 |
| Could this be the world's richest country? |
Firstly, as pointed out by many, the oil-rich state of Qatar (currently the world's richest country) was effectively ignored in this study - which only leads me to conclude that they believe that Qatar will run out of oil by 2050. Will it? It really depends on the rate they are using up their oil reserves between now and 2050 but until then, it's hardly going to be a fair fight trying to outdo an oil rich state who simply pump it out of the ground and sell the oil off. The same goes for other oil-rich states like Brunei, UAE, Kuwait and Bahrain. Secondly, what about Luxembourg and Monaco, the two tiny but super rich states in Europe who could outdo Singapore by 2050? After all, all it takes is for a country like USA to change their tax laws to drive their super-rich into tax exile in Monaco and it would automatically boost their national wealth overnight - anything could happen between now and 2050.
Furthermore, the biggest problem in Singapore is the huge disparity of wealth - the growing up between the have and have nots. There is a certain status quo that has remained thus far which is an uneasy truce between the government and the people - the people would continue to vote for the PAP as long as life is good in Singapore, but is it? Even if Singapore is indeed the richest country in the world, what would that mean for those in the bottom 25%? Or even the bottom 40%, given the absence of any kind of welfare state to redistribute the wealth? Indeed, what we have is the opposite - Singapore is a low-tax haven which has attracted the likes of Eduardo Saverin and other tax exiles. Most of my Singaporean friends are shocked at how much tax I pay as a British citizen - but such is the difference between the European and the Singaporean system. But the bottom line is that the wealth is not shared equally in Singapore - the rich get richer and the poor get fucked over and over again. The wealth is not and never will be shared equally.You don't wanna be poor in Singapore. Oh no.
Really? Can one safely make this assumption? After all, there is only so much a great education system can do for those who simply fall on the wrong end of the IQ bell curve - there will always be people who are born with a lower than average IQ who will have to end up doing manual labour as they simply will not be able to depend on their brain power to earn a living. Tough but true - there will always be Singaporeans of lower IQ around and they are the ones being squeezed tighter and tighter as the government imports more and more foreign workers. Don't forget, they may have a local IQ but they have the right to vote as well - if the government doesn't take care of them, then they may eventually wake up one day and realize that and stop this "turkeys voting for Christmas" attitude.
 |
| Roast Turkey with Cranberry sauce |
In case you're not familiar with that rather British expression, allow me to explain. In the UK, it is traditional that one eats roast Turkey for Christmas lunch. So if you are a turkey, you should not be voting for "Christmas" - an occasion which will see you slaughtered, seasoned, stuffed and roasted for lunch. It is a "death wish" when you vote for an outcome that will lead to your demise. In a Singaporean context, that would mean anyone in the lower 50% (of the IQ curve and in terms of income) voting for the PAP who are up front and honest about their FT/FW policies. It is a classic "turkeys voting for Christmas" scenario - why would the PAP get away with it? From what I have observed, there is a lot of chest-beating on the part of lower-educated Singaporeans about how rich Singapore is compared to countries in the West and ironically, they are doing so from their parents' flat in some HDB estate with no hope of ever owning their own property. Kinda tragic when you think about it.
Of course, the alternative is grim. If they ever looked at the mirror and took a long hard look at themselves and checked how much money they had in the bank - the conclusion is simple: I'm fucked. My future in Singapore is very bleak. Oh no, but that's too grim - so they'll rather indulge in a good ol' spot of Singaporean patriotic chest beating (in a rather anti-white racist manner). Yes, indeed many Singaporeans are extremely racist IMHO, especially towards white people. Yeah, let's see how long you can go on deceiving yourself in that manner - if it helps you sleep better at night, hey, do whatever you need to do. But what about when you need to send your child to university? Or if you fall ill and become unable to work - what then? All this anti-white racist chest beating ain't gonna put food on the table or pay the bills. Oh a reality check like that is such a bitch, eh?
 |
| They're not going to accept deposits of patriotic pride, they prefer cash. |
If the Singaporean turkeys stop voting for Christmas sometime between 2012 and 2050 - then it could see a halt to this influx of foreigners into Singapore and massive political change. It could easily upset the apple cart and then what? There is a lot of uncertainty indeed and I would say that there is a distinct possibility for things to remain exactly as they are until 2050 with the PAP in charge if they play their cards right - but what if there is an incident just before the next election to provoke an emotion reaction at the polls? Say if a FT boss fires a Singaporean man who has worked at the company all his life because the FT boss has replaced he entire workforce with PRCs at half the pay. The Singaporean man has two kids dependent on him on everything and the mother is unable to work because she has cancer - the whole family despairs entirely and kill themselves in a public, gruesome manner (oh witnessed by thousands on a Sunday afternoon, say on Orchard Road) in order to make a statement about the state of their lives in Singapore. The public are left feeling really upset because the children are young and cute and they punish the PAP at the polls - then what? What direction would the new government take then? Will they be able to deliver PAP-style double digit economic growth?
