Announcement:
The electoral rolls for the next General Elections are now open for inspection. Please go to: http://elections.gov.sg .
By Ng E-Jay
Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam delivered the Budget Statement in Parliament on Monday 22 Feb.
In the opening paragraphs of his budget speech, the Finance Minister acknowledged the vulnerability of Singapore’s export-oriented economy which caused it to suffer a 10% GDP contraction during the most recent recession. However, it is disappointing to note that the budget statement did not mention ways in which Singapore’s economy could be diversified so as to make it less reliant on exports.
Mr Shanmugaratnam said that Budget 2010 aimed at positioning Singapore’s economy to deliver growth based on productivity gains rather than ever expanding use of manpower, as per the Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) recommendations.
Emphasizing the need for transforming our economy and raising worker skills has been a constant refrain of the Singapore government since the late 1970s. The initial success of the government in the early days of nation building was due to the fact that we started off from a low base in terms of worker skills and overall educational level of the workforce. By the late 1990s, growth in productivity had stagnated after a couple of boom decades.
What has the Finance Minister said to convince us that it will be different this time, especially when the proposed measures in Budget 2010 are nothing novel or radical, but are merely variations of what the government is purported to have been doing in recent years?
According to Budget 2010, the government will spend $5.5 billion over the next 5 years on sustained initiatives to help businesses and workers raise productivity. While $5.5 billion may sound like a lot of money, it is just half the amount spent on defence in a single year. It is also a tiny fraction of the amount of money lost by GIC and Temasek during the 2008 financial meltdown. Is the government truly serious about its latest initiatives at raising productivity?
Mr Shanmugaratnam said that the government will support the growth of globally oriented companies including those involved in R&D. While that sounds positive on the surface, the government’s poor track record at picking industry winners casts doubt as to whether it should really be in a position to decide who should succeed or fail.
Very often, the free market makes much better choices compared to a team of ivory-towered bureaucrats. There are also conflicts of interests because many of Singapore’s globally oriented companies are Government-Linked Corporations.
The Finance Minister also acknowledged in his budget statement that reducing the dependence on foreign labour will pay off in higher productivity over the longer term, but impact growth in the short term.
The undesirable outcome of having to deal with reduced growth in the short term could have been avoided had the government calibrated the inflow of foreign workers right from the start, as opposed to waiting till the population had become saturated with foreigners before narrowing the valve. In this instance, the government has shown itself to be reactionary rather than proactive.
The Finance Minister also said that median incomes rose by 20% in real terms from 2005 to 2008, justifying the government’s growth strategy of importing large numbers of foreign workers.
Unfortunately, Mr Shanmugaratnam has neglected to consider the fact that wages at the lower end of the income spectrum are still stagnating. Therefore, contrary to what Mr Shanmugaratnam has said, the government had indeed embarked on a “growth at all cost” model of economic management in recent years, because the growth strategies contributed to larger income disparities and failed to take into account the strain on the social fabric of our nation as a result of uncontrolled population expansion.
The Finance Minister’s proposal for the government to facilitate mergers and acquisitions (M&A) through enhanced tax benefits and waiver of stamp duty on transfer of unlisted shares is disconcerting. M&As are good for an economy only up to a certain extent. While they help weed out companies that are not so competitive, in a small economy like Singapore’s, they also have a tendency to create monopolies that eventually retard productivity growth because of reduced competition and crowding out of smaller players.
The Finance Minister also spoke about nurturing the next generation of business leaders, such as spending money to enhance SPRINGS’s Business Leaders Initiative, which is a grooming programme for young business talents.
In order to successfully groom the next generation of entrepreneurs and risk-takers, the entire educational system has to be overhauled to encourage creativity and innovative thinking. The stigma of failure has to be removed. The stifling political climate which infects the civil service and our educational institutions must also be addressed, because vibrant minds cannot flourish in an oppressive environment. Unfortunately however, the ruling party does not seem to have the political will to make the necessary changes.
