Minimum Wage?

The Government has restated its stance against a minimum wage in a blog post by Minister of State for Trade and Industry, and Manpower Lee Yi Shyan. The decision to increasing the minimum wage is final.

Personally, I have strong feelings of opposition towards this policy.

I can understand where the government is coming from. By dropping the minimum wage of a citizen worker, the government is trying to show citizens that they come first, as well as to ensure the welfare of workers, especially lower-end menial workers who are usually the lowest-possible monthly salary.So far, the worst case I have seen is a worker who is paid $400 per month, with 2 children to look after. God knows how he is able to live till today!

But really, these are extreme rare cases that should not undermine the government's long-term vision when it comes to making policies that will affect the country.

The government must possess more long-term realization that employers are smarter than what they perceive. Will employers not be more encouraged to employ foreign workers (for whom no laws are currently being applied) for a lower salary, and probably same labour?

Netizens have made a joke out of this matter - pointing out the fact that the government's salary is ten times higher than average, perhaps this is a move to collect higher income taxes to feed fat themselves? A little extreme, but the government's unbelievable failure to see how employers will be more encouraged to avert their effort to foreign workers (some even illegal), seems very convincing. This move does not help citizen workers get more money, it makes many lose their money completely.

Some say - a pathetic move get the workers' votes? Haha, many possibilities lie. Who knows?

I think rather than talk about salary, the government has more work to do when it comes to helping the workers improve their skills and productivity, and it is indubitable that with higher productivity, comes more promotion and salary increase opportunities for the workers. It is natural that work abilities determine the level appreciation for one in the company.

The country's overall productivity is important as we step out recovering from the recession, and I don't think illegal foreign workers and employees have the motivation as well as the basic skills to work hard, and work smart.

As such, I think the government should really think further ahead - into increasing the country's overall productivity, truly protecting our citizen workers, rather then coming up with moves that really do nothing much than in the short-term make a certain group of people happy.

Corporate Universities

Since the 1990s, bigger companies came up with the strategy to train and equip employees with company, and by the 21st century, this strategy is being mass-practised by 2,000, including Walt Disney, Boeing, and Motorola. And this strategy is the establishment of corporate universities that specializes in training undergraduates how to work in that specific company.

Today, the term "corporate university" is not a new idea anymore. Being an increasingly popular alternative for undergraduates in this age, corporate universities no doubt have their alluring advantages of high job positions guarantee, early exposure to the real world, but is not without its disadvantages of opportunity-narrowing, lack of strong knowledge fundamentals, and over-commitment to one certain company.

It is widely known and recognized by undergraduates that once they enter corporate universities - such as Hamburger university of Macdonald's Corporation, they will no doubt, be automatically promoted to formal employer immediately. Whats more, high job positions and more opportunities such as managerial roles will come by with that certificate in hand.

As such, it is not unusual to see many students opting for corporate universities of hospitals, banks, and bug businesses. They are probably risk-avoiders and just want to secure a reasonably good life for themselves, with monthly wages of about 4000-5000.

Hate school? Think trigonometry is totally irrelevant to what you aspire to be in the future? Then, corporate university is definitely for those who would die to get out of taxing school, with most universities providing courses that are way deeper and complicated then what is really required in the real world.

"You won't use so much complicated knowledge of finance or accounting when in real business world", "EQ is much more important", these are popular cries by corporate university under-graduate when asked to justify their decisions. Well, it is not without proof. Today, a quick research on famous and rich people who drop out of school mid-way can easily tell us that in the business world, specific, real skills - whether in work or with people - are really more necessary than plunging into thick, deep books. And corporate universities provide the ticket to the gateway of early exposure to the real world.

However, it is not without its disadvantages, without qualms. It is not without reason, too, why over the years, people have also raised doubts about the quality of education corporate universities provide. Learning how to operate a Macdonald's cashier, how to make a hamburger, how to deep fry fries? Are these the things taught in corporate universities?

Now, the very reason for the existence of such questioning is because everyone understands how narrow the field of knowledge many corporate universities offer can be. It is only logical that learning what is the style of doing sales in one certain company is incomparable, in terms of transversality, to learning the general techniques of sales in a normal university.

What if recession hits your company very hard? What if another company offers a higher pay job? You, as a corporate university graduate, who only understands the certain company's model and way of working, may be left with less opportunities in the corporate world, as compared to someone with basic skills that can be applied to anywhere he goes. Of course, it really depends on one's decision - conservative, secure or bold and hungry for success.

Besides, it is no untrue that general skills and enlightenments from a normal, "orthodox" universities can more importantly, be applied in life. Sales "soft" power is used by many to pacify their wives, and finance helps many plan, financially, for retirement.

As we analyse this scenario, we would really find that corporate companies not only give one job opportunities, but by limiting one's knowledge learnt, it is forcing one to be loyal and commit fully to the company. The mentality goes, "Since I have already spent 4 years learning how to work in this company, I cannot waste the time, I have to use the skills learnt, and stay in the company". This is what makes the company not sorry for investing and pumping millions of dollars into these universities.

