An extract of the speech delivered in Parliament by NMP Siew Kum Hong, querying the effectiveness of the Jobs Credit Scheme. To read the full speech, visit his blog.
I NOW turn to the Jobs Credit scheme. It is one of the lynchpins of the Budget, and it seems to have caught the imagination of Singaporeans. Call it what you will, but it is fundamentally a wage subsidy for employers. It equates to a 9 percentage point cut in the employers’ CPF contribution rate. It will cost taxpayers S$4.5 billion dollars, and will be funded by our reserves.
The objective of this scheme is to save jobs. But how effective will it be?
Clearly, the effectiveness of the scheme for each employer will depend on the proportion of its costs attributable to wages. If wages form just 10% of an employer’s overall costs, then the Jobs Credit scheme will reduce its total costs by up to 0.8%. On the other hand, if 70% of costs are wages, then the scheme will reduce total costs by a maximum of 5.5%. These are theoretical maximums, based on improbable assumptions of 100% local employees, all earning $2500 per month or less.
The Minister has explained that the global economic crisis is caused by a worldwide collapse in demand. Simply put, there is massively reduced demand for the goods and services produced by our economy.
Last week, the EDB released a report on the manufacturing sector’s business expectations for the next six months. This report paints a shocking picture of just how dire things are expected to get. An across-the-board negative outlook for the first half of 2009 for manufacturing, with similarly negative forecasts for output and employment for Q1. For instance, 92% of data storage firms and 81% of precision engineering firms predict a drop in output.When demand falls off a cliff like this, many businesses will face a drop in revenue far exceeding 8%. Businesses will have no choice but to cut costs to stay afloat.
In this context, I suspect that the Jobs Credit scheme will turn out to just a band-aid. Yes, it will provide a temporary cushion for businesses, especially SMEs. Yes, it will make employers a little bit more reluctant to lay off locals. Yes, whatever protection it creates will probably benefit the low-income more than the high-income. But it will still only be a band-aid at best, in stopping job losses.
And what a very expensive band-aid it will be. Citigroup’s head of Singapore research Dr Chua Hak Bin has pointed out that if the Jobs Credit scheme helps to save 50,000 jobs, then the cost of saving each job is $90,000 – three times the median annual salary of each job in Singapore. Even if it helps to save 100,000 jobs, the cost of saving each job is $45,000 – still 50% more than the median annual salary.
And contract workers, who are probably most at risk when a business cuts staffing costs, may not benefit from the Jobs Credit scheme. Contractors are usually hired by employment agencies and farmed out to companies. The agencies will receive the subsidy. They have no incentive to pass it on to the companies. Unlike with property tax rebates, the Government has not exhorted these agencies to pass the savings on to their customers. And so, the scheme could make contractors, who form a growing proportion of the workforce, even more vulnerable than they otherwise would be.
I agree with people like NUS professor Shandre Thangavelu, who has said that the Jobs Credit scheme will only have a short-run impact on the retrenchment behaviour of employers. Even the MOF team who designed the scheme is unable to predict just how many jobs it will help to save, and for how long. Mr Poon Hong Yuen, who led the team that put the scheme together, said:
“If just because of this they rethink (retrenchments), then I think it’s already quite an achievement.”
I would praise the Ministry for its willingness to take a chance on the Jobs Credit scheme. I think this sort of policy risk-taking is important and helpful. But I don’t think the risk will pan out in this case. And I think Mr Poon sets a surprisingly modest target. At $4.5 billion, I would expect more.
The Jobs Credit scheme will end up benefiting capital owners disproportionately. It will reduce business costs, but I do not expect it to save very many jobs, and even then not for very long. It is essentially a special transfer to capital owners, such as business-owners and entrepreneurs. And considering that around 50% of the Singapore corporate sector is foreign-owned, a big chunk of this transfer will leak out of Singapore.
Today’s Straits Times Forum carried a letter from someone who works in an SME, praising the Jobs Credit scheme. But if you drill into the details, it is clear that the business was not considering retrenchments in the first place. Instead, it is considering using the Jobs Credit funding to invest further in its business. In these times, that is not a bad thing. But it clearly shows up the limitations in the scheme’s ability to achieve its stated goal of saving jobs.
