Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Why I Love Math - Bra & Tits

If you have a son who is having trouble in math at school, you need to find a way to motivate him.

This is how.

You need to tell him about this thing called Bra. You need to tell him for the rest of his life he will be chasing for the thing in that picture below. So the sooner he learns something about it, the better. Don't concentrate on the bra, it's the things inside.

Well, that's a bikini top but I like her tits. So sue me you fucking moron.


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
brassiere (pronounced UK: /ˈbræzɪər/US: /brəˈzɪər/; commonly referred to as a bra /ˈbrɑː/) is an article of clothing that covers, supports, and elevates the breasts. Since the late 19th century, it has replaced the corsetas the most widely accepted method for supporting breasts.
Female-bodied individuals wear bras for a variety of purposes: for support, to improve the shape of breasts, to reduce or to enlarge the perceived breast size, to restrain breast movement during an activity such as exercise, to enhance their cleavage or to facilitate nursing. Most bras are designed to be form-fitting and to lift the breasts off the chest wall if they sag and to restrain their movement. Bra designers strive to produce a garment that is both functional and aesthetically pleasing.
For some people, the bra has become a garment with erotic significance and a feminine icon or symbol with political and cultural significance beyond its primary function. Some feminists consider the brassiere a symbol of the repression of women's bodies.[1] Culturally, when a young girl gets her first bra, it may be symbolic of hercoming of age.[2]


What then does math gotta do with it????

Calculating cup volume
One of the principal functions of a bra is to elevate and "support" the breasts, that is, to raise them from their normal position lying against the chest wall. This is considered the defining characteristic of the bra: supporting the weight from the back and shoulders, as opposed to lift solely from below (as corsets do).[1] Over-reliance on the shoulder straps for support can lead to poor posture, back pain and neck pain due to pinched nerves. In a well-fitted bra, 80% of the breast weight is supported by the chest band, something which is particularly important to those with larger breasts.[16]

The average breast weighs about 0.5 kilograms (1.1 lb).[23] Each breast contributes to about 4-5% of the body fat and thus 1% of the total body weight of an average female-bodied person.
The major engineering weakness of the bra, particularly if poorly fitted, is that it acts as a pulley, transferring the weight of the breasts from the lower chest wall to higher structures such as the back, shoulder, neck, and head. This can result in pain and injury in those structures, especially for those with pendulous breasts.[24]
The density of all fatty tissue is more or less constant for all women but the volume of the breasts can vary. Bra designers can calculate the volume of a brassiere cup in several ways depending on the shape of the breast. If the breast is round and essentially the shape of a half-sphere, its volume V may be estimated as [21]

V={2 \pi r^3 \over 3}={2.0944 \times r^3}={0.2618 \times D^3}

where D is the diameter of the sphere, and r is its radius.
If the breast is shaped more like a cone, the designer might use a formula like the following:[21]

V={0.2618 \times D_b^2 \times h}

where Db equals diameter of the cone's base and h equals the height of the cone. Other formulas can be derived as needed to design bras for differently shaped breasts.
The chest band and cups should provide support for most of the weight of the breasts, rather than the shoulder straps. Over-reliance on the straps for support can result in health problems for the wearer. In most bras the straps are adjustable by sliding fasteners, and are usually made of a stretchable material such as spandex.

Now tell him he needs to ace all his math classes or he is not allowed to touch any tits for the rest of his fucking life.

Eeeeww, Sperm in Asshole

[Gee, I did not know that. Then again I've never been butt-fucked before...] - Hum Yee

Semen can remain in rectum for 72 hours, court told

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 22 — A Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) surgeon who examined Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan claimed today that seminal fluids can remain in a person’s rectum up to 72 hours after being sodomised.

“When a person ejaculates into the anus, how long would the fluids remain in anus area before it trickles down?” asked lead prosecutor Datuk Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.

“About 72 hours,” was the answer given by the bespectacled doctor.

Saiful had alleged that he was sodomised by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on June 26, 2008. He went to HKL for a check on June 28, less than 72 hours after he alleged that he had been sodomised.

Dr Razali Ibrahim told the court he inspected Saiful’s anus 54 hours after the alleged act took place.
However, the doctor maintained that upon examination he found that Saiful’s rectum was empty despite the fact that Saiful had complained that he had not defecated since he was sodomised.

Dr Razali said that the likelihood of seminal fluids remaining in the rectum depended on a person’s anal functions, or when a “mass movement” occurs.

“In some cases, you can still get samples within the 72 hours as the anal canal is not straight,” said the doctor.
The general surgeon also said it was still possible for a person to pass motion and still retrieve seminal fluids from the rectum, as some samples may remain “stuck” there.

This was refuted by Anwar’s defence team, when Sankara Nair asked Dr Razali whether he had the right authority to make such a statement.

