What Defines Success?

I’ve recently been in a position where I’ve had to contemplate what I define as success. At the age of 45, I’ve walked away from the “corporate-existence” that had fed me for the better part of five-years because it boiled down to a choice of being on the job or spending time on creating memories that money can’t buy. I tried to convince myself that I had responsibilities to my employer but in the end my sister came up with the most important argument of all – “You’re 45 – do you want to spend the rest of your life behind a desk,” and with that, I walked away from my corporate existence.

I know that a few people would argue that I took a dangerous path. I’m a late starter in the corporate rat race. While I had a few corporate gigs, most of my time was spent freelancing or waiting tables. Then, at the age of 39, I got myself employed in an accounting firm that specializes in liquidations. Though lacking in the necessary paper qualifications, I survived in the job, learnt a great deal, earned a few rounds of an annual wage supplement and had a few bonus payments and the boss deemed me worthy enough to discuss promotion. You could say that on paper, I had found security, stability and success and all I needed to do was to carry on the same path.

Yet, while I knew I was secure, I didn’t feel successful. While grateful that I had a salary and regular contributions to my pension fund for five-years, I didn’t feel that I had a particularly good life. It took going away for a week and cutting off ties with the rest of the world for me to realise that I was on the wrong path in life and although I’m back in a position where I don’t really know what will happen with my life, I have a strange sense of clarity of what life has to offer. While technically in a more precarious position, I feel more successful than I did a few weeks ago.

I talk about my personal situation here because it brings into the question of what defines success. What makes one person successful and another not. Most people would argue that success involves the material. A man with a particular car and house is defined as successful while a man without is often defined as not. We look at signs of success in terms of status and situations.

What is true of individuals is also true of nation states. I’ve lived in Singapore, which is the definition of a “successful” nation. As a child, I thought Singapore had it all and when I moved to the West, I found it very hard to accept that Singapore was part of the “developing” world for the simple fact that all the physical stuff (buildings etc) that I saw in the West, were not better in any shape or way than what I saw in Singapore.

When I returned to set up my life in Singapore and got into the national sport of complaining about the place, I often found myself being ticked off by people from the Western World for not appreciating the good things around me. Singapore is safe (no worries when my teenage girl takes a late bus home), rich (a Singapore dollar exchanged at one point something against global currencies like the Greenback, Euro and Pound and many times more in third world currencies) and clean (there is no reason to buy bottled water in Singapore – it’s the only drinkable water in some Western cities). So, what’s there not to like?

We are the very definition of success and yet, we, the people seem downright miserable. I feel it whenever I travel to a third-world backwater. Returning from places like Vietnam, Thailand and Bhutan makes me feel that I’m returning to a place that lacks something important. Why do people who have so much less than what I have, seem to much more ease with the world. In their eyes, I must have everything. Yet, I’m envious of them.

I’m well aware that life in rural Asia is tough. Outside of Singapore and Hong Kong, the facilities are awful. I remember my favorite Bhutanese tour guide telling his tour groups to “use bottled water to brush your teeth.” I am aware that farming by hand is brutal work. At the age of 22, I understood why the Thai girls in Geylang (Singapore’s red-light district) were selling their bodies – Kanchanaburi Province in Thailand was dirt poor. Yet, and yet I couldn’t help but feel that had something very important that I didn’t have.

I guess you could call it hope. People there face hunger and so they work hard to get over it. Yet they remain human and I can’t help but feel that this is the factor that makes them more at ease with the world. For us, it’s a case of joining a machine and being part of the machine. The system apparently looks after you and gives you “success” but after you achieve it – what do you have? 

Hanoi - The City of Dreams

By - Ms.  Vee



Hanoi ”, the sound sounded clear and touched the heart of Vietnamese people. Through many ups and downs of history, Hanoi still stands there, magnificent.

Talking about Hanoi, people can't help but think of a bustling city, skyscrapers, entertainment centers, and large trade centers.

But you know, besides modern beauty, Hanoi still retains a very unique and very Hanoi-like feature that is nowhere to be found.

I have been to Hanoi with my sister, having to see and see in Hanoi to see how beautiful it is, the food is very delicious and rich .. until now I still cannot forget the time The time is in Hanoi.

I hope that I will be able to return to this place soon because it gives me many unforgettable memories

Onward Singapore

It’s National Day tomorrow and I thought I would try and find a “patriotic” spirit to discuss what being a Singaporean means to me. Although I didn’t “grow-up” in Singapore (my formative years being spent in the UK), Singapore has been home for nearly two-decades. It remains the only country that I have a legal obligation to die for (OK, they did send me a letter discharging me from reservist duty a few years back, which came with a yearly $1,500 tax break for life) and it’s the only the country where I’ve started my family (Huong is determined that we’ll stay implanted in PAP lead Singapore forever).

I will never get tired of repeating the mantra that in so many ways, I’m lucky to call Singapore home. It’s become even more true in the age of the global populist, where you get the likes of Trump and Johnson stirring up “us – versus-them” sentiments in their respective countries. While there are people who are unhappy with the influx of foreigners, Singapore’s government keeps the place open to doing trade with the rest of the world. Although I’ve taken issue with the inherent racism in many aspects of life in Singapore, we are, for the most part a decent enough place where people can mix together regardless of race or religion.

As a father of a teenage girl, I am grateful that the place is pretty free of violent crime. Every area of Singapore is accessible to me. I can walk into Little India and feel right at home. I wouldn’t be able to do that in Harlem (I think of the movie “Live and Let Die,” when Bond’s entry into Harlem is described as “like following a cue ball.”) When Kiddo sends me, a late-night text saying she just left work, I don’t panic and worry she makes it home.

