Sunday, January 17, 2010
Rising Xenophobia in Singapore?
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Of hawkers, whining and foreign talent
I had noticed a bunch of hawkers grouped together at a table, and gossiping. Although I cannot say I heard their words, but through their gestures and glances, I quickly began to realize that it was directed at their more successful neighbour - Botak Jones.
Before we begin, let me give some background on this outfit Botak Jones (BJ). It started off as one outlet in Tuas, or so I heard from my brother's friend (should be accurate). That one is reputed to serve the best BJ food. The other outlets, I heard, cannot compare, somehowthe original is still best. (I've had the chance to dine at the Clementi outlet - the Cajun Chicken is not bad - but this post is not about food.) I think the idea of this BJ chain is to serve great Western food at "affordable" prices. Their prices are not hawker standard, but again, this post is not about food prices or quality. BJ has quite successfully infiltrated the coffeeshops they set up at, as evidenced by the crowds that throng these eateries AFTER they set up shop there. And it must be mentioned that most of these people eat from the BJ shop rather than the other hawkers.
---------
Now, picture this situation. You're an old-time hawker, having seen the setting up of this coffeeshop when it was still a venture between two old and balding men, rather than big coffeshop chains like S11 or Kopitiam. Now, the coffeeshop's revamped by one of these big coffeeshop chains, and then they bring in Botak Jones.
You laugh, thinking it must be one those ambitious entrepreneurships trying to make it big. Just another one of them, doomed to failure within... 3 months, you calculate with your fingertips. Then you go about your business, selling fishball noodles. You steal another glance at the stall, and get stumped. WOAH, is that $7.60 for a set of fish and chips? IN A COFFEESHOP!? Hahahaha... you recalculate with your fingertips, this time, you estimate that they will pack up and go within one and a half months. Nobody with half a brain would choose to eat there, after all people come to coffeeshops for CHEAP food. And of course, your fishball noodles has been the traditional crowd-puller. You go back to cooking food for that nasty customer who's yelling away. Secretly you wish to slap that guy's face, and when he shouts again, you tell him to "go eat at Botak Jones lah! Don't come back! Don't need your business!"
Within 1 month, your business is down 30% (no, it's nothing to do with that previous incident). The crowds prefer to eat at BJ, somehow. You begin fretting, but then you've seen many new shops open and suffered temporary loss of business before the novelty factor wore off and the new hawkers began to pack up and leave for a "better location". So this must be another trying period for you, but it's going to pass. No worries.
The next month, your business nosedives to 50% of the pre-BJ era. Now you start worrying. Weren't they supposed to ship out after one and a half months? And now they're not just going strong, they're growing stronger! The novelty factor is supposed to last all of a month only, wasn't it?
3 months since, your business remains dismal. Lunch hour comes and goes, it used to be hell for you, but now you're sitting at a table, shooing houseflies from your leftover ingredients from last week. Shit.
4 months pass. You start to get really angry about this BJ outlet. You secretly harbour thoughts of razing their stall to the ground, but of course you're more rational than that. You bitch about them to the next stall owner. "Look at them, they think they're so great cos they sell Western food. Please lah, Singaporeans where got so stupid like to eat Western food one. They still prefer the traditional food like laksa and chicken rice mah. How come all our business like that? Must be that stupid Botak Jones lah. Come and ji siao."
---------
I can imagine that was what happened. Anyway I believe it's been more than four months since BJ set up in my area, and a lot of these old time hawkers are getting really frustrated with them for snatching otherwise what would have been their business.
But from a neutral standpoint, I should say the increased business at the coffeeshop was in no small part due to BJ. And I shall use this example as part of bigger concepts - the foreign talent policy (see my previous article on the same topic) and the typical Singapore mindset to whine and complain (I'll talk about both in simultaneity.)
BJ can be seen as the foreign talent imported by say, Kopitiam, to improve their business. After all we know that Kopitiam is a business outfit driven by profit, and the way it functions is not unlike our government, who operates Singapore Inc. in a similar fashion. So of course, somehow, by means of some magical formulae or pure luck, Kopitiam hit on their jackpot, more people eat at the coffeeshop and handsome returns come flushing into their coffers. Very similar to Singapore Inc.'s reliance on foreign talents who create jobs for our locals and at the same time getting our own national coffers flushed with surpluses.
But see, the other hawkers are not happy. Yes, more people eat at the coffeeshop, but the influx of the new customers go to BJ! They don't really notice that they have new customers coming to their stalls too, because now their old customers eat at BJ (the stall which disgusts them to no end not least cos of their huge servings of fries which always seem to be unfinished.) Their business is down, but instead of seeking to innovate, how to improve themselves, they just sit around, mope, gripe and reminisce about the pre-foreign talent era.
