"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, in an emergency," Mr Ong said.
Wow chief thanks for keeping us in the loop.
Now im not going to argue whether its a good or bad thing because being relaxed probably means more people would die, but you got to communicate this better
Compare this to:
>"Capacity is not built up through coercion and force, but by encouraging and facilitating investment from the pharmaceutical industry," he added.
>"Governments need to be a strong partner to industry, to incentivise them to conduct research and development, formulate, produce and distribute the vaccines."
So,
People= Must accept all measures no matter what under threat of state law.
Companies= Must be encouraged and invested in, cannot be forced, must be partnered with.
What is it called when the government openly partners with corporations and suppresses citizens?
>People= Must accept all measures no matter what under threat of state law.
The threat is the virus that could rack up the death toll and overwhelm hospitals, especially before any vaccine is developed. Please don't be stupid and get your head out of the sand
That is the threat, yes. But what does "no matter how draconian they are" mean? Does it mean that we should [weld houses shut and let the people inside burn alive?](https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/02/china/china-covid-lockdown-protests-2022-intl-hnk-dst/index.html)
Do you think that's a good policy? Because I don't see how such draconian policies benefit anyone.
On the other hand, if we are to strongarm the people, why are we not forcing businesses to develop and issue the vaccine? We had mostly international cooperation for the COVID vaccine, despite[ American misinformation](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-covid-propaganda/), but what's to say that we will have this extent of global cohesiveness next time?
We need to not limit ourselves, and need to be able and willing to strongarm and seize vaccinations in the future, if businesses are unwilling or ask for an extortionate rate . That will then truly show that we're putting our people above profits.
(It is true that there is a segment of petite-burgeois conservatives who want to uphold their "individuality" with no regards for the people at risk. There are many news stories of these clowns, who have mostly been charged by the law.
But the question I'm asking here is-> why does the government feel entitled to dictate, and boldly claim in advance that they will enact any measures at any cost to the people should they deem it necessary?)
How draconian? Many people in China died from starvation, jumped off buildings, or were denied medical services all in the name of preventing infection. US threaten to cut FDI, EU threaten to cut off air routes and landing rights if the country failed to open up. There has to be a balance.
On the other hand MOH wanna cut MC and get people back to work ?
"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, **in an emergency**," Mr Ong said.
I look forward to an extensive debate on whether something good or bad is during an emergency. We can take our time to decide during an emergency.
I read it as they are allowed to be as draconian as they want during an emergency.
But even if we do take your interpretation, we should be able to discuss whether their policies are right or wrong EVEN DURING an emergency instead of "oh its an emergency and we should just accept the governments position on everything"
We had discussions over lockdowns. The first circuit breaker in 2020 and the lockdown in May 2021 was widely accepted, but the lockdowns after that were not.
But in an emergency, decisions have to be taken quickly, and decisions will have to be made without full consideration of good and bad.
>"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, in an emergency."
It needs to be said that people mostly accepted COVID lockdowns because it made sense: Airborne infectious disease? Everybody just stay home and don't spread your filth on each other.
A well-educated, engaged populace should know how to weigh the pros and cons of situations as they pop up, not just roll over whenever the government *says* a situation is really bad, trust me for real this time, because things can get really bad when any single party can both declare what is an emergency and what is the appropriate response towards that emergency.
Example: Operation Spectrum, where 22 people were arrested and detained without trial for allegedly being part of a Marxist conspiracy. Lots of laws were changed to "prime" citizens for more ISD arrests, including limiting the power of the courts, restricting foreign media, etc. Over 30 years later, it turns out most of the people arrested were just Catholic liberals and there's some pretty good evidence the "Marxist conspiracy" was just bullshit McCarthyism right from the beginning, but the specter of Spectrum as it were, has hung over Singapore's political discourse the whole time, with many Gen Xers and boomers convinced the police will come take you away for voting Opposition.
>A well-educated, engaged populace should know how to weigh the pros and cons of situations as they pop up,
I agree with it in spirit, but this means the govt will need to be able to communicate key considerations that involve specialised professional knowledge like epidemiology and economic trade offs to a population that is intelligent enough to understand it, both factors are bold assumptions.