The doctor then agreed with Sankara, saying that it was based on his “readings” but he could not recall which documents he had referred which led him to make the conclusion.

“When I did the examination, I did not know what to expect or whether I would find any samples,” said Dr Razali.

He also maintained that Saiful’s rectum was faeces-free, refuting suggestions by the defence that Saiful’s rectum could not be empty if he had not defecated for two days.

“It is not necessary there be faeces in the rectum area... I agree, at that time when I examined Saiful, there was no faeces,” said the doctor.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

Trojan Horse???

[I always wondered if Zaid was a trojan horse. I think Anwar took him in way too soon.] - Hum Yee

Anwar says Zaid free to go

UPDATED @ 03:20:47 18-11-2010

Anwar said PKR had already accommodated Zaid’s requests in several instances. — Reuters pic
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 18 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said today that Datuk Zaid Ibrahim was free to leave PKR, pointing out that the party had given the former minister many chances and special treatment.

Speaking to reporters in Permatang Pauh, Penang here this morning, Anwar said PKR had on many occasions accommodated Zaid’s wishes, adding that the latter had asked to become a PKR member following his sacking from Umno in 2008.

“He also asked to be candidate for Hulu Selangor (parliamentary by-election) although it was rejected by the division and they raised their objections to the president.

“But we gave him a chance, and when he lost in Hulu Selangor, we gave him a chance to lead the Federal Territories PKR,” said Anwar.

Zaid confirmed this week that he would quit PKR and was expected to make a formal announcement tomorrow.

Last week, the maverick politician dropped out of the party’s deputy presidential race, after claiming irregularities and manipulation in favour of rival Azmin Ali.

Zaid had said he wanted to quit PKR because of the increasing personal attacks by some party members against him.

Accusing PKR leaders of being “liars” and “cheats”, Zaid added that he was “sick of the sick leaders” within the party.

He has become increasingly critical of the party leadership in recent weeks, going as far as asking Anwar, the party’s de facto leader, and Azmin to quit their posts for the sake of the party.

Anwar also clarified today that Zaid had not been appointed Pakatan Rakyat (PR) co-ordinator, suggesting that his departure from PKR would have no bearing on the coalition.

“I usually chaired all the Pakatan meetings and to my knowledge, he was never appointed the co-ordinator,” said Anwar.

Zaid’s move to leave PKR is likely to see him lose most of his allies from PR parties and his options to stay relevant in Malaysian politics appear limited, mostly because of his failure to mobilise new supporters.

When Zaid joined PKR, he was labelled a successor to de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and the only other person capable of keeping the PR coalition and its leaders of different ideologies intact.

He was appointed to the party’s political bureau and once enjoyed the support of many of the PKR supreme council members because of his willingness to resign from the Cabinet to protest the ISA arrest of Selangor executive councillor Teresa Kok, blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin and journalist Tan Hoon Cheng.

Zaid however began to lose popularity when he decided to go on leave from the political bureau amid a power tussle in the Sabah PKR leadership.

He was also tasked with drafting the PR Common Policy Framework launched last December.

Goondu Salesman

Yesterday I went to Challenger in Funan IT Mall.

Looking to find a display monitor for my laptop, I walked over to section 4.

A salesman walked over to and pointed at a Samsung 23" and said to me: "That's HD, very good resolution." Well, I can see that. There's a sticker on the monitor that says "HD".  I'm always amazed how salesmen on retail floor will give you information that's obvious from the display itself. Did he not know that I can read?

Then I asked him: "what sort of cable that comes with the display?" He checked the back of the monitor and pointed at the VGA cable and said "this one."

I asked: "what about DVI?". "No, just this one." "Are you sure?" I said. He walked away, presumably to ask his colleague. I called out as he was walking away: "Have you seen the inside of the box before?"

He never came back.

Then I browse further. Another salesmen came forward. Young, local, and full of confidence. "Can I help you?" he said.

Pointing toward a Viewsonic, I said: "Does this one comes with DVI cable?" [I know it does. Every monitor comes with one."

Hesitant, he said: "I'm not sure. Why don't you take the Samsung?"

"So, what you're saying is that, as a consumer, I should pick another brand of monitor simply because the I cannot get information about this one?" I asked.

"Sir, I'm just give you a recommendation." he got defensive. Well, thanks for your recommendation, asshole. Please don't quit your day job.

Another salesmen rushed over in his defense with a flyer in his hand. "yes, yes, it does comes with DVI cable". He said triumphantly.

By which time, I've lost interest completely. I saw no point in discussing the difference in HD and IPS with anyone of them.

If they are going to sell monitors, why can Challenger give them some training? And as a salesman, why can't they just do some homework and look at Samsung's website?

