Club 30's "Kill the Boredom Demon" Jive Pad 154th Edition
-
have been vegging in the house these past weekends too
-
Cant wait to be freed.
Then I will check out what kind of fun there can be up north.
-
still planning on ipoh (last i heard right?)?
-
I ran StanChart in 4 hrs 48 min.
New personal best, but I could have done better.
I would have broken the 4:30 barrier if I hadn't gotten a bad case of the runs and blew at least 15 minutes at a public toilet at East Coast Park.
In fact, if it had not been for the presence of a 100 Plus water point near that toilet, I would have dropped out.
-
Originally posted by fudgester:
I ran StanChart in 4 hrs 48 min.
New personal best, but I could have done better.
I would have broken the 4:30 barrier if I hadn't gotten a bad case of the runs and blew at least 15 minutes at a public toilet at East Coast Park.
In fact, if it had not been for the presence of a 100 Plus water point near that toilet, I would have dropped out.
That's ... ... ... sux >___>Edited: ah, I was referring the toilet runs...
-
Originally posted by fudgester:
I ran StanChart in 4 hrs 48 min.
New personal best, but I could have done better.
I would have broken the 4:30 barrier if I hadn't gotten a bad case of the runs and blew at least 15 minutes at a public toilet at East Coast Park.
In fact, if it had not been for the presence of a 100 Plus water point near that toilet, I would have dropped out.
Good to hear that you're okay. It could've been disastrous, and there's always the next marathon to look forward to.
I would do one if it was held after 3pm but not as late as the Sundown.
-
morning.. poor fudgie...
-
Originally posted by fudgester:
I ran StanChart in 4 hrs 48 min.
New personal best, but I could have done better.
I would have broken the 4:30 barrier if I hadn't gotten a bad case of the runs and blew at least 15 minutes at a public toilet at East Coast Park.
In fact, if it had not been for the presence of a 100 Plus water point near that toilet, I would have dropped out.
great job fudgie -
Today's exam question came out SG's Bio-Med hub.
*lubs chin*
Asked me if I thought it was successful.
-
We want to be Sports Hub, Oil and Gas Hub, Bio-Med Hub, Air Transport Hub, etc etc.....
.... what, we're trying to be a hub of hubs is it?
-
The question totally threw me off.
That hub is only around 2 years old.
By what measure should I have talked about success?
*lubs chin furiously*
And yes. If you read the available literatures, being a hub for everything conceivable is indeed the plan.
And yes. I wrote in exact words "cheaper, better, faster" as the consequence.
Kinda tongue-in-cheek.
-
sea/ air tpt hub, banking hub still ok... all the simi other hubs can meh???
-
Can.
Agglomeration effects aka silicon valley 2.
By integrating upstream and downstream firms, you will have better spillover effects throughout the economy.
And based on data I received, actually the 2010 freak 15% was in fact due to the Bio-Med hub FDI. Not casino!
That's how much being a hub can mean to us!
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
The question totally threw me off.
That hub is only around 2 years old.
By what measure should I have talked about success?
*lubs chin furiously*
And yes. If you read the available literatures, being a hub for everything conceivable is indeed the plan.
And yes. I wrote in exact words "cheaper, better, faster" as the consequence.
Kinda tongue-in-cheek.
The way things are going, it looks as though we're trying to be a hub for hubris as well.
-
Originally posted by fudgester:
The way things are going, it looks as though we're trying to be a hub for hubris as well.
Its the price to pay for being small.
The other question I had to tackle was if I thought South Korea's strategy in developing the likes of Samsung was something other countries could emulate.
My assessment was a no.
My answer was that Taiwan's model of complementing its industries with foreign MNCs (read SG's strategy) was more viable.
In short, if you look at what happens today, you cant really blame MIW for the "hub this hub that" thinking. The reason is that we have little choice but to plug ourselves to the global economy if we want a less risky growth strategy.
Indeed I pointed out that Samsung was lucky. Korea took a HUGE gamble on electronics and it paid off.
If the USA hadn't arm-twisted Japan back in 1986, I can safely tell you Samsung would have bankrupted back then!
-
And yes. I pointed out that pandering to the world market might very well cost us dearly as well.
We would lack an identity.
We would have to be cheaper, better, faster.
It really is a high price to pay if we look from the perspective of the ordinary citizen.
But I couldn't provide an alternative strategy that would generate jobs for everybody.
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
Its the price to pay for being small.
The other question I had to tackle was if I thought South Korea's strategy in developing the likes of Samsung was something other countries could emulate.
My assessment was a no.
My answer was that Taiwan's model of complementing its industries with foreign MNCs (read SG's strategy) was more viable.
In short, if you look at what happens today, you cant really blame MIW for the "hub this hub that" thinking. The reason is that we have little choice but to plug ourselves to the global economy if we want a less risky growth strategy.
Indeed I pointed out that Samsung was lucky. Korea took a HUGE gamble on electronics and it paid off.
If the USA hadn't arm-twisted Japan back in 1986, I can safely tell you Samsung would have bankrupted back then!
