"Tuck You" Logic

Singapore - The Workers' Party's (WP) suggestion to nationalise public transport "might seem like a very attractive idea" but it has "serious downsides" in reality, Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said yesterday.

Chief among these "downsides" is that "commuters and taxpayers - yes, even those who don't take public transport - are likely to end up paying more, and possibly, for a poorer level of service over time", Mr Lui added.

Mr Lui's remarks on his Facebook page came a day after the WP reiterated its call for a National Transport Corporation.

The Transport Minister pointed out that, an entity that depends on Government funding and which operates on a cost-recovery basis, "would have little incentive to keep costs down".

Said Mr Lui: "Cost increases will be passed on to commuters. Over time, this will lead to higher costs for the same level of service, which means commuters pay higher - and not lower - fares. Not only would people have to pay more, nationalising the operators could result in a stagnation of service quality or efficiency over time." TODAYOnline [Link]

If an organisation does not wish to make profit, the services they provide will be 'tucked up", meh? It makes no sense to me that a non-profit organisation will hurt a commuter/taxpayer more than a greedy profit making company. Is it the same old logic of, "If you don't pay your ministers millions, your mother, wife and daughter will end up as maids in other country!"?

Yeah, each of us need to make a buck, to make a living. But how much is enough? Enough for what? Where health care, pubic transport and education is concerned, I believe that the average man-in-the-street and those below deserves a fair deal! It is a sin to ensure that shareholders in public transport companies and their CEOs rake in the $,$$$,$$$ at the expense of the ordinary people.

It is interesting to know that PM Lee allows ex-MM and the SM EMERITUS (Expired Minister Enjoying Ridiculous Income & Title that's Unusual & Superfluous) 5 Secretarial Staff each at the expense of taxpayers. With their pensions, I would have thought that the MM and Emeritus would pay for their own keep. I wonder if USA still pay for Clinton's or Carter's secretarial staff's salary? What about UK's Blair or Major or Thatcher's? Or is this the Uniquely Singaporean way of taking care of the obscenely rich and powerful???

The rationale on Tuck Yew's statement speaks volumes! Now I know why we pay through taxpayers' pants ($,$$$,$$$) for services from ministers, which unfortunately, is worse than what comes out through the crack of our buttocks! It is scary when the "greed for money" overtakes the "honour of duty"! Maybe there is hope yet in politicians who are willing to give up their lucrative jobs to sincerely serve the people. Heard of Mr Chen Show Mao [Link] or Sylvia Lim [Link], anyone?

The 4 K's of Kiasu, Kiasi, Kiamsiap and Kaykiang has been enshrined in the PAP for so long that it will take a while for it to disintegrate. The fact that they want us to perpetually Kia-PAP (5th 'K') is hurting them much since the last election!

What is important to one may be rubbish to another. For what it's worth, the "Tuck You" Logic may be the kingpin of what PAP is about.

It is sad that only the "downsides" of the common people can be the "upsides" for the rulers?

Can't they rule with empathy and compassion? Maybe I'm asking for too much . . .

Most of the time we wonder. Are they just 'tucking' thinking of themselves and their jobs or are they serving Singapore and its people?

feedmetothefish

Hokkien in 5 Ks:

Kiasu= Afraid to lose

Kiasi = Afraid to die

Kiamsiap = Stingy

Kaykiang = Act smart

Kia PAP = Afraid of PAP