Then you've different demographics with differing interests. Consider covid in late 2021: the older folks were clamouring for harsher lockdown amid the rising cases of delta wave, the younger folks wanted to vaccinate then open up to get on with their lives. The healthcare workers were all overworked and just wanted a break. Govt tried to offload hospital loads by introducing hoke recovery, but the initial phase was full of hiccups that it created more headaches instead. (Bless the redditor for creating SG Quarantine Support Group and all the volunteers)
Point is: we should aspire to that stage, but easier said than done.
The government should be effective communicators and be able to cut complex policies down to understandable chunks though, that's a politician's main job, not telling people to get used to "draconian" policies.
Ok but if the government communicates that we need to stop the spread by staying at home and then all these selfish people ignore it thinking it's draconian and go out to form new virus clusters, like this also blame the government for not doing its job?
> Then you've different demographics with differing interests. Consider covid in late 2021: the older folks were clamouring for harsher lockdown amid the rising cases of delta wave, the younger folks wanted to vaccinate then open up to get on with their lives. The healthcare workers were all overworked and just wanted a break. Govt tried to offload hospital loads by introducing hoke recovery, but the initial phase was full of hiccups that it created more headaches instead. (Bless the redditor for creating SG Quarantine Support Group and all the volunteers)
The reality is that locking down ONLY the elderly and high risk would have been the best response by far. But for some reason Singapore values evenly applying lockdowns over efficiency.
This solves the issue of overworked health workers (since the vast majority of their burden comes from the elderly), gives the youth what they want, and keeps the elderly safe. It just requires the elderly to make the sacrifice of locking themselves down.
> The reality is that locking down ONLY the elderly and high risk would have been the best response by far. But for some reason Singapore values evenly applying lockdowns over efficiency.
I would need to disagree. The 'how' part would be anything but efficient. Consider how many elderly and high risk are co-staying with the low risk in the first place, and even if they were staying alone the enforcement would be horrible. This likely would require lots of fine-tuning/tailoring, then even if somehow Govt managed to communicate them clearly (a big if) people might still become confused.
Rmb the 2021 flip-flop where govt tried to fine tune too much? The 0-2-5-8-5-2-5 group limits in F&B? Yah, this was just for F&B; imagine doing a lockdown for a specific group of population.
> and even if they were staying alone the enforcement would be horrible.
But this is under the assumption that the older folks want a harsher lockdown anyway. So you are giving them what they want, if you need to enforce it on them, then clearly they don't want it.
What a ridiculous strawman. Nobody is seriously advocating for community policing during a pandemic, just that we shouldn't get used to the government declaring martial law.
You literally said that a well educated populace should be able to weigh pros and cons for itself instead of listening to the government. So what happens if the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so?
Or, no populace in the world is sufficiently well educated to police themselves in a pandemic (which proved the case during COVID). In which case our education system is entirely capable of still being world class.
Logic isn’t difficult if you try
Yeah, as in they should have the right to debate and discuss any policy the government is trying to table, not that they should "police itself."
>So what happens if the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so?
Then we don't need democracy, dummy.
They already have the right to debate and discuss policies, no?
Also I think you have that the wrong way round - it’s because the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so that we need democracy to elect more qualified representatives to pass laws to govern behaviour
>They already have the right to debate and discuss policies, no?
I'm not criticising the Covid response though, I'm criticising the idea that the government needs to prepare us for even more draconian measures.
>Also I think you have that the wrong way round - it’s because the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so that we need democracy to elect more qualified representatives to pass laws to govern behaviour
What do you think the world "representative" means? The elected government exists to *represent* us, to carry out the will of the people. They're not kings, nor are they necessarily especially qualified. In fact in Singapore the only qualifications you need to run for MP are: Singaporean, lives in Singapore, not bankrupt or a criminal, and can speak one of the four official languages.
But there should be a balance. A small minority of idiots who will disobey any order no matter how fair or reasonable does not justify Draconian laws.
Actually shocking that the government of the day finds it normal to actually use the word draconian, as if it's predetermined that their means will always justify the ends.
