General Motors (GM) ran out of gas

Wow... how the mighty automobile icon of America has fallen! It actually ran out of gas!

GM stocks tumbled from a >$20US two years ago to a mere $2.67US today! And GM is now considering (or perhaps have already considered) bankruptcy. Just a year ago, the reowned financial institution Citibank fell heavily, wiping out 93% of the stock value. And not too recent it traded for $1.00US! Wonder if one can actually buy a bank from eBAY.

What gives? Why the sudden shake-up? Didn't we pay millions to the top executives to put in place robust measures so that the company stays afloat during crisis? What had happened?

I am fully convinced that paying top dollar to senior executives will NOT steer a company away from disasters or crisis. I believe rewards and encouragements go all the way down to the last man in the company doing mundane or administrative tasks.

Everybody counts in both good and bad times. It is not only the captain of the ship charting the course but also the lookout point person to the sweat-covered engineers in the engine rooms to the chefs and waiters serving the customers.

However in recent years, we have this 'I-know-it-all' attitude from many top executives, including cabinet ministers and politicians. Hey you know nothing until the 'sh*t hits the fan' as the saying goes. Your policies are considered sound when they are still left standing after the storms of crisis have passed.

That can be seen when the common folks grit their teeth and pull in the muscles to help steer the ship through the storm. And that includes YOU! Yes 'you' includes the million-dollar self-paid executives and politicians going down into the engine room and rolling up their sleeves to assist the engineers and sweating with them.

These policies will stand... simply because the people believed in what you stood for, instead of you thinking how to please your shareholders and only concerned with achieving the bottom line results. Many things are not just about statistics and tangible results.

I can only wish the workers in GM and their families well. Because they are the most likely impacted by the bankruptcy.

bxApage bxAinline

We are worth much more

If you happen to see a $10,000 dollar bill (I know it doesn't exist but let's assume it does) in the mud, would you pick it up? Many I know would pick it up because of the stated value of the bill. There is substantial value in it.

Does it matter if it is made of paper? Does it matter if it is covered in dirty, yucky mud? All these matters little to none at all. All because of the value stated on the paper.

Likewise, God sees the value in us. We are so precious in His sight that He sent His only Son to die for us and redeemed us back to Himself. Once in a while, we fall into mud (ie sin). But that does NOT change the value He had placed on us. There is nothing the washing of the water (ie Word of grace) cannot do to wash the exterior.

The purchasing power He had used to redeem us back gave us our worth. It was an overpayment for us in fact. More than we could ever think of. We deserved only the lowest but He gave us the Highest.

If a friend tells you that the $10,000 dollar bill is only worth $10 dollars, would you believe it?

None of us would. Simply because we can see the value for ourselves. Someone had printed the value on this piece of flimsy paper.

If we can believe the power vested by the monetary authority on that paper (even though it is just a paper), surely we can more than believe the Creator and Almighty who had placed our precious worth in His Word. He calls us Beloved, Redeemed, Precious, Children of God, Sons and Daughters, Heirs, a Holy Nation and Royal Priests.

The $10,000 dollar bill was just an illustrated value.

Dear brothers and sisters, we are worth MUCH MORE than that. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Eph 2:4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.
8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.

bxApage bxAinline

What happened to Jesus during the three days of His death?

I pray this sharing will shed light to what happened to Jesus during the three days of His death.

I want us to focus on Jesus - God's redemption and the eternal home He had prepared for us. I do not find joy speaking about Hades or hell. However hell is as real as Jesus claimed it to be.

Read Luke 16 The Rich Man and Lazarus
19"There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21and longing to eat what fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22"The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham's side. The rich man also died and was buried.

23In hell (original Greek is Hades), where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24So he called to him, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.'

25"But Abraham replied, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.' 27"He answered, 'Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.'

29"Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.' 30" 'No, father Abraham,' he said, 'but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.' 31"He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

This story is real.
So is Lazarus. He is not a story-made person by Jesus because Jesus does not use real names for parables in which He uses "There was a certain Jew, rich man, priest" etc. So we know a beggar named Lazarus actually existed during Jesus' time. And this story is not a parable but an actual situation.

Both died. Where did they go?
Lazarus went to be with Abraham in a place called Abraham's Bosom while the rich man went to Hades, or Sheol and was in torment, awaiting judgement. It was not clear why Lazarus went into Abraham's Bosom and why the rich man went into Hades.

