Discussion:
PM's call to othe parties.....Is he sincere ?
(too old to reply)
Bad boy
2006-03-05 00:19:59 UTC
Permalink
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.

He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.

To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.

For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.

LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.

His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.

If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?

I wonder !

Bad boy.
e***@s-mail.com
2006-03-05 01:05:00 UTC
Permalink
Bad boy wrote:
......
Post by Bad boy
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
.....
Oh, he has a mandate alright, a mandate from the filthy rich and the
cronies who benefit from him financially. That's the politics of The
ASEAN countries, and that's what's happening to Singapore. Rjaratnam
must be rolling in his grave - how could he have, as a poor journalist,
ever fight the British on such grounds?
The Esplanade is the best example of how hundreds of millions are
frittered away so the rich can have their concerts while the poor still
have to pay annual licences to watch TV.
news.news
2006-03-05 01:36:45 UTC
Permalink
Why not. Every one know opposition cannot do it and do not have a capability
to form a government.
They just simply do not have people to do the jobs.

All they can do is voice up. Step back and tell others I have done my part !
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Ventura
2006-03-05 01:59:31 UTC
Permalink
Your form of reasoning is like telling that a poor man has no skill to drive a luxurious car. Only
the rich man has?
Why not. Every one know opposition cannot do it and do not have a capability to form a government.
They just simply do not have people to do the jobs.
All they can do is voice up. Step back and tell others I have done my part !
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
Bad boy
2006-03-05 03:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Why not ? Yes. Why not?
The question should be-----
Has he got the mandate from the citizens who
have NOT voted....not having the chance to
choose the MPs of their choice ???

Forget about the opposition....the good and
able candidates are too poor to contest anyway.
The others... are not able, except the few who is
rich enough and able to put up a fight. However,
this is *NOT the issue*.

*The issue is the MANDATE from the citizens.*
If there is no GRC and the deposit is low enough,
every constituency will be contested. Every citizen
will have a chance to vote and to give his mandate
by casting a ballot.
If PM's party won, then he can say that he has
obtained the MANDATE from the citizens to
rule.
With the GRCs and high deposit, it is likely that
most GRCs will not be contested and there will
be walk over.
The majority of the citizen has NOT given their
mandate in the form of the ballot paper in support of
PM Lee.

Who has given him the mandate to rule ?


Bad boy.
Post by news.news
Why not. Every one know opposition cannot do it and do not have a
capability to form a government.
They just simply do not have people to do the jobs.
How do you know,... they do not have the people?
If there are no GRCs and the deposit is low, I think,
every seat will be contested.
Post by news.news
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
....lobert....
2006-03-05 05:48:14 UTC
Permalink
His father gave him the mandate
Post by Bad boy
Why not ? Yes. Why not?
The question should be-----
Has he got the mandate from the citizens who
have NOT voted....not having the chance to
choose the MPs of their choice ???
Forget about the opposition....the good and
able candidates are too poor to contest anyway.
The others... are not able, except the few who is
rich enough and able to put up a fight. However,
this is *NOT the issue*.
*The issue is the MANDATE from the citizens.*
If there is no GRC and the deposit is low enough,
every constituency will be contested. Every citizen
will have a chance to vote and to give his mandate
by casting a ballot.
If PM's party won, then he can say that he has
obtained the MANDATE from the citizens to
rule.
With the GRCs and high deposit, it is likely that
most GRCs will not be contested and there will
be walk over.
The majority of the citizen has NOT given their
mandate in the form of the ballot paper in support of
PM Lee.
Who has given him the mandate to rule ?
Bad boy.
Post by news.news
Why not. Every one know opposition cannot do it and do not have a
capability to form a government.
They just simply do not have people to do the jobs.
How do you know,... they do not have the people?
If there are no GRCs and the deposit is low, I think,
every seat will be contested.
Post by news.news
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Bad boy
2006-03-05 12:39:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by ....lobert....
His father gave him the mandate
The mandate from heaven.....like
the emperor of old!

Is the mandate from his father, from
heaven, legitimate?

Seriously, do you think, if the majority
of Singaporean had no chance to vote,
did not vote, did not cast their ballots to
give their mandate to rule...Is the government
so 'engineered', legitimate ?

Can you be the devil's disciple...try to argue
the case, that it is legitimate.

Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 12:43:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Can you be the devil's disciple...try to argue
the case, that it is legitimate.
Hmm....I think you need to define the
word "legitimate".
It means many things to many people.

Does it mean acting within the law or
legislation?
Last I heard, even "peanuts" can be
legislated to be "legitimate"....

I think wars have been fought with both sides
claiming to be the "legitimate" one...
LOL.
Bad boy
2006-03-05 13:14:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
Can you be the devil's disciple...try to argue
the case, that it is legitimate.
Hmm....I think you need to define the
word "legitimate".
It means many things to many people.
Does it mean acting within the law or
legislation?
Last I heard, even "peanuts" can be
legislated to be "legitimate"....
I think wars have been fought with both sides
claiming to be the "legitimate" one...
LOL.
True..."legitimate' means many things to many people.

Since we are discussing government and the
mandate to rule....I think we should follow
the definition in the Legal Encyclopaedia --
Quote:
"That which is lawful, legal, recognized by law, or in accordance
with law, such as legitimate authority; valid, or genuine."
In short : "Being in compliance with the law,... in accordance
with established principles and standards" unquote.

Since it involves Singapore and democracy, it should
comply with our Constitution and the principles and
standards of democracy.

Within these parameters, can you argue the case for
legitimacy if a government is returned by walk over ?

Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 13:29:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Since it involves Singapore and democracy, it should
comply with our Constitution and the principles and
standards of democracy.
Within these parameters, can you argue the case for
legitimacy if a government is returned by walk over ?
I'm sorry....but I'm still stuck in a limbo until
such a time where I can understand legal principles
where you can be sued fo denying that you are a
liar......or for saying I have a made a police report....
or that you cannot be within a 100 metres perimeter
of a voting centre but you can be IN it.

Like you, I'm not concerned about which parties
win or lose the elections....but about how the
rules are played and how it affect the citizens.

If you can explain to me the rudiments behind
the above rulings, then maybe I may attempt
to argue further...
LOL.
Bad boy
2006-03-05 18:30:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
Since it involves Singapore and democracy, it should
comply with our Constitution and the principles and
standards of democracy.
Within these parameters, can you argue the case for
legitimacy if a government is returned by walk over ?
I'm sorry....but I'm still stuck in a limbo until
such a time where I can understand legal principles
where you can be sued fo denying that you are a
liar......or for saying I have a made a police report....
or that you cannot be within a 100 metres perimeter
of a voting centre but you can be IN it.
Like you, I'm not concerned about which parties
win or lose the elections....but about how the
rules are played and how it affect the citizens.
If you can explain to me the rudiments behind
the above rulings, then maybe I may attempt
to argue further...
I read your message loud and clear. It is a crying
shame.

Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 10:35:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Why not ? Yes. Why not?
The question should be-----
Has he got the mandate from the citizens who
have NOT voted....not having the chance to
choose the MPs of their choice ???
You are greatly mistaken.
Present day conditions are actually
the IDEAL one that the rich have
been praying and hoping for since time
began.

In usa...the money politics have ensured that
only the rich can become president. This is
the same for ALMOST all countries in the world
today....even though they are "democratic"...

Why should the rich be satisfied in running a
company when they can control the country
itself?
Why....its even better that doing business...