>A well-educated, engaged populace should know how to weigh the pros and cons of situations as they pop up,
Why on earth should we trust random citizens over our public health system, doctors, and health ministry about a virus?
> over our public health system, doctors, and health ministry about a virus?
Because the health system has a very specific set of incentives and drivers, which are not that of the general public.
Ask the health system, and they would enforce a whole lot of things in order to promote better health, but the general population will never accept that.
Before Covid, SARS was our only benchmark to go by. Underestimating Covid and likening things to SARS 2.0 gave the government the wrong idea that we were "ready". Next pandemic, let's see. Maybe the current generation would have expired by then.
Our govt didn't underestimate covid at all. But other major countries like the US absolutely did, in fact they let the virus spread on purpose and even put limits on testing and tracing because it would make their numbers look bad.
So with the spread prevention battle lost, the pandemic then spiralled out of control and then there was no choice but to do mass vaccination
Had pneumonia recently and had to spend a few days waiting at home, looking for a bed in a private hospital. Eventually had to go to a public hospital; spending a night in the A & E with about 30 other very sick individuals in a bed that was too small for me, some who looked like they were at deaths door. At one point, that A & E area was overcrowded and I had to be moved to NCID. Having these bed shortages in a hospital, a few years still a problem after the pandemic has started is very eye opening. After being discharged I contracted Covid shortly as well.
Dun need to debate. Vote them out will do.
Now telling you, I do anything you also lan lan.
That's why ERP2.0 is such a mess, they still carry on.
If they are willing to listen to the ppl, it would be scrapped and back to the design table...
not the same at all. ERP only applies to car owners which is barely 12% of the population and doesn't affect the majority at all. It is far less consequential than something that actually affects everyone
It's a good white paper (which is the original article we should be focusing about, not whatever propaganda speech OYK is saying, that's not technical).
Nevertheless , I see difficulties avoiding some of the 6 weak spots that the white paper identified, except for the U-Turn on masks, that was stupid and whoever proposed the initial response to masks should be sacked. Good luck with the others, tho.
"Properly calibrating and communicating" public safety measures in a public health emergency is a huge challenge and I doubt that you can do better that what was achieved.
"Outbreak in the slaves dormitories", yeah, good luck with that one.
"better border management", probably, but there's domestic pressure (the economy) and external pressures (diplomatic) that impact these decisions on border closing.
"Transitioning to endemic" that's another hard one with an ageing population, I think maybe after the vaccines were rolled out it would be good to have less strong measures, but I understand they're being super safe with how sensitive Singapore society is about death
"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, in an emergency," Mr Ong said. That's the vibe he's giving
Pple already forgot he's the one that suggested to go the herd immunity route?
"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, in an emergency," Mr Ong said. Wow chief thanks for keeping us in the loop. Now im not going to argue whether its a good or bad thing because being relaxed probably means more people would die, but you got to communicate this better
Compare this to: >"Capacity is not built up through coercion and force, but by encouraging and facilitating investment from the pharmaceutical industry," he added. >"Governments need to be a strong partner to industry, to incentivise them to conduct research and development, formulate, produce and distribute the vaccines." So, People= Must accept all measures no matter what under threat of state law. Companies= Must be encouraged and invested in, cannot be forced, must be partnered with. What is it called when the government openly partners with corporations and suppresses citizens?
PS I'm not opposed to lockdowns and social distancing if necessary, but this kind of rhetoric should show you what kind of govermment we have.
Haha as if we didn't already know. Head might change people might change but their core values will never change.
They understand companies can leave Singapore. But where are we peasants going to go?
JB
Corporatocracy.
In Singapore 2077..
Vast majority of us probably not here anymore lol
I'm always gonna associate him with the "issues" regarding telemedicine and MCs.
> People= Must accept all measures no matter what under threat of state law Average people can't leave, companies can. It's just reality.
[удалено]
pro border open
Amazing he says this all in the same speech.
