TR EMERITUS

Dear Mr Lee, I refer to your comments as reported by Straits Times on 28th Jan 2010. You said that our flats are subsidised.  But what is $40,000 compared to $100,000 to $200,000 increase in flat prices over the last three years?  Even with the subsidies, Singaporeans end up paying a lot more. You said that our flats will appreciate in value and that will add to our wealth.  But for every $100,000 addition to the wealth of my estate, each of my children must fork out an extra $100,000 for his or her future housing needs.  As long as there is more than one child, the family as a whole loses, not gains.  The only entity that truly gains is the HDB and the government.  It would really be 'daft' of you if you cannot see the silliness of your own reasoning. You warned Singaporeans that our flats will not longer be of value if Mah Bow Tan loses.  Are you threatening Singaporeans?  Mah Bow Tan has already lost many years ago to Chiam See Tong and yet Potong Pasir flats are as pricey as any flat would be. You seemed to chide Singaporeans for always wanting it cheaper and better.  But flat prices have gone up by 30% in the short span of three years.  We are not asking for cheaper, we are asking for price stability.  Are you sure you're getting your facts right?  Are you sure you're not being 'daft' instead? You said the government has to price flats fairly.  Compared to three years ago, new buyers have to pay 30% more now.  You call that fair?  Did our salaries increase by 30% over this period? You said that the government is giving us something more valuable than what we paid for.  If the price of flats increased by $100,000 over the last three years and the government gives a $40,000 subsidy, aren't we paying more still?  Isn't it 'daft' to insist that we are paying less when we are actually paying more? You said that the government gives us an asset that is below market price the moment we buy it.  But by the time we buy the asset, the market price of that asset has already gone up by $100,000.  So even with a subsidy of $40,000, we are still paying $60,000 more for nothing the moment we buy it. So if there is a 'loss', it's a fictitious one that confounds the electorate. Ng Kok Lim  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent Vocal online critic of the PAP Mr Alex Tan, who embarrassed two PAP MPs with his sharp and pointed questions during a YPAP Forum last month, had started selling tooth-picks and T-shirts on his blog, according to a report by Lianhe Wanbao: Alex had just joined the Singapore People's Party led by veteran opposition leader Mr Chiam See Tong. The 22 year old is currently working as a project engineer and he has indicated his interest to take part in the next general election. The proceeds from the sales will go to paying the $15,000 deposit each candidate has to put up to stand for election. He has raised $772 so far with one donor paying $400 for a toothpick. The toothpicks cost $1 each while the yet to be printed T-shirts cost $12 each. Alex first shot into fame last month over his protracted online "flame war" with YPAP members which subsequently led to his eviction from its Facebook. He has been making the headlines for his relentless criticisms of the PAP as well as a complaint he lodged against YPAP member Sear Hock Rong over possible conflict of interest between his business interests and grassroots work at Eunos. Despite the (usual) attempts by the mainstream media to portray him as a "radical", Alex has won the support of many netizens. His "Vote the PAP out" has garnered more than 2,800 members in less than two months and already exceeded the membership of the YPAP Facebook. Most of the friends on his Facebook are young Singaporeans between the age of 18 to 30. This is unimaginable a year ago. Alex wrote on his Facebook that he would continue to fight for as long as it takes till he enters Parliament one day to speak up for Singaporeans. Though Alex may have limited financial resources right now, there are many Singaporeans out there, especially retirees who will have no qualms contributing to his election campaign. The Malaysian political tsunami in 2008 was triggered partly by fresh, young graduates like Alex Tan who toppled senior politicians in their maiden election like Tony Pua, Jeff Ooi and Jernice Tan. If the opposition has more Alex Tans joining them, they will stand a good chance of winning a few more seats in the next general election. Based on public sentiments at least in cyberspace alone, the tide is turning against the PAP. What is lacking now is a platform to link the IT-savvy young Singaporeans with the disgruntled Singaporeans who do not surf the internet which may snowball into a wider people's movement on the ground. If you are keen to support Alex Tan's efforts, please visit his blog here.  Read More →

