A reader responds to Ian Choo’s article “The unsustainable Singapore model’.
The “Singapore Model” is a remarkable one in many aspects, that it is now a textbook case of development. There are concerns however, regarding it’s sustainability, and how what has been established is no longer suitable and should be reviewed, revamped or even discarded. On the surface, it sounds logical.
Consider the irony behind this thinking however. If this particular model has functioned perfectly well for ~40 years, why does it need to be thrown away? The issue is not with the model, but the components of the model. A model specifies a set of conditions that it will work, it does not however, state how those conditions are or ought to be met. The way to do that is for the implementers to find and establish.
From a development perspective, the “Singapore model” is definitely sustainable. If it were not, it would not be held up for others to follow. It has proven its worth time and again in different settings, different countries, different climates even! Because simply, the Singapore model is an export-led model of development. The underlying logic is that so long as you can trade and export, you can grow. Why would it not be unsustainable? The answer to this is not the model, but something inside the model.
Consider this entry from the CIA world factbook, Singapore’s main exports are listed to comprise of “machinery and equipment (including electronics), consumer goods, pharmaceuticals and other chemicals, mineral fuels”. From a textbook perspective, these are all high-value goods. But they also come under a ‘manufacturing’ label. There is high value to be gained when the population make-up is semi-skilled and/or diverse in skills, e.g. the Singapore of 20++ years back. Then, manufacturing for export was feasible, and very successful, when wages were low and population density was relatively lower to allow factories be established (Think Jurong Industrial Estate). Present day does not allow that luxury.
But exporting for growth still makes perfect sense. Japan, Germany, Canada, the UK, Switzerland are all economies still actively exporting. But exporting what is the question?
Consider Hong Kong, who is probably the closest and most identical competitor, and therefore also the best role model to examine. The Hong Kong economy was not much different from Singapore in the early years, but it has successfully moved its name towards service exports. Hong Kong does still have manufacturing industries, but its name is now synonymous with finance and related services. But Singapore has yet to find an industry it is definitively associated with.
Small economies can grow and thrive, but those that do and thrive are also invariably linked with a distinct identity, e.g. Hong Kong – Financial Centre, Switzerland – Watches and banks, Finland – Nokia. They do have other industries, but they are identified by a core ‘brand’ or specialisation.
Which means the solution to this is “Complete specialisation”.
However, to reach such a status possibly requires a Schumpeterian form of creative destruction. This involves a lot of time and pain, which in a small economy, by virtue of being “small”, can be magnified to be many times greater. Chance of failure is also very much higher. Is a small economy willing, and more importantly, able to bear this price and risk?
Institutions can and do play a part to help or hinder this transition. And their use and effectiveness on this can be called to question. What is practiced in Singapore may be too cautious, microscopic, or whatever else it may be called. Concerns about the approach taken should, and need to, be considered and addressed in separate context altogether.
But there is little evidence at present, to suggest that what is in place in Singapore will ultimately, and definitely, result in disaster.
The “Singapore model” per se is not unsustainable. What makes it unsustainable is a missing component in the model.
In this case, it is the economy’s absence of a distinct identity.
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
All salient points CY! Thank you for caring enough to write up to my post – the public domain in Singapore will be better for discourse like this.
First and foremost, I would like to say I don’t think our positions on this are diametrically opposite at all. You’re totally right in saying that the Singapore model (in its historical context) is still well admired, even actively imitated around the world. Turning an economy inwards is a recipe for absolute disaster in a globalised knowledge-based era, which is hardly what any realist who does care for his country would suggest. The subcontinent mentality died when the Berlin Wall fell, and we’re hardly the best people to even try it.
And you’re also right – the pressing problem is “export what?”
