I was looking for
the significant “shifts” that some commented on his NDR 2013. And found these
significant hints instead that reflect his mindset/values:
“And overall, the Government creating the conditions
for a vibrant economy and for good jobs, investing heavily in our people
through education, through housing, through healthcare but keeping state
welfare low and targeted, stringent. Some people call this tough love but it is tough love which has worked well.” (bold prints are mine)
LHL’s statement
above indicates a continual defence of his “low welfare” value for the PAP-led
government against any public expenditure increase across transport, housing,
cost of living and healthcare where in reality, the policies of his government
are the root cause of these rising costs.
The Pioneer
Generation Package and removal of age limit for MediShield Life coverage etc
are attempts to shift our focus onto the wrappings of the same old gift, so
that we will be oblivious to the content beneath the wrappings which is the
“tough love”, ie. low welfare spending.
Charge the people a high price but spend as little on them as possible.
“The values of homes has appreciated and even poor
people are not poor by any international standard.”
Shifting our focus
from doing more to help the poor or to close in the income-gap to the discovery
of the good fortune of our poor compared to those tribes living in the Amazon
forests. Goodness, these tribal people do not even have a roof over their heads
and they feed on grass and air!
His denial of the
existence of the poor means that there is never the need for a real strategic
change in the current policies on the poor. Current schemes for the poor
suffice. Income gap issue will be swept under the carpet.
“….each poor household has on average $200,000 of net
wealth in the HDB flat.”
“No other society in the world has done that. We have
achieved in Singapore growth
with equity and spread the fruits of growth widely in Singapore.”
Shifting our focus
from over-priced HDB flats to his self-compliments. There is no poor in the
ivory tower of Singapore.
He has helped his poor to strike rich and that is an endorsement to his policies:
(1) Creating a property boom is the right strategy
that benefits the wealthy and the
poor alike. Nevermind if the wealthy can afford to flip properties and make
quick bucks while the poor can only flip their flip-flops. The poor can sell off
their homes and scum off to rental flats provided they can fulfill the
criteria.
(2) The open door immigration policy that allows
human tsunamis to wash ashore Singapore
from all corners of this globe to sustain or increase the heat in the property
market.
(3) Speculation of HDB flats is encouraged and
to be enabled for the boost in the private property market which will in turn set
the pricing for new HDB flats. LTA’s profits rely from the sale of over-priced flats.
“We can talk about other models we may experiment, but
the core of it, home ownership. 99-year
lease, it is yours.” (bold
prints are mine)
Shifting the focus
from the hefty price of something that you paid to be “rented” to you.
What is on a
“lease” cannot be fully “yours”. No change to the rule of the HDB game on our
flats. Securing the ultimate ownership of the flats for HDB, aka the PAP-led government.
Singaporeans are
not entitled to own anything in Singapore
for good even after paying them. HDB flats, COEs and CPF are some examples.
“…because the cheapest flat is just $150,000.”
(bold prints are mine)
His choice of word
“just” reveals his thought on prices of HDB flats. $150 000 is peanuts. LHL’s peanuts
is still cheaper by the standard of Goh Chok Tong’s wife who regarded $600K as
peanuts. In this regard, HDB’s strategy of maximizing profits from the sales of
HDB flats to citizens will not halt at this stage. The prices are affordable and the word “affordable” will
become the most hateful word here.
HDB will continue
to be the cash cow for our reserves and Singaporeans should resign their fates of
being milked.
“…we will means-test these additional subsidies so
that we know we can target them to the people who need them.”
Shifting our focus
to see that he is genuinely helping those who need help instead of looking at the
root cause of income inequality and inflation.
The means-test result
could very well be so stringent that chances are higher for people to die off
first than to lay their hands on the subsidies. The target is not about
targeting those who need the subsidies, but employing means-test to disqualify the
bulk of those who need it.
“Medisave rates have to go up. It has to be.”
This is the core value.
Expect no help
from the PAP-led government. You are on
your own. While there are 101 innovative ways to extract money from the
citizens, there is only one way of getting even half a cent from the PAP-led
government—paying our own money to get it.
“But the best way for us generally to keep healthcare
costs down is to stay healthy and especially for older people because for older
people exercise is not just keeping fit or keeping well but also making
friends, having the social contacts, the networks, the mutual support.”
The message is still
the same: do not expect help from the government of curbing the healthcare
costs. You are on your own.
“I think it is also good that we have top schools nationally”
Trying to shift
our focus onto his empathy for us. Whatever he tries to empathize on the
educational stress for our parents and children, at the end of the day, he
still needs the elites to distinguish themselves from the daft. And the elites
be rewarded for being elite.
“If we have a completely flat and featureless system –
every school is exactly the same as every other school, no difference – you
will have not excellence, but mediocrity.”
Shifting the blame
onto mediocrity for all the woes and pressures of our education system. There
is only one way to success by his definition. Not just the parents who think
this way.
“please be very careful when you touch the PSLE,
because the problem is not the exam. The problem is that parents think that the
exams count for everything in the world.”
The above was
taken from someone who has emailed to LHL on his thought about PSLE. LHL used
the above illustration to shift blame from the education system created by his
predecessors onto the citizens themselves. The parents brought it upon
themselves and their children.
Nothing new about
this finger-pointing trait as it is a consistent exhibition from the PAP-led
government throughout the decades in blaming the people for their own incompetence
and lack of foresight.
Even Orchard
floods were caused by litter-bugs.
“Meritocracy has to remain the most fundamental
organising principle in our society.”
Meritocracy will
continue in PAP-regime. Where the definition of merit is narrowly defined by
those who heads the regime. Where the super rich can absolve from the game of
meritocracy and still rise above it. Where those with merit will serve the welfare
of the regime itself and not necessarily to the welfare of our country.
“Other countries have tried to do similar things in
the past with the best intentions but ended up with unwanted outcomes. America has the
highest healthcare spending in the world. Their outcomes are worse than many
developed countries, including Singapore.
Finland has comprehensive protections for workers, yet 20 per cent of its youth
is unemployed despite a good economy and a good education system.”
Shifting our
attention from the need to address our bad policies from the root to others’
failures. And at the worst, rejoicing at their failures without a full
comprehension of the causes of their problems and using others’ failures as a
justification for not doing the right thing for ourselves.
We have to tread
our path ourselves and find our way don’t we?
“And finally of course, all good things have to be
paid for.”
There again. It is
about footing the bill.
However, it does
not necessary have to come directly from the people’s pockets but from the amount
that was already extracted from the people and the foreigners.
Shifting the focus
from exploring alternative funding and re-assessing current public expenditures
to mislead people into the belief that they have to pay everything directly out
of their pockets.
Too many shifts in attempt to veil the intention of preserving the fundamentals of all existing policies.
And no shift from his 6.9 million population plan.
