-
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.
Chitchat Why Jamus Lim join Workers' Party ?
- Thread starter batman1
- Start date
Jamus suggests alternatives to raising GST. 
This month, Parliament debated amendments that would raise the GST, from the current 7, to 9 percent. The #workersparty opposed the bill, and we have explained why we think alternative revenue sources are available. Now, even if you disagree that we should tap on these alternative revenue sources, it should at least be evident that raising the GST at this time seems to be a pretty bad idea. After all, inflation is still high and rising. This is especially the case for essentials: food—which has jumped by almost 7 percent compared to last year—and energy, which has gone up by more than a quarter.
Raising the GST now is likely to add fuel to the inflation flame. In similar episodes elsewhere in the world, increases in sales taxes have either been inflationary, or neutral at best. At the very least, prices on GST-applicable items are almost certain to jump. With no clear downward trend in inflation, and the virtual impossibility in distinguishing between general price increases and those from profiteering using the GST as an excuse, it’s hard see how a GST now hike wouldn’t make things worse.
We aren’t in dire need for revenue. Existing taxes, levied as a percentage of income or spending, will automatically bring in more as prices rise. And long-term our healthcare spending—the justification for the hike—is increasing only slowly. The effects from the inflation-GST hike double whammy would also hit middle-income families the hardest. These households get the least help from government packages, while facing unavoidable price rises as they spend on necessities.
This makes a strong case for us to consider a temporary exemption on GST for such essential items. The government has previously argued that such a system would be complex and costly to administer. But would it, relative to the system we have now? I’m not so sure. Currently, we have an unwieldy mix of subsidies, credits, vouchers, and rebates. You can call these targeted. But it’s much harder to say that they’re simpler than a GST exemption on essentials. Besides, saying it can’t be done because it’s too complex strikes me as selling ourselves short. Such differentiated GST regimes have been rolled out in Australia, Canada, the UK, and U.S.; it’s even done in developing countries like India and Indonesia!
One final point worth considering: rolling out a temporary exemption for essential items offers an opportunity for us to critically evaluate whether such a regime could work for Singapore. Make it temporary, evaluate its efficacy, then decide whether to keep it or not. The government likes to say that we are pragmatic, and policies must work in our unique setting. But without the data and analysis, how can we know for sure this policy isn’t a good thing? As folks know, the 1 percent GST hike will go ahead next year, as planned. I see this as a lost opportunity for us to roll out a policy that could be very attractive in the long run, while offering precious relief now. #makingyourvotecount
Jamus Lim
11 h ·This month, Parliament debated amendments that would raise the GST, from the current 7, to 9 percent. The #workersparty opposed the bill, and we have explained why we think alternative revenue sources are available. Now, even if you disagree that we should tap on these alternative revenue sources, it should at least be evident that raising the GST at this time seems to be a pretty bad idea. After all, inflation is still high and rising. This is especially the case for essentials: food—which has jumped by almost 7 percent compared to last year—and energy, which has gone up by more than a quarter.
Raising the GST now is likely to add fuel to the inflation flame. In similar episodes elsewhere in the world, increases in sales taxes have either been inflationary, or neutral at best. At the very least, prices on GST-applicable items are almost certain to jump. With no clear downward trend in inflation, and the virtual impossibility in distinguishing between general price increases and those from profiteering using the GST as an excuse, it’s hard see how a GST now hike wouldn’t make things worse.
We aren’t in dire need for revenue. Existing taxes, levied as a percentage of income or spending, will automatically bring in more as prices rise. And long-term our healthcare spending—the justification for the hike—is increasing only slowly. The effects from the inflation-GST hike double whammy would also hit middle-income families the hardest. These households get the least help from government packages, while facing unavoidable price rises as they spend on necessities.
This makes a strong case for us to consider a temporary exemption on GST for such essential items. The government has previously argued that such a system would be complex and costly to administer. But would it, relative to the system we have now? I’m not so sure. Currently, we have an unwieldy mix of subsidies, credits, vouchers, and rebates. You can call these targeted. But it’s much harder to say that they’re simpler than a GST exemption on essentials. Besides, saying it can’t be done because it’s too complex strikes me as selling ourselves short. Such differentiated GST regimes have been rolled out in Australia, Canada, the UK, and U.S.; it’s even done in developing countries like India and Indonesia!
