What do you think are the achievements of Lee Hsien Loong

[jacky43]

I gave this to him. He shut down RLD for a year. He flatten RLD curve. Next. Flatten crime curve. Please.

[rayshiny]

Originally Posted by staminadick

Able to get hard to naked Ho Ching

99.69% guys would impotent for life

World class standard LhL dun playpray

You mean erect once and that's it??

[blurblur2032]

He cry with tears

[kYdeng]

Originally Posted by blurblur2032

He cry with tears

During election campaign?

[morrissey1209]

Originally Posted by staminadick

Able to get hard to naked Ho Ching

99.69% guys would impotent for life

World class standard LhL dun playpray

Agree. Any man who can fuck Ho Ching is confirm a HARD man.

[pakpak2001]

[QUOTE=Footman;20527970]He opened up the flood gates and welcomed FT in the mid 2000s. Geylang was over-crowded with PRC FLs who stood in row ==============
city of opportuinehty
Sweetzerlan of the East
World Class Standard
1st World Standard

I proud to stand UP & HARD for Singapore

[Angmolover]

Originally Posted by morrissey1209

Agree. Any man who can fuck Ho Ching is confirm a HARD man.

He is not a hard man, he is a BLIND man

[Angmolover]

The achievements of Lee Hsien Loong is that he can get morons to talk about him in a sex forum.

[xxFTOxx]

Never done anything for our homeland. All we see is salaries being stagnant and costs of housing increasing. I mean how in the world can a public housing be 500k and above. Somehow their multimillion salaries don’t match with the improving expectations of us locals.

Somehow sg is like a company. Top management always get big fat bonus for bringing in profits. But does not give 2 fucks on the working condition of its employees.

[superstiffy]

who's he???

[pinkcrane]

Originally Posted by Angmolover

The achievements of Lee Hsien Loong is that he can get morons to talk about him in a sex forum.

Are you talking about him too?

[kuasimi]

https://samsforum.com/showthread.php?t=642656


http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/current-affairs-lounge-17/stunning-news-3in1-kopitiam-worlds-30-highest-paid-politicians-all-same-country-3096997.html

The TOP 30 highest paid politicians in the World are all from Singapore !!

1. Elected President SR Nathan – S$3.9 million.
2. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong – S$3.8 million.
3. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew – S$3.5 million.
4. Senior Minister Goh Chok Thong – S$3.5 million.
5. Senior Minister Prof Jayakumar – S$3.2 million.
6. DPM & Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng – S$2.9 million.
7. DPM & Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean – $2.9 million
8. Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo – S$2.8 million.
9. National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan – S$2.7 million.
10. PMO Miniser Lim Boon Heng – S$2.7 million.
11. Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang – S$2.7 million.
12. PMO Minister Lim Swee Say – S$2.6 million.
13. Environment Minister & Muslim Affairs Minister Dr Yaccob Ibrahim – S$2.6 million.
14. Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan – S$2.6 million.
15. Finance Minister S Tharman – S$2.6 million.
16. Education Minister & 2nd Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen – S$2.6 million.
17. Community Development Youth and Sports Minister – Dr Vivian Balakrishnan – S$2.5 million.
18. Transport Minister & 2nd Minister for Foreign Affairs Raymond Lim Siang Kiat – S$2.5 million.
19. Law Minister & 2nd Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam – S$2.4 million.
20. Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong – S$2.2 million.
21. PMO Minister Lim Hwee Hwa – S$2.2 million
22. Acting ICA Minister – Lui Tuck Yew – S$2.0 million.
23 to 30 = Senior Ministers of State and Ministers of State – each getting between S$1.8 million to S$1.5 million.

[kuasimi]

https://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.com/20...signation.html

Grace Fu Should Consider Resignation

Singapore has the world's most highly-paid ministers. If I recall correctly, they have held this world record for about the past 20 years. It is a record that has caused a huge amount of public unhappiness. Especially in the past decade, during which the government didn't ever seem to be particularly impressive or outstanding.

Now, finally, ministerial salaries are going to be cut. Mind you, after these cuts (which are quite substantial in percentage terms - about 36%), the ministers will STILL hold their world record. Which must surely suggest to any half-intelligent person how grossly overpaid the ministers have been all along.