The government has made the right decision to focus on productivity and reduce the reliance on unskilled foreign labour. The Finance Minister also made the right connections in asserting that future productivity growth can only come about by a concerted effort by businesses, individuals, and the government.
However unless fundamental issues concerning our educational and political system are addressed, the government will only be able to go so far before it hits a brick wall and has to retrace its steps all over again.
__________
Read the finance minister’s full budget speech here: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/budget2010
_____________________________________________________
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
My biggest concern is whether higher productivity (if successfully achieved) leads to higher wages for the workers.
The govt’s assumption is that higher productivity will automatically lead to better competitiveness for the companies and higher wages for workers. Better competitiveness yes, but I’m not convinced about the higher wages part.
As long as there is availability of cheap foreign workers (since the current local/foreign workers ration is maintained), wages of local workers will continue to be depressed. With higher productivity, it’s just means more bang for the buck for the employers.
PAP Banzai!
“….According to Budget 2010, the government will spend $5.5 billion over the next 5 years on sustained initiatives to help businesses and workers raise productivity. While $5.5 billion may sound like a lot of money, it is just half the amount spent on defence in a single year. It is also a tiny fraction of the amount of money lost by GIC and Temasek during the 2008 financial meltdown. Is the government truly serious about its latest initiatives at raising productivity? ….”
Typical statement to cover their asses. We LOST the productivity drive probably about late 1990s, which kinda coincidental with the drive to import cheap labour. If we had been injecting $5.5 billions into productivity for the PAST 5-10 years, will we be in the situation as now? Will we be at 36% foreign population? Did we used that kind of money feeding GIC/TH instead over the past 10+ years, which Mr T should well know? As always, WHO is responsible for the screwed up lost in productivity for the past 10+ years was not mentioned, only throwing impressive figures like 5.5b hoping to appease the situation and to ”show” people that they are “working”. Such reactive response is akin to the case of MSK escape — only when the bird has flown would they do some damage control. Hate to say, but this kinda job is more for PMET-type people (yeah maybe even FWs), not $-million ministers. And we still don’t understand cost-efficiency??
Last year, the emphasis was on integration foreigners, then around ND it was racial harmony; now it is productivity. For those involved in progress review meetings, if one guy presents a wonderful project he is working on in one meeting, and then another project the following meet (all clearly with recycled materials, data, slogans, etc), then you know that guy is just running in circles – after one year, you can bet there is NOTHING done, only sweet words. If in private sector, there is still the option to boot that fellow out; unfortunately, not in the public sector with ‘meritocratic’ ministers.
A lady went for interview at IR as F&B MANAGER, they can only pay $1500. So what does this mean?
Netizens have been criticising the FT policy is unsustainable.
They are Right!
1. Which 1st World has lower cost FTs like singapore? name me 1.
2. Lower Cost labor cannot be the best labor. This is one of the reasons why this model is not Sustainable. Even a hawker uncle told me that.
3. The ‘preaching’ has been welfare not good idea. Crutch mentality etc.
So, why are SMEs and MNCs given welfare via the recent schemes?
Would this encourage Crutch Mentality?
To survive in business is not so much about getting cheaper labor from policies as much as it is about You the business being able to provide better Serivice or Products. No one owes you your porche businessmen! You should not have Crutch mentality and Expect Welfare by way of labor cost subsidy. Look at 1st worlds in the west. Their labor is most expensive in the world and they do not rely on Cheaper labor you guys relying on at least in their own country in a scale as large as you businessmen are relying.
Therefore, it is proven this model is UN S U S T A I N A B L E!
As a citizen , i am totally Disappointed to learn about flaws or weakness in the policy.
Why ? Because i expect Non Mediocre , that is why.
We do offer the best renumeration don’t we?
This model is proven to be Un Sustainable!
I have lost Confidence in the Non Mediocre.
We do give out the best renumeration in the world right?
Dear Sirs,
A balanced article overall. 2 points, Singapore’s small size makes it unlikely that it can cut its dependence on exports to sustain its economy. The alternatives such as being a financial center, R&D, shipping hub, tourism and so on are already well in place so it is fair to say that the government is doing a great job there. Your comment on “the free market makes much better choices compared to a team of ivory-towered bureaucrats” is ironic given your stance on how the government should regulate property prices.
