Singapore as first world-Lee's personal dream?
-
Originally posted by Gedanken:Well, how are we to know if anybody else can implement their ideas if they're now allowed to? An opposition member wins a seat in parliament, and suddenly there are difficulties in the construction of an MRT station in that area. Another constituency votes an opposition menber in, and by the next election it ceases to exist as a voting constituency.
Sunny, how can any oppostion members demonstrate their abilities when the big boys use their power to shut them down? Certainly LKY has delivered the goods in the past, but how can we tell how good he really is if it's a one-man competition?
yup. i agree nobody plays that game better than Mr CEO. but maybe it's because he's the only player. absolute power shouldn't exist. -
Human nature dictates that if I was an all-powerful gar'men, I would try to create as many sunnies as possible, and when that is acomplished, use their unthinking nature and irrational and ignorant tendency to steer towards stability and security at all costs to loot them for as much as possible.
Of course, having already lost his ability to reason, Sunny is non-the-wiser. -
Hey guys sorry late reply!
However the world has moved on since then, we have moved on. The old formula of attracting MNCs here because we can produce what they want to produce at the lowest price with the highest level of stability are over. We are being beaten at that game from countries all over Asia.
In terms of manpower cost and raw materials, Singapore is definitely losing out to countries like China, Bangladesh and other SEA countries. Thus, by losing a substantial portion of our manufacturing base, lots of jobs are being lost and pays being cut. this move is to maintain competitiveness. But i think that the govt realises that Singapore is gradually and ultimately will lose its edge in these old-line industries as we cannot compete with places that have huge populations, lower costs and a heck lot more resources. Which is why they are emphasising a shift towards more high-tech and cutting edge industries such as medical sci, services and education. Of course alot of the middle class families employed in those sectors are going to lose out, but that is why there are so many campaigns for skill-upgrading. Most to most, they shld try campaign for much better unemployment benefits.The reasons for this are many, not least because of PAP interference that has seen costs here shoot up a lot higher than IMO they should be, making Singapore and Singaporeans uncompetitive. Getting us to accept less pay, while expecting us to pay more and more, will not work and will fly in their faces, sooner or later. Anyone who believes that Singaporean workers cost more than American or Australian ones should be shot. And I don't want to say what I think of the so-and-so who said that to us in the first place.
I definitely agree that the government is way too rich for their own good from all the taxes and such. Their budget surpluses is a really thorninthe side for many who feel that it could be put to much better use. Not to mention that there are several economic reports stating that teh presence of accumulated surpluses will be detrimental to the econ growth of singapore in the future.
About Singapore workers costing more, i would have to say that its pretty justified. Practically every Singaporean is educated up till tertiary level, and the investment by families in sending their kids to university only demands that by the time their kid enters the workforce, he/she shouldbe getting decent pay. Thus, with a highly educated workforce that demands pay equal to their skills, the only alternative to be more competitive is pay cuts. In place like the US etc,their populations are much larger and not all have access to education like the Singaporean community does. -
This economy has grown like it's on steroids. However, like in the case of steroids, one needs to be aware of the side-effects. Are they going to result in malformations of the organs that will eventually kill or cripple the user?
Ged, love your use of analogies! I believe that my reply to viper in essence answered your argument regarding manufacturing and otehr old-line industries. Now I'll deal with your points on brain-drain and lack of entrepreneural spirit.Right now, as a First World country by economic standards, Singapore would probably best be served by market creation, rather than by fighting for market share (which really depends on your ability to deliver better value per dollar than other countries). A good example of market creation is Creative Technology’s introduction of the Sound Blaster, but nobody seems to have been able to follow suit. Creative’s director, Sim Wong Hoo, lists “being creative” as one of his hobbies. Unfortunately, as the government itself has acknowledged through things like its entrepreneurship drives, Singaporeans are not being creative enough. For the first 25 years or so of independence, Singapore’s success was built upon the ability of the people to shut up, follow orders and in so doing get the overall effort to progress as rapidly as possible. That ability has not been replaced by the required creativity, and has become an unwelcome side effect of those economic steroids - we have not adapted to the new game as dictated by the change in the country’s circumstances.
The thing about starting a business or spearheading product development here is that there are very high elements of risk. The lack of entreprenuers in Singapore can in main part be attributed to the Singaporean mindset of wanting to play it safe, toe the line and so on. Indeed, Singaporeans have developed a complacency intheir economic well-being, believing that the government would take care of everything for them. This cannot be the case any longer, and now the government is desperately trying to "grow" entreprenuers much like growing plants. Courses on "becoming an entrepreneur present laughable attempts to stimulate the economy through the "market creation" you proposed. I totally agree with you that it is in great part due to the "shut up and follow orders" environment you mentioned, but it would be unwise to heap the blame on the govt when they can only do so much.
