Search the Community

https://mothership.sg/2020/03/bullying-singapore-school/?fbclid=IwAR22bNVjNUc7uIMz0z-XbIw5VT9dfxLr348xELz9gS09qoVz7BP6RXkm4wQ Pretty sad for a girl to be bullied to this extent. School should at least have let her switch classes. Mee Toh is a popular school among chinese ethnicity parents cos of it's strong value system and buddhist background (though academically average).

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/more-spending-on-healthcare-does-not-mean-a-healthier-population-ong-ye-kung SINGAPORE - The Republic’s healthcare challenge in the coming years is not spending more, but to ensure that Singapore does not go the way of many OECD countries where healthcare costs are “spiralling and escalating out of control”, Health Minister Ong Ye Kung told Parliament on Wednesday. Better health outcomes can be achieved by continuing with Singapore’s sensible and practical approach of having different layers of safety nets – subsidies, MediShield Life, MediSave and MediFund – and combining it with the Healthier SG strategy to reduce the sickness and disease burden even as the population ages, he added. Mr Ong was responding to Progress Singapore Party (PSP) Non-Constituency MP Leong Mun Wai’s assertion on Tuesday that the Government has not spent enough to cover Singaporeans’ healthcare costs, and should be spending more to help with medical bills. Mr Leong had cited data to show that the Government’s share of healthcare expenditure is lower than the average among Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. The majority of the 38 OECD members are regarded as developed countries. Mr Ong noted that it is widely accepted by health economists that spending more on healthcare does not mean better outcomes. For instance, the United States and Britain spend about 17 per cent and 10 per cent of their gross domestic product on healthcare respectively, compared with Singapore’s 4 per cent. Despite this, both those countries are facing a high incidence of chronic illnesses and high obesity rates, and expected lifespans there are lower than in Singapore, he said. Conversely, Singapore has delivered good outcomes given how much it is spending, while keeping healthcare affordable for the middle- and lower-income groups, Mr Ong added. Seven in 10 Singaporeans in subsidised hospital wards do not pay any out-of-pocket expenses, and nine in 10 pay less than $500 in cash. “So when Mr Leong asked the Government to spend more to lower out-of-pocket expenses further, he really meant to channel resources to unsubsidised patients, that is, those staying in A class wards or private hospitals,” he said. “This is where the big bucks and big expenditure are, and it will push our healthcare expenditure and spending to the levels of OECD countries.” Mr Leong also failed to mention that such spending ultimately has to be raised from the people through taxes, and made no mention of where PSP will get the funding from, Mr Ong added. The reality is that government healthcare spending has already been rising, having tripled between 2011 and 2020, and is expected to triple again between 2021 and 2030, said Mr Ong. Mr Leong had also called for increased spending from the Pioneer Generation (PG) and Merdeka Generation funds, as he felt that spending from those funds has been small relative to their total assets. This understanding is misplaced as both funds were sized based on the projected lifetime cost of the benefits, said Mr Ong. He noted that PG members are as young as 74 and “still have quite a bit of runway ahead of them”, though the Government will continue to review the adequacy of both funds. The Health Minister also responded to Workers’ Party MP Jamus Lim’s suggestion that Singapore’s medical infrastructure is too lean, and that the current hospital bed crunch speaks to a need to relook healthcare capacity. Mr Ong said every country is facing a similar crunch post-Covid-19, including the OECD countries despite their higher bed-to-population ratio. The reason for the bed crunch here is that the average length of hospital stay has increased by 15 per cent compared with before the pandemic, he said. This is likely a result of more older people falling ill due to an “immunity debt” as safe management measures were lifted, a problem exacerbated by poorer health from social isolation amid Covid-19. Singapore is catching up on healthcare capacity as projects delayed by Covid-19 – such as the Tan Tock Seng Hospital Integrated Care Hub and Woodlands integrated health campus – are now being completed, said Mr Ong. More transitional care facilities will also be set up to offer rehabilitative care for more stable senior patients. Closing the debate on the motion to support healthcare here beyond the pandemic, Nominated MP Tan Yia Swam responded to Mr Leong’s charge that drug prices were “marked up unreasonably for non-subsidised patients” in order to cross-subsidise others. Dr Tan, who is a breast surgeon, asked if Mr Leong had evidence that this was happening, and noted that non-subsidised patients are those who opt for an A-class or B1-class ward, or foreigners. “I, as a doctor, would think that allowing market forces to determine costings is fair, or would Mr Leong also want taxpayers to pay for everyone?” she asked. Mr Leong said he had heard “feedback from residents (that) they pay different prices when in different classes”, and that while it is understandable for services to be priced differently based on ward class, this should not be the case for drugs. The NCMP had earlier called on the Government to centralise drug procurement across public and private medical institutions, as doing so would reduce the cost of medicine. In response, Mr Ong said Singapore deliberately chose to have a variegated market for healthcare, with private-sector doctors having different business models. For instance, some private doctors charge very low consultation fees but make a margin on the drugs they sell, while others do the reverse, he said. “Sometimes you want to let market forces operate, but at the same time have some discipline through... what we subsidise and what we don’t, and I think that’s how we rein in unnecessary healthcare costs,” said Mr Ong.