One final point worth considering: rolling out a temporary exemption for essential items offers an opportunity for us to critically evaluate whether such a regime could work for Singapore. Make it temporary, evaluate its efficacy, then decide whether to keep it or not. The government likes to say that we are pragmatic, and policies must work in our unique setting. But without the data and analysis, how can we know for sure this policy isn’t a good thing? As folks know, the 1 percent GST hike will go ahead next year, as planned. I see this as a lost opportunity for us to roll out a policy that could be very attractive in the long run, while offering precious relief now. #makingyourvotecount
Jamus recently submitted a rebuttal to Zaobao in response to a forum letter. 
I recently submitted a rebuttal to Zaobao in response to a forum letter, where the writer had argued, among other things, that the policy proposals by #workersparty would raid our reserves, leaving our next generation impoverished and indebted.
I’ve often had difficulties buying into such arguments, for several reasons. First—as I stressed in the piece—slowing the rate of accumulation of reserves can hardly be called taking from it. It is like someone declaring that since they’ve cut down their meals from 6 a day to 5, they’re now on a diet. Second, it’s not as if the money spent today is being squandered. Often, it’s used to fund important public expenditure needs, like education and infrastructure. These are investments in the future to begin with, even if the spending occurs today. Finally, even if the spending goes toward noninvestment needs such as healthcare for the elderly, why would this necessarily amount to selling our children short? After all, if we scrimp on paying for essential preventative and corrective healthcare today, the bill will eventually come due down the road, and our kids may eventually be burdened with an even costlier palliative care bill.
The full letter is available here: https://www.zaobao.com.sg/forum/talk/story20221118-1334383
我最近向联合早报回应了交流站的一封读者信。作者在信中辩称，工人党的政策建议将掠夺我国的储备金，将会把债留给我国的后代子孙，使他们无法应对未来的挑战。
我难以接受这样的论点。正如我在回应中强调的，减缓储备金的积累速度不是等于在取走储备金。这就像有人宣称，将自己每天用餐六次减少到五次，就是在节食。我也认为，今日一部分支出，是对未来的投资。支出用于资助重要的公共支出需求，如教育和基础设施，是在为未来负责任。最后，即使一部分支出会用于老年人医疗保健等非投资需求，这不等于是把我们的未来给卖空。 毕竟，如果我们今天在必要的预防性和纠正性医疗保健方面缩手缩脚，账单最终会在未来到期，让我们的后代最终可能会背负更昂贵的姑息治疗账单。
全文可在此处获取: https://www.zaobao.com.sg/forum/talk/story20221118-1334383
Jamus Lim
12 h ·I recently submitted a rebuttal to Zaobao in response to a forum letter, where the writer had argued, among other things, that the policy proposals by #workersparty would raid our reserves, leaving our next generation impoverished and indebted.
I’ve often had difficulties buying into such arguments, for several reasons. First—as I stressed in the piece—slowing the rate of accumulation of reserves can hardly be called taking from it. It is like someone declaring that since they’ve cut down their meals from 6 a day to 5, they’re now on a diet. Second, it’s not as if the money spent today is being squandered. Often, it’s used to fund important public expenditure needs, like education and infrastructure. These are investments in the future to begin with, even if the spending occurs today. Finally, even if the spending goes toward noninvestment needs such as healthcare for the elderly, why would this necessarily amount to selling our children short? After all, if we scrimp on paying for essential preventative and corrective healthcare today, the bill will eventually come due down the road, and our kids may eventually be burdened with an even costlier palliative care bill.
