Money Culture
-
Are our Generation Y so money-minded?
littlespeck.com
Money culture
Spreading to the young
Affluence has its side-effects as Singaporeans discover. By Seah Chiang Nee.
Jun 27, 2005
A PRE-TEEN pupil offered $1 to his classmate to do his homework. Another gave his friend 10 cents as a tip to buy canteen food for him.
These Generation Y tales told to me by a mother over lunch recently touch on one of Singapore's maladies after years of affluence.
This wealth has given Singaporeans a good life but has also moulded a lopsided view that money is a quick fix for all problems.
But these schoolboy horror stories have been around for decades.
In the early years, even when Singapore was less wealthy, some students in elite schools were known to flash Rolex watches, Gucci bags and other branded goods.
Dr Tony Tan, the current deputy prime minister, once spoke of a spoiled brat who burned a $5 bill to show off how "successful" his parents were, and his friend promptly replied by torching a $50 note.
Since then, of course, the school involved had banned students from bringing or wearing to school any branded watch, pen, shoes, or more than $50 in cash.
Some time ago, a friend told me his son had come home one day complaining about his pitiful pocket money after being shown a classmate's birthday present from his father.
It was a $200,000 deposit in the 12-year-old's Post Office Saving Bank (since taken over by DBS Bank) account.
The stereotype of youth is someone who knows the price of everything but the value of none. It is, of course, exaggerated and hardly fair since he lives in his parents' mould.
The rapid transformation from Third to First World has created an attitude towards money more profound than in many other comparable cities.
"If you have a problem, just throw money at it and it will go away" seems to be a viewpoint that has been passed on to the young generation.
To an extent, it has distorted society. People often see money as a quick fix for all problems.
Take the case of nine-year-old Jeremy Tio, who was lost for three nights recently in Fraser's Hill with his three Malaysian cousins.
When he was found, he emotionally hugged his rescuer and said, "I love you."
But he revealed his Singaporean upbringing when he told his Malaysian rescuers, "If I give you money, can you take me home?"
His gracious rescuer Rapi Bata replied: "No need to pay us. We are here to help you."
This episode raised concern at the direction in which Singaporeans are being raised. Very few people blame Jeremy for the remarks because of his age and the severe fatigue he was under.
But spoken so matter-of-factly by one so young, it has placed the whole society, the education system and his parents under the critical spotlight.
One Internet writer said, "It belies a very serious problem with our society at large. From such a young age, little Jeremy knows the power of money."
Another cynical response: "Can't blame little Jeremy. He is only money-minded, that's all. This is a true blue Singaporean. Money talks every time. I think Jeremy will be an exemplary Singaporean when he grows up. He appreciates the value of money."
Others were less judgmental, pointing out his tender age. One defended him, "When you're cold, hungry, desperate, afraid ... would you will still be thinking straight?"
But the general view is: "He thinks money can solve everything or it can make people work!"
It flows down from the highest level of leadership, which has long used money as a weapon to fight corruption. Singapore's Cabinet ministers (and senior civil servants) are among the world's most highly paid.
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew often says that giving high salaries to government ministers and officials is the best way to keep graft at bay.
Even a junior minister in Singapore earns more than $1mil a year, with the Prime Minister and other senior leaders making at least twice the amount. By comparison, the US President earns US$400,000 or about S$700,000.
Several years ago, the son of one of Singapore's billionaires said in a public speech that "greed is good" because it served as a builder of human enterprise and wealth.
He is evidently not the only businessman to think in this way. A rising number of executives of publicly listed companies do more than just think; they are facing fraud or corruption charges in court.
The money culture is spreading but not every one is against it. In the name of pragmatism and reality, some support the principle that "if you want good service, you pay for it".
Want Olympic winners? Give a $1mil reward. In some charity bodies, $3 out of every $10 you contribute may end up as commissions to professional collectors.
Thank goodness we have not reached America's level of money-mindedness - yet! We don't have to tip our taxi-drivers or anyone just to make a dinner booking, but for how long?
Under a headline: "Tipping culture key to better service" a Straits Times columnist suggested recently we should go the US way.
Many American restaurants, she said, have a habit of assigning one server to each party of guests, and he tends to provide good exclusive service because he knows he will get a 15-20 per cent tip.
Needless to say, her idea to do it here hasn't been greeted with any overwhelming enthusiasm.
What the society needs is less talk of 'Want good service? Pay me well!' -
shan liang bu zhen xia liang wai......
PAP = Pay And Pay -
When LKY told the Malaysian PM during a recent visit: "You should pay more monies to your ministers to avoid corruptions", Premier Badawi was reported to have told him: "In Malaysia, we believe our ministers must have integrity"
So far LKY was tongue-tied and lost for words...Malaysian PM was right: He has implied in such a reply that the Malaysian Ministers have integrity, how about you or your Ministers LKY?
Money is not everything but our politicians who proclaimed confucianism have made monies in Singapore into everything. Finally after 40 years of taking monies from the people, government is rich and people become poor.
That is where the problem is with Singapore ministers : They all believe in taking as much monies as possible even though they already have taken enough over the past 40 years.
Hail to the money worshipping minsters. They will do well while people suffer. -
If the Ministers are all money minded and the newspapers are money minded, how do you expect Generation Y not to be money minded ?
By the time when they are out to work, the inflation rate will kill them.
