Quora Answer: If Singapore-Flagged Vessels are at Risk, Traversing the Strait of Hormuz, will the Singapore Navy Protect Them?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If Singapore-flagged vessels are put at risk, traversing the Strait of Hormuz, will the Singapore Navy protect them?”

If Singapore-flagged vessels were threatened in the Straits of Hormuz, the Republic of Singapore Navy is quite capable of deploying to the Persian Gulf.  Singapore has deployed to the region before, but always as part of a multinational effort under the auspices of the United Nations, never as a belligerent.  The most recent deployment to the region was as part of the international effort to curb piracy in the Gulf of Aden, at the western entrance to the littoral waters of the Arabian Peninsula.  The Straits of Hormuz is at the eastern edge of the Arabian Peninsula.

The being said, the RSN is not expected to be deployed there anytime soon, because Singapore is not involved with any dispute with Iran.  We are not America’s bitch, antagonising the Iranians just to give Trump a jingoistic erection.  That would be the UK, and Jeremy Hunt, as foreign secretary.  Iran is not going around arresting ships.  They are retaliating against the seizure of their own vessels, and the strangulation of their economic lifeline by the Americans, and their British sycophants.

Quora Answer: If Monogamy is Natural, Why Do Many Relationships End because of Affairs?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If monogamy is natural, why do so many relationships end because of affairs?”

Relationships do not end because of affairs.  Affairs are indicators that the relationship was already over, as far as one party is concerned, and they are considering options.  Sometimes, the party involved in the infidelity does not have the moral, or psychological, courage to admit it.  Or, as is often the case, they consider the legal or financial too high to initiate a proper break-up.

People assume monogamy means that we are obliged to be with the same person until death.  That may not necessarily be so, because people grow apart for various reasons.  We are monogamous, for the most part, because our societal structure and cultures are geared towards nuclear families, with clearly defined gender roles.  Even when those roles evolved, they still adhered to some form of societal norms.

Polygamous relationships are exceptions, based on circumstance, that evolved into culture.  In many societies, it was the privilege of the ruling class, as a means to ensure the propagation of the line, and keep wealth within the family.  In nomadic cultures, aside from being a source of prestige, it was also a means to ensure that children were taken of, and seen to belong to a family, or lineage.

None of this, however, is definitive proof that we are either monogamous or polygamous.  These are developments within the context of society, culture.  They are not biological.  The only biological consideration is the need for a male and a female to procreate.  It does not necessarily necessitate the father of the child staying.

As women gain equal status in society, and assert their role, polygamy has faded away.  Women are no longer property, and part of a man’s estate.  They are partners in a relationship.  This is why, as societies advanced, monogamy became a feature, and polygamy is considered anachronistic.

Quora Answer: If I make $100,000 Annually, Do I Save for Retirement or Live Comfortably?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If I make $100,000 a year, would it be better for me to live simply and comfortably, or save and invest the money for retirement?”

None of your goals are mutually exclusive.  It is possible to be comfortable, and still have money set aside for your retirement.  This is where good budgeting comes in.  Assuming you are young enough, you have greater options, because the mortality charges applicable in certain financial instruments such as insurance investment plans, are negligible.

Retirement planning generally considers an extended investment horizon.  This allows greater tolerance for inclement market conditions.  You have the option of a mix of pure investment such as mutual funds; and for liability mitigation, such as through specific types of insurance plans, that allow an immediate estate creation.

Quora Answer: If I Invest $10 Million in the Bank, What Annual Return Should I Expect?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If I invest 10 million in the bank, what would I be looking at for my annual return?”

The question itself is not very clear.  There are different sorts of banks.  In your case, assuming that you have that amount, I would assume that it has to be an investment bank.  Merchant and commercial banking have different areas of focus, and they do not have the sort of investment products that an investment bank has, and thus cannot give you that sort of returns.

With that amount, you are considered a High Net Worth client, meaning that you have access to investment products that people who do not fall into this category will not even know exist.  Your risk profile in this case should be at least balanced.  Anything lower, and perhaps fixed deposits, or government bonds would be more your thing.

