Tim Harford
21 Aug 2015
"The number of jobs lost to more efficient machines is only part of the problem... In the past, new industries hired far more people than those they put out of business. But this is not true of many of today's new industries."
This sentiment, from Time magazine, dates from the early weeks of John F. Kennedy's presidency. Yet it would slot nicely into many a contemporary political speech. Like any self-respecting remorseless killer robot from the future, our techno-anxiety just keeps coming back.
Arnold Schwarzenegger's Terminator was science fiction - but so, too, is the idea that robots and software algorithms are guzzling jobs faster than they can be created. There is an astonishing mismatch between our fear of automation and the reality so far.
Wednesday, September 23, 2015
Kind 'uncle' on MRT train lauded for his acts
SEP 4, 2015,
S'pore Kindness Movement honours man who told foreign workers to keep their seats
Melody Zaccheus
A Singaporean "uncle" who told three foreign labourers on a train to keep their seats when they offered to give them up to local commuters was honoured by the Singapore Kindness Movement yesterday.
Mr Rimy Lau, 68, was presented with a certificate commending his gesture and a figurine of Singa the Courtesy Lion by the movement's general secretary William Wan at the organisation's Hill Street office.
The movement said Mr Lau's caring gesture "helped to make Singapore a nation of kindness and graciousness".
S'pore Kindness Movement honours man who told foreign workers to keep their seats
Melody Zaccheus
A Singaporean "uncle" who told three foreign labourers on a train to keep their seats when they offered to give them up to local commuters was honoured by the Singapore Kindness Movement yesterday.
Mr Rimy Lau, 68, was presented with a certificate commending his gesture and a figurine of Singa the Courtesy Lion by the movement's general secretary William Wan at the organisation's Hill Street office.
The movement said Mr Lau's caring gesture "helped to make Singapore a nation of kindness and graciousness".
GE2015: What if the PAP were a person? Here's what IBM Watson has to say
SEP 6, 2015
Rebecca Pazos
Chew Hui Min
SINGAPORE - Nine political parties are out to woo voters this general election. If each were a person, what would he be like? How adventurous would he be, how assertive, sympathetic or conscientious?
The Straits Times turned to IBM Watson's Personality Insights for a tongue-in-cheek look.
The programme produces a personality analysis by examining language used. It has been employed to dissect the State of the Union address by American presidents, and can also be used to predict behaviour on social media.
It bases its assessments on personality models and text analytics methods developed by psychologists.
It groups its results into five main traits used in standard personality tests - openness, agreeableness, extraversion, conscientiousness and emotional range. Each trait has six facets that further define an individual.
As input, The Straits Times used the text of the eight party political broadcasts in English that were aired on Sept 3.
The People's Power Party was not eligible for the broadcast as it is fielding fewer than six candidates for the Sept 11 election.
What does Watson think of the People's Action Party (PAP), Workers' Party (WP), National Solidarity Party (NSP), Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), Reform Party (RP), Singapore People's Party (SPP), Singaporeans First (SingFirst) and Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA)?
HERE ARE SOME TAKEAWAYS:
Rebecca Pazos
Chew Hui Min
SINGAPORE - Nine political parties are out to woo voters this general election. If each were a person, what would he be like? How adventurous would he be, how assertive, sympathetic or conscientious?
The Straits Times turned to IBM Watson's Personality Insights for a tongue-in-cheek look.
The programme produces a personality analysis by examining language used. It has been employed to dissect the State of the Union address by American presidents, and can also be used to predict behaviour on social media.
It bases its assessments on personality models and text analytics methods developed by psychologists.
It groups its results into five main traits used in standard personality tests - openness, agreeableness, extraversion, conscientiousness and emotional range. Each trait has six facets that further define an individual.
As input, The Straits Times used the text of the eight party political broadcasts in English that were aired on Sept 3.
The People's Power Party was not eligible for the broadcast as it is fielding fewer than six candidates for the Sept 11 election.
What does Watson think of the People's Action Party (PAP), Workers' Party (WP), National Solidarity Party (NSP), Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), Reform Party (RP), Singapore People's Party (SPP), Singaporeans First (SingFirst) and Singapore Democratic Alliance (SDA)?
HERE ARE SOME TAKEAWAYS:
Sunday, September 20, 2015
Liberal reflections on loss and acceptance in GE2015
Eleanor Wong
16 Sep 2015
The People's Action Party's (PAP) political narrative for Singapore has always insisted on our exceptionalism. For the longest time, I had suspected that this was just an excuse to impose an unnatural dominance on the populace. I had assumed and hoped that, given time, given information and given choice, Singapore would one day become a democratic society like any other - with more than one strong political party, all realistically vying for power, ensuring diversity and providing checks on each other.