Like I said, a lot can happen between now and 2050 - so I wouldn't try to predict the future. A lot of it depends on what Singaporeans do really and one thing for certain is that people most of my mother's age wouldn't be alive in 2050 - well, if she is, she would be 107 years old. The life expectancy of Singapore is for females is currently 83. My mother is a good example of an older Singaporean who will always vote PAP no matter what - she is conditioned to do so. The profile of your average voter in Singapore will change over the next few elections and I am not able to predict what kind of result they will deliver - or if the PAP will evolve and change to appeal to this new type of voters who will be nothing like my mother.
Now, another question that was posed to me was this: why are you so concerned about the bottom half of Singapore? Given that I work in banking, I would enjoy a low-tax regime, not worry about cheap foreign competition given that I earn a living using my brain, not my muscles and I could possibly see my income rise if I worked in Singapore. After all, Singapore is now an international banking hub with so many expatriate bankers working in Singapore, enjoying the good life there.
 |
| Yes Limpeh works in financial services. |
All that is true, but allow me to share with you the reasons why I am still saying no to working in Singapore even if it does become the world's richest country.
1. I hate the weather so much. It is currently 31 degrees in London right now and I can count on two hands how many days the temperature has exceeded 30 degrees this year. I really enjoy outdoor activities and it is simply rendered impossible in Singapore unless you're prepared to sweat like a trooper. Given that Limpeh did serve NS and spent 2 years 4 months sweating like xiao in that time, I'd much rather enjoy my outdoor activities in the UK where temperatures peaked at 19 degrees when I went hill-walking in North Wales earlier this week. There is a fine line really, between pleasantly warm (around 15 to 20 degrees) and uncomfortably sticky (anything about 25 degrees): Singapore is always in the latter.
 |
| This is what I think of the weather in Singapore. |
2. Singapore is ridiculously crowded. Good grief. 5.1 million people in 710 km sq, that makes Singapore the third most densely populated country after Macau and Monaco. In any other country, even Malaysia, the population density is much lower and I remember visiting my grandmother in Johor as a kid and my father took me to the rubber estate and said to me, "You see, from the road here until that hill over there (like really far away) all that land belongs to our family." And I was like, good grief, that hill is really far away and I imagined the kind of house I could have in rural Johor. But such is the trade off - the population density in Singapore puts a squeeze on everything from property to education to the job market.
3. Singapore is an extremely high pressure, competitive environment where the odds would be stacked against as a male Singaporeans stuck with the obligation of NS reservist duties and CPF payments. On the other hand, I can have a much better life in the UK with less competition, no reservist duties and no CPF liabilities - life is much better for me from that point of view in the UK.
 |
| No I am not keen on doing any more of this, no thanks. |
4. The GNP/GDP statistics are extremely misleading for Singapore is a city state. If you were to look at the GNP/GDP statistics for the UK, it is a lot lower than Singapore's. However, if you were to look at the GDP statistics for London - it is much higher than all other regions of the UK as London is the industrial and financial hub of the UK. I have just had a holiday in North Wales where most of the land is used for farming and the average incomes there are much lower than in London. The same can be said about any big city like New York, Tokyo, Berlin or Paris. Singapore as a country may be a lot richer than the UK and US, but when you compare Singapore to New York, Tokyo or London - well, a very different picture emerges.
Now such comparisons vary as it really depends on where you draw the line for a city like London. If you were to only include the very heart of central London (ie. the zone 1 core) which would include the City of London (the CBD), the West End up to Notting Hill, then the figure would be much higher than if you were to include poorer suburbs like Newham, Waltham Forest, Havering and Barking & Dagenham which lie in Greater London but are in the outskirts or suburbs of London at best. It is expensive to live in the middle of the city, poor people cannot afford to live in the West End of London or say within walking distance of Orchard Road MRT station. So if you were to just take the GNP per capita of Lower Manhattan (rather than the whole city of New York), then the GNP per capita there shoots right up.
 |
| New York - one of the richest cities in the world. |
According to this study, the top 3 cities are New York, London and Paris - whilst Singapore is way down in no. 7 when you compare only the cities whilst ignoring the poorer countryside of these bigger countries. Hence as you can see, I'm not any worse off by choosing London over Singapore - I would be worse off if I had chosen rural North Wales or rural North Dakota over London or Singapore. Regardless of where you draw the boundaries, Singapore will be somewhere in the top 10 of any such list but not necessarily number one. There are huge regional disparities between the rich cities and their poorer, rural hinterlands, but really we shouldn't be comparing Singapore to the USA and the UK; instead we should be comparing Singapore to New York and London.
