Singapore Wages HIGHER than USA
-
Wednesday's - 27 August 2003 - Headlines in the Straits Times screamed that
" Singapore Wage Cost Burden is heavier than in the US " .
Surprisingly, the report only concentrated on the wages of the Singapore Workers but did not mention that Singapore POLITICIANS and MINISTERS have their wages bigger than those paid to US President and US Politicians.
While it was great to artificially forced wages to go up throughout the 1990's - so as to achieve the Swiss Standard of Living - somehow it was lost on the Government that Singapore Wages will outprice ourselves from the world.
Has the Singapore Government forgotten the purpose of Higher Wages during 1990's - (besides achieving a Swiss Standard of Living) ?
Have they forgotten that it was to force the Labor Intensive Industries to quit Singapore, and to force factories to retrain our Singapore Workers to take on HIGHER VALUE WORK ?
What has happened to all those glorious plans ?
Workers have been convinced to accept Companies cut to Workers' Pay so as to save jobs. Workers also have accepted retrenchment - or "restructuring" - to save the jobs of other fellow workers.
Now, despite all the brilliant plans cutting into Workers interests, the ultimate sacred cow (that belonged to LKY's 40% CPF Rate) is being offered to be slaughtered - yet the Singapore Government remained tight fisted in pump priming the economy, which the Malaysian Government had done 6 months ago that resulted in Wednesday announcement that Malaysia's ecnomy had a 4.9% growth during the second quarter of 2003.
Yet the Government held on to the various price increases in public transport, hospital fees, utility charges, telephone charges - until another surprised discovery has made us out to be higher than USA or Hong Kong or Timbuctoo. Until then, the Singapore Government might as well milk the Singapore Citizen Bulls and Cows until the milk runs out.
Wage cost burden heavier than in US
Quoting a Perc global survey, Deputy PM Tony Tan tells why it is urgent that costs are brought down through CPF rate cuts
By M. Nirmala
SINGAPORE'S workers have become more expensive than those in the United States and Australia, according to an international survey.
LABOUR COSTS
Grade
Japan 8.5
South Korea 6
Hong Kong 5.56
Singapore 5.5
Taiwan 5.33
US 5.07
Australia 4.8
Malaysia 3.9
Indonesia 3.33
Vietnam 3.33
Thailand 3
India 2.8
The Philippines 2.67
China 2
Grades range from zero to 10,with zero being the lowest cost possible and the the highest
Source: PERC
It shows Singapore is not just ahead of developing countries but also developed cities such as New York and Sydney.
This 'alarming' situation worries Deputy Prime Minister Tony Tan, who brought it up yesterday to show why the Central Provident Fund (CPF) rates must be cut swiftly and substantially.
The survey issued by the Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (Perc) firm on July 2 shows that on a scale of zero to 10, with zero being the lowest labour cost country, Singapore stood at 5.5, the fourth highest among 14 countries surveyed. This puts it ahead of the US (5.07) and Australia (4.8 ) .
'To me, this is a profoundly important statistic. It's a simple one but it gets to the nub of the problem. We have priced our labour out of the market,' Dr Tan told reporters, elaborating on a speech he made later at a dinner to celebrate the 35th anniversary of Sembawang Shipyard and its employees' union, and National Day.
He made it plain he was not expecting workers here to match the cheap wages of China and India or those of neighbouring countries.
'But it is crucial that we do not price ourselves ahead of developed countries which are also our competitors in the global market,' he said.
He acknowledged that obtaining a correct reading of the economic situation was difficult.
However, a meeting in June with US businessmen in New York led him to realise there was something amiss here. The Americans were confident of a resurgence in their economy but back home, he found companies continued to retrench.
'There was something more than the Sars' impact or other transitory factors. It must be a structural factor.'
The Perc report crystallised the problem: high wage costs.
Its labour cost index is derived from a survey of expatriates working in Asia, asking them to rate the country's labour cost. The finding is checked for consistency against its data on other labour costs.
The Perc survey also looked at overall costs of doing business, prime rents and utility costs, and Singapore did relatively better.
As Dr Tan pointed out, measures are in place to ease other business rigidities: Corporate tax will be cut to 20 per cent by 2005, many government charges have been cut or removed, and land prices are kept affordable.
The need now is to remove the rigidity in wage structure - the CPF rates, said Dr Tan.
It makes companies less flexible because it is 'a tax on cash flow'. By lowering it, more money is immediately available to keep companies viable, thus saving jobs.
'We have no choice but to reduce our CPF rates substantially and quickly if we want to save jobs,' he said, echoing similar calls made on Sunday by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong and Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.
