Category: Komentar

Send in your opinion to [email protected].
Kirimkan pandangan anda kepada [email protected].

  • Saudi Prince To Donate Entire $32 Billion Fortune To Charity

    Saudi Prince To Donate Entire $32 Billion Fortune To Charity

    A Saudi Prince will donate his entire $32 billion (£20bn) fortune to charity as part of a pledge modelled on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

    Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal announced his intention to donate the majority of his wealth to philanthropic causes in a press conference on Wednesday.

    Speaking in the Saudi capital of Riyadh, Prince Alwaleed said his vast wealth would go towards promoting health, eradicating diseases, providing electric to villages, building orphanages, providing disaster relief and empowering women through his foundation, Alwaleed Philanthropies.

    “The philanthropic pledge will help build bridges to foster cultural understanding, develop communities, empower women, enable youth, provide vital disaster relief and create a more tolerant and accepting world,” his statement said.

    “Philanthropy is a personal responsibility, which I embarked upon more than three decades ago and is an intrinsic part of my Islamic faith. With this pledge, I am honoring my life-long commitment to what matters most – helping to build a more peaceful, equitable and sustainable world for generations to come.”

    The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation works to improve health care, education and reduce extreme poverty around the world. It asks the wealthy to pledge the majority of their wealth to philanthropy and counts Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and Apple CEO Tim Cook as pledgers.

    The Prince will continue to retain his publicly-listed investment business, Kingdom Holding. He stressed that there was no deadline for donating all of the funds.

     

    Source: www.independent.co.uk

  • Day 1 – Roy Ngerng Vs Lee Hsien Loong

    Day 1 – Roy Ngerng Vs Lee Hsien Loong

     

    Thinking it over, I think yesterday’s six hours in court can be summarised like this:

    Mr Ngerng:
    “I am sorry if what I said hurt you, I never intended to hurt you. I’m sorry that you took it badly. You really shouldn’t have. You’re the PM, you’re a big man and I’m just a poor blogger trying to get answers on questions of immense public interest. Anyway, please point out which line hurt you? This one? That one? How do you know I was talking about you anyway? I never named you. How do you know people read my posts anyway? And what’s wrong with you? Couldn’t you just have told me nicely that you were hurt? Now, you sue me and want to bankrupt me, an unemployed man and who had offered a princely sum of $10,000 to you, more than what most people earn… Why are you so afraid of me that you want me to shut up? I am not shutting up. Never. In any case, since you now know that I never intended to hurt you – that is, you got me all wrong – can I have a second chance and we settle everything out of court can?’’

    And the PM:
    “You said sorry so many times but I’m quite sure you’re not. Because you keep repeating what I thought the court had already settled: That you defamed me. Do you seriously think that $5,000 or $10,000 will make up for what you did to me, the Prime Minister of Singapore? I would have been okay with a sorry but you’re too much…I’ve been watching you and now you’ve stepped out of line. Don’t wriggle out of it by asking me about this line or that line. The whole thing was offensive. As for whether people read you or not, there’s this thing called Google. Clearly you hate me and you want to make some political capital from putting me on the stand. This is so people will think you’re a champion. But it’s really back down to this: You defamed me and the question is: How much should you pay me?”

     

    Source: Bertha Henson

  • Peter Lim Buys Over Cristiano Ronaldo’s Image Rights

    Peter Lim Buys Over Cristiano Ronaldo’s Image Rights

    The image rights of Cristiano Ronaldo (picture), the world’s highest-paid footballer, are now being managed by a company owned by Singaporean businessman Peter Lim.

    In a press release yesterday, it was announced that Mint Media, a Hong Kong-based company owned by Mr Lim, had secured a six-year deal with the Portuguese star, who is the reigning FIFA Ballon d’Or winner, the award handed out to the best football player in the world.

    Mint Media will own and oversee all of the 30-year-old’s image rights, except those relating to Real Madrid, the Spanish football club for which he plays.

    Due to confidentiality reasons, contractual details, such as how much the deal is worth, were not revealed. But in response to queries from TODAY, a spokesperson for Mint Media revealed that Asian companies were very interested in working with Ronaldo.

    “We are seeing a lot of interest from Asian companies, including those from Singapore looking to expand their markets into North and South Americas as well as Europe, where Ronaldo has a huge following,” said the spokesperson.