The full letter is available here: https://www.zaobao.com.sg/forum/talk/story20221118-1334383
我最近向联合早报回应了交流站的一封读者信。作者在信中辩称，工人党的政策建议将掠夺我国的储备金，将会把债留给我国的后代子孙，使他们无法应对未来的挑战。
我难以接受这样的论点。正如我在回应中强调的，减缓储备金的积累速度不是等于在取走储备金。这就像有人宣称，将自己每天用餐六次减少到五次，就是在节食。我也认为，今日一部分支出，是对未来的投资。支出用于资助重要的公共支出需求，如教育和基础设施，是在为未来负责任。最后，即使一部分支出会用于老年人医疗保健等非投资需求，这不等于是把我们的未来给卖空。 毕竟，如果我们今天在必要的预防性和纠正性医疗保健方面缩手缩脚，账单最终会在未来到期，让我们的后代最终可能会背负更昂贵的姑息治疗账单。
全文可在此处获取: https://www.zaobao.com.sg/forum/talk/story20221118-1334383
Jamus Lim
12 h ·Sengkang GRC
1 d ·The MPs will be sharing on recent Parliamentary discussions such as the GST hike and carbon taxes, municipal matters pertaining to the estate, as well as addressing any question residents may have.
There will also be a talk on colorectal cancer by the Singapore Cancer Society.
So join us on 27th November at Blk 120D Rivervale Drive..
Jamus will be asking a few questions. 
The collapse of the FTX has resulted in a severe loss for one of our sovereign wealth funds, Temasek, which took a significant exposure to the cryptocurrency exchange. Having worked in the trenches of a similar public investment vehicle, I am keenly aware that investment is hard, and nobody gets it right all the time. Still, the massive size of the writeoff raises eyebrows, and this has in turn prompted calls for heightened accountability for what went on.
Historically, we have been limited in how we are able to pose parliamentary questions (PQs) regarding investments by our sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). In general, we’ve been told by the clerks that such queries must respect standing order 19(1), which states that questions have to fall within ministers’ official functions to be admissible; since the government has repeatedly insisted that both GIC and Temasek operate independently from the government, questions about the plans, processes, and targets of GIC/Temasek cannot be entertained.
Nevertheless, given the importance of such questions in the public interest, the #workersparty felt that it was necessary to pose some questions on the episode, while respecting the limitations of what we are able to credibly ask via PQs. Temasek released an official statement last week (see here: https://www.temasek.com.sg/.../statements/2022/statement-FTX), but we hope that our additional questions (and responses in Parliament) will shed additional light on the matter. Here are the questions I filed:
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance: (a) whether the Ministry tracks the extent of concentration of investments by GIC and Temasek Holdings investment vehicles either by (i) geography or (ii) asset class; and (b) whether there are thresholds that trigger warnings of excessive portfolio risks to the Ministry.
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance: Given the distinct investment and development mandates for the two national sovereign wealth funds, does the Ministry issue guidelines to each on acceptable limits for exposure to different asset classes, including alternative assets such as cryptocurrency and cryptocurrency exchanges.
To ask the Prime Minister: In light of MAS’s proposed measures to reduce cryptocurrency trading risks, have similar suggestions been promulgated to government-related investment entities, such as GIC and Temasek Holdings.
Jamus Lim
8 h ·The collapse of the FTX has resulted in a severe loss for one of our sovereign wealth funds, Temasek, which took a significant exposure to the cryptocurrency exchange. Having worked in the trenches of a similar public investment vehicle, I am keenly aware that investment is hard, and nobody gets it right all the time. Still, the massive size of the writeoff raises eyebrows, and this has in turn prompted calls for heightened accountability for what went on.
Historically, we have been limited in how we are able to pose parliamentary questions (PQs) regarding investments by our sovereign wealth funds (SWFs). In general, we’ve been told by the clerks that such queries must respect standing order 19(1), which states that questions have to fall within ministers’ official functions to be admissible; since the government has repeatedly insisted that both GIC and Temasek operate independently from the government, questions about the plans, processes, and targets of GIC/Temasek cannot be entertained.
Nevertheless, given the importance of such questions in the public interest, the #workersparty felt that it was necessary to pose some questions on the episode, while respecting the limitations of what we are able to credibly ask via PQs. Temasek released an official statement last week (see here: https://www.temasek.com.sg/.../statements/2022/statement-FTX), but we hope that our additional questions (and responses in Parliament) will shed additional light on the matter. Here are the questions I filed:
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance: (a) whether the Ministry tracks the extent of concentration of investments by GIC and Temasek Holdings investment vehicles either by (i) geography or (ii) asset class; and (b) whether there are thresholds that trigger warnings of excessive portfolio risks to the Ministry.
