PE: Four-cornered fight for Presidential race

my view...
TKL-he can turn the table jus to achieve his persnal goal. when he act hero for lehman case. already guess he is running for president. since his annoucement he make it very clear he is non-pap and non-opp person. he want to help ppl but don want to run GE becos he don want to run town council :doh: . talk cok, if really want to help ppl, can do in any form
TJS-he is all out against govt. with him around there will be no peace. investor will be shun away thinking of internal crack within govt.
TCB- can sense his passionate towards ppl. need not elaborate
TT- his wide experience definitely a plus point
like what devil mentioned, go for the one that have the capability. not of background. OTC also pap man but he did what he think is right.

my preference is TCB n TT. TCB has passion but TT has experience and he can present better for Singapore

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ay123

my view...
TKL-he can turn the table jus to achieve his persnal goal. when he act hero for lehman case. already guess he is running for president. since his annoucement he make it very clear he is non-pap and non-opp person. he want to help ppl but don want to run GE becos he don want to run town council :doh: . talk cok, if really want to help ppl, can do in any form
TJS-he is all out against govt. with him around there will be no peace. investor will be shun away thinking of internal crack within govt.
TCB- can sense his passionate towards ppl. need not elaborate
TT- his wide experience definitely a plus point
like what devil mentioned, go for the one that have the capability. not of background. OTC also pap man but he did what he think is right.

my preference is TCB n TT. TCB has passion but TT has experience and he can present better for Singapore

---

Hey, I agree with you!
TCB is so sincere and passionate and I really like him after his speech, especially about the part that he mentioned that the president should be above politics.
But TT has the expertise......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttercarp

Hey, I agree with you!
TCB is so sincere and passionate and I really like him after his speech, especially about the part that he mentioned that the president should be above politics.
But TT has the expertise......

---

if this is a prime minister election, my vote surely goes to TT BUT this is a presidential election!

we need an INDEPENDENT president! NOT just a parrot of either parties!

Helping the people is always a good thing, but you never know the motive behind what people do, that is my point. It is naive to think that just because doctor gives credit terms to his patient, he has a kind heart. If the poor patient is indeed down and out, shouldn't he be doing it for free? This aspect of tcb's character is reflected in this pe as well. When asked about whether he would pledge his pay to charity if he gets elected, he pushed the issue aside and say he won't use that to win votes and evaded the issue. if tt and tcb had gone ahead to also make the pledge just like tjs and tkl, how can it be called a tactic to win votes when all candidates made the same pledge. I see that having a charity heart is a basic necessity of a president and he has to make that pledge before he is elected, coz if he refuses to make that pledge before, he probably won't do that after.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by devilplate

wat kind of reasoning is tat?

u can turn black to white and now u turn white to black!:scared-1:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ay123

my view...
TKL-he can turn the table jus to achieve his persnal goal. when he act hero for lehman case. already guess he is running for president. since his annoucement he make it very clear he is non-pap and non-opp person. he want to help ppl but don want to run GE becos he don want to run town council :doh: . talk cok, if really want to help ppl, can do in any form
TJS-he is all out against govt. with him around there will be no peace. investor will be shun away thinking of internal crack within govt.
TCB- can sense his passionate towards ppl. need not elaborate
TT- his wide experience definitely a plus point
like what devil mentioned, go for the one that have the capability. not of background. OTC also pap man but he did what he think is right.

my preference is TCB n TT. TCB has passion but TT has experience and he can present better for Singapore

---

i goto explain on this statement....

i mentioned tat we shd look at each individual candidate's merits which is not entirely the same as capability.....merit and capability r different

TT got the BEST expertise on global economies BUT we oredi got our beloved Tharman:cheers6:

Lets not blurred the role of our president!:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

Helping the people is always a good thing, but you never know the motive behind what people do, that is my point. It is naive to think that just because doctor gives credit terms to his patient, he has a kind heart. If the poor patient is indeed down and out, shouldn't he be doing it for free? This aspect of tcb's character is reflected in this pe as well. When asked about whether he would pledge his pay to charity if he gets elected, he pushed the issue aside and say he won't use that to win votes and evaded the issue. if tt and tcb had gone ahead to also make the pledge just like tjs and tkl, how can it be called a tactic to win votes when all candidates made the same pledge. I see that having a charity heart is a basic necessity of a president and he has to make that pledge before he is elected, coz if he refuses to make that pledge before, he probably won't do that after.