Now just as an academic exercise, imagine if Singapore included the state of Johor and you had to account for 3.35 million people in Johor earning a lot less money than their Singaporean counterparts to the south. It would drag the average income down by a great deal. Now imagine if you had to then include a bigger, poorer state like Pahang. The average would go down even further. There you go, I don't want to take credit away from Singapore's undoubtedly impressive economic miracle, but one has to understand the numbers behind the statistics.
 |
| Imagine if Singapore had to subsidize the entire state of Johor |
5. There are just some things that cannot be measured in terms of GNP per capita. Good weather for instance - I love the four seasons in the UK, especially winter. I adore winter weather so much, the colder it is, the better for me. I guess it's the mentality that the grass is greener on the other side of the fence, I've had enough hot weather to last me a lifetime in my childhood and I don't understand why all these Brits are jetting off on summer holidays in search of holidays in hotter places. I mostly go on winter holidays when I am guaranteed of sub-zero temperatures and I was lucky enough to visit Croatia earlier this year when they had their coldest winter in living memory. -30 degrees anyone?
 |
| Limpeh in Croatia earlier this year |
Apart from the landscape and weather, there are just some things you can't put a price on. I hated living in Singapore because my liberal views placed me in a minority - I have found a coalition of the liberal here in the Europe where there are plenty of people who agree with me on many issues. I am so tired of bloody stupid Singaporeans who only think about being in the minority in terms of one's skin colour - I have been an intellectual minority in the Singapore all through my time there because my ideas and opinions were in the minority and it is undoubtedly worse living in Singapore as an intellectual minority.
I managed to track down an old RI friend who is a political dissident in Singapore, let's call him MK. He is always organizing something to provoke the PAP, constantly pushing the boundaries and risking arrest at every activity he organizes. I think he's after some kind of martyrdom - he sees himself as a Che Guevara of Singapore, except that he has no followers. Most people just find him kinda weird at best, others think he is mad. And I'm like, "Why are you constantly doing this? MK, do you honestly think you can change anything? It's like banging your head against the wall - you're only going to get hurt before you break down that wall!"
 |
| Che had followers, my old RI friend doesn't. |
MK's reply was, "Singapore is my home, I was born and bred here. I'm not going to run away like you - I am going to stay my ground and fight against the PAP here. Either the PAP has to listen to me or throw me in jail, they are not going to silence me." Yeah, good luck with that mate, if only you had some supporters - but you don't. He has chosen a life of constant frustration and anger, I am not sure what his motivation is but he is on the path to self-destruction as he has lost his job and has been unemployed for a while. Duh. How are you going to achieve anything like that when most people look at you and think you're mad and a failure.
Mind you, I have successfully adapted to various countries I have worked in, overcoming cultural and linguistic barriers. As a result of my social and linguistic skills, I have managed to make friends in any country I've been to and have rarely encountered any racism. And even when I have (in very rare instances), it has never stopped me from achieving my goals in my career. Modesty aside, if MK had my kind of skills to adapt to life in another country, I don't know if he would've stayed in Singapore - but I guess that is a hypothetical question that only MK can answer.
No, I don't want to end up like MK - you cannot change a system when Singaporeans don't want change; at least 60.14% don't so there's no point in banging your head against the wall at this stage. I wasn't prepared to spend my adult life in Singapore feeling the same kind of exasperation and frustration MK is experiencing, so I left - best decision I ever made. So there you go - that's my response to the prediction of Singapore becoming the world's richest nation. Let's hear what you have to say about the issue - please leave a comment, thanks!
 |
| There are greener pastures outside Singapore. |
I understand exactly your analogy about turkeys and Christmas. If only it's as simple as that in turning over the PAP and its' policies.
ReplyDeleteFor all the anger on the ground, the 'noise' (like how they see it} and popularity of some opposition parties and their candidates, it's still a Herculean task to deny them a 2/3 majority of seats, let alone defeat them outright.
True an incident like you mention can have a dramatic effect at the polls, like how the Arab Spring started with a simple Tunisian fruit seller killing himself over the unfairness of the Govt's policy.
But for that to happen here, it will have to follow a really dire situation on the ground, just as how Suharto fell from power. The people were simply fed up of suffering day by day and just needed a spark to set alight the process of change.
Why is it difficult here? Well for starters as you mentioned, we are a city (as well as a country) and a modern one too. Therefore it's logical to assume that managing a well developed city is far easier than a large country or state (like Johor). Plus as a bonus we are a nation as well, everything the city earns goes to itself as a country, as opposed to London, New York etc, where HM's Govt/ the Federal Govt (sometimes the state govt as well) has a large say on how and where the profits/benefits from London/New York go to.
As a city we enjoy many great amenities, modern comforts and a better quality of life than many cities in Asia and around the world. We have good roads, clean water, low crime, reasonable public transport (despite the recent fiascoes), passable education system, access to good public hospitals etc. The PAP has never been slow to mention all of these, not to mention a number of foreign investments here that makes Singapore a regional hub.