For the first time in history, the rich have managed
to engineer a system to make the poor "elect" them
so that they can use the resources of the poor to
make themselves even richer.
Do note also that the majority who support this
system vocally or by writing to the press are the
RICH...
Do you think the rich will willingly and voluntarily
let go of this gold mine?
LOL.
Post by Bad boy
Forget about the opposition....the good and
able candidates are too poor to contest anyway.
The others... are not able, except the few who is
rich enough and able to put up a fight. However,
this is *NOT the issue*.
Bad boy
2006-03-05 12:00:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
Why not ? Yes. Why not?
The question should be-----
Has he got the mandate from the citizens who
have NOT voted....not having the chance to
choose the MPs of their choice ???
You are greatly mistaken.
Present day conditions are actually
the IDEAL one that the rich have
been praying and hoping for since time
began.
In usa...the money politics have ensured that
only the rich can become president. This is
the same for ALMOST all countries in the world
today....even though they are "democratic"...
Why should the rich be satisfied in running a
company when they can control the country
itself?
Why....its even better that doing business...
For the first time in history, the rich have managed
to engineer a system to make the poor "elect" them
so that they can use the resources of the poor to
make themselves even richer.
Do note also that the majority who support this
system vocally or by writing to the press are the
RICH...
Do you think the rich will willingly and voluntarily
let go of this gold mine?
LOL.
An insightful analysis.....Yes. the 'rich' has certainly
engineered themselves to be perpetually 'elected' by
walk over, ....without having to obtain the necessary
mandate to rule from the citizens of Singapore.

Unfortunately...it is very true that with GRCs and
high deposit, the rich will rule Singapore, for the
next five years...and for many more terms in future.

In a democracy, the people's representatives are
elected and given the mandate by the people to rule.
In Singapore, the MPs are not elected by the people...
they are 'engineered' by default...by walk over. They
are NOT the people's representatives, ...the MPs are the
representatives of the rich, the 'government'.

I am perplexed and failed to understand...why PM Lee
need to resort to such 'engineering'.
Given his father's track record and his apparent leader-
ship ability, even if he revert to single seat constituency
and lower the deposit to affordable level, he and his party
should be able to beat the other parties(disorganised and
weak) hands down.
May he lacked the confidence to win, confidence on
his own ability. confidence on his party's popularity !

What's your take on this ?


Bad boy.
.
Observer
2006-03-05 12:34:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by Observer
Do note also that the majority who support this
system vocally or by writing to the press are the
RICH...
Do you think the rich will willingly and voluntarily
let go of this gold mine?
LOL.
An insightful analysis.....Yes. the 'rich' has certainly
engineered themselves to be perpetually 'elected' by
walk over, ....without having to obtain the necessary
mandate to rule from the citizens of Singapore.
I think this is not as simple as that.
This is a global phenomena.
Where everywhere you look, you will
find that all the countries are ruled or will
be ruled by the rich.
This "democracy" concept where a capable
person, no matter his social standing, can be
ruler is, in my opinion, not a reality that is currently
attainable. Nor do I see it being so, for a very long
time.

If you look carefully, its either by "engineered"
system to favor the rich is "elections" (where
virtually a poor chap will stand no chance) or
by the rich hiring thugs to beat the crap out of
the poor who blocks them....(note China farmers
plight).

Since its a global event, even if a poor chap
wins here and become PM, he'll be ostracised
and even isolated by the many "rich cliches"
presidents, PM ...of other "democratic" countries.
These countries who have the rich controlling
them will also want one of their kind to govern
other countries so that they "understand" each
other....hehe..
Post by Bad boy
Unfortunately...it is very true that with GRCs and
high deposit, the rich will rule Singapore, for the
next five years...and for many more terms in future.
No comment.
Sensitive issue....hehe
Post by Bad boy
In a democracy, the people's representatives are
elected and given the mandate by the people to rule.
In Singapore, the MPs are not elected by the people...
they are 'engineered' by default...by walk over. They
are NOT the people's representatives, ...the MPs are the
representatives of the rich, the 'government'.
I think ideally, a people's representative should
be selected and elected by the people, just like
in ancient times where the village will choose the
strongest, the bravest and the wisest amongst them
to lead. There should also be a mechanism for the
people to change their leaders if they find that the
one they chose do not meet their expectations....just
like in ancient times too.

But of course, you do not have this nowadays, not
even in usa or anywhere else. The people CANNOT
select their choice of leaders anymore. They can
only SELECT the "leaders" that a party, or some
other smart aleck group tell them to "elect".
In fact, the rich can also "pakat" amongst themselves
to form opposing parties and present "opposition"
that also comes from the rich, so that the people THINK
that they have a choice......when in reality, they are
only choosing which devil to elect....but all of them
are devils just the same...
LOL.
Post by Bad boy
I am perplexed and failed to understand...why PM Lee
need to resort to such 'engineering'.
Given his father's track record and his apparent leader-
ship ability, even if he revert to single seat constituency
and lower the deposit to affordable level, he and his party
should be able to beat the other parties(disorganised and
weak) hands down.
May he lacked the confidence to win, confidence on
his own ability. confidence on his party's popularity !
What's your take on this ?
I think that a NEUTRAL institution that oversee and
protect the rights of the citizens (that is non political and
does not come from any political party) be around to
determine what each candidate or party can do with
respect to affecting the rights of the citizens to choose
their own leaders.

No human being can govern his own emotions or
be an angelic superhuman to give way to others....
especially when they are with the upperhand.
This is also happening globally.
You can see it....even between countries...
Nobody will give way to the other if they can
get help it and that there is nobody to say that
they must.

As I see it, there are THREE distinct interested parties
in any election, the governing one, the opposition and
the CITIZENS.

So far, the citizens are the only ones apparently having NO
SAY as to how the elections are to be conducted and
which type of persons they can SELECT and choose
for themselves. They are being forced to select the
candidates that were "chosen" for them...in fact I
can even make it in such a way that ALL of the candidates
will be chosen by ME but of course, all using different
party name lar.....just to make it look like an bona
fide "election".

Hey...maybe this is already happening worldwide
only that we did'nt notice it...or aware of it....Always
being conned by the word "democracy"....and those
who claim to want to spread it like one dickhead who
keeps bombing people to set them free...
LOL.
Bad boy
2006-03-05 14:24:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
Post by Observer
Do note also that the majority who support this
system vocally or by writing to the press are the
RICH...
Do you think the rich will willingly and voluntarily
let go of this gold mine?
LOL.
An insightful analysis.....Yes. the 'rich' has certainly
engineered themselves to be perpetually 'elected' by
walk over, ....without having to obtain the necessary
mandate to rule from the citizens of Singapore.
I think this is not as simple as that.
This is a global phenomena.
Where everywhere you look, you will
find that all the countries are ruled or will
be ruled by the rich.
Unfortunately, this is very true. In the Singapore
context, is the rich the best leaders available ?
History has shown that our pioneers had performed
much better than second generation leaders who
are rich. LKY and his team were not exactly "rich"
and they had outperformed all his contemporaries
who gained independence at about the same time.

