Would I get into trouble?

went to watch an election rally today. it's the first that i've ever seen. it was an interesting experience. one speaker, i thought, was utter crap: incoherent, no style, bad structure, lousy points. the other speakers that i saw were stylistically beautiful to watch. and some of them raised pretty good points.

now, if i were to say which party's rally i went to watch, i would be in deep shit because i would be breaking the law. so i shan't say which party's rally i went to watch. neither shall i say whether anyone should vote for that party. that, you have to make up your mind.

but i do want to include some of the issues that i have been thinking about since leaving that rally:

1. what's the point of painting a vision of a beautiful future without offering concrete strategies of delivering a good significant proportion of people from a horrible present?
2. should people be made to co-pay for things such as lifts stopping at every floor? is that not the responsibility of the government to take care of our citizens? if anything, it's the PRs and the non-citizens who should be made to pay.
3. what's the point of upgrading anyway? particularly if the people staying in the block are facing financial difficulties, unemployed or might be unemployed? what's the point of upgrading when one is already facing negative equity on one's property and property prices in HDB flats are unlikely to go up anyways?
4. should water consumption by households be taxed? or should a portion of water used by household be tax-free on the basis that that amount is a basic necessity and any excess, which is then a luxury, then be subsequently taxed? is this already the case? if not, why not?
5. should public transport fares go up? why? especially when the public transport companies (which are government-linked) keep posting record profits while continually face complaints of declining service standards?

now, these 5 issues that i've raised are just issues that i've been thinking about. i don't think that i have, in any way, express support (or opposition) of any party (for that matter, i've not cited the name of any parties in this post). however, though it is interesting to note that i still publish this post with apprehension that it might be misconstrued as being against the law.

ah well... what the heck. one should learn to speak up. here goes...

Game on...

it's nomination day today.

i wonder whether Taman Jurong will be contested. we'll know in a few hours i guess...

regardless... as many observers have noted, it is highly likely that the PAP will not be returned to power today. which will be a first in quite a while.

for many reasons, i think that this will be one of the most interesting elections to watch in the last 20 years. for one, it is PM Lee's first election that he is leading. for another, the slate of opposition candidates seem to be of much higher calibre than in the previous few (that i remember of anyways).

the next few days would be interesting...

and i suppose this would be a good time to take some key lessons about democracy from Thailand.

as quoted by Akikonomu, the Thai monarch has remarked that: "The current election is undemocratic. Where there is only one candidate it is not considered a democracy."

some questions that come to mind is:
in Thailand's situation, where the majority (who are mostly farmers) votes in Thaksin, but the minority (of city-dwellers in Bangkok) removes him, is that considered democratic?

is having a small, vocal minority can force a democratically elected president out of power by demonstrations and protests which forced the capital to come to a standstill,considered democratic?

and what about what some of the anti-Thaksin city-dwelling demonstrators say about the farmers (that they are ignorant and hence their opinions should not count for anything)? does that mean that a person who is more educated should have more say about who is in office than someone who is illiterate (and perhaps more gullible) and thus votes based on who promises him more short term benefits?

Crap...

that's what i feel like now. sighz.

today was the toughest test of my resolve to perservere...

perhaps it's life trying to tell me that there should be times when i should lay my pride down and accept that i do need a rest. and perhaps i should have listened and taken MC today... grr...

sighz.

Smashing good weekend

had such a smashing good Easter weekend. but not because of any religious reasons (those of you who don't know me yet, and have not already figured it out... i'm not Christian...)

started with dinner then a movie (16 Blocks, which, while predictable at parts, was alright... gives one a warm fuzzy feeling kind of show...) with colleagues. company was good. conversation constantly generated good laughter. which always makes for an enjoyable time.

then Friday met up with couple of friends and had a good long chat, catching up about various things. but highlight of Saturday was the evening with Bern. went to Rochester Park, looking for dinner. stumbled into One Rochester Park, thinking it was a restaurant (for those of you who don't already know... it isn't. it's a wine bar/pub thing). the ambience was great, really good chilled out place. it felt like a really well organised yuppie house party. the music was great (had a couple of guest DJ's playing. it was acid jazz and one of the "DJs" played live music on his trumpet. which of course meant Bern enjoyed it all the more...). food was alright (nothing great... but decent). drinks were good.

and Saturday met up with Fajan and Weiting. was good catching up with this pair of friends from my JC days. of course, Weiting's wife was there too. sighz. how time flies, how people move on. indeed, we've come a long way since our JC days. and rightly so. it's been... almost 10 years already.

well... one more day to the weekend. got to get some exercise to work off the extra pounds that i must have piled on over the weekend...

Addicted

to the show "Jewel in the Palace". it's a Korean drama serial that is apparently based on a true story. it follows the life of a palace maid as she rises to eventually become the King's trusted physician and chef. one thing that i love about the show is the way the portrayed how the main character finds out how to cook different kinds of foods, and then show how different types of food are prepared... it's... i don't know... alluring to watch a story about a person who is so passionate about something.

and also, i think that the person playing the main character is quite cute (though my mother thinks otherwise). :)

and now the song for the series is now stuck in my head... grr...

I learnt that

cubicles in a ladies toilet is just there for decorations. at least that's according to my student who said that when i asked her why girls like to go to toilet in groups. an excerpt of our conversation:

Me: why do girls have to go to the toilet together? do they have to hold each other's hands when they pee?

Student: no... we go there for other things... the cubicles are just there for decoration...

Me (quizzical look...): so... what other things do you go there for?

Student: the mirror la...

Me: but why? why would you want to scare yourself, seeing that ugly thing?

Student (almost fuming...): NO!!! it's not just the mirror... and... what do you mean see ugly thing?

yada yada yada...

but yar... as you can see, some of my students can be quite hilarious...

