Tuesday, September 8, 2026

Comments on upward revisions of Ministers' salaries

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqrpGvmK/

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqrsAk5R/

Increase in Minister salaries.

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqrG7vG4/

No perks outside salaries.


@Babe:LCL Danny 心 (1st HP):

1. We shouldn't shortchange anyone - be it workers, civil servants or Ministers. We should pay market values.

2. This will get the right talents for the right jobs.

Because getting Ministers is actually competing with the private sectors and civil service for the top talents.

Shortchanging salaries must not be deterrence from getting the right talents to be our Ministers that will fight to secure our future.

3. Because Singapore is such a small Country with no natural resources. Getting the top talents to run the Country - will ensure Singapore future will be with a safe pair of hands.

4. For 4 consecutive years, Singapore governance have been ranked the best in the World. This is the testimony we are on the right track - pay what is worth, what is the market values to attract the right talents for the Minister jobs to secure Singapore future.

Source:- Google Gemini AI

Singapore ranks at the very top of the Chandler Good Government Index (CGGI) for four consecutive years, holding the number one global spot through 2026

Governance Ranking DetailsGlobal Position: Ranked first out of 133 evaluated countries

Pillars: Placed first globally in five out of seven categories:

- Leadership & Foresight

- Strong Institutions

- Financial Stewardship

- Attractive Marketplace

- Helping People Rise

5. KPI for Ministers is based on four socio-economic indicators weighted equally:-

a. The real median income growth rate of the average Singaporean,

b. the real income growth rate of the lowest 20th percentile of Singaporean income earners,

c. the unemployment rate of Singaporeans; and

d. the real gross domestic product (GDP) growth rate.

These are KPI that directly benefit each and every Singaporeans and residents.

Why should Singaporeans not support the Minister's salaries revision that directly benefit every Singaporeans?

6. These are objective KPI that are quantifiable, measurable that only when the targets are met - will be given the revised salaries as defined in the framework.

7. No additional perks - no hanky panky other than the published revised salaries. Hence possibility of corruption is greatly reduced within the political appointees.


@Babe:8. Looking afar, we have one Head of State that refuse to accept any salary for its job to appeal to voters to vote him in - aloft in civil spiritedness, but mess up big in domestic economy, mess up global affairs, turn allies into adversaries etc.

Eventually, secretly he setup shady crpto currencies, shady business to earn billions from unsuspecting investors exploiting his position as the Head of State.

It is precisely such candidates that Singapore cannot afford to get as Ministers to helm the most important office in the Country

It looks noble, but is a bait that will plunge Singapore success, peace and prosperity into abyss.

9. It doesn't make sense that senior civil servants, Perm Sec salaries exceed Miinisters salaries where political Ministers are their boss and held more responsibilites on the Ministries they helm.

This is karmaically not correct - and hence must be rectified.

10. CEOs, bankers, top professionals are fetching way above the million $ that our Ministers are fetching, just to name a few :-

Highest-Paid Top Executives

UOB (United Overseas Bank): CEO Wee Ee Cheong led top corporate pay lists with around S$15.9 million.

DBS: Former CEO Piyush Gupta previously drew S$17.6 million, while successor Tan Su Shan pulled in a package of S$9.6 million in her first year leading the bank.

Singapore Airlines (SIA): CEO Goh Choon Phong received nearly S$9.7 million for the financial year, backed by record airline revenues.

Singtel: CEO Kuan Moon Yuen received a package totaling S$6.8 million

These CEOs responsibilities are only the profit and loss for their respective companies they helm.

Ministers' responsibilities go far beyond these - Economic growth, secure jobs for the population, ensure their income rises, better living standard, peaceful environment, safety, security, better health, better welfare, matter of live and death etc.

And Ministers' salaries are fractions of those top CEOs' pay - already a big discount for Ministers' remuneration.


@Babe:Hence I support Ministers salaries revision - to ensure salaries are not deterrent to attract the top talents to be the Ministers that will help to secure Singapore future, as well as each and every Singaporeans' future.