However it cannot be that the rich man was rich therefore he went to Hades, or sheol. Because Abraham himself was rich, and so was Jacob and David, etc. I strongly suggest that Lazarus believed Jesus while Jesus was on earth while the rich man rejected Him. But that is another topic for discussion beyond this subject matter.

Where is Abraham's Bosom? Where is Hades?
No one could be justified through the Law. All have sinned through Adam's one disobedience. Yet there is a group of people known as the Righteous Dead. These are the people who believed in faith that God will provide a saviour and Redeemer in time to come. These people looked forward (or ahead) by faith that one day their sins would be cleansed and taken away completely. Not covered by sacrifices of the blood of bulls or lambs which were temporary.

That's why Abraham, even when he had lied was not struck dead. This included Jacob. All these people lived before the Law. Even after the Law was given, God's judgement was tempered with mercy. That's why David pleaded mercy when he committed adultery. Yet a death had to be wrought for his sins because David lived under the Law. However David looked forward for a time in future when he prophesied "Blessed is the man whose transgessions are not counted against him"! That's us, brothers and sisters in Christ. David saw us as - Blessed!

These people were put in a holding place called Abraham's Bosom. For those who rejected God's provision for a Saviour, they were put in Hades, a place of torment awaiting God's judgement. These are two different places because there is a great chasm between Abraham's Bosom and Hades (or Sheol) as mentioned in the story. These rightoues dead waited patiently for His death for them to be set free. That's where Lazarus went, I believe.

Hades is also a place of darkness, weeping and gnashing of teeth. See Luke 13:28 "28"There will be weeping there, and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown out." And Matthew 25:30 And throw that worthless servant outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.'

Where is Paradise?
Recount the thief who asked Jesus to remember him and Jesus assured him "Today you will be with me in paradise"?

The thief too looked forward for his sins to be forgiven and he was counted as part of the Righteous Dead, awaiting the Saviour to cleanse and save him completely. Hence I believe Paradise is in truth Abraham's bosom because Jesus had yet to ascend into heaven. First Jesus must pay for the sins he had carried (see later).

Where was Jesus in the three days He died?
We know that when Jesus died, He carried the sins of man throughout time, even those of Adam. Thus Jesus died a sinner, even though He committed no sin. There is a deeper purpose why He died a sinner too.

First He descended into the lower regions (Hades, or Sheol) carrying our sins. He died a sinner. One of his victorious work was to wrestle the keys of Death and Hades from the devil, which He did.

Ephesians 4:8 This is why it says:
"When he ascended on high,
he led captives in his train
and gave gifts to men."
9(What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions? 10He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)

Revelations 1:17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. Then he placed his right hand on me and said: "Do not be afraid. I am the First and the Last. 18I am the Living One; I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades.

And then He crossed over and went to Abraham's Bosom to bring the Righteous Dead with Him into heaven. See in Ephesians "He led captives in his train"? These were the Righteous Dead who could not ascend into heaven because of Adam's sin.

Another supporting verse John 10
14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— 15just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. 16I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. 17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

There are other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I believe most refer to the sheep from another pen as the Gentiles. But can it also not refer to the Righteous Dead?

These righteous dead were those people (ie Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, David, including the thief, etc) who died before Jesus' death but were awaiting for Him to come and free them and bring them into heaven. Thus when Jesus died, the tombs of many holy men broke open and they became alive in Christ!

Matthew 27: 51At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. 52The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus' resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Why did Jesus tell Mary not to touch Him?
John 20 Jesus Appears to Mary Magdalene
10Then the disciples went back to their homes, 11but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb 12and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.

13They asked her, "Woman, why are you crying?" "They have taken my Lord away," she said, "and I don't know where they have put him." 14At this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.

15"Woman," he said, "why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?" Thinking he was the gardener, she said, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him." 16Jesus said to her, "Mary." She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means Teacher).

17Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' "18Mary Magdalene went to the disciples with the news: "I have seen the Lord!" And she told them that he had said these things to her.

Mary could not recognise Jesus because He was in his glorified form. She only recognised Him when He called her and opened her eyes. When she looked to embrace Him, He told her not to touch Him. Yet in later scriptures, we see that He allowed Thomas to touch His side and hands. Why?

