The relentless rising cost of living in Singapore

[nuclearkid]

Originally Posted by sadfa

Don't teach ppl the wrong thing La.
As if a website owned or controlled by garbagement indirectly will not co-operate when isd demand info
_____
Exchange points co-operate ma

Then go to the coffee shop section of SBF lor. That one should be politically neutral, isn't it? The point is, fuck, I see this discussion everywhere on the media and it has been repeated ad nauseum. Do we really have to see it here as well???

[SiaSuay]

Originally Posted by nuclearkid

Then go to the coffee shop section of SBF lor. That one should be politically neutral, isn't it? The point is, fuck, I see this discussion everywhere on the media and it has been repeated ad nauseum. Do we really have to see it here as well???

You must be one the very rich guys who are not affected by price increase .

[kuasimi]

http://forums.$$$$$$$$$$$$.com.sg/current-affairs-lounge-17/stunning-news-3in1-kopitiam-worlds-30-highest-paid-politicians-all-same-country-3096997.html

The TOP 30 highest paid politicians in the World are all from Singapore !!

1. Elected President SR Nathan – S$3.9 million.
2. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong – S$3.8 million.
3. Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew – S$3.5 million.
4. Senior Minister Goh Chok Thong – S$3.5 million.
5. Senior Minister Prof Jayakumar – S$3.2 million.
6. DPM & Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng – S$2.9 million.
7. DPM & Defence Minister Teo Chee Hean – $2.9 million
8. Foreign Affairs Minister George Yeo – S$2.8 million.
9. National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan – S$2.7 million.
10. PMO Miniser Lim Boon Heng – S$2.7 million.
11. Trade and Industry Minister Lim Hng Kiang – S$2.7 million.
12. PMO Minister Lim Swee Say – S$2.6 million.
13. Environment Minister & Muslim Affairs Minister Dr Yaccob Ibrahim – S$2.6 million.
14. Health Minister Khaw Boon Wan – S$2.6 million.
15. Finance Minister S Tharman – S$2.6 million.
16. Education Minister & 2nd Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen – S$2.6 million.
17. Community Development Youth and Sports Minister – Dr Vivian Balakrishnan – S$2.5 million.
18. Transport Minister & 2nd Minister for Foreign Affairs Raymond Lim Siang Kiat – S$2.5 million.
19. Law Minister & 2nd Minister for Home Affairs K Shanmugam – S$2.4 million.
20. Manpower Minister Gan Kim Yong – S$2.2 million.
21. PMO Minister Lim Hwee Hwa – S$2.2 million
22. Acting ICA Minister – Lui Tuck Yew – S$2.0 million.
23 to 30 = Senior Ministers of State and Ministers of State – each getting between S$1.8 million to S$1.5 million.

[skyleon]

Hi kuasimi your information is outdated . Can you please provide the latest ? Thanks a lot . But then everyone knows our ministers are paid even better than President of United States if I am not wrong .

[kuasimi]