The real pragmatic considerations when thinking hard about this question is that knowledge-based dynamics are notoriously temperamental, even fickle. Plus, traditional high-value manufacturing (e.g. Silicon chips) are all economies of scale businesses which often the tipping point factor to location is proximity to large markets. Lower value manufacturing are increasingly becoming (if not already) commodities in a vast “red ocean” space. The “bleeding-edge” of the technological frontier is a natural barrier to entry that will increasingly dictate who stays profitable and stays in business. The profit windows are small, and the investments to stay on the “bleeding edge” are high. And let’s not even talk about the risk factors and difficulty in measuring return-on-investment. Just just the new rules of the game that all nations have to contend with.
More truth of the matter is that we as Singaporeans compete with everyone from everywhere for just about everything. The irony is that we have to compete for our own knowledge-workers as well. This can be a competition based on price (which we could sustain for a while based on our low tax rates). But competition based solely on price is a race to the bottom. The most important differentiator in industry will be knowledge-based assets – and the problem is that it sits in people’s heads. And manifests itself in unpredictable ways.
Perhaps if we stop seeing them as employees with dollar signs above their heads – but rather as full people, with all their quirks, fears and unique preferences – a larger picture will emerge. The best in people emerge many times from the irrational depths of their hearts and heads – rarely from the size of their paychecks. Pay is but a hygiene factor – getting it wrong is disastrous, but getting it right will not score you many brownie points if you just keep pushing on in that general direction. You have rightly characterized this as an identity issue.
It is my personal belief that the real answer is to make sure that for whatever reason, no Singaporean should be left behind in his quest for self-actualization. That each and everyone gets to their fullest potential as a human beings, within and beyond the economy. Its both humanistically desirable, as it is economically rational. And in that respect – we have a long way to go if we want to play in the big league. And certainty, trying to monetize the non-monetary is hardly going to help either. People have to choose for themselves, only then will they commit and achieve.
Have another article in the pipeline soon about fate-sharing communities – would love your comments on it! Thanks again!
best
ian.
CY: ‘From a development perspective, the “Singapore model” is definitely sustainable. If it were not, it would not be held up for others to follow. It has proven its worth time and again in different settings, different countries, different climates even!’
1. Which country is following (exactly) the singapore model? Burma? China (which city?)? North Korea? UK? USA? Australia? Malaysia? Thailand? Indonesia? Vietnam?
2. I find it very hard to follow the ideas in this article (because i am so stupid)
3. I only know one thing about the so-called singapore model: Growth at all cost. At all cost = replacing/renewing citizens+suppress labour rights+suppress wages+inflat property+propaganda
The “Singapore Model” is losing steam. Not much new and good ideas are coming out in the recent National Day speech. Our sustainability is in question by MM whether it can continue after another 2 elections.
We need to empower the people and strengthen entreprenuership.
How can Singapore economic model be sustainable?
Falling wage due to huge influx of Foreign worker.
That has led to rising property, which cause citizen more hardship, because of the rising cost of living. The high cost of property lead to higher cost of operating in Singapore which move companies overseas, that in turn contribute to higher umemployment. With the huge influx of Foreigner, the older workers are being marginalized, lead to retrenchent because of their higher wages. That will lead to more default on their HDB loan, unless they are able to secure a job fast. But the wage of the new job will definite be lower because of the Foreigner. With the wages going south, and more people competing for limited resource, the cost of resource will go up. Conflict will increase……. Actually it is a vicious cycle.
Who can resolve this situation??
The economic model may not be sustainable but the political model is VERY SUSTAINABLE!
This will ensure peace and stability, regardless of what happen economically.
Even in the worst of economic times like in the past few months, everything look so normal and prosperous.
It has been proven and will be proven again and again in future! Don’t worry.
Just make sure you have enough money and take care of yourself. At least 66% do. If not, gahmen can just get more foreigners to make up the numbers and percentage.
We cannot assume that what works for 40 years will continue to work in the future as pointed out in the book “Who moved my cheese”.
In Singapore’s context, change affecting the Singapore Model is not gradual. It is a disruptive change. Examples of disruptive change is the invention of CD/DVD to replace cassette tapes. digital cameras to replace film cameras.
