Old Topic on Entrepreneurship vs Foriegn MNCs
-
This is a posting I made back in 1997 with regards to the de-emphasis on foreign MNC investment, re-focus on grooming local entrepreneurship.
Goh Meng Seng
‘æ 12 �€
ŠñŒ�ŽÒ�FMADCOW ([email protected])
ŽåŽ|�FRe: Manufacturing industry doomed in Singapore
View: Complete Thread �i‹¤ 75 žŠ—¯Œ¾�j
Original Format
–Ô�ã˜_’d�Fsoc.culture.singapore
“úŠú�F1997/07/30
[email protected] (Edmund Chia) writes:
Edmund Edmund, you miss the cue here.
> While I quite agree with the fact that local enterprises have not been
> given as much assistance as might have been possible, I do not feel
> that MNCs have been over-emphasized, and IMHO much of the standard
> criticisms of the pro-MNC policies have come more sectional interests
> that may not have taken a wider view.
Supression and over-looking is different!
Wider view? In the wider view,
MNCs have no loyalty to you! IN wider view, MNC will inevitably go away one
day! (Some of them had already done so!) You call this not wider view? I am
not asking people to boot MNCs immediately, but to make preparations for the
eventual happenings; to encourage, as well as grooming more local entrepreneurs into
big MNCs! Give more opportunities to them, not assistance.
>
> I believe that Singapore has been trying to get local entrepreneurs to
> move production offshore, and these entrepreneurs have received
> incentives to do so.
>
Receiving incentives to do so? How big can the incentives be? Those who have the
economical power, has done so, going to China, regional; but how many of them? Those
who have not done so, they don't have enough economical power to do so! Why? Because all
these while, they are not given the opportunities to grow!
> As for policies to encourage entrepreneurship - I'd say that its not
> as simple as that. It was probably even harder for Hong Kong
> entrepreneurs to succeed - competing against established British
> corporations, low govenrment assistance, etc - yet the fact they
> succeeded is testament to their own ability, and not the assistance
> they received from government. In contrast, Singapore simply does not
> have the 'entrepreneurial culture' that exists in Hong Kong. We have a
> very well established MNC culture where people feel comfortable and
> operate well within the stable confines of a hierarchy, but not
> go-getters prepared to take risks.
>
Nope. HK enterprises do not grow out of assistance from govt, they grow
without the help of their govt, as well as interventions of their govt in
every opportunities. You have totally miss the point. The inability of our entrepreneurs
to grow is due to our all "too efficient" govt intervening in every aspects of our
economy; right from what you eat to what you wear to what covers over your head.
In HK, if you dare, everywhere lies opportunities! Govt is kept to minimum, unlike our
Termasek Holdings which have its invisible hands in every corners; anything that can make
money in Singapore, they have a hand in it; even Singapore pools and the now forthcoming
Soccer Pools! Stop blaming us, Singaporean for not being entrepreneurs! Our educational
system says that we need more engineers to feed the foreign MNCs!! If our govt deliberate
cultivate such "MNC culture" how can you blame our faithful citizens of not venturing out?
>
> Again - I must say that we can not 'groom' entrepreneurs in the sense
> that there is a course you take and if you pass with an A1, you are an
> entrepreneur. If such a mindset towards entrepreneurship persists,
> then we will never develop an "entrepreneurial culture". We can
> however remove impediments to entrepreneurship - if that is what you
> mean by 'groom' - by making it easier for individuals to obtain loans
> for projects, or organizing 'trade fairs' for small businesses to
> display their wares, exchange ideas, establish contacts, etc.
>
You must have a very narrow mind! Look at how Japan & Korea "groom" their
entrepreneurs.. not by your typical Singaporean mind of having courses &
certificates! First, trim down your GLCs & all those stats boards. Don't say
you privatised Singapore Telecoms; how can you say you privatise a Stats board
when you only issue less than 25% of its stocks?
Our entrepreneurs can compete openly, but only on fair playing ground. If
Govt Linked companies are to be in every field, do we expect a fair playing
ground for everybody?
> As for the MNCs, I think you have been too hard on them. Yes, MNCs are
> here for the profit, but it is not as easy to pack and leave as you
> suggest. A well-established MNC would have made a strategic commitment
> in Singapore that could be very expensive to abandoned. Staff would
> have been trained, machinery bought, contacts established, etc - and
> these would take considerable time and money to replicate - if indeed
> it were possible to replicate some of the infrastructure available in
> Singapore. In other words, they can not simply pack and leave without
> a great deal of thought, time and preparation. Then also, they must
> much to keep them bound to Singapore.
