Should ministers cut back 10% of pay like Abe?
-
The key issue of LHL government is how to lessen the cost burdens imposed by GCT and his father.
Solution actually is quite simple. Singapore has now achieved through people's past sacrifices a certain surplus level far exceeding than what is needed for stabilising the currency etc.
He can set up endowment funds from these surpluses to produce interest incomes which can be used to cover some subsistence costs for people who are unemployed. Many people are willing to find works but there is no jobs due to relentless tax-and-recovering policy of the government which caused the whole economy to lose its competitiveness.
This people's problem in finding jobs was caused by ministers' lack of talents as demonstrated by recent recessions when they conveniently blamed it on the people for lack of skills.
Let's say we consider helping people only on the basic i.e. utility and food for three months at reducing quantum over two years at the maximum after which further assistance needs certification.
If we do it like Japanese prime minister Mr. Abe, sacrifice 20% of his own pay and 10% of ministers' pay and do away with uncalled for life-long annuities to all his MPs and ministers who are quite rich and set up a endowment fund for this purpose, I am sure this will amount to hundreds of millions sufficient to help prevent desperate unemployed citizens from jumping the MRT track.
How much do we need to spend on such subsistences for those who are dying and starving. I am sure the whole society will not become a welfare state just because of such a gesture.
So I do not understand the elitist MPs who kept insisting this subsistence from cut-backs on over-generous salaries of ministers will lead to whole economy slipping down the slippery slope of welfare.
With the above-stated returns of repatriation of over-generous salaries packages from ministers and MPs to the people who are dying there will be sufficient fund to save some lives and no one needs to be left behind. There will be no need to increase the GST to cause more suicides.
Ministers and MPs who got lesser pays will not complain because in the first place they were over-generously paid and what is 10% of pay cut compared with people's support for their good deeds. -
This reminded me of an incident when I was working in a local company. In the newsletter, it mentioned that the company is not doing well. Then it highlighted that so-and-so took a 15% pay cut voluntarily.
Soon after that, everyone across the board was affected with "pay revision".
If so-and-so took a 15% paycut, say from a monthly salary of $30K, it means this great act will still leave so-and-so with a monthly salary of $22.5K per month during time of crisis.
Take 15% off a gross salary of $1500, you do your own maths.
So, I hope they increase their pay, so we can have our increment too. (as if) -
cut pay ?? you must be really and seriously joking ...
The 2% GST is the fore action for an increase for their pay, so no corruption in the gov ma -
Originally posted by rojak12:
When leaders are true and sincere people can see their act of sacrifice and will respond in other ways like working harder to make the company more competitive.
This reminded me of an incident when I was working in a local company. In the newsletter, it mentioned that the company is not doing well. Then it highlighted that so-and-so took a 15% pay cut voluntarily.
Soon after that, everyone across the board was affected with "pay revision".
[b]If so-and-so took a 15% paycut, say from a monthly salary of $30K, it means this great act will still leave so-and-so with a monthly salary of $22.5K per month during time of crisis.
Take 15% off a gross salary of $1500, you do your own maths.
So, I hope they increase their pay, so we can have our increment too. (as if)
[/b]
Japanese Prime Minister took a 20% pay cut for himself and his ministers all agree to a 10% pay cut. This is a good example for Singapore political leaders.
In such a true leadership by example, staff were not asked to sacrifice because their pays are not that high. Even if staff want to follow the leaders to sacrifice their pays such leaders might not agree. -
Bob, if those clowns were really serious, they'd do a Lee Iacocca and take a nominal $1 salary until they get the mess cleaned up.
-
Thanks, Iacocca has indeed been one of the greatest leadership by example. Now the ball is in the court of our leaders. Surely they don't want to pretend they never heard of this case and Abe.Originally posted by Gedanken:Bob, if those clowns were really serious, they'd do a Lee Iacocca and take a nominal $1 salary until they get the mess cleaned up. -
ya, should pressurise the leaders to cut their pay too...since they like to follow the trends of those developed countries so much...
-
Personally, I don't believe in the concept of taking pay cuts. There's only a limit to which pay can be cut to, and that's $0.
Looking on the other side, the ministers should be making more money for the country. Making more money has no limit. -
cutting their pay might start leading to corruption..
dun forget thats one of the reason why the ministers pay are so high, to discourage corruption..
-
how much is our minister taking home?
-
If that is the case, then those people should not be our leaders since they are corrupted.Originally posted by 4getmenot:cutting their pay might start leading to corruption..
dun forget thats one of the reason why the ministers pay are so high, to discourage corruption..
If you are really a good leader that can serve the people, you should not require such a high pay. Moreover, you should not even be corrupted.
I think giving the ministers a high pay for them not to go into corruption is a silly excuse!!!!
Does this explains that they are not good leaders? -
IMO the 7% GST could go in place. However, what needs to be called for in our Government is Transparency and Accountability.
