PAP shamelessly accept bribe infront of the public?
-
If they love money so much, they shouldn't be MPs and ministers in the first place.Originally posted by Lowclassman:Right!!!
Why not compare with Li Ka Shing, Bill Gates and other richest men on earth?
-
66.6% Strong mandate.
We gave them the gun to shoot us. -
Yes LKY has done things for Singapore, he has also gotten more than what he deserved. This doesn't mean a country should run like one's personal property. He said that to increase the pay of ministers and MP is to prevent corruption.Originally posted by crofty:LKY have done a lot for singapore and with the help of people ,of course..
about the rest..I do not know
If this is so,
civil servants also need to increase thier pay to prevent corruption.
The people of every level also need to increase thier pay to prevent corruption. Singaporean need to be paid sky high salary to avoid corruption. Isn't this not absurb? -
It's just a way of saying, If you don't pay me well I will look for other ways to make money loh... choose one!!
-
Durai was not wrong accepting his salary which was approved by the commitee. the only question was "is it ethicial to receive the huge amount from a charitiable organisation?"
the same can be asked of them. -
you are right.Originally posted by OO_OO_OO:the worse bull is when thy say what they earn is simply reflective of what they would earn in the private sector.
Well the difference is what you earn in the pivate sector, you earn it yourself. what you earn in the civil service is PAID BY THE PEOPLE.
if they cant accept that fact, then bloody step down.
i want passionate politicians to serve the country, not calculative fools who will only serve if they can get the same outrageous pay.
in the private sector you get farked and axed if you fail to achieve the desired result.
but do they do the same to the ministers? -
Nope, they will just do a cabinet reshufflement and try you out in the next department...Originally posted by dragg:you are right.
in the private sector you get farked and axed if you fail to achieve the desired result.
but do they do the same to the ministers? -
How well is enough? 5,6,7,8,9 figures or the whole people's reserve annually?Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:It's just a way of saying, If you don't pay me well I will look for other ways to make money loh... choose one!! -
I think Singapore is unique, in that Singapore is paying its civil servants really well.
This is comparable and it is throughout the civil service structure, from the president, PM, Ministers, MPs, down to deputies or director-generals etc, down to police sargeants and school teachers.
I think this is really good.
Perhaps, nobody complain about police sargeants and school teachers, but only complain about those politically-active positions, such as ministers, MPs, and so on.
I see a comparison between TT Durai 600k salary in the charity sector and how it is inappropriate, and it is used as an illustration that people in politically-active positions in the political sector are similarly expected to have reasonable salary only.
For me I can understand this expectation that politicans are looked upon as a kind of social service, and some degree of altruism is expected.
However in light of the general renumeration structure, I think it is impossible to lower their pay without lowering the entire pay scale, thus also affecting everybody including police sargeants and school teachers.
For me, I just like to think in positive way. This system has attracted and maintained talents relatively well, and it should be kept and improved.
Singapore is very unique. Not only it has a low corruption and an efficient bureaucracy, it is also promoting meritocracy, and heavily sponsoring scholarships. The civil service is not run by rejects, but by scholars and technocrats. Many MPs are doctors and lawyers.
However this system is always attracting critisism from people who feel that politicians in Singapore are not fulfilling the ideal image of a self-sacrificing social servant.
I think this schism is unfortunate and is distracting what is otherwise a perfect system. Perhaps we should all look at the bigger picture and appreciate its advantages more.
Meat Pao. -
there is value that police and teachers and other civil service provide.
The problem here is that the ministers and etc think their value so high that no matter the amount of pay, it is never enough. While their true value, everyone can see is not worth the current amount we pay them. This is the disconnect.
The other problem is that high pay is equated with unrelated things such as virtue, less corruption, passion to serve, ability to serve, attration of quality people to serve, higher IQ in academics require higher pay to keep them in the country and etc. Reality proved the different and sometimes opposite. There are countless examples out there.
As far as I can see:
They scream show them the money. We shout, show us your value.
Now, this is a turning point where people got to think.
Would SG be less well run with a lower paid cabinet? Would there be rampant corruption with lower paid cabinet? Would SG be in chaos with a lower paid cabinet? Then, What can we do? -
Maybe you can contribute to this topic. The good things about the new generation of MIW leaders. Difference between then and now. Why they deserve the higher salary that they older generation didn't give themselves.
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=234671&page=2 -
But country has to be driven my some ideals, without it the leader lose moral authority to demand sacrifices from the citizens. We are beginning to see leaders who raise their own pay despite the widening income gap.Originally posted by Meat Pao:However this system is always attracting critisism from people who feel that politicians in Singapore are not fulfilling the ideal image of a self-sacrificing social servant.
I think this schism is unfortunate and is distracting what is otherwise a perfect system. Perhaps we should all look at the bigger picture and appreciate its advantages more.
Meat Pao.
If everything is driven down to pragmatics, why should a citizen defend a country when there is a war? The HDB flats? If you dont have a life to live, whats the use of the leased property? -
Whatever has overstepped its due bounds is always in a state of instability. LKY is 83 years old, do you think at his age he still can think properly for Singapore's future?
-
-
The giant gaps of salary for ministers is unacceptable, this will be a laughing stock in future's history.
-
PAP's bibe? The GST hike,Taxi fare hike,FT's Levy fee...its all part of the bribe package. All these can be reduced if the leaders don't take singaporean peasants for granted. Its all for the PAP's own profits. So wake up singaporeans, if you are not happy, migrate to another country which pays you to own a car,landed property and more $$$, go ahead fellow folks~
-
Sorry type wrongly,not good in word spelling depending too much on secretary previously!!! how to install spelling check here!Originally posted by CKeer:U mean BRIBE?
