aaur4man

CB laaaaaaaaaaaa

leak when its near CNY notch simpur man

Good luck those coming in and out

Only one lab in China can safely handle the new coronavirus (Image: © CC2.0 Flickr/davidmartindavies ) As an escalating viral outbreak unfolds in China, only one lab in the country meets the required biosafety standards needed to study the new disease. The lab happens to sit in the center of Wuhan, the city where the newly identified coronavirus first appeared, according to the Hindustan Times, an Indian news outlet. The facility, known as the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory, is housed within the Chinese Academy of Sciences and was specifically designed to help Chinese scientists "prepare for and respond to future infectious disease outbreaks," according to a 2019 report published by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The Chinese government moved to construct such a lab following the 2003 SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) epidemic, during which more than 8,000 people caught the infection and more than 750 died worldwide, according to the CDC. Laboratories that handle pathogens receive a rating of 1 to 4, depending on what class of microbe they can feasibly contain, with 1 representing the lowest risk and 4 representing the highest risk. Designated at Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4), the Wuhan lab can hold the world's most dangerous pathogens at maximum biocontainment levels. Related: 27 Devastating Infectious Diseases All researchers in a BSL-4 lab must change their clothing upon entering the facility, shower upon exiting and decontaminate all of the materials used during experimentation, according to the CDC. Lab members wear full-body, pressurized suits to isolate themselves from the surrounding environment. The lab itself must be held in a separate building or an isolated wing within the surrounding university and must be supplied with its own air filtration and decontamination systems. BSL-4 labs are built to contain infectious agents such as the Ebola, Nipah and Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever viruses, all of which are highly transmissible and frequently fatal diseases. Although China intends to build five to seven high-containment laboratories by 2025, as of now, only the Wuhan lab can currently contain pathogens of this nature, according to the 2019 CDC report. Chinese health officials have classified the new coronavirus as a Class B infectious disease, placing the illness in the same category as SARS and HIV/AIDS, The Washington Post reported. However, the Chinese government announced that it will institute Class A controls — which are usually reserved for more dangerous diseases, like cholera and the plague — in an attempt to contain the outbreak. Reports of the first infection of this coronavirus in a U.S. citizen, a man in Washington state, have already prompted Chinese health authorities to place Wuhan under quasi-quarantine, meaning that movement to and from the region is now under tight control. Authorities may forcibly quarantine individuals known or suspected to be infected with the virus and will inform the public of each new case identified in China, according to The Washington Post. More than 400 people have contracted the new coronavirus in China so far, along with others in Thailand, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the U.S. China's supply of surgical masks is running low, and many travelers have canceled their plans for the upcoming Lunar New Year because of fears of becoming infected, the South China Morning Post reported. Only time will tell how and when the outbreak will be quelled and whether the outbreak presents any substantial threat to global health. Source

