$100million...

I realised that there is another very obvious use for $100 million dollars. We could just send it to Haiti to help in relief efforts. Although there is news that it's actually $40 million. But $40million is still more than the $70,250 that the government has sent.

$100 million...

$100million dollars is quite alot of money. But that is the amount that FIFA is asking for the rights to show the World Cup 2010. I wonder what FIFA is thinking about when they keep going on about how the wages of footballers and club debts are skyrocketing out of control. So how does asking for so much money to televise the World cup tie in with trying to control the soccer industry.

But that's too complicated. Instead, I'm going to give examples of what $100million dollars can get you.

First. You can send 6798 people to South Africa to watch the World Cup.

Each person will cost $20629.58. Each person will get one air ticket and tickets to all the matches. The Singapore Airlines, First class return tickets will cost $7459. These 6798 people will be able to watch all the matches at a seat in the first row, at the centre line. That will cost $18455.58. Each person will have to find their own accommodation, but the expensive things are paid for.

Second. Buy a 11% stake in Liverpool.

I wonder who might take this option. But you can buy a 11% stake in a ex-Champions League club for $100milion. Don't expect returns soon though.

Third. Buy 227 units at the Pinnacle@Duxton.

At the first release, one 5 room flat cost $439,400. Buying a block is a good investment. It's going to give a better return than Liverpool. Sorry to all Liverpool fans, but the truth hurts.

Fourth. Buy 50million packets of chicken rice.

At $2 a packet, it is cheap and good. In order to finish 50million packets, you need 2747 people to eat chicken rice 2 meals a day, for 50 years. Of course, chickens wouldn't be too happy.

Last. Retire at the age of 25.

Let's assume you are done with university at the age of 25. So you retire upon graduation. Let's also assume that most people live for about 80 years. So for 55 years, you can spend $1,818,181 a year. Almost 2 million a year or about $4981 a day. Sounds like good living.

I think $100million can be better spent.

the blog made the papers...

After some people asked some questions, I realised that the statement above can be misleading. The blog did not get featured in the papers. Instead, an extract from an entry was featured.

By popular demand... from people who don't subscribe to ST.

loansharks part II...

It came out in the papers again. This time in the opinions, forum section of the papers. Again the call to not criminalize borrowers came out again. Again, the reason being that it would drive the actives further underground. BUT, this time, they said that they didn't want to have borrowers needing to face another threat. They state that now, if borrowers don't repay their debt, loansharks can just threaten to to report the borrowers to the police. Somehow, I don't see how this works in favour of the loansharks.

Imagine this...

Loanshark: Owe money, pay money!!!!

Borrower: But I got no money, if I got money, need to borrow from loanshark meh?!?!?

L: Okie, then I report you to the police! Then you go and rot in jail!!! Muhahahahaha!!!

B: Great!!! In jail, the police will give me free lodging, food and most of all protection from you!!! And not like they can force me to cough out money I don't have.

Back to reality...

Furthermore, loansharks can only report the borrowers to the police. However, if they say, "Mr. Policeman, please arrest Mr. Tan Bo Lui. He borrow money from me, Mr. You Wan Lui. Make him return money to me. Thank you."

Since loansharking is still illegal, I'm sure the police will track you down and arrest you too. Hence, it makes no sense to report your debtors to the police.

I'm sure you all can think of other ways this will backfire for the loanshark. The loanshark can of course take this course of action.

L: Nevermind, I will continue to add your interest!! When you come out, you will owe me even more money!!!

B: Eh, which jail you go before got pay you money for squatting in a cell? When I come out, I still wouldn't have money...

Lastly, I would just like to say that loansharks is a colloquial word, nominalize form of the verb loansharking. The official word is illegal money lender, IML.

what is race?

What exactly is race?

Isn't it just another way to draw another line to tell people that they do not belong?

Of course, another to see it is to see it as another way to draw the line to tell people that they DO belong.

Recently, with the new changes that now allow for a dual race classification, a whole new generation of Singaporeans are voicing their views on the issue. Going off on a minor tangent, why is it called "double-barrel" race?

Coming back, how does this help in anyway in building the identity of a nation? Will this actually help people of mixed parentage to feel more connected to their roots? What does being connected to your roots actually mean? Most youth in Singapore today, identify more with the westernized, tv culture that they grew up with rather than the more traditional culture that they are supposedly connected to via heritage. Perhaps they should allow parents to choose "MTV Generation".

And what happens in the future when 2 parents of "double-barreled" races have children? If a Chinese-Malay and a Indian-Eurasian have a child, what is the child's race? Are they going to allow the ultimate race of permutations of "CMIO"? This might be funny, but this is really going to become complicated, real soon.