If we continue to rely on cheap foreign labor to compete with China and India, Singapore’s economy will decline just as America is declining with almost 10% of unemployment and trillions of debt.
In the 80′s when China was opening up and lack capital and management know how, Singapore with money and management was able to expand/export to China e.g. Suzhou Industrial Park. Now, China does not need Singapore but Singapore needs China.
Case in point. China and India has 16 and 13 companies in Forbes Asia’s Fabulous 50 List while Singapore has only 1.
The challenge is how?
How to make China needs Singapore. I do not think that Singapore has the answer.
Singapore model is ridiculous slave system that eventually we may lost most of what we accumulated.
The main driver of this model is export. What does we export? We do not have indigeous enginnering and sciencetific capabilty that build something people wants.
Our manufacturing are dying thanks first, partly to PAP’s property inflation. Second thanks to our elite who are unable to manage the most hardworking people to high productivity yield.
(the French who work less aka lazier, more relax, more militant trade union are more productive . I am not joking)
We are just at the lower end of Global financial and industrial chain aka slave of MNC. MNC are not sentimental and they will move to maximize their profit. This is the reason we need to lower our wages to compensate high property cost. (Government will not lower property price)
And to prevent Dutch Diesease, government choose to stash our surpluses in US dollar denominated asset (to lower Sing dollar against US). This system will bind Singaporean to be underlings forever. (They will not stash in Gold because we are not able to have creative industrial and financial output that will enable us to have independent monetary policy)
And with the depreciation of US $ these few years, at a third value of our monies are gone.
So where do you think we derive our wealth now? A large part of it is from providing corrupted financial service to the SE Asia region.
Just like HK providing money laundering to mainland China corrupt officials
groupthink.
we are good at groupthink. that is our forte.
what good can we do with groupthink? we are good at SOP (standard operating procedures). to think that we are born to be trained to follow SOP. quite sad isn’t it. why have we become like that? under a very, very strong autocratic leadership. can this last?
we are good at groupthink.
our KPI is GDP. come to think of it, singapore is nothing but a living, breathing GDP. the french are talking about inserting “happiness” into their GDP. they can talk big because they are big. can we talk big also?
hong kong has transform from a “made in hong kong” to what is now a global financial hub. (if you happen to possess a “made in hong kong” labeled toy car, hold on to it! ppl born after 1980s may not have seen one before!) how they do it? HK has no central planning. HK is led by its ppl – entrepreneurs and workers. both sharing the same ethos in their DNA.
taiwan for a while looked inward after KMT, but emerged self assured, forged an identity. now is engaging china like a young man whom has pass adolescence. fingers crossed. taiwan has an emerging political structure in the form of a two-party system. the lost of KMT for a period allow the ppl to “grow up”, with acne, bad hairdo and tantrums thrown in. they grow and found themsleves. even though their manufacturing stronghold is not as powerful as before, the ppl know – they are taiwanese. the taiwanese ppl are leading the country, not the political parties.
i believe when a country has core ‘brand’ or specialisation as described in the above excellent article, is when the ppl has found themselves. then the government can lead and no need to drag the ppl along.
our core competant may be groupthink! why has this come about? because of a very, very strong autocratic leadership.
to think that just two generations ago, we share the same DNA as the chinese in hong kong and taiwan, predominantly hail from southern china.
interesting question is: how about the chinese in m’sia and indonesia? can it be the geography? HK is out. taiwan vs china, south korea vs north korea. they got enemies also and for the beginning were led by autocrates which gradually gave way to a more trully democratic setup and emerged with a strong identity.
we are still being drag by an autocratic leader…
hi ;-)
for the record, i wish the french success in their endeavours. If the french can’t do it, nobody can! People’s power! the french revolution! a legacy to uphold!
Vive la France!
CY
“It has proven its worth time and again in different settings, different countries, different climates even!”
Regarding this, do you think it has proven its worth during this climate when it is the first one in asia to suffer from the economic climate?
“he underlying logic is that so long as you can trade and export, you can grow. Why would it not be unsustainable?”
