Is life generally better after GE2011?

[Hotshot85]

The only advice that I can give you is to stop reminiscing on old newspaper cutouts and snippets.

Stop looking backward. They're history!

Always look forward.

 

If that's the case, you wouldn't have brought up in your post earlier that in the 70s/80s when it was 100% PAP, our land was a better place to live in.

 

THATS history too, and the reality now is that it sucks. I'm not clamouring for BMWs/Private houses for all citizens etc. I just want a country where every class can still live decently and comfortably when they retire eventually. This generation's majority/ruling party DOES NOT offer that now.

 

You talked about investing in our children's future. Sending them for all overseas internships etc etc. You think its feasible for EVERY true blue Singaporean kid to be able to do that? Will a million such opportunities suddenly open up, if every couple now decides to have 1 child, just to accommodate such a call?

 

[Felipe]

The only advice that I can give you is to stop reminiscing on old newspaper cutouts and snippets.

Stop looking backward. They're history!

Always look forward.

 

Instead of complaining and going down the poverty spiral (with time), save enuf for your children to attain the highest post-graduate qualifications and all the overseas internships available.

The world should be their stage, not Singapore!

 

Make sure that they are ready to take on the world when they graduate and start working, on an equal playing field against the best that Britain, US, Oz has to offer ... China and India even!

 

Invest wisely in your next generation to help our nation move forward!

Stop bitching about the govt. You can do no better.

And neither the opposition.

 

the thing is not everyone is an elite. society cannot function that way. a govt must represent all classes of society. u sound like as if all the writers here are living in poverty which i can assure u, most are not. an advice i can also give is after getting those qualifications, better work overseas or yr kids may end up competing for lower, instead of higher pay.

[Edwardthy]

I would say that life in Singapore was much better in the 70's to 80's when the govt was 100% PAP.

Even in the 90's life was still relatively good for Singaporeans.

- low inflation rate

- low unemployment

- less congested roads, no jams

- no COE/ERP in the 70-80's

- low cost of cars, HDB, private property and basic necessities ... food

- low FT count, by numbers

- many of our children got into local universities, based on 100% meritocracy (no quota to foreign scholars)

- more local food / coffee shops in Geylang and even food courts (now infested with chinanese!)

- even our prostitutes were locals or Malaysians (now got china, vietnamese, pinoy, thai, indon etc.)

 

But into the new millennia, with opposition parties and one-upmanship, it seem that our current woes started from then on!

 

Perhaps we should go back to a 100% PAP govt by GE2016?

Food for thought to the 39.9%!

 

i can sense you are a PAP supporter

 

[Vid]

let's try to establish some facts here first. no one is talking about attaining pte properties and blaming the govt. Recent articles highlight the enormous income gap in SG, 2nd only to HK. The bottom 30% have made little headway for the past umpteen years, and worse, the standard of living has gone up several fold.

 

for the middle class, they aren't squeezed out by the Brits or Americans. I actually wish more of them come cos our employers will def choose us, as we're cheaper! It's the regional folks that are coming by the millions and companies are employing them over more talented S'poreans bcos there's little protection for the local citizens. and im not talking about protecting us when we're not good enough. So wages get depressed while the influx of FT increase costs. it's a double blow. u earn less while cost go up. worse for some is u get fired over the cheaper FT.

 

there have been articles as such in yahoo and asiaone. obviously i don't expect to read these in ST. compete in the global arena? we're talking about competing with the cheap FTs for cheaper pay. That's the competition we're facing. i wish we could also compete for cheaper ministers. but as the animal farm story goes, some animals are more equal than others.

 

There is no point talking sense to someone who only see/listen the good thing. Everybody knows the problem. It's whether anyone wants to face it. That Jolie888 is obviously a huge PAP fan. Likely someone who has a good job and doesn't need to compete with any FT/FW. Or maybe he is someone from PAP trying to brainwash the hardcore here

[Expertz]

And that's because the opposition never have good people to begin with.

All mediocre, at best.

Who in their right mind will vote them in?

Certainly not the silent majority!

 

you are missing the point

it doesn't matter if the opposition have good or lousy or mediocre people, what can they do with less than 20% seats in parliament?

if ALL opposition parties decide to oppose anything government wants to impose also not enough people to vote against any decision

 

so any decision that passes thru parliament is 100% PAP, how can you fault the opposition when every decision made is PAP's?