Because His work as High Priest had not yet been completed. Remember He still had to present His blood before His Father in the Holy of Holies and sprinkle them before the Mercy Seat. We also know the physical tabernale is a shadow copy of the one in heaven. Thus the final work was God's acceptance of His blood and believing man is completely cleansed and sins taken away. Jesus was doing the exact priestly work as required in the Old Testaments. He came to fulfil the Law, every bit of it, such that it satisfied God completely! For more understanding, read Hebrews in details to see Jesus' priestly work.

Hence He told her, "Do not hold (or touch) me as I have not yet returned to my Father." A High Priest cannot be defiled or touched just as he enters the Holy of Holies to sprinkle the blood upon the Mercy Seat on top of the ark. Likewise Jesus was carrying His own perfect blood for the cleasning of all of those who believed in Him, including the Righteous Dead. If only Mary's eyes were opened, she would have seen the spirits of many righteous men of the Old Testaments around Jesus.

So when Jesus went into heaven carrying his blood, the angels sang in joy. Man is now allowed into heaven for the first time. And heaven exploded with:

Psalm 24: 7 Lift up your heads, O you gates;
be lifted up, you ancient doors,
that the King of glory may come in.

Because of the perfect sacrifice and atoning work of Jesus was completed. The Lamb that that was slain was obedient till death and fully glorified God in Himself.

What is hell then?
Death and Hades are not a state of mind or being. Because Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire which is called Hell. How could a state of being or mindset be thrown into hell? It does not make sense. Hell is now a place for those who rejected God's redemption through Christ. It is also for the devil and his fallen angels. It is a place completely separated and apart from God. There is no redemption here. It is the second death.

Confusion also arose in 1 Peter 3:19...whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built.

That word preached is NOT 'the gospel preached for redemption' but 'to herald, or proclaim Lord's judgement' that Jesus is King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Not as a particular teaching by Catholics who hold that there is a second chance for redemption.

Jesus literally went through three days of 'hell' to save us completely.

May you be blessed by this sharing.

bxApage bxAinline

Is love a chore?

I read something about reasons for obeying and serving God. Are we doing it because because He first loved us, or we love Him, or because it is the right Christian thing to do, or because we want His blessing, or because we fear His wrath?

1 Corinthians 13:4Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8Love never fails.

I used to think this is the kind of love we must exhibit as Christians. I used to think this is the kind of love I must show to my neighbour. I was wrong. I can never in my lifetime reach or achieve this kind of love. Only God can. Thus this verse is the kind of perfect love God has for us.

Love will automatically fulfill His commandments, of which the two pillars are based upon - Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your mind. And love my neighbour as myself. I can never do it. But Jesus can.

This love as described in both Corinthians and the Law comes only when we know how much we ourselves have been loved by God. And this love was shown when Jesus willingly died for me. Without accepting His love, I can only sustain my own kind of love. My own selfish love.

Perfect love casts out all fears. This love comes only from God. There is no other perfect love, except that which a righteous man died for sinful men to redeem us back for His own. His blood shed completely cleansed me so much that I can stand before a holy God righteous and pure, and dispel the accusations thrown at me. His blood has drawn aline around me, protecting me and crying, "Redeemed!"

Love covers a multitude of sins. How much and how deep is the multitude of sins? Wide enough when His arms were thrown open wide on the cross. Deep enough that He went into the very depths of hell to wrest the keys of death back for us.

When this love displayed by God through Christ sits rooted within you, you don't have to be told not to kill your neighbour. You won't steal his stuff either. You won't commit adultery because you love your wife. All these are possible when we are first filled with His love for us. We, on our own, can only love so much.

Obedience out of fear has good short-term effects - but for how long? Eventually people will just run away from the prospect of an angry, judgmental God because we could not fulfill what is required from Him. Or turn away as the Israelites did because fulfilling those laws becomes a chore. How can we even fulfill the first commandment which is to have no other gods before or besides God? Who can truly say God is always #1 in our lives all the time?

And wanting blessings alone without knowing His love is only selfish gain. It is not worship of God but worship of self.

When we come to understand and experience how much God loves us, worship becomes a natural response. It fills our entire person even as our souls' longings are satisfied. We no longer fear Him because His perfect love for us, shown by sending His Son while we were deep in sin, drives out all our fear. And receiving His blessings is as easy as a child receiving from a loving father.

In Proverbs 10:22 (Amplified Bible) The blessing of the Lord--it makes [truly] rich, and He adds no sorrow with it [neither does toiling increase it].

This is the kind of blessings I want from the Lord - no sorrows and no toiling (or self-effort). Some people have told me this refers to spiritual blessings. Think again, if these blessings are spiritual, how can sorrow be added to them? Surely it means more than spiritual blessings. Can it not mean *gasps* material things too?

