All out to defame our governement
-
wao lao, dun say this man..very bad lehOriginally posted by maurizio13:Nah! Your wife and girlfriend gave me some french lessons in kissing.
-
Going by your argument, the road sweeper in Switzerland, Sweden, Finland and Norway should be making the same as a road sweeper in China or India.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:If the skills of our workers lag behind those of cheaper economies, their salaries will drop. At the moment, our workers are still paid much higher salaries than their counterparts in China/India but our productivity is not rising fast enough to justify the salary differential. In contrast, the skills of our top earners, the professionals and high level managers are in demand because their salaries, though high, are not as high as their competitors in the MNCs and foreign firms. Therefore the salaries of our top earners will only rise. If a local investment banker does better than one in London but draws half the pay, he can expect his salary to rise even further even though he already earns 100k a month.
But is this happening?
All your post bears resemblance to one another, globalisation, keep wages low to remain competitive and lower taxes to attract investments. Can you come up with any new arguments, as all these points have been rebutted by me and you did not come up with any conclusive points henceforth.
Actually a more efficient way for you is to start a thread with all these points, then when some opposing post comes up, just point them to the thread. Since you "claim" that you are a doctor, the opportunity cost is high for you to partake in arguments in forums, you should learn to be more efficient, else you will bring down the standard of NHS.
Hehehe -
Employers need expertise to move to China, Indonesia and Thailand, you must think that any Tom, Dick and Harry can move to China as and when they like. There are invisible cost involved to, GuanXi (connections with officials), corporation tax of 33%, infrastructure (depending on where you locate your factory, you might have to pay more transport moving it to port), communication, political risk (risk of an overheated economy causing riots or protest), expropriation, etc.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Not necessary. If you put in a minimum wage that is too high, the workers will be happy and you will cut the number of low-skilled foreign workers; but employers will move their factories to cheaper economies in Indonesia, Thailand and China. If you set the minimum wage low, that employers will use that as the maximum wage.
Artificially setting a wage distorts the market. Let the market decide the right wage.
Isn't the NTUC already setting the wage rate in the market? Who decides what is the right wage rate? An independent union fighting for the rights of workers; or a government controlled body fighting for the rights of the worker. I think this government controlled union is only specific to Singapore, apart from the MM & SM issue & the salaries of ministerial appointees. -
Another flawed logic.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Education is the best tool for upward mobility and it is available to all in Singapore. Of course not every has the same talents and not everyone will do as well, but they will be worse off without it. The pay gap will continue to increase. The effect of globalisation means there is greater mobility of both capital and labour. Talented workers from China are now able to compete directly with our own. If we do not upgrade the skills of our workers, they may even lose their low-paying jobs.
Let's say in the past, a doctor makes $10,000 while a labourer makes $1,000
With effects of globalisation, doctors get to make $11,000 while a labourer makes $900. So with globalisation the doctor performing the same job has gotten smarter, while the labourer has gone dumber like you.
Globalisation can only cause an equalisation of wages, not increase the income gap.
You are correct, there is no cure for your stupidity, you should get a lobotomy. Seriously, if I were you I'd wear a doggie (pun intended) bag over my head when I go out. -
If what you say is true, we should be getting "Made in China" Rolex, Patek Phillipe, Franck Muller, IWC, Porsche, Ferraris, Boeing and Airbus. Why haven't these products shifted operations to China, India, Indonesia or Thailand? Same logic between OM and the government, because they have been constantly aiming low, not high. Therefore when you aim low, you get lower, when you aim high you get higher. Let's face it, no matter what happens, you cannot compete with China or India in terms of labour cost for the next 15-20 years, China's population is 1.3 billion and the GDP per head is only $1,470 compared to our $24,840.The strategy crafted by the ruling elites and supported by you has the same effect as banging your head against a concrete wall. They say numbers does not win a war, but strategy and valour does. But let's face it, if China's population each spits at OM once, he will be drowning in their spit.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Look, if I employ a worker $600 a month to make plastic moulds in Singapore, I can just about keep the factory going and earn just about enough profits to make it worth my while. If you force me to pay the worker $800 a month, I will have to close my factory and bring it to China, where I can pay my staff $300 a month.
Who loses more? The Singaporean worker or the Chinese worker? Which is worse? To earn $600 a month or be unemployed? -
I suppose all those Indian, Bangladeshi, Chinese, Indonesian, Filipino and Thais that come here are all better educated and more productive than Singaporeans.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Japanese and Korean workers are on average, better educated and more productive. One must not forget that these countries are also more expensive...there is a general correlation between cost of living and salaries.
