Thursday, December 27, 2012

The by-election and Iron Bowl WINNING Strategy

Iron Bowl stands by the theory that if there are more candidates, the people will have more and better choices.

I don't understand why it will be bad if more candidates from different parties join in this battle. In most countries without GRC and barriers for democracy, it is often common for independent candidates to participate in the elections. It is all about the messages that they have and the values they believe in.

In Ponggol East (where is that again?? There is East of Ponggol?), I believe it is a new estate, formerly "Lush jungle of the north", no parties have really built up a stronghold and have members canvassing the grounds. It is in fact, fair game. Anyone, interested in making it a better place can definitely do so. Even though there is significant threats like "If you don't vote for PAP, your flat will worth $0, and you will not get upgrades and all MRT station will be closed" (Come on, you really believe that? -- And yes, perhaps the 60.1% do) The incumbent party will have the benefit.

BUT remember, it is their failure to do their duty (as a husband) that caused this to happen. PAP was literally in bed with PA, and this by-election has to be called by the PM(or will it).

I strongly believe that the best candidate for the constituency should win, regardless of party. The one that can articulate their values best deserve to win.


Iron Bowl WINNING Strategy.

OPPOSITION: Please listen.

Politics is all about collaboration, and "give and take". Negotiations is key. You MUST always communicate with members of other parties, and come out with the best solution beneficial to all parties.

Even though this may sound like a waste of money, some will win and some will lose.

If the opposition can group together, and bring in 2016 to the table, they can

1) Negotiate territories and start building support for 2016, without overlapping effort. (although the PAP is going to redraw the line and change GRCs, but this is going to happen anyways)

2) Build their base and find out about how much support their members have. A good litmus test on their strength of their party.

3) As the election date draw close, they can always negotiate to let the strongest candidate win. (If WP candidate is strongest, the RP Candidate can always give up and tell their supporters to vote WP)

4)You can have more than 1 speaking opportunity to support the other candidate. If each candidate gets a speech, 5 candidates have 5 venues to support 1 candidate. Reach out to more people.

5) The "losing party" can negotiate with the winning party, and bargain support for other constituencies in 2016. That is one politics is all about, the negotiations and dealings behind the screen.

See, in the end if we have more members, the opposition can still win, even with many parties competing.

-- Iron Bowl

Thursday, December 13, 2012

Down 1 Million = Profits.

Singapore Air bought the stake for S$1.65 billion and sells it for S$440 million.  (Source: Bloomberg)

Singapore Air will book an S$322 million gain from the sale, after accounting for a writedown in its investment of Virgin Atlantic. So Virgin in the eyes of SIA is worth S$118 million ($440m-$322m) and selling it gives SIA a profit, so that the shareholders can get dividends at year end (which is now)? (Profit: Source: ST)

In 1999, the airline paid $220 million for a 25% stake in Air New Zealand; it is now worth only $28 million after the bankruptcy of ANZ'S Australian subsidiary, Ansett.


My thoughts:

1) If you buy at $1.65 billion and sell at S$440 million, you lose $1.21 billion + interests for all the years. (you don't have a profit)

2) Singapore Air will book an S$322 million gain from the sale?? Really? SIA bought it years back for $1.65 billion.

3) All the Singapore Media seems to congratulate SIA for making a profit?

4) Isn't there any accounting standards for at least listed companies to follow? This data is just ridiculuous!

5) SIA's majority shareholder is Temasek Holdings and are the profits going to be divided by shareholders while something is underwritten and expense off and absorbed by Temasek Holdings or GIC which uses sovereign funds but is not transparent to the public?

Something smells wrong here, and I sure hope there are more ways to shad more light into this matter.

-- Iron Bowl

Tuesday, December 11, 2012

Bus Captain should be paid more

"To make it easier for the common populace to understand the required responsibilities and accountabilities of Bus Drivers in Singapore, I have a suggestion that we can try to look at the issue from another perspective/angle as suggested by some Singaporeans for your reference. The Bus Captain is our leader and he must be responsible for the well being of all the passengers (Say 200 passengers, 10 trips, 20 days a month) , therefore his salary can be based on our passengers, say, one person $0.10 per trip so that is $4000 per month...."

I think this makes much more sense.

-- Iron Bowl

Wednesday, December 05, 2012

The tale of 2 towns

In the city where we pay more than average by a magnitude to get the "best" for public service, and when it is for bus drivers, it is ok to lie to them and pay them low wages?

When there are no fair outlets that would listen to reason, and the rules and laws favor the rich and corporations, what can one do but to have a peaceful protest. And when that is illegal, then what?

“You can resign and go to SBS,” the drivers were told

Singapore is built on its position. A long time ago, many leaders have noted the advantageous position Singapore has geographically.

With no natural disasters, and an advantageous position, the Dutch, British and even Japanese wanted to take Singapore, and it is no surprise that Singapore once held the busiest port and best airport.

The well planned well oiled -- non-corrupt -- system built has seen great progress, however, in the pursuit of higher growth and higher GDP, many of the strategies have changed. The tax structure is evolving and mass influx of foreign workers does bring in the desired numbers, however the social cost is very high.

The leaders are put into place instead of being the right guy for the job and the dis-empowerment of the people, their lack of voice seemed to turn regular people into complainers and blamers.

There are 2 standards present, and whether it is legal to treat people this way, first think if it is right.

-- Iron Bowl