(no subject)
So I have a problem. I have enough money for the Leica M9 and the 35/1.4 Summilux. Buying this camera will probably make me the youngest owner of the Leica M9 in Singapore. Unless there is someone below the age of 25 who owns an M9, I don't think so. For one, its extraordinarily expensive. Two, most people aren't willing to use a manual focus rangefinder in the era of automatic everything and autofocus. My photographic vision has progressed from amateur automation, to complex professionalism and strangely so, things have been getting quite straightforward these days.
Zooms became primes. Autofocus became manual. Single Lens Reflex became Rangefinder. Big and Bulky gave way to small, light and discreet. Shooting stopped down for optimal sharpness became shooting wide open for dimensionality and depth of field separation. Surprisingly, I remain committed to shooting in color, not that I dislike black and white - but now is probably not the phase in time or the time yet to move to black and white. I like color compositions that are simple - with maybe just a few colors in the scene itself. For some strange reason, my photographic vision seems to have led me to the doorway of the Leica - the biggest possible sensor in the smallest possible body, extraordinarily high quality lenses that are tiny and sharp wide open, something light and discreet that can be carried around all day and doesn't attract the attention of others - or induce the reactivity in people having their photograph taken.
But the problem is that just one body and one lens alone costs basically $17,000. That's a lot of money. I'd like to get it as soon as possible before I turn 26 within the next two weeks, and also because I'd like to shoot with something different when I head back to the US and Beijing in the next 8 weeks or so. At the same time, I am being sued by the other drive since the accident for the exact same amount of money. I've already pre-ordered and locked in the purchase, so its not really possible to back out right now. And I really enjoy taking pictures. While it would be completely possible to save up and get it at the end of the year - that belies all the lost opportunities to take pictures with such a fantastic photographic tool throughout the rest of the year. I feel like I almost should take a short term loan, with those usurious rates of interest at 18% to be exact in order to buy it, take pictures, pay off the loan in 12 months or less and then have a decent amount of cash in the bank to meet the legal fees as well as the damages that will soon come forth.
The alternative would be to get dad to pay for it - aka put it on the credit card and repay him basically interest free over the course of the year. But in many ways, this is not a good way to live a life - in debt. I guess if I didn't do photography, I wouldn't really ever think of going into debt, since I have no debt on me at all. Though I wonder if I can even get a loan. I guess I'm stuck. I don't want to back out on my dealer as it is arriving soon, and I really really want to switch systems and take pictures and I really really want to settle both the camera as well as have ready funds to pay off the plaintiff when the day of reckoning comes. I'll try the dad route first. Failing so I will probably take the short loan to cover the camera, whilst retaining sufficient funds to overcome the maximum damages for the lawsuit at the moment. Who knows, maybe the judge will rule 10% in my favor and that would already cancel out whatever I owe to him. In many ways, I am confident of winning the case - although I am not so sure if the judge will not rely on his availability and representative heuristic during his judgments.
Indeed, even as I do not really love money per se, I do realize and recognize that it is necessary and important for me to have it - as it grants freedom, both artistic, personal and existential. I feel sad because everything and maybe everyone around me is so money minded. I don't blame them, but could we like move on to more "genuine" things? Maybe this is just who I am - the partial philosopher who only wants to dawdle upon ideas, abstract theories, rationality, reasoning and much analytical thinking. I feel like the short term loan is the best option, as it would allow me to purchase the Leica, and grant me the opportunity to take pictures with it - the costs being basically the interest paid in order to purchase these photographic opportunities - and a tying down of a significant portion of my salary for a time to come. I could sell off a portion of my gear to fund this purchase - but I'd rather not, as it is meant for my brother. My love for taking pictures makes things quite difficult on so many fronts. So I do hope in many ways that this will be one of my last purchases for quite some time - the only exception being the acquisition of the 50mm f/1.4 summilux-m lens. As I consider that to be a necessary purchase in photography. Oh money woes. And its my hobby getting me into debt along the way too!