Mr Goh had said the current 36 per cent could be lowered to possibly 30 per cent.
Yesterday, Dr Tan said: 'The more substantial the cut, the more likely you don't have to make another cut down the road.'
He assured Singaporeans of help: 'No Singaporean will lose his or her home or be denied medical care because of the cut in CPF. We will help Singaporeans to meet their mortgage payments.'
Poor families will also get aid for daily needs, he added.
Dr Tan's call for a CPF cut was supported last night by Mr M. Ramasamy, president of the Sembawang Shipyard Employees' Union.
He said: 'It's for our survival and we should have done it much earlier.'
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,206710,00.html? -
i'm no politician/economist..
but i take it that ur view is that the sg govt is now trying to lower our cost of labour (by cutting wages, cpf) but still inflating the costs of transport and utilities and the like, to pump money into the economy?
sorree if i've grossly misinterpreted, but it seems that's what's happening?
i guess i'll wait for other comments/explanations.
thanx for posting the article. -
that's what I intepret as well.
Pricing themselves out of the market. Very true.
In the end, I think not even high tech jobs will cost more, even manual work will also go up. -
Look, US federal government have very large reserves in their bank.
If current US government wanted to raise taxes to the people, they have strong opposition political parties to resist the move. Our government don't don't have that power of resisitance or to oppose. Every bill and act just pass like doctors faking MCs.
Look at Singapore. We have to raise taxes to pay for our government's bureaucracy-choked administration and its deficits here and there when evr we have an economy downturn. The federal US government all it needs to do is to withdraw a bit of reserves from their own bank, hence the people don't need to pay taxes as much. Thus the better ratio between their wages and cost of living. They are afterall a long-established nation but Singapore is younger. Very much younger.
It is not exactly about the wages that bother Singaporeans. It is the amount we have to pay for our cost of living using our wages.
Apart from the nonsensical people who says I don't have current money for cashflow beause I am asset rich with all the 5 or 6Cs I've got.
The rest of the Singaporeans who take buses or MRT are struggling.
That's why you see Singaporeans making a big fuss out of our mass transit fees, ERP fees, CPF and others. -
all i have to say is that the citizens of singapore voted the current political party to run as government so pls dun put the blame on the government.
BLAME YOURSELF!!!
-
Generally, the step they took is to show the world that Singapore is doing something to stop the rot in local economic. But they are kinda short sighted.
Reformative of wage structure, Wage cut, deduction of CPF, lowering Company taxes and income taxes dun at all help to shape things up. Rather, it is adding burden to it citizen; like us.
Most of our monthly salary/CPF is use to settle bills and housing loans. With the above like wage restructuring, wage cut, deduction of CPF was like adding kilos onto tons that was already on our shoulder. Our government turned blinded to the facts that it needs two hand to clap. If they are really out the help us, they should too lower our daily expenses at the same time ie, transport, all those stupid unnecessary taxes, daily expenses (food); generally the living standard in this island.
Sometime i really dun understand what those politician are thinking or are they being manuipilated by others behind the curtian? How is it possible to lower citizen wage but at the same time maintain the current living standard.
How many percentage of citizen gain from the company/income taxes rebate? Just a handful!!! And for that, they raise the GST to offset their lost. What is this? Just like their left hand pass you a bowl of rice and their right hand snatch it back from you.
One more thing, aint CPF our money. Why they say cut mean cut? Although, the cutting part is from the employer potion, but it is still our money, isnt it? What is the rational for the employers' potion of the CPF? Shouldnt they understand the rational before doing anything to it?
Richer will gets richer, by stepping over the poor!!!! Our economic will get unbalance, should the wage reform was implemented with CPF cut. The 1st option in my mind now is if possible, get out of this island. -
Don't you get it? Normal Singaporeans are but another material in the life support machine for the garmen called Singapore. The only problem is that this material is not very mallable and hence must be bashed to make it conform and it, and bashed into another shape once their purpose has been used up and needed for another thing.
I wonder if in singapore the pple serve the garmen or the garmen serve the pple... -
Originally posted by Atobe:
You often say this, but i would like to know where you get this source from.
[b]POLITICIANS and MINISTERS have their wages bigger than those paid to US President and US Politicians.
[/b]
Thank you. -
http://www.thinkcentre.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=2064Originally posted by CenturionMBT:You often say this, but i would like to know where you get this source from.
Thank you.