One hawker recently came up to my friends and me one day and whilst serving me my food, started to gripe to us about Botak Jones! He asked my friends sarcastically if they were getting food from BJ. One of them was, and he said so. Then the hawker went on to tell us a long story, about how he'd been there for a long time, that BJ was unhealthy, that the waiting times for their food was unreasonable, that the prices were crazy. By comparison, his fish bee hoon was the healthier choice (bah!), cheaper, and in the time my friend was going to get his western food serving, I was going to finish my bowl of noodles, walk one big round around the neighbourhood, and then come back to see... that my friend hadn't gotten his food yet (yes the hawker said all of that.) It wasn't like he knew or could reasonably expect my friend to drop his BJ order and immediately order from him, but he said it anyway. Kept coming back to make snide remarks, and, brought up by our parents NOT to be rude to the older generation, we could only nod and smile in silence, and pray that he would get the hint we were not interested in hearing him talk.
Yes, I know, I'm still young. I might not know as much about what goes on in the working world yet, cos I haven't started working. I would be the first to admit too, that I've had a very sheltered environment, being in all the, for lack of a better phrase, non-neighbourhood schools. But I make an effort to mix around with the neighbourhood school people, and I do not find that a chore. In fact, my life revolves about people and making friends. I do not see the people who did not go to elite schools as inferior. In fact, I'd say most are much better than me in EQ and people relationships when I was younger, especially when I was in secondary school and did not mix around much. So please, I do not see myself as part of the elite, nor am I elitist. (This paragraph is to pre-empt people who might offer dumb comments about me - please do not get personal.)
I think whining and complaining are both things which come naturally to us. It in itself is fine. I engage in whining too. But to rely on the government for everything and anything is becoming a chilling prelude to where our future is headed. I believe, as do many of my European friends that the Singapore CPF system is one of the best systems in the world. You reap what you sow, what is so wrong with that? If you choose to give private tuition, or set up your own business, and in both circumstances not contribute to CPF, then it's your choice too, and it's your fault if anything goes wrong later on, right? True, the government should provide some sort of social security, but too much of it provides for a crutch mentality in all Singaporeans.
I forget when the cash handouts started, prolly when GST was first introduced in Singapore, but since then we've almost begun to take it like a given. There're so many of these schemes that I've forgotten all their names, I just remember that the government's giving me money and that I've a bonus over my female counterparts cos I've done NS and they haven't. When the government started giving out cash handouts to ALL Singaporeans, they might not have anticipated the turn in tide of public thinking. It was all cosy in the beginning of course. Everyone appreciates spare cash.
But soon enough, the Government got so caught up with this that they conveniently ignored the fact that they did NOT want Singaporeans to rely on the Government! But slowly and gradually, it became such. You laugh, you think it's nonsensical, but you judge for yourself when you look at the deluge of extremely humourous articles in the Humour section of our
A ST forum article, which happened to be the centrepiece for Piper's article about a father writing in to gripe his daughter's inability to get into a local university despite her grades - A, B, E, made for good lunchtime fodder. A and B aside, what about the E she got? And I think it made perfect sense to read the fineprint in the university handbook that was given to most aspiring undergrads who bothered to turn up at the annual Open House - that meeting the minimum criteria would NOT guarantee admission into the university. I do not think an open admission policy would be in the sights of NUS/NTU/SMU, who are all so caught up with the rankings in the international arena that the last thing they need is a perceived drop in standards of entrance criteria and correspondingly the university's "exclusivity" and reputation. With UNSW Asia's pullout of Singapore, and other foreign institutions' unwillingness to move in as yet, Mr See's daughter would have to try her luck elsewhere.
Maybe in some part due to Singaporeans nowadays being better educated and as such being more vocal, they start to articulate issues which might have been their own personal grudges last time. True, See Jr's grades of A, B, E and a C for GP are reasonably good, but it's not like they're terribly good that a university would be damned not to accept her. Blame it on luck, blame it on herself. By no means the system is perfect, the net might not have been woven tight enough to catch all the capable people and not let anyone fall through. Whining, if done correctly, can cause the system to improve, but the truth hurts - not many people engage in constructive whining.
Wang Hongjun, in his letter to the ST Forum, laments the participation of our youth in their own business. In his letter, aptly titled "Why are students not writing in themselves?", he claims he is surprised to see parents writing in for their children when the matters at hand are clearly the problems of the children. Add that to the fact that these very children we speak of are not primary school going age, but rather aspiring to go to the university! Have their linguistic ability failed them? Or are they used to having their parents write parents' letters for them in primary, secondary school and even junior college? Stressed Teacher wrote about this topic before - a very interesting phenomenon indeed, although by no means new.
My whole point here is that, many Singaporeans have become sucked into a vacuum of mollycuddling by the government. We need to get out of this vicious cycle and once again learn to stand on our own two feet.