Welfare is perceived as a ‘Dirty’ Word, for lack of a better word.
We hear about ‘No one owes u a living’.
Why is labor subsidy given to help businesses when this can create a Crutch Mentality in them?
Businesses should not Survive based on subsidies eg job credits.
They should survive based on their Ability to provide Better Services and Products.
Businesses unable to survive without these ‘Welfare’ would not survive anyway . Why waste money on them?
Which 1st world has cheaper labor than sg?
Why other 1st worlds have high class workforce paid highest in the world?
Can cheaper labor be the best?
Is this model Sustainable?
But we expect Non Mediocre.
Year in Year out the same old crap budget…….what has it benefit the commoners ! our lives still miserable, still got to slog like a slave to cope with the high cost with our stagnant or lower salaries.Worst now have to compete with all the papaya foreign PETS TRASH on everything!
paper play on the computer system…nothing is spend or given….hehe
i take issue with the confession that following the abolishment of estate duty, to make up for the loss of tax base, all singaporeans (rich and poor) have to pay property.i see no change
conclusion: no change in the fundamental way of thinking within the PAP elites.
be sparing with the poor, but generous with the rich
you shld vote out PAP if you belong to the middle or low middle group – for your children’s sake!
i take issue with the confession that with the abolishment of estate duty and therefore the loss of tax base, PAP “has to” introduce property tax across the board for the rich and poor.
i see no change in PAP’s fundamental way of thinking: be SPARING with the POOR, but GENEROUS with the RICH
vote out PAP, if you are from middle to low income groups — for your future’s sake!
1. I do not know how the increase in foreign worker levy will “help” lift productivity. Isn’t the increase in foreign worker levy meant to encourage more employers to employ locals ?
2. 3 -tier property tax. - How does this help in addressing the escalating prices in the public housing sector? In the first place, why must anyone living in an HDB flat be made to pay property taxes ?
From what I can see, there are many issues that are already spinning out of control to the extent that if concrete actions are taken to rectify those issues, the consequences will be beyond anyone’s imagination.
I thought the article sounded a tad too positive in the papers today, am glad to see a flipside to the budgets here.
Agree more with the reality check over at TOC. It’s good that the govt’s taking steps to invest in the future and toward more knowledge based economies. But this article shows that it’ll take more than just a few budget allocations to make Singapore something positively different.
I take the most issue with this bunch of leaders providing no inspiration to the people except to try to placate every issue at the surface level just because it is election time.
Our Singapore dream, under the watch of this bunch of rich monkeys, have now become just to find a flat somewhere that’s affordable by locals’ salary levels, buy it, get busy paying for it with both husband and wife’s income for the next 30 yrs.
There’s really no inspiration whatsoever. Maybe it’s true, not having to fight for their place and their disgusting amount of money in politics has taken the spur out of their hides.
I dont understand the crap budget.
I only know that I am jobless and no money to pay my bills.
How can the budget help this group of people like me?
The ministers keep talking about upgrdaing … are they living in the real world ?
They think attending classes, any class will help the skill upgrading. but what core competence do the general polpulation lack ?
A simple MBA is $30K+, takes 24 to 30 months..
A non-grad without a $4K and above salary has no practical means to pursue a degree, afterall the 3 govt subsidised Uni don’t accept “over-age” students, for we have given TOO MANY seats to Foreign talents even for first degree study at the expense of our JC and Poly holders, external degree is costly, means no baby making ( do the authority hear this ?!)
As of now, we can’t us eour hard-earned CPF for self upgrading, I did a post grad that cost me $35K, and I have no kid, while I see my paid taxes gone into offering foreign students, undergrads and PhD study with no bond ( by the way, it is well known that many foreign nationality after graduating from SMU, NUS and NTU simply left Singapore, did govt answer this to tax payers ?)