The Jobs Credit scheme will have, at best, a marginal impact on businesses’ decisions on whether to retrench. Businesses facing collapsed demand will still retrench. Businesses doing well will reap a windfall benefit. MNCs will still, by and large, follow their corporate headquarters’ directions on retrenchments.
True, the Jobs Credit scheme is not meant to be the complete answer. It is not a panacea. It is one piece of the puzzle, albeit a big centrepiece, and there are many other measures to reduce business costs and help businesses through this difficult period. But the question must be whether spending $4.5 billion on the Jobs Credit scheme produces the most bang for the buck for Singaporeans.
This is a hand-out for businesses. But we have always opposed hand-outs for Singaporeans. Why are businesses different? In giving all this money away to businesses, are we somehow being psychologically held hostage to the ideological dogma that the best way to help Singaporeans is to help businesses, instead of helping Singaporeans directly?
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
That has been done, and being done, by many Indonesian rich men in Singapore.
Register a private limited company.
Appoint a board of directors, with GM and may be one clerk.
Put your own relatives as directors and get paid.
GM can be yourself; clerk can be your wife/sister.
96) smallvice585 on February 4th, 2009 11.19 pm
(a) With due respect. You are really out of your league here. All you are doing here is responding to my questions like a postman – you have not even begun to analyse the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of what you offering by way of a solution. There is no value add to your inputs. Pls dont say I am rude to you as there is no way to convey this without coming across as offensive.
If you really want me to give you a point by point evaluation why MOST of these measures currently offered by both EDB and SPRING are USELESS and UNRELIABLE. I can, but pls refer to my post in # 60 / otherwise pls go to the LKY school to seek for answers.
(b) I think there is a real danger this debate may spiral to the domain of a big WASTE of time – one really needs to SCALE the context of problem / solution accurately if the goal is to be EFFECTIVE, as I have described in 74 & 75 – There is really ONLY ONE question; you can throw the rest out of the window and it wouldnt even make the slightest difference to the outcome, but NOT this PNE, its jugular, central and strategic viz-a-viz why isnt the govt pumping more water DIRECTLY into the pond? Why is it pursuing INDIRECT measures at capitalising the market ?- how may this resolve the acute liquidity problem in the market?
We can go around talking about alot of USELESS things here; or listen to most of the nonsense botakhead siew and the WP mp may wish to highlight but that is really like quibbling over the color of wallpaper two minutes after the titanic has struck the iceberg – or we can decide to say, we have one bullet, we will go for the headshot here.
I strongly believe, UNLESS someone is prepared to do the requisite reading and seriously answer this question of the analogy of the pond that’s fast drying up and why no one seems to be WILLING to pump water into it; then we will just go around and circles. I am in the solution business, I am not in the wayang kulit and smoke and mirrors industry – so I dont think, I will even bother to follow it on TV or the papers. Its a waste of good time. I rather go cycling and improve my stamina and sleep.
Life is not so simple; you just pull me by the nose and I just follow along.
SD
I disagree fundamentally with the JCS. This is a demand -led recession where no country can reverse the trend of falling demand. So it’s not an issue of Costs, it’s an issue of the lack of Sales. Based on the assumption that if the retrenchments have to occur because business concerns cannot sustain even the cost of staff after this subsidy, it is really better to help the retrenched directly. That $300 (12%x$2500)per month can be given to the retrenched to help defray his living expenses for say 1 year to tide him over or until he gets another job within that 1 year period. Assuming here the funds are set aside from this year’s Budget and it should be spent.
Borrowing from his own CPF is not a bad idea and something I think is humane and I am a proponent of that. If the retrenched cannot survive today, let’s not even talk about retirement and if the govt keeps talking about a later retirement, the more we should let the retrenched take some of his own money out now with ample time to replenish his CPF.
I hope the article about the young team coming out with this borrowed idea from the USA where it was rejected is just propoganda because it sure backfires on the govt as if they have no ideas themselves.
