Minister Tan Chuan Jin justified legalising online gambling, saying that it is a growing activity and anyway, cannot be stopped entirely. Thus it would make sense to bring a part of this dark activity into the light so that it provides people with a guilt-free and legal avenue to engage in this erstwhile illegal activity. This decriminalising of online gambling in Singapore, with certain controls and conditions, will wipe out a criminal activity in one fell swoop. That's the main argument anyway, not to mention that it will increase government revenue from this once illicit activity. Minister Tan went into quite pedantic detail in an interview regarding this matter with Channel NewsAsia. I will not repeat the points, for by Minister Tan, and against by the Worker's Party and the National Council of Churches.
I would just like to add that the government, by the same argument and logic, should legalise the consumption of marijuana (cannabis) in Singapore. It is underground right now, and attracts draconian penalties when caught. In spite of all efforts to eliminate the trafficking of this drug and its use (if no one uses it, no one will traffic it, right?) remains unabated - the same as online gambling. After all, some countries have decriminalise the possession of the drug, including Australia, Austria and the US (in some States) as have some countries online gambling. But I suspect that the Singapore government will not do so anytime soon (or ever), never mind that the logic behind the easing of restriction on online gambling is exactly the same for consumption of marijuana.
I would suggest that the logic and argument that has been brought to bear on justifying the legalisation of online gambling has been quite selective and convinces no one except those for which it is music to the ears.
Showing posts with label Behaviour. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Behaviour. Show all posts
Saturday, October 08, 2016
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Q for the money
It is said that Singaporeans like to queue. This is proof yet again. Long lines were seen outside of banks. Singaporeans were seen queueing on 20th August 2015 to exchange their money for newly designed notes that commemorates Singapore's Golden Jubilee. Although $20 million worth of the new notes will be printed, enough for all Singaporeans, people just love to queue. Yesterday morning, before the bank was opened, some people had already staked their positions in a queue in front of the bank entrance. Hello...this is not the launch of Apple's latest gadget.
This is proof yet again that Singaporeans are not as hardworking, as in being productive, working late, typically till 7-8pm, as they have been made out to be. They would rather stand (or sit) in a queue for hours on end than to do something more productive. The only way in which Singapore has any hope of increasing the productivity of its workforce is to replace these people with robots. No no no, the robot won't replace the person in the queue, they'll replace the person in the workplace.
Singaporeans like to queue, right? Its a distinctly Singapore thing, uniquely Singapore...sigh....
This is proof yet again that Singaporeans are not as hardworking, as in being productive, working late, typically till 7-8pm, as they have been made out to be. They would rather stand (or sit) in a queue for hours on end than to do something more productive. The only way in which Singapore has any hope of increasing the productivity of its workforce is to replace these people with robots. No no no, the robot won't replace the person in the queue, they'll replace the person in the workplace.
Singaporeans like to queue, right? Its a distinctly Singapore thing, uniquely Singapore...sigh....
Saturday, August 22, 2015
Bread and milk
Breadtalk didn't really have to stop selling its "fresh" soya milk, really. It just has to learn to tell real 'fresh' milk from, err..not real 'fresh' milk, that's all. Short of having a cow (or soya milk making apparatus at the back of the kitchen), this is what fresh milk looks like:
It would have saved itself 50,000 pork floss buns, a red face and a lot of goodwill. While nobody is complaining about those freebies, for some, the damage is already done..
It would have saved itself 50,000 pork floss buns, a red face and a lot of goodwill. While nobody is complaining about those freebies, for some, the damage is already done..
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Unhappy Riches
It is sad that Singaporeans don't feel happy. According to a recent Gallup Poll, not only are Singaporeans emotionless, they feel less positive compared to people in countries where war is, or at least recently has been, the norm.
Actually, it is not difficult to understand this result. Singapore is a goal-oriented high performing country with an almost religious bent on efficiency, in terms of the economy, education, healthcare, finance, infrastructure, and whatever else it feels it must be first in, which just about includes everything. We have been brought up with a siege mentality - either we make the island succeed as a nation or we are consigned to the dustbin of history, easily absorbed by our neighbours, Malaysia or Indonesia. If this were to happen, we would be consigned to the backwaters, controlled by others where discrimination is the constant monotonous tune.
No, we don't want that, and therefore, we strived hard and succeeded. But success breeds success, and soon, we find ourselves condemned to a life of ever striving after the best. There is just no going back. Yes, we became rich, materially, but something had to give. And what gave was a simpler lifestyle where people and not money, matters more, where the simple things of life will suffice on the happiness index.
But it is not really our fault. As they say, we are victims of our circumstances. Perhaps now that we know how miserable we are compared to the rest of the world, we can engineer a lot more happiness and emotions among ourselves. It is ironic that we have to do this because we thought that our strivings for a better life will give us happiness, but it turned out to have the opposite effect. Is happiness and economic growth inversely related? Maybe someone economist or sociologist somewhere at sometime studied this and has the answer. In characteristic fashion, we need to study this carefully so that we can tune the system to yield more happiness though not at the expense of economic growth and efficiency.
Given Singapore's track record, I have no doubt that this can be done. Then we can share the formula with the Gallup organization.
Actually, it is not difficult to understand this result. Singapore is a goal-oriented high performing country with an almost religious bent on efficiency, in terms of the economy, education, healthcare, finance, infrastructure, and whatever else it feels it must be first in, which just about includes everything. We have been brought up with a siege mentality - either we make the island succeed as a nation or we are consigned to the dustbin of history, easily absorbed by our neighbours, Malaysia or Indonesia. If this were to happen, we would be consigned to the backwaters, controlled by others where discrimination is the constant monotonous tune.
No, we don't want that, and therefore, we strived hard and succeeded. But success breeds success, and soon, we find ourselves condemned to a life of ever striving after the best. There is just no going back. Yes, we became rich, materially, but something had to give. And what gave was a simpler lifestyle where people and not money, matters more, where the simple things of life will suffice on the happiness index.
But it is not really our fault. As they say, we are victims of our circumstances. Perhaps now that we know how miserable we are compared to the rest of the world, we can engineer a lot more happiness and emotions among ourselves. It is ironic that we have to do this because we thought that our strivings for a better life will give us happiness, but it turned out to have the opposite effect. Is happiness and economic growth inversely related? Maybe someone economist or sociologist somewhere at sometime studied this and has the answer. In characteristic fashion, we need to study this carefully so that we can tune the system to yield more happiness though not at the expense of economic growth and efficiency.
