The card tower mentality: what keeps the PAP in power part 2

OK I know I should never reply to comments late at night after a long day at work because I always rush into a reply without actually doing the topic justice - so I am going to write a piece now to give one of my readers Blueocean the reply s/he deserves on this topic. Firstly, here is blueocean's comment:

bleuocean3 October 2013 16:57

I can empathize with your frustration with foreigners but your comparison is biased. Singapore unlike UK, we have no natural resources. We have only good governance, good infrastructure, good education, good healthcare and business friendly environment. If Singapore is to make employment of foreigners difficult similar to UK, many of our local businesses will suffer with the shortage of labor. Foreign investments will avoid Singapore due to the unfriendly business environment and jobs availability for Singaporeans will fall. This is actual feedback from local businessmen. Look at countries around you who tried to follow the western ways. Indonesia is struggling after being betrayed by the IMF. The ways of the west are falling behind. Their wealth are declining. UK and EU are saddled with debt. Businesses are moving away from the west to Asia. Even the US government is forced to shut down due to differences from political parties. Hence, please think carefully of what you are asking.

Now before I begin, I am wondering how many of you have ever built a card tower? You know, when you take out a pack of cards and start building a tower with that basic triangular structure as seen in the picture below. They are notoriously difficult to build - small ones are fairly easy, but the bigger they get, the more unsteady they become.

A card tower - ever built one of these? 

Now if you were to read what Blueocean posted, s/he is actually supporting the PAP's stance on foreign talents. Now I doubt blueocean is actually from the PAP, I don't even think that s/he is an active supporter of the PAP. What blueocean supports however, is a concept we call 'chor-bo' in Hokkien (literally: do nothing). What I am suggesting is a change in in government policy towards foreign workers in Singapore to protect the rights of Singaporean citizens like blueocean - given the way blueocean has expressed himself/herself, it seems that s/he is probably your average Singaporean who is crushed on the MRT at rush hour, faces competition from FTs at work and probably isn't that fond of the obnoxious PRCs who have flooded into Singapore. So why would someone like blueocean reject a suggestion that is asking for better conditions for him/her? 

I am sure that Blueocean would love the idea for the working conditions of Singaporeans to improve, for Singaporeans to enjoy a more equal status when it comes to competing against foreign talents in Singapore. However, s/he also knows that the PAP is not going to budge on their stance on the issue and that the recent FCF is a toothless tiger designed to maintain the status quo whilst creating the illusion that they're doing something to help Singaporeans. Any kind of change like that would involve a fundamental change in the mentality of the PAP and that could either come from outside the PAP (ie. a strong opposition party could challenge the PAP to change their ways) or from within the PAP (ie. you could join the PAP and work from within the system to help them evolve). Needless to say, both options involve a lot of hard, hard, hard work in order to achieve the desired outcome. 

To take action or to chor-bo, that is the question. 

The alternative to hard, hard, hard work is 'chor-bo' - to do nothing. 'Chor-bo' is an easy option - all you have to do is.... nothing! How easy is that? There is the downside of 'chor-bo' though - people who choose this option may worry that they may look bad, that they are ignoring a situation that needs addressing, that requires action. There is also the moral dilemma associated with this option as they may actually think that they really should be doing something about the situation. They worry that people may look upon them and ask, "why aren't you helping yourself? Why aren't you standing up for yourself?" Hence they default to the card tower mentality to justify their 'chor-bo' stance. 

