President paid annually $2.5million to cut ribbons
-
Boys and girls.
Do your parents reward you when you are obedient? Do your teachers praise you when you do everything you are told to do?
They do. -
Sometimes, you need to whine a bit to make sure certain things are done.Originally posted by Salman:What for you guys whine? Work hard and you too will be rewarded. Whining won't get you anywhere in life man.
cheers -
what hard work did he do as president...learn mandarin, jog along east coast, sit comfortably while watching mediacorp circus act & etc.....Originally posted by Salman:Work hard and gets results first, then ask for a raise. -
That is where you are ignorant.
You gotta first work hard in order to get to where he is.
And the job of a president is not really that easy. You need to get up to date with events and issues and you meet with a lot of people. You basically have no private life. I met with teh wife of president Wee many years ago and she was complaining about Wee's life as president. She said it drives her mad and she kept nagging her husband to quit. -
Yeah, the job of a Singaporean president is more difficult than the US President or Australian Prime Minister to warrant such a high pay?
Singapore's GDP (2005): $131.3b USD
US GDP (2005): $12.37 trillion USD
Australia's GDP (2005): $642.7b USD
Maybe Nathan uses an abacus to count the reserves and therefore uses more time and effort than his foreign counterparts and hence should be paid more.
PAP makes me sick. Grabbing all the money they can while the peasantry suffer, justifying it through "legal" means. I'd be happy to see the day the ruling elite suffer the fate of the guillotine a la Marie Antoinette. -
The point is, you will always be a loser as long as you refuse to work kahrd but spend your energy whining.
-
i presume you are a winner then.Originally posted by Salman:The point is, you will always be a loser as long as you refuse to work kahrd but spend your energy whining.
what are you doing wasting your time with losers here? -
All good efforts should be rewarded with a raise ideally.
But, the reason given for the raise in salary is due to the "good" economic condition.
So, it was not a case of hard work or contribution.
Does your boss give u a raise due to good economic condition ?
I can remember the pay freeze that was imposed during the economic downturn which, in the end, was not rewarded when the company make money.
The people paying the salary dun even sure what did he do to deserve and require that amount of money ?
If his job is to safe-guard the singapore reserve, have he presented the status of the reserve to Singapore or does he know about the reserves in the 1st place ?
If he is just there to cut ribbons and attend charity show at TV station, any MP can do that job for him. -
cos he is still dreamingOriginally posted by dragg:i presume you are a winner then.
what are you doing wasting your time with losers here?
-
Mister Salman is repeating the same thing over and over again...Originally posted by dragg:i presume you are a winner then.
what are you doing wasting your time with losers here? -
I don't whine, I have fun with whiners and encourage them.Originally posted by dragg:i presume you are a winner then.
what are you doing wasting your time with losers here?
You people are great entertainment for me. Thanks -
How much does our President pay in taxes each year?
Anyway, the comparison with the salary of the US president does make our own President's salary seem excessive, especially since the US president holds executive powers while ours perform mainly ceremonial duties. Perhaps we should switch back to acknowledging the Queen of England as our head of state. After all, they are the most value-for-money monarchy in the world. -
mr bush also happens to come from a very very affluent fmily well connected in the political and financial circuit. 400,000 is the "official" salary published but US governmental officials often get much more from other sources.Originally posted by tohyi:According to the Straits Times today parliment increased the Presidents salary by $100k to a new annual salary of $2.5million . Not bad for a guy who spends most of the time cutting ribbions and entertains guest at the Istana Plus he is 'supposed' to keep an eye on the government machinery. Even George Bush does not get paid that much when he has the entire worlds problems on his shoulders! George Bush salary is US$400,000 (S$ 672,000) Are we Singaporean taxpayers getting value for money on the Presidents salary? How does the Minstry of Finance justify such fat cat salaries for mainly ceremonial roles?
-
Hello....
Maybe I could say something a little?
I think, the high salary is to compensate for his high role. He is a head of state. When you say he only cuts ribbons, it doesn't matter, he cuts ribbons in his capacity as a head of state.
Therefore, his salary must be commensurate with his position.
Secondly, when considering renumeration package, an important element must be a perception of 'equity' across the hirearchy and rank-and-file. When MPs, ministers, PM are already earning a lot, the salary of the president must rise in accordance with his higher hirearchy. This principle applies in any organization. You can't imagine a president earning less than a minister, can u?
So if you were to lower that salary of that president, u have to revamp the entire pay scale structure of the civil servant system.
Basically, I think the high renumeration in Singapore civil service is a plus, not a minus instead. It is one of the main tenets of why Singapore can be like it is today.