A story I once heard:
There was a woman who was married off to a tyrannical man. He dictated her every move and made her his servant. He wrote a list of her daily duties: waking up at 5am everyday, cooking his breakfast and serving it to him in bed, making coffee, getting his newspapers for him to read, basically waiting on him hand and foot. She was miserable.

One day the man died, and the wife was free. She married again later, to a patient, gentle man who loved her. One day she was looking through her stuff when she found the old list her husband had drawn up for her. She realised suddenly that she did the exact same things for her current husband - but because now she did them out of love, it was no longer the chore it had been.

bxApage bxAinline

No way, Jose... er, Josie

The response from DBS in relation to Josie Lau's appointment as AWARE President is laughable.
Quote:
“Banks worldwide are facing very challenging times and her role as VP in the credit card space today is even more challenging, given the environment we are in,” the spokesperson said.

How ironic and absurd. If I remember correctly, one of the core values in large MNC is to do volunteerism work, isn't it? I guess it isn't so for DBS since there aren't gonna be any monetary gains.

I felt it was eerily high-handed and arrogant like the PAP. Pray tell me, do you pay her after-hours 24 x 7? What has her role in AWARE got to do with her VP appointment in DBS? Are there conflict of interests between the goals of AWARE with that of DBS for you to make such a statement? My finite mind thinks not.

Let me ask you a truthful question:
Can you be certain none of your senior management has ever held a post as an Executive Committee member in golf resorts or town clubs before? I think you'd better do your checks before you response to my question.

Anway who are you to tell what I can or cannot do in my free time as long there is non-conflict of interest and it does not degrade my performance at work? You don't jolly pay me for after-hours outside the office and it is not as if Josie gave a credit card fraud teaching session to your competitors.

For that matter, I know of a Victorian senior policeman who is casually employed by universities to give talks on youth and crimes. And yes he is paid hourly. I am proud of him because he went beyond his call of duty to teach and enhance public awareness in youth crimes since he has the knowledge.

In Australia, organisations allow and encourage employees to be part of the volunteerism work. Hey, the staff are even honoured for their effort especially during the Victorian Bushfire Black Saturday!

I wish you could praised her. Praise her for her dedication and for her leadership qualities which the members saw to lead them. In addition AWARE is a non-profit organisation to help women, and doesn't even come close to the functions of golf resorts or town clubs.

Our Minister Mentor says it best about knowledge sharing. To quote:
"Singapore will assess a country’s ability to absorb the transfer of ideas and knowledge before deciding whether to collaborate with the country on joint projects."

Oh wait, being an AWARE President doesn't benefit the bank. Hey, you don't even get paid. You should have assessed if AWARE is able to absort your transfer of ideas and knowledge before you decided to collaborate with them.

Heh, no wonder Josie, you got the shaft. I guess you are only allowed to hold appointments where there are significant financial gains, connections or networking.

You can forget about being a president. That goes for us, lesser mortals.

bxApage bxAinline

There are Leaders, and there are Leeders

Told missus that the Top 10 Best Paid Politicians should be filled with all Singaporean ministers. I wonder if their salaries include other director fees they had received. They beat even the second-placed Donald Tsang hands down without a blink of an eye! (Read the rest in The Australian)

Anyway, I had a good laugh when there was a proposal to up the pay of Australian MPs. Result? There was a furore and backlash by the public to even dare mention it during this period.

In addition I was following the G20 summit in London. The Australian showed all the other countries' figures. There were Korea, France, Japan, Canada, Germany, even Luxemburg! But no Singapore. Checked the actual countries - no Luxemberg. Luxemburg was categorised with Singapore and Switzerland on the tax havens list. Read here.

Then I realised Singapore was not invited because she was not in the Top 20 largest economies of the world! But her leader sure is paid the highest. Mind-boggling, isn't it? Sheesh we must really be so unique.

Indeed there are Leaders, and there are Leeders.

