If the Singapore Gov trust the Workers, he will put the $600 into the hand of Unemployed Workers other than those still in their jobs with monthly income.

Gov has control every aspects of Singaporean life collect all monthly bills in on hand and the other hand force down the wages thru their employment pass policies.

PAP simply don’t trust average Singaporean Worker!

The side effect, nobody dares to give birth here and that further decreases our populations, diluted our arm forces and Singaporeans always get the first blame, for everything that our leader err, which than created further depression, social ungraciousness and resentment living in this dot. Hello, Hello!! are we all still sleeping. Time to open our eyes, wake our mind and exercise our only rights in the coming election.

The polars caps are fast melting, sea water level rises, islands will disappear all due to Global Warming so why are we concerned about job satisfaction. The survival of a nation will be severely under threats by nature…………….Relax & enjoy what is left as tomorrow may never come or be different.

Can’t agree more with 2) David. It is a known fact the MOM do not want a minimum wage and policy that favour workers so that companies, especially the foreign ones can be flexible in hiring and firing workers. If they had all these in place many years ago, the employment scene would be like say Australia, where is would difficult to fire workers. The game now has changed with the bad economic situation where Singaporean are now fighting with the foreigners over the sarce jobs. The government know it and it’s a political bubble just waiting to burst. They are very afraid and don’t seem to have any clear solutions and trying their best to spin one good one after another. But we all know the reality on the ground. I feel very let down by the government and basically they are of little help. Even if we go to the CDC’s ultimately we are let to fend for ourselves. Where is the quality of life? It only comes with lots of money that is “spare change” . Mr Tan’s survey is spot on, we earn the salary just to pay the government bills monthly. And if we delay payment a letter come demanding payment. Where is the Swiss standard of living, only the highly paid ministers and their families , the civil servant enjoy this. My take is, they’re not dented one bit. And I agree with you David, time to excercise our vote decisively.

Let the Singaporeans fight with Foreigners for Jobs!

But none the less, PAP fight with Opposition for the Gov.

Whoever can perform to bring up the economy and reduce inflation.
Let vote them in!

In a truly Democratic Society!!

43.6% said that the actual situation in Singapore is worse than reported, while 5.5% said that it is quite satisfactory (i.e. better than reported). 38.2% said that the report reflects the actual situation correctly.

this is telling you not to believe whatever the govt says. rem this is 154th media.

Anyway, if the govt is really sincerely about helping singaporeans, they should immediately stop hiring so many foreigners by not doing so many projects at this time. Eg of such projects include the IRs and MCE, bloody waste of time and money.

LKY never believe the following, he believe some man are than equal than other and same like his kind are equal to GOD! That why Singapore Workers Suffers!

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. “

I can believe that there people who are unsatisfied with work, and I can believe that the direct reasons are indeed real, e.g. long working hours, competition from foreign workers, etc.

But I don’t agree it’s a matter of lacking an union that speaks up for “more welfare”. Seeking a political solution does not solve the root of the problem.

Singapore’s small population puts us at a natural disadvantage:

(1) Domestic consumption is too small to create jobs for everyone. This forces us, like most other small nations, to be dependent both exports and imports. Therefore we are forced to compete in the global free market, and this indirectly puts pressure on the domestic labour market.

(2) One purpose of foreign workers is also to reduce the cost of living for Singaporeans, including the low wage workers themselves, although workers in sectors that face competition are naturally at stress.

(3) The small population also results in lack of employment choices. Unlike large nations with diversified economy, people can easily move about to find their job of choice. In Singapore, the large bulk of the economy is planned on the government, for example seaport, airport, IR, biochemical industry, financial MNCs, etc. This makes the economy even more focused, and this creates even more resentment from unsatisfied workers.

Any solution that attempts to improve job satisfaction has to (a) first make sure the economy on the whole has a net gain, (b) increase the diversity of jobs, (c) make sure that the labour market is free so that people can switch to the job of their choice easily, and (d) decrease on the reliance on the government.

I am glad Mr Tan came up with this article.
I have always wanted to know
How can information, in general, be proven beyond reasonable doubt that it is accurate, correct and unbiased ?
I do not know the answer.
But 1 thing I am sure is,
I feel that only through scrutinisation by as many people as possible and if this information still is convincing after that, then, I would feel comfortable to take this info with less pinch of salt.

While I like to Believe things I hear to be true and I respect people who provide information, a believe is still a believe. I mean, in a black and white world, where people providing info to me can be and usually is a stranger, I often question myself, how to know for sure what is true and what is 10% inaccurate due to whatever possible reasons that may exist in this universe?

Thanks Mr Tan for reminding the people to think about information presented to us, many of whom are mere mortals.

In this very challenging times, there is nothing much the unemployed workers
can fall on. Government would rather give money to employers
in the form of Jobs Credit to save jobs. But many employers are still not
recruiting, so those badly affected ones are people seeking jobs to
survive yet cannot find reasonable jobs easily when jobs are scarce.

Do anyone believe in Economic Migration rather than the Stupid Loyalty!

Had ask an Austrialia Agency they required you to get the PR first and the jobs are quite different unlike the IT, Semicond jobs here!

Also enquire China Company but they can pay so high!

Any idea!!!!

