This is my Prime Minister

Avatar

Murali

Murali did his undergraduate degree in molecular biology with a minor in biophysics from the National University of Singapore (NUS). He then changed direction and did his Masters in Philosophy also at NUS. Now, he is currently pursuing a PhD in Philosophy at the University of Warwick.

Related Post Roulette

15 Responses

  1. Avatar Lief
    Ignored
    says:

    Sure, I’d vote for him. What I like best in that statement is the section called “Aging with Dignity.” Anybody looking out for the interests of the elderly seems to have a special concern for my future welfare (as a future old person) that I like a lot. Plus I can’t help but laugh at the phrase “silver tsunami.”Report

  2. Avatar Mad Rocket Scientist
    Ignored
    says:

    I might vote for him.Report

  3. Avatar Jason Kuznicki
    Ignored
    says:

    The first few lines made me want to throw up. Should I keep reading?Report

    • Avatar Murali in reply to Jason Kuznicki
      Ignored
      says:

      What? Why? Lots of the stuff in the beginning is pretty anodyne standard preamble.Just which part of it made you want to throw up?
      And there is some really good stuff in the middle.Report

      • Avatar Jason Kuznicki in reply to Murali
        Ignored
        says:

        This bit, to be specific:

        …his Government’s vision to give every dreaming child, every anxious parent, every elderly person, a better tomorrow.

        Blech.Report

        • Avatar Tod Kelly in reply to Jason Kuznicki
          Ignored
          says:

          Still, if he’s running against the guy who’s promising to give everyone a shittier tomorrow this might just give him a leg up.Report

        • Avatar North in reply to Jason Kuznicki
          Ignored
          says:

          Meh would politicians lard their communiques with such gibberish in any conceivable governing system, always have always will.Report

        • Avatar Murali in reply to Jason Kuznicki
          Ignored
          says:

          Also, he did not specifically say that, that was the editor’s introduction.Report

        • Avatar James Hanley in reply to Jason Kuznicki
          Ignored
          says:

          I suspect I wouldn’t.

          I see lots of things that bother me, such as his emphasis on government-provided housing and his claim that Singapore can’t afford either “low key” government or any gridlock, which sounds like a call for a very activist government that brooks no dissent.

          What I don’t see, beyond the laudable emphasis on investing in education, is a clear plan for keeping Singapore economically important to the rest of the world. It’s too small to be self-sustaining at the level of wealth it has developed, but what’s to keep future developments in other countries from causing it to be passed by?

          I see lots of boilerplate, pretty much what we’d get from an American politician. Of course I wouldn’t expect much different from his opponent, unless he were running against one of those Republicans who is arguing against an inclusive society, so he might be able to sway my vote on the grounds of, “at least this one ain’t a lunatic.”Report

          • Avatar Murali in reply to James Hanley
            Ignored
            says:

            afford either “low key” government or any gridlock, which sounds like a call for a very activist government that brooks no dissent

            at first I thought so too, but it seems that by low key, the sense I am getting is that he is referring to mediocre politicians (but that may be wishful thinking on my part).

            Gridlock, on the other hand is antithetical to good governance. Libertarians shouldnt want gridlock because gridlock, or the significant threat thereof results in inefficient spending. i.e. while a libertarian could mount a reasonable critique of any government spending (even the possibly efficient and potentially useful ones) not just libertarians, but everyone should hate inefficient spending. Pork-barrel spending is a direct result of trying to buy up votes so as to break grid-lock. It may sound self seving for a politician to say it, but it is still true.

            see lots of boilerplate, pretty much what we’d get from an American politician

            You dont see american politicianstwlling the electorate that:

            1. Government cannot do everything by itself, and that people need to step up to form their own private charities in order to help eachother. Democrats dont say anything like that, Republicans if they mention charities at all say that charities are sufficient to take care of it. They dont actually tell people to go take care of it themselves and stop looking to the state for solutions.

            2. Tightening immigration restrictions will slow down economic growth and they shouldnt be so xenophobic

            3. Admit that economic growth may slow down because of policy measures implemented.

            There is boilerplate, but there is also a level of honesty that american politicians just dont exhibit.Report

          • Avatar Murali in reply to James Hanley
            Ignored
            says:

            from his opponent, unless he were running against one of those Republicans who is arguing against an inclusive society, so he might be able to sway my vote on the grounds of, “at least this one ain’t a lunatic.”

            The dominant opposition is the workers’ party which is anti immigrant and anti market.Report

  4. Avatar North
    Ignored
    says:

    I’m sorry, don’t have enough info to hazard an opinion.Report

  5. Avatar Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    How can I answer this question without a picture of the guy?Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *