There are Crimes and There Are Crimes

 

I was, until a month ago, married to Vietnamese girl, who believes that Singapore is heaven on earth. Whenever it came voting, she’d always remind me that it was “Lee Hsien Loong” and his family who built up Singapore to what it is.

In fairness to my ex-wife, she grew up in rural Vietnam and had a tough upbringing. She’s been through things that most of us have not imagined in our nightmares and so, to her, the comforts of Singapore are a world away from what she knew in rural Vietnam. She’s argued that “Singapore made me strong,” and has a certain sense of gratitude towards Singapore that I don’t always have.

So, what I am about argue is here is probably going to rub her the wrong way. However, I don’t believe I’m wrong to make the case to state that the Communist Party of Vietnam has recently taken an important stance, which I believe that Singapore and much of the developed world could learn from.

I am, of course, referring to the recent announcement that Ms. Truong My Lan, had been sentenced to death for masterminding a US$44 billion fraud. More of the story can be found at:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-68778636

 

 

 I used to get caught up in the “nationalism” of the death penalty debate. During my student days, I’d get this sense of nationalistic pride whenever we hanged someone from a “developed” country who got caught with drugs and we had to listen to their politicians lecture us about the death penalty. Call it a case of “Our land – our laws.”

However, as I’ve gotten older, I look at the issue from a less emotive point of view. Fact remains, no justice system is perfect and how do you say sorry to a corpse, should evidence come out later that the guy hanged, was in fact innocent. I’ve also started to notice that the guys who get hanged are inevitably of a particular socio-ethnic demographic and this over representation of death row inmates from this particular socio-ethnic group makes it feel like we’ve found it easier to go to war against poor people rather than poverty and thus disposing of lives to distract people from the fact that the real issues are not being tackled.

However, let’s leave aside my issues with the death penalty and focus on the one of the favourite arguments of people who believe in the death penalty – namely the argument that harsh penalties “deter” crime. Let’s point to the fact that people who make this argument might have a point. Singapore is on the surface of things wonderfully safe. I’m father of a young woman and I have no worries about her going out late at night. That, as, an English expat once said to me “Gives you freedom.” The safety of our society is a Godsend.

So, let’s take the deterrence argument for the death penalty at face value. The benefits seem obvious. In Singapore, we have wonderfully low drug rates, murder rates and armed robbery doesn’t seem to exist at all. Treason only seems to exist in “name calling.” You could say that this wonderful situation comes from the fact that these are all crimes where the price is the ultimate price. A list of capital crimes in Singapore can be found at;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Singapore#:~:text=Capital%20punishment%20in%20Singapore%20is,death%20penalty%20under%20Singapore%20law.

However, while these crimes are headline grabbing due to their immediate effects, there are other forms of crime. These crimes tend to be related to financial matters and they are grouped as what is called “Financial Crimes.”

Part of my life in the insolvency business involves looking for financial crimes, specifically the various forms of fraud. For anyone in a profession, one of the greatest worries is being associated with anything that can be construed as a “financial irregularity” let alone being sent to jail.

However, despite it, financial crimes do happen, even in the world’s major financial centres. Yet, financial crimes somehow never get the same attention as “blue collar” crimes nor do they end up being classified as “capital” crimes. In Singapore, you will be sent to the gallows if you had a few grams of weed on you. Should you smack someone in the face, you will be canned and scared for life. The official reason for this is that we need to deter people from selling dangerous substances and from being violent.

It's a different story when you swindle people out of their life savings through dubious accounting. The main punishment for such acts is usually a fine or a spell in prison or both. Apparently a high fine or lengthy prison sentence is enough to deter someone from say, committing fraud. Nobody talks about the need to hang or cane people when it comes to “financial crime.” Why is that so?

I guess the most obvious is that its hard to prove. In most of the drug offenses, its usually an open and shut case. The guy (the majority are) is more often than not caught red handed and the prosecution pretty much as an open and shut case.

