Avoidance of Income Disparity...

[Goh Meng Seng]

Some reporter ask me what I would like to hear from PM Lee's speech and whether those key problems of Housing, Public Transport, Healthcare, floods...etc. Of course, whether PM will give out goodies.

My take is this, the problems of Housing, Public Transport, Healthcare and floods are not simple issues that could be resolved within a short period of time. The fact is, mistakes and oversights have been made by various ministries with regard to the explosive growth in population due to PAP's own FT policy. Whatever he says will not take effect immediately and solve the problems in a short period of time. Thus, most probably he will avoid them.

PAP is just too used to giving out goodies prior to GE since GCT time. Such "populist vote buying exercise" has been entrenched. I would be pleasantly surprised if LHL decided to go into GE without giving out goodies. That would mean Singapore politics will take a turn for a better change in which political contests are based on contest on ideas and strength, instead of pork barrel and vote buying politics. But I guess even if the LHL wanted that way, his party colleagues would not agree. They are just too used to such pork barrel and vote buying politics that they will pressure their leadership to continue doing it. Else, they will feel insecurity and not confident of holding their grounds.

I would want the PM to address the vanishing middle class which result in the worsening of income disparity. When PAP MPs took the signs of engineers turning into taxi driver as a consolation, this is where the problem will explode. Retail stores targeting the middle class have suffered and withdrawn in size. This is a BAD SIGN. We will end up with two extreme polar income earners which will create social tension in the mid and long term. This situation is worsen by the influx of foreign labor which displace the middle class workers or depressing their wages.

These are important issues that could not ignore. But it seems that PAP's economic discourse has always avoid this important issue altogether.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[jw5]

In my opinion, there are 2 fallacies about the concept of social equity.

The first is that income disparity should be avoided in order to enhance social equity and prevent social problems.
If you try to depress the high income earners in SG, the individual talent will flow out. If you try to artificially push up the low income earners by paying a high wage for a low level job, there's going to be problems with the companies and businesses, especially the small ones.
The answer therefore is not to concentrate on avoiding income disparity but to try and address the following factors:

1. Establish a logical and fair wage structure which rewards people for their talents, contribution, innovation and effort. Therefore high income earners in the private sector are based on market forces. High income earners in private sector to be pegged to similar positions in other countries and also taking into consideration the other benefits they get like power, prestige and subsequent income streams like pensions and directorships. Low income earners not to be artificially inflated which would hurt businesses, but also not to be depressed due to influx of foreigners.

2. Re-visit and re-establish 2 concepts of the purpose of government. The first purpose is to ensure that the locally born and bred citizens should have their basic needs met first and not to have the over-riding purpose of economic growth and growing the country's coffers. The second purpose is to ensure that the people running the country see their jobs as a calling and a service to the country and the people, and not the objective of getting an equivalent renumeration to their peers in the private sector.

3. Establish a system of aid and welfare in the country, which serves to redistribute some resources to the really needy and under-priviledged and not simply to anyone who applies for it or who is unemployed or who claims to be needy.

The second fallacy is that the SG government does not help people in need.
They do. One possible issue is that they may not be helping the really needy people, those who continue to struggle day to day but for some reason or other don't seek help, or those who for reasons of pride or the will to self sustain, choose to slog hard beyond their years just to make a basic living.

Helping really needy people is not just about giving out food and grocery vouchers to people who come asking and pouring out their woes at meet the people sessions. For these people, more investigation should probably be done on how needy they are.

It's actually a very time consuming and probably expensive process, to go and "dig out" those who are really needy and worthy for assistance and help. It's not about giving to people who ask, to people who whine, or people who come with sob stories. Neither is it about giving arbitrarily to people who refuse to make an effort, or refuse to trouble their family members. Nobody is asking for a mindless, questionless welfare system. But if it has been investigated that certain really needy citizens need help and this means reducing the govenment coffers, so be it.

 

[Hans168]

Some reporter ask me what I would like to hear from PM Lee's speech and whether those key problems of Housing, Public Transport, Healthcare, floods...etc. Of course, whether PM will give out goodies.

PAP is just too used to giving out goodies prior to GE since GCT time.

What goodies? Take $1000 from us and give back $10 (expect us to be grateful...??). ONLY idiots see it as goodie when clearly it was our own money which also went towards paying the absurd MIW take home pay. Take car ownership & use as example: pay COE, PARF, Road Tax, GST, ERP and exhorbitant petrol prices - get whacked so many ways just to drive my car from A to B......... WTF does MIW care when their official cars do not cost them a cent! :oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo:

 

[Leongsam]

It's good that the Middle class has disappeared. Any change that simplifies matters has to be positive.

There is no overriding reason why any society needs three classes in the first place.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

It's good that the Middle class has disappeared. Any change that simplifies matters has to be positive.

There is no overriding reason why any society needs three classes in the first place.

