How PAP hoodwinked Singaporeans with statistics - a MUST READ!

[Papsmearer]

There are somethings strangely inaccurate about what you pasted above.

First, it is a fact that Canada, Australia, NZ (and the US and UK btw) have far far higher tax rates. This applies to all the brackets- the top, high, middle and lower income earners.

I'm not sure how much you earn, but I find it strange that you aren't aware of this very common knowledge that all my friends know. We have done countless comparisons with different countries, many of which we studied in, to arrive at the conclusion that Singapore has practically one of the best and most sound tax systems in the world.

Someone who made $120k per annum here, only pays 5% income tax. ($6k, before rebates and reliefs kick in). Someone who makes the same amount in any of the countries stated above, easily pays between 30 to 50 per cent, depending on which of these countries above.

The tax system in SG is actually one of the few things I feel was well thought out and would make me consider not leaving.

It places the penalty on the spender instead of putting the weight on high income earners on an unbalanced manner, which goes against the spirit of meritocracy and high achieving. Tax generators like GST, ERP and COE, are in place in order to fulfil this vision. If you choose to drive and own a car or take taxis regularly, go to Europe holidays every month and buy big ass 52 inch flat screens, you shall pay MORE ERP and COE and GST and contribute to the tax coffers. It does not place a weight on simply the fact that you have done well in life based on your merit and intellect, which is what an income tax heavy system does. In other words, the more you spend (which is an indicator of your means in any case), the more you are penalised.

This is a system that I think was very clearly borne out of extremely sound critical thinking, yes, by people with helicopter view. Yes, I can actually believe this is by the scholars.

Did you also know the rationale for ERP, and how it was meant to allow more Singaporeans to drive and own a car despite the limited size of the island, using staggered timings? After ERP was imposed, the price of COE practically halved. Even at its peak, COE today is half of the peak of COE in the pre-ERP days. COE is the highest barrier (price-wise) to car ownership. So reducing the COE and making up for the reduction to the tax coffers with ERP means there is a system of staggered car usership. By placing a premium on the peak times of usership, it becomes staggered. In other words, if you want to use it at the peak, you can, just pay. If not, use it at non peaks. This is also thought of by a scholar, Lee Hsien Loong.

Btw, i could be wrong but I don't recall the interest rate for CPF to be 2.5%. Isn't it 5%?

Congrats, u are the second biggest PAP ballslicker to Cass888.People like you who have no sound critical thinking are not in a position to say that the system is thought up by people who have it. I strongly believe that people like you contribute to the over all apathy, and stupidity of the general population.

All your friends and you, (who have supposededly spend so much time comparing the tax systems of other countries with that of S'pore) have the combined IQ of a flea. If you guys have 2 IQ points to rub between your fingers, u will realise that many of the S'pore taxes are hidden. The PAP is not stupid. They will advertise one low tax on income, but ding u on many other things.

For example:
HDB Flats - In the 60s and 70s when the HDB was selling flats at near cost to people, u could buy one for $30,000. $50-70K was a higher end flat. Today, the flats are being sold for $300-$400K. Do you really think it cost the HDB that much to build them? The gross profit to the HDB is easily $100-$200K per flat. This is a tax. The govt. controls it, the govt. levies it.
CPF - The PAP gives you 2.5% for your CPF savings and they are proud of it. In the past, the rate was as low as 1%. They take your CPF money and earn over 10% investing it in stocks, commercial property, etc. That 7.5% + difference should belong to the CPF holder. That is another tax.
Cars - A car costing $20Kin most parts of the world sells for close to $100Kin S'pore. The $80K difference is just taxes to the govt.

There are many more examples, and if you add them all up, you will find that the tax rate is not that much different. U have to see what a citizen of another country pays in total taxes over their lifetime, and see what a S'porean pays.

In many other countries, many services are free. It may cost $20K for a medical procedure here, but its free elsewhere. If you lose your job, u can get govt. assistance. U may not lose you home. What's that worth to a s'porean? In the long run, it pretty much evens out.

By the way, that scholar Gay Loong is not so smart as to think of all these.

 

[theDoors]

I'm amused by your post, because even before I logged in, I already wanted to say something, which incidentally directly answers you.

No, I'm not comparing apples and oranges. I'm comparing tax systems. And its NOT TRUE that the countries I named have free education and free acceptable healthcare.

You, are just like one of the gullible thousands who possess these two factors: 1) have not lived outside Singapore and 2) believe in anything you read that suits your agenda.

Not sure about NZ, as I have less experience with it, education is NOT free in the US, the UK and Australia.

In the US, citizens pay about S$400k for four years of tuition in its private universities (the Ivy League, MIT, Stanford, Chicago, John Hopkins, Caltech these are among the private universities in the states and many top universities are private, leaving many smart people with the brains to get in taking up hefty loans). There is no subsidy at all. Americans do get subsidised in public universities (which Singaporeans do not. Lots of gullible Singaporeans think that going to a US public university is cheaper for them, these people are retards), but it still costs about S$200-300k in tuition fees. This is why many Americans talk about spending the first 5 to 7 years of their working life paying off tuition loan.

In the UK, citizens do NOT get university education and most get by with bank loans unless they are rich enough to be funded by parents. One of my ex-es, a BBC took up a bank loan for her degree in LSE. Non citizens pay about 6 times more.

In Australia, university fees are much cheaper for citizens but NOT free. They pay about 5 to 10%, the same rate as what Singaporeans pay if they go to our farmer universities.

University is free in Canada for its citizens. But why do you think it only has a population (33 million) that's 1/10 the size of the population of the US (more than 300 million), despite the fact that US citizens don't get free university education? Go and try to figure out.

Talk about free healthcare? Do you know the costs of health insurance in the states?

Free healthcare in the UK? Sure there is. If you are ok waiting 4-5 years for your FREE heart surgery under its infamous NHS system. You may also like to know that in the UK, non-citizens like students and PRs also get to use NHS because I DID!!!

I've always known that the temasekreview amateur clowns are a bunch of embarrassing nobodies and frogs in the well with low IQ. Now its clearer than ever. before they write another one of their embarrassing cringe-worthy articles, they may want to recruit some people into their loser fold, who's actually lived outside of this tiny pathetic island.

These countries you mentioned, does the same party have uninterrupted power for 50 years?