I would support the proposal to reduce GST and if possible, remove it altogether to zero for a year.

I would support the proposal to reduce GST and if possible, remove it altogether to zero for a year. To partly compensate for the loss of income for the Government, the top personal income tax for those earning half a million or more could be raised. It is time the top earners help the nation and the poor.

The government should make credit-lines available for families who have a combined income of $2500 and who have been in employment for at least a year. The credit-line could be up to a maximum of the combined one month salary of the family (maximum). There should be minimal interest charged to this line-of-credit.

Hi!

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger plan will work well. From the looks of it. It seems to be a very workable proposal with even favorable uptake incentives on the part of employees. We should consider it. On a separate note. I just came away from your site. It seems mr tan kin lian you are looking for 100,000 supporters. I support you. But that doesnt count for much. I have a tip for you. You need to talk to those brotherhood people. They can be very sticky and difficult. But if you can get over their nonsense. I really believe they might be able to help you better than anyone online. The beginning of the year is usually the best time. This is the period, when all their readers buy into their annual circular. They actually lay it out like some great soviet plan. It may be a good idea to talk directly to their rep. They will do a write up on you for all their readers and they will usually just do as they say. No questions. Knowing them, this will not be easy, they will always ask for terms and conditions before support is given. But if you are prepared to make concessions. I am sure at least half your problems, statistically can be handled with great ease by those chaps.

Just my two cents. Merry Christmas all.

My proposed solution to end the recession in Singapore

1. Retrench (and send away) all foreign workers whilst employing all unemployed Singaporeans. Definitely to reduce local unemployment

2. Stop all upgrading and construction projects and use the intended money to provide subsidies for lower income group people

3. Reduce GST to 5% to stimulate consumer spending.
The reason for being 5% is because I felt anything below 5% would be too much, which may spark further taxes in other forms. Another reason being 5% is easier to calculate.

4. Close the income disparity gap. I think the rich are too rich, the poor too poor.

5. Remove ERP – it’s a stupid invention by some stupid outdated old fashioned people

The title of this article should be “Helping Singaporeans cope with recession”. I have asked the editor to correct this mistake.

I doubt the government will reduce GST. This issue has cropped up many times in the past and the response of the government has always been the same.

What do you think of the proposals?
Give your views in this survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=aY9oQl_2fZCD23kLx8r6_2f2dw_3d_3d

Very good suggestions or perferably, proposals for the government to consider seriously.

One thing to add. If the GST comes down, CASE should be empowered to take action against vendors e.g. hawkers and restaurants etc, that do not reduce their prices.

In Malaysia there are inspectors who conduct checks at markets, etc to ensure prices of essentials are fair. Supermarkets like Giant, Tesco and Carrefour, were roped in, in the price reduction campaign. Thus food hawkers and restaurants have no excuse to maintain high prices.

i propose that instead of reducing the gst, certain goods should be exempted such as food stuff, books, clothing apparel and restaurants where the money will go back into our economy and stimulate it.
luxury goods such as cars, branded goods and non essentials should continue to attract the current gst of 7%.

aiyoyo

not sure if the ELITEs also do as they preach?
(spending their own $$$ to keep economy growing..)
maybe can see more results with ELITEs $$$ (because of their BIG package)

“…advised people to continue spending,
to keep the economy growing and avoid the downturn getting worse.”

aiyoyo

I agree with the suggestion to exempt essential items from GST… At the very least food stuff should not have GST…

Yes, all basic food necessities should be GST exempt – rice, oil, salt, sugar.

GST for public mass transportation, ie, MRT and buses, should be reduced and permanently fixed at 2-3% or even 0% since travel is essential to a thriving economy.

The big issue is and has always been govt refusal to earn less through taxes even when times are hard. It is not as one with the people.

Dear all,

I have the same opinion as Kay, on that the possibility of a reduction in GST is quite slim. Honestly, I do hope for the best (GST is reduced to 5% or even to 3%), but prepared for the worst (no reduction).

Why not :

1. CPF could be temporarily reduced to 1 or 2 % to lower cost to businesses in return that less jobs be cut. With job secured, people can continue to spend with the cash in hand (salary) since cpf is not so immediately accessible for spending and it forms a substantial amount in relation to the salary.
Which is better? keeping your job or lesser cpf?

2. With the realisation of the huge reserve in the sinking fund, it could be used to lessen the amount residents have to Pay and Pay for the new lifts which costs around $700 (or more) per lift per household, based on my understanding.
The cost savings to residents makes them feel more comfortable to spend on more consumer items.
which is better? more burden on residents or more money spent on economy?

These are temporary or 1-off solutions that can increase spending.

so easy right? anyone can suggest. still need financial experts for this?

GST & other taxes can only go on way – upward! Btw, Australia started its GST in yr 2000 at 10% so We’re still to catch up.

Irrespective where U’re, there is also only one way to countering the recession – Manage your money in that income = expenditure.

No other routes, do not hope that gahman will heed. They couldn’t even make sinking fund grow.

good suggestion. there is this 69 year old guy who is on public assistance and is given $150 a month. the info is posted in sunkopitiam.

i will go and advice him to manage his income against his expenditure. i think he will be very grateful.

both ideas seem sensible and workable. but, pap is pap, i doubt they will implement either of them. chances are higher than they will come up with some “reasons” why both ideas should not be taken up.

“Many people do not agree with this call. They are afraid of losing their jobs. They prefer to save more, in case the need they money in the future. The reduced domestic spending is now being felt in many sectors of the economy.”

Sincerely the Newspapers reports dun seem to agree.

http://informationreadbyme.blogspot.com/2008/12/i-wonder-which-is-right.html

http://informationreadbyme.blogspot.com/2008/11/watching-down-turn.html
Under 22nd, 21st, 20th, 14th

Anyway, I guess maybe shouldn’t decrease GST. Since those who can spend will still continue to spend. Rather, increase Specific Hand Outs. But of coz, in the first place our safety nets got big big holes, so maybe 1stly need to repair those holes first.

Sincerely, by reducing GST, it doesn’t really solve the problem. I mean assuming a mthly NECCESSARITIES expenses of maybe 300 ~ 500. A decrease from 7% to 3% is only $12 ~ $20.

It doesn’t really help those whose pay is low in the first place.
It doesn’t really help those who ve big families.
It doesn’t really help those who need to c docs often.
There’s so many more pple who won’t really benefit from a reducation in GST.

I noe the arguement tat to a poor, $12 ~ $20 will mean alot. But isn’t it better instead to give them $200 per mth rather then give them a discount of $12 ~ $20? (Numbers are just a assumption, not facts)

Reducing GST ultimately only benefit those with money to spend since 4% of 1,000 = 40 where as 4% of 100 = 4. Tat’s a 10 times difference. It’s like pple saying tat u SAVE money when SHOPPING for Shirt/Shoe/Bag/Watever becoz there’s a DISCOUNT.

Tan, I support the call for GST reduction. May I humbly suggest you send an email to Nathan and urge him to support your call?

SM GOH advises people to spend more. He can talk cos money is all he and his ministers have from the huge salaries they get!

He should give some of his salary to others so that they can follow his call to spend. Those who have can easily talk and preach but what about those who don’t have. Where in the world do want them to get the money to spend even on the simple necessities of life?

And for those who spend the rich will benefit in the end more than the poor. Cos the rich will still have mega bucks but the poor would have depleted all thier cash and savings!

as usual
another stupid remark from a former highest paid prime minister
do he think every sinaporean is earning $3000/day?
machiam machiam liked him?
you wil be LUCKY
if you can earned $30/day
spend what?
with what?
even when i buy udongs
you know the $0.80cents type
i also checked values
if possible
try to get 2 similiar type @ $1.20 per packet
nabei
talk co ck like sink song

Good Afternoon,

I don’t think it’s a good idea to reduce GST. Even if that were really possible, it may not be effective in alleviating hardship where its most needed; as these proposed cuts will only mean single digit reductions which will simply have a negligible effect on the cumulative cost savings.

A better idea would be to moot a hard hitting approach that is focused DIRECTLY on lowering the price of necessaries (bread and butter stuff). And to accomplish this, it may be a better idea to encourage civic society to look into the whole issue of starting food cooperatives e.g provision shops.