But then you get the likes of Grace Fu (who is our Minister of State for something or the other). Writing on her own Facebook wall, Fu says:

“When I made the decision to join politics in 2006, pay was not a key factor. Loss of privacy, public scrutiny on myself and my family and loss of personal time were. The disruption to my career was also an important consideration. I had some ground to believe that my family would not suffer a drastic change in the standard of living even though I experienced a drop in my income. So it is with this recent pay cut. If the balance is tilted further in the future, it will make it harder for any one [sic] considering political office.” Grace Fu.
Now, lots of Singaporeans are angry with Grace Fu. The comments have come thick, fast and furious. As of right now, her Facebook post has drawn about 1,300 comments (that's about 650 times the average number of comments on her other Facebook postings). And of course, there is plenty of negative media attention, online and in the newspapers too.

Putting aside the other issues for now, I'm startled at Grace Fu's lack of political sensitivity. It was really, really stupid and unnecessary of her to write such a thing. Fu wasn't even under pressure. It wasn't as if she was at a press conference, and a belligerent journalist had just thrown an unexpected and difficult question at her, and she couldn't think fast enough about what best to say.

Instead - we can imagine it - there she was, relaxing in her living room, playing with her iPad, sipping a nice cup of tea, logging in to check her messages. And then suddenly, Fu decided to write what she wrote. On Facebook. Not in a private journal, not in a personal memo, but on Facebook.

She must have totally failed to foresee what would happen next.

What poor judgment! What a severe lack of foresight. And she's a minister, for goodness sakes. Who knows what other horrible errors she might have spoken or written, on other past occasions.

Now, of course Fu is backpedalling and she has made a statement that she had been "misunderstood". This is damage control .... for completely self-inflicted damage. LOL, that is funny.

Imagine this - you are a minister, and you say something, the public is shocked and angry. And then you say, "Oh, all of you tens of thousands of people, you've misunderstood me. I am the poor, unfortunate, misunderstood one." Sing me another song, birdie.

"Me talk nonsense. Also can sing song.

How much you pay me?"

If Grace Fu can be so badly misunderstood, then that surely says something about Grace Fu's communication skills. It is extremely difficult to get thousands of people to misunderstand you. I am sure that I could not possibly succeed in pulling off such a feat. (But then I am not a PAP minister, I lack such talent).

However - and this will surprise many of my own readers - I am not actually angry about the content, the actual substance, of Grace Fu's statement.

Why am I not angry?

Look - this woman is merely a product of the system. And what is the system that I speak of? It is the PAP recruitment system that Lee Kuan Yew decided to create, 20 years ago. A system that deliberately entices job applicants with world-record-setting amounts of money.

The inevitable result - the PAP attracts many talented political wannabes whose main interest is in the money. (Meanwhile, talented political wannabes who just hope to serve the nation can join the Workers' Party - like Chen Show Mao did).

And when the money gets cut, well, you can naturally expect the PAP ministers (at least, the more money-minded ones) to get upset. Isn't that logical? If you had come for the money, then you WOULD be upset by a pay cut, surely.

My blog post is entitled "Grace Fu Should Consider Resignation". Sounds sensationalist, doesn't it? But it isn't really. (I'm not that kind of blogger, lah). Let me just explain my thinking.

It goes like this - if any minister is really very unhappy with his or her pay, then he or she can always quit. It's not like they are being forced to be ministers.

Unhappy employees don't perform well - we know that from our own experiences in working life. It is better for the company if they quit. It is better for themselves too, for they can go elsewhere and find another job that is more satisfying for them.

Why would we expect things to be any different for our ministers? If they are not happy with their pay, they won't perform well. They should just quit and get a more lucrative job elsewhere (if they can, of course). After they resign as ministers, Singapore can replace them with new ministers who care less about the money, and care more about serving the nation.

So I say this to all the ministers - if you're not happy with your pay, please quit. Now, rather than five years later. Do yourself a favour, and do the country a favour. Just get out.

[kuasimi]

http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=4237

https://samsforum.com/showthread.php?t=642656&page=2

Said Mr Lee: “The PAP makes promises they deliver. The Opposition cannot deliver.”

