RA's Classes 2010

It is true that the salaries of our ministers are too high. This results in a social class that is too wide between the average Singaporeans and the ministers. The needs of the common people are not fulfilled through policies. However, the high salaries is probably one of the measures to deter corruption.

Well, too much acceptance of foreign workers into Singapore is really the spark plug for Singaporeans to demand for a change. However, i agree with Mr Andrew that Singaporeans will choose not to rock the boat because we all know fairly well that going against the flow would create problems which many don't wish to face and resolve.

i agree with Madeleine about this issue as the influx of foreigners may just be the catalyst to tip the scales. However, it is important to consider that the PAP has and have been 'walking the walk' for many years, legitimisting their authoritarian rule over singapore for 40 years. So one must consider if the people are willing to step into the unknown and elect another party to take over. We have never had a change of government before, and this has proven to work well for us for many years, so i do not think that given our attitude towards the unknown, as typical singaporeans(sorry for stereotyping here), we will be too 'kia si'(afraid to die) to change the current PAP as the governing party, simply because we do not know what problems will ensue, along with the questionable competence of the opposing parties. Thus i am with Mr. Andrew on the issue ; there might be some changes, but not as drastic as some people expect.

In my opinion, the government has also done a fair bit to discourage the number of foreign workers. For instance, the government have increased taxes on foreign labour based on their education standards. Moreover, more benefits, such as subsidies, are also given in favour of citizens. Therefore, some Singaporeans may still acknowledge these efforts and continue voting for the PAP.

I think that less people will vote for the PAP but for the next election PAP will still win and dominate. Most of the people will not be used to changes and they may not know whether voting for opposition will benefit them or worsen the situation. The government has promise to slow down future intake of foreigners so they will still stick to voting for the PAP. However, since the result of the promise that the government made will be shown in future, there will only be changes in the future elections.

Singaporeans are unhappy about the fact that foreigners are taking away the high ranking positions and houses. How come there is no one complaining about there are too many foreign construction workers in Singapore? And I think that if the birth rate in Singapore are high enough, there is no need for the intake of foreign talents. People are blaming everything on the government and does not reflect on themselves. But too bad, it is the citizens who vote for the government not the other way round, so the government will still have to try their best to "please" the people. I agree with Xiu Hui that the supporters of PAP will decrease but PAP will still win the next election, as they might want to take the risk in changing the government.

The influx of foreigners seems to be the issue that have caused the interplay of unsatisfaction among Singaporeans. I think that, yes perhaps there may be a fall in the number of seats for the PAP, however it is a high chance that they will still be the ruling party. This is because the PAP has proven to be a worthy party through their success in developing Singapore to her current status. So i think the people will still confidently vote for the PAP and not take risks to vote for the opposition.

The current dissatisfaction against the PAP is only temporary. PAP has walked alongside Singapore for many years and also survived many general elections. The confidence of the people in PAP will not diminish that rapidly at least not for the next decade. Hence it is not likely for PAP to be overthrown in the coming elections but the loss of seats remains a mystery as it depends on the population's mindset which can be quite unpredictable nowadays.

The PAP may lose more seats in the next elections however,I doubt that its role as ruling party will be taken over by opposition.Many voters may not be very discerning and may choose to go with the flow,in this case, the party that seems favored by the majority.Naturally, the ruling party would paint a wonderful picture of themselves.Hence, many flawed judgments would be made.

I feel that the author did not shown any balance at all. All the 10 points are all against the government. He failed to show balance how PAP help Singapore. The view is too subjective. Indeed the current infux of foreigners have ignite the tinderbox in many Singaporeans and this cause resentment towards the government. This may result PAP in losing more seats but PAP may still win in the next election because PAP have develop citizen loyalty towards them and have shown us that under their leadership, the tiny red dot in the map is now a red glowing dot. Furthermore, by Singaporeans do not like to take risks, they always play safe so i doubt they will vote for the opposition party.

