Singapore has NO legal minimum wage?
-
More than 500 business owners and executives across the nation(USA) support a higher minimum wage. These people have first hand knowledge of running a business. The views below are not a theory against the critics of mimimum wage.
HereÂ’s why they support minimum wages.
"When businesses don't pay a living wage all society pays. We pay through poverty and needless disease, disability and death from inadequate health care. We pay as workers struggle to put food on the table. We pay as businesses and communities suffer economic decline."
If employers can't stay in business without keeping their employees in poverty, there's something wrong with their business models.
"Trying to save money by shortchanging my employees would be like skimping on ingredients," explains statement signer Kirsten Poole, co-owner of Kirsten's Cafe and Dish Caterers in Silver Spring, MD. "I'd lose more than I saved because of declining quality, service, reputation and customer base. You can't build a healthy business or a healthy economy on a miserly minimum wage."
. "Yes, small business owners must spend wisely, but this means paying our workforce a fair wage if we expect quality work. I'm not looking for tax breaks or other 'helpful' legislation. I want the federal government to recognize hard work and raise the minimum wage so everyone who works can support themselves and their families."
If this affects the cost of goods we use, we will absorb the minor increases and attempt to pass along the larger ones. Frankly, it is hard to believe that the minimum wage is actually a living wage, and it is an insult to think that we would ask people to try to live on this. I think the whole issue is a smoke screen. If we indexed wages to inflation, we would never notice it and could plan from one year to the next.
Business leaders know it isn't good for workers or the economy that the middle class is shrinking while the gap between CEOs (nearly all men) and minimum wage workers (disproportionately women) has grown to outrageous proportions. The highest paid CEO made as much as 239 minimum wage workers in 1968, when the minimum wage was at its peak value of $9.27 in today's dollars. The highest paid CEO in 2005 made as much as 23,282 minimum wage workers. -
No replies from the delusional doctor wannabe?
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Can we trust your judgment in writing without any thoughts nor knowledge of what life is like on the other side of the divide ?
Having a job is always better than being unemployed. That is precisely why we must not follow the wlefare states where unemployment benefits are so generous that it does not pay to work.
Lots of foreign workers who take much lower pay than locals not only can make ends meet but send money home as well. If depends on how you manage your finances. Spend within your means. If you cannot make ends meet, it's because you are spending beyond your means.
What have you to offer from the security of your own position, when you have no more creative solution to a problem that existed since Singapore's independence, except to unthinkingly repeat condescending statements made by political leaders that shun their political responsibility to look after Singaporeans - even when they dare to declare that it is their right to interfere into every aspect of the life of every Singaporean Individual ?
It can be quite tiresome reading your worn out views that reflect little original thinking from yourself, except to spew ad verbatim from your Master's Voice.
Is this the best that you can offer from your time spent at Oxbridge ?
continue below
From Newsweek Special Edition : The Knowledge Revolution - Why Victory Will Go to the Smartest Nation & Companies.
Why SWEDEN is SO TOUGH...
''Those who think that the Swedish Welfare Model is too soft to survive in the Global Era miss the point. Yes, we are more generous than most, but we are far more competitive, too''
by Goran Persson - Prime Minister of Sweden
THE Economic success of the Scandinavian countries is surprising, perhaps, for some. It is often said that in the era of globalization, countries with generous welfare policies cannot be competitive. It is claimed that countries with high taxes and large public expenditures cannot be successful growth nations.
The rapid development of the Scandinavian countries during the past decade is a powerful argument against this logic.
True, we live in times of sweeping change. The last 10 years have taken us on a great journey, full of rapid and fascinating developments. The overall prosperity of the world is growing. People are rising out of hunger, oppression, and illiteracy. More countries have become democracies. Research and new technology offer new opportunities. Medicines are becoming cheaper and more widely accessible. At the same time new threats - in the form of terrorism, infectious diseases and climate change - spread fear around the world.
But change itself is nothing new for an open, trade-oriented country like Sweden.
For us, all this is challenging, but also exciting. Our economic growth is largely a product of continuous structural adjustments. We have encouraged those changes, and continue to do so. Our openness and innovative climate has help us to build a number of successful internation companies such as Saab, IKEA, Volvo, Ericsson and ASEA.
What is new is the pace of change. The globalization of economics and markets affect people's everyday lives. For society as a whole, the continuous shift of labor into new, more productive areas is of great benefit. But for individuals, these changes carry great costs. Workers in the most developed countries face competition from workers with lower wages and less secure working conditions. Businesses face tougher pressure on prices and a rapid increase in efficiency demand. At the same time, more jobs require high education and specific skills, and an increasing number of jobs are emerging in the service sector.