[Expertz]

Or maybe he is someone from PAP trying to brainwash the hardcore here

 

i grew up with my parents telling me that PAP is the past, the present and the future. in my parent's words, only stupid and lazy people will vote for opposition. the people who vote for opposition are those who want the government to serve them hand and foot

 

however of late i've been becoming more and more disillusioned with PAP's policies. i'm sincerely hoping some PAP supporter will come up with valid arguments to change my mind and hopefully i will one day find myself voting for PAP

 

but every single argument that any PAP supporter gives holds no valid grounds and jolie88's arguments seem to have not gone thru any thought process whatsoever

 

i'm still hoping somebody smart will come into this thread and provide the case for a pro-PAP stance which i would love to adopt

Edited May 8, 2012 by Expertz

[Vid]

i grew up with my parents telling me that PAP is the past, the present and the future. in my parent's words, only stupid and lazy people will vote for opposition. the people who vote for opposition are those who want the government to serve them hand and foot

 

however of late i've been becoming more and more disillusioned with PAP's policies. i'm sincerely hoping some PAP supporter will come up with valid arguments to change my mind and hopefully i will one day find myself voting for PAP

 

but every single argument that any PAP supporter gives holds no valid grounds and jolie88's arguments seem to have not gone thru any thought process whatsoever

 

i'm still hoping somebody smart will come into this thread and provide the case for a pro-PAP stance which i would love to adopt

 

The thing is PAP knows what the problems are. The problem to the problems is they do not know how to solve it. They thought they have the solution by opening the floodgates. On the surface it looked like a perfect solution - unlimited supply of cheap labour. Employers are happy. GDP is satisfied. World continues to spin. They never expected the influx to create societal problems. They thought everyone will live happily ever after. Next, transport can't handle the extra load. Housing became insufficient. Prices started rocketing. Inflation is not helping.

 

What they can do is to get the loyal ST papers to support their cause by publishing frequently why they had to do what they did in a bid to calm the masses. Well, the damage is done.

 

Unless everything is fine and well, no valid arguement is ever going to hold water from the PAP or their supporters.

[Without_a_car]

The only advice that I can give you is to stop reminiscing on old newspaper cutouts and snippets.

Stop looking backward. They're history!

Always look forward.

 

Instead of complaining and going down the poverty spiral (with time), save enuf for your children to attain the highest post-graduate qualifications and all the overseas internships available.

The world should be their stage, not Singapore!

 

Make sure that they are ready to take on the world when they graduate and start working, on an equal playing field against the best that Britain, US, Oz has to offer ... China and India even!

 

Invest wisely in your next generation to help our nation move forward!

Stop bitching about the govt. You can do no better.

And neither the opposition.

 

I am presenting historical numbers to highlight how the old guards took good care of Singaporeans for their support, while the current leadership milked Singaporeans and expects Singaporeans to support their policies that enriched only 10% of the population.

 

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/ft-policy-may-hav...gap--panel.html

Yahoo! Newsroom

Edited May 8, 2012 by Without_a_car

[Lethalstrike]

So what you're saying is the current team are not good enough ?

 

Yes.

 

I believed it is a fair assessment from my part to say that what we are currently doing now simply isn't enough and right. As if the reactionary policies aren't bad enough, complacency from the top to the bottom had already started to set in quite sometime ago (cue SMRT's fiasco as an example).

 

All these which we are witnessing now simply doesn't happen overnight. They are the cumulative result of policies being put in place which had largely sacrificed the common interests of the citizens for the advancement of the country.

 

As we all knew, the survival of any modern society depends on the prosperity of the middle-class, which rather regrettably, had to bear the brunt of the consequences due to the policies which we are pursuing.

 

Singapore do not have the luxury of shifting down to a reverse gear to revert the consequences. This is a big gamble by the incumbent with all chips on the table, largely provided by me and you, as well as our children's future.

 

 

[Without_a_car]

First world country, but not First World wages?

http://www.asiaone.com/print/Business/News...517-216611.html

 

Tue, May 18, 2010

The Straits Times

 

By Sue-Ann Chia, Senior Political Correspondent

 

 

For years, companies have creamed off a larger share of economic gains - larger than those in other developed countries or industrialising economies in Asia.