Right general correlation between cost of living and salaries! Singapore is the country with a negative correlation between cost of living and salaries; cost of living goes up, but salaries go down.
Irrelevant propaganda to placate the peasants again.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Think of Sweden, it has a very narrow wage gap. They have high taxes and a generous welfare scheme. But the richest man in the world, the Ikea boss, is from Sweden. Many of the high net-worth individuals escape the taxes by financial arrangements that on paper, shows them as earning very little:
" In total, these two groups suffered tax bills of a mere €19m in 2004 on their combined profits of €553m. Clearly, the Kamprad family pays the same meticulous attention to tax avoidance as IKEA does to low prices in its stores."
http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=6919139
It is the richest people that can hire the top lawyers and accountants to avoid taxes legally through every loophole possible. There was even recent news about a member of the House of Lords in UK who is non-resident in Britain...a tax exile.
Yay!!! You agree that protectionism will work for us!!!Originally posted by oxford mushroom:You can keep the salary gap small by protectionism against the forces of globalisation. But Singapore is a small economy. We have come so far through globalisation. Protectionism will be work for us. -
OM practises double standard. All the while he is against protectionism, now talk about it!!! ha ha ha, what a good laugh!!!Originally posted by maurizio13:Yay!!! You agree that protectionism will work for us!!! -
Double Standard? No. He only cares about his pocket. Nothing more. The Amorality may seem surprising, but hey, it's only typical of morons such as him to justify with silly rationales and contradictions just to get what he wants.Originally posted by rane:OM practises double standard. All the while he is against protectionism, now talk about it!!! ha ha ha, what a good laugh!!!
And what do we usually label them? Extremists. -
Let me paint a scenario to all of you:
Let's assume that Person 1 and Person 2 collectively earn $4,500/mth. (Median household income for 2006)
http://www.singstat.gov.sg/papers/op/op-s12.pdf
Table 2 (pg 5 of 15)
They decide to buy a 4 room flat valued at $280,000. They have $50,000 in their CPF - OA. As they are first time buyers, they shall enjoy the concessionary rate of 2.6% p.a and settle on a loan tenure of 30 years.
CPF Home Affordability Calculator
Housing Loan and Use of CPF for Housing
Based on the inputs and the assumptions adopted, the total payments for your housing loan and other housing payments are estimated to be:
Estimated housing loan is : $ 224,000
Estimated interest on the loan is : $ 98,920
CPF Balances
Based on the inputs and the assumptions adopted, your CPF balances on reaching 55 years old and the CPF Minimum Sum you might be able to set aside are:
------------------------------------------------------------- Person 1 Person 2
Ordinary Account balance : ----------------------- $103,768 $103,768
Special Account balance : -------------------------$81,073 $81,073
CPF Minimum Sum set aside : --------------------$158,100 $158,100
CPF balance (after set aside Minimum Sum) : $26,741 $26,741
Based on the inputs and the assumptions adopted, the Minimum Sum that you might have at 55 and the monthly retirement income that you might receive from age 62 are:
-------------------------------------------------------------------- Person 1 Person 2
Applicable CPF Minimum Sum at 55 : ------------------ $158,100 $158,100
Projected Minimum Sum set aside in cash at 55 : -- $158,100 $158,100
which is equal to (% of applicable Minimum Sum) : 100 % 100 %
Estimated monthly income from 62 : ----------------- $1,249 $1,249
Estimated duration of monthly income (years) : ---------20 20
http://www.cpf.gov.sg/cpf_trans/ssl/financial_model/NewHAC/Home_Afford_calc.asp
The amount of $26,471 is the lump sum that Person 1 and 2 shall each receive once the minimum sum of $158,100 has been set aside at age 55.
Amount of $1,249/mth is the money that Person 1 and 2 shall each receive from age 62 till age 82.
Are the above enough for retirement from year 2039 till 2059? -
You forgot to factor one thing: Possible forced retirement and depletion of income due to age. At age 40, they practically have nothing left.
-
Very good point. I did not factor this in so that when criticism pours in, I can bring issues like this up.Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:You forgot to factor one thing: Possible forced retirement and depletion of income due to age. At age 40, they practically have nothing left.