So, they are just making good foundation of earning income to path a way for their $$$ intensive future. -
if malaysian ministers have integrity abdullah wont be going all out trying to fight corruption.Originally posted by robertteh:When LKY told the Malaysian PM during a recent visit: "You should pay more monies to your ministers to avoid corruptions", Premier Badawi was reported to have told him: "In Malaysia, we believe our ministers must have integrity"
So far LKY was tongue-tied and lost for words...Malaysian PM was right: He has implied in such a reply that the Malaysian Ministers have integrity, how about you or your Ministers LKY?
Money is not everything but our politicians who proclaimed confucianism have made monies in Singapore into everything. Finally after 40 years of taking monies from the people, government is rich and people become poor.
That is where the problem is with Singapore ministers : They all believe in taking as much monies as possible even though they already have taken enough over the past 40 years.
Hail to the money worshipping minsters. They will do well while people suffer. -
Petty corruptions do happen everywhere. Our press and media under government control certainly have highlighted all the petty corruptions occurring in various poor countries to serve the purpose of our political control.Originally posted by dragg:if malaysian ministers have integrity abdullah wont be going all out trying to fight corruption.
There are many least corrupted countries as published in annual authoritative sources without blowing all the trumpet like we always see our leaders do for obvious political control purpose.
The worse form of corruptions not published is the legal taking of self-approved salaries and disproportionate bonuses as well as the life-long so-called annuities to be given to politicians after two terms of office.
Our politicians do not have to be corrupted by taking a few thousands under-table. They only need to go to parliament to approve without regard of citizens' disapproval disproportionately high salaries and superannuated pay packages amounting to S$1,000,000,000.00 (annual annuities at two-third of last drawn pays of 100 retiring MPs and ministers for 25-30 years) at a conservative estimate. Singaporeans will have to work very hard to pay for all the ministers and MPs despite their taking above-market salaries even after they have stopped service.
So which system is more corrupted - self-taking of high pays from public coffers or sensationalised so-called occasional corruptions.
Malaysians will not have to pay every years and for the life time of the politicians this kind of monies which is most improper and without consideration of morality or integrity.
By the way, many other countries are being run in more accountable manner and do not have to resort to taking own pays in such self-approved manner. Yet they are listed consistently higher than Singapore on the corruption-free indices. Our corruption cases involving large sums of monies not only affected the civil service but the ministers some of whom are still not brought to book.
The Malaysian way of rewarding bumiputra business dealings should not be regarded as corruptions but part of the political system typical of their particular nation building. So one should be clear and not compare without basis too. Singapore should compare the pays of all politicians to that of US or UK and see who are taking more monies.
Monies taken by politicians in an unilateral manner is incorrect and morally decadent equal to corruption in another sense except that it can be said to be following proceedings of parliamment. To thinking people this is not right. So how can our leaders talk about building a corruption-free society? -
During my army time, I was offered $50 bucks to exchange duty from a weekday to a weekend.
Of course, I did not take it, during army time, weekend is worth more than $50 bucks!
-
Well lets be realistic. . . .money is important . . . but not at the expense of your character . . . .but the opposite holds true too . . . .things in life is sometimes worth more than wu mao qian . . . .we must look much furthur in life . . .
-
-
i do agree that our ministers are overpaid.Originally posted by robertteh:Petty corruptions do happen everywhere. Our press and media under government control certainly have highlighted all the petty corruptions occurring in various poor countries to serve the purpose of our political control.
There are many least corrupted countries as published in annual authoritative sources without blowing all the trumpet like we always see our leaders do for obvious political control purpose.
The worse form of corruptions not published is the legal taking of self-approved salaries and disproportionate bonuses as well as the life-long so-called annuities to be given to politicians after two terms of office.
Our politicians do not have to be corrupted by taking a few thousands under-table. They only need to go to parliament to approve without regard of citizens' disapproval disproportionately high salaries and superannuated pay packages amounting to S$1,000,000,000.00 (annual annuities at two-third of last drawn pays of 100 retiring MPs and ministers for 25-30 years) at a conservative estimate. Singaporeans will have to work very hard to pay for all the ministers and MPs despite their taking above-market salaries even after they have stopped service.
So which system is more corrupted - self-taking of high pays from public coffers or sensationalised so-called occasional corruptions.
Malaysians will not have to pay every years and for the life time of the politicians this kind of monies which is most improper and without consideration of morality or integrity.
By the way, many other countries are being run in more accountable manner and do not have to resort to taking own pays in such self-approved manner. Yet they are listed consistently higher than Singapore on the corruption-free indices. Our corruption cases involving large sums of monies not only affected the civil service but the ministers some of whom are still not brought to book.
The Malaysian way of rewarding bumiputra business dealings should not be regarded as corruptions but part of the political system typical of their particular nation building. So one should be clear and not compare without basis too. Singapore should compare the pays of all politicians to that of US or UK and see who are taking more monies.
Monies taken by politicians in an unilateral manner is incorrect and morally decadent equal to corruption in another sense except that it can be said to be following proceedings of parliamment. To thinking people this is not right. So how can our leaders talk about building a corruption-free society?
corruption is rampant in our neighbouring countries, propaganda or otherwise. we are now in the internet age. everyone can go online for the 'truth'. there is also no denying that there are many countries consistently ranked above us whom does not pay astronomical salaries. -
When I was in primary school, I used to catch spider and sell them at $0.50 each. Some said I was money minded; others said I am a entrepauner. Each coin has both sides, depending on how you look at it.
-
When In primary school, I used to sell cards at high prices to my school mates...I made quite a bundle and some people started calling me a conner.
