What I forgot to put in the last post was what I thought the outcomes would be.
I feel that if Labour gets (sorry 'Labor') enough indies then they will deliver a short term government. Firstly with the two 'green' indies they only need two of the three country indies, therefore there is a high possibility of one of them going Conservative. And then it will only take one by-election to change government, because you can guarantee that if any borderline left or indie seat goes up for by-election it will go to the right strongly.
However, if the Conservatives get the three country indies, then they will only pick up any by-elections as well, and, the next full election they will get one or two of the three country indie seats and at least one of the green seats. So they will only get stronger and thus they will deliver a longer term government.
Still on politics, but SG not AU.
Senior Minister Goh has flagged the idea of approaching 50,000 of the 500,000 permanent residents in Singapore and strong-arming them into taking citizenship.
I think that this is a no-win situation, specifically a lose-lose-lose.
Firstly, half a million PRs is a lot, just as a general observation, for a country of four and a bit million citizens. I know that there are going on a million foreign workers and a few hundred thousand tourists at any one time, but these PRs are the business expertise that built Singapore's thriving economy. If he is planning on approaching some of them, then I am betting that it will be the better, or the longer term, one tenth. These people may have good reasons for not taking citizenship and by cajoling them Singapore will probably drive them away. And it makes a mockery of the term 'Permanent' Resident, you know, the kind that isn't permanent. So these PRs will probably leave, they lose, and Singapore loses them, and the SG government loses face over a failed policy.
Mind you, I would like to see the demographics. And I would also like to see the results of any interview based survey on why they didn't take citizenship.
Mind you, I could be reading this wrong, maybe they are the Malaysian Chinese PRs? I know two of those that took citizenship a few months ago (well, one's husband did, she kept her MY citizenship and SG PR-ship). In this case maybe a squabble between Chinese? But what I see in my Malaysian Chinese friends living PR in Singapore is that they don't like MY, but they have so much family there that they feel compelled to return. And also they like that they can work for good money in SG and buy a good house in MY to retire to. Dual citizenship would resolve that, but create its own problems. So in this case I see them all leaving SG, moving to Jahore Bahru, and commuting to SG to work. This will free up a lot of HBDs, forcing their price way down, and it will move a lot of grocery shopping over the bridge, forcing prices way down. Maybe both are good things, but will it achieve much else?
Tuesday, September 7
Post Election Greens
Still no government.
We are meant to hear today from the three independents that have been holding the country to ransom. As in, they said that they would deliver their final decision today. So I wanted to write this before I find out what way they go, then I can see how well I went.
I think that they will back Socialism.
These are my reasons:
1. Costings.
The Conservatives' costings were savaged by the Civil Service. Despite lots of experienced commentators reminding people that the government bureaucrats are not very good with numbers the majority of journalists still believe that 'Treasury' are somehow sacrosanct. Despite Treasury using a fallible interest rate projection, despite Treasury applying current government policy to the Conservatives' budget to warp it. And despite the Socialists' 43 billion dollar broadband project not being included in their costings. The independents still made lots of comments about the Conservatives being fiscally irresponsible. Yet after adjusting for all of the smoke the Conservatives will deliver nearly a billion in surplus versus the Socialists delivering more than four billion in deficit annually. In short the independents are economically naive.
2. Politics.
The independents come from seats that the Conservatives will contest and may take from them, so any alliance would be fraught with danger. The Socialists will never get those seats and so they will welcome the independents and value them, their alliance would be far more secure.
3. Personalities.
The three independents are all renegades from the minor party in the Conservative Coalition. They have severe issues with the Nationals' leadership; they will never sit well together.
4. Politics 2.
The independents have all made quite a lot of leftist sounding policy statements; therefore it seems more likely for them to side with the left. An alliance of Agrarian Socialism, Environmental Socialism, and Union Socialism.
In the meantime, they have been holding the country to ransom, to ensure that both sides of politics would agree to a range of demands prior to their making a decision. That is to say; they laid out a list of demands, and demanded both sides to affirm these, then they would decide which side they would support.
One of the 'Environmental' Socialists, as opposed to the Agrarian Socialists, and I put 'Environmental' in single quotes because he is a member of the Greens and they are red not green in this country, demanded a hospital as the price for his support. The Conservatives offered him one billion dollars, the Socialists offered him one quarter of a billion, with ongoing funding - which is to say a billion dollars but with a schedule. He then went public with both offers and condemned the Conservative offer as irresponsible.
The Agrarian Socialists also published the Conservatives' offers and costings. Which the Conservatives had only given them on the understanding that the content of the negotiations remain confidential.
So complete under-handedness and untrustworthiness on the left.
What's new?
We are meant to hear today from the three independents that have been holding the country to ransom. As in, they said that they would deliver their final decision today. So I wanted to write this before I find out what way they go, then I can see how well I went.
I think that they will back Socialism.
These are my reasons:
1. Costings.
The Conservatives' costings were savaged by the Civil Service. Despite lots of experienced commentators reminding people that the government bureaucrats are not very good with numbers the majority of journalists still believe that 'Treasury' are somehow sacrosanct. Despite Treasury using a fallible interest rate projection, despite Treasury applying current government policy to the Conservatives' budget to warp it. And despite the Socialists' 43 billion dollar broadband project not being included in their costings. The independents still made lots of comments about the Conservatives being fiscally irresponsible. Yet after adjusting for all of the smoke the Conservatives will deliver nearly a billion in surplus versus the Socialists delivering more than four billion in deficit annually. In short the independents are economically naive.
2. Politics.
The independents come from seats that the Conservatives will contest and may take from them, so any alliance would be fraught with danger. The Socialists will never get those seats and so they will welcome the independents and value them, their alliance would be far more secure.
3. Personalities.
The three independents are all renegades from the minor party in the Conservative Coalition. They have severe issues with the Nationals' leadership; they will never sit well together.
4. Politics 2.
The independents have all made quite a lot of leftist sounding policy statements; therefore it seems more likely for them to side with the left. An alliance of Agrarian Socialism, Environmental Socialism, and Union Socialism.
In the meantime, they have been holding the country to ransom, to ensure that both sides of politics would agree to a range of demands prior to their making a decision. That is to say; they laid out a list of demands, and demanded both sides to affirm these, then they would decide which side they would support.
One of the 'Environmental' Socialists, as opposed to the Agrarian Socialists, and I put 'Environmental' in single quotes because he is a member of the Greens and they are red not green in this country, demanded a hospital as the price for his support. The Conservatives offered him one billion dollars, the Socialists offered him one quarter of a billion, with ongoing funding - which is to say a billion dollars but with a schedule. He then went public with both offers and condemned the Conservative offer as irresponsible.
The Agrarian Socialists also published the Conservatives' offers and costings. Which the Conservatives had only given them on the understanding that the content of the negotiations remain confidential.
So complete under-handedness and untrustworthiness on the left.
What's new?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)