>
>
Please do a study of how many MNCs have come and go due to lower production
costs in other places. The problem is so acute that even PM Goh has to sound it
out loud. The catch is, no matter how you want to put it, with the steady pace of
development, they will ultimately leave Singapore for greener pastures. We should not
trick ourselves into thinking that they are so good to us that they will not leave us.
They will go, eventually, and the question is, how are we going to cope with that?
With even bigger GLCs like Singapore Technologies? And thus, less opportunities for our
local enterprises?
Your argument of the so call "created competition" by making two GLCs fighting themselves
are so flawed. It will only lead to bad competition. We have noticed there are instances
of open fightings between big GLCs, but where does it lead to? Your argument that local
entrepreneurs may not offer "Global Advantages" (whatever it means) is also flawed. It is your
typical Singaporean mentality of kiasu and intolerance of failure that leads you into such
narrow-minded conclusions. Let me ask you, when SinTel first come about, does it has the so call
"Global Advantages"? It is only throughout these 20-30 years, they achieved it,no? Then how
can you kill and brush local enterprises aside like this? They need to get hands on inorder
to learn the trade! If you are going to rule HK, people like Lee K.S. (Hutchison) will not grow
into such aspects! This is a ridiculous argument!
So we come to the final point: we should be more tolerant to failures and weaknesses; we should help
local enterprises to improve themselves instead of brushing them aside! Give them a chance; without such
chances or opportunities, how can you groom local enterprises? remeber the old days when everyone shun Japanese
goods? But the Japanese did not brush those companies aside; they let them improve and today, they are one of those
standards keepers!
Wake up Singapore! Before it is really too late! -
I think more important question is whether start-ups are being hampered unnecessary that makes it difficult to grow any local business?
The rest are up to individuals I think.
So, got examples of policies and activities by Temasak holding on that aspect? -
The MNC help bring in technologies and capital in the 70's and 80's. That help provide employment and help built up our industries. Even today their presence in petrol chemicals and life sciences is important to us. Singapore's size and talent pool is too small for us not to rely on MNCs.
Without these MNCs there will be less jobs and our economy will be smaller. The MNCs is an important and integral part of our economic strategy in the past and will be so in the future.
-
Essentially MNCs are foreign companies (once SMEs) which had grown to a size which enable them to go international hence the name MNCs.Originally posted by sgsentinel:The MNC help bring in technologies and capital in the 70's and 80's. That help provide employment and help built up our industries. Even today their presence in petrol chemicals and life sciences is important to us. Singapore's size and talent pool is too small for us not to rely on MNCs.
Without these MNCs there will be less jobs and our economy will be smaller. The MNCs is an important and integral part of our economic strategy in the past and will be so in the future.
These companies go to where it allows them to make money.
when such places are no longer able to help them make money, they pack up and leave, to them it is a matter of dollars and cents.
MNC are the companies which are most likely to leave at the onset of push factors like high cost which in Singapore has become a big and expensive problem.
Yes, the MNCs did their fair share of "nationbuilding" and profit making.
and SG policies in the past were biased towards MNCs and did not help SME in any way.
In the new world economy, with cheaper labour and lower costs elsewhere MNCs move off resulting in loss of jobs. On whom could the Singapore economy and job market fall back on? It was supposed to be SMEs.
However, this was not the case. Singapore's system had not done enough to cultivate a strong sense of entrepreneurship and the number of SMEs and their sizes cannot soak up the spare labour floating around. Furthermore, efforts to attract the MNCs have not been as successful as before. Hence the structural unemployment.
This is a clear flaw in old PAP planning which they now are trying abysmally to rectify by encouraging entrepeneurship.
If i understand you correctly SGsentinel you are disagreeing with the PAP. Correct me if i am wrong.
That aside, has the climate for SMEs really been improved?
Has the PAP government relaxed enough regulations allowing for easier setting up of small businesses?
Has the PAP Govt opened up enough industries and opportunities to SMEs?
Or is the PAP Government still trying to stick its thumb into every pie?
These days MNCs are very much more important than before but its not the foreign MNCs that are needed in Singapore. Its the local MNCs that are needed. Hence the rush to go global and expand.
Who will be these future SG MNCs? Why but of course the present lowly local SMEs!
Now since they have been neglected for so long, its gonna take some time for them to grow. -
so you want to ban all MNCs and foreigners from Singapore so SMEs have room to grow ?Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:Essentially MNCs are foreign companies (once SMEs) which had grown to a size which enable them to go international hence the name MNCs.
These companies go to where it allows them to make money.
when such places are no longer able to help them make money, they pack up and leave, to them it is a matter of dollars and cents.
MNC are the companies which are most likely to leave at the onset of push factors like high cost which in Singapore has become a big and expensive problem.