Then, there’s the topic of government. While the Singapore government has taken a beating in the online space, one’s daily interactions are pretty civil. Cops don’t take it a point to shake you down for bribes and most government agencies (including the tax department) make a show of being “customer-centric.”

Let’s not kid ourselves but material comforts matter and when you’re comfortable, you tend to forgive many things. I’ll never stop saying it but Singapore has excellent infrastructure and that makes it a great place to live. I’m not so much “proud” of being a Singaporean but I’m grateful for the things that the place provides me and the people that I’ve brought into my life.

Where Singapore falls grossly short is in its moral compass. I am aware that one should use the word “moral” sparingly when discussing a “geopolitical” situation in as much as things work on a “greater-good” principle – ie, if you have to kill one to save thousands, you got to do it. However, there are things about Singapore that enrage me because they go against what I believe a normal person would consider immoral.

My biggest bugbear about Singapore is the treatment of dark-skinned workers from poorer parts of the world. OK, I admit that people from what the Trump calls “Shit Hole” countries get a raw deal. However, in Singapore it seems like treating people from “Shithole” countries is an acceptable practice.

I think of an Englishman I once knew who asked me about what I missed about the UK. When I said, “The intrinsic decency of people,” my reply was “That’s because you’re white, try being a dark-skinned laborer.” True enough, we met up six -years later and he couldn’t stop talking about how Singapore was living off “slave labor” and told me about how a Bangladeshi worker in the shipyard he works at was only paid $2,000 a month (I didn’t have the heart to tell him that the man was lucky to be earning $2,000 a month).

Talk to enough of “my-people” about the plight of the “dark-skinned” from poorer parts of Asia and the answer is inevitably “they’re earning a lot of money compared to where they come from.” OK, a few Singapore dollars is equivalent to a handful of Rupees or Pesos but we have to remember the guy is not living in his home country, he’s here.

Actually, it’s OK, when there’s work. The unspoken contract being that these guys are earning more than what they could back home and the local economy gets people willing to do the dirty but necessary jobs that need to get done. So, even if the guy is paid less than a local to do more, its not a great moral issue.

What I do have an issue is when things go wrong such as in incidents where employers don’t pay or when the Company goes belly up. The hoops that these poor guys must go through to get what is due to them is ridiculous. The system seems to treat their request for what is rightfully theirs as an irritant. This being the same system that rushes to see high flying politicians, bankers and lawyers get more than their fair share, I think the phrase is “talent retention.”

I take the 2013 riots in Little India as an example. This was Singapore’s first riot since the 1960s and the only thing that officialdom could come up with was to ban alcohol (because dark people can’t hold their booze) and some comments from a high ranking official about “Migrant Resentment.” Nobody talked about how a migrant worker (who was admittedly pissed as a newt) got run over and the police was more concerned about protecting the guy who ran over the worker from the angry darkies than in enforcing justice. The bus driver who ran the guy over didn’t even get a slap on the wrist – apparently, he’s a victim. Talk to enough Singaporeans, particularly the Chinese variety, and there’s indignation that the darkies had the gall to riot. I’m with my favourtie Englishman who said, “In that situation, I’d bloody riot too.”

We are a rich nation but we need to remember that we also need to be a “respected” nation. We are respected in as much as for the most part there is “fairness” in the system. I am not sure how one can be proud of situations like this and having people shrug off those incidents as being due to the poor not being grateful for their lot?

We have many beautiful things but we need to remember they were built by the sweet of the labor. We need to remember that labor can only be good for the country if the country shows it respect. Nobody is asking for Bangladeshi, Indian and Pilipino workers to be paid on par with bank executives. What we should ask for is that their gradiences are treated with sincerity and respect.

I also concur with my Dad’s former neighbor, Professor Tommy Koh, who has come out to state that we need to develop a culture that respects different views.

This is unfortunately very true in our local politics, where people who differ from the main stream get jumped on. I take the example of a former Presidential candidate, Dr. Tan Cheng Bock, who set up a new political party recently.

Before you know it, you had the former Prime Minister launching an attack on the man. While Mr. Goh Chok Tong was perhaps not as vicious as it could have been (Mr. Goh’s predecessor was famous for using every trick in the book to crush his opponents) but it still reflected the inability of the powers that be to understand that ideas are not a monopoly but a market place. If only one played the video of the late Senator John McCain describing his former senatorial colleague and rival for the presidency as “A decent man whom I happen to have disagreements with.”

On National Day, I will sing Majullah Singapura in its only acceptable language (Malay) with pride. I will thank the divine for all the good things that this little red dot has brought to me and my family. At the same time, I will look for every way I can to combat the things about this country that I find so abhorrent. I am a Singaporean and I have an obligation to make my country a better place.

What Are We Asking For?

One of the things about being a blogger is that you sometimes attract the most interesting of followers. If you take my last piece on the topic of “racism,” I actually got a comment from an anonymous (the standard name of commentators) asking me to describe “real meritocracy” from my “non-Chinese” perspective.

I have answered the said reader of the comment and I think he or she didn’t quite do his or her research on Singapore’s history. I suspect the commenter had taken offence with the fact that I had taken offence with the fact that an IPS survey had found that half of Singapore’s Malay and Indian population felt they were discriminated against when applying for jobs.

Unfortunately, I understand where the comment is coming from. It comes from a cultural prejudice of our local Chinese community that views the indigenous Bumis, Pinoys, Thais etc as being less hardworking and clever than the Chinese – therefore, in a “meritocracy” where you look at things like qualifications and work experience (who did you work for before me and what did you do) rather than ethnic group, it goes without saying that the Chinese with their superior school results get the job. Hence, the argument goes – if the Malays don’t want to feel discriminated against, they should learn to work as hard as the Chinese if they want to survive in a meritocracy.