People like Blueocean believes that in giving local Singaporeans slightly better conditions in the job market, in leveling the playing field between Singaporeans and foreigners, the whole system would collapse like a card tower that became unstable. They fear upsetting the whole system in a way that would tantamount to trying to adjust a card in the middle of your card tower - so they would rather put up with the disadvantages of the current system than to risk toppling the tower. Blueocean paints such a vivid picture to justify this point, " If Singapore is to make employment of foreigners difficult similar to UK, many of our local businesses will suffer with the shortage of labor. Foreign investments will avoid Singapore due to the unfriendly business environment and jobs availability for Singaporeans will fall. "

My response to that is simply to roll my eyes and say, really? Do you really believe that the whole system is so flimsy that it will topple and collapse just because the locals get treated a little bit better by the government? All you have to do is take a closer look at Blueocean's statement and you will soon see how quickly his/her logic falls apart - some local businesses who are used to employing foreigners may have to turn to locals instead, is this such a bad thing? I'm not suggesting that we should ban foreign workers from Singapore altogether, I am just saying that it shouldn't be cheaper to hire a foreigner than a Singaporean (the foreign worker levy is $330 compared to an annual CPF contribution of $350 for a local, making Singaporeans more expensive to hire than foreigners).

Leveling the playing field would alter the market in a way which will result in an improvement in conditions for local Singaporeans - think about how many Singaporeans have been forced out of their jobs and have turned to driving taxis and giving tuition as a result of this influx of foreign talents? Have you ever tried speaking to a taxi driver in Singapore recently and realized just how well educated they actually are? 

The next statement made me lose my temper originally when I typed my reply - but I shall attempt to complete the next few paragraphs in a calm manner without any name calling, but it is clear that Blueocean knows virtually nothing about foreign investments or economics. (Steady on Alex, don't start the name calling just yet...) A friendly business environment doesn't tantamount to opening the flood gates to anyone and everyone to come to your country and work there - hell no, it is clear that Blueocean doesn't quite understand what that means. Fostering a friendly business environment is a far more complicated process than that. 

I work in finance and in my little niche within asset management, I am always comparing and contrasting different financial jurisdictions to see which ones are most business friendly. The measures we use include looking at the amount of red tape there is when it comes to new businesses being set up, the amount of time it takes for a government to process applications for permits for new projects, the amount of help new businesses could get from the government when launching new projects, the amount of tax breaks new businesses are given when they are trying to get through the first few years, how easy or hard it is to obtain credit from local banks when you want to expand, the quality of the local infrastructure - I could go on. It is a very long list of complex criterias for us to measure against and Singapore actually ranks fairly high in terms of having a business friendly environment not because of it's foreign talent policy, but because of the tax laws, the quality of the local infrastructure and most importantly the ruthless efficiency of the civil service. Most foreign companies in Singapore are very impressed by all of the above - not just the availability of cheap labour. Heck, if they wanted cheap labour and cheap everything else, they should just go to India or China. Why bother coming to Singapore in the first place if you're just trying to save money? 

Do you know what a business friendly environment is?

So you see, someone like Blueocean takes a term that s/he has heard before (maybe in the news or on the internet) a "business friendly environment" and tries to use it to create an argument without actually understanding what a "business friendly environment" actually is. So Blueocean's doomsday scenario of Singapore no longer having a "business friendly environment" and driving away foreign investors is built completely on a misunderstanding of what that term means. You could call me cruel in pointing this out ("somebody didn't make it through economics 101, #buehtakchek, #bodohgoondu, #bohtakchek), but such is the kind of people who have this card tower mentality. Without actually understanding the situation properly, they still somehow convince themselves that trying to improve their lot in Singapore will send the system into a total collapse. Duh. As if. 

But I am not done with Blueocean yet - what on earth do you mean " Foreign investments will avoid Singapore due to the unfriendly business environment and jobs availability for Singaporeans will fall." Listen dude, clearly, you don't know the first thing about trade finance or FDI... Alamak where do I even begin with you. Let me put it to you quite simply. Foreign investment will continue to come to Singapore if Singapore continues to have excellent investment opportunities - be it in the property sector, in the tourism sector or in the biotechnology sector. The quality of such investment opportunities do not depend on whether or not we have cheap foreigners working super long hours for peanuts, but rather on the quality of the intellectual property behind those projects. 

Foreign investment is dependent on a range of many different factors. 