The answer is simple…if you can trade and export, everything goes well…but what will happen when there are no customers? if there are no customers, do you think it will be sustainable?
“But exporting for growth still makes perfect sense. Japan, Germany, Canada, the UK, Switzerland are all economies still actively exporting.”
Look at their portion of export VS GDP and ours? do you see the difference there?
“But there is little evidence at present, to suggest that what is in place in Singapore will ultimately, and definitely, result in disaster.”
I am sorry, but there is a whole lot of evidence….but my favorite is the learning disability of the singapore system…or inability to change….that alone is enough to result in disaster…
as Darwin says ” it is not the strongest of species that survive, nor the most intelligent, it is the most adaptable to change”
Thus from this quote of yours “In this case, it is the economy’s absence of a distinct identity.” I will say the missing component is the learning disability…
CY, you are too kind, your words.
PAP IS THE CAUSE OF OUR UNPRODUCTIVITY
Look around East Asia beside Singapore and slave shop China, one cannot failed to realise that these folks derived their wealth from creative scientific/ engineering output or their entreprenership.
Example Japan South Korea Taiwan, one thing in common is that their entreprener nevermind how crooked they are, deserve great credit in driving the technology advancement.
And HK, the entreprener are famous for trading and providing whatsoever service china wants. (and of course they are good in blackmailing favors from China)
Why is it that Singaporean who are the same culture and racial stock scantly has any entreprener? Even our brothers in Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand are prosperous in their business well and kicking.
The reason is because PAP simply take over all profitable enterprise they can think of.I give few example.
If PSA was farmed out to private sector, we would have created a Lee ka Shing.
If Chartered Semi is to be a government hands off entity, we might have built another TSMC.
If ST Electronic DSTA is to be replaced by another sub-contractor, we would have our Hyundai, Samsung or Mitsuibishi.
In fact our state entreprises that enjoyed state handout (DBS, ST, DSTA)or natural monopoly survive (eg port, power, telecoms).
PAP brags their success hoo-ha in these GLC, but elsewhere such tasks delegated to private sector turns them world class conglomerate MNC.
The reason of such incompetency of our GLCs is that it is parachutted with former civil servant who qualified for the job mainly because they have a good A level results.
The rises to the top not out of performance but as their disposition in being meek, compliant and risk avoiding.
Elsewhere one might have curse the corrupted Asian CEO, but in fact they are giving more well-being to society than PAPs lackey. (Of course, they are much better system than the Asian Towkay ways)
I believe LKY system of madarin CEO days are numbered. The game has changed. Next to fall would be our venerable SIA if they insist on continuing their mandarin way.
Ten commandments of a sustainable unique model:
1. Choose a small country
2. Be ruthless to your opponents
3. Treat the citizens as digits and forget about their contributions
4. Take all credits to yourself and go around boasting about the so-called “achievements”
5. Design and implement policies without conscience and give no regard to the low and mid income groups
6. Keep increasing your own pay and drawing as much directors’ fees as you can
7. Have your family members joined in the game as well
8. Be thick skin and promote yourself to whatever title as you like
9. Do not be accountable to your performance neither admit your mistakes and stubbornly refuse to leave your position
10.Set yourself above the law and appoint your cronies to key positions
We had better not be arguing over deck-chairs on the sinking Titanic.
Singapore’s growth model is not just export-led growth; it is government-directed export-led growth.
But more important is that the Industrial Age is ending, and the generic model of the global economy is sputtering, as seen from the recent Lehman Crisis. The Lehman Crisis has ended up revealing far more than just the weakness of the financial industry. Along with assessments of economic health, other studies have also found the opportunity to be taken. And these studies have found that excessive CEO pay is the tip of an iceberg that includes all kinds of vices such as sponsoring ethnic cleansing in Africa and Serbia and pumping water out of people’s backyards in suburban USA.
We really need a Schumpterian Creative Destruction for the whole global economy and the courage to exercise it.