I never support Job Credit Scheme. It seem like government is helping the local. It depends. During this time, rational businessman will just keep the money. A businessman might think: It is not my problem. Who cares right if there are more unempolyed? You give me money, I will feel stupid if I do not take the money. In Singapore, businessman is the king. Government supports them and thats bad.

so that the best our high pay government can do…. sick

These days there are NO such thing as Company Loyalty. I was once employed by an MNC………solid as ever, when part of their dept. was acquired by merger and aquisition, it was the Union who approached me rather than the Admin. Dept. of the MNC so what JOB satisfaction are we talking about when the Big boys take you for granted and even for a ride!…………believe in yourself and move on!.
If you find NO Job Satisfaction then destress yourself by listening to Mick Jager’s “I can get no Satisfaction”

Based on my long work experiences in Singapore I already know the situation and so Tan Kin Lian simply confirms all that I know.

Employers are rotten and so are the work places.

I see so many unhappy people at work in sing.

I have worked in both the private and gahmen sectors in four countries and I am able to make comparisons.

So, some people migrate to seek more relaxed countries and to lead happier lives.

What can one do?

The workers and employers must come together, feel determined to make the work places happier and employers must believe that happy workers will make them more productive.

However, based on my experiences employers believe that if I can hammer and bully you and you will fear me and work yourself to death and that is what I as Mr employer wants. Your misery is my happiness. I am number one.
Sad. But, true.

This happened to me and I cannot reveal the place as it is all security and very, very sensitive.

Bad employers and unhappy work places and aren’t we sliding to barbarism.

That is why many quit.
I have left.

Many will be leaving.

They fear the work places in sing.

The gahmen does understand. Only vote to get millions for salary.

can i add to the fact measures to protect local workers must have teeth- the must work. & not just for show.

i have been jobless for “a few” months liao. i went for several interviews for a job that is currently in demand. but the contact has too many unfair terms liao, top that off with a low basic pay.

i not beggar, dun expect me to work any job with a laundry list of terms heavily worded against me. i am Singaporean ok!

What I’m going to say is not going to be taken well here but it has to be said none the less: I’ve worked overseas before and yes the worklife balance is infinitely better than it is here. My boss used to shoo me out of the office by 6pm! Summer Fridays were even better- we were usually done by 4:30pm!

When I came back here, it was a rude shock. My new boss was all for work life balance but here’s how things ended up. The rest of the (Singaporean) workers put in hours way past what was required. What they did I don’t know but they always went home later than I did. Boss started to praise those workers and the rest of us who went home early weren’t. Predictably, everyone started staying late since it’s obvious that boss praise = job well done = better bonus.

Who’s fault was it? Boss? Other workers? Me (and the early leavers)? Govt?

I’ll give you my take: With respect to work life balance, stop blaming the government. If you want your work life balance, it’s got to start from you. You are responsible for your own happiness.

Sorry Mr Tan. I think you’ve brought out some good points and I generally like many of your articles. but I agree with 1c @8 in this case.

re post #17) RighteousSinga on May 8th, 2009 1.06 am

if you do not belong to the group that is regularly worried about social & financial security, i will understand, a little empathy would go a long way.

since you have worked in another country (enjoy a higher social mobility) before, you may not share similiar concerns as those mentioned by Mr Tan Kin Lian.

This PAP govt has always bent backwards to prostrate to foreign investors, bosses and rich capitalists. The NTUC serves as the weapon to silence and suppress workers’ dissent. The so-called Tripatritism epitomises this and seals the fate of the workers. Media and news channels are controlled by the govt so that only pro-govt voices and news are published and broadcast. Judges are appointed by the Executive branch and tenured so independence of the judiciary is an open question raised by many outsiders and Opposition members, who were later sued for millions for defamation. Yet, the govt makes no apologies and do not deem themselves necessary to be accountable and transparent. Public reserves can be lost thru ‘gambling’ in the stock mkts by govt stat boards, town councils and GLCs without having to answer in Parliament except vague and ambiguous replies. Before elections, the govt indulges shamelessly and brazenly in gerrymandeering and passing rules with impugnity from a Parliament which the PAP managed to dominate 82-2 using the prior mentioned tactics. Admission of Chinese from the PRC are granted liberally to boost the ranks of the Chinese to other races ratio, and these PRC PRs can be trusted to multiply like pigs and dogs which they couldnt do back in China.

Thank you, Mr Tan, for writing this article. Your conclusions reflect my real-life work experience. Now if only the PAP-dominated will take action. I doubt so, thus I’m another one who aims to leave this country.

aiyoyo

economy so tough liao, man on the street feel more pressure liao,

got so many debts to pay, family to take care, rising costs etc etc

how to feel satisfy in working?

look at china friends happy go lucky, buy branded goods no close eyes one,

just take n go. alamak china now very different liao from

people impression (last time), they’re $$$$$$

another sad story when look in this country.

aiyoyo

“There is better work life balance, 5 day week, strong social support and better protection by the unions.”