    “We believe they would be keen to have Ronaldo, who is one of the most accomplished and popular sportsmen in the world, endorse their products. And we hope the collaborations will see Ronaldo making more appearances to Asia in general and Singapore in particular.”

    Ronaldo, who previously played for record-20-time English league champions Manchester United before joining Real in 2009, is the third-highest-paid athlete in the world, behind boxers Floyd Mayweather Jr and Manny Pacquiao, according to Forbes.

    Among the brands Ronaldo endorses are sportswear giant Nike, nutrition and weight management firm Herbalife, Swiss watchmaker TAG Heuer, and fashion and lifestyle brand Sacoor Brothers. A Forbes report this year stated that he draws US$27 million (S$36.4 million) from endorsements alone.

    Ronaldo will be Mint Media’s first client as it looks to venture into sports marketing, and Mr Lim — who last year became owner of Spanish club Valencia — expressed confidence that the football star’s brand “will continue to grow”.

    “Peter has a valuable and extensive business network, and I have always admired his entrepreneurial savvy and ability to grow businesses,” said Ronaldo in a statement.

    When the six-year deal ends, Ronaldo will be 36, which traditionally is the twilight of the careers of many professional footballers. But the spokesperson said: “We believe Ronaldo’s popularity will transcend his football career, as he also has a strong following among non-football fans because of his good looks and charisma.”

    WORLD’S HIGHEST-PAID ATHLETES (TOP 10):

    1. Floyd Mayweather (Boxing): US$300 million

    2. Manny Pacquiao (Boxing): US$160 million

    3. Cristiano Ronaldo (Football): US$79.6 million

    4. Lionel Messi (Football): US$73.8 million

    5. Roger Federer (Tennis): US$67 million

    6. LeBron James (Basketball): US$64.8 million

    7. Kevin Durant (Basketball): US$54.1 million

    8. Phil Mickelson (Golf): US$50.8 million

    9. Tiger Woods (Golf): US$50.6 million

    10. Kobe Bryant (Basketball): US$49.5 million

    *Includes endorsement deals.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • HDB Flats For Even Rich Kids’ Children?

    HDB Flats For Even Rich Kids’ Children?

    It’s difficult for a heartland born-and-bred Singaporean like me to imagine, but there are apparently people in Singapore who have never lived in, or even stepped into, a Housing Board flat.

    When I was discussing property purchases with a group of friends, one of my girlfriends confessed she would not buy a HDB flat because she wouldn’t feel safe in one. She grew up in private property and her first purchase was a condominium.

    I got to thinking about this issue, following reports that National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan wants to make it easier for all couples, including high-earning ones, to own and live in a HDB built-to-order (BTO) flat.

    In a live radio talk show on Chinese-language station Capital 95.8FM, he is reported to have said: “If you ask for my personal opinion … I generally prefer to give every Singaporean couple a chance of living in HDB.

    “You may come from, say, an upper-income group. You do not need an HDB flat. But I feel that it’s good for … almost all Singaporeans to have a chance of living in HDB for five years, and interact with the community.”

    He added: “It’s part and parcel of the Singaporean way of life. It’s just like males go for National Service … If we can give them this opportunity of staying in HDB towns, I think there are more positives than negatives.”

    His remarks were made in the context of raising the income ceiling for HDB flats, which he said could happen by Sept.

    Now, a married couple with a joint monthly income of up to $10,000 can buy a subsidised, new HDB flat. It was raised from $8,000 in 2011.

    This isn’t the first time Mr Khaw made such a comment. In an exclusive interview with The Straits Times in April 2013, he had broached the idea of scrapping the income ceiling to allow even couples with very high incomes to own HDB flats, as living in HDB flats would give people more chances to interact with others of different races and incomes. But the lower-income households ones would still get bigger housing grants.

    Mr Khaw said then: “If a rich man’s kid wants to apply for a BTO flat, provided he stays the five-year minimum occupation period, there’s nothing wrong with that to me”.

    My reaction both times was bemusement.

    For most Singaporeans, HDB living is part and parcel of being Singaporean. Most live in HDB estates. Those of us who grew up in one, and moved on to private property, will probably always hanker after the bustle of HDB life.