Depending on the investment horizon, the type of securities, the currency and other forms of exposure and the liquidity you are looking at, a good investment banker can give you at least 8% per annum, without you getting involved in leveraged and high-risk products.  There are fund managers affiliated through the banks that can offer much higher of course, but the fine print is full of disclaimers since they cannot guarantee the principal.

Quora Answer: If I am the Beneficiary of a Will, but with No Means to Ascertain It, is There a Way to Collect My Inheritance?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If I am the beneficiary of a will, but cannot find the will, and do not know the name of the lawyer who made out the will, is there still a way to collect my inheritance?”

How are you certain that you are the beneficiary of the will, if you do not have a copy of it?  Assuming the person has told you, it could have been changed.  One way to avoid all this uncertainty is for wills to be filed at a registry of wills.  But even then, you have no right to see it even if the benefactor is deceased, unless you are the executor of the estate.  You will have to trust the probate process.  Due to personal data protection laws, you have no right to a process of discovery.

Quora Answer: If Hong Kong Declared Independence, Would China Invade Militarily?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If Hong Kong declared independence, would China invade militarily?” 

There are a few assumptions here, and they are all mistaken. 

Firstly, Hong Kong is in no position to declare independence.  It has never been independent, it does not have an independent military force, and the previous British Administration was never interested in an independent Hong Kong, and never drew a road map for that eventuality.  For any territory to declare independence in the current era, it requires two things: a legal basis under international law, no matter how flimsy; and a state actor that would sponsor or guarantee it.  Hong Kong has neither.  Claims about human rights and freedom of speech are insufficient to claim independence. Hong Kong’s economy is so dependent on the Chinese hinterland, it cannot claim economic independence.  It has never had autonomy in foreign relations.  It does not even have a sufficiently distinct ethnic or linguistic identity from southern China.  Such is China’s position, there is no country that would sponsor Hong Kong’s independence claims.  Even the US cannot bear the political and economic cost of this.  Aside from its harbour, Hong Kong is not sufficiently strategic to an external state actor. 

Secondly, China does not need to invade Hong Kong.  Hong Kong is Chinese territory, and as an important port and major city, the PLA has a significant garrison, which is right next to the old governor’s mansion.  It is not a case of moving assets into the territory, when they are already there.  From a political perspective, a successful independence bid by Hong Kong would spell the end of the CCP.  The Communist Party cannot afford to lose credibility.  This would also signal to restive regions such as Tibet and Xinjiang, which are very much in the political and economic periphery, that the CCP does not have the political will to enforce hegemony, leading to a rise in civil disobedience, and eventual rebellion.  This will also embolden an actual independence movement in Taiwan.  China cannot countenance that.

Quora Answer: If I Do Not Tell Anyone about My Insurance Policies, How Will My Beneficiary Know about It When I Die?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If I buy life insurance, and do not tell anyone, how will my beneficiary know about it when I die?”

When you pass away, as part of the probate process, the lawyer will write to every bank and insurer to check if you have an account or a policy.  This may take months.  Should you have a will, and an executor, it is part of his job to distribute the proceeds according to the will.

Alternatively, nominate the policy, and bypass the probate process.  Your beneficiaries will be directly informed by the servicing financial advisor.  This takes days, or weeks.

Quora Answer: If China Wages Total War on Vietnam, the Philippines, & Malaysia over the South China Sea, Should Indonesia, as a Non-Claimant Get Involved?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “If China wages total war with Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia, over the South China Sea, should Indonesia, as a non-claimant, declare war on China?”

There are three assertions here, and all of them are incorrect.

Firstly, whilst Indonesia is not a direct claimant of any territory in the South China Sea, it is a claimant of an exclusive economic zone in an area it has renamed the North Natuna Sea.  These claims on an exclusive economic zone overlap with China’s.  This means Indonesia is a claimant.

Secondly, Indonesia, along with Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines, are all part of ASEAN.  Whilst ASEAN does not have a mutual defence treaty such as NATO does, an attack upon one member of ASEAN would drag the others in, including Singapore, the rest of Indochina, Myanmar, and Thailand.  The Philippines is a major part of the US sphere.  Malaysia is part of the FPDA which includes Singapore, the UK, Australia and New Zealand.  The US has a carrier refit base in Singapore.  Such a war will not be a regional war, but have consequences across the globe.