But I do worry in an era where wages are stagnating, where the mantra is a "faster, better, cheaper" race to the bottom when it comes to salaries, and the costs of living is generally skyrocketing and significantly outpacing regular inflation. With an economy "growing" mainly by rent seeking activities, property flipping, speculating in financial markets and an income divide that is probably the worst in the entire developed world - its almost like 5% of Singapore is extraordinarily developed with the other 95% is still a developing country... but that 5% make so much money that the mean GDP per capita derives a developed world status. Kinda like Carlos Slim Helu moving to Singapore and channeling all his revenue from his monopolistic business model to his bank account in Singapore - GDP per capita will definitely rise significantly as a result and thus propel us into a "developed" nation in the rankings... but the living reality is substantially different for a lot of people.
I don't think the current model of economic growth - importing "foreign talent" is sustainable in the long run. Because most people that sink their roots here in Singapore are usually those from poorer countries, whilst those from much nicer countries will eventually leave. This has the effect of causing a brain drain as some who are disgruntled with the situation on the ground vote with their feet and leave (that's why our passports are only valid for 5 years now, and they can revoke your citizenship if you've been out of the country for more than 10). At the same time, the inability to invest in our local workforce and local talent, whilst subjecting them to the citizen responsibilities of national service (a great deal of time wasted, plus huge opportunity costs in the prime time of life) and the inability of Singaporeans to have their grouses promptly responded to by the government will cause our society to gradually decline over time.
I suspect that the government will call a very quick election sometime this year that will be over in 9 or 10 days, giving opposition parties almost no time to mobilize (since it takes like 5 days to get a permit for public political speech, much less rally) and then announce a slew of changes - mostly price hikes across the board once the election is over. I also expect some form of a "progress package" that mainly consists of a redistribution of nominal sums of wealth to the heartlanders in order to secure the vote in important districts. Nomination day itself will see the government returned to power, as many seats remain uncontested because no one wants to lose their $12k election deposit if they fail to garner at least 1/8th of the popular vote. Likewise, the GRC system itself is a barrier to political power, as the need for suitable slates that include a minority race member precludes a large number of these potential opposition slates from forming in the first place - especially with a fractured opposition like we have in Singapore that just cannot seem to agree on anything except arguing with each other. Its almost like they didn't take politics 101 - first past the post wins. 50% + 1 vote. But no, they like four way fights, or five way splits.
Indirect rent seeking taxes will go up across the board - conservancy fees, COE, ERP, school fees, electricity, public healthcare and on things like cigarettes. I will not be surprised to see GST increase to 8 or even 10% over the course of the next few years. The goal overall is simple - it is to get Singaporeans into debt. Workers who are in debt make very docile, obedient and non challenging status quo employees - perfect for Singapore INC. Rent seek and tax the workers until they are heavily in debt because of their HDB flat loans - basically a transfer of economic growth into capital wielding entities who can capture the producer surplus by means of flipping property in the ever speculative market. Workers in debt will except ever lower standards of pay, longer hours at work, and greater competition from both the top and the bottom - and it will be a hard life. I'm not surprised if they eventually sell off their flats, pay off the loan and leave Singapore for other places like Canada, New Zealand or China. Our country is headed in the wrong direction, but I guess everyone's too worried about "bread and butter" issues to actually really know what is in their best interests. The winners in the end are the banks, the statutory boards, the monopolistic companies that dominate various sectors and big business.