1. Lee Hsien Loong - Singapore
   Salary in dollars - $2.47 million
   Salary in local currency - S$3.76 million
   
2. Donald Tsang Yum-Kuen - Hong Kong
   Salary in dollars - $516,000
   Salary in local currency - HK$4 million
   
3. Barack Obama - United States
   Salary in dollars - $400,000
   
4. Brian Cowen - Ireland
   Salary in dollars - $341,000
   Salary in local currency - €257,000
   
5. Nicolas Sarkozy - France
   Salary in dollars - $318,000
   Salary in local currency - €240,000
   
6. Angela Merkel - Germany
   Salary in dollars - $303,000
   Salary in local currency - €228,000
   
7. Gordon Brown - UK
   Salary in dollars - $279,000
   Salary in local currency - £194,250
   
8. Stephen Harper - Canada
   Salary in dollars - $246,000
   Salary in local currency - C$311,000
   
9. Taro Aso - Japan
   Salary in dollars - $243,000
   Salary in local currency - Y24 million
   
10. Kevin Rudd - Australia
    Salary in dollars - $229,000
    Salary in local currency - A$330,000

bxApage bxAinline

Missing links?

This 'thoughts and rambling post' was in draft. Until the recent Cabinet re-shuffle announcement triggered the release.

Currently I am pretty busy at work. Blog time is whatever spare time I have. Being busy is a good thing in this 'so-called' time of downturn. Well, I had never believed in downturns as a matter of fact. My perception is what people often see as failures are really opportunities. Read Joseph (of Eygpt) in the bible and you won't be far off.

Anyway back to the main topic. This re-shuffle got me seriously thinking about the recent slew of questionable and mind-boggling events that had occurred recently.

David Widjaya's death
The MSM (mainstream media) reports were highly suspicious when they began to publish the likely causes of the death in spite of in-progress investigations. More sickening was pointing the finger at World of Warcraft. Right... that made me a 'suicidal person' since I had been playing it for many years. The most striking thing was that an official coroner's report had yet to be published!

I did remember commenting on MM Lee's statements some time ago about the Mat Salamat's escape. He said those statements while an independent inquiry was investigating. MM Lee is a very highly respectable person in Singapore. His words can effect and affect the outcome of a situational crisis. So it was no surprise when the independent inquiry report showed the lack of vigilance and total complacency. Duh! I for one felt two persons actually walked away scot-free.

Anyway it was as if MM Lee had either knew the details of the report beforehand or that he had sat with the 'independent' inquiry throughout the investigations.

Censorship on Dr Alan Ooi's farewell letter
Now that was really uncalled for. What was the MSM trying to achieve when it played the 'mind-game' of censorship?

Don't you think the truth will be out sooner considering how information is now shared on the Internet? Well it cuts across human barriers for one. The later the truth got out, the more the disgruntlement is bottled up. Be it through blogs, alternative reads, or just foreign press coverages - when people want to get the information, they will get it.

And I had to read the whole letter posted online by the Wayang Party instead of the MSM (though Wayang Party initially posted a partial letter to protect the farewells to personal friends and family).

Following this the MSM decided to publish the letter as an act of damage control. At a national level, it seemed all good to put to rest unanswered questions about the death of a scholar. The catch however was that a whole paragraph about Dr Allan Ooi's grievances with the SAF was 'snipped out'! And we had to read the unadulterated and unblemished version in Wayang Party blog!

Wow... that sure was a sinking feeling, isn't it? To have the truth withheld from me. What are you hiding? Could it be true about his grievances? Even if it was, it should be the people to decide how they want to digest the information. These are real opportunities for Ministers and SAF to stand up and respond. Instead the MSM chose the censor... what gives?

It's no fancy that the bloggers had a field day of throwing 'rotten tomatoes' and 'bad eggs' at the MSM. So much for our national paper global rankings.

CDC 8-month bonus to 2 senior managers
I will never blog about it. Except now.

In my opinion that is NWC (National Wage Council), PA (People's Association) and/or Dr Teo Ho Pin's business. And they are free to declare it and rightly so too, without any misgivings or misinterpretations. Well, on a personal note, to say 'I don't know' is a lousy answer to give to the press. Afterall Dr Teo himself is drawing money from the taxpayers too.

Just like the Perm Sec Tan Yong Soon open declaration in spending S$46,500 to learn French cooking. It's his business anyway. Who am I to say if it was well-spent or not? It's not as if he had taken his salary through underhand methods. And I truly respect him for even saying it aloud. Takes a lot of guts and confidence. Hmmm... perhaps not so smart in this 'economic recession'; maybe he should have published it in ICON or Plush magazines. At least the people who read them are in his category.

The disgruntlement became more acute within the blogsphere when the online media started a 'black-out' on this topic (read here). To make it inaccessible is to openly declare that 'we have something to hide'. Well, sort of.

