.

Today, I made the decision to never let unimportant people affect my life, my mood and my well-being, ever again.

Some people are just not worth my time & energy. 

Advertisements

Lunch @ The Coffee Academics

I hardly blog anymore. (Does anyone still blog anymore??) The only times when I am inspired to blog is when I am angry or sad. I dont like to document unpleasant stuff, I’ll end up reliving it later, over and over..!!

(Also, when all you blog about is angry or angsty stuff, people get the impression that you’re a horrible angry/ angsty person, when 95% of the time, you’re actually happy & cheerful!)

Hence.. the lack of blog posts in the past year. 

Blogging is a nice way to remember happy events and occasions, so I guess I will try to blog more often.

Between work and school, let’s see how I manage to pull that off. 


 

 Had a lovely lunch + catch up session with my dear friend J last week, at one of my new favorite haunts, The Coffee Academics at Scotts Square.

She was friends with my ex boyfriend and we knew each other > 10 years ago. She used to visit my nail salon at Far East Plaza to do her nails. 

Its so damn long ago, it feels like a different life time. Lol. (I was only 23 years old then. Shite.)

I must say, it is nice to talk to someone who can empathize with your situation and feelings, because she has also been there.

 

Processed with VSCO with hb1 preset

IMG_9410

Good natural light is paramount to good pictures! 

I like to think that we both look the same.. Or in fact BETTER than a decade ago. :D

IMG_9308

My brunch came in the form of scrambled eggs with crayfish and caviar on toast. Interesting! Although I’m not sure if I would order it again..

I really like the chicken pot pie and fish tacos though! 

 


 

 

New term at school is starting next week. 

There are 8 modules in total and I’m doing 3 modules this year. Went for the induction session last Wednesday. I am half excited and half terrified.

Was really amused when I collected my textbooks, and saw this:

textbook.jpg

That’s Fish & Chips on the cover. In a styrofoam takeaway container, no less. 

Couldn’t they find a nicer picture to put on a law textbook!?

 

 

 

 

Red Flags Part 2

I posted Red Flags Part 1 two years ago.

Here’s Part 2.

 

Red Flag: 

He asks you out for coffee. For the first date.

If a man is genuinely interested in you and wants to ask you out, he will ask you out to dinner. And if he drives, he’s gonna come pick you up. No excuses.

It is NOT your job to make it easy or convenient for him to date you. Girls always tend to be too nice and too considerate.

If somebody asks you out for coffee, (and he’s not even that cute), dont bother. It means he is a cheapskate who only wants to buy you a cup of coffee to see if he has any chance of banging you.

He intentionally wants to keep things casual so you two wont get too serious.

(What? You want to be molly-coddled? Wrong place, honey.)

The guy cant even commit to a proper dinner date. What makes you think he can commit to a relationship? #fuckyourcoffee

(A little caveat: Just because a man takes you to a nice fancy dinner and is very generous, does NOT necessarily mean he is serious about you. He could also be just trying to bang you, just that he’s got deeper pockets. Sorry.)

Btw, there is no such thing as “going Dutch” on dates. Okay? What is this nonsense and who started it?

The phrase was coined as an insult to the Dutch for being CHEAP.

(http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=go+Dutch)

If a man asks you out and expects you to pay or “go Dutch”, pay for your share and dont go out with him again.

This has absolutely nothing to do with money.

How he treats you, shows you how much he cares about you. A man who wants to “go Dutch” is NOT a gentleman and he cant be that into you.

Please dont get me wrong. I am not saying never ever reciprocate. But reciprocation can come much later, AFTER he’s already won your heart. And it doesnt always involve splitting the bill into half.

Only colleagues and acquaintances split the check. Heck, I dont even spilt the bill with my closer friends- sometimes I pay, sometimes they pay, who cares its just food!??

If a man asks you out, he shouldnt expect you to pay. Just like how I wouldnt expect my guests to chip in money for the food if I invite them to my house for dinner. This is only basic courtesy and I am appalled that people are actually debating over who should pay for dates.

Personally, I never offer to pay UNLESS I am not sure how I feel about the guy and Im kinda on the fence. If I offer to share the bill, and the guy happily accepts, then he has unknowingly failed the test and will never get a second date. :)

If this makes me a “gold digger”, so be it lah. You think I cant buy my own dinner? Lol.