Shouldn't our system be tailored to allow even the
poor, but able, to contest for leadership.
Such competition is good for our future...it will ensure
the performance of leaders are always up to par...
Leaders who promised "more good year" but failed
to deliver could and should be eliminated.
For the good of Singapore, we must not follow
the route to an 'uncertain' future by perpetuating
the rule of the rich,. We should have the best and
most able leader at the helm all the times.
Post by Observer
This "democracy" concept where a capable
person, no matter his social standing, can be
ruler is, in my opinion, not a reality that is currently
attainable. Nor do I see it being so, for a very long
time.
I don't agree with your take. The US system allow
Clinton and Regan, who were poor originally, to
be elected. They were chosen because of their
ability ....not because they were rich. There is a
choice and venue for the American....to kick out
the poor performers.
We do not have such a system to get rid of poor
performers, because of the large GRCs and high
deposit.
Post by Observer
If you look carefully, its either by "engineered"
system to favor the rich is "elections" (where
virtually a poor chap will stand no chance) or
by the rich hiring thugs to beat the crap out of
the poor who blocks them....(note China farmers
plight).
Since its a global event, even if a poor chap
wins here and become PM, he'll be ostracised
and even isolated by the many "rich cliches"
presidents, PM ...of other "democratic" countries.
These countries who have the rich controlling
them will also want one of their kind to govern
other countries so that they "understand" each
other....hehe..
Post by Bad boy
Unfortunately...it is very true that with GRCs and
high deposit, the rich will rule Singapore, for the
next five years...and for many more terms in future.
No comment.
Sensitive issue....hehe
Sensitive ?? Criticising the flaw in our political system
is sensitive ! Giving constructive feedback to our
PM Lee who invited such feedback... is sensitive.
He he he.... Aren't you being over sensitive !!
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
In a democracy, the people's representatives are
elected and given the mandate by the people to rule.
In Singapore, the MPs are not elected by the people...
they are 'engineered' by default...by walk over. They
are NOT the people's representatives, ...the MPs are the
representatives of the rich, the 'government'.
I think ideally, a people's representative should
be selected and elected by the people, just like
in ancient times where the village will choose the
strongest, the bravest and the wisest amongst them
to lead. There should also be a mechanism for the
people to change their leaders if they find that the
one they chose do not meet their expectations....just
like in ancient times too.
This is the most basic mechanism in progressive societies.
Systems without getting the mandate from the people
to rule, ...like the emperor of China, are doomed to failure.
System that allow the best and most able to be elected
as leaders are progressive and will prosper.
Post by Observer
But of course, you do not have this nowadays, not
even in usa or anywhere else. The people CANNOT
select their choice of leaders anymore. They can
only SELECT the "leaders" that a party, or some
other smart aleck group tell them to "elect".
In fact, the rich can also "pakat" amongst themselves
to form opposing parties and present "opposition"
that also comes from the rich, so that the people THINK
that they have a choice......when in reality, they are
only choosing which devil to elect....but all of them
are devils just the same...
LOL.
Post by Bad boy
I am perplexed and failed to understand...why PM Lee
need to resort to such 'engineering'.
Given his father's track record and his apparent leader-
ship ability, even if he revert to single seat constituency
and lower the deposit to affordable level, he and his party
should be able to beat the other parties(disorganised and
weak) hands down.
May he lacked the confidence to win, confidence on
his own ability. confidence on his party's popularity !
What's your take on this ?
I think that a NEUTRAL institution that oversee and
protect the rights of the citizens (that is non political and
does not come from any political party) be around to
determine what each candidate or party can do with
respect to affecting the rights of the citizens to choose
their own leaders.
No human being can govern his own emotions or
be an angelic superhuman to give way to others....
especially when they are with the upperhand.
This is also happening globally.
You can see it....even between countries...
Nobody will give way to the other if they can
get help it and that there is nobody to say that
they must.
As I see it, there are THREE distinct interested parties
in any election, the governing one, the opposition and
the CITIZENS.
So far, the citizens are the only ones apparently having NO
SAY as to how the elections are to be conducted and
which type of persons they can SELECT and choose
for themselves. They are being forced to select the
candidates that were "chosen" for them...in fact I
can even make it in such a way that ALL of the candidates
will be chosen by ME but of course, all using different
party name lar.....just to make it look like an bona
fide "election".
Other big countries can have a poor political system
and they will survive....or muddle through...with
a lot of human suffering.
Singapore is a tiny country....we don't have the luxury
of poor leadership....chosen only from the rich.
If our system is flawed, ie the most able, best performer
are prevented from leading our country....then we are
doomed.
The small red dot...will perish...may not be overnight....
but a slow death...unable to compete with our more
powerful neighbours including China and India.

We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".

Bad boy.
....lobert....
2006-03-06 06:32:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
Post by Observer
Do note also that the majority who support this
system vocally or by writing to the press are the
RICH...
Do you think the rich will willingly and voluntarily
let go of this gold mine?
LOL.
An insightful analysis.....Yes. the 'rich' has certainly
engineered themselves to be perpetually 'elected' by
walk over, ....without having to obtain the necessary
mandate to rule from the citizens of Singapore.
I think this is not as simple as that.
This is a global phenomena.
Where everywhere you look, you will
find that all the countries are ruled or will
be ruled by the rich.
Unfortunately, this is very true. In the Singapore
context, is the rich the best leaders available ?
History has shown that our pioneers had performed
much better than second generation leaders who
are rich. LKY and his team were not exactly "rich"
and they had outperformed all his contemporaries
who gained independence at about the same time.
Shouldn't our system be tailored to allow even the
poor, but able, to contest for leadership.
Such competition is good for our future...it will ensure
the performance of leaders are always up to par...
Leaders who promised "more good year" but failed
to deliver could and should be eliminated.
For the good of Singapore, we must not follow
the route to an 'uncertain' future by perpetuating
the rule of the rich,. We should have the best and
most able leader at the helm all the times.
Post by Observer
This "democracy" concept where a capable
person, no matter his social standing, can be
ruler is, in my opinion, not a reality that is currently
attainable. Nor do I see it being so, for a very long
time.
I don't agree with your take. The US system allow
Clinton and Regan, who were poor originally, to
be elected. They were chosen because of their
ability ....not because they were rich. There is a
choice and venue for the American....to kick out
the poor performers.
We do not have such a system to get rid of poor
performers, because of the large GRCs and high
deposit.
Post by Observer
If you look carefully, its either by "engineered"
system to favor the rich is "elections" (where
virtually a poor chap will stand no chance) or
by the rich hiring thugs to beat the crap out of
the poor who blocks them....(note China farmers
plight).
Since its a global event, even if a poor chap
wins here and become PM, he'll be ostracised
and even isolated by the many "rich cliches"
presidents, PM ...of other "democratic" countries.
These countries who have the rich controlling
them will also want one of their kind to govern
other countries so that they "understand" each
other....hehe..
Post by Bad boy
Unfortunately...it is very true that with GRCs and
high deposit, the rich will rule Singapore, for the
next five years...and for many more terms in future.
No comment.
Sensitive issue....hehe
Sensitive ?? Criticising the flaw in our political system
is sensitive ! Giving constructive feedback to our
PM Lee who invited such feedback... is sensitive.
He he he.... Aren't you being over sensitive !!
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
In a democracy, the people's representatives are
elected and given the mandate by the people to rule.
In Singapore, the MPs are not elected by the people...
they are 'engineered' by default...by walk over. They
are NOT the people's representatives, ...the MPs are the
representatives of the rich, the 'government'.
I think ideally, a people's representative should
be selected and elected by the people, just like
in ancient times where the village will choose the
strongest, the bravest and the wisest amongst them
to lead. There should also be a mechanism for the
people to change their leaders if they find that the
one they chose do not meet their expectations....just
like in ancient times too.
This is the most basic mechanism in progressive societies.
Systems without getting the mandate from the people
to rule, ...like the emperor of China, are doomed to failure.
System that allow the best and most able to be elected
as leaders are progressive and will prosper.
Post by Observer
But of course, you do not have this nowadays, not
even in usa or anywhere else. The people CANNOT
select their choice of leaders anymore. They can
only SELECT the "leaders" that a party, or some
other smart aleck group tell them to "elect".
In fact, the rich can also "pakat" amongst themselves
to form opposing parties and present "opposition"
that also comes from the rich, so that the people THINK
that they have a choice......when in reality, they are
only choosing which devil to elect....but all of them
are devils just the same...
LOL.
Post by Bad boy
I am perplexed and failed to understand...why PM Lee
need to resort to such 'engineering'.
Given his father's track record and his apparent leader-
ship ability, even if he revert to single seat constituency
and lower the deposit to affordable level, he and his party
should be able to beat the other parties(disorganised and
weak) hands down.
May he lacked the confidence to win, confidence on
his own ability. confidence on his party's popularity !
What's your take on this ?
I think that a NEUTRAL institution that oversee and
protect the rights of the citizens (that is non political and
does not come from any political party) be around to
determine what each candidate or party can do with
respect to affecting the rights of the citizens to choose
their own leaders.
No human being can govern his own emotions or
be an angelic superhuman to give way to others....
especially when they are with the upperhand.
This is also happening globally.
You can see it....even between countries...
Nobody will give way to the other if they can
get help it and that there is nobody to say that
they must.
As I see it, there are THREE distinct interested parties
in any election, the governing one, the opposition and
the CITIZENS.
So far, the citizens are the only ones apparently having NO
SAY as to how the elections are to be conducted and
which type of persons they can SELECT and choose
for themselves. They are being forced to select the
candidates that were "chosen" for them...in fact I
can even make it in such a way that ALL of the candidates
will be chosen by ME but of course, all using different
party name lar.....just to make it look like an bona
fide "election".
Other big countries can have a poor political system
and they will survive....or muddle through...with
a lot of human suffering.
Singapore is a tiny country....we don't have the luxury
of poor leadership....chosen only from the rich.
If our system is flawed, ie the most able, best performer
are prevented from leading our country....then we are
doomed.
The small red dot...will perish...may not be overnight....
but a slow death...unable to compete with our more
powerful neighbours including China and India.
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
Bad boy.
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.