---

u have ur views but i have my own differing views

I find it very low class to pledge pay to charity b4 he is even elected.....

and yes, i find it as a CHEAP tactic to win some votes....tats partly why TKL puts me off right from the beginning

Making a pledge to donate your pay to charity once elected is a very noble act so how can that be cheap? The gesture tells people that the person is not in the job for the money, which is something that tt and tcb has not shown so far. Making the declaration takes courage coz imagine once you get elected, at least $10 million of your pay in that one term will have to be given away, that takes courage coz $10 million is not a small sum. Just ask yourself, what has nathan done for charity in his own personal capacity with all that $40 million he received in salary from taxpayers in his two terms? What kind of president have we had for two terms? To me nathan is the worst president we have had to date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by devilplate

u have ur views but i have my own differing views

I found is very low class to pledge pay to charity b4 he is even elected.....

and yes, i find it as a CHEAP tactic to win some votes....tats partly why TKL puts me off right from the beginning

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

Making a pledge to donate your pay to charity once elected is a very noble act so how can that be cheap? The gesture tells people that the person is not in the job for the money, which is something that tt and tcb has not shown so far. Making the declaration takes courage coz imagine once you get elected, at least $10 million of your pay in that one term will have to be given away, that takes courage coz $10 million is not a small sum.

---

we dun have to argue over this.....

best is to check TT and TKL whether both of them have been donating a considerably sum of their wealth to the charity for the past 20yrs anot.....

btw, TJS got pledge his pay to charity?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

Helping the people is always a good thing, but you never know the motive behind what people do, that is my point. It is naive to think that just because doctor gives credit terms to his patient, he has a kind heart. If the poor patient is indeed down and out, shouldn't he be doing it for free? This aspect of tcb's character is reflected in this pe as well. When asked about whether he would pledge his pay to charity if he gets elected, he pushed the issue aside and say he won't use that to win votes and evaded the issue. if tt and tcb had gone ahead to also make the pledge just like tjs and tkl, how can it be called a tactic to win votes when all candidates made the same pledge. I see that having a charity heart is a basic necessity of a president and he has to make that pledge before he is elected, coz if he refuses to make that pledge before, he probably won't do that after.

---

Hey, doctor also need pay to eat and survive, ok!
So you think doctor must be so charitable and waive all fees for the poor?
You think doctors no need to take care of themselves and their families?
Of course TCB does not need to waive fees for poor people, as he is not a charitable organization.
In this life, we work for our pay. We don't have to donate to charity if we don't want to and should not be criticized for that.
Anyway, why should the EP donate his pay to charity. He works hard for the pay, so let him decide what he wants to do about it.
A capable president is what we need.

Of course people need to work for their money, but my point is when someone else brought up about TCB giving credit for his services and commented that he had a good heart, I do not see any correlation coz the person he gave credit to would eventually still have to pay him back. i have come across doctors who waive medical fees for those really down and out and also provide discounts for the needy.

I am puzzled by your statement (in red) as to why the president should donate his money to charity. Don't you think $4 million a year for the president of singapore is too excessive when comparing with his job scope? When you mentioned he works hard for his money, do you mean to say he works 10 times harder than Obama? Please lah...everybody knows the president in singapore is overly paid that is why despite TKL and TJS donating half of that to charity, there is still a lot left. Even at $2 million a year, I think the president is overly paid coz he plays a ceremonial role largely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttercarp

Hey, doctor also need pay to eat and survive, ok!
So you think doctor must be so charitable and waive all fees for the poor?
You think doctors no need to take care of themselves and their families?
Of course TCB does not need to waive fees for poor people, as he is not a charitable organization.
In this life, we work for our pay. We don't have to donate to charity if we don't want to and should not be criticized for that.
Anyway, why should the EP donate his pay to charity. He works hard for the pay, so let him decide what he wants to do about it.
A capable president is what we need.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

Of course people need to work for their money, but my point is when someone else brought up about TCB giving credit for his services and commented that he had a good heart, I do not see any correlation coz the person he gave credit to would eventually still have to pay him back. i have come across doctors who waive medical fees for those really down and out and also provide discounts for the needy.

I am puzzled by your statement (in red) as to why the president should donate his money to charity. Don't you think $4 million a year for the president of singapore is too excessive when comparing with his job scope? When you mentioned he works hard for his money, do you mean to say he works 10 times harder than Obama? Please lah...everybody knows the president in singapore is overly paid that is why despite TKL and TJS donating half of that to charity, there is still a lot left. Even at $2 million a year, I think the president is overly paid coz he plays a ceremonial role largely.

---

I agree that $4 mil a year is a lot of money.
But we can't change that.
So if you are running as EP, you resign from your present job and you expect that pay, so why should you donate part of it to charity, if you don't want to?
Of course it will be noble of the EP to donate part of his salary to charity, but I will certainly not vote for someone just becoz he will donate his pay.

Just becoz a person earns lots of money does not mean he should donate it to charity. And if he is sincere about it, he will not go around and broadcast
that he is doing so.