Unfortunately, the statistics seem to support this prejudice. If you take a broad-brush sweep of Southeast Asia, you’ll find that the top scholars tend to be Chinese as are the top working professionals. The economies of Southeast Asia are dominated by ethnic Chinese – just trace the shareholders of the top conglomerates in the region and you’ll find that they are inevitably Chinese. The Malaysia’s “Bumiputra” policy, which favors ethnic Malays in business and the awarding of government contracts, was put in place because the Chinese control of the economy was so dominant that it didn’t leave much for the natives.

So, in the Southeast Asian context, it is not wrong to argue that if you want “meritocracy” at its purest, you’re going to have to accept that the “Yellow” faces are going to be the dominant force in business and the jobs will inevitably go to those with the best qualifications, who happen to be Chinese. Singapore’s ethnic Chinese majority allows Singapore to trumpet meritocracy as the way to go. Governments in the rest of the region, where the Chinese are the minority, don’t use the word “meritocracy” and instead, talk about “native rights.”

Having said that, it still remains morally wrong to discriminate against someone based on their skin colour or religion and when you look at things from a social perspective, it is short sighted to allow a situation where one ethnic group dominates everything.

I’ve argued that Singapore’s initial ethos of “meritocracy” is correct. How can you argue against having the most capable person for the job? As former President Obama argued in the 2016 election – “It is NOT COOL to NOT KNOW what you’re doing – if you’re lying on an operating table, you want your surgeon to be the best.”

However, there is a draw back to this. Yes, you should let the smart people get ahead regardless of race or religion but you need to look after the “losers” of the system too for the very purpose of keeping “meritocracy” pure.

In Singapore, we focused on meritocracy, which was correct. However, human beings don’t always work on pure ideology and sooner or later, the ideals of meritocracy get diluted. In Singapore, we have the scholarship system, which was supposed to allow the less well off to climb up the social ladder and get the smart guys working to make life better. However, parents soon realized that the key to success was ensuring academic success and before you knew it, scholars started coming from the same type of background, going to the same institutions, where they ended up helping their buddies. 

Take SMRT as an example. You had one Chief of Defense Force (CDF) becoming CEO and when things didn’t go well, they hired his successor as CDF. While the new guy did make the right noises, the results have not been impressive. 

The same thing has happened in European Soccer. The Manchester United’s of the continent, win everything, get the most sponsorship and have the most money to buy the best players. The Champion’s League (Man U, Bayern Munich, Paris St Germaine etc) is just that – a league of its own. It makes players rich, keeps the TV cameras rolling but doesn’t go much to help soccer develop. 

As I have often said, life is unfair and people can accept that. Fact remains – there are winners and losers. However, as any fan of athletics will tell you – they all start at the same point. 

To get “real” meritocracy, you need a situation where the people on top are being challenged. You need a situation where the people at the bottom can choose the race, they want to enter without feeling they are screwed. 

I can accept that Chinese and Malay cultures are different. When it comes to economics, they look at things differently. Malaysia’s perpetual Prime Minister, Dr. Mohammad Mahathir observed in his book the “Malay Dilemma” that when the price of rubber doubled, the Chinese worked twice as hard (more money), while the Malays worked half as hard (same money for half the work). These are two different approaches to life. Neither should have a “legal” right of being “THE” way of life for everyone. Furthermore, a lifestyle should not be restricted to a particular ethnic group. My father once told me, “I’ll be happy if you marry a Malay girl. You won’t have much money but you’ll be happy.” 

I’m intellectually against government intervention in how people live their lives. However, it bothers me when a significant portion of the population feels screwed whenever they do something like apply for a job. It should be a telling point that what we’re getting is not meritocracy but an oligopoly. 

So, what do we do? I don’t believe in ethnic discrimination for the sake of it. In neighboring Malaysia, Bumiputra laws were supposed to even the playing field. The reality was, Chinese businessmen tied up with well connected Malay politicians and the only Malays that got rich were the well connected. The result was that a minority ended up taking up so much of the pie that the people at the bottom got fed up. As an ethnic Malay lawyer said, “The beauty of the 2018 election was that race stopped being an issue – people voted as Malaysians to get rid of a corrupt bunch.”

Social planners should take note – we, the people accept that there are rich and poor. I, for example, can accept that there are people with more than me just as I accept that there are people who have less. What I cannot accept is the other guy getting so much of the pie that I have nothing, whatever I do. So, let’s understand this – our Malay and Indian brethren are not asking for more of the pie. They are merely asking to be judged on their abilities and talents. The day any ethnic group believes that its not getting anything is the day we are in trouble.  

The Multi-Coloured Face

You have to hand powers that be for being able to distract you from the issues that matter. The latest row involved the Minister for Law deciding to take on the might of the racist minority by accusing  a YouTuber by the name of Preeti Nair of trying to stir up racial hatred in multiracial Singapore because she had the audacity to do a rap criticizing an ad by “E-Pay” because it centered around a Chinese man dressed as a variety of people in Singapore, including an Indian and Malay woman, to which he had to darken his skin tone (The fact being that ethnic Malays and Tamils tend to be a few shades darker than those of Chinese decent.)

Much is being said at the moment. One of my former juniors from my agency days is on Facebook talking about racism in Singapore. A few of my Chinese friends or at least the ones who like to think of themselves as nice people, are having a moment of angst, and are suddenly realizing the “apu-neh-heh” jokes that they used to crack with their Tamil friends might actually have been offensive.

It’s good that we’re talking about race, which is a rightfully touchy subject and I have to stress people from any ethnic majority tend to forget that people from minorities have feelings too. I don’t disagree with the fact that many “racist” comments are actually made with the kindest of intentions. I remember one of my favourite Englishmen telling me that his dad used the term “Chinky” all his life (it was the term for the Chinese take away) and although the term is often used to be offensive, I believe my friend. People do use terms that are overtly racist, without meaning for there be ill will.