Our economy is headed in a hybrid direction of Hong Kong, Monaco, Hawaii and Las Vegas. We are trying to become as big a financial hub as possible - like Hong Kong. At the same time, we desire to attract the greatest possible concentration of wealth in South East Asia - like Monaco in Europe and thus every whim, fancy and demand of the massively wealthy - be it seaside houses, docking spaces for their mega yachts, personalized private swiss banking, active investment opportunities, personal safety, political stability, high end healthcare, fine dining, exclusive entertainment, high society social activities and a pro business environment come to active fruition. And like Las Vegas, which runs its economy based off entertainment and the flesh trade, it is not secret that the casino itself and the associated entertainment acts that tag along with it are based off Las Vegas' entertainment industry. Integrated Resort really is a very bad euphemism for the Casino, which takes center stage in every aspect and is pretty much the flagship that is talked up in the papers on a daily basis. The roller coaster can spoil, but the gaming tables will always be open.
From my time in Hawaii, I have observed that the locals are mainly the servants/service staff to the wealthy, the tourists, the fun seeking entertainment crowd. And life is tough for most local Hawaiians. Cost of living is high, and they are so far removed from the Federal Government that their voice is almost something of a distraction than a contribution to the political process. After all, the only jobs that can't really be exported are service based jobs - but you can however import the labor for it to happen. As such, the liberal immigration policy has successfully driven wages down across the board. This would not have happened if the people truly had a voice in parliament to protect their interests first. Singapore has the unique contributions of viable economic geography to sustain trade and service related jobs, the educational capacity of its people to relate to most of the world with ease, but also the ethic of hard work that is borne throughout the people culturally.
Also, wages can be kept low because the government has wisely staked a gamble that young people will continue living with their parents until they get married - so there is no need for higher wages just because everyone needs to rent a place for themselves to stay post college. And likewise, the slow pace of HDB flats that are "built to order" is merely a tool to take advantage of newly weds living with their parents first... while they wait... and have no rental responsibilities for a while, and will thus accept lower purchasing power more willingly over time, coupled with debt from the flat, become willing partakers in a system of misery. I know that I am a cynic. But it cannot be helped. What I see for Singapore is that it is unsustainable in the long run. My intuition keeps telling me to get out of this country and find a place where I can be much happier, and live a simpler life. I guess the pursuit of crass consumerism, materialism and money doesn't drive me to work hard - it is the need to do things with a meaning and purpose that stokes me to live. Because the government has nothing to fear about whatever the repercussions and social consequences of their public policy, we have begun a nice gradual spiral downwards into despair.
Zooms became primes. Autofocus became manual. Single Lens Reflex became Rangefinder. Big and Bulky gave way to small, light and discreet. Shooting stopped down for optimal sharpness became shooting wide open for dimensionality and depth of field separation. Surprisingly, I remain committed to shooting in color, not that I dislike black and white - but now is probably not the phase in time or the time yet to move to black and white. I like color compositions that are simple - with maybe just a few colors in the scene itself. For some strange reason, my photographic vision seems to have led me to the doorway of the Leica - the biggest possible sensor in the smallest possible body, extraordinarily high quality lenses that are tiny and sharp wide open, something light and discreet that can be carried around all day and doesn't attract the attention of others - or induce the reactivity in people having their photograph taken.
But the problem is that just one body and one lens alone costs basically $17,000. That's a lot of money. I'd like to get it as soon as possible before I turn 26 within the next two weeks, and also because I'd like to shoot with something different when I head back to the US and Beijing in the next 8 weeks or so. At the same time, I am being sued by the other drive since the accident for the exact same amount of money. I've already pre-ordered and locked in the purchase, so its not really possible to back out right now. And I really enjoy taking pictures. While it would be completely possible to save up and get it at the end of the year - that belies all the lost opportunities to take pictures with such a fantastic photographic tool throughout the rest of the year. I feel like I almost should take a short term loan, with those usurious rates of interest at 18% to be exact in order to buy it, take pictures, pay off the loan in 12 months or less and then have a decent amount of cash in the bank to meet the legal fees as well as the damages that will soon come forth.