====

After note:-


In his speech, Mr Wong said that the prime minister’s salary is set at twice the MR4 benchmark. This means that Mr Wong earns a total annual salary norm of S$3.6 million including bonuses, up from S$2.2 million presently.             

“I have decided that, for the next five years – assuming I remain PM – I will donate the full increase in my salary arising from this adjustment,” he said.

He will continue to receive his salary as provided for under the framework, and will then “donate the increase to suitable good causes”, said Mr Wong.

“This is my own decision. I do not expect other office holders to do the same. As a general rule, I do not believe in making a public show of charitable giving."

Mr Wong said that, as prime minister, he carries the “ultimate responsibility” for the salary framework, and so “it is right that Singaporeans should know what I have decided, and that I am taking these changes forward because I believe they are in Singapore’s interests”.


====



"Higher political salaries give 'better chance' of persuading capable Singaporeans to step forward: PM Wong.

Prime Minister Lawrence Wong says he had personally approached several senior permanent secretaries and private-sector CEOs to join politics before the last General Election – and all of them turned him down."

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/minister-salaries-review-lawrence-wong-6368526#:~:text=Higher%20political%20salaries,turned%20him%20down.


====


Saturday, September 5, 2026

Nasty racist remarks about Nepal and Air India - Police stepping in

 https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqNQeaGv/

@Babe:Glad that police are investigating nasty racist remarks that threaten our racial harmony.


@Babe:Inciting racial hatred or discord is illegal in Singapore, and authorities enforce strict penalties to protect public safety and social stability as outlined by the Ministry of Home Affairs.

The Legal Framework

Penal Code: Section 298A makes it a crime to promote enmity between different groups on the grounds of race or do acts prejudicial to the maintenance of harmony. Offenders can face up to three years in prison and fines.

New Laws: Singapore introduced the Maintenance of Racial Harmony Bill to strengthen government powers. It adds measures like restraining orders and community remedial actions instead of just court punishments

Source:- Google Gemini AI


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqYBwycN/

Safeguard our multi racial society.


====

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqNpRUPC/

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqNpskow/

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqNswwcF/


Comments on WP Kenneth Tiong Air India post.

1. Government and politicians should not comment on commercial decisions that will be color by political considerations. It should be left to the shareholders of SIA.

2. Temasek don't make cheque to Air India - it is SIA.


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqYrXpcb/

None of politicians business to interfere in commercial decisions by SIA.


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqYPGMVx/

Commerical decision turn racism.


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqY9CrHU/

WP Kenneth Tiong political intervention turn into racism.


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqYbEQq6/

Kenneth Tiong has no experience in running an airline, but want to interfere into SIA commercial decisions.


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqNtjE3t/

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqNtKvMv/

Good insight why SIA want to fund Air India.


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSq2ebteP/

WP Kenneth Tiong giving fuel to the racist followers.


====

Other comments:-


@mrlorenzomatterhorn:The racist remarks during the Nepal flood discussion were unacceptable, but the Government cannot keep pretending that the growing anger and resentment appeared out of nowhere. For years, Singaporeans have raised concerns about CECA, immigration, foreign manpower, job competition and whether citizens are truly being prioritised, only to feel that their concerns are dismissed, lectured away or conveniently branded as xenophobia. That is a serious failure of political leadership. When legitimate grievances are repeatedly brushed aside instead of confronted openly, frustration festers, trust collapses and eventually some people lash out in ugly and unacceptable ways. Racists must be responsible for their own words, but the Government must also answer for creating an environment in which public frustration has been allowed to reach boiling point. You cannot suppress a difficult debate for years and then act shocked when anger explodes. Condemning racism is easy; addressing the policies, anxieties and loss of trust feeding the anger requires political courage. On that, the Government has failed badly.


@Fakir:Notice how this argument hasn't lifted a finger to mention who actually makes up the largest group of foreign workers in Singapore? If this outcry were truly about job competition, the focus would be on Malaysians, particularly ethnic Chinese, who form the overwhelming majority of the cross-border workforce.Instead, the focus is hyper-fixated exclusively on CECA and the Indian community. Leaving out the biggest demographic piece of the puzzle shows exactly what this narrative is trying to do—it isn't a genuine concern about local jobs, but a targeted attempt to stir up resentment against one specific group. An "honest debate" cannot be claimed while deliberately hiding the most important facts. And yes the government has failed for not highlighting the actual data of who has been stealing your lunch.