So, the budget is again another sales pitch before Election, to increase new citizens and ask them to spread across Singapore so to shore up PAP votes is all the budget year by year aimed for.
It is always the budget for those in power ! Not a people’s budget.
alamak,
1. cold rice fry again?
2. how sg people really benefit? when can get the result?
3. how to ensure sg economy do not get hit again?
4. people no job, cpf can use to tide over the current situation? (rather than look at retirement withdrawl)
…………………………………. so many real life queries going on and on
alamak
I dont see how the no property taxes work for houses that worth 65k and below, considering that 2rm costs 130k and studio costs 70k in recent BTO. And many poor ppl stay in 2rm and 3rm flats…so how is that going to help those poor people. It is nothing but a new type of taxation…..when have Singapore stoop so low to tax tax tax the people?
these days, most doctors in govt hospitals are foreigners from third world countries. why limit the number of locals studying for a medical degree in the first place? why makes locals ended up with jobs that are boring and unfulfilling and want them to go for retraining now? this gahmen are very good in making all the wrong policies and then shift the blame to the poor citizens.
The budget failed to address the competition from supposedly less developed countries like China, India. How is higher productivity here going to compete with China’s low costs, huge labour pool, low labour costs and increasing productivity? China and India productivity have much more room for improvement as compared to ours, does the PAP think they will stand still?
Improving productivity here is meaningless because our products are just also-runs, we do not have innovative products of our own. Increasing productivity to produce more of the same will not be able to increase our workers income simply because the demand is limited. Our product/service range is limited. Limited by the IMAGINATION OF THE PAP. Because they decide what Singaporeans ‘Should/Should Not’ do. Or put ‘ROADBLOCKS’ to limit our creativity.
The MILLIONAIRE MINISTERS are BANKRUPT. They do not have any more IDEAS to help us.
VOTE PAP OUT.
@ Amazing singapore
$65k refers to the “annual value” which is linked to rental potential, not market price.
having said that, it is UNREASONABLE to extract property tax from the majority of HDB-dwellers who occupy the flat they have and have no other property assets, because they are not renting out period. moreover, for goodness’ sake, these HDB dwellers do NOT own the HDB flats, they are only leasing from HDB, and they have to pay an enormous sum to lease for 99 years.
property tax for this group of people seems to be like robbing the poor, TWO times.
@howsmartareyou – “Your comment on “the free market makes much better choices compared to a team of ivory-towered bureaucrats” is ironic given your stance on how the government should regulate property prices.”
Really, do we have an ‘open’ market for property, especially the Public Housing? You are obviously quite blind to the OBVIOUS..
Dear theonlinecitizen,
In what way has this article “dissected” the budget?
@Not a HDB lessee
Thanks for clarifying=)
I agree with ur point. We r renting from HDB and do not owe them. So why should we pay property tax for something that would be surrendered? It is unjustified for the gov to give us this tax , it is a mistake from the 1960s and is never corrected.
You know…with the constant talk about upgrading etc…who will be unhappy…locals will now have to do more to get the same old stagnating pay
This all sounds good for the moment – but to really find out whether its can fly or do a swan dive. You really need to go beyond the level of just what the ST has published, with the greatest respect to journalist, they are just journalist, so most of them report very much in the way a camera captures a image – no more or less and usually they capture the most flattering image that only serves to skewer the real picture.
To really find out about the details; one would need to look deep into the innards of the budget i.e how will this be accomplished - for example what does it really mean when the govt says it’s going to spend $5.5 billion over a 5 year period on sustained initiatives to help workers boost productivity? – in what way will this money be disbursed; what is the amortization of rate of disbursement over a period of 5 years is it 20% per year, ,more or less; does it take into account inflation and cost of capital lost? So this is just an illustration of how complex it can be.
For me it is simple. No more taxes, direct or indirect (GST). Give us that and we will be happy – the rest is not important – one good arrow is better than a thousand lousy arrows.
SD
“The stigma of failure has to be removed.”
How the heck can the govt do that? It’s inbuilt into the society.