    You see all the BMW-driving businessmen in long-sleeved shirts wiping away beads of sweat as they wolf down their bak chor mee or mee goreng at their favourite HDB coffeeshop and hawker centre, and you see the looks of blissful content on the well-dressed women as they buy their cheap laundry baskets or pick up kitchen utensils at the household sundry shop, and you know you can take the boy or girl out of the HDB estate, but you can’t take the HDB out of the boy or girl.

    So the idea that a special policy is needed to encourage people to live in and interact with HDB residents will appear slightly surreal to some. On my Facebook, a friend commented that she felt insulted, as though HDB residents were creatures in a zoo that the rich are being encouraged to visit to see.

    I empathise with that comment. It’s like having a special policy to encourage those who live with a permanent bubble around their heads to take their heads out of the bubble and breathe normal air like the rest of us.

    Breathing normal air is the default, and should be so. But I can see that if segments of our population have become so used to living in that bubble of air, it would take concerted policy action to persuade them to try normal air for a change.

    The truth is that Singapore society is stratifying. Whereas many of today’s middle-aged professionals grew up in HDB flats, it’s probably the case that more of today’s 20-something year old professionals and managers grew up in private housing. So the idea of having them live in and experience HDB life, isn’t a bad one. From the point of view of social cohesion, it makes sense.

    In Singapore, public housing caters to the majority of the population – 80 per cent of Singapore resident households live in HDB flats. The idea is precisely that we would all grow up in mixed neighbourhoods that jumble up people of different races, different income groups, and different socioeconomic status.

    So it makes sense to encourage the small minority who never had a chance to do that when they were growing up, and encourage them to do so in their young adulthood.

    I often wonder how many of today’s young Administrative Service civil servants, and the smart youngsters who enter the banks, the legal profession, and even the media, have lived in HDB flats, and if they have empathy for the average Singaporean who does. These people are future leaders and decision-makers.

    If too many of them come from privileged families, they would never have experienced poverty, or suffered from want or anxiety over money problems. But if they had a friend in school or in their neighbourhood who did, and were close enough a confidant to share vicariously in the friend’s struggles, their worldview will be more rounded than the wealthy child who lives with, plays with and goes to school with only other wealthy children.

    If raising the income ceiling to allow more young couples to live in HDB flats can help reduce the social gap that can exist between the privileged and the masses, then there are reasons to do so.

    I know some readers will argue that HDB flats should be reserved for the lower-income. Let the high-income earners who want to live in HDB estates buy flats on the resale market.

    But the fact is that, with 80 per cent living in HDB estates, HDB flat owners already include the high-income. Increasingly, the subsidised HDB flat is being viewed as the birthright of every Singaporean couple. The HDB gravy train gives them a ticket to an affordable first home – and a firm step up the ladder of financial success, if they are lucky enough enough to make hundreds of thousands of dollars subsequently by selling it on the open market.

    But opening up the floodgates this way will inevitably lead to demands from other groups to be given the same access to HDB subsidised flats. Mature couples who missed out on buying HDB flats earlier will also want to be allowed to buy subsidised flats. And singles will demand more leeway to benefit from housing subsidies too.

    The arguments about the social benefits of having every Singaporean experience HDB living applies equally to them.

     

    Source: http://business.asiaone.com

  • Problems With Increasing Housing Grants

    Problems With Increasing Housing Grants

    I disagree with the calls to increase the Higher-Tier Central Provident Fund Housing Grant for young couples who wish to buy a resale flat in mature estates so as to live close to their parents (“Buy resale flat near parents? Financial help is key: Experts”; last Tuesday).

    There are problems with increasing the grant.

    First, it could lead to a mentality among the younger generation that living close to their parents is an entitlement, and if they cannot live near them, then that is an excuse to not look after them.

    Second, raising the grant would lead to an increase in property prices in mature estates, and could trigger a vicious circle where the Government constantly has to raise the grant for young couples as the property prices in mature estates keep rising.

    A better idea would be to give the seniors incentives – not limited to monetary ones – to move out of mature estates to live near their married children in new estates.

    When elderly couples move out of mature estates, it increases the supply of resale flats available in these estates, thus lowering the asking price of these units and making it more affordable for young couples who wish to live there.

    Ultimately, young couples should not be encouraged to buy a flat in a mature estate where decades of the lease have already expired.

    Singapore will face a major challenge in future when there are too many couples outliving their property lease because they bought a property with a shorter remaining lease.

    Chan Yeow Chuan

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

deneme bonusu