How well is well-paid?
By Tan Hui Leng and Jasmie Yen, TODAY | Posted: 10 April 2007 1028
They expressed support for the need to pay top dollar for top talent in the public sector.
But Members of Parliament (MPs) who took part in yesterday's parliamentary debate on the pay hike also spoke passionately about what many Singaporeans believe to be the heart of the issue: The benchmarking formula used to determine ministerial pay.
Ang Mo Kio MP Inderjit Singh noted that Singaporeans could not expect their leaders to serve based on altruism alone. "Are we willing to leave the future of the country to chance, that we will get good people who will give up their competence without caring about their salary?" he asked.
Some MPs, however, saw problems in benchmarking ministers' pay to the private sector, pointing out to disparities in the risks taken by company chief executives and ministers and top civil servants.
Marine Parade MP Lim Biow Chuan said: "I struggle to understand what a top Admin Officer aged 32 at grade SR9 has to worry about that will justify him receiving $363,000 a year … From many people's perspectives, they take no personal risk and are at best, paid employees."
Opposition MPs Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir) and Hougang's Low Thia Khiang took issue with the fact that Singapore's ministers are paid more than their counterparts in developed countries.
MPs like Bishan-Toa Payoh's Mrs Josephine Teo, however, pointed out that ministers in other countries may make more money after their term in office ends, such as through public speaking.
Some MPs voiced concerns about the timing of announcing the pay revisions, especially with the Goods and Services Tax (GST) due to rise to 7 per cent in July.
Mr Singh said: "How do we answer the man-in-the-street when we're told that about one-quarter to one-third of the expected revenue increase this year from the GST is going to be for the proposed ministerial and civil service salary increases, about $240 million, I was told?"
Mr Low also referred to the recent debate on increasing the amounts for public assistance. "It's also ironic that we are consuming taxpayers' money and … discussing how much more of a fraction of a million to pay civil servants and ministers while we haggle over additional tens of dollars to hand out to our needy and disadvantaged citizens," he said.
Some MPs who supported the pay hike also suggested that the salary benchmarking could be finetuned, such as pegging ministers' salaries to more realistic markers such as top men in private equity firms and top companies based on market capitalisation.

[kuasimi]

‘Reasonable pay will help to maintain a bit of dignity’
Member of Parliament Lim Wee Kiak of the Nee Soon group representation constituency (GRC) defended ministerial salaries by saying a reasonable payout helped maintain "dignity" for politicians.
He was quickly slammed by netizens, many of whom pointed out in various posts on the Web that "dignity" should not be justified by salary alone.
The multi-million dollar pay of ministers was a hot-button issue in Singapore's recent General Election, which saw the ruling People's Action Party win 81 out of 87 seats but at a significantly lower share of the total votes.
Following the results, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced the formation of a committee to review the "basis and level of political salaries". Any pay changes would take effect from 21 May this year.
"If the annual salary of the Minister of Information, Communication and Arts is only $500,000, it may pose some problems when he discuss policies with media CEOs who earn millions of dollars because they need not listen to the minister's ideas and proposals. Hence, a reasonable payout will help to maintain a bit of dignity," Dr Lim told LianHe ZaoBao in Chinese.
In reaction, Francis Oen postedon Facebook: "Hi Wee Kiat.. Suggest you clarify your statement. Does it mean that only $ talks?! ... And if someone earns less, does it mean he cannot have dignity?"
Winnie Lim tweeted: "So according to Dr Lim Wee Kiak's theory, our ministers will ignore Obama because he earns less than all of them."
On his Facebook page, Dr Lim said that his quote was taken out of context.
"Minister's pay issue is a sensitive one. There must be a balance. After all, capable individuals who are willing to come forward to serve should not so because of pay and perks," he replied to a user's question about his quote.
He added, "On the other hand, they do have families and dependents and need to consider for retirement, etc."

[kuasimi]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/09/wo...0498.html?_r=0



Singapore announces 60 percent pay raise for ministers

By Seth Mydans

Published: Monday, April 9, 2007


SINGAPORE — How much money does it take to keep a Singapore government minister happy? The government says a million dollars is not enough, and on Monday it announced a 60 percent boost in ministers' salaries, to an average of 1.9 million Singapore dollars, or $1.26 million, by next year.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong will see his pay jump to 3.1 million Singapore dollars, five times the $400,000 earned by President George W. Bush.

In this nation where the bottom line truly is the bottom line, the argument goes, you've got to pay to get them and you've got to pay to keep them.

"If we don't do that, in the long term, the government system will slowly crumble and collapse," Defense Minister Teo Chee Hean told reporters last month.

As the minister who oversees the civil service, Teo announced the pay hikes Monday, saying: "We don't want pay to be the reason for people to join us. But we also don't want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us."

It is a pay system created in 1994 by Singapore's founder, Lee Kuan Yew, pegging the salaries of government ministers and top civil servants to the money they might earn at the top of the private sector.

