“THE Government will encourage banks and other financial institutions hit by the recession to take on new graduates by offering to subsidise the recruits’ allowances for up to a year,” reports the Straits Times on 13 March 2009.
It goes on, “Assuming that all the $15 million is utilised in the first year and each trainee gets a monthly allowance of $1,500, the financial sector could absorb between 900 and 1,200 fresh graduates if the MAS pays between 70 per cent and 90 per cent of their monthly allowances.”
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) said that S$15 million has been set aside for the scheme.
Firstly, I would like to ask if this amount could be put to better use, such as helping the poor and the needy. This amount could sustain 2,500 families with a monthly $500 for a year. This time period could act as a buffer for the breadwinner, who may be unemployed, to find another job. This buffer could also give affected families 12 months to adjust their finances and cut down expenditure. Also, this amount can act as subsidies to employ the retrenched who badly need jobs.
The $15 million MAS plans to give out is targeted at fresh graduates. As a fresh graduate myself, I think this may be unfair. There are other segments of the population which needs this amount more than fresh graduates who have better chances of surviving this financial crisis because they do not have wives or children to feed – although there could be some graduates who need the money to support their families immediately. However, could they not join the public service which have been advertising that they are recruiting by the thousands, such as the Ministry of Education?
Even if this amount is used to help fresh graduates get employment in the finance industry, how many fresh graduates will be helped? What if the participating financial institution offers mostly internships and industrial attachments? Will this really translate into 1,000 full time financiers next year? I believe not.
Fresh graduates can seek income from giving tuitions and participating in part time work. These graduates can also seek employment in other industries. MAS hopes to spur the financial sector to continue to invest in talent. I may be wrong, but isn’t it better to boost the standards of finance courses in tertiary institutions if MAS really wants to invest in talent? In this case, the $15 million can be spread across more students.
I understand that investments in talent is important. But in times like this, I think it is better to help the needy who are struggling to even make ends meet.
———
The letter writer wishes to remain anonymous.
———-
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
The $15 million MAS plans to give out is targeted at fresh graduates. As a fresh graduate myself, I think this may be unfair. There are other segments of the population which needs this amount more than fresh graduates who have better chances of surviving this financial crisis because they do not have wives or children to feed – although there could be some graduates who need the money to support their families immediately. – Author
Well said.
The MAS scheme is probably targeted at helping the heap of foreign students graduating soon from the 3 tertiary institutes.
Please, these undergrads are abled and should learn to be resourceful by seeking out opportunities for themselves, just like professionals in other industries. Why should special help be given to them just because the finance sector is suffering ? And worst, using tax payers’ monies again ? Other sectors are badly hit by the crisis as well.
I totally agree that the money can be put to better use like helping the disabled, intellectually challenged or ppl who are marginalised, esp in these trying times.
The MAS scheme is probably targeted at helping the heap of foreign students graduating soon from the 3 tertiary institutes, in the hope of grooming these future FOREIGN TALENTS.
Please, these undergrads are abled and should learn to be resourceful by seeking out opportunities for themselves, just like professionals in other industries. Why should special help be given to them just because the finance sector is suffering ? And worst, using tax payers’ monies again ? Other sectors are badly hit by the crisis as well.
I totally agree that the money can be put to better use like helping the disabled, intellectually challenged or ppl who are marginalised, esp in these trying times.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) said that S$15 million has been set aside for the scheme.
Firstly, I would like to ask if this amount could be put to better use, such as helping the poor and the needy.
I think the letter writter is confused? MAS is the ‘central bank’ of S’pore, not the agency responsible for welfare benefits, which does not exist yet.
Mr. Frust – I totally agree with you. In any case why is there a need to help just the U grads only. What about fresh Poly, A , O Level or ITE grads? Surely , the lower qualified people need more help than U grads. I certainly hope, tax payers money can be put to better use, i.e. to help everyone, not just the U grads only.
Eventually, which 3rd party would know for sure how many fresh grads receive handouts and how much of the 15 million is un-utilized?
who?
Hi
Although I think it is laudable that the author feels so strongly for the needy, I personally feel that we should not prevent the govt from helping fresh graduates.
If not the govt will say- don’t help also cannot; help also cannot. Singaporeans are a hard bunch to please.
I feel that everyone suffering in the economic crisis should get help – it is a matter of degree ( no pun intended). Needy ones should get more and others less.
Why does degree holders need help? It’s not like the situation is so bad that they’ve to work as janitors?
Firstly, good for this young Author of the article. At least he/she shows consideration for the sufferings. That is an admirable attittude and an example for other youngsters to take heed.