I dont have a long list of criteria, but I expect to date a man who knows how to be a gentleman. Its really not that difficult.

Dont waste your precious time with fuck/ lame/ cheap boys. Our time is literally more valuable than men. Infinitely more valuable. They can knock women up till they’re 85 and taking their last breath, while your eggs are rotting away.

You’re welcome.

 

Red Flag: 

He has tons of girls in his Facebook/ Instagram, and they are all models, stewardesses, etc.

And he’s constantly liking/ commenting on their photos. (With emojis! Wow!)

Dude is a player.

His hobby is skirt-chasing. He will never be happy with whatever you have to offer (even if you can have sex 24/7 and you’re tight as a virgin), because the best girl is the next girl. And the next. Andddd the next. Some men will never be satisfied with just one woman and nothing will change that.

Unless….you are secretly a masochist and enjoy vying for his attention among all the hoes, then go for it.

 

Red Flag: 

He is extremely suave, is a smooth talker and knows all the right things to say.

This guy is a PRO.

He’s done this a million times, hence he is not nervous at all. If a guy is really into you, and isnt a player, he is going to be quite nervous.

Ive met a guy whose hands trembled throughout our date at TWG. (I seriously thought he had some kind of neurological disease.) Another one was so nervous he had gastritis and was trying not to throw up. Couldnt even take a tiny bite of the food I ordered.

Holy crap. I had no idea I was that intimidating.

 

Red Flag: 

He is very touchy. 

This, I have a big problem with.

I am not a prude. I have attended business functions & friendly gatherings where some guys (whom I do not know) somehow feel they can use photo-taking opportunities to place their sweaty paws on my shoulder or even my waist.

(I took an antibacterial wet wipe and wiped my shoulder after that. I dont know what he touched before he touched me- filthy door knobs, his penis, his butt hole, some chick’s vagina….??!)

If I am not your girl, dont fucking touch me. You may not rest your hand on ANY part of my body. What am I, a come-grope-me statue??

A man who gets very touchy with you right from the start is testing the boundaries, and trying his luck. If you’re okay with him touching your shoulders or waist, then maybe he might start moving his hand further down to stroke your ass or even “accidentally” brushing against your breasts. #FUCKOFF

Someone who respects you will not touch you, especially when you barely know each other.

The key word here is respect.

I’ve gone out on dates with some dudes who expect to take me home/ come up to my place after just ONE dinner, because they somehow feel entitled to a little something something after buying me food.

Do I even need to elaborate on how disgusting this is?

How about I buy YOU dinner and you come scrub my kitchen and bathroom for 2 hours, asswipe. 

Men who expect sexual favors in return for buying girls dinner, are very likely to be men who go to prostitutes. Where else would they get this kind of mindset from???

 


Well, its now 3.16am and I cant sleep, I slept all day thanks to this flu/ cold thing Im having. Bleh. I’ll add on more if I think of more!

 

School life.

The one thing Ive learnt so far is that… Stupid questions deserve equally stupid answers. :D

 

Question 1

John had won an interview for a scholarship to Oxford. It was for a full scholarship worth $100,000 per year. On the day of the interview, he left his home at 7.30am, planning to be in good time for the interview which was at 9am. He looked at the display board on the MRT station and was told that his journey from Pasir Ris to Clementi was expected to take 45 minutes. John boarded the train at 7.42am.

Unfortunately, the train broke down. John was late for the interview and was not allowed into the interview room on account of his being late.

You are a top-notch commercial lawyer. John comes to you and says he wants to sue SMRT for causing him the chance at the scholarship. He asks you for a brief on his case and his prospects of success. Outline the matters that you wish to discuss with John. (20 marks approximately 1000 words)

Question 2

On that same train, Ellie was also delayed. However, before she boarded the train that day, she read a notice on the train platform which read:

“Passengers of SMRT agree that SMRT will not be liable for any loss or injury or damage suffered for any reason whatsoever during their rides with SMRT.”

Ellie is an insurance agent was on the way to meet a potentially lucrative client. As it turns out, Ellie was late and the client contacted another agent from whom she purchased her policies. Ellie later learns that the client had intended to buy a few multi-million dollar policies for her 9 illegitimate children. She lost out on more than $300,000 in commissions which she blames on the delay by SMRT.

