Why is there so much dislike towards PAP?
-
Originally posted by Sky_Blue223:
Do you know what is a "welfare state"?
And the pros and cons behind it?
We could be the next Britain.
aiyah, sg also becoming welfare state if we keep having inflation and salary don't raise -
Originally posted by Summer hill:
aiyah, sg also becoming welfare state if we keep having inflation and salary don't raiseSince when sg become a welfare state?
-
She meant that if the preelection situation persists, (without the current change in policy) ppl will poorer n poorer.
-
liars
-
Originally posted by lce:
liars
Who?
-
yeah, ice, who??
-
because they ppor alien to much
-
Originally posted by Summer hill:
aiyah, sg also becoming welfare state if we keep having inflation and salary don't raiseActualy Singapore is a welfare state. Singapore helps those who help themselves. You want to be rich, help yourself to be rich, the goverment will help you. You don't do nothing for yourself, you wait nong nong, go buy toto.
-
you pay a fee - you cum spore, you break the law earn quick marnie go back. gahmen earn you visit money happy, you earn here illegal money both happy. ype mancha wrote - gahmen help you wen you help yourself
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Actualy Singapore is a welfare state. Singapore helps those who help themselves. You want to be rich, help yourself to be rich, the goverment will help you. You don't do nothing for yourself, you wait nong nong, go buy toto.
really?
I want to own the entire island smaller that new york city, heard that its called singapore.
Will the singapore govt help me??
Must rule singapore = Rich
-
You must help yourself first.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
You must help yourself first.
The govt increase gst to help you already.
What more you want?
-
what turned me away? the stupidity of the pay system for ministers ESPECIALLY the president.
the US president earns no more than 300k a yr. yet they seem to do bttr than us, no?
to this day, i still seem to get the impression that our president, to put it bluntly, is a bum, no offense intended. he does NOTHING related to governing this ocuntry, am i wrong to say tht? so... a huge chunk of our salary goes to him.... WHY? answer tht, skyblue.
and pegging our ministerial pay to the top. has tht REALLY worked? REALLY?0.0
-
$300,000 a year is more like pocket allowance.
Must be The US President is paid nothing. He has the nations' resource at his beck and call, and therefore does not need to be paid.
$300,000 a year, thats just for dropping into the mom and pop store and buying some ice cream.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
$300,000 a year is more like pocket allowance.
Must be The US President is paid nothing. He has the nations' resource at his beck and call, and therefore does not need to be paid.
$300,000 a year, thats just for dropping into the mom and pop store and buying some ice cream.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
$300,000 a year is more like pocket allowance.
Must be The US President is paid nothing. He has the nations' resource at his beck and call, and therefore does not need to be paid.
$300,000 a year, thats just for dropping into the mom and pop store and buying some ice cream.
Cannot compare sg and us la.
-
Originally posted by TheCritic:
what turned me away? the stupidity of the pay system for ministers ESPECIALLY the president.
the US president earns no more than 300k a yr. yet they seem to do bttr than us, no?
to this day, i still seem to get the impression that our president, to put it bluntly, is a bum, no offense intended. he does NOTHING related to governing this ocuntry, am i wrong to say tht? so... a huge chunk of our salary goes to him.... WHY? answer tht, skyblue.
and pegging our ministerial pay to the top. has tht REALLY worked? REALLY?0.0
If you believe the US president earns no more than 300k a year, you are naive once again. Each time he gives a talk, he earns too. So 300k is the ground pay, but in real numbers, thats not all he is earning.
And to our president role, unfortunately I don't know much about the details of the president work so I'm in no position to comment. But if you are so interested, google will help you. -
"Why is there so much dislike towards PAP?"
In my opinion, i dont think it is dislike. Its more of, Singaporeans today are more educated and we have the ability to question and rationalise policies. Thanks to our world class education system, the "Govt" planted the seed of destruction when they introduce this kind of education system. -
because their solutions got pattern one - opne size fits all
-
let me show you this intresting yahoo! answer user
http://answers.yahoo.com/activity/qa?show=r4pijbizaa&link=question
she's quite stupid, left her privacy settings open
-
Originally posted by Sky_Blue223:
If you believe the US president earns no more than 300k a year, you are naive once again. Each time he gives a talk, he earns too. So 300k is the ground pay, but in real numbers, thats not all he is earning.
And to our president role, unfortunately I don't know much about the details of the president work so I'm in no position to comment. But if you are so interested, google will help you.You cannot compare US and Sg lah.
-
-
-
They did themselves in by developing too fast! When you develop too fast you might miss out on the finer details of thinking thro' policies carefully. There is really no excuse for not thinking longer term or being proactive when it comes to policy making. Instant remedies also bring along with them other types of problems which unfortunately sometimes manifest itself decades later! The biggest problem about them is that they let economic considerations override all other considerations. Thus a seemingly prosperous country on the surface, with the great infrastructures around, when in reality you have at least 3/4 s of the population actually all stressed out to make ends meet, with a future scenario of a souless people with little lasting values and or tradition. These days ends ( economic well being of the country) justify whatever the means( even if it mean casinos and property speculation) . No doubts about it - we are deteriorating in our values. Alot depends on the ethos of the government leading a country. If their objective is high salaries for themselves justified by high GDP and thus a very fast pace development, the outcome will definitely be different that one that allows for a slower development and an easier pace of life of its citizens. Then again, if one wants to be 'first world"economically and also have a secure future, can one afford slow development today? Will the world wait for you at your pace? Or will the world pass you by? Having said all that, the report card of the government is excellent as recognised by not only our voters but the world. How about that? So what dislike are we talking about?
-
they are out of touch.