Now that not one but seven Chinese cities - including Wuhan, ground zero of the coronavirus epidemic - and collectively housing some 23 million people, are under quarantine... ... comparisons to the infamous Raccoon City from Resident Evil are coming in hot and heavy. And, since reality often tends to imitate if not art then certainly Hollywood, earlier today we jokingly asked if the Medical Research Institute at Wuhan University would end up being China's version of Umbrella Corp. As it turns out, it wasn't a joke, because moments ago it was brought to our attention that in February 2017, Nature penned an extensive profile of what it called the "Chinese lab poised to study world's most dangerous pathogens." The location of this BSL-4 rated lab? Why, Wuhan. A quick read of what this lab was meant to do, prompts the immediate question whether the coronavirus epidemic isn't a weaponized virus that just happened to escape the lab: The Wuhan lab cost 300 million yuan (US$44 million), and to allay safety concerns it was built far above the flood plain and with the capacity to withstand a magnitude-7 earthquake, although the area has no history of strong earthquakes. It will focus on the control of emerging diseases, store purified viruses and act as a World Health Organization ‘reference laboratory’ linked to similar labs around the world. “It will be a key node in the global biosafety-lab network,” says lab director Yuan Zhiming. The Chinese Academy of Sciences approved the construction of a BSL-4 laboratory in 2003, and the epidemic of SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) around the same time lent the project momentum. The lab was designed and constructed with French assistance as part of a 2004 cooperative agreement on the prevention and control of emerging infectious diseases. But the complexity of the project, China’s lack of experience, difficulty in maintaining funding and long government approval procedures meant that construction wasn’t finished until the end of 2014. The lab’s first project will be to study the BSL-3 pathogen that causes Crimean–Congo haemorrhagic fever: a deadly tick-borne virus that affects livestock across the world, including in northwest China, and that can jump to people. Future plans include studying the pathogen that causes SARS, which also doesn’t require a BSL-4 lab, before moving on to Ebola and the West African Lassa virus, What does BSL-4 mean? BSL-4 is the highest level of biocontainment: its criteria include filtering air and treating water and waste before they leave the laboratory, and stipulating that researchers change clothes and shower before and after using lab facilities. Such labs are often controversial. The first BSL-4 lab in Japan was built in 1981, but operated with lower-risk pathogens until 2015, when safety concerns were finally overcome. And here's why all this is an issue: Worries surround the Chinese lab. The SARS virus has escaped from high-level containment facilities in Beijing multiple times, notes Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey. Below we repost the full Nature article because it strongly hints, without evidence for now, that the coronavirus epidemic may well have been a weaponized virus which "accidentally" escaped the Wuhan biohazard facility. NEVER MISS THE NEWS THAT MATTERS MOST Inside the Chinese lab poised to study world's most dangerous pathogens A laboratory in Wuhan is on the cusp of being cleared to work with the world’s most dangerous pathogens. The move is part of a plan to build between five and seven biosafety level-4 (BSL-4) labs across the Chinese mainland by 2025, and has generated much excitement, as well as some concerns. Hazard suits hang at the National Bio-safety Laboratory, Wuhan, the first lab on the Chinese mainland equipped for the highest level of biocontainment. Some scientists outside China worry about pathogens escaping, and the addition of a biological dimension to geopolitical tensions between China and other nations. But Chinese microbiologists are celebrating their entrance to the elite cadre empowered to wrestle with the world’s greatest biological threats. “It will offer more opportunities for Chinese researchers, and our contribution on the BSL‑4-level pathogens will benefit the world,” says George Gao, director of the Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory of Pathogenic Microbiology and Immunology in Beijing. There are already two BSL-4 labs in Taiwan, but the National Bio-safety Laboratory, Wuhan, would be the first on the Chinese mainland. The lab was certified as meeting the standards and criteria of BSL-4 by the China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS) in January. The CNAS examined the lab’s infrastructure, equipment and management, says a CNAS representative, paving the way for the Ministry of Health to give its approval. A representative from the ministry says it will move slowly and cautiously; if the assessment goes smoothly, it could approve the laboratory by the end of June. BSL-4 is the highest level of biocontainment: its criteria include filtering air and treating water and waste before they leave the laboratory, and stipulating that researchers change clothes and shower before and after using lab facilities. Such labs are often controversial. The first BSL-4 lab in Japan was built in 1981, but operated with lower-risk pathogens until 2015, when safety concerns were finally overcome. The expansion of BSL-4-lab networks in the United States and Europe over the past 15 years — with more than a dozen now in operation or under construction in each region — also met with resistance, including questions about the need for so many facilities. The Wuhan lab cost 300 million yuan (US$44 million), and to allay safety concerns it was built far above the flood plain and with the capacity to withstand a magnitude-7 earthquake, although the area has no history of strong earthquakes. It will focus on the control of emerging diseases, store purified viruses and act as a World Health Organization ‘reference laboratory’ linked to similar labs around the world. “It will be a key node in the global biosafety-lab network,” says lab director Yuan Zhiming. The Chinese Academy of Sciences approved the construction of a BSL-4 laboratory in 2003, and the epidemic of SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) around the same time lent