News Stories

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

I am not worried about now because I am still living quite comfortably (thanks to my otaku hobbies - I don't spend alot by drinking and clubbing unlike peers of my age), but rather, I am worried about the future.

Earning $1,300 and saving $1,000 just doesn't cut it in the long run if the inflation doesn't subside by next year June - I have already put off my second year in uni to shore up living funds. Market data is disturbing at best - if China doesn't come clean on their accounts, AND that Malaysia doesn't fix their budget deficit, we could have another Asian Financial Crisis by 2013/2014, coupled with a possible double-dip recession in the US.

Sardine cans don't fix themselves - the government has to put temporary tariffs on petrol imports, 200% COE prices to get private cars off the road. With an increased rate of public transportation alternative to the train, the public can move much easier. If anyone is going to complain, then "subsidise" Singpost, the public transport system and a few taxi companies temporarily so as to ease up the roads.

Mind you, there are a number of my peers who are wanting to become parents, but unable to do so or even get a decent house to live in. I am glad I am single, but probably not in 10 years because I would want a couple of lolis then, one which would call me "Honey" and another to call me "Daddy".

That's where we differ. I actually plan on staying single. Apart from that, I am not worried about the future.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

That's where we differ. I actually plan on staying single. Apart from that, I am not worried about the future.

Actually if you do save at least 10% to 20% of your income, you worry about the future - when your disposable income decreases, you DO panic.

[Tom Bombadil]

Originally Posted by JMvS

After the Chinese announcing their plans for a high speed railway network connecting China with Europe, Central and South-East Asia, it seems the Russians are also on the move.

The Telegraph? Isn't that the paper read by those who think the Britain is run by another country?

All joking aside, the scale of the project described in the article makes it wishful thinking at best, just imagine the shear number of political bodies whose blessing for such a project are absolutely necessary, not to mention these political bodies are constantly changing. Besides, who is going to ride a train to cross the continent when he can just hop on a plane?

I only have some hope that the projects in southeast Asia go through. People are entitled to interpret them in whatever way they like. But imho, countries like Laos or Cambodia need the infrastructures to help their economy, while these rails will also give a nice boost to the relative backward provinces such as Yunnan in southwest of China.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Tom Bombadil

All joking aside, the scale of the project described in the article makes it wishful thinking at best, just imagine the shear number of political bodies whose blessing for such a project are absolutely necessary, not to mention these political bodies are constantly changing. Besides, who is going to ride a train to cross the continent when he can just hop on a plane?

If the train is cheaper than an airlift, why not?

On the other news :

Tony Tan wins Singapore Presidential Election 2011 by narrow margin

Dr Tony Tan is the next president of Singapore.

After a tight race and a recount of votes, the Elections Department has confirmed him as the winner of the presidential election.

Announcing the results, the Returning Officer Yam Ah Mee said the local votes counted are conclusive and that the overseas votes will not affect the results of the election.

5,504 Singaporeans have registered as overseas voters and their votes will be counted on Tuesday, August 30.

Dr Tony Tan beat his closest rival, Dr Tan Cheng Bock by a margin of 7,269 votes

The winning margin was about 0.34 percent of the vote

Dr Tony Tan had 744,397 votes or 35.19% of the valid vote

Dr Tan Cheng Bock garnered 737,128 votes or 34.85%

Mr Tan Jee Say won 529,732 votes or 25.04%

And Mr Tan Kin Lian received 103,931 votes or 4.91%, losing the election deposit of S$48,000 as he has less than the required 12.5% of the vote

There were 37,826 spoiled votes

At the close of poll for Presidential Election 2011, the total number of votes cast in Singapore is 2,153,014 (inclusive of 37,826 rejected votes)

The Elections Department says this is 94.65% of the 2,274,773 million registered electors.

The new President will be sworn in on Thursday, September 1.

[TinyRedLeaf]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

That's where we differ. I actually plan on staying single. Apart from that, I am not worried about the future.

NooooOooOoooOooo.... Think of all the unborn children!

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Tony Tan wins Singapore Presidential Election 2011 by narrow margin

The Singapore President is a largely ceremonial role, with limited custodial powers over the country's past reserves (accumulated from past government budget surpluses; yes, you read that right: budget surpluses; they're not a myth, they do exist).

Dr Tony Tan is a former deputy prime minister, and had also served as the minister for education and defence, two of the most important portfolios in Cabinet. He had also served as chairman for OCBC Bank (one of the three surviving Singapore banks, the other two being DBS Bank and United Overseas Bank) and Singapore Press Holdings (the near-monopoly media company that owns all but one of the country's newspapers).

In other words, Dr Tan is perceived by many to be among the Singapore elite, leading some to doubt whether he could stand up to the government if need be (actually, that is a moot concern; constitutionally, the president can act only on the prime minister's advice on almost all matters; still, that won't stop die-hard opposition supporters from fuming that Dr Tan would just be a government puppet at best).

