This is something that was sent to me. I am reproducing the letter in it's entirety and is not written by me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Classmates of RI,
Dear Classmates of RI,
As you know, our dear friend and classmate, Jee Say, has come out to stand for elections in GE2011. I want to wish him the very best and win this election. I am somewhat ashamed that I have not been able to do more to support the cause of the Opposition. So let me do a little bit to help via this.
Please allow me to share why I am so heated against the PAP:
I fully agree with Jee Say that the PAP has lost its moral compass. While Jee Say cited the casinos as an evidence of his accusation, I cite what the Old Man himself said and was reported in the Straits Times. I am not sure how many of you spotted it. I wrote something which is attached right below - do feel free to forward if you think it makes sense because people need to know.
The PAP is conscious that it is losing votes because people are being left behind in Singapore's progress.
There have been many reports about the growing Gini Coefficient. If this is not clear evidence of people being left behind, then I don't know what.
Here are some more evidences. I work in the social service sector, and I am fully aware of the many social needs out there. I am not referring to just the financial hardship cases. I am also referring to the many who struggle in dysfunctional families, who have disabled children to support in costly special education, who have aged parents who need costly medical care. My aunt who suffered a heart attack in 2010 was placed in Class C for a bypass. She had to incur $17,000 by the time she was well enough. And we are talking about Class C health costs which her daughter has to pay for her.
Yet, the PAP government stinges when it comes to helping these people who cannot help themselves much. They may cite figures of how many millions they give as funding to support charities to help these. But they don't tell you that their share of the total cost is not more than just 30% of the funding needs. The charities have to raise the remainder all by themselves. And
you know how depressed the charity sector is in terms of what they can afford to pay the people who work for them to provide the social services to the needy.
Now, compare what they spend for Defence. Scrutinise what the budget for social needs is relative to the entire National Budget. You can find the data:
http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/budget_2011/revenue_expenditure/attachment/5%20GOS%20Expenditure%20EE2011.pdf
The report is reproduced on the PMO website:
http://www.pmo.gov.sg/content/pmosite/mediacentre/inthenews/ministermentor/2011/January/Will_PAP_last.html
A section of the report reveals a fundamental change in the PAP in comparison to its early years. I cite an extract in full so that the context is also clearer
[Start of extract]
WHAT IS FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG?
In today’s news Singaporeans are called not to rock the fundamentals.
The Straits Times on 21 January 2011 reporting the launch of LKY’s “Hard Truths”, featured an article titled “Will PAP Last?”
The report is reproduced on the PMO website:
http://www.pmo.gov.sg/content/pmosite/mediacentre/inthenews/ministermentor/2011/January/Will_PAP_last.html
A section of the report reveals a fundamental change in the PAP in comparison to its early years. I cite an extract in full so that the context is also clearer
[Start of extract]
One potential source of trouble for the PAP that Mr Lee singled out is the growing wage gap, which could spark class interests. 'There could come a time when the interest of the upper middle class will be divergent, that they don't think they should subsidise the lower classes. They may well support a party which says, 'No, I don't think this taxation is right. Why should I support the people in the two-room and three-room and four-room flats?' We will widen the divide in our society. I don't know when, but it will come.'
This was why the Government went out of its way to cater to the lower-income, to prevent the entrenchment of a 'disaffected, discontented and rebellious' underclass, like in America.
But Mr Lee insisted that solving this problem using welfare payments, as European countries do, would not work in Singapore - 'we will not perform'.
Instead, the PAP redistributes enough to secure the support of more than half the electorate, but not so much that the country loses its competitive drive. 'So you say to me, the chaps at the bottom will become anti-government. Do we change because of that or do we say, 'Right, we are likely going to lose that number of votes each time and so we've got to win from the median upwards'? I mean, that's politics.'
This was why the Government went out of its way to cater to the lower-income, to prevent the entrenchment of a 'disaffected, discontented and rebellious' underclass, like in America.
But Mr Lee insisted that solving this problem using welfare payments, as European countries do, would not work in Singapore - 'we will not perform'.