I believe this will be an EFFECTIVE solution to slash the price of necessaries by at least thirty to forty percent by amplifying the purchasing power of those who may be currently experiencing difficulties in stretching their dollar.

I could provide more information as to how this might be organized or how it may be even expected to work financially, but unfortunately, there is a restriction on me to post material from a certain person and group. So I am unable to help in this regard.

However, despite these restrictions. I will try to provide a working example; if lets say a pair of bicycle wheel sets retail for $1,500 in the high streets. The cost can be reduced by getting a group (has to be quiet a big consortium) of cyclist to buy in bulk directly from the manufacturer. This will not only do away with the extraneous cost such as the mark up of the stockist, but also retailer along with warehousing, marketing, inventory etc, thus reducing the per unit cost to maybe a manageable $500 per set of wheel sets.

I have personally done this a few times (I wish, I could give you all specific details, but I would have to mention a certain character, so that is really out of the question) to get around the exorbitant cost of purchasing bicycle componentry and I wonder why it has NOT been mooted as a solution to help lower the price of necessaries to people who may be suffering in such tiring times.

As I said, I wish, I can elaborate further on the mechanics and even provide specific case studies to illustrate how this might be accomplished, but regrettably, I am compelled to abide to some restrictions – I hope as patchy as this may comes across; it will hopefully make sense.

We believe very strongly every Singaporean and resident has a right to three square meals a day.

SD (Internet Liaison officer of the Brotherhood)

SD, you pathetic man! go study the rationale for implementing GST, go work out the mechanics of GST, and then come back here, and indicate whether reducing GST can help Singaporeans in today’s climate.

Mr Tan Kin Lian,

I’m sure if you have the power as the leader of this country, you’ll implement measures to help the needy. But then you are not the leader. Our leaders will never do anything that hurt their pockets. The bottomline will always be, don’t hurt my pocket. Money they are willing to give out are always string attached for political gains. This, they had proven time and time for the last fifty years!
Those who had voted them in all these years and are now in trouble should reflect on their past decisions!

Dear all,
The relief loan is certainly an excellent idea to help those who are retrenched or face a reduction in earnings, since this measure provides much needed funds at a low cost, which enables them to have their monthly bills paid, have food on the table and the children have clothes to wear.

On the other hand, we need to be aware of the drawbacks of the repayment method stated.

To me, I would regard the relief loan as a loan that lends an amount equal to the loss or reduction in earnings, and his/her CPF is used as a “collateral”, in the event the loan is unpaid. The question is can CPF be used as a collateral?

For example, a household of 4 people living on a take-home pay of $1,200, which the pay is now reduced by 20%, he/she will owe a total of $5,904 (principal and interest). The possibility of this household getting a higher pay check after 2 years is low, which means that he/she will be bearing the repayments on the same pay check of $1,200.

In the above situation, this household will be most likely to opt to use the CPF as a repayment option, so as to reduce their financial burden. In such a situation, will this relief loan be viewed as a “backdoor” to withdraw the CPF funds? If this measure is approved, will this result in a floodgate situation, where others will propose reasons and situations where the CPF should be used as a “collateral”? If CPF can be used as a collateral, will this lead to another suggestion of allowing them to “borrow” from their CPF, which is similarly to those who used their parents’ CPF to pay for their tertiary education.

This measure is worth further consideration and at the same time, I would strongly appeal for an alternative repayment method.

Spent more? Wait long long. You give me my CPF first. With that, you can also do away with GST 0%. Then public transport should be free, Govt should give unemployment money, at least 60% of my last income for the next 3 years. My insurance policy should cover all medical expenses. Can or not? Cannot rite? Then dun ask me to spent, you wait long long first.

Good Afternoon Your father,

“SD, you pathetic man! go study the rationale for implementing GST, go work out the mechanics of GST, and then come back here, and indicate whether reducing GST can help Singaporeans in today’s climate.”

Yes, I understand completely how you may have derived at that “logical” conclusion, but always bear in mind the heading of this essay is helping singaporeans cope with recession, not making microscopic cosmetic changes which will have little or no effect on the final outcome.

So at the end of the day, it is NOT abt ‘rationale’ -’mechanics’ or even abt ‘philosophy.’ As it remains what is EFFECTIVE and what will WORK or would not.

But really to argue this matter in comprehensively so that you may somehow come to see my point in marvellous completion; I would have to access certain material from a group of people and from one character especially who I cannot mention here due to certain restrictions. I dont know how to do this now. So I may need a few more days to find a way to put it in my own words.

Pls give me some time. I will come back to you.

SD

loans?
every months no needs to pay is it?
everytime when i intend to take a loan
or buyin a REPLACEMENT motorsikal
i think 5 TIMES hard
simply because no matter how
a loan is a loan
let used basic 12 months
to us all maybe
we think
aiyah $200 (basic min example hor)
is nothing what
sured can settled
siap siap suay
kechil kechil ayer
than howlian have a little extras
go to court
buy 55″ lcd tv
@ the same time
buy that blueray dvd
not enough?
how bout that 2″ minature super duper dvd/vcd/icac/cpib videocam as well?
when you finished all this?
alamak
my month ends loan is near $999 nia
still have enough budgets to tarhan ley
mei wun ti
imagined that you worked for dbs/sony/stat compaines
guranteed aluminium ricebowls what
no problemo
this month this year
just received your retrenchment notice of permanent shakeleggs extended holidays?
where on earth
are you goin to find $999
every month till you finished?
my living example is here
i have a 2 year installment plan to settle my motorsikal
only $295/month nia
i still have 14 months to go
yet i already settled in FULL!
how come?
did i striked lottery?
no
i told you peeps before
i have the 3rd eye vision
when i was doin well
i paid doubled
sometime tripled the monthly loan
see?
so young couples
spent within your means
heck i still have budget sulphus
to go on a feb 09 holiday in china if i want to
but i am not
because
i know
you know
jan09
what is not gonna happenned
snow drops that for sured…

We should avoid condensing poverty reduction only to GST. As I said, the heading in this article is very specific; helping sg’s cope with the recession.

If it is to remain useful, the focus should be directed specifically at poverty reduction and not ONLY to GST. As its overall is impact is nominal when you see in the cummulative context of expenditure at a macro economic level; tell me; if you dont have alot of money to spend in the first place; then how might a one or two percentile increase in GST even affect you so drastically? The chances are the price of a cup of kopi going up from 50 to 70 cents is likely to impact you more – economist refer to this as reverse or inverse cobweb theorem.

As I said, I can talk more abt this screwy theory, but there are currently restrictions on me to share openly. That is most regrettable.

This brings into sharp focus the appropriateness of the question which should be posed here is therefore; what is the most effective way to reduce poverty?

SD

I do not agree with the loan suggestion. I still feel (as I have been saying, and almost out of breath already) that since we have our CPF contrbutions because we have been working hard, it is only fair that that govt look into allowing us to dip into it at least this once. What is the point of keeping it till we reach CPF puberty and nearing our death bed?

Give us back 2%, 3%,4% now. It does not make much difference if we keep it till we reach retirement age but it makes a huge difference if we are given this small percentage sum at this moment of global financial turmoil. We, Singapore, has a ready-made solution but we are not using it.

I would say, use it, and go blow your own trumpet so that other countries may follow you and introduce CPF for their own workforce. I would even allow you to glow in the praises and I would go even further to tell of its wonders.

Do it, Mr PM.

30) Singaporedaddy on December 26th, 2008 2.17 pm

“As its overall is impact is nominal when you see in the cummulative context of expenditure at a macro economic level; tell me; if you dont have alot of money to spend in the first place; then how might a one or two percentile increase in GST even affect you so drastically?”

If you are facing a crunch, every cent (or %) counts. If you are one of those on the borderline case or very low income earner, 1% & 2% gst of sgd1000/- spending is actually = sgd10/- & sgd20/- (a tidy sum for those households who never get to earn more than sgd1000/- per month.

How many households are there in such category (below sgd1000/-) ?