Given Singapore's track record, I have no doubt that this can be done. Then we can share the formula with the Gallup organization.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Fright train - the Zombies
 |
| A China national playing Chinese Chess with his companion in a very crowded train |
But I must be fair. All is not lost. There are the occasional kid who gets up the moment they see someone in need of a seat. And some, bless their souls, even offered me a seat just because they see a few more strands of white hair on my head, or the wrinkles that have become quite pronounced over time on my face. At least, that's why I think they think I am elderly probably in need of crutches all too soon. I am not yet that old, but the gesture is much much appreciated. There is hope yet.
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
The right stuff
I had a very bad experience when I visited Beijing some years ago. You see, my friend used a public toilet. We were in a place where tourists go to. I just can't recall which one that was. Anyway, she exited the toilet looking choked and on the verge of spilling her guts outs. What was the reason for this? The toilet. It was damned damned damned (pardon the word and the emphasis) smelly. It looked ok from the outside though. I may not have used the toilet myself, but I believed her 100% when I saw the 'pain' she was in.
So toilets, dirty, messy and stinking ones, are not the preserve of Singapore. Yes, we do have them, and in a First World country that we have become, now for more than 10 years, we are damned ashamed of it. Truth be told, there are probably well kept toilets for every dirty stinky ones. In fact there are probably more than a 1:1 ratio. I would hazard that for every stinking ones, there are probably 2 well maintained ones. If you lived in Singapore, like me, you might not agree. Perhaps I don't visit public toilets all that often nowadays, at least not those in our hawker centres. I'd use the ones in the shopping malls, which if you consider the prices that shops there charge for their merchandise, you sort of expect better treatment in their loos.
Now Singapore is considering building more hawkers centres that will not be parceled out to commercial operators such as Kopitiam and Koufu to operate. Hooray! Lower prices of food, but I hope that the toilets would be 21st century quality also. Or are our designers of our new generation hawkers centres going to retain this aspect of our dirty toilets, for nostalgia's sake? Nooo, social enterprises will be running these places, surely they are more socially conscious and will have a heart not to cause a person to retch upon existing that most essential of places?
But who know? There's nothing like nostalgia.
So toilets, dirty, messy and stinking ones, are not the preserve of Singapore. Yes, we do have them, and in a First World country that we have become, now for more than 10 years, we are damned ashamed of it. Truth be told, there are probably well kept toilets for every dirty stinky ones. In fact there are probably more than a 1:1 ratio. I would hazard that for every stinking ones, there are probably 2 well maintained ones. If you lived in Singapore, like me, you might not agree. Perhaps I don't visit public toilets all that often nowadays, at least not those in our hawker centres. I'd use the ones in the shopping malls, which if you consider the prices that shops there charge for their merchandise, you sort of expect better treatment in their loos.
Now Singapore is considering building more hawkers centres that will not be parceled out to commercial operators such as Kopitiam and Koufu to operate. Hooray! Lower prices of food, but I hope that the toilets would be 21st century quality also. Or are our designers of our new generation hawkers centres going to retain this aspect of our dirty toilets, for nostalgia's sake? Nooo, social enterprises will be running these places, surely they are more socially conscious and will have a heart not to cause a person to retch upon existing that most essential of places?
But who know? There's nothing like nostalgia.
Saturday, January 01, 2011
Murderous Youth
If you had followed the local news in the last 3 months, you would have asked the question, "What is wrong with Singapore's Youth today?" Frankly, if it were anywhere else except Singapore, this question would have been passe - what is wrong with youth has always been wrong with youth. But in the usually orderly and systematic Singapore, a country where you can reputedly walk the streets at night alone without beings harassed or mugged, youth gangs fighting other youth gangs, and in some instances youth attacking by-standers, this is unusual to say the least, and very worrying for everyone - the government, society and parents. Now every parent is worried any time their teenage children are spending time out on an evening, no matter where. We parents advise them to 'walk away' when there is any hint of people turning aggressive - better to be a living 'coward' than to be a dead 'hero'. At least you live to 'fight' another day for society and become a real hero.
But really, what is wrong with youth in Singapore today? Some are still reported to be involved in fights at the very same locations that shocked Singapore. Downtown East is at risk of gaining the unwelcome reputation of being a den of gangs. It first got into the news with the murder of a Polytechnic students on its premises. Of late, another 3 assault cases have been reported at Downtown East, by youth to youth. Downtown East, in various forms, has been there since I was a youth, and that is many many years ago. It used to be a quiet place for a family-and-friends-BBQ getaway. It still is. It was redeveloped over the years and has become a much more hip-and-happening destination for the family, but more so today for youth who descend on its holiday chalets, amusement parks, live shows and the great variety of food. It appears that many hot-blooded youths are attracted to it in droves and at all hours of the day. It used to be a members-only place - you had to pay an entrance fee to get into its premises. Now it is wide open. Anyone can walk in and out of the place any hour of the day, except for the holiday chalets.
Yes, there have been gang fights elsewhere on the island, some reported and some kept quiet, but Downtown East is the focus of youth mis-behaving today in Singapore. Many have written and speculated on why Singapore youth have turned out this way. But to put it in perspective, it is after all just a handful compared to the generally well-behaved youth in Singapore. And we should suspend our judgments until the original murderous youths are brought before the Courts. Then perhaps we can better understand what has gone wrong. In the meantime, we should advise our children to be cautious and not get into meaningless arguments and fights, and above all, not to stare at anyone. For some people, this is even worst than pointing with the middle finger. Bravado counts for little when you get a black eye for no good reason.
But really, what is wrong with youth in Singapore today? Some are still reported to be involved in fights at the very same locations that shocked Singapore. Downtown East is at risk of gaining the unwelcome reputation of being a den of gangs. It first got into the news with the murder of a Polytechnic students on its premises. Of late, another 3 assault cases have been reported at Downtown East, by youth to youth. Downtown East, in various forms, has been there since I was a youth, and that is many many years ago. It used to be a quiet place for a family-and-friends-BBQ getaway. It still is. It was redeveloped over the years and has become a much more hip-and-happening destination for the family, but more so today for youth who descend on its holiday chalets, amusement parks, live shows and the great variety of food. It appears that many hot-blooded youths are attracted to it in droves and at all hours of the day. It used to be a members-only place - you had to pay an entrance fee to get into its premises. Now it is wide open. Anyone can walk in and out of the place any hour of the day, except for the holiday chalets.