At crisis time like this, any assistance program is a laudable effort. You can’t please everybody, but certainly, if one feels that some groups are left out, common citizenry who are concerned can always chip in their effort to help raise the issue to the government or help group to look into it albeit the expected results might vary. Let’s try to look at the positive side of things. There are no shortages of negativity in the market these days and that is not going to do any good or help if people jump on the bashing wagon. Can the governent do more? Obviously we think they can. Can we fellow citizenry do more too, I think so as well. As Singaporeans, I think we should all try to work together regardless of our ethnicities, gender, age, whatsoever, I said this before and am going to repeat it, If Singaporeans do help each other, who will? As a matter of fact, we should try to extend our helping hand (if you can) to those who are in dire straits (whether they are local or foreign).
I guess there’s always a tradeoff. While the money could be put to better use to help the needy, this can also be seen as government’s effort to create job opportunities for fresh grad, although it is questionable why is it only for the finance sector.
Graduating students like myself sometimes lament why the government is not doing much to help us in this climate. But when they do, we tend to be critical about it.
Definitely put more resources to helping needy. The experience graduates get through sacrifice early in their lives will benefit them for a longer time, personally and for the economy.
What is wrong with helping fresh graduates. They are citizens too.
At least, Singapore is not as bad as Australia announcing today that they are curbing immigration so as not to allow foreigners to compete with Australians for jobs, British who are saying British jobs for British and Americans shouting buy Americans , Kiwis nationalising their airline to Singapore’s equity loss and the French keeping their auto jobs at home.
Australians, Kiwis, British, EU and Americans combined take up most of all the new CEO jobs in Singapore- DBS – do not be Singaporean! Temasek – who is the American ? & New Zealander ?and NOL ? another ang mo; next PM could well be a FT ang mo – just the way the leaders like it and they should let it happen to see themselves clearer. Ang mos are blessed by our system and so
this time some unemployed & fresh graduates will have some small blessings coming their way if it is really true that banks of all institutions are going to lift their fingers to help for once.
It is high time that charity should begin at home and ang mos who take care only of themselves in their own countries should be ashame of their plundering of Singaporeans’ jobs albelt encouraged to do so by the Singapore policy makers.
First and foremost Singapore should help and reward all the Seniors for from them, they produced the present generation of children that served NS and TOTAL DEFENCE.
I cannot comment on Foreign talents as with today’s Recession, I really wonder are they economic migrants ?…………let time be the judge as we welcome then anyway!
>Better Than Aussies, Kiwis, British, EU & Americans
Even Saudi Arabia is better than us in this aspect. I was chatting with my friend a few days back, and could hardly believe it when he said they had a policy where if a qualified citizen was available for the job, the company has to hire the citizen instead of a foreigner, even if it means kicking the foreigner out of the company. My friend was equally incredulous when I told him about the differences with Singapore government’s policy, and his question was, “what are they thinking?” Just about every other country’s government have a policy that favours their own citizens to foreigners.
If Govt does not give handouts to fresh grads, most will join opp parties!
PAP so clever!
these fresh grads, most have not even begin to experience what is it like to pay and pay for their HDB loans, car loans and all costs associated with being married, children etc. now, they have not even seen the competition they have to face with FTs and life’s good and bad sides. Now, they rely on their parents who are feeding them and providing them financial means to survive like buying the mp3 player, pat tor money etc. Welcome to Reality. They will learn, like most of adults have. Work hard!
Peter Lim, you are very rihgt. that is what i was thinking. do u mind if we keep in contact? mmy email is alexlewyl@gmail.com
Peter Lim (#15),
PAP giving out money that don’t belong to them? That is just more and more pork.
This should not be a case of either this or that situation. The government should do both instead of having to choose one.
#10 – “Graduating students like myself sometimes lament why the government is not doing much to help us in this climate. But when they do, we tend to be critical about it.”
I really hope this mentality is confined to the minority of our local graduates.
Helping the poor and needy is not as simple an issue as you think. U can’t just say, “Why not just spend 15 million dollars to help the poor instead of chaneling that amount through banks?”
U have to address the asymmetric information issue. Govt officials are notoriously worse than private firms in deciding how to spend money.
When you give people money, you are changing their incentives to behave. They could be poor and needy precisely because they made the wrong decisions, such as those pertaining to laziness, and you certainly do not want to reward that. Problem is, how do u differentiate between those that are poor through no fault of their own and the other group.