TKL, Great suggestion, but LOL

If PAP adopt this pro-citizen policy, the Sun will rise from the west instead

You’d only pay more during recession to top up the billions they have lost from their stupid investment.

This is Singapore, this is PAP, this is wtf&^*$#%^ tax haven for the elites !

Wake up, and stop making suggestion which does nothing but a sense of false hope.

singaporedaddy (#23):

I don’t think it’s a good idea to reduce GST. Even if that were really possible, it may not be effective in alleviating hardship where its most needed; as these proposed cuts will only mean single digit reductions which will simply have a negligible effect on the cumulative cost savings.

I think the rationale of lowering GST is to increase spending and not so much of helping individuals cope with the recession, and thus fulfilling SM Goh’s desire of keeping the economy going.

Sure, ultimately it only moves a few cents in daily spendings and probably some dollars for larger spenders, but I think it will nonetheless have a psychological effect in encouraging people to spend more. What’s more, for those rich guys who are not as much affected by the financial crisis, the reduction will serve as real advantage for spending now than before or after, since it may be thousands of dollars that they save.

Of course, the main difficulty of this idea, as I see it, is how to translate the reduction in GST to a real reduction in prices among the vendors.

Here is the results of a survey conducted in my blog. It is based on 25 replies.

1. What do you think about the relief loan for Singaporeans to cover loss of earnings caused by reduction or a shorter work week?

It is a good idea 32.0%
It is worth a try 56.0%
It is not practical 12.0%

2. Is there a big risk that the relief loan can be abused?

It is a big risk that cannot be managed 12.0%
There is a risk, but it can be managed 84.0%
The risk is small, and worth taking 4.0%

3. If a business faces reduced demand, what is the best way for the business to cope?

retrench employees 4.0%
cut wages 36.0%
ask the employees to take no-pay leave 60.0%

4. Many countries have unemployment insurance. Is it time for Singapore to introduce such as scheme?

Most countries find it difficult to prevent abuses 20.0%
The abuses are small and can be managed 40.0%
It is better to start offering a relief loan along the lines proposed 40.0%

5. Should Goods & Services Tax (GST) be reduced temporarily to cope with the recession?

Yes – to encourage consumer spending 75.0%
No – people should reduced spending in hard times 12.5%
No – there are better ways to encourage spending 12.5%

6. How much should GST be reduced to encourage spending?

reduce by 7% replies: 8.0%
reduce by 4% replies: 48.0%
reduce by 2% replies: 20.0%
0% – do not reduce GST replies: 24.0%

7. How should the Government cope with a reduction in GST revenues?

Increase personal income tax 8.7%
Reduce government spending 30.4%
Draw down on past reserves 60.9%

8. What is the best way to encourage consumer spending?

Give cash handouts 29.2%
Give food and other coupons 16.7%
Reduce GST and charges 54.2%

Singaporedaddy

I have heard of cob web in econs. But I have never ever heard of how this may apply to explain the idea GST rises will have a marginal impact on the poor.

Another thing is GST prices do affect right across the board and I dont see how the poor could in any way be exempted.

Kelly

Btw I dont like your new way of writing. I prefer the old fluid style.

Just to add on further. One way to resolve the low purchasing power of the poor maybe to give them food vouchers or coupons. I used to study in Ireland and I do remember very clearly this was widely used in some parts to supplement the welfare system.

Wouldn’t this be a better idea when compared to cooperatives? Another thing is how do you expect a cooperative to work. As I believe most commercial products have a rsp (recommended selling price) and that means even if you want to reduce the price. You cannot.

Kelly

38) Kelly on December 26th, 2008 5.04 pm

NTUC, CC, CDC etc do give out food vouchers or coupons to help the poor.

NTUC Fairprice being a giant super market chain has a very big bargaining in getting discounts from suppliers. Besides, they can always get their own house-brand products that is much cheaper and RSP does not apply.

1) Provide Relief Loan
- Should be applicable only to those who are retrenched and not those who are gainfully employed but faced reduced earnings. Rationale being those who are retrenched would face the greater hardship of cash liquidity (assuming they have not saved for rainy days) and should be priority in the queue. Those who faced reduced earnings should instead review their own finances and spendings and respond accordingly to maintain prudent financial discipline.
- For those who are retrenched and facing hardship, the relief loan should be drawn in this manner:-
a) CPF account – to be repaid in installments/whole (with interest) from a period of six months after subject gets re-employed. Interest rate will be set by the CPF board to allow the authority to compensate for the sudden withdrawal of funds that might have been deployed elsewhere to earn the interest required. This should not be subjected to case by case review as long as the subject can prove he is unemployed(since it is his money to begin with).
b) Govt Relief Package – This should only be drawn if the subject does not have enough in the CPF. However, this should be on a case by case basis to prevent abuse (since this is the tax-payers’ money loan out and govt have the fiduciary duty to ensure accountability to the tax payer)

2) Helping business reduce operating expenses
Suggestion of encouraging no-pay leave monthly to reduce operating expenses is an excellent idea and is a sustainable option for the company. This has been proven to be workable in many countries(with strong union hand) and is a reflection of the company’s attitude towards its employees and also a form of CSR.
Like you mentioned, the govt should take the lead in this. Next in line would be the GLCs and the peer effect would be felt hopefully on the rest of the corporate world.

3) Reduce GST
Reducing GST will have its side-effect of:-
a) Govt have to find another avenue to increase its revenue and this means increase in other direct/indirect taxation measures aim to balance the budget (eg, it could be increase in ERP or Property tax or income tax). This means net net, people might still not be better off.
b) Reducing GST might not encourage spending as people are still wary of the downturn and there is no real incentive to spend.
c) The reduction in GST will not reduce consumer prices as businesses do not reduce prices correspondingly to the decrease in percentage of GST.
d) If the purpose of reducing GST is to help domestic consumption, then I would think the current govt implementation of GST rebates would achieve the purpose mentioned. Although imperfect, it has minimized issue mentioned in pt a and c. With pt b, that is entirely up to the businesses to innovate to entice consumers to spend.

Hi 40) Wil

a) CPF account – to be repaid in installments/whole (with interest)

the cpf is the citizen’s money to begin with. why do they need to pay interest when it is their own money they are withdrawing in the beginning. it is not a loan they are making. so if they want to implement this, it should allow installment without interest over the a few months after employment…i mean, where in the world do you pay interest for using/withdrawing your own money…

i mean, put in your hard-earned money into CPF and earn peanuts, then you are in hard need of cash, take out your money from CPF and you have to pay an interest for using your own $$$?anyway, not 100% of the money is been put into investment, a percentage has to be kept for reserve and i don’t think that will affect the current investment…until we have to pay to use our own $.

“Govt have to find another avenue to increase its revenue and this means increase in other direct/indirect taxation measures aim to balance the budget”

mmm…please….balance the budget? having surplus in the magnitude of billions, and you have to balance the budget? it is not as though the GST is use to ensure 0 deficit since there are always surplus

“With pt b, that is entirely up to the businesses to innovate to entice consumers to spend.”

well, it is not 100% up to the businesses to entice consumers…even if business came out with great promotions, but the consumer’s livelihood is not protected, do they still want to spend? so in short, the gahmen has to play a part too.

Dear all,
A reduction in GST is generally assumed that that it will lead to lower prices, which in turn, higher consumer spending. The higher consumer demand will keep companies to stay in business and to hire more workers (or at least maintain their current workforce.)

Based on the above assumption, I have 2 concerns:

1) Is GST the main factor in affecting the prices?
In the current economic situation, consumers are generally fearful that the economic downturn will affect their income or even be retrenched, therefore resulting in a lower spending pattern. If the GST is reduced to 3% or even to 0%, will consumers restore to their normal spending pattern? Can a GST reduction alone restore consumers’ confidence in spending?

2) Will a lower GST lead to a actual reduction in prices?
We often see a corresponding increase in prices of consumer goods along with an increase in crude oil. However, when oil prices fell by more than 50%, did we see a corresponding decrease in prices of consumer goods?

The acid test is whether we can see a bowl of noodles in a hawker centre reverting back to $1.50, if GST is reduced to 0%.