Finally, China does not have the ability to wage total war in the South China Sea.  Total war means that the entire economy is converted to military production.  China is a large country, with the second-largest economy in the world.  However, considering debt to GDP ratio at over 300%, they cannot afford total war.

China also does not have a surface navy large enough to wage war in the vast area of the South China Sea, and still deter potential belligerents, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan in the East China Sea.  Having long borders and massive territorial claims means that even a military the size of the PLA cannot enforce them.  China’s military is also in a modernisation phase.  They do not have the force projection capability to fight a war on distant lands, across the sea.  China also does not have the lift capability to support an expeditionary force away from the Chinese mainland.

Crafting a Humorous Speech

Unless a person is naturally witty, it is challenging to craft a humorous speech. And even then, it is not an easy thing to do.  However, we can consider the technicalities of humour and draft the parameters of what constitutes a humorous speech, and more importantly, a winning one.  It would not do if the only person who finds it funny is the speaker. 

In general, whilst we may have this habit of sprinkling sarcasm and irony in our speeches, by themselves, they may not be accessible to a wider audience, and cannot, by themselves, build a humorous speech.  We require one or both of the two other major elements of humour: hyperbole and misdirection. 

The first thing to remember is that a humorous speech, particularly in a Toastmasters context, is distinct from stand-up comedy.  We are not telling a series of anecdotes which may or may not revolve around a theme.  We are not performing a roast, which is a series of witty insults, which is culturally specific.  Like any speech, this is about bringing the audience on a journey and relating a story that has lessons and experiences which resonate with them.  The speaker persona still channels the audience. 

We begin crafting the speech by deciding on the outline of a story.  The best source of materials is always our personal experiences.  We are the experts of ourselves, and no one can say we are wrong or challenge our credibility there.  The irony of humorous speeches is that the best material is found in our most painful memories, our personal tragedies, our loss.  Humour is part of our coping mechanism.  It is no coincidence that the best comedians speak from pain, and sometimes suffer conditions as diverse as depression, bullying, and loss on a scale that people may not normally comprehend.  To them, comedy is life, it is therapy, it is validation.  Even the mildest comedy comes from a place of discomfort.  There is no humour in self-satisfaction, only gloating, and the audience reacts negatively to that.  Petty revenge, on the other hand, is vicariously cathartic. 

The next step is to fill in the details.  Many people would find it a challenge to see the jokes and craft the punchlines here.  That should not be the concern.  The story must be congruent.  This is where you work out the introduction of the premise, the story, and the call to action.  In that sense, it is no different from writing a normal speech.  A humorous speech must be short.  If the time is five to seven minutes, the material should be at least a minute or more less than that, since the magic of a humorous speech is in the delivery. 

Once that is done, this is the part where we look at the speech and tweak the words, working on the elements of humour.  The easiest and lowest-hanging fruit is to play on words.  A master of this was the late George Denis Patrick Carlin.  Much of his material was built on the incongruity of word play, and how, when we think about it, language and rhetorical devices are absurd.  The mastery of Carlin, however, is that he did not stop at rhetorical absurdism.  He demonstrated, through his material, that words matter and how we are taught to say certain things have shaped our views on certain issues.  He then expounded and expanded on this to the wider tragedy that the masses of humanity are willing victims of the political systems we put in place above us.  In this, even as we laugh, we think, and there is that call to action there. 

A second type of humour, and this was the forte of masters such as Julius Henry “Groucho” Marx, was misdirection humour.  Misdirection humour subverts our expectations of the story.  This may involve transposing the protagonist and the antagonist, the hero and villain, or simply upending our expectations.  “Groucho” Marx passed away from pneumonia on the 19^th August 1977.  In his obituary, The New York Times wrote, “He developed the insult into an art form.” 

Finally, the easiest way to inject humour into a speech is hyperbole, or exaggeration.  This can be mild, for comic effect, or it can be stretched until it becomes satire.  The art of satire is to stretch the credulity of the audience without breaking it.  At the end of the speech, the audience must have that sense of disbelief, wondering if the story was real. 