Along with the other Scandinavian countries, Sweden has been coping wel with this fast-changing environment. Our country has had higher growth over the past 10 years than the EU and Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development ( OECD ) average. Sweden is held to have the world's most internationalized economy after Ireland. We have been designated the most creative country in the world and the best climate for innovation in the EU. Sweden is third in the World Economic Forum's ranking of growth prospects, and invests more in education than any other OECD country except Denmark. Sweden is also in the lead at balancing growth and environmental concerns.
International studies confirm it time and again : Sweden is one of the world's most modern countries. We have strong social security - but a higher level of employment and work-force participation than most other countries. We have high public expenditures - but we have had greater economic growth in the past 10 years than the OECD average. We have a large public sector - but there is also a vigorous and expanding business sector that competes successfully in the world market.
I believe the reason we are doing relatively well is that we have developed policies that facilitate structural adjustment. That enables us to harness the full potential of globalization. It is not about protecting old and inefficient sectors. It is about facilitating change for the individual - to build bridges from the old to the new, from the shrinking sector to the innovative, from the stagnating to the vibrant and growing. -
deleted
-
continuation
If Sweden has a larger land mass than this Little Red Dot, and she cannot depend on immigration, why is the Government of this Little Red Dot allowing a free flow of foreign talents in, and allowing them easy access to Citizenship or trial Permanent Residentship ?
To do so, we must provide people with opportunities to learn new things, to move or to change jobs late in life. And they need secure income, in case the unpredictable - an illness, unemployment - strkes. In a rapidly changing economy, lifelong education, a strong social-security system and active labor-market policies are key assets.
The Swedish model clearly shows that an ambitious welfare policy is fully compatible with free trade and openness. High taxes do not get in the way of good growth if they are levied through a sensibly constructed tax system that does not place an excessive burden on production.
On the contrary - a system of this kind is an advantage for development and growth. A robust public sector gives people the security to seek new opportunities and test new grounds. In this way, security goes hand in hand with development. Our experience also confirms this. Willingness to pay tax, moreover, is relatively high in Sweden, as people feel confident that the money is used to address common concerns - health care, schools and social services available to all.
In the same way, it is crucial to give women the same rights, opportunities and wages as men. Parenthood must not be an obstacle to work, which is why Swedish couples have the right to stay home with 80 percent pay for 13 months (including at least two months for the father) after chidlbirth, and to full-time day care. As a result, Sweden has one of the highest level of female labor participation in the world, and one fo the highest birthrates in the European Union. As Western populations age, a high birthrate is critical for maintaining a balance between the working-age people and retirees so we can afford pensions.
Sweden - small, cold, with a difficult language - cannot hope to rely on immigration.
I am convinced that the Swedish general welfare model is modern and forward-looking. It is not only fair. It can also be a very competitive model in a globalized economy.
While Sweden collect very high level of taxes, it return the taxes to all Swedish Citizens with carefully crafted social service and social welfare programs that protects the Swedes from economic downturn, and which provides the security for the Swedes to venture into new employment and newer ventures.
What has the Singapore Government done with all the Direct and Indirect Taxes that it extracts from Singaporeans ?
While it provides health care, basic amenities, infrastructure and public housing - it also charges for these essential services at a high cost to Singaporeans - who are captive consumers to these essential services; and the rates charged only serve to enlarge the amounts collected by the State Treasury that become bloated with surprising annual surplusses that embarrass even themselves.
The obscene amounts of taxes collected hardly benefit Singaporean Workers in any direct way, as in the way the Swedes are looked after by the State, and the amount collected by the Singapore Government only serve as additional funds for SINGAPORE Inc in its questionable overseas investments by the Government Investment Corporation and Temasek Holdings.
While the Swedish and Singapore Governments have both identified the same Global Challenges and have urged their Citizens to restructure, it seems that the lower paid Swedish Government is having better results despite a population that is supposed to be numbed by taxes that are supposed to be higher than Singapore's.
Singapore is facing the same challenges of a low birth rate, shrinking population made worst by an ageing population, global competition to keep the Countries economic engine running without stalling, and yet Sweden is supposed to be disadvantaged by its high tax and high social welfare system - is Singapore ahead of Sweden in this global competition ?
Sweden is able to succeed in producing world beating brand names, and getting its birth rates up, and its population to be more innovative; while the Singapore result is still flip-flopping as the overpaid Singapore Government refuse to accept any openness in Singapore society - claiming exclusiveness and continued monopoly on politics and economic activities, while ''guiding'' social and cultural directions in the lives of all Singaporean Citizens. -
Ha... somebody should start a movement and turn the tables on the government.
