Welcome, Guest

1. •  
     CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 21st 2008)

    

   Posted By: caniggia
   1. housing; newly wed couples (combined income <$8k, qualifies for HDB), have preferece to buy a 3rm flat, in lieu of limited cold hard cash/ CPF for down payment, but r directed to go for 4rm or more. hence, resulting in them taking up a loan, that they've no intention to stretch. n if they inisist to get a 3rm, itd have to be a resale 1, which inevitably costs just about the same. (though i wonder y the mkt valuation doesnt factor depreciation into the equation?)

   
   This is where HDB - the most successful public housing programme - lost its way. Instead of continuing to provide low cost public housing, it veered off its objective. Finally, after 20 years of denial and insisting that the people would like bigger, better and more expensive apartments, it restarts building 2 and 3 room flats, and rental flats. After being burnt by having 17,000 unsold flats, it's so conservative that it wants to build only when there is demand. Of course apartment blocks don't appear overnight, so by the time they finish building 4 years later, the supply backlog has led to a supply shortage for years. And of course we need very high calibre civil servants and political masters to build only when there is already demand.
   
   

   Posted By: caniggia
   2. transportation; the fare hikes for the public transportation is becoming ridiculous, seeing that the number of commuters these days have increased sharply. while the transport network is considerably extensive, bt capacity still limited to how much the vehicles were built to capacitate

   
   Truth be told, Singapore has one of the most affordable public transport services. It's not world class like LTA would like others to believe, but it works reasonably well and goes to most places.
   
   

   Posted By: caniggia
   3. transportation; amidst the rising need for personal transport, regardless saloon/sedan/goods vehicles, the on-road running costs is also becoming absurd. seeing the increase in number of ERP gantries, as well as the ERP charges is quite alarming. it may seem a necessary means to control the traffic flow in n out of the biz district, but factually is not solving the problem.
   if ppl need to report to work in town, they have to pay the price no matter if they like it or not. likewise, when ppl knock off n need to go home, they have to pay the price regardless.

   
   Most of the hours of the day, traffic around Singapore flows smoothly. It's only during certain hours that it doesn't. People are not helpless to pay the price regardless - they make economic decisions to balance their cost against their time and earnings to maximise their own interest. When something gets too costly, some people forgo it or find something else.

   Gaz
2. •  
     CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 21st 2008)

    

   Posted By: picky gourmet
   Will opposition ever get such coverage? NO - they are going to dig all his skeletons out

   
   The PAP were highly successful in drawing publicity for the opposition candidates in elections, often backfiring on themselves. Francis Seow, Juffrie Mahmood, Tang Liang Hong, James Gomez - we all knew these top polling politicians better after the PAP kindly introduced us to them and drew the masses to attend their rallies. How many people would have known Tang Liang Hong without the PAP drawing attention to him, for instance? And we wonder why all these guys happened to poll the best loser performances in their respective elections.
3. •  
     CommentAuthorTim G (CommentTimeNov 22nd 2008 edited)

    

   Posted By: contrarian

   Posted By: Tim GRelative to many other countries, it really is pretty good to live in Singapore.

   
   I agree.
   
   

   Posted By: Tim Gthey are already doing a pretty darn good job.

   
   I disagree.
   
   

   Posted By: Tim Gthis is a true test of the government

   
   A true test? This is part of economic cycles, just as the moon waxes and wanes. If the economy goes down, the citizenry reverts to a lower GDP, a lower standard of living.
   
   A true test would be dealing with a natural or man-made disaster, rising income inequality, systemic failures of financial institutions, and the like.

   
   
   Again you have taken my comments out of context - please do not pick and choose certain words and give inaccurate comments by responding to misquotes. Clearly you are well read and sufficiently intelligent, and I should be grateful if you do not misquote myself in future.
   
   Certainly, we are all entitled to our own opinion. You have the right to disagree, but if you disagree, then disagree properly. Such a blanket statement as "I disagree" neither addresses the question nor the point raised by me - which was that there isn't a one size fit all policy, but they are doing a pretty good job with Singapore, raising standard of living, education, health care, etc etc. That must certainly be an indicator of whether a government is doing a decent job of running the country. Can we be run better? Possibly, but as I said, it is impossible to please everybody (clearly they are displeasing you). Do i dislike certain elements? Yes certainly I do. I have never forgiven PAP for not giving President Ong TC a state funeral, which to me that was just petty and uncalled for. But have they done a good job of keeping Singapore competitive and giving us a high standard of living? Yes they have, thus far at least.
   
   Why is keeping Singapore afloat not a true test of the government. You have seen how governments bring down the country with bad fiscal management. Iceland is bankrupt. Indonesia, Thailand during the financial crisis. This is an unprecedented melt down. Singapore who is dependent on exports and being a financial hub, if the revenue stops coming in, how are we to survive? As the economic cycle reaches the bottom, do we have a soft fall or do we crash land, there is a vast difference. Do you not think the government plays a big part? And if it does, isn't that a test of the government whether in down times the citizens can still weather it through? So I think your logic is flawed if only a disaster can be a true test of the government (which btw, we passed also, the world is amazed at how our government guided us through the SARS period).
4. •  
     CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 22nd 2008)

    
   I too would be grateful if you don't misquote me. I haven't raised this earlier but do so now that you opened the door. Earlier you have inferred what I did not imply, by putting it to me that I meant:
   "By basing the idea that well-run organisations have pulled through has two repercussions (1) you've made the assumption that Singapore is a 'well-run organisation' and (2) history is by no means the definitive measure of the future and we should not be complacent that since we've pulled through before, we will do so again. Lehman brothers would be the best example."
   
   1. I said "Economic cycles are part and parcel of life, and well run organisations will do well in both good and bad times."
   I expressed no opinion here that the Singapore government is a "well run organisation". Neither did I say that it would do well in this recession.
   
   2. I said "History has given much worse, and pull through we have."
   I didn't say that we should be complacent that since we've pulled through before, we will do so again. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough - we have been through and got through much worse than this current situation. In my opinion, this current situation in Singapore doesn't compare to those situations.
   
   You suggest that this current situation is a major problem, to the extent of keeping Singapore afloat. I disagree with your opinion and think that this does not rank as highly as housing the masses, educating the uneducated masses, and other major tests that we have dealt with. I say that this situation won't sink this country.
   
   Singapore is dependent on exports and imports. Nothing the Singapore government can do within its powers will change the external aggregate demand. Similar to when it stated that it could do nothing within its powers to change external aggregate demand that was leading to high inflation recently.
   
   I believe that I can disagree to an assertion of fact, or opinion, or both, put to me or the general public. You may feel that disagreeing properly requires a point-by-point rebuttal, but I see no need.
5. •  
     CommentAuthorcaniggia (CommentTimeNov 22nd 2008)

    
   Contra, thanks for your resonse on my earlier response to GG17.
   
   1. sad to say, HDB is no longer affordable housing for the people. the higher they build the flats, the more returns they gain per sq/m.
   
   2. transport fares, i'd agree its not the dearest that i've reckoned with. however, its relatively high if we take reference to the general income per capita.
   
   3. the new implementation of ERP in many other areas are now a big hindrance to business operations, which inevitably brings up the costs for everything, and the ones that suffer from the chain reaction - end consumers.
6. •  
     CommentAuthorTim G (CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008)

    
   "Economic cycles are part and parcel of life, and well run organisations will do well in both good and bad times. History has given much worse, and pull through we have."
   
   This response was to my comment that "this recession would be a test of the government". If your usage of "we" is the same as mine, i.e. Singapore, then the natural inference is that Singapore is a "well run organisation" that will do well in bad times so that we can still pull through regardless. I think mine was a fair comment, and i had no intention of misquoting you. If I am wrong, then my sincere apologies for misinterpreting your words.
   
   I think it is fair comment when you say that this will not sink the country (and I agree, if it is properly handled). However, by simply dismissing this current situation and stating categorically that it does not compare to those situations is complacency in my opinion. Sure, all the abovementioned problems were major, but it does not detract from the severity of this recession. Being able to solve those problems before does not guarantee that this can be solved.
   
   Also I think it is not entirely correct to say that fiscal policy and indeed, trade relations cannot influence external aggregate demand. The government has and must play a role in stroking and encouraging external aggregate demand. Even if it cannot do it directly, it has to do so indirectly - creating a conducive environment such that aggregate demand.
7. •  
     CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008 edited)

    
   The magnitude of this recession, according to the MTI on 21 Nov 2008, is a -1% growth in 2009, using the low end of MTI's 2009 forecast. While I hold a less optimistic view, neither do I see it coming in at, say, -15%, notwithstanding the drop in aggregate demand.
   
