Why are the rich more selfish?

I have always had the nagging feeling that rich people are less generous when it comes to charity giving. Well, it seems that I am right after all, based on the results of NVPC (National Volunteer and Philanthropic Centre) 2006 survey on philanthropic giving in Singapore. The results were published in The Straits Times article ‘In aid of the poorer or richer?’ by Willie Cheng (Sept 04, 2007). The survey results showed that lower-income earners donated a larger proportion of their income compared to higher-income earners. For example, those earning less than $1000 monthly donated 0.65% of their annual income while those earning in the range of $9000-$9,999 donated only 0.12% of their annual income. But it is not only the rich in Singapore who give less proportionately compared to the less well-off. In Britain, a study by Banks and Tanner showed that the richest 20% of households donated less than 1% of their expenditure while the poorest 10% donated 3%.

It seems counter-intuitive that the rich should give less compared to those who are poorer. Having their basic needs met and left with so much surplus wealth, the rich would feel much less pinch to donate some of their money compared to those who are struggling to make ends meet. Yet the reality is stranger than what our logic dictates.

So what might explain the tighter string-purses of the wealthy when it comes to charity giving? Perhaps the more affluent one is the more detached from the other segments of society, such as the needy and less fortunate, one becomes. As one grows richer, one’s circle of friends and acquaintances evolves as the rich tend to clique among themselves. This might result in the inability of the rich to fully comprehend the difficulties faced by the needy and less fortunate or become ignorant of the extent of the problem. This is especially true for those who grew up with silver teaspoons in their mouths. One might think that those among the rich who came from poor backgrounds would be more inclined to donate to charity. This may not always be true. Even those who saw their fate turn from rags-to-riches might forget what it meant to be poor with the passage of time or due to other social factors like peer pressure, and as a result be less generous than expected.

The parsimony of the rich toward philanthropic causes may also be a reflection of the apathy of the rich towards the less fortunate. The rich may feel that the suffering of the less fortunate is in no way attributable to their actions and thus should not be compelled to help them. They may argue that the poor and less fortunate only have themselves to blame or it is just their fate that they are mired in their unfortunate situations. However, such an argument is devoid of morality. As part of the larger society, the rich has an obligation to contribute back to it and help the other segments of society that require assistance. I am not suggesting that the rich has to support the needy and less fortunate financially all the way for doing so would be counter-productive. Donations from the rich should be used to fund education or programmes that will equip the needy and less fortunate with skills to enable them to break out of the cycle of poverty. As the saying goes “Give a man a fish and he will only live for one day, but teach him how to fish and he will live for a lifetime.”

It is inconceivable that the rich might be willing to splurge thousands or even millions on Lamborghinis, Rolexes and personal yachts or even planes but donate so little of their wealth to charity. Recently, there was a newspaper report of a late British tycoon who left one million for the upkeep of her dog. The rich has definitely got their priorities wrong. Such money could have been put to better use if donated to charities. I wonder what is the purpose of amassing so much wealth when one can only live finitely and that material possessions are merely transient. Is it because one becomes blinded by wealth the richer one gets so that they become only concerned with amassing ever-increasing amounts of wealth? Or is it the lack of moral guiding principles among rich people that has led to this perceived apathy towards the needy and less fortunate?

Whatever the reasons may be for the selfishness of the rich towards philanthropy, we should take heart in the fact that there are many out there who give whatever little they have to help the needy and less fortunate. It is this kind of spirit of giving and selflessness that should be encouraged.

Hostages - The Currency of Terrorists?

There has been much controversy over the recent South Korean hostage crisis in Afghanistan which began on 19th July and I would like to add my two-cent worth. The Saemmul Presbyterian Church from which the 23 South Korean hostages hail claimed that they were only doing aid work such as teaching English and hospital work in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, their aid work was only a veneer for their main motive to proselytize their religion to Muslims in Afghanistan. One must question if such an aim was sensitive to the Muslim community there, or to those of other religions in other parts of the world. The South Korean missionaries only intended to stay for a short-term and this places doubt on the sustainability of their aid work. Their prudence in traveling to such a troubled region despite a travel ban to Afghanistan by the South Korean government and without necessary protection is also questionable. Thus, it is only natural to expect ambivalent feelings of sympathy for the two hostages who were killed and relief for those who were freed and flaming criticisms for the 23 missionaries by South Koreans and the world at large.

