Skeppshult
In The Robb Report’s Great Machines Special Issue, they feature Swedish company Skeppshult’s Nature models for men and women. Prices range from US$995 to $1,295:
Many upscale features are standard on Skeppshult bikes: an integrated locking system, spring-loaded rear carrier, chain covers, front and rear fenders, and pedal-generated headlamps.
Vintage cool, eh?
Skeppshult chief designer Kjell Sture says,
“Biking is a great form of transportation that incorporates exercise, pleasure, and perhaps the completion of a few errands.”
The catch: the bikes pictured above are not Skeppshults; they are factory-standard push bikes made in Ningbo and Tianjin. They are also about 1% of the price of a Skeppshult, retail.
Uniquely Singapore
Rejected slogans for the Uniquely Singapore tourism campaign:
I was inspired by the Business Times story, Uniquely Singapore brand finding its feet.
I joined the Bookworm Club and everything
Reading for pleasure is key to literacy:
Teenagers who read a large amount of fiction tended to score highest in literacy tests, although those who read a lot of non-fiction or read from the internet also tended to perform well above average.
Since I read fiction, non-fiction, and stuff from the Internet almost every day, I must be pretty fucking literate. Good for me.
A big life change
I just answered an e-mail from someone worrying about culture shock, should she move to Xiamen. Answering in the capacity of What’s On Xiamen’s webmonkey, I was pretty positive about the whole thing, saying, Yes, it will be very different from what I reckon you’re familiar with, but hey, it’s not so bad.
I haven’t told her about the spitting, littering, peeing, cussing, triads, mad driving, or bad techno yet.
(Was on a little bus trip yesterday, a mate and I visited Quanzhou. Found something there that even Singapore lacks. And I mean something good.)
Skateboarding is not a crime
A link from SixDifferentWays brought my attention to Skatestoppers, a company that makes ‘anti-skating’ devices (plenty more where they came from). Pieces of metal or plastic are affixed to pavements and other places to prevent skaters (inline and boarders) from grinding.
At least grinding is what we called it when I was skating.
I can understand why property owners wouldn’t want people to grind their trucks or whatnot all over the place, and skaters shouldn’t be destroying other people’s property, but this only looks like lawsuits waiting to happen. Especially since they’re American firms. Will they (or these aggrieved property owners) pony up when someone hits one of these things, flies onto the road and gets hit by a car? From what I’ve read, skaters can pry them out with screwdrivers, causing more damage to the property they’re supposed to protect.
Maybe there should be more skate parks or ’skate-safe’ areas. Maybe people should stop trying to make the world perfect and pleasant according to their image, because that goal is clearly not the same for everyone.
In a nutshell: you’re always going to have people who disrespect other people’s property, no matter what you do. Unless, of course, you live in a castle, then you can sic archers and musketeers on them or something.
When truth is stranger than fiction
Apparently, lawyers for the Bush White House decided back in March 2003 that Mr Bush and his top officials are above the law.
The March memorandum, which was first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Monday, is the latest internal legal study to be disclosed that shows that after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks the administration’s lawyers were set to work to find legal arguments to avoid restrictions imposed by international and American law.
All these pesky laws! How can we expect a great leader like President Bush to obey such anachronisms when they’ve got an enemy to fight. Sure, they can’t see the enemy, but it’s here, it’s everywhere! Only by ignoring the law can they keep your family safe. Anyone who opposes Bush and his pals hates freedom, democracy, and human rights!
This sure explains a lot. Why bother with war films with special effects and even more special premises when we have one that should come with the disclaimer, “All events and characters featured are fictitious and are in no way meant to resemble any thing in real life.”
Except it is real life. Box office ratings must be massive.
(More can be found on Salon’s War Room, ‘Presidential power at its absolute apex’.)
Money is happiness
Todd Crowell, Speaking Freely:
People are upset? It must be about the economy. The solution is to find ways to give them more prosperity. If people are busy making money they will be happy and not agitate for political reforms.
Economic security in exchange for personal freedoms and democratic reforms. Give up any rights to speak out, demonstrate, gather, organise, and they’ll make sure you prosper. Sounds familiar? Sounds historical?
As the author says, this approach cannot last forever; “… inevitably it will lead to further blow-ups.”
(I’m clearly not talking about China.)
I find myself torn.
One the one hand, the time is long overdue for my government (and I use the term loosely) to give power back to the people. They say we’re a democracy. We’ve got good infrastructure, a well-run (I think) financial system, lots of players in the market, a noisy and relatively fun social scene - all in all, hallmarks of a modern country. Many young Singaporeans are chafing at the bit to do more, to strike out on our own and be independent minded, both in thought and action¹. Government-mandated initiatives in ‘innovation’ pen us in, it’s their way or the highway, since they’ve decided that this is the path to further economic prosperity.
On the other hand, I’m not sure Singaporeans are ready for any real power. We’ve been nannied (what’s the masculine term, Lee’d?) by the state for so long that I reckon most of us either can’t remember or have no knowledge of what life was like before the all-powerful PAP ruled the roost. Even if completely free and fair elections were to be held next week, with no difficulties faced by opposition parties, I doubt any superstars of the Singapore scene would quickly join up with [insert name of opposition party here], and so they will not field any new, household name candidates. Voters would then go with the ’safe’ bet.
(You know, this might actually be a good strategy for the PAP.)
It would be wonderful if the Registry of Societies relaxed, if the National Trades Union Congress was broken up into unions that were independent, if libel suits were decided by a panel of international judges, if I actually had to vote at the next general election because my constituency didn’t get redistricted yet again to ensure the safe political retention of an important neighbourhood.
¹ I don’t know this for sure, but certain individuals I have become acquainted with recently (online, so about as acquainted as I can be in that respect) inspire a lot of hope that Singaporeans are not doomed to just seek out monetary wealth.
watched the first season of The Office (I can’t laugh at this F.A.B. programme when it fills me with skin-crawling fear and recognition - except for Tim, I can laugh at Tim)
