3 ms·

Not nearly as many Singaporeans drive, though, and a pretty substantial proportion of the cars on the street are taxis. So, given that taxi drivers are generall

by etal 16y ago

Not nearly as many Singaporeans drive, though, and a pretty substantial proportion of the cars on the street are taxis. So, given that taxi drivers are generally good drivers but prone to the occasional stunt to get a passenger somewhere on time, this could just be pragmatic, where the government isn't interested in punishing the taxi drivers that keep the city running smoothly. Also, Singaporeans are better trained than Californians, so less of a deterrent is needed. And, U.S. traffic laws and fines seem decidedly optimized for raising money for the local city government, rather than the safety or convenience of drivers or pedestrians, whereas Singapore has a more monolithic and paternalistic government which can raise the money it needs through other means.

Ryanmf 16y ago
That all seems sensible to me. Although having established that: 1. the penalty for performing an illegal u-turn in Singapore isn't as harsh as penalties for the same act in America, and perhaps other western nations as well, 2. that penalty seems especially lenient in comparison to laws in Singapore that punish more severely behavior that many Westerners would have trouble considering a crime at all (i.e. chewing gum in public or carrying a durian on the metro), 3. regardless of the penalty, the average Singaporean is unlikely to be affected by the law, as they are more inclined to ride in taxis or other forms of public transportation, this analogy doesn't seem very apt. Is it just the cute acronym that caused this expression to stick? Or the imagery of making a u-turn being representative of rebelling against the "path" as prescribed by authority figures? Maybe Sim Wong Hoo is just popular and knows how to be catchy? There are a great many draconian laws in Singapore which cause its citizens to be unwilling to act without governmental approval. This certainly has some endemic effect on their societal norms as well. I would argue that this has less to do with Singaporeans being risk-averse and more to do with the fact that on the other side of many of those laws a government official is waiting to beat them with a stick. Except, of course, in the case of illegal u-turns. I will admit that having not read Chaotic Thoughts from the Old Millenium I cannot say whether or not the analogy is more clearly defined and/or convincing in the original text.

by etal 16y ago

Ryanmf 16y ago

That all seems sensible to me. Although having established that: 1. the penalty for performing an illegal u-turn in Singapore isn't as harsh as penalties for the same act in America, and perhaps other western nations as well, 2. that penalty seems especially lenient in comparison to laws in Singapore that punish more severely behavior that many Westerners would have trouble considering a crime at all (i.e. chewing gum in public or carrying a durian on the metro), 3. regardless of the penalty, the average Singaporean is unlikely to be affected by the law, as they are more inclined to ride in taxis or other forms of public transportation, this analogy doesn't seem very apt. Is it just the cute acronym that caused this expression to stick? Or the imagery of making a u-turn being representative of rebelling against the "path" as prescribed by authority figures? Maybe Sim Wong Hoo is just popular and knows how to be catchy? There are a great many draconian laws in Singapore which cause its citizens to be unwilling to act without governmental approval. This certainly has some endemic effect on their societal norms as well. I would argue that this has less to do with Singaporeans being risk-averse and more to do with the fact that on the other side of many of those laws a government official is waiting to beat them with a stick. Except, of course, in the case of illegal u-turns. I will admit that having not read Chaotic Thoughts from the Old Millenium I cannot say whether or not the analogy is more clearly defined and/or convincing in the original text.