While the hostage crisis has ended, the political crisis is not over yet. The Taleban claimed that the South Korean government has given them US$20 million and promised to withdraw South Korean troops in Afghanistan by the end of the year. The Taleban also went as far to claim that they would use the money received to buy more weapons and conduct more suicide bombings and other terrorist activities. In their over-zealous evangelistic zeal to ‘spread the word of God’, these missionaries have not only put their lives in danger, but also the lives of others, as well as the political situation in Afghanistan. The readiness of the South Korean government to give in to the Taleban’s demand have merely emboldened them and boosted the morale of terrorists all over the world. It seems that hostages are the new currency for terrorists these days. Well, the South Korean hostage crisis was not the first of its kind and I do not expect it to be the last either. There have been hostages from other countries such as Germany and Italy taken by the Taleban in the past too. The South Korean government has promised to withdraw all missionaries in Afghanistan but this is not enough. There are still many South Korean missionaries in other dangerous regions who are at risk of being kidnapped by terrorists. Other countries should also ban missionaries from visiting troubled regions and withdraw those already there. I wonder when these foolhardy people who take unnecessary risk will stop visiting such troubled regions and leave the aid and relief work to the experts and correct agencies. It would indeed be foolish for these missionaries to think that just because they are doing good deeds or proselytizing, they would be protected by God, and when they face trouble God would save them. One must not be blinded by the desire to spread his or her religion or do good deeds without careful consideration of the risks involved, otherwise one may end up doing more harm than good.

I wonder what action the Singapore government would take and what the public reaction would be if any Singaporean was so unfortunate to be taken hostage by terrorists in another country. If he or she is personnel of the SAF and doing peacekeeping work in the country then I believe the public’s response would be of sympathy for they would understand the purpose of his or her presence in the country. But would the public be as sympathetic if he or she was proselytizing in that country despite a travel ban by the Singapore government?

Magic VS Technology

I just watched ‘Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix’ today and can't help seeing the obvious parallels between magic and technology. Harry Potter's world portrays an alternate reality. In his world, newspapers (The Daily Prophet) could display movie clips and photographs show moving pictures instead of static ones. Mails and envelopes could fly to their recipients and even talk and disintegrate automatically after delivering their messages. These ideas may not be as far-fetched as they seem. There is already much research done on thin, flexible active matrix displays for several years by companies such as Siemens, Philips and Plastic Logic. These displays are as thin and as flexible as paper and can display moving images and store thousands of pages of text. Some of these displays are already in the prototype stage and we can expect to see them in the market in a few years time. As for flying and talking mails, I do not think that will be necessary, for we already have e-mails which are faster and allow us to add file attachments such as voice or movie clips.

In the realm of transportation, Harry Potter’s world depicts wizards and witches riding on flying broomsticks and using port-keys, which transports people to another place in a somewhat fashion to teleportation. Well, we may not have flying broomsticks but we do have flying cars. Yes, you did not read wrongly. There is a company called Moller International that produces personal commuter Skycars which as the name suggests, take you to the sky. The Skycar is a vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) vehicle and does not need a runway. In the recent ‘Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer’ movie, the Silver Surfer rides on a flying ‘surf board’, but the difference is that the ‘surf board’ is supposed to be a piece of advanced alien technology and not magic. As for teleportation of human beings, such technology may not exist now but that does not preclude such a possibility in the future. Scientists have already succeeded in teleporting a single photon via a process called quantum entanglement. But to teleport a macroscopic object like a human which consists of trillions of atoms is far beyond our technological abilities currently. In the process of teleportation, the object to be teleported is to be split into the individual constituent atoms and sub-atomic particle and then the quantum states of all these particles are recorded and the information transmitted to the designated teleporter to be reconstructed. So effectively, the teleported object is destroyed and then reconstructed. In Harry Potter’s world, doors could lead you to another place or rooms that are much larger than they look from the outside. To achieve something like this, we will have to enter other dimensions. String theory states that there are 10 dimensions, 6 of them being spatial dimensions and the remaining 4 are time dimensions. In M-theory, there are 11 dimensions. We are unable to see the other dimensions because we exist in three dimensions and it is difficult for us to visualize a higher dimensional reality. By moving in another dimension, we will appear to disappear and enter another place. We do not yet know how to move in these other dimensions or whether it is possible to do so in the first place, so extra-dimensional travel will remain a fantasy for now.

The ability to move objects without physical contact is also a prominent aspect in Harry Potter’s world. In fact it is possible to do so, using a method called acoustic levitation. However, scientists have only been able to lift very light loads using acoustic levitation till now. Perhaps in time we will find some ways of moving larger and heavier objects without physical contact. A professor called John Hutchinson has reportedly claimed to have devised a way of doing so by tapping into vacuum energy. However, there have been much doubt and controversy over his claims.

Metamorphosis is another thing which caught my eye while watching the Harry Potter movie. In the movie Sirius Black could transform into a dog and back into the human form. This reminded me of ‘Transformers’, which I watched recently too. The idea of machines that could transform might not seem too far-fetched but living organisms that could transform into other things stretch the mind. I have been thinking how this may be done in a scientific way but have not been able to think of any satisfactory idea. A cluster of nanorobots could do the job by reconfiguring themselves into any desired structure but it will be impossible for a living organism to do that as all the cells have to be reorganized.