Yes, there have been gang fights elsewhere on the island, some reported and some kept quiet, but Downtown East is the focus of youth mis-behaving today in Singapore. Many have written and speculated on why Singapore youth have turned out this way. But to put it in perspective, it is after all just a handful compared to the generally well-behaved youth in Singapore. And we should suspend our judgments until the original murderous youths are brought before the Courts. Then perhaps we can better understand what has gone wrong. In the meantime, we should advise our children to be cautious and not get into meaningless arguments and fights, and above all, not to stare at anyone. For some people, this is even worst than pointing with the middle finger. Bravado counts for little when you get a black eye for no good reason.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
The big i
What's it with people nowadays anyway? They hear that Apple is going to release the iPad this Friday (tomorrow) and the iPhone 4 a week later and they go into a frenzy. People have been reported to have made plans to queue for these coveted products. Queue! Like they have got all the time in the world. If they are really mad about these devices, they would already have paid the premium to secure one already. Why wait till tomorrow?
So I would say that these people who plan to camp outside an Apple store tonight are just imitators, pure and simple. They do not want to vote with their wallets (or purse) as the case may be, and instead look for the moment of fame for queuing up for a device which is no more than an enlarged iPhone. Well, maybe that's it. An enlarge brain with nothing much in between but pockets flowing over with cash.
But who am I to say anything? It is their money and they can spend it any way they want. I am sure Steve Jobs approves of such enthusiasm.
So I would say that these people who plan to camp outside an Apple store tonight are just imitators, pure and simple. They do not want to vote with their wallets (or purse) as the case may be, and instead look for the moment of fame for queuing up for a device which is no more than an enlarged iPhone. Well, maybe that's it. An enlarge brain with nothing much in between but pockets flowing over with cash.
But who am I to say anything? It is their money and they can spend it any way they want. I am sure Steve Jobs approves of such enthusiasm.
Sunday, May 09, 2010
Stupidity is as stupidity gets
There is probably an index on the state of the Singapore economy that can be created: the number of taxi bookings per hour. You see, when the economy is not doing all that well, fewer people book for taxis, even when they are at a taxi stand. When the economy is doing well, you will see not a few people with a cell-phone seemingly stuck to their ears even as they queue up for taxis. In these times, they'd book for taxis even as empty ones come by. I suppose they just have too much money to burn, or they are showing off?
So you can't blame taxi companies for imposing a $3 surcharge for picking up passengers at Marina Bay Sands, really. Singaporeans just ask for it to happen. Sure other right thinking Singaporeans say this is profiteering at its worst, and I agree. But I also say that Singaporeans should stop calling taxis willy nilly to give the impression that they have a lot of excess cash in their pockets which they are more than happy to hand over to the cabby, not that I have anything against cabbies. Some of my friends are cabbies. This was exactly what happened yesterday as I waited for a cab at a taxi stand. Sure there were 5 people ahead of me, so I had to wait. I looked around and there were 3 people apparently wishing to jump the queue by 'ordering' a taxi. The booking took a while but a 'booked' taxi duly came and the commuter was off. Then almost immediately, 3 empty cabs came at one go, and that cleared the queue dramatically. I don't think this was luck or anything. It's just cabbies cruising for business, that's all. I wondered if the 'booker' had just been more patient, she would have saved some money. And there were still 2 people booking for a taxi as the queue cleared. If there is demand, the supply will be more than willing to oblige, is it not so? If people are willing to spend $3.20 booking fees, then what is $3 for the speed of the service at Marina Bay Sands? After all, it is a hip and happening place where people are supposed to have their pockets overflowing with cash after a day at the Casino? At least, some of them?
The problem is of our own making, not only in MBS, but anywhere else in Singapore. My heart always sinks when I see cell-phones appearing at taxi stands. I can understand this behaviour if the person is somewhere in Tuas, or even some less remote parts of Singapore, but at a taxi stand? I don't blame the cabbies for seizing the opportunity of making a couple of bucks more. If there is money to be made from stupid people, why not? People's stupidity is the least of their problems.
p.s. Come to think of it, probably the Competition Commission and the Public Transport Council (PTC), and probably also the LTA, should investigate the collusive behaviour of all 6 taxi companies deciding that a surcharge should be levied on taxi trips made out of Marina Bay Sands. Or are they in on this too?
So you can't blame taxi companies for imposing a $3 surcharge for picking up passengers at Marina Bay Sands, really. Singaporeans just ask for it to happen. Sure other right thinking Singaporeans say this is profiteering at its worst, and I agree. But I also say that Singaporeans should stop calling taxis willy nilly to give the impression that they have a lot of excess cash in their pockets which they are more than happy to hand over to the cabby, not that I have anything against cabbies. Some of my friends are cabbies. This was exactly what happened yesterday as I waited for a cab at a taxi stand. Sure there were 5 people ahead of me, so I had to wait. I looked around and there were 3 people apparently wishing to jump the queue by 'ordering' a taxi. The booking took a while but a 'booked' taxi duly came and the commuter was off. Then almost immediately, 3 empty cabs came at one go, and that cleared the queue dramatically. I don't think this was luck or anything. It's just cabbies cruising for business, that's all. I wondered if the 'booker' had just been more patient, she would have saved some money. And there were still 2 people booking for a taxi as the queue cleared. If there is demand, the supply will be more than willing to oblige, is it not so? If people are willing to spend $3.20 booking fees, then what is $3 for the speed of the service at Marina Bay Sands? After all, it is a hip and happening place where people are supposed to have their pockets overflowing with cash after a day at the Casino? At least, some of them?
The problem is of our own making, not only in MBS, but anywhere else in Singapore. My heart always sinks when I see cell-phones appearing at taxi stands. I can understand this behaviour if the person is somewhere in Tuas, or even some less remote parts of Singapore, but at a taxi stand? I don't blame the cabbies for seizing the opportunity of making a couple of bucks more. If there is money to be made from stupid people, why not? People's stupidity is the least of their problems.
p.s. Come to think of it, probably the Competition Commission and the Public Transport Council (PTC), and probably also the LTA, should investigate the collusive behaviour of all 6 taxi companies deciding that a surcharge should be levied on taxi trips made out of Marina Bay Sands. Or are they in on this too?
