraints perhaps, but also perhaps because it was too racy. Those of you who read about my experience with Rea! Talk will know my reservations on the issue. I originally swore off talking with the media when I found out that some of my comments I found to be most important had been sliced off the show due to 'time constraints' (they involved the lack of protection of citizens' privacy from the state). Evidently, I changed my mind. This was due to a promise made to me by the BlogTV crew that very little would be cut and spliced, and that the format of the show would be more freestyle conversational than anything, leaving little room for censorship or misrepresentation (a promise they did live up to for the earlier episode, we'll see what happens tonight). More than that as well, from reading my last post you will note that when I re-thought the issue carefully, I figured there was no sense in declining these chances. The best scenario: views are aired, questions are asked, the public learns and benefits, and the debate is taken some steps further. The worst scenario: they don't use the material... and I publish it on this blog! Hee. Here it is, read it and reach your own conclusions: Hd: Blogger's New Year wish: Govt should loosen up
by Ken Kwek
BLOGGER Gayle Goh has a passion for politics that the typical apathetic Singapore teen would find incomprehensible, if not downright weird.
The 18-year-old, who is waiting for her A-level examination results, writes extensively on national policy issues, from immigration and foreign workers to the impending hike in the Goods and Services Tax (GST).
The former Anglo-Chinese Junior College student shot to prominence last May (2006) following a fiesty [sic] exchange with Mr Bilahari Kausikan, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, over a talk he gave at her school on Singapore's foreign policy.
She also traded views on national education with Minister of State (Education) Lui Tuck Yew in a forum discussion with students organised by The Straits Times in September, and was an outspoken forum panellist at the 2006 Singapore Theatre Festival that staged several political dramas and satires.
Sipping a cold soda at a Marina Square diner, she said that other than the A-Level exams, the biggest event in her life last year (2006) was the May General Election.
She hopes the political fervour she sensed among Singaporeans then will continue to prevail this year (2007).
"I hope to see political parties engaging people constantly throughout the intervening years, laying the groundwork, working harder," she adds. The next General Election is due by 2011.
She is well-acquainted with current issues, especially education-related topics, such as impending changes to the English syllabus. But unlike many, Gayle follows national issues closely as well and is not reticent in giving her views on them.
For instance, she feels the immigration debate, on whether foreign workers and immigrants are desirable for Singapore, has stalled.
"What we need now is to move beyond the debate of whether to keep immigrants in or out, and focus on what to do with them once they are in, because they're coming in anyway because of globalisation," she added.
Another pet issue is the authorities' threshold of tolerance for alternative views and political humour.
Some of the reactions are "knee-jerk", she said, citing the Government's criticism of blogger mr brown's column in Today newspaper. The column was later suspended by the paper.
While politics is weighty business, she says politicians should learn to laugh at themselves more, to "close one eye" at political satire and see it as a way of making politics interesting.
The People's Action Party (PAP) comes across as too serious, she adds, and having younger MPs do a hip-hop performance at the Chingay festival will not change that impression.
She adds: "The Government and MPs need to loosen up a bit, and I don't mean go dancing!"