Ellie asks you for a brief on her case and her prospects of success given the fact of the exemption clause. Outline the matters that you wish to discuss with Ellie. (10 marks approximately 500 words)

Question 3

You represented both John and Ellie in the above cases and managed to get each of them substantial damages from SMRT. Impressed by your brilliant legal mind, SMRT has decided to hire you on a project. They have asked you advice on how to protect themselves if they are sued in the future.

Give them 1 suggestion which you believe will be most useful to them, elaborating on your advice appropriately. However, do not give any advice on exemption clauses as they have already been advised by a Senior Counsel on that particular area of concern. (10 marks approximately 500 words)

 

Q1.

Issue:

Can John sue SMRT for causing him the chance at the scholarship?

Rules:

Breach of contract occurs when a contracting party fails to perform, without lawful excuse, a contractual obligation, assuming that a valid and legally binding contract exists. (Chiong, 2014)

Misrepresentation is a false statement of fact made by one party to another party before the conclusion of the contract and has the effect of inducing that party into the contract.

Tort of negligence covers both acts and omissions, i.e. a person could be negligent for doing something he should not have done, as well as for not doing something he should have.

There are three essentials that need to be proven for tort of negligence, namely a duty of care, breach of that duty, and damage (or loss) resulting from that breach.

Application:

John can either file a claim under breach of contract or in tort. However contract and tort are two very different and distinct issues, hence John will not be able to claim for both.

First, we need to examine if there was a contract between SMRT and John.

Also, we need to determine whether there was misrepresentation on SMRT’s part, as John was led to believe that the journey from Pasir Ris to Clementi was expected to take only 45 minutes, and he boarded the train based on the presumption that the train was going to take him to his destination on time.

Filing under breach of contract:

Unliquidated damages are damages in a breach of contract case that were not predetermined by the party. One of the aspects of this principle to consider is remoteness.

The defendant will only be held liable (in damages) for the plaintiff’s losses if they are generally foreseeable or if plaintiff tells the defendant about any special circumstances in advance.

In [Hadley v Baxendale (1854)], X delivered a broken shaft to Y, a carrier, to take to a manufacturer to copy it and make a new one. Y delayed the delivery of the shaft and X’s mill was idle for a long period of time resulting in loss of profits. However the court held that Y was not liable for loss of profits during the period of delay as X did not make it known to Y that delay would result in loss of profits.

In this case, John did not inform SMRT that time was of the essence, and he was required to be punctual for a very important interview. Even if so, SMRT is not obligated to go out of its way to fulfill a duty for one specific passenger, when there are hundreds of thousands of passengers daily. It is also unreasonable to expect or demand that the trains to never break down, despite running for long hours on a daily basis.

It can also be argued that John could have easily chosen to take a cab or any other form of private transportation instead, as he was the only person who was aware of his crucial need to be punctual that particular morning, hence he should be responsible for ensuring a mode of transportation which is fail-proof. Even then, private cars are not exempted from unfortunate circumstances such as breakdowns and traffic jams.

Filing under tort of negligence:

John may also file a claim under tort of negligence, provided that he is able to prove that SMRT did not do something they should have, i.e. not performing adequate and regular maintenance on the trains which resulted in the train breakdown.

But then, exactly how frequent would be considered adequate enough to ensure trains will never break down? Some can argue that monthly maintenance is adequate but others may think that it isn’t and insist that weekly maintenance is necessary. Even with regular maintenance, the occasional breakdown is to be expected.

It is not known where the train broke down- underground or on train tracks above ground. If the train had broken down in the underground tunnel, the passengers in the train are able to leave the train cars and walk along the side of the tracks to the next MRT station. As MRT stations are fairly close to each other, it would not have taken more than 20-30 minutes to walk to the next closest station.

A crucial point in this case and whether John will succeed in suing SMRT, depends on whether John was able to get out of the train and take an alternative mode of transportation. If he was able to remove himself from the broken down train and take an alternative mode of transportation, but failed to do so for whatever reasons, then he would have a very weak case as he had failed to mitigate the situation.

One of the three essentials to prove tort of negligence is damage- the plaintiff is required to show that he had suffered damage as a result of the defendant’s breach.