I get very frustrated with people like that.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

Getting A Woodie

This post is dedicated to the boys with little dick and perverts at:

1) Sammyboy
2) Delphi forum
3) Temasek Review
4) Hardwarezone
5) Mycar forum
6) The three Myanmar fuckers in my block who is taking up all the bandwidth

If you find this information helpful, please donate $5 to Red Cross in the name of "Hum Yee"

Tuesday November 9, 2010

Watching porn can help cure PE condition

WATCHING porn movies can help cure premature ejaculation, experts said.
Sin Chew Daily reported that a man who was diagnosed with prostatitis went to seek treatment at a hospital in Guizhou, China, and was asked to watch porn movies.
He paid S$120 (RM288) for the treatment.
Singapore urologist Dr Lin Fa Cai said the hospital might want the patient to masturbate while watching the movies, in order for him to discharge “unhealthy sperm”.
He said the movies used in such treatments were specially selected.
Dr Yang Zhi Jian from a men’s health clinic in Singapore said watching porn films could help as patients learn skills to improve their sex lives.
He, however, said he had never used the method before.
Another sex expert, Dr Yu Wei Siang, said the method could stimulate the production of male hormones."



Road Trip: Pekan Nenas/Kukup/Pontian

Recently I decided to take a road trip. I chose Kukup because it was not too far and yet gave me a chance to get out of the city. I can only take Orchard Road so much you know?

On the way after the 2nd Link, I turned of to Pekan Nenas which is supposed to have lots of pineapple. There's in fact a pineapple museum.

Saw some new houses being built at the edge of town (about 25km from Tuas), it's very cheap. RM138k (S$58k) for a single story house. For the same amount, you can't even buy a toilet in Singapore. Note to self: potential weekend house.

Before you reach Kukup, there's a very nice golf course if you're into that kind of things. Not many people though, even on weekends.

Then off to Kukup. It's really a very small fishing village. But quite a lot of seafood restaurants. Must plan a separate trip to come makan.

One the way home, passed by Pontian. Nothing to shout about, just a regular small town.

Also around the Pontian exit, saw a gated community type of development by SP Setia called Setia Eco gardens. Very nice.

When it was launched in late 2008, double storey link was about RM280k (S$118k). Now that it is completed, 2nd hand market is listing them at slightly over RM300k (S$127k). Very cheap. If you see how well they are built, you'll agree with me.

The advantage is the development is very near the highway. I clocked exactly 20km to Tuas checkpoint. Note to self: Retirement Home!!!!!!!!

Monday, November 8, 2010

Penang Char Kuay Teow

Just came back from Penang today.

We had lunch at a normal coffeshop. And the char kuay teow is just so good. Mind you, this is not a famous place, just a hole in the wall. Gotta come back more often.

Speaking of Penang, I think DAP is doing a good job considering LGE has never run a state before. Still we see development uneven, public services not up to par, and FDI not exactly booming.

In Singapore, LKY has his fair share of critics when he was the PM. I don't know much about the man and his long political life. However, just looking at the robust state of progress and economic dynamism today, I have to say he did very well.

It is no easy task to run a country. A lot of us can't even run a department properly.

On that note, I hope Lim Guan Eng continues to work hard and learn from experience.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

True Blue

In many of the forums and discussion boards, you have people calling themselves "True Blue Singaporean". I don't really get that.

Do they look like this?

What would a "Fake Blue" or "True Green" Singaporean look like???

Saturday, November 6, 2010

FT and Retirement

From a pure economic perspective, the knowledge and skills of an FT (migrant/international worker) is nothing but a product that generates economic value. The physical form (the person) is the vehicle that carries/houses the said product.

That is to say foreign migrant workers are here because Singapore economy wants it, DEMANDS IT. Willing buyer and willing seller, you see.

A lot of critics of foreign migrants in Singapore invariably spout this argument.

- they come and work and get all the economic benefits, then they (the foreign talents) leave and go back to their country.

These critics are fucking morons. Let me simplify the points for them to digest.

1) If your take foreign skills as a product, by having these products in Singapore means Singapore willingly imports these products. The issue of pricing (as in Singaporeans are losing jobs to FT because FT is cheaper to hire) is an issue of protectionism (For boys with little dick, please review your Econ 101). I won't argue about protectionism in international trade because lots of people can do it better than I.

2) That means if you morons are against FT, and version of it, you are also against buying t-shirts from China. Better throw away that GAP t-shirt that you so proudly wear.

3) By the same toke, this also means the current FT situation may not necessarily be static forever. If and when the economic conditions are such that both parties don't consider it MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL, these importations will slow or stop completely.

For the FT, it is simple economics. If I can't sell my products in one market, I will sell it in another, INCLUDING MY OWN MARKET. Capish?

Let's now talk about retirement for FT's:

The same critics complaint that we, the FTs, will take our CPF money and go back to our country and have a comfortable life, taking into account the relative exchange rate.

