Govt professes going to help the needy. How do they....
-
Every now and then, we hear the Govt saying that they will work out something, some policy to help the needy people and families.
But I am just wondering, how do they define needy? How does the Govt identify them? To begin with, one of the MPs Dr Ong in his Parliament speech proclaimed that we Singaporeans are rich, on the basis that each family can afford a TV at home.
In the hospitals, needy patient's medical bills are SUPPOSED TO BE either fully paid for or heavily subsidised by the hospital's charity known as Endowment Fund. But most of these charities set a maximum household income for every applicants for the fund which is $1,500. This means that if the patient is poor, but his combined income in the family reaches $1,500, the hospital charity will not help him.
If the Govt used the same methodology to identify needy, I really wonder how many people can be helped and how many needy remain helpless and desperate. -
I agree with your point. There has to be more information of how the government plans to "assist" those that are needy and the first thing is who are included in the "needy"? The definition of household income of 1.5k is too simplistic (as shown in the case of the MRT suicide case) ... I guess there has to be more holistic idea (e.g. taking into account household situation e.g. health burdens, family burdens etc. With 1.5 k but with a deep burden of taking care of a sick household member should definitely merit some type of assistance. Furthermore, assistance should be more "creative". Does it always mean a specific sum, can assistance extend to other type e.g. provision of medical services or children services etc? These are some of the things that are applied in the US and perhaps other countries.
Reflecting on this entire episode, I find that much is lacking in the government's manner of approaching the issue (helping the poor and needy) and disseminating the information/plans and ideas. To be upfront, I am neither pro- nor anti- the PAP government. But from a (hopefully) neutral view, I feel there are just some many ways that the government could have used to more effectively put forward its policies and programs. For e.g. instead of just informing about the GST increase, the focus should have been on the programs and plans for the needy, getting more feedback and inputs (government, grass roots, the general public). The way to fund the program is important but frankly secondary once people see the vision, the need, the plan and provide the support. Technically, I believe the government rationale of using the GST as a means is correct (specifically, our implementation of the value-added tax is not regressive since businesses with less than 2mil are not required to pay it but rather it is progressive given that the wealthier consumers consume more of the services/goods that larger businesses provide and therefore taxed more - this however is debatable - e.g. a trickle effect that someone else mentioned). Yet, being technically correct does help when people are so keenly aware of the many cost increases that have been occurring over the last few months. If you have played some of the strategy games like Romance of the Three Kingdoms, you know that you can't continue to impose hikes as the "population" will revolt. Similarly, there is only so much the general mass of Singaporeans can accept with respect to policies that hits directly on their pockets. So it would seem that the lack of transparency, the seemingly cold economic mindset and logic of the present government serve to reinforce its apparent disconnect with issues close to the ordinary Singaporean. I find that there is some much that our current bureaucrats can learn from our founding history (how that generation of PAP dealt with and effectively delivered on its promises). -
"help the needy" is just talk. Who is needy is up to them to define. Help in what form is up to them to deny.
So why does anyone even think help would be coming when statements like "There is no free lunch", "Survival of the fittest" fly out from LHL and his MP mouth.
I think it would be used to built more MRT tracks for more needy people to jump in and solve their issue. -
talk only. wayang.
-
everyone please kindly wait while the gahmen think of the brilliant and yet logic defying public statement to 'satisfy' the community on how they will use the extra fund to 'help' the needy...
-
If they can only stoop to the level of the needy will they understand truely how much help they need.
But I dun tink they can ever get it. Even if they propose plans and policies, it will most likely only smooth out the surface. The problem in side will still remain intact and MORE problems will occur. -
Well, it is all a lot of BULLCRAP from our gov when it comes to some form of meagre welfare that they "agree" to provide for NEEDIES.
In whatever that involves PAYING OUT money to or for the people, they will have lots of obstacles and policies to make receiving their money, almost IMPOSSIBLE.
That's why I say, WE should STOP - OWING THEM the VOTES!
They only care about their own pockets and coffers!
Fark them all...
-
Ah Peh agrees with you. They are only wayang.Originally posted by Ito_^:talk only. wayang.
People who wear whites doesn't mean their hearts are also white colour.
Psuedo politicians are good actors, not real political leaders.
We have seen through the whiter than white syndrome over the past 20 years.
However, there are still 66.6% of people who believe in them.
Sad, very sad. -
who knows the needy at the government themselves... prob they need a increasing of pay.. haha..
pity the citizens of singapore... -
+1Originally posted by ShutterBug:Well, it is all a lot of BULLCRAP from our gov when it comes to some form of meagre welfare that they "agree" to provide for NEEDIES.
In whatever that involves PAYING OUT money to or for the people, they will have lots of obstacles and policies to make receiving their money, almost IMPOSSIBLE.