Posted at 05:46 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Those of you who have read Mr. Wang's post will know that I was invited to appear on a CNA talkshow regarding politicians blogging. I guess the cat is out of the bag so there is no point in me keeping hush hush about it here, as I did on my previous TV appearances (did not want the scrutiny, ironic I know). Yes, I did accept, and in fact I just returned from the recording. It was interesting and fun (I have worked with the producers etc. who run the show before and they are a wonderful bunch of people) but the show itself, I am afraid, might be rather lacklustre. One or two questions I asked led to some interesting soundbites, but I generally kept quiet because honestly, I had nothing to say for most of it; it was all very politically correct and meditated. There are some gems though, probably booboos on my part hehe. "Gayle, do you read the Minister's blog?" "Umm, at first, but then not really." "Why not?" "Well... (long pause as I tried to figure out how to say this nicely) I only read things that hold my interest (OOPS!)." If you do catch the show, also watch out for when I ask him about opposition politicians and new media like podcasts and (tongue-in-cheek) sound amplification devices in public. Hope these things will survive the cuts and edits. Cos otherwise, I CONFESS, I was boring. BG Yeo himself seems a nice man - soft-spoken, mild-mannered, with a faintly bewildered and endearing air about him. Don't be fooled though, he is certainly sharp and knows his business. We chatted after the show about a range of topics I must confess were much more interesting than the theme for the show ("Should politicians blog?" Sure, why not, who cares? Just another fish in the big blue sea), including the conscription of women and genetics. Well really I say 'chatted' but it was more like him talking with a few of us offering the occasional comment. BG Yeo has one thing in common with all other ministers I've met in person -- they talk slowly and at great length, making it difficult to interject, or feel like you should at all. Every. Thing. They. Say. Carries. Much. Pomp. And. Gravitas. Like. Every. Word. Really. Means. Something. (How to talk like a minister 101). My fellow guest was Bernard Leong from Singapore Angle, who was even more reticent than I was. What struck me the most about this episode, really, had little to do with the show itself. It had more to do with Mr. Wang's post. I must say I entirely disagree with his take on this issue. "One year ago, an opportunity like this would have been really exciting to me. To appear on TV! And talk about blogs! With a PAP minister! Well, that was one year ago.
And one year in Internet time feels like 10 years in the offline world. Since then the Singapore blogosphere has come a long way. Bloggers are no longer going to burst with surprise, delight or alarm just because the mainstream media or the government wants to talk to them." -- Mr. Wang
I am rather confused by Mr. Wang's train of thought here. He acknowledges that the blogosphere has come a long way. To me, this is a positive thing, and something to be celebrated. Granted, I am turned off sometimes by how blogging has become the 'in-thing' and also by the wave of attention paid to blog(ger)s in the form of flattery, critique and even imitation (STOMP!) by mainstream media. Nevertheless, one can't help but admit that this is a net benefit to the blogosphere regardless of my personal sensibilities, especially with regards to my own personal cause of citizen participation in politics, which I should hope Mr. Wang shares, when the focus turns on to citizens with something to say about socio-political issues and the interaction between the government and the people. Mr. Wang makes it sound like it is a trivial, unimportant and passe that an opportunity is given for a blogger to speak face to face with a politician. Well it is not unimportant. Will it change the world? Of course not. Will it change anything? Not directly. But is it worth three hours of your time? Yes, definitely. Bloggers often feel themselves to be at liberty to pass comment on political issues and politicians. They do have, and must have, that liberty. But I cannot help but feel that their commentary and criticisms would be taken so much further, and would be delivered/crafted which so much more insight and clear-mindedness, if they were willing to step up and say these things openly and face to face with the person/policymaker they are criticizing, so that the latter will have the right of reply and also so that you, as a commentator, do justice to your views. The right of reply is a wondrous thing. How many clamoured for Mr. Brown to have access to it over the TODAY article and the subsequent loss of his job? Politicians should not be excepted from this right. Because when a reply is made, it means it is no longer one man shouting at a brick wall of bureaucracy or the iron curtain of politics. A reply means it is a conversation. A lot of insecurity can come with that on both sides because now one's views can be challenged, upset, overturned, undermined. But it is a necessary step to shortening the divide between government and people. And it would be a grave mistake for us to think that we do not need this step, or that we have heard all there is to hear from the official channels. I have never walked away from a conversation with a politician or a civil servant without having learnt something. It does not mean that I am converted to their thought - often I come away with