But I'm big enough to admit when I'm wrong.
In the Sept 11, 2015 General Election, voters gave the PAP 69.9 per cent of valid votes, an increase of 9.8 percentage points from 2011. They handed 83 of 89 seats to the PAP. This wasn't just a national swing to the PAP. This wasn't just a vote in favour of the ruling party's policies over those offered by other parties. This wasn't even about picking the group at municipal level that best proves itself at the hustings or on the ground thereafter.
Such analyses try to shoehorn the facts into the framework of a typical democracy. They miss the point entirely.
This was a vote confirming the type of system that Singaporeans want to live under.
16 Sep 2015
The People's Action Party's (PAP) political narrative for Singapore has always insisted on our exceptionalism. For the longest time, I had suspected that this was just an excuse to impose an unnatural dominance on the populace. I had assumed and hoped that, given time, given information and given choice, Singapore would one day become a democratic society like any other - with more than one strong political party, all realistically vying for power, ensuring diversity and providing checks on each other.
But I'm big enough to admit when I'm wrong.
In the Sept 11, 2015 General Election, voters gave the PAP 69.9 per cent of valid votes, an increase of 9.8 percentage points from 2011. They handed 83 of 89 seats to the PAP. This wasn't just a national swing to the PAP. This wasn't just a vote in favour of the ruling party's policies over those offered by other parties. This wasn't even about picking the group at municipal level that best proves itself at the hustings or on the ground thereafter.
Such analyses try to shoehorn the facts into the framework of a typical democracy. They miss the point entirely.
This was a vote confirming the type of system that Singaporeans want to live under.
The strategic voter in the 'new normal'
Chan Heng Chee
Chairman of the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology
19 Sep 2015
In the 'new normal' of Singapore politics, expect voters to be strategic, using their vote to push for the outcome they want. Voters' support is conditional and can change from election to election
On the Monday after General Election 2015, I brought a humble pie to my office.
Like so many analysts on the elections, I did not see it coming - that the PAP would have a landslide victory winning 69.9 per cent of the votes, regaining the seat it lost in the by-election of 2013, Punggol East, and not yielding another group representation constituency (GRC).
The leading opposition party, the Workers' Party (WP), saw its share of the votes cut back from 46.6 per cent in 2011 to 39.75 per cent in 2015 and lost one seat, leaving it with six in a House of 89.
Interestingly, a cab driver who took me to my destination in Orchard Road on Cooling-off Day was nearer the mark in his prediction. He told me the PAP would get 65 per cent of the vote. He hoped there would be a few opposition members in Parliament.
The PAP's vote would improve as "they have done some things after 2011, not everything, it could be improved, but they have done things and people will give them their vote".
So in the "new normal" of Singapore politics, expect the "old normal" but with an electorate that is now more demanding, seeking participation (a voice), and more accountability than ever before.
Chairman of the Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities, Singapore University of Technology
19 Sep 2015
In the 'new normal' of Singapore politics, expect voters to be strategic, using their vote to push for the outcome they want. Voters' support is conditional and can change from election to election
On the Monday after General Election 2015, I brought a humble pie to my office.
Like so many analysts on the elections, I did not see it coming - that the PAP would have a landslide victory winning 69.9 per cent of the votes, regaining the seat it lost in the by-election of 2013, Punggol East, and not yielding another group representation constituency (GRC).
The leading opposition party, the Workers' Party (WP), saw its share of the votes cut back from 46.6 per cent in 2011 to 39.75 per cent in 2015 and lost one seat, leaving it with six in a House of 89.
Interestingly, a cab driver who took me to my destination in Orchard Road on Cooling-off Day was nearer the mark in his prediction. He told me the PAP would get 65 per cent of the vote. He hoped there would be a few opposition members in Parliament.
The PAP's vote would improve as "they have done some things after 2011, not everything, it could be improved, but they have done things and people will give them their vote".
So in the "new normal" of Singapore politics, expect the "old normal" but with an electorate that is now more demanding, seeking participation (a voice), and more accountability than ever before.
Friday, September 18, 2015
Wither the Opposition: A Sisyphean future?
September 18
The resounding People’s Action Party (PAP) landslide in the General Election (GE) — which surprised many — must have given the Opposition camp reasons to worry.