There are many other things in the movie which I might have left out in my discussion but my main point here is that fantasy serves as a source of inspiration for invention and technological progress. The renowned science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke stated in his 3rd law that ‘Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic’. Indeed our current technology might seem like magic to cavemen and perhaps in time the magic depicted in Harry Potter’s world will become something common in our everyday life.

Where have the Confucius teachings and moral values gone in China?

Recently I have been seeing more and more news reports of fake food products, slavery and large-scale environmental pollution in China. Unscrupulous people intent only on making more money have thrown aside their moral values and sold themselves to the devil, doing unthinkable things such as selling fake baby milk powder which caused the deaths of 12 infants in China and other food products contaminated with or even made from inedible poisonous substances like paint which was used to manufacture fake toufu. The vegetables grown there are also tainted with pesticides and the pigs there force-fed with waste to make them grow fat faster and cheaper. Even more shocking and saddening is that such cases are not isolated but rampant.

There have also been reports of slavery practices in numerous brick kilns in China where children are abducted and sent to work in harsh working conditions for more than 15 hours a day and fed nothing more than mere porridge.

Large-scale pollution of the environment is also common-place in China where factories spew noxious fumes into the air without proper treatment and discharge toxic effluents into rivers and lakes, contaminating the water supplies of millions of people. Countries which share the same contaminated rivers like Russia were also affected.

Lost and blinded by greed, people can become inhumane monsters without regard for the lives and well-being of others. It is indeed unthinkable that China, the country that gave birth to the Confucius teachings would become the state that it is in now. Corruption, lack of a proper system of checks and the difficulty in implementing such checks has helped to perpetuate such irresponsible acts. Amid the increasing pressure from both its citizens and international environmental watch groups, the Chinese government has recently pledged to redouble their efforts to put an end to such egregious acts. Well it is certainly in their best interest to do so, for such acts tarnish the ‘made-in China’ brand and will have detrimental effects on their trade exports and image of the country. Already countries like the United States have banned some products from China as they failed to meet the required safety and quality standards. It looks like in their quest to make more money, those unscrupulous Chinese have only lost more.

Individual Responsibility in Reducing Usage of Plastic Bags

Every year, Singapore uses about 2.5 billion plastic bags a year for bagging purchases. This translates into 1.7 bags per person each day. While this is better than Taiwan's 2.4 and Hong Kong's 3.7, it is still a very high figure. The National Environment Agency (NEA) wants to bring down usage down to the levels in countries such as Australia (1.0), the United States (0.9) and Ireland (0.8). The ideal level would be zero but that is not possible, especially in a society plagued by mass consumerism. Achieving this target is not easy, and it will take the concerted effort of every individual to realise it. No longer can the responsibility of environmental conservation and protection be solely placed on the government or industries. It is now clear that every individual has a part to play in environmental protection and can make a difference.

Plastic, which is made from crude oil is a non-renewable resource, and should be used wisely. Current practices of throwing away plastic bags after use are far too wasteful and unsustainable for the environment in the long run. Being non-biodegradable, plastic bags have to be either incinerated or dumped in landfills. In Singapore, the incineration option is usually chosen as dumping in landfills is not a viable permanent alternative in our land-scarce country. However, incinerating plastic bags produces toxic fumes such as carbon monoxide which can kill in high concentrations.

The improper disposal of plastic bags also poses additional problems to the environment. Carelessly discarded plastic bags can end up as litter and clog up drains or collect rainwater, becoming ideal sites for the breeding of mosquitoes and other pests. This would promote the transmission of vector-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue-fever. The sight of plastic bags strewn all over the place is an eyesore and mars the beauty of our living environment and taints the image of Singapore as a “Garden City”. Not to mention the additional costs incurred in clearing up the mess. Plastic bags can also harm wildlife and have a strong tendency to suffocate marine and land creatures.

The best solution to these problems is to reduce the usage of plastic bags and reuse them as much as possible. However, this is easier said than done in a society where the “use-and-throw” mentality is so deeply ingrained. Efforts have been made by the government, mass media and environmental watch-groups to enlighten the masses of the consequences of unrestrained and rampant usage of plastic bags.

Recently, Singapore launched the “Bring Your Own Bag Day” (BYOBD) campaign on 18th April 2007 to generate awareness of the importance and need for individual responsibility in environmental protection. The BYOBD is held on every 1st Wednesday of the month. On this day, customers are expected to bring their own shopping bags to participating outlets to hold their purchases. They can also buy reusable bags at these outlets or will have to donate 10 cents for every plastic bag they use to the SEC, which will use money to fund other environmental programmes. While the intention of this campaign is noble, its effectiveness in promoting the intended message remains in question.

