Symbolism of the Three Caskets

  In the Merchant of Venice, Portia's father asked the suitors who wanted Portia's hand in marriage to choose a casket from three caskets: gold, silver, and lead, and the one who chooses correctly will marry Portia. However, I believe that the three caskets have a deeper layer of symbolism.

  I think that the casket test represents Belmont, where the casket test is held. Belmont is a cosmopolitan society, more accepting of foreigners, and the casket test is based solely on the wisdom of the suitors, with a little luck thrown in, and not on their nationality, race, language, religion, et cetera. 

  Also, the casket test seem to be representative of Bassanio, a Christian and a risk-taker. The gold and silver caskets are inscribed with "Who chooseth me shall gain what many men desire" and “Who chooseth me shall get as much as he deserves" respectively. Those inscriptions are also Christian values, such as that desire is something undesirable and that humans does not deserve the blessings from God. In Shakespeare's times, the idea of not judging something by its appearance is also common, hence the humble lead casket. The lead casket is inscribed with "Who chooseth me must give and hazard all." In my opinion, this carry the meaning that the suitor must be willing to risk all that he has for love, and hope for Portia even though he may not deserve her. Bassanio is the perfect example of that, as in his heart, he knows that he does not deserves Portia, but he's still willing to risk all he has (admittedly, not much) on one hand of cards.  

  Lastly, the three caskets also seem to represent the three main types of people present in the play - greedy, materialistic people, such as Shylock; cautious, confident people, such as Portia; and risk-takers and gamblers, such as Bassanio. 

Ministerial Pay

  Recently, there had been a lot of public debate and a wide range of opinions on the topic of Ministerial Pay, which many Singaporeans feel is too high. Therefore, I shall attempt to express my opinion on the topic of Ministerial Pay.

  In my opinion, I think that the current high ministerial salaries are necessary, as although the top talent in the private sector may not be attracted to public office that has high salaries, they will definitely not be attracted to public office with much lower salaries.

  In the current economic situation, and especially in the materialistic Singaporean context, money is a very significant factor that affects the job that top talents choose. In Asian societies, people are typically very materialistic, and the top talents with usually have a wide selection of different paths and occupations to choose from, and one of the most important, or even the most important, factor would be money. In many other countries, both developed and developing, the salaries of the politicians and civil servants are much lower compared to those in their private sector, which is one of the reasons that in those countries, much less people are attracted to public service and politics.

  Therefore, government salaries must be competitive with the salaries of the private sector. The current ministerial pay is derived from a formula that pegged the salaries of ministers and civil servants  at two-thirds the average principal earned income of the top four earners in six professions: accounting, banking, engineering, law, local manufacturing firms and multinational corporations. Government jobs are mainly about governing, which is a form of management. The six professions’ top earners all have excellent management skills, especially banking, manufacturing and multinational corporations. To serve the people of Singapore better, the government has a necessity to attract the best talents from the private sector, and then to keep them.

  Although some people in the private sector may not want to join a government with salaries that are comparable to the ones of the private sector, they will definitely not want to join one with salaries that are far beyond those in the private sector. The ministers of Singapore’s pay had already been cut to two-thirds of the private sector’s high flyers’ salaries, as a sacrifice of entering public service. It had been cut even further in the economic crisis of 2008-2009, and even further in 2010. Personally, I feel that that amount would be suitable for government ministers of a country with one of the most efficient and corruption-free governments in the world, as a reward for the work they had done for Singapore. Currently, Singapore is the second-richest country in Asia after Japan, and after all, the ministers’ salaries tie in directly with the work they’ve done; if they do a bad job, Singapore’s economy suffers, the pay of everyone in the private sector falls, and so their salaries fall too if they do a bad job, and rise if they do a good one. And in order to obtain ministers that perform well and do good jobs, government salaries must be competitive. After all, it’s a simple logic; you’ve got to pay to get them and you've got to pay to keep them, and you’ve got to pay them well to prevent them from resorting to taking bribes, like poorly-paid ministers in developing countries and even some developed countries do. To use the words of Defense Minister Teo Chee Hean, "We don't want pay to be the reason for people to join us, but we also don't want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us."

  In view of the recent economic crisis, the salaries of the ministers had already been cut twice. Furthermore, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had formed a committee to review ministerial salaries, headed by National Kidney Foundation (NKF) chairman Gerard Ee. To use the words of PM Lee, salaries must reflect the values and ethos of public service. And there is no doubt that being a top minister is inferior to being a top lawyer or top engineer, so the pay shouldn’t be inferior either.

  Therefore, I think that the current ministerial pay is the correct one, and will encourage the high flyers in the private sector like me to join government service and so better serve the people of Singapore. You pay the best, you get the best, and I think that a virtually corruption-free and extremely efficient government is worth fifty cents more from each taxpayer each year.