Lam Pin Min opens Sengkang West community garden

 

How amusing.

WP's supporters are more concerned that their favourite MP did not get to front the opening of a community project for a photo shoot than the project itself and how it will benefit residents.

Why should they be upset when from the beginning to the end of the project, they had nothing to do with it?

Why should they be upset when the project was initiated under Dr Lam's watch and he was involved in it inception?

They are upset at a lost opportunity to claim credit for work others had done?

Why did TOC use a photo of Jamus Lim that looks like he was going to cry?

Don't cry lah. WP has 5 years to initiate many projects and have many opening ceremonies.

Embrace the digital economy

There is one important reality that we must come to terms with now, and that is this. We are not returning to a pre-COVID world. We should not be preparing for ‘business-as-usual’. Or preparing to return to the good old normal.

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞-𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬, 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐲, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐛𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞.

𝐈𝐟 𝐰𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐜𝐭 𝐧𝐨𝐰, 𝐰𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐲 𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐞 𝐒𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐡𝐮𝐛 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐲𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝. We may see our businesses and workers losing their relevance and competitive edge, and in turn, our economic and geopolitical manoeuvring space will be more limited and constrained.

- Trade & Industry Minister Chan Chun Sing

Stern warning for Raeesah Khan the offence of promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion or race

Stern warning for the offence of promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion or race.

Let's hope that she will toe her party line of being 'race-blind' and cease from ever making comments that touch on racism or promote enmity between different groups.

That said, there is no place for racism in Singapore, regardless of one's position.

𝐖𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐞 𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐦𝐞, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐲 𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬, 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐨 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞.

𝐃𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐰𝐞 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐭𝐡𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬.

"She allegedly commented that Singapore law enforcement authorities discriminated against citizens, and that compared to other groups, rich Chinese and white people were treated differently under the law," said SPF in a statement on Jul 5.

"In the context of a news article on the City Harvest Church ruling, Raeesah Khan allegedly commented that Singapore jailed minorities mercilessly, harassed mosque leaders but let corrupt church leaders who stole S$50 million walk free, and questioned who had been paid."

We know this isn't true as the leaders were jailed.

WP supporters creating a false perception

Right after WP won Sengkang GRC, this petition went round without any basis for it. Today, after more than 2 months, the petition is still going round.

The intent of this petition is not about asking for a promise of grant (which should not even arise in the first place unless the petitioner wants to imply that the new Sengkang Town Council will manage town council funds very badly).

The intent of this petition is to spread a false perception. This is why more than 2 months later, the petition is still making its rounds.

The uninformed and the gullible reading the petition will think that the government intends to withhold grants from Sengkang. This is how seeds of falsehoods are sowed. They get entrenched through their continued presence on social media.

In a statement published by Sengkang GRC Facebook page, the WP describes these petitions as ''WELL-MEANING" and WP 'APPRECIATE' the efforts of many Singaporeans ASSISTING them. The only instruction WP gave to their supporters is not to use WP photos..
Guess other than that, supporters can continue their efforts.

You can withdraw up to 20% of your Retirement sum at age 65

Really, ignorance is not bliss.

Some are just not interested in keeping themselves informed or up-to-date. They prefer to spend their time spreading misery with their misinformation, deliberately or otherwise.

It is a false perception they seek to perpetuate and they have found social media to be a great tool to do just that.

Be informed. Not misled.

Temasek does not handle CPF monies

After having clarified so many times on this page that Temasek does not handle CPF monies, still we see people making the false claim. We therefore come to the conclusion that it is a deliberate attempt to perpetuate a falsehood.

To be clear, Temasek does not handle CPF monies, does not manage foreign reserves, does not manage government reserves.

Temasek OWNS the assets on its balance sheet (Not your money).

Temasek manages its own assets, which have accrued mainly from proceeds from sale of its investments and reinvestments of dividends and other cash distributions it receives from its portfolio companies and other investments.

Temasek also has its own borrowings and debt financing sources such as the Temasek Bonds and Euro-commercial Paper Programme.

CPF monies are invested by the CPF Board (CPFB) in Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS) that are issued and guaranteed by the Singapore Government.

The proceeds from SSGS issuance are pooled with the rest of the Government's funds.

The comingled funds are first deposited with MAS as government deposits.

MAS converts these funds into FOREIGN assets through the foreign exchange market.

A major portion of these assets are of a long-term nature.

These assets are ultimately transferred to GIC to be managed over a long investment horizon.

