The cardboard collecting elderly
are everywhere to be seen in
Singapore, painfully and slowly struggling to collect cardboard, to earn a few
cents a day. It is neither fulfilling nor rewarding. Yet,
there have been attempts to say, whenever such incidents
have been reported or complained about, that we talked to this elder person or
that elderly person and they told us that they were only doing it to pass the
time and earn a little bit of money. Or the other answer – oh, they said they
were doing it for exercise! Is that really credible? Does that make sense at all? Or is it just an
absurd insulting and demeaning excuse of an explanation?
Let’s look at what then Minister and one-time SAF General
Tan Chuan Jin did with this one. Note that the argument he presented has been
analyzed and shredded in chapter seven’s example No 3. No need to repeat it
here. It’s already dead and buried. No hope for it. He made a statement about
cardboard collection and exercise and was criticized for it. Then, as the MCCY
(MCCY = Minister for Culture, Community & Youth), he got the Youth Wing to take
on a project of sorts, to prove his statement had been an accurate one. Didn’t
really succeed. And we ended up with a
misleading article that originated from MCCY’s volunteer Youth Corp.24 Their findings were insufficiently
representative and weakly argued. But that is how poor statistical work is
done.
Most of the elderly who are financially stable have good
social lives; they visit with children, grandchildren, relatives, friends. They
go out and eat. If they want exercise, they join a group that exercises. You
can see many of the ’exercising elderly’ in the morning at almost every HDB
estate. Those who are comfortable will go to a club and exercise, or just go
out and spend money, be it over shopping, at dinner engagements with friends, or
at the Marina Bay Sands Complex with all of its Casino activity. Or they will
just walk a little down the lane on their own if they wish to. Many of them
look askance at ‘exercise’. They will tell you they have enough exercise
because they go out to dinner often enough! And as for the cardboard collectors
themselves, they have no desire to take on manual labor, which is hard work for
someone of old age. They are very clear about this - I asked them about it.32 And some laughed. ‘Where did you get that
from? Siao nang!’ (Hokkien for crazy
person) My Hokkien is still reasonably good, and so is my Mandarin. I can speak
the language, and that ability is appreciated and gets responses! Hey, I grew up learning how to curse in Portuguese
from my Eurasian friends!
A relevant incident is the one where a foreigner reported an
elderly cardboard collector as being at risk because she was out collecting
cardboard in rainy weather, and there were slippery, wet road surfaces to deal
with.25 Back came the stock
answer again, ‘oh, we asked her. She says she is collecting cardboard to pass
the time and get some exercise.’ Right, add insult to injury. Treat them as
stupid as well, in their old age. Take away a little more dignity. But that wasn’t
enough on this one. The reporter was also told that ‘she is visited by PM Lee’s
staff often to check up on her well-being.” Well, we don’t really know
that. It was just reported as such i.e. she was reported to have said this. So,
if it’s not true, the poor lady is a liar as well. A little too obvious, don’t
you think? The Prime Minister’s staff must have a lot of time on their hands.
And why is this one lady being singled out by the PMO (Prime Minister’s Office)
for such attention?
But the lady in question had perhaps said nothing, since everything
had been done in 3rd person reported speech. This is how the
approach seems to work. Give ‘em a story to keep ‘em quiet; let’s not have
people raise a ruckus about it. Control the narrative. Sure, they are old. And
many of them are unsteady, like the poor old ladies who are bent over,
struggling with loads of dishes at food centers. So heartbreaking, and very
maddening. I hate that. But speak with them. They will tell you there is no
dignity in collecting cardboard or collecting dishes. They just don’t have a
choice. The only dignity gained is when that small quantity of cash is paid to
them. They get to say I did this myself. Didn’t ask anyone for help.
Some useful information on the reality of this situation did
come from an article written by journalist Zalhan Mohd Yusof, who went out and
collected cardboard to see what it was like. He found out and shared his
findings. It was a mean and tough experience.26
The unmistakable conclusion is – you cannot whitewash this, white uniform
or otherwise! Enough with cheap excuses and feeble explanations. This is what
our elderly do to survive while we look the other way. A reasonable allowance
would put an end to it. A nice home for the elderly would be even better, be it
a converted disused primary school or a new home in Johore, modeled on a
kampong village! It would possibly even bring back a little of the feel of old
times.
Aging is part of family culture and only in a minor
capacity part of the national economy.
To speak of an ‘aging’ population in economic terms is nothing more than
to give voice to an ill-defined attempt at describing economic limits. It
really is a declaration that the ‘work force’ constitutes of nothing more than
the able-bodied persons of the State, and the young (helpless, but potential
workers!) and the old (equally helpless, and now with zero or low potential
supposedly) are nothing but burdens. And who takes care of them? Oh, family of
course. And how broadly or narrowly is this creature called ‘family” supported
by government policy in housing, health, education, and so on?
