Should Singapore subsidise medical care?
-
When i went Japan, I was touched by the Japan's Healthcare system. The lower income group in Japan pays only $180 of national insurance a year and it would cover 70% of you medical bills. Despite subsidies, their standard of medical care is very high, probably higher than Singapore.
We are not discussing about those fake subsidies like HDB,NKF or transport companies buying disel at bulk discount and claiming to be giving subsidies from market rate. This topic is about real subsidies
Should subsidies be given to health care? Will giving subsidies lead to an inefficient health care system like the British? Will giving healthcare subsidies lead to citizens demanding more subsidies from the goverment? What is the point of building a huge reserves if the money cannot be used to benefit the people? Or should huge reserves be only used to benefit the civil service and civil servants with posh office, posh furniture and high salaries?
Your opinions please forumites -
Compare apple with apple lah. How much tax they pay? How much tax we pay? I think we pay lesser tax than them lor. That's why the lower income groups can get more subsidize.
Do you mind paying more tax to get more subsidized healthcare system? British tax is much larger than us. That's why they can afford to have free healthcare. -
Before sweeping statements are made, please review the information that is freely available and accessible through the internet search engines and get more free information on the subject of the Japanese Tax System.Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:Compare apple with apple lah. How much tax they pay? How much tax we pay? I think we pay lesser tax than them lor. That's why the lower income groups can get more subsidize.
Do you mind paying more tax to get more subsidized healthcare system? British tax is much larger than us. That's why they can afford to have free healthcare.
You will be surprised that the manner in which the Japanese Government has planned its Tax System allows it to be more effective when compared to the burdensome tax systems of most European and Scandinavian countries, and the USA - all of which are well known for its high tax rates and freely available health and social security benefits.
The Japanese Tax system is not punative in its DIRECT Personal and Corporate Income Tax, nor in its INDIRECT Tax schemes covering a whole host of consumption tax, inheritance tax, stamp duties, and with exemptions even granted on domestic transaction of assets.
The Japanese Tax system does not take the wealth created by its Citizens, and instead the Japanese Treasury accumulates its huge surplus from the incentive rated tax on Corporate EXPORT earnings.
Despite a comparably lower tax burden on its Citizens, the Japanese tax revenue still allow the Government to provide a social medical and health plan that is comparable to that offered by other industrilaised countries.
Singapore Tax System seems low but allows the Government to accumulate its large annual surplus from a whole string of INDIRECT TAX collected across a wide spectrum of economic and social activities that are not exempted from this large tax net.
Despite huge annual tax revenue surplus, our social, medical and health system is available at a punitive cost to the Citizen that can wipe out one's accumulated assets.
The Singapore Social, medical and health system remains unsophisticated and is dependent entirely on direct accumulated personal cash savings in CPF and personal bank accounts, with no Government program to create any kind of endowment fund to support this essential services needed by Singaporeans.
It will be interesting for you to read a January 2006 report that " High Taxes Do Not Hinder Competitiveness - it is the QUALITY and EFFICIENCY of Government EXPENDITURES that will have a DIRECT IMPACT on competitiveness "
Is our current lack of supposed competitiveness due to the inefficiency of the Singaporean workers, or is it due to the inefficient use of expenditures by the Singapore Government.
For more information, click on the following:
Japanese Tax System
Singapore Tax System
High Taxes Do Not Hinder Competitiveness -
Quote : According to the publication, the real 'engines' of competitiveness are, however, science, technology, entrepreneurship, finance, logistics and education. "A Science Culture plays a central role. In the end, science, supported by education, is at the core of competitiveness for a nation."
Taxes still matter as a production cost and are one of the reasons why companies relocate abroad. "The real impact of taxes is, thus, on job creation or destruction," underlines the book. A higher cost of business can, however, be in part compensated by improving the "ease of doing business". The simplicity of the tax system seems thus as important as the level of taxation. "In this regard, a simpler flat tax system may be more valuable in the long run than a complex low tax regime," indicates the WCY.
Singapore is still very dependent on manufacturing, while countries like Australia are not. Therefore it is wrong to say that High taxes do not hinder competitiveness -
If our government would to provide free healthcare to all Singaporeans, I am quite sure that all government clinic and hospital will run out of staffs because all the kiasu and kiasi singaporeans will see the doctor every other day, to collect free medicine, and free consultation.Originally posted by Calvin86:When i went Japan, I was touched by the Japan's Healthcare system. The lower income group in Japan pays only $180 of national insurance a year and it would cover 70% of you medical bills. Despite subsidies, their standard of medical care is very high, probably higher than Singapore.
