https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSQQgAVxF/
@Babe:1. Envy and jealousy knows no bounds.
2. These 2 are very successful and rich persons before they join politics.
One is a famous lawyer earning much more than a Minister.
Another is a CEO of a big enterprise.
3. They take a big pay cut to join politics and become Ministers to serve the Country.
4. Why can't they buy a GCB with their own money?
https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSQQphn4P/
Values of a public servant.
1 important ingredient - " Must be thick skin" - because it is a thankless job.
----
@WPCanChangeSG:The problem with most people who defend pap is dishonest cause u guys have a bias towards this gov and attack anyone who disagrees with u.
@Babe:Let us examine all the flaws of WP alternative policies and why WP is not right party to govern Singapore.
@Babe:WP Kenneth Tiong suggest paying NSF $1,800 a month as minimum wages like regular pay.
@Babe:1. WP Kenneth Tiong want Government to pay the minimum salary to NS man $1,800 - which is essentially transforming our conscription into regular army with regular pay.
2. No small countries can afford a regular army of strength 300,000 servicemen = 300,000 x $1,800 x 12 months = a whopping $6.48 billion every year just to pay the NS.
3. This will take out a big chunk of the SAF budget to buy weapons, maintain weapons, do R&D, keep all the 4 services function effectively, training, overseas exercise, maintain overseas bases etc - to ensure Singapore has an effective SAF fighting forces.
4. In other words, this opposition MP suggestion - will have make our SAF less effective in ensuring a effective fighting force with less effective weapons, less budget for training, reduce training hours, maintain weapons to become operational, less flying hours etc to defend our Countries.
It pose an existential threat to Singapore.
5. As MP, does he have strategic depth when making suggestion in Parliament - without resorting to populist policy just to woo votes - but pose a great threat to the Country?
@Babe:@Babe:---
1. NS men unlike other jobs - are given full time accomodation to live in barracks (Mon - Fri) except weekends when they book out - they don't need to pay rent, house loans etc.
2. NS men are given 4 meals everyday (commercial caterers) - breakfast, lunch, dinner, night snacks.
3. NS men are given full clothings, footwear, bags etc - no need to buy clothes, running shoes, T-shirts, short pants, full packs, ali-baba bags etc
4. NS men don't need to pay electricity, water for bathing, charging handphone to surf internet etc.
5. NS men only pay public transport during book out time and book in time.
6. If sick, see doctors (MO - Medical Officers) are free.
7. Half of the expenses are taken care off by the SAF - hence cannot justify the needs for a minimum wages of $1,800 a month.
Workers outside don't have such special privileges, perks and services - that will have easily cover more than half of the $1,800 if a worker with minimum is on their own.
8. DId this WP MP take into account of this - and include in his calculation when making comments in Parliament?
9. Besides, performing National Service is a sacred duty that is a responsibilities of all male Singaporeans - without the Country, we have no home, no peace, no prosperity, and we cannot protect our loved ones.
Does WP MP reflect on this?
@Babe:@Babe:Do you know why many countries cannot afford a regular standing Army to defend their countries?
Because it is too expensive and will burn a big hole in their defense budget, albeit their fiscal budget - and leave with very little to finance their social and economic needs.
That's why countries have to turn to conscription by paying allowance.
Else our soldiers will have to use their salaries to fight advanced weapons thrown by enemies without effective weapons to counter them.
This is simple math.
Why doesn't this WP MP cannot see this and instead focus in winning votes while putting our NS boys at risk?
@Babe:Throughout all his Parliament speeches, Kenneth Tiong is all about how to dig more and more into the fiscal budget to pay more for this and more for that.
I have not come across making constructive suggestions how to bring in more money for Singapore.
He think Singapore money fall from the sky.
@Babe:He will bankrupt Singapore coffer very quickly.
@Babe:@Babe:6. Advocate Nationalisation of public transport.
This will drain taxpayers money, inefficiency, no market discipline, cannot bid overseas project to earn revenue.
After Note (about Nationalisation, what is the impact):-
Assume what WP and the oppositions say, let us revert back to Nationalisation – by converting all GLCs (that provide public goods and services) to State-Run Enterprises, what will be the implications :-
Funding – how and where to get the money to buy out all the public shares in the Singapore Stock Exchange eg. Singtel, PSA Corp, NCS, ST Engineering, Keppel Corp, Smrt , Comfort Delgro, DBS, Sembcorp, SIA, SIA Engineering, Scoots etc ?
a. Liquidate half of Temasek Holdings GLCs' assets to pay shareholders holding all these GLCs shares and delist from the Singapore Stock Exchange (about $200 billion). What will be the implications:-
SES (Singapore Stock Exchange) portfolio diminished drastically – and can no longer function as a stock exchange as the market capitalisation heavily front by GLCs. SES paralysed and could become dysfunctional as the remaining shares are SMEs or smaller values in capitalisation.
