Working poor in Singapore can't make ends meet: NUS

[streetcry]

[h=2]A new study has shown that the working poor in Singapore are not getting enough pay to make ends meet. Working poor is defined as someone earning less than half of the average monthly income of a Singaporean, which now stands at S$3,000.[/h]

• PHOTOS

File photo: A general view of the Singapore skyline.







SINGAPORE: A new study has shown that the working poor in Singapore are not getting enough pay to make ends meet. Working poor is defined as someone earning less than half of the average monthly income of a Singaporean, which now stands at S$3,000.


The survey on poverty attitudes by the National University of Singapore's Social Work Department showed that those who need money, want to work, and there are jobs available.


66.4 per cent of respondents said jobs are available for aid recipients who want to work. However, 85 per cent said most jobs aid recipients can get are not paying enough for them to support a family.


Researcher Irene Ng cited factors such as globalisation and the widening income gap, which ha
ve led to stagnating wages for Singapore's poor.


About 60 per cent of respondents said government expenditure to help the poor in Singapore is not enough, and about half said they were willing to pay more taxes to help the government raise its social spending to help disadvantaged groups.


Associate Professor Ng said this bodes well for Singapore, as it shows citizens' willingness to support and do more to uplift the lives of the low income within the community


Experts at a dialogue session on Tuesday also made a call for a minimum wage in Singapore. They said it was one way to force companies to pay workers decent wages.


Associate Professor Hui Weng Tat of the Lee Kuan Yew Public Policy argued that government social transfers like Workfare, in which the government subsidises the wages of a low income worker, does not have the desired effect. He said, that was because the subsidies come from tax payers and not employers.


The study covered 383 Singaporeans across income levels and ethnic groups.


- CNA/ac

 

[halsey02]

"About 60 per cent of respondents said government expenditure to help the poor in Singapore is not enough, and about half said they were willing to pay more taxes to help the government raise its social spending to help disadvantaged groups"

This is a foretelling of the future, where G.S.T., will be 10% & ERP will raised, "higher" & COE tweak to collect more, "they are willing to pay more"..who are the THEY??

 

[gingerlyn]

[h=2]A new study has shown that the working poor in Singapore are not getting enough pay to make ends meet. Working poor is defined as someone earning less than half of the average monthly income of a Singaporean, which now stands at S$3,000.

Poor workers must adjust their expectations and re-define their ends meet.
Quote: Dr Vivian Balakrishnan:
How much do you want? Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?
Unquote:
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2007/04/parliamentary-exchange-between-lily-neo-and-mcys-minister

:*:

 

[wMulew]

The working poor in every country in the world have problems meeting ends meet. Those who think people earning minimum wage in other countries can easily get by needs to get their head checked

 

[gingerlyn]

The working poor in every country in the world have problems meeting ends meet. Those who think people earning minimum wage in other countries can easily get by needs to get their head checked

You may be right! but none of their leaders earn as much as Sinkie leaders :*:

if sinkie poors are just the same as other countries in Australia, NZ etc, what makes you think that Sinke leaders deserve the highest pay in the world? :kma:

 

[Unrepented]

Chee bye.....wonder where they pull this 60% and respondents from...........Chinese seventh month izit:(

...............

About 60 per cent of respondents said government expenditure to help the poor in Singapore is not enough, and about half said they were willing to pay more taxes to help the government raise its social spending to help disadvantaged groups.


Associate Professor Ng said this bodes well for Singapore, as it shows citizens' willingness to support and do more to uplift the lives of the low income within the community


..............

- CNA/ac

 

[enterprise2]

The working poor in every country in the world have problems meeting ends meet. Those who think people earning minimum wage in other countries can easily get by needs to get their head checked

Dont they get it by now??? U needs loads of poor people so that u can have some rich people. If everyone same same, then how??

 

[PrinceCharming]

Hi guys,

Please tell me when Pinky's LEEgime allow the use of the term "poor" instead of "needy" in state-controlled media? Is it the beginning of the year?

 

[soIsee]

Hi guys,

Please tell me when Pinky's LEEgime allow the use of the term "poor" instead of "needy" in state-controlled media? Is it the beginning of the year?

When you are 'poor' you are poor!

