Did Elites help to lower cost of living, restructure economy
-
A few ministers have said they welcome people with different ideas from that of the incumbent parties and even invited them to join the party.
I have applied to take part in public debates within PAP or Young PAP but so far have received no reply because of a lack of OPPORTUNITIES OR CONNECTIONS to the circle of ELITES.
It seems that what Ms Wee's dad has had the opportunities which were not available to people outside the circle of elites.
So she could say what she likes and slam others for not being grateful or grousing because she will have little or no difficulty of getting jobs in Singapore unlike those mentioned by Derek Wee and those above-40s. Her dad obviously belongs to those of the elite circle who are chosen because of one word - OPPORTUNITIES.
Let me deal with OPPORTUNITIES. In Singapore, for years, we have heard our dear leaders selling their talents and leadership for the past 41 years using meritocracy as the political tool to sustain control and entrenchment of power.
People waited with abated breath to see how these elites measured up to upgrade the older moribund pro-foreign basic model to one which will bring about higher standard of living to all comparable to that of Korean or Finland which leverage on technology due to open and motivational entrepreneurial abilities of their more humble leaders.
Instead of upgrading the economy to a value-adding technology driven model talked about by elites for years people only saw the leaders and their consorts rewarding themselves in good and bad times with greater titles and ever-higher salaries and bonuses year after year. This is a case of OPPORTUNITIES at work not delivery of leadership or talents based on results.
Who will become the ministers and MPs? Can those who are selected from among the grade As and elite circle turn around the economy and solve the high-cost problem ?
In Singapore, elites are just a political tool for entrenchment of powers of the incumbent politicians. For example, if we open the OPPORTUNITIES of joining as CNA's political newscaster to all, will we only have those like the Ms. Lim taken in due to connection or elitist influence. I am sure there are many good political newscasters out there who could do just as good if not better job.
The same goes for people who are given high NKF peanut salaries in many GLCs well-paid CEO jobs.
There are many many people with potential to be chief justices and CEO posts in GLCs where the jobs were reserved for connections.
Now come back to joining the youngPAP or PAP for debates on its major policies like the political renewal or high costs of living or government's competitions against people for private business.
It seems very clear to me that even for someone who says he wants to be involved just to provide an alternative voice, he will have to go through the recommendations of the MP, grassroot first before being accepted for such devil advocate positions.
I had thought that as a citizen, if someone is not after any high position and for as long as there is no tainted crime or records of misconduct in public offices, he should be able to get admitted to the party to serve tea or debate its policies as no harm is done.
So, it is important that MS Wee should understand that it is a case of OPPORTUNITIES as without opportunities being given, no matter how great is her results she would not have made it.
So what makes her smug about her views - Derek Wee according to her was simply too ungrateful to the party and the country for his three meals on the table.
So the leaders have lately somewhat realized that there is a lack of progress in uplifting the standard of living or solving the high cost problem affecting majority of citizens. Obviously despite all the claims by elites of their abilities, they have been given all the OPPORTUNITIES TO SOLVE problems (see 20 Major Government Policy Errors as posted to Feedback Unit) but our elites measured by the nos. of "A"s in school report cards have yet to turn around the moribund economy after three deep recessions.
The more humble leaders like the Japanese and Koreans have at least done better in upgrading their economy without all the arrogance.
Singapore leaders have obviously neglected the welfare of their people and have always treated them with disdain. That is why they cannot achieve what the Koreans have achieved in upgrading their economy to one of mass application of high technology and innovations.
Under such circumstances of a stymied economy with no further progress from the people, something has gone seriously wrong with the leadership and talent.
So why afraid to allow people with desire to take part in the invited great debate of major government policies? MPs should not be overseeing such individuals asking to join the party ? So isn't it a case of OPPORTUNITIES not being extended to people outside MS Wee's close cycle of elites?
If elites which Singapore has put together since the early 1980s have indeed the talents and leadership to upgrade the people's standard of living beyond three meals as Ms Wee has accepted as norm of our society despite elites being paid peanuts and millions of taxpayers' monies to deliver such standards, then again it is a case of OPPORTUNITIES being given to the elites like her dad and not the failure of people to be thankful of the three meals delivered by her conceptualized class with special abilities.
How to trust our younger elitist leaders when so many of them and their kind have yet to lift up the standard of living and lower the increasing costs of living that make people jump the MRT track.
Do the elites apart from their academic attainment what it takes to deliver the Korean style of internationalizing their brands and technology drive to be equal of Japan.
...to continue -
...Continued from previous post:
For a start, some of the old elitist meritocracy and high-cost essential service corporatization policies need to be debated without any pretentions.
It is not good enough to induct people into the system based on some exclusive stringent pupilage and control admission process. It is not enough to invite a few journalists for dialogue or debates on policies and issues as these people are controlled by someone and cannot be objective and independent citizens like the forumers who posted here.
One example of a good debate will be about minister's own assessment of their own worth or pay. They think that they need to be paid by comparison against the bests but are the criteria of comparison fair and above board. In the first place any such salary comparison should have been benchmarked against the wage or remuneration and not the capitalist or boss categories.
There has been a fundamental error in the way ministers have made comparison of their pays with those of CEOs or successful entrepreneurs in the private sector.