Do we still need LKY now? It is time that he let go.
Bad boy
2006-03-06 08:12:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
History has shown that our pioneers had performed
much better than second generation leaders who
are rich. LKY and his team were not exactly "rich"
and they had outperformed all his contemporaries
who gained independence at about the same time.
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
Bad boy.
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you have
been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Do we still need LKY now? It is time that he let go.
Of course I don't mean many LKYs literally. We need
leaders with the abilities of LKY who are NOT rich,
but with ability and can perform.
We should get rid of leaders who promised "more good
years" but can only managed many bad years.

Yes, LKY will go in his own time....His abilities and his
performance should be the 'standard' for the selection of
future PM.

Unfortunately, all the current MPs do not measure up.. ...and
it is therefore important the election rule allow bright young
and able candidates the chance to stand for election.


Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-06 11:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Do we still need LKY now? It is time that he let go.
Of course I don't mean many LKYs literally. We need
leaders with the abilities of LKY who are NOT rich,
but with ability and can perform.
We should get rid of leaders who promised "more good
years" but can only managed many bad years.
Actually there is a scientific basis as
to why we should never close our doors
on the poor (but capable) to lead us.

History has shown that only those that
are poor will be willing to strive hard and
do the extra mile because simply, they have
no where to go...but onwards. They do not
think of going on holidays because they
have never needed one. And they're the only
ones who will be willing to dirty their hands
to get the job done, because their hands
have always been dirtied from toiling, hence
they do not mind.

Technically, these candidates will be WORKING
for us once they are elected. They are supposed
to work FOR US to improve our lives.
So, if you're smart, which type of WORKERS
would you hire to work for you?
Those that are rich and scared to get their
hands dirty, or the hungry and hard working
worker whom you know will work hard for
you?
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:13:50 UTC
Permalink
LKY and immediate family is richer than all of them .
Post by Bad boy
Post by Bad boy
History has shown that our pioneers had performed
much better than second generation leaders who
are rich. LKY and his team were not exactly "rich"
and they had outperformed all his contemporaries
who gained independence at about the same time.
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
Bad boy.
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you have
been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Do we still need LKY now? It is time that he let go.
Of course I don't mean many LKYs literally. We need
leaders with the abilities of LKY who are NOT rich,
but with ability and can perform.
We should get rid of leaders who promised "more good
years" but can only managed many bad years.
Yes, LKY will go in his own time....His abilities and his
performance should be the 'standard' for the selection of
future PM.
Unfortunately, all the current MPs do not measure up.. ...and
it is therefore important the election rule allow bright young
and able candidates the chance to stand for election.
Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-06 11:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?

Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?

LOL.
Post by ....lobert....
Do we still need LKY now? It is time that he let go.
....lobert....
2006-03-07 03:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
ardeedee
2006-03-07 04:35:03 UTC
Permalink
So only the rich can gamble?
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Bad boy
2006-03-07 05:38:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.

With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.

With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.

Bad boy.
....lobert....
2006-03-07 06:21:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.
With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.
With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
MP was paid $500 in early Singapore and PM was paid $3000/=
$13,000 is definitely not much as compare to MP monthly allowance.
If deposit is $500, poor tom dick and harry will also become MPs.
Bad boy
2006-03-07 16:49:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.
With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.
With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
........ PM was paid $3000/=
LKY was paid $3,000! His performance as PM
as outstanding.
GCT was paid $1,000,000. His performance ???

Bad boy.
ardeedee
2006-03-07 18:01:55 UTC
Permalink
GCT was paid peanuts to act like monkey?
Post by Bad boy
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.
With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.
With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
........ PM was paid $3000/=
LKY was paid $3,000! His performance as PM
as outstanding.
GCT was paid $1,000,000. His performance ???
Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-08 11:25:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by Bad boy
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
........ PM was paid $3000/=
LKY was paid $3,000! His performance as PM
as outstanding.
GCT was paid $1,000,000. His performance ???
Aha....you really missed the gist of his
hidden message...
That he personnaly thought that our founding
politicians should NOT have been allowed to
lead Singapore and that only the RICH
rice towkays back then should have lead
Singapore....

Sometimes you must read between the lines
for some of these very "intelligent" posting
where one proclaims that only the RICH
is fit to govern.....and that the poor should
be barred.
What next?
The poor should be castrated and not
allowed to take public transport?
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-08 12:32:36 UTC
Permalink
No - public toilets only for those who are rich and can afford $100 a peek.
Post by Observer
Post by Bad boy
Post by Bad boy
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
........ PM was paid $3000/=
LKY was paid $3,000! His performance as PM
as outstanding.
GCT was paid $1,000,000. His performance ???
Aha....you really missed the gist of his
hidden message...
That he personnaly thought that our founding
politicians should NOT have been allowed to
lead Singapore and that only the RICH
rice towkays back then should have lead
Singapore....
Sometimes you must read between the lines
for some of these very "intelligent" posting
where one proclaims that only the RICH
is fit to govern.....and that the poor should
be barred.
What next?
The poor should be castrated and not
allowed to take public transport?
LOL.
Bad boy
2006-03-09 01:48:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
What next?
The poor should be castrated ...
Poor to be castrated and to serve as eunuchs
to MPs and minister !!

Bad boy
Observer
2006-03-08 11:22:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
Kah...kah...kah.
This is proof that there are Singaporeans
who are really IGNORANT about Singapore's
history and its founding politicians.

Yes...at that time there were barbers, teachers
as MP's and together, they built Singapore for
one SNOBBISH dickhead to prosper and now
declare that poor people do not deserve to lead
and only the RICH does.

Why....some don't even know who Rajaratnam
was....or that Devan were incarcerated by the Brits.
And so were many who fought for Singapore's
independence.
Were they rich?
Did they have a lot of money after being
arrested and hit upon?
Yes.....there were of course many who were
RICH back then....because they do not need
to go to jails to fight for Singapore....
Yet...there is one ungrateful dickhead who now
proclaims that anyone who does not even have
$13,000 is not fit to lead.
This is the sign of that there are plenty of ungrateful
Singaporeans who only know how to cream off what
others worked hard and probably paid with their
lives...(which made them poor of course) and now
turn around and say that only the RICH deserve to
be leaders...
What do you think of such people and where
will it lead for Singapore if we continue to have
young ungrateful brats like this?
LOL.
Post by Bad boy
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.
With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.
With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
Hmmm...I think somewhere along the line,
the subject of Critical Thinking was not
taught when some people when to school....
Only had good grades at easy subjects (just
memorise) to luckily using connections perhaps
to get ahead in life......not knowing that if they
ever go to another country with this kind of
muddled thinking, they'd be at the bottom of the pile.
Maybe thats why they die die must stay in Singapore
and dare not venture overseas....because they know
they are'n worth much without their local connections...
LOL.
Bad boy
2006-03-09 02:14:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Hmmm...I think somewhere along the line,
the subject of Critical Thinking was not
taught when some people when to school....
The colonial educational system,... Singaporeans
were educated to think as civil servants and to
look up to Europeans.... becoming subservient.