Gripe about work

this post will be a general gripe about work. it's me ranting about the frustrations that i have about work.

Not having time and energy to blog and read blogs as much as I would like to
and that is why i don't update my blog as regularly anymore. as opposed to when i first started my blog, when i would post 4 entries in a day. but then again, as Jeremy would testify, that was my marvellous smokescreen which suceeded in making my other colleagues in that office that i was actually damn super busy. and hence i got less arrows.

but that was NS... now that i am actually (well... kind of) working... i guess i have to (or feel more motivated to) be on the ball anyways. so i actually do work. and also cos a good part of my work now demands that i am away from my computer. and hence i get to blog and read blogs less often than i would like to.

and that is a pity because that means i don't keep up to date with what's going on in the lives of some of my friends as well as not able to crap as much as i would like to...

No life...
too tired to actually have much of a life. i got home at 4pm yesterday and crashed. and that was after many days of getting to work at 7 and leaving at 7. i'm just not made to be sleep-deprived... and so... it's hard for me to have a social life after work hours. to be fair, i still try to keep up with the few other things that i'm involved in. that too, takes up much time, which again means that all the more i have no social life. liddat how to get girlfriend? sighz...

Emotionally draining
read in a friend's blog about how he wants to be a teacher and how he enjoys the experience of teaching after his first tution session. thing is, with tuition, or at least most tuition, one teaches students who want to learn. but in schools, except the elite schools, there is a significant proportion of students who do not want to learn and some are only in school because they are forced to be in school.

it takes a lot of emotionaly energy trying to engage students, disciplining them, getting them to sit still, keep quiet, don't disturb the students who want to learn. and then there are those who come to the teacher with a whole host of other problems from home, such as parents just divorced and mother being retrenched or gang problems, etc.

and the thing is, these usually happen in the non-elite schools, where teachers are payed less than their counterparts in the elite schools. why? is the job of these teachers in non-elite schools any less challenging than that of the teachers in the elite schools? on the contrary, i think that the teachers in these 'neighbourhood' schools face far more challenges than those who teach in the elite schools. and consequently, they should be paid more. alas... that is not the case.

further, a lot of times policy makers are from the top-echelon schools and worse, feel that everyone else is like them, with the same intelligence, same drive, etc. but that is not te case. as a lot of my studnets have shown, a lot of them are brought up in such a way that does not breed in them a sense of drive nor a go-getter attitude. a lot of my students are so, for want of better word, nuah.

sighz... well... that is my gripe about work, students and whatever other random things that popped into my head... slightly more awake now...

Stupid suggestion

there's this letter to the forum sometime ago suggesting that teachers' performance should be based on appraisals by students.

that is a phenomenally stupid idea.

as a teacher, one must some times do things that are unpopular to the students, including disciplining students. further, not all subjects nor topics can be taught in a super interesting way. there are times when one has to simply force the students to sit down and do the drills. that won't make one very popular. and... having seen my students, i don't think they will be able to rationally, reasonably give an accurate appraisal of who makes a good teacher (to them, a good teacher is one who lets them sleep in class, let them talk in class, let them walk around in class, lets them go look for friends from other classes during lesson time...).

it's the same reason why voting is a right that's reserved for people above 21. so as to ensure that most voters are able to understand that a good government has to adopt unpopular policies for the long-term good of the people.

but that is not to say that students should not have the avenue to feedback to the teachers and the school administration. then the senior management of the school then assess whether the teacher has done the right things (even if they are unpopular...) and how this teacher can do better.

Bboyz II

my group of breakers performed yesterday. of all the performances at yesterday's event, i think the breakers drew the biggest crowd. and they impressed some PA people which would grease the mechanisms for getting some money for the breakers. which is good news i guess... :)

Beyond Fear and Favour

the motto of the Public Service Commission. it embodies one of the principles of governance in Singapore, that of incorruptibility. it is supposed to bring about confidence that the civil service is impartial, fair and beyond rent seeking.

now the HDB, while not a civil service in itself, is a stat board that does take some of its instructions from the Ministry of National Development, which is part of the civil service. so in matters of whether a particular estate is to be upgraded, it is still a decision to be made by the civil service. now if the civil service is truly beyond fear and favour, the estate would be subject to a series of published and transparent evaluation process as to whether it should be upgraded. in other words, if the civil service is truly beyond fear and favour, then upgrading should not be linked to who the MP of that particular estate is.

yet... we all know that if your MP is not from the ruling PAP, you can forget about your estate being upgraded. what does that make of the principle of beyond fear and favour?

further, upgrading of HDB estates uses public funds. funds from taxpayers, from Singaporeans. funds that should be used for the good of Singaporeans, not for partisan purposes.

yet... upgrading has become a carrot to entice people to vote for the ruling PAP. is that not using public funds for partisan purposes?

or am i much mistaken? can someone please enlighten me?

Conspiracy Theory

one has to wonder why the hell Temasek spent so much buying Shin Corp. did its analyst not suspect the backlash that it would create? were its analysts so incompetent as to underestimate the nationalism of the Thais and thus not realise that the Thais would boycott a Shin Corp owned mainly by a foreign company (more so because it is seen to be linked to a foreign government...)? Did its analysts fail to realise that the Thai people would perceive the sale as the Thaksin family cashing out while the going is good and hence result in the whole political crisis?

of course they did. in fact, they were counting on that. why?

cos they deliberately want to create unrest in Thailand. because Temasek Holdings deliberately wanted to create conditions that would bring about the ouster of Thaksin. because Thaksin has been wildly successful in making Thailand far economically competitive than any of his predecessors and more so than any of his likely successors are possibly able to.

and hence, to keep Thailand from becoming more competitive than Singapore, Temasek had to move.

does anyone really believe in this shit?