Now Singapore practices monogamous marriage...
Cheers.
C.K
Since retirement this year, my c cant stand up even go to G,dont know why?
-
For me, I just like to think in positive way. This system has attracted and maintained talents relatively well, and it should be kept and improved.
Not many more federal countries where one family has been in power for almost... what, 50 years?
I can only think of North Korea.... -
To moderate your claim, super-scale earners in the govt pertain only to ministers, senior staff of the office of ministers and senior staff in various ministries like eductaion, health, etc etc.Originally posted by Meat Pao:I think Singapore is unique, in that Singapore is paying its civil servants really well.
This is comparable and it is throughout the civil service structure, from the president, PM, Ministers, MPs, down to deputies or director-generals etc, down to police sargeants and school teachers.
I think this is really good.
Perhaps, nobody complain about police sargeants and school teachers, but only complain about those politically-active positions, such as ministers, MPs, and so on.
I see a comparison between TT Durai 600k salary in the charity sector and how it is inappropriate, and it is used as an illustration that people in politically-active positions in the political sector are similarly expected to have reasonable salary only.
For me I can understand this expectation that politicans are looked upon as a kind of social service, and some degree of altruism is expected.
However in light of the general renumeration structure, I think it is impossible to lower their pay without lowering the entire pay scale, thus also affecting everybody including police sargeants and school teachers.
For me, I just like to think in positive way. This system has attracted and maintained talents relatively well, and it should be kept and improved.
Singapore is very unique. Not only it has a low corruption and an efficient bureaucracy, it is also promoting meritocracy, and heavily sponsoring scholarships. The civil service is not run by rejects, but by scholars and technocrats. Many MPs are doctors and lawyers.
However this system is always attracting critisism from people who feel that politicians in Singapore are not fulfilling the ideal image of a self-sacrificing social servant.
I think this schism is unfortunate and is distracting what is otherwise a perfect system. Perhaps we should all look at the bigger picture and appreciate its advantages more.
Meat Pao.
The average teacher and policeman get a commeasurable wage which is marginally better off than most in the private sector when they start out in the civil service. But they are not that highly paid.
As for your claims on low corruption and efficient bureaucracy, it is purely subjective. Many of the govt agencies are snail-slow to respond to requests and problem-solving; some take weeks to months before a response is provided. Such tardiness will not be experienced in the private sector, where slow response under threat of competition could mean a potential customer could take his business elsewhere.
As for corruption, all i can say is: why is PM Lee adament that minister's wages and the formula to calculate their salary 'non-discussion' points? What does that say about a govt that preaches transparency, but when 'audited', their actions amount to mere selective transparency?
During the recent recessions, private sector heads and senior management have been known to take up to 25% pay-cuts as a example to their staff while the technician level have their 5% MVC absorbed to keep their jobs. In light of such actions, i find your claim that it is 'impossible' to reduce super-scale salary without lowering those of the junior staff completely absurb.
If money, and lots of it, is the sole motivator to attract talents into the govt sector, what does that say about the type of talent we are attracting? Those willing to serve the people or the Wee Shu Min-type of future leaders? -
The superior man undertands what is right; the inferior man understands what is gain.
-
Making the minister's salary so high up and making the gap till extensive multiple times of the common, isn't this not an act of injustice? Is this not muddled headedness?
-
Originally posted by BillyBong:
BRAVO
To moderate your claim, super-scale earners in the govt pertain only to ministers, senior staff of the office of ministers and senior staff in various ministries like eductaion, health, etc etc.
The average teacher and policeman get a commeasurable wage which is marginally better off than most in the private sector when they start out in the civil service. But they are not that highly paid.
As for your claims on low corruption and efficient bureaucracy, it is purely subjective. Many of the govt agencies are snail-slow to respond to requests and problem-solving; some take weeks to months before a response is provided. Such tardiness will not be experienced in the private sector, where slow response under threat of competition could mean a potential customer could take his business elsewhere.
As for corruption, all i can say is: why is PM Lee adament that minister's wages and the formula to calculate their salary 'non-discussion' points? What does that say about a govt that preaches transparency, but when 'audited', their actions amount to mere selective transparency?
During the recent recessions, private sector heads and senior management have been known to take up to 25% pay-cuts as a example to their staff while the technician level have their 5% MVC absorbed to keep their jobs. In light of such actions, i find your claim that it is '[b]impossible' to reduce super-scale salary without lowering those of the junior staff completely absurb.
If money, and lots of it, is the sole motivator to attract talents into the govt sector, what does that say about the type of talent we are attracting? Those willing to serve the people or the Wee Shu Min-type of future leaders? [/b] -
I am really farking sick of those people who say that since we complain so much we should all just fark off. We are not quitters and we don't keep our mouth shut and pretend nothing is happening. You farkers who pretend that everything is so farking rosy should just open your farking eyes that is provided you have any. Farking government puppets, farking cowards.
I am vulgar, but only when refering to farkers like you guys. So get the farking hell out and kowtow to your farking government. -
The 'strong mandate' is not so strong afterall...?Originally posted by mistyblue:66.6% Strong mandate.
We gave them the gun to shoot us.
It's just a form of manipulating the 'voting system' to their own favor...
However, the reality would only be RIPPED APART under this form of delusion one day...
Look at the other countries.. Hope Singapore won't turn into one of the examples one day? -
In the common people there is no wisdom, no penetration, no power of judgment.Originally posted by Devil1976:The 'strong mandate' is not so strong afterall...?
It's just a form of manipulating the 'voting system' to their own favor...
However, the reality would only be RIPPED APART under this form of delusion one day...
Look at the other countries.. Hope Singapore won't turn into one of the examples one day?