Are you happy with this cut??

nientsu wrote:

I personally do not feel comfortable comparing a minister with a top CEO. But sadly, this is what these ministers want to be compared to. Whats the difference you might ask? A CEO sees and is judged solely by revenue and cost management. To me, i do not want a group of ministers that only sees GDP, demographics, net export, personal consumption to make impt decisions. If you are an economic minister, fine. Thats your job, like Bernanke or God Greenspan. But if you are a community development or a housing or for that matter minister, i dont think revenue or cost management is a good indicator of their performance.

To me, a good minister is someone who needs to have the heart to serve. Plain and simple. If you are there (like most of our current ministers) to sulk up to the Lees, earn their millions at the expense of the people and give stupid excuses for the boos boos they have done (like the one surnamed Teo) then sad to say, you do not deserve to be there.

Gd sayg man! Thump up!

Quite honestly, even if someone has the heart to serve, if they pay u 400k a year (i.e. US president), would anyone wanna take up that role as a PM? Most US presidents are already rich outside office. But for Singapore, they have been in politics all their life.. although some might literally sit on stat boards.

Anyone know what's coming next?
SG gov always dangle some freebies b4 hitting us with the big

Salty wrote:

Hey, at least they are not corrupt!

U heard from which little bird?

sob wrote:

Anyone know what's coming next?
SG gov always dangle some freebies b4 hitting us with the big

Wait for budget meetingnin the next parliament

nientsu wrote:

I personally do not feel comfortable comparing a minister with a top CEO. But sadly, this is what these ministers want to be compared to. Whats the difference you might ask? A CEO sees and is judged solely by revenue and cost management. To me, i do not want a group of ministers that only sees GDP, demographics, net export, personal consumption to make impt decisions. If you are an economic minister, fine. Thats your job, like Bernanke or God Greenspan. But if you are a community development or a housing or for that matter minister, i dont think revenue or cost management is a good indicator of their performance.

To me, a good minister is someone who needs to have the heart to serve. Plain and simple. If you are there (like most of our current ministers) to sulk up to the Lees, earn their millions at the expense of the people and give stupid excuses for the boos boos they have done (like the one surnamed Teo) then sad to say, you do not deserve to be there.

Spot on, mate!

Salty wrote:

Hey, at least they are not corrupt!

correction, they are not reported to be corrupted !!

Quoted from Facebook ...

This policy has been in place for 17 years now, and we have not been more successful in attracting private sector talents into politics. On the other hand, corruption is as illegal as robbery or theft. And just as we do not pay people not to rob or steal, it is ridiculous to pay people not to be corrupt. In any case, as the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius once observed, “a man should be upright, not be kept upright.”

nientsu wrote:

I personally do not feel comfortable comparing a minister with a top CEO. But sadly, this is what these ministers want to be compared to. Whats the difference you might ask? A CEO sees and is judged solely by revenue and cost management. To me, i do not want a group of ministers that only sees GDP, demographics, net export, personal consumption to make impt decisions. If you are an economic minister, fine. Thats your job, like Bernanke or God Greenspan. But if you are a community development or a housing or for that matter minister, i dont think revenue or cost management is a good indicator of their performance.

To me, a good minister is someone who needs to have the heart to serve. Plain and simple. If you are there (like most of our current ministers) to sulk up to the Lees, earn their millions at the expense of the people and give stupid excuses for the boos boos they have done (like the one surnamed Teo) then sad to say, you do not deserve to be there.

Like!

Its sad when you think by having top dollar is what attracts the right talents to politics, I see it different, the high salary only attracts the wrong type of people, people who "serve" the wrong purpose.

People like Grace Fu.

https://www.facebook.com/gracefu.hy/posts/227076997368383

I am very disappointed. These are the type of people that we attract to politics using remuneration as a carrot.

I see similarities with golf Le... Carrot need to be dangle to get top performance

here are some of my thoughts:

we did not get this far without good leadership....

looking at our neighbouring countries, i think our government has done well....

how many ppl in their prime working age chose to become PR/citizens here....

i know a few ppl here, mayb they can give their reasons.... whatever reasons, they adopted Spore as home

clearly, our government has done something....

what is our national average wage compared to others?

what is our unemployment figures?

do we all have roof over our heads?

in the span of 50-60 years, we have outgrow/outpace our neighbours with limited natural resouces.... again, our government must have done something right

i am not some flag-waving PAP, but i do acknowledge the milestone our government has achieved....

of course, i do share the sentiments that there are incompetence in the system....

but so are many institutions and companies....

which i think our PM is trying to get in right....

if he is not listening to our voices, why would he appoint a committee to look at their wages..... i would like to call it progress

yes, i like some of the cabinet ministers, Tham n Sham to name a few..... of course i also think there are some that are off the mark, hopefully things will improve


as for salary, here is my take:

if u are sales, and u rack in $1M in PROFIT for the company, dun u think u deserved at least 5-10% of that.....

of course we will say "they are government"..... but aint civil servants ppl like us


finally, i think PM has done something with regards to the salary structure, is it fair? everybody will have their opinions, but i would like to call it progress....

slinger wrote:

here are some of my thoughts:

we did not get this far without good leadership....

looking at our neighbouring countries, i think our government has done well....

how many ppl in their prime working age chose to become PR/citizens here....

i know a few ppl here, mayb they can give their reasons.... whatever reasons, they adopted Spore as home

clearly, our government has done something....

what is our national average wage compared to others?

what is our unemployment figures?

do we all have roof over our heads?

in the span of 50-60 years, we have outgrow/outpace our neighbours with limited natural resouces.... again, our government must have done something right

i am not some flag-waving PAP, but i do acknowledge the milestone our government has achieved....

of course, i do share the sentiments that there are incompetence in the system....

but so are many institutions and companies....

which i think our PM is trying to get in right....

if he is not listening to our voices, why would he appoint a committee to look at their wages..... i would like to call it progress

yes, i like some of the cabinet ministers, Tham n Sham to name a few..... of course i also think there are some that are off the mark, hopefully things will improve


as for salary, here is my take:

if u are sales, and u rack in $1M in PROFIT for the company, dun u think u deserved at least 5-10% of that.....

of course we will say "they are government"..... but aint civil servants ppl like us


finally, i think PM has done something with regards to the salary structure, is it fair? everybody will have their opinions, but i would like to call it progress....