Written by Our Correspondent Despite explaining in person on the YPAP Facebook why he asked Eric How to make a police report over a non-existent "impersonation" on Facebook, netizens continue to lobby YPAP Chairman Teo Ser Luck with questions which he appeared to be unable or unwilling to answer. Two "Eric Hows" from the PAP had filed police reports separately in the last two weeks over somebody "impersonating" them and posting callous remarks about Singaporeans on the YPAP Facebook which sparked a massive outcry in cyberspace. Mr Teo claimed that he "advised" one of the Eric How to make a police report as the latter appeared worried and he thought the police might provide "some clarity" to him in their investigations. Netizens questioned Mr Teo if there is a need to make a mountain out of a molehill as there are more than 50 "Eric Hows" on Facebook in Singapore alone and most should be able to differentiate the "Eric How" who posted the comments from the YPAP Eric How since they have different Facebook IDs and avatars. Furthermore, one of the YPAP Facebook moderators Edgar Kieu had added the "Eric How" who made the disparaging remarks on his Facebook which suggests that he may know him personally. Mawson criticized Edgar Kieu for not condemning the offensive comments posted by "Eric How": "I saw that webpage myself that Edgar is a friend with that merc Eric who made those repungnant statements. There is a difference between can't and won't for Edgar to identify who that merc Eric is. All I see in Edgar posting is a refusal to come forward with helping to identify merc Eric to denounce those sickening statements. He said that discussions should be rational and responsible but all I see is the traits of a hypocrite in him. I don't believe he has the impartial quality to comment this matter." Kojakbt added: "Certainly, if you think someone is offensive, you won't want to become his friend in the first place, unless you are also thinking like him.... I guess Edgar is being cornered now and don't know what to say. Personally, I think he should just apologise to the netizens for this mistake and quit being the mod for YPAP...." Kelvin Leong continued to press Mr Teo for an answer: "Mr Teo Ser Luck, you haven't answered our question also. There are at least 100 "Kelvin Leong"s in facebook; does it mean that I have to lodge a police report for what every of them say? Isn't that a public waste of resources? The correct thing to do was for Eric How to step out and clarify on facebook that he is not the one involved. Actually we are not so concerned with the innocent Eric How. We are more concerned about the Mercedez Eric How who made those insensitive comments. These two have different facebook IDs. Checking on their IDs would suffice to tell you that these are two different persons. Yet you asked the innocent Eric How to blow up the matter to the police." Since the saga first erupted last week, Mr Teo and his deputy Mr Zaqy Mohamad had jumped immediately to the conclusion that "Eric How" was an impostor who posted the remarks to sabotage YPAP. Mr Teo said that it is a "challenge to differentiate the truth from the lies on the internet" to cast doubts on the credibility and integrity of the new media. After it was proven that the "impersonation" is highly unlikely to have occurred, Mr Teo now tried to sing a different tune and placed the onus on the Singapore police to complete their "investigations" where there is absolutely no need to make a police report in the first place. It is improbable that netizens will ever get a satisfactory answer from Mr Teo. They will continue to be stone-walled till the fiasco fade away from public attention completely. Such is the PAP's "modus operandi" in engaging with the online community.   Related articles: 1. Teo Ser Luck: Let police do their work 2. YPAP resorts to police report to silence online critics 3. Teo Ser Luck asked Eric How to make police report 4. Eric How apologizes to netizens for making police report 5. Netizens remain unconvinced that Eric How is an impostor 6. 5 reasons why Eric How cannot be an impostor 7. Big BOO-BOO by Teo Ser Luck 8. A compilation of Eric How’s comments 9. Will the real Eric How please stand up? 10. YPAP Eric How made police report on Facebook impersonation  Read More →