Not only was the Opposition’s combined vote share diminished by almost 10 percentage points, the main Opposition Workers’ Party (WP) lost one of its seven seats and its seemingly impregnable fortress — Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC) — was won by only the slimmest of margins.
However, far from being despondent, the Opposition can still continue to be a relevant fixture in Singapore’s political landscape for some years to come. But the parties will have to reinvent and revamp to ensure their continued existence.
NEW NORMAL OR JUST NORMAL?
In GE2011, when the tide turned towards the Opposition with the WP breaking a psychological barrier by winning a GRC — once considered unthinkable — Singapore was said to have entered a “new normal”.
It was seen as the electorate having a stronger desire for political plurality, after years of living with one-party rule. This sentiment gained ground with each subsequent election — the Presidential Election, Hougang by-election and Punggol East by-election.
This could have led to a pervasive sense that while the ruling PAP has been performing well, some effective Opposition was still needed to produce even better policies and politics.
But the GE2015 results give reason for reflection: Did Singapore enter a new normal after GE2011 or was it just a blip?
The resounding People’s Action Party (PAP) landslide in the General Election (GE) — which surprised many — must have given the Opposition camp reasons to worry.
Not only was the Opposition’s combined vote share diminished by almost 10 percentage points, the main Opposition Workers’ Party (WP) lost one of its seven seats and its seemingly impregnable fortress — Aljunied Group Representation Constituency (GRC) — was won by only the slimmest of margins.
However, far from being despondent, the Opposition can still continue to be a relevant fixture in Singapore’s political landscape for some years to come. But the parties will have to reinvent and revamp to ensure their continued existence.
NEW NORMAL OR JUST NORMAL?
In GE2011, when the tide turned towards the Opposition with the WP breaking a psychological barrier by winning a GRC — once considered unthinkable — Singapore was said to have entered a “new normal”.
It was seen as the electorate having a stronger desire for political plurality, after years of living with one-party rule. This sentiment gained ground with each subsequent election — the Presidential Election, Hougang by-election and Punggol East by-election.
This could have led to a pervasive sense that while the ruling PAP has been performing well, some effective Opposition was still needed to produce even better policies and politics.
But the GE2015 results give reason for reflection: Did Singapore enter a new normal after GE2011 or was it just a blip?
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
GE2015: Let your rallying cry be one of hope, not hate
Aw Cheng Wei
Sep 8, 2015,
SINGAPORE - It’s Thursday, 8.30pm, and the crowd at the Singaporeans First Party (SingFirst) rally is getting heated up.
In front of me, a party candidate stands on the stage, behind a rostrum, his fist in the air. He shouts into a mic. “Foreigners have come into our country, stolen our jobs, broken our families! They have destroyed our self-esteem!”
A wave of cheers erupted from the audience, with only a smattering of boos.
“Throw them out!” yelled a man with grey, thinning hair, his elbows propped against a yellow metal barricade.
Another man, with a gold chain around his neck and his hands cupped around his mouth, screamed, “Ask them to f*** off! They are not Singaporeans!”, as a woman, with her hair stuck to her forehead, knocked two empty plastic bottles furiously against each other, showing her support for his strong words. A folded-up pram leaned against her thin frame.
Nearby, two children stood silent, peering through the yellow bars. Their parents were nowhere to be found.
The same scene was played out at a Reform Party rally the next night and another SingFirst rally on Saturday.
Targeting foreigners is a tactic as old as politics itself.
Sep 8, 2015,
SINGAPORE - It’s Thursday, 8.30pm, and the crowd at the Singaporeans First Party (SingFirst) rally is getting heated up.
In front of me, a party candidate stands on the stage, behind a rostrum, his fist in the air. He shouts into a mic. “Foreigners have come into our country, stolen our jobs, broken our families! They have destroyed our self-esteem!”
A wave of cheers erupted from the audience, with only a smattering of boos.
“Throw them out!” yelled a man with grey, thinning hair, his elbows propped against a yellow metal barricade.
Another man, with a gold chain around his neck and his hands cupped around his mouth, screamed, “Ask them to f*** off! They are not Singaporeans!”, as a woman, with her hair stuck to her forehead, knocked two empty plastic bottles furiously against each other, showing her support for his strong words. A folded-up pram leaned against her thin frame.
Nearby, two children stood silent, peering through the yellow bars. Their parents were nowhere to be found.
The same scene was played out at a Reform Party rally the next night and another SingFirst rally on Saturday.
Targeting foreigners is a tactic as old as politics itself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)