1) Who does these CPF money belongs to? You? No, belongs to me. And if I want to take it out to use it as I wish, who the fuck are you to say otherwise?

2) By relocating back to our country, we forgo your beautiful Orchard Road and super efficient transportation system. Do you know what is it like to take a bus in KL? Naturally, there's always pros and cons. So, please, don't be so daft. It's embarrassing.

3) The critics always says, "oh, we've got not enough money to live by; oh we can't afford HDB flat" because of the FTs. Well, have you fucking morons heard of this concept called "living within your means" or "spending only what you have"???? Will you fucking die if you don't own an iPhone? Do you really need a fucking boat like Honda Odyssey to get around a small island like Singapore?

My mother used to tell me: "When you're unhappy about something in your life, look in the mirror first."

In every society, there are people with extreme views. Singapore is no different. That doesn't represent the majority of the Singapore people. I get that.

While I'm in your country, I will do my best to contribute. In fact, I always scold my wife for littering. Singapore is a clean and beautiful city, it's all our responsibility to keep it that way.

And if someday I want to go back home, will you hold it against me? 

Why is that? Why is it wrong for me to be loyal to MY OWN COUNTRY, while is it not wrong for you to do the same? 

For the boys with little dicks, there's is sub-forum in Sammyboy called FT Bashing Ring that is a dedicated place for shitheads like you. Enjoy yourself.

Boys with little dicks.

1) I post and delete whatever I wrote whenever I want. If you have a view directly opposite mine, and FEEL THIS INCREDIBLE URGE TO EXPRESS IT, by all means go ahead start your own blog.

2) To all the boys with little dicks: I'm too busy to reply "FUCK YOU TOO" forty thousand times. You see, I'm an FT, I have got work to do.

3) I don't make money on this blog and it is for my own amusement and research. So I don't really give a fuck whether you read my blog or not.

Capish? [this refers to boys with little dicks in particular at 3in1kopitiam, hardware zone, and my car forum, TR, TOC, Asiaone forum...]

Thursday, November 4, 2010

The Power of Believing

In time when people think they have lost hope ... and start to fucking WHINE [you know who you are, yeah you].

This is a simple story of David and Goliath.

The story [from Wikipedia]

David hoists the severed head of Goliath.
The account of the battle between David and Goliath is given in 1 Samuel, chapter 17.[2] Saul and the Israelites are facing the Philistines at the Valley of Elah. Twice a day for forty days, Goliath, the champion of the Philistines, comes out between the lines and challenges the Israelites to send out a champion of their own to decide the outcome in single combat. However, Saul and all the other Israelites are afraid of him. By chance, David is present, having brought food for his elder brothers. Told that Saul has promised to reward any man who defeats Goliath, David accepts the challenge. Saul reluctantly agrees and offers his armor, which David declines, taking only his sling and five stones chosen in a brook.
David and Goliath confront each other, Goliath with his armor and shield, David with his staff and sling. “The Philistine cursed David by his gods,” but David replies: “This day the LORD will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down, and cut off your head; and I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that God saves not with sword and spear; for the battle is God’s, and he will give you into our hand.”[3]
David hurls his sling with all his might,and hits Goliath in the center of his forehead. The Philistine falls on his face to the ground, David takes Goliath’s sword and cuts off his head. The Philistines flee and are pursued by the Israelites “as far as Gath and the gates of Ekron.” David puts the armor of Goliath in his own tent and takes the head to Jerusalem, and Saul sends Abner to bring David to him. The king asks whose son he is, and David answers, ‘I am the son of your servant Jesse the Bethlehemite.’”

RPK and Mahathir

This is an interest take by RPK on what's happening back home.

Perkasa and Me -A Cheong Hei Reply

Does Mahathir have any "secrets" on Najib?

It's the demographics, stupid.

[Is Singapore's challenges in immigration policy any different? I think not] - Hum Yee



Between 1950 and 1975, the average annual rate of population growth in Europe was 8.4 per 1,000 inhabitants, a rate that has decreased to 2.9 per 1,000 inhabitants in the subsequent quarter-century. Statistics issued by the Council of Europe show a concerning population decrease in 17 European countries in 2000. In this trajectory, by 2050 half of the European population will be older than 50 years, and the share of the population aged 65 and older will spike up from 14 percent in 2000 to 30 percent. In the absence of considerable immigration flows, the populations of the EU-27 and the United States are likely to converge beyond 2050.

The population of the EU increased by an annual average of 2.7 million between 1950 and 1975, by 1.3 million between 1975 and 2000, and is expected to shrink by one million per annum in the first half of the twenty-first century. This phenomenon is exacerbated by the fact that out of the eight central European countries that joined the EU in 2004, five showed negative population growth, with the exceptions of the smallest EU Member States, such as Slovakia, Slovenia, and Estonia.