Defending the system last month against an unusual public yelp of pain, Lee Kuan Yew painted a horrifying picture of a Singapore governed by ministers who earn no more than ministers anywhere else.

"Your apartment will be worth a fraction of what it is," he said, "your jobs will be in peril, your security will be at risk and our women will become maids in other people's countries."

Singapore has one of the most efficient and corruption-free governments in the world.

It is Asia's second-richest country after Japan, with a gross domestic product per capita of about $31,000, and Lee said it could well afford to pay its leaders top dollar.

The total of the salaries before the increase amounted to 46 million Singapore dollars a year, he said, or 0.13 percent of government expenditure - 0.022 percent of gross domestic product.

Under the government's formula, ministers are to be paid two-thirds of the median of the top eight earners in each of six professions: accounting, law, banking, engineering, multinational companies and local manufacturing.

There has been no public sign of discontent among the men and women who run Singapore, but last month the prime minister noted that they were earning just 55 percent of this benchmark.

"We don't want pay to be the reason for people to join us," Teo said Monday in announcing the pay hikes. "But we also don't want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us."

Talk of the impending pay increase drew an outcry here for weeks that included letters to newspapers and an online petition that has collected more than 800 signatures.

The average Singaporean earns something over $2,000 a month, and the government has voiced concern over a widening gap between rich and poor.

The ministerial raise comes three months ahead of a 2 percent increase in the sales tax.

Mohamad Rosle Ahmad wrote in a letter to the editor: "I am sure Enron and Worldcom paid more than top dollar for their top executives, and look where their companies are now - six feet under."

Lee Kuan Yew, whose title is minister mentor, said naysayers like this need a reality check.

"I say you have no sense of proportion; you don't know what life is about," he said last month.

"The cure to all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government," Lee said. "You get that alternative, and you'll never put Singapore together again."

He presented himself as an example: "A top lawyer, which I could easily have become, today earns 4 million Singapore dollars. And he doesn't have to carry this responsibility. All he's got to do is advise his client. Win or lose, that's the client's loss or gain."

The Straits Times newspaper quoted him as saying his current salary as minister mentor was 2.7 million Singapore dollars.

Money may buy happiness for a government minister, but some Singaporeans suggested that other motivations should also come into play for government service.

"What about other redeeming intangibles such as honor and sense of duty, dedication, passion and commitment, loyalty and service?" asked Hussin Mutalib in the Straits Times' online forum recently.

Carolyn Lim, a prominent writer, suggested in an essay in The Straits Times that Singapore needed a little more heart to go along with its hard head. "Indeed, a brilliant achiever without the high purpose of service to others would be the worst possible ministerial material," she wrote.

"To see a potential prime minister as no different from a potential top lawyer, and likely to be enticed by the same stupendous salary, would be to blur the lines between two very different domains."

The minister mentor brushed aside concerns like that.

"Those are admirable sentiments," he said. "But we live in a real world."

[kuasimi]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/10/wo...ref=leekuanyew


Singapore’s Highly Paid Officials Get Richer



By SETH MYDANS

Published: April 10, 2007


Correction Appended

SINGAPORE, April 9 — How much money does it take to keep a government minister in Singapore happy?

The government says a million dollars is not enough, and on Monday it announced a 60 percent increase in ministers’ salaries, to an average of $1.9 million Singapore dollars, or about $1.3 million, by next year.

Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s pay will jump to about $2 million — five times the $400,000 earned by President Bush.

In this nation where the bottom line truly is the bottom line, the argument goes, you have to pay to get them and you have to pay to keep them clean.

“If we don’t do that, in the long term the government system will slowly crumble and collapse,” Defense Minister Teo Chee Hean told reporters last month. “Corruption will set in, and we will become like many other countries, and face the problems that many other countries face,” The Straits Times, Singapore’s largest-circulation newspaper, quoted him as saying.

In announcing the pay increases on Monday, Mr. Teo, who also oversees the civil service, said: “We don’t want pay to be the reason for people to join us. But we also don’t want pay to be the reason for them not to join us, or to leave after joining us.”