Private firms, like banks, are more capable of assessing people than the govt. Thus, if DBS interview and selected a few candidates for a job, we have more confident that these people are really good and hence the subsidy will be better directed.
Of course, I agree that the choice should be a bit of both rather than why this and not that.
If MAS is doling out money to assist employment of new graduates for the finance industry, what about the other graduates linked to the construction, manufacturing, shipping, logistics, service etc?
Talk about all fairness of the system. MAS should be more concern about monetary and financial policies and be watchful of the AIGs, the Lehman Brothers and Madoff schemers.
New graduates, Welcome to the Real World and Face up to the Challenges.
Agree with #22.
Why finance industry fresh grads only when most sectors suffering?
Based on equality, I would like to see everyone get goodies.
Afterall, its 2009 mid year coming. i mean crisis drag and drag, till then, many more hungry liao. need money to stay alive leh. not born with silver elite spoon leh by inheritance leh.
Kelvin,
There is a simple solution to the asymmetric information issue. The govt should employ more social workers who are trained to undertake needs and welfare assessment to decide on the disimbursement of financial assistance. The problem now is that a lot of the money is channelled through the CCCs. These grassroot volunteers have no training at all to be able to conduct the appropriate assessment. Moreover they do not have to adhere to any professional ethics and standards, and there can be issues of conflict of interests since these volunteers live in the same estate, maybe even the same block.
I’m not surprised it’s the graduates whom the PAP are rushing to assuade — the ‘bright young things’ who, ostensibly, have a greater capacity to think critically, and to turn against the government once the ‘comforts’ are no longer being delivered. The legitimacy of PAP rule has long been based on a largely content middle-class; this is clearly on shaky ground since jobs can no longer be guaranteed.
^ I’d like to just add that I personally don’t believe the masses are falsely indoctrinated. Given the leadership’s elitist mindset (and remnants of eugenicist belief?), this is my perception of what the government must be thinking.
The govt should employ more social workers who are trained to undertake needs and welfare assessment to decide on the disimbursement of financial assistance.
====
I am not too sure whether such “trained” workers even exist. How do u train someone to discover whether a person’s poor and needy state is of no fault of his own? That poor person would have all the incentives in the world to blame society, to blame his parents, for his current state, so that he can receive the taxpayers’ money. How in the world can someone sift out the half-truths from the truth?
Furthermore, like what Milton Friedman would also say in “Free to choose”, such social workers, even if they exist, are ultimately “spending somebody else money on somebody else”. They have little incentive to really do a good job at it.
If there is any real life example of such social workers in Singapore doing this kind of job, I would like to know hehe.
Kelvin,
For a start, one has to look at the issue from a psychosocial perspective rather than from a purely economic viewpoint. If you do it entirely from the latter, I agree with you the task is almost insurmountable. Unfortunately, social science is not a precise science. If only it can be as accurate as measuring the length of an object. It is indeed a difficult assessment to make, which makes it all the more important that the people who decide who gets what assistance should have the proper training and experience.
You appear to think that the people who seek welfare assistance are lazy and blame everything and everyone but themselves, and are taking advantage of and abusing the system/taxpayers’ money? Do you not believe there are people genuinely in need?
Although I can’t give you any names, I’m sure many of the social workers in SIngapore are doing a fine job helping those genuinely in need. I know that because I used to work in the sector in Singapore. I still work in the same sector just in a different geographical location now.
It was nice having a civil debate with you goh.
Was just trying to point out certain viewpoints that people may have missed. While it is easy to say, “Let’s spend $X million to help the poor”, very few people actually realize the huge complexities involved in helping the poor and how it changes incentives.
Okay, time to take off my economic hat and say, “If we can afford to lose millions in GIC and Temasek investments, we can spend $X million to help the poor and needy in Singapore!” =)
quoted “Let us make sure the message to Temasek and GIC is holistic, and not one that says only, ‘Well done for losing less money’, because $58 billion is an enormous amount to lose.”
SG gov very ‘rich’ eh
I agree helping the needy should be first priority.
However, the assumption that fresh graduates can help themselves is not right.
I have a GPA of 4.7+. I applied diligently to lots of places, but received not even an offer for interview. Given that they haven’t even met me, logically they should at least ask me to attend an interview by virtue of grades.
If I can’t get an interview, then it means situation could be worse for most other students.
Many of us are expected to start contributing to our families and start building our own lives and families after graduation. If nobody helps us to get jobs, then the situation will only get worse with more and more graduates piling up on the job market.
They are giving money to grads because they presume the “intelligentsia” will start resisting them, become more politicized and join opposition parties.