absolutum dominium

i love a good iced mocha anytime of any day, and the great thing about vancouver in the spring is that in 15 degree sunshiney temperature, it's a little bit of heaven to just walk around the estate enjoying the open space and the cool fresh air, while taking sips of your bittersweet rich creamy grande iced mocha.

an iced mocha is not a terribly difficult concoction to make. it's just a shot of espresso and steamed milk mixed with chocolate and served with whipped cream on top. despite being chocolatey, it is not terribly sweet either, and with ice... it's amazing. i have actually become addicted to starbucks coffee here in canada, even though prices are comparative (and probably more expensive) to singapore.

but that being said, with my final exam less than 2 days away, my time here at ubc is coming to an end. already i am fretting about boxes to buy so that i can pack all my unnecessary baggage for shipping back to singapore. and already i am dreading the countdown to the days where after spending so much time with 1 person and away from my parents, it will be back to spending so much time with my parents and away from tt 1 person.

nonetheless, i feel tt in some ways, i have grown older from this experience. for one, i think i care more, at least about things around me other than my own life. seeing how the system here works; the welfare net, the imposition of the minimum wage, the much-increased quality of life and the overall state of happiness among the people, not to mention their attachment to this country; and looking at how my own system works, what with the underlying objectives of economic growth and efficiency, and how tt has so affected us in a much different way...

you might argue tt the difference between singapore and canada is tt canada has a wealth of resources. it is one of the biggest countries in the world, yet with a disproportionately sized population (also because it is impossible to live up north, say in the yukon territory, coz it's just too fucking cold), its got so much water and agriculture and even oil in the albertan tar sands... and in contrast, singapore has nothing. but while i believe tt natural resources does count for a large part of canada's success as compared to singapore's, i don't believe tt our lack thereof are able to justify some of the policies as they stand, contrary to what some other people might have you believe.

i guess a lot of people are just worried about the "bread and butter" issues over and above everything else. over things like quality of life, happiness, being able to have a life tt does not just include working till the day you die to pay off tt hdb mortgage loan (even though you suspect the cost of your flat is only a third of what it was sold to you for), or a childhood slogging through your education for all your As and whatever coz if you went to ite instead of poly, you were finished, and if you went to poly instead of jc, you wouldn't succeed as well, and even if you went to uni, you would never be able to find a job if you did not get a cap score of above 4.0.

canada, in comparison... if you attend uni here, all you need is a degree. employers don't look at your grades. you are in university to learn, not to get those pretty As and high GPAs. what matters to employers is things like work experience, versatility, and personality.

in singapore, what matters is grades, possibly cca points (the paper qualifications equivalent of versatility), and no personality.

but before this becomes too much of a tirade, i would like to draw your attention once again to the singapore elections blog. i find this site very interesting and helpful in putting things in perspective, for those of us who have very short memories.

its latest post is interesting when it comes to describing the increase in living costs, even though there is barely a proportionate increase in pay (for the population at large). it also helps to highlight my point about the 'first world government' comment, which can be substantially proven as lacking. the focus on economic growth and efficiency is a third world political perspective. tt is how it is in third world countries seeking to develop. even the academia here in canada concede tt tt is a third world political objective. in a first world, there is no more requirement for economic efficiency as the overriding aim. in a first world, you should already have achieved tt, therefore a balance may be struck between the economy, quality of life, the environment, etc.

for example, in canada 'poverty' isn't just defined as 'income deprivation'. (yes. even in a first world country, poverty still exists. but it is dealt with, not swept under the carpet). in singapore, as long as you have a handphone, you are not considered poor. in canada however, "poverty involves more than just income deprivation. it can also extend to (or result from) exclusion from essential goods and services, meaningful employment and decent earnings, adequate and affordable housing, safe neighbourhoods with public amenities, health and well-being, social networks, and basic human rights. it is generally acknowledged that today's social realities differ significantly from the time when most of Canada's current social policies were put in place.