So far, there is little information on how the Government's funds fare in its investments. Further, there is little accountability these ministers have to their citizens.
If Singapore goes into depression, do they apologise and say that some level of punitives will be applied to the ministers? No, instead they like to blame the citizens for being non-competitive, not doing enough. And even say that Singaporeans are full of complaints. Everything that evolves is from a function of government policy.
Now that Singapore is aiming for one gold for the olympics, will the minister in charge take responsiblity and suffer a pay cut if we do not gain so? All empty words and air.
I think we should start giving ministers firm targets to achieve and not just immeasurable, arbitary goals. Like if we don't grow by a certain percent or if unemployment not reduced, then a proportional paycut is order. You don't see a CEO enjoying a pay rise when his company doesn't register growth.
You have to start taking the government as a business entity, subject to shareholder scrutiny, especially since all their policies are driving towards 'Singapore Inc'. -
the minster's pay in SG is considerred too high...Originally posted by robertteh:The key issue of LHL government is how to lessen the cost burdens imposed by GCT and his father.
Solution actually is quite simple. Singapore has now achieved through people's past sacrifices a certain surplus level far exceeding than what is needed for stabilising the currency etc.
He can set up endowment funds from these surpluses to produce interest incomes which can be used to cover some subsistence costs for people who are unemployed. Many people are willing to find works but there is no jobs due to relentless tax-and-recovering policy of the government which caused the whole economy to lose its competitiveness.
This people's problem in finding jobs was caused by ministers' lack of talents as demonstrated by recent recessions when they conveniently blamed it on the people for lack of skills.
Let's say we consider helping people only on the basic i.e. utility and food for three months at reducing quantum over two years at the maximum after which further assistance needs certification.
If we do it like Japanese prime minister Mr. Abe, sacrifice 20% of his own pay and 10% of ministers' pay and do away with uncalled for life-long annuities to all his MPs and ministers who are quite rich and set up a endowment fund for this purpose, I am sure this will amount to hundreds of millions sufficient to help prevent desperate unemployed citizens from jumping the MRT track.
How much do we need to spend on such subsistences for those who are dying and starving. I am sure the whole society will not become a welfare state just because of such a gesture.
So I do not understand the elitist MPs who kept insisting this subsistence from cut-backs on over-generous salaries of ministers will lead to whole economy slipping down the slippery slope of welfare.
With the above-stated returns of repatriation of over-generous salaries packages from ministers and MPs to the people who are dying there will be sufficient fund to save some lives and no one needs to be left behind. There will be no need to increase the GST to cause more suicides.
Ministers and MPs who got lesser pays will not complain because in the first place they were over-generously paid and what is 10% of pay cut compared with people's support for their good deeds. -
if they do that,
next ge confirm will be party of one win again -
Why cut pay?
I read The Economist this morning.
I saw Singapore GDP growth, quite strong, healthy number.
Not bad too, compared to other countries.
So why cut pay? Recession? -
Higher GDP growth are not contributed by ministers or civil servants as they have failed in economic restructuring to a value-adding and technology-driven model.Originally posted by #$%^&*:Why cut pay?
I read The Economist this morning.
I saw Singapore GDP growth, quite strong, healthy number.
Not bad too, compared to other countries.
So why cut pay? Recession?
Singaporeans still suffer from massive job losses and dropping wages since the last recessions.
Korea, Hongkong, China and India all recovered faster and more substantially than Singapore from the last recessions in 1997-2002 and their ministers did not claim the GDP growth as created by them although their leaders and MPs did more to promote their domestic business growth and mass knowledge application than Singapore MPs and ministers who only promoted foreign MNDs and foreigners.
So from facts 2004-2006 GDP growth in Singapore was largely the result of external factors as admitted by ministers during the last recessions.
Growth in GDP translates to profits which entitle shareholders and businessmen to extra profits dividend and not their employees' or CEOs' own self-rewards which would be criminal as found in NKF.
It does not give government ministers the right to pay themselves or their durais higher peanut salaries or July bonus.
Government surpluses belong to the people as they come from GST increases, taxes, fees especially the profiteering through creative double-taxations through sale of HDB flats and triple taxations on vehicle ownership etc. -
It is a good idea but how it is possible to achieve thatOriginally posted by TYING:ya, should pressurise the leaders to cut their pay too...since they like to follow the trends of those developed countries so much...
Mostly the gahmen do not generally listen to the ppl. They tend to make haste decision. What you, me or the other forumnites suggest at the end of the day fall on dear ears. 
-
To avoid courruption....does that mean our ministers have to draw many times higher than President of USA, Australia and etc.Originally posted by Y_Shun:If that is the case, then those people should not be our leaders since they are corrupted.
If you are really a good leader that can serve the people, you should not require such a high pay. Moreover, you should not even be corrupted.
I think giving the ministers a high pay for them not to go into corruption is a silly excuse!!!!
Does this explains that they are not good leaders?