“…to reach such a status possibly requires a Schumpeterian form of creative destruction. This involves a lot of time and pain,…”"
Schumpeterian Creative Destruction comes when Singaporeans vote against the PAP. It will not take a lot of time and can be done within an election.
The Singapore model is based essentially upon the system created by LKY and his cronies. (Not surprising that the PAP government and Burmese junta are great friends)
We can’t trust GDP figures to measure performance. The following points proves beyond doubt that the Singapore model is failing:
i) a very, very low birth-rate; this means that the country will eventually die off without mass immigration.
ii) within a few years, 200,000 of the better educated have left Singapore for good to other countries.
iii) with strong GDP growth figures over the years has not benefited the average Singaporean because the cost-of-living has risen even faster.
“Who has the mandate of heaven to rule Singapore?”
Contrary to popular beliefs, the PAP has screw up more than they had contributed to Singapore’s success. They adopted the “Stop-At-Two” policy in the early years becos of housing shortages and when the economy is still developing, not realising that housing shortages and economic development are short/medium term problems which can be resolved by building more houses and creating more jobs within the next 10 years. However, the population policy is a long term issue. When a baby is born, it takes 20 years for him to mature and contribute to the nation.
Hence, now that there is a problem of aging population becos of their stop-at-two policy, they again tried to remedy their screw-up by bringing in more foreigners, not realizing that with more PRs/foreigners coming in, there will be a surge in demand for housing and jobs and reducing Singapore to be a home for foreigners and citizens as slaves in their homeland.
However, by skillful manipulation, they had managed to cover up their screw-ups and short-sightedness in every elections by pointing out the successes they had done for Singapore and instill fear among Singaporeans how Singapore will go into trouble without them. By giving incentives such as HDB upgrading, New Singapore Shares, GST credits, etc. etc., they had also managed to play on the greed of Singaporeans in voting for them.
Hence, Singaporeans can only blame themselves for their short-sightedness during the past elections for giving in to the fear and inducement of the PAP. Who can they blame for the high cost of living in Singapore, the 7% GST, losing of $40 billion by Temasek Holdings without accountability and transparency, large numbers of foreign workers pushing down the wages and competing with Singaporeans for jobs and HDB resale flats, high transport costs, etc. etc.? Can the PAP be blamed? No! Singaporeans must blame themselves and their forefathers for the sins of greed and cowardice in the past elections in voting for the PAP out of fear and greed!
It is time for Singaporeans to wake up from their slumber and repent of their past sins committed in the past elections in voting for the PAP out of fear and greed! The time for repentance of fear and greed of Singaporeans has come and the time is now! 1st in Malaysia. 2nd in Japan. Now is the turn for Singapore to change. It’s time for Singaporeans to wake up from their slumber and challenge the intimidation and fear PAP always seek to create in the minds of Singaporeans by saying how Singapore will go in trouble without them. Nobody is indispensable. Even if the opposition parties are voted in and formed a coalition government, Singapore will still be business as usual or may even be better. In fact, it is dangerous for Singaporeans to think that there are no alternatives.
NCMP and NMP cannot vote against bills and can only voice their opinions. What’s the point of talking when they do not have the power to check the PAP?
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. It’s time Singapore has a opposition party or a coalition parties strong enough to provide a check and balance to the PAP, similar to the Western-style democracy.
However, if Singaporeans don’t give the opposition parties a chance to prove themselves by stepping forward in faith and vote for them, how can they be expected to prove their competency and re-govern Singapore for the welfare of Singapore citizens? How can Singaporeans said that the opposition parties are incompetent and cannot provide a credible alternative to the PAP if they are not given a chance to prove themselves? Singaporeans should be merciful to the opposition parties by giving them a chance to prove themselves by voting for them. By showing mercy to the opposition parties, Singaporeans are also showing mercy to their children who will be the victims of who we vote for, for we are now victims of our forefathers who voted for the PAP. “Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.”