That's why I say, WE should STOP - OWING THEM the VOTES!
They only care about their own pockets and coffers!
Fark them all... -
++++++++1Originally posted by ah peh:Ah Peh agrees with you. They are only wayang.
People who wear whites doesn't mean their hearts are also white colour.
Psuedo politicians are good actors, not real political leaders.
We have seen through the whiter than white syndrome over the past 20 years.
However, there are still 66.6% of people who believe in them.
Sad, very sad. -
66.6 also include walkover leh...not all support...
-
wa lao after election than verything goes up...
-
i dont believe a single thing they say.
the govt are only interested in earning more money for the coffers. -
My big question is that how are they gonna expand the social safety net as they claim. The GST increase is going to fund this? How much and what are the figures and what they plan to do? How are the needy gonna benefit from this grand plan? Is this gonna narrow the expanding income gap? Several people in this forum are argueing that this GST hike is just gonna dig into the pockets of the middle and lower income segments of the population, to fund a net which is suppose to support us, so wouldn't this be worsening the problem?
-
dont we have 120 billion in reserves.
its just another excuse.
i wonder what excuse they will use for the next GST increase? -
You proposing they dig out the reserve and fund this project?
-
we have 120 billion and yet they are unwilling to take out a small amount to help the needy. btw 120 billion is 120000 million!!!Originally posted by Quincey:You proposing they dig out the reserve and fund this project?
how much can the 2% GST bring that cannot be taken from the 120 billion?
obviously it is an excuse to take more money from singaporeans. -
They will used tried and tested slippery slope arguement, u use once, next time got problem, will also use.
-
which is what they always say.Originally posted by Quincey:They will used tried and tested slippery slope arguement, u use once, next time got problem, will also use.
i cant help wondering under what circumstances will the reserves be called into use. war? natural disaster?
what difference does it make to the average singaporean if we have 120 billion or 1000 trillion in the reserves??? -
when they are not in power?Originally posted by dragg:which is what they always say.
i cant help wondering under what circumstances will the reserves be called into use. war? natural disaster?
what difference does it make to the average singaporean if we have 120 billion or 1000 trillion in the reserves???
Maybe terrorist when nuke the whole singapore... that would be a good time to use the money to fly the elites out in first class and set themselves up on a nice patch elsewhere.
would not make any difference if all of us non-elites from all of singapore go and lie down on the mrt tracks and just die overnight. we will never see that 120billion be ever used. Lets never hope for 1000 trillion. Its even harder to get that amount out and there are always more disasters in future that our elite leaders need to collect more money from us to prepare against. -
MP Dr Ong should go hang himself. What a load of crap? Which country and period in history is he comparing us with? Having a tv is rich? This is the kind of MP that sits in parliament and drawing high pay.Originally posted by Honeybunz:Every now and then, we hear the Govt saying that they will work out something, some policy to help the needy people and families.
But I am just wondering, how do they define needy? How does the Govt identify them? To begin with, one of the MPs Dr Ong in his Parliament speech proclaimed that we Singaporeans are rich, on the basis that each family can afford a TV at home.
In the hospitals, needy patient's medical bills are SUPPOSED TO BE either fully paid for or heavily subsidised by the hospital's charity known as Endowment Fund. But most of these charities set a maximum household income for every applicants for the fund which is $1,500. This means that if the patient is poor, but his combined income in the family reaches $1,500, the hospital charity will not help him.
If the Govt used the same methodology to identify needy, I really wonder how many people can be helped and how many needy remain helpless and desperate.
Combined household income of $1500? Another way of saying gahmen is not going to help you. Go and kill yourself at the mrt tracks. -
I have zillions in hell money. Do you really think the reserves exist at all?. Even so it won't go to you. Buying Toto is easier.Originally posted by dragg:dont we have 120 billion in reserves. -
that is the whole purpose - they are not interested in helping.Originally posted by Honeybunz:Every now and then, we hear the Govt saying that they will work out something, some policy to help the needy people and families.
But I am just wondering, how do they define needy? How does the Govt identify them? To begin with, one of the MPs Dr Ong in his Parliament speech proclaimed that we Singaporeans are rich, on the basis that each family can afford a TV at home.
In the hospitals, needy patient's medical bills are SUPPOSED TO BE either fully paid for or heavily subsidised by the hospital's charity known as Endowment Fund. But most of these charities set a maximum household income for every applicants for the fund which is $1,500. This means that if the patient is poor, but his combined income in the family reaches $1,500, the hospital charity will not help him.
If the Govt used the same methodology to identify needy, I really wonder how many people can be helped and how many needy remain helpless and desperate. -
i've read and re-read honeybunz's post...
and thought and thought about it.. but i cannot think of anything defensible about the gabrament's actions at all..
that says a lot... when the gabrament doesn't even bother to make up a believable lie