With all my life!

A sense of deja vu decend upon me on Friday as i witnessed one of my close friend, Qiu Qiang take the Oath as he was enlisted into NS. When i sat in the auditorium, flashbacks of the time where i was there, taking the oath play out in front of me. I can connect with QQ on this. As you recite the Oath, suddenly you feel that the responsibility of protecting your country, your loved ones rest on your shoulder and that you must discharge your duty with full allegiance and if possible, defend the soil with your life. Yet on the other side, you feel you are going to leave them as you embark on an unfamiliar journey all on your own and you will have this fear on the unexpected.

I feel proud of my friend as i look at him take the oath. As you began to recite it, slowly and surely, you are flush with the sense of responsibility you must have and as you end it, you realise you are already, not a boy but a man. I can see the kind of determined look on his face as i pondered over the meaning of the oath once again.

Of course, the first meal there always taste good as that is also the "last" you have with your family or friends. Hopefully for him, other subsequent do taste as well.

Little john beats Giant

I was roaming around marina square a couple of days ago when i realised the space that Giant used to occpy was replaced by John Little. I find it amusing because a little john could defeat a giant. ha ha ha.

Ok its lame.

unsw

I applied for UNSW too, in september last year. When i reached the fair organised by IDP Australia, UNSW booth was filled with people. However, the booth for their sydney campus only. As for the Asia campus, only 2 to 3 were seen enquiring on the course of studies. The reason was simple for me to apply to the sydney campus and not the singapore campus, the cost and the opportunity to study in an overseas institution.

The cost is of the same as the asia campus, i see value added should i go to australia and study. There, i will gain new insights, perhaps opportunities that can't be found in Singapore. Though foreigners may prefer coming to Singapore for its bilingual or bicultural expierences, but as i am born here, i do not value it as much as gaining exposure in another country. I have this notion that if i mix too much with my fellow people, i will be sterotyping alot of stuffs. Therefore, going overseas will be like a fresh breath of air sniffed.

It kind of sad that UNSW flopped barely months after it started. As to how much damage it inflicted to both the university and Singapore, i would say more on the university. In a newspaper article, it says that the new vice chancellor wants to focus more on research and therefore, axed many of its non academic staff. In research, one has to constantly pick himself up after failure and also be determined no matter how ardous or tedious the task may become. The insignificant enrollment for its pioneer batch is just a minor setback. Which business doesn't need months to break even? Giving it up when it doesn't even try hard give me the impression that the university isn't ready nor have the stamina for long haul research which rewards can only be evident in years or even decades.

For Singapore, this is definitely a setback for the vision and aim to be a world class educational hub. People do not remember how successful you are but should you fail, that one failure will be forever etech in people's mind. This is definitely not just a blip but should be asked some real deep questions. Are the government set too high a standard which it may be doing so in order to give a good value for taxpayers' money. Secondly, why the government doesn't seems to enthusiastic in defending the move of letting unsw go? Most importantly, is it the case of trying to sink into oblivion once things go awry? I remembered once we were trying to set up some techo -IT centre or something, but after the dot com bubble burst, none was heard from it.

If unsw is an insolated case, then at least we can seek consolation in it. However what if the pertinent flaw is the negotiation and the projecting of figures that lead to the miscalculation of such ventures? Is it because our officers from EDB are a bunch of quitters that didn't aggressively seeking a compromise with the unsw officials or that our EDB people are forever rigid in not making any compromise? Or is it a case of government scholars miscalculated the projected number of students or returns and end up with an unrealistic figures that ended up in a doom venture? This is of the most concern because these are fundamental flaws. I shudder to think that our Integrated resorts or F1 would end up in such a way as of unsw.

Lastly, my consolation to the students. But a word of advice: go to australia for that different perspective.

(by the way, i was accepted but i rejected the offer of going to sydney as they didn't offer me golden jubilee and so, my finance couldn't make it)

Anything whatever

This is the latest marketing fad/ gimmick by some drink company. It aim to prick on the consumer sense of curiosity so that they will try them out. However i think it didn't manage to convince me to part with my dollar as i am a skeptic who won't try it out unless they tell me what is inside first.

But a trip to the supermarket make me wonder something. Supposedly such drinks were spiked or something went wrong during the manufacturing process with a particular flavour. How are they going to recall back that flavour given it may be anything or whatever things?