The RP is right that defence spending should be cut. If the defence spending is cut, the GST, income tax and corporate tax may also be cut as well. Thus, bringing more income and purchasing power to Singaporeans and businesses. With more purchasing power in the hands of Singaporeans, it can lead to more demands for goods and services and thus, improve the welfare of Singaporeans and provide better businesses to the companies.
With a reduction in corporate tax rate, it can also boost business profits in Singapore and attract more foreign investments into the country and create more jobs for Singaporeans. Why should the welfare of 1 big money wasting / money making machine (not war fighting machine) come at the expense of majority of Singaporeans? The PAP is paying the army regular officers a very high pay in the hope that should there be a freak election, they can depend on the army to keep them in power. That explains why many ex-SAF officers serve in high appointments in the PAP, civil service and statutory boards and even if the opposition parties win an election, they had no power to remove them and has to seek the approval from the President.
The SAF is a national service army and Singaporeans serve NS for the defence of Singapore, not for the PAP and the military elites. Moreover, the deterrence value of the SAF comes from the commitment of Singaporeans, NSmen and NSFs to national service. Before Singaporeans can defend Singapore against any external aggressor, they should 1st defend themselves against internal aggressors i.e. the PAP, the high-paying SAF officers and the foreign talents, which constitute the “evil tripartite” oppressing the welfare of ordinary Singaporeans!
While the PAP is calling Singaporeans to defend their home, they are at the same times bringing in more foreign talents to take away the jobs and HDB flats of Singaporeans. Hence, Singaporeans had been called to serve 2 years of NS and 10-ICT cycle to defend the jobs and homes of the foreigners living in Singapore. Statistics of Singapore revealed that 34% of the population are PRs/foreigners. Thus, Singapore citizens had become slaves to the foreigners in our homeland.
With the influx of foreigners into Singapore, Singapore has already been colonised by foreigners through economic means, not military means. Hence, the threat of national security and defence of Singapore is not at the military front, but at the home front. Hence, defence spending should be cut by reducing the high pay of the SAF regular officers without affecting the military capability, and foreign talents should be restricted in Singapore for the welfare of the citizens.
This is what the government should focus on in terms of national security. Without a job and a house to raise a family, what security is there for a Singapore citizen to defend in Singapore? Instead of doing some soul –searching for their screw-up becos of their “Stop-At-Two” policy, the PAP is blaming Singaporeans for not producing enough babies and collaborate with the PRs/foreign talents to suppress the wages and reduce the welfare of Singapore citizens, in the hope by suppressing the wage level, ordinary Singapore citizens will be preoccupied with their bread and butter issue and have no time and power to question the rule of the PAP.
Hence, it’s time for Singaporeans to take the step of faith to take back their rights as a Singapore citizen by voting for the opposition parties and empower them to break the dominance of the PAP!! If Singaporeans have faith as small as a mustard seed, we can move mountains! The mandate of heaven to rule Singapore is in the hands of every Singapore citizen!
There’s still fear in some people’s mind that withholds them from participating online forum like such to speak their minds, I think more so for civil servants, pro-government people, and those government planners.
Perhaps this is one of the key contributions of the MIW govt, their legacy to this country for 44 years of rule, a self-destructing act that will eventually bring this country called Singapore out of the world stage, though not over night but surely as days go by just as history has witnessed the rise and fall of Portugal, Spain, Netherlands, the UK, France, Germany, Japan and USSR.
Such stiffening of the people’s expression results in concentrating and heavy dependence on the elite group for charting the future of this country, instead of drawing on collective wisdom and absorbing all useful ideas from the masses for ideas generation that can help the country to scale greater height.
I wish this day will come for Singapore that Singapore will rise from height to height, and grow strength to strength.
For that, we really need a different model.
Talk about the So-Call SAF
SAF destroys civil, kind and gentle young Singaporean physically as well as mentally leaving only bitteness and a vile soul. Don believe go ask yourself those conscripts other than officers or specialist corp.
SAF is an entire different thing from her mother Israel’s IDF (Israel Defence Force).