I wonder how many shoppers actually know the purpose and message of the BYOBD. For many of these heartlanders are ordinary ‘aunties’ and ‘uncles’ who are illiterate and do not read the newspapers. This is where the message of individual responsibility in environmental conservation fails to reach its intended audience. What I suggest is that television advertisements highlighting the purpose of the BYOBD, not just mere details of when it is held, be screened often during prime air-times. Cashiers at participating outlets could also take some time to explain the message of the campaign to customers. If this is not possible (for fear of holding up queues), perhaps schools could send students as ambassadors to explain the message to customers at these outlets as part of their community involvement programme. This way, we could kill two birds with one stone.

Another shortcoming of the BYOBD is that it is only held once a month. Doing so would cause people to shop on other days to avoid the inconvenience of having to bring their own bags or ‘paying’ for plastic bags. While I understand that it might take some time for consumers to wean out this practice of the provision of free plastic bags by shops, I feel that holding BYOBD once a month is far too rare and insufficient to drive home the importance the message to the public. In other countries such as Japan and South Korea, it is a daily practice to charge their customers for every plastic bag they use at certain retail stores and supermarkets. Singapore still has a long way to go towards emulating these societies in terms of good environmental practices.

The BYOBD should also be extended to all shops instead just a few supermarkets and retail stores. Why limit the BYOBD when the purpose is to reduce usage of plastic bags on a national scale? However, this must be done carefully with sufficient checks in place to prevent shopkeepers from profiteering from ‘selling’ plastic bags and causing consumers to incur extra costs.

The BYOBD is a good start and is the right direction forward for Singapore in empowering individuals with the responsibility in environmental conservation and protection. Nevertheless, the campaign has room for improvement. We must not let up in our efforts in protecting the environment and I hope there will be more campaigns to educate the masses and imbue them with the individual responsibility to care for the environment.


Points to take note of the next time you go shopping:

• Do not ask for a bag for small purchases
• Always ask cashiers to pack more purchases into bags
• Avoid double-bagging
• Carry and use reusable bags where possible

The Return of the Poet

I was flipping through one of my files today when I chanced upon a poem which I wrote for a class assignment in sec 4.

Title: The Beginnings of Life
Date composed: 29/07/2003

Created from nothing,
Yet it contained everything.
One big bang started it all,
Quarks, atoms and all.

The superforce split into four forces,
And photons became free.
Matter triumphed over antimatter,
Baryonic life became possible.

Stars formed and illuminated the Stygian void,
Along with them came galaxies and planets.
Life there was,
At least on one planet - Earth

Evolution occured,
And gave rise to intelligence.
Why are we here?
Are we alone?
Questions left unanwered.

Copyright © Ong Wei Guang (Note: Please seek my permission before replicating any part of my poems elsewhere)

Reading the poem refuelled my interest in writing poems after 4 years and I suddenly got an impulse and inspiration to write another one today.

Title: Time
Date composed: 31/05/2007

It can flow quickly like a river,
But it can also inch like a glacier.
Our percpetion of time is relative,
For that is part of our reality.

Intricately entwined with space,
Relativity comes into play.
The faster you move through space,
The slower it will be for time's pace.

Just as flowers bloom but do not unbloom,
Water spills but do not unspill,
Glass shatters but do not unshatter,
The arrow of time will always fly in one direction.
Such is the irreversible nature of time.

Stretching into infinity,
Every moment etched in eternity.
Cherish it we must,
For every second passed,
Will forever be the past.

Copyright © Ong Wei Guang

Both poems are about science, space and the way we percieve reality. Though I am not an arts student, I also enjoy reading and writing poems, for poetry is a tool which helps me to express my thoughts. Hope you like my poems and I hope you will also be able to again deeper insights about the world we live in after reading them. Feel free to give me feedback about my poems.

Happy Vesak Day!

Wish everyone a Happy Vesak Day today!
Vesak Day celebrates the birth of Buddha is also a time for great joy and happiness. Buddhists are reminded to live in harmony with people of other religions and to respect the beliefs of other people as the Buddha had taught.
May everyone be blessed with good health and happiness. :)

New posts coming up.