The present educational system, do not train
our students to be leaders or entrepreneur ....
but good workers, and followers, looking up
to Mandarin (officials) and the Authority. They were
trained NEVER to question authority....
Watching the university under graduate debates,
one can see them quoting 'Authority' or from
books, as gospel truth to support their arguments.
They were unable to argue their cases based on merits,
on basic principles, on logic, and sound reasoning.

All Singapore students are not trained to be thinking
individuals, questioning dogmas, theories, ways
of doing things, social rights and privileges, unequal
practices,....Good US colleges train students to think
for themselves, as individuals and to ask questions.

Local institutions pass students on their memory
ability and their ability to pass exams...Top
scholars are not thinking individuals ...but 'robot"
who memorise facts and date, and to reproduce
them at exams.

Sad.

Bad boy.
Post by Observer
Only had good grades at easy subjects (just
memorise) to luckily using connections perhaps
to get ahead in life......not knowing that if they
ever go to another country with this kind of
muddled thinking, they'd be at the bottom of the pile.
Maybe thats why they die die must stay in Singapore
and dare not venture overseas....because they know
they are'n worth much without their local connections...
LOL.
....lobert....
2006-03-09 02:38:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.
With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.
With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
Bad boy.
How come no more barber and hawker in the parliament now?
Don't live in history, the world has changed.
Rich are not Tom Dick and Harry otherwise he is not rich.
Bad boy
2006-03-09 07:51:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Bad boy
We need more LKYs.... not leaders who promised of
"more good years".
in Singapore, you have $13,000, you can stand for election unless you
have been fined by the court for more than $2000/= or bankrupted.
Why must a Singapore citizen be made
to come up with $13,000 just to qualify as
a candidate?
Does it mean that a Singaporean without
$13,000 is not allowed to be a leader in
Singapore?
Hehe...this must be another trick by
the RICH that only one of their kind
can hold power?
LOL.
Yes, can't even have $13,000 should not be a leader. Only rich and
powerful should be leader. Not any tom dick and harry who will take the
election like gambling.
Harry and his pioneer (barber and hawker)
would not have come up with half a million
dollar and won the election.
If there were high deposit, we would still be living in
shanty town, slumps,...20% unemployed,.... our
women working as maids in Hong kong and Malaysia,....
our men working as contract labourer in Hong Kong
and Taiwan.
With $13,000 deposit, we get leaders who
promise us "more good years" but we get shitty
years for over 12 years.
With the high deposit, able leaders,( who are poor
because of house loan and car loans) are prevented
from serving us.
Now... rich tom, dick and harry become our MPs...
becoming elites who get the best jobs, earn millions,
live in big houses, leaving crumbs for the poor.
Bad boy.
How come no more barber and hawker in the parliament now?
Yes. They are barber and hawkers, because
they are poor,.....Not because they are less
able, less intelligent then our MPs.

Remenber, poor is NOT equal to less able
or less intelligent.

Bad boy.
news.news
2006-03-05 01:39:40 UTC
Permalink
In fact, I would like to add another comment to it.
If this single opposition cannot come up and contest all 84 seats. then
forget about it.
No opposition will even cooperate if they happen to win and form a
government.
Just look at what happen in nearby region outside Singapore!
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Ventura
2006-03-05 02:00:29 UTC
Permalink
Of course the PAP is like using a parang to kill an ant.
Post by news.news
In fact, I would like to add another comment to it.
If this single opposition cannot come up and contest all 84 seats. then forget about it.
No opposition will even cooperate if they happen to win and form a government.
Just look at what happen in nearby region outside Singapore!
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***
Bad boy
2006-03-05 04:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by news.news
In fact, I would like to add another comment to it.
If this single opposition cannot come up and contest all 84 seats. then
forget about it.
No opposition will even cooperate if they happen to win and form a
government.
Hey. You are way out ....
The issue is between the government and the
citizens of Singapore including me. It is NOT about
PAP and the Opposition. I don't care about the PAP
nor the opposition....I am simply NOT interested.

However, I am very concern about the rights
of the citizens, the process of electing the next government,
whether they have obtained the MANDATE from the
people to rule..

By fixing the deposit at $13,000 and having the
majoirity of MP in large GRC, the government
has forced walk over in most GRCs. ...It has
effectively taken from the citizen (including me)
the right to vote, to give the mandate to rule to the
next government. This, I found, is NOT kosher...
not right...not according to democratic principles.

*A government returned by walk over* ....have the
government so returned to power, obtained the mandate
from the people to rule? Can you explain this to me.

This is my concern.

Bad boy.
Post by news.news
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
ardeedee
2006-03-14 14:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Then do away with walkovers - even if only one candidate is put upin a
constituency hold an election and the sole candidate must obtain at least 50
pct of the votes or there must be a rerun.
Post by Bad boy
Post by news.news
In fact, I would like to add another comment to it.
If this single opposition cannot come up and contest all 84 seats. then
forget about it.
No opposition will even cooperate if they happen to win and form a
government.
Hey. You are way out ....
The issue is between the government and the
citizens of Singapore including me. It is NOT about
PAP and the Opposition. I don't care about the PAP
nor the opposition....I am simply NOT interested.
However, I am very concern about the rights
of the citizens, the process of electing the next government,
whether they have obtained the MANDATE from the
people to rule..
By fixing the deposit at $13,000 and having the
majoirity of MP in large GRC, the government
has forced walk over in most GRCs. ...It has
effectively taken from the citizen (including me)
the right to vote, to give the mandate to rule to the
next government. This, I found, is NOT kosher...
not right...not according to democratic principles.
*A government returned by walk over* ....have the
government so returned to power, obtained the mandate
from the people to rule? Can you explain this to me.
This is my concern.
Bad boy.
Post by news.news
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
kilometric
2006-03-05 01:49:46 UTC
Permalink
Do people see many happy and contended faces around this time ?

Many citizens already knew whom they should vote, PAP or the opposition.
Now it really depends if the opposition is able to get together and do
something.

The timing for the opposition is extremely favorable.

If PAP is able to win 55% of the vote, they'll count themselves lucky since
40% of the citizens are going poorer by the day.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Longman
2006-03-05 02:41:38 UTC
Permalink
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,

I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Post by kilometric
Do people see many happy and contended faces around this time ?
Many citizens already knew whom they should vote, PAP or the opposition.
Now it really depends if the opposition is able to get together and do
something.
The timing for the opposition is extremely favorable.
If PAP is able to win 55% of the vote, they'll count themselves lucky since
40% of the citizens are going poorer by the day.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
globalise
2006-03-05 04:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Why the hell should I become idiotic and spoil my vote ?
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
....lobert....
2006-03-05 05:50:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
Longman
2006-03-05 11:55:19 UTC
Permalink
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
Observer
2006-03-05 12:35:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Then why vote at all?
Use WALKOVERS tactic lar....save
some time...
LOL.
Post by Longman
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
truth
2006-03-05 16:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Even if it is a monkey standing against them, I still
think u should vote for the monkey.
Why ?
In this way, u reduce their % of votes to near 50%.
Then they will value ur vote even more.
So next election instead of getting only $1,000, u might
get $10,000 in cash without condition.
It is like an auction, u play smart. The harder they bid
for ur vote, the more u get.
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
....lobert....
2006-03-06 06:36:35 UTC
Permalink
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP candidates.
All these new PAP candidates cannot even stand on their own and have to
hide behind the minister to enter parliament from back door. It disgracing.
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
Observer
2006-03-06 11:36:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by ....lobert....
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP candidates.
Maybe...but they appear to be NOT bright.
Harping on peripheral issues like HDB race
quotas which is a populist stand....