Temasek Holdings' asset values as Sovereign Fund cut by half – and the NIRC and the profit earned will be greatly reduced. Hence the half of NIRC contributing to the fiscal budget will be greatly reduced – means more taxes in the form of GST, personal income tax, corporate tax etc will be needed. We as a taxpayer will have to pay more taxes – don't know how many percentage more taxes that we need to pay to make up for the lost government revenue earned from the NIRC.
@Babe:b. If financing the Nationalisation of all the GLCs are not to be funded by the liquidation of Temasek Holdings, then Government will have to make use of taxpayers money to “Nationalise” the GLCs – assume Government need to collect additional $200 billion more taxes to do that. Now with GST, personal income tax, corporate tax, NIRC, other taxes – we collect about $100 billion to finance our yearly government spendings. To finance another $200 billion to “nationalise” the GLCs, taxpayers got to pay 200% more in terms of GST, personal income tax, corporate tax, NIRC, other taxes etc for the government to collect $200 billion more --- are taxpayers willing to pay 200% more taxes? Not to mention getting CDC vouchers, GST vouchers etc ---- taxpayers will have to pay much more taxes to “Nationalise the public goods and services” with no more CDC or GST vouchers.
c. The impact to our structure of our Economy and GDP is huge – we immediately drop from a very rich country to become a 3rd world country – from 2025 back to 1990s or 1970s – this is the impact of mismanaging our Economy if WP and the oppositions play their cards to push for Nationalisation of our public goods and services.
d. In addition, all our GLCs without subjecting to market forces and market competition will fall into inefficiency – because it cannot benchmark to market competitive pricing – as these State-Run Enterprises (SOEs) will keep putting out their hands to the Government for funds year after year. How do the various Ministers determine if the funds requested by the SOEs are reasonable if there are no market competition and benchmark? Where do the Ministers get the fund from short of taxing taxpayers to pay them?
e. GLCs if nationalise cannot tender and compete for business in overseas market – whereby currently, most if not all our GLCs gain very huge revenue and profits from overseas business because Singapore domestic market is very small unlike overseas world market - then we are losing billions and billions of $ in foreign earnings.
Only North Korea are using SOEs to run public goods. Many current and previous communist countries such as China, Russia, Vietnam, East European countries
@Babe:Only North Korea are using SOEs to run public goods. Many current and previous communist countries such as China, Russia, Vietnam, East European countries have long discarded Nationalisation and convert to Privatisation or GLCs (Government Linked Companies) operate in a market economy precisely the negative impact of a SOEs.
Now our oppositions, WP want to revert back to Nationalisation of our public goods and services started with SMRT?
Are we dooming ourselves to place our trust with the oppositions and WP?
I am surprise that WP has an Economist that work with international economic bodies – but fail to understand this very basic fundamental principles of macroeconomics – free market economy.
@Babe:@Babe:Flaws with WP alternative policies in Parliament :
1. Propose land sales to finance recurrent fiscal budget - soon no more lands for younger generations as Singapore is a little red dot.
@Babe:2. Use more nirc 60% - no GST hikes.
Equivalent to raiding our reserves & leaving less reserves for our younger generations.
@Babe:Babe:4. Advocate Minimum wages without productivity growth. Singapore labour force lose competitiveness to other countries.
PAP advocate PWM - step increase in wages with productivity growth.
@Babe:5. Advocate Retrenchment insurance.
Retrenched workers no incentive to rejoin workforce.
PAP provide job support fund + training + job placement.
@Babe:Workers' Party, that criticized high fuel taxes and introduced carbon taxation during economic hardships.
Government Stance: Acting Transport Minister Jeffrey Siow stated that reducing fuel duties is a "too blunt" and regressive approach. The government prefers to let fuel prices reflect market realities to prevent inefficient energy use.
Alternative Support: The government focuses on targeted relief, including $200 in cash for platform workers (covering taxi/PHV drivers) and additional $200 special payments, rather than broad tax cuts.
Context: These discussions come as global fuel prices remain elevated, leading to concerns about the overall cost of living.
[07/05, 6:47 pm] Close friend comments: How to subsidize diesel as per their suggestion. Throwing money into fire.
[07/05, 6:48 pm] ☸️ Danny 心: Exactly.
That's why I keep rebutting them. Including an economist TikTok video who support our government stand. I also help to explain why cannot subsidies fuel and diesel in the comments section - targeted by oppies attacking the economist to justify removing fuel tax.
They will sink Singapore finances.