new points of disagreement. But my perspective is always developed, because it has ventured out of its safety zone, and dared to engage. If we become blase and disinterested, distancing ourselves, then is it really the government's fault when we complain of an affective divide? "The TV show will probably be a good chance for George Yeo to publicise his own blogging attempts (on Beyond SG and Ephraim Loy's blog). George Yeo has been blogging diligently for the past few months. But after the initial burst of public interest, hardly anyone bothers to read him anymore. But I bet George will keep on trying. So will the post-65 MPs. After all, remember what PM Lee Hsien Loong had prescribed? The PAP needs to be more hip and happening, and the government needs to use "new" media to reach out to the masses. The leader has spoken. And so the show must go on." -- Mr. Wang Comments like this excerpt reinforce the perception of an all-powerful conspiring government and its lapdog politicians. Is there truth in it? Maybe, maybe not. As it stands, it is little more than speculative derision. Yes, it is an opinion, and has a right to exist. But perhaps it would be more fair to those involved if we did not turn down opportunities to say these things straight to those we judge so easily in the comfort of our homes. Furthermore, the opportunity to quiz ministers directly on the issue helps the debate to evolve. BG Yeo acknowledged, straight to the point when asked, that yes, blogging is indeed a way of reaching young voters, and is a new medium which should be embraced for that purpose. When something like that is admitted candidly, then we can move on to asking questions like -- is this move a good thing, and does it make our political system more healthy, or detract from it? -- rather than stagnating on the same accusations without receiving confirmation or denial. Now, please note, this is not directed at those who may not have opportunities to address politicians on all their issues of concern. Rather, this is an appeal to those bloggers whom I know to have specifically declined the chance to have their views heard in other avenues. Bloggers whom I consider smart, savvy, able to hold their own in a debate, and more experienced. When the media contact me, they more often than not mention that you have declined the chance to say your piece, or that they have received no reply. Some of you have valid reasons. I was told that Alex Au of Yawningbread, for instance, did not accept a slot on the show because he simply had no real opinion on the issue. Fair enough, though I would love to see Alex on TV giving as good as he gets or better. I have worked with him a couple of times and he is charming, smart and forthright in his views; a man who would add expertise and confidence to any discussion. But if you are declining because you feel there is no point in talking with 'the establishment', or because you would rather remain safely incognito/distanced from a political arena perceived as dangerous, then I appeal to you NOT to. Xenoboy, Mr. Wang, Mr. Brown, and other notoriously uncontactable bloggers -- you know who you are. Your efforts would really help to bring us to new levels of debate and citizen representation over a broad range of Singaporeans. Cheers all, and goodnight.
Posted at 11:27 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and Some Explanations
Hi everyone :) yes, I know this post has been long overdue. I do check back here regularly and I notice the avalanche of comments asking, cajoling, demanding, threatening and commanding me to write. There have been many reasons for my extended hiatus and I beg your understanding for them.
First of all though, a very Blessed holiday season to you and yours. Thank you for your continued visits to this site despite its lack of action; hundreds still come everyday and for that I am very grateful and feel very unworthy of. All you anonymous people who keep up to date with political discourse and citizen commentary are probably the key reason why I have any urge to keep on blogging at all.
Which leads me to the reasons for my absence; I think you all deserve an explanation. The first reason is mundane; yes I have had various things to do. My A'Levels have been over and done with since the end of November, a big load off my back. Since then I have been taking a little time off to catch up on reading and yes, quite a bit of gaming as well; all the small things I had no chance to do during my hectic two years in JC. I am now also working as a debates coach, and am looking to do some things on the side as well. If you need tuition in English, literature, history or social studies, drop me an e-mail =p I also can give piano lessons, so yup! Gotta keep myself busy for the long stretch headed up to my entrance into university. I have also been spending this time on university applications; for all those interested, I have received acceptance letters from Edinburgh, Warwick, Sussex, East Anglia and King's College London, but as far as the UK is concerned I am still waiting for news from my real dream university -- Cambridge. I will know in January whether or not I have been accepted and until then I will continue to have difficulty breathing :) all the other universities are of good repute and sound exciting but due to heavy financial constraints, if I am unable to secure a place there, then I will stay right here in Singapore and enrol in NUS. In fact, I don't even know how I am going to afford Cambridge if I do get in. But we will see. Life has odd ways of working out.