Yes, I am finally going to put my writing skills into use once again after a 2-year haitus. I have been busy for the past 14 months serving National Service in the army and I didn't have the mood nor urge to write anything serious. But well, I will going to university next year and I still got 8 months to ORD so I might as well spend the time polishing my critical thinking and literal skills before they get too 'rusty'. Actually I thought of writing some serious articles a few months ago but somehow I lost the drive amidst all the outfield training and other 'saikang' which we have to do in the army. There are a lot things that I have wanted to write about but did not do so. However, seeing my good friend Lin Yi starting to blog recently prompted me to start writing once more. I will not be blogging often for I am a stay-in personel in camp. Hopefully I will have the time to sit down and crystalise my thoughts and write them in my blog. Do check out my blog from time to time for new entries. (Note: This blog is actually my General Paper Blog when I was in JC but I will use it as my personal blog from now on as I do not want to create too many blogs.)

“If you or your loved ones are stricken with an illness and your only hope of being cured is therapeutic cloning, will you go for it? Why?”

Yes, I will go for it. Buddhism's stand on therapeutic cloning is that if the stem cells obtained from the embyros are intended to be used for saving lives or finding cures for diseases, then it is acceptable. As a Buddhist, one might say that I would naturally be inclinded towards supporting such a stand. However, I would like to make it clear that I do not support the stand blindly, for I have made an independent assessment of the logic behind the stand and found it to be rational, logical and yet morally sound. Other religious groups have differing stands on the issue of therapuetic cloning. For example, the Catholics are strongly opposed to therapeutic cloning as they believe that life begins at the instant of conception and thus destroying embyros is tantamount to murder.

So much for the religious and moral viewpoints, now let's consider the issue from a scientific viewpoint. If science is to make progress, we must be daring to try new things and explore the unknown, but of course we must also be rational and exhibit good judgement in our quest to discover the unknown. Thus, science should not always give in to moral and religious opposition. As history have shown, religious views are not always correct. Take Galileo for example, he was killed because he believed that the Earth revolved around the Sun while the Catholic Church thought otherwise. Thus, my point is that science should not always give in to moral and religious viewpoints. Therefore, despite what others might say about therapeutic cloning, I will still support it and use it if need be.


(Definition of therapeutic cloning: Therapeutic cloning is a technique that would be used to produce cloned embryos, but only to create stem cells that can in turn be used to repair damaged or defective tissue in the parent of the cloned cells. Such stem cells could theoretically be used to grow replacement livers or hearts (or any of a variety of organs) for transplant without fear of rejection. They might be used to create healthy nerve cells for people with Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease. Skin cells could be derived from cloned stem cells for burn victims.)

GM Food

Scenario 1
1．As one of the country’s decision makers, would you advocate the use of GM crops? Why or why not?

The use of genetically modified (GM) crops meant that we have already taken the first step down the slippery slope of genetic engineering and there is no turning back Scientists claim that using GM crops can boost yields, reduce use of pesticide, create more nutritious food and a multitude of other benefits. In light of the ever-growing global population, GM crops are poised to bring about the second agricultural revolution to meet the burgeoning food demands of the future. However, GM crops are relatively new inventions, and thus their effects on human health and the environment are not yet fully known. Advocating the use of GM crops without any restriction may engender undesirable consequences. Thus, if I am one of my country Singapore’s decision makers, I would advocate the use of GM crop, but there will be a system of strict regulations in place to minimize the detrimental consequences of using GM crops.

Scenario 2
2． Would you buy products that contain GM foods for consumption by your family? Why or why not?

I will buy products that contain GM food for consumption by my family as these foods have undergone rigorous checks and tests by the Arigfood Agency of Singapore. If we look at the food that we consume, we will realize that most of them contain GM food. This means that we have already been consuming GM food for quite some time, but there have been no reports about anyone suffering from health-related problem due to the consumption of such food. Nevertheless, we must not be too quick to dismiss all the concerns about the adverse effects on health due to long-term consumption of GM food. Studies have shown that animals fed with GM food suffered adverse health effects and this is prove that GM food is not totally safe. However, before we ban GM food, we should step back and take a look at the effect of a non-GM food diet. Studies have also shown that eating too much of something will cause harmful effects on our health. Thus, we should keep an open mind about GM food.

"What are your views on abortion?"

There has been much controversy surrounding abortion, or the act of prematurely terminating a pregnancy. Views on abortion are varied, ranging from pro-life to pro-choice. Pro-choice proponents argue that women should have the right to abort their pregnancies, while pro-life proponents are against the idea of killing unborn foetuses as they feel that abortion is tantamount to murder. The world's main religions are inclined towards pro-life ideology and are firmly against abortion.

Personally, I am against abortion, but in exceptional cases such as pregnancy of rape victims, it should be allowed. Abortion should not be used as a means of birth control. By not legalising abortion, couples will have to think twice before giving birth and make sure that they are financially capable of raising the child, instead of making impulsive decisions to have babies without careful thought and planning. Some couples do not want to have babies but do not have the habit of using contraceptives and use abortion as the easy way out. Making abortion illegal will force them to take precautions and use birth control methods, resulting in fewer necessary loss of lives.