the project momentum. The lab was designed and constructed with French assistance as part of a 2004 cooperative agreement on the prevention and control of emerging infectious diseases. But the complexity of the project, China’s lack of experience, difficulty in maintaining funding and long government approval procedures meant that construction wasn’t finished until the end of 2014. The lab’s first project will be to study the BSL-3 pathogen that causes Crimean–Congo haemorrhagic fever: a deadly tick-borne virus that affects livestock across the world, including in northwest China, and that can jump to people. Future plans include studying the pathogen that causes SARS, which also doesn’t require a BSL-4 lab, before moving on to Ebola and the West African Lassa virus, which do. Some one million Chinese people work in Africa; the country needs to be ready for any eventuality, says Yuan. “Viruses don’t know borders.” Gao travelled to Sierra Leone during the recent Ebola outbreak, allowing his team to report the speed with which the virus mutated into new strains. The Wuhan lab will give his group a chance to study how such viruses cause disease, and to develop treatments based on antibodies and small molecules, he says. The opportunities for international collaboration, meanwhile, will aid the genetic analysis and epidemiology of emergent diseases. “The world is facing more new emerging viruses, and we need more contribution from China,” says Gao. In particular, the emergence of zoonotic viruses — those that jump to humans from animals, such as SARS or Ebola — is a concern, says Bruno Lina, director of the VirPath virology lab in Lyon, France. Many staff from the Wuhan lab have been training at a BSL-4 lab in Lyon, which some scientists find reassuring. And the facility has already carried out a test-run using a low-risk virus. But worries surround the Chinese lab, too. The SARS virus has escaped from high-level containment facilities in Beijing multiple times, notes Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey. Tim Trevan, founder of CHROME Biosafety and Biosecurity Consulting in Damascus, Maryland, says that an open culture is important to keeping BSL-4 labs safe, and he questions how easy this will be in China, where society emphasizes hierarchy. “Diversity of viewpoint, flat structures where everyone feels free to speak up and openness of information are important,” he says. Yuan says that he has worked to address this issue with staff. “We tell them the most important thing is that they report what they have or haven’t done,” he says. And the lab’s inter­national collaborations will increase openness. “Transparency is the basis of the lab,” he adds. The plan to expand into a network heightens such concerns. One BSL-4 lab in Harbin is already awaiting accreditation; the next two are expected to be in Beijing and Kunming, the latter focused on using monkey models to study disease. Lina says that China’s size justifies this scale, and that the opportunity to combine BSL-4 research with an abundance of research monkeys — Chinese researchers face less red tape than those in the West when it comes to research on primates — could be powerful. “If you want to test vaccines or antivirals, you need a non-human primate model,” says Lina. But Ebright is not convinced of the need for more than one BSL-4 lab in mainland China. He suspects that the expansion there is a reaction to the networks in the United States and Europe, which he says are also unwarranted. He adds that governments will assume that such excess capacity is for the potential development of bioweapons. “These facilities are inherently dual use,” he says. The prospect of ramping up opportunities to inject monkeys with pathogens also worries, rather than excites, him: “They can run, they can scratch, they can bite.” The central monitor room at China’s National Bio-safety Laboratory If that wasn't enough, here is January 2018 press release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, announcing the launch of the "top-level biosafety lab." China has put its first level-four biosafety laboratory into operation, capable of conducting experiments with highly pathogenic microorganisms that can cause fatal diseases, according to the national health authority. Level four is the highest biosafety level, used for diagnostic work and research on easily transmitted pathogens that can cause fatal diseases, including the Ebola virus. The Wuhan national level-four biosafety lab recently passed an assessment organized by the National Health and Family Planning Commission, according to a news release on Friday from the Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Virologists read data on a container for viral samples at China's first level-four biosafety lab at the Institute of Virology in Wuhan After evaluating such things as the lab's management of personnel, facilities, animals, disposals and viruses, experts believed the lab is qualified to carry out experiments on highly pathogenic microorganisms that can cause fatal diseases, such as Marburg, Variola, Nipah and Ebola. "The lab provides a complete, world-leading biosafety system. This means Chinese scientists can study the most dangerous pathogenic microorganisms in their own lab," the Wuhan institute said. It will serve as the country's research and development center on prevention and control of infectious diseases, as a pathogen collection center and as the United Nations' reference laboratory for infectious diseases, the institute said. Previous media reports said the Wuhan P4 lab will be open to scientists from home and abroad. Scientists can conduct research on anti-virus drugs and vaccines in the lab. The lab is part of Sino-French cooperation in the prevention and control of emerging infectious diseases, according to the news release. The central government approved the P4 laboratory in 2003 when the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome spread alarm across the country. In October 2004, China signed a cooperation agreement with France on the prevention and control of emerging infectious diseases. This was followed by a succession of supplementary agreements. With French assistance in laboratory design, biosafety standards establishment and personnel training, construction began in 2011 and lasted for three years. In 2015, the lab was put into trial operation. Source