We are not discussing about those fake subsidies like HDB,NKF or transport companies buying disel at bulk discount and claiming to be giving subsidies from market rate. This topic is about real subsidies
Should subsidies be given to health care? Will giving subsidies lead to an inefficient health care system like the British? Will giving healthcare subsidies lead to citizens demanding more subsidies from the goverment? What is the point of building a huge reserves if the money cannot be used to benefit the people? Or should huge reserves be only used to benefit the civil service and civil servants with posh office, posh furniture and high salaries?
Your opinions please forumites
IMO, Singapore is still too inmature for such thing -
They (govt) over priced the land cost, administration and dirty accounting methods with inflated figures to claim these subsidies to singaporeans.Originally posted by Gazelle:If our government would to provide free healthcare to all Singaporeans, I am quite sure that all government clinic and hospital will run out of staffs because all the kiasu and kiasi singaporeans will see the doctor every other day, to collect free medicine, and free consultation.
IMO, Singapore is still too inmature for such thing
How much is sg govt subsidising on NKF??? with a piece of small land at kim Keat........That land belongs to us, singaporeans OK.....Wake up man...PAP.. -
Let not talk about land cost lah. If there is no demand, price will not go up. honestly we only have ourselves to blame. Singapore are kiasu and thats why some HDB flat can cost 700K in Bishan and COE can hit 100K+.Originally posted by Lowclassman:They (govt) over priced the land cost, administration and dirty accounting methods with inflated figures to claim these subsidies to singaporeans.
How much is sg govt subsidising on NKF??? with a piece of small land at kim Keat........That land belongs to we singaporeans OK.....Wake up man...PAP..
Like I say, Singapore is not a country will you can give our freebies to the people. They will be the one that is going to destroy it. -
You are wrong...our HDb flat value had shot up was due the govt had allowed Hong Konger whom got PR here and speculated the public housing market during 1992 to 1997.Originally posted by Gazelle:Let not talk about land cost lah. If there is no demand, price will not go up. honestly we only have ourselves to blame. Singapore are kiasu and thats why some HDB flat can cost 700K in Bishan and COE can hit 100K+.
Like I say, Singapore is not a country will you can give our freebies to the people. They will be the one that is going to destroy it. -
Let me tell you...the cost land are mostly held by the GLC or GIC in controlling of the price. Tell me why so many vacant factories amd warehouses in industries park..why Technopark at Alexandra is only about slight over 50% occupied?Originally posted by Gazelle:Let not talk about land cost lah. If there is no demand, price will not go up. honestly we only have ourselves to blame. Singapore are kiasu and thats why some HDB flat can cost 700K in Bishan and COE can hit 100K+.
Like I say, Singapore is not a country will you can give our freebies to the people. They will be the one that is going to destroy it. -
Originally posted by Lowclassman:
I would rather the land be held by GLCs than some foreign developers that come here to make quick bucks and leave the country. And if the GLCs dont own the land, I can bet that 50% of singapore land will be own by Hong Leong, and Far East Organization.
Let me tell you...the cost land are mostly held by the GLC or GIC in controlling of the price. [b]Tell me why so many vacant factories amd warehouses in industries park..why Technopark at Alexandra is only about slight over 50% occupied?[/b]
As for empty factory and warehouse, that is simply the nature of business. they come and they go. Some companies make wrong decision, the mismanaged, and they relocate. You cant put all the blame on land cost alone. Why so many empty warehouses? you should ask the developers. They bid for the land and they build it. -
Who are the developers of those Industries Parks? how many belong to private? Tell me... You mean people made wrong choices and mismanaged? You think investors are stupid and who had been listening and encouraged by sg govt to come into spore?Originally posted by Gazelle:I would rather the land be held by GLCs than some foreign developers that come here to make quick bucks and leave the country. And if the GLCs dont own the land, I can bet that 50% of singapore land will be own by Hong Leong, and Far East Organization.
As for empty factory and warehouse, that is simply the nature of business. they come and they go. Some companies make wrong decision, the mismanaged, and they relocate. You cant put all the blame on land cost alone. Why so many empty warehouses? you should ask the developers. They bid for the land and they build it.
Are you saying pap govt is god and have no fault?
The way you putting in your statement is very contradicting. -
What makes you think the the industrial parks will be better off if it is privately managed?Originally posted by Lowclassman:Who are the developers of those Industries Parks? how many belong to private? Tell me... You mean people made wrong choices and mismanaged? You think investors are stupid and who had been listening and encouraged by sg govt to come into spore?
Are you saying pap govt is god and have no fault?
The way you putting in you statement is very contradicting.
Yes, many businessman in Singapore do make wrong decision and a classic example are logistic companies.