Having lived as an ethnic minority for a good part of my life, I also believe that you’ll end up killing yourself, if you took offense at everything that was said. By all means, call me a “Chink” but don’t expect me not to think of you as “Gwei Lo” (I prefer this Cantonese term meaning “Ghost Person” to the one used in Singapore or “Ang Moh” – which means Red Hair – Gwei Lo, is well…….). It is possible to be insulting and well meaning at the same time.

So, I look at this whole incident as nothing really serious. Yes, the ad was done in bad taste. Yes, “Brownface” was not meant to be “complimentary” but nobody called for violence to be done on any particular ethnic or religious group. So, why on earth is there such an almighty row here and why is the minister taking on two rappers?

I believe that the Ms. Nair and her brother are wonderful distraction from the real discussion about race. A few days before this  incident, a report by the Singapore Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) foundthat half of all Malays and Indians feel discriminated against when applyingfor a job.

Let that sink in. In “meritocratic” Singapore, a country where it’s citizens pledge to be blind to things like one’s pigmentation, a third of the population feels they are screwed for merely being the wrong colour, when it comes to basic things like applying for a job.

Unlike Malaysia, which is open about favouring one ethnic group over others, Singapore makes a song and dance at every opportunity of being “regardless of race.” We bleat to the “foreign  investor” community that they can happily set up business in Singapore without having to favour any particular ethnic group and every year (National Day being the day we do this most) we talk about how every citizen is equal and we judge people by their capabilities rather than their skin tone.

This isn’t just a statistic from a “government” organization. I’m quite open about why I never took up a job in an organization that everybody (including the owner’s family) assumes I run – whenever I’m offered the job, its always significantly less than someone of a fairer complexion and that’s after I’ve over achieved in doing what should be done (bringing in them money).

But who cares about me? I don’t take the job on a full-time basis and everyone seems happy enough. I think of the number of times that I’ve been told “can don’t recommend Malay ah….” or the legal copout being “Must be a Mandarin Speaker,” for jobs that don’t deal with business from PRC China.

I think of the number of times I’m told that a “slave” wage for Indians and Filipinos is “good money” where they come from – hence, they’re damn lucky we let them shovel our shit.

The most prominent example of “work place” racial discrimination comes from the one organization that was built to be a “people’s force,” and force of national unity – the Singapore Armed Forces. It’s no secret that being a “Muslim” is a sure way of ensuring you don’t get promoted (a few years back, Indonesia’s President, JB Habiebie made some remarks about how Singapore lacked “brown” colonels and the very next day our national paper published the picture of every “brown” colonel and above.”) The argument was the fact that we didn’t want our Malay population to feel a conflict of loyalties should we ever go to war against Malaysia and Indonesia. However, with the nature of conflicts changing (going against trans-national extremist) as opposed to nation states, isn’t this form of discrimination actually harmful?

The most interesting part about the “real” debate on racism in Singapore is that you have ethnic minorities promoting it. Back when I lived in Dad’s condo – I remember the one Indian security guard telling me that the management of the building was quite right not to hire Indian people. You got to admit that this is a sign of genius when you get the downtrodden to justify things.  

We need to be a real meritocracy and we need to stop pretending that a “cast” system does not exist. Sure, Singapore looks pretty damn good compared to most places – or at least to the people with money – but this cannot go on. Name calling and tasteless ads are the least of our issues. Who really cares if someone paints their fac brown or calls someone a brown face? Let’s not get distracted that one third of our population feels discriminated against in the things that matter. Let’s ask ourselves some hard questions like – are we stopping ourselves from actually using our “human” resources because our prejudices get in the way. Time to look beyond the noise and get to the real issues.

I Hate it When People “Chope” Seats – Please Continue to Chope.

One of the most irrirating things about Singapore is a practice known in local lingo as “Chopeing.” The practice is “chopeing” is an unofficial form of reserving spaces. This habit is most prominent in food courts and hawker centres where people “reserve” seats before going to buy food from one of the stalls in the centre. Unlike formal restaurants where the seats are the property of a single establishment, seats in a hawker centre or food court are common property and anyone can sit anywhere he or she choses to sit.

In practice, hawker stall seats are a free for all. However, a culture of “chopeing” has developed where all you need to do is to leave your business card or a packet of tissue paper on a seat and it’s effectively yours.

Personally, I hate it. It’s like, you have an hour for lunch, there’s only one place to eat and its filled with people. You get your food and there’s an empty seat – then all of a sudden, you see a business can or a packet of tissue paper and you’re left standing and looking for a place to sit again. I mean, who the heck reserves things with a packet of tissue paper? In places outside Singapore, a group will go out for lunch, leave one person to sit there and reserve the seats and then buy his or her stuff once the rest have come back. Only in Singapore does a packet of tissue paper count as reserving the seats.

Having said all of that, I respect the fact that you can “chope” your seats with something as biennial as a packet of tissues. This irritating habit is based on what of the things that makes Singapore a decent place to live in – safety.

To put things in a nut shell, if you saw a packet of tissues lying around in somewhere outside Singapore, you’d pick it up and use it and that’s just tissue paper. I’ve seen people reserve their seats with things like a set of headphones and today, I even saw something resembling a purse. Once again, if you saw a pair of headphones lying around, you wouldn’t think the place was reserved, you’d think that someone had left a pair of headphones behind for your taking.

Yet, and yet, this is Singapore and there are harsh penalties for crimes. Our crime rates for the most part are low and while you can say that this has made the population complacent, there’s a lot to be said for being able to leave your goods unattended in a public place and be confident that they’d still be there after taking a small walk. 