Criticism such as "what makes you think pay will stagnate?" You know what I mean...... -
THIS is the first time I've heard about globalisation bringing about income equalisation.Originally posted by maurizio13:Nadah!!! Globalisation brings about income equalisation, it does not lead to greater income gap. There is a difference you know. What you said in an earlier post relates to you all this while, "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".
o.O
Umm. I've posted this question to a certain minister. Anyway, globalisation brings about a rising Gini index. Almost all developed nations have rising Gini coefficients. Internationalisation is unavoidable in this current age as international trade is getting more prevalent. This would ensure more or less an economic success, yet it creates a disjoint society whereby the different socio-economic groups are moving apart.
Since Singapore is never a welfare state, the government cannot really do anything to help them directly. There will be many groups of people who are "left behind", as they do not benefit from the Workfare Income Supplement. These recent GST hikes to help the poor is also not too effective.
Take a look at some of the stats that I've done. It's on page 15 of this topic.
Anyway, if you're interested in what the minister replied, the gist is that globalisation is beneficial to the general state of the nation. Singapore would not retard her growth due to the "incompetent few", those who were left behind. The govt would try to help by reviewing the Workfare scheme every 4 years. -
the minister reply is very harsh and cruel. Judging by this statement i presume that now Singaporeans have to compete with the worlds' workforce. If we are competing with such a huge talent pool and with many handicaps no wonder there will be many "incompetent few"Originally posted by gevo:Anyway, if you're interested in what the minister replied, the gist is that globalisation is beneficial to the general state of the nation. Singapore would not retard her growth due to the "incompetent few", those who were left behind. The govt would try to help by reviewing the Workfare scheme every 4 years. -
by the way, the manpower minister is hopeless. From his interview, I see that he will not go all the way to service the nation. He is better off go back to SGH and be the surgeon there. Don't think he has got the calibre to be a politician! He made a lousy manpower minister!!Originally posted by gevo:THIS is the first time I've heard about globalisation bringing about income equalisation.
o.O
Umm. I've posted this question to a certain minister. Anyway, globalisation brings about a rising Gini index. Almost all developed nations have rising Gini coefficients. Internationalisation is unavoidable in this current age as international trade is getting more prevalent. This would ensure more or less an economic success, yet it creates a disjoint society whereby the different socio-economic groups are moving apart.
Since Singapore is never a welfare state, the government cannot really do anything to help them directly. There will be many groups of people who are "left behind", as they do not benefit from the Workfare Income Supplement. These recent GST hikes to help the poor is also not too effective.
Take a look at some of the stats that I've done. It's on page 15 of this topic.
Anyway, if you're interested in what the minister replied, the gist is that globalisation is beneficial to the general state of the nation. Singapore would not retard her growth due to the "incompetent few", those who were left behind. The govt would try to help by reviewing the Workfare scheme every 4 years.
He is just wasting taxpayers' $$$. -
Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:Double Standard? No. He only cares about his pocket. Nothing more. The Amorality may seem surprising, but hey, it's only typical of morons such as him to justify with silly rationales and contradictions just to get what he wants.
And what do we usually label them? Extremists. extremist - "terrorist"!! He is really typically "ba dao"! -
Furthermore, global integration should not only focus on economic prosperity but ensure a certain living standard to all citizens, guarantee substantive equality, and advance income equalization and full employment on a global scale.Originally posted by gevo:THIS is the first time I've heard about globalisation bringing about income equalisation.
o.O
Umm. I've posted this question to a certain minister. Anyway, globalisation brings about a rising Gini index. Almost all developed nations have rising Gini coefficients. Internationalisation is unavoidable in this current age as international trade is getting more prevalent. This would ensure more or less an economic success, yet it creates a disjoint society whereby the different socio-economic groups are moving apart.
Since Singapore is never a welfare state, the government cannot really do anything to help them directly. There will be many groups of people who are "left behind", as they do not benefit from the Workfare Income Supplement. These recent GST hikes to help the poor is also not too effective.
Take a look at some of the stats that I've done. It's on page 15 of this topic.
Anyway, if you're interested in what the minister replied, the gist is that globalisation is beneficial to the general state of the nation. Singapore would not retard her growth due to the "incompetent few", those who were left behind. The govt would try to help by reviewing the Workfare scheme every 4 years.