PAP do make mistake, but if you consider limited supply of land, I think it is better to let the government manage it then to let private companies ruin it.
Further it is easier for the gov to manage the cost since they are in control of it. -
Did I say industries parks will be better if managed privately?Originally posted by Gazelle:What makes you think the the industrial parks will be better off if it is privately managed?
Yes, many businessman in Singapore do make wrong decision and a classic example are logistic companies.
PAP do make mistake, but if you consider limited supply of land, I think it is better to let the government manage it then to let private companies ruin it.
Further it is easier for the gov to manage the cost since they are in control of it.
One word that I describe our govt. Freaking govt!!!!!!! -
i'm of the opinion that if we can increase the supply of doctors, then the price of seeing a doctor would diminish. there is currently a quota on the number of doctors that can be trained locally each year. if this number can be increased, it should help to alleviate our health costs.
i'm also wondering if it would be possible to separate the MBBS course into two courses - a medicinal bachelor degree and a bachelor of surgery degree. we can train a larger pool of medicinal bachelors to serve in the clinics and the better ones can continue on with the surgery degree to become a full fledged doctor. -
Maybe you should be saying EVERY goverment is a freaking goverment simply becos there is no PERFECT goverment on this earth. Every single of them are always subjected to "ABUSE" by their people in one way or another.Originally posted by Lowclassman:One word that I describe our govt. Freaking govt!!!!!!! 
-
Japanese ciitzens still have to pay 30% for the medical fees despite national insurance. You are jumping into the assumption that subsidies means 100%. If the subsidy level is set at a reasonable level, it is less likely to be abused.Originally posted by Gazelle:If our government would to provide free healthcare to all Singaporeans, I am quite sure that all government clinic and hospital will run out of staffs because all the kiasu and kiasi singaporeans will see the doctor every other day, to collect free medicine, and free consultation.
IMO, Singapore is still too inmature for such thing -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
While you are correct in your views held, the article is a report from the World Competitiveness Yearbook had also indicated that "In the end, science, supported by education, is at the core of competitiveness for a nation".
Quote : According to the publication, the real 'engines' of competitiveness are, however, [b]science, technology, entrepreneurship, finance, logistics and education. "A Science Culture plays a central role. In the end, science, supported by education, is at the core of competitiveness for a nation."
Taxes still matter as a production cost and are one of the reasons why companies relocate abroad. "The real impact of taxes is, thus, on job creation or destruction," underlines the book. A higher cost of business can, however, be in part compensated by improving the "ease of doing business". The simplicity of the tax system seems thus as important as the level of taxation. "In this regard, a simpler flat tax system may be more valuable in the long run than a complex low tax regime," indicates the WCY.
Singapore is still very dependent on manufacturing, while countries like Australia are not. Therefore it is wrong to say that High taxes do not hinder competitiveness
[/b]
Its first statement that it is the quality and efficiency of expenditures that determines the economic competitiveness of a country - and such quality expenditures in education certainly is correct and true to its first premise taken.
It also recognise that "The real impact of taxes is, thus, on job creation or destruction" - and also to the fact that "A higher cost of business can be in part compensated by improving the ease of doing business. The simplicity of the tax system seems thus as important as the level of taxation - a simpler flat tax system may be more valuable in the long run than a complex low tax regime " .
The report also indicated that there is "no clear co-relation between a country's total tax pressure and its overall competitiveness or growth rate seems to exist. Despite the high taxation (above 40 per cent of GDP), Finland, Denmark and Luxembourg rank among the top ten in competitiveness while Estonia, Ireland, the Slovak Republic and the US had excellent growth rates with much lower taxes (25-34 per cent of GDP ) .
Singapore manufacturing sector is largely export oriented which is supported by a very liberal tax regimes towards costs and revenues earned.
The impact of high taxes - if any exist - has no direct bearing to the manufacturing sector in Singapore. -
Let not talk about so far away countries. Take malaysia as comparison. Malaysia and singapore has similiar tax rate and similiar tax system. One of the best of malaysia government is keeping the GH as a real public hospital for the public which everyone can afford. Those who are rich can go private by paying higher. But in spore, the GH has already cost close to private hospital rate. Please GH is for the people and not to make $$$ out of it.
Normal sickness will cost only RM1 ~ RM5 with lots of medicine and will heal within one visit.
We dont need "World Class" general hospital with World Class exp rates.