This process of injecting humour into a crafted speech goes through several drafts and iterations.  The speaker must note how he should sound at various points of the story.  There is a stronger emphasis on vocal variety and connecting to the audience.  The audience must feel that they are part of the story, either as unwilling witnesses, hapless bystanders, or even co-conspirators.  At some points, it massages the ego of the audience when they feel they are in on the joke, and then misdirection is applied to subvert this, so that they can laugh at themselves.  A quip published in 1937, and mistakenly attributed to Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, goes, “Diplomat: A person who can tell you to go to hell in such a tactful way that you will look forward to making the trip.”  To paraphrase that here, humour is the ability to insult people in such a way that they laugh at themselves. 

Within all that, the best way to deflect criticism and audience pushback is for the speaker to be the vicarious sacrifice, utilising his speaker persona to be the willing victim of the joke.  This is the essence of self-deprecating humour.  It makes it easier for people to laugh at themselves when they think they are laughing at others first.  An ideal scenario is for that dawning realisation to be worked into the call to action. 

The final element of delivering a humorous speech is relentless practice.  For Toastmasters, what they can do is use the airtime of chapter meetings, even during the table topics segment or delivering a project evaluation, to test out punchlines.  This allows the speaker to hone the material, one part at a time, and the delivery, without revealing the entire speech until it is time to deliver it. 

One of the considerations in speech delivery that is often neglected is to pause after a punchline.  These pauses add up, and that it why we need to leave time for it.  The right deployment of pauses elevates the humour.  Body language, exaggerated hand gestures, even rolling of the eyes – these are the visual elements of humour that enhance a speech. 

Ultimately, humour is an ongoing experiment of experiential living.  People want to laugh, they want to be entertained, and they want to feel good.  Instead of being intimidated, I encourage people to go out and try to be funny.  At the very worst, people will laugh at you.

EMinent Communicators TMC as Project Evaluator, 11th February 2020

On the 11^th February 2020, I was at EMinent Communicators Toastmasters Club, as project evaluator.  This was my 160^th club visit on the 226^th day of the Toastmaster year.

The sergeant-at-arms, and timer was Mithun Jugal Kishore Malani.  The Toastmaster of the Day was Angela Lansbury.  The ah counter was Florence Ling.  The table topics master was Putu Sanjaya Setiawan.  The language evaluator was Penny Anne Radcliffe.

Mithun Jugal Kishore Malani, in his opening address, mentioned that today is the birthday of Thomas Alva Edison.  This is the basis for the theme of the day – “Innovation”.

Khoo Li Shan gave an account of her experiences in matchmaking.  She took a course in it, and in the course of it, she had to arrange a date for two strangers.  She explained the challenges of getting complete strangers to at least have that connection for a second date.

Swaminathan Rajamanickam told us a morality tale with three lessons, focusing on the need to be selfless.  It was an original story with depth.

The evaluators were Simon Ang, and myself.

Best Table Topics Speaker: Guest.

There was no voting for best speaker, and best evaluator.

Tampines West TMC as Project Evaluator, 09th February 2020

On the 09^th February 2020, I was at Tampines West Toastmasters Club, as project evaluator.  This was my 159^th club visit on the 224^th day of the Toastmaster year.

The sergeant-at-arms was Ng Kian Hao.  The Toastmaster of the Day was Ong Kai Kiat.  The timer was Terence Tan S. Y.  The ah counter was Manudatta Muralidhara.  The table topics master was Kirby Lim Aik Boon.  The language evaluator was Ng Kin Foong.  The creative director was The Guo Pei.

Stella Lo M. Y., in her opening speech, talked about the mysteries of love, and how it moves people to great things, or maroons them in the oceans of utter despair.

Anupama Singh gave us an overview of the seven methods of learning, and how to engage an audience.  She drew upon her experience as an educator, and gave us examples from teaching children.

Anubhav Sharma spoke about the need for us to present a unique selling point in our job interviews.  He gave us examples from his personal experience, and how he failed interviews until he understood this concept.

Rina Tay Sim Seck attempted  humorous speech about the time she went to Sweden on holiday with her son, and got list in an LGBT Pride parade.  Her search for her son in that crowd was an epic impromptu journey.

The evaluators were Angela Lansbury, Sin Ren Peng, and myself.