Friday, April 23, 2010
Do your math
I am alarmed to read in MyPaper (22 April 2010) that some of our local undergraduates are taking anti-sleep pills to force themselves to stay awake. Why are they doing this? Well, according to the report, these undergraduates need the time not only to study, but they also need it to attend to businesses that they are running at the same time. The report doesn't say what these businesses are, but the impression given is that these businesses are not part time pursuits meant to defray livings costs and school fees, etc., something which is quite common in tertiary level education. Rather, the impression is that these businesses are serious enough to be careers in the making. The focus appears to be to build a business that will generate a steady income (lots of it too) by the time these young people turn 30. That's when they say they will stop the sleep-reducing drug and lead a more normal life, while enjoying the fruits of the sleep-deprived labour.
It isn't wrong to have ambitions early in life, and it isn't wrong to want the good material things in life early either. But when that is the overriding consideration, at the risk of long term damage to one's health, then you really need to reflect on what you are doing. Young people, they always think they can live forever and they throw caution to the wind. They should remember what a wise man once said. Paraphrasing him, "What does it profit a man if he should gain the whole world and loses his own life/health?"
Young man, there is yet time to 'make it', but don't die making it now. The Mathematics just doesn't add up.
It isn't wrong to have ambitions early in life, and it isn't wrong to want the good material things in life early either. But when that is the overriding consideration, at the risk of long term damage to one's health, then you really need to reflect on what you are doing. Young people, they always think they can live forever and they throw caution to the wind. They should remember what a wise man once said. Paraphrasing him, "What does it profit a man if he should gain the whole world and loses his own life/health?"
Young man, there is yet time to 'make it', but don't die making it now. The Mathematics just doesn't add up.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Entertainment Today
Nothing titillates more than sex. And Singapore is now in a frenzy over the Woods-like scandal that one of its most famous sons is embroiled in - yes, you guessed it, the Jack Neo extramarital affair. First, it was about a 22-year old who came knocking on the front door, but in this instance, nothing was broken, unlike what happened in Florida. Instead, a pow-wow was organised in a quiet corner of Singapore, consisting of the wayward husband, the long-suffering wife, the aggrieved third party, and her parents, or so it was reported. It was also reported that some others joined in the pow-wow. What I heard so far is that the extramarital affair was consensual, whichever one hooked the other first is immaterial. The girl, Wendy Chong, said that Jack made the first move. Whichever. Both jumped into bed (and rolled in a car) quite willingly, and I assume, with their eyes opened.
Now, the 'paparazzi' or 'kaypoh news' are going to town with stories of other women who are accusing Jack of trying to seduce them in the past. These are just stories so far, nothing proven, but they sound oh so familiar to that Florida story. But all of a sudden, some women have become shameless. If they have had such grievances regarding Jack Neo's indiscretion with them, they are all coming out now. Why now, you wonder? I don't know the details, nor am I interested to read the details. Unless Jack Neo has committed rape or molest, these women have no case. If they had, probably half of Singapore will be embroiled in multiple scandals. So I think these women are merely taking their cue from Wendy and trying to profit from someone's shame for the fame, or notoriety. But for the rest of Singapore, its oh so juicy. Flaunt it if you have done it, they say, or even if you haven't.
Some may sympathise with or berate Jack's wife for her calm and forgiving stance. But this whole affair is a private one and it should stay private. Whatever happened to common decency? If it were you, do you want the whole of Singapore to keep talking about you and your affairs? Would you want your wife/husband, and your children to be dragged through the mud? You say Jack has had it coming to him, that he is a celebrity and therefore these things come with the territory. Well, who said so?
Now, the 'paparazzi' or 'kaypoh news' are going to town with stories of other women who are accusing Jack of trying to seduce them in the past. These are just stories so far, nothing proven, but they sound oh so familiar to that Florida story. But all of a sudden, some women have become shameless. If they have had such grievances regarding Jack Neo's indiscretion with them, they are all coming out now. Why now, you wonder? I don't know the details, nor am I interested to read the details. Unless Jack Neo has committed rape or molest, these women have no case. If they had, probably half of Singapore will be embroiled in multiple scandals. So I think these women are merely taking their cue from Wendy and trying to profit from someone's shame for the fame, or notoriety. But for the rest of Singapore, its oh so juicy. Flaunt it if you have done it, they say, or even if you haven't.
Some may sympathise with or berate Jack's wife for her calm and forgiving stance. But this whole affair is a private one and it should stay private. Whatever happened to common decency? If it were you, do you want the whole of Singapore to keep talking about you and your affairs? Would you want your wife/husband, and your children to be dragged through the mud? You say Jack has had it coming to him, that he is a celebrity and therefore these things come with the territory. Well, who said so?
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Flogging a dead horse
It would appear that, from what little I have read, that Singaporeans, or at least those who live on this little red dot of an island of ours, is having a field day putting in their 2 cents worth over the incident of Past Rony Tan's sermon on Buddhists and Taoists. Now I must confess that I haven't read much of these comments, nor am I interested in reading any of them. But I do notice that besides apologizing to the Buddhists and Taoists, that some are demanding that Pastor Tan also apologize to the Lesbians and Homosexuals. What next? The Muslims? The Jains? The Government? The man has said his sorries, very publicly, so what else is there to flog? People just cannot leave the issue alone. They must say something. I think they should heed the advice of Jesus, who said, '...let he who has no sin cast the first stone', or the common and wise saying that 'he who lives in glass houses should learn not to throw stones'. I think our Buddhist and Taoists friends would agree wholeheartedly with these.
But of course there will be many who will disagree with me. They see this opportunity to lambast others in the name of their beliefs and self-interest too good to pass up. In this sense, how are they any different from the pastor?
But of course there will be many who will disagree with me. They see this opportunity to lambast others in the name of their beliefs and self-interest too good to pass up. In this sense, how are they any different from the pastor?
Monday, February 15, 2010
Let the games begin
"The Chinese are inveterate gamblers", said MM Lee Kuan Yew, when the setting up of resort casinos for Singapore, along the lines and scope of those in Las Vegas and Genting, was approved. True to fashion, Singapore's first casino was opened to the public on the first day of the Lunar New Year, at the auspicious hour of 12:18pm. Auspicious for who, you wonder? For the operator, which in this case is Malaysia's Genting group, or for the punters, the gamblers? Even the God of Fortune will find it hard to give its fortune to both the Operator and the gambler at the same table at the same time.You either win the money or you lose it. There is no third way about it.