This perhaps the key to worker happiness in Mr Tan’s survey, which is timely and revealing.
I feel we have carried this theory of tripartism too far in Singapore — to the extent that union chiefs sound like company bosses. Union chiefs must put worker interest first, which is to secure salaries and remuneration commensurate with the work required to be done.
Leave the management of the bottom line to the company bosses. They are well trained to do that. Unions should work with company bosses to ensure that a happy workforce will bring abour greater productivity — and which will lead to a better bottom line.
Working longer hours may not necessarily lead to higher productivity. More often, it’s just inefficiency that requires more hours to be spent in the workplace.
Sociolgists might want to carry our studies to determine if the falling birth rate is linked to unhealthy work practices.
I join Mr Tan in calling for holistic solutions to promote work life balance and a happier society.

mice is nice @ post 18

I do care greatly for what is happening in the SIngapore labor force. And I do empathize with those who are out of a job. Mr Tan has brought out several concerns which I share, contrary to what you said. Just because someone has enjoyed social mobility, it does not mean that he does not share your concerns.

And if it makes any difference to you, I’ve not been gainfully employed for the past few months too.

There are many things that the govt can and should do/look into. For example, they should look into the problem of companies hiring cheap service staff from overseas.

But work life balance is a cultural issue. I don’t see how the govt is responsible for the atmosphere created by a worker, his colleagues and boss. Let me give you an example: I have a friend who runs his own firm. He drives his people very hard but he’s also adamant that his workers get out by Friday evening and makes sure they dont’ work on weekends ( He does though! but that’s because he loves what he does).

The firm’s culture of work hard/play hard didn’t come from some government study decreeing that it should be, it came from within. So yes there are many things the govt needs to look into but work life balance, and by that extension- happiness, has to start at an individual level.

re RighteousSinga at post #23

the way you have worded your post sems to speak otherwise.

quote from post #17
////If you want your work life balance, it’s got to start from you. You are responsible for your own happiness.////

its easier said than done for most be it true blue S’pooreans, PRs & FTs.

protecting workers is more a question of financial stability. people who constantly worry about having being replaced, not having enough savings for retirement, rainy days due to sudden major illness, marriage hitting the rocks, not earning enough with 1 job to pay the bills, so on…

work-life-balance (stated in above in bold as a criteria in judging advanced countries) is the next level in worker protection, but its not the basic concern, its more intermediate level concern.

laws can dictate a company’s culture by removing unfair work terms out. as of now, workers at the mercy of companies. work life balance should not be an exception, it should be made the norm. if companies cannot be trusted to initiate such policies into their work culture, laws should be formed to level the playing field.

*IMO, advanced countries are countries that have met or exceeded undeveloped or developing countries in terms of standard of living, with legal protection for fair employment being basic requirement.

Hi friends
Thank you for your comments. I am now in Canada on my vacation (but it also includes checking into the internet in my hotel to read the comments to this article).

#8 1c has used the often-repeated argument that Singapore is a small country, no natural resources to justify the economic and social policies advocated by the Government.

There are many other small countries around the world, such as Denmark, Switzerland, that have to overcome the challenges of size and lack of natural resources. They are able to adopt policies that give a better life to their citizens.

I believe that the policies in Singapore can, and should be, changed to achieve this goal.

The basic problem is that our ministers are not incentivise to look after the well being of ordinary S’poreans. Their pay is pegged to top private sector earners, who are mostly CEOs and owner-bosses of companies.

By allowing free inflow of foreigners, wages are lowered, thus these CEOs’ and bosses’ remuneration will increase (in line with the earnings of the companies they run)…..presto, ministerial salaries will rise too!!

Don’t forget that Jobs Credit apply to PRs as well…..and we all know how easy it is for foreigners to get S’pore PR.

Where is the Solgan “More Good Year” after so many years!

What has NTUC Income become, no longer a Social Enterprise but a profit driven Organisation.

What has POSBank become no longer a people bank!

Denmark’s Flexcurity model deserves further study. Low employment security is compensated with good unemployment insurance and job retraining benefits/programs which has resulted in lowering unemployment and low but decent GDP growth. At the same time, income inequality is very low.

A very key point to the success of these programs is a highly educated workforce. The Danes (and Swiss) have had a 800 year head start. Their populations were already very well educated even before starting these programs. Only 33% of Singaporeans enter tertiary education, in Denmark 59% of the population does so.

If we want to adopt the Danish model, we first have to educate our workforce. This could take at least 1/2 generation.(10-15 years) It will not be as simple as creating a SPUR program.

I’m not 100% convinced that the Danish method works. The results were very commendable but it also occurred during a period of great economic growth (the 1990’s). Denmark may well have prospered with or without the program given the boom. Another cost of the program are the high taxes. Denmark has some of the highest taxes in the world (68% at the top tier). Are we prepared to pay that price?

Hi #27 Lego

The ministers have a duty to the people. They do not need to be incentivised to do their duty. We need leaders who are prepared to look after the welfare of the people, without getting rich in the process. If they want to be rich, they can go to the private sector.

Many leaders in democratic countries earn a modest salary and the public recognition and respect from looking after the welfare of the people. They work hard to get elected.

Hi #30 Righteous People
You said that you are not 100% convinced about the Danish system. Do not wait to be 100% convinced (which is another Singapore trait).

Every system has its positive and negative aspects, and is not 100% perfect. We should choose a system that is likely to work well for us, even if it is not 100% perfect. Our current system has many flaws anyway.

We need adequate taxes to pay for the public services, including health, education, environment, law and order. public transport and a pension for the elderly.

