News of a young CEO slamming her haters have been making its round in the Malay Community.
Leza Parker is the CEO of Spendless Cosmetics, a company which specialises in choosing, packing and delivering branded cosmetics to your doorstep for as little as $30 a month.
According to netters, despite promising quality products and beautiful packaging, some of her products were not to her customer’s satisfaction.
Netters soon posted their angry feedback on her page along with what they thought about her fake accent.
She came & she took us home. She knows we were stretched out to the max after the long waiting game at the doctor with my little one. Upon reaching the destination, she politely rejected the fare.
I was adamant & told myself I have to pay up this lady as she’s definately working for a living & there’s nothing like “free lunch” in Singapore.
But when she humbly said, “It’s alright, just take good care of the little one & pray for my well being”
I was taken aback… lost for that 10-20secs or so..
I can’t believe what I heard..
And no, I’ve never been in this situation before.
(only heard stories of good drivers on the internet & it has to be a one in a million chance to really stumble upon them)
But tonight I became part of the stories, this is as real as it gets & no amount of “Thank You” are ever enough to bless her.
To Mdm Rokila, may Allah bless you with good health & reward your kindness here till hereafter. Aamiin.
One of our ASS readers Aida shared a disturbing Facebook post by a man named Raden Tri Riffaee calling for the authorities to ban the radical “incense burning” religion as it was considered terrorism to humans, nature and animals.
In addition, the man suggested that HDB should change their housing policy and give Malays priority for the higher HDB floors and let the “paper burning ethnic(ity)” stay at level 2 or ground floor.
The man is understandably upset at the inconvenience caused during religious festivals where members of the taoist or buddhist community burn incense offerings to their Gods or ancestors.
What do you think about the way this resident voiced his unhappiness? Isn’t this the reality of living in a multi-racial multi-religious country like Singapore?
Apparently, charges on plastic bags used during supermarket shopping trips.
According to a report on Channel NewsAsia at around 10pm last night, “local supermarket chains could impose a plastic bag charge if there is an industry-wide effort to implement one”.
The statement comes as a response to environmental group Zero Waste’s call for the Government to introduce charges on the use of plastic bags among Singaporeans.
Executive director of Zero Waste, Mr Eugene Tay, said: “If there is a charge [for plastic bags] then people will start thinking about how can they reduce the plastic bags that they take.”
The group proposed that retailers charge their customers 10 cents and 5 cents for large and smaller plastic bags respectively, which already sparked discussions on Facebook on the feasibility of the solution.
For example, a netizen said, “Most dwellers use plastic bags to recycle as trash bag. Imagine them dumping trash directly into our rubbish chutes. It would be environmentally unhygienic when the waste foods start rotting inside.”
On the Government side, Member of Parliament Lee Bee Wah, chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Environment and Water Resources firmly stated that it should be the big supermarkets’ duty to carry out this proposal, as “The Government should look at education; look at bigger issues on the environment, not just plastic bags, per se.”
Spokespeople from the Dairy Farm group (which owns Cold Storage and Giant), and NTUC FairPrice have come forward to tell CNA that at the moment, they already have incentives and efforts in place to reduce the dependence on plastic bags by their shoppers.
NTUC’s”Bring Your Own Bag, FairPrice Green Rewards Scheme” / Image Credit: TODAY
Singaporeans are said to use a whopping 2.5 billion plastic bags each year, and according to statistics from the National Environment Agency’s website, 824,600 tonnes of plastic waste were generated in 2015.
From the latest report, it does seem like these big supermarket chains have decided to respond, albeit without promising anything concrete, to the proposal.
Singaporean Netizens Debate
In response to the news, netizens seem to be somewhat divided.
One begged for others to look at the “bigger issue” as compared to potential inconveniences:
“The rubbish thrown down the chute doesn’t just disappear into thin air y’know.”
Some have mentioned how it is “long overdue”, and suggested ways that the implementation can be carried out:
“[…] Provide one or two reusable shopping bags to the low income group.”“For those who [don’t request for plastic bags], you pay them instead.”
One called for the Government to take the lead, in light of other nations already taking nationwide steps to reduce plastic waste:
“So come on Singapore Government […] make it compulsory across the industry”“Adding charges to [the] consumer is definitely not the way to go.”
However, some are adamantly against the potential changes, and have spoken out strongly against it:
“Don’t buy the hype”“[It’s utter] nonsense.”
Regardless, the sentiments can be accurately summarised in this particular thread, and the number of ‘likes’ for each polarising comment:
Screenshot from CNA’s Facebook page
Online Grocery Providers Can Be Pioneers In Environmentally-Friendly Practices
What’s interesting though, is the fact that a few have taken to the news as even more reason to grocery shop online.
Netizen cites saving time and money on taxi rides
The online grocery shopping scene is a highly competitive one, with honestbee and RedMart being among the few big players in the (pun intended) market.
honestbee team / Image Credit: Vulcan Post
An increasing number of Singaporeans, even without the plastic bag charge fiasco, have been turning to these online providers due to the convenience that comes with the services, especially in light of their busy schedules and the need for a means of transport after an intense grocery shopping session.
Perhaps then, these providers can be the pioneers in encouraging environmentally-friendly practices, and use recyclable bags for their clients’ purchases.
Regardless, the issue seems to be still in pending mode, and there’s no certainty on what the verdict will be.
The Workers’ Party notes with concern the applications from Singapore Pools and Singapore Turf Club (STC) to launch online betting services.
There are no lack of legal gambling venues in Singapore, including the two casinos and hundreds of outlets accepting bets for Singapore Pools and STC.
When the government decided to clamp down on remote gambling in 2014, it cited concerns about addictive behaviour and easy access to these games. Should the Government approve their applications, Singapore Pools and STC will have 24/7 virtual betting outlets available in almost every home and mobile device.
This convenience may encourage Singaporeans to take up the habit and possibly become a gateway to more serious gambling. The social costs of gambling on families are well documented, and the number of problem gambling cases in Singapore has been on the rise.
It makes little sense for the government to close one door on remote gambling in order to “protect young persons and other vulnerable persons”, while opening another door that exposes them to the ills of gambling in their homes.
During the second reading of the Remote Gambling Bill in 2014, the Government rejected the Workers’ Party call to send the Remote Gambling Bill – specifically the clauses that dealt with exemptions – to a Select Committee of Parliament for further scrutiny and oversight. Nonetheless, the Government committed itself to step up public education and awareness efforts with a specific focus on online gambling. However, as of today, it remains unclear what are the Government’s specific plans and strategies to address the negative effects of online gambling, especially on young and vulnerable persons.
The WP’s 2015 Manifesto contained five proposals to fight problem gambling, including the complete prohibition of remote and online gambling with no exemptions allowed. Exempting Singapore Pools and STC will undermine the government’s motivations for banning remote gambling in the first place.
We oppose the granting of exemptions to any organisation to operate remote and online betting services and we call on the government to reject these applications.
!["So come on Singapore Government [...]](https://cdn01.vulcanpost.com/wp-uploads/2016/09/Screen-Shot-2016-09-27-at-11.25.51-AM.png)