Take NKF for example, they make the dialysis center so high quality and patient are paying the price of quality. Those who really poor and cant afford will have to sit and wating for dead. -
honestly you should be thankful that we have a good medical facilities here. many people from neighbouring countries actually travel to Singapore just to get medical treatment.Originally posted by LittleTiger:Let not talk about so far away countries. Take malaysia as comparison. Malaysia and singapore has similiar tax rate and similiar tax system. One of the best of malaysia government is keeping the GH as a real public hospital for the public which everyone can afford. Those who are rich can go private by paying higher. But in spore, the GH has already cost close to private hospital rate. Please GH is for the people and not to make $$$ out of it.
Normal sickness will cost only RM1 ~ RM5 with lots of medicine and will heal within one visit.
We dont need "World Class" general hospital with World Class exp rates.
Take NKF for example, they make the dialysis center so high quality and patient are paying the price of quality. Those who really poor and cant afford will have to sit and wating for dead. -
"there is no free lunch"
"we cannot afford a deficit"
"we will be sending a wrong impression to singaporeans and our investors"
"singaporeans should do their part and help poorer singaporeans"
which template you want? please choose!!! -
I disagree with this kind of arguments. It kills all form of discussion about improving Singapore. Making frequent comparisons with places like africa,indonesia vietnam, leaves no room for any debate in Singapore because we are better than them in many ways. Why not compare with Finland or Denmark since Singapore ministers are drawing world class salaries?Originally posted by Gazelle:honestly you should be thankful that we have a good medical facilities here. many people from neighbouring countries actually travel to Singapore just to get medical treatment.
There are a lot of other debate-killing arguments from the goverment like - "Join politics if you want to debate" or "take action and join community work before you debate". These are senseless arguments because not everyone can be a politician or allocate time to community work because some jobs require 7 days a week commitment. But it doesnt mean they do not have a right to say how they wish their immediate enviroment to be run. -
Originally posted by Gazelle:
Yes, we "should be thankful that we have a good medical facilities here" - but at what price to ourselves in having the facilities and benefiting from it ?
honestly you should be thankful that we have a good medical facilities here. many people from neighbouring countries actually travel to Singapore just to get medical treatment.
The Government has already seen the competition in the Health and Medical Sector that neighboring countries are building to also cater to the poor standards of some of our neighboring countries.
Thailand is now reputed to pose the most serious challenge against us, with similar high quality facilities that are linked with similar joint co-operation with VERY WELL KNOWN medical research and hospitals from the USA.
Thailand has been able to offer the same high quality medical and health care at a much lower costs than the same facilities in Singapore - with the facilities in Thailand being owned by PRIVATE enterprises, compared to the facilities that are owned by the Government but misleadingly made to look "PRIVATISED" to justify the higher charges.
Direct and Indirect Taxes in Singapore has become a burden to Singaporeans, and have allowed the Government to collect windfall annual surplus that are not effectively spent for the benefit of Singaporean - in a manner that make the "quality of LIFE" better and allowing for a safe nest egg during retirement.
How often have we heard that the majority of those growing old will have to DOWNGRADE, selling their present HDB homes so as to be able to live out their old age ?
How did this come about, if not for the high cash outlay to pay for the high cost of living and services - that are caused by the manner in which the Government imposed direct and indirect taxes, ineffective manner in spending the taxes for high cost services to the citizens, which require the citizens to pay for the high costs - all of which deplete the Citizens bank and CPF account. -
True!!! many people are going to china and thailand to medical and surgery.Originally posted by Atobe:Yes, we "should be thankful that we have a good medical facilities here" - but at what price to ourselves in having the facilities and benefiting from it ?
The Government has already seen the competition in the Health and Medical Sector that neighboring countries are building to also cater to the poor standards of some of our neighboring countries.
Thailand is now reputed to pose the most serious challenge against us, with similar high quality facilities that are linked with similar joint co-operation with VERY WELL KNOWN medical research and hospitals from the USA.
Thailand has been able to offer the same high quality medical and health care at a much lower costs than the same facilities in Singapore - with the facilities in Thailand being owned by PRIVATE enterprises, compared to the facilities that are owned by the Government but misleadingly made to look "PRIVATISED" to justify the higher charges.
Direct and Indirect Taxes in Singapore has become a burden to Singaporeans, and have allowed the Government to collect windfall annual surplus that are not effectively spent for the benefit of Singaporean - in a manner that make the "quality of LIFE" better and allowing for a safe nest egg during retirement.
How often have we heard that the majority of those growing old will have to DOWNGRADE, selling their present HDB homes so as to be able to live out their old age ?
How did this come about, if not for the high cash outlay to pay for the high cost of living and services - that are caused by the manner in which the Government imposed direct and indirect taxes, ineffective manner in spending the taxes for high cost services to the citizens, which require the citizens to pay for the high costs - all of which deplete the Citizens bank and CPF account.