GMS is concerned. 
Here we go again. It's a systematic issue with SMRT maintenance management.
Goh Meng Seng People's Power Party
·Here we go again. It's a systematic issue with SMRT maintenance management.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
A Tribute To Good Old Forum Banter
- Thread starter jw5
- Start date
GMS believes in karma. 
因果报应
小时候常听大人说，不要做坏事，不然会有报应的，报应可以祸及子孙后代！ 我当时满脸迷惑，因为这不公平，我父母亲做的事为何由我来承受因果的报应？我们不是常说一人做事一人当吗？
在我成长的过程，经历过许许多多因果现世报活生生的例子。恶因遗祸后代的案例，也历历在目。
在政治上担当掌大权者，手握生死大权者，通常以为不可一世，一手遮天，为所欲为。其实权力越大，责任就越大。虽然任何有利于民众的政策都会给予巨大的善报，但同理，如果有任何差错，这恶果报也会同样的巨大。
每个政策都会既得利益者，也有即受害者，如何去平衡利与弊，也关系到自身果报的终极报应。
有些大政治人物，曾经叱咤风呼天唤雨，不可一世，但死后却连自己的遗愿和居家私隐都保不住，家破离散，甚至互斗，媳妇和孙子被告上公堂，后代被流亡国外。。。其实很多时候都是自己在世掌权时埋下了这独裁体制和制度的因，使自己后代也必须承受这能个让掌权者为所欲为，一手遮天，毫无权力制衡的体制所带来的巨大逼害。
这真是果报现世报在下一代。
权倾一世，也有自伤余世的时候。
世人怕果，菩萨怕因。在这混沌世间，又有谁人能不受权、钱、利的贪婪所迷惑？
欺人容易欺天难
别人欠你天会还
别想善恶无所谓
因果报应终循环
Goh Meng Seng People's Power Party
·因果报应
小时候常听大人说，不要做坏事，不然会有报应的，报应可以祸及子孙后代！ 我当时满脸迷惑，因为这不公平，我父母亲做的事为何由我来承受因果的报应？我们不是常说一人做事一人当吗？
在我成长的过程，经历过许许多多因果现世报活生生的例子。恶因遗祸后代的案例，也历历在目。
在政治上担当掌大权者，手握生死大权者，通常以为不可一世，一手遮天，为所欲为。其实权力越大，责任就越大。虽然任何有利于民众的政策都会给予巨大的善报，但同理，如果有任何差错，这恶果报也会同样的巨大。
每个政策都会既得利益者，也有即受害者，如何去平衡利与弊，也关系到自身果报的终极报应。
有些大政治人物，曾经叱咤风呼天唤雨，不可一世，但死后却连自己的遗愿和居家私隐都保不住，家破离散，甚至互斗，媳妇和孙子被告上公堂，后代被流亡国外。。。其实很多时候都是自己在世掌权时埋下了这独裁体制和制度的因，使自己后代也必须承受这能个让掌权者为所欲为，一手遮天，毫无权力制衡的体制所带来的巨大逼害。
这真是果报现世报在下一代。
权倾一世，也有自伤余世的时候。
世人怕果，菩萨怕因。在这混沌世间，又有谁人能不受权、钱、利的贪婪所迷惑？
欺人容易欺天难
别人欠你天会还
别想善恶无所谓
因果报应终循环
GMS met George Yeo.
A friend who has just read George Yeo's latest book "George Yeo Musing with Woon Tai Ho" called to ask me whether I really met up with George in Hong Kong and encouraged him to return to serve Singapore in political capacity again?
Yes, I did and that was in 2015. I had a meeting with George Yeo at ShangriLa Hotel Hong Kong.
Although we have contested against each other in 2006 GE, Aljunied GRC, while I represented Workers Party, but it was just a democratic process where we serve Singapore in different capacity. There is absolutely nothing personal between us.
I see George Yeo as a gentleman who loves Singapore as much as I do. It is unfortunate that he has to discontinued his service to our beloved Nation prematurely as a Minister. He is definitely a Prime Minister caliber in his era.
I told him back in 2015, in the aftermath of the death of Lee Kuan Yew and amidst the mounting tensions in Asia geopolitics, he could well fill the gap which LKY has left as a political meditator between the two giants as well as Taiwan and among ASEAN. His wealth of experiences and contacts in diplomacy would serve the interests of our Nation well.
My worries of escalation in tensions between US and China unfortunately surfaced a few years later. It may develop further adversely and Singapore would be caught as the ant among the fight of 2 elephants.
Goh Meng Seng People's Power Party
·A friend who has just read George Yeo's latest book "George Yeo Musing with Woon Tai Ho" called to ask me whether I really met up with George in Hong Kong and encouraged him to return to serve Singapore in political capacity again?
Yes, I did and that was in 2015. I had a meeting with George Yeo at ShangriLa Hotel Hong Kong.
Although we have contested against each other in 2006 GE, Aljunied GRC, while I represented Workers Party, but it was just a democratic process where we serve Singapore in different capacity. There is absolutely nothing personal between us.
I see George Yeo as a gentleman who loves Singapore as much as I do. It is unfortunate that he has to discontinued his service to our beloved Nation prematurely as a Minister. He is definitely a Prime Minister caliber in his era.
I told him back in 2015, in the aftermath of the death of Lee Kuan Yew and amidst the mounting tensions in Asia geopolitics, he could well fill the gap which LKY has left as a political meditator between the two giants as well as Taiwan and among ASEAN. His wealth of experiences and contacts in diplomacy would serve the interests of our Nation well.
My worries of escalation in tensions between US and China unfortunately surfaced a few years later. It may develop further adversely and Singapore would be caught as the ant among the fight of 2 elephants.
Goh Meng Seng People's Power Party
3h ·
+2
https://www.facebook.com/peoplespow...Baofjlq1mmbYn8ylGZnAchLk2nkMg&__tn__=<<,P-y-R
People's Power Party - PPP
3h ·How Past Policies Pushed Us to Over-Consume Housing and Risk Our Future
-
For decades, Singaporeans have been guided into using their CPF for housing purchases, turning retirement savings into property investments. But what if we’re doing it all wrong? Shouldn’t our CPF be strictly for retirement?
-
Past policies pushed us into over-investing in housing, at times risking our future financial security. Imagine if your CPF contributions were lower, allowing you to choose how to use your income—whether renting, saving, investing, or buying a home. The flexibility to decide could lead to better financial outcomes, rather than being locked into a singular path.
-
To ensure a secure future for all, we need to rethink the CPF-housing link. Correcting this could save future generations from unnecessary financial strain and provide the freedom to make financial decisions based on personal needs rather than policy constraints.
-
#CPF #HDB #Singapore #Singaporepolitics
Goh Meng Seng People's Power Party
8h ·Now the dam at BBC has broken down! It starts to report on the serious COVID Vaccine injury suffered by victims...
It is always extremely painful to read all these accounts but it hardens our resolves to get to the bottom of all these harm.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0kj1pmr7jdo
GMS is concerned about Origin Sin.................. or should it be Original Sin? 
Origin SIN of NTUC Income saga
NTUC Income has become a private corporation in 2023 and it should have its full rights as a private profit oriented business entity.
Apart from following the rule and meeting all the regulatory obligations, it is free to decide its own fate and operation needs.
Just like other companies, both private and listed ones, it could carry out capital reduction as it deems fit, as long as it meets all regulatory requirements.
Corporate raiding is legitimate although it may be regarded as "unethical" or "immoral" by some people when companies were broken up, workers retrenched while the capitalistic raiders just sold off all valuable assets to make big bucks.
NTUC Income and Allianz, both private business entities, are free to to strike any deals about stripping NTUC Income's assets and distributing them to the shareholders.
The only problem arises is MCCY has made an exemption for Income which basically given Income a HUGE amount of $2B which was supposed to be transferred to public accounts without formal legal binding terms and conditions except some "promise" made by Income to spend $100m over 10 years aka $10million per year for social cause, apart from the promise of continue to pursue its "social mission".
For Income to claim that nothing will change fundamentally in its social mission except that it will be a private corporation instead of a co-operative is ingeniously misleading.
In terms of shareholding, there is fundamental difference. $2B surplus in the original Co-operative DOES NOT belong to the shareholders and these monies cannot be distributed or allocated to all shareholders. These surplus $2B are just in custody of the co-opt while the share price for the shareholders stay put at par value.
