- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 33,627
- Points
- 0
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR>May 29, 2009
MOLLYCODDLING?
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Limits to self-reliance
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->IN TUESDAY'S report, 'Government help is not 'first port of call'', the Member of Parliament (MP) for Tanjong Pagar GRC Sam Tan questioned if government efforts to cushion the recession have lulled Singaporeans into a false sense of security, and would reduce their resilience in future recessions and other times of difficulty.
Resilience is important but Mr Tan's suggestion that the Government should do less during times of economic hardship to help develop public resilience is not as clearcut.
The Government plays a unique role in a free-market economy. It is in a unique position because it sets the rules of the market and is the sole arbiter of economic policy.
The Government alone can take some of the actions needed to mitigate economic hardship. Individual citizens cannot.
While the free market can be counted on to run most of the economy, in times of market failures when prices fail to deliver services society needs such as education and health care, and when the market has its hiccups such as in the current period of a prolonged demand slump, only the Government can ease the pain through policy measures.
Taking away economic measures by the Government that would cushion the blow of the recession will only sharpen the drop into recession and prolong it.
As a result, having the Government 'do less' and making citizens 'do more' for themselves, as Mr Tan suggests, is futile, because there is little people can do.
The Government's role is to step in where the common man cannot, but Mr Tan is suggesting that the Government do otherwise in the case of economic policy.
Mr Tan should remember that the failure of the United States government to act following the stock market crash in 1929 led to the Great Depression of the 1930s.
While I applaud Mr Tan's desire to increase national resilience, cutting government involvement in areas where it is essential is unwise.
The Government's participation in the economy is a unique one which no individual can replace.
Hence, I urge policymakers to be aware of the Government's indispensability in certain areas of public policy. Tan Jiaqi
MOLLYCODDLING?
</TR><!-- headline one : start --><TR>Limits to self-reliance
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->IN TUESDAY'S report, 'Government help is not 'first port of call'', the Member of Parliament (MP) for Tanjong Pagar GRC Sam Tan questioned if government efforts to cushion the recession have lulled Singaporeans into a false sense of security, and would reduce their resilience in future recessions and other times of difficulty.
Resilience is important but Mr Tan's suggestion that the Government should do less during times of economic hardship to help develop public resilience is not as clearcut.
The Government plays a unique role in a free-market economy. It is in a unique position because it sets the rules of the market and is the sole arbiter of economic policy.
The Government alone can take some of the actions needed to mitigate economic hardship. Individual citizens cannot.
While the free market can be counted on to run most of the economy, in times of market failures when prices fail to deliver services society needs such as education and health care, and when the market has its hiccups such as in the current period of a prolonged demand slump, only the Government can ease the pain through policy measures.
Taking away economic measures by the Government that would cushion the blow of the recession will only sharpen the drop into recession and prolong it.
As a result, having the Government 'do less' and making citizens 'do more' for themselves, as Mr Tan suggests, is futile, because there is little people can do.
The Government's role is to step in where the common man cannot, but Mr Tan is suggesting that the Government do otherwise in the case of economic policy.
Mr Tan should remember that the failure of the United States government to act following the stock market crash in 1929 led to the Great Depression of the 1930s.
While I applaud Mr Tan's desire to increase national resilience, cutting government involvement in areas where it is essential is unwise.
The Government's participation in the economy is a unique one which no individual can replace.
Hence, I urge policymakers to be aware of the Government's indispensability in certain areas of public policy. Tan Jiaqi