Top Class from Middle Class !!! - Global Leaders from India

By Mr. KV Rao

I was born and raised in India in small towns, and started reflecting how is it that so many of my compatriots make it to global leadership positions ?

Many of our ilk have left the shores, for distant foreign lands. Have studied and imbued the best of cultures, but retained some of some of that inner rusticity, and native eclectic personalities. They have made it to the top jobs of Google, Microsoft, Mastercard, or a Pepsi, and the list is endless and still more to surface. All have been exceptional fighters, who seem to compete fiercely but fairly, often guided by their simple inner compass. All have had their roots in Middle Class India. What is the magic that’s at work ?

Typically, in a middle class family, that typifies some common basics - a high dose of personal values with low resources, what in a South Indian phrase is termed as “high thinking and simple living” - hard work, education, discipline are the key mantras drilled into young minds, to help them break through the glass ceiling. Exceptionally strong personal family bonds, and a natural willingness to put oneself down for the other, compassion and care seem to naturally flower

 What are those simple things that make them such effective leaders. Here are some reflections :-

1. ‘There was never enough ….’   If one grew up in my generation in middle class India, life was always on the edge. Just about balancing ends with limited means. That meant, living happily and contented with what you have, than to aspire for what you don’t. Realism, practicality. But, also have the uncanny ability to stretch the buck – unbelievable value engineers, we are naturally. No wonder, hard to beat an Indian at cost cutting. !. Defining needs vs wants was deeply embedded in the frontal lobe of the mind, filtering away desires :) 
2. “We always ate together….” . Families would wait for each other to eat together. (Also the fact that there were hardly fridges then, and you ate hot and fresh !).There was sharing and caring. The bonds built were deep that lasted a life time, and giving and serving each other, imprinted that quality of care for a lifetime for another member of the family. 
3. “We celebrated together, we mourned together …” Families, lived as communities, extended with relatives, friends and neighbors. Much to the chagrin of modern nuclear families, there was little private and personal space  ! … All celebrations were shared, and so were the strains of illness or misfortune. Jumping in to help, give someone a shoulder was so very natural. That was the normal thing to do, not an act of valor or sacrifice. Your loss was mine, your success too was mine. Empathy a natural flow.
4. “Maths and English, are important…. “. Our fathers simply emphasized on 2 subjects, Maths and English, particularly in South India, as if they were meant to train the left and right brains, and eventually spur some whole brain activity. In hindsight, they seem to make sense. English opened the doors to global opportunities, the computational abilities pushed forward analytical thinking. 
5. “ We laughed a lot, joked, and pulled each others leg… “ Families, neighbors, and community living provided the best of entertainment, and a source of immense comedy. Radio and cinema was the only companions, and Black & White TV just came in with one or two long running serials. Sense of humor was valued, and we learnt to laugh, when nothing else could be done. Being sportive and getting the rough edge, is so normal, no big deal. It built great resilience and forbearance, for there were many things we could not change but had to live with. 
6. “ We prayed together….. “ . There was always a routine of prayer, whether you liked it or not. Before you start the day, go to college, go to exam, go to an interview. All of which, reinforced the positive belief, that no matter what, there is something more powerful and higher that resides above you, and cares for you should you make the effort to reach out. It ingrained the simple truth of focusing on the effort and leaving the ultimate result to the forces that be. It also made one more prepared to take risks, and face failure – a trait that today people struggle with, to fail, and yet to rise and be innovative.
7. “ There is always a fix …."  Last but not the least, there was never a “no” to be taken. There is always a fix, a Jugaad if you may, or a work around. Hard to accept and give up. Persistence, thinking upside down, creativity or sheer street-smart tactical reflexes. Or the ability to bow, and accept failure honestly and humbly. It’s a potent combination of inner strength and outer smartness, to craft a strategy that works in the face of adversity.
8.  “ You are not the smartest .. “. When you grew up, you always had someone much smarter than you, much better than you. You often wonder you were blessed or damn lucky to be where you are. There is a common streak of simplicity and most importantly humility. Go back to point 6, above – there was also someone “above” there who wished you well. Humility reinforced. !

 It is not the top management schools that honed the skills alone, but the the middle class homes of India that gave many of our generation, that inner compass and embedded CPU that makes one see life with a set of different lenses.

Leadership today, hinges on the ability to inspire, share, care, lead with empathy. Inflect clarity, sharpness, and fight the forces of competition with courage and tenacious persistence, never to give up. The ability to remain cheerful, spread laughter and joy around the work place. The training school of which is located in middle class Indian homes, that have often produced top class international business leaders

All Men are Equal – Some Are More Equal than Others

Do We Need More Equality?

If there is a theme that makes our chattering classes chatter, it is the topic of inequality. However, unlike the other topic that riles people, namely arseholes and what we do with them, the topic of inequality has a way of making people, particularly those in power, squirming in discomfort.

Just mention the fact that Singapore, when measured by the Gini Coefficient (standard measurement of social inequality), is one of the most unequal societies in the world in a public forum. Before you know if, you’ll have a good portion of the government reminding you that such measurements like the Gini Coefficient don’t really tell you the whole story (which was something my former headmaster used to do when the school wasn’t ranking that highly on the league tables – he changed his tune the moment the rankings reflected something he liked to see) and they’ll then roll out all the wonderful social programs that they’ve come up with to prevent the poor from dying on the streets.

While I’m not going to dive into statistics to prove a point. What I will say is that Singapore is an obviously unequal place. In my daily life, I deal with Indian and Bangladeshi construction workers earning the princely sum of $1,100 a month (US$800/Euro 700 or GBP 646) and I also deal with high flying corporate lawyers earning that amount in an hour. In Singapore, it’s a national celebration when the likes of  Facebook’s co-founder, Eduardo Saverin who has a net worth of over 11 billion US dollars settles in Singapore (or when James Dyson buys a very expensive piece of property) and at the same time, we’re perfectly content for a legion of dark-skinned Asian workers to come here to work what can only be described as “slave wages” (we even get indignant when the dark people have the gall to riot after the police protect the guy who runs over a dark person).