Lol wut

Pikachu

Who is that sia

i read as AKB48

very easy for AIA la. just remove him and move on. no loss. 999999 others being recruited

He calls the water arrangement between Hong Kong and Guangdong an "unequal" deal. Chapman To (Du Wen Ze, 杜汶澤) is a Hong Kong actor and comedian known for his roles in the Infernal Affairs trilogy and the Initial D movie. Known for anti-mainland China views He is also known for his anti-government views, and for supporting the pro-democracy movements in both Taiwan and Hong Kong, as well as his anti-mainland China sentiments. As a result, he has been banned from the Chinese market, and has since ventured into the film markets in Malaysia and Singapore, setting up a movie production firm in Malaysia and collaborating with Singaporean comedian Mark Lee in the movie King of Mahjong. To called out unfair water contract between Hong Kong and Guangdong In an episode of his regular talk show Chapman To’s Late Show that aired on Jan. 15, To talked about that the water agreement signed between Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) government and the Guangdong local government in 2006. The episode was titled, “A big gift from the Chinese Communist Party”. In the show, To referred to the agreement as the “minimum price contract” and the “2006 Hong Kong inequality contract”. Guangdong province is situated at the southernmost tip of mainland China adjacent to Hong Kong. Here’s the segment from the episode: To explained that under the contract, Hong Kong had to buy 820 million cubic metres of water from mainland China. The volume was increased from 22.7 million cubic metres to 820 million cubic metres, he said. He further said the cost of importing water from Guangdong was HK$4.8 billion (S$832 million) in 2019 alone. However, even if Hong Kong does not use all the water they are entitled to under the contract, the SAR is still required to pay the price. “That was the contract, it’s minimum payment,” To said. He likened the contract to paying HK$8,000 (S$1,387) at a club for bottle service even if a customer just ordered a single glass of juice. To: Beijing should thank Hongkongers instead To added that Hong Kong residents could not use up all 820 million cubic metres of water they are entitled to annually, which meant that the city “overpaid” Guangdong by HK4.5 billion (S$781 million) in 10 years. Lastly, in response to the narrative among some mainland Chinese that Hongkongers should thank mainland China for providing them with water, To said it is the mainland Chinese who should thank Hongkongers instead for the huge amount of money the mainland Chinese got from the deal. The live audience in the studio then erupted in applause. Mainland China supplies 70 to 80 percent of Hong Kong’s water Hong Kong has been importing water from the Dong River, or Dongjiang, since 1965. According to the SAR government’s Water Supplies Department, the Dong River is Hong Kong’s main source of water. Water pipes from Dongjiang in Sheung Shui. (Image via Wikipedia Commons) About 70 to 80 percent of the city’s water supply comes from the river. The city gets its remaining 20 to 30 percent of water from the rainfall captured in natural catchments. Lump sum package deal criticised for inflexbility The details surrounding the water agreement that To criticised appear to be accurate. Hong Kong pays HK$4.22 billion (S$732 million) annually for water from the Dong River, regardless of how much it actually uses, South China Morning Post (SCMP) reported. And according to an article published by the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP), the agreement cost the SAR HK$4.5 billion (S$781 million) for “water it did not consume”. Hong Kong has been “getting the shorter end of the stick” under the lump sum package deal approach, it added. SCMP reported that while the annual supply ceiling is fixed at 820 million cubic metres, the import amount is adjusted monthly according to the needs of Hong Kong resident and rainfall in the city. Such a lump sum deal has been criticised for its inflexibility. Hong Kong consumes nearly a billion cubic metres of freshwater every year. Hong Kong and Guangdong have agreed to review the current price package this year. You can watch the entire episode here: Source