Low taxes does not lead to a better standard of life. It leads to selfishness and exploitation of the weak and poor. It is better to have a more balanced system with higher taxes to provide adequate social benefits..

[...] Discourse – TOC: Job satisfaction – inadequate measures to protect workers – Singaporean Skeptic: 7 wrong things we teach our children! – Seelan Palay’s Blog: North [...]

Thank Mr Tan @ 31 for replying whilst you are on holiday.

First, let me say I tend to be very verbose when i write… so when i wrote “not 100% convinced”, i was using it as a figure of speech. So I will rephrase it more clearly:

I DO NOT BELIEVE that the Danish model works in Singapore because the program relies on a workforce that is much much more highly educated than Singapore currently has.

Therefore, anybody who wants to adopt the Danish model must realize that it’s not going to come about just because you have good unemployment insurance, or the minimum wage. The Danish model can only work when we have a more educated workforce thus any true solution requires us to pump even more resources into education (particularly tertiary). [Regardless of going Danish or not, I hope that we make a commitment to pump more money into education]

Regarding taxes: I agree with Mr Tan that low taxes do not lead to a better standard of life. In fact, I do believe we may have gone too far in lowering our taxes.

In my previous comment, I had mentioned the high taxes that Danish pay for the flexcurity model because I wanted readers to realize that it doesn’t’ come free. Our GST is 7% and we hear non-stop complaining already. Danish GST (known as MOMS over there) is 25%!

Unfortunately, as I read through blogo-sphere, many people give solutions while conveniently omitting the price tag.

I am all for improving benefits and I realize that this will probably result in higher taxes. I am prepared for that. My question for everybody is: Are you prepared to pay the higher cost?

ideas are only good if
1) they are given a chance to prove themselves, “never try never know”.
2) they are not taken whole sale & implimented. some level of customising is needed to fix into local context.

i believe there are many pro (local) worker ideas that are simply not implimented. we already have many capable people running our country, the biggest obstacle is a shift in focus (to pro worker), not the lack of ideas.

i could be wrong, though i hope i am not.

31) Tan Kin Lian on May 9th, 2009 2.15 pm
It is better to have a more balanced system with higher taxes to provide adequate social benefits.

33) RighteousSinga on May 9th, 2009 5.56 pm
Unfortunately, as I read through blogo-sphere, many people give solutions while conveniently omitting the price tag

I agree with RighteousSinga completely. I’m sure that people like Mr Tan knows what balance means, but how many people are willing to contribute more taxes to support more welfare?

Many people assume that taxes from higher income groups alone can finance all the welfare they dream. But doing some rough calculation will reveal that this is insufficient. There are many more people who don’t even pay taxes at all, like senior citizens, children, students, etc. (and it is discouraging see some opposition parties baiting voters with promises of free lunch)

How many people who are already paying taxes are willing to pay even more to support more social welfare without having direct benefits to themselves? How many car owners, who complain that ERP cost is high, have ever think about paying even more road charges and taxes to improve public transport for people who can’t afford cars?

Maybe TOC or Mr. Tan can conduct a survey on this…

Hi #33 and #35

If you ask people, “do you want to pay more tax”, the answer is obviously “no”. However, if you ask “are yo willing to pay more tax, so that you can get an old age pension, unemployment benefit, cheaper transport, cheaper health care and other services”, the answer is likely to be “yes” – for the majority. This is why the advanced countries continue to have these welfare systems.

There is also an economic justification for the welfare system. The state is likely to be able to provide these benefits at lower cost and greater efficiency, compared to individuals buying these services on their own (and being ripped off by profit-oriented businesses). Look at what happened to the investments in the structured products.

It is possible for the Singapore government to offer better welfare benefits without increasing the tax burden. Actually, Singaporeans are already paying a high rate of tax, if GST, COE, ERP, foreign workers levies and high land price (levied by the state) are taken into account.

The state already accumulated so much surplus that they have accumulated so much foreign reserves. It is so sad that one third (or more) of these reserves have been lost through bad investments. If they have been spent on welfare benefits for Singaporeans, so many people would have been better off.

There is no need to raise taxes to provide better benefits. We only need to discontinue adding to the foreign reserves.

So, the more important question is, “Is our Government prepared to provide better benefits to the citizens in return for the current taxes that are now being paid?”

By the way, I have been quite happy to pay the top rate of tax on my earnings during past years. I would also have been willing to pay a higher rate of tax to give better benefits to Singaporeans, especially those in lower income groups. After earning a high income, there is still a lot remaining after paying a high rate of tax.

After paying a higher rate of tax, there is no need to discriminate between citizens on their access to the welfare and social benefits. There is no need for means-testing, which places a stigma on the lower income groups. It is better to levy higher tax and offer the same benefit to all citizens, regardless of income level. This is equality.

To Mr Tan @36 &37,

I’m glad we are in the same camp of possibly paying more tax so that Singaporeans, especially lower income folks enjoy better benefits. However, I am unfortunately, in the awkward situation of having to refute your statements about not having to raise taxes.

You said:”There is no need to raise taxes to provide better benefits. We only need to discontinue adding to the foreign reserves.”