Under damage, there are two aspects which need to be considered- causation and remoteness. A test used to determine causation is the “but-for” test.

Would the result have occurred regardless of the act or omission of the defendant?

In this case, would John have gotten the scholarship if the train had not broken down, and he had made it in time for the interview?

Even if he had made it to the interview on time, he may not have gotten the scholarship. Since damage and causation cannot be determined, John cannot prove tort of negligence.

Conclusion:

Based on the facts presented, the prospects of John successfully suing SMRT are slim.

 

Q2

Issue:

Can Ellie sue SMRT successfully, given the fact of the exemption clause?

Is the exemption clause fair and/ or reasonable?

Rules:

Remoteness is once again an issue here. SMRT was not informed in advance of any negative consequences as a result of the train breakdown. Therefore, they cannot be held liable for the plaintiff’s losses.

It is also unlikely that Ellie can sue based on breach of contract, because SMRT did not make any explicit promise or guarantee to passengers to take them from a certain Point A to a certain Point B within a specific time frame.

Implied Terms are terms though not specifically mentioned in the contract, are understood to exist.

Unfair Contract Terms Act (Chapter 396)- “An Act to impose further limits on the extent to which civil liability for breach of contract, or for negligence or other breach of duty, can be avoided by means of contract terms and otherwise”.

Application:

Since the defendant will only be held liable for the plaintiff’s losses if the plaintiff tells the defendant about any special circumstances in advance, it would be unreasonable to expect SMRT to be liable for consequences which they were not even aware of in the first place.

Additionally, it would be unreasonable to expect or demand SMRT to cater to the specific requirements of each and every passenger, given that so many people take the train daily.

It is reasonable and acceptable to expect the train to take passengers from Point A to Point B safely, within a reasonable time frame (i.e. 1 hour- 1.5 hour). However SMRT cannot guarantee that all passengers will be able to arrive at their destinations by a certain time limit, certainly not at the fares paid per passenger.

Even if one were to pay $20,000 for a seat in First Class on a world-class airline, the airline would not be able to guarantee the passenger that the flight will take only a certain number of hours & minutes or that they would be no delays on the ground, due to all the variables, some of which would not be under their control, i.e. weather conditions and airport congestion.

“Passengers of SMRT agree that SMRT will not be liable for any loss or injury or damage suffered for any reason whatsoever during their rides with SMRT.”

 This exemption clause on the train platform is not enforceable and hence not valid, as Section 2 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act Chapter 396 states that:

  • A person cannot by reference to any contract term or to any notice given to persons generally or to particular persons exclude or restrict his liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence.
  • In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness.
  • Where a contract term or notice purports to exclude or restrict liability for negligence, a person’s agreement to or awareness of it is not of itself to be taken as indicating his voluntary acceptance of any risk.

 

In simple terms, SMRT cannot restrict liability for death, injury, damage or loss arising from negligence on their part.

Section 11(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act (Chapter 396) states that in order to satisfy the reasonableness test, a contract term must been “a fair and reasonable one to be included having regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably to have been, known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made”.

This exemption clause was made one-sidedly by SMRT and under no contemplation of the passengers; hence it cannot be considered a fair or reasonable one.

One of the three essentials to prove tort of negligence is damage- the plaintiff is required to show that he had suffered damage as a result of the defendant’s breach. Ellie lost out on a $300,000 business deal because she was late for her meeting with her client, and her loss is quantifiable in monetary value.

Like in John’s case, the other issue to consider is causation.

Would Ellie have successfully gotten the business if the train had not broken down and she had managed to get to her meeting with her client on time? If so, then Ellie would have a better chance at filing a claim under tort of negligence.

Conclusion:

Based on the facts presented, the prospects of Ellie successfully suing SMRT are fairly slim but probably slightly better than John’s.

If she is able to prove negligence on SMRT’s part, which caused her recoverable damage, she may be able to file a claim under tort.

 

Q3

In order to prevent from getting sued in future, SMRT should be advised to put up notices that are displayed prominently, which could read as follows:

“While SMRT has made every effort to ensure that the information on train schedules and estimated timings of trips provided on this display to be accurate, the train schedules are subject to change from time to time. Timings listed are estimations.

 As such, SMRT does not accept any liability for any claim arising out of use of such information. All persons who use such information provided by SMRT do so entirely at their own risk.