   While public policy could influence aggregate demand locally, nothing the Singapore government can do will be able to replace the magnitude of the loss of aggregate demand from the American consumer, which has led to the loss of aggregate demand from Chinese manufacturers, which has led to the loss of shipping volumes etc. The PAP government has expressed similar views on its own limitations.
   
   Capitalism is like the law of the jungle: the weak get eaten, the strong get stronger. Life carries on as it has since the beginning of time, until the end of time. The well run organisations among the lot will do well in both good and bad times; the poorly run ones tend to do well only in good times.
   
   To date, I haven't held a view that we should be complacent. I believe you and I agree that past performance is no predictor of future performance. I'm sorry if that isn't clear.
   
   Nevertheless, I also believe that this recession isn't going to sink the country. This is not complacency. Yes, some or most people will reduce their standard of living for a while - maybe even a long while. I'm of the view that people are made of sterner stuff and can through ups and downs of economic cycles as realities of life. Big problems or smaller ones like recessions, come what may, get on with it. Make do with what life gives you, onward and forward to another day. Eventually storms, wars, pestilence and what-have-you will pass over, and often we are poorer for it, but we will get on with it. Much as we got on with life earlier when faced with worse adversity. Much as Japan rebuilt after the war, much as Thailand and Indonesia rebuilt after the currency devaluation.
   
   On the other hand, bigger problems like SARS open our eyes to the weak social and psychological defence of the citizenry, where for instance people shunned medical professionals, neighbours, co-workers and more. These indicators do not make for a strong nation.
8. •  
     CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 23rd 2008 edited)

    
   Why is it that I can hold the view that Singapore is a relatively good place to live, but hold the view that the government is not doing a good job?
   
   As a place to live, if you do your business and mind your own business, Singapore is indeed a good place to live. That is why many flock here. I hold the view that when Singapore stops being attractive as a place to work and live to foreigners like Malaysians, Chinese, Indians, other South East Asians, then fear for the country, for I'm not so sure you'd really like that.
   
   However, if I were just looking for a good place to live, Bangkok, Boston or other places can also be good places to live. That also explains why many of those who flock here are transient, and move on to other good places to live.
   
   Notwithstanding all of Singapore's relatively "good place to live" attributes, Singapore is a country, a nation - more than a merely good place to live. An example of the consequences of striving to achieve the PAP's vision for Singapore can be found in Simon Tay's commentary.
   
   On another note,
   "A high-performing paternalistic state which engenders passive dependence and apathy on the part of contented - or fearful - citizens is perhaps a greater threat to nationhood than an under-performing state which permits and provokes active civic and political participation."
   
   Open invitation: the first forum reader to tell me who said the above quote and when, I will be happy to buy you one lunch or dinner at either one of my various favourite restaurants - one that we can mutually agree.
9. •  
     CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 25th 2008)

    

   Posted By: contrarianOn another note, "A high-performing paternalistic state which engenders passive dependence and apathy on the part of contented - or fearful - citizens is perhaps a greater threat to nationhood than an under-performing state which permits and provokes active civic and political participation."

   
   
   hmmm i know who its from! not because i'm widely-read but cos i googled it. shan't be a spoiltsport by saying it here.
   
   oh my havent popped by for a few days so many comments >.< will read through when i can find the time to digest everything. Btw, what indicators exactly do you guys use to guage that the govt's performance?
10. •  
      CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 25th 2008)

     
    The prize goes to SCDreamer, for citing (through PM) Professor Linda Lim at a talk given at ISEAS in June 2006 "Singapore: place or nation"
11. •  
      CommentAuthorcontrarian (CommentTimeNov 25th 2008)

     

    Posted By: girlgirl17Btw, what indicators exactly do you guys use to guage that the govt's performance?

    
    First, it would be a strong bond among the citizenry that is built on mutual trust and respect, without force. Otherwise it is a house of cards instead of a nation, ready to fall apart easily.
12. •  
      CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 26th 2008)

     
    CG: haaa sure you can pm me!
    
    Caniggia: i dont know about the general poplulation, but those few examples i know of are paying by themselves.
    