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance: Given the distinct investment and development mandates for the two national sovereign wealth funds, does the Ministry issue guidelines to each on acceptable limits for exposure to different asset classes, including alternative assets such as cryptocurrency and cryptocurrency exchanges.
To ask the Prime Minister: In light of MAS’s proposed measures to reduce cryptocurrency trading risks, have similar suggestions been promulgated to government-related investment entities, such as GIC and Temasek Holdings.
Jamus encourages PSLE students.
It’s the end of the year, which means exam results season (for instance, PSLE results were released today). For many who have taken high-stakes exams, this may seem like a make-or-break moment, where the grades received will forever define one’s future. But I have a story of why we shouldn’t take grades as the be-all-and-end-all.
I spent the summer between the first and second year of grad school buried in my first-year macro textbooks. Usually, summer is an extended break, and tertiary students use the time to attend summer schools, do internships, or travel. So why was I mugging the previous year’s material?
Well, at the end of the academic year, most programs have what is known as the “comprehensives”—an exam that combines all the material taught over the course of that year, for which rising students have to pass (usually, for university, exams are only given at the end of the module, since there is so much more material typically covered in a given module). So in some ways, it’s a bit like the high-stakes PSLE or O/A-level exams, which is likewise cumulative in nature.
Anyhoo, I was studying because I had failed my macro comps. This was particularly devastating because I wanted to be a macroeconomist, rather than a microeconomist or econometrician (which are the three big fields within the discipline of economics). I thought I had done okay, and I was in a bit of a blur. The only thing I recall was that one of my macro professors told me that he had likewise failed his macro comps, and look at where he was now (he ended up becoming a world-class macroeconomist who is the author of one of the main textbooks that is used to teach the economics of central banking).
I wouldn’t claim to be as accomplished a macroeconomist as my professor was, but I did end up specializing in open-economy macro, and I’ve also written and published a number of papers on the topic. And having been on the other side—where I make rather than take exams—it’s amply clear that exams are just one hurdle that may or may not be a signal of true aptitude for a subject. Most academics are aware that some of the most creative, productive, and celebrated researchers and professors didn’t actually do well in their coursework, and only found their stride in the later years of grad school.
So if you got your results recently and did well: congratulations! It is an achievement, you’ve done yourself (and your parents) proud. Use the success to inspire you to accomplish even greater things. But if you didn’t do so well, just remember that many of us that faced similar circumstances, and managed to rise above them and even prove ourselves in future settings. You can do that, too.
Jamus Lim
2 h ·It’s the end of the year, which means exam results season (for instance, PSLE results were released today). For many who have taken high-stakes exams, this may seem like a make-or-break moment, where the grades received will forever define one’s future. But I have a story of why we shouldn’t take grades as the be-all-and-end-all.
I spent the summer between the first and second year of grad school buried in my first-year macro textbooks. Usually, summer is an extended break, and tertiary students use the time to attend summer schools, do internships, or travel. So why was I mugging the previous year’s material?
Well, at the end of the academic year, most programs have what is known as the “comprehensives”—an exam that combines all the material taught over the course of that year, for which rising students have to pass (usually, for university, exams are only given at the end of the module, since there is so much more material typically covered in a given module). So in some ways, it’s a bit like the high-stakes PSLE or O/A-level exams, which is likewise cumulative in nature.
Anyhoo, I was studying because I had failed my macro comps. This was particularly devastating because I wanted to be a macroeconomist, rather than a microeconomist or econometrician (which are the three big fields within the discipline of economics). I thought I had done okay, and I was in a bit of a blur. The only thing I recall was that one of my macro professors told me that he had likewise failed his macro comps, and look at where he was now (he ended up becoming a world-class macroeconomist who is the author of one of the main textbooks that is used to teach the economics of central banking).
I wouldn’t claim to be as accomplished a macroeconomist as my professor was, but I did end up specializing in open-economy macro, and I’ve also written and published a number of papers on the topic. And having been on the other side—where I make rather than take exams—it’s amply clear that exams are just one hurdle that may or may not be a signal of true aptitude for a subject. Most academics are aware that some of the most creative, productive, and celebrated researchers and professors didn’t actually do well in their coursework, and only found their stride in the later years of grad school.