( Don't i sound like some kind of pro-PAP supporter)
But seriously, i believe that economically, the govt is moving forward and doing the best they can, unlike in the social and political arenas (media, free speech etc) I believe they have relaxed several laws, including those on bankruptcy to be more flexible to the needs of the businessman, esp those running SMEs.
Thus, I believe that the situation is one of quid pro quo, and not just one where the govt has to shoulder most of the blame. -
cookiecutter, I can see the efforts being done, however one interesting point to ponder is, why only now? Even in the heady days of the early/mid-90s, a lot of economists had highlighted the issues of cost as well as what they saw as overdependence on Foreign Direct Investments from MNCs in Singapore. They predicted that if we insisted on following the formula, the good days will not last that much longer as our regional competitors had a lot more going for them in this respect. And its not just the foreign analysts who say that, in a wide-ranging article published around the same time, the Singapore Democratic Party highlighted these points and much more, including the need for more entrpreneurs, education reform etc. It hardly rated a mention in the local press then, only for many of the same points to resurface (repackaged as government ideas) when "Remaking Singapore" was announced almost 10 years later. (Disclaimer: As usual, I'm not a member of any political party, just a Singaporean who believes in reading more than propaganda)Originally posted by cookiecutter:In terms of manpower cost and raw materials, Singapore is definitely losing out to countries like China, Bangladesh and other SEA countries. Thus, by losing a substantial portion of our manufacturing base, lots of jobs are being lost and pays being cut. this move is to maintain competitiveness. But i think that the govt realises that Singapore is gradually and ultimately will lose its edge in these old-line industries as we cannot compete with places that have huge populations, lower costs and a heck lot more resources. Which is why they are emphasising a shift towards more high-tech and cutting edge industries such as medical sci, services and education. Of course alot of the middle class families employed in those sectors are going to lose out, but that is why there are so many campaigns for skill-upgrading. Most to most, they shld try campaign for much better unemployment benefits.
Another thing which the analysts had noted was that a lot of the costs derived was from land costs which was set by the government. Absolutely nothing has been done in this respect when we're talking about cutting costs in the past few years, despite the slump in property prices, land in Singapore is still regarded as over-valued. And of course, this issue rates nothing more than a passing mention in the local mouthpieces. Before anyone starts going on about "land-scarce" Singapore, ask why are there so much unused office space, unoccupied HDB flats, unrented apartments. The government has no qualms about inflicting pain on Singaporeans to cut costs, yet it seems amazingly reluctant to inflict pain on itself for that reason.
As for why land prices were so high to begin with, remember "Asset enhancement"?
BTW, in your paragraph above, the last 2 words are considered "dirty words" in Singapore. Go wash your moth young lady!
The nonsense about Singaporean workers costing more than their American and Australian counterparts stems from a study done by PERC which was used by a Singaporean Minister (who shall remain unnamed) to cite as an example that Singaporean workers are overpaid and uncompetitive. Only thing is, there are 2 significant problems:-I definitely agree that the government is way too rich for their own good from all the taxes and such. Their budget surpluses is a really thorninthe side for many who feel that it could be put to much better use. Not to mention that there are several economic reports stating that teh presence of accumulated surpluses will be detrimental to the econ growth of singapore in the future.
About Singapore workers costing more, i would have to say that its pretty justified. Practically every Singaporean is educated up till tertiary level, and the investment by families in sending their kids to university only demands that by the time their kid enters the workforce, he/she shouldbe getting decent pay. Thus, with a highly educated workforce that demands pay equal to their skills, the only alternative to be more competitive is pay cuts. In place like the US etc,their populations are much larger and not all have access to education like the Singaporean community does.
- Singaporean workers almost always cost LESS than their American or Aussie counterparts, whether you're taking gross pay or net pay, before or after taxes, whether you're a temp, contract, blue collar or white collar. Notable exceptions are top civil servants and politicians (notice a trend developing?)
