More than just money needed to help poor
Sunday, 15 July 2007, 3:22 pm |
This is TOC writer Leong Sze Hian’s letter to The New Paper which was published on the 14th of July, 2007.
I refer to the article ‘Would you work 2 shifts over 14 hours for $4.90 an hour?’ (The New Paper, 6 Jul) and the recent launch of the Centre for Social Development (Asia) at NUS.
Helping the poor is not so much about giving money or assistance to them. The most important areas that the poor need help in are, in order of priority:
1. Reduce the risk of losing their HDB flat and lifetime CPF savings, in the event of foreclosure by the HDB or banks.
Lower-income Singaporeans have a much higher probability of defaulting on the typical 30-year mortgage.
2. Restrain the rise in prices of basic necessities like utilities, transport, HDB rental and Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC).
For example, water, gas and electricity rose by 8.6, 4.2 and 2.8 per cent per annum from 1995 to 2005. Transport fares have risen almost every year, in recent years. All these increases were much higher than the 1 per cent rate of inflation.
3. Review the way subsidies for the poor really work for them.
For example, the $20 transport voucher for the lower-income is a one-time offset against fare increases for just one year only. So, to truly offset the increases occurring almost every year over the last 5 years or so, transport vouchers should be increasing at, say, $20 a year too.
4. Level the playing field between foreigners and Singaporeans in lower-income jobs.
Employers save 13% by not having to contribute to CPF for non-residents; lower-wage non-residents have reduced turnover problems because they are stuck with the same employer for 3 years.
On the other hand, male residents have to go for reservist training, and residents have less disposable income because they have to contribute to CPF.
It may thus be harder for residents to accept lower-wage jobs to be able to provide for their families.
Unless the above are addressed comprehensively, the trend of declining real income and relative higher inflation rates for the lower-income group may continue to widen the income and wealth gap.
That is because they are chasing after a standard of living target that keeps running further away from them.
Visit Sze Hian’s website here.
Email this to a Friend
Bookmark this
To help the poor is not to force them to buy house. Government should have ample 1 room, 2 rooms and 3 rooms flats to let out to the down trodden and low income family to rent.
PAP’s policy to have citizen owning their own home is not workable for the poorest 5% population.
The proper solution is to inculcate family responsibility to the young male citizens. Shame those young men who make the girls pregnant and running away from their responsibility. In a way also hold the parent of the young male responsible for the new born baby.
Our policy tends to follow the West. We should adopt Eastern policy of having the male taking responsibility. This is Confucianism. Western liberal policy will only degrade our society.
By including Confucianism in school ethic study, we are making the boys to be future good citizens.
As for destitutes, the allowance for them should be sufficient to cover their food, lodging and clothing. I have not study the cases of poor so I don’t know the right amount to be given to them. But what I see from reports in newspapers is that other volenteers are giving extra help to them. If this is so that means, the allowance is not sufficient.
I think GST should be only imposed on non-necessities. The 7% savings will amount to a lot for a family that doesn’t earn much.
This is what is being done in some developing countries. Think of it this way: Taxing 9% on a luxurious item (i.e. LV handbag) will net more tax revenue than taxing 7% on 3000 cans of baked beans. And the well-to-do would not mind paying a little more for their branded goods, I’m sure.
This is a good way to redistribute income (actually no distribution is made, but it appears to have that effect) without spoon feeding. IMHO I feel that this is better than handing out ERS or NSS.
But our government seems to love the idea of taking money from the people upfront and then giving back in the form of ‘rebates’. Reminds me of those controversial ‘opt-out’ policies.
Let’s start a People’s Self-Help Fund as posted at SgForums
yes i agree. we should help the poor more in other ways. the government shd subsidies more. cheers:)
About 9 months have passed since the above TOC posting, and thanks to lizard, I feel that it is timely to re-visit.
The policies have been made clearer recently, and expectations are played down.
Perhaps Robert Teh and SgForums can lead the starting up of the “Self-Help Fund” - the present timing seems to be quite perfect.
I am heartened by the generous contributions by Singaporeans to the recent disasters of cyclone hit Myanmar and earthquakes in China.
The people behind this “Self-Help Fund” may even win a Nobel Prize, as the Bangadesh gentlemen did with his unprecedented help of very soft loans to the poor.