In a nutshell, the decision has its advantages, of course, but be aware of its drawbacks too when making considerations. Personally, I would choose the latter stand, as a much better alternative for entrepreneurship aspirations.

Should we do away with Singlish?

Sept 8 ST article "Ah Beng English part of our culture" has reference.

"Ah", "mah", "lorh", "yah", "lah", "cheah", "ai yo". These words probably surface to your mind whenever the word "singlish" is being mentioned. And it is precisely because of these words that netizens are having great debates over whether we should do away with Singlish.

What is Singlish exactly? It is basically English with the fusion of words from Chinese and Hokkien into the language. Nobody is sure of when it started, but somehow it has over the years slowly integrated into the way all Singaporeans speak and communicate with others.

I'm neither a big fan of Singlish, nor somebody here to greatly support British / American English, but I feel every Singaporean must master at least a basic of both former and latter.

Singlish is, with no doubts at all, a very good representation of our multiracial country. If we pick up a language-based perspective, we would see the Singaporean Hokkien is not pure-hokkien, but a language that fuses Malay words into it. But is Hokkien a good-enough symbol of Singaporean's Chinese and Malay culture? I doubt so. Singlish is the best representation because it not only incorporates Chinese words, but also Hokkien language, as well as Malay words such as "alamak".

'Primitive' Mortlock islanders spoke grammatical English in their own accent - unmixed w local speech. Mainland Papuans use Tok Pisin - their 'Singlish'; an official language, and I think it is time Singapore recognizes the language epitome of its multi-racial culture - Singlish.

However, it is important to realize the significance of the ability to speak proper English too. After all, in this increasingly globalized world with English as one of its only communication bridge between countries of cultural polarities, speaking good English has inevitably became a need, and no longer a "bonus" in the good old days. "Want a good job? Do you know how to speak English?" has become one of the important questions in any job interview.

If a foreigner comes to this so-called bilingual country (or vice-versa), yet does not understand a word we are saying, then won't it be very embarrassing for ourselves and for Singapore too. Of course, the same case is even worse for Chinese language!

Therefore, it is invariably vital that we at least master the ability to speak proper language. Some said that language is language and if Singlish can be a communication that is understood and convey a meaning, then so be it. However, one should realize that this choice would only limit their world to our small island, which also in fact, is increasing with young generation so called "Ah moh" speakers. There is only indubitable benefit of widening our world, our friends, and our social and commercial circle, if we put in the effort at least grasp the basic pronunciation, grammar and spelling of English language.

Of course, its ok to use Singlish in Singapore. Personally, Singlish feels more warm to the heart and it identifies who we are. But what I think we should possess is the very least ability of transition.

Singlish has only one tap of education, and that is from one's parents, of course. When I was 6-7 years old, still without many friends and without classmates, I could already speak Singlish with extreme fluency.

As such, I feel the first step we should take in consideration for the younger generation would be to, as parents, control our tongues with moderation, Singlish is okay, but not too much until this language hijacks proper English. It will be sad if the child grows up, not being able to differentiate between standard English and informal English.

Let us be truly fit for the term "bilingual"!

Florida Pastor Burns Quran: A Christian's Viewpoint

A rash believer or somebody there just to stir trouble? I'm sure you would choose the latter.

"I mean ask yourself, have you ever really seen a really happy Muslim? As they're on the way to Mecca? As they gather together in the mosque on the floor? Does it look like a real religion of joy?" Jones asks in one of his YouTube posts. "No, to me it looks like a religion of the devil."

That was Pastor Terry's justification.

When asked if he would decide not to act, the response was, "We are actually very, very concerned of course; we are taking the general's words serious. We are continuing to pray about the action on September 11. But we don't know, how long do we back down?"

Luke 6:29, “If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.”

From my understanding Christ never decided it was time to not “back down”. In fact, Judas believed it was time to stop backing down and he betrayed Jesus, Peter believed it was time to stop backing down and he cut of the servants ear. Christ, however, went passively from the garden, to the courtroom, all the way to the cross.

As Christians, is our solution, and is our witness an uncivilized act of violence? Yes, it is true that Muslim religion does not have the correct beliefs that God imparts to us, but as witnesses and stars for Jesus, is this the way we shine for God?

I believe that this is the most important question we could and should ask at this moment. What is the message of Christianity? Why are we here on Earth? If we want people to see Christians as the more mature religion, let’s act like Christ and not like Goliath. Or Hitler. Or Osama Bin Laden.

I think that, when we look at the life of Christ, we can gain a wonderful understanding as to why we are here.

Before Jesus told the prostitute to sin no more, he saved her from being stoned. Had he not prevented her stoning, not only would she have not been able to hear his message, but she would have had no desire to hear his message. The first thing that Jesus did was reveal that he truly cared for her (saved her life) – and then he taught her how to live a better life.

Perhaps then, the answer to witnessing to a Muslim is to show up in his village, give him a meal to eat, talk with him, and then discuss religion.