In a report published by the United Nations in 2000, it becomes clear that the EU has to tackle the issue of demographics and define a medium-term strategy for the admission of third country nationals. The report, entitled "Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Population?," states that a significant increase of immigration flows becomes a necessity if EU member-states wish to maintain the constant size of the working population.

The obvious next step for the technocrats of the European Union based in Brussels is to seriously consider the incorporation of Turkey. The conservatism of European baby boomers coupled with the unfounded fear of accepting a new Member State with a Muslim majority are two drivers that condition a positive outcome for Turkey. In the absence of incentives for EU-citizens to increase the fertility rates, and if the current reluctance on a future Turkish incorporation continues, the European Union's immigration policies could target skilled workers from developing countries.

The thirst to attract skilled migration in the European Union (EU) stems from low fertility rates that are leading to shrinking populations, particularly in Western and Eastern Europe. As Paul Demeny, Distinguished Scholar at the Population Council, points out:
Oswald Spengler's prophecy may turn out to be correct after all: depopulation may be slow, rather than precipitous; it could indeed last for centuries. If Europe would prefer a different future for its descendants, corrective action cannot be delayed.
Much has to be done in the EU in the first half of the twenty-first century if it is to cope with the expectations established in the summit of Lisbon of March 2000 and in view of the failed referenda in France, the Netherlands, and Ireland to approve the revision of the EU Treaty framework which culminated in the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty in December 2009. The European Union faces increasingly poor demographics that put it on the verge of economic stagnation, compounded by a potential inability to sustain its own welfare.

The EU Lisbon summit of 2000 established an ambitious goal of economic growth beyond the three percent mark. Average growth in the EU has been on average lower than three percent ever since. Economists agree that only a higher immigration rate can help the EU grow faster in terms of GDP, and the Lisbon target could only be reached if immigration inflows reach an unlikely three million individuals per year. Notwithstanding the need for foreign workers, the last decade marked a sharp turn away from the liberal ideology in citizenship and residence matters in Europe. The majority of EU Member States introduced even more restrictive naturalization policies and gave the misconceived idea of what they term as "integration of migrants" a priority. As a result of the new policies, becoming a fully-fledged member of society through naturalization, or, in some cases, even simply entering the territory with a purpose of establishing residence is made more difficult than ever.

This is not only due to the increasing costs of all the (un)necessary procedures and the sophistication of the language testing (which includes the languages irrelevant for the successful functioning of the migrants in the Union, such as Latvian, Dutch, or Luxembourgian), but also because of the fundamental shift from the multi-cultural vision of European societies to the mono-cultural fantasies. In practice, such shift means that not only naturalization, but also taking up residence in a number of European states has been made conditional upon the successful completion of "integration" tests.

Ironically, some governments, following the Dutch, which first introduced such approach, feel that becoming part of their society 'mentally' speaking should precede the very act of moving into their territory. Besides the misconception with regard to the nature of what society and culture naturally constitute, such governments, notwithstanding abundant evidence to the contrary, dismiss any idea of social learning through simple interactions by building one's life and social connections in the new environment. EU Member States came to regard new migrants willing to enter the Union as socially-incapable and generally uninterested human beings possessing inferior if not dangerous non-culture which is unable to enrich any of the European societies and has to be combated. In the EU we are currently facing a general trend towards the bureaucratization of prejudice.

The policies in question are clearly racially biased, targeting migrants from the most economically vulnerable parts of the world, people who also happen to look different from a popular ideal of what a European should be. While an American or an Australian would be presumed good enough to take up residence in Europe without any "culture integration tests" the same does not apply to a Malagasy, a Kenyan or even an Argentinean, whose culture is presumably not white enough to be possibly accommodated by the European societies without any purification rituals.

Guillermo de la Dehesa, Chairman of the Center for Economic policy Research, summarizes the main economic and demographic challenges faced by the EU in his book Europe at the Crossroads. De la Dehesa heads the European think-tank, the Centre for Economic Policy Research. For De la Dehesa, the following underlying motives represent a concerning evidence of a worsening economic environment:

• Age dependency ratio will more than double between 2000 and 2050, spiking up from 24 percent to 49 percent.
• A majority of the new member states coming from Eastern Europe are bringing lower than average fertility rates, contrary to what has historically happened with previous expansions (Greece, Portugal, and Spain).
• De la Dehesa states, that "the The likelihood of a big population increase in the fully enlarged EU is much lower than in the United States unless the EU sees a massive influx of African immigrants."
• Life expectancies in the EU have been increasing and are only likely to improve, pushing up dependency ratios even further and putting pressure on the welfare state, that which relies on pay-as-you-go pension schemes in a majority of member states, except perhaps for the United Kingdom.