While scientists have not been able to determine exaclty when does life begins, most of them agree on the 14 day cut-off point for embyro research. This can be taken to be tacit agreement that life starts form the 14th day of coneception onwards. Religious leaders adopt a more conservative stance in believing that life begins immediately at conception. Thus, this supports that abortion is equivalent to murder as the unborn foetus has the potential to fully develop into a sentinent being.

"In the modern world, image is everything." Discuss

In the modern society of today, people have become increasingly image-conscious. Image refers not only to the outward physical appearance but also the demeanor of oneself. 'Looking good has become so deeply entrenched in the modern societal psyche that many people, both man and women alike, are willing to fork out thousands of dollars to lavish themselves on expensive designer clothing and beauty treatments and products, but are unwilling to donate an equally impressive amount to the charity. It is clear that the values and priorities of the modern generation are based on image rather than the heart. In this modern world where people increasingly judge and assess others based on first impressions, it has almost become a necessity to project a good and favorable image of oneself in front of others, and this has resulted in many people subscribing to the notion that image is everything. But is it really so? While a good image is a highly valued asset in today's context and can help one attain success, there are other things which are just as important, if not more important that it, such as having good moral values and the ability to think critically.

Image is so important to people of the modern generation that many do not mind burning a hole in their pocket to buy designer clothes and beauty care products. To them, wearing designer clothes and spending thousands of dollars on beauty treatment such as facials and body hair removal are no longer things restricted to the rich and high-class socialites, but have become the norm. In some universities such the Singapore Management University, students have to attend etiquette courses so that they know how to 'peel prawns using forks and spoons' in order to boost their image. Lasik surgery, a laser surgery used to correct myopia has seen demand soar over the past few years as more myopic people turn to it as the answer to wean them off their spectacles so that they will look better. Plastic surgery, which is usually used for correcting severe facial anomalies such as replacing a broken nose or charred facial skin, has in recent years become a popular cosmetic treatment. An increasing number of people with perfectly normal faces but are unsatisfied with their appearance have gone under the knife, hoping that plastic surgery can correct their perceived 'flaws' and transform the ugly ducklings in them into beautiful swans. American reality shows such as "Extreme Makeover" and "The Swan" and 'Man-made beauty' contests in China show that the obsession with image is growing into a global phenomenal. The fact that so many people now view plastic surgery as an ordinary cosmetic surgery and are willing to take the risks of undergoing surgery for vanity sake, on top of having no qualms about spending so much money to improve their outward appearance shows that image is indeed everything to them. In light of the obsession with image, people are starting to embrace artificial 'plastic' beauty and discard traditional notions of natural beauty, thinking that a good image is a necessary ingredient in achieving success. But they have failed to realize that having a good image without substance and good character will not lead them very far in whatever their endeavors.

“There are no permanent friends, only permanent interests.” Comment. (Holiday Journal Topic 2)

I beg to differ with the statement: “There are no permanent friends, only permanent interests.” While the statement may be true for international relations and the corporate world, it may not always be true down at the person-to-person relations. For nations and companies, interests are permanent while friends may not be so. However, for people, permanent friends do exist, even though interests may change.

Friends are formed when people with similar interests meet each other. While it may be argued that friends are forged as a result of similar interests and thus when interests change, friends also change, this argument is flawed. Interest is not the only binding factor among friends; fate is another factor. People have feelings, unlike entities like nations and companies. A friendship formed from the bottom of the heart is usually hard to break. True friends are those who go through thick and thin with you and stand by your side when you are down, not those who only make use of you and leave you when you cannot serve their interests anymore. Interests may change, but friendships can still last. You do not become enemies with your friends just because he developed a liking for a particular sport which you do not like, do you? There are indeed permanent friends, albeit rare. The have been cases where people do not mind getting themselves into trouble or even sacrificing their own lives in order to save their friends in times of need. This goes to show that there are people who put their personal interests behind them when it comes to helping their friends.

Nations do not become friends in the same sense that people do. The people of one nation may have good feelings for the people of another, such as people of US and UK, because of common cultural or familial links. But nations do not define their relationships by the feelings they have for one another. Instead, nations have permanent interests, for they have to further the well-being and security of their citizens. When nations perceive that an alliance with another nation will secure those interests, they enter into one. During World War II, even nations that are fundamentally hostile to one another allied themselves when their perceived interests dictated that they do so. That is how the USSR ended up allied with the US and Britain. Another example is the recent Iraq War in which France, a hitherto staunch ally of the US, did not support the US-led war. This was in stark contrast to the US-led war in Afghanistan a few years ago, in which France supported the US in their war efforts. Thus it is clear that when the interests of allied nations no longer converge, the reason for their alliance disappears, and the alliance splits apart. The former allies do not necessarily become enemies, but each becomes freer to pursue its own interests. The merger and separation between Singapore and Malaysia in the 1960s also serves to illustrate the point that friendships between nations are transient. Therefore, nations do not have permanent friends, only permanent interests.

In the dog-eat-dog corporate world where business interests come first, there is no such as thing as permanent friends or enemies. Sometimes rival companies may enter into a merger with one another if doing so is beneficial to their business interests. Such mergers between companies are not uncommon. An example would be the recent merger of two local media giants, MediaCorp and SPH MediaWorks. After several years of rivalry and competition for viewer-ship which left them bleeding in their finances, they decided that it was better to work together and tap on the synergy of the merger. Multi-National Companies, Sony and Ericsson, have also merged to jointly develop mobile phones. It is without doubt that companies only have permanent interests and no permanent friends.

In conclusion, the statement “there is no permanent friends, only permanent interests” does not apply to all levels of society. The statement is the defining equation in relations between nations and companies, but it is not so when it comes to person-to-person relationships.

Should gifted children be allowed to skip grades? (Holiday Journal topic 1)

I agree most with Dr Lee Siew Peng in not supporting grade-skipping for gifted children. I agree with her on the point that ‘gifted children are not spectacularly more successful than their peers who are of 'lower' intelligence as children.’ She also cited evidence from Mr Lewis Terman’s study who found out that 'children with very high IQ did not necessarily make any mark in science, business, arts or commerce'. Thus, I see no reason to allow gifted students to skip grades since doing so may not enable them to make a mark in any area.

If gifted children are allowed to skip grades, the only benefit they will get is that they get to complete their education and probably start work earlier. But why cram two decade’s worth of education into a span of several years for gifted children and deprive them of a wonderful childhood? Childhood should be a time when children can play and enjoy, not studying all the time. As Dr Lee has said “All-round development is important.” While a child may be academically gifted, he may not be good at his social skills. Development of social skills of gifted children is important for it will help him or her to network with others and this will become increasingly important as he grows up. What better way to develop a child’s social skills than to place him/her in a class of children his/her age and allow him/her to interact? Thus, I feel that gifted children should not be allowed to skip grades.

Allowing gifted children to skip grades is not without risk. If the child is unable to cope with the higher level of academic performance that is required of him when he skips grades, he might become too stressed and suffer from stress-related problems and depression. Worst still, he/she might have to revert back to the normal academic curriculum for his/her age and that would waste a lot of time. Surely, this risk is not worth it when the potential benefits of doing so remains obscure. Recently, there was news on The Straits Times about a gifted teenager currently studying at NUS and he has not done as well as he has expected and regretted taking things so fast. This goes to show that skipping grades does come with a price.

Some may argue that not allowing gifted children to skip grades may stymie their maximum learning potential. Thomas Anthony said that ‘sticking to the current curriculum would only cause such a whiz-kid to become laid-back and complacent and, in due course, he might become so complacent that his current level of achievement takes a dip.’ Mdm Lai Ee Sa said that ‘the gifted child spends many hours in school and these hours would be better spent doing work that challenges and intrigues him, rather than on lessons on topics that he already has a good grasp of.’ To prevent this from happening, special exceptions could be made for the gifted pupils such as allowing them to do their own self study in class at faster pace than their peers. This way, the gifted child can not only mix around with children of the same age and develop his social skills but also challenge himself/herself intellectually.

Should marriage be a legal contract between individuals or a non-binding relationship based on love? Why?

In light of the changing social circumstances in today’s world, where women are no longer financially dependent on men, views on marriage have also changed with times. In traditional societies, there is a social stigma associated with singles who cannot find a mate but polygamous relationships are usually frowned upon, except for some Muslims who believe that it is the religious obligation of men to several wives. However, the increasing trend of singles preferring to stay unmarried in developed countries these days shows that it is now socially acceptable to remain single.

People marry for a variety of reasons; some marry as a culmination of love while others marry for money and there are those who are forced to marry against their own will as in the case of forced match-making in some traditional societies. In the modern context of today’s world, more and more feel that it is superfluous to make marriage a legal contract if the relationship is rooted on love. Nevertheless, it would be an idealistic thinking to assume that marriage based on a non-binding relationship rooted on love would work out for all couples as not everyone marries for love. A more realistic approach would be to make marriage a legal contract.

A recent survey in Singapore this year showed that couples who have been married for more than a decade made up most of the divorce cases. With trends and statistics in developing countries pointing to increasing divorce rates, it is clear that some couples do fall out of love. Thus, a non-binding marriage would engender social problems as people can simply walk out of their marriage as and when they like and throw away their responsibilities. In the end, the ones who would suffer the most are young children of the couples.