All combat units are over subscribe in IDF. All conscript who wants to go to Sayeret Golani, Sayeret Givati, Sayeret Barak Sayeret Matkal, needs to go through stringent test just like Singaporean student want to go RI. (Conscipt that do not volunteered for combat unit goes to support unit)
These units are so popular that even oversea Jews that has just a few week of stay in Eratz Israel volunteered. Even the Arab Muslim Bedouin and Druze volunteered just because they believe in Israel righteosness and justness and are willing for kill their Muslim brothers in defending Israel.
The most distinguish unit in last lebanon war is the Druze unit, and many of legendary IDF fighter like Amos Yarkoni are Muslim.
And volunteering in IDF is no joke as one can just get killed anytime. I can say many Israeli from private to officers is positive about IDF.
SAF is universally reviled other than those from commanding corp. Its whereby meritocract give way to rank. Its place whereby white house congregated themselves into special white house unit and serve out luxuriously in recruit and officer phase.
We see there all wayang, pull rank, unjustice and irationalisam and favorism.
Anyone now visiting our unit will realised the staggering amount of people reporting sick to get a vacation or to get kick out from unit.
Officers fail IPPT test.
SAF officers and side by side with foreign counterpart look weak like woman because they are promoted base on their carry ball wayangism skill and not on code of honor or performance.
Soldiers fighting abilities, discipline and fitness dropped. Our elite sowed and get what they deserve.
/PAP is blaming Singaporeans for not producing enough babies and collaborate with the PRs/foreign talents to suppress the wages and reduce the welfare of Singapore citizens, in the hope by suppressing the wage level, ordinary Singapore citizens will be preoccupied with their bread and butter issue and have no time and power to question the rule of the PAP.
The same technique is used in the new CPF life where the interest rate calculation will end up suppressing high interest rate.
PAP increases all our expanses to support the government operations.
The gov operation I believe is one of the top highest in the world.
Do they justify how they spend money. No.
Now they created lots of jobs which end up benefiting the immigrants.
The immigrants convert the money and spent back home.
Hence, there are money that loses in our landscape. Who will suffer.
Is the locally born Singaporean. Thanks to the millionaire in the parliament
that has ant brain.
Burn them is the solution.
lets be honest for once people. We know that there is really only 1 Way out.
Whilst the article on the face of it sounds logical and plausible, the inescapable fact is that the vast majority of Singaporeans, outside of the top 10% to 15%, are no better off today than 20 years ago and it is a fact that the bottom 30% are worse off. This is a direct result of the Government’s economic and social policies.
Common sense says that if the present trend of relying on cheap imported third world labour continues, and there is no sign at all of any shift in policy, foreigners living in Singapore will rise from the current 40% or so to well over 50%. Singaporeans will be economically displaced in their own country, if they have not migrated. The LARGE bottom end of Singapore society ie 30% to 40% will be increasingly worse off financially and socially. This is what is totally unsustainable – eventually whatever is brewing will boil over. This is where the views of Gayle Goh are up the creek – except for scholars and Government ministers of course.
“The Great Crash 1929” by John Kenneth Galbraith
1. The bad distribution of income.
“Whilst the article on the face of it sounds logical and plausible, the inescapable fact is that the vast majority of Singaporeans, outside of the top 10% to 15%, are no better off today than 20 years ago and it is a fact that the bottom 30% are worse off. This is a direct result of the Government’s economic and social policies.”
2. The bad corporate structure.
TH, GIC
3. The bad banking structure
Dirty Money in Singapore?
MAS losing money
4. The dubious state of the foreign balance.
Dirty Money in Singapore?
5. The poor state of economic intelligence
“The unsustainable Singapore model”
Take turn to fill in the list. Wake up and smell the coffee my friends.
You want ideas on export? Simple. Weapons. Once upon a time, SG was the top exporter of land mines. There will always be wars and with so many top brains working in defence institutes, there is always a need for weapons.
SG weapons are already exported to many countries.