But of course, some gamblers will tell you that they take pleasure in the act of gambling, and therefore losing any or all of their money is no different from dining at an expensive restaurant. You get treated like a king. You get served (I heard that free food was offered to one and all), you can drink in the den's ambiance, savour the atmosphere which must be very different from queuing in the neighbourhood 4-D and Toto counters). If you want to gamble, do so in style and comfort, they say. So there was a reported bee-line for the entrance of Resort World Sentosa's (RWS) newly minted casino, never mind that you lose a S$100 to the Entrance Levy (tax) before you pass the door into the casino. But that money doesn't belong to the Casino Operators, it is money made by the Singapore Government in the name of gambling addiction*. It is probably a good idea to levy the fees to fund the programmes meant to correct the anticipated problem behaviour and chronic habits that gamblers would pick up as a result of accessing the gambling facilities blessed by the government. Sounds convoluted? Yeah, but gambling is straightforward - either you win or you lose. And for the Operators to be around, gamblers must lose more than they win. That's simple Mathematics, although the Math underlying the Game of Chance may not be understood by most people.
This is indeed a milestone, as our Institute of Mental Health (IMH) prepares to admit its first patients in the new category of big time problem gamblers.
God help us, in more ways than one.
*p.s. If 75,000 people got into the casino on the first 2 days, the government itself would have raked in a cool $7.5M. Now that's what I call good business and easy money.
But of course, some gamblers will tell you that they take pleasure in the act of gambling, and therefore losing any or all of their money is no different from dining at an expensive restaurant. You get treated like a king. You get served (I heard that free food was offered to one and all), you can drink in the den's ambiance, savour the atmosphere which must be very different from queuing in the neighbourhood 4-D and Toto counters). If you want to gamble, do so in style and comfort, they say. So there was a reported bee-line for the entrance of Resort World Sentosa's (RWS) newly minted casino, never mind that you lose a S$100 to the Entrance Levy (tax) before you pass the door into the casino. But that money doesn't belong to the Casino Operators, it is money made by the Singapore Government in the name of gambling addiction*. It is probably a good idea to levy the fees to fund the programmes meant to correct the anticipated problem behaviour and chronic habits that gamblers would pick up as a result of accessing the gambling facilities blessed by the government. Sounds convoluted? Yeah, but gambling is straightforward - either you win or you lose. And for the Operators to be around, gamblers must lose more than they win. That's simple Mathematics, although the Math underlying the Game of Chance may not be understood by most people.
This is indeed a milestone, as our Institute of Mental Health (IMH) prepares to admit its first patients in the new category of big time problem gamblers.
God help us, in more ways than one.
*p.s. If 75,000 people got into the casino on the first 2 days, the government itself would have raked in a cool $7.5M. Now that's what I call good business and easy money.
Friday, October 02, 2009
Abused Beauty
After all is said and done, I think Singaporeans have been a bit mean (well, ok, very mean) to Ms Ris Low. Much has been said and written about her less than perfect English diction and videos have made her the laughing stock of the whole country. Why are we so mean? It is not as if she is totally unintelligble when she speaks. I can think of and heard other Singaporeans pronounce English words the way she does. Just today I was at a seminar presented by a major public-listed company, in a room full of professionals, and its speakers were pronouncing 'badder' for 'better'. There were a couple of other words that were similarly abused. This isn't all that different from Ms Low's diction. In this respect, I think some of the Youtube videos about her less than perfect diction have been made in bad taste. Yes, they are funny, but they are also very cruel. In fact, unless Mediacorp (or whoever the original video belongs to) is in on it, some IP rights may have been violated and the perpetrators could be charged in Court. What's the difference then between Ms Low's trouble with the law with this sort of 'stealing'? So whoever put them up should take them down.
And what's wrong with Boomz? At least now English has a new word, and words are created all the time. Singlish has produced not a few of them, which we have come to love. We don't understand what Boomz is? Well, neither do I understand what the 'lah' that ends Singlish phrases mean. But don't we use it with relish because that is so Singaporean? That's one thing you look out for when you are overseas, when in a sea of people, it brings a smile to your face the moment you hear it. You know for sure that a countryman is in the midst. Lewis Carroll himself was probably 'guilty' of spouting nonsense, with his invention of the nonsensical words 'jabberwocky', 'chortled and 'galumping' in his poems. But these words have since entered the English language. OK, ok, Ms Low was not being particularly poetic when she blurted out the Boomz word. But inventions are often made at the spur of the moment, no?
But isn't the whole of Singapore, in ridiculing it, now trying to give meaning to the word? In time, who knows, it may become a peculiar Singlish word that our children will use without the ridicule that accompanies it today.
I think the real 'problem' is not her language, nor particularly her diction. If it were, many Singaporean's will be just as guilty as her. Her diction could have been 'badder', as befits the representative of Singapore women, but I think the real issue about her representing Singapore is her conviction for credit card fraud. She should have come clean about it from the start. Unfortunately, she did not. Maybe she was immature, maybe she thought that her achievements in the beauty pageant will erase her 'moment' of weakness (well, that moment did last quite a while, I admit). But I think enough is enough. Let the poor girl alone. Hopefully she has learnt the right lessons from the whole affair and we will hear better things of her in the future.
Boomz! RIP.
And what's wrong with Boomz? At least now English has a new word, and words are created all the time. Singlish has produced not a few of them, which we have come to love. We don't understand what Boomz is? Well, neither do I understand what the 'lah' that ends Singlish phrases mean. But don't we use it with relish because that is so Singaporean? That's one thing you look out for when you are overseas, when in a sea of people, it brings a smile to your face the moment you hear it. You know for sure that a countryman is in the midst. Lewis Carroll himself was probably 'guilty' of spouting nonsense, with his invention of the nonsensical words 'jabberwocky', 'chortled and 'galumping' in his poems. But these words have since entered the English language. OK, ok, Ms Low was not being particularly poetic when she blurted out the Boomz word. But inventions are often made at the spur of the moment, no?
But isn't the whole of Singapore, in ridiculing it, now trying to give meaning to the word? In time, who knows, it may become a peculiar Singlish word that our children will use without the ridicule that accompanies it today.