Proving a financial crime is not the case. To find and build a case for something like fraud takes allot of work. One has to dig into financial records and transactions may have a cross border element to them. Documents get destroyed and getting the evidence to convict is a challenge. Easier to spend resources chasing after the low hanging fruit.

This becomes even more challenging when the person on the other side is a billionaire. A Grab driver who gets caught with weed outside his house usually ends up with a legal aid lawyer who really doesn’t have the incentive to do his or her best. A billionaire gets the best possible lawyer who will tie up the authorities for years in the legal system.

Then, there’s the fact that executing billionaires for financial crimes doesn’t look good, especially if you’re a country desperate to attract “investment.” If anything, the usual habit for countries competing for billionaires, is for them to find ways of making the legal system easier. Loopholes in laws were invented for this purpose.

Then there’s the fact that financial crimes don’t create news headlines unless the numbers are large. Reading about some tycoon swindling other tycoons doesn’t hit home the way watched a teenage boy bash up a toddler would.

So, Vietnam handing down the death sentence to Ms. Troung is pretty remarkable in that sense. It sends a message out that nobody is above the law. Billionaires face the same consequences as the rest of us and given that Vietnam is a country hungry for foreign investment, its all the more remarkable.

Then, you could say that this sends a message out to people who want to commit fraud. Let’s face it, fraud is not a victimless crime. It’s not just corporations and billionaires swindling each other. It is, as the British found out in the 1990s when the Daily Mirror Pension fund was found to have been looted, a crime that robs people of their security and livelihood. Ordinary people have their lives ruined because the people who ran institutions that were supposed to look after them were more interested in lining their pockets rather than running institutions.

Why can’t we apply the same reasons to financial crimes that we do to drug mules. The benefits would definitely help so many more people.

Change is the only Constant Except when You’re in a Changing World.

 

Around three days ago, SPH Media, the non-profit that took over the once thriving media business of a listed company called Singapore Press Holdings Limited (SPH Limited) announced that it had appointed a new CEO. The man who will be leading Singapore’s once powerful media monopoly is Mr. Chan Yeng Kit, former Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Health and former Chairman of the Infocom Media Development Authority (“IMDA”). Mr. Chan will be taking over Ms. Teo Lay Lim, who ran Accenture before she was called over to run Singapore’s most prominent “commercialized statutory board.” More on the story can be found at:

 https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/former-imda-chairman-to-be-new-sph-media-ceo-from-july-15

 

 To be fair to Mr. Chan, he comes to the top job with impeccable credentials. The cookie-cutter that is the Singapore civil service means that Mr. Chan would never have made it to permanent secretary or chairman of a statutory board had he not been sent to one of the best universities in the world and done exceedingly well there.

If you consider the fact that the media business of what was then called Singapore Press Holdings Ltd, is now under a “non-profit” organization called SPH Media, where the tax payer is the major funder, you could say that Mr. Chan is simply moving from statutory board to another. As chairman of the IMDA he played a role setting the “vision” for the media industry in Singapore whereas as CEO of SPH Media, he gets to put that vision into action.

So, if you look at it from this perspective, the announcement of Mr. Chan’s appointment as CEO of SPH Media would be like any other appointment of the top civil service jobs. Mr. Chan will undoubtedly be a competent enough manager of another statutory board.

However, the issue is not Mr. Chan himself but a damming reflection of the government’s inability to grow what should be a dynamic and innovative industry that has the potential to create a decent number of high paying jobs for local Singaporean entrepreneurs. Let’s just look at how we compare what’s happening with the other “Asian Tigers,” (South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore).

All of us were manufacturing powerhouses. All of us built economic wealth by offering multinationals a well-educated and disciplined work force that could make things more cheaply than the “West” (which in this case, includes Japan). The only difference between Singapore and the other three is the fact that we never built a media industry that produced anything that anyone outside Singapore’s shores would consume. Korea has K-Drama and K-Pop, Taiwan has drama series worth watching and Hong Kong cinema was at one stage, the world’s third largest after the mammoth markets of Bolly and Hollywood.