Of course personally, I think all these could have similarly achieved by any Govt in power not just by the PAP, it might have taken a bit longer but we would have gotten here anyway.
But the fact remains that the PAP were the ones that oversaw these and as such can take the credit, and there are a fair number of voters who feel that way, and would oblige them in any polls.
And then there are the older generation like your parents (and most of ours) who were here from the 60s and 70s and have seen this change over the hard times from yesteryear. And many of them still have a fear that voting for anyone else will have dire consequences, because they witnessed what extent the PAP would be prepared to go to to quash 'those deemed a threat to national security'.
This core group maybe makes up 25-30% of the electorate - the elderly and those who buy into the success story spinned by the PAP, and the dire warnings they dish out, for those thinking of voting someone else - all this success would crumble, investors will run away etc. Then let's take another 10% of Singaporeans who have benefited from this system that the PAP has set in place, notably the elite, the rich and businesses who are given breaks to employ FTs, lower taxes, etc. These people have no reason not to vote them.
So just at 1 glance you see that they have lock on about 40% of the electorate, therefore they just need another 10-15% to be assured of staying in power. Not very difficult if you look at it.
So how to win over the next 10-15% voters maybe more? Easy, make it difficult to vote another party, tie the vote to things like upgrading, amenities and some good old fashion charm, Ministers and MPs meeting residents, hearing their views etc close to election time. And then, to sweeten it, offers some carrots in an Election budget and some 'cash rebates' just before the polls.
ReplyDeleteThat's just the good cop part, the bad cop part has been developed perfectly over the years. They just don't go after the opposition, they go after them with a vengeance. Say something wrong, you get sued and bankrupted, thus becoming ineligible to run. Do something worse, and for certain, you'll be subject to a criminal investigation. And every dirty or bad little secret you have, will be dug up and exposed. And they have a Press only to willing to got he extra mile in giving them them all the negative coverage they can muster.
Yes there's a lot of angst online, but the silent majority still read the papers for their fix on local stuff, and many are happy to believe everything they read in them.
And for good measure, how about some good old fashioned gerrymandering? While votes are secret and cannot be discovered/revealed without a court order (which has never happened, but some people still think the votes can traced), vote counting is done precinct by precinct (say 5-10 HDB blocks or something the like), so they (and the opposition candidates) can know how a certain precinct voted. And the remedy is simple, a) tear down the blocks and relocate the residents under the guise of upgrading or development, b) place a lot of effort in the intervening years to ensure a better quality for these precincts, c) absorb/combine the precincts into a wards that have a higher % for them, thereby negating their effect and d) bring in new residents more likely to vote for them (eg: new voters, RC members/civil servants, new citizens or voters from pro-PAP precincts).
And then there is the 'famous' GRC system, where you have to vote for a team of MPs instead of just 1 one. Throw in a heavyweight Minister, some popular MPs (yes there are actually quite a few good PAP MPs) and combine a poor showing constituency with others that they have done well in, and the task facing the opposition becomes much harder. Don't forget deposits are high too unlike in the UK where it's around 5-500 pounds to stand, here it's around $15k per constituency, so a 5 man GRC means you have fork out around $75k just to run, and the opposition parties individually just don't have the funds, let alone the numbers, to contest in each and every seat.
Plus the PAP can sneak in weak/new candidates in these GRCs and they would almost certainly be elected. And since no 1 opposition party can contest even half the seats, this presents the PAP a useful argument, in cautioning against voting them. Do you want a stable Govt who has set policies in place that is able to govern effectively or do you want chaos by voting in all sorts of parties, all with different ideals and policies, and unable to work together?
Thanks for your response. A lot there - but I'd just like to pick up on the very last question you asked for I feel it is an unfair question! You seem to offer Singaporeans two options:
Delete1. Status quo with the PAP
2. "Chaos by voting in all sorts of parties, all with different ideals and policies, and unable to work together?"
Really? Frankly, I am going to offer Singaporeans the possibility of option 3:
3. A much brighter future by voting in a mix of opposition parties who will have to find common ground, form a coalition government and work together to deliver what they have promised - because they know they only have one chance. If they fail, Singaporeans will go right back to voting for the PAP and never vote for the opposition again. With that in mind, the coalition government will triumph, do extremely well and convince even cynical PAP supporters that actually, hey, a coalition government can work in Singapore and we don't need the PAP for Singapore to be a successful, stable and prosperous country.
Coalition governments are nothing new at all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_government#Examples_of_coalitions There are plenty of example of coalition governments around the world: Germany, Indonesia, Ireland, Australia, Israel, Canada and the UK.
All this scaremongering about "oh different parties cannot work together and there will be chaos" - well that has been used time and time again to scare voters into voting one way or another, but guess what? Coalitions can work and I am a British citizen currently governed by a Lib Dem-Tory coalition - a rather unlikely partnership given that the Tories are right wing and the Lib Dems are left wing - but guess what? Despite their differences in ideals and policies, they have managed to reach compromises and agreements by working together like gentlemen in a mutually respectful way. Yes it can be done.
