M.Parade voting is about SG futures not two lao GOH.

[RealSingaporean]

Marine Parade voters please take note. Your 2011 vote will help shape the futures of Singapore. I do understand most likely voters and papers will compare the two GOH before they vote. But I have second thought, two GOH is old already, i will think is about TPL and Nicole, both will be singapore futures pillars. So who will you vote for the futues and your children?

IF TPL go into Parliment, what is she trying to potray to our young generation?

My vote go to Nicole.

I stay in kallang, my vote go to oppo.

 

[GeylangCheongster]

I have many friends in Marine Parade. I will ask all of them and their families to throw their weight behind Nicole Seah. PAP has forgotten the poor. Nicole Seah shows real concern about the poor.

 

[RealSingaporean]

Thank you, i want my children to growth up like Nicole not TPL. So if Nicole go into parliment i can see my children have a better influnece.

I will suggest NSP use the futures topic of SG to win vote in Marine parade.

 

[RealSingaporean]

I think TPL is like minister Lim boon heng: to create 35,000 jobs i agree to have cassino. maybe in futures TPL will be: to have 35,000 jobe i agree to SG become Brothel of the World.

 

[Einfield]

You may not have notice, we are already sold by PAP to the Rich around the world, PAP is the pimp for Singapore. Many locals are 2nd class prostitute and they don't even know it. Happily screwing in the HDB pigeon hole, just the way PAP wants it.

I think TPL is like minister Lim boon heng: to create 35,000 jobs i agree to have cassino. maybe in futures TPL will be: to have 35,000 jobe i agree to SG become Brothel of the World.

 

[GeylangCheongster]

They realised their mistake - TPL really cannot make it. It reflects very badly on their selection

 

[Leongsam]

Nicole Seah shows real concern about the poor.

I simply cannot comprehend why there are actually people who are bothered about how the poor live and what they do with their lives. After all, the poor contribute nothing to society whatsoever. In fact, they're a considerable burden.

My vote goes to the party that shows real concern for the rich. The rich pay a substantial amount of tax. They create employment. The money they spend goes towards making the buildings bigger, the roads wider, the parks prettier, the restaurants swankier, the hotels grander and the entertainment industry wilder!

Take good care of the rich and the rest of jigsaw puzzle will fall into place. They'll take advantage of the help they get to become even richer. The booming economy they create as a result benefits the whole country. On the other hand, the poor are like a bottomless pit. You can spend a 10 billion dollars a year helping the poor but they'll still remain poor because all they'll do is waste the money on trivial pursuits.

I speak from first hand experience because I've seen billions of tax dollars go up in smoke trying to provide a leg up to the losers of society in OZ and NZ. All those idiots do is squander the whole damned lot.

 

[boman]

Besides persuading your friends verbally, email them sites like Temasek Review, Online Citizen, Yahoo News Singapore, Yawning Bread so that they get news that the Straits Times will never publish. I've found this way the best way rather than talking verbally to friends.

 

[Charlie99]

I agree with Sam Leong's as this matter and the government policies pertain to the Canadian environment. Without the rich, wealthy and entrepreneurial citizens, there will be less employers and jobs. The New Democrat Party (NDP) in Canada advocates the repeal of legislation providing for reduction in corporate income tax rates. Accordingly, the NDP in Canada, has never formed the government at the federal level.

But the government should not neglect the poor and disabled.

A joke as it pertains to Canadian politics, where the federal elections is scheduled for May 2, 2011.

I asked my friend's little girl what she wanted to be when she grows up.

She said she wanted to be the Prime Minister of Canada some day. Both of her parents, NDP supporters, were standing there, so I asked her, "If you were Prime Minister what would be the first thing you would do?"

She replied, "I would give food and houses to all the homeless people."

Her parents beamed, and said, "Welcome to the NDP (New Democrat Party)!"

"Wow...what a worthy goal!" I told her. I continued, "But you don't have to wait until you are the Prime Minister to do that. You can come over to my house, mow the lawn, pull weeds, and sweep my yard, and I will pay you $50. Then I will take you over to the grocery store where the homeless guy hangs out. You can give him the $50 to use toward food and a new house."

She thought that over for a few seconds, then she looked me straight in the eye and asked, "Why doesn't the homeless guy go over and do the work, and you can just pay him the $50?"

I smiled and said, "Welcome to the Conservative Party." Her parents still are not speaking to me.”

*** *** *** ***

I simply cannot comprehend why there are actually people who are bothered about how the poor live and what they do with their lives. After all, the poor contribute nothing to society whatsoever. In fact, they're a considerable burden.

My vote goes to the party that shows real concern for the rich. The rich pay a substantial amount of tax. They create employment. The money they spend goes towards making the buildings bigger, the roads wider, the parks prettier, the restaurants swankier, the hotels grander and the entertainment industry wilder!

Take good care of the rich and the rest of jigsaw puzzle will fall into place. They'll take advantage of the help they get to become even richer. The booming economy they create as a result benefits the whole country. On the other hand, the poor are like a bottomless pit. You can spend a 10 billion dollars a year helping the poor but they'll still remain poor because all they'll do is waste the money on trivial pursuits.

I speak from first hand experience because I've seen billions of tax dollars go up in smoke trying to provide a leg up to the losers of society in OZ and NZ. All those idiots do is squander the whole damned lot.

 

[RealSingaporean]

Haha i like this joke.
But first we must create enough job and help the poor to get these job, so that they can help themselves. help have a lot of way, not just giving fish. teach them to fish.