By 'likes' did they mean electronics or homegrown companies? Hyundai and now Kia are doing well in the motor industry too, and have been for the past 5 years.
-
but it had its flip side also... Daewood
-
Yes. The likes referred to the Chaebol system, but the particular interest and the specialty of the professor was in the electronics sector.
Based on my past looking-up, actually KIA was another example of why SG couldnt afford to follow Korea's example.
KIA went flat bankrupt in 1997 crisis and had to be bailed out by the govt.
And that was because by refusing to use FDI to finance, Korea had to find dough in the form of external debt.
When Asia went belly up, so did the majority of the Korean firms. Which was why Korea was particularly badly hit in 1997.
Today's story is different but the past reflects inherent risks that developing countries can ill-afford.
-
Another reason why Korea's strategy (and Japan's) is likely going to be one-off in this world and in the forseeable future, is in the presence of WTO.
Unless you are someone like Mahathir who's willing to call George Soros evil and try to aid Proton, you are not likely to try risking the wrath of other countries by denying them exports into your country.
Korea and Japan are probably the only countries to have developed successfully with an import-substitution strategy in living memory.
Which meant that the SG strategy, which was a pioneering one, is the most viable today.
One further point to note is that we grew so rapidly because back in 1965, we were in fact the first country to even dream of pandering ourselves so freely to the world, kinda like a whore in fact.
It was a novel idea and the MNCs were sold on it.
But its just a matter of time before they get tired of us, which literally means a rat race for us just to keep ourselves in the race.
-
Originally posted by SBS2601D:
Another reason why Korea's strategy (and Japan's) is likely going to be one-off in this world and in the forseeable future, is in the presence of WTO.
Unless you are someone like Mahathir who's willing to call George Soros evil and try to aid Proton, you are not likely to try risking the wrath of other countries by denying them exports into your country.
Korea and Japan are probably the only countries to have developed successfully with an import-substitution strategy in living memory.
Which meant that the SG strategy, which was a pioneering one, is the most viable today.
One further point to note is that we grew so rapidly because back in 1965, we were in fact the first country to even dream of pandering ourselves so freely to the world, kinda like a whore in fact.
It was a novel idea and the MNCs were sold on it.
But its just a matter of time before they get tired of us, which literally means a rat race for us just to keep ourselves in the race.
The latter still holds true. It seems that we're trying to attract foreign investment by bucking the worldwide trend of protecting people more than businesses. But our local businesses haven't developed much and are still dependent on migrant workers and grants, aren't they?
-
Spot on.
It calles into question the entire sustainability of the system.
In our jargon, we call it "technology-less growth". And its something that has been found to afflict ASEAN countries.
Consider Krugman's assessment of SG in 1994.
“Singapore's growth has been based largely on onetime
changes in behavior that cannot be repeated.
Over the past generation the percentage of people
employed has almost doubled; it cannot double
again. A half-educated work force has been replaced
by one in which the bulk of workers has high school
diplomas; it is unlikely that a generation from now
most Singaporeans will have Ph.D's. And an
investment share of 40 percent is amazingly high by
any standard; a share of 70 percent would be
ridiculous. So one can immediately conclude that
Singapore is unlikely to achieve future growth rates
comparable to those of the past. ... all of Singapore's
growth can be explained by increases in measured
inputs. There is no sign at all of increased efficiency.”Of course we know now how wrong he is. But the logic stands.
On the other hand, his assessment was also based on some terribly flawed methodology which has been heavily criticised (using his method revealed a technological progress of SG as negative??!!).
-
may i ask if the shitty situation of the economy of everyone right now is down to the fact that everyone was indulging in wagging the dog?
everyone gamed the system in order to produce their "desired KPI" and in singapore's case it was GDP growth, damn the torpedoes...
now it's time to pay the piper and all the people who were in power then have run away enormously enriched by their actions and policies, and left the commonfolk to pick up the pieces..
-
If you are talking about the shitty growth rate now, its due to the shitty EU politics elsewhere.
Its also a natural evolvement of our economy. We cant be growing forever!
If you talking cheaper better faster and KPI, that thinking evolved from our FDI-led strategy. It really is a rat race.
And it will get worse, no mistake about that.
Because now the rest of the world has awoken to the terrific idea of selling their people to the global market and now the MNCs are spoilt for choice.
Do we have a choice out of this?
We often compare to Japan, that has remained stable despite its "lost decade", but Japan has a large domestic market to fall back on.
We do not.
So the global market is in fact paramount to our survival.
A lot of people might say that growth is not everything, but its easy to say that when we have the dough now.
Perhaps thats why they say often also that the older generation can tahan more nonsense because they underwent shit that people like me, never knew of.
As individuals nonetheless, it isnt really all gloom as long as we can find ways to circumvent these issues. And if anything, the SG education and economy does provide for that.
The problem comes when you fall through the non-existent safety net though!
-
Choices choices choices.
We chose growth.
We chose money.
Its inevitable something else falls along the wayside, and then we slow down and wonder if we shld reverse to pick it up.