And when the year ends comes Pinky will change again to 'lower income group' when he disburse his year end and pow to the balless Sinkie to make them feel good! LOL

 

[Annunaki]

We do not need another study to tell us what we already know.

 

[TopSage]

There is nothing new in this report. My father was a factory worker. He was able to provide me education and a roof over my head....raise a family and never felt "sinking poverty". That was the PAST. NOW things have changed as our income gap became biggest in developed world.

When I worked in fast food, those who were married dispatch riders, fast food workers were basically struggling with debts and monthly expenses - the worry about money and stress was perpetual living from hand to mouth...and when family member get sick days get worse.

Life got worse for many low wage workers and basic human things like raising a family and providing them with a home has become difficult challenges for this group of people. Its keep getting worse and worse for them.

 

[soIsee]

There is nothing new in this report. My father was a factory worker. He was able to provide me education and a roof over my head....raise a family and never felt "sinking poverty". That was the PAST. NOW things have changed as our income gap became biggest in developed world.

When I worked in fast food, those who were married dispatch riders, fast food workers were basically struggling with debts and monthly expenses - the worry about money and stress was perpetual living from hand to mouth...and when family member get sick days get worse.

Life got worse for many low wage workers and basic human things like raising a family and providing them with a home has become difficult challenges for this group of people. Its keep getting worse and worse for them.

So you are telling everyone here this.

Anything going to change? For those fast food workers?

For you?

If your 'intelligent' answer is...NO..then why the fuck tell everyone here this? hahahahahahaha

 

[babuSingh]

They can make ends meet if they don't spend all their money on useless shit like car grooming, LEDs, overrated restaurant food and prostitutes....

 

[TopSage]

So you are telling everyone here this.

Anything going to change? For those fast food workers?

For you?

If your 'intelligent' answer is...NO..then why the fuck tell everyone here this? hahahahahahaha

To raise awareness for the need for minimum wages.

 

[singveld]

wow, working poor is 3000 now. that was a lot of money in my time.

 

[chonburifc]

wow, working poor is 3000 now. that was a lot of money in my time.

Fuck your mother pua chee bye. Not say I look down on you this bastard, u earn half of 3000 boh? Got pics to show or not? Knn, another Tua kang Yao siu wor.

 

[laksaboy]

wow, working poor is 3000 now. that was a lot of money in my time.

Working poor is defined as someone earning less than half of the average monthly income of a Singaporean, which now stands at S$3,000.

You utterly fail at reading comprehension and basic maths.

Please kill yourself now and don't pollute the human gene pool.

 

[winnipegjets]

The average is $3k a month but it does not reflect the true depth of how low wages are in sinkapore...the median take home pay is $1,700. 50 percent of sinkees make less than $1700!!!!

That explains why 60 percent of sinkees don't pay taxes. Boh lui to pay taxes!!! But they still pay lots in GST proportionately.

 

[gingerlyn]

The average is $3k a month but it does not reflect the true depth of how low wages are in sinkapore...the median take home pay is $1,700. 50 percent of sinkees make less than $1700!!!!

That explains why 60 percent of sinkees don't pay taxes. Boh lui to pay taxes!!! But they still pay lots in GST proportionately.

Let's use sgd1700 as the yardstick. Their minimum expenditures are:
1) PUB bills - 150
2) Conservancy - 60
3) Transportation - 150
4) Phone bills - 100
5) Children education 200
and many more.
all their basic expenditures are controlled tightly by the government. government can easily lowering their cost of living by lowering the above cost. In reality, government does not do that. In fact, government is making huge profit and milking them. For example, Malaysia sells cheap water to Singapore but government imposes very expensive water tariff to its citizens.

 

[iluvgst]

Fixing Inequality Can Save Us From the Next Crisis

Americans are egalitarian. This trait has long frustrated plutocrats who, more than a century ago, invented Social Darwinism to teach that the rich prospered because they were smart and productive. Few people believed this, not then and not now.

A new Census Bureau report released last week showed that since 2009 economic gains have accrued only to the top 5 percent of households; the rest have gained almost nothing; poverty remains high and inequality has worsened. Yet libertarians still ask: Does inequality matter? Is our fondness for equality good economics or does it stand in the way of creativity, hard work and just rewards?