@mrlorenzomatterhorn:This is an embarrassingly crude rebuttal that confuses raw headcount with economic impact. Nobody needs a calculator to know there are huge numbers of Malaysians and other foreigners working here; that was never the argument. The CECA controversy is specifically about competition for scarce, well-paid PMET positions, hiring practices, intra-company transfers and the perception that foreign professional networks can reproduce themselves while qualified Singaporeans struggle to break in. So shouting “but there are more Malaysians!” is about as intelligent as saying there are more cleaners than CEOs, therefore cleaners have greater influence over the corporate labour market. And dragging racism into every criticism is the ultimate intellectual escape hatch: when you cannot rebut concerns about jobs, fairness and enforcement, accuse the critics of xenophobia and hope moral outrage substitutes for evidence. Singaporeans don’t need lectures or statistical smoke screens; they deserve evidence that hiring is genuinely meritocratic and citizens are not being systematically disadvantaged. 😂😂😂😁😁😁


@Fakir:To claim this is a simple mix-up between raw headcount and high-level economic impact completely misses the mark, as the comparison to "cleaners versus CEOs" simply does not hold water [MTI]. It assumes the massive Malaysian workforce consists only of low-wage labour, when in reality, thousands of professionals crossing the causeway every day occupy highly paid, corporate PMET positions and establish vast professional networks [MTI]. Curiously, not a single finger is lifted to protest against them, nor is there any public anxiety directed at these regional groups reproducing their own corporate networks. By hyper-fixating relentlessly on the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) and the Indian minority while turning a completely blind eye to a much larger influx of corporate talent, this narrative betrays its true nature [MTI]. When an economic argument relies entirely on selective panic over one specific community, it stops being a genuine crusade for meritocracy or local jobs—it becomes a textbook case of targeted hostility disguised as economic anxiety.


@mrlorenzomatterhorn:What a wonderfully convenient argument: because Malaysians also hold PMET jobs, apparently nobody is allowed to question CECA-related hiring patterns without being branded a xenophobe. That is not serious reasoning; it is whataboutism dressed up as moral superiority. If Malaysians, Indians or any other nationality form closed hiring networks, practise discriminatory recruitment or disproportionately crowd Singaporeans out of particular sectors, scrutinise them all. The nationality is irrelevant; the principle is the same. And the irony is spectacular: Singapore’s own COMPASS framework explicitly considers nationality diversity in firms’ PMET workforces, so apparently examining workforce concentration is legitimate when MOM does it but suddenly becomes “targeted hostility” when Singaporeans ask uncomfortable questions. Stop weaponising accusations of racism to dodge the substantive issue. “But Malaysians!” is not a rebuttal to concerns about CECA or hiring practices; it is a giant flashing sign saying you cannot answer them. 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂


@Fakir:To weaponise the COMPASS framework as a defence of this narrative is a spectacular own goal, because the system explicitly invalidates the fixated grievance. If the concern were genuinely about objective policy frameworks like MOM’s COMPASS criteria—which systematically penalises any firm where a single foreign nationality exceeds 25% of the PMET workforce by awarding zero points [MOM]—the public outcry would be applied evenly across the board. Instead, while foreign employment passes require strict, age-progressive minimums like S$5,600 to S$6,200 to match top local earners [Singapore EDB], the total absence of public scrutiny directed at the massive, concentrated regional PMET demographic proves this isn't a principled stand on workforce concentration. It is textbook whataboutism used to camouflage selective hostility against the Indian minority. Conflating state-enforced, data-driven diversity regulation with targeted online vitriol doesn't make the argument intellectual—it simply confirms that policy jargon is being used as a shield to excuse a blatant double standard.