    Contrarian: i did hear my lecturer mention about GST being a good way to raise revenue by the govt. but progressive though, which is what we have last i checked the website
    
    errr but i also rmb her saying that PPP is different from standard of living. the latter includes many aspects including intangible things like 'happiness quo' though the components is subjective for various economies.
13. •  
      CommentAuthorTim G (CommentTimeNov 26th 2008)

     
    Maybe we should be like Bhutan and use GNH (Gross National Happiness) instead.. hahaa
    
    Bhutan :
    Singapore :
    Thailand :
    
    With regards to GST, concur that it is a good way to raise revenue for the government, but I think our concern is based more on at whose expense and at what cost. Critics of the GST cite it as a regressive tax which has a more pronounced effect on low income earners - spending a larger portion of income on necessities and having to bear the burden of GST. Fortunately our income tax is still low and progressive, so I think it kind of balances it out as insofar as it taxes consumption, the rich get hit harder by GST.
    
    (wah, what sch you go, so advance one your lectures)
14. •  
      CommentAuthorcaniggia (CommentTimeNov 27th 2008)

     
    actually, there's more than 1 way to find a balance to the situation. though i feel decision makers haven't really explored other possibilities prior to passing certain legislation. am no economist, bt just some of my thoughts for sharing.
    
    1. advocating salary cuts means, more ppl now can afford less as before, while those who're tangled in mortages/loans/instalments may find themselves digging more into their reserves. and if the expenditure in general becomes conservative, the entire economy slows down significantly.... who knows? maybe retail operators with less healthy balance sheets might resort to folding.
    
    2. implementing cut on GST, ppl can continue to afford, or in some cases, better afford. hence injecting more vibrancy in the economy, businesses may bustle or sustain longer, so the cyclic motion of transactions goes up a few notches.... in the long run, keeps the economy at a healthy level.
    
    3. realign the CPF contribution ratio for employee & employer, be it to level at 20% each, or to mark down employee contributions, so there's more cash to tide over the present situation. then, make further adjustments later as the economy moves along.
    
    4. draw a small slice of the reserves for distribution in kind, and or subsidize GST for necessities; food staples, medical consumeables, utilities, education... etc. when ppl feel less strain on their pockets, the natural reaction is for them to splurge more on other purchases.... also causing healthier transaction counts.
    
    5. do like the UAE, give prospecting business starters a decent (unconditional) monetary grant, so they can start their businesses on better footing. for if the business thrives, mandatory taxations keeps the economy afloat as well. if the business folds, well, that $ is somehow lost within the country, and the revenue is eventually drawn from whoever profited in the game. (left pocket, right pocket)
    
    i believer there're definately many more approaches to remedy the situation.... just that i've not come across any more to add to the list. all in all, its a bid to ensure that there's activity in businesses, so to keep everybody afloat. for when all heads r above water, there's possibility of reaching the other shore.
15. •  
      CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 27th 2008)

     
    Tim G: ehh? thought this is basic econs? was gone through in jc leh... actually i felt that the lessons werent really as in-depth as i hoped they would be. haaa thats why i cant really comprehen some stuff discussed here
16. •  
      CommentAuthorTim G (CommentTimeNov 27th 2008)

     

    Posted By: girlgirl17Tim G: ehh? thought this is basic econs? was gone through in jc leh... actually i felt that the lessons werent really as in-depth as i hoped they would be.

    
    
    JC student so advance these days, poor farmer like us old-school one.. very swa ku one know? But good lah, learning new thing everyday - support gahmen's lifelong learning.. hahahaa
    
    

    Posted By: girlgirl17haaa thats why i cant really comprehen some stuff discussed here

    
    
    haha.. i guess you're probably referring to contrarian here..
17. •  
      CommentAuthorcloudgal (CommentTimeNov 27th 2008)

     
    tim G, JC students these days get to study abt investments/entrepreneurship aspects too.
18. •  
      CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 27th 2008)

     
    CG: erms i didnt leh... okayy cant say too much later you guys will know my age!
19. •  
      CommentAuthorTim G (CommentTimeNov 28th 2008)

     
    eeks.. age.. very sensitive topic.. feeling pre-historic already.. SIGH
20. •  
      CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 28th 2008)

     
    heehee tim g how old are you?
21. •  
      CommentAuthorTim G (CommentTimeNov 28th 2008 edited)

     
    Tsk, that's so impolite!! Young people these days..
22. •  
      CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 28th 2008)

     
    har like that impolite meh... hmm are you hinting you arent -young- anymore
23. •  
      CommentAuthorgirlgirl17 (CommentTimeNov 28th 2008 edited)

     
    heyy everyone, found a good link: http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2007/02/pap-masterpiece-gini-out-of-bottle.html
    
    oops i forgot the html code to make it click-able. pls copy and paste the url