I think the real 'problem' is not her language, nor particularly her diction. If it were, many Singaporean's will be just as guilty as her. Her diction could have been 'badder', as befits the representative of Singapore women, but I think the real issue about her representing Singapore is her conviction for credit card fraud. She should have come clean about it from the start. Unfortunately, she did not. Maybe she was immature, maybe she thought that her achievements in the beauty pageant will erase her 'moment' of weakness (well, that moment did last quite a while, I admit). But I think enough is enough. Let the poor girl alone. Hopefully she has learnt the right lessons from the whole affair and we will hear better things of her in the future.
Boomz! RIP.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Confused Beauty
Do we have another air-head in the making? I don't know, but I am beginning to have grave doubts about the girls that were crowned first and second (and third and ....?) in the Miss Singapore World 2009 contest.
It is all well and good for friends to stick together and speak up for each other. But when the first runner-up, Ms Lee, a graduate of NTU's aerospace engineering, insisted that Ris Low should still represent Singapore in Africa even after Ms Low has bowed out, you have second thoughts about the quality of the person who came in second. Let's separate personal loyalty and national duty. One can, and should be, loyal to one's friends, but when that loyalty concerns the nation, then you should put aside personal feelings. Ris knows she has become a liability in the competition in Africa. She knows that she can potentially shame Singapore and give it a bad name. She knows she cannot be an effective ambassador and spokesperson for Singapore, much less win the title But it would appear that Ms Lee doesn't get the point when she insisted that Ris proceed to Africa.
If Ms Lee is now chosen as the replacement, I will cringe at the thought of Singapore's name being dragged through the mud of Africa. It'll be no different sending Ris.
Where did they get these 'beauties' from, anyway? Perhaps all those years of studying aerospace has gotten to her head, She should land and show us some maturity, not blind loyalty. One would have thought that she hasn't been reading the newspapers and blogs of late. Or if she had, she hasn't been applying her mind.
P.S. Its tough to be a beauty in Singapore.
It is all well and good for friends to stick together and speak up for each other. But when the first runner-up, Ms Lee, a graduate of NTU's aerospace engineering, insisted that Ris Low should still represent Singapore in Africa even after Ms Low has bowed out, you have second thoughts about the quality of the person who came in second. Let's separate personal loyalty and national duty. One can, and should be, loyal to one's friends, but when that loyalty concerns the nation, then you should put aside personal feelings. Ris knows she has become a liability in the competition in Africa. She knows that she can potentially shame Singapore and give it a bad name. She knows she cannot be an effective ambassador and spokesperson for Singapore, much less win the title But it would appear that Ms Lee doesn't get the point when she insisted that Ris proceed to Africa.
If Ms Lee is now chosen as the replacement, I will cringe at the thought of Singapore's name being dragged through the mud of Africa. It'll be no different sending Ris.
Where did they get these 'beauties' from, anyway? Perhaps all those years of studying aerospace has gotten to her head, She should land and show us some maturity, not blind loyalty. One would have thought that she hasn't been reading the newspapers and blogs of late. Or if she had, she hasn't been applying her mind.
P.S. Its tough to be a beauty in Singapore.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Cheating beauty
Given the revelation of this year's Ms Singapore World, Ms Ris Low's conviction for credit card fraud, cheating and criminal misappropriation, numbering no less than 60 charges, and given that she did not reveal this to the organisers until after she had secured the crown, demonstrating her dishonesty and hypocrisy (I can only imagine the 'honest-to-God' answers she gave during the competition proper on her way to her now tainted crown), how can she represent the whole of Singapore on foreign soil? She can represent herself, she can represent the organisation that anointed her, but can she claim to represent the women of Singapore? If I were a women, I would cringe, though as a Singaporean, I still will cringe. Hey world, this girl doesn't show off the best of our girls - heck most of them are honest and hardworking, never mind that they may not have the perfect physical features and proportions. And many of them may have a problem or two with some physical or mental condition, but they don't steal credit cards and dine dishonestly at posh-posh restaurants.
Some talk of second chances and all. Well, yes, that is desirable. But to use Ms Singapore World to redeem yourself ultimately cheapens the Ms Singapore World title and brand. Actually, I don't care very much for Beauty contests, but if Singapore's name and reputation are at stake, that's when a line needs to be drawn. One may be compassionate and forgiving, but in the dog-eat-dog world out there in South Africa, any pretender will be mauled if she even has a spot of blemish. So the best thing for Ms Low is to give up her crown gracefully instead of hanging on to it so doggedly. I think she has already proven something. No point exposing herself to ridicule in South Africa. She will jeopardise the chances of all future Ms Singapore World at these competitions. The world will look at Singapore women with a different eye. It'll be a steeper slope for all future Ms Singapore World to climb on the world stage.
You don't want to be that selfish, do you?
Some talk of second chances and all. Well, yes, that is desirable. But to use Ms Singapore World to redeem yourself ultimately cheapens the Ms Singapore World title and brand. Actually, I don't care very much for Beauty contests, but if Singapore's name and reputation are at stake, that's when a line needs to be drawn. One may be compassionate and forgiving, but in the dog-eat-dog world out there in South Africa, any pretender will be mauled if she even has a spot of blemish. So the best thing for Ms Low is to give up her crown gracefully instead of hanging on to it so doggedly. I think she has already proven something. No point exposing herself to ridicule in South Africa. She will jeopardise the chances of all future Ms Singapore World at these competitions. The world will look at Singapore women with a different eye. It'll be a steeper slope for all future Ms Singapore World to climb on the world stage.
You don't want to be that selfish, do you?
Friday, September 11, 2009
Cult of religion
On the whole, Singapore takes a balanced approach towards people's beliefs, and their freedom to practice those beliefs. This was one of the major themes in the PM's National Day rally speech this year. And for the most part, this is something to be happy about. There will, of course, be some who think otherwise, when their 'religion' is frowned upon as they propagate values that are alien to a conservative society's, as is Singapore's. Amazingly, this atmosphere prevails when the government openly favours the Muslims in putting aside land for them to build their Mosques. Less so for Christian, who often have had to resort to gathering in house-churches, or abandoned cinemas or even huge conventions centres like those in Suntec City, paying an arm and a leg, to practice their religion every week. But we all live and let live. Religion is not about equality on earth. It is the afterlife, after all, that matters, isn't it? But some religions somehow miss this point.