Being noble and charitable is what a president should be, not a matter of choice, otherwise how can a president advocate compassion and do charity when he has done little himself? Nathan often appeared in charitable events to grace the occasion, but has he proven it with his own actions and money? How many millions did he donate to charity in his two terms? A president needs to be exemplary and not merely tell others to do it but not himself. A person can earn obscene millions in his private business ventures but that is money generated by his business and nothing to do with the people. If president's $40 million comes from taxpayers, that is a different matter coz all eyes will be on him as every cent he gets comes from someone who has to toil and sweat to put money into his pocket.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttercarp

I agree that $4 mil a year is a lot of money.
But we can't change that.
So if you are running as EP, you resign from your present job and you expect that pay, so why should you donate part of it to charity, if you don't want to?
Of course it will be noble of the EP to donate part of his salary to charity, but I will certainly not vote for someone just becoz he will donate his pay.

Just becoz a person earns lots of money does not mean he should donate it to charity. And if he is sincere about it, he will not go around and broadcast
that he is doing so.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

Being noble and charitable is what a president should be, not a matter of choice, otherwise how can a president advocate compassion and do charity when he has done little himself? Nathan often appeared in charitable events to grace the occasion, but has he proven it with his own actions and money? How many millions did he donate to charity in his two terms? A president needs to be exemplary and not merely tell others to do it but not himself. A person can earn obscene millions in his private business ventures but that is money generated by his business and nothing to do with the people. If president's $40 million comes from taxpayers, that is a different matter coz all eyes will be on him as every cent he gets comes from someone who has to toil and sweat to put money into his pocket.

---

The role of the elected president of Singapore :
http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/ips/docs/e...ncy_050811.pdf

No mention that president must be noble and charitable, leh.

:doh: :doh: :doh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttercarp

The role of the elected president of Singapore :
http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/ips/docs/e...ncy_050811.pdf

No mention that president must be noble and charitable, leh.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

:doh: :doh: :doh:

---

Hahahaha.... gotcha!
You are speechless.
Being noble and charitable are virtues that a president SHOULD possess but it is not a prerequisite.

bro, the prerequisites we are discussing here is not something that has to be spelt out in a book, it is what common people like us feel a president should be based on conventional wisdom. If an army general is afraid to die in battle, can he conscienably tell his army to die in battle bravely? If a priest is gay, can he conscienably tell others that homosexuality is wrong? Likewise if the president hoards $40 million of taxpayers money without doing much for charity, can he then conscienably tell people to be more charitable? People's president should lead by example and not be a nato (no action talk only) president.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttercarp

Hahahaha.... gotcha!
You are speechless.
Being noble and charitable are virtues that a president SHOULD possess but it is not a prerequisite.

---

The Wayang Man

His arms across his table he laid;
He looks more cunning than words can say;
Barehanded came the wayang man
Before the PE TV live event.
In awe and sceptics the folks came forward,
To meet and greet him afterward;
‘It is no wonder,’ said the folks,
‘He is more cunning than fox.’

As cunning the fox in the dark forest,
He in a nice attire was seen;
Some praised his dear Patrick son,
with passion in science over twelve years of decent time
So sweet a face, such an angel grace,
In all Singaland had never been.
Folks swore a cursing oath:
‘This wayang man shall never be my man!’

Guess who this is?

Where is wq?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by devilplate

Where is wq?:rolleyes:

---

why u want to summon him back :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regulators

bro, the prerequisites we are discussing here is not something that has to be spelt out in a book, it is what common people like us feel a president should be based on conventional wisdom. If an army general is afraid to die in battle, can he conscienably tell his army to die in battle bravely? If a priest is gay, can he conscienably tell others that homosexuality is wrong? Likewise if the president hoards $40 million of taxpayers money without doing much for charity, can he then conscienably tell people to be more charitable? People's president should lead by example and not be a nato (no action talk only) president.

---

Den how about our ministers?

Took them so long to revise the pay....quite sure president salary will b cut....by 20%?:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggy

why u want to summon him back :D

---

I wud expect him to cut n paste bad stuff on tt and gd stuff on tjs mah....for the benefit of everyone here too rite?:D

Anyway i dun like tt too! Hehe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by devilplate

Where is wq?:rolleyes:

---

Tot he migrate to china?

I hope to see this happens asap...

http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2011/05/3...t-music-video/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by westman

I hope to see this happens asap...

http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2011/05/3...t-music-video/

---

Mr Brown is good, give us sth to laugh abt..., ya WQ provide good sparring during GE... , open our eyes to all candidates...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by land118

Mr Brown is good, give us sth to laugh abt..., ya WQ provide good sparring during GE... , open our eyes to all candidates...