Let me give you an example: ST Engineering is one of the most dynamic Singaporean firms today and they have a wide range of engineering products and solutions. They are a great example of a Singaporean company that has attracted foreign investment on the basis of its intellectual property, rather than trying to compete on cost. It is the quality of R&D that propels ST Engineering as a leader in its field. Such companies are not like the sweatshop garment factories in Bangladesh dependent on an endless supply of very cheap labour to make the goods - hell no, we're dealing with a very different kind of competition altogether. Foreign investments will be attracted to Singapore as long as companies like ST Engineering produce great innovation, creative solutions and new products to keep them ahead of the competition - it has nothing to do with ST Engineering having an endless supply of cheap foreign labour. 

As for the rest of Blueocean's argument, geez it's so ridiculously stupid that I get the feeling I am probably dealing with like a 13 year old kid from a neighbourhood school #buehtakchek #chapalangsecsch and if it really does turn out to be a 13 year old kid from some chapalang secondary school, then I might actually feel bad about attacking him/her like this. (Mind you I really have no idea who he or she is.) This is what s/he wrote (and bear in mind this is in relation to the PAP's policy on foreign talents and the labour market in Singapore): 

Do you know what drives Singapore's economic success?

Indonesia is struggling after being betrayed by the IMF. The ways of the west are falling behind. Their wealth are declining. UK and EU are saddled with debt. Businesses are moving away from the west to Asia. Even the US government is forced to shut down due to differences from political parties. Hence, please think carefully of what you are asking.

1. Indonesia is fucked up because of endemic corruption. They do not have a business friendly environment at all, it is ridiculous to blame the IMF for the problems of Indonesia - Indonesians have fucked up their own country without any help from outside. What has this got to do with the PAP letting in all those foreign workers anyway?

2. Wealth declining? The UK and EU are saddled with debt? Bullshit. What you have is a situation some EU countries are doing better than others - sure there are the basket cases of Greece, Italy and Spain, but there are also plenty of success stories like Germany, Austria, the Netherlands and all of Scandinavia (definitely a North-South, Nordic-Germanic vs Mediterranean divide going on here). Likewise in the UK, it's such a big country that you have regional disparities with some areas booming and others not doing well. 

By the same token, are all Singaporeans living in the Sail at Marina Bay or in Sentosa Cove? Hell no, I see some of the older flats in places like Toa Payoh and Bukit Merah and some Singaporeans are barely getting by - the country may be booming but there are millions of ordinary Singaporeans who are seeing no benefit whatsoever, they are still having to cope with the huge increase in population and the problems brought on by overcrowding, they are squeezed out of the property market and they are certainly not seeing any real rise in their living standards as prices keep rising. 

Are all Singaporeans enjoying great prosperity?

Hence in both Singapore and the EU, you have regional disparities - not all EU countries are broke and in dept, some are, some are actually quite rich. Not all Singaporeans are living the high life in Sentosa Cove like Kong Hee and Sun Ho - a small number are, but there are millions who are struggling to make ends meet in places like Toa Payoh and Bukit Merah. So it is ridiculous for you to paint such a black & white picture whilst ignoring the grey areas in between. 

What has this got to do with the PAP letting in all those foreign workers anyway?

3. This is the biggest fucking joke of Blueocean's comment, "Businesses are moving away from the west to Asia." This is so fucking ridiculous because it is totally untrue. OK let's look at what the reality of the situation is with a simple example. Harrods is one of London's most famous department stores. They opened a boutique in Ngee Ann City within Takashimaya because Singapore is a great place for top end shopping and it gave them valuable exposure to the Singaporean market. This is just one of many businesses from the West who have chosen to have a presence in Asia and this has been happening for decades. Would Harrods shut down their flagship London store and focus on their business in Asia instead? Why the hell would they do that when their London store is still making so much money? 

Western companies are expanding into Singapore but are not deserting their core markets in the West. 