To gauge the success or failure of the JCS, there must be tangible KPIs. Second there must be transparency. The government should make public the disbursement record so that the public will know who the money went too , more so as the reserves are being used. Lets not forget that the bulk of our workers are employed by SMEs, we need to see if this group benefits and if they have shed more workers despite the JCS. Transparency will also show if the big MNCs and GLSs are the ones benefiting from the JCS while still posting healthy profits.
what JCS means?
if a company is going to retrench, it will.
if a company is not going to retrench, it won’t.
for the above two scenarios, JCS can do nothing about them.
JCS comes in only in the case of to retrench or not to retrench companies.
this is similar to the pay more to avoid corruption.
if a person is corrupt, pay more or less, he will still be corrupt.
if a person is not corruptible, pay more or less, he will still be incorruptible.
it only applies to people who can be corrupt or are tempted to corrupt. so pay them more and they will not be corrupt. pay them less and they will corrupt.
with the cut in pay at the top level i am getting worried.
Now with all the comments from PAP MPs on the weaknesses of JCS, let us see what the Presidential Council and President says.
Is the 2nd key effective to hold back an ineffective cabinet, hoodwinked by a bunch of pre-thirties scholars, playing and bandying around with our hard earned reserves?
I hope TOC will highlight the role of this 2nd GREAT KEY and see if our $4.5 bil can be salvaged.
My suggestion
1) Let companies who need JCS apply on line
2) Let companies have some KPI for this eg SMRT should not hand out bonuses of more than $50,000 to top management if they request for it.
Think about it, the JCS is a Welfare and handout for all companies, and they don’t even ask for it. Just a damn waste of our reserves. Are the Presidential Council able to see it?
Do the Council members have a sense of moral uprightness like Ong Teng Cheong to see through the errors of the thirtysomething Scholars?
I pray for our President. Lord save the Country.
104) redbean on February 5th, 2009 9.55 am
I believe your points are very valid and logical and no one can really counter you directly.
I wonder if Job Credits so super, does it mean when demand in zero, issuing $300 a month to a company can help it stay in operation or not move out of singapura or go bankrupt?
Very wise solution indeed. Why din think of it? Kudos to the youthful scholars. study more really makes a difference.
I think the CREDITS should not just go to the young scholastic talents of the land but also very much to the directional advice given by our most revered and talented talent ministar.
Maybe when formulating the solution, I wonder if LTK’s views were seeked?
just a question lah. I donche know mah. u know meh?
Singaporeans, you must be so happy knowing your future is in good good hands.
103) Transparency on February 5th, 2009 9.41 am
To gauge the success or failure of the JCS, there must be tangible KPIs. Second there must be transparency.
—————————————————–
Questions derived from your points:
1. Who creates what KPIs?
2. Who does the assessment?
and there you have it. My questions derived.
This is what our government should considered implementing:
WASHINGTON: President Barack Obama on Wednesday launched a new bid to tame Wall Street excess, clamping a half million dollar salary cap on executives of stricken finance firms who plead for taxpayer bailouts.
Striking a populist note, the president warned he could not tolerate huge “bad taste” bonuses paid out to fat cat corporate bosses and big spending on luxuries, while job losses and economic woes stalk ordinary Americans.
The president also promised the Treasury would next week unveil a new strategy designed to free up frozen credit markets, in an effort to ignite lending and consumption as the worst economic crisis since the 1930s bites.
“What gets people upset – and rightfully so – are executives being rewarded for failure, especially when those rewards are subsidised by US taxpayers,” Obama said at the White House.
“For top executives to award themselves these kinds of compensation packages in the midst of this economic crisis is not only in bad taste – it’s a bad strategy and I will not tolerate it as president.”
I think there must be certain criteria in place for the Job Credit Scheme. Read this write-up by this chap and I agreed with him.
http://kentridgecommon.com/?p=351
Has anyone read Lucky Tan’s blog titled “The Truth about Job Credits”.
====Quote===================
I first heard about this term called the jobs credit during Barak Obama’s campaign a few months ago. He wanted to subsidise firms for keeping and hiring workers. This idea was thrown out by his own party members, the Democrats, as unworkable.