- When the survey was cited, the said unnamed minster neglected to go into detail on the methodology used. A serach would reveal that the survey was done by asking EXPATS in the countries surveyed what THEY THOUGHT of the costs hiring local workers in the countries they were based in. Wow, why use researched facts and figures when you can ask a well-paid, detached lot for their "gut feel" about the local populace. Surprisingly, the local press forgot to ask about that as well. -
Cookiecutter, as far as entrepreneurs are concerned, while you are right to a certain extent about the average Singaporean's mentality when it comes to doing business, you'll also have to look at the way to gah'ment is introducing anti-competitive measures when it comes to the GLC's interests in the local economy. At last count, the areas the GLCs made inroads into private enterprises range from supermarkets, convenience stores, driving schools, transport companies and now even pawnshops (the list I have posted is not exhaustive, please feel free to add on).Originally posted by cookiecutter:The thing about starting a business or spearheading product development here is that there are very high elements of risk. The lack of entreprenuers in Singapore can in main part be attributed to the Singaporean mindset of wanting to play it safe, toe the line and so on. Indeed, Singaporeans have developed a complacency intheir economic well-being, believing that the government would take care of everything for them. This cannot be the case any longer, and now the government is desperately trying to "grow" entreprenuers much like growing plants. Courses on "becoming an entrepreneur present laughable attempts to stimulate the economy through the "market creation" you proposed. I totally agree with you that it is in great part due to the "shut up and follow orders" environment you mentioned, but it would be unwise to heap the blame on the govt when they can only do so much.
( Don't i sound like some kind of pro-PAP supporter)
But seriously, i believe that economically, the govt is moving forward and doing the best they can, unlike in the social and political arenas (media, free speech etc) I believe they have relaxed several laws, including those on bankruptcy to be more flexible to the needs of the businessman, esp those running SMEs.
Thus, I believe that the situation is one of quid pro quo, and not just one where the govt has to shoulder most of the blame.
Not only do these GLCs stifle entrepreneurship with their bulging wallets to squash private rivals, they are not above using the gah'ment controlled stat boards and ministries to shift the goalposts (look at how private bus companies were stopped by the LTA from running the 'B' services in the NE corridor after the NEL opened).
They mumble about divesting from non-core businesses which serve no strategic national interests, but their actions speak louder than words.
We can't lump all the blame of the current predicament on the gah'ment. But it must take its share for it, and stop their holier than thou attitude on this issue. Had those at the top spent their time looking and analyzing ALL the views available then, rather than merely seeing all the ones they wanted to see back in the "good ol' days", maybe the pain on many Singaporeans would have been cushioned. -
Damn, Viper, I couldn't get a word in edgewise!
-
wow, viper! *speechless*
That was darn persuasive!!! -
We're not worthy! We're not worthy!
Seriously, one thing has been nagging at me. Japan presented all of the warning signs throughout the 1990's - the increasing currency value, rocketing property prices, the bubble finally bursting. We could see all of the measures they took to try and deal with the problem, and how things spiralled downwards for the first half of the decade. How much could the Singapore government have learned vicariously from watching Japan's example? What can they still learn? Should Singapore be moving manufacturing overseas as the Japanese have been doing? -
Thanks guys, and I didn't think it was that good, I suppose theres nothing original in those arguments, but its a side of the story that doesn't often get aired in the "mainstream" media
I don't know about the other questions, but as to "Should Singapore be moving manufacturing overseas as the Japanese have been doing?" Singapore really has no say in this matter. Unlike Japan, whose main manufacturing activities came from Japanese companies, the core of Singapore's manufacturing base comes from MNC, which Singapore vigourously pursued at the expense of developing its own companies and SMEs during the good times. When Japanese companies move overseas, profit still makes it way back to Japan one way or the other as well as the new manufacturing base, when Singapore-based MNCs move overseas, the new country and the MNC's home country benefit. Singapore gets nuts, while paying the ministers more. -
yes we have 1st world housing, roads, infrasturctute: sad to say 4th world mentality & attitude .........Originally posted by euphratis:Yes give the man the credit for a better life we have, create nothing to 3rd world to 1st world................but he forgotten about the people.....he left the citizen in the 3rd world. Only foreigners are 1st world & deserves better pay, treatement & Kawtows.
The charge us 1st world rates...housing, transport & etc....but demand we recieve 3rd world's pay..........
-
Now LKY could U turn and say "All I wanted to do was make a comfortable life for myself, my family and my croonies - it's not my fault that the rest of the country didn't come along. Those people were not as talented as us what!"Originally posted by Gedanken:I can't remember which BBC show LKY was interviewed on years ago, and the interviewer asked him, "Did you ever anticipate Singapore being such a success when you first started out as Prime Minister?". LKY's response was something like, "All I wanted to do was make a comfortable life for myself and my family - it's not my fault that the rest of the country came along". I think that says it all, and he's even put it out into the open.