Sure, plenty of American and European companies have been establishing a presence in Asia to cash in on the spending power of rich Asians in places like Singapore, Seoul and Hong Kong. But this is quite different from businesses moving away from the West to Asia - that implies them abandoning their European and/or North American businesses altogether whilst relocating to Asia. That simply has not happened. Abercrombie & Fitch opening a store on Orchard Road is not the same thing as A&F ditching America for Asia. It doesn't take a genius to understand that difference. #buehtakchek #stupidbodoh #kaugoondulah #你这个白痴

The bigger companies are glad to have a presence in Asia, but the small to medium sized companies simply cannot move - take a medium sized British company like Evans Cycles for example - you want to buy a good bicycle, you go to Evans Cycle. They are all over the UK but have no presence outside the UK. Why would someone like them try to move into a market like Hong Kong or Singapore when there are already loads of businesses already selling bicycles in Hong Kong and Singapore. It makes no business sense - Evans Cycle is successful in the UK because of their local reputation, local knowledge and local connections. That's why locals are happy to buy bicycles from them, knowing that you will get a good product at a very reasonable price and if there's anything wrong with the bike, you can always bring it back to the shop and they will help you. If they open a branch in Singapore, nobody will know who they are and they will not enjoy this good reputation for their service - they will have to start from scratch. There's always another British town for someone like Evans Cycle to expand into rather than try to go international - so businesses like that will never move to Asia because they cannot make money as easily in Asia once you take them out of their home market.

And yet again. What the hell has this got to do with the PAP letting in all those foreign workers anyway?

4. As for the US government shut down, yeah that's because of the fighting between the Republicans and the Democrats - but what the hell has that got to do with asking the PAP to treat Singaporeans a bit better when it comes to the labour market policies? You see, by the time I saw Blueocean referring to the US government shut down, I just rolled my eyes because none of this has anything to do with this issue. Yet Blueocean is clearly oblivious to just how ridiculous and stupid his/her statement sounds. It's like him/her screaming at me, "if you touch just one card in my card tower, the whole thing will collapse! Society as you know it will reap at the seams and disintegrate. The sky will fall down as a result! Don't mess it with, don't play play okay, don't anyhow kachiaow!"

Blueocean is not being logical. Those who have the card tower mentality are not logical people who are able to talk about the situation in a rational way. To suggest that Singapore risks a US style government shut down if you simply level the playing field between locals and foreigners is simply ludicrous. More than half of Blueocean's post is factually incorrect anyway - but guess what? That wouldn't bother him/her because s/he is going to believe what s/he wants to believe in. I suppose this is a result of the PAP's indoctrination - they do want Singaporeans to shut the hell up, sit back and not change the status quo, so Singaporeans with Blueocean's attitude would suit the PAP just fine.

Here's the irony: many Singaporeans who are not gung-ho pro-PAP supporters still have this card tower mentality. It is a blind spot - it is a result of growing up in Singapore and being brainwashed. Time for a reality check - the card tower doesn't exist. Singapore is a country that has achieved so much and all these achievements are not going to disappear overnight if you make some changes in the country, such as by improving the lot of male Singaporeans, or getting rid of the PAP altogether. No, life will probably go on much the same - the economy is very robust. If these people actually think that the Singaporean economy is as flimsy as a card tower, then goodness me, they have even less faith in Singapore than I do - and I'm the one who gave up on Singapore and migrated to the UK! #irony

My point is simple: if you do believe in the PAP and support their decisions, then by all means, go ahead - that's your choice, I don't have a problem with that. But if you don't like what they do, don't give in to the card tower mentality. Arm yourself with accurate facts, if you're not sure - ask around, speak to intelligent people who know what is going on, do your homework and research, gain new insights and understanding into the situation before forming an opinion. Do not base your opinion on inaccurate facts and completely salah bullshit the way Blueocean has. Don't be lazy. Be a good boy/girl and do your reading on the subject first, then after you've done that, come back to Limpeh and let me know what your opinion is by leaving a comment below. Kum siah, thank you.