 

As a result, workers get a slice of Singapore's gross domestic product (GDP) that is considered unusually small compared with their counterparts' share in those countries.

 

Workers' wages account for less than half of Singapore's GDP. In contrast, wages take up more than half of GDP in developed countries.

 

This means that Singapore may have achieved one of the highest per capita GDPs - at $51,656 last year - but the superlative showing may not reflect the wealth of workers or benefit them as much.

 

It has led some analysts to wonder if Singapore is a First World economy with what is closer to a Third World wage structure.

 

'Factually, our wage levels are much higher than Third World (economies'). Otherwise, so many foreign workers would not be flooding into Singapore,' notes economist Manu Bhaskaran from Centennial Asia Advisors.

 

'The problem is not our wage levels, which are reasonably high, but whether they are commensurate with our per capita GDP level.'

 

So are wage levels keeping pace with economic growth? Or is Singapore's low wage share of GDP an indication that workers have been losing out?

 

 

 

 

Higher profit share

 

THE issue of Singapore's low wage share has surfaced time and again.

 

In 2000, a paper by the Singapore Statistics Department highlighted this anomaly, noting that it could be due in part to conscious efforts by the Government to moderate wage increases and maintain high returns to investment largely from multinational companies.

 

The GDP is split three ways: One share is paid out in wages, another to companies as profits, and lastly, to the Government as taxes.

 

In 1980, the wage share was a low 38 per cent, climbing to a peak of 48 per cent in 1985, due to high wage policies during that high-growth period.

 

But recession hit in the mid-1980s, and the high wage policies were seen as adding to the severity of the situation as they eroded the profitability of companies.

 

Since then, the wage share has moderated to an average of 43 per cent to ensure a competitive wage structure.

 

It is, however, not on a par with that in other countries with similar GDP rates.

 

In 2000, Singapore's wage share was 42 per cent, lower than the United States' (58 per cent), Japan's (57 per cent) and France's (52 per cent), according to the paper by the Statistics Department.

 

In contrast, Singapore's profit share was 48 per cent, higher than these countries', which were closer to 35 per cent.

 

In fact, countries such as South Korea, New Zealand and Spain have a higher wage share than Singapore even though they have lower per capita GDP.

'These observations suggest that Singapore has First World per capita income but a Third World cost or productive structure,' the paper stated.

 

But it is not necessarily bad, the paper went on to explain, adding: 'As the economy matures, and wages and per capita income increase, the tendency is for the remuneration share of GDP to rise.'

 

Yet, a decade later, the wage share has not risen much. At last count, it was 44.9 per cent in 2008.

 

In March last year, economist Linda Lim said Singapore's economic growth model has tried to 'do too much, and achieved too little' in delivering returns for Singaporeans, relative to foreign firms and foreigners.

 

She cited the low wage share (41 per cent in 2007) and high share of profits, interest and dividends (more than 50 per cent). Foreign share of domestic production and income has also increased.

 

Similarly, a survey by Swiss bank UBS on prices and earnings last year showed a sobering picture for Singapore workers.

 

On a list of 73 cities, Singapore is the 24th most expensive city - moving up eight spots from the previous survey in 2006. It is costlier than Chicago, Hong Kong and Sydney.

But when it comes to wage levels, Singapore slipped two notches to 40th position. It is just one rung above Moscow, which is way down the 'expensive cities' list at No. 56 - or 32 places below Singapore.

 

With prices rising more than wages, Singapore workers cannot afford to buy as much as people in many other cities.

 

Purchasing power in Singapore declined 10 spots to 50th place, behind cities like Bratislava in Slovakia, Johannesburg in South Africa and Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia.

 

While some observers question the accuracy of such comparative studies, one inescapable conclusion is that wage increases have not been on a par with economic growth.

 

What accounts for this phenomenon?

 

 

Worrying trends

 

IT GOES back to the issue of low wage share - for two main reasons.

 

One, the dominance of foreign multinationals, which are likely to repatriate a large proportion of their profit rather than distribute it back to workers as wages, Citigroup economist Kit Wei Zheng noted in a paper last November.

 

He pointed out that the Economic Survey of Singapore in the first quarter of 2004 made the same point.

