Vivian's "Bar top dancing will result in murder" Singapore.
If it was a woman making that kind of statement I can sort of understand...
Originally posted by kivichio:
Understood Atobe, perhaps I was a little hasty in saying "bitching". No reason why we have to resort to personal attacks and that was admittedly hitting below the belt. But to respond to your queries:
Great to know that you are able to change your opinion.
In any case, one should be prepared to accept the same as what one can deliver, which makes me unable to resist but to compare to the Singapore Political Leadership being unable to accept the same robust treatment that they will so uninhibitedly dish out to the members of the Alternative Parties.
a) Lowering the gas tax essentially means lowering the price of fuel at the pump. I understand the difference between subsidies and removal of taxes, but in both cases you are stimulating relative demand. I do not argue prices may not continue to increase if oil prices increase, but you're essentially rewarding those who use fuel and removing an impt revenue source. Do you not understand the same debate is flaring in the US, where every economist in the land has derided Hillary's campaign promise to revise fuel taxes. Same rules here.
How can demand be stimulated when the number of cars are also modulated through the COE mechanism ?
Why will you doubt the ability of this Government to find alternative means to regain their revenue even as they remove some existing one ?
Rest assured that this Government will not allow any reward to those who use fuel and remove the important revenue source - as the Government can easily make the usage of cars to be made more prohibitive by extending the network of ERP gantries, raising the ERP charges, and prolonging its operating hours; as well as by other revenue collection means such as public car parking rates.
As matters stand, this Government has already begun to quietly spring onto Singaporeans - on a regular annual basis - additional ERP gantries, extending operating hours, increasing ERP charges - all done without even the Road Tax being further reduced as ''assured so convincingly by Minister MBT when the ERP was first introduced when he was the Transport Minister..
b) As to you thinking of a breakdown in public transport systems due to singaporeans not able to take buses/mrts... Well the substitution effect of those choosing to take public transport over their now much more expensive automobiles have actually helped increase ridership. As to R&D for fuel alternatives to oil... are you serious? You want Singapore to fund research for this when supernations like the US as well as private investments are already channeling billions into alternative energy research?
The public transport system is not immune from the market forces nor from the cyclical global stresses hitting the Singapore economy.
Taxis are already affected with a lower passenger count, and soon with the proposed buses being allowed again to operate on the same routes as the MRT - there is a definite cost advantage for the public to take the bus over the train.
The public transport system cannot satisfy the innate human desire to own an automobile for varied personal reasons; and the Weekend Car may probably become more popular although limited by a reduced COE available monthly.
Why should Singapore not invest money in R&D for an alternative oil substitute - especially when it has a large global market ?
By your reasoning that if super-nations are pouring billions into searching for alternative energy resources, Singapore should not put our toe into this area. We should then ask why will Singapore also invest monies in R&D into Defense Science when Supernations are already in the cutting edge of defense technology ?
Similarly, why will the Singapore Government draw more foreign investments into Singapore and also investing in their local ventures in Bio-Science and Pharmaceutical R&D in competition with the leading centres around the globe ?
There are niche areas where the supernations are taking a different track from what can be done in Singapore - such as putting money in accelerating the R&D in the use of palm oil as an alternative fuel source when we can capitalise on the abundance of this commodity in South-east Asia.
Singapore can take a lead role in R&D to assist the neighboring countries in the R&D for new and improved strains of palm oil that will produce higher yield per acre of land in these countries.
c)when talking about welfare services you use Sweden as a comparison, well you state that "they take a fixed sum up front." Feel free to move to a country which takes just a hair under 50% of GDP in taxation income. I'll be happy to take the 20-25% income tax and GST anytime over that... Hidden taxes? Ummm GST is as crystal clear as you can get... Also, please note that Sweden is much larger than Singapore, has a hinterland which is resource rich. Do we also have cheap hydropower to draw upon?
The tax structure maybe hefty on the Swedes, yet they are a happy and contented lot with a population that is faster growing than the other neighboring European countries with lower tax rates. The Swedes are a happier community and more so when compared to Singaporean with your supposed idea of a lower tax environment.
This is largely due to the fact that even as the income tax structure placed onto the working Singaporean maybe low, there is a plethora of Government Revenue mechanism that is daily raping our wallets as Singaporeans go about their social and economic activities.