Creating good jobs and opportunities for you and your children: Lee Kuan Yew

 

𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧-𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠, said Mr Lee Kuan Yew, is 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬, step by step.

"Each step we take is to open avenues for yourself and your children’s future and that is the message I want to convey very strongly before I am not able to say it." - Lee Kuan Yew

The globalized companies that Singapore wants to attract are staffed by talents from many parts of the world. These are companies at the cutting edge, breaking new grounds, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said.

Singaporeans may not have the skills needed for a higher level job in such companies.

What do we do? So 'no' to the investment because we lack the skills?

Trade and Industry Minister Chan Chun Sing said:

"We land the investment first. Create the jobs in Singapore first. Work hard to train our people, upgrade their skills to take over the jobs as soon as possible."

This is the way we create good jobs not just for present Singaporeans but also for your children in time to come.

What do you see? 600 jobs held by foreigners (PRCs) or 400 job opportunities for Singaporeans and a chance to learn, gain experience and grow in a global company?

What do you see?

600 jobs held by foreigners (PRCs) or 400 job opportunities for Singaporeans and a chance to learn, gain experience and grow in a global company? Is the glass half full or half empty?

Or are you going to complain that there are many PRCs in your workplace and start a petition to ban them like Lim Tean?

A petition that says: abolish Alibaba and return 1000 jobs to Singaporeans (Lim Tean's petition: abolish CECA and return 2400+ jobs to Singaporeans)? Does this even make sense?

Abolish CECA and you still have 2400+ jobs to take back? Are you thinking?

If Alibaba does not feel welcome, do you still have 400 jobs? If Alibaba is 'banned', can you take back 600 jobs? Does this make sense at all?

Don't be fooled.

When a global company comes here, they bring with them some talents, they also create some jobs for Singaporeans. This is how good jobs are created for Singaporeans.

If they do not come here, if they go elsewhere, then every job they create goes to a foreigner elsewhere. It's really that simple.

https://www.facebook.com/104144511361804/photos/a.138524671257121/150591023383819/

Still want a minimum wage of $1300 when you can earn at least $1850?

The Progressive Wage Model for the fourth cluster, the Lift and Escalator cluster, will be phased in in stages.

Here's how it looks like.

Still want a $1300 minimum wage? That's what you will get if it is the legislated national minimum wage.

The Progressive Wage Model is sector-based. The minimum wage in the model is sector specific. This allows the minimum wage to be set differently according to each sector.

The set of skills required in different sectors is different and therefore wages will also be different.

The minimum wage in the PWM is set through consultation and negotiation among tripartite partners, taking into account all needs and sustainability.

Wages are tied to productivity. They are determined by output and decided by employers. A more productive worker will be paid more.

It really does not make sense for a third party - politicians - to decide arbitrarily by themselves, what a suitable wage should be. That's an unbalanced equation.

If you're in the lift and escalator sector, you wouldn't want $1300 when you can earn at least $1850.

A minimum wage of $1300? Under the PWM, workers are already earning that and MORE.

A minimum wage of $1300? Under the PWM, workers are already earning that and MORE.

The 3 clusters - cleaning, security, landscape - together have benefitted more than 78,000 workers.

Be progressive. Why support a $1300 min wage when you can earn more than that?

If such a min wage policy is adopted, your wages will come down to that minimum. Is that what you wish?

This is what happens when there is no super majority in Government

This is what happens when you have a balance of power between opposing parties. Partisan politics come to the fore. The government is checkmated. At crucial moments, important things don't get done.

Members vote according to partisan politics and there is no long term planning as the goal is always about what it takes to win the next election.

A super majority is not a bad thing. It is a bad thing only if the party with the super majority is a bunch of crooks.

A super majority allows for long term planning in the interest of the country as the leaders do not worry too much about the next election. This includes doing what is unpopular but necessary.

What this means is that it is not how many people from a party you vote in, it is the integrity of the people you vote in.

What makes a system a good system is the integrity of the people in leadership position. The leader sets the tone and the direction.

Chinese companies coming to Singapore to invest

According to the report by FT, companies like Alibaba-backed Ant Group, China’s second-largest brokerage Haitong Securities, Huawei’s cloud division and Tencent-backed digital bank WeBank have in recent months approached Singapore’s industry groups about becoming members or partnerships.

“Singapore is benefiting from geopolitical tensions,” said Chia Hock Lai, president of the Singapore Fintech Association, adding that the organisation’s membership had swelled from 350 groups in March to 780 as of September.