@mrlorenzomatterhorn:Why you keep repeating same thing 😂😂😂😂😅😅😅🤣🤣🤣🤣


====

Source:- Google Gemini AI 


An estimated 1.13 million to 1.18 million Malaysians live and work in Singapore, while Indian nationals account for roughly 44,000 to 50,000 skilled professional Employment Pass (EP) holders. 

  • roughly 350,000 to 400,000+) of Malaysians in Singapore fill skilled and PMET-equivalent roles.

@Babe:Malaysians are 10 times more in PMETs jobs compare to Ceca PMETs.
Debate, debate with facts - not with brute force colored by race.

@Babe:Misrepresentations of Ceca have caused unnecessary public concern: PM Lee | The Straits Times
====


@Babe:1. There is a need to unmask those people that make nasty racist comments in the social media.

2. Unmask those from Singapore.

3. Unmask those who are Foreigners.

4. Uncover the root cause of racial slur and nip it from the bud.

5. Singapore should not allow racial harmony to be compromised.


@Babe:We do not want to see the 1960s racial riot coming back into Singapore.

I think is time for MHA to act and unmask those people - Locals and Foreigners stirring up racial disharmony in Singapore.


@Babe:Taken aback to see those nasty comments when family members are in distress worrying about the whereabout of their loved ones.

The comments are not only insensitive and inappropriate, it is down right cruel and devoid of compassion - cannot imagine those words come from fellow human beings mouth when peer beings are in danger and in distress.


====

Exact comments by WP Kenneth Tiong on SIA investment in Air India.

  • On Temasek and SIA: "I will not support, nor expect, any future use of Temasek's funds to prop up Air India via Singapore Airlines. If Singapore Airlines wants to continue its bet on Air India, it should do so on its own two feet, and not on Temasek's."
  • On Financial Impact: "Whichever of the two writes the cheque, it will have a significant impact on Temasek."
  • On the Airline: "No one, least of all Singaporeans, owes Air India a living." 

@Babe: Kenneth Tiong is not asking a legitimate question about SIA investment in Air India.
He is directly interfering into the commercial decisions by SIA even though he has no experience in airline business.

Temasek and GIC investment in India and the rest of the world are making very good profit.

Source:- Google Gemini AI 
@Babe:Temasek's investments in India have been highly profitable, ranking as the Singapore state investor's best-performing market globally over the past decade.
Portfolio and PerformanceTop Market: India is Temasek's top-performing geographic market on a 10-year basis.
Portfolio Size: India accounts for about 7% of Temasek's global portfolio, representing an exposure of roughly US$40 billion.
Recent Success: Temasek recently experienced a strong market streak as several portfolio holdings, including Shiprocket, surged following their market debuts.
Capital Deployment: The firm deployed nearly US$9 billion in India over a three-year period and plans to invest up to US$10 billion more.
====
@Babe:Kenneth Tiong has no strategic depth in many of the issues he raised in Parliament and outside of Parliament - but spark many serious issues.

WP Kenneth Tiong asked to do his homework about SIA investment in Air India.

PM Lawrence Wong - Legitimate question versus mask prejudice.

@Babe:If we allowed such racist sentiment go unchallenged and not stop at its track, Singapore could go down the path of racial disharmony and our many decades of peace since independence will be shattered.
Hence there is a need to unmask :-
1. Locals that fan the racist sentiment.
2. Foreigners that fan racist sentiment, and activate diplomatic channels to catch those culprits.
We must never let this racists destroy Singapore peace and prosperity.

====
@pokefriend17:Let Singaporeans have a referendum see how many percent vote affirmatively to increase Air India investment using SIA or SG funds, SIR !

@Ommit1202:So for every commercial decision, we need a referendum? So free ah?

@Babe:Commerical decision should not be left to people referendum.
You are abusing the political process.

====
There must be consequences for those anonymous hateful racist remarks.
====
SM Shanmugam very detail explanation if SIA investment in Air India.
====
SM Lee - troubling to see racial hatred speeches following Nepal disaster.

