The competition of egos.
Sorry that I haven't blogged in a while. I have gotten pretty lazy and if I wanted to rant, I'd do so on twitter. I'd blog only if I have too many thoughts to fit into 140s characters. Well, I HAVE tweeted on this issue but I feel that it's SO IMPORTANT that I have to rant some more. Hurrr.
My dad sent me an e-mail containing an abridged version of this blog post, "My Vote Counts: 10 Reasons Why I Cannot Vote for the PAP in the Next Election".
Let me just start out by saying, this guy is an idiot. He is 21 years old, first time at the polling booths, and his hands are itchy with the ability to affect a decision of this magnitude for this once in his life. Seriously, I don't give a damn what he votes. But apparently, his blogpost has gone viral and I don't want anyone to be swayed by his biased opinions.
One excuse that almost every opposition supporter uses in not voting of PAP is the whole Lim Chin Siong/Operation Coldstore saga. PLEASE lah. This happened in the 1960s! TWO prime ministers ago! Why is it still held over their heads?! Yes, our current prime minister is the guilty prime minister's son. But ARE you like YOUR father? Has Lee Hsien Loong showed any similarities in ruling like his father so far? Even if the answer is yes, are we even facing the same political context as the 1960s?
Just to clarify: I am not usually into politics. And I'm not in the PAP fan club either. But at this elections, I'm thinking PAP is good choice considering the alternatives. Did you know, according to wiki, there are 23 registered parties in Singapore? TWENTY THREE. Without the PAP, there are 22 opposition parties in a country of a population reaching 5 million. People, PLEASE don't decide to vote against PAP for the sake of voting against PAP. Is the opposition even competent enough?! Have they even gotten their bloody act together to run a country?
Let's face it. No political party will ever be perfect. Our government right now is far from it and I disagree with a few of their policies. But why are we so against PAP just because of a few problems?! Where it matters, PAP has delivered. We have been doing relatively well in almost every economic crisis thus far, we have achieved stability and safety (yes, at a cost to freedom of speech, but nevertheless), and we are on the list of best countries to live in. Are you willing to give any of these up?
People nowadays are swayed with the promise of change. Especially those in my age group, they believe that the PAP has been in power far too long, and it'll be 'nice' to see a change. I myself have probably thought that. But at the end of the day, even if the opposition takes over, is there even going to be a positive change?
Look at the glaring recent history. The US put Barack Obama into power, drunk on the promise of change. But is there really change? Are there not still troops in Iraq? Has there been any action on climate change? NO. How about Australia? Last year, the then prime minister Kevin Rudd got kicked out and replaced by Julia Gillard because Aussies wanted change. But this year- election year, Gillard is not doing much besides implementing a carbon tax, and currently her political party looks like they might be kicked out too.
Now, look at our elections. What solid plans have the opposition came up with? Hmm. Not so opinionated now?
Let me tell you now why I WOULD vote for PAP. You don't have to agree, but I have thought about it long and hard from an economist point of view, and since I've been trained this way, I feel it's a VERY important point that has trumped every other argument for the opposition.
In the time that the PAP has been in power, they have been able to make policies and effectively carry them out without fear of being voted out. Thus, this confidence in continuing power has enabled them to make plans for Singapore in the long term. If there IS a change in political parties in the government, would they make plans for Singapore 10 years down the road? For example, wiki (I know, the MOST trustworthy source ever, hurhur) claims that plans for the MRT circle line dates back from the 1980s. Government elections come by every 5 years. If the government thought that they would lose power, would they have bothered coming up with a development that is only apparent in about 30 years down the road? .
Being in Australia has made me realise how blessed our government is to be able to be forward-looking (at least 10 years ahead). Using the MRT example again, Sydney railways has such a backward and inefficient operation. Someone once told me that Sydney's railways has not been changed since it started operations in the 1850s. Along that vein, there are constant massive jams on roads from bottlenecks in roads and new road planning and restructuring is sorely needed. But nothing's changed, because the politician in power (of the moment) just doesn't have the capacity to improve it during their term. They need more time than that.
Also, Australian labour policies are in a big mess since the time John Howard was prime minister (2 PMs ago man!). Without going into the boring details, he basically implemented a set of labour policies that was GOING to take effect, but didn't end up seeing the light of day because of elections and government change. And then Kevin Rudd got kicked out before he could delve into the nitty gritty of the labour policies. It doesn't look like anything will happen soon either, with Julia Gillard in a lot of hot water right now.
Sorry I talk a lot about Australia. It's hard to live here and not laugh at the entire political game they are playing over here. I mean, one of the criticisms of Julia Gillard during elections last year was her ear lobes. REALLY?? REALLY???
Anyway guys, I just want you to vote wisely. Don't be swayed by strong opinions, because for every pro, there is a con. I'll end this post with a random geeky economics theory where when elections are coming up, if politicians try to reduce the unemployment rate to artificial low levels for votes, the economy will eventually suffer later on with a higher inflation rate.