So if you got your results recently and did well: congratulations! It is an achievement, you’ve done yourself (and your parents) proud. Use the success to inspire you to accomplish even greater things. But if you didn’t do so well, just remember that many of us that faced similar circumstances, and managed to rise above them and even prove ourselves in future settings. You can do that, too.
Jamus has more questions about GST.
On our way to the airport at the end of our #Anchorvale Jeju hiking trip, the tour guide reminded us to submit our claims for GST refunds, for items we had purchased. This got me thinking about how foreigners pay GST, including in Singapore. So I decided to ask about the extent to which our GST derives from foreign sources (the data I had found had lumped foreigners with the top 20 percent of households). I also wanted to know what the GST burden was on nonresidents versus residents.
On its face, it seems like foreigners foot a hefty part of the GST burden. In response, the government indicated that revenue net of refunds was a solid $6.8 billion, with an estimated 50 percent of GST receipts paid by nonresidents. This sounds impressive—soak the foreigners! On top of that, wealthy households—the richest 20 percent—foot a substantial part of the bill. The top 20 percent account for around an additional 20 percent of this net GST. This also sounds great—soak the rich (Personally, I find that 20 percent paying only about a fifth of the share surprising on the downside; after all, the top quintile often contributes a much higher share for income taxes worldwide, often more than half).
One problem with taking this at face value—as anyone who has taken an introductory course in economics should know—is that the incidence of any tax need not fall on the party on whom it is levied. It all depends on the intensity of demand and supply (which economists call elasticities). Put another way, if higher GST charges crimp demand at the margin, Singaporean businesses—rather than foreigners—are the ones who end up bearing the burden of the tax, due to reduced revenue and profits.
Now, even if we have done the math and definitively establish that our businesses (mostly) aren’t harmed by a higher GST, it is still worthwhile asking a different question: whether the benefit of additional revenue gain worth the additional pain that our middle class would need to endure.
Thinking about this tradeoff is important, because many in our sandwich generation—including many in #SengkangGRC—have received limited support from government support programs, but their monthly expenses on their children and parents will now be subject to a higher GST. That’s been exacerbated by inflation, which is why many households in this group feel that the GST hike, even with the temporary rebate, still doesn’t quite work to alleviate their tight budget circumstances. #makingyourvotecount
Jamus Lim
10 h ·On our way to the airport at the end of our #Anchorvale Jeju hiking trip, the tour guide reminded us to submit our claims for GST refunds, for items we had purchased. This got me thinking about how foreigners pay GST, including in Singapore. So I decided to ask about the extent to which our GST derives from foreign sources (the data I had found had lumped foreigners with the top 20 percent of households). I also wanted to know what the GST burden was on nonresidents versus residents.
On its face, it seems like foreigners foot a hefty part of the GST burden. In response, the government indicated that revenue net of refunds was a solid $6.8 billion, with an estimated 50 percent of GST receipts paid by nonresidents. This sounds impressive—soak the foreigners! On top of that, wealthy households—the richest 20 percent—foot a substantial part of the bill. The top 20 percent account for around an additional 20 percent of this net GST. This also sounds great—soak the rich (Personally, I find that 20 percent paying only about a fifth of the share surprising on the downside; after all, the top quintile often contributes a much higher share for income taxes worldwide, often more than half).
One problem with taking this at face value—as anyone who has taken an introductory course in economics should know—is that the incidence of any tax need not fall on the party on whom it is levied. It all depends on the intensity of demand and supply (which economists call elasticities). Put another way, if higher GST charges crimp demand at the margin, Singaporean businesses—rather than foreigners—are the ones who end up bearing the burden of the tax, due to reduced revenue and profits.
Now, even if we have done the math and definitively establish that our businesses (mostly) aren’t harmed by a higher GST, it is still worthwhile asking a different question: whether the benefit of additional revenue gain worth the additional pain that our middle class would need to endure.
Thinking about this tradeoff is important, because many in our sandwich generation—including many in #SengkangGRC—have received limited support from government support programs, but their monthly expenses on their children and parents will now be subject to a higher GST. That’s been exacerbated by inflation, which is why many households in this group feel that the GST hike, even with the temporary rebate, still doesn’t quite work to alleviate their tight budget circumstances. #makingyourvotecount
Jamus wants to initiate and inspire.