I would suggest that a significant reduction in rental costs, employer’s CPF contribution rates and related business costs imposed by the government will have a more powerful effect in reducing the cost of running a business. This will allow the business to sell their goods and services at a much lower price, which will contribute to both higher cash flow and consumer demand in the long run.

Well, GST does affect the price….but i think our forex is an even bigger factor. they are going to further weaken SGD, and if that is done, cost of import increase and you will see prices increase, no matter what is the GST.

Although the relief loan idea is a good one, I am afraid the govt will never approve it for one simple reason – it is borrowing against the CPF. In the last recession, the govt refused to even let people draw out a little of their CPF monies.

Although this relief loan idea has caveats (can only borrow a certain amount and has to be paid back to the CPF), the govt will be concerned about those who may never be able to pay back. What then about their retirement? This, I suspect, is the main worry for the govt. They’re reluctant to help people in retirement. All their policies in the last few years have been geared towards getting people to be “self-reliant” and to “work for as long as you can”.

What could work, however, is unemployment insurance and a minimum wage.

Andrew Loh

The current recession is going global mainly due to extremely deep drop in demands of wide ranges of goods from developed countries such as USA, Europe,Australia etc when their citizens’ purchasing power were wipe off when they lost huge junk of their savings on toxic investments and shares. Many were bankrupted and they were fearful to spend more on future money that is credit from bank loans. Thats why the world big and famous automobiles companies are in troubles now. So to increase domestic demands, may not have much impact on improving the orders of many companies here whose orders come from overseas. Any stimulated domestic demands only help to sustain the retail and services industries but not industries that prodruce electronics-related products, equipment, shipbuilding, manufacturing etc.
The surplus of manpower as a result of retrenchment maybe redeploy in other areas. The government has to take the lead in these such as the recent recruitments of 1,000 people by the home team. For those who are retrenched may be call up for full-time reservist training if they are still eligible until they found their next job. Government may set up more R&D centres for different research into future technologies to employ those who are retrenched. Some retrenched workers may be sent on overseas missions to study other countries’ situations and level of progress to learn the good things from them at the same time to network for future markets when the upturns come.
Therefore the government should increase spending to help the retrenched with the aim to be productive for the future.

Good Evening 36 & 37 Kelly,

As I said previously, we should avoid condensing poverty reduction ONLY to GST.

That’s really only the tip of the iceberg. And we should not be afraid to call a spade a spade.

The target IMHO is poverty reduction i.e how to prevent folk from falling into the vicious poverty cycle. The appropriate question therefore is; what is the most effective way to reduce poverty?

Kelly, why is cob web theory so pertinent? Firstly, although it is an agricultural model; the value it brings is, it provides plenty of vignettes into why giving direct hand out’s in the form of aid to those in need – don’t usually work – so to some extent this rubbishes the assumption that if we cut GST, all our problems will melt away like lemon drops.

The cob web theory also provides us with warnings that if we don’t handle this problem wisely and only choose to resolve it point wise, instead of right across the board, then we may find ourselves inadvertently in something very similar to the African aid paradox; the more you give; the more nothing happens.

So I really believe the cob web theory provides us with many insights as to how best to crack this nut. One valuable thing it gives us is strategies to short circuit the poverty cycle by promoting sustainable income earning opportunities to the poor. This can very well be stimulated by making loans available to people who are currently retrenched or will be soon. Or through other means.

IMHO the govt is slow to pick up the slack; they should just take a look at what’s really going on in the job market and learn to call a spade, a spade. Instead of spouting the same litany of useless advice such as retraining and reskilling; just accept the fact that some of these jobs are gone for good and no about of retraining is going to plug the hole and start by looking into ways and means to free up liquidity so that entrepreneurs can find a dignified and meaningful way to side skirt poverty. And at the same time kick start the local economy.

IMHO, no one at ministerial level wants to broach this issue by even mooting it as a strategic vision; all they seem to do is hold to their guns steadfastly and say tampering with CPF is out of the question; then I think, it is reasonable to expect nothing will ever happen. As for the banks they are tapped out.

The 1st division should really come in with 1st division ideas – as it is, I cannot understand why they are just sitting around rain dancing.

I cannot understand. I really cannot. This is the time to move decisively.

SD

aiyoyo

think in the 70s & 80s do we see prices so sky high?

with so many ELITEs and need to pay them with BIG package,
if the top management in an organization take lead to cut $alary,
think should see some effects very soon…

aiyoyo

The two suggestions by Tan Kin Lian are worthy of consideration by the Govt. Let the Govt consider the suggestions and to let the people know whether the suggestions are workable. If not they should come up with some ideas to help the people. So far only one of our leaders has put forward some suggestion.
SM Goh has asked the people to spend the way out of the recession if they have the means to do so. PM Lee said the idea might not work because of possible leakages. Whatever we spent will leak out of the country because we import most of the raw materials and food.Other leaders are surprising silent on helping the nation getting out of this situation.
One way, govt can help is to allow CPF fund for payment of rental accommodations subject to conditions, of course.

It makes sense to help the unemployed in Singapore.

In some countries you can go back to the land.

I am living in such a country and it has vast stretches of land.

My friends or my fellow villagers here are also very good at foraging and in fact it is built into their psychic.

We have some land in Singapore and there is a huge patch in front of my HDB block in Singapore and it gets flooded during the monsoon.

I want to grow some rice to show fellow Singaporeans what wet rice looks like.

But I know the garmen is one kind and do not like smart alecs and people with novel and new ideas and so I just keep quiet.

I practice what I preach. I grow sugar cane and I sell them to the local hawkers who crush them and sell one packet or ning tong for pun ning or just 14 Singaporean cents. No bluff.

I also dug a lake and I rear fish. For the past three years they were stolen by thieves.

I work too and for free. I sub-edit, report on news and do some press photography.

I live on very little and try to go local or go bush.

I hit on all these by accident.

My little message to my fellow Singaporeans is that there are other ways of solving the recession problem and one of them is my diy method. For Singaporeans who can and who are looking for a Brave New World they can use my method or an adaptation of mine. Just to stay in Singapore and to be struck by retrenchment, you just die slowly from starvation. Get out and look at the new brave worlds outside. Wait for the upturn, you will die too as this is going to be a bad one. All the other recessions are just Sunday school picnics.

Bonnie

Singapore is freaking exploitative.

I think the gist of the problem is anover paid government
who has been giving us all the bull shit and have failed to perform
Their talk down approach, refusal to admit mistakes
They are not demi gods or gods as we are overpaying them
just like those non performing CEOs who brought down the whole
economy like GM Chrsyler Fannie Mae Barclays Merrill Lych
The 60pct of the voting population still have not get their act together
it the same with the financial industry where the CEOs gets to keep
their multi million stock options for non performance
Same with the politburo here what miracle can they perform aside
from overtaxing us to upkeep their lifestyle
When it comes to a recession it the same of shit and jargon being said
Please spare me

If there is any part of Singapore that is as good and as juicy as claimed by PAP, I have yet to taste it. So far, I am always at the receiving end of the exploitation. From childhood to teenagehood to adulthood, it is always exploitation. Life is one long rotten journey in Singapore. Uniquely Singapore? My foot! Only the PAP kakis get to enjoy the good and juicy parts. The PAP kakis are always singing the praise of the PAP, from dawn to dusk. It is so sickening listening to them.

Yes, Singapore is very freaking clean and green, but it is intellectually dull and non-stimulating, like living in a hospital for the mentally ill or in a village for the simple villagers. And what more, they are always picking on gays and lesbians and others like petty law-breakers or former prisoners, to make an example out of them, giving an extremely bad name to morality or ethics. I can go crazy and the simple village folks just look at me. On the other hand, some of non-PAP groups are intellectually stimulating and it is really enriching to be with them. The problem is, why can’t PAP be somewhat like them? I just do not understand.

Can gov provide me unemployment income?

http://www.straitstimes.com/
Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_318503.html

[Recruits sport new SAF fatigues]

This is the kind of mindless and endless propanganda as put out by the
PAP associated media. Everybody know that the 18 year olds boys are being sacrified to the military conscription and life in the military is grossly unfair. It is already 40 over years since Independence and yet 18 years olds boys are still being drafted into military conscription. Only a dull and exploitative mind will continue with that kind of policy.