So - don't be afraid to tell PAP to stuff it and vote for the opposition.
Of course, people like your mum (and mine) will eventually die and thus lose the PAP a guaranteed vote, so they must be replaced a similar minded voter. Our fathers and grandfathers(the majority of them), came to Singapore to escape difficult conditions back home. No matter what, they realise that life in Singapore throughout the years, has been much better than what they fled from. Therefore, their loyalty to the PAP remains intact, despite the occasional hiccup.
ReplyDeleteWhen this floodgate of FTs was opened at the turn of the century (not forgetting the thousands of Hong Kongers from 1997 and rich Indonesians in 1998), I remarked then to many friends, that whatever the PAP may say about the benefits and the need to have them boost the workforce, there is an underlying political benefit which will become more obvious in the future.
Logically speaking if you applied to become a British citizen, let's say the Labour Party was in power and your citizenship was approved, I think I can safely say that you would vote Labour from here on. Of course they will always be a few discerning voters who would not vote blindly, but the majority will always feel a debt of gratitude to the Party who gave them that chance. So new citizens coming here for a better life, will almost certainly vote the PAP from here on, just like our parents had done. It's only us their children and grandchildren who don't feel indebted and maybe don't seem to enjoy the benefits, who will not so easily vote for them.
The PAP has found a replacement for their core group of older voters and are safe for at least another 20 years. In 1997, our population was around 2.6 million (maybe half were eligible voters), now it's 5.2 million with just under 3 million able to vote.
And the PAP are a pragmatic party, they only respond when they need to. Why did the PM apologise to voters before the last polls, something they have never done? Because it was practical/beneficial to do so. Why don't they come out and say voters cannot be traced? Because it's not beneficial for them to do so. So they have worked everything out pretty well to ensure their stay in power for at least the next 3 elections or more. You can be sure they will come out with something new when these new voters' children reach polling age, who might not feel as obligated as their parents to the PAP.
Finally, about this richest country in the world theory (sorry I digressed so much from the topic), why are they happy to publish and highlight it? Well it does more good than harm on their image and perhaps to Singapore's as well. The PAP has always been quick to embrace or follow other countries's policies (especially the West and now maybe China/Japan) or use them as a comparison to implement something here, when it's beneficial to do so. Eg; rising costs in public health, energy etc, they will say, even the West and China are doing it, we live in a global world, we have to accept it.
But when it's not in their benefit, they will say we must do our own way because Singapore is unique.
I am just going to reply to the one part you claim "logically speaking" because it's not logical. I became a British citizen in 2006 Feb. That was when Tony Blair was still PM. I loathe Tony Blair so much because of the illegal war in Iraq. I have never liked Labour and despite my obvious left-wing liberal views, I find it impossible to vote Labour. They are disgusting, they are monsters. Don't get me started. I could be ranting here all night.
DeleteThe two parties I support are the Greens and the Liberal Democrats. In an ideal world, yeah I'd gladly vote Greens all the way but they have no hope in hell of getting anywhere in the UK. Not in my life time - so I give my vote to the Lib Dems instead who are left wing & liberal but not tainted like the wicked and vile nasty Labour party. Actually, I like what the Tory government are doing with the economy - I trust them with the economy far more than the useless idiots of the Labour party, so really, a Lib Dem - Tory coalition government for me is really perfect, it's wonderful. I can't be happier - I couldn't have picked a better coalition for us in such challenging economic circumstances.
I'm not 'grateful to the party who gave me the chance - hell no. I know how immigration works in the West - if you meet the criteria, it's pretty straight forward. If you are well educated, have a good job, plenty of work experience, have plenty of money and meet the criterias they've set - then it's really a question of filling up a few forms and the rest is paperwork. I'm not some kind of refugee fleeing a war torn country begging for refuge - hell no. I am a highly educated skilled very rich professional who could've gone to a number of countries and I picked the UK - the UK is lucky to have me and they should thank me for choosing their country.
If I was some uneducated PRC idiot who had no chance of making it to Canada, the UK or Australia but somehow managed to get a work permit for Singapore, then yeah, that'll be a different story. But Limpeh's not some uneducated PRC idiot and Limpeh hates the Labour party, and I have a special kind of deep hatred that I reserve for that vile monster Tony Blair who was PM when I became a British citizen. I knew his days were numbered so I picked the country for what it had to offer, rather than because I liked their PM or the political party that was in power when I got my British passport.
Take someone like Eduardo Saverin for example. He lives in Singapore now - do you think he should be grateful to the PAP for giving him a chance, or should it be the other way around, should we be rolling out the red carpet for him and thanking him for choosing Singapore?
Duh.