They just lost a lot of votes...
LOL.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:09:06 UTC
Permalink
They are not fimely tuned but this where they need help.
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP candidates.
Maybe...but they appear to be NOT bright.
Harping on peripheral issues like HDB race
quotas which is a populist stand....
They just lost a lot of votes...
LOL.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Observer
2006-03-06 12:19:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by ardeedee
They are not fimely tuned but this where they need help.
Unfortunately, they have the SAME defect
as those they accuse......they do NOT LISTEN.

Nor do they ask the general public whether
they really liked getting enclaves in housing
estates which led to the riots.

I have said it before, the opposition have
NOT proven that they are any better than
the PAP that they accuse.....nor have they
proven that they will NOT enact the SAME
things they accuse PAP of doing if ever they
get into power.

IF they are sincere, they will promise to set
up independant bodies for the same stuffs they
accuse the PAP of bullying.....like boundaries,
civil servant's salaries...etc.
How do we know they would also pay themselves
MILLIONS if ever they got into power, they accuse
the current ministers are doing?

This has happened many times before in
history.......men who promised to be different,
to care for their charges.....etc...and then became
dictatorial once they achieved control.
Can you guarantee that the opposition will
not be the same as those they accuse?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP candidates.
Maybe...but they appear to be NOT bright.
Harping on peripheral issues like HDB race
quotas which is a populist stand....
They just lost a lot of votes...
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:42:56 UTC
Permalink
The oppostion is not saying that they are against the idea of the HDB
estates being opened up forcefully to all races what they are against is the
resale flats havingf to undergo the same enclave percentages when the resale
flats are small in number and do not viably distort the racial composition.
The only ones whoa re suffering the low resale flat pricing are the other
races who are thereby bearing the brunt of the integration policy unfairly.
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
They are not fimely tuned but this where they need help.
Unfortunately, they have the SAME defect
as those they accuse......they do NOT LISTEN.
Nor do they ask the general public whether
they really liked getting enclaves in housing
estates which led to the riots.
I have said it before, the opposition have
NOT proven that they are any better than
the PAP that they accuse.....nor have they
proven that they will NOT enact the SAME
things they accuse PAP of doing if ever they
get into power.
IF they are sincere, they will promise to set
up independant bodies for the same stuffs they
accuse the PAP of bullying.....like boundaries,
civil servant's salaries...etc.
How do we know they would also pay themselves
MILLIONS if ever they got into power, they accuse
the current ministers are doing?
This has happened many times before in
history.......men who promised to be different,
to care for their charges.....etc...and then became
dictatorial once they achieved control.
Can you guarantee that the opposition will
not be the same as those they accuse?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP
candidates.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Maybe...but they appear to be NOT bright.
Harping on peripheral issues like HDB race
quotas which is a populist stand....
They just lost a lot of votes...
LOL.
Observer
2006-03-06 12:57:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by ardeedee
The oppostion is not saying that they are against the idea of the HDB
estates being opened up forcefully to all races what they are against is the
resale flats havingf to undergo the same enclave percentages when the resale
flats are small in number and do not viably distort the racial
composition.

If you're speaking on behalf of
the opposition, you just lost them
more votes...LOL.

How is it you want to make people
believe that the percentages will not
change in due time?
THis is the same reason why opposition
will lose time and again.....they have people
who think with their arses to canvass for them...
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
The only ones whoa re suffering the low resale flat pricing are the other
races who are thereby bearing the brunt of the integration policy unfairly.
Haha....then they should have proposed
OTHER solutions to solve this easy problem
if they are smart.....which they are not as proven
by their actions so far...
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
They are not fimely tuned but this where they need help.
Unfortunately, they have the SAME defect
as those they accuse......they do NOT LISTEN.
Nor do they ask the general public whether
they really liked getting enclaves in housing
estates which led to the riots.
I have said it before, the opposition have
NOT proven that they are any better than
the PAP that they accuse.....nor have they
proven that they will NOT enact the SAME
things they accuse PAP of doing if ever they
get into power.
IF they are sincere, they will promise to set
up independant bodies for the same stuffs they
accuse the PAP of bullying.....like boundaries,
civil servant's salaries...etc.
How do we know they would also pay themselves
MILLIONS if ever they got into power, they accuse
the current ministers are doing?
This has happened many times before in
history.......men who promised to be different,
to care for their charges.....etc...and then became
dictatorial once they achieved control.
Can you guarantee that the opposition will
not be the same as those they accuse?
LOL.
....lobert....
2006-03-07 03:35:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP candidates.
Maybe...but they appear to be NOT bright.
Harping on peripheral issues like HDB race
quotas which is a populist stand....
They just lost a lot of votes...
LOL.
who said they have just lost a lot of votes? There is no need to have
race quotas for each HDB block or neighborhood. It is racist policy. Let
people stay where they want.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Do not vote for the candidate who is best qualified or wealthiest or best "
do goody" type - invariably it will be the PAP - vote for the one who is not
the better in any respect as this will make the PAP sit up and take notice -
why are people not voting for the best there is - because the best cannot
represent the masses as can the opposition - they vote in accordance to
their conscience and the virtues of any bill or motion not in accordance to
what the whip tells them to.
Post by ....lobert....
The opposition has people as strong if not stronger than PAP candidates.
All these new PAP candidates cannot even stand on their own and have to
hide behind the minister to enter parliament from back door. It disgracing.
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:03:53 UTC
Permalink
A spoilit vote is as good as a vote for the PAP as ther are few voters with
guts for the opposition.
Post by Longman
The opposition are not so strong, why vote for them? the garmen are
behaving like bullies, why vote for them, so spoilt vote lah.
Post by ....lobert....
Post by Longman
one way out is that people forced to vote will do so with spoilt vote.
make a cross for both pap and opposition while voting,
I think spoli votes will increased this time round
Why spoilt vote ? Why not vote for an opposition if you are not satisfied
with the government ?
....lobert....
2006-03-05 05:52:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by kilometric
Do people see many happy and contended faces around this time ?
Many citizens already knew whom they should vote, PAP or the opposition.
Now it really depends if the opposition is able to get together and do
something.
The timing for the opposition is extremely favorable.
If PAP is able to win 55% of the vote, they'll count themselves lucky
since 40% of the citizens are going poorer by the day.
If the result is that bad, the first one to lost his job is Director ISD and
then Home Affairs Minister
Observer
2006-03-05 10:37:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by ....lobert....
Post by kilometric
If PAP is able to win 55% of the vote, they'll count themselves lucky
since 40% of the citizens are going poorer by the day.
If the result is that bad, the first one to lost his job is Director ISD and
then Home Affairs Minister
LOL....why?
ardeedee
2006-03-06 06:30:45 UTC
Permalink
LOL - what do you expect from an idiot?
Post by Observer
Post by ....lobert....
Post by kilometric
If PAP is able to win 55% of the vote, they'll count themselves lucky
since 40% of the citizens are going poorer by the day.
If the result is that bad, the first one to lost his job is Director ISD
and
Post by ....lobert....
then Home Affairs Minister
LOL....why?
ardeedee
2006-03-05 02:56:23 UTC
Permalink
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Holy Smoke
2006-03-05 03:46:52 UTC
Permalink
Good suggestion.
Post by ardeedee
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
....lobert....
2006-03-05 05:53:21 UTC
Permalink
So what if he get 49% ?
Post by Holy Smoke
Good suggestion.
Post by ardeedee
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 10:27:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by ardeedee
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
WRONG you dickhead!
If no opposition candidate, the deposit
should be reduced until one is found or
one is able to afford to contest.
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
ardeedee
2006-03-06 06:34:51 UTC
Permalink
You do not think - if the PAP sole candidate fails to win 50 pct the next
runoff election will surely attract the opposition.
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
WRONG you dickhead!
If no opposition candidate, the deposit
should be reduced until one is found or
one is able to afford to contest.
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
Observer
2006-03-06 11:35:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by ardeedee
You do not think - if the PAP sole candidate fails to win 50 pct the next
runoff election will surely attract the opposition.
You moron.
Thats EXACTLY what I want you to
think if I am holding the trump card.