John Terry seems to be a very fervent believer who seems to practice "what God tells (him) to do", as quoted from his press statement.

Will God, the creator who teaches us to "love our enemies" send a message to treat our enemies by "not backing down" and burning their books? I highly doubt so. I am sure love, kindness and respect would be more possible alternatives God's message to his servants will deliver?

I assume, since John Terry is really a Christian, that he see Christianity to be a superior religion to Islam. then my advice to this pastor is this: If we want people to see Christians as the more mature religion, let’s act like Christ and not like Goliath. Or Hitler. Or Osama Bin Laden.

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God” Matthew 5:9, Pastor John Terry of Florida Church.

Too Many PRs?

Are you a PR? If you are one, better be a citizen soon.

In a press statement just yesterday, SM Goh Chok Tong pointed out the importance of loyalty to one's country.

'We want to welcome selectively some immigrants - we just can't open our floodgate to all and sundry or Singapore will be overwhelmed. But... we should choose the right people to help contribute to Singapore.' This was what the senior minister said that sparked off vigorous debates and reaction from netizens.

He quipped that Singapore is a sovereign state and its people have a 'uniquely Singaporean' identity that embraces elements of China, India and Malaysia - even in the way we speak.

"So likewise that must be our attitude - to try and entice these people to take the next step and become a Singapore citizen," he said, urging Singaporeans to welcome the right people to come to their own country.

As there are increasing number of complains about foreigners stripping away citizen rights - from overcrowding MRT trains to taking away job opportunities, it is understandable where SM Goh is coming from. More than appeasing citizens, SM Goh is also apparently concerned about citizen loyalty to countries.

It seems that certain groups of people are making use of Singapore for personal benefits.

'I know there's some debate over this Chinese girl who's a PR in Singapore who took part in the parade, the 60th anniversary of China, PRC,' Mr Goh said, referring to Chinese national Zhang Yuanyuan who displayed her Singapore permanent resident (PR) identity card on Chinese TV.

The senior minister's statement implies as a hint that there will be more actions taken following previous policies taken up to tackle this problem - such as the National Citizen Test for general knowledge about Singapore, as well as the NS award that distinguishes citizens from foreigners.

Personally, I feel that it is totally understandable why the government is doing so much to curb Singapore's population. After all, has to be a limit simply because of our small land area. It is only fair that elitism be carried out in our society.

The Transport Problem

As population hits 5.08m, how is the government going to solve the problem of transport? This question bothers many commuters in Singapore.

Every morning as we enter the public transport, be it the 190 bus or the North-East line, things like overcrowding, people being squeezed, waiting for the next train ... has become common sight to commuters nowadays.

The underlying reasons behind this trend seem to be the increasing young generations picking up public transport as a viable and cheaper alternative to car, as well as the more frequent need to travel to the city that can provide business, socializing and shopping needs. Furthermore, the rise in number of "lines" and bus routes in our system makes it more convenient and attractive to use public transport.

The government claims to have solutions to the problem, and tells Singaporeans that they can be rest assured the problem would be solved.

However, the statistics are - the project to increase the number of trains on the North-South line can only be finished by 2020, and even by then, carriage load can only be increased by 20%. In fact, it is estimated that our population would increase by another 3 million then.

Is this really a viable solution to this long term problem? I doubt so.

In my opinion, here are some solutions I think the government can consider.

• Instead of working on increasing train carriage, which presently is too slow, the government should curb and increase filtering regulations on foreigners wishing to become Singaporeans.
• Spend more time, effort and money on increasing number of trains.
• Increase bus and MRT fares for commuters
• Since increasing bus speed through buying buses is much more convenient and much faster than increasing MRT carriage load and waiting speed, the government can consider initiatives and policies to encourage commuters to take bus instead.

In general, I think this matter is something the government should pay more attention and money to.

Let Singaporeans go to work on time.

New Creation Resurrection?

It has been months after the New Creation saga, where concerns arise over potential misuse of funds. But just last Saturday, the megachurch broke its previous record when it received a grand total of $21.1 million in donations from four services, in less than 24 hours.

Though the litmus test has proven success in showing the church members' faithfulness to the mega church, it seems to only retrieve further undesirable results from netizens.

Whilst some defended the church, most were appalled at how people can get "scammed" and "cheated" again even after acquiring knowledge of fund misuse.

Some even went on to list examples of the money, used for building towering skyscrapers, can be put to better use such as saving children dying in Africa. Statistics such as how one iPhone can save three years of a African kid's life popped up in one of the comments.

Personally, I was rather disgusted when I saw these baseless and seemingly hypocritical cliches appear in response to New Creation's new record. Why talk about saving an African kid, when I can give that commenter statistics that half an hour electricity of using the computer to type his comment could save an African kid for 10 days?

Let's not assume that New Creation Church has, without qualms, misused the funds. After all, they are also Christians, just with different beliefs. Let us accept the possibility that New Creation Church may be using Suntec City for congregation services, and let us be more forgiving towards them.