I meant equalisation of income in the global market, has nothing to do with individual country. An engineer working in India will get roughly the same as an engineer in the USA. Didn't mean the specific country income equalisation per se. -
$1.5 million for 3 properties? Private or HDB? Doesn't take a rocket scientist to cure this speculation ill, you only need curb the speculation, have more restrictions.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:It's due to speculation, mainly by Singaporeans incidentally. The ST recently reported about even undergrads who pool their resources to speculate in property. We have 35 year-olds who borrow 1.5 million from the banks and own three properties. This is not sustainable and I expect the property bubble to burst. But if prices drop, Singaporeans will also complain and blame the government because their main asset, their properties, have tumbled in value.
The government has a tough time trying to keep prices low enough for people like me who want to buy and property owners who want the prices to stay high.
The private property market has an impact on publich housing as well because they compete for the same pool of buyers. Now if the government no longer allows HDB flats to be sold freely in the open market , say set a price cap on the resale value of HDB flats, the cost of public housing will drop.
But will Singaporeans be happy? With the majority of Singaporeans owning a HDB flat, you will have a revolt.
The government trying to keep prices low? HDB hasn't been transparent about it's pricing policy, from the what I see it's a cost + profits kind of pricing system.
In the first place, the government was wrong to allow resale in the private market. But they still persist in that direction.
If you are holding the property as your permanent abobe, it wouldn't make a difference if the price is $250,000 or $150,000. If you sell your house you end up without a roof over you head, unless you are holding it for speculative purposes. The ruling party only wants the peasant to have an illusionary effect, thinking that they have an expensive property, they have accomplished something in life. Hehehe.....Not knowing that if they sell their property, they won't have a place to live. -
Economy doing well? All these stock market talk, you regurgitate from the news huh?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Multiple factors. The economy is doing well currently, the bank interest rates are too low, the stocks market is booming but there are concerns over the Chinese and US stock markets...people looking for ways to take profits and park their money elsewhere, the IR coming and expected to bring in more tourists...more accommodation and higher rental prices, more FTs coming in along with government's plan to increase population further to support economic growth....
Didn't know casino punting tourist stay in HDB these days. Times must be really bad. -
A pooch is not capable of independent thought, a pooch can only perform what his master tells him to. So........How can he ever answer your question? Unless his master tells him what to say.Originally posted by Rock^Star:I'm afraid you haven't answered my question.
You said: At the moment, our workers are still paid much higher salaries than their counterparts in China/India but our productivity is not rising fast enough to justify the salary differential. In contrast, the skills of our top earners, the professionals and high level managers are in demand because their salaries, though high, are not as high as their competitors in the MNCs and foreign firms. Therefore the salaries of our top earners will only rise.
I asked: Based on the above in relativity to China and India, please educate me on how Japan, South Korea and even EU countries can keep their income disparity lower than us?
Are Chinese and Indian workers not cheaper but also equally productive compared to the Japanese, Koreans and EU nations?
So please answer in relativity to China and India. -
Think you have a comprehension problem, your post hardly answered Rock^Star, it just side track the whole issue as usual. Below is Rock^Star's original post.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:I can explain to you. I cannot understand for you. This was my reply 9edited typo errors), what is it you do not understand?
"Japanese and Korean workers are on average, better educated and more productive. One must not forget that these countries are also more expensive...there is a general correlation between cost of living and salaries.
Think of Sweden, it has a very narrow wage gap. They have high taxes and a generous welfare scheme. But one of the richest man in the world, the Ikea boss, is from Sweden. Many of the high net-worth individuals escape the taxes by financial arrangements that on paper, shows them as earning very little:
" In total, these two groups suffered tax bills of a mere €19m in 2004 on their combined profits of €553m. Clearly, the Kamprad family pays the same meticulous attention to tax avoidance as IKEA does to low prices in its stores."
http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=6919139
It is the richest people that can hire the top lawyers and accountants to avoid taxes legally through every loophole possible. There was even recent news about a member of the House of Lords in UK who is non-resident in Britain...a tax exile.
You can keep the salary gap small by protectionism against the forces of globalisation. But Singapore is a small economy. We have come so far through globalisation. Protectionism will not work for us."
Income disparity can be narrowed if our low paid workers work in wafer fabs instead of selling cosmetic jewelry, or work in shipyards instead of doing general clerical work. However, I do not think we should aim for income parity...even the communists have learnt that it does not work. What we should go for is an increasing pay for all workers with the possibility of social mobility up the ladder.
Globalisation might not work in every country's favour. The benefits of Globalisation resides in the theory of Comparative Advantage, which has been debunked.
Rock^Star ask that you explain the mechanics of how China & India is able to keep their income disparity to a minimum. You give people c0ck and bull story about tax avoidance to widen the income disparity.