For the benefit of our fellow readers, that is NOT TRUE. We have been incurring annual deficits for years.* In fact, we have had to dip into the interest income from our reserves to pay for special programs. The government (yes I am in a very weird position of having to defend them) has in fact proposed not just dipping into interest income but also potential capital gains to meet future deficits. So contrary to popular opinion, we have NOT been adding to our foreign reserves through our taxes.

http://www.singaporebudget.gov.sg/speech_toc/downloads/FY2009_Budget_Highlights.pdf

It is also not true that Singaporeans pay a high rate of tax once COE and GST are taken into account. Total Taxes (including COE, GST,motor taxes etc,) are about 15% of GDP. Our comparison countries: Denmark- 50%. of GDP; Switzerland- 30% of GDP.

Our current tax structure supports our current benefits level. If we want more benefits, we will have to increase tax revenue. Unless Singapore goes through a massive boom, such an increase can only be fueled by tax rate increases.

I hope our fellow readers share with the goal of increasing benefits but it is a fallacy that such improvements will come at no cost.

*2007 was a unique year. Because of the booming economy, the tax revenue actually collected was far in excess what they expected. The proposed budget was actually in deficit

laws must be fair to employers & employees alike. for it to tilt in favor of either is a bias.

the current bias towards the employer could be the cause of:
1) delayed marriages, due to the rising cost of living like getting a roof over the heads.
2) lower birthrates, due to lack of financial stability.
3) lower productivity, due to work related stress, unhappiness, etc…
4 more job hopping, due to stagnant pay or minimal annual wage increments.

if salaries for the majority of lower income & lower-middle income individuals are adequate, our government can actually cite personal financial prudence for not giving too much welfare in the form of social safety nets.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………

another issue in the light of current economy, is that maybe our govt should consider reimbursing men who (are currently retrenched, out of job) are serving their annual in-camp-training an amount more akin to a minimal salary based on the number of days required of them, as they may have a family to worry about. this group deserve more financial support.

[...] Job satisfaction – inadequate measures to protect workers (The Online Citizen) [...]

36) Tan Kin Lian —— “However, if you ask “are yo willing to pay more tax, so that you can get an old age pension, unemployment benefit, cheaper transport, cheaper health care and other services”, the answer is likely to be “yes” – for the majority….The state is likely to be able to provide these benefits at lower cost and greater efficiency, ”

Not quite sure about the old pension part. There are already people who can’t wait that long — they have been complaining about the lock-up period of their CPF.

Also have doubts about the part about reducing cost through consolidation. I don’t agree that state ownership necessarily lead to better efficiency. Mix successes can be easily seen worldwide. And there is already a blend of privatisation and state-ownership in Singapore (also with mix successes), so the question is how exactly to do a better job, not just a mere conversion to public ownership. The politicians of course play a role, but to a considerable extent, the quality and efficiency of the operation depends on the companies (in the case of privatised entities) or the civil servants.

I can understand why you think it’s hard to improve quality of life for the lowest income group without more social welfare, but to make such promises to draw more financial support for them is a very dangerous thing….

Hi Righteous (#38)

Can you adjust your figures of the 15% of GDP to include the amount raised from the sale of land and from development charges and property taxes that are related to land.

You will need to look into the accounts for a few years, as this item does fluctuate significantly from one year to the next.

In recent years, the Government may have to dip into the reserves and to use the investment income. This is especially the case for this year, due to the Global Crisis.

How about looking at the years before that? I recall that for most years, the Government surplus was around 5 billion a year. This surplus can be used to increase welfare, without increasing taxes.

But, it is all right to pay more taxes … if the people get more social benefit in return.

Hi Ken (#41)
We can have another debate on the merits of state and private management of pension funds, health, education and social service. As this article is on “job satisfaction”, I do not wish to expand on this area. Let me write another article for TOC on this matter.

To Mr Tan @42

I have gone back to 2003 to get the capital receipts (which includes land sales) and adjusted the numbers. I have not been able to find data for earlier years so if anyone knows it, please shoot

In any case, capital receipts account for an additional 3% of GDP. Taking out 2007, the number is more like 2.5%. This makes Singapore’s true Tax Rev as a % of GDP more like 18% vs the 15% I mentioned. This is still quite not the 30% of Switzerland and 50% of Denmark.

However, your point is taken. Even taking into the unpredictable nature of land sales, there is about 2 Billion+ that is not accounted for in the budget.. If this money is indeed being used to add to the reserves then we could use some of it to fund programs.

Let me caution certain readers about salivating over the full amount received from capital receipts. The money received fluctuates very wildly with the economy and intrinsically depends on Singapore’s prosperity. (Land sales are attractive only when developers think it’s economically worthwhile to build something).

As I have mentioned repeatedly, I am not against further funding provided the cash flow is there to sustain it.

#42 Mr Tan:
“Can you adjust your figures of the 15% of GDP to include the amount raised from the sale of land and from development charges and property taxes that are related to land.”

But even if very generous adjustments, it is hard to establish that the low-income families are short-changed. Personal income tax and GST in total for the whole population take up less than 20% of the total fiscal revenue.

I’m not trying to say that low-income contribute less taxes so they deserve less social support. Rather, my point is that Singapore is very conservative when it comes to social welfare, and also very prudence when it comes to accumulating reserves (this just shows how cautious the govt is about the future.)