Similary, if Singaporeans indeed must expand overseas and go regional there has to be certain accountable and transparent guidelines and principle.
If government must use the public taxes to invest them in overseas projects, like Shin Corp, Global Crossing or Bangalore, or Russian Townships, ministers must exercise great care to make sure that it will not result in huge losses as has happened in Shin Corp.
No companies or governments in this world will ever retain the services of any of their CEOs or managers who have caused such huge losses and yet go on to promote them in higher offices or grant them bonuses after such disastrous records.
So something is seriously wrong in the present investments of public taxes in overseas project. There will be more losses and disasters if there is no action taken to redress such huge losses.
Moreover a policy should be implemented to benefit all or majority of citizens. If such foreign investments should benefit only the government in hoarding surpluses to look good and give more bonuses to their own MPs, ministers and civil servants, the country will not gain the support of the people.
For the past 41 years, the government only governs to tax and recover all costs to the fullest degree even by way of creative accounting, double-charging on lands or rentals on public buildings or transport or utilities.
There has been a lack of accountability and transparency in the running of the government so far in public taxpayers' investments overseas.
There has to be clear policy to benefit the people in such areas of government. If there is none, and everything has to depend on summary statements of ministers or insight or foresight of leaders, there is no point to go on investing their tax monies in such overseas projects.
If government must practise avoidance of welfarism, fine. Then if such a policy is adopted, then government must take care not to over-tax and recover all costs. It should try to let citizens survive on their own economic competitiveness and not jeoparidize their retirements or medicare. The principle in a non-welfare state should be spelt out - if government does not help its people in creating jobs or social and cultural benefits then don't over tax and squeeze them dry.
But Singapore seems to have gone to the other extreme of taxing the citizens fully such as double charges on land or triple charges on vehicles and recovering all costs of essential services against the people by corporatization of such services to give them excuses in increasing fees and charges.
In a welfare state, government has the right to tax and recover all costs to pay for welfare. In a anti-welfare state like Singapore, its government spends only the minimum on citizens so there is no justification on principle or facts to charge the citizens more than nominal administrative fees.
In a non-welfare state, it would be immoral then for the government to refuse to help the citizens to keep increasing taxes and recovering all essential expenditures as Singapore has done and has been doing.
Let the comparison be fair if Singapore ministers want to quote welfarism as the excuse for its policy of not helping citizens in times of crisis.
It surely cannot have the cake and eat it. It is now enjoying all the benefits of not having to help its citizens and at the same time accumulating all the taxes into surpluses and reserving all rights to squeeze the citizens through all forms of taxes, direct, indirect and using excuses of all kinds to get them to pay.
So think again if anyone wants to talk about the danger of welfarism as practised in Australia, UK, Europe. We are certainly not having a welfare state but we may be producing a monster of government which keeps increasing its own surpluses while not lifting a finger to help them and squeezing them dry.
Even if we need to recover some costs the govenment should first only be entitled to recover only the consumption items but it has reserved its fullest right to recover any costs it likes until the citizens cannot survive resulting in so many family problems now ...suicides, low child birth, migrations, family disharmony, divorces etc. -
MM says we might have more IRs in the future.
Seems like they are more interested in making more money. Not lowering cost of living or what nots.
-
Money is what they want only.
Lowering the costs of living I Think, was never in their minds.
Driving people to suicide perhaps, is more likely the outcome of their relentless pursuit of money for their coffers!
In my opinion, it isn't our economy that needs restructuring, it's our gov that needs to REPLACED!!!
Damn them! -
That's why everyone is migrating overseas - funny yea?
Foreign talent comes into Singapore, while Singaporeans leaving - from ITE grads (strong demand for vocational trades people overseas) to our top degree/masters/doctorate holders (obviously these people aren't stupid - where the grass is greener, they will go). -
It is mentioned 800 Sporean migrated each year n in 2005 12500 foregners converted to become Sporean. I wonder how many of these latest immigrantsOriginally posted by rmyfrm:That's why everyone is migrating overseas - funny yea?
Foreign talent comes into Singapore, while Singaporeans leaving - from ITE grads (strong demand for vocational trades people overseas) to our top degree/masters/doctorate holders (obviously these people aren't stupid - where the grass is greener, they will go).
will stay here on a permanent basis? -
Convert to Singaporeans as in taking up citizenship or merely just applying for PR? Our govt is very good at manipulating number and statistics to favor the message they want to bring across. Remember the case where NTU professors has to apologise for quoting that 1 in 2 jobs goes to foreigners but MOM counts PR as citizens too??Originally posted by will4:It is mentioned 800 Sporean migrated each year n in 2005 12500 foregners converted to become Sporean. I wonder how many of these latest immigrants
will stay here on a permanent basis?
That's why they need all the A grades mathematicians. -
I am sadden by what our ministers did and are still doing now. Zero respect.
When travelling, I do not tell foreigners that I am Singaporean cause I don't feel proud of being one. -
sings* here we go again, same old sh|t again, walking down this avenue...
-
to TS "Did Elites help to lower cost of living"
They did not ......
not doing now......
and will never in future.......
so what is there to discuss ???