Since we are becoming a cosmopolitan country with sooo much foreign talent, we might as well consider foreign talents for government, especially when the country is run like a business organisation and patriotism shouldn't come into the picture - only simple loyalty towards this business organisation. So we tell PAP, lower your wage or lower your competitiveness.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
All that before you further take into consideration how the Swedes have actually achieved more without the significant strategic advantages Singapore possesses (from being a former British colony where English is the lingua franca to the location of its ports), but have failed to adequately leverage on.
[b]continuation
Singapore is facing the same challenges of a low birth rate, shrinking population made worst by an ageing population, global competition to keep the Countries economic engine running without stalling, and yet Sweden is supposed to be disadvantaged by its high tax and high social welfare system - is Singapore ahead of Sweden in this global competition ? -
alamak ... same thing wat...
high wages given... means have to give more tax...
end of the day, it is still given back to the government...
It is just a play around with figures... -
I read with interest on the issue of minimum wage because I am working in Malaysia these days and MTUC there is clamoring for a minimum wage.
I note that there seems to be little justifications against a min wage put forward on this thread. I hope I can at least offer an alternative point of view with regards to min wage without sounding like a prick.
Note I have no issues with helping the needy and the poor. It's my opinion that Singapore does need to work on it's support structure for those in need.
However, I am against a minimum wage as a means to achieve these ends because:
1. Setting the minimum wage
I can imagine it's absolutely hell to try and set a minimum wage. What is the minimum standard of living? How do we set a value for electricity, water, food (coffeeshop only , cannot buy drink), education, handphone, internet access (got free wireless so don't need), computer (only second-hand), movies only once a month, medical (can only get flu, if you kenna crabs, your own pasar) etc.
Bear in mind, setting too low a minimum wage has no impact and thus pointless. Setting one that is too high can create complications (some are detailed below)
2. Foreign workers in Singapore
Forget the FT with expat packages. Think about your domestic maids, construction workers etc. Is the minimum wage going to apply to them? I can imagine most Singaporeans don't want that - that will raise the cost of everything. I know there are arguments regarding the foreign workers having subsidized housing and what they send back is more than enough. So is it going to be only Singapore citizens can enjoy the min wage? Like we need something else to give us a superiority complex.
3. Reduced employment opportunities
Having a min wage can backlash to the workers. Employers prefer foreign labor because they are cheaper, even more so than now. People who want to work cannot work because the law sets a wage higher than the employer wishes to pay, even if the employees is willing to accept less. So the job is not created at all. What about part-time work - is the same or different? If different how to manage it?
And since it's Singapore, few are going to try pay less and break law.
4. Charity organizations - does the minimum wage apply? (no snide jokes about Singapore charities, ok.... = ) )
There are ways and means to help the truly poor and needy but I am not convinced a minimum wage is the way to go. -
well the swedes have the facts and statistics and ranking status to prove their point that their system is working..Originally posted by ispyyy:alamak ... same thing wat...
high wages given... means have to give more tax...
end of the day, it is still given back to the government...
It is just a play around with figures...
so not what that may not seem viable in signapore is not viable in other countries..spore gahmen shud take a lesson or two from the swede and denmark government.. but of course they can;t .. afterall ministers with a million dollar salaries are supposed to be teaching and not taking lessons from others with 1/5 of their salary right?
-
Originally posted by 4getmenot:well the swedes have the facts and statistics and ranking status to prove their point that their system is working..
so not what that may not seem viable in signapore may be not viable in other countries..spore gahmen shud take a lesson or two from the swede and denmark government.. but of course they can;t .. afterall ministers with a million dollar salaries are supposed to be teaching and are inventive, not taking lessons from others whos drawing 1/5 of their salary right? -
Please lah....I believe this argument is just an excuse to keep uncompetitive companies in Singapore from going out of business and also It is an excuse for SG Gov taking an easy way out.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The minimum wage is also often the maximum wage. Let market forces decide what is fair and equitable wages.
Market forces takes a long time....it need a push.
The minimum wage will not be the maximum wage. Even if you establish legal minimum wage, there will still be market forces interplay. Private company will always look for good worker to perform and will be willing to pay a little more than market price to get hard working individual rather than the unproductive worker.
Here is a real example:
I have ever walked towards a group of illegal Mexican and willing to pay $7.50 /hr and got reject flat out. nobody want to work at this “PRICE” --- $10/hr is the going rate. Plus target incentive. They rather stand in the sun all day and not take the $7.5 because they know it is $10 and they can get that amount.