Enough of that babble though, now you know what I have been up to lately. The other reasons why I have not been blogging are rather complicated. I have been suffering from a kind of blog fatigue, I suppose you might call it. I am usually a very private person and having my life and identity out there in the open is tough for me. You just have to look at my tagboard to see how much pressure there is on me to write, write, write like I'm some article generator or a conveyor belt of political angst. I am not. I do not write on automation, I do not write for the sake of writing, I certainly do not write for the attention as many have suggested or I would not have deliberately lost so many readers with my absence. I resist being told to write when it comes to the issue of my blog which is something that I have invested a lot of personal time, motivation and yes, emotion into. When I write, I write because I believe in something and want to champion it. I do not write -- as I suspect, without dropping names, many bloggers do -- because I want to keep my readers or have high figures on my visitor counter or make little advertisements and generate income on sidebars. Perhaps I take myself way too seriously; I'm not trying to be any high horse here. I'm just saying, these are conditions I find it difficult to write under.
Another factor which has turned me off blogging is the overwhelming media hype there is about blogging these days. Ironic, I know, because I was part of the movement that helped propel blogging to such fame/notoriety, but really.. am quite tired of blogging being the 'in' thing. And the recent Girls Out Loud episode where Xiaxue "faced off" against that other girl (I just checked out her name and it is Mia) who accused her of being racist by suggesting that foreign workers should be banned from Orchard Road -- it was funny, it was good entertainment, I enjoyed it, but it trivialized things and turned a debate over a social issue into a catfight over whether or not Mia's eyebrows are too high. Uh oh, I am being stuffy aren't I? :( I guess it's just a matter of personal taste.
So anyway. That is the long and short of why I have been absent, and I am hoping to get back into my writing groove.. rediscover what really excites, interests and challenges me, and take good long looks at those issues -- not churn out tokenistic drivel. Quality not quantity :) Hope this post helps to clear things up at least. Do be patient with me; love you all. Have a wonderful New Year ahead. You will be hearing more from me soon.
Posted at 12:45 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Brief Thoughts on the GST Hike
Since my next exams is the Econs essay paper I thought it would be relevant to pass some brief comments on the GST hike -- just vague impressions and nothing fully developed, but some food for thought. Be warned.. econs not my best subject.
Looks like the government is trying to improve things for the lower income groups (I found it amusing how I heard that repeated about 10 times over and over again on the News last night as if to make sure we Really Get The Message). Ok, that's a good thing in principle. So apparently, it needs to increase its budget by increasing taxes. It has three choices -- increase direct income tax, increase direct corporate tax, and increase indirect tax (GST).
Increase direct corporate tax cannot -- foreign direct investment and business outlook will suffer. Singapore's economy very open, must attract lots of big MNCs. In fact PM Lee hinted that corporate taxes will be -lowered- (so maybe the GST hike will go towards compensating for that, as well as being channelled into safety nets).
Increase direct income tax, interesting policy -- it will hurt the rich more than the poor because our taxes are progressive (in terms of proportion, we tax the rich more than we tax the poor). So maybe they don't want to hurt the rich so much. Income tax also another problem: CPF. They may SAY our taxes are among the lowest in the world, but in my humble opinion CPF is just a way of taxing us and compensating for it with delayed and conditional welfare services -- just a matter of viewpoint. Anyway, CPF so high, plus income tax some more, our disposable income will shrink even more -- reducing consumption, hence bad for our economy.
So how? Increase indirect taxes lah. Indirect taxes are also interesting because they are regressive -- they hurt the poor more than they do the rich, because both the poor and the rich must pay the same amount of tax for a certain good, but that amount will take a larger proportion out of the poor person's income than it will for the rich. However, this can be offset by greater safety nets and services for the poor. This is where the gahmen's grand plan comes in. A lot rides on the quality and extensiveness of the services they will introduce. If the balance is truly tilted towards the lower income, then the impact can be minimized, and there may even be a net benefit for the poor.
So, don't get too angry about the GST hike just yet. It may be ok, depending on the quality of the package introduced for the poor. Or it may just make things worse if impossible conditions, red tape and bloated bureaucracy makes it difficult for the poor to access the new measures.
I'm not convinced it's the best way to deal with it though. I think what we really need is a comprehensive rehaul of the CPF/enforced savings system. Sucks to give up so much money that you can only use if you are dead or dying.
In the meantime though, I would urge everyone to look at things objectively. If we really want to help the poor more than we currently do, then something must give. There must be some kind of trade-off involved. Just wondering if we are trading off the right things. Seems like we are taking from the poor to give to the poor, right now -- bizarre.