Excerpt from the posted URL:
1. Singapore Prime Minister's Basic Salary US$1,100,000 (SGD1,958,000) a year
Minister's Basic: US$655,530 to US$819,124 (SGD1,166,844 to SGD1,458,040) a year
2. United States of America President: US$200,000
Vice President: US$181,400
Cabinet Secretaries: US$157,000
3. United Kingdom Prime Minister: US$170,556
Ministers: US$146,299
Senior Civil Servants: US$262,438
4. Australia Prime Minister: US$137,060
Deputy Prime Minister: US$111,439
Treasurer: US$102,682
5. Hong Kong Chief Executive : US$416,615
Top Civil Servant: US$278,538
Financial Sec: US$315,077
Source: Asian Wall Street Journal July 10 2000
============================
Now whos wages are a bigger drain on the economy? Singaporeans, or their ministers? -
Now I'm no economist, but I really have to question the logic of the Perc survey, if its done the way which I think its done, ie. by comparing the wages of one country across the board vs that of another country.
Now my question is: Isn't it unfair to compare wages this way? Australia and US might be developed countries, but a large proportion of their workforces are employed in the agricultural and other low-paying sectors. Would it be fair to take into account the wages in, for example Iowa, South Carolina and North Dakota when comparing the wages in Singapore vs the US as a whole? I don't think so.
Wouldn't a comparison with countries like Singapore (eg Taiwan, Japan and HK), with small land areas, relatively high population density and highly urbanised people, seem to make more sense?
Just goes to show that you can use a set of statistics to skew a conclusion anyway you want it. -
Thanks to that "$ingapore $hare" prior to last GE, now these voters got their own taste of what vote-buying is about....Originally posted by windjammer:all i have to say is that the citizens of singapore voted the current political party to run as government so pls dun put the blame on the government.
BLAME YOURSELF!!!
Its pay-back time for the ruling party! It is time to ripe the reward they've sow....Squeeze you left, right and centre...from GST, CPF, foreign labour to even public transportation, Singaporeans are in for a few more "Good Years" !
THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH ! -
I'm a citizen of Singapore eligible to vote, but didn't because they government used some f***ed up non-existent security concern to prevent overseas Singaporeans from voting.Originally posted by windjammer:all i have to say is that the citizens of singapore voted the current political party to run as government so pls dun put the blame on the government.
BLAME YOURSELF!!!
Not to mention the ridiculous 9-day rule.
As for this government being voted in by Singaporeans, I wonder how many % of eligible Singaporeans voters actually voted. I ask again, can this government claim that it represents Singaporeans?
The state of Singapore politics is the perfect example of why proportional representation should be the way to go. -
Originally posted by Gun:
One side cheapens itself by stooping so low as to blatantly buy votes, the other cheapens itself by allowing itself to be bought for so paltry a sum. Sad....
Thanks to that "$ingapore $hare" prior to last GE, now these voters got their own taste of what vote-buying is about....
Its pay-back time for the ruling party! It is time to ripe the reward they've sow....Squeeze you left, right and centre...from GST, CPF, foreign labour to even public transportation, Singaporeans are in for a few more "Good Years" !
[b]THERE IS NO FREE LUNCH ![/b]
Hmmm...Cut CPF and confirm they will squeeze an extra 1% of GST on the same day. This government has really outdone itself today, even by its standards. -
All salaries indicated are Gross Salary per Year, unless otherwise stated.Originally posted by CenturionMBT:You often say this, but i would like to know where you get this source from.
Thank you.
US President Pay USD400,000 VP USD186,000
http://www.presidentsusa.net/presidents_salary.html
http://www.govspot.com/know/presidentsalary.htm
UK Prime Minister Salary StgPd 163,000
Cabinet Ministers Salary StgPd 100,000 – 118,000
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/1384245.stm
HK Tung Chee Hwa USD625,641
SGP Goh Chok Tong USD600,000
Japan PM USD 307,000
NZ PM USD 110,300
http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/east/06/24/Hongkong.cabinet/index.html
Taiwan President Chen Shui Bien NT$822,000 per month
http://www.taiwanheadlines.gov.tw/20000830/20000830p8.html -
the rice has been cooked, no point debating who voted or who did not. Singaporeans really never learn from the lessons of other countries.... look at the Indonesians and Filipinos .... the Suharto and Marcos era.... what happen to them???Originally posted by Viper52:I'm a citizen of Singapore eligible to vote, but didn't because they government used some f***ed up non-existent security concern to prevent overseas Singaporeans from voting.
Not to mention the ridiculous 9-day rule.
As for this government being voted in by Singaporeans, I wonder how many % of eligible Singaporeans voters actually voted. I ask again, can this government claim that it represents Singaporeans?