Here come the loophole of getting the flavour you want. I suspect there is a manufacturing code or something that differentiate what flavour it is. If we know what is the code for that particular flavour, we are able to get what flavour we want and the marketing gimmick fails!

If they didn't have any form of differentiation, then bless them should something went wrong because they need to recall every single can. Imagine they need a particular flavour of batch xxx manufacture on date yyy, huge logistics problem!

Man in Pink

I have just read my cousin post on gays. This debate (sort of) was brought up again during an interview with the young PAP where MM Lee spoke of that its genetics or something that cause gay to be gay. When debating about gays issue, i have a question. Should we separate physical with mental.

I supposed when MM Lee says that, he meant mental. But what about physical? Does a gay consitute a gay should he engage in anal sex, engage in anal sex but his mind was not on it, or engage in it and his mind was on it. In another word, should a man engage in that but believe he is not a gay, then is he a gay? Sorry if this is sound stupid because i really is confuse at this point.

My "brush" with gay was quite a happy one, definitely not like my cousin who i supposed, spooked by the "sliding tackle". Happy in a sense there is mutual respect between my friends in pink and me. Personal encounter with them was that there are as human as we are. They didn't appear feminine or "gayish". Rather, they are humourous, intelligent and definitely matured. Perhaps their long time persecution by the society shaped how they look at life itself.

Socially speaking, in Singapore context, we aren't accepting them, not ready. Even if we did, its a case of " it doesn't happen to me" syndrome that we are accepting them. I believe no matter how matured a society is, acceptance will happen, albeit at face value as we can't separate the mental with the physical. I think one can accept that gay is a gay in term of his way of thinking, as in, he think he is a gay. However we aren't ready to accept when the physical part comes into play. That is the reason why people cringe when men kiss men or other actions.

Of course you may ask, then what is it that people are more willing to accept lesbian and not gays? I believe this is due to gender. Female has longed been view as a fairer, weaker sex. Therefore, they are dismissed or view with less disdain compared with males who have traditionally been associated with propagating , protecting.

Economically, the presence of gays will spice things up. The latest GDP figures suggest service take the lead. They are really more creative and they generate ideas. As Singapore opts to be a service and creative hub, we cannot afford to misplace the man in pink.

I have read a post on why men have nipples, which is vestigial on men. The reason is still unkown. It is still in question on whether do our ancestors breast feed the offspring and hence, the nipples. Perhaps this can shed light on whether gay can be able to procreate babies in the future, with the aid of technology and advancement in medicine.

Maybe until then, with this new found ability, humans are more willing to accept gays as who they are, regardless of mental or physical.

Well, some plants and insects are known to be single sex, so nothing is impossible.

$30

How much do you have? How much pocket money does your parents gave you? I have been pondering over this 2 qns ever since i flipped the wanbao, a local tabloid which trives on sex or sensational murder stories for its circulation digits, and i read the story of the man who jumped into the MRT track at Chinese garden Station, the place where he met his current wife.

His whole entire fortune was a measly 30 dollars. For some of us, 30 dollars perhaps was a day's pocket money or the cost of a meal we have eaten at crystal jade. But for him, his 30 dollars need to be stretched to fill up not only a day, a week but maybe a month. I can understand his anguish, his anxiety and his worries. Two teen sons, a loving wife who unfortunately, striked with polio, a 3 room flat which perhaps, mortgage has not been fully paid. In a society like Singapore where a plate of chicken rice cost $2, he can either sacrifice his whole fortune for 15 plates, or to divided it equally to paying utilities, food, transport and health care.

So what went into his mind when he decided to take the plunge? Does he not care about his family? Is he suffering from depression? Does he regret the moment his life flashed in front of him? Sadly, no one can answer these question.

To the society as a whole, the government has been reassuring that Singapore must be an inclusive society. Then, this inclusive society as it is called, does it include the poor as well? If it does, then why has he got to die? Sure, there are alot of measures and avenues presented to the poor like the progress package. However, fingers has been pointed to the poor themselves for not accepting these help due to "face saving".

But thats not forget, the poor usually has little or no education. For him, he only had a primary three education. So shall we just play the blame game and say :" oh the help are there, but blame yourself for not wanting it". I feel its not they not wanting it but they do not know how to get it?