(see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/12/AR2009011203298.html)
Ironically, the support for this comes from the opposition Republican camp because it will put money in the pockets of businesses and in some ways has the same pro-business effect as a tax cut….not because of its ability to save jobs
====Unquote===================
Handouts to consumers, cut GST. Do things to increase expenditure which would lead to overall higher demands – business may be better off too.
/// I first heard about this term called the jobs credit during Barak Obama’s campaign a few months ago ///
And those civil service guys shameless claimed that as their own creation. Reminds me of our slogan “One People, One Nation, One Singapore”. This phrase was uttered by Margaret Thatcher and recorded on TV, except she didn’t say the “One Singapore” bit.
Heard from news today that OBAMA annual salary is US$400,000/- and imagine the load on his shoulders………..JCS may or may not be the answer!…….To mend the corporate giants and rescue a slew of troubled banks is another headache!
let’s watch how this US$400,000/- man solve problems…….
Whether the Job Credit Scheme is effective or not is not measurable.
Who will be able to quantify that xxx jobs were saved because of this scheme?
Yet the fat cats will probably claim credit and get their handsome bonus in 2010 which they are now advised by Teo Chee Head as minister-in-charge of the Civil Services to splurge on the quiet and not write about it in the Straits TImes!!!
One PAP MP mentioned that a similar jobs credit scheme was recently
discarded by the US Administration and we should find out the reasons.
Looks like our bunch of young scholars are copycats.
And it is mindboggling that the PAP leadership could entrust them
to come up with a scheme to spend billions of state funds wisely.
This jobs credit scheme appears to be a mindless form of foreplay
by the ruling party to stimulate the private sector but we can expect
an anti-climax because many will still lose their jobs.
115) Towgay
Mr Obama salary is nothing compared to our extraordinary leaders who get paid in the million. and yet our extraordinary leaders can’t seem to perform as well as what their pay justify.
If I’m a business owner, here’s how I think.
If I retrench one worker, I save money in that wage and that job credit scheme’s amount.
But people always see retrenchment as bad. Let me tell you want is bad. Keeping that worker around to increase the risk of the company going under is even worse – you retrench everyone.
Allow me.
To me, JC is not a bad thing in itself.
I hear that JC is equivalent to cutting CPF by the same % or something like that.
So, this helps companies to afford to pay and pay local workers , PR included.
So, in a way, JCS == CPF cut. Using JCS no need cut CPF.
Last crisis, CPF cut was one of the solutions used.
So, my question is like so many have in their minds,
why this time CPF not cut? by cutting, workers still have CPF what.
Then I realised something. There is a difference.
get my drift?
116) anti-climax scheme on February 5th, 2009 7.37 pm
Assuming this scheme works,
have any country in the world used the same?
why not?
Is this the same as spending money for
1) IMF- 4 million smiles welcomes you :)
2) F1
3) Casino – its not a IR
4) Investments that are losing money
5) Town Councils – Lehmans……
6) Biggest loss is MSK climbed out a window
We have got it all, and I am sure we see the BIG RETURNS!!
Last but not least highest paid ministers !!!
I personally think that the JCS is no magic ……….it’s temporary and having no guarantee as I tend to agree with Parka .
A typical scenario is when a Capt. of a sinking ship will make sure he get his
men to safety before he jump ship. But as a Capt. of Industry or Business
owner it is only logical to retrench your staff in order to save your comany from going burst. So when TIMES are good then start to recruit
An alternative to JCS as follows:
Cut CPF
Cut Pay
Cut Bonus
Cut GST
Cut Utility Bills
Cut Taxes
Give out cash to the needy and retrenched.
All for 1 yr, timeframe to stimulate the economy
http://singsupplies.com/showthread.php?t=17109
Above is Sylvia Lim’s speech on parl on the budget and JCS and reserves.
After hearing the short but concise speech by our loyal opposition NMP Sylvia,
I am proud of her and she has convinced me that they are for Real.
Her last question in the speech was most interesting. She asked about the use of Past Reserves without many knowing how much we have in the Current Reserves.