Of course Limpeh, I know you'll never subscribe to blind voting, the party must prove itself to you and offer constructive policies, but I think we can say that many would follow the norm. I'm sure the PAP calculated this, but I think they knew they could still afford to lose some new citizens to the opposition, knowing full well the bulk will line in their column.
DeleteHonestly until today, I have yet to meet a foreign born new citizen or PR, who has bad things to say about the PAP. And I have met hundreds, maybe over a thousand over these past 7 years as my work involves meeting all sorts of people.
Let's put it this way - if a migrant was shopping around for a true democracy practising fair multi-party politics, then Singapore would be one of the last places that migrant would pick. Migrants don't choose Singapore for its democratic system - hell no. There are plenty of reasons why one would want to live and work in Singapore - democracy is not one of them.
DeleteSaying "I've moved to Singapore for the democracy" is like saying, "I've moved to Singapore for the high mountains."
Finally let me just say a bit about the poor (or less well off here). You might think they will stop being turkeys soon, but I think again the PAP has worked this one out rather well.
ReplyDeleteTake my block where I live, it's a rental block, with many poor or less well off here. And some of them would still be considered poor, even if you compared them to people in less developed countries. Many struggle to cope, some are old obviously, some from broken families, some without education or proper skills, working in low paying menial jobs, some are sick or have sick ones to care for, etc. Every day, week, even month, is a struggle.
Singapore is not like the UK with a broad based welfare system, but that is not to say there is no welfare whatsoever. Here there is means testing for the lower income, unemployed due to illness, the elderly and others that cannot support themselves or their family. Once they are deemed as such, they can apply for a monthly grant given by their CDCs (Community Development Council). Not surprisingly these CDCs are run by Mayors and PAP MPs under the auspices of the People's Association (PA). And a PAP MP or candidate (defeated ones) is always the PA's grassroots advisor for each constituency.
Accordingly all constituencies whether GRCs or no, are grouped into Mayoral districts and have their own CDCs. 1 lucky PAP MP gets to become a 'Mayor' for each of this districts. (I think we have 5-6 CDCs, so 5-6 Mayors)
So all these poor people can apply and will receive (if successful), a monthly cash grant from $270-$400 from the CDCs. The approval letter is signed by the various MPs for each constituency. In fact it has gone up slightly over the years from $200 7 years ago to the present day figures of $270 upwards. Now $300 isn't a lot of money, you and I will say, but to the poor, it makes a whole lot of difference. Plus add in a monthly shopping voucher of $20, free lunches (sometimes 5 days a week), not forgetting AngPaos during Chinese New Year for all races (say another $300), community activities like National Day Dinner etc, where more AngPaos are given. So the final figure can come out to over $4000 each year for each poor person. And in all these things, the PAP MP or Grassroots advisor is always present.
So the impression left clearly on these people's minds are - vote out the PAP MP, you might not get this allowance. I asked my friend who receives this, not to vote PAP in the last elections, but he refused because he was scared that if the PAP lost, he might not get his monthly money and other benefits. In fact I think in opposition wards such activities and funds while made available, is not so readily given or as often.
So therein lies the problem for the opposition, because the turkeys will always vote for Christmas. True there are the (lower) middle class who are screwed left and right by PAP policies, and would be willing to vote against them, but the % of these kind of voters is still only about 20-30%, as it has been for donkey years. Perhaps occasionally you can throw in another 10-15%, like what happened in the last elections, but the figures still remain below 50%. And even if they (opposition) do manage to garner 50% or close to it in GE 2016, they might not necessarily win 50% of the seats, given how the voting is counted (through GRCs, precincts). In all the close contests of 2011, they attained 40% and above in GRCs and single wards, yet still only won 6 seats outright overall.
And mind you, the PAP increased the number of seats from 81 to 87, so the loss of 6 seats, was more than mitigated with the creation of 6 new seats which they easily won.
So things are still pretty much in the PAP's favour and while they have some concerns, there remains no danger to their hold on power for the next 10 years at least. The opposition meanwhile has to grow stronger and begin winning more and more seats, but as always the PAP will be there with policies, rules and Laws to make sure it won't be easy for them.
Don't get me wrong - I know the PAP has manipulated the system in a way to keep themselves in power (as you've explained) and they know how to control the turkeys.
DeletePeople like me have the option of picking another country of my choice and saying, that's it, I'm outta here, goodbye PAP. But the turkeys who are the ones who are most screwed by the PAP don't have that luxury as countries in the west welcome highly skilled professionals who earn a lotta money, but not turkeys ... so they have to remain in Singapore, but IMHO they have to at some stage stop voting for Christmas.
