How to reduce income inequality in Singapore

[mojito]

The difference is that there is a very large supply of people who can clean toilets well but a smaller supply of those who can run an office well.

Salary is determined by supply and demand which is the way it should be.

Ah, so we agree supply and demand affects prices.

Assuming local people want to be cleaners at higher wages. if we tighten supply of labour from foreign sources to put a constraint on the limitless supply of labourers working as cleaners, then income inequality can be reduced. Government does not have to intervene in prices, it can do so with labour supply.

 

[Fook Seng]

Sorry Fook Gor, I cannot remember liow. It was more than 30 years ago :o

If got time, I want to tap your memory again on another matter: proportional representation. Understand there is a form of proportional representation based on a GRC but elected not on a single ticket but on multi-tickets which means the winning candidates need not be from the same party. You don't have to answer me now.

 

[Fook Seng]

The difference is that there is a very large supply of people who can clean toilets well but a smaller supply of those who can run an office well.

Actually, the supply is so small that the one you have recruited often cannot run the office well.

 

[blur sotong]

I won't even define them as high achievers and under achievers. We are too much conditioned by the Govt's definition of meritocracy.

If you have a good education, you have high merits and you are an over-achiever. Otherwise you are underachieving. Here we are talking about different type of jobs. How can we talk about underachieving and overachieving?

...

We can consider this in two ways. First, is this job so critical to the local employee? If it is, then the salary must be raised above the sustenance level and we need to have in place things like FW levies to balance out the import of FW. If the job is not critical to the local job market , then let it be filled by FT and we enjoy the low cost that this brings. Without the first approach of handling this situation, we are letting a local problem to grow.

Fook Gor,

Thanks for the effort in putting your points across. I agree with your view.

Think you may have mis-understood the terminology I used.

The term high achiever vs under achiever is used specifically to reply this post below.

I refused to use the term "losers". Because they are not. Earning less does not make one a loser in everything. That is how that under achiever came about - to differentiate that "achiever" term.

Societies who punish achievers and reward losers perish.

Not necessary. It just reward high achiever less and reward underachievers better.

P/s underachievers =/= losers.

 

[Fook Seng]

The term high achiever vs under achiever is used specifically to reply this post below.

I refused to use the term "losers". Because they are not. Earning less does not make one a loser in everything. That is how that under achiever came about - to differentiate that "achiever" term.

Now I understand. Achiever is defined by earning power.

 

[blur sotong]

Ah, so we agree supply and demand affects prices.

Assuming local people want to be cleaners at higher wages. if we tighten supply of labour from foreign sources to put a constraint on the limitless supply of labourers working as cleaners, then income inequality can be reduced. Government does not have to intervene in prices, it can do so with labour supply.

Basic Labour Economics - Supply and Demand of labour where wages is the equilibrium. In between, many other factors coming into play.

 

[blur sotong]

Now I understand. Achiever is defined by earning power.

Yes Sir!

 

[blur sotong]

If got time, I want to tap your memory again on another matter: proportional representation. Understand there is a form of proportional representation based on a GRC but elected not on a single ticket but on multi-tickets which means the winning candidates need not be from the same party. You don't have to answer me now.

Fook Gor, the 1st part yes, proportional representation based on GRC to ensure that the Chinese do not dominate entirely and minority groups are represented.

As for the 2nd part, hee hee... better ask those cronies that wear wigs to interpret. Remember that being inside the polling staion does not breach the regulation where candidates cannot be within a certain meters from the polling station since they are INSIDE the polling station. How else do these candidates got in to begin with?

 

[Fook Seng]

Fook Gor, the 1st part yes, proportional representation based on GRC to ensure that the Chinese do not dominate entirely and minority groups are represented.

As for the 2nd part, hee hee... better ask those cronies that wear wigs to interpret. Remember that being inside the polling staion does not breach the regulation where candidates cannot be within a certain meters from the polling station since they are INSIDE the polling station. How else do these candidates got in to begin with?

Remember the Old Man once said that maybe there should be more than one vote per person?

At that time, most of us interpreted it as he wanted to give more votes to some than to others (he could still be meaning that). But assuming he was a fair guy and was looking at all the options of how to get minority representation (OK this is a big "if" because we all know that whatever he did was to screw the Opposition but just assuming that this was true), wouldn't PR through a GRC system have been a studied option?

Under such a system, for a 5-member GRC, you get, say, 6 votes with the sixth, compulsorily going to a minority candidate. Other than the minority candidate, all the other four candidates are elected based on the number of votes received but constrained by some restrictions that favour proportional representation. This would be a very interesting system - proportional representation yet with minority protection.