Without this video, I would not know many things. This logically led me to ask myself, which of these 80 plus people inside there knows about the status of our reserves past and current enough to answer Sylvia Lim? She also asked about the approval process to get key from Nathan. Our great leader of all time, in my opine.
I hope that any of these 80 will be able to reply as its a very valid question.
I think the job credits scheme has its merits. The fact that the Government is sponsoring part of the wages of the local employees is a drive to lower down costs of hiring Singaporeans. This will in effect, prompt an employers to think twice about retrenching Singaporean employees, in order to save costs in this economic downturn.
After all, the aim is to keep the companies here and to preserve Singaporean jobs. This is a good step in the right direction so far.
JCS, like a 1-size plain T-shirt, can it fit every1?
worst it comes only in white, no QC.
A childhood story, the Emperor’s New Cloth … lol
“An emperor of a prosperous city who cares more about clothes than military pursuits or entertainment hires two swindlers who promise him the finest suit of clothes from the most beautiful cloth. This cloth, they tell him, is invisible to anyone who was either stupid or unfit for his position. The Emperor cannot see the (non-existent) cloth, but pretends that he can for fear of appearing stupid; his ministers do the same. When the swindlers report that the suit is finished, they dress him in mime. The Emperor then goes on a procession through the capital showing off his new “clothes”. During the course of the procession, a small child cries out, “But he has nothing on!” The crowd realizes the child is telling the truth. The Emperor, however, holds his head high and continues the procession.”
To: #126 Doctorwho….
that is so…… precise.
115) Towgay.
Heard from news today that OBAMA annual salary is US$400,000/- and imagine the load on his shoulders.
Aiyo, our perm sec french chef earns much more than Obama. Shame Shame….leader of the free world and chief of the world’s largest economy earns less than our Civil Servant chef. I guess the reason for Obama’s low pay is that he is not a talent wanted by the private sector and corruption is actually a crime in US. In Singapore we are better because our Civil Servants are so sought after by the private sector that you have to block the door with money to stop them from leaving and also pay them high salary so as to prevent corruption.
125) fuzzy on February 5th, 2009 11.06 pm
U: “I think the job credits scheme has its merits.”
PA: who ever said it has ZERO merits? Even little merit or some merit is merit.
Your argument is too brief and general and not specific.
U: “The fact that the Government is sponsoring part of the wages of the local employees is a drive to lower down costs of hiring Singaporeans. ”
PA: who ever said giving Credit will not lower down costs of hiring sgporeans?
Any amount given large or small to employers technically lower costs.
As simple as : 1 + 2 = 3 and 3-1 (credit)= 2.
So, are you saying people do not know how to do the above sums?
The issue is how EFFECTIVE is JCS? Is there a business plan kind of proof of concept about the kind of good effect it will have? Is there no other way to spend this JC to better effect? There is always effect. Its either big or small. Concerned citizens are trying and cracking their brains to analyse and dissect this JCS to see what it is all about.
Again, your statement is too general and brief. Not convincing when your statement is dissected.
U: “This will in effect, prompt an employers to think twice about retrenching Singaporean employees, in order to save costs in this economic downturn.”
PA : Which employer never think twice about retrenching? Are you all of them?
How can you say so? Retrenchment is not a wrong thing. Its a Business Requirement. Its for their survival. So, if they think 3 times over can they retrench still?
U: “After all, the aim is to keep the companies here and to preserve Singaporean jobs. This is a good step in the right direction so far.”
PA: hey , people everywhere already said help for singaporeans is good and welcomed. The issue here is EFFICACY. Use of the Reserves should be handled with utmost seriousness and every cent spent should be as Effective as is humanly possible. Its not just your money , its not just my money. Its the nation’s money. Its money that came from everyone.
ONLY WITH A GOOD DEBATE CAN A BETTER SOLUTION EMERGE.
Instead of saving jobs, why not people join the Public sector which I assume retrench less if not at all? anyone knows?
I mean, does the Army Retrench?
does the Police force Retrench?
does the CD retrench?
If ever?
I envy my friends working in there now.
They , i suppose, no need fear about drop in Demand for goods and services?
juz my thinking only. u know meh?
