most mfg jobs move to where the cheapest labor & other tangible costs are the lowest

wake up!

“Granted that some of the comments at TOC are a little over the top……”

I don’t think ANY of the comments following the article by Andrew Ong could be considered “over the top”

Andrew Ong’s rationale/basis has been shown to be rather facile whereas the person you were responding to was just trying to tarnish and discredit the people who countered Andrew………..the usual SOP of the supporters of the govt./ruling party.

I think this was rationalised more from the point of attracting more tourist and MICE dollars; and more subtly to give a boost to the property sector. Frankly I think the latter was more of a red herring, and cant help but laugh at all those analysts who bought this hook,line and sinker and talked up the potential for renting expensive condos to casino workers.

62) Puzzled on March 15th, 2009 9.04 am

“Singaporeans are always and forever so negative and skeptical leh…good news also criticise, bad news also crticise…wah, tak boleh tahah lah!”

Granted that some of the comments at TOC are a little over the top, but frankly, for the bulk of S’poreans who are hard-working, honest workers, they are not compensated as well as they should be. I’m not comparing S’pore to third-world countries (and after almost 45 years of advancement, we should not be!)- but rather to opportunities that similarly skilled workers have in N America/W Europe/Aus.
Why do you think so many of the skilled workers from neighbouring countries merely use S’pore as a stepping stone?

The same can be said for casino jobs too.

Having worked there for a number of years, the fact is that EDB’s biggest KPI by far is FAI (fixed asset investment), which comes solely from mfg projects. I believe that the bosses tried to change this mindset and target set by the political masters, but the latter felt that other metrics (eg. value-added, value-added per employee – which have a direct correlation to GDP) were too, well “cheem” for them to boast about to the man-in-the-street, who they felt would more easily understand “ah, foriegn company invest $XXBil, wah!!”. I remember being stunned when I was told this.

This is also why they focus so much on attracting electronics, chemicals and biochemical manufacturing, because these are big FAI (each one in the billions) projects. It certainly does not mean that they are the best projects in terms of well-paying jobs for S’poreans.

But whatever my misgivings are about mfg, I can say that my conclusion too is that S’pore needs mfg. It is more stable than services industries (eg. you cant move a mfg plant as easily as you can move a call centre or IT operation) and it does have a greater multiplier effect (suppliers etc). For a country with a negligible domestic market, it needs to export products.

The problem is that S’pore continues to indulge in attracting the wrong type of manufacturing projects – all making some kind of commodity or another. Microchips may look complex, but ultimately they are a mass-produced commodity, requiring not so much on the skill of the engineers or labour on the shop floor, but the cost of labour and other input prices. These goods are highly cost-sensitive.

As competition from lower cost countries increases, the govt continues to attract and promote manufacturing through generous subsidies for big projects (which are never made public) and through a low-wage policy. The latter is of course highly effective due to the ease of hiring foriegn labour.

There is little effort to promote the kinds of manufacturing that keeps the likes of Germany, Japan and Sweden highly competitive export economies. These countries focus on automation of processes, manufacture of customized/complex goods such as semiconductor mfg equipment, turbines, aerospace equipment etc etc. These are niche industries which suit a small population like S’pores which doesnt have to worry about finding high-employment projects.

Frankly, engineering/manufacturing is a very exciting and certain can be a well-paying job. Just not in Singapore.

China is going down soon at the rate they are buying the debts over from the US. So it is nothing spectacular whether people intend to manufacture their exports from there. Not forgetting that there are also competitors and they are moving fast into the market.

I’d agree with Manabo that Indonesia is a good place to set up your manufacturing business because there is land, space and economy for development. But more importantly, the indonesian market is not as open as china.

In other words, the western MNC’s have trouble breaking into their market and setting up their base there because of state laws. However, we as asian businesses have the advantage in this area.

This article highlights an important fact that businesses here are protected by government and tight regulations. Imagine how will your businesses fare overseas where none such laws exist and you have to have a good network of influential people in order for it to survive.

Corruption is everywhere, it just depends on the degree it extends into the economy. Governments everywhere are the biggest culprits, not just in Singapore.

In my opinion, China have already caught up with us in the production of high tech and high precision stuffs. I am sure all decent MNCs who are here may also have some operations in China. They are much cheaper. The current downside to do business in China is still the red tapes with hidden cost and the highly unreliable and challenging business climate.

However if Andrew had interviewed me, I would have given him exactly what he has written in his article. How else can I answer to my shareholders that I am still producing things here?

Hello, why couldn’t Novartis Ciba Vision or Leblond Makino rely on their home countries to do the launching?

Don’t try wriggling your way out when the fundamental basis of what you said in your leading commentary has been exposed as unsound.

They did not relocate their plants here. Theirs are expansions of their businesses.

They chose Singapore for its accessibility to reach the Asian market. It is also a globalised and lawful country so it is easy and safe to adapt and operate here.

Manufacturing here is a sunset industries,

High overhead, High labor cost, lots of red tapes, shortage of high skilled workers, and one last thing, is not the top priority from the EDB.

Does he mean that Switzerland where Novartis originates and is headquartered does NOT have laws which safeguard their IP and that Switzerland’s labour force is less skilled than in Singapore?

Ditto Leblond Makino which is a Japanese company – Japan does NOT protect IP & less skilled labour than Singapore?

Please!

Glaxo has been in manufacturing in Singapore since the 1970s or earlier BEFORE Singapore enacted strict IP laws.

My latest comment was not to defend. It was merely to clarify on the intent so that all of us could have a fruitful discourse.

Again like I say before, from my point of view and I don’t speak for others, is that your intention to write this article is not the point of the debate. For me what was more worth debating on is the points or if you like the “logic” raised in the article.

Whatever your intention is to write the article, whether it is to make your fellow Singaporean appreciative of what we have, as you put it “sound” fundamentals or to shame or to whatever your reasoning is would not, in my opinion, not going to make a fruitful discourse.

I think if we are to have a fruitful discourse it would make sense to understand the logic behind your message. That way we can really debate about the issue of manufacturing policy in Singapore rather than focus on whether your intention to spread the message is a sinister one or miguided one.

As I have indicated, you have raised two key parameters of success factors, why not just explain how YOU see the logic of the parameters contribute to the success factor of Singapore manufacturing based. May you could also elaborate on what you mean by “high tech”, “manufacturing”, sector.

I did not picked up quotes and pasted them in this article. I met this people and had discussions with them on this matter.

I think you are taking the word “pick up” too literally.

The fact of the matter is that you have quoted someone for saying something and you have used it, on face value, as evidence to support your thesis, which is manufacturing is really sound. The fact that you did not do a cut-and-paste or for that matter even if you did is not really the issue.

The point I was making is that you simply pick out a statement made in your discussion with someone. And just using that statement as a basis of evidence for you to come to you conclusion is flimsy at best.

I am not saying that the statement you quoted is inaccurate or accurate but the problem with just quoting what someone say at face value, without some degree of inquiry on your part to further probe what is being said does not make for sound analysis.

None of us are asking for welfare, or subsidy. We are only hoping that the govt does not treat us like cash cows.

Why is there a 40 cents tax per of petrol? Why are we paying sky high prices for public housing? And yes, is not Singapore economically competitive, but at the expense of its cititzen’s pay?