Economists have argued about this for more than 200 years. Adam Smith, that apostle of markets, saw the political danger of inequality, and expressed it most compactly: “Wealth is power, as Mr. Hobbes says.” John Maynard Keynes wrote of the Victorian era: “It was precisely the inequality of the distribution of wealth which made possible those vast accumulations of fixed wealth and of capital improvements which distinguished that age from all others.” On the other hand, the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter argued that inequality is the force behind technical advance. According to Schumpeter, progress is a lottery. And if the prizes are really big, more people will try to win them. There will be many failures -- but much invention.

Rising Inequality

Inequality waned during most of the 20th century, to Schumpeter’s dismay. By 1958, even John Kenneth Galbraith could write, “few things are more evident in modern social history than the decline of interest in inequality as an economic issue.” In the 1980s and 1990s, though, inequality shot up and interest revived. These days the battle rages on.

Of course, market outcomes are unequal. And to liberals’ chagrin, inequality is exacerbated in good times. In the late 1990s, under President Bill Clinton, the U.S. had four years of full employment, and income inequality hit levels not seen since 1929. The reason is simple: Inequality is driven mainly by capital gains, stock options and the proceeds of venture capital and initial public offerings, all of which exploded during the information-technology boom.

But do more unequal countries, generally, work better? In Europe, “labor market flexibility” has been the mantra of conservative reformers for years. According to them, skilled workers were paid too little and unskilled workers too much. The supposed remedy was to weaken unions, cut pensions and reduce state benefits for working people. Recently Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy and Spain carried out such “reforms.” Competitiveness didn’t return and unemployment rose.

Here are two facts: First, rich countries are usually more equal than poor ones. For a nation to be rich and developed, it must -- by definition -- have a large middle class. Second, inequality and unemployment rise and fall together. If pay gaps are large, people will quit low-paying jobs (on farms, for example) and move to factory towns (or technology centers) where the jobs are better -- but scarce. Those who can’t get the good jobs stay unemployed. It’s pretty simple. Also, if wage rules forbid low pay, then businesses innovate more rapidly and productivity increases. Decades ago the Scandinavians grasped this dynamic, and since then, those countries have become some of the richest on earth.

In short, as economics, inequality is like blood pressure. There’s a healthy range. Within that range, lower is better but too low can be dangerous and zero puts you in the morgue. When inequality rises, the symptoms aren’t necessarily immediate. It may even feel pretty good; credit booms do. But rising inequality is a sign of crisis to come. We saw that in 1930, in 2000 and again in 2008. You can’t eliminate inequality, and we don’t want to. But it should be kept under control.

Minimum Wage

So, on one side, we want the lure of large prizes to help drive innovation. On the other, we want a stable and secure middle class. Can we have both? Would raising the minimum hourly wage -- let’s say to $12 or even $15 -- threaten innovation? Of course not. Nor would a more generous Social Security system, easier terms on student loans or a robust public jobs program. Nor for that matter would raising the top income tax rates or rates on capital gains. The lure of big prizes isn’t diminished much by having to pay a little more in taxes.

What is key, though, is that innovation’s big prizes not fund dynasties. The second and third generations never replicate the genius (or luck or graft) of the first. Instead, the descendants go into politics, or become speculators or tax evaders. An effective estate-and-gift tax works to prevent this. With a high rate and a generous exemption or even a full deduction for qualified philanthropy, those who have won great fortunes will give most of them away. They will endow universities, hospitals, museums, libraries, parks, theaters and churches. Within a generation, the money goes out of family hands and the proceeds go back to the community, funding good works and creating jobs.

We can tolerate inequality, in other words, as long as we meet two conditions. First, there must be a strong, stable foundation for middle-class life with protection from poverty. Second, great fortunes can pile up but they must then be dispersed. In a democracy, no one should rule by inherited wealth -- or it’s no democracy to speak of.

(James K. Galbraith is the author of “Inequality and Instability: A Study of the World Economy Just Before the Great Crisis.” His next book is “The End of Normal,” due in 2014. He teaches at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.)

To contact the writer of this article: James K. Galbraith [email protected].

To contact the editor responsible for this article: Alex Bruns at [email protected].

Find out more about Bloomberg for iPhone: http://m.bloomberg.com/iphone/