Instead of saving jobs, why not people join the Public sector which I assume retrench less if not at all? anyone knows?
I mean, does the Army Retrench?
does the Police force Retrench?
does the CD retrench?
If ever?
I envy my friends working in there now.
They , i suppose, no need fear about drop in Demand for goods and services?
juz my thinking only. u know meh?
So, does the services get to receive the JC too?
Welfare State is the best protection against RECESSION!
JCS….No idea ?
I tell you… the whole thing is just a ploy to line the pockets of their cronies at all the big firms. Capital Land, DBS, SBS… it’s all a ploy…
In the end those who earn S$2600 will get fired loh…
Just a few numbers to illustrate how inefficient the Job Credits Scheme is
Size of Singapore labour force (according to the CIA world fact book) :2.71mil
Cost of JCS : $4.5bil
Assuming an unemployment rate of 10%,
271,000 people in Singapore would be jobless.
If that $4.5bil were to be distributed to the people in the form of food stamps, transportation rebates, mortgage rebates, utilities rebate, (ie. necessities) etc. each of the 271,000 unemployed folks would receive a sum of $1384 per mth.
I am sure they would do pretty fine on that amount each month.
In fact if we were to half that sum of money given to each of the unemployed, we could feed, clothe and house 20% of the labour force with approximately $700 a month each.
Given that this recession is a sudden contraction in demand, why persist in keeping people employed, producing goods that are not needed anyway?
Can JCS save 20% of jobs? I doubt so. It only breeds inefficiencies is businesses and perhaps a clutch mentality?
to Please Makes Sense:
read this article and you will think that instead of doing JCS, pay people through other means like food vouchers, you end up spending less but achieving more.
jcs is not a wage cut but a wage subsidy.
the employer end up getting more monies. it didn’t change the demand dynamics. employers experiencing a sudden reduction in demand will still retrench. employers who are not having that problem and still not retrenching get free monies. let’s say only 1 in 5 expand, how big an expansion do you think that would be?
is it worthwhile
Please Makes Sense !
Talking about Saving Jobs, have you guys heard from Taiwan SCV channel news?
It said singapore casino is hiring 1800 equiv to ‘O’ level graduates to work here.
there will be training to them and will , when hired, be paid approx equivalent of NT$60K to 180K salaries (need to confirm this amount).
I wonder why not hire singaporeans who easily qualify? Am I something missing?
133) Imustbestupid on February 6th, 2009 2.49 pm
I think you are smarter than you claim. :)
Well said! bravo!
Retrenchment is not a scam but an inevitability.
While I understand its good to project to be pro-business , to attract companies to come here and invest, it seems to me clearly that this 4.5 bln can be put to super effect if distributed to citizens or those unemployed.
The problem is Demand. Giving to consumers will boost spending.
PA, I agree with you on a need for a better debate. Nice work debunking my points. What are your solutions like, then? *This is no personal attack, my friend. Just wanting an opinion from you. Hope you don’t take it wrongly*
For those who advocate a welfare state system:
It’s been proven time and time again that a welfare state, although a very tantalising idea, is some sort of forbidden fruit. A trap for parties who had wanted to gain popular support.
I’ve got a chance to stay in Australia for a couple of months and happen to have the opportunity to witness one such session of unemployment welfare distribution. They actually do have unemployed citizens collecting their welfare benefits in Mercedes Benz and Audis. Would that be a more efficient use of our reserves, then?
Let’s also go back to basics, shall we? After all, common sense would dictate that if a person’s needs are met without working, would one want to work to start with?
138) puppies are loyal to on February 6th, 2009 5.04 pm
Ya, i have seen TW reporting that their Consumer Voucher issued to their citizens had a positive effect on their economy.
Singapore should learn from TW.
To sound fair, TW also may have or may not have learnt other thingies from Sg.
Like this sound so much nicer right?
yours
Poaching c f m
Comment # 6 by Andrew Loh is spot-on – The Job Credit Scheme is effectively a hand-out to companies.
Giving hand-outs to citizens is taboo. But being typically pro-business under this PAP Govt’s Progressive Corporatism ideology, giving hand-outs to companies is perfectly fine.