If this thought process did actually take place, then the final decision had been made in the interest of selfish control and at the detriment of fair play.

 

[blur sotong]

At that time, most of us interpreted it as he wanted to give more votes to some than to others (he could still be meaning that). But assuming he was a fair guy and was looking at all the options of how to get minority representation (OK this is a big "if" because we all know that whatever he did was to screw the Opposition but just assuming that this was true), wouldn't PR through a GRC system have been a studied option?

"PR" as in Perm Resident? Then it will openly declare favouring one minority race over another. And definitely detrimental to the majority race. How do you have sufficient Eurasian PR vs say Indian PR (which can be large in numbers)

Under such a system, for a 5-member GRC, you get, say, 6 votes with the sixth, compulsorily going to a minority candidate. Other than the minority candidate, all the other four candidates are elected based on the number of votes received but constrained by some restrictions that favour proportional representation. This would be a very interesting system - proportional representation yet with minority protection.

If this thought process did actually take place, then the final decision had been made in the interest of selfish control and at the detriment of fair play.

Fook Gor, your proposal would be too much for most Singaporeans to understand. Already 60% didn't realised how badly they are being screwed. What more a such refined electoral systems?

GRC have been transformed into an instrument for selfish control and detrimental to fair play. It is so obvious, is it not?

Soon GRC will be their Waterloo. It is only time. Unless they open the flood gate so quickly that it will continue to outweigh the growing resentment.

 

[monkey101]

If you have a good education, you have high merits and you are an over-achiever. Otherwise you are underachieving. Here we are talking about different type of jobs. How can we talk about underachieving and overachieving?

If we ask an office manager and get him to clean all the toilet bowls within 10 minutes, something which the office cleaner can accomplish with ease and if this office manager fails to do within the given time, that is what I call underachieving.

For this job, he gets $6000 a month and, being in the good book of his boss, he is expected to get 5 months' bonus this year.

His working day is effectively used to the full with a 45-min lunch break. For this he is paid $800 a month. He only enjoys a 13th month bonus if the company makes money.

cheem. why you want to talk about achieving something that you have not master yet. the manager may end up as a taxi driver. can he be better than an old uncle who has no o-level cert.

 

[Fook Seng]

"PR" as in Perm Resident? Then it will openly declare favouring one minority race over another. And definitely detrimental to the majority race. How do you have sufficient Eurasian PR vs say Indian PR (which can be large in numbers)

Fook Gor, your proposal would be too much for most Singaporeans to understand. Already 60% didn't realised how badly they are being screwed. What more a such refined electoral systems?

GRC have been transformed into an instrument for selfish control and detrimental to fair play. It is so obvious, is it not?

Soon GRC will be their Waterloo. It is only time. Unless they open the flood gate so quickly that it will continue to outweigh the growing resentment.

No lah. PR as in proportional representation.

 

[monkey101]

Ah, so we agree supply and demand affects prices.

Assuming local people want to be cleaners at higher wages. if we tighten supply of labour from foreign sources to put a constraint on the limitless supply of labourers working as cleaners, then income inequality can be reduced. Government does not have to intervene in prices, it can do so with labour supply.

yes. demand high with supply low means uncles and aunties can get higher salaries.

however, our government will not allow that to happen. fts slaves. lhl and company will get more. ask lhl to be a professor in nus. see whether he is better. they always claim they are the elites and ordinary singaporeans stupid. let them prove it.

 

[Fook Seng]

"PR" as in Perm Resident? Then it will openly declare favouring one minority race over another. And definitely detrimental to the majority race. How do you have sufficient Eurasian PR vs say Indian PR (which can be large in numbers)

Fook Gor, your proposal would be too much for most Singaporeans to understand. Already 60% didn't realised how badly they are being screwed. What more a such refined electoral systems?

GRC have been transformed into an instrument for selfish control and detrimental to fair play. It is so obvious, is it not?

Soon GRC will be their Waterloo. It is only time. Unless they open the flood gate so quickly that it will continue to outweigh the growing resentment.

Honestly speaking, SMC won't get us much further than GRC, slight improvement only, still unable to achieve one third seats. Only a proportional representation will. The implementation is not so difficult, just give them 5 lines of boxes with the top line your most preferred candidate, the second line next and so on. You click, cross or shade on the box against the photo of the candidate heading that column. Counting is more problematic but not the voting itself.