Thursday, December 30, 2004

Over and above S$2 million: NTUC offers condolences

Some corporations, really big ones, like Pfizer,, Citigroup, Cisco Systems, Bristol-Myers Squibb, have rallied in response to the tsunami disaster by donating generously. Over here, our very own very big quasi-corporation, NTUC, 'expresses her deepest heartfelt condolences to the families of victims affected by last Sunday's tsunami that struck many parts of Asia, following the earthquake off the coast of Aceh, Sumatra. The Singapore Labour Foundation (SLF), on behalf of the labour movement, has made a S$20,000 donation to those affected in the region through the Red Cross. Additionally, 5,000 food relief packages worth S$50,000 and weighing some 1.5-million tonnes have been sent to Colombo, Sri Lanka by NTUC Fairprice, which is working with Mercy Relief to raise up to S$100,000 for tsunami victims. Staples will also be channelled to Aceh where the quake was hardest hit. On 1 Jan 2005, members of the public can also purchase Food Relief Packages at S$10 each from Fairprice supermarkets, which will then be sent to Aceh and other parts of India. Donation cans will also be placed at all Fairprice outlets from today'. As some Singaporeans are wont to say, very big corporations here must have very good reason for not being as generous as say, Abbott Laboratories. But you know what? Right now I just feel like telling some large local corporation they're a fcuking ntuc.


Blogger littlecartnoodles said...

Your dyslexic readers probably understood the last line right away ...

12/30/2004 06:10:00 PM  
Blogger cour marly said...

Hey, my company donated more than BMS leh... why didn't you mention it? Wait, you mean this isn't a competition?

And is it just me or did they throw in that the food relief weighed 1.5 million tonnes so to hope that readers will be distracted and think NTUC donated 1.5M dollars instead.

12/30/2004 07:16:00 PM  
Blogger Airbag said...

I sometimes wonder if I am dyslexic? Did you mean FUCKING CUNT?

12/30/2004 07:17:00 PM  
Blogger Merv said...

Again, its not the measly amount of donation that scares me. What scares me it that they're so damn proud of it!

12/30/2004 08:09:00 PM  
Blogger redshot said...

They would be proud of themselves whether they are generously giving or just paying lip service. At least consider matching the public's donations of the $10 Food Relief Packages, on top of your 1.5-million tones of packages, can ?

Someone told me that Malaysia is off our aid list ?

12/30/2004 08:35:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

tsk tsk. such righteous anger. read up on coca-cola and pfizer's recent run-ins with the indian govt and things may become clearer.

12/30/2004 11:19:00 PM  
Blogger six-sugars said...

just wondering, is fcuking ntuc profiting from the $10 food relief packages? i have been hesitant about buying them coz i dont think they should profit from this.

12/31/2004 01:55:00 AM  
Blogger Mr Miyagi said...

Yeah, angry 'cos it's like witnessing someone seriously hurt in a car accident and all you do is throw a packet of tissues.

No I don't know if NTUC is profiting from the $10 relief packs.

Anyone know what's in those packs?

12/31/2004 02:10:00 AM  
Blogger mb said...

Read on Sammyboy's that those Food Packs are actually stuff that was expiring anyway, and were going to be written off by them. Dunno if it is true (it IS Sammyboy, after all). If it is, wah lau eh.

But I agree that with the Red Cross declaring that cash is best, it seems strange to me that NTUC is still doing this in kind.

12/31/2004 01:27:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is appropriate for NTUC to donate in kind because even if Red Cross receives cash, they'll have to purchase the same items at a higher price anyway. So isn't it better to obtain them at cost price and send it to them? Which is to say, $50,000 can buy alot more food if bought at cost price than if bought from other vendors by Red Cross.

12/31/2004 05:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you should read the articles in Business Times today to see how S'pore is contributing before you get on your political hobbyhorse and call local corporations cunts.

12/31/2004 05:12:00 PM  
Blogger Mr Miyagi said...

Political hobby horse? Siao! Read the post again leh.

12/31/2004 05:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous" - assumptions so many I even wouldn't attempt to unpack all.

"Which is to say, $50,000 can buy alot more food if bought at cost price than if bought from other vendors by Red Cross."

You've mixed up RC with the UN agencies. And assumed too much about the mastodon of local supermarkets.


12/31/2004 06:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

By accusing the supermarket of selling food near it's expiry date, haven't the others made assumptions too? If food is what NTUC is well positioned to donate, what's wrong with donating food? What percent of your own annual income have YOU donated, anyway.

12/31/2004 11:27:00 PM  
Blogger Mr Miyagi said...

Are you directing that question at Mr Brown, Anonymous? I can't really tell. I can never really tell what people named Anonymous are trying to say, usually. But I did donate 2% of my annual income.

1/01/2005 01:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think it is pointless to argue or judge based on how much or what is given. Perhaps we should focus on the deed and see the positive side of things. Giving is in itself a good deed. There are those who give little but from the heart and others who give much with a hidden agenda. I will also not judge others by how much I am giving or doing because everybody's financial responsibility is unique.

1/01/2005 02:20:00 AM  
Blogger Airbag said...

The goal to life is happiness.

1/01/2005 05:07:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home