 

'The success of Singapore's efforts to attract foreign investments meant that foreign investors also earned a larger proportion of the returns to capital in Singapore...Partly reflecting this, the growth in personal disposable incomes, from which households could finance their consumption, was lower than GDP growth in Singapore.'

 

Two, an increase in the number of lower-skilled jobs created over the last decade, many of which are filled by foreign workers who depress the wages of the bottom fifth of workers here, says labour economist Hui Weng Tat from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.

 

Both trends are worrying.

 

As Mr Bhaskaran puts it: 'It is certainly a cause for concern since the point of economic growth is to improve the welfare of the people.

 

'So if the rise in GDP is increasingly going to companies rather than individuals and most of the profits go to foreign companies, the welfare improvement from economic growth in Singapore is not as great as it might have been.'

 

Yet, some labour economists such as Professor Hoon Hian Teck have a different outlook.

 

'It would be misleading to suggest that because Singapore's wage share is low, its workers' wages are stagnant despite economic growth,' says the Singapore Management University professor.

 

'Basically, the idea is that even if the wage share is comparatively small, workers as a whole can still benefit enormously from growth because the size of the national pie is growing strong.'

 

National University of Singapore economist Shandre Thangavelu also notes that wages here remain very competitive.

 

He cites international data which shows that the average hourly pay in Singapore was consistently higher in the past decade than that in Taiwan, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Asean and Latin American countries.

 

 

Widening wage gap

 

BUT whatever the difference in views, there is consensus on one issue: How the gains of growth are spread among the different groups of workers is critical.

 

In this regard, low-skilled workers tend to get the short end of the stick compared with their higher-skilled peers, as their wages have stagnated while salaries of the rest have improved over the years.

 

For instance, the median monthly wage of cleaners and labourers was $1,270 in 2008, lower than the $1,389 in 1998. They were the only group of workers whose wages did not progress, according to the Manpower Ministry's report on wages last year.

 

The result is a widening wage gap between occupations at the top (managers) and bottom (cleaners and labourers). Those at the top earned four times more than those at the bottom in 1998; this grew to 5.12 times in 2008.

 

This means the low-skilled workers 'have a less than equal share in the fruits of rapid economic growth', notes Associate Professor Hui.

 

Associate Professor Shandre adds: 'Income distribution is a key concern and this might be driven by economic shocks as skilled workers are better equipped to ride the business cycles as compared to the unskilled.

 

'As industries restructure to higher value-added activities after each business cycle, the demand and wages for skilled workers increase.

 

'It is likely that we will see some vulnerable groups that might not be able to keep up with structural changes in the economy, and thus we need more social welfare to help them.'

 

Other developed countries have also not been spared the spectre of a growing income gap, with wages rising rapidly for the top 10 per cent - especially the top 1 per cent - at a much faster pace than for the rest.

 

Part of the explanation again leads back to how the profit share of GDP has risen at the expense of wages, as some top earners such as business owners also reap a bigger proportion of profits.

 

According to the Bank for International Settlements, wages as a share of national income in the Group of 10 countries - the US, Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium, Sweden and Switzerland - declined from 63 per cent in 1980 to less than 59 per cent in 2006.

 

In the meantime, the profit share of GDP in these countries increased from around 11 per cent to more than 15 per cent in the same period.

 

This shift is due in part to the massive surge of workers from developing countries such as China and India into the global market, which has weakened the bargaining position of workers in the advanced economies.

 

Does the solution for more even growth distribution lie in increasing the wage share of GDP, to tilt the balance in favour of all workers, including the low-income earners?

[Scion]

1 year on, more of the same...

 

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/singaporesc...-152850327.html

 

 

PM Lee: I'm sorry for our mistakes

 

Wayang???

 

I AM SORRY!!

 

[Without_a_car]

Income gap is

[TheRationalVoice]

Singapore is no longer a place to live. It is now merely a place to earn a living.

[Lethalstrike]

A few external factors that helped create the golden years in the 70s and 80s for Singapore, and perhaps even the other 3 small dragons of Asia -- Cold War, Economic Boom in Japan, Vietnam War, Cultural Revolution in China, Downfall of Marcos in the Philippines, amongst others. Japan, US, Germany and other European investors needed low-cost manufacturing like they do now, they came to Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Korea. Traders needed to export their goods to 3rd World Asia, Middle East and the Communist World, they came to Singapore and Hong Kong. There wasn't the Internet, IDD and trunk calls were ridiculously expensive and before we had fax in the 90's, there was only telex and snail mail. Therefore, customer service and call centres are always local staff.