In fairness to Singapore, we’re not the only unequal place on the planet. My university days were spent in London’s Soho, and the common sight was tramps on the streets camping outside bars waiting for people throwing a couple of hundred pounds away to spare them some change. You could say that Singapore’s inequality is only more telling for me because it’s physically more compressed.

The other observation that I’d make is that nobody seems to have really “rioted” over the “unfairness” of society. So, the question that we all need to ask is whether inequality is really such a bad thing after all.

For me, the answer was given by Raghuram Rajan, the former Reserve Bank of India (RBI) Governor at IIMPact 2013, when he argued that it all depended on how people saw the elite. Dr. Rajan argued that people could accept inequality if they saw the elite as getting there through hard work and guts. However, if people saw the elite getting ahead at their expense, they would not accept it.

Dr. Rajan’s point was clearly visible in the Arab Spring and seen in places like Tunisia, where the average educated person needed to work a few jobs to buy a loaf of bread while any idiot who had the good fortune to be related to president Ben Ali, would inevitably get rich.

By contrast, America has held relatively steady even though you have the likes of Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates whose net worth’s are comparable with GDPs of some nations and at the other extreme, you have dreadful levels of poverty (American satirist, PJ O’Rouke, went as far as to compare Detroit to war-torn Beirut). Bezos and Gates are perceived as ordinary guys who had a great idea that could change life for the better and made a fortune from it (and made many other people rich in the process – think of the Microsoft millionaires in Seattle). While their fortunes are greater than what the average man could dream of, they are not resented because they are ordinary guys who made good rather than crooks who screwed over the ordinary guy.

The problem with inequality arises when the ordinary guy is made to feel that he’s being screwed for merely being born. To a certain extent, that has become true in America with the election of Trump, who is ironically the prime example of someone who has benefited from the faults of the system (inherited wealth, payed less than minimal wages – if he paid at all, coopted local government officials to do him favours etc). Despite being a product of the faults of the system, Mr. Trump is a genius at tapping into the resentments of the average man and exploiting them to his advantage – the average man being so excited that he’s got poor Mexicans, Chinese, Indians etc to blame that he forgot that the guy really screwing him is the Wall Street banker or dare I say, the Manhattan Property Developer.

In Singapore, something similar is happening. The average person notices that life is becoming expensive. Leaving the rising costs of houses and cars, we, the poor sods notice things like we need to top up our bus cards three times a week instead of twice as we did a few years back. At the same time, we’re noticing how things which were meant to be “equalisers” like the scholarship system are looking more and more slanted against the ordinary people (the idea of the scholarship system is good – your family background is secondary to your academic ability – however, over time, the guys getting the scholarships are – the same guys who’ve been getting them for the last few decades – the families that can afford top notch tutors).

So, what do we need to do? I believe the answer should focus giving those at the bottom of the heap the feeling that they have a chance, no matter how slim of coming up on top. Most people can accept that life is intrinsically unfair, and the poor do accept that the rich will have advantages.  What the poor will find hard to accept is that they and their children are automatically screwed for being born into the families they are born into and that the rich remain and get richer at their expenses because the system is slanted in such a way. Society only works when the rich get richer and the poor get richer too.

Free market on its own won’t do the trick and some government intervention in life is necessary. To use sporting analogies – you have the European Champion League, where the top clubs (Man United, Real Madrid, AC Milan etc) win pretty much everything, get more money, buy up the best players and continue winning and there’s nothing left for anyone else.

What you need is something like the NFL, where the rules are such that the losers at the bottom of the heap get the first pick of the top talents coming out of the college football system, from where most players come from. This so called “socialist” arrangement has ensured that competition remains healthy and no one team ends up wiping everyone else out of the field.

It’s time for us to reject populist nationalism that leads to nowhere and to look to leaders willing to come up with sensible rules that will offer the downtrodden a glimpse of hope.

Where Do You Come From?

I’ve been away from my desk for a better part of this month and so it’s been hard to sit down and bash out a reasonable blog entry. However, thanks to the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue’s latest tweet, I’ve got something to write about.

The background is well known. The Occupant decided to do what he does best and bashed out a “Tweet” telling four Congresswomen who are “women of colour” to “go back to where they came from.” As expected, this has caused something of a “shit-storm.” On one hand, you have people denouncing the occupant as a “racist xenophobe,” and on the other, his supporters are lapping it up as an example of how their hero tells the world the “ugly truth.”

As always, comedians have had plenty to work with and social media discussions have been passionate. The Occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has continued to add fuel to the fire by doubling down on his tweet. While a good number of decent people are getting upset, I believe that the Occupant has done us a very important service by getting us to ask ourselves what makes a citizen.

Let’s start with the obvious. The tweet was intended to be racist because racist statements are inherently provocative. The women in question were all US Citizens, with three of the four being born in the USA. The other common factor was the fact that they were not white. The message was clear – these four non-white women were not “real” Americans, even if they had US passports. The Occupant’s supporters then turned their focus on the one woman who wasn’t born in the US, Ilhan Omar, the Congresswoman from Michigan. Apparently, Ms. Omar, who came to the US at the age of 10 from Somalia is “anti-American” because she doesn’t follow a known Zionist narrative that Israelis of European decent, have a “God-given” right to take land from brown people. As far as the Occupant’s supporters are concerned, Ms. Omar has now replaced Osama Bin Ladin as the spokesperson of every terrorist organization out there. Any rational person would see that this only makes Ms. Omar different from her fellow citizens, not “anti-American.”