A solution for the EU would be to become more immigrant-friendly and aspire to replicate the successful model of Canada, Australia, or the United States, all of which have and are expected to have lower dependency ratios. Instead, the wave of restrictive regulation has been rising in recent years, demonstrating a definitive turn towards right-wing populism on (inter alia) the immigration matters in a large number of the Member States of the European Union. The idea of a multi-cultural society is announced "to have failed" in a situation where discrimination against those who fail to sound white and Christian on the phone is overwhelmingly strong. Instead of showing an example of openness and reason to the rest of the world, the EU, which is by far the largest economy and one of the richest spots on Earth is moving towards upgrading its "fortress Europe" idea in the most ugly of all possible ways: by denying those from 'outside' (with an exception of a handful of the citizens of other richest countries) their culture and humanity, should they be willing to come to the EU.

As already mentioned above, this move is particularly illogical in the situation when the European population is aging at an increasing pace and when plenty of sectors of our economy are bound to suffer from the shortages of work-force in the nearest future, making the retreat into the shell of nationalism particularly harmful for all possible interests concerned. Besides long-term interests that are clearly undermined by the new neo-racist policies of pre-entry purification, the social cohesion within EU Member States flirting with nationalist ideas of mono-culture is bound to be severely harmed. Already now we witness cars burning in the banlieues and 'migrant revolts' in Southern Italy. Until the latest turn to the right acquired its shape those from 'the inferior world,' although constantly discriminated against, were at least tolerated rhetorically. Now the situation has changed: the new times moved the threshold of generally accepted intolerance to previously unimaginable heights. Legal immigration to the EU is made virtually impossible in a situation when illegal immigration is increasingly getting criminalized.

The latter is a highly debated topic and one of the main concerns in the industrialized world. The current income gap and the increasing inequality between developed and developing nations allows for the intensification of human flows between adjacent, yet dissimilar regions in the United States and Europe. Yet while there is a regime of regular migration in North America, the European Union fosters the accumulation and residence of foreigners in an irregular situation. Accordingly, the debate in the developed nations has shifted gears and now focuses on illegal immigration, illegal workers, and their impact and consequences. In the current discourse being foreign (i.e. coming from a country which is not a Member State of the Union) is often marked by a presumption of illegality.

Leading representatives acknowledge the need to focus a greater deal of effort on immigration. Britain's home secretary at the time, John Reid, was reported in the Economist saying that managing immigration is now "the greatest challenge facing all European governments." Former French President Jacques Chirac said to listeners of the 2006 Bastille Day address, "Africans will flood the world and we have an immense problem, which is that of development".

Illegal immigration is viewed from an angle of concern from Europe towards North Africa and beyond. The poor integration of some immigrant communities and the turmoil caused by the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in New York, March 11, 2004, in Madrid, and July 7, 2005, in London, have exacerbated the problem of illegal immigration. This should not, however, undermine Europe's commitment to human rights and refugee protection.

In this lack of political consensus on the issue, policies within countries vary significantly depending on what party -- either right or left -- rules the government. The absence of a continental regulation leads to the absurd scenario of different approaches undertaken by any two nations in the European Union. Populist messages are thus turning popular among an aging European population that needs migration (whether legal or illegal) to sustain an economic growth able to feed its retirees.

Populist messages are increasingly frequent in Europe. As a matter of fact, 2007 polls showed how a quarter of Denmark's voters support the anti-immigration Danish People's Party; the Swiss gave 29 percent of their votes to the xenophobic Swiss People's Party; Norway's second political force is anti-foreigner; and a fifth of Belgium's Flemish population now votes for the far-right Vlaams Belang. In June 2010 general elections 15.5 percent of Dutch voters gave their support to PVV -- the party of notorious Geert Wilders.

The situation where virtually no regulation, let alone coordination of long-term migration and citizenship matters, happens at the Union level is particularly illogical in the light of the recent developments which marked the rise of European citizenship as a meaningful concept.

Since an ever increasing number of rights is enjoyed by the nationals of EU states in their capacity of EU citizens and comes directly from the Union, the Member States of the EU have irreparably lost virtually any legal ability to control, let alone to prohibit the moving in and settlement of EU citizens and their family members of any nationality. The absence of national borders for European citizens inside the Union is amplified by a strict prohibition of discrimination on the basis of a Member State nationality in the EU. In practice this means that no 'integration' or 'culture' testing can possibly be applied to any EU citizen moving from one EU Member State to another.

What does this mean in practice? Entirely random divisions have been created by the rise of European nationalism which distinguish between those whose culture is 'good enough' and the others, coming from poorer regions of the world, whose culture is viewed as deficient and potentially harmful, disqualifying them from settlement until they pass profoundly arbitrary 'integration' tests at the embassy of the country they wish to immigrate to in their country of nationality. Imagine how many Dutch language and culture teachers a Sri-Lankan capital can boast, allowing any citizen of that country to pass an arbitrary test to purify herself to become tolerable, her skin-colour notwithstanding. At least the tests are moderately priced at the level of several monthly incomes of the locals. Worse still: as a consequence of the new policies a Moldovan and a Romanian, having identical socio-cultural background, speaking the same language and going to the same Church end up in opposing invented categories.