Best Speaker: Anubhav Sharma;

Best Evaluator: Sin Ren Peng; and

Best Table Topics Speaker: Senthil Kumar Narayanasamy.

Leng Kee Advanced TMC as Project Evaluator, 07th February 2020

On the 07^th February 2020, I was at Leng Kee Advanced Toastmasters Club, as project evaluator.  This was my 157^th club visit on the 222^nd day of the Toastmaster year.

Being an innovative club, Leng Kee Advanced Toastmasters Club held two simultaneous meetings at adjoining rooms to accommodate their members speaking needs.

The sergeant-at-arms was Robekka Purba.  The table topics master was Sarah Geiger.  The ah counter, solely for the impromptu speeches, was Junie Seow.

Room 1

The Toastmaster of the Day was Steven Yap.  The timer was Robert Ng.

The evaluators were Jeevan Mahendran, Steven Yap, and myself.  I evaluated two speeches back to back.

The speakers were Angeline Tjhin, Deborah Ong, Terra Tea, and Julie Ong P. S.

Room 2

The Toastmaster of the Day was Patrick Oei Kian Seng.  The timer was Junie Seow.

The evaluators were Ivan Lee Kuan Seng, and Thomas Chen Jun Ying.  Both evaluated two speeches back to back.

The speakers were Sandra Interdonato, Ikumi Usuda, K. S. Rajan, and Sebastian Chong.

Angeline Tjhin cited Thanos’ snap, and mentioned that, perhaps, Thanos was not wrong.  She spoke about the overcrowded Earth, and the strain on resources, and the effects of the loss of biodiversity.

Deborah Ong spoke about her discovery of coffee, and its effects on her body.  She talked about the stimulant, caffeine, found in coffee.  She listed the benefits and the detrimental effects of consumption.

Terra Tea gave a speech on absurdism, and memes.  She explained how her generation coped with its own existential crisis, and nihilism.  She mentioned the role of Dadaism, and the repudiation of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

Julie Ong P. S. gave a reflection of her second path, Visionary Communication.  She is well on her way towards her DTM.

Best Speaker: Angeline Tjhin & K. S. Rajan;

Best Evaluator: Myself & Thomas Chen Jun Ying; and

Best Table Topics Speaker: Terra Tea.

Rohde & Schwarz TMC as Chief Judge, 07th February 2020

On the 07^th February 2020, I was at Rohde & Schwarz Toastmasters Club, as chief judge, for their International Speech & Humorous Speech Contest.  This was my 156^th club visit on the 222^nd day of the Toastmaster year.

The contest chair, as well as Contest Toastmaster of the Day, was Anand Rangarajan.  The sergeants-at-arms were Kunal Arora and Edmund Pang.  The timers were Lisa Wong Pui Wan, and Vasanthi Jagannathan Ravi.  The tally counters were Livio Deltin, Putu Sanjaya Setiawan, and Jerry Lim.

International Speech

Arnold Stanley spoke about the lottery, and how too much money, without the right values, created bigger problems for the winners.  He gave the example of Michael Carroll, the so-called “Lotto Lout”, who won almost £10 million when he was 19 years old.  He was a garbage man, he spent all that money on drugs and prostitutes, and returned to being a garbage man with a multimillion-pound debt.

Alexander Gummenscheimer spoke about his childhood, growing up in Russia, from an ethnic German family.  He was given the impossible goal of mastering German in a short time because they migrating there.  He spoke about impossible goals, and how they are sometimes not impossible, how they drive us to excellence.

Vignesh Natarajan spoke about multilingual intelligence, and how the ability to not only speak, but think in multiple languages is an underrated advantage in a globalised world.

Humorous Speech

Lee Kah Heng spoke about the lessons he learned from his grandmother, mother, and wife.  They were quotes from his women.

Anugeetha Vishwanatha gave an account of a road trip that did not quite work out.

The third speaker was Amol Malokar.  Unfortunately, I did not manage to record notes down.

International Speech Winner: Alexander Gummenscheimer;

International Speech 1^st Runner-Up: Vignesh Natarajan;

Humorous Speech Winner: Lee Kah Heng;

Humorous Speech 1^st Runner-Up: Anugeetha Vishwanatha; and

Humorous Speech 2^nd Runner-Up: Amol Malokar.