Every population always has an aging component. The reality
behind a wicked phrase like ‘aging population’ is that old folk are seen to be
an economic liability, and that is so wrong! For they soon become seen as a
societal liability, and then a family liability. And who cared for you when you
were young? We are all aging. It is not a liability. We just need to be better
prepared for it, and I don’t mean by topping up CPF. To be described in such
terms as ‘aging’ is demeaning, delegitimizing, and a betrayal of those who have
worked hard. Even more, it is a denial of what is owed to whom. Choose your
terms of discourse carefully. That’s what we have academics for! Unfortunately,
too many of them tend to say what pleases the boss. Ever the dilemma of the scribe.
Don’t think. Just write as you’re told to. Every generation of parents tries
hard to build for the next. And when the building effort is over, what happens
then? They are now an old bunch of dobbins to be put out to pasture? The old
were once young. To give meaning to existence requires understanding the many
stages of the human condition; the young and the old parallel; for in both, we
require care.
We seem to be missing out on that one to a disturbing
degree. The tragic case of the little one who died from abuse is one more sad
example. In a small place that is purportedly a rich one, this should not be
the case. Must do better.
And here's the example I was referring to :
3.The normal perception that all
cardboard collectors are people who are unable to take care of themselves
financially is not true. There will be some who do this as their main source of
income. Some do so to supplement what they have. Some prefer to earn extra
monies, treat it as a form of exercise and activity rather than being cooped up
at home. They do this to remain independent, so that they can have dignity and
not have to ask their families for help.
Always settle issues of clarity first,
before moving on to structural improvements. Here, the generalization of ALL
cardboard collectors gets subdivided into different ‘kinds’ by need: main
income; supplementary; extra monies - isn’t this ‘supplementary’, restated? and
the now infamous ‘exercise’! The writer intends to say it is not absolutely
true but needs to go beyond stating the case to proving it. Be careful with
style. When you need to be precise, watch out for common errors of style that
create ambiguity instead.
1. Perception is never a generalized ‘normal’ in
form, although it may be common to all; it is always subjective....
2. ‘Exercise’, is almost always voluntary and is
done for a physical ROI – improved health. That does not apply in these cases.
There are any number of voluntary exercises that can be done outdoors to avoid
feeling ‘cooped up’ at home. That these folk would opt for cardboard collection
instead is illogical. It cheekily and
perhaps somewhat stupidly actually claims that they seek self-punishment. I
could not find any old folk in an entire new town who recognized the ‘exercise’
value of cardboard collection. They all laughed. Sarcastically. The argument
fails reality here.
3. ‘supplement’ carries overtones of support and
is needed; ‘extra’ is not.
4. Line four would be strengthened if it read
...treat it as a form of economically profitable exercise.....
The paragraph is considerably weakened
in the last sentence when rationale is attempted but fails because it is
self-contradictory i.e. They do this
a. to remain independent
b. so they can have dignity
c. not to have to ask their families for help.
If they do this to remain independent,
then it is no longer a matter of choice. They are constrained by circumstances
to do so. Their independence is already at risk. It is not an elective option.
Not a want. But a need. The argument then proceeds to go downhill once it gets
to dignity. Why? Simply because there is nothing dignified about collecting
cardboard. Might be okay when you’re young, but it sure ain’t when you are
older and bent over and lack strength. It is demeaning, humiliating, and in a
prosperous economy, should not exist.
A good example is found in the elderly
who work in security. Twelve hour shifts with 2 hours spent traveling to work
and a further 2 hours traveling home, for a good many. Go with old uncle Simon
– who takes the MRT to Jurong West – then takes the bus to the end of the line;
then walks more than a mile to the guard post. You’re way out where Shell and
other good people are! He reverses his steps and repeats the ritual in the
evening. Are you kidding me? Nope. What does that leave you with? Not much.
Maybe six hours of sleep for an old man if you are fortunate to be working near
home. Most are not.
What does the writer mean here? The
writer wants to say that to maintain their dignity, they need a certain level
of independence. That independence is facilitated by having sufficient income.
Then they can enjoy the dignity and independence of not having to ask for $
help from anyone. However, that is ironically achieved at the price of their
dignity! So, in a parallel to number one, we have here a “they do x in order to get y, but where x removes y!” Okay,
something very wrong with the helicopter-hair assumption. Shoot ahead to the
section on SAFOS and you’ll get what I mean.
I collect cardboard to earn $ so that
I can maintain my dignity and independence by not having to ask anyone for $
help. However, I have realized that in doing so I have already lost what little
dignity I had left in the first place. I guess it’s a trade-off? Conclusion:
the writer has inadvertently negated the argument. Try a rewrite....
Some older folk collect cardboard to earn
income, but not all of them do this because of financial need. Some do. Others
just don’t have enough pocket money, so a little extra income helps. Either
way, they do it because it helps them be totally independent and not have to
ask anyone for financial help.
Now there are no contradictions, and there is
no argument. Just a neutral statement.
What did we do? We took dignity out of
it! How touching! Effective argument? Nope. Effective writing? Nope.
No comments:
Post a Comment