Thus it is puzzling that peoples in other countries practice their religion in such as literal and earthly manner. This calls to mind whether they are following the letter of the law, and blindly at that, but have lost the spirit of these religous injunctions. For example, we hear of 2 Muslim women sentenced to caning for doing nothing more than drinking beer and wearing pants! Maybe in these places, such barbaric practices are the norm, that women-folk are accepted as the constant object of abuse in the name of religion, if not society at large - even by the women themselves. In the case of the women sentenced to canning, she perversely asked that she be caned. I often wonder if women like her have a sado-masochistic streak or are they plainly longsuffering in the name of religion? Whichever the case, it is probably no wonder that that section of society finds the whole thing quite civilised, proper, and (gasp), holy(istic).
Which reminds me. Today is 911 - the day of infamy when, 8 years ago, a few religious Muslim fanatics found it the height of their obligations to Allah, their God, to first hijack a plane, and then ram them straight into 2 towering buildings in New York City, thus attaining their ultimate religious state at the expense of thousands of poor innocent people. As I am reminded today, these people who perished were fathers, they were mothers, they were sons and daughters, husbands and wives, grandchildren and grandmothers....How can any religion find it right in its teachings that killing innocent people is the way to release? Yet as recent events have shown, in Jakarta for example, these religious fanatics have persisted in their perverse views. They will glady kill again in the name of their religion.
May such thinking and the people who continue to propagate them, face their just deserts when they see their God. Those who have already gone before would have been shocked to discover that they have died for a lie.
Thus it is puzzling that peoples in other countries practice their religion in such as literal and earthly manner. This calls to mind whether they are following the letter of the law, and blindly at that, but have lost the spirit of these religous injunctions. For example, we hear of 2 Muslim women sentenced to caning for doing nothing more than drinking beer and wearing pants! Maybe in these places, such barbaric practices are the norm, that women-folk are accepted as the constant object of abuse in the name of religion, if not society at large - even by the women themselves. In the case of the women sentenced to canning, she perversely asked that she be caned. I often wonder if women like her have a sado-masochistic streak or are they plainly longsuffering in the name of religion? Whichever the case, it is probably no wonder that that section of society finds the whole thing quite civilised, proper, and (gasp), holy(istic).
Which reminds me. Today is 911 - the day of infamy when, 8 years ago, a few religious Muslim fanatics found it the height of their obligations to Allah, their God, to first hijack a plane, and then ram them straight into 2 towering buildings in New York City, thus attaining their ultimate religious state at the expense of thousands of poor innocent people. As I am reminded today, these people who perished were fathers, they were mothers, they were sons and daughters, husbands and wives, grandchildren and grandmothers....How can any religion find it right in its teachings that killing innocent people is the way to release? Yet as recent events have shown, in Jakarta for example, these religious fanatics have persisted in their perverse views. They will glady kill again in the name of their religion.
May such thinking and the people who continue to propagate them, face their just deserts when they see their God. Those who have already gone before would have been shocked to discover that they have died for a lie.
In memoriam, to the victims of 911
and terrorism the world over
May you rest in peace
Friday, August 28, 2009
Castle in the air
It was James Otis who first said that a "man's house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his castle...". Well, I am sad to observe that in Singapore, even the Law acknowledges that this is not necessarily true. There was a recent case where 2 people sued a man for not being dressed at all while he was in his house's kitchen. The inside of this kitchen faced a public area, and as the newspaper account went, these 2 women were walking pass it when they saw the man of the house all naked sitting in his kitchen. Their modesty was so outraged that they sued the man. The Courts agreed with the women and fined the man $2,000 for the indecent exposure and a follow-up act of agression against the same.
So now, I am very careful about being decently dressed while I am at home. All the more so as many public, and might I say also private, apartments face public wakways and other apartments' windows. I once observed that in Hong Kong apartments, you could just reach out with your hands to touch your neighbours' window. Such was the congestion and design of their houses. Nowadays you can say the same about Singapore. At least you could see clearly into someone else's apartment.
Why would anyone move around in his/her apartment dressed to the zeros (as opposed to nines, i.e.?) Well, given Singapore's hot and humid climate, this would be the most sensible thing to do, actually. Nowadays, I sweat even when I remain still, sitting on my sofa chair in the living room. Sometimes, I take off my shirt and go around the house in nothing more than a pair of shorts. How short is my shorts? Well, that is my business. But that is exactly the issue. How much or how little must you have on before you offend the modesty of some prudish women (or men for that matter) and land up in court on the opposite side of the law? Nobody is forcing anyone to look into somebody's castle...err house. You are not forced to be a kay-poh. You choose to be one. If you take a look and see a naked man or woman in the house and am offended by what you see, that is your problem. You shouldn't even contemplate taking the owner of the house to court for exposing whatever. We talk of being tolerant when religion is concerned, but we must be equally tolerant of what the master of the house chooses to do, short of committing a crime. An act of indecency you say? What is indecent to you may be common sense to another, so long as it is done in his castle.
So now, I am very careful about being decently dressed while I am at home. All the more so as many public, and might I say also private, apartments face public wakways and other apartments' windows. I once observed that in Hong Kong apartments, you could just reach out with your hands to touch your neighbours' window. Such was the congestion and design of their houses. Nowadays you can say the same about Singapore. At least you could see clearly into someone else's apartment.
Why would anyone move around in his/her apartment dressed to the zeros (as opposed to nines, i.e.?) Well, given Singapore's hot and humid climate, this would be the most sensible thing to do, actually. Nowadays, I sweat even when I remain still, sitting on my sofa chair in the living room. Sometimes, I take off my shirt and go around the house in nothing more than a pair of shorts. How short is my shorts? Well, that is my business. But that is exactly the issue. How much or how little must you have on before you offend the modesty of some prudish women (or men for that matter) and land up in court on the opposite side of the law? Nobody is forcing anyone to look into somebody's castle...err house. You are not forced to be a kay-poh. You choose to be one. If you take a look and see a naked man or woman in the house and am offended by what you see, that is your problem. You shouldn't even contemplate taking the owner of the house to court for exposing whatever. We talk of being tolerant when religion is concerned, but we must be equally tolerant of what the master of the house chooses to do, short of committing a crime. An act of indecency you say? What is indecent to you may be common sense to another, so long as it is done in his castle.