[SeijiSensei]

Dr Tony Tan had 744,397 votes or 35.19% of the valid vote

Dr Tan Cheng Bock garnered 737,128 votes or 34.85%

Mr Tan Jee Say won 529,732 votes or 25.04%

And Mr Tan Kin Lian received 103,931 votes or 4.91%, losing the election deposit of S$48,000 as he has less than the required 12.5% of the vote

I assume Singaporeans have other surnames than Tan. Is it a constitutional requirement that you be named Tan in order to run for the Presidency? And why is the name order in the newspaper report inconsistent? Isn't he really Tan Tony?

Color me confused; no wait, color me tan!

[MakubeX2]

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I assume Singaporeans have other surnames than Tan. Is it a constitutional requirement that you be named Tan in order to run for the Presidency?

It's just a curious oddity for the candidates in this Presidential Election, nothing more.

And why is the name order in the newspaper report inconsistent? Isn't he really Tan Tony?

His family name is Tan. Given name, Keng Yam. Tony is a foreign English name he adopted for easy reference.

[TinyRedLeaf]

This just in from Daegu, South Korea: Usain Bolt disqualified from the World Championships 100m final due to a false start. Compatriot Yohan Blake wins the blue-ribbon race instead.

Edit: Blake wins 100m gold after Bolt disqualifed

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I assume Singaporeans have other surnames than Tan. Is it a constitutional requirement that you be named Tan in order to run for the Presidency? And why is the name order in the newspaper report inconsistent? Isn't he really Tan Tony?

It's a naming convention widely used in this part of the world. In most cases, when writing Chinese names in English, we proceed with the family name before stating the given name. Hence, Dr Tan Cheng Bock. But when the Chinese in question has an English name, we state the English name before the Chinese name. Hence, Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam.

This applies to Chinese outside Singapore as well. For example, Mr Donald Tsang Yam Kuen, the current Chief Executive of Hong Kong and Mr Ma Ying-jeou, the President of Taiwan.

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

NooooOooOoooOooo.... Think of all the unborn children!



The Singapore President is a largely ceremonial role, with limited custodial powers over the country's past reserves (accumulated from past government budget surpluses; yes, you read that right: budget surpluses; they're not a myth, they do exist).

Dr Tony Tan is a former deputy prime minister, and had also served as the minister for education and defence, two of the most important portfolios in Cabinet. He had also served as chairman for OCBC Bank (one of the three surviving Singapore banks, the other two being DBS Bank and United Overseas Bank) and Singapore Press Holdings (the near-monopoly media company that owns all but one of the country's newspapers).

In other words, Dr Tan is perceived by many to be among the Singapore elite, leading some to doubt whether he could stand up to the government if need be (actually, that is a moot concern; constitutionally, the president can act only on the prime minister's advice on almost all matters; still, that won't stop die-hard opposition supporters from fuming that Dr Tan would just be a government puppet at best).

Aye. As for the unborn kids, I'll follow Winston and be part of the "putting milk in babies" gang. Those babies need not be mine, right?

(In case you're wondering, Winston Churchill has a quote that goes: There is no finer investment for any community than putting milk into babies.)

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by TinyRedLeaf

NooooOooOoooOooo.... Think of all the unborn children!

We don't have exclusive access to the e-news like you TRL - we need another link.

Consequently, we should just ease up on our human rights legislation and start a cloning project to make up for the aging population; if we are to mature 16,500* babies at once we can easily make up for the loss in working population.

* - For those who don't get what the number means, read Aldous Huxley's works.

The Singapore President is a largely ceremonial role, with limited custodial powers over the country's past reserves (accumulated from past government budget surpluses; yes, you read that right: budget surpluses; they're not a myth, they do exist).

We don't have a budget surplus right now.

Dr Tony Tan is a former deputy prime minister, and had also served as the minister for education and defence, two of the most important portfolios in Cabinet. He had also served as chairman for OCBC Bank (one of the three surviving Singapore banks, the other two being DBS Bank and United Overseas Bank) and Singapore Press Holdings (the near-monopoly media company that owns all but one of the country's newspapers).

In other words, Dr Tan is perceived by many to be among the Singapore elite, leading some to doubt whether he could stand up to the government if need be (actually, that is a moot concern; constitutionally, the president can act only on the prime minister's advice on almost all matters; still, that won't stop die-hard opposition supporters from fuming that Dr Tan would just be a government puppet at best).

The problem with the opposition parties is that not many of them actually had credibility or sensible ideas. I am appalled that the SED actually allow them to publish garbage as manifestos in this year's elections - not a single one of them had outlined a process in which they would make their promises work.