@Babe:Singapore Airlines (SIA) invested in Air India to gain direct access to India's massive domestic aviation market and expand its multi-hub strategy.
The Rationale for Investment
No Domestic Market: Singapore is a small city-state with no domestic flights. SIA needs foreign markets to grow.
Huge Growth in India: India is the world's third-largest aviation market with over 1.4 billion people.
Multi-Hub Strategy: SIA uses Air India to capture domestic and international traffic within India, complementing its main hub at Changi Airport.
Vistara Merger: Following the merger of Vistara into Air India in November 2024, SIA holds a 25.1% stake in the enlarged carrier, while Tata Sons owns 74.9%.
Current Challenges
Heavy Losses: Air India has faced severe financial losses, prompting discussions and scrutiny over capital injections.
Long-Term View: Despite financial strain, SIA and backer Temasek remain committed to the turnaround, viewing it as a long-term strategic game.
Read more on CNA Explains regarding why SIA stays invested, or see Ho Ching on Air India investment for additional market context.
====
Temasek and GIC profitable investment in India.
====


Friday, September 4, 2026

现在的境界,涅槃的境界。

现在的境界。(Current)

神秀大师著名的四句偈语是:
“身是菩提树,心如明镜台,时时勤拂拭,莫使惹尘埃”。


涅槃的境界。(Around 1993 - 1995 ....) (NCB) (ROV)

禅宗六祖慧能大师最著名的四句悟道偈语是:“菩提本无树,明镜亦非台,本来无一物,何处惹尘埃?” 





Thursday, September 3, 2026

Childcare leave need few months to implement

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSqJ7NXg7/

Childcare leave need months to update on IT system.


@Aura 🌸:dont bullshit and beat around the bush la. just implement it and get it going. all the IT systems and whatever shouldnt take so long to manage. dont give people false hope can? so you announce in August mid and now early Sept already. Those parents who feel this is a good deal COULD HAVE ALREADY tried for baby by now. And could be pregnant already. SO WHY this implementation will take several months?? never think of the implementation before announcing meh?? tsk


@Babe:obviously you don't work in IT.

Passing naive comments.


@Babe:We are talking about hundred and thousands companies needing to change their respective IT system.

And the changes involved changes to HR system, integration with the government finance system, payment system, iras tax system etc that have to undergo the full IT application system development life cycle.

It you don't know the intricacies of apps development, I suggest don't act smart, because it reveal your full ignorance.

----

@Babe:Changing the IT application system needs money and man hours to change the application system.

Easily can run up to 5 or 6 figures depending on the complexity of the amendments.

You think application changes a tweak of the finger, everything is ready?

----

@Babe:And after making amendments to all the integrated apps, need extensive testing to ensure there are no software bugs.

All these are months of manpower efforts and the IT manpower costs are not cheap.

So people not in IT line better don't pass uninformed comments when you know nothing about apps amendments.


----

@FurryCat:IT system. just update one config file. 5 minutes.


@Babe:This show you are totally ignorant on apps development.

Changing 1 config file will change the childcare leave system?

you must be joking.

it show your ignorant knows no bounds.


@Babe:Change which magical config file and you can get the childcare leave ready with the corresponding $70,000 credited to the appropriate couple?

Pse show us how you do it?


====





Tuesday, September 1, 2026

Environmentalists picking on landed properties and GCB dwellers

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSVcapmUS/

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSVsTFCF1/

https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSVsf3Ecn/

Maju forest discussion intrude into private houses.

Golf course, gcb - maju forest.

Climate group against GCB and landed properties.


----

1. I read and listen to some of the environmentalists comments and speeches.


2. I find it appalling that these groups are attacking residents living in landed properties and GCB - to give up their honest hard-earned assets.

3. These attacks go right into the ethos of attacking:-
a. The core of capitalism
b. The function of market economy
c. The reward system that encourage people to be innovative, enterprising and create wealth for themselves - which in turn benefits the whole economy - by creating business, companies, create jobs and employment for other Singaporeans.

4. It smack of being a sour grape, envious of people success - in which equal opportunities are given to everyone in our Nation successful economic, social and political model that make Singapore successful as a nation.