 SMRT does not warrant or guarantee that its train system does not break down, as the train system may be disrupted from time to time due to technical faults, power failure, force majeure or other factors beyond SMRT’s control.”

This is a very limited exclusion clause that should not contravene the Unfair Contract Terms Act for the reasons that follow:

  1. It does not purport to restrict SMRT’s liability for death or personal injury resulting from negligence (which would contravene section 2(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act, Chapter 396);
  1. It is also not likely to contravene Section 2 (2) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act, Chapter 396 which says, “In the case of other loss or damage, a person cannot so exclude or restrict his liability for negligence except in so far as the term or notice satisfies the requirement of reasonableness” because it is likely to satisfy the “reasonableness test” in Section 11 of the Unfair Contract Terms Act.
  1. Section 11(1) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act, Chapter 396, says “In relation to a contract term, the requirement of reasonableness for the purposes of this Part and Section 3 of the Misrepresentation Act [Cap. 390] is that the term shall have been a fair and reasonable one to be included having regard to the circumstances which were, or ought reasonably to have been, known to or in the contemplation of the parties when the contract was made.”
  1. By stating clearly that the train system may be disrupted from time to time due to technical faults, power failure, force majeure or other factors beyond SMRT’s control, the suggested notice should be considered as a fair and reasonable contract term because a commuter would read the notice before deciding whether to board the train and therefore it would be within his/ her knowledge or contemplation that the trains may be delayed.

Exams, moving, etc.

Im really getting old. After the super busy weekend, I was so tired I slept pretty much the whole of today.

I am moving in a couple of weeks, and while I am really excited about the new place and looking forward to moving, I am feeling a little overwhelmed from everything that is going on at the moment.

I have exams this weekend. Submitted my assignments in time last week, but I had an unpleasant incident with one of my lecturers in class which ended up with me leaving the classroom in tears. I wont elaborate further because I dont like to dwell on negative unhappy events but lets just say that some lecturers are not meant to be educators.

Some days I am so angry at myself, that I chose the wrong path and did not choose to go to JC after secondary school. So bloody stupid. Cant tell you how many times I wished and wished that I can turn back the clock. I dont know how much better the local universities are, but my school is not exactly very helpful when it comes to student welfare. Basically, if you encounter any problems with your studies, you are ON YOUR OWN.

I absolutely HATE the business modules this semester and I am so glad I have no more business modules.

I have to collect the keys for the new house this Friday, as my Fengshui Master is viewing the place the following Monday. (Yes, I strongly believe in Fengshui, deal with it.)

I will need to make a trip to Ikea this week and buy a wardrobe among a few other things, because I dont have one and the new place does not have a built-in wardrobe. It has a space which is supposedly a “walk in wardrobe”, but I will use that as a storage room instead. It is definitely too small as a wardrobe!

I managed to go out for a pedicure today because my feet were so dry and gross.

I am attending a talk tomorrow, have a business meeting on Wednesday, I have to work on Thursday, anddddd collecting keys on Friday. Urg. Have not studied for exams yet.

I have not started packing yet, and can only start when my mover sends me the empty cartons next Monday. So much to do, so little time, and only one of me. Halp.

GE2015: The govt is NOT your sugar daddy.

I am not at all into politics.

But I do have some thoughts with regards to the on-going General Elections. Frankly, I am appalled that there are so many ignorant people who are choosing to support the opposition, for no reason other than they are just generally unhappy with the PAP and dont want to vote for them.

 

…….

Really?

I feel like this situation is similar to the anti-vaxxers who vehemently insist that vaccines are dangerous and detrimental to health, DESPITE overwhelming scientific evidence that vaccines are not dangerous, and in fact extremely vital and necessary.

These people are experts on the human body and how vaccines work after only reading a few articles online. (Nah. Here’s your MBBS.) Not only do they choose not to vaccinate themselves and their offspring, they are usually very passionate about spreading their “wisdom” about the “dangers” of vaccines and also to encourage others not to vaccinate.

Sure of course, you wouldnt want to take any chances with autism but perhaps you would prefer that your child die from diphtheria instead. What? Never heard of diphtheria??

Gee, I wonder why.

Ignorance can be deadly. This is another topic which I really want to write about, but for now I shall stick to the elections.