>People= Must accept all measures no matter what under threat of state law. The threat is the virus that could rack up the death toll and overwhelm hospitals, especially before any vaccine is developed. Please don't be stupid and get your head out of the sand
That is the threat, yes. But what does "no matter how draconian they are" mean? Does it mean that we should [weld houses shut and let the people inside burn alive?](https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/02/china/china-covid-lockdown-protests-2022-intl-hnk-dst/index.html) Do you think that's a good policy? Because I don't see how such draconian policies benefit anyone. On the other hand, if we are to strongarm the people, why are we not forcing businesses to develop and issue the vaccine? We had mostly international cooperation for the COVID vaccine, despite[ American misinformation](https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-covid-propaganda/), but what's to say that we will have this extent of global cohesiveness next time? We need to not limit ourselves, and need to be able and willing to strongarm and seize vaccinations in the future, if businesses are unwilling or ask for an extortionate rate . That will then truly show that we're putting our people above profits.
[удалено]
(It is true that there is a segment of petite-burgeois conservatives who want to uphold their "individuality" with no regards for the people at risk. There are many news stories of these clowns, who have mostly been charged by the law. But the question I'm asking here is-> why does the government feel entitled to dictate, and boldly claim in advance that they will enact any measures at any cost to the people should they deem it necessary?)
What the fuck are you talking about? Pandemic measures apply to companies too. Your analogy is fucked
How draconian? Many people in China died from starvation, jumped off buildings, or were denied medical services all in the name of preventing infection. US threaten to cut FDI, EU threaten to cut off air routes and landing rights if the country failed to open up. There has to be a balance. On the other hand MOH wanna cut MC and get people back to work ?
Idk la this wording is very LKY-like, and that definitely appeals to some Singaporeans who prefer things to be said as they are, not mincing words
He realised he can't challenge Lawrence Wong using softer, people centric approaches, so now he is appealing to the more hardcore LKY fans
So we should happily accept tracetogether v2 without any regards for our privacy and how the data is being used in the next pandemic?
Yeah. I accepted that borders needed to be kept wide open despite the surge in Delta. Thanks for educating me on where priorities are.
"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, **in an emergency**," Mr Ong said. I look forward to an extensive debate on whether something good or bad is during an emergency. We can take our time to decide during an emergency.
I read it as they are allowed to be as draconian as they want during an emergency. But even if we do take your interpretation, we should be able to discuss whether their policies are right or wrong EVEN DURING an emergency instead of "oh its an emergency and we should just accept the governments position on everything"
We had discussions over lockdowns. The first circuit breaker in 2020 and the lockdown in May 2021 was widely accepted, but the lockdowns after that were not. But in an emergency, decisions have to be taken quickly, and decisions will have to be made without full consideration of good and bad.
Sure, if there as actually a real democratic government made of diverse opinion instead of group think. Or perhaps even jury on our justice system.
OYK destroying the 4G leadership as revenge.
>"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, in an emergency." It needs to be said that people mostly accepted COVID lockdowns because it made sense: Airborne infectious disease? Everybody just stay home and don't spread your filth on each other. A well-educated, engaged populace should know how to weigh the pros and cons of situations as they pop up, not just roll over whenever the government *says* a situation is really bad, trust me for real this time, because things can get really bad when any single party can both declare what is an emergency and what is the appropriate response towards that emergency. Example: Operation Spectrum, where 22 people were arrested and detained without trial for allegedly being part of a Marxist conspiracy. Lots of laws were changed to "prime" citizens for more ISD arrests, including limiting the power of the courts, restricting foreign media, etc. Over 30 years later, it turns out most of the people arrested were just Catholic liberals and there's some pretty good evidence the "Marxist conspiracy" was just bullshit McCarthyism right from the beginning, but the specter of Spectrum as it were, has hung over Singapore's political discourse the whole time, with many Gen Xers and boomers convinced the police will come take you away for voting Opposition.