The inevitable excuse remains that Singapore is “too small” for a media industry to develop and since we live in a hostile environment, we can’t afford to throw resources into uncertain media industries. The other Asian tigers are living examples of the fact that this mantra is not true. None of them have particularly large populations and of the four, we actually live in the nicest neighbourhood – South Korea has nuclear armed North Korea that make no secret of its violent fantasies towards South Korea. Hong Kong gets publicly beaten up by China whenever China wants to prove a point. Taiwan also remains in China’s crosshairs and to all intents and purposes, Taiwan can’t even call itself an independent country. Sure, we may bicker with Malaysia and Indonesia from time to time and our people might have a bad experience or two – but by and large, we’ve not had a regional conflict since the 1960s.

Like it or not, places that export media content, are actually places that produce innovative technologies and entrepreneurial uni-and-decacorns. Why is that so? Ironically it was best summed up by Singapore’s Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong who talked about having to “fix” the opposition instead of coming up with good policies. If creative people worry about “being fixed” they’re going to spend more time avoiding getting fixed than actually producing things that can be sold. If you have an environment which rewards being in a cardboard box cut-out and upstarts are going to get kicked in the teeth whenever the cardboard box cut outs need to feel that they’re human, smart people are simply not going to do anything.

Even hiring people from elsewhere won’t work in the long run. Sure, you can offer the world’s best everything to come to Singapore and they’ll do it. However, sooner or later they are going to realise that they’re actually better off looking like they’re creating than actually creating.

While I don’t doubt Mr. Chan is a competent enough manager, he’s not the man give Singapore the job-creating media industry it deserves. To do that, the government needs to make institutions like SPH Media and MediaCorp face competition or go bankrupt. The media houses that survive in a cut throat market will pay for talent, thus creating wealth. People will see street-level creativity and innovation being rewarded and work towards it. This isn’t going to happen if the media monopolies are nothing more than glorified statutory boards.

Power to the People

 

 

This month marks my tenth years in the insolvency business and so, I thought I would try and touch on a topic that is sadly too common in the global financial system – fraud.

I’m not a lawyer or an accountant, so I can’t give you a “legal” definition of term. However, as a layman, I understand the term as “making something appear a certain way for personal gain.” If you look at this definition, you’ll notice that its something that happens quite often and its not that difficult to do.

Getting away with “fraud” is actually easy. As long as you can make the documents match, you’re pretty much OK. Yes, there are audits and various government regulations, which are supposed to check on these things but the reality is that as long as you have documentary proof to back things up, nobody is going to question you too much unless they choose to – which is unfortunately something that happens rarely given that most authorities are overworked.

What do I mean by this? Well, use a basic example. Take a loan application for example. Well, if you’re an employee, you’re going to be required to provide “pay slips.” If you own the company, its actually easy to generate the pay slips required. As long as you can show the pay slips and you make the required payments, nobody is going to question you.

It’s one of the first lessons I learnt in the business. I was thrown into an investigation and required to look at the payments issued to a director. I saw lot of payment vouchers issued to as salary. I was then required to check a General Ledger. The vouchers and ledger entries matched. Then, my boss, Mr. Farooq Mann, would insist that I check bank statements. His point was that there was a clear difference between what businesses recorded in their books and what money actually went in and out of the bank account.

This is just the most basic and crudest form of making something appear a certain way. One of the most sophisticated ways in which this happens is called “round tripping.” The most common instance is when assets are sold, which inflates the sales of the company. Perfectly legitimate sales documents are generated and cash does enter the account. However, sometime down the line, the company buys back the same asset for the same amount. This makes the company’s sales figures look good for a certain period.