As one looks at the events surrounding this debacle, the key question that we need to ask is “what exactly is it that makes one an American,” or that matter of fact, a citizen of any society. Is it ethnicity or religion? If you take Israel as an example, the answer would be religion. Israel officially claims to be the “homeland” of the Jewish people. When you think of Israel, one automatically assumes that its citizens are automatically Jewish. Yet, at the same time, Israel has “Arab” citizens, who are for the most part Muslims and contrary to what the average American may believe – Christian. The Arab citizens of Israel have the same rights of the average Jew and they do things like serve in the Israeli military (something which Orthodox Jews do not do). Are Israel’s Arab citizens any less Israeli than the Jewish ones?

In Singapore, where I live, we have a similar question. Is being a Singaporean about race? Our founding fathers were booted out of the Malaysian Federation because we claimed that we didn’t want being Malaysian to be about a particular race or religion and so, we, the citizens of Singapore now have a ground level culture where we’re a patch work of many things. I’m an ethnic Chinese working with a Malay speaking colleague on a project where I much Dossai (South Indian food) on a daily basis. I look to the fact that I have various shared experiences like National Service and a love for various cuisines as the things that bind me to Singapore and Singaporeans. Does that make me more Singaporean than someone like my restaurant owner, who is ethnically Caucasian and has never served a day in uniform but speaks “Singlish” and swears in Hokkien (with a French accent) and chats about the creaminess of durian. While I struggle to pay my bills, he runs a relatively successful business that employs otherwise unemployable Singaporeans – would that for example, give him more claim to being Singaporean than me?

I’ve tried to escape belonging to a particular country and focus my belonging to a people. My parents, are very sure that they are “Singaporean of Chinese descent.” I like to think of myself as being “Chinese” but not from China. For me, Singapore is home in as much as this is where I am physically based. However, I see the Chinese diaspora in the China towns of the Western world as being home too. 

Although I speak Cantonese like shit, it was the language that for many years that gave me a feeling of belonging into a pretty cool network (speaking to your Chinese take away guy in something other than English ensures the food is better). Having said that, a client of mine once asked, “Are you sure Tang is Chinese, he seems more Indian.” He has a point, I’ve picked up bits of Hindi, which gives people the impression I speak the language. I still can’t pick up a word of Hokkien, the majority dialect of Singapore’s Chinese (I get away with it in Singapore because everyone then assumes, I’m Peranakan – which is partially true too). 

I’m still trying to figure out what makes me, me. I’m obviously Chinese with a Singapore passport but culturally British in so many ways but at the same time emotionally Indian, as this particular client pointed out (apparently, I’m the talk of his office – the Chinese boy who eats dossai with his hands). 

If I’m constantly trying to work out who I am as an individual, I’ve got to assume that nations are also doing the same with their national identities. To, which I need to state, that while I have no conclusive answer to what makes a nationality, I’d urge people to ask themselves the question every day. It’s only by asking that question on a daily basis that one reaches something that they’d like the answer to be. 

And the Land of the Brave and the Home of the Free

It’s no secret that I don’t like Donald Trump as a President. I believe that while his policies may have a short-term gain in some aspects, in the long term, his boorish behavior and downright nasty policies on immigration and foreign policy will be bad for the world and America, the nation that he claims to care so much about.

A few Americans I know, would say that my dislike for their president might have something to do with the fact that my personal politics are slanted to the left or that I don’t understand what or how “White America” feels about being displaced by migrants from Mexico and “losing” the global stage for “unfair” competition from China and to a lesser extent Russia and India.

My dislike for the Trump administration has nothing to do with either. I don’t consider myself particularly slanted to the political left or right. One of my professors (A Canadian Lady living in London) complained that she had failed to put a liberal thought in my head. I also don’t believe that government is a solution to anything particular (which puts me in the Reagan version of the conservative movement, though in Singapore I guess I’m considered something of a loony left radical).

I also stress the point that I am the ideal target for ‘anti-immigrant’ messages. I belong to the ethnic majority in my homeland and I am a “college graduate” who had to take on a blue-collar job in my late thirties just to make ends meet. Yet, despite being shoved onto the ground when I could least afford it, I understand that I’m not entitled to a cushy office job (most are overrated in my opinion) and my lot in life is not the fault of the poorer and darker people from other parts of the world. So, I’m sorry, I simply cannot rationalize or internalize “anti-migrant” sentiment.

I have family from White America. Both parents remarried White Americans after they got divorced and I struck the lottery. On my Mum’s second marriage, I got a wonderful stepfather, Lee who brought me to my extended family lead by my stepsister, Carol. From my Dad’s second marriage, I got the most amazing granny, Joan. For me, this part of my family represents why America in so many ways is the Greatest Nation around and I say this as an ethnic Chinese who does look forward to a strong and vibrant China.

What makes America great. Well, the statistics are glaring. Despite China’s vast and rapid rise, America still leads the way in so many aspects of life. It has the world’s largest economy, the world’s most innovative universities and the most technologically advanced military machine (as a matter of fact, America spends more than the next 26 nations combined – 25 of which are allies or as a Taiwanese fellow once said, “China is modernizing its military but it’s modernizing from the 1950s).

For me, these are just statistics. China will be the largest economy by the mere fact that is has so many more people and when China is the largest economy, the average Chinese will feel less well to do than the average American. China is very advanced in certain technological sectors (e-commerce and e-payments as in my previous posting) but the world still looks to Silicon Valley for leadership in innovation. America still rules the world and I believe its for a good reason, and that reason can be found in my American family.

The key to American dominance of the world lies in its ability to be open to the rest of the world. There’s something about America that makes people want to go there and not just go there – go there and succeed. Trump and gang may complain about people from “Shithole” nations but these are the very people who come over and make the place work. As one Southern Baptist I know said, “Americans always complain about the Mexicans but its Mexicans who make the basic services run.”