Qiyuan has made an excellent observation: People are unpredictable. You just never know. In 2008, the Malaysian government was shocked to lose 4 states to the opposition. They never saw it coming. You never know. Most of us are probably right. The PAP will take a few blows, but they'll survive. However, there is that outside chance that the dreaded freak election (like the 2008 Malaysian polls) could occur.

In my opinion,I feel that PAP will still win,but the percentage of people voting for PAP will decrease, as many Singaporeans are still afraid to change,as they are used to PAP being the ruling party after so many years.However,Singaporeans might use the voting as an opportunity to express their unhappiness,decreasing the percentage of people voting for them.

I agree with Mr Andrew.The PAP MPs are trying to reach out to young singaporeans as soon as possible by Facebook.I think that it is not a good or effective measure for them to take as not many young singaporeans are joining their facebook group.Nowadays,technology has been leading to many changes.

It is feasible to use social networking sites to reach out to the young since it is convenient, but the younger generation may not be interested in joining such political groups as they don't have the interest and they will think twice before joining such a group.

i agree with vanessa tay, not many youth will be interested to join political group. most youth that are using the facebook are still naive and they are not intrested with the issues happening around them yet..however more older people are using facebook today, the PAP should focus the attention on them instead..

i agree that not many youth are interested to join political group. but they are a smal group that will be interested and will have some help to the government by giving information.

To me, half of youths are politically apathetic and only a few are engaged in the affairs of the nation. Though honestly, it is sort of a good outlet for the PAP to bank on the politically-engaged youths (because almost all of us, even the political ones, are on Facebook) but it seems too, how should I put it...easy? It doesn't seem to be legitimate enough to have a PAP Facebook group, amongst the throngs of other Facebook groups trying to advocate menial things. I mean, how do I take a PAP Facebook group page with the utmost seriousness when next to it, I see a group calling for people to join them just because Megan Fox looked way different ages ago? And they've said that their Facebook profile pages are just a "wayang" (film; an act) for publicity's sake - not to be taken seriously - so I guess this way to govern, well, shouldn't be taken seriously?

I think that it s an interesting way to somehow connect the political leaders with the people. Even though there is not much discussion or debates about government issues, by making friends with the people, it shows that the leaders want to be closer with the people through their friendliness. There is increased connection between the leaders and the people in this way. Therefore, it is evident that technology can allow greater connection between the government and its people.

I think the British government has done the right thing in clarifying the specific instances in which assisted suicide is legal. Perhaps Singapore should consider similar legislation?

Singapore can consider the same legislation. I think that the patients' relatives should not keep on saying about assisted sucide to the terminally ill patients.They might feel that they are a burden to their loved ones.They will not be in a certainly right frame of mind. Sometimes I feel that assisted sucide helps the patients a lot,as we do not know their pain.They can be suffering from tremendous pain.

If assisted suicide is being persuaded by their loved ones to ease the suffering, it may not be something bad, however, if it is forced, the government should step in.

Maybe singapore should only allow euthanasia to be carried out only when the terminally patients wish to die as they are physically sick.

I agree with the British Prime Minister that the law on euthanasia should not be changed. If it is left to the patients or their relatives, they would surely choose the easy way out which is to resort to assisted suicide. This is especially bad for those who believe in God as they are going against His might. If it is not their time to go, it is not their time to go..they should just let it be.

Exclusion orders are like individual ban orders. It may promote illegal gambling and drive gambling addictions underground as the addicts seek to relieve themselves at illegal gambling dens. Instead of issuing exclusion orders to bar addicts from entering the casinos, a better solution would be to identify these addicts at the casinos and give them mandatory counselling help. My name is reversed.

In time to come , we will see whether the police force is able to meet the demands of having casinos in the region.

Singaporeans can see that the casinos are going to be a big social problem due to the effective promoting and education by the NCPG. The government would not be too worried about the rise in demand for exclusion orders as Singaporeans are only a small portion of their target group.They are looking to the rich business men and big shots from other countries, especially our neighbouring countries, to make the casinos a success. I wonder how many muslims asked for the exclusion order out of the 264.