The case for a welfare state system cannot be based on the principle of “upholding justice for exploited peasants”. It has to be brought about by:

(a) the willingness of the all people, especially anyone who pays taxes, to support the heavy tax regime, which will give more welfare to the lower class as part of the process

(b) the feasibility of implementing it. Massive financial resources and state management alone cannot be used to justify its feasibility (so I share many of the concerns of RighteousSinga.) It is not difficult to find examples of abuse, wastage, and inefficiency in welfare states elsewhere.

Once people have paid upfront for the long-term promises, it becomes an economic and political commitment for future generations to bear. So as much as I share your concern to assist the low-income class, I urge everyone to give a throughout study, rather than relying on the heart alone.

In the short-run, why not examine the criteria of current welfare programmes, and see how better to utilise it. I don’t see many articles about this.

Hi Righteous (#44, #45)

There are two additional points that I have left out earlier:

a) A significant portion of the GDP of Singapore comprise of the MNC sector. They pay little tax but are included in the GDP. As the GDP is inflated on this account, the actual tax to GDP is under-stated.

b) There is a lot of surplus accumulated under the government agencies, including the companies that are largely owned by the government. These surplus can be considered as another form of indirect taxation. These agencies are able to earn high surplus in near monopolistic situations (e.g. JTC, PSA, Changi Airport).

But I take your point that taxes have to be increased, if more social benefits are to be provided. I believe that the people will be willing to pay more tax, if they get value in the social benefits that they receive.

#47 Tan Kin Lian: These surplus can be considered as another form of indirect taxation. These agencies are able to earn high surplus in near monopolistic situations (e.g. JTC, PSA, Changi Airport

i won’t consider it indirect taxation — if they were to be owned privately, the taxes will fall under corporate tax.

in fact, this is how singapore’s “capitalist socialist system” works: such profitable companies which arise from central planning are kept under state ownership (directly or as a GIC) so that revenues and control don’t flow out.

Thanks Mr Tan (#47). I’ve learnt a few things I didn’t know before reading this column.

I would be interested to find out whether you think current policy of importing “foreign talent”, both highly and lowly skilled people is suitable for us. Are we un-sustainably trying to drive up growth and GDP while risking social friction and the marginalization of our own citizens? Or is this something that Singapore has no choice but to proceed with?

What then are the solutions?

This will probably be best articulated in another article rather than in the comments box.

Even big economy countries in Europe have job security for EU only. FT are only accepted if post is left empty for at least 6 mths. why I know? cos I lived and studied in UK for 9 yrs.

Hi Righteous Singa #49

I intend to write another article about creating jobs for people. I will cover foreign workers in that article. It may take another 1 or 2 weeks. Thanks for the contribution to the discussion.

You can also send an email to me at kinlian@gmail.com. We can discuss other matters privately.

Hi twinkeytot (#50)

Thanks for your contribution. I have suspected that many countries do protect their citizens better than we do in Singapore – and your comments seems to confirm that.

By allowing foreign workers to come into Singapore freely, we are depressing the wages at the lower end (and make it difficult for them to make ends meet, unless they work long hours). This is the point of my article. It is also a main reason for the high job dissatisfaction.

I hope that our Government leaders take note of the discontent from the ground. It is expressed in the survey that is used for my article.

While there is always small percentage of rich singaporeans at all times like even in recession, majority are not filthy rich. But the Cost of Living has gone skywards and its fair to expect even more costly future.

Many are earning 3k-5k a month, double income families, few kids, if any.

This model of super easy access to the cheapest or cheaper labor to hope that MNCs will remain here is being super good to employers. But singaporeans BUY expensive flats here. Cars are so expensve compared to elsewhere. Even in this mother of all financial crisis, cost of foods like Rice and hawker center foods, daily necessities , HAVE THE PRICE GONE DOWN? Some of my friend even dare to say it has actually gone UP!

Salaries. What happened to it? News say singaporeans are even willing to accept DRASTIC pay cuts. Some can even accept 42% cut!

This increases their chance of employment as these citizens can now be more cost competitive with FTs.

But, what if you are old?
How long Can this Last ? Can a citizen survive on such pay for the long run? Can they have sufficient to meet the minimum sum after paying the flat?

Remember, each day, we grow OLDER, never younger. At the Same Time, FTs of the world are producing endless supply of SAME Young foreign workers ready to take on jobs here at Great Exchange Rate. Endless batches will come here.

While no one owes us a living, we as citizens should be taken care of one way or another.

Can the Cost of living be lowered when to secure jobs and compete with younger FTs, many would resort to drastic pay cuts?

How long more can this model continue?

Pork and Pork (can pork no more)

retirement will be a very distant dream for most if things go downhill further. citizens into their golden years who wish to remain in the workforce after retirement should do so out of free will, not because of the lack of retirement funds.

there is a big difference from enjoying a leisurely pace of life after retirement to a lifelong work (slog?). working way past age 65 with paltry pay & sometimes physically demanding job reeks of exploitation, its no where near meaningful.

I feel the same.

I see many old citizens aged 60 and above working as toilet cleaners, coffee shop cleaners, collectors of tin cans and carton boxes.

I like to use this opportunity to CLARIFY for naive singaporeans about working past retirement age.