“If you have a flood, just carefully think who is more likely to get the drainage put right and have the flood alleviated as quickly as possible: A PAP candidate with links to the ministers and Prime Minister, or a non-PAP candidate who has become an MP, like in Potong Pasir or Hougang, and who has to manage on his own?”

“That’s a fact of life.”

Source: Today newspaper, “MM Lee explains his tough stance against Opposition, throws a challenge“, 29 April 2006.

[kuasimi]

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/w...ref=leekuanyew

Singapore’s Highly Paid Officials Get Richer



By SETH MYDANS

Published: April 10, 2007


Correction Appended

SINGAPORE, April 9 — How much money does it take to keep a government minister in Singapore happy?

The government says a million dollars is not enough, and on Monday it announced a 60 percent increase in ministers’ salaries, to an average of $1.9 million Singapore dollars, or about $1.3 million, by next year.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s pay will jump to about $2 million — five times the $400,000 earned by President Bush.

In this nation where the bottom line truly is the bottom line, the argument goes, you have to pay to get them and you have to pay to keep them clean.

“If we don’t do that, in the long term the government system will slowly crumble and collapse,” Defense Minister Teo Chee Hean told reporters last month. “Corruption will set in, and we will become like many other countries, and face the problems that many other countries face,” The Straits Times, Singapore’s largest-circulation newspaper, quoted him as saying.

In announcing the pay increases on Monday, Mr. Teo, who also oversees the civil service, said: “We don’t want pay to be the reason for people to join us. But we also don’t want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us.”

Singapore’s pay system was created in 1994 by the nation’s founding prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew. It pegged the salaries of government ministers and top civil servants to the money they might earn at the top of the private sector.

Under that formula, ministers are to be paid two-thirds of the median of the top eight earners in each of six professions: accounting, law, banking, engineering, multinational companies and local manufacturing.

There has been no public sign of discontent among the men and women who run Singapore, but last month the prime minister noted that they were earning just 55 percent of that benchmark. Hence the raise for the three dozen men and women who run Singapore.

Defending the system against an unusual public yelp of pain, Mr. Lee, whose title is minister mentor, painted a horrifying picture of a Singapore governed by ministers who earn no more than ministers elsewhere.

“Your apartment will be worth a fraction of what it is,” he said. “Your jobs will be in peril, your security will be at risk, and our women will become maids in other people’s countries.”

It is true that Singapore has one of the most efficient and corruption-free governments in the world. Transparency International, a private monitoring agency, recently listed it as the fifth most corruption-free nation of 163 surveyed.

It is Asia’s second-richest country after Japan, with a gross domestic product per capita of about $31,000. The first Prime Minister Lee said it could well afford to pay its leaders top dollar.

The average Singaporean earns roughly $3,000 a month, and the government has voiced concern over a widening gap between rich and poor. The ministers’ pay was approved three months before the sales tax is to be increased by 2 percent.

Talk of the pay raise drew criticism here that included letters to newspapers and an online petition that has more than 800 signatures.

“I am sure Enron and Worldcom paid more than top dollar for their top executives, and look where their companies are now — six feet under,” Mohamad Rosle Ahmad wrote to the editor of The Straits Times.

The elder Mr. Lee said naysayers needed a reality check. “I say you have no sense of proportion; you don’t know what life is about,” he said.

“The cure to all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government,” he added. “You get that alternative, and you’ll never put Singapore together again.”

The Straits Times quoted him as saying his current salary as minister mentor was about $1.8 million.

Some Singaporeans suggested that other motivations should also come into play for government jobs.

“What about other redeeming intangibles such as honor and sense of duty, dedication, passion and commitment, loyalty and service?” asked Hussin Mutalib, a political science professor at the National University of Singapore, in a Straits Times online forum.

Carolyn Lim, a prominent writer, suggested in an essay that Singapore needed a little more heart to go along with its hard head.

“To see a potential prime minister as no different from a potential top lawyer, and likely to be enticed by the same stupendous salary, would be to blur the lines between two very different domains,” she wrote.

The minister mentor brushed aside such concerns. “Those are admirable sentiments,” he said. “But we live in a real world.”

Correction: April 13, 2007



An article on Tuesday about the high salaries of Singapore government officials misstated the given name of a prominent writer who suggested in an essay that comparability with the private sector should not be the only consideration in setting government salaries. She is Catherine Lim, not Carolyn.