Regarding 'cutting of ribbon' , this phrase implies a lookdown on his ceremonial roles. Please remember ceremonies and symbolism and national figurehead, these are important part of the overall nation building, as important as the work of a minister or a general. -
The President is exempt from taxes..Originally posted by dakkon_blackblade:How much does our President pay in taxes each year?
Anyway, the comparison with the salary of the US president does make our own President's salary seem excessive, especially since the US president holds executive powers while ours perform mainly ceremonial duties. Perhaps we should switch back to acknowledging the Queen of England as our head of state. After all, they are the most value-for-money monarchy in the world. -
Hmm.. are you implying that if their pay were to be halved, Singapore would not be like it is today? And why should that be so?Originally posted by Li Ka Shing:Basically, I think the high renumeration in Singapore civil service is a plus, not a minus instead. It is one of the main tenets of why Singapore can be like it is today. -
You are correct.
-
Of course.Originally posted by cornyfish2000:Hmm.. are you implying that if their pay were to be halved, Singapore would not be like it is today? And why should that be so?
Because renumeration package is an important element of attracting and retaining capable people. Capable people are the pillars and backbone of any system or organization. It is the most important resource. Human resource. And the efficient, effective, capable civil service is a contributing motor, grease, engine, of the nation's growth.
Singapore will definitely not be like it is today if the civil service pay is low, or halved. But of course this will never ever happen. Singapore is very well managed.
You see.....some people complain about minister's pay or president's pay... but they forgot that it's not a minus, it's a plus instead. They can't see the long term implication. -
Are you implying that most (if not all) of our members of paliament, inclusive of our President Nathan, MM Lee, SM Goh, PM LHL, are in politic for the money?Originally posted by Li Ka Shing:You see.....some people complain about minister's pay or president's pay... but they forgot that it's not a minus, it's a plus instead. They can't see the long term implication.
So all the talk by our politicians (PAP or OP) about wanting to serve the people of Singapore, by participating in the coming election are bull****ing.
I'm interested to know what is the percentage within our 84 MPs in the paliament today as well as many more upcoming new candidates (PAP or OP) dare to state publicly in the media that they are in politic for wanting to serve and improve fellow Singaporean lives, money pay are not an consideration in the first place.
Thereby going on record that if being elected into the paliament in the next election, they will not accept any further increment to their MP allowances for the next 5 or 6 years (until next election), even the government of the day wanted to give a collective raise to them in the future.
Hmmm..... just wondering when the time comes, during the election rally, whether there are journalists who have enough courage in the first place when interviewing all the new and old candidates(PAP or OP), started the interview with this question
"Mr/Ms Politician, firstly, lets start off our interview with this very basic question; ARE YOU PARTICIPATING IN THIS ELECTION FOR WANTING TO SERVE AND IMPROVE OUR FELLOW SINGAPOREAN FIRST?"
Just wondering........ how many of them will answer this question with a firm and convicted YES!
And follow up with action to resist or reject in the paliament, if and when the issue of pay increment for them is to be brought up by the government of the day during their term of service.
Afterall, if our MPs seriously think that today, a $1200 salary for a Singaporean family able to last thru a month, then $13,000 per month of MP allowances should be more than sufficient for them.
Rite or not.............
-
i think, PM, ministers, minister of state, president and cabinets MPs are not civil servants. Not sure about ambassadors.
-
Our leaders copy the private sector of a smaller country to pay themselves $2,000,000.00 per annum for the prime minister and $2,500,000.00 p a for the president.
If US President is to apply this same reasoning, he would probably be worth US$25,000,000.00 per annum or more and could easily cite Singapore's ministers and President pay as precedents.
He can also use the excuse or justification that higher salaries would prevent or avoid corruptions.
Our leaders have from time to time advise the citizens "not to open the Pandora Box" when it comes to welfarism or settings of bad precedents in policy decision.
By making making the salary comparison with the bosses' pays (some are drawing from their own monies in the company investment profits) they are in fact setting bad precedents or "opening up the Pandora Box". There will now be endless comparisons from one sector to the next from public sector to private and private to public sector.
It is very easy to see why the government needs to pay NKF CEO %600,000 per annum as he is copying benchmark salaries artificially pushed up and wrongfully set to the investment profitability pays of bosses by the civil servant and ministers.
The list of salary snowballing to keep up with the ministers' own highly inflated pays goes on and on for all in the civil service and GLC employees some of whom are rewarded for loyalty or connections without competition or assessments of performance by accountable and transparent system.
No wonder SBS with all the civil servants seconded there carrying all the highly inflated pays cannot be competitive and cannot lower their costs and SIA Pilots refused to accept advice to take pay cuts during the recent spat with MM Lee.