Sickening!

After all the complaints, I still do not see that the PAP is willing to make amends and compensate for the mistakes they made in the past to the lives of Singaporeans.

If this is the case, PAP should just resign and and let other parties run Singapore. Stop wasting my time and my life, and stop wasting others time and lives.

There is no solution other than telling all of us, other than illegalize Trade Your Human Organ Transplant + Las Vegas plan is to move on since declaring “Singapore is in RECESSION” to all people. More good years, Singaporeans with these million dollars decision.

They will never do that…since singapore will “go down the drainer’ if run by anyone other then them….

heh,i mean, since we may be going down the shitter, why don’t we just try letting other parties….i don’t think they can do any worse…

Hi Kin Lian,

I have suggested before in Parliament that the Government allows CPF members to take loans from their own CPF money if they are retrenched / unemployed for certain numbers of months — so that they can tide over their present difficult period, instead of salivating for their money at a far unforseable future — when they might have already died from hunger / starvation or stressed.

THis proposal was flatly dismissed by the Manpower Minister then but you may want to consider revisiting this idea in future discussion. I believe we will get a lot of people’s support on this matter.

It is afterall the people’s own money forcefully locked up. If they can borrow from it to buy house, why can’t they borrow from it to survive for another week or month.
cheeze!!!

cheers,
steve

#58 – Could you kindly refresh our memory why the idea was dismissed?

Much of Singapore now is run by non-Singaporean foreigners according to PAP foreigners-friendly ideology. Only freaking idiots will allow the country to be over run by non-citizens, denying citizens the space to grow, in this case, it is the PAP. By any country standards, this is surely disloyalty and betrayal. It is sickening!

Enough said. PAP is sickening!

Just to add: Some Singaporeans, poor or rich, are not any better either, including some of the non-PAP parties, companies and individuals.

I can’t remember exactly, and I no longer have access to the past hansard report. It is only available to sitting MPs for their research.

In essence, the Minister said something like there are other avenues for people to borrow money — from banks, family members etc, and that they already have existing plans to help people who are retrenched and jobless There is already a lot of demands made on the CPF, so they will not want to open up another window for people to draw down on their CPF.

In short, their answers imply that it is ok for the jobless to borrow from the banks, credit cards, family and friends or even loan sharks — but not their OWN CPF for their OWN SURVIVAL.

cheezeee.

With regards to Mr. Tan Kin Lian’s suggestions, they are worth thinking out of the box and could be implemented but in different forms and timing.

Relief loan can be made using their property as collateral and there should be some form of means-testing to prevent abuse.

For the lowering of GST, it would be a good idea to lower it to 5% instead of 3% and to do it 12 months before the election. After the election, can raise back again to 7%.

The third suggestion is to encourage more people to moonlight, take on a second job or to do more part time work (especially over the weekends), to earn extra money to spend. This suggestion has the three advantages: a. create more wealth and spending power for people; b. increase and widen their skillsets power; c. encourage people to be more industrious. For e.g., a construction supervisor can take on a part-time taxi license and drive taxi after finishing his construction shift.

#63 – When it comes to the crunch, everybody hoards money.
Bank takes away the umbrella whenever it rains. Everybody knows that. Banks are watching delinquency rates and NPL going up. They will be more and more scared to lend. In this type of environment, which banker dares to be hero?

CPF Act 15(2)(d)(ii) says members can withdraw “in such other manner as the minister may approve”

Wondering if we need to wait till loan sharks force people to jump down the roof and then someone will respond…

—
In short, their answers imply that it is ok for the jobless to borrow from the banks, credit cards, family and friends or even loan sharks — but not their OWN CPF for their OWN SURVIVAL.

58) Steve Chia, you wrote:
I have suggested before in Parliament that the Government allows CPF members to take loans from their own CPF money if they are retrenched / unemployed ……… — when they might have already died from hunger / starvation

To the PAP, the CPF, judiciary, GST, GRC, etc are taboo, sacred and untouchable. Rest assured, nobody can die from hunger/starvation in Singapore, not even those who tried to go on hunger strike. People can beg on the streets or their MPs. We have old people collecting used drink cans and discarded papers to earn a living. Some religious organisations also provide free food. If anyone dies from hunger/starvation, the PAP not only lose one vote but at least one GRC.

Help Singaporean cope with recession ???……………………….. only one best way….. kick them out of parliament……… the most practical method…..period

To Post 48 Ronnie, are you staying in Thailand or China at the moment?

aiyoyo

Why own CPf $ can take out as loan during bad times huh?

No sense leh cpf is own hard earn $ also ma

Aiyoyo

Good Morning Kelly 37

“Wouldn’t this be a better idea when compared to cooperatives? Another thing is how do you expect a cooperative to work. As I believe most commercial products have a rsp (recommended selling price) and that means even if you want to reduce the price. You cannot. ”

I am very sorry Kelly, due to certain restrictions. I am currently not able to provide you with the information you are seeking. Give me a few more days to put it in my own words as I dont want believe I should plagiarise the work of certain someone whom I am not able to mention here – generally I like to attribute my work only bc that is what educated and civilized people do, they dont scrub out your history.

As for the other part of your question. I regret, I am currently not able to help you due to certain restrictions imposed on me.

Thanks

SD

[i]partisan on December 27th, 2008 1.02 am With regards to Mr. Tan Kin Lian’s suggestions, they are worth thinking out of the box and could be implemented but in different forms and timing.

Relief loan can be made using their property as collateral and there should be some form of means-testing to prevent abuse.[/i]

there is no abused @ all
some hawkers has been doing it for years
helping other hawkers/customes
by charging only 1 percent/month
even some filipinos maids do it
its a fair deal
nobody forced you to take out a loan
during my poor broke times in london
i also borrowed from a fellow singaporean
on the same terms
unfortunately
our pap government think otherwise
to them its ^UNEITHICAL^ and unliscend
hauled all this innocent moneylender (who is also moonshinnin partime)
to our high court with the highest punishment
usually with a minumum of $5,000 fines

#63 steve chia
In short, their answers imply that it is ok for the jobless to borrow from the banks, credit cards, family and friends or even loan sharks — but not their OWN CPF for their OWN SURVIVAL.

——

if this is true, I would disagree with the idea.
When survival is a problem, cpf should be accessible.
what is more important than survival of individuals?
oh…..sharks!……and then i suddenly understood….
SAD.

The pulpit must stop .
90, 89, 88, 87, 86…….

LOL is correct. Everything about this government is money and more money. So cutting GST is out of the question. I would suggest that companies that are still profitable and not in danger of losing money should refrain from retrenching staff. They should only retrench staff when there is no other alternatives. Many GLCs and TLCs are still profitable but making less money, hence they should not follow the example of DBS and retrench staff as the first choice. There are many ways for companies to cut cost, one good example is for top management to cut their pay by at least 25% and board of directors to forgo their director’s fees which can amount to millions dollars. For a start all board of directors should forgo their director’s fee. One private company Parkway has also done it.

Help economy’s wheels to run friction-free, open a Coffeeshop.

“I am very sorry Kelly, due to certain restrictions. I am currently not able to provide you with the information you are seeking. Give me a few more days to put it in my own words as I dont want believe I should plagiarise the work of certain someone whom I am not able to mention here – generally I like to attribute my work only bc that is what educated and civilized people do, they dont scrub out your history.

As for the other part of your question. I regret, I am currently not able to help you due to certain restrictions imposed on me.

Thanks

SD”

What kinda of useless liason officer r u? I came here to learn something new! This is like watching a pirated bootleg dvd, its 10% fact / 40% speculation and the rest pure imagination. just my 2 cents.

most of these ideas are just delaying the pain of lack or the result of one’s financial mismanagement. these measures recommended, thus far, basically shift economical problems to other areas eg. taking from cpf may result in insufficient retirement fund for the financially challenged etc

the authorities, as far as i can see, are usually indifferent towards people with financial problems. they generally regard them as “irresponsible” or deserving of their plight( god knows what kind of “bad karma” they had invited into their lives )

if that’s the case, self reliant/ being responsible for one’s keeping is obviously the government’s preferred choice to solve all your financial woes and thus….