Instead, the PAP redistributes enough to secure the support of more than half the electorate, but not so much that the country loses its competitive drive. 'So you say to me, the chaps at the bottom will become anti-government. Do we change because of that or do we say, 'Right, we are likely going to lose that number of votes each time and so we've got to win from the median upwards'? I mean, that's politics.'
[End of extract]
Read that last bit again. Unless my English has failed me, I understand that to mean that the PAP is prepared to lose votes from the lower income groups. They are prepared to move “up market” – to win from the median upwards.
Read that last bit again. Unless my English has failed me, I understand that to mean that the PAP is prepared to lose votes from the lower income groups. They are prepared to move “up market” – to win from the median upwards.
Excuse me? “From the median upwards”? You mean the super rich and famous? You mean the upper middle class (not even the lower middle class)? You mean the new “bourgeoisie”? You mean the capitalists who are driven by an insatiable hunger for profits?
So what happens to those in the median downwards? That’s 50% of the population, no? They may tell us of their Public Assistance scheme. Would they care to share some statistics with the public – how many benefit from Public Assistance, and how much?
So what happens to the sandwiched class who don’t qualify for assistance and remain constantly under cost pressures?
The rising Gini Coefficient is evidence enough that the policies of the PAP are not “lower income friendly”. They are “prorich”.
What makes this situation all the more troubling is that much of that wealth the nation is generating, is locked up in the reserves. We don’t even know how large that reserve is. They make a big deal out of “returning” the reserves they took out in the recent downturn even though they didn’t have to.
What does it say of a government that has the ability to do more, much more, yet refuses to do so? They say they’ll ensure no one gets left behind in the nation’s progress. But their actions say otherwise. We need more than propaganda.others.
Why, they won’t even adequately help those community organizations that are trying to help the needy. In the name of antiwelfarism, they tell them that if they don’t have enough to do their good work, to go help themselves so that they can help others.
No, we do not want welfare policies. It is wise never to kill the individual motivation and attitude of self-help. Neither do we want to plunder the reserves. It is always prudent to save and store up enough for a rainy day. But those words tell me that the PAP can no longer adequately represent and attend to the needs of the lower 50% of the Singapore population.
Back to those very troubling words, “so we've got to win from the median upwards'? I mean, that's politics.”
Well, excuse me then. It is also politics that that will hasten the decline of the PAP. That decline had already been in progress for a number of years already.
“Let us not speak of economy in the wrong places…can we not show a little more humanity – no more than that – to the very under-class?” David Marshall, founder of the Workers Party, 1961 Parliamentary Speech
So what happens to those in the median downwards? That’s 50% of the population, no? They may tell us of their Public Assistance scheme. Would they care to share some statistics with the public – how many benefit from Public Assistance, and how much?
So what happens to the sandwiched class who don’t qualify for assistance and remain constantly under cost pressures?
The rising Gini Coefficient is evidence enough that the policies of the PAP are not “lower income friendly”. They are “prorich”.
What makes this situation all the more troubling is that much of that wealth the nation is generating, is locked up in the reserves. We don’t even know how large that reserve is. They make a big deal out of “returning” the reserves they took out in the recent downturn even though they didn’t have to.
What does it say of a government that has the ability to do more, much more, yet refuses to do so? They say they’ll ensure no one gets left behind in the nation’s progress. But their actions say otherwise. We need more than propaganda.others.
Why, they won’t even adequately help those community organizations that are trying to help the needy. In the name of antiwelfarism, they tell them that if they don’t have enough to do their good work, to go help themselves so that they can help others.
No, we do not want welfare policies. It is wise never to kill the individual motivation and attitude of self-help. Neither do we want to plunder the reserves. It is always prudent to save and store up enough for a rainy day. But those words tell me that the PAP can no longer adequately represent and attend to the needs of the lower 50% of the Singapore population.
Back to those very troubling words, “so we've got to win from the median upwards'? I mean, that's politics.”
Well, excuse me then. It is also politics that that will hasten the decline of the PAP. That decline had already been in progress for a number of years already.
“Let us not speak of economy in the wrong places…can we not show a little more humanity – no more than that – to the very under-class?” David Marshall, founder of the Workers Party, 1961 Parliamentary Speech
No comments:
Post a Comment