Like +1

beery goose england.. and anal ysis.. well said ..
which school u go to ah? can i sent my sun to there?

next erection i vote for u if u stand for erection

Like +2.

I am not exactly pro-PAP as well but I just want to know what is the definition of 'serving with a heart'?


Grace Fu stepped down from the top position of PSA before becoming an MP and Minister. I believe her pay in PSA is more than what she is being paid before the recent pay adjustment. If taking less pay to do a thankless job is not 'serving with a heart' then I do not know what is.

Again, I just want to point out that I do not condone her recent post on FB. That one is done without proper thinking.

mUAr_cHEe wrote:

Like +2.

I am not exactly pro-PAP as well but I just want to know what is the definition of 'serving with a heart'?


Grace Fu stepped down from the top position of PSA before becoming an MP and Minister. I believe her pay in PSA is more than what she is being paid before the recent pay adjustment. If taking less pay to do a thankless job is not 'serving with a heart' then I do not know what is.

Again, I just want to point out that I do not condone her recent post on FB. That one is done without proper thinking.

BTW, your AP2 63 deg lie is ready at keppel.

nientsu wrote:

I personally do not feel comfortable comparing a minister with a top CEO. But sadly, this is what these ministers want to be compared to. Whats the difference you might ask? A CEO sees and is judged solely by revenue and cost management. To me, i do not want a group of ministers that only sees GDP, demographics, net export, personal consumption to make impt decisions. If you are an economic minister, fine. Thats your job, like Bernanke or God Greenspan. But if you are a community development or a housing or for that matter minister, i dont think revenue or cost management is a good indicator of their performance.

To me, a good minister is someone who needs to have the heart to serve. Plain and simple. If you are there (like most of our current ministers) to sulk up to the Lees, earn their millions at the expense of the people and give stupid excuses for the boos boos they have done (like the one surnamed Teo) then sad to say, you do not deserve to be there.

I think I need to clarify something. When we compare minister to CEO, in term of CEO there are a few aspect that can be compared.. The first is RANK. Minister should IMHO at least equivalent in RANK to a top exchelon in a firm as they are also considered a top escehlon in the goverment and hence the comparison.

For objective obviously CEO in enterprise and a minister has different objectives. CEO is to rake in as much money for the company (and in turn his pay and bonus and survivebility). For Minister it is whatever the PM set his objective to be which should be encored to the very point of a poublic servant goverment which is to serve the country as a whole and to execute governance.

Hope that clear up the point.

slinger wrote:

here are some of my thoughts:

we did not get this far without good leadership....

looking at our neighbouring countries, i think our government has done well....

how many ppl in their prime working age chose to become PR/citizens here....

i know a few ppl here, mayb they can give their reasons.... whatever reasons, they adopted Spore as home

clearly, our government has done something....

what is our national average wage compared to others?

what is our unemployment figures?

do we all have roof over our heads?

in the span of 50-60 years, we have outgrow/outpace our neighbours with limited natural resouces.... again, our government must have done something right

i am not some flag-waving PAP, but i do acknowledge the milestone our government has achieved....

of course, i do share the sentiments that there are incompetence in the system....

but so are many institutions and companies....

which i think our PM is trying to get in right....

if he is not listening to our voices, why would he appoint a committee to look at their wages..... i would like to call it progress

yes, i like some of the cabinet ministers, Tham n Sham to name a few..... of course i also think there are some that are off the mark, hopefully things will improve


as for salary, here is my take:

if u are sales, and u rack in $1M in PROFIT for the company, dun u think u deserved at least 5-10% of that.....

of course we will say "they are government"..... but aint civil servants ppl like us


finally, i think PM has done something with regards to the salary structure, is it fair? everybody will have their opinions, but i would like to call it progress....

Exactly my sentiment. So like +3 I guess.
People so focus on the bad and forget the whole picture. There are good and bad, nobody can be perfect, much less an organization. They can however be better but never be perfect, maybe close to it which is what we are hoping for. If 90% are good then I think we are good, and let's work on improving that to 95 or 99 or whatever.

I'm just trying to bring in the idea ofl seeing thing as a whole picture when focussing on the failure. The goverment has done well for the past 40 so years, the evidence is there and I think most people will agree. they can be better no question about it, but before we bash them as monkey, peanuts, lets' consider what they have achieve as well. Compared singpaore goverment to the neighboring countries, what will that make those countries goverment that is not even close to bring their nation out of poverty and 3rd world status in a much longer time to singapore with the loads of resource they have ?

PS : I'm not affiliated with PAP in anyway,

i agree that the government has done a good job, for the past 40 years

i agree that they needs to be rewarded for the good job, for those who drives Singapore to the state now

i disagree that whoever just become a minister, without achieving anything, starting pay is so much higher than every other leader in the world

i disagree the statement that they are paid well so as to prevent corruption

just my 2 cents.