 

Since the 2000's, the options are many, they can go to China, they can go to India, they can also go to Vietnam and Indonesia. They can even go to Brazil and Russia. Likewise, these countries are also driving changes to the global economy and creating new markets. Only mindsets need to change to adapt to the new order, or else we will never progress out of the 1980's. If you are a Singapore business owner, you will also want to take advantage of the new markets, both in terms of selling them stuff and also tapping into their talent pool. Philippines is already becoming the next India as an IT and call centre hub, and India will need to move on to greater things, expanding their domestic market. Vietnam and Indonesia are slowly taking away manufacturing orders from China, and China will need to move on to greater things, expanding their domestic market. Where will Singapore be positioned ?

 

That's a lot of valid points on the effects of globalisation which had been assisted by the advancement of technology.

 

The only real advantage which Singapore had is its geographical location. Think about it, without such a strategic position, there is no way we are able to capitalise on the events which had happened during the last century. It is also a blessing that by being a small dot near the equator, we are free from natural disasters.

 

Where will Singapore be positioned?

 

Frankly speaking, even our million-dollar talents don't have a firm answer. That's why we are trying to be a jack of all trades...financial hub lah, education hub lah, life science hub lah etc. Hopefully, all these hubs are able to give us a competitive advantage.

[Ghostami]

Don't know if this is a simple man's thinking, but if one day, the bubble burst, will Singapore degrade to those of 3rd world?Hmmm.....

[Jolie888]

The FTs in many MNCs, with expat perks, housing, car, school and all, are never cheap.

Other than those FTs paid on local terms (minority), it is usually SGeans' lack of experience, specislization, or worse, incompetence that result in us being bypassed, in favor of FTs from Britain, US, or Oz.

 

let's try to establish some facts here first. no one is talking about attaining pte properties and blaming the govt. Recent articles highlight the enormous income gap in SG, 2nd only to HK. The bottom 30% have made little headway for the past umpteen years, and worse, the standard of living has gone up several fold.

 

for the middle class, they aren't squeezed out by the Brits or Americans. I actually wish more of them come cos our employers will def choose us, as we're cheaper! It's the regional folks that are coming by the millions and companies are employing them over more talented S'poreans bcos there's little protection for the local citizens. and im not talking about protecting us when we're not good enough. So wages get depressed while the influx of FT increase costs. it's a double blow. u earn less while cost go up. worse for some is u get fired over the cheaper FT.

 

there have been articles as such in yahoo and asiaone. obviously i don't expect to read these in ST. compete in the global arena? we're talking about competing with the cheap FTs for cheaper pay. That's the competition we're facing. i wish we could also compete for cheaper ministers. but as the animal farm story goes, some animals are more equal than others.

 

[Tigerwoods]

There is no point talking sense to someone who only see/listen the good thing. Everybody knows the problem. It's whether anyone wants to face it. That Jolie888 is obviously a huge PAP fan. Likely someone who has a good job and doesn't need to compete with any FT/FW. Or maybe he is someone from PAP trying to brainwash the hardcore here

Brainwash us I think TPL can do a better job.

[Jolie888]

I'm not clamouring for BMWs/Private houses for all citizens etc. I just want a country where every class can still live decently and comfortably when they retire eventually. This generation's majority/ruling party DOES NOT offer that now.

 

You talked about investing in our children's future. Sending them for all overseas internships etc etc. You think its feasible for EVERY true blue Singaporean kid to be able to do that? Will a million such opportunities suddenly open up, if every couple now decides to have 1 child, just to accommodate such a call?

You are not living decently and comfortably now, or you think, when you do retire?

You're awfully pessimistic aren't you?

Have more faith lah. Look at the countries around us!

 

If you only believe that your children are able and can do it, they will.

Have more faith and hope in them!

Money no enough, plenty of scholarships available - both govt & non-govt, provided that your child makes the cut! But why have a dooms day attitude?

 

We did well for the last 47 years, producing the best in us for at least 2 generations!

Why even doubt now?