Sunday, April 10, 2011

The SDP contesting here

Finally we are getting a chance to choose who will represent us in Parliament. We have had far too many walkovers already.

I see Dr. Vincent W. is with them. He had dispatched himself well on TV. Are they fielding him here?

Nice brochure by the SDP, but I am concern about some items in their promise.

1. I am not sure if they are able to recognize an unsafe investment from a safe one. I hope their idea of safe does not mean the equal of the biblical parable of burying it in the ground. Do they have an investment management background? It is much harder than you think.

2. I like their idea of involving residents in precinct management but not sure if they have the leadership and organizational capability to pull this off. It is really hard. If they can achieve this, it will really put the PAP in the shade. Do we want to let them try?

3. GST for essential items should go, after all it is a regressive tax. But to take it down to 3%, can we afford it?

4. Singapore First Policy: Everyone welcomes it, but how do you make sure there is no excessive unwanted consequences, e.g., driving away talent that we need. Just show me how this can be done better than the PAP, which I feel could do much better. The PAP said this is the best achievable. I doubt it.

5. There are macro economic consequences to returning the CPF min sum to the people. I hope they understand the many degrees away consequences. It is always easy to have fun today and not worry about tomorrow. The principle must be ownership and what you sow, you and not others reap. The violation of this good apple pie principle had led to the 2008 subprime crisis.

6. Good to reduce health cost but how to ensure quality remains high and improving over time? Let's be honest about this; most doctors are it foremost to make a good living for themselves and others.

7. If I am not wrong, the research show that the quality of teachers is more important than class size. Nevertheless class size still ranked high in helping pupils perform. With technology and thinking out of the box, we can allow class size to be fluid. Effective rather than a fixed number of pupils per class is the way to go.

8. I hope minimum wage is just a shorthand to substitute for a far more complex issue.

9. I wonder why there is no opinion from SDP on the housing and rent issue. Isn't that one of the biggest contributors to the rising prices here?


  1. This is a good, rigorous analysis of a typical politician's collection of campaign promises.

    At first blush, the SDP's promises appear to be fantastic. But upon closer inspection, they lack detail, and turn out to be nothing more than motherhood statements.

    The Singapore electorate has evolved to become more sophisticated, so it is important for aspiring politicians try a little harder, than in the past. Otherwise, they will fail the scrutiny of the more intelligent voter (as has been shown in this blog).

  2. Most if not all political manifestos provide the 30,000ft view. It is in the details - and this is the role of the civil servant - that will determine how it gets executed and who wins or loses - that matters .

  3. the SDP isn't going to become the majority power after this elections. maybe the question you should ask yourself instead is: do you think these issues being debated in parliament with an alternative slant (the SDP's) will be beneficial for Singapore?

  4. Historically, they were the strongest oppo ever in SG with 4 seats. But after that, PAP launched endless smear campaigns and even wanted it to be forced to close down by bankrupting it.

    With Dr VJ's joining of the SDP, Dr Chee is like a tiger with wings now.

    I urge you to keep an open mind about SDP.

  5. @Stan: I agree with you. Open mindedness is the most important ingredient to mitigate the effects of bias and prejudices.

    @3rd Anonymous: Open debate is a necessary condition for a functioning democracy. To even question the value of debate is to reject the foundation of democracy: liberty.

    @1st Anonymous: Ideals without practice are empty. Practice without ideals is blind. It is in my humble opinion that ideals should marginally triumph because ideals lead to principles. While actions may go wrong, principles are time-honored. Without ideals, principles are not firm, then actions are unguided. Thus, to identify ideals that will be in the people's interests (by extension, to the nation) is more important than to start with blind details.