VOTE WISELY GUYS!!
My dad sent me an e-mail containing an abridged version of this blog post, "My Vote Counts: 10 Reasons Why I Cannot Vote for the PAP in the Next Election".
Let me just start out by saying, this guy is an idiot. He is 21 years old, first time at the polling booths, and his hands are itchy with the ability to affect a decision of this magnitude for this once in his life. Seriously, I don't give a damn what he votes. But apparently, his blogpost has gone viral and I don't want anyone to be swayed by his biased opinions.
One excuse that almost every opposition supporter uses in not voting of PAP is the whole Lim Chin Siong/Operation Coldstore saga. PLEASE lah. This happened in the 1960s! TWO prime ministers ago! Why is it still held over their heads?! Yes, our current prime minister is the guilty prime minister's son. But ARE you like YOUR father? Has Lee Hsien Loong showed any similarities in ruling like his father so far? Even if the answer is yes, are we even facing the same political context as the 1960s?
Just to clarify: I am not usually into politics. And I'm not in the PAP fan club either. But at this elections, I'm thinking PAP is good choice considering the alternatives. Did you know, according to wiki, there are 23 registered parties in Singapore? TWENTY THREE. Without the PAP, there are 22 opposition parties in a country of a population reaching 5 million. People, PLEASE don't decide to vote against PAP for the sake of voting against PAP. Is the opposition even competent enough?! Have they even gotten their bloody act together to run a country?
Let's face it. No political party will ever be perfect. Our government right now is far from it and I disagree with a few of their policies. But why are we so against PAP just because of a few problems?! Where it matters, PAP has delivered. We have been doing relatively well in almost every economic crisis thus far, we have achieved stability and safety (yes, at a cost to freedom of speech, but nevertheless), and we are on the list of best countries to live in. Are you willing to give any of these up?
People nowadays are swayed with the promise of change. Especially those in my age group, they believe that the PAP has been in power far too long, and it'll be 'nice' to see a change. I myself have probably thought that. But at the end of the day, even if the opposition takes over, is there even going to be a positive change?
Look at the glaring recent history. The US put Barack Obama into power, drunk on the promise of change. But is there really change? Are there not still troops in Iraq? Has there been any action on climate change? NO. How about Australia? Last year, the then prime minister Kevin Rudd got kicked out and replaced by Julia Gillard because Aussies wanted change. But this year- election year, Gillard is not doing much besides implementing a carbon tax, and currently her political party looks like they might be kicked out too.
Now, look at our elections. What solid plans have the opposition came up with? Hmm. Not so opinionated now?
Let me tell you now why I WOULD vote for PAP. You don't have to agree, but I have thought about it long and hard from an economist point of view, and since I've been trained this way, I feel it's a VERY important point that has trumped every other argument for the opposition.
In the time that the PAP has been in power, they have been able to make policies and effectively carry them out without fear of being voted out. Thus, this confidence in continuing power has enabled them to make plans for Singapore in the long term. If there IS a change in political parties in the government, would they make plans for Singapore 10 years down the road? For example, wiki (I know, the MOST trustworthy source ever, hurhur) claims that plans for the MRT circle line dates back from the 1980s. Government elections come by every 5 years. If the government thought that they would lose power, would they have bothered coming up with a development that is only apparent in about 30 years down the road? .
Being in Australia has made me realise how blessed our government is to be able to be forward-looking (at least 10 years ahead). Using the MRT example again, Sydney railways has such a backward and inefficient operation. Someone once told me that Sydney's railways has not been changed since it started operations in the 1850s. Along that vein, there are constant massive jams on roads from bottlenecks in roads and new road planning and restructuring is sorely needed. But nothing's changed, because the politician in power (of the moment) just doesn't have the capacity to improve it during their term. They need more time than that.
Also, Australian labour policies are in a big mess since the time John Howard was prime minister (2 PMs ago man!). Without going into the boring details, he basically implemented a set of labour policies that was GOING to take effect, but didn't end up seeing the light of day because of elections and government change. And then Kevin Rudd got kicked out before he could delve into the nitty gritty of the labour policies. It doesn't look like anything will happen soon either, with Julia Gillard in a lot of hot water right now.
Sorry I talk a lot about Australia. It's hard to live here and not laugh at the entire political game they are playing over here. I mean, one of the criticisms of Julia Gillard during elections last year was her ear lobes. REALLY?? REALLY???
Anyway guys, I just want you to vote wisely. Don't be swayed by strong opinions, because for every pro, there is a con. I'll end this post with a random geeky economics theory where when elections are coming up, if politicians try to reduce the unemployment rate to artificial low levels for votes, the economy will eventually suffer later on with a higher inflation rate.
VOTE WISELY GUYS!!