Singapore’s pay system was created in 1994 by the nation’s founding prime minister, Lee Kuan Yew. It pegged the salaries of government ministers and top civil servants to the money they might earn at the top of the private sector.

Under that formula, ministers are to be paid two-thirds of the median of the top eight earners in each of six professions: accounting, law, banking, engineering, multinational companies and local manufacturing.

There has been no public sign of discontent among the men and women who run Singapore, but last month the prime minister noted that they were earning just 55 percent of that benchmark. Hence the raise for the three dozen men and women who run Singapore.

Defending the system against an unusual public yelp of pain, Mr. Lee, whose title is minister mentor, painted a horrifying picture of a Singapore governed by ministers who earn no more than ministers elsewhere.

“Your apartment will be worth a fraction of what it is,” he said. “Your jobs will be in peril, your security will be at risk, and our women will become maids in other people’s countries.”

It is true that Singapore has one of the most efficient and corruption-free governments in the world. Transparency International, a private monitoring agency, recently listed it as the fifth most corruption-free nation of 163 surveyed.

It is Asia’s second-richest country after Japan, with a gross domestic product per capita of about $31,000. The first Prime Minister Lee said it could well afford to pay its leaders top dollar.

The average Singaporean earns roughly $3,000 a month, and the government has voiced concern over a widening gap between rich and poor. The ministers’ pay was approved three months before the sales tax is to be increased by 2 percent.

Talk of the pay raise drew criticism here that included letters to newspapers and an online petition that has more than 800 signatures.

“I am sure Enron and Worldcom paid more than top dollar for their top executives, and look where their companies are now — six feet under,” Mohamad Rosle Ahmad wrote to the editor of The Straits Times.

The elder Mr. Lee said naysayers needed a reality check. “I say you have no sense of proportion; you don’t know what life is about,” he said.

“The cure to all this talk is really a good dose of incompetent government,” he added. “You get that alternative, and you’ll never put Singapore together again.”

The Straits Times quoted him as saying his current salary as minister mentor was about $1.8 million.

Some Singaporeans suggested that other motivations should also come into play for government jobs.

“What about other redeeming intangibles such as honor and sense of duty, dedication, passion and commitment, loyalty and service?” asked Hussin Mutalib, a political science professor at the National University of Singapore, in a Straits Times online forum.

Carolyn Lim, a prominent writer, suggested in an essay that Singapore needed a little more heart to go along with its hard head.

“To see a potential prime minister as no different from a potential top lawyer, and likely to be enticed by the same stupendous salary, would be to blur the lines between two very different domains,” she wrote.

The minister mentor brushed aside such concerns. “Those are admirable sentiments,” he said. “But we live in a real world.”

Correction: April 13, 2007



An article on Tuesday about the high salaries of Singapore government officials misstated the given name of a prominent writer who suggested in an essay that comparability with the private sector should not be the only consideration in setting government salaries. She is Catherine Lim, not Carolyn.

[kuasimi]

http://www.sgpolitics.net/?p=4237

Said Mr Lee: “The PAP makes promises they deliver. The Opposition cannot deliver.”

“If you have a flood, just carefully think who is more likely to get the drainage put right and have the flood alleviated as quickly as possible: A PAP candidate with links to the ministers and Prime Minister, or a non-PAP candidate who has become an MP, like in Potong Pasir or Hougang, and who has to manage on his own?”

“That’s a fact of life.”

Source: Today newspaper, “MM Lee explains his tough stance against Opposition, throws a challenge“, 29 April 2006.

[kuasimi]

http://mrwangsaysso.blogspot.sg/2012...signation.html

Grace Fu Should Consider Resignation

Singapore has the world's most highly-paid ministers. If I recall correctly, they have held this world record for about the past 20 years. It is a record that has caused a huge amount of public unhappiness. Especially in the past decade, during which the government didn't ever seem to be particularly impressive or outstanding.