Also, there has been a constant haranguing for a "first world parliament" - e.g a two-party system in the parliament by many of the opposition. I wonder if they are all idiots, retards, or Alzhiemic to suggest using US as a model - they practically screwed themselves up with the GOP and the Democrats at each other throat, playing political games instead of addressing socioeconomic concerns. What is more, the propensity for one or another party to be bought out my members of Big Corp are apparent - Murdoch made a "political donation" to secure GOP's win in the Congress and perpetually screwing up the entire government as they constantly try to undermine funding for social projects and capital infrastructure in favour of more funding for Big Corp.

Between a ruling party who does the bare minimum and an opposition that make erratic claims, it casts a shadow of doubt that Singapore actually has smart heads in the cabinet - I made a running joke to my friends that the few hundred dollars are to pay for our air-ticket out of here should someone incompetent take the seat of the PM.

Well, when in doubt or at a loss, vote for the person who gave you money. *sarcastic*

Originally Posted by SeijiSensei

I assume Singaporeans have other surnames than Tan. Is it a constitutional requirement that you be named Tan in order to run for the Presidency? And why is the name order in the newspaper report inconsistent? Isn't he really Tan Tony?

Color me confused; no wait, color me tan!

All of them have the same surname - it is a coincidence. Like what my mother said, it doesn't matter who I vote for in my first presidential vote in my life, all of them are the same.

Though I agree with her, my reasons might be a little more different than just the surnames.

[Anh_Minh]

Eh. At least it must make your politics pretty non confrontational. "Tan for President!"

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Eh. At least it must make your politics pretty non confrontational. "Tan for President!"

I don't think that will make a tangential difference in how our country is being run in the next half-decade.

[yezhanquan]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

* - For those who don't get what the number means, read Aldous Huxley's works.

Heh. I have never read "Brave New World", although Aldous himself fascinates me more. Dying on the same day as another author and a US president: only this once, I guess.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by MakubeX2

It's just a curious oddity for the candidates in this Presidential Election, nothing more.

In both the US and the UK, there have been candidates who have changed their names to match those of better-known contenders. Voters generally aren't fooled by these manipulations, though. I believe someone became "Edward Heath" to run against the former Tory Prime Minister in his constituency.

[andyjay729]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

They are trying to copy the Eurotunnel.

Has anyone ever considered a tunnel from Japan to South Korea? It would seem a bit more feasible than a Bering Strait tunnel. Of course...North Korea kinda stands in the way between the rest of the Eurasian rail network and Japan and the South.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by andyjay729

Has anyone ever considered a tunnel from Japan to South Korea? It would seem a bit more feasible than a Bering Strait tunnel. Of course...North Korea kinda stands in the way between the rest of the Eurasian rail network and Japan and the South.

Provided the anti-Japanese Koreans and anti-Korean Japanese on both sides don't hold out and sit on the construction sites.

Though I do know there may be a possibility of one party that might heavily lobby against or even buy up the sites for the entry/exit points for the tunnels : shipping companies. They lose alot of revenue in small/medium packet shipments when people send curios across the East China Sea.

Also, earthquakes are pretty common in that area, so the tunnel may be actually a bad idea.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Provided the anti-Japanese Koreans and anti-Korean Japanese on both sides don't hold out and sit on the construction sites.

Though I do know there may be a possibility of one party that might heavily lobby against or even buy up the sites for the entry/exit points for the tunnels : shipping companies. They lose alot of revenue in small/medium packet shipments when people send curios across the East China Sea.

Also, earthquakes are pretty common in that area, so the tunnel may be actually a bad idea.

but a underwater tunnel would be Gozilla proof.

[ganbaru]

Army fights defectors near Damascus: residents
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...77P12M20110828
Again, battle in Syria, again.

[Tom Bombadil]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Also, earthquakes are pretty common in that area, so the tunnel may be actually a bad idea.

Yep, the pacific ring of fire did gets its name from somewhere.

[JMvS]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Provided the anti-Japanese Koreans and anti-Korean Japanese on both sides don't hold out and sit on the construction sites.

Though I do know there may be a possibility of one party that might heavily lobby against or even buy up the sites for the entry/exit points for the tunnels : shipping companies. They lose alot of revenue in small/medium packet shipments when people send curios across the East China Sea.

Also, earthquakes are pretty common in that area, so the tunnel may be actually a bad idea.

I've read somewhere that Kim Jong Il's recent trip to Russia was aimed at resuming economic ties between the two former allies, and in the basket there were some Russian plans for a pipeline to reach South Korea trough North Korea.

And the earthquakes didn't deter the Japanese from digging a tunnel between Honshu and Hokkaido.

BTW, the Korea-Japan tunnel is an idea almost 100 years old, and since 2009 is being examined again in commitee.