|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
TCHS 4O 2000 [4o's nonsense] alvinny [2] - csq - edchong jenming - joseph - law meepok - mingqi - pea pengkian [2] - qwergopot - woof xinghao - zhengyu HCJC 01S60 [understated sixzero] andy - edwin - jack jiaqi - peter - rex serena SAF 21SA khenghui - jiaming - jinrui [2] ritchie - vicknesh - zhenhao Others Lwei [2] - shaowei - website links - Alien Loves Predator BloggerSG Cute Overload! Cyanide and Happiness Daily Bunny Hamleto Hattrick Magic: The Gathering The Onion The Order of the Stick Perry Bible Fellowship PvP Online Soccernet Sluggy Freelance The Students' Sketchpad Talk Rock Talking Cock.com Tom the Dancing Bug Wikipedia Wulffmorgenthaler       |
|
bert's blog v1.21 Powered by glolg Programmed with Perl 5.6.1 on Apache/1.3.27 (Red Hat Linux) best viewed at 1024 x 768 resolution on Internet Explorer 6.0+ or Mozilla Firefox 1.5+ entry views: 2368 today's page views: 46 (6 mobile) all-time page views: 3248193 most viewed entry: 18739 views most commented entry: 14 comments number of entries: 1215 page created Mon Apr 21, 2025 02:42:50 |
|
- tagcloud - academics [70] art [8] changelog [49] current events [36] cute stuff [12] gaming [11] music [8] outings [16] philosophy [10] poetry [4] programming [15] rants [5] reviews [8] sport [37] travel [19] work [3] miscellaneous [75] |
|
- category tags - academics art changelog current events cute stuff gaming miscellaneous music outings philosophy poetry programming rants reviews sport travel work tags in total: 386 |
| ||
|
It's been a rather quiet week - returned my obsolete if trusty old school PC (but not before copying every single bit of data on it, then wiping the disks), sampled the much-lauded KFC bucket rice (ok, the week before - for S$4, that's a lot of rice - and hey, nutritionists are changing their minds again about portion distributions), continued accumulating those Panini World Cup stickers (which appear to have a wider appeal than thought), and saw another blogger sued by the authorities. Yes, all in all, a fairly typical week. It was with a light heart, then, that I paid a call to the offices of H.L. Ham, only to see Mr. Ham engaged in conversation.  Shh, this is important (Image source: flickr.com) Mr. Ham: *motions to take a seat* Yes, sir, the poll findings are in... 72% of respondents indicated that they would welcome having their privates cut off, the usual, eh? *slight pause* But that's what the survey description said! I have it right in front of me, and I repeat to you, right at the end of the page: "...have the private cutoff", the missing plural of which I assumed was obviously a typo. There's another page, you say? *flips paper over*. Oh. So it is "...have the private cutoff contribution level of your pension scheme increased". *longer pause* Well, sir, just between you and me - it's not like it's really gonna make a huge difference whether or not I go out and round up another fifty people to redo the poll, right? I mean, if I may say so, your publications are no stranger to slightly dubious poll findings anyway, they always just so happen to be two-thirds or slightly more for whatever stand you happen to be pushing; but with such a tiny sample size, it's not like they can't happen just by chance either, if you catch my drift. Also, how do you know that people don't like having their privates cut off? I mean, this is a land where they're absolutely delighted to work more years for less pay, according to previous surveys; what's to say they don't have other, lesser, kinks? Who are we to judge? Have you tried it yourself? You might well like it... what, you don't care, and want the poll redone? Fine, alright, but only because you're an old customer. Yes, yes, ok, thanks. By tomorrow, sure. Bye. *hangs up* You! Why are you stifling a smile? Me: Oh, nothing. Mr. Ham: *with dangerous look in eye* Careful, human, I know what you're thinking. Shame be upon you for having the slightest suspicion that the firm of H.L. Ham would ever be involved in such shenanigans! If we hadn't known each other for so long, I would settle this slight the local way! Me: Which is... Mr. Ham: Suing your pants off, of course. Wait, let me make a call. *taps on smartphone* Hey, Mr. Robo? You can stop doing interviews outside the gender reassignment clinic now, that job's busted. Go ring up some of those nice people we normally approach instead, I've already messaged the new question to you. Yes, now. Get back to me when it's done. *turns back to me* What? Quit that giggling, it's not like it was ever specified that they had to be randomly selected. But I'll let it slide, since I'm in such a great mood today - H.L. Ham has made the big time! Me: Fine, Bitcoin's rebounded to as high as US$580 before settling back at US$565 - so it seems that you called the US$350 floor exactly. A forty-five percent return is not too shabby for just over a month, and a bit quicker than I expected, but... Mr. Ham: *sighs* No, no, no, human, nothing so vulgar. Is money the only thing your species thinks about? Just for that, I'm not repaying last week's loan yet. No, what I wanted to reveal was that hamster butts are the new craze in Japan. Hamuketsu!  