[07/05, 6:54 pm] ☸️ Danny 心: These people don't have economic grounding and strategic depth - but yet insisting on making such dangerous suggestions.
Fuel tax though fixed including GST in total are percentage of fuel prices - and removing it will create a big lobang in our fiscal budget.
The rest of the taxpayers are financing this small group of people which will be a black hole as fuel & diesel prices keep escalating.
Subsidise tax or fuel tax removal will lead people to use more, rent out their vehicles after office hours for leisure or other frivolous purpose, keep refueling and then store it in containers etc - while the rest of taxpayers keep using tax money to compensate them.
This is what happens to Malaysia and Indonesia as well as other countries that subsidise fuel/diesel or remove fuel/diesel tax.
End up the countries financial coffer go into red, need to ration fuel/diesel and finally their fuel/diesel reserves run dry.
Diesel is also used to complement LNG as fuel to generate electricity.
The whole economy and transport stop functioning.
@Babe:@Babe:Jamus Lim is trying to define social needs for some groups of people but neglected the needs for other groups - playing the role of a "social judge".
Who has given him the right to do so?
@Babe:Apparently Jamus Lim very weak in the economic principles of scarce resources, demand, supply, opportunity cost vis a vis definition of social needs.
As well as knowledge of alternatives such as MRT, bus, taxi, private hire, av - a mass mover versus a selfish self-centred private car in lieu of limited road space.
@Babe:@Babe:Just cannot understand some people:-
1. call cab cannot?
2. call grab cannot?
3. take MRT cannot?
4. take bus cannot?
5. rent car cannot?
die die must buy a car? no car can die?
if die die want car, then work hard, earn more money, bid for coe and buy lor.
so many people can travel everywhere with public transport without a car - but yet some people prefer the vanity to own a car.
cannot afford Kao beh Kao bu.
@Babe:Limited land space that are shared by the population is an expensive economic goods.
People who want to own cars for its private use must pay a high price for this privilege luxurious commodity for its own used at the expense of the rest of the population.
I am surprise Jamus Lim as an economist don't understand this Economic principles and try to fool his supporters appealing to compassion - but work against the benefits and interest of the population at large for a few selfish individuals not willing to pay the price to enjoy the privileges.
----
@Babe:Opposition parties, such as The Workers' Party (WP), have called for greater transparency from GIC, particularly regarding its total assets, performance figures, and the specific valuation of its unlisted assets, arguing that Singapore's sovereign wealth funds are falling short of transparency standards compared to other nations and that the lack of detail raises questions. While GIC discloses its policy portfolio and some performance data, the WP and others have specifically requested more detailed public disclosure of its total assets, arguing it does not share annual performance figures and that hiding performance figures is not sensible, according to The Workers’ Party.
Sovereign wealth funds’ transparency—by Chua Kheng Wee Louis
Delivered in Parliament on
28 February 2025
https://share.google/QOD16Q4Ipwwt2WY0S
----
1. I take very strong stand against WP in Parliament and some opposition parties position to force our Government to be transparent and reveal GIC financial statement.
2. We need to keep our financial positions secret and not to reveal to the outside world because there will be crocodile out there in the world that can launch speculative attacks on Singapore finances, lead our nation wealth to plummet, including yours and mine (denominated in S$) or even bankrupt our reserves.
3. Because our sovereign reserves is to protect Singapore wealth, you and my wealth - not to subject to speculative attack by any hostile foreign actors.
4. Hence WP position and some opposition parties position in revealing our reserves and GIC assets - are in fact harming Singapore, as well as your wealth and my wealth.
5. WP and the opposition parties are assisting hostile state actors to attack us by pressing our government to reveal our financial reserves leaving us vulnerable to financial attack.
6. We must not be gullible and fool by WP that will harm all of us.
7. Imagine your wealth and my wealth suddenly cut by 1/2 in values after hostile actors successfully launch a financial attack on us aided by our oppositions and hostile actors earn 1/2 of our wealth thanks to our oppositions?
@Babe:心法:
1. How George Soro speculative attack destroy UK, Mexico, some ASEAN countries financial system and economies.
2. Assume US $1 = UK $1 pound for easy illustration and understanding.
3. Through future trading, assume Soro come into UK market to buy or borrow UK 50 billion pounds. (Note:- Soro taking significant position can influence market trends).
4. UK pound exchange rate value increase and US $ fall as UK in short supply in UK financial market.
5. Soro buy US $ of $60 billion using UK $50 billion pounds as UK pounds is stronger than US $.
6. US $ in UK market in short supply. But US $ as global reserve is needed to make payment for trade.
7. Hence UK business and banks will chase up US $ by buying at higher prices using UK pounds. Leading US $ to strengthen against UK pound.