The exclusion can only ban from entering casinos in Singapore. It will definitely lead to a rise in illegal gathering, or even an outflow of Singaporeans to other countries and gamble. Such exclusions maybe done unwillingly, thus leading to the possibility of the negative outcomes.

I agree that this will lead to a rise in illegal gamble. However, i believe that if they have the will to make self-exclusion applications, they will stop gambling.

The main difference is that the Chinese have a superior technical education and mant travel and work overseas, hence the difference. China has produced people who can create the Great Firewall and also hack it! The product of success. Same thing applies to Singapore. You can't have a great education system and not expect to produce people who will challenge the government.

The internet help to protect the rights of the people in China. However, not everyone is able to benefit from this. The people from older age group may have differing comfort with internet and also the people from rural areas may not have access to it when injustice is always done to people who are from rural area.

Although Google threatened to leave the China market, I doubt that will happen. Even if they were to leave China, there are other search engines available too. I feel that more people in China should pick up the skill of hacking, such that they will learn about the truth of what is actually happening around the world.

I'm amazed by the power of twitter. I think that it is asinine for the Chinese government to persistently try to censor information because in this technological age people can actually learn to hack and get past the GFW.

In this era of modernisation, with advances in technology, its rather laborious to prevent people from entering any sites. Even if there isn't twitter, there are still other sites for the individuals to leave their comments on.

Chinese government may try all means to censor what is on the internet. However, there are many tech savvy people around who are able to surpass the "Great Firewall". People should have the right to know what is going on around the world. I think that China hasn't transit successfully from communist to democratic.

Overcensorship is one thing but creating technology that is able to evade government barriers? I don't know if we should go in that direction. In the case of China's Great FireWall, there is certainly too much censorship going on but what I am concerned is that innovation of technology to evade government barriers would certainly allow too much internet freedom. Technology has again created a solution to a problem and yet also created another problem. If such technology floods the internet, we would see much more undesired stuff that would normally be censored such as pornography and websites that promote terrorism.

This incident is just another example showing how fearful the power of technology is. The Chinese government is well aware of this, hence the Great Fire Wall. But I am sure many more similar incidents will appear, and China's adamant stand on censorship might backfire on them. The question is how long till the volcano erupts? China needs to accept the fact that just opening up their economy is not enough for their country to progress.

"Government can also play a role in empowering Chinese netizens.I disagree with this statement that an external government should meddle in the domestic affairs of another country.Besides, it was suggested that the "United States, for example, could start with some basic funding for the kind of "science and technology innovation that gave us the Internet to begin with." ".Honestly, if the United States,already having such a huge deficit,was able to pump in money to meddle with the domestic affairs of others,isn't it more reasonable for them to use the money more wisely, for starters, help improve the current situation in their own country?

I feel that this is like the battle between technology, the stronger technology will win. Indeed, I believe that in some cases, cencorship will be required, but excessive cencorship is not good as the effects of it are detrimental to the society. It is as though the citizens in China are living in a segregated world from us. However, in this globalising world, more people are becomming tech savvy and with greater knowledge of technology, they bound to outsmart the Chinese government and the so called "Great Firewall" may just crumble and become an ordinary wall

Haha. Mr Ang would have accepted the offer if the price is little lower and his wife is not around. According to the text, prostitution is legal in Singapore. How is the authority supposed to handle this problem if the prostitution is legal in Singapore? Other problems like drugs, loan sharks and money laundering are yet to rise. New sets of regulations will be needed when this happens, though these problems are difficult to detect.

i agree with mr.abdul...the opening of the integrated resort seems to be creating problems not faced by singapore before. singapore is certainly in a predicament since we have not encountered anything like this since our independance, where singapore had a myriad of problems (drug trafficking, prostitution etc.). This may be the next major problem, considering the high probability that singapore simply does not have the means or experience to deal with the upcoming problems faced by casinos world-wide(underground prostitution, triads etc...). Lets hope singapore will be able to handle this, although the future seems bleak, seeing as Mr. Abdul has clearly pointed out the problems of legalising prostitution.