One of the ground-up initiatives we’re trying to inspire in #SengkangGRC is a more holistic embrace of arts and the humanities in the lives of our residents and their children. To that end, the town council rolled out a mural competition, in the hopes of both lighting the creative spark among our residents, as well as fostering a sense of ownership over the town’s shared spaces.
Of course, murals aren’t unique to Sengkang, and can be found in estates across the island. Still, we tried to inject our own approach into the effort. One aspect was a focus on building community spirit. In addition to soliciting residents’ contributions for the base artwork, the two mural artists actually tasked with executing the vision are likewise Sengkang residents. We were also glad that one of the #Anchorvale schools with a strong arts focus—Anchor Green—also sent a strong contingent. The judging panel was comprised of the town council members, most of whom are residents. And finally, while we kept the topic open, our theme for the mural competition stressed community. Kampong spirit, in a modern town. #TeamSengkang
Jamus Lim
1 d ·One of the ground-up initiatives we’re trying to inspire in #SengkangGRC is a more holistic embrace of arts and the humanities in the lives of our residents and their children. To that end, the town council rolled out a mural competition, in the hopes of both lighting the creative spark among our residents, as well as fostering a sense of ownership over the town’s shared spaces.
Of course, murals aren’t unique to Sengkang, and can be found in estates across the island. Still, we tried to inject our own approach into the effort. One aspect was a focus on building community spirit. In addition to soliciting residents’ contributions for the base artwork, the two mural artists actually tasked with executing the vision are likewise Sengkang residents. We were also glad that one of the #Anchorvale schools with a strong arts focus—Anchor Green—also sent a strong contingent. The judging panel was comprised of the town council members, most of whom are residents. And finally, while we kept the topic open, our theme for the mural competition stressed community. Kampong spirit, in a modern town. #TeamSengkang
Jamus Lim
22 h ·The Workers' Party
23 h ·In his speech on 377A and the Constitutional Amendment, MP Jamus Lim explained why a repeal of the law criminalizing sex between men, alongside the incorporation of the institution of marriage into the constitution, represents the sort of societal compromise between individualism and majoritarianism that is necessary in democratic republics such as Singapore.
Jamus celebrated Grandparents' Day.
Last weekend, #TeamSengkang helped celebrate Grandparents’ Day, with (what is now becoming) our annual tradition of distributing fruits to residents in a few of our “elderly” blocks, in this instance at #Anchorvale and #Compassvale.
Although the exercise of handing these care packages out unit by unit is undeniably tiring, I also find it meaningful and rewarding. I get to express my gratitude to the sacrifices and contributions of the earlier generation, which has done so much to get us to where we are today. And the fruit will, hopefully, bring a sweet touch to the day-to-day of our seniors.
Our deep gratitude goes out to our kind donors, who made all this possible, and to all those who came out to help; it was a grimy afternoon, and I appreciate the volunteers sweating away to repackage the various fruit into baskets, and helping haul them for distribution to the various blocks. Special thanks as well to our newly-minted CEC member Kong Soon, who we immediately put to work in assisting with the door-to-door distribution! #SengkangGRC
Jamus Lim
5 h ·Last weekend, #TeamSengkang helped celebrate Grandparents’ Day, with (what is now becoming) our annual tradition of distributing fruits to residents in a few of our “elderly” blocks, in this instance at #Anchorvale and #Compassvale.
Although the exercise of handing these care packages out unit by unit is undeniably tiring, I also find it meaningful and rewarding. I get to express my gratitude to the sacrifices and contributions of the earlier generation, which has done so much to get us to where we are today. And the fruit will, hopefully, bring a sweet touch to the day-to-day of our seniors.
Our deep gratitude goes out to our kind donors, who made all this possible, and to all those who came out to help; it was a grimy afternoon, and I appreciate the volunteers sweating away to repackage the various fruit into baskets, and helping haul them for distribution to the various blocks. Special thanks as well to our newly-minted CEC member Kong Soon, who we immediately put to work in assisting with the door-to-door distribution! #SengkangGRC