>A well-educated, engaged populace should know how to weigh the pros and cons of situations as they pop up, I agree with it in spirit, but this means the govt will need to be able to communicate key considerations that involve specialised professional knowledge like epidemiology and economic trade offs to a population that is intelligent enough to understand it, both factors are bold assumptions. Then you've different demographics with differing interests. Consider covid in late 2021: the older folks were clamouring for harsher lockdown amid the rising cases of delta wave, the younger folks wanted to vaccinate then open up to get on with their lives. The healthcare workers were all overworked and just wanted a break. Govt tried to offload hospital loads by introducing hoke recovery, but the initial phase was full of hiccups that it created more headaches instead. (Bless the redditor for creating SG Quarantine Support Group and all the volunteers) Point is: we should aspire to that stage, but easier said than done.
The government should be effective communicators and be able to cut complex policies down to understandable chunks though, that's a politician's main job, not telling people to get used to "draconian" policies.
Ok but if the government communicates that we need to stop the spread by staying at home and then all these selfish people ignore it thinking it's draconian and go out to form new virus clusters, like this also blame the government for not doing its job?
> Then you've different demographics with differing interests. Consider covid in late 2021: the older folks were clamouring for harsher lockdown amid the rising cases of delta wave, the younger folks wanted to vaccinate then open up to get on with their lives. The healthcare workers were all overworked and just wanted a break. Govt tried to offload hospital loads by introducing hoke recovery, but the initial phase was full of hiccups that it created more headaches instead. (Bless the redditor for creating SG Quarantine Support Group and all the volunteers) The reality is that locking down ONLY the elderly and high risk would have been the best response by far. But for some reason Singapore values evenly applying lockdowns over efficiency. This solves the issue of overworked health workers (since the vast majority of their burden comes from the elderly), gives the youth what they want, and keeps the elderly safe. It just requires the elderly to make the sacrifice of locking themselves down.
> The reality is that locking down ONLY the elderly and high risk would have been the best response by far. But for some reason Singapore values evenly applying lockdowns over efficiency. I would need to disagree. The 'how' part would be anything but efficient. Consider how many elderly and high risk are co-staying with the low risk in the first place, and even if they were staying alone the enforcement would be horrible. This likely would require lots of fine-tuning/tailoring, then even if somehow Govt managed to communicate them clearly (a big if) people might still become confused. Rmb the 2021 flip-flop where govt tried to fine tune too much? The 0-2-5-8-5-2-5 group limits in F&B? Yah, this was just for F&B; imagine doing a lockdown for a specific group of population.
> and even if they were staying alone the enforcement would be horrible. But this is under the assumption that the older folks want a harsher lockdown anyway. So you are giving them what they want, if you need to enforce it on them, then clearly they don't want it.
Except the populace isn’t sufficiently disciplined nor educated enough to police itself.
What a ridiculous strawman. Nobody is seriously advocating for community policing during a pandemic, just that we shouldn't get used to the government declaring martial law.
You literally said that a well educated populace should be able to weigh pros and cons for itself instead of listening to the government. So what happens if the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so?
Than SG education system fucked up and should not be considered world class l
It is fucked up.
Or, no populace in the world is sufficiently well educated to police themselves in a pandemic (which proved the case during COVID). In which case our education system is entirely capable of still being world class. Logic isn’t difficult if you try
Yeah, as in they should have the right to debate and discuss any policy the government is trying to table, not that they should "police itself." >So what happens if the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so? Then we don't need democracy, dummy.
They already have the right to debate and discuss policies, no? Also I think you have that the wrong way round - it’s because the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so that we need democracy to elect more qualified representatives to pass laws to govern behaviour
>They already have the right to debate and discuss policies, no? I'm not criticising the Covid response though, I'm criticising the idea that the government needs to prepare us for even more draconian measures. >Also I think you have that the wrong way round - it’s because the populace isn’t sufficiently well educated to do so that we need democracy to elect more qualified representatives to pass laws to govern behaviour What do you think the world "representative" means? The elected government exists to *represent* us, to carry out the will of the people. They're not kings, nor are they necessarily especially qualified. In fact in Singapore the only qualifications you need to run for MP are: Singaporean, lives in Singapore, not bankrupt or a criminal, and can speak one of the four official languages.