Yes, the MNCs did their fair share of "nationbuilding" and profit making.
and SG policies in the past were biased towards MNCs and did not help SME in any way.
In the new world economy, with cheaper labour and lower costs elsewhere MNCs move off resulting in loss of jobs. On whom could the Singapore economy and job market fall back on? It was supposed to be SMEs.
However, this was not the case. Singapore's system had not done enough to cultivate a strong sense of entrepreneurship and the number of SMEs and their sizes cannot soak up the spare labour floating around. Furthermore, efforts to attract the MNCs have not been as successful as before. Hence the structural unemployment.
This is a clear flaw in old PAP planning which they now are trying abysmally to rectify by encouraging entrepeneurship.
If i understand you correctly SGsentinel you are disagreeing with the PAP. Correct me if i am wrong.
That aside, has the climate for SMEs really been improved?
Has the PAP government relaxed enough regulations allowing for easier setting up of small businesses?
Has the PAP Govt opened up enough industries and opportunities to SMEs?
Or is the PAP Government still trying to stick its thumb into every pie?
These days MNCs are very much more important than before but its not the foreign MNCs that are needed in Singapore. Its the local MNCs that are needed. Hence the rush to go global and expand.
Who will be these future SG MNCs? Why but of course the present lowly local SMEs!
Now since they have been neglected for so long, its gonna take some time for them to grow. -
Did i say that?Originally posted by sgsentinel:so you want to ban all MNCs and foreigners from Singapore so SMEs have room to grow ?
SGSentinel
I know you are here to (1) guard the forums.
I know you are here to (2) guard PAP's turf.
But as a sentinel, the very first thing you must do to accomplish the above is to guard your speech.
-
Even if you dun say that you seem to imply that. You are a lawyer you shd know.Originally posted by Chia Ti Lik:Did i say that?
SGSentinel
I know you are here to (1) guard the forums.
I know you are here to (2) guard PAP's turf.
But as a sentinel, the very first thing you must do to accomplish the above is to guard your speech. -
ha ha You are taking your sentry guard duty too seriouslyOriginally posted by sgsentinel:Even if you dun say that you seem to imply that. You are a lawyer you shd know. 
reading too much into my innocent post. -
With the high costs here it is really very difficult to start a business not to mention the red tape one has to surmount!
-
Any government in the world needs to grapple with main burning issue and thats how to feed your people. Any government that doesn't do that risks open revolt and not being in government for very long. We rely on MNC is because we do not have much of a choice during our early nationhood as well as today.
If you look at our country then we didn't have any natural resources except a natural trade waterway or very much money and our people then didn't have skills, so no choice any fish or prawn came we just grabbed and upgrade the workforce along the way as we went.
If you look at now we still don't have any natural resources only a natural waterway like before but we do have a major port and cargo business + others, large savings and fortunate enough to have a government who didn't rob us blind even when they could like that Marcos. As a result many people have jobs today, their children can go to school and later become Litigation Lawyers and Businessmen wannabe politicians and talk big on sgforums. If things were different today maybe they will be at changi beach digging see-ham with their families for the evening meal.
Yes there are many graduates and people with skills today but there are still very many without very high academic and skills and there are bills mounting every month to pay and food to put on the table, so you don't really have a choice but continue to rely on MNC knowing these mercenaries speak $$$ and cts ... Remove the MNC from singapore, folks have no jobs or food, you want to die?
If civil strife happened here you may disturb the life lines of other countries since we are located smack in the middle of the trade waterway ships may want to avoid getting their heads blown off will avoid coming here, what that will lead to I don't even want to think.
You want to be an MNC you need something called technology then you can export it to other countries, to get it you need $$$ and more $$$ for investment and branding Whatever! Then you can talk big like the yanks abt things like human rights issues, otherwise you have to be very pro business and cannot have too many workers unions or opposition, then MNC business not so affected and they very happy make $$$ here, if not they leave. Remember you need MNC's to provide jobs for your people, they sure as hell don't need you. Thats fact of life.
For those that have high qualifications in academic and skills terms there's nothing to worry, go wherever it benefits you, leave when it does not. For the rest of us politicians can say whatever they want at the end of month food needs to be put on the table and bills need to be paid.
nuff said. -
entrepreneurship = lack of jobs.
-
i think the main reason why the government does not want to really encourage entrepreneurship is because powerful business corporations usually contest and challange government power as corporate and political interests often conflict. just like in Japan and the US where powerful business lobbys often challange government policies. a good example would be the war on Iraq, I'm not sure if i'm right to judge but from the way I see it, its the powerful energy companies that pushed the government to launch a war to secure oil fields.