These companies will want to bring with them the specialised talents that they need. Singapore may not have sufficient talents to meet all their needs. Singapore will have have the whole suite of talents they need.

What do we do? Welcome them and some good jobs are created for Singaporeans who will gain good experience as well and learn new things.

Foreign talent: the silent majority must speak up!

The loudest group is not necessary the majority. We saw how over 100,000 signed a petition to do away with the NDP funpack. As big a group as they may be, we have seen how they represented only a minority in the real world.

The concern over fair hiring and discriminatory hiring is a legitimate one and that concern is being addressed. We must not allow that concern to be exploited by a vocal minority that seeks to turn it into an anti-foreigner sentiment.

Don't shoot ourselves.

Stop talking about the minimum wage

If the Workers' Party feels strongly about a minimum wage, it should move beyond a critique of outcomes to examining the merits and demerits of the policy measures to help the poor and address inequality. Show why these policies are inadequate and propose alternatives.

Singaporeans are not ideologically fixated, so if a better policy solution can be found, we will do the right and pragmatic thing to help citizens live a better life.

Are hubs still relevant in a COVID world?

Trade and Industry Minister Chan Chun Sing said:

In a more fragmented global economy, there will not be just a single hub, but a series of key nodes in a larger network with other nodes that must be able to connect seamlessly with one other.

Singapore aims to be one of these critical nodes in the global system. To achieve this, we will not only remain committed to make Singapore the preferred hub for companies to connect and do business with Asia and internationally but also ensure that our businesses and people can continue to have access to opportunities.

Foreign talent policy cannot change: Lee Kuan Yew

The question on foreign talents is not a new question we face today. Back in 2003, Mr Lee Kuan Yew was asked by a student in NTU whether the Government would re-examine the foreign talent policy and this is an excerpt of Mr Lee's reply.

Be thankful we are able to live a proper life because of COVID-19 precautions

Don't complain about restricitve COVID-19 measures. Be thankful instead and continue to observe them with discipline.They have enabled us to live a 'normal' life.

Indeed, our students have gone safely back to school and are now enjoying their one-week break.

In places where basic safeguards are not in place, people dare not leave their homes for fear of being infected.

The paradox of life is that rules and laws actually give people more freedom than if rules and laws are lacking or not enforced.

Jamus Lim shamelessly takes credit for Progressive Wage Model

 

Cockadoodledoo!

The Progressive Wage Model will still be around if the cock forgets to crow.

The Progressive Wage Model has been in Singapore for much longer than Jamus' return from overseas.

It's been around since 2012 and expanding. Jamus came back only in 2018.

In Feb this year at the Committee of Supply debate, Minister Zaqy Mohamad had announced the expansion of the model to other sectors to create a virtuous cycle where companies that voluntarily pay progressive wages and provide job progression pathways to their lower-wage workers, are recognised and rewarded by consumers who support them by purchasing their products or services.

"We will not stop at these four clusters, and intend to expand the PWM to more sectors," affirmed Minister Zaqy in February.

He revealed that MOM was actively working with tripartite partners to explore how to expand the PWM in new sectors and with a new approach. More will be shared once the economic climate and business conditions are more favourable.

That was in February.

Minimum Wage Plus is not anything new.

It is just another name for Progressive Wage Model.

Everyone knows that the Progressive Wage Model has a minimum wage feature incorporated into it. Everyone, that is, except Jamus.

Why PLUS?

PLUS: steps of progression to earn more than the minimum through enhanced and skills training.

Hence, Minimum Wage Plus or progressive wages.

Nothing has shifted. The Government has been marching forward with the Progressive Wage Model.

What has been on display is Jamus' unabashed showmanship, the form without the substance.

Jamus Lim's universal progressive wage model

Jamus Lim proves to be an inattentive listener as well.

No, the MInister did not refer to a universal Progressive Wage Model.

Because there is no 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐥 Progressive Wage Model.

There is a progressive wage model. The progressive wage model is also known as 'Minimum Wage Plus'.

Minimum Wage Plus is not a new thing. It was started in 2012. It is the Progressive Wage Model. It is not universal. It is sectoral-based.

Well, sometimes failing to listen carefully and getting it wrong can warm the cockles of your own heart.