P.S. For all those who nag me about my studies everytime I post here or on the tagboard, it's relevant to my paper and only took like 9 minutes ok? So don't scold! :)
Posted at 01:08 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
Saturday, November 11, 2006
I know I'm on a blogging hiatus, but two things today irritated me so much I had to say something. The first one is something I particularly wanted to raise because a) it actualizes an observation of mine that I've made privately for a long while now, and b) it doesn't seem as though anyone else is interested as a quick scan of my usual blogs and a Google search don't return anything related. It has to do with this: "Foreign construction workers now can't rent HDB flats", screamed today's headlines - unless of course they are Malaysian.
Suddenly foreign workers (except Malaysians!) are not fit to live in the same space or breathe the same public air as us. You know why?
"The board made the decision - believed to be in response to complaints about foreign workers living in HDB estates - known in a circular sent out to real estate agents on Tuesday.
Mr Chris Koh, director of Dennis Wee Properties, said the decision to disallow foreign construction workers from living in public estates may have come about because of the disturbance that some of them create .
MP Ho Geok Choo, who looks after the Boon Lay ward where many foreign workers live, disclosed in a recent interview that she gets frequent complaints of the noise foreign workers make when they congregate , and the litter they leave behind in parks and gardens."
Ohh, because they cause 'disturbance'!
Now, I sure wonder if we are talking about the same foreign workers I know about. You know, the ones who build the roads we walk on, the buildings we live in, and the MRT tracks we travel? 'Cos I have never, ever witnessed a 'disturbance' by foreign workers. I have never seen a quarrel, or a fist-fight, or heard them play loud music, or gamble in void decks. You know, I wonder if these people who complained to MP Ho Geok Choo were mistaken. Maybe when they heard a 'disturbance', they were really hearing the noise of a Malay wedding celebration or a Chinese funeral, or something. Stuff that makes a lot of noise but we gladly put up with because we must be gracious to our fellow residents (only if they are worthy, and do not work in construction sites, of course). Mahjong players, karaoke blasters, maybe those are the mysterious 'disturbances' people talk about but I have never seen. As for the litter...maybe they mean the uncles who spit on sidewalks, and on the grass, and even in shopping malls? Or hmm...I know! The ashes from the burning of incense during the Hungry Ghost Festival!
Let's be honest lah. This is nothing but a cheap excuse to excise foreign "low-class" workers from our easily-offended sensibilities. The real reason why they are being prevented from living in public housing is because they are an affront to our Singaporean decencies.
Meanwhile, Indonesians can stay in our bungalows, talented expats can live in their executive condominums, and Malaysians, as we learn from today's groundbreaking news, can stay wherever the heck they want.
You know what we are turning into? A plural society. Kinda like the ones that were formed all over Southeast Asia under the colonial masters of the past two centuries. Immigrants coming in all over the place, but different communities living in the same country but never coming into interaction except for in the marketplace (as in, not pasar malam or wet market, but when we do business). It used to be:
Colonialists
Foreign Talent (clerks, lawyers, bankers. etc.)
Locals
General Immigrants (Chinese coolies, Telugu labourers, etc.)
And now it's:
Foreign Talent
Locals
Construction workers
Aren't we supposed to be building a welcoming, cohesive society? Why exactly are we shunning the air breathed by construction workers? It is a bitter irony indeed to not be able to live in the very house you helped to build. It reminds me in fact of the instance where maids were not allowed to swim in the swimming pools of private condominums.
It might possibly be a reasonable policy if there were some kind of severe housing shortage and citizens needed preferential treatment, but given the reasons behind it? Lame and discriminatory. If you must, then have a preferential system, where if a citizen and a foreign worker applies to rent/buy a HDB flat, then we choose the citizen, much like how our HDB racial quota laws operate. That makes sense, because public housing is built for the Singaporean populace after all. But to ban them from living in our midst because they supposedly make mysterious noise I've never heard, is flimsy and disappointing. I don't care how squeaky clean or fabulous their "dormitories" are either, in principle it is wrong. Already they have travelled far from their own countries to work for us and earn a better living -- reasonable and human things to do. So why are we treating them in such a high-handed manner?
