Singapore Democrats

There can be nothing more articulate thatn this, although I am going to reverse the order that it was presented to us:

"Over the decades the Government has instilled in the population that their HDB flats are investments to be bought and sold for huge profits rather than homes that we live in with our loved ones.

The PAP must bear responsibility for the curent unhappiness voiced by residents who are affected by the building plans."

The resistance they now face from residents, now that they want to do the right, is of their own making.

Other than what this article points out, they have at elections been propandizing that should the opposition be voted in, the "market value" of their flats would fall, that they would not get "upgrading" on time, etc.

Well, habits die hard! Ingrained with that mentality of having politically and nationally irrelevant motives, but only protecting the market value of their flats, when doing something as important as voting at GEs, how can they expect now that they will overnight become morally altruistic about having in their neighbourhoods those old age facilities, which might undermine their flat values?

"...we need to reform our healthcare system to address the changing needs of our population. The SDP is confident that when responsive, affordable healthcare services are associated with void deck eldercare centers as we proposed (and will further outline in our National Healhcare Plan which will be unveiled soon), residents will welcome these facilities and there will be a demand for them."

I have feedback to communicate to the SDP's National Healthcare Plan team; I'm very confident from what I have seen so far from the team, that they also comprise some of our more excellent - and unpaid - researchers.

I refer to the following Straits Times article, titled - and crowing, pathetically as usual on the PAP government's behalf - "More Singaporeans signing up for 'living wills'".

Also as is usual with the PAP=ST nexus which is continuing to do the disservice of inflicting intellectual incest on Singaporeans against the national interest, you would have to dig deeper to uncover the truth. (Actually, you dont have to scratch far below the surface for this, but I guess this Nexus is still of the belief that after their ignominious dumbing down deed/s, they have successfully managed to eradicate Singapore of all individuals who have even a mildly investigative bent of mind.)

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_766049.html

I quote specifically from two comments following the article:

1. "I signed the AMD after I had an acute stroke 3 years ago, as I wanted to spare my family the trauma and financial strain of prolonging my life artificially."

Or more tellingly:

2. "I was one of the very first few to sign the AMD around 1998 when I was still young and healthy. I could see the problems coming, families too small with little resources to care for the living dead."

(Note: The above two comments are from only two out of a grand total of six commenters currently, which might - or might not, until better empirical evidence is forthcoming - be an indication of how widspread the sentiments expressed by them actually prevail in the population.)

These are my concerns:

Just what kind of 'First World' healthcare system has the grossly negligent PAP government put in place that any among the elderly would feel that they are are burden to their grownup and perhaps, even economically viable children? (WP: Any comments from you, especially ith regrds to the "First World" part?)

Has the care of the elderly become so finacially unaffordable that the elderly cannot but VERY consistently express the view that they are so burdensome? (I have heard such views many times before.) And how much more of a 'burden' might an elderly person feel s/he is if their child/ren might not be as economically viable, such as might be the case with an elderly person with a disabled grownup child?

Good ol' suicide as a solution, perhaps?

I know that this problem has only come about as a result of it being very firmly rooted in the PAP's worldview that those who are - or who are no longer - economically useful can, and perhaps even SHOULD be quickly dispensed with. Even the two commenters above sound so blase and matter-of-fact about any impendng doom that they might experience in their old age and/or infirmity.

But I really have to challenge Singaporeans, especially (but not confined) to those who have elderly parents/relatives: Do you dare say that you prefer them dead than for them to have the best that medical science as well as your country's fiscal health can offer today?

Alright, so "dare" may not actually have been the that best word to describe how we feel, but is that what you think your parents should be feeling in their old age: "Better dead than to be a burden my children"?

I would like to inform Singaporeans reading this that there are actually far better healthcare alternatives for the elderly than this, and it/they can be found in other mature economies, many of whom can afford it less - fiscally speaking - than Singapore.

This is exactly where I am hoping that the SDP's anticipated National Healhcare Plan team could fill in for me and other Singaporeans.

And if only we can also further spread the message that it is actually the PAP's fascist ideology that is the reason that we can be in such a predicament, and that the correction can only come from those who are substantially different from the PAP.

So Straits Times, wipe that smugness off from your collective face because that article that you published was no proof of a Highly Successful PAP Scheme and something to glorify and gloat about; it's far more a symptom of a deeper PAP-institued malaise that has pervaded the minds of Singaporeans, though hopefully, not irreparably.

Over to you, SDP, who I believe are the only ones currenly constituted in Singapore to reverse the damage caused by the PAP and all who collude with them.

Basic necessities and needs of Citiznes should be the responsibility of the Government. Public housing, transport, utilities and healthcare are of utmost urgency and requires immediate attention. Otherwise, the cost of living will further escalate and Citizens will suffer more. It is the duty and responsibility of an elected Government to take care of her Citizens. That is why are they elected in the first place.

For decades, we've been having loads crocodiles shedding tears and in the end, nothing much is done. The MiWs attempt to win ground support by building more eldercare centres though laudable, still lacks sincerity as they're more willing to give $1.1 Billion to help the duopoly transport companies to buy new buses but reluctant to further reduce Citizens' cost of living. Have they declared how much they're willing to set aside to build these eldercare centres and healthcare costs for our elderly?

It's good to see an Opposition Party to supporting good moves by the ruling party and not perceive as always against or anti-government. Well done SDP. Keep up the good work, continue to be vigilant, working towards the good cause, well-being and helping to take care of Singaporeans' interest.