Government leaders have always said that they are prepared to debate their polices and problems with robustness or debunk them so to speak. So far when it comes to ministers' salary issue, I don't see that they are able to enter into any robust debates or reply to forumers' posts on such issues. -
some buddhist abbess big on charites died and all the president offerred were some wreaths.....come on lah, donate the pay rise to the charities......
-
The president put the flower there to show his name.
The rest of the pple went there for another purpose.
If not for a destined day, they will be playing golf. -
Singapore Ministers Pay, Legitimised Corruption
Singapore Review, 2 May 2003 (updated May 2005)
By Mellanie Hewlitt
The headlines blared loudly in the 2 May 2003 issues of the Straits Times and Business Times "Pay cut? Ministers ready to lead by example: DPM", announcing to the entire world this selfless act of leadership by Singapore's Ruling Elite.
In what appeared to be an initial move to reduce severely inflated salaries, to more reasonable industry standards, Singapore's Ruling Elite have bowed to public pressure and hinted at accepting a pay cut.
Or have they?
What exactly does "Leading By Example" mean? Lets try to put some substance behind those brave words. As of last count, average take home pay of a Singapore minister was well in excess of SGD100,000/- a month.
The below table puts things back in proper perspective: (these are basic figures as of July 2000 and did not include last year's pay hikes or other benefits. Otherwise the updated numbers may well be much larger)
1. Singapore President's Basic Salary US$1,483,000 (SGD$2,373,100)*a year
Singapore Prime Minister's Basic Salary US$1,100,000 (SGD1,958,000) a year
Minister's Basic: US$655,530 to US$819,124 (SGD1,166,844 to SGD1,458,040) a year
2. United States of America President: US$200,000 Vice President: US$181,400 Cabinet Secretaries: US$157,000
3. United Kingdom Prime Minister: US$170,556 Ministers: US$146,299 Senior Civil Servants: US$262,438
4. Australia Prime Minister: US$137,060 Deputy Prime Minister: US$111,439 Treasurer: US$102,682
5. Hong Kong Chief Executive : US$416,615 Top Civil Servant: US$278,538 Financial Sec: US$315,077
Source: Asian Wall Street Journal July 10 2000 *Singapore President's salary which was updated in 2005 from the Singapore Straits Times
In relative terms, less then 20% of Singaporeans here have take home salaries
exceeding SGD100,000/- A YEAR.
In stark contrast, BASIC SALARY FOR A MINISTER STARTS AT SGD1,166,844 A YEAR,OR JUST UNDER SGD100,000 A MONTH.
What these ministers earns in just ONE MONTH exceeds the ANNUAL TAKE HOME
salary of 80% of Singapore's income earning population. Lets not even begin to compare annual packages which will exceed SGD1 million easily.
With the above numbers and figures now in perspective, it is easier to give substance to the words "leading by example". Several facts are noteworthy here;
a) That the ministerial salaries are grossly out of proportion, even when compared with their counterparts in much larger countries (US and UK) who have far heavier responsibilities.
b) That these salary reductions were long overdue. In the past, such handsome remuneration were "justified" on the back of resounding performance. However, Singapore's economy has been in the doldrums of a recession for several years now (with beginnings reaching as far back as the 1997 Asian economic crisis). This economic barometer is a rough measure of performance and implies that ministerial salaries were due for review at least 3-4 years ago.
c) That adjustments should be made to bring them back within the industry benchmarks. Taking the salary of US vice president as a rule of thumb, the percentage for reductions should start at 50% of current pay. Even if a Singapore minister takes a 50% pay-cut, he would still be earning much more then the US vice president.
d) The percentage reductions should greater then 50% if the intent is to bring the salaries within the perspective of Singapore's domestic scene.
With such inflated figures, it is understandable why the local government controlled media (Singapore Press Holdings) have taken pains to exclude mention of actual numbers for the world to see. The numbers would be too glaring and no amount of window dressing or creative writing could have reconciled these numbers with a sane figure and restored credibility.
Also relevant is the question whether such highly paid million dollar ministers can ever relate to the plight of the average man on the street. The remarks of Mrs Goh Chok Tong, that a SGD600,000/- per annum salary (of NKF CEO) is PEANUTS, is a harsh reflection of the real mind-sets, priorities and values of Singapore's million dollar ministers. And it is these same million dollar elitist bureucrats who will shape and determine public policies which will touch on the daily lifelihoods of every Singaporean.
It is unlikely that Singapore's Ruling Elite will accept such huge salary cuts. Exactly How much and when the ministerial pay-cuts takes effect is not revealed. Ask any man on the street and 9 out of 10 responses indicate many agree the current ministerial salaries are grossly inflated, especially in these lean and difficult times.