How does moving from one low paying job to another low paying job decrease the income disparity in aggregate terms (whole economy)? Then who do you suggest takes over the job of cosmetic sales and clerical work? Are there enough jobs in the wafer fabs or shipyards for all?
You trying the Emperor's New Clothes strategy, if you don't understand, you must be stupid.Originally posted by Rock^Star:I'm afraid you haven't answered my question.
You said: At the moment, our workers are still paid much higher salaries than their counterparts in China/India but our productivity is not rising fast enough to justify the salary differential. In contrast, the skills of our top earners, the professionals and high level managers are in demand because their salaries, though high, are not as high as their competitors in the MNCs and foreign firms. Therefore the salaries of our top earners will only rise.
I asked: Based on the above in relativity to China and India, please educate me on how Japan, South Korea and even EU countries can keep their income disparity lower than us?
Are Chinese and Indian workers not cheaper but also equally productive compared to the Japanese, Koreans and EU nations?
So please answer in relativity to China and India. -
I wonder how many scholarships they give out each year? Enough for all the poor gifted students; or just a handful.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Not true. If you have the talent, you are not denied educational opportunities in Singapore. I know that from my own experience and I have also mentioned the ST senior writer whose father is a cab driver. My father earned even less than a cab driver...he couldn't have afforded the education I had. There are scholarships and busaries available. If you have the talent, you can go all the way to Oxbridge and Ivy league colleges...the government and various stat boards will fund you. Those who are not good enough for a scholarship can get bank loans and busaries...if you can get into one of our local Unis, you will not be denied an education because you cannot afford the fees.
Those who are less talented will not do as well, but not because of financial reasons. -
HDB is overpriced!!! Why there are 80% of Singaporeans living in them? What is the other alternative? Private housing? Which is even more expensive. Rental market? If you pay $1,000 a month rental for 20 years, the amount you have paid would have gotten you the apartment. Therefore it made more sense to buy than lease. Singaporeans don't have a choice, that's why 80% of them were "persuaded" into buying HDB.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:It does. The new flats from HDB are not overpriced. If they are, we won't have 80% of Singaporeans living in them. Consider this, do you expect the government to sell you a heavily subsidised, new 5-room flat for only 50k, so that you can sell it in the resale market for 250k? The government has 2-room flats and rental flats for the very poor for almost nothing. But for the rest of Singaporeans, the CPF investment in a new subsidized HDB flat is almost guranteed to increase the value of your assets.
But I do not think it is fair for the government to subsidize too much using tax payers' money. If you think the private sector can build HDB flats more cheaply, then they are welcome to bid for it, as they now do.
Did the government really subsidise the public housing? Cost of building apartment $50,000 + profits $150,000, they give you subsidy of $50,000, they still make $100,000.
Come on! Don't be naive, did you really think the government really dip into taxpayer's money to help subsidise HDB housing. -
For more than 40 years, the closet has never been opened for airing, the air in the closet is stale and there might be more skeletons in the closet than you think there are.Originally posted by mistyblue:There is never a perfect system. People always want to air their views.
However, if the system is so fearful of the truth coming out, then this is a big question to ask. Why is it so. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
What's worse is that there are restrictions against renting HDB flats. Here in the US, not everyone owns a house, but rents. They only buy a house only if they plan to stay some place for a few years. Also, a nice house costs much less than a flat.
HDB is overpriced!!! Why there are 80% of Singaporeans living in them? What is the other alternative? Private housing? Which is even more expensive. Rental market? If you pay $1,000 a month rental for 20 years, the amount you have paid would have gotten you the apartment. Therefore it made more sense to buy than lease. Singaporeans don't have a choice, that's why 80% of them were "persuaded" into buying HDB.
Did the government really subsidise the public housing? Cost of building apartment $50,000 + profits $150,000, they give you subsidy of $50,000, they still make $100,000.
Come on! Don't be [b]naive, did you really think the government really dip into taxpayer's money to help subsidise HDB housing.
[/b]
And HDB has yet to reply to the ST Forum letters some years back. How about OM do us a favour and reply for them? Their silence is deafening. -
After being confronted with so much facts, I think oxford mushroom has gone underground again. He is a master tactician in gorilla warfare (pun intended), hit and run. Think he should now be hiding in Changi Village leading a double life as a proper gander (pun intended).
I am still waiting for his "I don't reply to illogical rants", since that's his modus operandi when he is not able to refute the facts presented.