Once hailed as a model of progress, poverty and nativist resentment are on the rise PETER GUEST, Nikkei staff writer JANUARY 22, 2020 15:10 JST SINGAPORE -- From around 10 p.m. until the early hours of the morning, Aziz drives a private hire car through the streetlit hinterlands of Singapore. On weekdays, he shuttles from the airport to downtown condos and back; on weekends he patrols around Tanjong Pagar where the upscale bars kick out late, picking up drinkers, bar staff and other nocturnal tradespeople. On an average night, he can book upward of 150 Singaporean dollars ($111). His situation, he said, is "jialat." Jialat, a Singlish word taken from Hokkien, literally means "drained." In his early 50s, Aziz -- not his real name -- was retrenched from his job in a professional services company two years ago, and turned to the gig economy to make ends meet, joining hundreds of other former white-collar workers in a nocturnal demimonde of midrange saloons and weary discontent. "Cannot retire. Cannot take my [pension]," Aziz said. "As soon as they let me take it, I'll buy a house in Indonesia and retire there. If I stay here, what am I going to do?" Midlevel jobs in manufacturing and multinational companies are disappearing, and being replaced by technology and financial services roles, which are easier to fill with younger, more affordable migrants. Singaporeans like Aziz struggle to get back into the workforce. Only half of retrenched over-50s are reemployed full time within six months. Nearly three-quarters of people laid off in Singapore last quarter were what the country classifies as professionals, managers, executives and technicians, or PMETs. A quarter of a million people are in functional poverty. The bottom 20% of Singaporean households have an average monthly shortfall of S$335 between their incomes and outgoings, according to the government's latest economic survey. Living costs have risen. Water bills are up 30% since 2017; medical costs have increased 10% in just over five years, an acute problem in a population that is aging rapidly. Technological disruption is breaking the link between economic growth and earnings. Growth has slowed to its lowest level since the 2009 financial crisis tipped the island into recession. Singapore has long relied on migrant labor to drive economic growth. (Photo by Peter Guest) Together, these have massed into an unprecedented challenge for the People's Action Party, which has held power in Singapore for more than half a century by delivering growth and prosperity. An election is looming, and there are no easy answers. "I think the social compact is fraying" Donald Low, associate partner at political consultancy Centennial Asia Advisors "The PAP's legitimacy has depended not primarily on electoral performance or democratic accountability. Its primary source of legitimacy has come from economic performance," says Donald Low, who spent 15 years in senior government roles and is now an associate partner at political consultancy Centennial Asia Advisors. "I think the social compact is fraying. The PAP's capability to ensure upward social mobility as long as you work hard and get an education, that ability has been seriously eroded." Glamour and grit For outsiders, Singapore's progress is often measured by the way that it accessorized its strides forward. Its infrastructure is near-seamless, its airport among the best in the world. Its network of subterranean malls is populated with high-end homogenized, globalized retail and leisure outlets -- designer clothing, luxury luggage, franchised restaurants from celebrity chefs -- of the kind found in wealthy emirates and airport departure lounges. After separating from Malaysia in 1965, the country opened its economy to international trade and capital, rising from a middling post-colonial port city -- albeit one at the nexus of global shipping -- to the ninth wealthiest nation in the world per capita. The PAP used that growth to dramatically raise the living standards of Singaporeans through education and a radical public housing policy. Starting in 1966, the Singapore government bought land from private owners -- who were legally obliged to sell -- to build massive public housing developments. Today, the state owns 90% of Singapore island, and 80% of Singaporeans live in "HDBs," Housing & Development Board apartments, which they own on long leases from the government. After separating from Malaysia in 1965, Singapore opened its economy to international trade and capital, achieving rapid growth. (Photo by Ken Kobayashi) Free public education helped to encourage social mobility, supporting a doctrine of self-reliance and meritocracy that was the cornerstone philosophy of the PAP's founding father Lee Kuan Yew. "Because I hailed from a poor family, my school fees were waived, and I could apply to borrow free, but used, textbooks," says Tan Ern Ser, associate professor in sociology at the National University of Singapore. "[The government] believes in investing in people through education, housing and health care. It believes that people should be given the opportunity to be educated, to acquire skills and qualifications and be rewarded on the basis of merit, and in turn do well for themselves and be self-reliant." Through