The state of Singapore politics is the perfect example of why proportional representation should be the way to go. -
That is the trouble when countries "TRUST" their leaders so much that they willingly worship them and entrust them that they will do good for the country.Originally posted by windjammer:the rice has been cooked, no point debating who voted or who did not. Singaporeans really never learn from the lessons of other countries.... look at the Indonesians and Filipinos .... the Suharto and Marcos era.... what happen to them???
While Marcos and Suharto did as much for their respective countries, they helped themselves to more, although in some very questionable and arbitrary ways.
In Singapore, we are more sophisticated, and legalistic, everything is done above board - by way of chairmanships, directorships, appointments in GLCs with shareholdings, fat salaries and bonus issues, bonus stocks, performance stock options, and any other creative form of political rewards.
One of the most famous line in the political career of LKY is:
"Fill the Stomach, and dull the Mind" .
Now that the Stomach will be going hungry - with the repeated belt tightening exercises, will the Mind slowly stir from its dullness ? -
Breaking News
Reduce cost of living and cut Ministers pay
(Think Centre)
28 August 2003 by J B Jeyaretnam
In all this hue and cry of the PAP leaders about our wage levels hindering economic growth, not one word has been said about the cost of living in Singapore.
The cost of living in Singapore is higher than even in the developed countries like Britain, Australia and even the United States, perhaps excepting New York.
Has it not occurred to this PAP government that if it wants the workers to accept lower wages, then it must set about reducing the cost of living especially in the areas of transport, medical care, school fees [why can't we afford free education at primary level at least] and rentals of stalls at markets and hawker centres.
I see DPM Tony wants wages reduced to below the United States.
The cost of wages paid to Ministers and Judges exceed well above that paid to Ministers in the United States and their Judges.
The Prime Ministers here gets three to four times that of the President.
What about bringing the wages of the Ministers and the Judges and even of the top civil servants to below that paid in the United States and other developed countries.
Shoudn't that be done first before calling on the workers to accept reduced wages.
The savings from a reduction in the Ministers' salaries to below the United States could then be channelled to pay for the cost of health care of citizens earning less than $1000-00 a month who should receive free medical care.
Why should it be the workers who have to make sacrifices for the country's economic growth.
Signed
J B Jeyaretnam
27th August 2003
http://www.thinkcentre.org/article.cfm?ArticleID=2160 -
The availibilty of free education or such for the lower income cluster would no doubt come as a timely rain.
Given the similar benefit that our fellow Malay community has been grant, it would not be difficult for schools to waive all of the fees off for those students who are currently under assistance schemes.
In addition in view of the coming 1% increase of GST to the previously announced 5% level, prehaps it would not also be too much to lobby for government polyclinics to at least provde free basic medical service to those needy families.
Even with the downslump, I dun foresee that the country will be threaten with a huge deficit if the above were to be materialized.
If the colonial British government could have provided the population with the same during the pre-independence era environment, it shouldn't be that difficult for the similar to be implemented under current day context. -
During the British Colonial Rule, there was no CPF system, which was implemented when Singapore became independent, and when the Ruling Party took over a Treasury that was empty.
To kick start the Government, CPF was implemented.
After more then twenty years, it probably dawn on the Government that with a shrinking population, the CPF system cannot possibly work in paying off the larger pool of retirees in a population that is experiencing zero growth.
Imagine a pyramid, in which the base is bigger that the peak.
As long as the base is continuously bigger - with population growth - the base will be able to support those age group that move up the ladder of the pyramid.
In a shrinking population, the pyramid will be inverted, with the pyramid being made to stand on its narrow peak.
This will be similar to a shrinking population having to support a large pool of retirees.
In a population size such as Singapore of 4,500,000 people and assuming that only 2,000,000 people are in the lower income group paying $500 per month of CPF, and another 500,000 people are in the upper middle income group paying $1,500 per month into CPF, and another 500,000 persons paying $2,000 per month to CPF.
This will result in an Monthly CPF Collection of $2,750,000,000.
In one year, the Annual CPF Collection will be $33,000,000,000.
In twenty years, the collected CPF amount - BEFORE interest is added - will be $660,000,000,000.
This amount collected will need to be returned to the CPF Acount Holders.
With the CPF monies being largely in non-liquid assets held in Government Investments, how can this amount be returned.
Could this be the reason for the numerous schemes to prevent "one time withdrawal" on reaching retirement age, and the supposed necessity to keep some for the later years, essential minimum sums in Medisave and Medishield, and the insistence to pay cash for some medical services, as well as the high priced hospital charges even with Government subsidies ? -
I got no choice, i am 30+, Singapore citizen but cant vote!!!!!!! WHY???!!! It is a walkover for my area...what a pity!!!