With the legalisation and opening of the Integrated Resorts, the government should already have seen this coming. Since they are against prostitution, they should have addressed the issue and consider the externalities involved before they built the IR. By the way, I think $200 is too expensive for a massaging service. Haha.

Problems such as drugs, loan sharks and prostitution have been existing all this while, it is just that no one makes a big fuss out of it. Since Casino is such a big project of Singapore, naturally people will focus on these problems more. I agree with Nabilah that new sets of regulations will be needed for these problems, though they may be difficult to detect. Although it is challenging to differentiate the prostitutes and the decent ones, i believe that prostitutes have some significant characteristics such as wearing revealing clothings, indecent actions. The police might want to take note of these.

I suppose the profits earned from the Sentosa World Resort Casino greatly outweighs the disadvantages and that is why the government decided to go ahead with the plan, building the resorts.

Well it is quite impossible to differentiate the prostitutes from others. Before the government have decided to build the IR, they should have already considered such problems that may arise. So now i think that the best way is to implement new sets of regulations to prevent or possibly reduce such problems, like what Nabilah has said.

Wherever there is money,there would always be nasty social undesirables that comes along with it.Thus,it should be pretty obvious to anyone that these problems regarding the Casinos were bound to happen sooner or later.The government must have known this right from the start.However,they either choose to ignore it in hopes that it wouldn't happen,or the economic benefits that comes along with the Casinos must have been much more attractive than the prevention of social problems.The decision to build the Casinos clearly indicates the government's priority.

The casino has just opened for around two weeks and there are a lot of problems arising from it such as prostitution and theft cases and even loan-shark problems. These problems will be hard to resolve and will exist for a long time. Furthermore, there is only one casino which has opened for now. Imagine what impact will it have on the society after another casino which is Marina Bay Sands open?

I feel that casino and prostituition are synonymous, one will lead to another. I think that the government would have already predicted that there will be prostitutes going to the casino but the casino was built to drive the economy and the government would have already weigh the cost and benefit and thus comming to a conclusion to build the casino as the benefits of building the casino would probably outweigh the cost of it. By the way, if the wife is not with Mr tan, that means Mr tan would have a one night stand with the prostitute. This shows Mr tan is not loyal to his wife

NIce one Jing Yaw, well i basically do agreee with Jing Yaw as with more prostitutes around, it can cause problems between spouses as they might commit adultery, It is definitely not a good thing. However, the total amount of money earned from the casino is tremendous and the government is enticed by the huge amt of money earned.

Though I don't really agree that prostitution and gambling/casinos are symbiotic in relationship (which I assume what Jing Yaw is saying - Hi friend, band on Wednesday) but it is quite a "social" trend that the two fit together like perfect puzzle pieces. By the way, prostitution is legal in Singapore. It's the act of procuring that is illegal. That is where the problem lies. People are just outraged by the amount of prostitutes lingering around. Plus, recently there's this report about kids hanging around the place while waiting for their parents, so I guess it's a major no-no for these 2 groups of people to "collide". It seems to them that we're throwing our religious/social morals out for such things to happen - a conservative's nightmare. But, the government should have expected this to happen. They can't be that myopic to not notice such trends happening in other countries right? So let's just safely assume they knew it was going to happen. Because I did. So if they did expect this, then clearly this is not a major problem for Singapore, especially if the economy is concerned. And funny is the case of America, where there is no federal law against prostitution. Prostitution is illegal in all states except the state of Nevada (the ol' Silver State as they call it), where there are licensed brothels. And yes, Nevada is well known for it's casinos, sprawled across the state, from Reno to Sin City itself - Las Vegas. To me, the placement of the 2 things just calls for it - prostitutes (and their sugar daddies no doubt) will flock to these casinos, where old sleazy men under the influence would just be vulnerable for a, well, you get the point. So I suppose the government is just looking over some things because it blocks the way of better things to come. I mean, you've heard of how much this brings to the economy right?