'Not the time' for environment tax on SIA during crisis, says Transport Minister Ong Ye Kung to WP's Jamus Lim source:https://mothership.sg/2020/10/environment-tax-jamus-lim-ong-ye-kung/ Slapping an environment tax on the Singapore Airlines (SIA) in the current climate would be akin to hurling stones at someone who has fallen into a well. Transport Minister Ong Ye Kung used the Chinese phrase "落井下石", when describing the potential effect of such a tax during a debate in Parliament on Oct. 6. Ong had given a Ministerial Statement on the plan to reopen Singapore's borders and revive air travel, and in his speech, referred to Workers' Party Member of Parliament Jamus Lim's suggestion of a per-flight environmental tax for SIA's proposed "flights to nowhere." He said: "Whichever way SIA had decided, MOT would always try our best to support our national carrier in times like this. But what I will not contemplate is to impose on them an environment tax at this time, as Associate Professor Jamus Lim has suggested, because that will worsen the crisis for SIA." "Not the time" for environment tax In a follow-up question, Lim asked Ong to "clarify his thinking", explaining that an environment tax could be borne either by the consumer or the producer, depending on the price elasticity of the product on offer (the flight), and SIA could still find it economically viable if it is able to pass on the cost to the consumer. In reply, Ong said this could have been considered, had it not been for the current pandemic and the dire situation SIA is in. He pointed out that it was not a matter of passing on the cost to the customer, because there are practically no customers at the moment, citing a passenger volume of just 1.5 per cent. Ong added that if it were not for SIA's recapitalisation exercise, the entire company would have gone under. As SIA needs to preserve as much cash as it can at the moment, "this is really not the time" to talk about an environment tax, said Ong. He then used the Chinese phrase to illustrate his point: "I think there's a Chinese saying, 落井下石. I would have made the situation much worse for SIA. It means someone fell into the well and you throw a stone to make the situation worse. So let's be very careful about that. When things resume, the international conversation will go on (as to) whether there should be an environment tax. Slapping an environment tax on the Singapore Airlines (SIA) in the current climate would be akin to hurling stones at someone who has fallen into a well. Transport Minister Ong Ye Kung used the Chinese phrase "落井下石", when describing the potential effect of such a tax during a debate in Parliament on Oct. 6. Ong had given a Ministerial Statement on the plan to reopen Singapore's borders and revive air travel, and in his speech, referred to Workers' Party Member of Parliament Jamus Lim's suggestion of a per-flight environmental tax for SIA's proposed "flights to nowhere." He said: "Whichever way SIA had decided, MOT would always try our best to support our national carrier in times like this. But what I will not contemplate is to impose on them an environment tax at this time, as Associate Professor Jamus Lim has suggested, because that will worsen the crisis for SIA." SIA has already decided not to pursue the idea. "Not the time" for environment tax In a follow-up question, Lim asked Ong to "clarify his thinking", explaining that an environment tax could be borne either by the consumer or the producer, depending on the price elasticity of the product on offer (the flight), and SIA could still find it economically viable if it is able to pass on the cost to the consumer. In reply, Ong said this could have been considered, had it not been for the current pandemic and the dire situation SIA is in. He pointed out that it was not a matter of passing on the cost to the customer, because there are practically no customers at the moment, citing a passenger volume of just 1.5 per cent. Ong added that if it were not for SIA's recapitalisation exercise, the entire company would have gone under. As SIA needs to preserve as much cash as it can at the moment, "this is really not the time" to talk about an environment tax, said Ong. He then used the Chinese phrase to illustrate his point: "I think there's a Chinese saying, 落井下石. I would have made the situation much worse for SIA. It means someone fell into the well and you throw a stone to make the situation worse. So let's be very careful about that. When things resume, the international conversation will go on (as to) whether there should be an environment tax." Further clarifications by Lim online Later in the day on Oct. 6, Lim shared a Facebook post explaining his position further. Lim said that he is proud of SIA and wants the industry to survive, and his suggestion of an environment tax would be borne by wealthier customers who would be more willing to take a proposed "flight to nowhere." Lim added that he was hoping to "spur some creative thinking about how we can help ensure the future viability of our national airline, without compromising the need to pay attention to the environment, too". He said that "such creative thinking is necessary to ensure that we don’t spend our hard-earned reserves in an unwise fashion". On Oct. 7, Home Affairs and Law Minister K Shanmugam shared a video of the exchange between Ong and Lim, reiterating why Lim's environment tax "is not a great idea right now, when SIA staff jobs are at stake".

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/secondary-1-students-own-device-digital-learning-12498494 Haha the vendor/apple huat ah. Ipad obviously easiest for tablet since other tablets sure have some android or what not issue. Base laptop could be too expensive given u want something lightweight and portable for children. Or maybe a chromebook.