Another example of “round tripping” comes from directors who pump money into a company to inflate the paid-up capital. This amount is then paid back to the directors and usually booked as “repayment of loan from director.”

Why do people get involved in such “financial dressing?” Well, financial dressing is pretty much like any other form of dressing. We do so to make a point to certain people. Think of the world’s most famous property developer – Donald Trump. When asked about his wealth, the answer is inevitably “depending on whose asking.” If it’s the tax man, the valuations are low. If it’s the bank, its higher. The sad reality of the capitalistic system is that h’s merely the most famous person doing it.

Whenever a scandal breaks out, governments inevitably wring their hands, throw a bit of money at the victims to keep them quiet and then come with a slew of regulations. One of the crackdowns in Singapore involves the number of nominee directors.

As was reported in an article by Blackstone Gold LLC (as a matter of disclosure, this is a firm that has given my employer works with on a number of matters) that was published in the Business Times in Singapore, “Recent crackdowns by the authorities have given a glimpse of the proliferation of nominee directors, where in one case a local resident was a nominee director of 980 companies at the same time. It is one of the most striking contrasts in our line of work, to see frauds perpetrated by foreign individuals using Singapore companies with local nominee directors, most of whom are modest people living in public housing unaware of how they might have unwittingly aided some dubious actions by the companies they have been asked to be a director of.”

Whilst tighter regulations help, regulations themselves are pointless if they are unenforceable. There is a high standard of proving fraud in a trial. So, how do the authorities gather the evidence effectively. As stated by the BlackstoneGold article, “ In every commodities fraud case I was involved in, empowering the individuals pressured to falsify information, with a protected forum to whistle blow could have made all the difference.”

However, while Hollywood might be inclined to glorify whistleblowers, most countries are not inclined to do so in their legislation. Think of the most famous whistleblower in Singapore and Germany – Pav Gill, the man who blew the whistle on the Wirecard Fraud.

Whilst Mr. Gill has become something of a celebrity, he revealed the sad reality of being a whistleblower in an interview with Fraud Magazine:

https://www.fraud-magazine.com/cover-article.aspx?id=4295017127

 

 

In that interview Mr. Gill says that “the authorities in Singapore and Germany have barely acknowledged or thanked him for his efforts, not to mention provide any protection from top executives at Wirecard whom he had a hand in bringing down.”

So, here’s the point. If whistleblowers can make all the difference in the prosecution of fraud and other doggy practices, shouldn’t we make it safe for people willing to do the right thing? As Blackstone Gold argues: “A robust national whistle-blowing regime would put the power back into the hands of the very people that might feel unfairly pressured to commit wrongs – and in doing so, protect not just their interest but the national interest of Singapore as a trade and financial hub as well.”

Experiments with the World’s Oldest Intermittent Fast

 It’s no secret that I’m the furthest thing away from being a male model. At the age of 49, I am officially overweight, though if I wanted to be more accurate, my BMI levels would put in the range of being “obese.”

It’s not that I am lazy. I walk more than 10,000 steps most of the time and around two to three nights a week, I’m usually pumping until my arms start quivering or I sprint. I am admittedly fond of the odd beer but by and large my main vice is local coffee (served with condensed milk). Since I discovered that my blood sugars were on the worrying side of things, I minimize my intake of white rice.

Yet, try as I might, I can’t seem to lose the fat around the neck and I still have a belly. So, as much it annoys the Neurotic Angel, the sad truth is that I look like an Obese Middle-Aged man. Though, admittedly I have improved from a decade ago when my own mother described me as a “Gross-Looking Obese Middle-Aged Man.”

So, given that I’m an Obese Middle-Aged man trying unsuccessfully to be a little less so, I thought I’d try something new to honour the season. It is, as my Muslim friends would remind me, the Holy Month of Ramadan and there is the obligatory tradition of fasting from sunrise to sundown:

https://www.tiktok.com/@tang.li0/video/7344933683918408968?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7274292816955999746

 

 My mum and a friend of mine told me that intermittent fasting is something worth trying and somehow, I never thought of doing. However, since I still look like an Obese Middle-Aged Man, I thought I would try to join in the world’s oldest and most popular intermittent fast.