In the US, The National Gambling Impact Study Commission reported that it received "abundant testimony and evidence that compulsive gambling introduces a greatly heightened level of stress and tension into marriages and families, often culminating in divorce and other manifestations of familial disharmony." Children have died as a direct result of adult gambling problems. In Louisiana and South Carolina, children died after being locked in hot cars for hours while their caretakers gambled.8 An Illinois mother was sentenced to prison for suffocating her infant daughter in order to collect insurance money to continue gambling. 9 Cases of child abandonment at Foxwoods, the nation's largest casino in Ledyard, Conn., became so commonplace that authorities were forced to post signs in the casino's parking lots warning parents not to leave children in cars unattended. The social impacts on casinos are indeed disastrous, the government needs got to put in place policies that can minimize such things from happening.

Singapore should been ready for this. Prostitutes, gangs and loan sharks come hand-in-hand with the casino. Before opening up the casino, Singapore government should have already thought on how to react if such problems occur. The casino may bring about a high increase in revenue, but the cost needed to maintain it and the problems that come with it could decrease the benefits that the casino could bring about.

Using mobile phones for transactions are useful.It saves time in standing in long queues at the bank.Transactions can be done at any time.We should not forget that there will be more opprtunities for massive disputes.What if the system in the mobile phone hangs when big amounts of transactions are made?

It saves the hassle of going down to the bank to make transactions, however, technology may sometimes malfunction and creates problem for the user.

i think it's good that technology has made our life to be more convenient but we shouldn't get over-dependant on it because it is not perfect. when there's system malfunction, there may be chaos and problems.

Wow, the Reform Party made PAP's economic policies seem like rubbish. However this eventually boils down to who makes more economic sense. I don't think I am at that kind of a level of economics to be arguing this but at least I know this: PAP had better get new economic advisors fast!

Well,the Opposition have found many faults in the existing policies and claims that they will do better in those aspects by implementing new policies if they're elected.However,talk is cheap and it is so much easier to make a claim than to show actual results.So how do we know whether they will be able to do a much better job than the existing government?

Singapore's development and expansion should not come at the cost of the environment. However it is not the time to be pointing fingers and let Singapore take the blame alone. A suggested solution would be to enhance cooperations between countries to arrest and deter sand smugglers, and also to pass legislations to make the source of the sand transparent. It is to be taken note that Singapore has been engaging alternative sources and diversifying its supply sources of sand. My name is reversed.

I feel that the sand war has started because of self-interest. Singapore does not have natural resources and is represented by a small red dot on the world map. There is an increasing population in Singapore and the small country is not big enough to hold so much people. Thus, Singapore can only resort to buying sand to expand its coastline through land reclamation. Since there are bans on exporting sand in Indonesia, Cambodia and Vietnam, these have cut off supplies and encourage the opening up a thriving smuggling trade. Singapore will buy sand from the smugglers and smugglers are willing to steal the sand from neighbouring countries as they get to earn a lot of money. Both parties benefited from it, however, impact on the environment is detrimental and it will be irreversible. Thus, I think Singapore should look for other methods to expand its land and only this way, it will stop the sand war.

Chaos creates resilience and versatility. Too much success creates stagnancy and complacency. Think about it.

I disagree with Mr Andrew that too much success leads to stagnancy and complacency. This is because too much success do not necessarily lead to stagnancy and complacency. Furthermore to maintain the success, one may feel compelled to innovate and improve so that he would not lose out, thus leading to further success. This is evident in Apple which has continuously stunned consumers with its innovative products such as the iPhone and more recently, the iPad. My name is reversed.

In the case of hiring foreigners, how can we constantly maintain the success of that? by retraining and upgrading? The money would be better off spending on singaporeans. isn't that's the issue going on right now? we have quantity but no quality. as the finance minister said , it takes two men to build a house in japan but in singapore, it takes 6 men. if the issue is not rectified, potential economic growth may not be attained.