The following is the missing part of my posting:

"Any students of economics who study Capitalist by Karl Marx would know that such income disparity will eventually result in class struggle and instability. I just hope that our Nation would face this severe problem of income disparity with an open mind and try to resolve it before it is too late."

The predictions of Karl Marx is that once that happens, there will be class struggle between the have and have not. That is the source of instability.

Goh Meng Seng

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Somehow, Lucky Tan shares my view as well....

http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2010/08/4-themes-for-pm-lees-national-day-rally.html

4 Themes for PM Lee's National Day Rally Speech

Time flies. The previous ND Rally did not feel like it was a year ago.
In the last ND Rally, there was expectation for PM Lee to talk about the problems and issues faced by the country but he a speech recapping the PAP govt's old achievements and on religiosity. However, with the elections coming, he now has to now focus on important problems faced by Singaporeans. PAP MP Teo Ho Pin got it right when he said

“If I am the one deciding, I will not call for an election this year. There are still issues which are not solved which may lead to some Singaporeans being unhappy with the government. Next year will be better......” (Translated) MP Teo in Lianhe Wanbao

Whether the elections is held this year or next, there is little time left to win the voters over. What PM Lee should have done was to focus on the problems and solutions in the previous ND rally and demonstrate the results in this one. Allowing the problems to worsen and unhappiness to fester for so long has been unwise. For this ND Rally, if he wants to limit the loss of votes at the election, he will have to show that he understands the concerns of Singaporeans and will take steps to address them. However, I believe it is a little late and voters will suspect he is just doing it just for the elections. He and his ministers wasted 4 years doing little to address the key issues and now the unhappiness is fairly widespread. The frustration surrounding these issues has grown into intense anger for some and that showed up as vitrolic criticism during the YOG - an event on which the PAP staked its reputation. All this ugliness ended with a critic arrested for "inciting violence" when he posted on the “I hate YOG organising committee” Facebook page that it was time to "burn" Vivian Balakrisnan and the PAP govt at the next elections. It didn't matter to the police that everyone else can see that he was speaking metaphorically. That so much anger was vented on Minister Balakrisnan shows how deep the divide has become. Vivian Balakrisnan was after all the the minister that headed the "Remaking of Singapore" committee that held out hope for some that the PAP govt would become less "PAP-like" and was ready for change. We have since learned how unchangeable the PAP has become and this young minister who was once seen one who would challenge the old PAP ideas morphed to accept and support them. It's like "change we can't"...and the ridiculous charges against of PAP critic Malik shows that when the going gets tough and they can't win, they will simply use and spread fear.

Before I discuss the themes that will be covered in today's ND rally, I digress a little to show a series of articles that has been appeared in the Straits Times:

For the past few months, the Straits Times has published a number of articles that follows a common template - a PR, foreigner or new citizen with excellent accomplishments in school, in business or at work coming out to say how much they like the system in Singapore. It is not clear what the intent of these articles are but they keep reappearing in the main stream media. Some people believe they are trying to tell long time Singaporeans to be grateful for the wonderful system they live in. It is a little strange if they are trying to do that is the intent because anyone from a developing country would be grateful if they get to move to a developed country. Often coming from an impoverished countries with widespread corruption, these people would be happy and grateful whether they are in Germany, USA, Sweden or Australia. Because they are grateful, long time citizens have to also be happy with the system and their political leaders? German citizens have to be happy with Merkel because immigrants to Germany are happy and grateful to be there? Using immigrants to tell citizens to be grateful is a silly idea. This series of articles have an unintended negative effect. A significant number of citizens that have seen their incomes and living standard fall in the past decade facing intense competition for jobs and housing in a tough struggle to better their lives- emphasizing that foreigners come here and do very well rubs salt on their wounds and heighten their fears that the govt immigration policy will worsen their plight.

For the main themes at this years ND rally, I look forward to PM Lee speech on the economy and immigration. The main problem with our economy is the unequal distribution of wealth leading to biggest income disparity in the developed world. Many Singaporeans did not benefit directly from the GDP growth of the past decade and PM Lee has to explain how he plans to narrow the income gap and ensure that the benefit of GDP growth is more evenly distributed. The last time he spoke on this issue, he said that the GINI Index which measures inequality does not matter - I want to see if he continues to deny there is a problem here. Many Singaporeans are still waiting for an explanation on how the liberal immigration policies which has pushed up the cost of living, strained our infrastructure and depressed the wages of a large segment of our workforce actually benefits them. Early this year the govt appeared to be doing a U-turn when it said that it will moderate the foreign worker policy. PM Lee did a U-turn on that U-turn when he said that the growing economy means that an extra 100,000 workers will be imported in the coming year. This ND rally is a chance for him to further clarify the govt's stand on this important issue. If he can't convince Singaporeans that the immigration policy is beneficial to them, the unhappiness will translate to votes against the PAP at the next elections.

 

[pfingo]

Mr Goh,

Could you kindly enlighten exactly which group of people should typically fall under this category and their income level?

thank you

 

[Teo Kok Eng]

Case of rich getting richer and poor getting poorer???