I agree though, that a RIDICULOUS amount is being spent on defence. Yah I know we need to have a strong army but for pete’s sake.. why so much? Doesn’t the army need to be productive as well?
“A lady went for interview at IR as F&B MANAGER, they can only pay $1500. So what does this mean?”
It means the service sector is not highly scalable (productivity is low); hence wages in the service sector will be lower than the manufacturing sector. Just look at US wage data.
A condition of scarcity of labour especially cheap labour must exist before company are forced to adopt less labour intensive production systems such as automation and mechanization of work processes. ]
The initial capital outlay for automation and mechanization are very much higher to start with and company also face the risk of the products being phasing out due to new product innovation rendering current automation and mechanization irrelevant in future. Government should help to bear part of this risk as another condition to make company comfortable to jump on the bandwagon of automation and mechanization. Budget 2010 only give them tax incentive for their investment on automation and mechanizaton meaning you get the benefit only when your company make profit what about those who do not make profit show government help is half-hearted.
Upgrading the skill of the workers alone do not ensure productivity, it is just shifting the workers role to another role. It is the training of workers to adopt efficient work processes together with the use of new machines, computers, digital equipments that help to increase overall productivity. With new machines and equipments , workers may not need to work long hours to achieve the same or even higher output. With higher output they may enjoy higher pay.
Government should also encourange company to go into robotics technology for long term goal of productivity increment. Probably in the first place , our government should import robots instead of FTs to prop up our GDP that give us less social and sharing of resources problems. They can work 24 hours a day and 365 days a year. Is it excellent!! Let robots do the dirty work, we just become managers of robots, marketeers for new markets and administraors and service providers. All our salary definitely go up and up, right. This may be the future economy to come.
So it has been called a “Productivity” budget.
The govt has over the last few decades, brought in “cheap labor” into the country — lots of them. Now they realize that they had overdone it, much so that our productivity has declined over the years. Now isn’t that a surprise?? What did they expect to get by paying peanuts to an immigrant-workforce that represents one-third of the total? (You get what you pay for!)
So now, we Singaporeans are told that its all our fault for not training and upgrading hard enough. We will now have to pay the price because of it. Where would the money needed to fund these productivity programmes come from, if not from impending (but yet to be announced) money generating activities from the government??
To Budushu, Feb 23, 2010 10:54
“i take issue with the confession that with the abolishment of estate duty and therefore the loss of tax base, PAP “has to” introduce property tax across the board for the rich and poor.”
>>Conspiracy Theory: The MIW abolished the estate duty in 2008 a.k.a. inheritance tax, so that when “the one that shall not be named” left to meet his maker, there is no need to declare the wealth – see so smart. Also, they didn’t mention inheritance tax, and use estate duty…. brilliant choice of English to avoid the “sensitve” topic. However, the abolishment of inheritance tax resulted in loss of “revenue” by the government – recent case is Singapore “No.1″ richest passed away, Ng Teng Fong…. don’t need to pay inheritance tax. Hence, to kill two bird with one stone (recover more money for the government and avoid being chastise for favoring the rich), ta ta… property tax.
let’s see how this will pen out.
Ministers are also human beings and get salaries. soemtimes, they do not think long term.. as long as they can appear to be doing something during their tenure, and when it is time to retire, they would have amassed enough savings.. then it is the next generation who will carry the baby… they don’t really care…
Eg. Goh Chok Tong is now SM… on and off, he will make some speeches but he is supposedly playing an advisory role.. anything goes wrong, not his fault. Meanwhile get handsome salary.
LKY, he keeps saying the running of the government is by the present leaders. He is there to oversee only. Huh ? again another guy who gets handsome $$ but is not accountable to government’s performance.
Jeyakumar – what ? another SM?
So every one is the same. Even the present generation will wayang a show while they are in power. They think that they dance for 5-6 years, then it is over.. it is sucessor’s problems not their problems…
forget it lah, with such mindset and leaders, singapore will surely sink
“The undesirable outcome of having to deal with reduced growth in the short term could have been avoided had the government calibrated the inflow of foreign workers right from the start, as opposed to waiting till the population had become saturated with foreigners before narrowing the valve. In this instance, the government has shown itself to be reactionary rather than proactive.”