…top down decrees that you
1) work harder and upgrade to solve your financial problems. but that’s easy said then done in reality( one circumstances can be too complex to fit into any single mould) so the least the government could do, if they enforce “self-reliant” on its people, is to help create jobs for the lower 20 percentile of the population that’s close to an iron rice bowl( state jobs or something similar – state/pte ventures). however, a secure job is not enough if these people don’t get paid a decent salary to live on. again, what good is self-reliant without minimum sum? the government needs to fine tune the reward system to ensure a more equitable recognition for the contribution by the lower percentile of our population. the government may impose financial planning etc or some kind of supervised spending( prudent financial management) on this group of people in order to protect its socialist program from abuses – yes, some aspect of freedom maybe lost but that serves as deterrence to mediocrity to balance capitalist’s leaning.

2) however, if proven the needy found unfit for work( critical health problems, unusual circumstances etc), the authority can then refer this group of people to charitable organization or NGO etc for financial assistance/ counseling etc

the government needs to bear the social costs( through economic concession) of the disadvantaged group as the …. poor/weak will always be with us!

Dear all,

Please be patient. Do try to understand my constrains, they are very real and as such present complications. As some of you know, I am NOT able to specifically mention the name of a certain person here; I have already been cautioned abt this matter (go and ask gemami, if you all dont believe me); otherwise I may even be fingered for talking “too much” abt him. So these days, I have to be very careful. These days, I don’t even dare to talk about Mr Tan KL or Cherian George these days. It doesnt mean, I dont have an opinion, it just means its best to keep quiet and not rock the boat. On the other hand since this person who I cannot mention once wrote nearly 9 out of 10 articles in a press that I am not allowed to mention here. You can see how that presents many problems.

As a general rule, I don’t steal and I try to be honest, so I never plagiarize.If I say something and it actually came out once from the pen of someone. I feel, I that person deserves due recognition in the form of attributions, if not then do without what he once conceived. Its as simple as that.

So I really need time to read what this person once wrote and revert to you all perhaps in a few weeks time. I need to remove his references etc. By that time this thread would probably have phased off the radar, but rest assured. You can always count on me to give you an answer.

Many thanks and sorry for the hassle

Do bear with us.

SD

What I will say here is this; if the imperative is to carve out effective solutions to get on top of poverty; then cutting GST or even relief loans are NOT going to be long term and sustainable solutions. I think most people haven’t really scaled accurately the magnitude of these problems or how long they may even remain with us.

As such, we believe co-operatives represent a real way of moving forward because of their versatility and operational simplicity.

We believe very strongly and we even have various models which have been developed that proves conclusively this is perhaps one very effective way to meet the needs of people in very diverse circumstances.

Thus, given the pressing times these days, both singaporeans and residents MAY choose to use the co-operative model to meet their emerging needs, notably in alleviating poverty, education, health services etc.

In our opinion it’s a good way of mobilizing human wealth to deliver good to humanity.

As I said, I need time to work on this.

SD (Internet liaison officer of the brotherhood)

Huh…like that one ah singaporedad?

Wait – borrowing to spend, is this the right way to move forward?

Hi All

I doubt that the govt will lower GST or allow us to take a loan against our CPF due to the massive administrative overload.

Worldwide, there is hardly any govt that reduces GST once it is being implemented. If I am not wrong, only Britain recently reduces their GST (please check me if I am wrong). It is easier to provide for economic stimulus which we will all know by next year January.

Frankly, our govt has enough resources to provide for unemployment benefit. It is currently providing limited unemployment benefit to the lower income. In CDC, if you are the breadwinner staying in HDB 4 room and below you can have access to betwwen $300-$500 a month for at least three months. The catch is you must attend interviews or go for retraining. The benefit is limited to the down and out and sadly only benefit a certain portion of the population. Those retrenched executive or with working home members have a difficult chance of seeking any of such financial aid. The govt could expand this benefit to all Singaporeans or at least widen the catchment.

My take is that we should have unemployment benefit but with conditions attached i.e. you must go for interviews or at least retraining if relevant. The same happens in Australia – the jobless collects $230 a week but must go for interviews or retraining.

Every six months, the benefit is subject to review again thus eradicating the fear of the jobless being overly dependent on handout. Moreover, the minimum wage there allows one to seek for a job earnestly as the pay there is at least $550 per week. Thus, for me, unemployment benefit and minimum wage go hand in hand. People only clamour and depend on employment benefit if the pay outside is miserly. Frankly, this may happen in Singapore as our pay is so low that if the govt introduces unemployment benefit it may cause them to over depend on such welfare.

The govt’s fear that the population goes soft on their work ethics is unfounded as advanced countries such as US, Sweden, Finland, Britain all provide unemployment benefit subject to certain inherent conditions. The main idea of such benefit is to allow the breadwinners to have enough money to put food on the table so that our children do not suffer as a result of the economic hardship. Such countries not only work as hard as us but also feel that their govt is helping them in times of need. What good can a govt be if they could not do much to improve our living conditions when the there is economic hardship?

As the economy worsen next year, many Singaporeans will be jobless and some may face severe economic difficulty. Many will turn to loan shark or even perform illegal activities just to make ends meet.

It is up to the govt to pacify the population failing which many may with their feet at the polls.

Looks like LKY prophecy may come true when there are huge retrenchments next year, our retrenched woman may have to work as maids overseas properly in China who are still doing well. Government may have to suspend full-time NSF enlistment for two to three years to allow young Singapore man to proceed to University and free up national services posts for retrenched reservists who can become full-time reservists getting at least 80% of their last salary to tight over their financial difficulties.

79) singaporedaddy on December 27th, 2008 3.09 pm

Co-ops sounds very good. I used to eat frequently in this eatery when I was in the states that used to harvest and cook their own organic food. It worked on a honor system. You can pay as much as you like. For some reason the owners didnt seem to have trouble despite having to regularly balance the hubris between clients who didnt pay alot and those who did. They seemed for the most part satisfied. Dont have any idea how they managed to juggle that hubris.

Just to tag on further on what one poster said here. I believe it was kelly. How do you propose to iron out the problem with rsp? And would what you propose be under the charities act by any chance?

One final word, if you find it claustrophobic here. Maybe you sound consider visiting the ypap site and bringing along all your friends. I am very sure a cool room can be arranged where all of you will feel most welcomed.

Good evening Teo,

How are you Teo? Long time no see. I remember you from the IS. Interesting story. Thanks.

Cooperatives are businesses. They are NOT charities. They range in size from small eat-as-you-pay frontages (as you mentioned) to mega Fortune 500 companies. In many ways, they’re like any other business, but I agree they do have charitable elements; but in several important ways they are unique and different; for one the folk who use them; be it to get lower priced goods and services are SHAREHOLDERS rather than just passive consumers; so there is a big conceptual distinction.

RSP is a contentious issue with any retail enterprise. I understand Teo, completely. But it’s not a big deal. I see this as a solvable problem bc one can always go around it with a link point system or something that exchanges equal or comparable value; I don’t consider that the main issue. Really, I don’t.

The main issue is as with any business is being able to get a decent margin by competing with the big boys like giant, shing seong and NTUC; those guys have economy of scale; so when they buy lets say; tin curry; they do so by the container loads and that simply means; they get a bulk discounts and that may even negate the whole idea of a cooperative.

So research and primary data is key here; otherwise we may just be talking blue sky projections here.

But as I said Teo, I need time to revert to you and the others on the details of how this whole plan may be a recession buster; I still believe the best way to cut this recession is by putting food and basic commodities on a strategic footing; I don’t like the current system; as its too laden with criteria’s and paperwork. In fact, I have just seen the pre-qualifying documentation today and its more like an application form to be an astronaut in NASA. So I seriously have grave reservations that the current scheme to alleviate poverty will even be able to work. I really do.

I will probably post in on this thread in 3 to 4 weeks time; as its quiet leceh for me to gut out so many personal references; by that time, this thread would probably slip over the horizon, but if you and others are interested; do check periodically.