---

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/08/...video-preview/
this one seems interesting...:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggy

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/08/...video-preview/
this one seems interesting...:D

---

Looking fwd to the actual broadcast..., interesting TJS vs TT on the ISA..issue...:o

Singapore Election: Young Voters could be the Key


Presidential Elections, just like the recent GE of Singapore...it not what we, the 'old birds' want.
Now ... the young voters are holding the Key.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13305828

Got this from another forum:



http://singaporereserves.blogspot.com


Thursday, 18 August 2011DR TONY TAN LOST MULTI-BILLIONS DOLLARS OF SINGAPOREANS' MONEY
DR TONY TAN LOST MULTI-BILLIONS DOLLARS OF SINGAPOREANS’ MONEY

Dr Tony Tan spent $24.2 billion of Singapore's hard earned reserves to buy UBS and Citigroup less than a year before the 2008 banking crisis struck. The billions of dollars he lost for Singapore may mean nothing or very little peanuts to him. However, billions of dollars means far too much to every Singaporean.

How can Dr Tony Tan be the President to audit his own horrendous mistakes that cost Singaporeans billions of dollars (thousands of millions of dollars)!

http://singaporereserves.blogspot.com

How many generations of children will the average Singaporean need just to save $24 million? Multiply that by 1,000 times. That is how much money Dr Tony Tan was willing to lose for Singapore. His timing of the purchase was so terrible. The price he paid was even more terrible. Both UBS and Citigroup almost went bankrupt even after Dr Tony Tan’s multi-billions dollars to them at Singaporeans’ expenses. Both banks needed many billions of dollars of bailout money from their governments to survive.

How can Dr Tony Tan be the President to audit his own horrendous mistakes that cost Singaporeans billions of dollars (thousands of millions of dollars)!

On 31 Jan 2008 , AsiaOne reported thus:

EVEN after taking significant stakes in UBS and Citigroup, the Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) could still invest in another distressed bank, if the deal is worthwhile, the agency's deputy chairman Tony Tan revealed in a briefing to The Business Times.
"We will look at any deal that is shown to us. We have a duty to do so.We would still have the capacity if we find it worthwhile to invest," he said.
"Whether it would be of the same size as what we are now doing is a matter to be decided."

Isn't that scary? He has a “duty” to lose more money by buying more banks at horror prices? Are we watching some horror movies? Lets hope GIC didn't buy many more banks in smaller pieces at the worst times and at the worst prices.

Please spread this message to every voter. The future of Singapore depends on you!

http://singaporereserves.blogspot.com

Got this from another forum:

MORE PAMPERED THAN ROYALTY?
By Philip Tan

The question of why exactly Dr Patrick Tan was so special that he had to be given a unique posting that does not even normally even exist is one that only he and his father can answer. But perhaps they should consider the example of Princes William and Harry, who are respectively third and fourth in line to the British throne. Even though there is no mandatory consription in the United Kingdom , both princes volunteered to enter into armed service, with Prince William having qualified as a search and rescue helicopter pilot and Prince Harry having qualified as a tank commander.

Prince Harry, a lieutenant in the Blues and Royals of the Household Cavalry Regiment, has on more than one occasion volunteered for active duty in Afghanistan , even though his commanders felt that he would be targeted by enemy forces. He is set to return to Afghanistan for another tour of duty next year.

Both princes had to go through rigorous training for their combat roles, beginning with basic officer training at Royal Academy Sandhurst, and later on extending to specialised vocational training. They were not treated any differently from other soldiers despite their royal status; on the contrary, Prince Harry was reportedly singled out by his instructors at Sandhurst for extra punishment if he made any mistakes.

The fact that the princes are serving in front-line combat roles alongside ordinary men and women is a testament to their courage and their commitment to their country. Both were born in the lap of luxury and had very privileged upbringings, but this did not deter them from answering the call of duty even though they did not have to.

So why do the children of our nation�s top leaders expect to be given special and preferential treatment? Seeing as NS is compulsory for all Singaporean males, why should any of them not be doing their duty in front-line combat roles?
Dr Patrick Tan can say all he wants about �contributing to Singapore � via his lab research work� but everyone knows that it is another thing altogether to be out in the field performing exercises with your fellow soldiers. Even Medical Officers are made to perform perfunctory and menial tasks for much of their time, and that is precisely what makes NS such a hated but respected institution.

National Service is not about an individual�s professional or academic qualifications, it is not about giving people the opportunity to make the most of their talents. Otherwise, all law students should be given legal work, all engineers should be given engineering work, and all history students should be assigned to curate military museums. National Service is about making a personal sacrifice to do your patriotic duty regardless of your educational background, which schools you attended or who your parents are.

At least, that�s what we were taught to believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by taggy

http://theonlinecitizen.com/2011/08/...video-preview/
this one seems interesting...:D

---

Wow... TT evaded the question regarding ISA... am awaiting the full version to be release...