Once branded as an outsider of deficient culture, any newcomer from outside the EU is most likely to be stigmatized after resettlement, making the whole process, which involves a cardinal rebuilding of one's life and is thus potentially damaging per se, even more difficult to go through. The new nationalist turn, harming the interests of European economy, social cohesion and obviously contradicting common sense, is also deeply stigmatizing for the potential migrants. This is too high a price to pay, for flirting with the neo-racist sentiments of the huge chunks of EU population. The perceived need of "cultural integration", even be it before flying to Europe is an overwhelmingly poor cover up for racist policies relying on the messianic idea of superiority inherent in European culture, which any new comer is to be aware of before boarding the plane. This situation is very wrong but, unfortunately, is unlikely to change in the near future.

The public opinion in many European countries drifts to undecided on the debate of how to approach illegal immigration. Different countries suggest different policies. The package adopted on July 19, 2006, by the European Commission helps identify the EU's priorities on how to approach and cope with illegal immigration. Tackling illegal employment represents the punch line of a joint effort that should target and help eliminate situations of exploitation of illegal immigrants who work in poor and unsafe conditions in industries such as construction, catering, or the textile sector (EurActiv 2006).

Spain's massive legalization process of some 547,000 undocumented working adults in 2005 triggered a sentiment of discontent in France. Former French Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy blamed the Spanish Administration for its lax policies on immigration. Spaniards show most tolerant vis-à-vis immigration among European peers, with 55 percent of respondents believing that immigrants are good for the economy, whereas only 42 percent of Britons share the same view.

Jesús Caldera (IMM) was Spain's minister of labour and immigration at the time. How can a country like Spain sustain the millions of migrants who were losing their jobs in 2009 and provide them with the same welfare state Spaniards can access in times of economic crisis? For Caldera, the immigration model he embraced attracts foreign labor when there is demand and closes the borders to foreign migration when the demand for labor shrinks, as was the case in 2009. Caldera notes that immigrants should have the same rights and obligations as Spaniards. In times of economic bonanza immigrants helped strengthen Social Security. In times of economic turmoil, immigrants are entitled to the same rights they earned while they contributed to the maintenance of the welfare state. It is an approach that dignifies the country.

On practical grounds, it's all about demographics or in other words: It's the demographics, stupid. Europe's native-born workforce is forecast to shrink by 44 million by 2050. As a result, skilled workers will be in short supply. The continent will therefore become increasingly dependent on foreign labor. Closed borders are a threat for Europe's own aging population. A common European policy based on the restriction of unskilled workers could prove detrimental for certain countries. Denmark is in strong need of unskilled labor due to the shrinkage of its population participating in the labor force. Germany has kept its economy closed to workers from new EU countries until 2011, but now promotes it due to a skills shortage.

After all, Demetrios Papademetriou, president of the Washington-based Migration Policy Institute, explains, "Illegal immigration is part of the vital lubricant of our societies. It wouldn't be happening if so many people's interests were not served by the status quo."

The Pseudo Economic Problems of Immigration

The Pseudo Economic Problems of Immigration
December 22, 2005
Benjamin Powell
San Diego Union-Tribune, Silicon Valley/San Jose Business Journal, Providence Journal

During the past five years more new immigrants came to the United States than ever before in our history -- nearly 8 million, according to a new study by the Center for Immigration Studies. This influx has stirred much public debate. But before we adopt new policies, politicians need to distinguish clearly between the real problems caused by immigration and non-problems based on popular myths.

Probably the number one misconception about immigration is that it harms our economy. In reality, conservative estimates put the net gain to the U.S. economy from current immigration at about $20 billion. Instead of recognizing this overall gain, immigration critics typically claim that immigrants take away American jobs, depress wages and drain our tax dollars by consuming social services.

A fundamental truth about our economy is that as long as we desire more goods and services than we have, the number of jobs is practically unlimited. In fact, when we have more workers, we create more jobs. Total employment and the size of the labor force have tracked each other fairly closely over the past 50 years despite dramatic changes in immigration flows.

It’s a well-known fact that many of the jobs immigrants come here to fill are jobs Americans are not taking. And when we prevent immigrants from taking those jobs, American producers and consumers suffer the consequences. For example, due to labor shortages caused in part by increased border controls, only 30 percent of last fall’s lettuce crop in Arizona was harvested. Losses were nearly one billion dollars. There simply were not enough U.S. workers willing to pick the crops at prices that would have made it profitable.