 

[QXD]

Sam is half-right by saying that taxes are garnered from the rich. With GST, the bulk of cashflow from taxation comes from consumption taxation within the country and not class-centered.

The rich (i.e. myself) can choose when, where, what and how to spend my money should I choose to. This can either effect capital flight (buying a multi-million dollar home overseas, spend on cookery courses in France) or tax revenue (buying a GCB, D9,10 condo in SG or learning how to cook local favourites). If I were less ethical, I could further lower my personal tax exposure in SG by stating these as expenditure due to business or even pay for my condo via CPF top-ups, which is an outright deduction from my P&L or non-taxable, and IRAS will not even bat an eyelid so long as my tax returns grow YOY.

Put is simply, I can pose as a frugal business man, knowing that I my company will provide for me and my spoilt rotten children.

However, when you look at the middle class, they are effectively the "squeeze class", most of their spending is non-discretionary, i.e- they have no choice but to spend. These are garnered from day-to-day consumables (food, utilities, transport, communications, ERP etc), and thus give the best level of certainty of cash flow in terms of tax revenue.

Therefore, it is not specifically true that the rich pay the bulk of taxes, but rather from the fact that they can (if they want to) effect larger tax income from discretionary spending.

 

[Leongsam]

Haha i like this joke.
But first we must create enough job and help the poor to get these job, so that they can help themselves. help have a lot of way, not just giving fish. teach them to fish.

Trying to teach the poor to fish is like trying to teach quantum mechanics to a moron. They simply don't learn. The Western democracies have conjured up all sorts of schemes whereby the poor are taught trade skills or small enterprise management. A huge song and dance routine is performed at the start of the scheme. One year later, all those involved are back on the dole queue. Human nature is predictable. Why bother working when something is available for FREE. Many poor families with 4 or more children take home more money on the dole than they would if they earned an honest living.

The poor are dumb but they aren't THAT dumb. They can recognise a good deal when they see one.

 

[ktc5972]

Its the same feelings & thoughts I have, & started a Post, to let go of the Old Bird. I am happy to see positive comments of Nicole's dream & commitment, not to mention her guts. If she is given the support, she can go a long way & make history. In 20 years, she can be the first woman, PM. She has that fire & we are the fuel. Remember, your children’s, exactly the same sentiments I had, future is in your hand.

 

[Leongsam]

Therefore, it is not specifically true that the rich pay the bulk of taxes, but rather from the fact that they can (if they want to) effect larger tax income from discretionary spending.

You're spot on with your analysis. The rich are mobile and tax savvy and they can easily afford an army of tax advisers to considerably lower their tax bill.

That is why it's so important for a govt to pander to their needs. If the rich can be convinced to place their $$$ and park their families in Singapore and use the country as a base for their worldwide exploits and escapades, Singapore will be able to maximise the tax take from these wealthy individuals. The wives will live it up when they're in the country on high teas, fancy wine, high society get togethers. The sons will want Porche or a Ferrari to show off in. The daughters will live it up in the nightspots, get regular $400 haircuts and $300 manicures.

All of these sorts of high value added activities can only work wonders for the economy. In Monaco, the whole economy is built upon catering to the rich and famous. There are no beggars on the streets of Monaco.

 

[Sideswipe]

All of these sorts of high value added activities can only work wonders for the economy. In Monaco, the whole economy is built upon catering to the rich and famous. There are no beggars on the streets of Monaco.

no point using Monaco, an unnormal country for any analysis.

Monaco is smaller in size than Singapore smallest single seat constituency.

 

[Charlie99]

abnormal rather than unnormal

no point using Monaco, an unnormal country for any analysis.

Monaco is smaller in size than Singapore smallest single seat constituency.

 

[Charlie99]

affect vs effect

Sam is half-right by saying that taxes are garnered from the rich. With GST, the bulk of cashflow from taxation comes from consumption taxation within the country and not class-centered.

The rich (i.e. myself) can choose when, where, what and how to spend my money should I choose to. This can either effect capital flight (buying a multi-million dollar home overseas, spend on cookery courses in France) or tax revenue (buying a GCB, D9,10 condo in SG or learning how to cook local favourites). If I were less ethical, I could further lower my personal tax exposure in SG by stating these as expenditure due to business or even pay for my condo via CPF top-ups, which is an outright deduction from my P&L or non-taxable, and IRAS will not even bat an eyelid so long as my tax returns grow YOY.

Put is simply, I can pose as a frugal business man, knowing that I my company will provide for me and my spoilt rotten children.

However, when you look at the middle class, they are effectively the "squeeze class", most of their spending is non-discretionary, i.e- they have no choice but to spend. These are garnered from day-to-day consumables (food, utilities, transport, communications, ERP etc), and thus give the best level of certainty of cash flow in terms of tax revenue.

Therefore, it is not specifically true that the rich pay the bulk of taxes, but rather from the fact that they can (if they want to) effect larger tax income from discretionary spending.

 

[Rogue Trader]

There are varying degrees of state welfarism. Voters are not asking for a dole system to support the slack. I am also very sure Singaporeans will not allow that to happen. But the elderly must be looked after urgently. It is jusy irksome watching old people with crooked backs picking kallang guni for a living.

 

[Leongsam]

affect vs effect

I believe "effect" is the appropriate term.

"Effect" can be used as a verb that essentially means "to bring about," or "to accomplish."

 

[Leongsam]

picking kallang guni for a living.

How about other sorts of guni like "geylang guni" or "katong guni". Is that acceptable??:p

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karung_guni