5. In fact, I want to draw a parallel to the seriousness of such group tearing into the fabric of our social cohesiveness, harmony and unity - for pitching one group against another group that happen to do well in the economy.

The like of exploiting racial, religious divisiveness and divide our Nation.

6. Such attack by the environmentalists are unwarranted and does not help in their cause of protecting the environment - and will in fact lead Singaporeans to call our capitalist system and market economy that make us so successful into question - and does not help in social cohesion.

In fact, these environmentalists are trying to drive a wedge, sow discord and exploit the faultlines of social class to deliver their environmentalist message.

I feel that there is a need to bring this up politically to address this head-on and not let such sour grape syndrome sow discord in our Society.

----
Singapore allocates about 15% of its total land area for housing, splitting this footprint almost equally between public and private developments.

Land and Housing Breakdown

Public Housing (HDB / BTO): Takes up about 8% of Singapore’s total land area. It houses roughly 80% of the resident population across 1.09 million flats.

Private Housing (Condos & Landed): Takes up about 7% of total land area.

Private Condominiums/Apartments: Accommodate about 18% of residents with roughly 370,000 to 400,000 units.

Private Landed Properties: Account for only about 5% to 6% of total housing stock (approx. 70,000 to 73,000 homes) due to extreme land scarcity, housing less than 5% of the population.

Source:- Google Gemini AI

----

URA has already allocated the appropriate ratios for :-
1. Public housing BTO flats
2. Private condos and apartment
3. Landed properties and GCB


Why should these environmentalist groups single out landed properties and GCB - to sacrifice their hard-earned assets to be sacrifice in the name of climate protection and sow discord and wage divisiveness and unhappines within our society?

----

Environmentalist sour grape stance against landed properties and GCB dwellers - will in effect sending message that:-

1. Talents with the abilities to create wealth for themselves, the economy, setup business, companies and create jobs are not welcome in Singapore.

2. Capitalism and market economy that drive success in Singapore economy and society that reward enterprising individuals and talents are to be discarded to be replaced by socialism, equal miseries - that will reverse Singapore success.

3. I think it is time to push back against these environmentalists excesses - don't fool around with Singapore successful economic model - the push back will be strong and ferocious.

====

PAP MPs on Gilman Barracks and sunset way development.


====

Source :- Google Gemini AI 

LCL Danny 心 (1st HP):
Speech that intentionally exploits fault lines like social class to divide Singapore's social fabric can constitute a breach of law under specific legal mechanisms, depending entirely on the speech's context, intent, and threat to public order.

While Singapore's most explicit hate speech legislation focuses heavily on race and religion, several broader public order, safety, and digital harms laws address acts that threaten overall societal cohesion.

----

Applicable Legal Frameworks
Public Order Act: If speech exploiting class divisions incites a public assembly, procession, or creates a threat to public order and tranquility, it can be restricted or prosecuted under the Public Order Act. The state maintains strict control over public messaging that could lead to physical unrest.

Online Criminal Harms Act (OCHA): If the divisive speech is propagated online via social networks, websites, or messaging apps to deliberately polarize communities or create systemic malice, the government can issue "disabling directions". This forces platforms to block or restrict the content to protect the domestic social fabric.

Historical Precedent (Sedition Laws): Historically, laws like the Sedition Act penalized the promotion of feelings of ill-will and hostility between different "classes" of the population. While Singapore has modernized its statutory landscape to focus on targeted public harmony, the foundational principle of legally protecting the state from class-driven fracturing remains integral to its legal philosophy.
----

Where the Law Draws the Line
Singapore legal policy distinguishes between objective commentary and targeted exploitation:

Permitted Discourse
Criminal or Actionable Offence

Permitted Discourse
Academic discussions on income inequality.

Criminal or Actionable Offence
Intentional incitement of hostility against a group.
----

Permitted Discourse
Research or surveys regarding class divides.

Criminal or Actionable Offence
Spreading harmful falsehoods to trigger unrest.
----

Permitted Discourse
Policy debates on social mobility or housing.

Criminal or Actionable Offence
Actively trying to fracture the social fabric.

====