Others have talked about happiness and the absymal rankings that Singapore has earned itself on the dunno what Happiness Index or something. This is actually somewhat of a mystery to the KTM. He has travelled to quite a few places in the world and while it is true that Singapore is not Shangrila, things ain't bad in Singapore on most counts. The KTM recently visited the A&E Unit in SGH (suay man) and the A&E Unit in a Shanghai Hospital (lucky he wasn't the one sent to hospital), and he can only say that he's really thankful for what we have in Singapore, notwithstanding the three-hour-long waits.

Dansong said something earlier about Singaporeans not being happy because they are caught in some lousy rat race where they have to work very hard to make the money 'cos they can consume and yet they are not happy even after they make the money 'cos they find themselves in lousy jobs that they dun like. The KTM hopes that Dansong will forgive him for anyhow liberally misquoting him. :-) In any case hor, the KTM has no sympathies for such people. Such people have chosen their own fates and they deserve what they get. There's always a way out and that's to marry a rich, capable career woman and become a house husband (or marry a rich man and become a tai tai, depending on one's gender). ;-P

The fundamental question moving forward is what the government can perhaps attempt to do to address this issue of some Singaporeans behaving like lemmings and marching together into a life of disgruntledness and misery. Make no mistake, the KTM is not suggesting that the Garmen should go into the business of "happiness engineering."

The crux of the problem here is that the Singapore economy has reached a state of maturity (or perhaps crisis, depending on how you look at it) where it is simply unsustainable to depend on economic growth to keep people happy. Intensive competitor from our neighbours (especially emerging China and India) means that there's no point in complaining about long hours. If Singaporeans don't want to do those jobs, there are some 2 billion people waiting in line for them. The question is: do Singaporeans have a choice NOT to do those jobs?

The KTM believes that to simply aim at raising the standard of living to dunno what Swiss standard of living for all Singaporeans is not a sustainable long term model of development. Instead, we should make room for people to fail (!) and to allow for diversity in our midst. We are perhaps trying too hard to be perfect. :-)

While it is true that we have to continue to place our bets as a country on specific sectors for continued economic development, i.e., R&D, biotechnology, education, finance, and dunno what other areas, the KTM would like to argue that we need to keep a lid on the cost of daily necessities to ensure that the poorest of the poor in Singapore can survive, and I do mean survive without creature comforts like an air-conditioner and a mobile phone.

It is perfectly fine for wages of low income workers to be $300 or $400 a month, AS LONG AS it is possible to survive on that amount without suffering from malnutrition, going into debt or depending on the Progress Package. The KTM would argue that perhaps more subsidies can go into ensuring that basic (no frills) services are available on the cheap.

Cost Control. The KTM believes that the cost of basic necessities need to be controlled so that they will remain accessible to the poor. The KTM had argued before for cost control for public transportation and will not say more about this here.

Other than transportation, the other major item is food -- and food really isn't all that cheap in Singapore nowadays. It actually doesn't completely make sense for food costs to be as high as they are in Singapore, given that we are importing most of what we eat from our poorer neighbours. Most of the prices that we pay on food comes from the markup that goes into paying the middle men (i.e. wholesalers, driver, stallholder, cook, waiter, etc. and unfortunately GST). The markup is high because wages are higher in Singapore. This is a reality we cannot avoid.

No only should we consider scrapping GST on food items (and perhaps making up the lost revenue by increasing the tax rate on other items), it might be plausible for the Garmen to consider directly importing and selling food on the cheap (maybe NTUC can do this since they are already doing two million and one random things already :-)). The food need not be yummy - just nutritious and affordable to the poorest of the poor. It is actually a good thing for the food not to be too good to prevent the kiasu Singaporeans who are rich to rush for the food. It's a fine balance and the key is cheap sustenance. The KTM thinks also that the ST Pocket Money Fund was a great idea! ;-)

Cheap Housing. Singapore is very proud of the fact that some 90% of the people are so-called home owners. Nevertheless, there is a very serious disconnect between this apparent success at universal housing and the fact that many families are now what people call asset rich and cash poor.

Those who complain that it's the Garmen's fault should look in the mirror. Garmen ask you to buy the five-room flat you can ill afford izzit? Or was it because your sixth uncle's seventh nephew's cousin's sister's brother-in-law live in condo and you dun want to lose face by living in a three-room flat? In some way, it's the Garmen's fault too. By allowing people to buy their flats at rock-bottom interest rates over a 30-year repayment period, your Singaporeans are all lured into buying bigger places than what they can realistically afford if they are financially prudent.

If people have to live in a smaller place because that's what they can realistically afford so be it. They should just downgrade and live in a smaller place. The Garmen should simply faciliate this process and perhaps encourage some Singaporeans to downgrade for their own good by reducing the tax burden on downgraders in some way?

At the very bottom of the pile, the rents for the one- and two-room flats should continue to be rent controlled and cheap. The poor should always be able to have a roof over their heads by paying only a nominal sum. There's no reason to make them comfortable though. It's okay for them not to be satisfied with their lot, because it is good to generate some hunger and the will to improve their lots in life.

