Opposition, opposing for name sake?

Democracy. A country with this system of governance will have ruling and opposition. The latter designation is improper and counter-productive. The term "oppose" suggest that the loser in general election is destined to blindly oppose whatever implementation or plan by ruling party, regardless of fact or rationale. Unfortunately, it is true that opposition often drum up "bad results" by ruling while keeping quiet when "good results" occur, which is unfair, but a must for opposition's survival in a democratic society. There is constant competition between ruling and opposition, which its really unhealthy and detriment to a country's growth. Why oppose for the sake of opposing?

There is always risk involved in whatever plan or venture by ruling (aka government). In Singapore, the Youth Olympic Game (YOG) was a risk worth taking as it could boost both Singapore's brand as well as increase tourists arrival. In addition, the improvement on sport facilities and other infrastructure will prove useful post-YOG, as these facilities/infrastructure will benefit Singaporeans. They could also be reused for other games in the future. Moreover, the rights for broadcasting the Game was expected to increase revenue from advertisement etc... All these benefits are not factored in when Opposition drummed up the fact that (1) there were glitches, (2) overspending due to underestimation of cost etc. which is really unfair.

Another venture the government risked for the betterment of economy was the development of integrated resort, with casino as one of the attractions. Opposition again highlighted the negative implication without looking at the whole picture. Opposition suggested that casino will increase gambling problem, without considering that (1) measures were taken by authority to monitor and stop problem gamblers, (2) illegal gambling dens have been there in Singapore, e.g. Geylang etc with its associated Ah Long (loan shark) before integrated resort was mooted, (3) benefit of integrated resort far outweighed the cons, e.g. increasing jobs and tourist arrival.

Next, F1 in Singapore. Some complained about this as well. What a success it proved. The revenue from tourist arrival was amazing. The revenue from advertisement brought about by broadcasting the event was super. F1 will definitely stay and it will surely contribute to Singapore's economy.

Now, if the government don't do anything, there will not be anything worth looking forward to. "No venture no gain" as we all know it, and if the government listen to Opposition most of the time, there will be nothing to implement, nothing to venture, nothing to develop and nothing for nothing.

So please, in a democratic society, please please.... Opposition need to grow more mature in dealing with matters pertaining to Singapore. Sometimes, give ruling some slack if there is failure in ventures (as risk is always there no matter how well the plan had been) and do pat ruling's back if they did well. After all, when Singapore prospers Singaporeans prosper as well. As for now, that ideal is an impossible task because no one wants to be the loser for long and politics is a dirty game. That is why, shit is everywhere, even in Opposition.

Take for example, the Opposition tried to please the populace by promises of giving "handouts" when Opposition is in power. We must understand where the money will be coming from, from this promised handouts by Opposition. It will surely be the national coffer (from ventures and risks taken by ruling in generating this saving). That money is not Opposition's to promise as handouts! What shameless and irresponsible audacity. I could promise each Singaporean a palace too by spending the coffer if I'm in power, but that would make me deceitful!

Are we going to end up as the US in spending national coffer? Over there, it's always a race to dry up the national coffer before the end of next term and after which wait for the other party to clean up a shitload of debts. I worry Singapore will sink if that happens.