OK, I’m not doing this for religious reasons so, I don’t have to follow the timing of my Muslim friends. I wake up around 7 plus and have a light breakfast which consist of a bowl of fruit, a bowl of oats and a boiled egg. I go through the work day without food and try to reach home at around 7. By 7.30, I engage in a work out, which consist of a series of Mike Tyson Push Ups (target 50, made up of sets until failure), bench dips (up till 60), various rows (eight sets until failure) and some other pulling exercises. On alternate nights, I walk about two kilometres and then go through around 4 rounds of 30 second sprints. Once I’m done, I head back for dinner, which consist of vegetable broth, a single bowl of rice and some meat or fish. Then around 10pm, I take stroll to a coffee shop for tea without milk and lime (though they do serve it with some sugar). Occasionally, I’ll try and have a snack of something that gives me protein.

https://www.tiktok.com/@tang.li0/video/7350306543360806146?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7274292816955999746

 

 Again, I stress that I am not doing this for religious reasons. So, whilst I do abstain from food, I do take water most of the time and I do go for tea with no milk but lime. I’m usually pretty good Monday to Thursday. The last two Fridays ended up with social events and so, I ended up taking alcohol (a pint or two).

Now, I’m not a health exert (I mean, would I be in this state if I were?). However, I’ve noticed one or two things about this experiment.

Firstly, it takes discipline. I have a side gig promoting food and there are temptations to snack. However, buy and large, I’ve managed to avoid temptation during the day and going without food for around 12-hours is something I am relatively used to.

However, what is a challenge is going without water. There were I few days I inevitably didn’t have a chance to hydrate as I was running around. I’ve heard that avoiding water improves the body’s capabilities to burn fat but I’m not trying to push things. However, on the day that I went without water, I learnt to respect the Bangladeshi construction workers who go without food and water during the day and still manage to do their work in the hot sun.

Secondly, I’ve noticed that I am relatively energetic during the day and somehow tire and the appropriate moments. So, I have been getting decent enough sleep, since I usually tire around midnight to 1am – thus I get around six to seven hours of sleep.

The most interesting thing I’ve found is that recovery from exercise is relatively better. I usually try and push myself till my arms are shaking. However, whereas I used to still feel the tremble when I sat down to eat, that feeling is gone by the time I head up for dinner.

Again, this is just an experiment to see if I can make progress with my health. I’ll probably remain on the chubby side at the end of the fasting month but I believe that its been a good experience and people, especially those who are struggling with weight should try.

Still Wanna F**K with Me – Mike Tyson

 

The latest buzz in the world of boxing is the fact that Mike Tyson, once regarded as the “Badest Man on the Planet” is coming out of retirement to fight Jake Paul, a 27-year-old YouTuber turned boxer.

In normal circumstances a physical contest between a fit and active 27-year-old and a 58-year-old coming of retirement shouldn’t be allowed. Although Mr. Paul has only started boxing publicly in recent years, he’s had success against some credible opponents like Anderson Silva and Nate Diaz:

https://news.paddypower.com/boxing/2024/03/19/jake-paul-next-fight/

 

 However, this isn’t “normal.” Back in his hey-day, Mr. Tyson was known for his brutal destruction of opponents. He only discovered defeat when he discovered partying and underestimating opponents. His physical power and speed were legendary. Whilst Mr. Tyson isn’t the youthful force of explosive power that he once was, clips of him training show that he’s still someone that most normal people wouldn’t want breathing at them when he’s in a foul mood. As famed combat sports podcaster Joe Rogan says, “I don’t care if he’s 55, he can still hurt you.”