(note: it is funny how in a much older country like canada, there is an acknowledgement tt even with a progressive and liberal government, policies can still become outdated and out of touch with the changing times. yet in a smaller country where the times change even more quickly...)

the policy and research initiative of canada thus invests money into systematically examining a number of issues such as the role of assets, financial literacy, the social economy, housing, and the challenges faced by the working poor in helping to formulate policies to reduce the problem of poverty here."

for the interested, here are the other social policies tt the pri of canada is conducting research into to help with future policy formulation. this includes "population aging and life-course flexibility" (i.e. how to deal with an aging population without having to ask them to fuck off to batam, bintan and johor, while at the same time commanding the young to make more babies), north american linkages (i.e. how to have good relations with our immediate neighbour no matter how irritating he might be or how much of an idiot some of us might find his president. probably does not entail the use of technical legal arguments to prove a right over things like crooked bridges), and sustainable development (damn. does singapore have development to sustain? or are we still developing per se?).

okay. enough of this talk. i shall now get back to my psychology and the development of mental disorders. i'm currently on personality disorders such as antisocial behaviour and excessive narcicissm. yay!!!

oh. and i am very angry. my sylvia lim has been insulted. :( fuck paper qualifications.

taken from the straits times interactive (go ken kwek!!!):

April 24, 2006
No First World Parliament? It's PAP's fault: Opposition
By Ken Kwek

OPPOSITION leaders yesterday said they backed the idea that Singapore deserved a First World Parliament but laid the blame on the People's Action Party for it not having one.

Workers' Party (WP) chairman Sylvia Lim said she had 'no quarrel' with Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's comments that the country needed a First World opposition in Parliament, adding that her party was working towards this.

'Singapore would benefit if we had a first-class Parliament, whether it comprises the ruling party or opposition parties,' she said.

'As far as the WP is concerned... we have made steps to bring ourselves up to a level that the people deserve,' she added.

While there was room for the WP to 'move upward', she hoped voters recognised its efforts to build up a strong team, and 'give us a sign in this election that they do value the steps we have taken to give them a credible opposition'.

She was speaking at a press conference to introduce the third batch of the party's candidates for the May 6 polls.

Mr Lee had said on Saturday that while the WP had learnt from the PAP in recruiting better candidates, its line-up showed that it was still far from being a serious party.

He also referred indirectly to Ms Lim when he said that while the Workers' Party boasted a law lecturer among its candidates, there were 'hundreds' of lecturers around.

To this, Ms Lim replied: 'I've never claimed to be extraordinary. If his comment is that I'm just a run-of-the- mill average person, then I'll gladly claim that. As far as we're concerned, we want to represent the people, so it's okay - I'm one of thousands.'

She took issue with Mr Lee's suggestion that the party had introduced three of its most presentable candidates, including Ms Lim, at its first press conference last Friday.

'The PAP tends to look at the paper qualifications of candidates. But we take a holistic assessment of candidates, not just their education level.

'How do you measure sincerity and commitment to serve? We have a spread of candidates, and if some are not as qualified academically, their commitment is not necessarily proportionate to their qualifications,' she said.

Other opposition leaders laid the blame for the country not having a First World opposition on the PAP.

Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA) chairman Chiam See Tong said Mr Lee's comments were 'unfair' since the PAP imposed rules, such as high election deposits and GRCs, that discouraged electoral contests and the overall growth of the opposition.

The PAP had also created an environment that made qualified individuals wary of joining opposition parties.

'There is an element of fear, and this atmosphere does not encourage political participation and the growth of a good opposition in Singapore,' he added.

Mr Sebastian Teo, vice-president of the National Solidarity Party, a component party of the SDA, also accused the PAP of stifling the development of opposition parties here.

'I'm not saying that the PAP should build up the opposition or give us resources. I'm saying they should give fair space for the opposition to grow. They should not erect unnecessary hurdles.'

The opposition parties also responded to Mr Lee's assessment that the Singapore Democratic Party secretary-general Chee Soon Juan was 'giving the opposition a bad name' by making statements which he said were defamatory.

Mr Chiam said: 'I think opposition members in Singapore are, on the whole, an honest lot. We are responsible and we care for the nation. It's not fair to condemn the whole barrel of apples just because one apple has become rotten.'

WP's Ms Lim said the SDP's plight was 'unfortunate', but trusted that voters would discriminate between the SDP and the WP.

She added that the WP had learnt from its own legal battles in the past and would steer clear of making imprudent comments about the PAP leadership.

'We've learnt our lessons...and we know that because we are a party with very little money, we would like to steer clear of legal battles as far as possible because they could kill us.'

JUST ONE BAD APPLE

'I think opposition members in Singapore are, on the whole, an honest lot. We are responsible and we care for the nation. It's not fair to condemn the whole barrel of apples just because one apple has become rotten.'
-- SDA CHAIRMAN CHIAM SEE TONG