P.S.: I'm not sure if hawkers can opt to sell anything they want or change the food they cook (if they don't have that liberty, then maybe the fault's not really theirs), especially in the setting of a coffeeshop. But then they could ask for a switch? Or somehow improve their cooking, come up with other gimmicks, team up with other hawkers, come up with discount schemes? I dunno, but many of them are the older generation, haven't had the benefit of a tertiary marketing education. Tough luck.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Singapore, Forever a Migrant City?
As I commented in the Young PAP blog (reference the link above, please) on EOC's post, our country has made good on its progress and has attained first-world status. Now after our basic physiological needs have been met, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs actually suggests that we might have moved on to the next level, and what's that? Yes, safety. What safety? I quote excerpts from Wikipedia: of body, of EMPLOYMENT, [...] of health and property.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs - every business student knows this by heart. (Disclaimer: I am NOT from Business.)
Which brings me to...
The Foreign Talent policy. Sweet. Don't we all have a love-hate relationship with it?
No, actually I know of people who only love it. Our leaders. Don't they? They only proclaim the positives of this policy, and conveniently sidestep the problems that this policy can bring about.
Business students anywhere and everywhere would know, that globalization and diversity are inevitable in this era, and our government has so cleverly tweaked immigration and work policies to make it easier for an inflow of, what we now know as, foreign talent. Yes yes yes, of course, Singapore only has one resource, foreign talent. Oops, I actually mean Singaporeans, our human resource. And now that resource is unhappy that it is being used, but not given remuneration commensurate with the amount of time spent studying, or serving National Service, or the number of upgrading workshops they have attended. So they leave. And get labels like traitor, quitter and the like.
So that's how our government leaders are worthy of their salaries. They invent names! They do not squirrel down to the root of the problem, but think they can hold people back by publishing their faces in our very own well-loved and widely-circulated Shit Times. Oooh, dangerous territory I am wading into.
So as to protect myself, I would like to have you and the whole world know, I agree with many policies that PAP has made, I am happy with how the country has been run so far, but that does not necessarily preclude me from speaking up about those policies which are quite clearly disadvantaging Singaporean citizens now, and well into the future.
Whilst I am NOT a low wage-earner (or maybe, who knows), nor someone who is not internationally mobile (after being endowed with a world-class education from 18th-in-the-world NUS, yayness!), I feel for these categories of people. Nowadays, I go out and I try to spot the old men and women who are picking up cans from the streets, from the rubbish bins, the dishevelled old man who sits by the wall begging for money, the cleaners! (OMG this should really be another post.) The cleaners in the food courts, or the hawker centres, or the coffeeshops are more likely than not to be our senior citizens, 65 or older, supposed to be enjoying their twilight years. Hey they could be your grandmas or grandpas for all you know.
OK, I shall not deal with the topic that these elderly folk should be resting at home, playing chess at the void deck with their friends or jetting off to see the world, but now I shall more pertinent to the point. Have you guys noticed a paradigm shift? Now what did I just say earlier? Did you spot something wrong? Were you sharp enough? I specifically point you to this statement. "The cleaners in the food courts, or the hawker centres, or the coffeeshops are more likely than not to be OUR senior citizens..." Anything wrong?
No, wrong. That was in the past. Now, the cleaner cleaning your table is likely to be a "foreign talent" - many from India/Bangladesh/Timbuktoo, and more recently, more from China. OMG really, you surely need talent to clean a table! Then the not-so-talented elderly folk have no money to retire, no job to work and a rather supportive government providing them with $290 per month. Wait, that's just slightly more than my monthly pocket money - $200 - and I did not have to pay for my transport fees, or utility bills. I only had to pay for my school lunches. And guess what, $200 was just about enough for me. So pray tell, does the government need anymore proof that $290 per month is not enough? Darn, I strayed from my main topic again!
Rehashing Nicholas Lazarus's point (read his comments from EOC's post), the locals should not suffer because of replacement by cheaper substitutes. The government says, upgrade lah! Eh, upgrade to what? What other skills does a cleaner need to have besides being able to clean stuff? Oh yeah, maybe being able to paint walls, use Microsoft Word, and being fluent in 3 other languages besides English and Mandarin might help you to snare the cleaner position. Then other problems remain, what about those who are not academically inclined? I mean, they couldn't do well in school that's why they ended up in menial jobs in the first place, right? Correct me if I'm wrong.
All in all, my point is, Singapore has to develop into a more compassionate society. If foreign rubbish is going to balloon our population to 6.5 million, then I can say with confidence (and maybe a little flourish) that I will be saying bye bye Singapore! And then after leaving Singapore, "YES, NO MORE RESERVIST!" I do not want to see the little red dot we love so much turn into a huge rubbish dump.
You see, at the end of the day, I am still proud to say I am Singaporean. What about the foreigners?