This categorises under a major PR department glitch.

BBC interview with PM Lee
In the recent interview, PM Lee was asked, “Finally, Prime Minister, I read that you are apparently the highest paid head of government in the world. Your salary is about four or five times what President Obama gets. Are you worth all that money?”

PM Lee laughed and said:
"I am not comparing myself and I don’t look at these rankings. We go on a system which is open, honest, transparent – what is the job worth, what is the quality of the person whom you want. We need the best people for the job and these are jobs where you make decisions which are worth billions of dollars.

And you cannot do that if you are pretending and you just say, ‘Well, we are all in it for the love of King and Country’. We want it to be honest, we want people not to come in for the money. But at the same time the sacrifice cannot be too great. And at times like these, you want the best possible government you can have."

Now you have just gone and shot yourself in the foot.

In lieu of the recent predicaments by the MSM in trying to publish 'half-truths' or hide them (I don't know which), how can you say "we go on a system which is open, honest, transparent"?

What about how the President approval of touching the reserves? Was it open? Or based on trust? Surely not open if you had asked any man on the street until you were pressed for more answers.

Let me also draw you to the recent Town Council, Temasek and GIC invesments. Can you truly say it's transparent? I'm not too sure... and if I have doubts, it means you haven't been very transparent at all.

So if there is 'little' openness and much improvement for transparency (in my opinion), how can the word 'honest' be thrown it? It's pretty contradictory, don't you think?

And to top it off - now hear this:
Your whole answer (yes, your answer, PM Lee) was MISSING from Straits Times publication!

Why? Isn't the act self-contradictory again? It looked so, so silly from my point of view. Really. Anyone can just pick it up the missing pieces quickly (just like here) especially reading from other foreign online press. So it behooves me about the unnecessary censorship.

I'd reckon the current MSM wouldn't had 'blacked-out' your answer if there had been another independent media publishing the full transcript of your interview with BBC.

I just don't know where to hide my embarrassed Singaporean face. Again I ask - why?

Cabinet re-shuffle
Why on earth do you need these people when you are the highest paid politician in the world?!!

• 1x Minister Mentor
• 2x Senior Ministers
• 2x Deputy PMs
• 3x Ministers in the Prime Minister’s Office

Mind-bloggling, isn't it? Gee, that's a lot of top-notched salaries to give out. And under the super-super scale salary scheme, they must be drawing millions! They must be truly the best politicians in the world.

On a personal note, if I were a Chairman of a company, I'd fire the CEO straightaway. Either the CEO is totally incompetent, or his workload is so uniquely 'out of this world' that he needs all these 'supporting' seniors. I wonder also how in the world does one justify drawing all these million-dollar salaries without declaring their assets?

Competition
So where does all these ramblings lead to? I'd reckon the missing links are choices and competition.

Think about it. They are the same reasons why many readers turn towards online media like blogs and foreign press to have an alternative read. It is not that the current newspaper is lousy (well, it may be but that's another topic) but people want choices and competition. We want to see from another angle but alas, we don't really have a choice, do we?

I mean if I want to know more about aerodynamics physics, it would be foolish to just read from a book or article or from one author, wouldn't it? And how much I want to read depends on how much information I want to get from the various sources of whitepaper, academic books and analytical findings.

We agree that not all these theories are correct. Well, so does reading it from one academic source alone, isn't it? In fact it's even riskier!

And how does one get better in sports or in a soccer game? Well, simply pit your skills against your opponents on a level-playing field. Of course sometimes the referee is kayu (biased).

So why should it be different in reading about news and politics in Singapore? Wouldn't alternative read enable us to question and fine-tune the system better? If we are really open, honest and transparent, then healthy competition should be encouraged. Shouldn't it?

Competition brings in healthy checks. More often it draws the best candidate too! If the government can think that a company would pay a lower wage to a foreign talent to compete on the same job, would not the people think likewise to have a lower-paid government yet performing up to par with the incumbent?

I mean that's why we have tender processes to evaluate and pick out the best company to deliver the solutions. And that's why we have more than one interviewee for a job opportunity and then another round for the short-listed candidates. To instill choices for employers and competition among the employees.

Shouldn't it be likewise for elections and MPs representing us? But we don't seem to have such a choice because the MPs and policies have already been selected for us. At least for me because I have never had a chance to vote.

Why would it then be different in Singapore politics and the MSM? Perhaps the missing links are choices and competition.

bxApage bxAinline