Sir has made a great analysis of PAP's political strategy. For years, Singaporeans have been voting for PAP because we saw PAP produce results. And PAP has always used fear tactics and intimidation (sue you until bankrupt) which worked to PAP's advantage. Many Singaporeans continue to vote for PAP out of fear or losing what they have, e.g. stability, job, etc, without realizing that their lives in Singapore have already started to go downhill 15-20 years ago. Singapore is such a pressure cooker, working 60-80 hr weeks to put food on the table, and life is so hectic and fast-paced that many Singaporeans don't stop to think and plan for the future and I mean long-term. They just react to the symptoms.
DeleteI agree with LMFT that Singaporeans have to at some stage stop voting for Christmas. But I don't see it happening in the next 2 or even 3 general elections. If you look at history, most of the revolts, be it against a dictator, or a government, happened when the poor's living conditions had deteriorated so much that they had nothing left to lose except their lives. Singaporeans who are poor at present can still put some food on the table. The situation would have to be so bad that they are willing to lose everything they have (which by that stage would be nothing other than their lives) that they could possibly "stop voting for Christmas", so to speak. And by then, Singapore would have hit rock bottom and would have to be rebuilt from square one. In the meantime, majority of Singaporeans will just do nothing but complain.
As for your friend MK, I don’t know him and won’t speculate on his intentions for staying in Singapore to “fight”. But I do admire people like JB Jayaratnam. He is a man with principles and I respect that very much. Many people might think of him as crazy or stubborn. But he’s a well-educated man who could have continued with his great career as a lawyer, and yet he had chosen to be an opposition against the then almighty PAP / LKY. All the great men in history were stubborn…and that’s why they did the things they did and became great men. And I must admit, I am no great man. I’m practical and selfish. I chose to leave Singapore in search of greener pastures more than 5 years ago and found it. And so, my answer to the question: “if I will ever go back to Singapore where my profession (Accountant) is in high demand and remuneration is a lot better (very low taxes = higher take home pay)”, my answer is “HELL NO!!!”.
Hiya. Having returned for a brief stint of work last year, I found Singapore to have changed a lot - mostly for the worst. Gone was that optimism I experienced as a child. Ironically, I left back in 1997 not because I hated Singapore, but it was more a simple desire to wanna get out of that little red dot on the map and see the rest of planet Earth, spread my wings & fly. But had I been ten years younger, I would've still left but for v different reasons.
DeleteAs for people like us who left vs my friend MK ... I just wanna say you cannot compare MK to JBJ - tolong lah please. That's insulting JBJ. He was a great man who had so many followers and admirers in the Workers Party and his legacy lives on in the Reform Party. MK has probably a handful of supporters at best. That's why you know who JBJ is but wouldn't have a clue who MK is until he gets arrested again and makes the news for the wrong reasons. Whilst all great men in history were stubborn - you cannot lead a revolution unless you have followers. MK still has yet to win the respect of even someone like me for his antics are questionable at best - and that's me putting it very, very mildly.
And yes I've entertained that question before (ref: returning to work in SG) - my profession (consultant for asset management, specializing in expanding 3rd party distribution channels) is in demand in S'pore as it's a big industry in S'pore and my language skills puts me heads and shoulders ahead of anyone else trying to do the same job but speaking only 2 or 3 languages. Ha! I've done so briefly last year cos my company sent me there - but in the long run, no, I prefer being in London than in Singapore. You gotta look at the bigger picture.
For people to survive, there are 2 things to watch out for: complacency and the unexpected.
DeleteComplacent folks are the least prepared for the unexpected.
Even well-prepared, the unexpected can destroy what would seem to go on well forever.
That's what happened last year, with the quake of Christchurch, New Zealand, and the tsunami in Japan, first upon the Sendai coast, then against the nuclear reactors at Fukushima.
It's dangerous to arrogantly assume that one has all the turkeys under control, indefinitely.
Imagine the horror, should the turkeys 'inexplicably' rise up and peck their masters to death, then with newfound carnivorism, feed on their former rulers' corpses for Christmas.
Let's consider how crazed turkeys might turn rogue this way, against all logic, calculation and manipulation.
The key is in how said turkeys became so crazed, without any emergency prevention; think SARS bird flu, swine flu and mad cow disease.
One powerful cause is overcrowding.
Research has shown us how negative stress can make turkeys so sick with the system, especially when it affects their housing, long hours from overwork, and traffic jams:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_turkey#Commercial_production
Of course our government is as aware as they want to be about such dangers, and likely think they are doing a lot now.
But imbalance that remains and continues, is still imbalance.
When the time comes that turkey vouchers can no longer mask the stink from all those appalling turkey rearing conditions, then the turkeys will rise up, not in some dramatic Turkey Spring, but rather some manmade disaster called Turkey Desperation.
We can conclude that Singaporeans, Turkeys included, have not suffered enough to unleash such an artificial disaster.
The fact that we can still complain, means that we still have a pressure release valve that helps us accept being shovelled turkey feed.
Therefore the establishment and local powers are not worried about Turkey Desperation happening in their lifetimes.
It's as fictitious as Angry Birds, right?
