That’s the way to go. Other states should learn financial discipline – it stems from moral discipline. See 3 milestones in Penang. Facts & figures don’t lie.

1. On Investments: Penang’s total investment for Penang has surged from RM 1.53 billion for the first 6 months of the year to RM2.25 billion as at July 2010. In other words, for the month of July alone, there was an increase of RM716 million of investment or an increase of nearly 50% in one month as compared to the total investments for the first 6 months of the year. Penang’s performance for the first 7 months until July 2010 of RM2.25 billion is higher than the RM2.17 billion achieved for the whole of 2009.

2. Local Councils (Penang Island and Seberang Perai) – By renegotiating with the contractor to reduce the cost of transporting solid waste within the state these councils have saved RM33 million by way of reclaim of surcharge payment to the contractor.

3. Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai (MPSP) was ailing financially prior to LGE’s takeover in 2008. Per MPSP’s finances, the figures in bracket ( ) show deficit which turned around in 2008 –

MPSP Surplus/(Deficit)
2000 – (RM5.1 million)
2001 – (RM31.2 million)
2002 – (RM36.7 million)
2003 – (RM39.0 million)
2004 – (RM48.9 million)
2005 – (RM57.1 million)
2006 – (RM5.4 million)
2007 – (RM5.1 million)
2008 – RM3.0 million
2009 – RM14.6 million
2010 – RM54.39 million (as at 4 October 2010).

///which ruling government in this country would the Singapore government prefer?/// #13

If’s it’s a choice strictly between (A). stupid, corrupt and incompetent current government versus (B). a new govt with whom S’pore has not had past dealings before, S’pore Govt policy position is probably pretty neutral and indifferent.
Business-wise what counts is S’pore has Money to take the deals – and the Talent to evaluate if the deals are worth going into.
A govt whether stupid, corrupt and incompetent or the opposite would still need S’pore’s money to invest.

From political stability versus upheaval point of view S’pore is more worried not so much of the effects of neighbouring govt’s incompetence or corruption but its institutional racism and the kind of events like May 13 that have spill over effects.
Wikileaks: – “Situation in Malaysia is confused and dangerous… fuelled by distinct possibility of racial conflict” which could see ethnic Chinese “flee” Malaysia and “overwhelm” Singapore….
From that security perspective S’pore is unlikely -all things being equal- to prefer (A) over (B).

///?Be prepared to scarify something when people perception or belief might not able to accept it/// – #12.

That’s OK. It is customary human nature that when people & believes cannot accept something, they will use their brains to rationalize that something in another way to suit their beliefs, hopes and desires, and, in so doing maintain their emotional equilibrium. The psychologist will call these responses “Defence Mechanisms”, two of which are denial and rationalization.
It is called “rationalization” not because the mental process to reason things -as part of this rationalisation to suit one’s desires beliefs and hopes – is inherently rational and logical. Rather it is called so because the process involves trying to make rational and justify logically (often on most selective argumnts & assumptions) something to meet the ends of consistency with one’s beliefs desires and hopes than consistency with the probable Truth of any issue. This is because to most people whilst Truth is always important, it however will still have to take Second Place to their own emotional equilibrium and happiness in a conflict situation!

Re #15, Singapore has (a) money to buy (I cost of supply were issue) (b) desalination plants meeting 10% of needs (b) expanded no. of reservoirs, (c) wayer re-use – Newwater and if all (a) to (c) not enough in times of supply cut off threatening survival, then an efficient organization of forces-in-being to try take over neighbour’s catchment areas.

WikiLeaks should be taken for what it is: a disclosure of government leaders/officials’views and assessments intended confidential but somehow exposed, whether one agrees or not depending on one’s view of the credibility of the parson saying it.

Like for example Godfather thinks I am an “implant from our neighbour, or perhaps a member of the Singapore SB” #20 though on other earlier occasions when I said something about not so rosy livelihood of Singaporeans in spite of their high per capita GDP he might say I had something against S’pore!

But that’s OK because people are entitled to whatever they want to believe, and their situational opinion, depending on their bent/tilt of mind.

That’s the way it should be taken when we hear of what was said and assessed by world leaders/officials of one another in WikiLeaks.
Wikileaks promote transparency to go behind these confidential exchanges. No one says that the opinions expressed are necessarily true or false – just the fact that they are expressed by such and such a person is true!

Whether what that govt leader says is true or not we’ll never know because we have no information of his intelligence sources, in the absence of which, we can only surmise based on our perception of that person’s general integrity of views and opinions and intellectual ability to process information given to him.

LKY’s opinion was probably expressed well before WikiLeaks hacked Pentagon’s encrypted codes and whistle blew. It was an opinon/private assessment expressed under conditions of strict confidentality. It was not intended to be disclosed to the world at large; certainly it was not expressed for Malaysian voters/electorate for the conspiracy theory to be credible. And if the conspiracy theory were credible, the S’pore official opinons will not, in neutral way, make reference to just not ‘incompetent’ leaders but the other broadside on “Altantuya” by S’pore senior foreign official Kausikan (in WikiLeaks) as reported in The Malaysian Insider by Debra Chong 12th Dec under caption “PM mum on WikiLeaks expose” that I earlier mentioned for your reference.

Thanks Wang Yen, re your comments which, as always, contribute to objectivity in public discourse here.

Besides length, sometimes certain words automatically trigger the moderation. Its an automatic mechanism that operates relying on human agency to later lift the moderation, which may take short or long time and sometimes never, lost in cyberspace. Perhaps you can re-try, change a few words, rearrange format whilst retaining content and re-post.