The alternative would be to get dad to pay for it - aka put it on the credit card and repay him basically interest free over the course of the year. But in many ways, this is not a good way to live a life - in debt. I guess if I didn't do photography, I wouldn't really ever think of going into debt, since I have no debt on me at all. Though I wonder if I can even get a loan. I guess I'm stuck. I don't want to back out on my dealer as it is arriving soon, and I really really want to switch systems and take pictures and I really really want to settle both the camera as well as have ready funds to pay off the plaintiff when the day of reckoning comes. I'll try the dad route first. Failing so I will probably take the short loan to cover the camera, whilst retaining sufficient funds to overcome the maximum damages for the lawsuit at the moment. Who knows, maybe the judge will rule 10% in my favor and that would already cancel out whatever I owe to him. In many ways, I am confident of winning the case - although I am not so sure if the judge will not rely on his availability and representative heuristic during his judgments.
Indeed, even as I do not really love money per se, I do realize and recognize that it is necessary and important for me to have it - as it grants freedom, both artistic, personal and existential. I feel sad because everything and maybe everyone around me is so money minded. I don't blame them, but could we like move on to more "genuine" things? Maybe this is just who I am - the partial philosopher who only wants to dawdle upon ideas, abstract theories, rationality, reasoning and much analytical thinking. I feel like the short term loan is the best option, as it would allow me to purchase the Leica, and grant me the opportunity to take pictures with it - the costs being basically the interest paid in order to purchase these photographic opportunities - and a tying down of a significant portion of my salary for a time to come. I could sell off a portion of my gear to fund this purchase - but I'd rather not, as it is meant for my brother. My love for taking pictures makes things quite difficult on so many fronts. So I do hope in many ways that this will be one of my last purchases for quite some time - the only exception being the acquisition of the 50mm f/1.4 summilux-m lens. As I consider that to be a necessary purchase in photography. Oh money woes. And its my hobby getting me into debt along the way too!
But I do worry in an era where wages are stagnating, where the mantra is a "faster, better, cheaper" race to the bottom when it comes to salaries, and the costs of living is generally skyrocketing and significantly outpacing regular inflation. With an economy "growing" mainly by rent seeking activities, property flipping, speculating in financial markets and an income divide that is probably the worst in the entire developed world - its almost like 5% of Singapore is extraordinarily developed with the other 95% is still a developing country... but that 5% make so much money that the mean GDP per capita derives a developed world status. Kinda like Carlos Slim Helu moving to Singapore and channeling all his revenue from his monopolistic business model to his bank account in Singapore - GDP per capita will definitely rise significantly as a result and thus propel us into a "developed" nation in the rankings... but the living reality is substantially different for a lot of people.
I don't think the current model of economic growth - importing "foreign talent" is sustainable in the long run. Because most people that sink their roots here in Singapore are usually those from poorer countries, whilst those from much nicer countries will eventually leave. This has the effect of causing a brain drain as some who are disgruntled with the situation on the ground vote with their feet and leave (that's why our passports are only valid for 5 years now, and they can revoke your citizenship if you've been out of the country for more than 10). At the same time, the inability to invest in our local workforce and local talent, whilst subjecting them to the citizen responsibilities of national service (a great deal of time wasted, plus huge opportunity costs in the prime time of life) and the inability of Singaporeans to have their grouses promptly responded to by the government will cause our society to gradually decline over time.
I suspect that the government will call a very quick election sometime this year that will be over in 9 or 10 days, giving opposition parties almost no time to mobilize (since it takes like 5 days to get a permit for public political speech, much less rally) and then announce a slew of changes - mostly price hikes across the board once the election is over. I also expect some form of a "progress package" that mainly consists of a redistribution of nominal sums of wealth to the heartlanders in order to secure the vote in important districts. Nomination day itself will see the government returned to power, as many seats remain uncontested because no one wants to lose their $12k election deposit if they fail to garner at least 1/8th of the popular vote. Likewise, the GRC system itself is a barrier to political power, as the need for suitable slates that include a minority race member precludes a large number of these potential opposition slates from forming in the first place - especially with a fractured opposition like we have in Singapore that just cannot seem to agree on anything except arguing with each other. Its almost like they didn't take politics 101 - first past the post wins. 50% + 1 vote. But no, they like four way fights, or five way splits.