Said a long time forumer from an internet political chat group:
"First of all the Ministers are NOT leading on pay cut. Workers' salaries have been drastically reduced since the beginning of the recession while thousands have been unemployed. so the Ministers are NOT LEADING. they are only CATCHING UP. And they have several decades to catch up on."
"Secondly, how much of a pay cut will Ministers take? 10%? 20%? unless its a cut that will affect their lifestyles, it is merely symbolic and they would still not know what it feels like to be a normal worker. as such, this is not Leading by Example. Its just another bogus political propaganda stunt"
A 29 yr old executive who requested to remain anonymous admitted sheepishly ; "The numbers (ministerial salaries) are a national embarrassment really, because it reflects the underlying materialistic value systems of Singapore Ministers. No matter how you look at it, the fact remains that our ministers are money faced, and these are supposed to be Singapore's leaders, with value systems that Singaporeans should follow." "It (the ministerial salaries) puts Singapore in a bad light in the eyes of the world. The rest of Singaporeans really put in an honest days work for every penny they earn. And the process for review and approval of the ministerial salaries is also a joke. Imagine sitting on the board and approving (on White Paper)your own salary increments! Its all a wayang show".
This also raises the question as to the authenticity of the actual process for review and approval of cabinet minister's salaries. Who decides on these numbers? Is there independence and transparency?
Veteran opposition figure J.B. Jeyaretnam on Wednesday, Nov 20, 2002 challenged Singapore government ministers to take a pay cut to show they understand the economic hardships faced by the public. And the over-riding concern is that Singapore's Ruling Elite are unable to appreciate the economic hardship that the masses face in these tough times.
The growing public resentment comes afew months after PM Goh's careless comments that "lay-offs were not all bad", drew a backlash from the public with a flood of e-mails being sent to the foreign press to register public indignation.
It is a revelation that when the "paycuts" were finally effected they amounted to a miniscule 10% haircut from the massively bloated ministerial salaries.
It is also a revelation that barely a year later (in June 2004) the bloated ministerial salaries were restored and increased beyond their original levels even as the rest of Singapore was still struggling in the throes of a recession. (There were no CPF restorations for the rest of working Singaporeans).
Source Sg_Review group
Singapore Review welcomes honest feedback on this hotly debated topic. You can Send your comments to the editor: [email protected] -
From: Julie Rogers
To: Singapore Review
27 October 2004
Does Inequality Make You Sick? S'pore ministers salaries
Hi, I pondered over Catherine Lim's article "PAP and the people: A return of
disaffection?"
(see: http://www.singapore21.org.sg/art_disaffection.html#debate1)
Until recently I knew next to nothing about Singapore so it is a revelation
that my first introduction to this little speck is through various discussions
on the internet about Ministerial Salaries.
Quite frankly I am rather appalled by the fact that ministers in your country
can earn upwards of USD 1 million. Any officer of the state is a
public servant and this was a once noble and honourable calling. In the
civilised world, persons assume this office because they want personally to
contribute to the well being of the country. Self sacrifice and altruism are
essential hallmarks for a public office holder and the minister must be ready
and willing to make these personal sacrifices.
If the heart is not in this noble service, then it will be wasted effort.
Money should not be an issue at all and if it is, then your "elected leaders"
have very ill-placed priorities and are obviously in it for the wrong reasons.
Even if we were to overlook the misplaced financial motives of your ministers,
the sheer gulf in income disparity between ministerial salaries and those of
the working class will create a huge irreconcilable dichord and disenchantment
with any normal voting public. (A valid point in Catherine Lim's article)
But I am told that Singapore is a democracy with elected leaders! So I have to
assume that Singapore must have a very unique "voting public" which is able to
silently and willingly take all this in their stride. Singaporeans should take
note here that Who they vote for and who they elect is a reflection of their
own core value systems and the undeniable fact remains that Singaporeans have
elected a group of Leaders who are eminently pre-occupied with escalating their
on salaries.
I for one will never be able to accept this unequal state of affairs if ever it
was my lot. And thank goodness it isn't for I will never be able to sleep
soundly at nights knowing that the fate, future and well being of my country
are in the hands of a bunch of financially motivated hired mercenaries.
Below is a further write-up of some of the social ills that a huge income
disparity can create. There is an old saying that the most efficient form of
governance is a Monarchy, but this assumes the Monarch has the same priorities
and agenda as the people he rules. Is this the case with Singapore's Monarchy?
I repeat that who you elect is a mirror image of your own core values and
Singaporeans have to ask themselves whether their current leaders who require
million dollar salaries to be in office, have the same value systems as the
voters who elected them.
Lastly, I have also copied in Guniess World of Records to see if this unique
feature of your country will earn it a place in the world record books.
Julie Rogers