In a way, this fight is what boxing, a sport that is primarily funded by the fans, needs. There hasn’t been an “electrifying” and “charismatic” champion that drew people in since Mr. Tyson’s hey day in the 1980s. Both fighters are undoubtedly going to make a huge amount of money.

This is, in many ways, a clash of “visions.” Mr. Paul is a young upstart in the world of boxing. Talk to enough boxers and you’ll find that many of them want Mr. Tyson to teach Mr. Paul a good lesson because as far as they are concerned, Mr. Paul is a young upstart who hasn’t paid his dues. As far as many professionals are concerned, Mr. Paul is soaking up the monied fights based on the fact that he’s gained fame as a YouTuber.

While there’s something tempting about smacking up the face of a young, rich kid who thinks he can’t be touched (think “My uncaring elite face” in Singapore), young upstarts are, from a social perspective, a good thing. Reason being – they’re more often than not, the guys who think of something quirky that upends a system, thus creating the disruption and innovation that is a hall mark of progress. Steve Jobs and Bill Gates were, as far as the high-powered executives of IBM were concerned, young upstarts who ended up revolutionizing computing. Now, its guys like Evan Spiegel of Snapchat who are upending our relationship with cyberspace.

Say what you like about Mr. Paul but he’s interesting. People who might never had watched boxing are now tuning into watch him fight and in fairness, he’s actually won a number of fights. He can actually fight.

However, there’s one slight problem. Mr. Paul is a nice boy from a well to do family His father is a realtor and his early career was on YouTube playing pranks. Boxing comes across as a hobby to him. In fairness, he’s been relatively successful at it and he’s won fights that nobody expected to him to win. I can sympathise with Mr. Paul in as much as he may be a “rich kid” trying to show that he’s actually got some merits of his own.

However, whilst Mr. Paul has won fights, he’s never really faced anyone who had a hunger to “kill him.” Sure, Nate Diaz and Anderson Silva are good fighters in their own right. However, both were not “angry killers.”

Mr. Tyson is a different story. If you read Mr. Tyson’s biography “Undisputed” truth, you’ll see that here is a guy who may well have been murdered in gang violence had he not found boxing. For Mr. Tyson, smacking people up is the core of his being.

Sure, the current 57-year-old Mike Tyson has mellowed. He’s no longer the angry 21-year-old who became the world’s youngest heavy weight champion. Back then, being heavy weight champion and knocking down everyone in his way was the only thing he had to love for. These days, he’s having fun on his cannabis farm.

However, whilst age can mellow you, it doesn’t really take away who you really are deep inside. Many of the training videos that have been leaked, show that Mr. Tyson still has speed and power. Sure, he may not be as explosive as he was – but he’s still powerful enough as Roy Jones Junior states:

https://www.google.com/search?q=jake+paul+vs+mike+tyson&sca_esv=1f6968c2800695af&source=hp&ei=IgD9ZZDlIqLi1e8PlK-

Mr. Tyson’s last fight was an exhibition in 2020, where he was in it for fun. However, this fight has awakened something in Mr. Tyson. It’s not just his physical conditioning that people notice but his intent to make a point. His hunger to hurt has been awakened as anyone who looks into his eyes from this training montage will realise:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9VaIbFTQHU

 

 If Mr. Paul thinks that the 58-year-old Mike Tyson is going to be a case of fighting his grandpa, he will be in for a nasty surprise.

In a way, this comparison between Jake Paul and Mike Tyson is the one that best illustrates the point when I talk about competing people who are less educated and from less privileged backgrounds. In the last decade of being in a working professional environment, I’ve noticed that working professionals have one major flaw – namely the fact that they think their professional status gives them some magical status. This is especially true when they face people who are less “qualified” than them.

I remember being on a project many years ago involving Nestle. The marketing manager of the division we were working with had started out as an office boy. I remember he had something to a business partner who felt aggrieved enough to complain about it to me. My partner dismissed him as “just an office boy.” I shuddered - anyone who climbs from office boy to marketing manager isn’t someone you want to mess with.