Jamus' virtue signalling

Donovan Choy wrote:

This is fantastic. Tharman sees through Jamus' virtue signalling and calls it out exactly for what it is. These rhetorical tactics are so typical of figures on the Left. I cannot recall how many times I've heard progressive speakers push the insanely empty-headed "we shouldn't only be concerned with economic efficiency" trope, as if being financially efficient and prudent was a factor to consider in isolation, separated from having basic human compassion or decency.

𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐤 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐤𝐢𝐝𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲'𝐫𝐞 "𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐮𝐩 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐨𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲", 𝐭𝐨 𝐛𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 "𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐞" 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐤𝐢𝐝𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐰. 𝐈𝐭'𝐬 𝐮𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐧𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐯𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬. Every dollar spent on A is a dollar not spent on B. Inefficient and wasteful policies merely means that the people of a specific group today benefit at the expense of another group tomorrow.

https://www.facebook.com/1534710122/posts/10223260700855867/?extid=xiZ76oyy8LuAMWug&d=n

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬: 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬, 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐈 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐈 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐁𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐬. 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲.

Recently it was reported in the news that there were Singaporeans in financial difficulties due to COVID-19. These were not the average earners. They are high earners who had not managed their funds well. Just as an individual must live within his means, so too must a family and a country.

In his speech in Parliament on 2 September, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong emphasized the need to live within our means and to save for rainy days.

He said:

As a matter of principle, our social safety nets should be paid for out of current revenues. 𝐖𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐝𝐫𝐚𝐰 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝, 𝐧𝐨𝐫 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐰𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐫𝐞𝐧.

When our founding generation were building up our reserves, they never asked themselves whether they had too much savings.

We were in our early days of nationhood. Things were so uncertain, and no one knew what the next day would bring.

Compared to today, incomes then were low but it was never a question of how much reserves would be enough.

The question was whether we could steadily squirrel away a bit more in our reserves, year after year, decade after decade, as protection for a rainy day.

After several generations of frugal prudence, we have built up significant reserves and 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲, 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞 in this enormous monster storm.

We have been able to draw on past reserves and fund our essential Budget packages and help people on a very big scale.

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬: 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬, 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐈 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐈 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐁𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐬. 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲.

𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐚𝐲𝐬: 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐦𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐰𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬, 𝐛𝐞𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐈 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐈 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐁𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐚𝐱 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐬. 𝐋𝐞𝐭 𝐮𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐲.

This was not the attitude of our forefathers, the founders who are building for the future.

But the 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐢𝐧𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐮𝐢𝐭𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐨𝐫𝐬’ 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬.'

This is fundamentally the wrong approach.

How much reserves are enough, or too much? There can be no good answer to this question.

Jamus Lim disappoints with no answer for minimum wage level

One expects more of Jamus Lim.

But his maiden performance in Parliament was an anticlimax to the hype of election and the expectations that followed

He came to Parliament to make the call for a minimum wage but has no idea what that wage should be.

He seemed completely unaware of WP's call for a $1300 min take-home wage. Does he think this is the right level? Is it too high? Too low? What's the impact on SMEs? Etc?

He does not know of any country with a minimum wage that has a lower unemployment rate than Singapore but he has 'reams and reams of studies' that support his claim of the impact of a minimum wage.

Reality is not an academic discussion.

Will WP step up to be a loyal opposition?

PM Lee hopes that WP will step up and do more than just asking questions and scrutinising policies. He hopes they will put up serious proposals for debate and scrutiny, and to be adopted if found to be of merit.

But will the WP rise to it?

Will taxpayers' money be spent in vain? What do you think?

It is morally wrong for Pritam Singh to tell voters they can safely vote for him because the PAP will still be the government.

It is morally wrong to tell voters they can safely vote for him because the PAP will still be the government. It is deceptive. It is dishonest

It is not right for Singapore.

WP has been pursuing this free rider concept for a long time.

At the local level, they tell voters they can vote for the opposition as the losing PAP candidate will still take care of them. Vote for the opposition. You still get the services of the losing candidate. Buy 1 get 1 free.

Where else in the world do you find voters voting for party B when they want Party A to be the government?

If pursued long enough this free rider problem will lead to market failure. In this case, a failure in the democratic system where voters elect a government they do not want.

Pritam insisted he was not desperate for power. In reality, he is using deception to grow power.

Do not doubt. Do not fear. Our economy will prosper anew..

Yes! Thank you, PM Lee for an inspiring message. It will come to pass.

"Do not doubt. Do not fear. Jewel will shine again. Changi will thrive again. SIA will be a great way to fly once more. Our economy will prosper anew. And our children and our grandchildren will continue ascending to the sunlit uplands of a fairer, ever more just and equal society."