Now, finally, ministerial salaries are going to be cut. Mind you, after these cuts (which are quite substantial in percentage terms - about 36%), the ministers will STILL hold their world record. Which must surely suggest to any half-intelligent person how grossly overpaid the ministers have been all along.

But then you get the likes of Grace Fu (who is our Minister of State for something or the other). Writing on her own Facebook wall, Fu says:

“When I made the decision to join politics in 2006, pay was not a key factor. Loss of privacy, public scrutiny on myself and my family and loss of personal time were. The disruption to my career was also an important consideration. I had some ground to believe that my family would not suffer a drastic change in the standard of living even though I experienced a drop in my income. So it is with this recent pay cut. If the balance is tilted further in the future, it will make it harder for any one [sic] considering political office.” Grace Fu.
Now, lots of Singaporeans are angry with Grace Fu. The comments have come thick, fast and furious. As of right now, her Facebook post has drawn about 1,300 comments (that's about 650 times the average number of comments on her other Facebook postings). And of course, there is plenty of negative media attention, online and in the newspapers too.

Putting aside the other issues for now, I'm startled at Grace Fu's lack of political sensitivity. It was really, really stupid and unnecessary of her to write such a thing. Fu wasn't even under pressure. It wasn't as if she was at a press conference, and a belligerent journalist had just thrown an unexpected and difficult question at her, and she couldn't think fast enough about what best to say.

Instead - we can imagine it - there she was, relaxing in her living room, playing with her iPad, sipping a nice cup of tea, logging in to check her messages. And then suddenly, Fu decided to write what she wrote. On Facebook. Not in a private journal, not in a personal memo, but on Facebook.

She must have totally failed to foresee what would happen next.

What poor judgment! What a severe lack of foresight. And she's a minister, for goodness sakes. Who knows what other horrible errors she might have spoken or written, on other past occasions.

Now, of course Fu is backpedalling and she has made a statement that she had been "misunderstood". This is damage control .... for completely self-inflicted damage. LOL, that is funny.

Imagine this - you are a minister, and you say something, the public is shocked and angry. And then you say, "Oh, all of you tens of thousands of people, you've misunderstood me. I am the poor, unfortunate, misunderstood one." Sing me another song, birdie.

"Me talk nonsense. Also can sing song.

How much you pay me?"

If Grace Fu can be so badly misunderstood, then that surely says something about Grace Fu's communication skills. It is extremely difficult to get thousands of people to misunderstand you. I am sure that I could not possibly succeed in pulling off such a feat. (But then I am not a PAP minister, I lack such talent).

However - and this will surprise many of my own readers - I am not actually angry about the content, the actual substance, of Grace Fu's statement.

Why am I not angry?

Look - this woman is merely a product of the system. And what is the system that I speak of? It is the PAP recruitment system that Lee Kuan Yew decided to create, 20 years ago. A system that deliberately entices job applicants with world-record-setting amounts of money.

The inevitable result - the PAP attracts many talented political wannabes whose main interest is in the money. (Meanwhile, talented political wannabes who just hope to serve the nation can join the Workers' Party - like Chen Show Mao did).

And when the money gets cut, well, you can naturally expect the PAP ministers (at least, the more money-minded ones) to get upset. Isn't that logical? If you had come for the money, then you WOULD be upset by a pay cut, surely.

My blog post is entitled "Grace Fu Should Consider Resignation". Sounds sensationalist, doesn't it? But it isn't really. (I'm not that kind of blogger, lah). Let me just explain my thinking.

It goes like this - if any minister is really very unhappy with his or her pay, then he or she can always quit. It's not like they are being forced to be ministers.

Unhappy employees don't perform well - we know that from our own experiences in working life. It is better for the company if they quit. It is better for themselves too, for they can go elsewhere and find another job that is more satisfying for them.