1. Many singaporeans were told the good things about working after retirement.
eg. mentally active prevents alzheimers , depression , senile etc.
Is this true? Maybe. Lets say it is. I think it is true. BUT!!!!! BUT!

There are many ways to keep the brain active and stay happy and healthy!

a. why does a retiree have to work as , among all jobs, a fast food helper cleaning tables and clearing rubbish? At age past 65?

b. ask them, given the choice would they want to do something else? Lets say the choice is he has sufficient retirement money such that he need not Work FOR Bread and Butter and Salary for survival?

c. Ways to achieve the same anti-aging :
c1. Be active in social work events to help the less fortunate.
c2. Join tour groups to see the world
c3. Do something that you are passionate about (not clearing french fries or washing plates lah)
c4. Voice up at Hong Lim park for singaporeans.
c5. Help Analyse social issues and provide solutions based on their life experience. This will make the brain very active and sharp. Routine work at fast food restaurants stiffle the brain in its own ways. This is not good for brain.
c6. Join alternative parties to help them as they are short of a few good men.
c7. many others.

In short, naive people will just accept that elderlies working in fast food restaurants is good for them when in fact these elders have no choice – they are not enjoying their golden years as much as they should but instead they are clearing golden fries from tables.

Naive people please fly a kite.

i would like to add that unfair employment terms are the norm whatever the age group, the ugly truth staring back at us now is how the old (past age 65) are having things really bad. but the young from age 21 above are not having it any better, of the little real salary (if any) increase through these years of high inflation on the cost of living.

the younger generation may very well be worse of than this current generation of folks working past retirement age for the already paltry pay….

Has the labour union any comments on the Business Times report.Maybe our infamous Lim Swee Say has.

How about trying this out: for the next 2 years, double the income tax and devote this ONLY TO SENIOR CITIZENS (age 65 years and above)?

There are around 400,000 senior citizens. Personal income tax receipt for FY2008 is around $6,000,000,000, so doubling taxes will raise about $15,000 per year, or $1,250/mth, for each senior citizen as a form of cash payment.

Maybe we can have a vote in TOC and send a petition to the govt. Since it will come as cash, there is not much admin the govt need to do, so they don’t have any excuse not to do it.

I have created a survey on taxation and social benefits. Please participate in it. I will use the survey results for a future article.

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=0Dic7wNm0ESudiwhPAGRcw_3d_3d

hi Tan Kin Lian,

i find some questions with rather limiting options 6) & 8).

in light of the current economic situation, since the nation reserves are spent to minimise job losses. why need to increase tax? more like how the money is spent…

maybe an option for a worded reply would be more accurate an answer?

> 60) mice is nice: why need to increase tax?

This is how welfare state system works: everyone pays more taxes for more welfare which is made equal to all people.

Before we can get this system to work, everyone must have a clear understanding of this principle.

Hi #60
There is a free format question at the end of the survey. You can use this question to give your comments.

This topic has become an issue of the welfare state system.

That is, job satisfaction would increase if we have a better social safety net so that workers in Singapore do not need to work hard due to lower costs of living to have a better and happier life.

Is this true?

What is happiness? What is job satisfaction? Is happiness tied to being liberated, i.e freedom to do what you want? Or is it tied to the monetary rewards from an employment that had become dehumanised due to the capitalistic system?

agree with Poeticmi that some posts dwell too much into welfare issues for jobless, its not about jobless satisfaction.

the term job satisfaction is becoming a distant dream when a job (more & more of such) even cannot ensure 1’s survival into retirement age.

Hi #58 fj,

You brought up an issue that is worth further thought: The current personal income tax revenue, if used for supporting senior citizens only, provide each with $15,000 annually.

Let’s say each taxpayer supports 1 senior citizen on average. What proportion of taxpayers pay more than $15,000 annually? A net annual income of $140,000 pays this amount of tax (at the 14% bracket)

Does it mean that a small group of taxpayers (who are in the top-2 highest tax bracket) pay for almost all of the personal income tax? Does it mean that we are vulnerable to these people leaving the country?

#19

///and these PRC PRs can be trusted to multiply like pigs and dogs which they couldnt do back in China.///

A little constraint with the use of words here would be helpful.

More and more people are been compared to other species, something is seriously wrong with humans or is human just like any other animal ?

48) kkk on :/// These surplus can be considered as another form of indirect taxation. These agencies are able to earn high surplus in near monopolistic situations (e.g. JTC, PSA, Changi Airport

i won’t consider it indirect taxation — if they were to be owned privately, the taxes will fall under corporate tax.///

I am inclined to agree to the author on this point. Perhaps not so much for JTC, PSA, Changi Airport, but for agencies like HDB,PUB, Singapore Power and its like that touches every Singaporean, the taxes toward these agencies are ultimately paid by the end users.

33) RighteousSinga

///Unfortunately, as I read through blogo-sphere, many people give solutions while conveniently omitting the price tag////

Yes, That is the impression I get too.

36) Tan Kin Lian

///There is no need to raise taxes to provide better benefits. We only need to discontinue adding to the foreign reserves.///

Mr Tan, you have found an ingenious solution.
Yes. We seemed to have became a nation of overzealous squirrels feverishly saving disproportionate amount for the proverbal “raining day” to the extend of somewhat malnourishing ourselves during the sunny days. If continued for extended period (if 50 years is not extended enough) we may die of malnutrition before we see the rain.