homeownership, education and almost full employment, Singapore leapt forward not just in absolute wealth, but in quality of life and aspirational potential. "Singapore has ... become a middle class society," Tan says. The depth and pace of economic progress established the political legitimacy of the PAP for generations. The party has never been out of power. Lee Kuan Yew's son, Lee Hsien Loong, is the current prime minister. The economic model, which began as a mixture of socialist nationalism and paternalistic authoritarianism, before veering toward Thatcherite shareholder capitalism in the 1990s, has been much mythologized by free marketeers and aspiring autocrats worldwide. Prosperous, crime-free, technologically advanced and just about free enough for comfort, the tiny city-state appeared to have found a formula to inoculate itself against the decline and division that seem to characterize other developed economies in the late stages of capitalism. "Everybody thinks it's a perfect economy," says Yeoh Lam Keong, the former chief economist of Singapore's state investment fund GIC. "On the surface, it looks as though people must be looked after." (Photo by Peter Guest) "On the surface of it, [the Singapore economy] looks astonishingly miraculous," says Yeoh Lam Keong, the former chief economist of Singapore's state fund GIC. "Everybody thinks it's a perfect economy. On the surface, it looks as though people must be looked after. But that's on the surface." Yeoh is perhaps an unlikely critic of Singapore's political elite, having spent the majority of his professional life close to the heart of the establishment, stepping down from the GIC in 2011. In an interview with the Nikkei Asian Review, Yeoh, dressed on a Saturday afternoon in a polo shirt and shorts, a faded Make Poverty History wristband dangling on one arm, sought to portray Singapore's challenges -- in his words, "the bogeyman" -- as part of decadal struggles being fought across the globe. Economic malaise and social tensions are engulfing Western democracies, he warns. Democratic socialism is facing off against nationalism, winner-takes-all shareholder capitalism against a more progressive "stakeholder" capitalism, he says, and Singapore, he warns, is far from insulated. "If you stand back and study this, it's a global phenomenon," he says. The roots of Singapore's current problems, Yeoh believes, were planted in the 1990s, when its politics lurched rightward. In line with the prevailing neoliberal thinking, the government moved toward a more market-based approach to the pricing and ownership of HDB flats. Many citizens bought houses, taking advantage of a government scheme that allows citizens to use the savings in their Central Provident Fund -- a compulsory pension scheme -- to do so. Property prices were booming, so in theory this meant that they would have a valuable asset in retirement, which they could sell or borrow against. However, HDB houses are sold as leaseholds, and the leases are ticking down. The value of many older homes has peaked, and their owners face a retirement with a depreciating asset and a diminished pension pot. That means the signature social policy has gone from one of the most successful public housing initiatives of the 20th century, to a liability for some elderly citizens, Yeoh said. "It's a time bomb." Perhaps a more consequential policy decision was made in the belief -- and up to that point, the experience -- that growth would continue to drive social mobility and job creation. "They thought that they wanted to maximize welfare by maximizing growth. They had one huge policy lever, which was immigration," Yeoh says. A state scheme to set up Singaporeans with housing assets is backfiring; thanks to a stagnant market in HDB sales, many elderly homeowners are now, in fact, saddled with liabilities. (Photo by Ken Kobayashi) Between 2000 and 2010, Singapore's immigrant population nearly doubled from 755,000 to 1.3 million, not counting foreign-born citizens given permanent residence status. As of June 2019, Singapore's population was composed of 3.5 million citizens, 530,000 permanent residents and 1.7 million foreign workers, students and dependents. "Relative to the base population, you haven't seen that anywhere else. It's unimaginable. It depressed permanently the wages of all those at the bottom," Yeoh says. Singapore has no statutory minimum wages, and labor unions have little power, so there was nothing to cushion the blow. A generation whose incomes had loosely tracked the country's growth suddenly found it accelerating away from them. "You're earning your adult life in a middle-income country, and you end up having to retire ... in one of the richest developed countries in the world," Yeoh says. "It's like working in the Philippines and retiring in London." Inevitably, this led to social tensions, which have simmered close to the surface for years. Late last year, they boiled over. Rising nativism In October, an Indian-born Singaporean citizen, Ramesh Erramalli, was videoed verbally abusing a security guard at his upscale condo block. Stories of foreigners behaving badly are red meat for Singapore's tabloids, but this clip, in which Erramalli is heard to shout: "I bought your f------ property for