whoa dudes. I not pro gahmen but in this case really gotta say
some of you lack balance in your opinions.
i previously worked as a temp at one of the MCYS community
development centres. and i handled data processing for these kinda
social worker case.
suffice to say, it works both ways. sometimes its the problem
with the individual sometimes within the system
system problems :
1) welfare scheme YES, complicated, confusing and multiple
schemes YES. public awareness of schemes POOR
to top things off, social workers are overworked and handle a
huge mulitude of cases per individual. how to provide quality care
and concern when they are outnumbered and overworked ?
2) abuse of system :
i m not saying this old man is an abuser of the system but do
observe that, he get P.A (criteria 65 and above, proven medical
disability / condition that impairs him from working and no known
support group, i.e relatives or friends)
and he gets offered a Job. but what happens ? he complains about
it and the transport fare ?
he dosent make mention of the fact that there are schemes like
PAYU and utilities and town council conservancy fees waiver
arranged by social workers.
3) government policy :
from my experience working and temping there and government
rhethoric, it is my humble opinion that government dosent want to
move towards a welfare model.
the bedrock behind the government's stance and policy still lies
with community and family help. government action should only occur
in the case where the individual involved has no family , cannot be
helped by community then the government step in.
it is a final safety net. not a welfare state. i know i m
probably going to get flamed for saying this but most people cannot
differentiate between them and see the government's intent.
which is to actually create a system where people rely on their
own initiative. i.e you dont have money, u need a job, you look for
a job, government agencies help you find, pay for education and
training and give you a small amount to help you while you find a
job.
it is not meant to replicate social welfare systems like in
europe where you get single parent benefits, unemployment benefits
and social security. we wont have that. we probably cant afford
that.
1) You said the welfare scheme do exists but is confusing. So is
this the people fault? Did the gov do anything to make it easier so
the really poor have access to these scheme?
So if the social workers are overworked, shouldn't the gov do
anything abt it? The gov has billion of reserve every year but it
can't afford to hire more social workers?
2) If the cleaner job is $300 and the transport is $100++, is it
enough to even survive in Singapore?
You mention that there are schemes like PAYU and utilities and
town council conservancy fees waiver arranged by social workers,
but could it be these scheme are not even made know to the
old man which is why he never mention it? So again, whose
fault is it?
The old man did mentioned that "Not enough. The water
bills is already a couple of dollars…..in 2, 3 or at most
4 days, the money is gone." which mean he is still required to pay
utilities bill, So obviously, he is not aware of the so-call PAYU
schemes or whatever so it doesn't apply to him.
3) Is it very clear that in this case, the gov was helping the
old man half heartedly. Just give him $150 per mth and throw him
any cleaner job, and that's it. The old man did said he
wanted to work, but of course, it must be reasonable too. At least
the gov should find him a job and somehow work out the sum so that
he can survive. What's the point of finding him a job which a large
portion goes to transport.
And even if he take up the cleaner job, and that's $200 + $150,
is that enough? -> Yes, if the gov waive the utitities and
whatever bill which I stronger believe didn't happen in this
case!
And having worked as a temp at one of the MCYS community
development centres, you really think that there's no room for
improvement in the current system?
