[Bigiron]

Bullshit in Grace Fu says Singaporeans will end up paying for opposition’s GST promises; Sylvia Lim hails current WP batch as most promising: Singapore live news
https://sg.news.yahoo.com/live/singapore...19625.html


The article you referenced reports statements from Singapore's ruling party (PAP) and opposition (Workers' Party) politicians. Here are some potential points of contention or "bullshit" claims, depending on perspective:

### 1. **Grace Fu’s Claim: "Singaporeans will end up paying for opposition’s GST promises"**
   - **Why it’s questionable**:  
     - **Misrepresentation of Opposition Policy**: The Workers' Party (WP) has never advocated for abolishing GST without alternative revenue streams. They’ve called for more progressive taxation (e.g., wealth taxes, higher corporate taxes) instead of regressive GST hikes. Fu’s framing implies fiscal irresponsibility by the opposition without evidence.  
     - **Fearmongering**: The PAP often frames opposition proposals as economically disastrous, ignoring that many developed nations fund social services without relying heavily on GST/VAT. Singapore’s fiscal policy choices are political, not inevitabilities.  
     - **Hypocrisy**: The PAP raised GST to 9% in 2023 despite record budget surpluses and massive reserves, claiming it was "necessary." The opposition’s critique of this move is dismissed without addressing why alternatives weren’t considered.

### 2. **Sylvia Lim’s Claim: Current WP Batch is "Most Promising"**
   - **Why it’s questionable**:  
     - **Subjective Praise**: This is political rhetoric with no measurable criteria. Every generation of politicians could be called "most promising" to rally support.  
     - **Lack of Concrete Achievements**: While WP has grown its presence in Parliament, its policy influence remains limited due to PAP’s supermajority. Calling them "most promising" may overstate their impact without tangible legislative wins.  
     - **Internal Bias**: As WP chair, Lim’s endorsement is expected but not neutral. It’s akin to PAP leaders calling their team "the best."

### 3. **Unstated Bullshit: Framing of the Debate**
   - The article itself may perpetuate bias by:  
     - **False Equivalence**: Presenting Fu’s attack on WP and Lim’s praise as balanced "news," when one is a critique of policy and the other is internal morale-boosting.  
     - **Ignoring Context**: Not questioning PAP’s insistence on GST hikes despite Singapore’s $1.3 trillion reserves (per Temasek’s portfolio) or why wealth taxes aren’t prioritized.  
     - **Normalizing PAP Narratives**: Fu’s statement assumes GST is the only viable option, which is ideologically driven, not economically proven.

### 4. **Omissions in the Debate**
   - **Alternatives to GST**: Neither the article nor Fu’s comments seriously engage with WP’s proposals for capital gains taxes, higher top-tier income taxes, or drawing slightly more from reserves.  
   - **PAP’s Fiscal Conservatism**: The PAP’s resistance to wealth redistribution is ideological, not a fiscal necessity. Singapore could afford to delay GST hikes or fund subsidies differently.  
   - **Public Sentiment**: Surveys show widespread public dissatisfaction with GST hikes, but this is often dismissed as "populism" rather than debated substantively.

### 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧
𝐓𝐡𝐞 "𝐛𝐮𝐥𝐥𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐭" 𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧:  
𝟏. **𝐏𝐀𝐏’𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐰𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠** 𝐨𝐟 𝐨𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐬.  
𝟐. **𝐔𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠** 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐜 𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭.  
𝟑. **𝐈𝐠𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐜 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞𝐬** (𝐞.𝐠., 𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐨𝐩𝐚𝐪𝐮𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭) 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐩
𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬.

[Ola]

We are VERY sure 100% already paid for your mistakes

the NAC Dustbin, Toilet Upgrading, overpayment of $13 Million . . .