By making marriage a legal contract, one would have to abide by the laws and take responsibility in their relationship. One would then think twice about divorcing as it is a long and complicated process, not to mention the legal costs involved. As a result, couples would be more willing to reconcile rather give up on each other. Also, couples will also be less likely to engage in extramarital affairs as they would not want to endanger their relationship which could lead to divorce.

However, the consequence of making marriage a legal contract is that more singles may choose to remain unmarried as they do not want to be tied down by marriage for this would entail curtailing their social activities. Nevertheless, after weighing the pros and cons, I think marriage should be a legal contract between individuals.

My views on advertisements

Advertisements help businesses to sell their products or services by generating awareness about them. Advertisements can come in different forms, such as in newsprint, flyers, television, radio and internet advertisements.


What makes a good advertisement?

A good advertisement should be one which can capture the attention of the target audience and influence them to buy or use the advertised products or services. It need not necessarily be sophisticated or glitzy. The styles of advertisements have evolved over the years as they need to suit the changing preferences and psyche of the target audience. In the past, telco television commercials would usually contain a commentary on the pricing of the different phone plans, but nowadays some of the telco television commercials do not contain such commentaries. A recent M1 advertisement in Singapore had a short animated clip of a ‘paperclip man’ prancing about the screen with two bikini-clad ladies to convey the company’s catchphrase “Anywhere anytime under the Sun.”

Most people nowadays are busy and are already tired of putting up with constant barrage of advertisements they encounter in their everyday lives. As such, advertisements have to creative and stand out from the rest in order to capture the attention of the target audience. The recent Carlsberg beer television commercial had a group of people ‘humming’ to the tune of a catchy song (Can’t Take My Eyes of You) using beer bottles. The advertisement drew warm response from people because of its catchy song. Using superstars in advertisements can also help to capture the attention of the target audience as in the numerous sports commercials starring sports stars like footballer David Beckham and basketball player Michael Jordan. The clever use of graphics, music and even positioning of texts and layout can have a subliminal effect on the minds of the target audience and influence their purchasing decisions. Condominium advertisements in newspapers are usually uncluttered and contain as little text as possible to project an impression that the condominium is spacious. Some bank advertisements in newsprint take up an entire page but only have a single line of text in the center of the page to catch the eye of the reader.

Do you think the money that companies spend on advertising is worth it?
Some people think that certain companies spend a disproportionate amount of money on advertising which could instead be used to manufacture more products or refine the products or services. However, one must realize that though the product is important, the awareness of the product or service is important as well. Without awareness of the products or services, how would people buy or use the products or services? Thus, it is important for companies to invest equally in their product research and advertising.


Should unsolicited advertisements be banned?

With the advent of the Internet, unsolicited advertisements in form of emails and pop-up window advertisements have become ubiquitous. Some companies send a myriad of emails using random email generators to Internet users, even if they have never released their email addresses to those companies. This is known as ‘spamming’. Spamming has been on the rise and it has become such a big problem that Microsoft, a software giant, has paid attention to it and even suggested introducing email stamping, that is an email user has to pay a fee to send an email. Currently, sending emails is free and that is what makes spamming so attractive to companies. Tracking down the spammers is not an easy task and thus it is difficult to prevent spamming.

Unsolicited advertisements, whether in the form of flyers or spam emails, are a source of nuisance to people. Instead of promoting the companies products or services, unsolicited advertisements may lead to a public backlash and irritated people may even boycott the advertised products or services. Thus, banning unsolicited advertisements is necessary not only to protect the interests of the recipients but also that of the companies.


Should advertisements be restricted in any way?

Some advertisements contain explicit violence and sex content and exposure to such materials may corrupt volatile young minds. In order to prevent this from happening, it is imperative to impose restrictions on advertisements. In Singapore, the Media Development Authority (MDA) regulates media content, including advertisements.

What is one value or belief which you hold on to in life?

I believe that fifty percent of what happens in life is determined by fate and the other fifty percent by our actions. As a Buddhist, I believe in Kharma, that is what you do now will affect you in the future, including your next life. A person who has done numerous bad deeds in his past life will suffer in his next life.

However, not everything is entirely decided by fate alone. We have to make numerous decisions every day, including small and insignificant ones such as whether or not to eat or got to the toilet. In almost every decision that we make, we have a choice. Thus, we can control our lives to a certain extent. One may argue that whatever decisions one make had already been decided by fate and whatever that happens is predestined. But if this true, then there is no purpose in life.

Since everything that we do will eventually affect us, we have to be cautious about what we do and do what is right. We should help others around us and have compassion towards all sentinent beings. If we want to achieve our goals, we have to work hard and not just wait and let fate decide everything.As the saying goes, "You reap what you sow."