Likewise for the people who kept complaining about my ex-wife being an uneducated Vietnamese. This girl clawed her way up from a home town. She came to Singapore, became a business owner and then a beauty queen at the international level. After years in Singapore, she’s setting up in the USA. I think the only person who understood this is my partner in the Chubby Tiger venture who said, “This woman is no joke.”

So, when we talk about what gives people the edge, we’ll talk about things like education, connections, family background and so on. This is where people from comfortable middle class professional backgrounds get lulled into a false sense of superiority. The most crucial fact that everyone seems to over look is will, or desire. You could call it “killer instinct.” Look at Mr. Tyson who trains at inhuman levels (500 daily pushups among many others). He’s focused and the only thing that matters is flattening the other guy. I think of my ex, who entered a beauty contest because she had that ultimate goal of getting into the USA and became a global champion. I think of her focus and the work she put in. It’s that drive that gives people the edge. It’s just too bad HR can’t measure it.

 

Cracked

I’ve finally changed my phone. It turns out that my phone contract was up for renewal and I managed to pick up a new iPhone 15plus, which is sleek and sexy. It’s the first time in over a decade when I’ve actually picked up a new phone from a contract renewal. Huong, used to recontract all our lines early so that she could pick up phones at a discount and sell them onto her friends. The phone I had been using previously was a hand-me-down from her.

 

 My New Indulgence

I got to admit that the last few hours playing the new phone. The battery is solid, the face ID feature works and I’m only just getting used to the fact that this is a phone where the volume works sufficiently enough for me not to need to have all my conversations on loudspeaker.

One might ask why it took me so long so change phone. The phone was a second hand from Huong who had a way of changing phones rapidly. It was with me for four years and I am, as a rule of thumb – rough. In a way, I held on because, I didn’t see the need to change the phone. It still functioned and did all the things I needed it to do. It functioned as a phone and the apps that I use worked well enough. I never saw the need to spend money on a new phone because it worked and as my favourite gym instructor likes to remind me - “real men carry cracked phones.” However, the charging jack has been going slowly but surely. It used to be that I would have to hold the charger at an angle, then one day it only charged when put on an air charger. A phone dying on me when I needed a phone most looked like a very real prospect:

 

 Bro-Phone

I talk about my recent phone purchase because there are apt parallels with life, particularly in the employment market, particularly in a day and age where there is a big worry that society is getting older and by extension, there is a worry about what do with the labours force.

Let’s face it, everyone wants sexy, sleek things that function at optimal performance. I love my new phone because its sleek and sexy. Its battery life is resilient and all its functions are in tip top condition. Filling it with new apps and data is not an issue.

If I look at my relationship with my phone, I get why employers are keen to snap up fresh graduates. They come into the work force fresh. They’re enthusiastic and their minds are functional. Everything is new to them and they approach task with energy that their more experienced counterparts treat as routine. The best part is that you can fill their heads with the way you want them to work.

There is, however, one problem with this. Whilst I do get why hiring the kids is fun, the definition of old becomes rather relative. When people are looking for sleek and sexy things, they tend to dump the current sleek and sexy thing the moment they see something else which they may consider even more sleek and sexy.

My soon to be ex-wife and dad do that with phones. The moment there’s a new model, they’ll be out trying to make sure they have it. Given that new models come out on a yearly basis, they’ll happily brave the crowds to get hold of the latest new model.

Think about it, our youth may be young and enthusiastic to work. They may be the sexy and sleek things. However, before they’re ready to mature and be really productive, they get discarded by the kids from elsewhere who are hungrier and willing to work for less or by a technology.

To an extent my old phone was lucky in that, there are people who are more than happy to take “second-hand” goods. For me, the phone that I inherited was not the latest and greatest but it did all the things that I needed it to do. As long as it functioned in the way that I needed it to function, I had no reason to change the phone. My need to change the phone only came about when there was a question of its mechanical longevity.