So in another word...we may have to suspect that Bill Clinton, Bush, Koizumi, China top man, Badawee, John Howard, Margarate Thatcher and etc...might be corrupted? -
They'll tell you economy is picking up, take what pay cut?
-
Originally posted by Lowclassman:
I think it is quite obvious or a common knowledge that these people are corrupted. I do not believe that Singapore is an anti-corrupted country. There is sure to be a form of corruption existing in the current system but just that it is being hidden from the public. In addition. our leaders always emphasise that they have the integrity and would not succumb to corruption
To avoid courruption....does that mean our ministers have to draw many times higher than President of USA, Australia and etc.
[b]So in another word...we may have to suspect that Bill Clinton, Bush, Koizumi, China top man, Badawee, John Howard, Margarate Thatcher and etc...might be corrupted?[/b]
With a plus fact that there is some kind of anti corruption unit connected directly to the PM office. How the public can dont believe....haiz... -
So what...if anti corruption unit connected directly to the PM office?Originally posted by TYING:I think it is quite obvious or a common knowledge that these people are corrupted. I do not believe that Singapore is an anti-corrupted country. There is sure to be a form of corruption existing in the current system but just that it is being hidden from the public. In addition. our leaders always emphasise that they have the integrity and would not succumb to corruption
With a plus fact that there is some kind of anti corruption unit connected directly to the PM office. How the public can dont believe....haiz...
Pap ex-mp or ex-minister Tay Cheng Guan not corrupted? Do you know how much was Tay Cheng Guan drawing pay checks at that time...not suficient for him to live in high luxuries with his previous salaries?
What basis do you have to say that these people, Bill Clinton, Bush, Koizumi, China top man, Badawee, John Howard, Margarate Thatcher are corrupted? What common knowledge do you have? -
Would dare to conclude that these people are not corrupted? There are so many evidence circulation round the internet especially about bush. Yes. We cannot fully believe these sources. But they come from people like their personal assistant. And most websites criticising these top people have been closed. Politics are very dirty things. They can get despicable and you just never know what is happening.Originally posted by Lowclassman:So what...if anti corruption unit connected directly to the PM office?
Pap ex-mp or ex-minister Tay Cheng Guan not corrupted? Do you know how much was Tay Cheng Guan drawing pay checks at that time...not suficient for him to live in high luxuries with his previous salaries?
What basis do you have to say that these people, Bill Clinton, Bush, Koizumi, China top man, Badawee, John Howard, Margarate Thatcher are corrupted? What common knowledge do you have?
You think those leaders would tell you that they are embezeling the funds or taking in some bribery? I think it is quite naive to think about these situations too superficially.
And i mentioned the anti corruption unit connected directly to the PM office is to say that the government annouce this so as to put a rest to the people's questions on the leaders honesty and uprightness.
Nobody will admit the truth in this world especially when it concerns reputation, wealth, status and their future. -
You telling people that human beings are all with no intregrity and sincerityOriginally posted by TYING:Would dare to conclude that these people are not corrupted? There are so many evidence circulation round the internet especially about bush. Yes. We cannot fully believe these sources. But they come from people like their personal assistant. And most websites criticising these top people have been closed. Politics are very dirty things. They can get despicable and you just never know what is happening.
You think those leaders would tell you that they are embezeling the funds or taking in some bribery? I think it is quite naive to think about these situations too superficially.
And i mentioned the anti corruption unit connected directly to the PM office is to say that the government annouce this so as to put a rest to the people's questions on the leaders honesty and uprightness.
Nobody will admit the truth in this world especially when it concerns reputation, wealth, status and their future.
So tell us ...your conclusion of Bush's many evidence that circulate round the internet. Can you prove the words from people like their personal assistant saying Bush is corrupted.
So you are say our Presidents, PM and right down to police officer that these people the of ''Nobody will admit the truth in this world especially when it concerns reputation, wealth, status and their future.''
Our arguement is ''why would a minister need sooooooooo much $$$$ for fcuk. Their children or grand childrem would not need soooooo much $$$ to live in luxuries...or shouldn't they? DO YOU UNDERSTAND? -
Originally posted by Lowclassman:
ALL THAT I HAVE DONE IS ARGUING BACK TO WHAT YOU HAVE SAID. HENCE, THE TOPIC STARTED BECAUSE OF YOU! GET IT RIGHT!
You telling people that human beings are all with no intregrity and sincerity
So tell us ...your conclusion of Bush's many evidence that circulate round the internet. Can you prove the words from people like their personal assistant saying Bush is corrupted.
So you are say our Presidents, PM and right down to police officer that these people the of ''Nobody will admit the truth in this world especially when it concerns reputation, wealth, status and their future.''
Our arguement is ''why would a minister need sooooooooo much $$$$ for fcuk. Their children or grand childrem would not need soooooo much $$$ to live in luxuries...or shouldn't they? [b]DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
[/b] -
...