Friday, July 17, 2009
A fine society
Eating on the MRT (subway trains) and be fined $30? I say, fine them $500 - the amount that is applied ever since I was a kid. Don't you fine it ironic that 30 years ago, it was $500 and today, when Singaporeans are more affluent, you fine them as measly $30? It would solve the problem immediately. Otherwise, it'll be like the case of the guy, who was fined $1,500 recently, retorting that it was JUST ONLY that amount, that he could afford it, that it was no big deal. And why just only the MRT? Just the other day, there was a whiff of ham and cheesey smell when I was on a bus travelling home. Lo and behold, the teenage girl sitting just in front of my seat was eating away, oblivious of the aroma. Well, ok, the food smelled good, but what of noses that are less appreciative of the smell of ham and cheese, or what if she was eating something more, err, exotic? And this isn't the first time. Slightly more than two years ago, I captured on my HP camera a picture of a teenager eating away on a subway train and blogged how I noticed more and more people eating away on MRT trains. Well, it about time SMRT did something about this anti-social behaviour.
Yes, Singaporeans have become more affluent, and with it has gone the social graces that we lament about nowadays. I don't know if it is due to the lifestyle - that we need to fill in every waking hour of the day doing something besides looking out the window of life passing by on a bus or a train. But there is a good reason why food and drinks are not allowed, just as it is forbidden in offices and some other places, except canteens and restaurants. Food left behind in these places, whether intentionally or unintentionally, attracts creepy crawly vermints that can destroy things, besides scaring some people, especially the fairer sex, out of their wits. I know because I have to prepare to carry my wife when such creatures appear.
There are certain things that were done better in the past than now. How about it - lets up the fine to $500. That'll not only stop the littering, but the bugs will also stop appearing. Ahhh....heaven on earth.
Yes, Singaporeans have become more affluent, and with it has gone the social graces that we lament about nowadays. I don't know if it is due to the lifestyle - that we need to fill in every waking hour of the day doing something besides looking out the window of life passing by on a bus or a train. But there is a good reason why food and drinks are not allowed, just as it is forbidden in offices and some other places, except canteens and restaurants. Food left behind in these places, whether intentionally or unintentionally, attracts creepy crawly vermints that can destroy things, besides scaring some people, especially the fairer sex, out of their wits. I know because I have to prepare to carry my wife when such creatures appear.
There are certain things that were done better in the past than now. How about it - lets up the fine to $500. That'll not only stop the littering, but the bugs will also stop appearing. Ahhh....heaven on earth.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
An Inconvenient Virus
The Influenza A H1Ni virus is not a deadly virus. Yes, it has killed more than 12,000 people worldwide, but I understand that this number pales in comparison to the numbers that die from the seasonal flu virus, which I caught last week, probably from someone in the MRT Train while going to work a week earlier. Yes, 2 weeks ago, I have had a person sit next to me who was sniffing mucus all the way to my destination. I optimistically hoped that he had a case of sinus. Then there was the case when a woman sneezed while standing next to me in the train. Fortunately, she didn't sneeze in my direction, but she was standing next to me.
With over a hundred people identified with H1N1 and not a single fatality in Singapore, people are beginning to treat H1N1 as a variety of the seasonal flu. Only this flu strain is so new that we don't have a vaccine against it yet. Some pharma companies have announced positive results towards a vaccine but we do have other drugs, such as Tamiflu and Relenza, which have proven effective against it.
Really, the problem with H1N1 is not that you die from it. The inconvenience is that you get 'jailed by association' for it - a minimum 7-day quarantine period - either on your own, or in government mandated locations. That means that you can't earn a living, you can't socialise, you can't see your kids or your husband/wife. (Well, ok, for some people, this can be a blessing). Nor do they want to see you during this 1-week jail time. And you get to go to this 'jail' not because you carry the virus, but that you have been in contact with a person or persons who carried the virus. That's why people are afraid of travelling - not that they will die, but that they will be locked up. So holidayers who have gone overseas over the last couple of school vacation weeks will be treated as a separate class of citizens once school starts. Some wouldn't be in school with the rest of their classmates.
One only hopes that these vacationeers won't 'elevate' those who have stayed home to that separate category of people. So I thought it ludicrous that people think they can 'get away' from these complications by their staycation plans. What if that staycation involved a 4-day 3-nights at the Swissotel the Stamford over the last weekend, or even into this week when more athletes from around the region show up at the hotel?
So staycation or vacation, it makes no difference in Singapore because Singapore brings the world to its doorsteps anyway. The only way to avoid the bug, whether of the seasonal variety or the H1N1, is to go to 'jail' - voluntarily. No turning right, no turning left, just go straight to jail. That's what most of us are already doing, anyway. What an inconvenient virus!
With over a hundred people identified with H1N1 and not a single fatality in Singapore, people are beginning to treat H1N1 as a variety of the seasonal flu. Only this flu strain is so new that we don't have a vaccine against it yet. Some pharma companies have announced positive results towards a vaccine but we do have other drugs, such as Tamiflu and Relenza, which have proven effective against it.
Really, the problem with H1N1 is not that you die from it. The inconvenience is that you get 'jailed by association' for it - a minimum 7-day quarantine period - either on your own, or in government mandated locations. That means that you can't earn a living, you can't socialise, you can't see your kids or your husband/wife. (Well, ok, for some people, this can be a blessing). Nor do they want to see you during this 1-week jail time. And you get to go to this 'jail' not because you carry the virus, but that you have been in contact with a person or persons who carried the virus. That's why people are afraid of travelling - not that they will die, but that they will be locked up. So holidayers who have gone overseas over the last couple of school vacation weeks will be treated as a separate class of citizens once school starts. Some wouldn't be in school with the rest of their classmates.
One only hopes that these vacationeers won't 'elevate' those who have stayed home to that separate category of people. So I thought it ludicrous that people think they can 'get away' from these complications by their staycation plans. What if that staycation involved a 4-day 3-nights at the Swissotel the Stamford over the last weekend, or even into this week when more athletes from around the region show up at the hotel?
So staycation or vacation, it makes no difference in Singapore because Singapore brings the world to its doorsteps anyway. The only way to avoid the bug, whether of the seasonal variety or the H1N1, is to go to 'jail' - voluntarily. No turning right, no turning left, just go straight to jail. That's what most of us are already doing, anyway. What an inconvenient virus!
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)