And it’s not just the Mexicans who want to come to America and to do well. One of my best friends in Singapore is a Nepali migrant who wants to go to the USA because he believes, despite Trump, that its place that all you need to do is to work hard and in the Americans I know, things like race or religion don’t matter as long as people believe you made your success through hard work. I have a friend of Pakistani Decent who has done well in the USA and the fact that he’s Muslim and a darker skin tone that the majority in Oregon is not a factor in how people view him.

I make no secret of the fact that I disagree with much of American foreign policy, particularly in the Arab World. However, I also believe that America has done much for the world to be thankful for. In Europe (a continent that I called home for my formative years); it was the “Marshal Plan” that helped Europe rebuild after the second World War. In Asia, a continent I currently call home, it’s the American military that has kept stability and American education has helped mold the minds of very successful business leaders.

While the Trumpites might disagree with me aggressively, I’ve noticed that America has actually grown despite competition from Europe (particularly Germany) and Asia (Japan, India and obviously China) despite having “given advantages” to its competition. As Jack Welsh, former CEO of General Electric (While GE may be going through a rough patch, it has proven to be a far more successful business than say – The Trump Organization).once argued “You can complain about China growing or you can look at the opportunities a growing China offers you.”

My family America continues to welcome me with open arms despite the fact that my parents are no longer married to their respective second spouses. When I told Nora, my dad’s second wife about Jenny, her first reaction was “Tell my granddaughter, welcome to the family.” To me, that’s America and that is why America remains great despite Trump.

It’s All About Image

About a month ago one of the Bistrot’s customers decided to pay their bill using GrabPay. The process was exceedingly simple. We keyed in the bill amount, chose the GrabPay option and the customer than scanned the QR code and hey presto the bill was paid.

This was an amazing experience. It was watching the “reality” of a “cashless” transaction in action using what we now consider standard technology. One should have had a moment of clarity and a delirious feeling that you were witnessing the future.

It wasn’t. Watching someone use “mobile technology” to pay a bill didn’t feel special and it seems to be the case for quite a few people. In the few months that we’ve installed the option to use “GrabPay,” I’ve witnessed a grand total of two transactions using GrabPay.

By contrast, most of our transactions in the entire restaurant come from credit cards and one of the things that most of us do notice is the type of credit card, especially the shiny metallic ones, which offered to the banks higher end customers. Apparently, you need a couple of million dollars’ worth of assets under management (“AUM” in technical jargon). When someone hands you a shiny card, it’s a sign that you’re in the presence of someone who’s made it.

 
That last sentence is a problem or rather an opportunity, depending on which side of the table you’re on. For the banks, the credit card has been one of the greatest money spinners ever invented. It allows us to borrow money from the bank without having to fill out lots of paper work or put down any collateral. Interest rates on credit cards are high, in fact interest on credit cards are probably the highest legal interest rates available anywhere in the world. On top of that, the credit card issuer takes a fraction of a percentage on every transaction from the merchant (this is what you call being the ideal middle man). 
 

By contrast, GrabPay does not charge the merchant on a transactional basis (every penny charged by the merchant is for him or her to keep) and the system is based on actual money as opposed to borrowings as in the case of the credit card, so using GrabPay or any similar system doesn’t get you into unnecessarily legal issues (I must disclose that I have credit card debt, which while under control, does take a hefty chunk of my salary.) 

If you look at the basics, GrabPay and other similar systems are a better payment system for both business and consumer. The only beneficiary in a credit card transaction is the issuer of the credit card. So, why do we in the so called “Developed” world not rushing to adapt systems like “GrabPay” and sticking stubbornly to old fashioned systems like cheques and most of all credit cards.

I believe that the answer lies in marketing and the way in which old fashioned products like the credit card are marketed. There’s something “magical” about writing a cheque and receiving a cheque and it’s even truer of the credit card. 

The marketing of the credit card has been first rate. That piece of plastic isn’t just a means of making a transaction. It is a symbol of who you are and it announces to people that you have access to the lifestyle that most can only dream off (this is especially true when it comes to air miles promotions – think of Amex Krisflyer – swish credit card that helps you fly on a swish airline).  

I think the metallic credit cards like Citibank’s Ultima, American Express’s Centurion Card or United Overseas Bank (UOB) Reserve Card. Apparently these are “invitation only” and in technical jargon you need to have a few million AUM (assets under management) with the issuing bank. The people who hand me these cards are people who can “Afford it.” 

I must confess that I am very guilty of being a “star-fucker” in this respect. In my casual surfing habits, I like to surf the net for information on what having these credit cards will get me. The thought of “wow, won’t this be nice if I could pull out this card” and “wow, this will help me fly in the new first class cabins” does cross my mind whenever I see these things. 

That’s precisely what the banks are counting on. As long as I’m working, I’m in a position to pay down bills. As long as there are merchants that accept cards, they earn decent fees. By comparison, there’s nothing particularly cool or glamorous about scanning a QR code – doesn’t say very much about me when I scan a code does it?

The only place where mobile payments have really taken off is China, where, as one PRC customer of the Bistrot explains – “Not even the beggars use money – they scan a code from WeChat or AliPay.” Why have these systems worked so well in China but less well elsewhere.

Perhaps the answer lies in necessity. China’s banking system is notoriously slow and SME unfriendly but at the same time there is plenty of technology talent in China. So, for Chinese consumers and businesses find a way to work round officialdom. This isn’t the case in America or dare I say Singapore.

Marketing investment works and over the long run it creates an emotional attachment to doing certain things. Perhaps it’s time for the likes of GrabPay and other systems to start working on branding themselves well.