Should we set up a unit to track these poor people, offer them help instead of them coming to get help, to ask for help. Even we do not want to build a social welfare system in singapore, but sometimes, too rigid to one policy may blind us from seeing the big picture.

On a personal note: After i read his story i realised that compared to my silly problem, his is the one which indeed, constitute a problem. I also felt that actually i am still considered lucky for the fact i do not have to worry how to feed my family with just $30. I think i will do volunteer work after i graduate.

IMF

i am horrified by the barriers, cages to be exact that are erect all in our town areas for the IMF meeting. Well i kept my comments reserved for the banning of some activist, but i feel that by erecting those barriers seems abit out of scope, absurd.

By erecting those, it seems our police, army are incompetent to deal with any clashes or riot and we need those artificial steels to keep them out.

If i am a delegate, i will feel like entering a prison. True, keeping them safe is the most paramount thing to do, but why other country can keep them safe while allowing activist, minus away the barriers but we can't?

Are we telling the whole world we are too pananoid, too insecure or just plain lack of confidence?

Politics is not about shouting slogan, hunger strike, bold and rude questioning, selling twisted ideas to singapore, collaborate with foreigners, having a questionable agenda.

I don't understand why he support( morally i think. In Sg, we support morally) that chee guy.

Barriers to keep you safe, and you are complaining

I read one entry by a blogger about the north eastern side of Singapore, being fitted with green barriers that divide the road and of course, stop any jaywalkers from performing their act of potential death. The blogger said he overheard an conversation of an old lady, presuming to another old lady, complaining that she couldn't jaywalk and had to walk all the way to the nearest traffic light to cross the road. The blogger pondered why there is a need for the barriers if the area is deserted and it is okay to jaywalk. Such warp idea.

Now before we argue whether people ought to jaywalk or not. Let see why humans jaywalk. The question here is why human want to cross the road, not the chicken but human. There are many reasons why human want to cross the road. He may cross the road for fun, for school, for walk, for recreational,etc. Yes, crossing the road is a goal to be achieved. Now that is established, then why do they need to jaywalk? I think this is the same as asking, why do you want to cram up studying everything before exam, why you want to cheat during exam. Why you need that 3 in 1 coffee mix instead of manually adding milk and coffee powder. Exactly, human prefer to take the shortest avenue to achieve the same thing. So the reason for jaywalking is obvious, we want to save time. So human will jaywalk! its an inate behaviour!

So in order to save time, we jaywalk. But do you realise nobody jaywalks on an expressway? Well, because when human jaywalk, they exercise their brain to judge and to weigh the pros and cons. Risking their lives to jaywalk there isn't the most intelligent thing to do.

But, does that means jaywalking in deserted road, safer? On the contrary. Precisely it is deserted, vehicles will move faster. And when vehicles move faster, there is a need to set up the barriers because time is not on the driver's side and as human reaction time is pretty slow, slower if he is occupied with something else. Accident happen in this way because one party want to cut time, another party think its alright to speed up. All this are connected to the idea that the road is deserted.

So we should even more put up barriers in deserted road. However i assume the blogger main idea of questioning the viability of barriers is the expense that was spent in erecting up a stretch. He questioned that if the contract to erect one was given to a singapore company, then its alright as money flows back to the economy. However if given to a foreign one, money flows out.

Well, i feel that even if its given to a foreign company, it doesn't matter. Firstly, the cost of putting up one is not that great. Secondly, i believe that such national development projects may be undertaken by HDB surbana or some local satutory affiliated companies. Lastly and more importantly, what is money spent if we can save lives?

The blogger also says that its a sign of nanny-ism because of the barriers as it reflect the political, society atmosphere of Singapore. But to quote a man:" the sg govt is like an open book, but you need to find the answer yourself" And in this barrier incident, if singaporean can think for themselves and do not jaywalk, i believe the barriers won't be set up in the first place. We seek the answer ourselves and the answer here is Barriers to the Jaywalk Question.

Lastly, the blogger think that if the related ministry didn't put up the barriers and the jaywalker died from any accident, his own fault and nobody should care, i think he is missing the bigger picture that a good govt is one where take care of its people and in this case, value human lives.