S$1.5 million, you know?" went viral. Erramalli's salary, address and phone number were circulated online. A petition was started urging his employer, the investment bank JPMorgan Chase, to fire him, as he became an avatar for Singaporeans' worst view of immigrants -- entitled, overpaid, unwilling to integrate. A few days later, several hundred people gathered in Hong Lim Park, the country's only designated protest spot, to demonstrate against the government's labor policy. It was hardly a mass protest, but in a country that tightly regulates public shows of dissent, it was significant. "People are struggling. They see the foreigners living in a posh condo, while I'm struggling in an HDB, driving Grab," says Gilbert Goh, the protest's organizer. Goh is a fringe political figure, but has built a following on social media, and through his blogs, where, like his analogues in other countries, he purports to speak for the squeezed middle-aged, middle-class and mostly male workers displaced by social change. On stage, he is not a firebrand orator; his delivery style is more reminiscent of a corporate presentation than a political rally. What he mostly talks about is immigration, which he insists is compounding the economic problems faced by average Singaporeans. "It was already tough for people in their 40s and 50s to find a job, but with the influx of foreigners it has made it harder," he says. In an interview with Nikkei he denied being "anti-foreigner" and sought to portray the debate as a purely economic one. However, he drifted unbidden into questions of identity, and raised the specter of unrest. "People like Ramesh [Erramalli] don't help. ... He has citizenship, but we don't view him as one of us," he said. "The sentiment will get worse, I can assure you. ... There's not much collaboration, there's not much integration. I think that will blow up one day. There will be fights." "Call me xenophobic if you like," he said in parting, his tone more melancholy than angry. "I'm used to it." Yeoh interprets this kind of nativism and nationalism, which is on the rise around the world, as a demand for social protection that is not being met within the current political system. "When people hurt ... they go back to their animal way of looking at things, which is totally irrational, primitive, which is what you have in the U.S. and U.K. right now," he says. Yeoh insists that the inevitable impacts of globalization and technological shifts on average people need to be mitigated by governments through social safety nets. Time is running out, and the threats are mounting. "These forces of the gig economy, [artificial intelligence,] technological unemployment, competition from China and India, the breakdown of the global trading system, the disintermediation of manufacturing chains around the world ... the aging of our population -- are going to gradually immiserate the average voter. It's a slow fuse time bomb," he says. "We've got to think: Social protection is the key." Self-reliance Welfare is a hard sell in Singapore, where meritocracy is still a mantra. The country has no unemployment insurance, very limited unemployment benefits or in-work benefits for low wage earners, little state support for pensions. This is partly a function of its early success. As it moved rapidly through the stages of development, people's livelihoods improved enough that welfare was not a consideration. "Singapore, for the first 40 years, never needed robust social safety nets," Donald Low says. "Now that society is a lot more mature, and all the low-hanging fruit in terms of progress up the socioeconomic ladder ... have been harvested. With or without growth, social mobility is going to slow." The government has made some concessions, with support packages for some elderly and poorer Singaporeans, and tighter migration controls. Critics like Low and Keong argue that these are still inadequate, and that the government could afford a lot more. Singapore runs a structural fiscal surplus -- S$2.1 billion in fiscal 2018. Almost uniquely among developed economies, Singapore has the financial firepower to tackle its problems. "We are so parsimonious. We save everything for a rainy day," Yeoh said. "But we need to use that surplus to stave off the bogeyman. ... It's raining like hell." In the coming election, the fragmented opposition has a new figure to rally around: Tan Cheng Bock, a former 26-year veteran of the ruling People's Action Party. (Photo by Peter Guest) Nikkei contacted several government departments seeking comment. None agreed to be interviewed. However, in his New Year's speech, Lee said that the government would look for "practical measures" to deal with households that are struggling. The resistance to deeper change, insiders say, is ideological. Speaking privately to Nikkei, current and former PAP members as well as government employees used the terms "ossified" and "calcified," as they lamented that a system once known for its flexibility and willingness to debate internally has hardened, and is no longer willing to challenge its core ideologies. Reformists have been sidelined, in favor of a more conservative, nostalgic core. "I do think you see signs of atrophy and decay in what has been a highly successful, highly