Agree.
To me at least, this change is a reflection of the inherent weakness now acknowledged.
Its REACTIVE.
Its not Non Mediocre, according to my standards.
Also, shifting more focus to R&D is easy talk. Implementation is what counts.
I can say i have a project and my objective is to create World Peace.
Everyone would agree and support this idea and no one would say it is a bad idea.
But the implementation is the Reality.
An objective can be anything you say.
R&D thing should have been the focus long long long ago when even a student knows that sg only has human resources from the beginning many decades ago. I acknowledge there was R&D focus long ago. Any country has. Its the Extent.
This sort of situation should have been easily forecasted and prevented IF the Strategy was Proactive Enough.
I see how they change things and frankly, I have lost confidence involuntarily.
Sad.
“Very often, the free market makes much better choices compared to a team of ivory-towered bureaucrats. There are also conflicts of interests because many of Singapore’s globally oriented companies are Government-Linked Corporations.” refers to picking winners and losers, not setting HDB prices.
You’re not very smart, especially at reading the whole paragraph.
After watching much of the budget forum , I have this comment:
1. The invited guests seems to be benefitiaries of the system in one way or another.
2. The invited guests did not include a single Opposition party leader or representative of the 33.3% populace who are unhappy.
3. The invited guests comments are generally speaking majoritily supporting the budget more so than offer constructive criticisms although there was a few rare ‘criticisms’.
a. Its the implementation of the vision. But this is not exactly a Criticism in my dictionary.
b. Will the GST be raised? This is also not a criticism.
Thats it guys, injoy your mo good years and swiss standard to come as well as world cup 20xx as we go into the Golden Arena of Erratic Financial conditions of the world.
Ng E-Jay,
That is a darn good critique of the budget and economic strategy. One more point, we are still on the single assumption of growth, growth and more growth….and we will always be able to keep growing. This assumption is rather optimistic given we had 3 recession and 2 major crisis in the past 10 years. There should at least be some stabilisers in place for contigencies and crisises…which is more important continued growth or stability during crisis. Our economic position is highly vulnerable the last dip was 10%…like a roller coaster ride.
that’s why we need to have labour laws that are fairer to S’poreans to ensure that they benefit from the economic growth and productivity growth.
How can a 1st world achieve 1st world standard with cheaper than 1st world labor?
If got meat, how can labor be cheaper?
Business = GDP = More pay & bonuses.
People = Burden = Whine too much.
What do you think our Lord Sidious prefers?
Why did Melvin tan not invited people who are able to offer Commentaries like E-Jay?
I wonder.
The fear and concern i have is when a leader propose a solution and all his supporters offer more praise than criticism, i wonder what more Value should they have brought to the table?
1) Raising the foreign levy to encourage the employment of foreign workers.
It’s been known for long that this type of policy approach is brutal and weird. for example, raising the ERP to encourage the usage of public transport. Instead of having a positive push (carrot) for us to do something, the policies are often geared towards punishing a certain behaviour, and then pushing the people to choose the other default alternative.
Not only is this type of policy approach brutal (punishing), it also presents itself as a “no choice” situation. Singaporeans are often lured to this false impression that by being punished to choose B, we are “left with” A. This is often not the situation, and besides, the market is then artificially distorted to make A more attractive.
Also, this only targets the construction industry and some blue collar workers. None of the white collar workers’ concerns are addressed. I don’t think Singaporeans are complaining that they can’t work as a construction worker (that’s my humble perhaps erroneous opinion), i think they are complaining that every sector there is cheap labour infiltrating and even though they can be less qualified, they are simply cheaper. Have you ever heard of a cheaper but more well-trained worker? Perhaps, but only in the third-world country. Now even to become a cleaner you have to get training, really? And what’s this certificate good for? Say if I apply to be a cleaner in a developed country, say the UK/US/EU countries, does this give me and advantage from the rest of the applicants? Will it be recognised? No. Fact is, none of these developing countries deprive their citizens to take up menial jobs, they have moved up the ladder and left these jobs alone.