The HDB should think seriously about building heterogenous flats. Instead of a whole block of three- or four-room flats, build new flats with a mixture of one-, two-, three- up to five-room flats. In the same way that we have dunno what racial quota policy, we should ensure that we have all kinds of people living together in the same place. Let's not have yuppy neighbourhoods and run-down old towns (did some one say Potong Pasir?). Let's have Singaporeans from all walks of life live together in the same place like a kampong. What about the extra costs of building heterogeneous flats you say? Aiyah, I say to HDB, dun complain lah. It is well-known that the market prices of HDBs are quite a lot higher than (or at least comparable to) the actual costs of building the flats, so just absorb the additional costs lah. We can well afford for HDB to add a little less to the reserves over the next couple of years lah.

Universal Access to Healthcare and Education. When it comes to universal access to healthcare and education, the KTM doesn't believe there should be any compromises. Overall, the KTM doesn't have very much to say except that he's quite happy with both healthcare and education in Singapore (at least at this point in time). It is important to note that access does not equate to free hor, 'cos there are few things in life that are actually free. It is one thing to ensure that all Singaporeans get the medical treatment that they need, it is another thing altogether to say that they dun need to pay for it.

It seems to the KTM that the Garmen has done a really good job at controlling healthcare costs and he certainly hopes that it will stay this way. For those who complain about the high healthcare costs, the KTM has two things to say to them.

One, how many much taxes do you pay a year? $2,000? $3,000? $4,000? And you want the Garmen to pay for your $50K medical bill if you suay suay get sick? Where does Garmen's money come from? It comes from the tax payers' leh! It completely makes sense for people to take care of their own medical costs by buying their own medical insurance. Poor how? Extend HDB-style 30-year loans to them (on top of the current C-class ward subsidies). Also be nice lah, if people suay suay kick the bucket, perhaps consider writing off the medical bills for the lower income folks.

Two, you want cheap healthcare? Can. The healthcare in China and India are very cheap. Perhaps the Garmen should sign agreements with these countries so that Singaporeans can have the option of being shipped to China or India for cheap medical care. Sounds good? Well, you get what you pay for. :-)

Expectation Management and PR. Alamak, please dun anyhow go and promise people what "More Good Years" can? How can tell what the future will be? In any case, even if the good years come, will everyone get to enjoy the fruits of the good year? Not likely and we really shouldn't be giving away stuff for free. The KTM is of the opinion that the $2.6 billion Progress Package was spent in a very inefficient way. Fair enough, the money went back to the people and probably stimulated some spending. Some tell me they bought a dunno what iPod. Whatever lah. Nevertheless, the KTM was simply not impressed. What catchy election slogan to adopt then? Dunno lah, the KTM is just a kay poh and not a politican. You ask him, he ask who? :-) The last slogan came from some kid right? Ask the kids again lah. Dun try to pretend got monopoly on all the good ideas can already.

Actually hor, how hard is it to win a 50% major in every constituency in Singapore? The KTM actually thinks it's not too hard as long as the ruling party is a little more focussed and dun try to be all things to all people and dun have to aim for dunno what 70% of the vote. Eh, this is not PSLE leh. 51% win already, so why try to hard for 70%. Democracy has often been called the 'Tyranny of the Majority' so just have to keep 60% of the voters happy already can win by comfortable margin. Just need to have a mindset change of what comfortable means. There is the 80/20 principle in this matter also. It is probably relatively easy to find decent jobs and provide a decent standard of living for the 80%, so just focus on that and with regards to the rest, just do your best. Act gracious and dun piss off the people who got no real issues with the Garmen to begin with, gao deem already.

In case people are completely confused about what the KTM is trying to saying after that long exposition of dunno what nonsense also, the KTM can perhaps try to summarize his thinking as follows:

We should not try to carry all Singaporeans up with everyone (and everything) else as the tide rises. This is not a feasible and sustainable approach in the long term and it is likely to hurt our competitiveness since we are so small and we are being squeezed by humongous neighbours. Rather, perhaps consider putting some effort into ensuring that the poor folks dun drown and their kids have a chance at swimming to the top.

The KTM believes that it is not the role of a Government to provide a good life for its citizens. The Government's role is to provide opportunities for the people to provide a good life for themselves. Those who fail will have to keep trying, or they can learn to be content with what they have.

While this view of the world is a little less than Utopian, the KTM believes that it is a more sustainable model of development for the near future. Hands up those who have really good ideas about how to narrow the income gap in the first place? In any case, can someone remind the KTM why we're trying to narrow the income gap? So that the people at the bottom will not feel so un-shiok izzit? The KTM thinks that if we make life bearable for them and show that there is a future for their children, the so-called income inequality is completely manageable (oh, did the KTM forget to mention that the ruling party also needs a new PR consultant while we are at it?).