Indirect rent seeking taxes will go up across the board - conservancy fees, COE, ERP, school fees, electricity, public healthcare and on things like cigarettes. I will not be surprised to see GST increase to 8 or even 10% over the course of the next few years. The goal overall is simple - it is to get Singaporeans into debt. Workers who are in debt make very docile, obedient and non challenging status quo employees - perfect for Singapore INC. Rent seek and tax the workers until they are heavily in debt because of their HDB flat loans - basically a transfer of economic growth into capital wielding entities who can capture the producer surplus by means of flipping property in the ever speculative market. Workers in debt will except ever lower standards of pay, longer hours at work, and greater competition from both the top and the bottom - and it will be a hard life. I'm not surprised if they eventually sell off their flats, pay off the loan and leave Singapore for other places like Canada, New Zealand or China. Our country is headed in the wrong direction, but I guess everyone's too worried about "bread and butter" issues to actually really know what is in their best interests. The winners in the end are the banks, the statutory boards, the monopolistic companies that dominate various sectors and big business.
Our economy is headed in a hybrid direction of Hong Kong, Monaco, Hawaii and Las Vegas. We are trying to become as big a financial hub as possible - like Hong Kong. At the same time, we desire to attract the greatest possible concentration of wealth in South East Asia - like Monaco in Europe and thus every whim, fancy and demand of the massively wealthy - be it seaside houses, docking spaces for their mega yachts, personalized private swiss banking, active investment opportunities, personal safety, political stability, high end healthcare, fine dining, exclusive entertainment, high society social activities and a pro business environment come to active fruition. And like Las Vegas, which runs its economy based off entertainment and the flesh trade, it is not secret that the casino itself and the associated entertainment acts that tag along with it are based off Las Vegas' entertainment industry. Integrated Resort really is a very bad euphemism for the Casino, which takes center stage in every aspect and is pretty much the flagship that is talked up in the papers on a daily basis. The roller coaster can spoil, but the gaming tables will always be open.
From my time in Hawaii, I have observed that the locals are mainly the servants/service staff to the wealthy, the tourists, the fun seeking entertainment crowd. And life is tough for most local Hawaiians. Cost of living is high, and they are so far removed from the Federal Government that their voice is almost something of a distraction than a contribution to the political process. After all, the only jobs that can't really be exported are service based jobs - but you can however import the labor for it to happen. As such, the liberal immigration policy has successfully driven wages down across the board. This would not have happened if the people truly had a voice in parliament to protect their interests first. Singapore has the unique contributions of viable economic geography to sustain trade and service related jobs, the educational capacity of its people to relate to most of the world with ease, but also the ethic of hard work that is borne throughout the people culturally.
Also, wages can be kept low because the government has wisely staked a gamble that young people will continue living with their parents until they get married - so there is no need for higher wages just because everyone needs to rent a place for themselves to stay post college. And likewise, the slow pace of HDB flats that are "built to order" is merely a tool to take advantage of newly weds living with their parents first... while they wait... and have no rental responsibilities for a while, and will thus accept lower purchasing power more willingly over time, coupled with debt from the flat, become willing partakers in a system of misery. I know that I am a cynic. But it cannot be helped. What I see for Singapore is that it is unsustainable in the long run. My intuition keeps telling me to get out of this country and find a place where I can be much happier, and live a simpler life. I guess the pursuit of crass consumerism, materialism and money doesn't drive me to work hard - it is the need to do things with a meaning and purpose that stokes me to live. Because the government has nothing to fear about whatever the repercussions and social consequences of their public policy, we have begun a nice gradual spiral downwards into despair.