Thanks and Happy New Year and do send my warmest regards to your two year old.

SD

I will be very honest and candid with you Teo.

It would be great if some of you. Perhaps CEO, landser and some of the other seniors can come and join us for dinner to discuss this matter further.

If we sit down in one table. Many things can happen based on past history. If we dont. All this will just be hot air.

I can easily make the arrangements. What do you say? A round of golf?

Pls consider this Teo and do send my warmest regards to CEO and gang.

He should join us for cycling. Tell him, we miss him dearly. And his absence is greatly felt by every single one of us.

SD

Why must NTUC INCOME be allowed to collect more Premium Deduction for Incomeshield Plan C and MB, reference GH/RB/INSHRB/059, dated Nov. 30, 2008 when so many senior citizens are with nil Income ? Singaporeans above 75 years should be exempted. Where tio get tghe money to pay and pay ?
Osamaobamataksamah

Kin Lian, I think you suggestions are good and implementable. Results may vary but surely in the positive direction. However I feel that our Government do not think that cutting GST or giving loans is the solution. Look at the passive measures that they are taking during this financial crisis. Extraordinary times require extraordinary measures; too bad, ordinary people run the show.

When people talk about CPF contribution cut, why does it seem that everyone is assuming that the cut has to come from the employer contribution?

Malaysia had reduced their employee CPF contribution. I personally like this idea. If I had to take a pay cut, at least I can bring home a little bit more cash.

Some commenters said that reducing GST is a good idea, but the Government will not agree to do so.

I prefer to withhold judgment on this matter. If this is an appropriate measure, after considering all factors, then the decision maker may accept it . My task is to get views on whether it really helps.

Some people said that if GST is reduced, the retailers will up their prices to make up the difference. Some may do, but their business will drop. The customers will buy from other retailers. There is still a competitive market out there.

I have considered the other factors for boosting the economy. It seems that reducing GST is a more effective tool.

This is what I think:

(a) Given that exports account for about 200% of our GDP [1], I believe domestic stimulus is not going be as effective as China (where exports accounts for only about 40%) or the USA

(b) Should we continue to spend or not? My advice is: be prudent but not pessimistic. Continue to spend, but WITHIN your limits.

(c) I think domestic spending helps the local economy somehow, but I don’t really know if it’s significant enough to stimulate growth. But this might be the only thing we can do since we can’t control the global economy. (If SM Goh was trying to mean the same thing, then I think his communication wasn’t clear enough.)

(d) I think the intention to help the lower income group tide over the economy crisis is a good one. Lowering GST across the board is one way. Alternatively, we can provide more food vouchers or subsidies specifically to the lower income group. The former is simpler to implement but does not target only the lower income group. The latter is more complicated but less wasteful (for the the goal of social welfare, not stimulate economy)

(e) Personally, rather than reducing taxes across the broad, I prefer reducing taxes for businesses, especially businesses that exports goods and services. Ultimately, exports account for about 200% of our GDP. And I believe this is more effective at keeping jobs for most of us. We can even take this opportunity to reduce taxes for new businesses to start growing the domestic sector. Again, without detail statistics, I can’t possibly even make any calculated guess.

(f) Nobody likes taxes, but ultimately it is taxes that fund most if not all of the social welfare. Once personal taxes is reduced significantly, it is very difficult to raise it again. People who are contributing most to tax benefit least from it.

[1] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2798.htm (exports= $313 bil, GDP=$168bil)

“ultimately it is taxes that fund most if not all of the social welfare” yes, by right taxes are funding most of the social welfare…but how much is used to fund social welfare? i don’t think it is the majority of taxes

#92 Taxes:
yes, by right taxes are funding most of the social welfare…but how much is used to fund social welfare? i don’t think it is the majority of taxes

I don’t know exactly too. I search around and this may resolve all our guesses:
http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2008/revenue_expenditure/toc.html

1) The estimated expenditure for FY 2008 and revised expenditure for FY 2007 is shown in the “Expenditure Estimates” document on page 12. It probably doesn’t show how much goes to people in each tax bracket (and it’s probably impossible to do so)

2) In FY 2007, the revenue document shows that income tax (corporate+personal+stat board) made up about 25% of the total revenue. Personal income tax actually only contributed to about 9% of the total. GST accounts for about 10% of the total.

So the lower income group probably contribute 19% or less of the total revenue, and 10% (i.e. GST) if they don’t pay income tax. They spend less than people in the higher tax bracket, so their contribution to the total revenue is probably even lower. People who earns and spend more pay even more types of taxes.

Asking everyone to pay more taxes to fund more social welfare specifically for this group is a slippery slope. It’s like pushing for more donations during charity drives. Although it is for a good cause, it gets increasingly harder.

Personally, I think we have to go beyond the goal of increasing the amount of expenditure for social welfare policies by refining these policies to stretch each dollar. That’s probably the main purpose of discussion forums like this.

#92 Taxes:
yes, by right taxes are funding most of the social welfare…but how much is used to fund social welfare? i don’t think it is the majority of taxes

I don’t know exactly too. I search around and this may be helpful:
http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2008/revenue_expenditure/toc.html

Some interesting facts (see revenue document):
- In FY 2007, income tax (corporate+personal+stat board) made up about 25% of the total revenue.
- Personal income tax actually only contributed to about 9% of the total.
- GST accounts for about 10% of the total.

So the lower income group probably contribute less than 19% of the total revenue. For those who don’t even pay tax, it’s probably less than 10% of the total, i.e. GST only. It might be even much less since they spend less. People who earn more pay more in terms of amount and percentage, and also other types of taxes.

Asking everyone to pay more taxes to fund more social welfare is like pushing for more donations during charity drives. Although it is for a good cause, it gets increasingly harder.

Personally, I think we have to go beyond the goal of increasing the amount of expenditure for social welfare policies by refining these policies to stretch each dollar. This is probably one of the purpose of discussion forums like this.

Idealistic but unworkable.

Once you build a structure atop a foundation, you cannot remove the groundwork.

1. Retrench (and send away) all foreign workers whilst employing all unemployed Singaporeans. Definitely to reduce local unemployment
This is dumb, this will increase cost for businesses so much it will be unviable. Already my business is running into trouble because singaporeans are not willing to work in logistics and crafts trade and demand amazingly impossible salary, good office hours and airconditioned environment.

2. Stop all upgrading and construction projects and use the intended money to provide subsidies for lower income group people
Tons of subsidies are already there for lower income group. Are you one of them? If yes, please inform me and I can see what I can help.

3. Reduce GST to 5% to stimulate consumer spending.
The reason for being 5% is because I felt anything below 5% would be too much, which may spark further taxes in other forms. Another reason being 5% is easier to calculate.
Why shifting of GST is unwelcome – because businesses and GST registered personnels have alot of additional costs to incur by shifting the GST benchmark

4. Close the income disparity gap. I think the rich are too rich, the poor too poor.
Why so? How?

5. Remove ERP – it’s a stupid invention by some stupid outdated old fashioned people
Not possible, it already have sunk cost. ERP actually WORKS because so many pple are complaining, if pple are not complaining, than it should be worrying!

why the magic number? any empirical or stimulated studies to show that those are the magic numbers?

Year of the OX (slog) and the coming 44th Anniversary of Singapore in 2009….. means what? sounds like Double Death ? property bubble akan datang to singapura!……………….unemployment to rise?………..where to get job after 62 ro extend retirement to 65 when the young are struggling to find a job upon graduation? ……………..raise some more taxes and wait for deflation to set in.

New Year came and gone so my CNY Wish for year of THE OX is as follows:
GST……….reduce to 20%
ERP……….reduce by 50 cents to $1 for 1 yr.
COE……….allow bidding and have 50% rebate.
TV Licence…………scrap all together!
employ locals as maids to solve the unemployment problems.
employ retirees from age 55 as Security Guards
employ more ablebodied Sr. citizens as MRT wardens in and out of Trains
let wealthy retirees enjoy their Golden Yrs. and NOT to work beyond 60 best at 55 if they are financially well off.
learn to appreciate retirement gracefully and not work like a bull to death!
make way for the young to be employed .