Hamster Illustrated No Swimsuit Edition Mr. Ham: And H.L. Ham's right in the thick of the action, with Mr. Fish's perfect posterior! With our marketing capabilities, I daresay that he will be known as the Best Ass in the West! Mr. Fish: I'm so excited! Mr. Ham: Yessir, we've got big plans. There will be picturebooks, of course, and then a paysite! Mr. Fish: ...why do I suddenly feel slightly uncomfortable? Mr. Ham: Hey, it's a legitimate component of GDP. Those numbers aren't gonna pretty themselves up, you know? Human, stop squeezing my client! Me: Sorry, it's a habit. Well, on GDP growth, it seems as if the incumbents have come to accept that 2-4% is ok - but for all the talk of a slowdown in population stuffing - not a reversal, mind you, just a slowdown - they're already sounding out hiring foreigners for law enforcement, basically to save on costs, like with all the other occupations. It's one thing if it were a tourism gimmick, but it doesn't seem to be one. It's nice to hear talk about construction robots and whatnot, but with even the official productivity figures seeing negative growth in the past two years and indirect schemes getting exploited left and right, it could be a sign that these light-touch policies aren't working. And, according to a tech blogger, who happens to be a fine IT admin at the uni, neither is the NDP website. On this, they've at least implemented SSL in double-quick time - and it's not as if governments elsewhere tend to have a super track record with websites either. Mr. Ham: *inspecting nails* Done yet? Me: Be patient. Let's see... ah yes, on the academic score banding proposal, it's come up on Slate too, along with concurring observations that it would be a mostly pointless endeavour that merely amplifies the gap between students on the borders of a grade/band, and doesn't really fix anything. Oh, and a few months after noting that the bus wait-time incentive scheme got ported over from the UK, it looks like we're going the whole hog in copying the tender system, with a massive overhaul to a contracting model due by 2016. However, as previously pointed out, the possibility of shorter wait times probably has little to do with the operators themselves, and a lot more to do with the number of buses and average congestion along the route, because what can a driver do? Speed up by 5km/h? Indeed, online commentators have noted that this means that maintenance costs - which might have been skimped on - will thus be transferred back to the government, i.e. general taxpayer, but the whole manoeuvre is somehow not considered "nationalization", because an opposition party got there first. That said, some are positing that the move is mostly dumping costs onto the public coffers, such that Our Most Successful Investment Firm remains very successful, but I'm content to wait for more details, such as how much will be paid for the existing hard assets, which if share price movements are to be believed, will be a generous sum. The setup does appear to imply that operators' profit will be determined by how low they can get wages to go, since that will be their major remaining cost. But yes, we should wait and see what actually happens. *Mr. Fish yawns* Me: Oh, you're still here. It's ok to go if this doesn't interest you. Mr. Fish: Ah. I'll take my leave, then. Mr. Ham: *calls after him* Remember, no buts, all butts! Suesuesu! - Our Law Minister (who is both a lawyer and a politician) shows his sense of humour Me: Alright, we can get back to the news of the week, Blogger vs. Prime Minister. Actually, I was half-expecting him to duke it out, but he's gone the probably-sensible route and posted an apology for the offending post, which insinuated that the CPF monies had been personally and directly misappropriated by our head of government, by analogy to an ongoing trial. Frankly, this was playing with fire given how many better criticisms of the CPF were available, and led me to initially suspect that the blogger was intending to be a Chee-style martyr. In addition, the comparism was iffy too - my personal opinion has always been that, if someone manages to convince you that an all-powerful deity