So I read with amusement how the bright young team spent their energies to dream up this name of Job Credit Scheme – to make it sound like this scheme is to help us keep our jobs. What an achievement, eh? Except that quite a lot of us don’t buy it!
Comment # 125 by Stand Up For Sg – Thank you for the YouTube link to WP Sylvia Lim’s parliamentary speech. Ms Lim made an excellent point about Current Reserves versus Past Reserves.
I am speculating here … but I reckon that the Govt is setting aside the Current Reserves for downward dollar-averaging of their ill-timed 2007/08 investments. Conventional wisdom is that buying opportunities will occur over the next 6-12 months as this global economic crisis deepens!
It would be politically incorrect to draw on Past Reserves for such dollar-averaging investments. Can you imagine the flak this would draw??? Whereas, it’s easier to sell the idea politically to draw the Past Reserves to stimulate economy on the basis that extreme circumstances justify this exception.
Gimme a break, man!
As Daoism puts it: “Non-action is Action”. Watch what the PAP does NOT do and you are likely to figure out what they are trying to do!
139) fuzzy on February 6th, 2009 6.59 pm
I believe majority of the posters here are not looking towards Singapore being a welfare state (We all knew it too well). Most of them are questioning the efficacy of the reserves utilization and that it did not go far enough to ease the immediate needs of hte dire fellow citizens who badly needed it.
There is a quick fix suggestion that cost the government not a single cent of the reserves. Propositions had been made to call for the government to approve the interim withdrawal of one’s CPF (with a certain cap~I have in my submission proposed up to a limit of 15K over the next three years per household to help settle the basic necessity bills such as utilities, SC, property taxes, rentals, property taxes, phone bills, all link directly through giro payment) to help ride through this depression that will last at least through the second half of 2010. I personally had submitted along with this propsoal a bunch of others such as lowering the GST by 2% if not freezing it for at least a year, lowering corporate taxes…etc.
JCS works if and only if global demand returns (that certainly applies to the Singapore Operating Model). If you have run a company or been in a senior management post who needs to make tough decisions, you will understand why it does little to help for those who have to toy between keeping an employee versus the 3,600 JCS spread across 4 qtrs (I am not saying that it does not help every company there is in Singapore). At most what JCS does is allow company who are trying hard to keep the company afloat to maintain a skeleton crew and hope business will turn around soon enough. This will be a long wait. Another simple scenario, if a company can employ a foreign worker to do the job with the same calibre and at half or 2/3 of the salary of a Singaporean, will JCS do any good? Business people in general knows the math much better. Even these MPs admitted there is no guaranteed it is going to work.
The only way to save the economy is to stimulate the local demand. Yet what did the govt do?
Try to save costs for foreign MNCs and pray hard that the world economy is going to rebound soon. That’s what they have been doing all these years and then they take credit for it and award themselves big fat pay checks. Even after a 20% pay cut, that’s still a lot to pay for a bunch of waiters an copycats.
139) fuzzy on February 6th, 2009 6.59 pm
FZ: “PA, I agree with you on a need for a better debate. Nice work debunking my points. What are your solutions like, then? *This is no personal attack, my friend. Just wanting an opinion from you. Hope you don’t take it wrongly*
PK: Anyone shall be Debunked where ever debunkable. yup, nothing personal. I hope so too.
FZ : “For those who advocate a welfare state system:
It’s been proven time and time again that a welfare state, although a very tantalising idea, is some sort of forbidden fruit. A trap for parties who had wanted to gain popular support.”
PK : I think you are making a sweeping statement which is so convenient to confuse the more innocent mortals. Are you alleging that MPs have asked for welfare state? Are you debunking yourself? Can your words stand up to being dissection ?
FZ: “I’ve got a chance to stay in Australia for a couple of months and happen to have the opportunity to witness one such session of unemployment welfare distribution. They actually do have unemployed citizens collecting their welfare benefits in Mercedes Benz and Audis. Would that be a more efficient use of our reserves, then?”