CCR- “I wanna know have you ever seen the rain, coming down on a sunny day”

///Although the survey is made among workers in the finance industry, I believe that it does reflect the views of workers in general. ///

The financial industry is in dire straits, would that have affected the outcome of the survey.

Job satisfaction:
This is a very subjective thing. When we move up the heirachy of needs, we look upon intangibles as such.
What we love doing may not give us the money for the lifestyle we desire.
So we go do some job that we do not love as much doing that gives us the money for the lifestyle we desire.
Unless you are a successful painter, a rock star, or a soccer star, in reality, the 2nd case is true.
So we must find satisfaction outside our job. In our family, our social circle and leisure activities outside job to fulfill that vaccuum.
But if one hang around the office until there is no daylight day after day, (unless one loves the job so much, then it is fine) out of fear that he will lose the job, then that person is going to be very dissastified, whichever job he may be in, no matter how many jobs he hopped. Because of his underlying fear of losing the job, which may be unfounded. So in a way, he created his own misery.
But a more positive person may choose to be so dung good at what he does that he is valued at work, and when he walk out at 6 pm with head high, nobody can say nothing.

Among the ideas kick up in the post are:
Raising taxes
Mandatory retrenchment allowances
Minimum wages

If these are forced on to the employers by law, employees’ take home pay may be correspondingly reduced when the employers factor all these additional cost when hiring.
If these are to be state funded, the taxes may be increased.

the problem is job satisfaction & protection in the form of employment rights should not be mentioned in the same thread.

is like debating about hawker food being healthy & being tasty in one sentence.

74) mice is nice

/// the problem is job satisfaction & protection in the form of employment rights should not be mentioned in the same thread. ///

You got a point there.
Any form of employment rights will to some extend erode the motivation for work, and result in some one else paying for it. Basic right must be institutionalised, wether it is sufficient now is always debatable. From a employer point of view, he wants the best ROI for anyone he employs, from the employye point of view, he too wants the best “ROI” for his time put in his job, when both needs are congruent enogh, the job fit will happen. So you see Blangadeshi workers willingly cleaning our estates at the pay which gave them a deal they cannot get back home, but you will never seee an angmo cleaning our etsate because he has got a better deal back home, no right, no wrong, all relative.

///is like debating about hawker food being healthy & being tasty in one sentence.///
That’s whey D graded hawkers’ food are Delicious because they are busy cooking up great dishes, leaving no time to clean; whereas the taste of the A graded hawkers are Atrocious because they spent all the time cleaning and not honing their cooking skills.

Job satisfaction comes from employers that do not exploit their workers by assigning them projects within their(employee) scope of duties, giving employees sufficient timeframe to complete their assignments and hence provide adequate time of rests. Providing employees with reasonable salaries and welfares in the forms of medical coverages and incentives.

In Singapore, exploitations by employers are rampant in the names of competitions, job scopes are enlarge infinitely, works are assign in project form instead of time based. Starting salaries are reduced, annual increments and bonuses shrink and incentives are hard to come by. From the write-ups in the cybersphere and whinnings of most workers, it seems job satisfaction is as remote as to find happiness in everyday livings. And happiness in living is intertwined with job satisfaction making our life as a citizen even more complex.

Dare I say a satisfied employee is likely to form a happy family and happy families are likely to form a happy society and the reverse is just as real. An unhappy individual(employee) is not likely to form a family and if he or she forms one, it is certainly going to be affected by the unhappy employment and the marriage and family will be troubled as a consequence. Many troubled citizens will then translate into a fragile society.

In every country, the Government and Labour Movement/Organization play vital and pivotal roles in the wellbeing of the Nation. Mismanagement and abuse of workers will cause much dispute and discontent to the citizenry that will naturally mire any society.

76) ah soh

///From the write-ups in the cybersphere and whinnings of most workers///

Cyberspace may not be representative of the entire workforce, probably only representative of the IT savvy workforce who wants to participate in cyberspce discussion.

I think your para 2 is a slanting on the side of generalisation.

The thing that are constant in your life is you, followed by your family and then your work. When you are happy, you create a happy family, and that is carried to your workplace.
With the first 2 is strong, you will change your job if you get nasty employers and will seek one that suits you.
But when you run your life the reverse way, then it harder to be ever happy.
Just my way of looking at things.

76) ah soh

/// every country, the Government and Labour Movement/Organization play vital and pivotal roles in the wellbeing of the Nation. Mismanagement and abuse of workers will cause much dispute and discontent to the citizenry that will naturally mire any society.///

Every country?
I do not think so.

First we take control of what we can control in our life, and it is more than most people think they can, and what we cannot control, we can only hope the gahmen will do it.

But most posts here dwell on waiting for gahmen to do this and do that, and since they complain that gahmen is useless, not doing anything good for the citizens, then their wait will be in vain.

See my point? It is contradiction.

Permanently in the victim mode state of mind. How is that going to help one move forward in life.

My 2 cents worth of though.

Do somebody know, where I can find this research of this private research firm? I didn´t find it in the business times archives.
Thanks