Because you are foolish not to see that
even if you are right.....it will take another
FIVE years for the "next time"....

So you keep on hoping for the "next time"
to get even...in the meantime a CENTURY
has passed...
Go and read up Sun Tze lar...
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
WRONG you dickhead!
If no opposition candidate, the deposit
should be reduced until one is found or
one is able to afford to contest.
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:16:44 UTC
Permalink
You do not read properly what i am advocating - that even if there is no
contest - there will still be an election and the PAP candidate or
candidates(GRC) must return with 50 pct of the votes failing which there
will be a run off election .
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not think - if the PAP sole candidate fails to win 50 pct the next
runoff election will surely attract the opposition.
You moron.
Thats EXACTLY what I want you to
think if I am holding the trump card.
Because you are foolish not to see that
even if you are right.....it will take another
FIVE years for the "next time"....
So you keep on hoping for the "next time"
to get even...in the meantime a CENTURY
has passed...
Go and read up Sun Tze lar...
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
WRONG you dickhead!
If no opposition candidate, the deposit
should be reduced until one is found or
one is able to afford to contest.
LOL.
Observer
2006-03-06 12:26:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by ardeedee
You do not read properly what i am advocating - that even if there is no
contest - there will still be an election and the PAP candidate or
candidates(GRC) must return with 50 pct of the votes failing which there
will be a run off election .
And the run off election will require a deposit
of $50,000......maybe a MILLION?

The basic tenet is that ANYONE is allowed
to stand as long as he is a Singaporean.
This has NOTHING to do whether he MUST
have $13,000 or other things.

Only morons cannot see the root cause
and try solutions that should not even be
needed in the first place.....and in the meantime
a CENTURY passes by...
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not think - if the PAP sole candidate fails to win 50 pct the
next
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
runoff election will surely attract the opposition.
You moron.
Thats EXACTLY what I want you to
think if I am holding the trump card.
Because you are foolish not to see that
even if you are right.....it will take another
FIVE years for the "next time"....
So you keep on hoping for the "next time"
to get even...in the meantime a CENTURY
has passed...
Go and read up Sun Tze lar...
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 12:44:41 UTC
Permalink
The $13,000 deposit is not that high by other countries's standards and
campaigning costs are low in Singapore.
You will not get the PAP to change this part of the election laws so why
break your head trying?
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not read properly what i am advocating - that even if there is no
contest - there will still be an election and the PAP candidate or
candidates(GRC) must return with 50 pct of the votes failing which there
will be a run off election .
And the run off election will require a deposit
of $50,000......maybe a MILLION?
The basic tenet is that ANYONE is allowed
to stand as long as he is a Singaporean.
This has NOTHING to do whether he MUST
have $13,000 or other things.
Only morons cannot see the root cause
and try solutions that should not even be
needed in the first place.....and in the meantime
a CENTURY passes by...
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not think - if the PAP sole candidate fails to win 50 pct the
next
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
runoff election will surely attract the opposition.
You moron.
Thats EXACTLY what I want you to
think if I am holding the trump card.
Because you are foolish not to see that
even if you are right.....it will take another
FIVE years for the "next time"....
So you keep on hoping for the "next time"
to get even...in the meantime a CENTURY
has passed...
Go and read up Sun Tze lar...
LOL.
Observer
2006-03-06 13:00:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by ardeedee
The $13,000 deposit is not that high by other countries's standards
What "other countries" standards?
Which "countries"?
Why should their standards be imposed
on Singaporeans?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
and
campaigning costs are low in Singapore.
So?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
You will not get the PAP to change this part of the election laws so why
break your head trying?
Haha....who said I'm trying?
I am stating what I observe.
Whether anything is done or not is
irrelevant.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not read properly what i am advocating - that even if there is no
contest - there will still be an election and the PAP candidate or
candidates(GRC) must return with 50 pct of the votes failing which there
will be a run off election .
And the run off election will require a deposit
of $50,000......maybe a MILLION?
The basic tenet is that ANYONE is allowed
to stand as long as he is a Singaporean.
This has NOTHING to do whether he MUST
have $13,000 or other things.
Only morons cannot see the root cause
and try solutions that should not even be
needed in the first place.....and in the meantime
a CENTURY passes by...
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 14:25:28 UTC
Permalink
US, Britain, Japan, Korea, etc.
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
The $13,000 deposit is not that high by other countries's standards
What "other countries" standards?
Which "countries"?
Why should their standards be imposed
on Singaporeans?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
and
campaigning costs are low in Singapore.
So?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
You will not get the PAP to change this part of the election laws so why
break your head trying?
Haha....who said I'm trying?
I am stating what I observe.
Whether anything is done or not is
irrelevant.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not read properly what i am advocating - that even if there
is
Post by Observer
no
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
contest - there will still be an election and the PAP candidate or
candidates(GRC) must return with 50 pct of the votes failing which
there
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
will be a run off election .
And the run off election will require a deposit
of $50,000......maybe a MILLION?
The basic tenet is that ANYONE is allowed
to stand as long as he is a Singaporean.
This has NOTHING to do whether he MUST
have $13,000 or other things.
Only morons cannot see the root cause
and try solutions that should not even be
needed in the first place.....and in the meantime
a CENTURY passes by...
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 14:33:10 UTC
Permalink
Do you think you will get the PAP to change their mindset on this deposit
value?
They got a good thing going for them.It is also equal for all candidates.

But when LKY and LHL and other ministers talk of wanting to face an election
and an election campaign being good for blooding their youngsters etc then
of course we should follow up this idea and ask them why not proceed with
the election even if there is no opposition candidate - this will mean
their candidates will have to convince the voters that they are the best men
for the job even in the absence of opposition and they prove themselves
capable of delivering on their campaign promises.
If they cannot get 50 pct of the votes cast in a walkover then they have to
ask themselves why have they failed?

We know why but do they know?