Yes, the 7% GST is crystal clear and is all encompassing in every commercial activity that Singaporeans consume and add to the low tax rate that is imposed on income.
Did you overlook the other hidden tax paid by Singaporeans - that will include the import duties paid on luxury items, with the retail prices again being levied the 7% GST ?
Similar examples exist in the sale of automobiles when the PARF tax on the imported car is computed into its final retail price that is subjected to 7% GST - resulting in GST tax being levied on the amount stated as PARF tax. Please correct me if I am wrong, and I stand to be corrected on this.
You may claim that not all Singaporeans can afford to purchase a car, we can take the basic item of electricity, with the tax on fuel used to generate electricity being priced into the electrical charges, and our Utility Bill being charged a 7% GST again.
The infrastructure cost for sanitation is paid through tax revenues collected, yet Singaporeans are again charged on a monthly basis for the number of toilets installed per household. This computation method may soon be changed to sanitation charges being computed from an arbitrary estimated percentage of the amount of fresh water used and enter the sewer system.
Yes, GST is also to be paid on top of the sanitation charges.
The cost of hospital and medical care is being recovered from Singaporeans who are unfortunate to succumb to the necessity of using these facilities; and despite the cost being supposedly subsidised. There is no knowing if these artificially and arbitrary priced medical bills are not first raised before being lowered by supposed subsidies, and with the final balance actually being the true amount to be paid and not subsidised.
We should be astounded that despite our stronger Singapore Dollar, the cost of our medical services is not lower when compared to similar services provided in facilities with similar medical standards and best practises as in Thailand - where the medical staff is also FT, or similarly local Thais scholars receiving medical training abroad in similar institutions attended by Singapore students.
Sweden maybe a large country with a bigger hinterland with hydro-electric power{?}, however, do you know that most part of the country is inaccessible and uninhabitable for most part of the year ?
With a population that is only twice that of Singapore - 9,045,389 vs 4,608,167 - Sweden has some surprises when one compare her with Singapore in the manner that public funds are collected and results achieved.
Distribution of Family Income - 2007 Gini Index: Sweden 22, Singapore 42.5 with the value 0 being the most equitable.
{source: http://www.swivel.com/graphs/show/20429046 }
.
Budget 2007: Sweden - Revenue $241.2 Billion Expenditure $229.1 Billion; Singapore Revenue $27 Billion Expenditures $21.5 Billion
Public Debt 2007:: Sweden 41.9% of GDP; Singapore 101.2% of GDP - this item consist the cumulative total of all government borrowings less repayments that are denominated in a country's home currency.
GDP [purchasing power parity] 2007: Sweden $333.1 billion; Singapore $222.7 Billion
{source:
Sweden : https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sw.html -
Singapore: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sn.html
d)affordable housing for all. By this I don't mean everyone can afford to buy a HDB flat. That's not a god given right, but the Singapore gvt has subsidized public housing so having a place to live in while difficult for poorer income groups, are still within their reach. But as always, gvts cannot and should not cater to the lowest common denominator otherwise you end up with a welfare state like the US with its attendant problems
Singapore government subsidise public housing ? This must be the joke of the century when this Government will seize private land at below market rate compensation and sell the home with the cost of land based on market prices.
The US Government do not involve itself in any direct public housing construction on the scale of the Singapore Government, which has made Public Housing an profitable enterprise in itself.
Your postion in not catering to the lowest denominator will only result in Class division, a proposition that is against the social grain of the Ruling Political Party in levelling the field for all.
Anyway, let's agree to disagree. I personally feel Singapore has done a great job by all the relevant benchmarks. Everyone has their own opinions and all the data spouted here won't change most who are committed to their viewpoints, be it yours or mine.
It all depends on the benchmark that one prefer to use to measure the state of affairs in Singapore. It is always convenient to compare ourselves with the lowest denominator, so that Singapore will always be in the superlative class - which I presume you will surely not approve given your earlier position on this.
If we strive to be in the same league as the First World, surely it is not too much to measure ourselves using the same standards as the First World; otherwise are we not deluding ourselves into complacency ?
If we always agree to disagree to avoid confronting the issues - can such a status quo lead to any progress to understanding the truth and find a way out of the quagmire ?
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:robertteh, what is your impression about the people at youngpap?
Are they brainwashed by PAP propaganda?
And you would be the first person on this forum to be brainwash by PAP mentality.