So, if our policy makers need to look through the fact that while the number of sexy and sleek things may dwindle as people don’t have babies, we have plenty of people who are still functional. Let’s look how we can make use of this growing legion of “cracked” people who are still functional. Sleek and sexy fades according to trend. Functional last a lot longer and you can do more with it. Surely, that point should not be lost on our policy makers.

 

Budget Buses

 There was a time when there was an issue about transporting workers from South Asia or the proverbial “Darkies” who are exploiting Singapore by doing the jobs Singaporeans won’t do. A few “aged lefties” (In Singapore, they’re inevitably aged – the kids are too busy trying to be successful in cubicle land to care about the rest of the world), got upset that the construction companies were jamming the workers in backs of lorries that had no seat belts or any form of safety during accidents:

 

 

If I remember correctly, there were one or two traffic accidents and I believe one or two “Darkies” were killed. Singapore’s aged lefties were up in arms that human beings could be transported in such a fashion and wrote many social media post about this.

However, whilst there was a hue and cry about this and the government did make one or two noises about promising to look into things, nothing actually happened. Around two-years after the din of needing to treat dark skinned South Asians who do actual work, nothing was actually done. The reason was simple. The construction lobby made the point that it would be prohibitively expensive for them to actually provide things like buses to get their workers from point A to point B.

To be fair, to the government, only the aged lefties seemed upset by the issue and sine aged lefties aren’t inclined to vote for the government anyway, the government decided to do what it does best – pay attention to those who can be reminded to vote “properly.” As far as that segment of the population is concerned, the Darkies should just be grateful for whatever they’re getting and one shouldn’t force “prohibitively” expensive things onto the employers like wages, accommodation and let’s not forget the levy for foreign workers.

Then, as was once pointed out to me, Singaporeans used to ride around in a similar fashion and were perfectly happy with it. So, why should one impose “unfair” expenses on the construction industry (which is inevitably government funded) when everyone was perfectly happy with such methods of transportation.

I’ve come round to accepting that there may be a point here. Instead of calling for the ban on putting workers in lorries, we should expand this and create a new form of mass market transport.

Look, many us complain about how the bus and MRT services have become more expensive in recent years. I am guilty of this. I notice that a decade ago, it was possible to travel around for a week on $10. These days, $10 last you a day or so. What I can do about it? The answer is utterly jack all because mass market transport in Singapore is a duopoly run by the same people. They can charge whatever they want and the masses like myself can either learn to walk longer or die if we don’t want to pay the fares.

So, what’s to be done. Well, the answer is lies in the taxi market. At one stage, driving a metered cab was to exclusive purview of a few big companies. Then Uber came along made it such that anyone with a car could be a taxi driver. Uber was eventually booted out and replaced by Grab in Southeast Asia but the point remained – everyone with a car was suddenly giving rides. Metered taxis were forced to get creative because the ride hailing platforms were actually competing with them.

The same thing happened in the telco market. Along came Starhub and M1 and before you knew it, SingTel, the elephant of the market was forced to cut prices (especially on long distance calls) and look beyond Singapore for growth.

I am very sure that there are plenty of people yearning for an alternative to the bus and MRT. You just need to let entrepreneurs fill this niche. A guy with a lorry can become a bus operator of sorts. Just figure out a route and I’m sure enough people will be willing to cram onto a lorry to get from the housing estates and head to say the centre of town for half the cost of a standard bus ride.

I’ve sat in the back of lorries. Happens when I used to hitch a ride with the guys helping me move things. When I was married to Gina, we’d ride in the back of my then father-in-law’s lorry, which he would use for egg delivery. It was one of my few happy memories of that period.

So, let’s remember that we once used to move around the way foreign workers move around. Let’s see if we can return to that era and think of how happy our local population would be.