This is why when there is a liquidation of the co-opt, these surplus money are supposed to be transferred to public accounts for further social causes instead of being distributed to shareholders.
By exemption of such transfer of $2B by Income to public accounts when it converted into a corporation, it changes the nature of ownership of this $2B aka now these $2B are technically transfered and owned by the shareholders!
Once Income relinquished its "Co-opt" status, it will no longer be binded by the rules and regulations of MCCY or the laws embedded for cooperatives.
It would be utterly naive for MCCY to think that it could make Income to abide by its rules and regulations of cooperative when Income is no longer one!
What MCCY should have done is to turn this $2B surplus into perpetual loans to Income with certain interests it could utilize for social cause. In such way, this $2B will not be regarded as assets owned by the shareholders which will inflat their share value but instead become just a loan liability.
By doing so, no matter who take over Income, it will be obliged to pay interests for this $2B loan instead of having the rights to strip it off and redistribute these money to themselves as shareholders!
Thus, in my view, the Origin Sin of this whole NTUC Income saga is the Grave mistake made by MCCY to grant such exemption to Income when it did the conversion!
$2B is not a small amount of money. $2 billions is equals to 2000 millions! Requesting Income to use $10million per year for social cause amount to a mere 0.5% of 2000 millions! Not even 1%!
Whoever made the decision for such exemption should take full responsibility of such mistake.
Goh Meng Seng People's Power Party
6m ·Origin SIN of NTUC Income saga
NTUC Income has become a private corporation in 2023 and it should have its full rights as a private profit oriented business entity.
Apart from following the rule and meeting all the regulatory obligations, it is free to decide its own fate and operation needs.
Just like other companies, both private and listed ones, it could carry out capital reduction as it deems fit, as long as it meets all regulatory requirements.
Corporate raiding is legitimate although it may be regarded as "unethical" or "immoral" by some people when companies were broken up, workers retrenched while the capitalistic raiders just sold off all valuable assets to make big bucks.
NTUC Income and Allianz, both private business entities, are free to to strike any deals about stripping NTUC Income's assets and distributing them to the shareholders.
The only problem arises is MCCY has made an exemption for Income which basically given Income a HUGE amount of $2B which was supposed to be transferred to public accounts without formal legal binding terms and conditions except some "promise" made by Income to spend $100m over 10 years aka $10million per year for social cause, apart from the promise of continue to pursue its "social mission".
For Income to claim that nothing will change fundamentally in its social mission except that it will be a private corporation instead of a co-operative is ingeniously misleading.
In terms of shareholding, there is fundamental difference. $2B surplus in the original Co-operative DOES NOT belong to the shareholders and these monies cannot be distributed or allocated to all shareholders. These surplus $2B are just in custody of the co-opt while the share price for the shareholders stay put at par value.
This is why when there is a liquidation of the co-opt, these surplus money are supposed to be transferred to public accounts for further social causes instead of being distributed to shareholders.
By exemption of such transfer of $2B by Income to public accounts when it converted into a corporation, it changes the nature of ownership of this $2B aka now these $2B are technically transfered and owned by the shareholders!
Once Income relinquished its "Co-opt" status, it will no longer be binded by the rules and regulations of MCCY or the laws embedded for cooperatives.
It would be utterly naive for MCCY to think that it could make Income to abide by its rules and regulations of cooperative when Income is no longer one!
What MCCY should have done is to turn this $2B surplus into perpetual loans to Income with certain interests it could utilize for social cause. In such way, this $2B will not be regarded as assets owned by the shareholders which will inflat their share value but instead become just a loan liability.
By doing so, no matter who take over Income, it will be obliged to pay interests for this $2B loan instead of having the rights to strip it off and redistribute these money to themselves as shareholders!
Thus, in my view, the Origin Sin of this whole NTUC Income saga is the Grave mistake made by MCCY to grant such exemption to Income when it did the conversion!
$2B is not a small amount of money. $2 billions is equals to 2000 millions! Requesting Income to use $10million per year for social cause amount to a mere 0.5% of 2000 millions! Not even 1%!
Whoever made the decision for such exemption should take full responsibility of such mistake.
Similar threads
