of social status

Photo from The Enduring Vision

So I read that 1984-ville's public housing authority has decided to make it illegal for foreign construction workers to rent public flats.

Before I go on about my personal feelings on this, here are a few scenarios of what might happen when the ban kicks in:

1. Construction cost goes up. This is because construction companies which hire these workers will have the responsibility of providing purpose-built housing for these foreign workers. Every company in Singapore hires foreigners because locals won't do the job. The cost will of course have to be passed on to consumers. The smaller firms who can't afford to do so will go under. So let's brace ourselves for another shake-up in this sector.

2. Employers re-classify their workers when registering with the authorities. One way to overcome the problem of building housing facilities is to register their workers as someone other than a construction worker. Maybe a stone mason, brick-layer etc. This then makes mockery of the ban.

3. Exodus of workers to private housing. If local leasees of public housing complain about the presence of foreign workers in their midst, imagine the kind of noise that the nouveau riche will make when they share cubic space in the sky with foreign faces. Bring out the popcorn for showtime.

4. Further social isolation of foreigners, creating pockets around the island where foreigners dominate and no locals would voluntarily go. This flies in the face of the current government's drive to promote integration of "foreign talents" into local society.

These are just some thoughts off the top of my head.

Back to why I'm against the ban. The public housing authority (and the residents who brought up the "problem") are essentially saying that foreign workers are of a lower class, behave badly, create social disorder and generally responsible for the bulk of crime statistics. This sounds very much like the message that's been sent out by ring-wing anti-immigration groups in Europe.

I walked through my estate at 6 this morning to go to work . I bet my bottom dollar that all the spittle, used tissue paper and general uncleanliness I see was caused by my neighbours - all local born-and-bred 1984-ville denizens.

The bottom line is this: we bleed red and the sewers are equally smelly.

Division

Image from Google

Here's something for mental gymnastics...

Express the following fractions to 3 decimal places, you have 5 minutes:

1/10
2/5
1/3
3/7
1181/3034

I'm sure it took a bit more time for the last one but 5 minutes is plenty for all.

Unless you're in lower primary.

Or a pseudo-premier secondary school.

Why I bought a $10k piece of paper

Image from Google

So the Public Transport Council says 80% of passengers on public buses were satisfied with basic bus services.

I guess that makes me one of the minority.

Satisfied my ass rear-end.

If you follow the press release all the way to the bottom, you'd notice that there were 1661 respondents to the survey. That's out of about 2.1 million passengers in total for the month of February 2006 (when the survey was carried out). Ridership information available here. The survey is highly unrepresentative at 0.07%. And that's only counting SBS passengers. The percentage representation is even lower when you take into consideration TIBS passengers.

I wouldn't give myself a pat on the back just yet if I am a policy-maker.

Somehow, this survey seems to contradict sentiments expressed here where:

"...the authorities hope to reverse...the decline in the share of public transport trips. From 67 per cent in 1997, it has fallen to 63 per cent in 2004 for the morning peak period, despite the heavy investment put into providing a good public transport system..."

Back to my previous claim, satisfied my rear-end.

Here are some basic truths:

1. Money doesn't fix problems.

2. Survey results are highly subjective.

3. Having the traffic police block roads when you move around clouds your perception of things.