We have moved on, but the government leading the economy doesn’t want to, nor want us to. They failed to create jobs that Singaporeans want and can do.
2) XXX billion to help Singaporeans.
Who are these Singaporeans, you may ask. This budget helps married couples, couples with parents (those with kids but no surviving parents, sorry, no new help over there). What about singles with parents? Worse, how about singles with parents who are jobless (i.e. me?)?
I can see that old folks get so many benefits! Oh, hang on, it’s going into their Medisave! This is like the “subsidy” you get from buying HDB. You get it if you buy HDB at their dictated “market subsidy”. So the old folks have to fall sick, pay exorbitant medical fees just to “enjoy” this huge Medisave pay out, that goes back into government coffers. This money is not in your pocket, btw, it simply appears there but remains in their pockets, but when you use it, it disappears on paper and remains in their pockets. Wow. Cheem.
3) Productivity.
I really forgot about NPB, It used to be this big building near Bt. Merah. After so many years, name changes….we are talking about productivity. Really? After importing massive cheap labour we are talking about productivity? We have well-trained workers here, but companies are so giam siap or ignorant in capital investment, they are also so bad at training their workers (only big companies bother or can “afford” to), that workers are in fact paying these companies to maintain productivity. They are attending classes on their own to be competitive (esp in the IT sector), getting part-time courses, or working OT. Companies have long been leeching on their employees to fatten their bottom line. The weak or lack of labour union has turned a blind eye to this situation. That’s how we end up here, deprived workers trying to live day-to-day and make ends meet, deep in debt and worried about being able to afford children. Now the government is telling us, hey, you not productive enough. There is a Cantonese saying that don’t tell me we have to even 贴埋大床.
Simply put, the 5.5 millions are now used to patch mistake made in previous budget and the result of policies failure? I felt nause listening to people who merry-go-round and do things in trial and error while ignoring that Singaporeans are the one taking in all the shits from the ruling party who are nothing but a bunch of morons.
It pains my ears to hear our government preach the same old tunes over and over again and not come out with something different. Can they not study what other countries are doing to help create their private sector grow and create jobs as discussed in:
http://www.transitioning.org/2009/03/10/helping-private-enterprises-create-jobs-apca/
how come germany with the fewest working hours are considered the most productive? How come Sg ppl that work long hrs are not? Does the gov care to give us an explaination why sg workers who are working for so long, and low pay are not, by their definitions? Is it becos we r working long hrs and not enough pay???
#spirited-centred , Feb 23, 2010 13:57,
Actually there was such an initiative back in (I think) early 1990′s, when it was considered that we had TOO many foreign factory workers then. There was an indicated cap on the percentage of FWs and a scheme to push for automation as alternative. Unfortunately, I think it didn’t pick up per same issues as your first paragraph on funding. Or maybe some smart ass eventually thought that would be too slow & expensive a process & stifle economy growth, and the bright scheme to levy on foreign workers was born. The rest is history as we now know it to be.
I don’t think automation will work this time round because in factories it is quite possible, but now the shift is to the construction & service industries. So frankly, how to automate a brick-layer or a cleaner at hawker centers? “Automation” would probably be more with the financial services, etc.
At best, a road sweeper may be given an “improved” broom and then expected to work at double pace to show some productivity improvements! (Just kidding).
//shibuyume
great comment.
#Amazing singapore, 23 Feb 2010, 14:33
Same reason(s) why President Obama can lead a superpower and win a Noble Prize at one-fifth our PM’s pay — and it ain’t cos others are Cheap, Better, Faster.
I am amazed that the budget totally ignore the plight of underemployed and unemployed PMETs who had been discriminated and displaced by cheaper foreign workers as a result of the government’s liberal foreign worker policy. This group should be given more financial assistance and companies should be given incentives to hire them over ‘foreign talents’. They should also be given full subsidy to attend trainings to upgrade themselves.