Race is sensitive. Classification only highlights the difference. Difference is sensitive.

loansharks...

I am amused by the comment that came out in the papers today. A member of parliament said that we shouldn't criminalize people who borrow from loansharks as that would only drive loansharking activities further underground. After reading that, I wondered how much thought went through the thought process before he decided to come into the open with that statement.

Loansharking is illegal. The loaning part is anyway. It's like chewing gum. It's illegal to sell it in Singapore. However, you can bring in small quantities for personal consumption. Chewing in public is not illegal either. But disposing it irresponsibly will result in breaking the law.

But what really is wrong with making it illegal to loan from loansharks? If your main concern is for the convenience of policing them, it's not really a strong argument. It's not like legalizing prostitution or gambling. The legalizing of such activities might have helped the government to keep the activities in check. But they only work because the "bad" effects of prostitution and gambling are quite limited to the person who participates in these activities. i.e: The man who visits the prostitute risks getting STD and the man who gambles risks losing his own money. Loansharking is a tad different. There is an after-effect of borrowing, the harassing to repay debt.

And it seems that this is what causing more problems. I mean if all the borrowers were responsible people who repaid their debts on time, the problem of harassing the wrong people would never have arose. Then again, if all the borrowers were responsible people, I doubt they need to borrow money from a loanshark. But that's my opinion.

Also, by keeping borrowing from loansharks legal, it is as much a sign that it is alright to borrow from loansharks. And as long as there are people who are willing to borrow from loansharks and incur high interest rates, there will be people who are willing to lend money to these people. It's all about the theory of demand and supply. In theory, if the government passes a law that makes borrowing from loansharks illegal, then the number of people who would risk going to loansharks would dip. Resulting from this dip, loansharks cannot make enough money from loansharking and they would leave the "industry". This will then lead to a dip in the number of loansharks. In theory it sounds good.

bodyguards and assassins...

It's not that I haven't been dreaming, it's more like there isn't one that is worth blogging about. But this is not bad.

In this dream, I part of the police. Though I do remember threatening someone with death. Maybe the police in my dream are allowed to do that. It takes place in Chinatown. Looks like Chinatown in Singapore. We run down Chinatown chasing this group of Indians, not being racist, they just happened to be Indians. We catch up with them, confront them. They look like they are 40ish. Too old to be young punks. We exchange threats, issue ultimatums. Ultimatums which includes the death as the ultimate result.

We then run back to where the main group of police are. I get separated from the others running back and I end up in this back alley of this bodyguards training school. Singapore must have really gone into some niche production if this really happens. They see me running towards them and the whole bunch of them starts running in the same direction. And no, I don't know why this happens either. It's like a movie loophole, you just accept it. Before I can reach where I was running to, I have to cut through this wet market. Just before I could reach the "safe point", just a stairway away, the dream ends.

That was quite an exciting dream.

what more can we expect?

This is a line from song. I cannot seem to find the song it came from though. Actually, it appeared in so many songs, I cannot decide which song it came from. It was playing when something of significance happened. When lulling about why it might have happened and how easily it can happen, the line kept shouting out, "What more can we expect?"

We ask for much. That's understated. We usually ask for more than commitment. Most could say we have given up our lives for it. Sacrificed our lives. For the better good? Most cannot see the better good. The "better good" can only be seen after we all stop, take a step back, see, ponder. But only after at least a span of a good 5 years. Because of this inability to see the results of what we do, some have fallen. Fallen might be an exaggeration. Sounds like they've died. Maybe it's more apt to say, "left the cause."

Yes. If you fail to see the better good, you cannot sustain the ministry for long. If you made it to the 1 year mark, you could easily see yourself in the same ministry for a good decade. It only sounds long. Young people fail to see the better good more often. Living in our fast-paced, fast-track society doesn't help. It only gives you that added need to see something. It's an unrealistic expectation. Some have the fortunate opportunity to learn this before they start. Most don't and learn the hard way. Some of the most learn and reinvest their lives. More learn the lesson, but don't apply it in the ministry. I can only hope they apply it some other parts of their lives. Of course, there will be that group that refuse to see the lesson at all and get all bitter. Fortunately, the number can still fit comfortably on one hand.

Sigh.

It seems easier to chronicle something that pains. I wonder if somewhere inside people need to remember the pain in their lives. Hopefully, it will only be used as reminders to the lessons that we all can learn.

On a brighter note. I finished everything that I wanted to do today. More than what I can say for the entire holiday.