8. Because Soro significant position suck up significant US $ in the UK financial market leading to short supply, UK Central Bank (Bank of England) will have to release US $ in its reserve to stabilise the exchange rate between UK pound and US$.
9. But as Soro significant position knowing how much Bank of England US reserve is could draw down the CB US reserves beyond what it have to stabilise the exchange rate.
10. Assume CB only have US $30 billion, UK are still short of US $30 billion to support the payment of trade needed by UK business and banks.
11. So in order for UK economy to service the trade payment, CB have to devalue the UK pound to buy US$ assume UK $2 to US$1.
12. Soro is waiting for this opportunity to earn a big buck and raid UK Bank of England reserves.
13. Soro only needs to use US$25 billion to pay back UK $50 billion pounds as the exchange rate now is 1 : 2.
14. Soro earn US $60 billion - US $25 billion = US $35 billion with virtually 0 or minimal capital.
15. Whereas UK wealth plummet by 1/2 as it devalue its UK pound from 1:1 to 2:1 against the US$.
16. How does HK through the backing of China reserves stop Soro speculative attack against one country after another for his personal gain - and lead to the bankruptcy of Soro Long Term Capital Management Fund?
17. Soro launch a similar ploy on HK financial markets again through future trading.
@Babe:18. But HK through the backing of China are ready for it.
20. Soro target HK equity and currency exchange through future trading leading turbulence selling of HK shares and currency.
21. But China financial reserves are very strong and much more than Soro depth in many folds, whereby Soro is unable to know how deep China and HK reserves are.
22. As Soro sell HK shares and currency extensively, China and HK keep buying to maintain and preserve its exchange rate stability with US $ as well as sustainable share prices.
23. As Soro is unable to exploit its significant position, because this significant position is in the hands of China and HK, Soro is not able to profit from the differences in exchange rate through the future contract as his predicted market trend cannot be materialised.
24. As a result, when the future contract mature, Soro funds got to top up the significant differences in the shares and the currency exchange to fulfil the future contract.
25. Eg. Soro predict HK currency to be low 2:1, but ended up 1:1 due to active prop up by HK and China CB, Soro got to dig into his fund to pay the differences.
26. So if he borrow HK$50 billion using US$50 billion, he now have to use US$100 billion to repay HK$50 billion when the future contract mature.
27. Hence Soro fund bankrupt.
1. To conclude, I take very strong stand against WP in Parliament and some opposition parties position to force our Government to be transparent and reveal GIC financial statement.
----
@Babe:[16/10, 11:00 am] ☸️ Danny 心: Inheritance tax and capital tax are the main drivers that chase away millionaires from the country.
WP Jamus Lim say taxes on the rich is not the main motivator that chase away rich individuals and business when he debate the GST tax.
He is always wrong economically.
[16/10, 11:06 am] ☸️ Danny 心: If millionaires migrated, they will stop creating business and jobs. And many Singaporeans will lose their jobs. Economic growth will be dampened.
In addition when that happens, the tax burden fully falls on the middle income and the lower income groups.
This means an even higher GST tax will need to be levied for the loss of tax income - and no GST vouchers will be issue to these 2 groups as the GST tax collection can barely cover other government expenditures with lesser leftover for GST vouchers and CDC vouchers.
----
[13/11, 11:15 am] ☸️ Danny 心: "Singapore ranked third top destination for world’s wealthy: Savills".
After Dubai, New York.
HK and Abu Dhabi 4th and 5th.
https://www.edgeprop.sg/property-news/singapore-ranked-third-top-destination-world%E2%80%99s-wealthy-savills#:~:text=Advertisement-,Singapore%20ranked%20third%20top%20destination%20for%20world%E2%80%99s%20wealthy%3A%20Savills,-By%20Atiqah%20Mokhtar
[13/11, 11:18 am] ☸️ Danny 心: Singapore also ranked among the top locations for legacy, given its absence of inheritance, capital gains and wealth taxes.
====
@Babe:
To summarise, WP have governance deficiencies in the following areas:-
1. Economic engineering deficiency.
2. Social engineering deficiency - misplaced compassion.
3. Financial engineering deficiency.
4. Tax engineering deficiency.
5. Technology engineering deficiency.
6. Political engineering deficiency - adopting populist policies to gain votes instead of holistically and objectively solving difficult issues that impact the Nation.
How to let WP alternative policies take root?
@Babe:Singapore hard earned economic miracle will cease to exist and fail if WP alternative policies is to take root and govern Singapore.
@Babe:Only 1 word to summarise WP alternative policies.
"Disastrous" !
Cannot stand up to scrutiny.
====
@Kevin:do we even need a good gov given SG is situated in a regional hub where billions of flows pass through?
@Babe:Did money drop into your pocket just because you are in Singapore?
====