Why would we expect things to be any different for our ministers? If they are not happy with their pay, they won't perform well. They should just quit and get a more lucrative job elsewhere (if they can, of course). After they resign as ministers, Singapore can replace them with new ministers who care less about the money, and care more about serving the nation.

So I say this to all the ministers - if you're not happy with your pay, please quit. Now, rather than five years later. Do yourself a favour, and do the country a favour. Just get out.

[kuasimi]

Originally Posted by skyleon

Hi kuasimi your information is outdated . Can you please provide the latest ? Thanks a lot . But then everyone knows our ministers are paid even better than President of United States if I am not wrong .

It is not outdated because the Minister's pay still does not match reality and remains overpaid.

Issues that were 10 years ago remains today and unresolved.

It is sad but true that everything above still applies today.

Every election for past 50 years always have bread & butter issues as main theme. It did not go away.

Entire world had improved materially, not just Singapore. This means Singaporeans continue to struggle with livelihoods.

[winphenom]

I think all MPs and ministers should go for a lie detector test to see if they are really doing for the people and nation or for the salary and benefits of that job. All full of crap people.

[sadfa]

Originally Posted by skyleon

Hi kuasimi your information is outdated . Can you please provide the latest ? Thanks a lot . But then everyone knows our ministers are paid even better than President of United States if I am not wrong .

Please La.
Where would all of u be without me.
Ppl like u obviously don't keep abreast of news.

Barry Obama got a 20 million book deal. Both his wife n kids are also set for life without a cent from him.

US presidents pay is low but his perks like air force one n all meals provided 24/7 n secret service detail is unmatched OK.

And even Clintons also got huge book deals n appearance n speech fees.
One year easily make millions.
They don't need to work n Chelsea Clinton also don't need to work

If they want to take the job, there's nothing more prestigious for Facebook or Apple or esso or some Arab oil fund than being associated with former US president in terms of them being patron or director of yr company. Plus US lobbying so strong. Israel n middle East countrys or even worse China will bid millions to have a former US president in their corner.

It's only whether Barry or Clinton or Bush or jimmy want to take the offer or not
______
Exchange points ignorant ma

[sadfa]

Originally Posted by winphenom

I think all MPs and ministers should go for a lie detector test to see if they are really doing for the people and nation or for the salary and benefits of that job. All full of crap people.

Hahaha I think if they bring out all their lie detectors n let garbagement assholes take the test, when they say 'no' they're not doing for personal benefit, the lie detectors will beep so loudly, and the needles will move so powerfully, it'll rip apart the paper n so much energy produced, there'll be a fucking explosion.

And the plp officials on scene will scream to the cb media STOP FILMING THIS. STOP!!
______
Exchange points Liao u will explode ma

[kuasimi]

Originally Posted by sadfa

Please La.
Where would all of u be without me.
Ppl like u obviously don't keep abreast of news.

Barry Obama got a 20 million book deal. Both his wife n kids are also set for life without a cent from him.

US presidents pay is low but his perks like air force one n all meals provided 24/7 n secret service detail is unmatched OK.

And even Clintons also got huge book deals n appearance n speech fees.
One year easily make millions.
They don't need to work n Chelsea Clinton also don't need to work

If they want to take the job, there's nothing more prestigious for Facebook or Apple or esso or some Arab oil fund than being associated with former US president in terms of them being patron or director of yr company. Plus US lobbying so strong. Israel n middle East countrys or even worse China will bid millions to have a former US president in their corner.

It's only whether Barry or Clinton or Bush or jimmy want to take the offer or not
______
Exchange points ignorant ma

State benefits only apply when you have the position. It is not your personal benefit to take away when you leave the job. But salaries are personal to keep for life usage regardless you leave the job.

To use USA State benefits for high office as consolation for Singapore's Government Highest Pay in the world does not make sense at all.

Book deals depends on demand and supply. Not all USA Presidents got fantastic book deals by default. But key difference is book deals still need to be won and earn by USA Presidents. Singapore Ministers rather get highest salaries then do book deals for the equivalent money.