Otherwise it is all talk and tic toc.
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
The $13,000 deposit is not that high by other countries's standards
What "other countries" standards?
Which "countries"?
Why should their standards be imposed
on Singaporeans?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
and
campaigning costs are low in Singapore.
So?
LOL.
Post by ardeedee
You will not get the PAP to change this part of the election laws so why
break your head trying?
Haha....who said I'm trying?
I am stating what I observe.
Whether anything is done or not is
irrelevant.
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
You do not read properly what i am advocating - that even if there
is
Post by Observer
no
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
contest - there will still be an election and the PAP candidate or
candidates(GRC) must return with 50 pct of the votes failing which
there
Post by ardeedee
Post by Observer
Post by ardeedee
will be a run off election .
And the run off election will require a deposit
of $50,000......maybe a MILLION?
The basic tenet is that ANYONE is allowed
to stand as long as he is a Singaporean.
This has NOTHING to do whether he MUST
have $13,000 or other things.
Only morons cannot see the root cause
and try solutions that should not even be
needed in the first place.....and in the meantime
a CENTURY passes by...
LOL.
Abang Komeini
2006-03-05 12:03:43 UTC
Permalink
Good idae. At least this to show the people indeed want and even them.
Post by ardeedee
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 06:38:08 UTC
Permalink
This will prove they are elected by the majority as they have always been
insisting on having a campaign - well they will get one even if there is no
alternative candidate(s).
Post by Abang Komeini
Good idae. At least this to show the people indeed want and even them.
Post by ardeedee
All candidates should face an election even if they received "walkover".
If they cannot garner at least 50 pct of the votes cast they are deemed
ineligible for Parliament as they have not obtained the majority vote for
their respective constituency.
A re-run election will be then be held and if no opposition candidate is
fielded then the seat is awarded to the walkover candidate.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
booby
2006-03-05 05:43:24 UTC
Permalink
opt-for-poor-position.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Loganathan
2006-03-05 06:14:55 UTC
Permalink
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd
within 4 years to stand for election, then
they are not fit to run such an important
institution as the Govt.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all
84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties
are
poor, unable to come up with the required
deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to
$13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young,
able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties
have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his
party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other
parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one
GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan
and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor
young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has
cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor
young
men....like our political pioneers. The
general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call
millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not
have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise
Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy
leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our
landscape now
could have been slums and poverty
everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on
nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has
won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who
have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
The Bishop
2006-03-05 07:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Loganathan
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd
within 4 years to stand for election, then
they are not fit to run such an important
institution as the Govt.
They belong to a new opposition party, called "Tai Yi Loong" party.
This party does not run against anybody, only make noise, the more the
merrier ........ LOL
Post by Loganathan
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all
84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties
are
poor, unable to come up with the required
deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to
$13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young,
able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties
have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his
party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other
parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one
GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan
and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor
young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has
cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor
young
men....like our political pioneers. The
general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call
millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not
have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise
Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy
leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our
landscape now
could have been slums and poverty
everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on
nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has
won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who
have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
truth
2006-03-05 16:11:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Bishop
Post by Loganathan
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd
within 4 years to stand for election, then
they are not fit to run such an important
institution as the Govt.
They belong to a new opposition party, called "Tai Yi Loong" party.
This party does not run against anybody, only make noise, the more the
merrier ........ LOL
Now I know why the pap so rich.
Must be sucking the people's $.
Post by The Bishop
Post by Loganathan
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all
84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties
are
poor, unable to come up with the required
deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to
$13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young,
able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties
have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his
party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other
parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one
GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan
and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor
young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has
cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor
young
men....like our political pioneers. The
general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call
millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not
have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise
Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy
leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our
landscape now
could have been slums and poverty
everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on
nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has
won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who
have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 10:39:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Loganathan
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd
within 4 years to stand for election, then
they are not fit to run such an important
institution as the Govt.
Kah...kah..kah...
What an arrogant dickhead.
Its NOT for you to determine whether
anyone is fit to govern the people (citizens).
In the demorcratic process, it is the PEOPLE
who can and should determine that....

Unless of course you admit to being a
communist...
LOL.
Post by Loganathan
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all
84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties
are
ardeedee
2006-03-06 06:32:19 UTC
Permalink
Loganathan has more than $13000 to lose LOL.When they open the casino he
will be bankrupt.
Post by Observer
Post by Loganathan
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd
within 4 years to stand for election, then
they are not fit to run such an important
institution as the Govt.
Kah...kah..kah...
What an arrogant dickhead.
Its NOT for you to determine whether
anyone is fit to govern the people (citizens).
In the demorcratic process, it is the PEOPLE
who can and should determine that....
Unless of course you admit to being a
communist...
LOL.
Post by Loganathan
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all
84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties
are
Bad boy
2006-03-05 12:07:27 UTC
Permalink
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd within 4 years to stand for
election, then they are not fit to run such an important institution as
the Govt.
LKY and the early pioneers (very poor) did
not have the ability to put together 13,000sdg !
They were NOT required to put together
such high deposit.

They proved to be exceptional leaders who
were far better than others who had gained
independence ...better than India, Pakistan...

Wealth is NOT equal to leadership quality or
ability.

Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 12:51:39 UTC
Permalink
"Bad boy" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:440ad48b$***@news.starhub.net.sg...
...
Post by Bad boy
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd within 4 years to stand for
election, then they are not fit to run such an important institution as
the Govt.
LKY and the early pioneers (very poor) did
not have the ability to put together 13,000sdg !
They were NOT required to put together
such high deposit.
I think, since the choosing of leaders is
a very important event for the citizens because
it will affect their lives, the determination of
things like deposits, boundaries.....etc should
be determined by the citizens themselves.

Can you allow any boxer to decide what the rules
of a BOXING match should be?
If we do not do this for boxing matches, why are
we allowing our "boxers" to determine the rules
of election for them to be "elected" and probably
opening the door to million dollar salaries for
themselves?

If I'm the boxers, I will pakat and make sure the
rules are easy, and will only get be and my kakis elected and
BLOCKED other pesky poor farmers who think
they want to be goody two shoes...
Post by Bad boy
They proved to be exceptional leaders who
were far better than others who had gained
independence ...better than India, Pakistan...
Wealth is NOT equal to leadership quality or
ability.
So are we blocking FUTURE outstanding people
(but poor) just like our founding politicians
from becoming leaders here?
LOL.
ardeedee
2006-03-06 06:33:29 UTC
Permalink
PAP scared to lose - they msut win at all costs even if unfairly.
Otherwise heads will roll.
Post by Observer
...
Post by Bad boy
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd within 4 years to stand for
election, then they are not fit to run such an important institution as
the Govt.
LKY and the early pioneers (very poor) did
not have the ability to put together 13,000sdg !
They were NOT required to put together
such high deposit.
I think, since the choosing of leaders is
a very important event for the citizens because
it will affect their lives, the determination of
things like deposits, boundaries.....etc should
be determined by the citizens themselves.
Can you allow any boxer to decide what the rules
of a BOXING match should be?
If we do not do this for boxing matches, why are
we allowing our "boxers" to determine the rules
of election for them to be "elected" and probably
opening the door to million dollar salaries for
themselves?
If I'm the boxers, I will pakat and make sure the
rules are easy, and will only get be and my kakis elected and
BLOCKED other pesky poor farmers who think
they want to be goody two shoes...
Post by Bad boy
They proved to be exceptional leaders who
were far better than others who had gained
independence ...better than India, Pakistan...
Wealth is NOT equal to leadership quality or
ability.
So are we blocking FUTURE outstanding people
(but poor) just like our founding politicians
from becoming leaders here?
LOL.
truth
2006-03-05 16:10:34 UTC
Permalink
Hi, in Australia, no deposit need to stand for election
to the state of federal parliament.
The only qualification is u have to be an Australian citizen.
If they can't even put together 13,000sgd within 4 years to stand for
election, then they are not fit to run such an important institution as
the Govt.
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
9of10
2006-03-05 07:54:52 UTC
Permalink
Most singaporeans are cash poor. Because they park their money on HDB flats.
Alot of them have liabilities, because they have to pay their mortgage
loans...
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
To contest all 84 seats, the other parties have
to come up 84 x $13,000 = $1,092,000....ie
over a million dollars. For the PM and his party,
a million dollar is peanut. To the other parties..
it is a HUGE sum, way beyond their means.
For able young men to contest even in one GRC,
it means...... 6 x $13,000 = $78,000!
They have to service housing loan, car loan and pay
high costs of living....Yes, the poor young, but able
leaders, has NO money to contest.
By setting the high deposit, PM Lee has cleverly
prevented competition from able but poor young
men....like our political pioneers. The general election
is now meant for ONLY the rich, who call millions
as peanut.
LKY and our pioneers (very poor) did not have
to face such high deposit ....Otherwise Singapore
could have been ruled by the rich but lousy leaders....
Instead of a modern metropolis, our landscape now
could have been slums and poverty everywhere like
in India.
His call to other parties is rhetorical.
PM Lee could win this GE by walk over....on nomination
day.
If that happened, can he claim that he has won the mandate
to rule...from the majority of citizens who have NOT cast
a single ballot paper in support of him ?
I wonder !
Bad boy.
Observer
2006-03-05 10:39:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by 9of10
Most singaporeans are cash poor. Because they park their money on HDB flats.
Alot of them have liabilities, because they have to pay their mortgage
loans...
So its all "engineered"?
LOL.
Post by 9of10
Post by Bad boy
PM issued a call to rivals...."contest all 84
seats" in today's ST.
He knows full well that the other parties are
poor, unable to come up with the required deposit.
The government has raised the deposit to $13,000
a seat, apparently to keep out ....'young, able and
strong' candidates who are POOR.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...