 

 


 

Here’s my view:

 

If you are poor and/ or your life sucks, and you blame the PAP, then you are a fucking moron.

 

Im not Krispy Kreme, Im not in the business of sugar-coating anything. Nobody is paying me to be politically correct on my own blog, unfortunately. So if you are unhappy with or cannot accept my blunt honesty, go away.

 

Here’s something everyone needs to know:

The government is NOT YOUR SUGAR DADDY. 

What, you want a 3-day work week? Free housing? Free or heavily-subsidized transportation? Why not throw in a free Porsche and annual vacays to the Maldives for every Singaporean too? I want a sponsored lifetime supply of Llao Llao, Chanel bags and Christian Louboutin shoes can? All mien zhogang also can!

Wait for the PAP to spoon-feed you, find you a hot and sexy woman/ man to please you in bed, pay all your bills, babysit your kids and wipe your ass after you shit.

Then you will confirm plus chop vote for them, yes?

 

Just in case you think I come from a privileged background, let me assure you that I dont. My parents were dirt poor. I grew up in a 3 room HDB flat in Bukit Batok. We were so poor, we had our water and electricity cut off many times because we could not afford to pay the utility bills. I remember having to do my homework in candlelight. (No, its not romantic at all.)

Ever tried turning on the tap and not have water flow out? We had to borrow pails of water from our neighbors for our daily usage. So if you think you are poor just because you cant afford that BMW or because you cannot afford yearly holidays to Europe, think again.

So nope, I am not rich by any means. You know what else I am not?

I am not UNGRATEFUL.

I dont blame the government for my family being poor. Its not their damn job to ensure that every Singaporean gets to live in comfort and luxury. My parents are poor because they are lazy, uneducated and unskilled. My father gambled and drank away his money, then had to go around borrowing from relatives & loan sharks to finance his gambling and drinking habits. They have nobody else to blame for their lack of money management skills and sheer irresponsibility.

 

I had a friend who loves to blame the PAP for EVERYTHING. She blamed the govt for how the haze was handled back in 2013. She criticized their efforts and was upset/ resentful that they did not issue a stop-work order due to the haze. For someone who cannot even manage her own family and her own life, she sure has plenty of great ideas on how to run a country with millions of people.

Unfortunately there are plenty of such people around- people who make $2k-$3k monthly salary & have to work their butts off, therefore they are resentful about ministers’ salaries, because they THINK they can do a way better job at running the show. Its so much easier to pick at the faults and shortcomings of the govt (and other people), than to acknowledge your own shortcomings. Lets just say that she’s not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer.

The irony is that stupid people always think they’re very smart, and smart people often question their own capabilities. Agree?

 

We Singaporeans have been so bloody lucky for so long that so many of us have become complacent, ungrateful and ENTITLED.

Right from the second we are born in this country, we have everything we can possibly need to thrive and do well.

Every. Single. One. Of. Us.

All of us have access to heavily subsidized primary, secondary and tertiary education. We have clean water flowing from our taps 24/7, water so bloody clean we can drink directly from the tap. That did not happen by chance, btw. You think a kid in a third world country gets clean potable water simply by turning a tap clockwise in his house?

Where else in the world can you drink water directly from the tap? Whenever I am overseas, I have to go to the nearest 7-11/ supermarket to buy bottled water to boil so I can make hot beverages. Clean drinkable water from the tap is something that most Singaporeans have taken for granted.

We have plenty of coffee shops, hawker centers and food courts- cheap and delicious food that is readily available to everyone. Hygiene standards of all dining places are monitored and regulated. Anyone can have a decent meal for only $2-$3. (Not necessarily healthy or nutritious, but decent.) Even a bowl of CCYD instant noodles with one egg from a grubby cha chan teng in Hong Kong costs at least HKD$20, which is roughly S$4. This was back in 2008- 2009, when I travelled to HK on a monthly basis, so chances are the food now is even more expensive.

We have an extremely efficient, clean and convenient transportation system. For such a tiny country, we have this many MRT lines and bus services.

The unemployment rate is one of the lowest in the world, and jobs are aplenty. Provided that you are not nit-picky and unrealistic, of course. Ive heard stories of people rejecting good jobs because of all kinds of stupid reasons- they dont like the boss, the location is “too inconvenient” etc

We have 24/7 access to excellent world-class healthcare. There are clinics everywhere- I can count SIX clinics (six!!!) within the immediate vicinity (5-10 minute walk) of my home, not to mention the many polyclinics and government hospitals which are heavily subsidized by the government.