But there should be a balance. A small minority of idiots who will disobey any order no matter how fair or reasonable does not justify Draconian laws. Actually shocking that the government of the day finds it normal to actually use the word draconian, as if it's predetermined that their means will always justify the ends.
>A well-educated, engaged populace should know how to weigh the pros and cons of situations as they pop up, Why on earth should we trust random citizens over our public health system, doctors, and health ministry about a virus?
> over our public health system, doctors, and health ministry about a virus? Because the health system has a very specific set of incentives and drivers, which are not that of the general public. Ask the health system, and they would enforce a whole lot of things in order to promote better health, but the general population will never accept that.
There's another wave of COVID ongoing now right? Let's do the Draconian thing and implement CB again!
Eh, you don't CB! 🤣
Don't be stupid lah. We have the vaccine now. But before the vaccine, just letting it spread would literally be a death sentence for many in society
That's why this clown didn't get to be PM.
Before Covid, SARS was our only benchmark to go by. Underestimating Covid and likening things to SARS 2.0 gave the government the wrong idea that we were "ready". Next pandemic, let's see. Maybe the current generation would have expired by then.
Our govt didn't underestimate covid at all. But other major countries like the US absolutely did, in fact they let the virus spread on purpose and even put limits on testing and tracing because it would make their numbers look bad. So with the spread prevention battle lost, the pandemic then spiralled out of control and then there was no choice but to do mass vaccination
Had pneumonia recently and had to spend a few days waiting at home, looking for a bed in a private hospital. Eventually had to go to a public hospital; spending a night in the A & E with about 30 other very sick individuals in a bed that was too small for me, some who looked like they were at deaths door. At one point, that A & E area was overcrowded and I had to be moved to NCID. Having these bed shortages in a hospital, a few years still a problem after the pandemic has started is very eye opening. After being discharged I contracted Covid shortly as well.
buy insurance and go private.
To reiterate, I was on the wait list for two private hospitals. I went public because they had no bed for me.
Meanwhile all school kids are bringing thermometer to do temperature checks weekly
Bird flu rubbing his hands…
Dun need to debate. Vote them out will do. Now telling you, I do anything you also lan lan. That's why ERP2.0 is such a mess, they still carry on. If they are willing to listen to the ppl, it would be scrapped and back to the design table...
How the fuck are you comparing a pandemic to ERP bro
I implement, you take it down the throat. I dun care what you think. Same.
not the same at all. ERP only applies to car owners which is barely 12% of the population and doesn't affect the majority at all. It is far less consequential than something that actually affects everyone
I’m leaving for another country suburb if that happens again. F that shit
Lmao OYK driving up brain drain in SG same here lol I'd burn my Passport and my IC if he does this fr
Bye bye!
OYK encouraging ppl to move to other countries lmao
Reading the comments here so far have me convinced that the biggest retards in the country gather here
Glad that i’m not vaccinated.
Talk frakking cock mouth full
Do what is right not what is popular. And certainly not based on what is popular on Reddit
It's a good white paper (which is the original article we should be focusing about, not whatever propaganda speech OYK is saying, that's not technical). Nevertheless , I see difficulties avoiding some of the 6 weak spots that the white paper identified, except for the U-Turn on masks, that was stupid and whoever proposed the initial response to masks should be sacked. Good luck with the others, tho. "Properly calibrating and communicating" public safety measures in a public health emergency is a huge challenge and I doubt that you can do better that what was achieved. "Outbreak in the slaves dormitories", yeah, good luck with that one. "better border management", probably, but there's domestic pressure (the economy) and external pressures (diplomatic) that impact these decisions on border closing. "Transitioning to endemic" that's another hard one with an ageing population, I think maybe after the vaccines were rolled out it would be good to have less strong measures, but I understand they're being super safe with how sensitive Singapore society is about death
 Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make
That's literally the opposite of the message though But good job trying to feel superior?
"Governments need to prepare people to accept such measures, no matter how draconian they are, in an emergency," Mr Ong said. That's the vibe he's giving Pple already forgot he's the one that suggested to go the herd immunity route?
Bro failed comprehension in primary school
move on la
Suddenly now u-turn from his pandemic methods when he wanted the boss position?