Once again -- irritated! If we could look beyond the length of our own infuriating noses for a moment we would see how easy it is to, corny but true, live harmoniously with different races. When I offer a simple smile to the domestic helper who hangs clothes out to dry one floor beneath me, or a 'thank you' to the construction worker currently renovating my HDB block who lays a path of boards for me to walk on instead of making me trudge through swamps of half-wet concrete, the gesture is returned and understanding passes between two human beings: an understanding of basic respect and gratitude between two people of different nationalities. There is no inherent problem in letting foreign construction workers live in public housing that cannot be solved by a) an application system which prefers citizens, b) standard eviction/public nuisance laws, and c) a little neighbourliness.
The second thing which raised warning signals for me when I was surfing blogs to find out if anyone had raised comment on the housing policy was this:
Singapore to tighten curbs on free speech. For anyone who wondered what the voodoo 'light touch' Dr. Lee Boon Yang meant when he spoke about the Internet, I guess this helps.
"Internet users could face punishment for defamation and making "statements that cause public mischief" or for "the wounding of racial feelings". Documents, including film or sound recordings, sent over the internet could be subject to criminal prosecution."
You know what this means? Well basically it means anything, as all sorts of naughty things can cause 'public mischief'. Some things that come to mind - people who question ministerial salaries (uh oh...), Mr. Brown podcasts, and even this very entry, because I - gasp! - talked about different nationalities being treated differently in Singapore, and the various cultural practices of different races such as incense-burning, funerals and weddings, which potentially 'create disturbance'.
You know this by now -- I'm irritated.
Signing out from Pacific Coffee, Changi Airport, who has been my bulwark this past week in my A'Level preparation (thank you for letting me sprawl over your wonderful armchairs and mug away),
Gayle.
Posted at 08:14 am by gaylegoh
Permalink
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
1. For those who wish to read the inaugural New Paper article I wrote, please refer here. It's regarding Ministers blogging. I've read the article and am very happy with it -- it said exactly what I meant. 2. Blogs have been cited in the court filings of the Lees vs. FEER case for having reproduced the offending article. It is also interesting to note that MM Lee Kuan Yew has a sweet IC number! SOOOOO03E. Now isn't that awesome. I wanna be special too.
Addendum: Amused and honoured that Life! recommended me as a must-visit site for the weekend. Have compiled a series of 'Recommended Posts' available to the sidebar for those who want a sense of who I am and what my views are. Well...what my views are, at least. And I've been 18 years old since August 12 2006. See? Don't believe what the state newspapers say ;)
Posted at 08:59 pm by gaylegoh
Permalink
Friday, October 13, 2006
They tell me my article was published today in The New Paper. I haven't had a chance to read it but I heard it hasn't turned out too badly. I wrote about the George Yeo and p65 blogs. So yep, I have an irregular column there now, shared with some other writers. Feel free to check out today's issue, Thursday 12th October.
Posted at 01:15 am by gaylegoh
Permalink
|
|
 |
gayle goh
profile
Recommended Posts
Do We Owe Our Existence to the PAP?
A Message From a Media Insider
The Bilahari Kausikan Post
Bilahari Kausikan's Reply
Money in Politics, Politics in Money
Workers' Party, PAP or My Living Room Armchair?
My Vision for Singapore
Democracy is Dangerous!
Singapore's Midlife Crisis
Smile, Singapore! WB and IMF Meetings a Scam
Chees' Rally & March; Interview with Gandhi Ambalam
worthy reads
xenoboy sg
students' sketchpad
singabloodypore
singapore mind
young republic
i-do-not-speak
friends
kwee boon
brendan
ben teh
2sa3
gecko
shameless advertising
if you're looking for air compressors and ancillary parts (vane, rotary, screw, etc), my dad sells them! ;)
disclaimer
the author of this site has based all her personal opinions on what is known to her as fact. any error is made of ignorance, not malice, and is accordingly apologized for. any views and opinions expressed by other persons on this site are not the responsibility of the author, nor does she claim to espouse them.
|
|
|