(I have been seeing a specialist in CGH in the past few months, and it only costs me $41 per visit, because of the government subsidy. Im somehow automatically qualified as a subsidized patient, just for being Singaporean. Did not need any referral letter from polyclinic or whatever.) If you have deeper pockets, there are tons of private clinics and hospitals. We are quite literally spoilt for choice.

Do you know there are millions of people in the world who do not have access to basic healthcare at all and have to travel for miles to the nearest hospital where they have to wait for days just to be seen by a doctor, and therefore die from very ordinary and simple illnesses? Are you aware that there are millions of people in the world who die from stupid things like diarrhea and flu? These people are usually the very young (infants and children) and the old, because their immune systems are weaker.

By the way, there is something called INSURANCE and it is not the government’s responsibility to pay for your medical bills. I pay a couple of hundred dollars in insurance premium every month so that I am well-insured in the event of illness. Even if I require surgery and hospitalization in a private hospital, I do not have to pay a single cent because my insurance provides 100% coverage. I believe that paying for/ being ABLE to pay for my healthcare is MY responsibility, NOT the government’s.

Our crime rate is one of the lowest in the world, and there is no other place in the world where I would dare to walk alone on the streets at night. I did not dare to take the subway (be it day or night) when I was in New York CIty, for fear of getting mugged or worse. I did not dare to take the subway in Taipei because some nutcase had gone on a stabbing spree and stabbed a few people in the subway and I did not feel safe. I have to be extra careful with my belongings whenever i travel outside of Singapore. Not to say that this country is totally crime-free of course, but thanks to our very strict no-nonsense laws, people tend to behave themselves. There is no better deterrent than strict punishment for breaking the law.

Whenever I hear news stories of women being attacked in other countries, I am very glad and grateful that we have these strict laws in place.

 

 


 

We have top-notch world class everything. What more do you want?

Do you think all these happened by chance? If our country did not start out with outstanding leaders, do you think we would be where we are today?

We are so accustomed to all of these good things that most of us have taken everything for granted.

 

Of course we should not compare ourselves with the third world countries, and we must look towards the first world countries such as Switzerland & Sweden, so that we can continue to improve and upgrade ourselves. But really, can anyone in GOOD CONSCIENCE say that our government is terrible?

I know I cant.

No government is perfect and it is impossible to please everyone. The fact that even a great man like the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew can have haters show that no matter how good you are, and what you do, there will be people who can find reasons to dislike and criticize you.

I have not watched all the videos being shared on Facebook, however I keep hearing of the opposition making promises of free money to Singaporeans.

“We will give every Singaporean $300/ $500 every month. Blah blah…”

 

*EYE ROLL*

EH. WHERE IS THIS MONEY COMING FROM?

Your arse?

Your dog’s arse?

Why only $300?? Why not $3000? Or $30,000?? Our reserves are unlimited what. Its a bottomless pit! No meh? While you are at it, give every Singaporean a free bungalow in Sentosa Cove also.

 

The lure of free money only attracts the lazy and unskilled who feel entitled to subsidies and freebies just because others have more. I want to believe that Singaporeans are better than this.

I do not need a government who doles out free money, nor one which makes tons of empty promises but has NOTHING TANGIBLE to show. I do not want my country to end up in massive debt like Greece because of a shite government.

 

There are reasons why things have to be done a certain way here in Singapore. I will leave this for the analysts and economists to elaborate and explain in detail why because I lack the knowledge and expertise to do so, but if you think you’re suffering, that the government is horrendous, that you’re being bullied by the ruling party and their unfair policies, then please by all means move some place else.

Take your talents to another country which will welcome you with open arms and give you everything you’ve ever wanted- plus freebies, goodies and no taxes. YAY.

Do send a postcard every now and then so we know how much better off you are.

 

 


 

 

I am voting for the very first time in my life come 11 Sept. Ive moved around so much in the past decade that Ive never belonged to any place for more than 1-2 years, hence I was never required to vote.

I really really hope that the majority of Singaporeans will be wise enough to vote wisely.