PK : Are you alleging or do you have concrete evidence what you said? While you choose to mention only the alleged ills, I question why you choose not to highlight the good effects ?
FZ : “Let’s also go back to basics, shall we? After all, common sense would dictate that if a person’s needs are met without working, would one want to work to start with?”
PK : One commonsense example is TW uses Consumer Vouchers which boosted their economy.
http://www.asianewsnet.net/news.php?id=2720&sec=2
http://taiwanjournal.nat.gov.tw/ct.asp?CtNode=122&xItem=47625
DeBunk this.
Fuzzy,
Have people received Rebates of the several sorts?
Is this handout?
regards
Pinkie
143) Observer(SG-HK) on February 7th, 2009 12.12 pm
Agree with you. In the last 10 odd years alone, we experienced the several crisis and I have been affected always. I never asked for assistance from the gov. Never asked for handouts. Many like me never asked for handouts. Singaporeans know, its wise to depend on ourselves, for reasons not convenient to explain here.But since money is budgetted to be SPENT, taxpayers contribute to the country by making suggestions on how the monies should be spent.
1. why 1 size-fits-all issuing of JC?
2. why is it not possible companies doing well to pass this JC to other companies which may still need to retrench to be given even more to tide over?
3. how will defence budget be spent? who knows? But having said (a logical response question) this I trust it would be prudently and wisely spent and no one in the world could spend it more prudently. How this sounds? logical?
4. companies who wants to retrench would have informed MOM or something. many company P&L , Balance sheet is available online to assess their performance. Is it not easy to tell who does not need the JC?
Then again, these are puzzles in my mind. Anyone can answer, pls share.
i no no wan.
146) abandoon Shipe everytime track record on February 7th, 2009 12.47 pm
Let me attempt to respond to your queries. It all boils down to one single issue. Adminstering will be diffcult if not possible, let alone the cost of administering. It also not feasible as Singapore is “Free Market Economy” and too much monitoring and meddling at company level may have adverse impact on businesses operating in Singapore.
I originally thought the JCS was meant to help local Enterprises (non listed or listed local companies that showed without a benefit of a doubt that their Balance Sheet is broken). I am making assumption that the “supposed think tank” had thought of these issues but I think they fall short of thinking that; WILL THESE “STILL PROFITABLE” COMPANIES THEY ARE HELPING AT THE SAME KIND coining from your take of “One Size Fits ALL”, REALLY BEHAVE? I am skeptical on this (particularly on those listed “STILL PROFITABLE” corporations, for their main objective of operation is to take care of their shareholders interest and values. There are no real hard and fast rules or criteria to meet JCS. I would have thought they put in at least some criteria such like in order to qualify for JCS, the ratio of employed personnel in an organization is 1:3 or 1:5 (i.e. for every Foreign Worker there must be at least 3 to 5 Singaporean employed). I think this at least has some detering effect if companies are genuinely needing this JCS and think that it does help to keep their dire business operation afloat. That also makes administering much more clear cut and simple to track for the government if transparency and accountability of the JCS withdrawal is deployed.
Having said, JCS does not really help the dire citizenry who are the guardians of this country. For people or PR or Foreign Workers who think this is unfair treatment, I have this to say, if you think Singapore is a place good enough for you to call home, then apply for citizenship. That will entitled you to enjoy the same benefits of being a Singaporean. Many PRs fall short of inking this probably due to two major reasons; CPF + Compulsory NS for their male OffSprings.
May I say here and correct me if I am wrong, that there is an assumption here that ALL companies(employers) failed because of poor business.
Are there failures due to poor managements and risky ventures?? And if there are, which I am sure, these employers be given more monetary helps?
Just wondering.
patriot
147) Observer(SG-HK)
Nice answers.
PRs are welcome to come back when the its boom time again where jobs are plenty and vacancies a lot. There MUST be better treatment for citizens who are the defenders of this land. As simple as that. Its not that PRs are not helped. Yes, they are. I went to job fairs and seen many blue ICs queueing up receiving same help. But this is EXTRA Ordinary times. No one owes no one nothing. Jobs are scarce. This world is not PERFECT. Its give n take. Accept it.
come back another day.