Less well known is that many jobs immigrants take are jobs that would have otherwise been outsourced. Nearly one-third of U.S. garment workers are immigrants. Increasingly, we are turning to international trade to secure our clothing. If it were not for immigration we’d likely be importing even more clothing. Similarly, in high-skill occupations, such as software engineering, when companies are not allowed to bring immigrants to America, they send the job to the worker. Microsoft’s Bill Gates has said that eliminating caps on H1-B visas would encourage his company to outsource fewer jobs.

What about wages? Immigration increases the supply of domestic labor. Basic economic reasoning shows that when you increase the supply of any good, holding other things constant, its price should go down. However, immigration brings many secondary effects that offset the increased supply. Most immediately, when immigrants earn money, they demand goods and services. This increases the demand for labor, which in turn creates more jobs and pushes wages back up.

A less obvious, but no less important, consequence of immigration is that with a greater supply of labor, more goods and services are produced. This leads to lower prices, and an increase in the purchasing power of existing American wages. Finally, a larger labor force can raise the profitability of capital investment. If increased capital flows match the increased labor force, wages are not pushed down. Even Harvard economist George Borjas, a prominent critic of immigration, admits that if the capital stock increased enough to keep returns constant, immigration would not lower the earnings of natives on average.

The secondary consequences of immigration are born out in the professional economics literature. A comprehensive survey of the immigration literature, published in the Journal of Economic Perspectives reached the following conclusion: “Despite the popular belief that immigrants have a large adverse impact on the wages and employment opportunities of the native-born population, the literature on this question does not provide much support for the conclusion.”

The economic case for open immigration is not fundamentally different than the case for free trade or free capital mobility. Allowing goods and services, capital, and labor to flow freely allows them be channeled to their most efficient uses and brings overall benefits to the domestic and world economies.

The objection that immigration costs tax dollars has some merit. Since many of the tax-funded services immigrants consume are funded at the local level and much of the taxes that immigrants pay goes to the federal government, immigration is a tax burden on some communities. This is fundamentally a problem of public policy, not economics. Policy reforms could fix this by decreasing the social services that immigrants and their children are eligible to consume.

We need not fear that immigrants will burden our economy, take more jobs than they create, or depress our wages. Quite the contrary, immigration brings economic benefits, so it should not be artificially limited. Current guest worker proposals by President Bush and the Senate do not go far enough. A truly beneficial reform would concentrate on creating an open immigration policy while dealing with real problems that increased immigration could bring. This would involve limiting entitlement spending and may require more restrictions on immigrants’ ability to eventually vote.

Benjamin Powell

Benjamin Powell
is Research Fellow at The Independent Institute ,assistant professor of economics at Suffolk University and a Senior Economist with the Beacon Hill Institute. Dr. Powell received his Ph.D. in economics from George Mason University. He has been assistant professor of economics at San Jose State University, a fellow with the Mercatus Center's Global Prosperity Initiative, and a visiting research fellow with the American Institute for Economic Research. Benjamin is also the editor of Housing America: Building out of Crisis.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Can UMNO survive GE 13th?

These two by-elections in Galas and Batu Api is making UMNO nervous. GE 13th is not too far away.

Najib is now begging for Chinese votes:

“Malaysia would not be what it is today without the industry, expertise and dedication of the Malaysian Chinese community,”

“Likewise, there will be a bleak future for Malaysia without the Chinese community’s support. We would clearly fall short of reaching the goals to become a developed nation by 2020.”

He added that the community formed the backbone of the Malaysian economy through its small and medium enterprises.

I say we don't now give the NAZI a single vote! They need to do something for us first.

Arrest ALL, yes I mean all, Perkasa morons and place them under ISA for twenty years. THIS IS WHAT ISA WAS INTENDED FOR. Use it the right way.

Another thing is to charge the "Apanama" Mahathir for corruption and send the senile fucker to jail.

Otherwise, come GE 13th, vote opposition!!!

Food Review: Chee Cheong Fun

Blk 505 Jurong West St 52, #01-18, S229495

If you are ever in this area in the morning, go to Yi Fatt for breakie.

They have only three things, all GOOOOD.

1) Chee Cheong Fun (Pig Intestine Noodle). The "fun" looks like pig intestine. It's actually very thin Hor Fun rolled into cylindrical shape.

2) Woo Tou Kou (Yam Cake)

I usually get a "chum" which is (1) + (2), topped with very yummy sesame seeds.

3) Porridge with cuttle fish and peanuts.

The owner is a really cool guy. He bounces up and down like dancing when he's preparing food.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Shit my wife says

Just now my wife and I were lying back on the sofa watching TV.

I looked over and saw that she's got a buldging tummy going on.

So I said: "Eh, you fat liao."

She replied: "So what? I'm married."

Can you believe that woman???