I think my 3rd measure will be more idealistic.
That is The Garmen can help by giving out Khang Thow Jee.
Like guarantee 2.1 billion to help 12,ooo SME.
Then we can have 2112 as first prize.And those who bet will be much richer and thus can help those who don’t bet by spending,thus helping the economy and also help to create more jobs .
Efficiency start from the top.
If the above is consider not favourable.Then help those small company and SME first.Many small business owner ,taxi drivers,hawkers have problem topping up their medisave to get their license renewed.If cannot give Khang Thow Jee,never mind.Excuse them from topping up their own medisave and let them carry on with their business for the next 2 years till they have the money.Temporily don’t pressure those who owe income tax to pay up first .Give them some time.

But ideally is still the Khang Thow Jee.

I just think that Government should stop giving Singaporeans false hopes and start helping us financially. What they giving us in whatever offset packages are never enough to cover Singaporeans for the near future……

Has our government tried to follow only the beneficial concepts of the “First Emperor of Qin” who was well-known as “Shihuangdi” to the Chinese? At least “Shihuangdi” didn’t allow the untalented foreigners to migrate to
China for jobs or to be PRs as to cause all average peoples of the Han to be second-class citizens as we average Singaporeans are now treated by our own government. Whether his people were wealthy or poor he raised heavy taxes just to fulfil his dreams of constructing “The Great Wall of China” to keep all the foreign invaders from trying to invade China. Our government refuses to hear from us because we are an ordinary Singapore citizen who is incompetent in politics. We would like to add two excerpts in the next paragraphs from the history of China’s most famous emperors to prove why our government will not be successful in its rule for another decade if it doesn’t solve the problems of continuous unemployment and reduce prices of most usable things in time and if it still listens to its several selfish government advisors similar to Shihuangdi’s so-called highly-talented political advisors Lisi, Weiliao, Wangjian, Mengtian and many more who refused to accept the verbal protests of their own average citizens in the streets during their time. History can repeat itself. PAP can never last for another decade for sure. Do we think Shihuangdi was just a simple-minded emperor? His political concepts of controlling and benefiting China was marvellous despite cruelty but our government’s political concepts are indeed worse than his because all average and below average salaried and unemployed capable Singaporeans are forced to be second-class citizens and most of them are stranded in the middle of a dangerous bridge where both ends are on fire. Please refer to the two excerpts below to why PAP will collapse very soon:

1)About Shihuangdi
The emperor Shi Huangdi(259-210BC), whose family name is Ying and first name is Zheng, is one of the most famous kings in Chinese history. He is also the emperor who created the first feudalism country made up of several peoples.

The times when Shi Huangdi was born was the end of the period of the Warring States in Chinese history. It was the times that wars broke out quite often. His father was named Zichu—the grandson of the emperor Chin Shaodi and also the son of the prince Chin’an’guo. Zichu was sent to the country Zhao as a hostage. At that time, a businessman called Lubuwei saw the special situation of Zichu, so he helped him a lot to make him back to his native country. Lubuwei also provided Zichu with a beauty called Zhaoji to be his wife. Before long she got a son, it is the right person called Yingzheng-the emperor Shi Huangdi.

When Zichu got back to the country Chin, he became the emperor of Chin. He was called the emperor Zhuang Xiangdi and he made Yingzheng to be the prince. The emperor Chinzhuangxiang died in 247 BC and Yingzheng became the emperor who was only 13 years old at that time. In 238 BC he held a coronation and after that time he became the real emperor who could control the whole country. He defeated the army which wanted to overset him and sent his mother into prison. The next year he made the Premier Lubuwei to be a civilian. With the help of Lisi, Weiliao, Wangjian, Mengtian and so on, he chose the right time to attack other countries. The war lasted 10 years from 230-221BC. He annihilated the countries–Han, Zhao, Yan, Wei, Chu and Qi and brought the Warring States which lasted about 100 years to an end. He made himself to be the emperor of the first fuedalism country made up of several peoples in Chinese history.

After he made all parts of China to be a whole country, he called himself “Shi Huangdi”. To make his power more stronger, he made a lot of policies, including consolidating characters, coin and metrology, putting the rule of province and country into use, dividing the whole country into 36 provinces, making country under the control of province and so on. He created several important officials who were under the control of the emperor. All the officials was chosen by the emperor. It was Shi Huangdi who was in charge of the power of the army and politics. From then on during about 2000 years, the results of innovation made a great effect of the feudalism system of China.

2)The First Emperor’s Treatment of his People:
The First Emperor trusted his own judgment, never consulting others, and hence his errors went uncorrected. The Second Emperor carried on in the same manner, never reforming, compounding his misfortune through violence and cruelty. . .

At that time the world was not without men of deep insight and an understanding of change. The reason they did not dare exert their loyalty and correct the errors of the ruler was that Qin’s customs forbade the mentioning of inauspicious matters. Before their words of loyal advice were even out of their mouths, they would have been condemned to execution. This insured that the men of the empire would incline their ears to listen, stand in an attitude of solemn attention, but clamp their mouths shut and never speak out. Therefore when the three rulers strayed from the Way, the loyal ministers did not dare remonstrate, and the men of wisdom did not dare offer counsel. The empire was already in rebellion, but the ruler was never informed of the villainy—how pitiful!. . .

In case I have exceed 500 words by adding the two excerpts:
1)About Shihuangdi
The emperor Shi Huangdi(259-210BC), whose family name is Ying and first name is Zheng, is one of the most famous kings in Chinese history. He is also the emperor who created the first feudalism country made up of several peoples.

The times when Shi Huangdi was born was the end of the period of the Warring States in Chinese history. It was the times that wars broke out quite often. His father was named Zichu—the grandson of the emperor Chin Shaodi and also the son of the prince Chin’an’guo. Zichu was sent to the country Zhao as a hostage. At that time, a businessman called Lubuwei saw the special situation of Zichu, so he helped him a lot to make him back to his native country. Lubuwei also provided Zichu with a beauty called Zhaoji to be his wife. Before long she got a son, it is the right person called Yingzheng-the emperor Shi Huangdi.

When Zichu got back to the country Chin, he became the emperor of Chin. He was called the emperor Zhuang Xiangdi and he made Yingzheng to be the prince. The emperor Chinzhuangxiang died in 247 BC and Yingzheng became the emperor who was only 13 years old at that time. In 238 BC he held a coronation and after that time he became the real emperor who could control the whole country. He defeated the army which wanted to overset him and sent his mother into prison. The next year he made the Premier Lubuwei to be a civilian. With the help of Lisi, Weiliao, Wangjian, Mengtian and so on, he chose the right time to attack other countries. The war lasted 10 years from 230-221BC. He annihilated the countries–Han, Zhao, Yan, Wei, Chu and Qi and brought the Warring States which lasted about 100 years to an end. He made himself to be the emperor of the first fuedalism country made up of several peoples in Chinese history.

After he made all parts of China to be a whole country, he called himself “Shi Huangdi”. To make his power more stronger, he made a lot of policies, including consolidating characters, coin and metrology, putting the rule of province and country into use, dividing the whole country into 36 provinces, making country under the control of province and so on. He created several important officials who were under the control of the emperor. All the officials was chosen by the emperor. It was Shi Huangdi who was in charge of the power of the army and politics. From then on during about 2000 years, the results of innovation made a great effect of the feudalism system of China.

2)The First Emperor’s Treatment of his People:
The First Emperor trusted his own judgment, never consulting others, and hence his errors went uncorrected. The Second Emperor carried on in the same manner, never reforming, compounding his misfortune through violence and cruelty. . .

At that time the world was not without men of deep insight and an understanding of change. The reason they did not dare exert their loyalty and correct the errors of the ruler was that Qin’s customs forbade the mentioning of inauspicious matters. Before their words of loyal advice were even out of their mouths, they would have been condemned to execution. This insured that the men of the empire would incline their ears to listen, stand in an attitude of solemn attention, but clamp their mouths shut and never speak out. Therefore when the three rulers strayed from the Way, the loyal ministers did not dare remonstrate, and the men of wisdom did not dare offer counsel. The empire was already in rebellion, but the ruler was never informed of the villainy—how pitiful!. . .