Whi Singaporeans Are Unproductive

[makapaaa]

<TABLE id=msgUN border=0 cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD id=msgUNsubj vAlign=top>

Coffeeshop Chit Chat - Whi Singaporeans Are Unproductive</TD><TD id=msgunetc noWrap align=right> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=msgtable cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="96%"><TBODY><TR><TD class=msg vAlign=top><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgbfr1 width="1%"> </TD><TD><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead vAlign=top><TD class=msgF width="1%" noWrap align=right>From: </TD><TD class=msgFname width="68%" noWrap>Rowbox <NOBR></NOBR> </TD><TD class=msgDate width="30%" noWrap align=right>Mar-12 7:52 am </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT height=20 width="1%" noWrap align=right>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname width="68%" noWrap>ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right> (1 of 5) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"> </TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>30024.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt>Are we really to believe that the PAP is serious about their latest drive towards greater productivity, strategically implemented onlyafter the the SDP's Economic Alternative published a shameful revelation of Singaporean unproductiveness?

Or is this just one more of the PAP's many economy-related conjobs?

Introduction: SDP's alternative economic programme

Part 1: The GDP, productivity and you

Part 2: Getting rich quick

Part 3: A comprehensive set of measures

Part 4: Rich man, poor man

Part 5: The MNC-GLC syndrome


Productivity entails - among other things - worker knowledge, skills and the proper attitude towards the task at hand.

And the judge presiding over the case below, Chia Wee Kiat, should be viewed as nothing else but an employee of the Government of Singapore: a mere worker, and as equally subject to scrutiny for his productivity as any other worker in Singapore.

Has the sentencing judge Chia Wee Kiat displayed any one of those qualities I mentioned above in any of the aspects of criminoloy, phenology, jurisprudence and law enforcement required to sentence these SDP members?

Can he be considered productive on those counts?

Productivity is also enhanced by experience on the job.

In this case, that would have to mean experience in presiding over cases such as this one. Does Chia Wee Kiat have any experience on that count to draw directly from?

But in the case of law, "experience" can also mean legal precedence. What legal precedence did Chia Wee Kiat reference in this sentencing?

To push my point further, productivity is also about worker qualities like a preparedness for and committment to the task at hand, in this case, the task of meting out justice.

And those demands impinge on the philosophical and legal as much as they do on the professional and technical.

Has Chia Wee Kiat displayed any of those qualities?

If we are still puzzled about why Singaporeans are only producing only 60-70% of what they should be, look no further than the PAP government that sets the tone for how and why it should be that way.

Why is the Executive the highest paid in the world when they don't even know these basics?
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[makapaaa]

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=msghead><TD><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0><TBODY><TR class=msghead vAlign=top><TD class=msgF width="1%" noWrap align=right>From: </TD><TD class=msgFname width="68%" noWrap>Rowbox <NOBR></NOBR> </TD><TD class=msgDate width="30%" noWrap align=right>Mar-12 7:54 am </TD></TR><TR class=msghead><TD class=msgT height=20 width="1%" noWrap align=right>To: </TD><TD class=msgTname width="68%" noWrap>ALL <NOBR></NOBR></TD><TD class=msgNum noWrap align=right> (2 of 5) </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgleft rowSpan=4 width="1%"> </TD><TD class=wintiny noWrap align=right>30024.2 in reply to 30024.1 </TD></TR><TR><TD height=8></TD></TR><TR><TD class=msgtxt><TABLE class=contentpaneopen><TBODY><TR><TD class=contentheading width="100%">TBT protesters hold heads high as they are found guilty </TD><TD class=buttonheading width="100%" align=right> </TD><TD class=buttonheading width="100%" align=right> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><TABLE class=contentpaneopen><TBODY><TR><TD class=createdate vAlign=top>Thursday, 11 March 2010 </TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top>Singapore Democrats

The Tak Boleh Tahan activists who stood outside Parliament House on 15 Mar 08 to protest against escalating food prices were found guilty of taking part in an assembly and procession without a permit.

The defendants, however, remained defiant - "unremorseful" in the DPP's words - even as the verdict was read. Remorseful? Why should anyone be remorseful when they have done what is right? "One day, it will be shown that we are right and the court is wrong," Dr Chee Soon Juan said to the Judge.

District Judge Chia Wee Kiat announced the verdict this morning and convicted the defendantss of two charges each.

Mr Gandhi Ambalam, Ms Chee Siok Chin, and Dr Chee were fined the maximum amount of $2,000 ($1,000 for each charged) and sentenced to 2 weeks' jail in default.

CASE: Allowed

TBT: Banned

Mr Chong Kai Xiong, Ms Go Hui Leng, Mr Muhammad Shafi'ie Syahmi, Mr Carl Lang Chin Kah, Mr Mohamed Jufrie, Mr Seelan Palay, and Mr John Tan Liang Joo were each fined a total of $1,800 for the two charges and 12 days' imprisonment in default convicted of two charges for assembly and procession. Some of the other defendants had to plead guilty during various stages of the trial due to work commitments.

During the entire trial the defendants were prevented from asking questions of the police about their allowing the Consumer Association of Singapore (CASE) who had also conducted its protest outside Parliament on two occasions: 18 Mar 07 and 16 Mar 08. CASE is, of course, headed by PAP MPs.

TBT: Banned

CASE: Allowed

The defence indicated vehemently that the discrimination of the police to target the TBT protesters while allowing the CASE protest to take place was illegal because Article 12 of the Singapore Constitution states that citizens are to be treated equally under the law.

The Judge refused to allow this line of defence.

The defendants had also sought to question the licensing officer on why the police banned outright outdoor poiltical activities. Such a policy contravenes the Constitution which guarantees the freedom of assembly and speech unless dire national circumstances are at hand.

Again the Judge refused to let the defence pursue this line of questioning.

CASE: Allowed

TBT: Banned

In their closing submissions, the defendants maintained that the police policy (which was derived from Home Affair's Minister Wong Kan Seng's declaration to outlaw public protests) is unconstitutional.

They also argued that the courts, by doing what they are doing, would aid the PAP in abusing its power and help the ruling party entrench is rule through undemocratic means.

The defendants are appealing the decision. The execution of the sentences have been stayed pending appeal.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
</TD></TR><TR><TD> </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[Papsmearer]

How come so many FT groups from PRC etc. can hold large protests outside MOM and not get arrested? PAP double standard again?

 

[halsey02]

How come so many FT groups from PRC etc. can hold large protests outside MOM and not get arrested? PAP double standard again?

PRC are comrades, one PRC = $xxx in levies...their money bags, you think they dare offend them!

 

[Wang Ye]

How come so many FT groups from PRC etc. can hold large protests outside MOM and not get arrested? PAP double standard again?

That is because PAP knew they screwed up by not doing their job. By arresting them would only compound their their mistake and expose their screw-ups to the whole world.

 

[myfoot123]

We live in a double standard society. A small island ruled with two systems. Forget to add that LTK was forbidded to ride bicycle in EAST COAST by poodle while LHL was enjoying his day cycling in WEST COAST with a bunch of dogs barking at residents. Do we want to live under the leadership of PAP with so much confusion in themselves? I won't because the next generations will question where is the standard.