Yeah you're right, 2 of my sisters live in the UK and US respectively in some kind of PR. They are already seriously considering converting to citizens there. But for myself and many others who don't have a choice, we are stuck to live under the yoke of the PAP.
ReplyDeleteWhile I hope many Singaporeans would not be so dumb to always swallow whatever policy they force down our throats, by giving them a pasting at the polls, even to forcing them out of power, the best we can hope for at present is for the change to come from them.
But as mentioned they will only do it, if push comes to shove. If not, it will just be piecemeal or superficial changes to policy.
And I certainly hope as you believe, that they (the ordinary/oppressed/poor etc, people) will 'stop being turkeys who vote for Christmas'. And I hope that day will come in my lifetime. And when that day comes, I hope we never again so foolishly give all power to just 1 party or groups of people, that we cherish and jealously guard our rights and freedom as citizens. That we always demand a Govt that serves all the people first, not just a select few, or for it's own self-preservation.
Hiya. I just think it's bizarre that it's your 2 sisters who have moved away but you've chosen to remain in SG. After all, women are treated better by the SG system (ie. no NS liability) whilst SG men are 2nd class citizens in their own countries, screwed doubly by 2 years of NS followed by more reservist obligations.
DeleteWell, if Sir's sisters are married, have sons and don't want their sons wasting time doing NS, then of course, the whole family will move before the sons turn 13. And there are a lot of red tape when it comes to immigration for boys. Don't miss filling any applications forms (e.g. exit permits, etc etc) for the boys or they will still be liable to do NS. But then again, if the boys do not intent to step foot in Singapore for the rest of their lives (not even as a tourist), then that's fine. I have several friends with kids who immigrated to Australia, NZ, Canada before their sons turn 13. Of course, avoiding NS is not the sole reason. Another reason is they don't want their kids to live in the frenzy mad education system in Singapore where kids were forced to grow up faster and not be able to enjoy childhood. Yet another reason is that one of my friend's child is dyslexic and they were afraid that the child is going to be left behind in Singapore. So they moved to Australia where the education is a lot more supportive of children with dyslexia. And I must admit that Australia and Canada (I name these 2 countries that I've lived in and know well) provide a lot of support for people with disability, be it a child or an adult. I have coworkers who are on wheel chair and they take public bus to come to work on their own everyday, like any regular employee. The additional help they get is buddy-system with at least 2 coworkers (working on the same floor) who support them in case of emergency.
DeleteSingapore has still a long way to go in terms of providing support to disabled people to help them lead an independent life.
Fair point, ie. that about his sisters getting married and having children. I know what you mean about the future for people with disability in Singapore - I have an autistic nephew who will have to serve NS. I am worried about how he will be treated in NS having survived NS myself. I was able to adapt to the people and environment around me there but it did take me a few months really and until I was able to adapt, life was hard. My fear is that an autistic person like my nephew will simply not have the social skills to adapt and it will be life in hell for him from the day he enlists till he ORDs if people are unsympathetic to his autism - already he is getting bullied left, right and centre at school because the kid has ZERO social skills and my entire family have been burying their heads in the sand as to what will happen when he has to serve NS. Groan. They're like, "so poor thing, he gets bullied in school, come here let me give you a hug" - as opposed to, "if this is happening in primary school, how bad is it going to be in NS?" Double groan.
DeletePower abhors a vacuum.
DeleteRemember that PAP liberated us from our British colonial masters, and we became our people again, never to be oppressed by others.
Today, we're under the control of our popular government.
Likewise, the victors of tomorrow's revolution will continue to dominate our people in future.
Power corrupts this way.
The seeming solution to this is enlightened anarchy, in which every individual is powerful and mature enough to live in mutually enforceable harmony with one another.
Humanity as a whole remains too childish for this.
Escaping your Singaporean sons to another country before age 13, just to evade NS in the army, is not as easy as it seems.
DeleteThey are only allowed to renounce citizenship when they are of age to be called up for NS, and they have to return to this gilded cage to do so.
Any excuse that can be found, that in the little time they were here they used citizenship privileges, can be used as obligation to do National Service.
So, never come back to Singapore?
Easy, of course.
But I wonder, why allow oneself to be treated as a fugitive from Singapore law, and live like an exile, when one should be as free as is possible?
What if one day, you find yourself forced to transit at Changi airport?
Unfortunately in this case, Singapore is not some remote mountain kingdom that the world can now effortlessly bypass.
As for high-functioning autistics (ADHD, Asperger), sadly as a father I'm forced to say this: train early, prepare differently, to work with the mainstream.
Many ASD conditions are for life, they CANNOT be outgrown, but society may not care to understand that or react properly, cruelly insisting that there are "no problems".
So rather than lie down and die, better to cope and adapt as well as possible.
After all, does this society give adequate support to families where ASD is too real?
At least we are turkeys who can think and act for our own survival.
And prosperity.