competent, professional, technocratic regime," one said. Another argued that the combination of a state-controlled media and nervous academia, both prone to self-censorship, lead to an illusion of consensus that leaves policymakers "drinking their Kool-Aid" and blind to the concerns of people on the ground. Several pointed with varying degrees of exasperation to a sudden ban on the use of electric scooters on pavements -- commonly used by delivery riders -- in November, which led to protests and accusations that the government was out of touch with working class voters, and no longer listening to them. "To a large extent, Singapore's ability to continue succeeding will be determined by the party's ability to respond and adapt to these demands from dissenting and oppositional voices, which are growing," Low says. The ruling PAP has always made the case that Singapore's economic prosperity and stability are dependent on near-total political control. (Photo by Peter Guest) The PAP has always made the case that economic prosperity and stability are intertwined with the near-total control that it wields politically and socially. The economic model comes with an implicit contract -- that Singaporeans give up a substantial amount of personal liberty in exchange for prosperity and security. While elections are held, the PAP has always cannily used the levers of government to retain power, suppressing political opposition and civil society and using its financial resources to give itself an insurmountable advantage. An election is coming, although when is still not clear. In September 2019, the government formed its Electoral Boundaries Review Committee, which draws up the constituency lines on which the polls will be run. Historically, that has meant an election within six months. The poll has to be held by April 2021. Lee Hsien Loong has said that he will step down before he turns 70 in February 2022, and hand over power to a successor, likely to be Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat. This time, the fragmented opposition has a new figure to rally around. Tan Cheng Bock, a 26-year veteran of the PAP and former member of its executive committee, has formed a new party, the Progress Singapore Party, to contest the election. Having spent so long inside the system, he is realistic about his chances. The PAP will win the next election; the question is by how much. If the opposition can dent the ruling party's lead, it can force a change of course. "It is difficult for us to make really deep inroads into government. But we are content if we can get a sizable number [of votes]." Tan says. "Once we get a foothold, I hope ... we can point out where things can get better." Limited change at the ballot box has happened before. In 2011, in the aftermath of the 2009 recession and with mounting discontent over the PAP's population policy, there was an unprecedented swing away from the ruling party, which won 60% of the votes -- although that still translated to 93% of the available seats in parliament. The result led to a degree of introspection inside the government. Unpopular policies, including immigration policy, were revised. Activists said that civic space for public conversations opened slightly. "There was a kind of flourishing of dissenting views," says Jolovan Wham, a prominent social activist. "That was very short-lived." In recent months, independent news outlets, opposition politicians and activists, including Wham, have been hit with a variety of criminal and civil charges. In 2019, the government gave itself sweeping new powers to limit "fake news" with the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act, which allows ministers to demand corrections or takedowns of stories that they deem to be "false or misleading." The act has now been used a handful of times, mainly against social media posts by opposition figures, and mainly on areas identified as vulnerabilities: migration, education, and the running of the state-owned funds. The prime minister's wife, Ho Ching, is the CEO and executive director of state investment fund Temasek Holdings. Her compensation is not disclosed. In one case, which is currently going through an appeal in the courts, the Singapore Democratic Party was accused of misrepresenting statistics on PMET unemployment. This closing of the political space is concerning for those advocating for a rethink of the government's role in the economy. "There's a lot of self-affirmation," Yeoh Lam Keong says. "And because [the government] mistake criticism for dissent, they muzzle it. That's why it took them 20 years to change their immigration policy. If you're improving at that rate, it's not fast enough for the bogeyman. The bogeyman is coming." Source

CB fucked up

Or diamond

Shame on Shabellin and Citiklan

no la they will just keep asking US for help Taiwan Relations Act ftw!!!

anyway applying for muay thai instructor jod naooooooooooooooooo

this one confirm watch too much massage beedios

that is hard to digest lol

Making friends naoooooooooooo

I use ezviz from taobao, $200+ Battery is long about 1mth+, resolution is decent Motion detection, set to take pic or record up to 15s

Ordering Japanese parcel naoooooo

Lemme pull the thread out and check

Sell to btss