needs your money, they earned it fair and square, and should therefore be able to spend it in whatever way they want. Fair is fair. But if you're being cool about it, it's all a-ok But anyway, despite the apology, the demand for damages stands, which I don't see winning the incumbents many new fans. Now, it is questionable whether the honourable gentleman's reputation was appreciably besmirched by such online ramblings - just imagine how clogged up the American courts would be, if Obama pressed charges against everyone who labelled him a "Kenyan secret Muslin" - but unfortunately for us, we have legacy precedent to uphold. Mr. Ham: I don't think it's a good idea either. Me: Wow. I didn't expect this from you, Mr. Ham. Mr. Ham: It's from a practical standpoint only, mind. The standard solution, followed by nearly all modern and democratic leaders, would be to ignore it altogether, and in the very unlikely event of being pressed directly, simply laugh the accusations off as being ridiculous and beneath notice. The reason is simple - you could sue one blogger into oblivion, but the trouble comes when you get twenty or a hundred of them; now what are you going to do to maintain your dignity? Sue them all? It's not as if the incumbents have had any trouble turning a deaf ear to "online noises" in the past, in any case. Furthermore, the fact is that worse (and likely false) things have been said about our incumbent leaders online - just that these websites (which shall not be named) and their creators are not based locally. Then, the major raison d'etre for the lawsuit would seem to be "making an example" of this particular blogger, and while I have little doubt that the Prime Minister would (rightly) prevail if it went to court, this could well be a case of winning a battle, but losing the war. As a Mast... I mean, friend of Master Political Analyst Herr Ahm, whose track record during the previous elections was beyond reproach, I would like to couch this in purely analytical terms - can win elections anot? So what do you think, O Man Who Hast Bowed To Mammon? It's All Very Simple Me: I prefer to think of myself as having inclined my head a teeny bit. But I suppose I've been too obliging in the past; I was like, well, you like exam marks, fine, I get you the marks, no problemo, consider it done. And then now, it's like, what job can you get after you graduate, and will it pay well? This was a bit annoying - I mean, if what was actually desired was the cash, you could have just said so upfront, you know? Anyhow, it's really not that complicated. I have written about many aspects of the situation at some length, but it mostly comes down to this, as argued in August 2012 and expanded last month - our successes have, to a large extent, been predicated on having an unsustainably huge percentage of our population in the workforce. Now, I am not saying that there is nothing else to it, but the problem is that the incumbents don't seem to be directly acknowledging the elephant in the room - for example, the much-maligned Population White Paper gives an old-age support ratio of 5.9 in 2012, and projects a support ratio of 2.1 in 2030 without immigration (disaster!), but completely neglects to mention that in a steady-state society, the support ratio should remain constant at about 2.25. In short, the local economy has already been running on "easy mode" for some decades - which the incumbents appear to have absolutely no intention of relinquishing, instead being intent on propping up the support ratio through constant population growth. However, imported working-age citizens and permanent residents will themselves grow old, which is a classic case of can-kicking. This leaves opening the floodgates to foreigners in greater and greater numbers, who will hopefully put in their years of labour, and then go back to whereever they came from once they're done. Mr. Ham: It could work, you know. Me: I didn't say it was impossible. Indeed, due to our small size, this plan is at least technically feasible - unlike for say China, which our PM has warned will likely grow old before it grows rich. Still, it is interesting to observe how similar China's - doomed? - trajectory resembles ours; even if demographics is not destiny, it surely comes pretty darn close. Of course, technically feasible and politically defensible are two different things altogether. As I once said, borrowing people is still borrowing - it has its costs. But that's for next week... Next: Twist In The Briefs
Trackback by click through the following website page
Trackback by installing central heat
|
|
|||||||||||
 Copyright © 2006-2025 GLYS. All Rights Reserved. |
||||||||||||
