No Singaporean will go Hungry

last SG · 2007-12-03T21:10:05+00:00

We are close to that, we are a hybrid regime, maybe one rung higher than communism. If we try harder, we will go back to Monarchy and Feudalism.

qlqq9 SG

Yeah, tell that to your master, PAP. Think they will reward you if what you suggest works.

deathbait SG

red tape to get to free money is not about drawing lines. It's about increasing opportunity cost.

Let's say I have a million dollars to give away. If I announce that I'm giving 2000 to the first 500 ppl to come to my house, EVERYONE would come, needy or not. That's because the opportunity cost is greatly shadowed by the potential rewards.

If I changed the rules a little, and now announce I'm just giving out 100 dollars to the first 10000 ppl to come, I'll get a more selective bunch of ppl. The people who don't really need 100 dollars will think twice before coming.

Playing down the pattern, we'll see that the most effecient way of making sure only the needy get money is to give out maybe 10 dollars each. You REALLY have to be desperate to travel all the way down to get 10 dollars.

But that's not effective right? We don't want to give out 10 dollars to ppl who need 100. But how do we give out 100 without having tons of freeloaders who don't need it?

Enter the mountains of forms designed to increase opportunity cost without reducing rewards. Take me for instance. Tell me I get 100 dollars just for travelling to town, and I'll go this instant. Tell me I have to fill up a form, and I'll still go. Tell me it's 5 forms, and I'll probably hesitate before going. If it's going to be 5 forms now, 3 forms next week and another 5 in a month before a 3 month wait for the cash, I'm staying at home. The point is, people who REALLY need the money would still go.

And that's the whole point.

CX SG

I have no objections with your logic but the rationale of making the needy jump through hoops to get the few dollars they really need to make ends meet just seems really dehumanising and humiliating to me...

Why do we have to have the mindset that the disadvantaged NEEDS to PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt that they NEED the $$$ before they are given a condescending pittance???

Aren't they humans too? who bleeds like us? and sweat like us? and feel hunger and thirst like us?

Aren't they Singaporeans too, who "voted" in the government that is treating them like beggars to be played like fools and trampled at their whim and fancy?

I'm no anti- PAP raver... neither am I a blind pro-PAP stooge. I am however, a Singaporean who cares A LOT the poor, tottering, old pple around my estate selling tissue and collecting cardboard and drink cans for a living.

I do my part by supporting their "entrepreneurial" efforts and giving where I can to assuage my conscience but seriously, I'm one man trying to make a decent living too. I can't change the world.

These are however, the same pple who, in their small ways, bled, and shed sweat to make this country what it is today: an uncaring, mercenary society with a government that chooses to treat the needy as a nuisance rather than as citizens who have a right to get help from the government they elected.

And where is LHL's promise that the 2% GST hike was going to fund the social safety nets? I don't see it... But I do see ministerial salaries jump by a rather enviable quantum...

And cut the crap about "there's never a good time to raise the salaries".

Apply the same Goddamn logic u used when u justified your cushy salary increase cos there's never a good time to help the poor! But u should do so ANYWAY!

I do believe that we have the best government that money can buy... But it just plain stinks that this same government is unable to spend money to PROPERLY address the problem of the poor and the destitute.

Over the past few years, I personally, have noted an increase in the numbers of homeless poor people. Look around... They're sleeping in the parks, the void decks and any halfway comfortable flat space they can find.

Oops... Sorry... Our millionaire ministers are comfy in their mansions and unable to see...

I would seriously like a government staffed by people with hearts as big as their wallets, especially after they've pocketed a million bucks hard cash...

deathbait SG

it's nice to see you quoted my post and didn't understand a word of it.

Ok, it's tragedy of the commons, pure and simple.

The poor need to prove they need the money, because otherwise ppl like you and me who don't will still go and try to grab money meant for them.

So don't look at the government when you're trying to find blame here. Look at yourself. Everytime you walk into a store and ask about a product, only to buy that product from a cheaper store across the road, you are part of the problem.

Everytime you pick up a free food sample at NTUC with no intention of buying the product, you are part of the problem.

Everytime you harbour thoughts of attempting to avoid taxes in any way, you are part of the problem.

The government isn't to blame here. It is trying to help PROTECT the actual poor from people such as us. The greedy humans. And don't insult my intelligence by trying to deny you're not part of the problem.

deathbait SG

Apply the same Goddamn logic u used when u justified your cushy salary increase cos there's never a good time to help the poor! But u should do so ANYWAY!

Do you see how much of yourself you revealed via this innocent sentence? To a truly selfless person, every minute is a good time to help the poor. Why is there ever a bad time to help the poor? Your reasoning here is unsound.

But the truth is, you can't always help the poor. Again I raise the subject of tragedy of the commons, because it is so universal in our nature. Help the poor too much, and they grow to depend on it. Refuse help, and the story may have an ugly ending.

But for the sake of your understanding, let's have an exercise. You seem to consider yourself a decent human being, so let's assume you're incorruptable. Because I trust you so much, let's give you 50 million to spend or distribute as you please amongst the needy for the year 2008. How would you go about doing it?

You seem to care alot for the homeless. Let's find them some shelter first, right? 50 Million can build quite a few homes. Let's get started. But wait, there's a housing shortage. Nevermind, we'll just build more, right? Argh, these damn flats sure take a long time to build.

In the meantime, let's see if we can rent out existing old flats to help solve the immediate problem. Oh, the poor can't afford the high rents? Let's make rental lower! We have 50 million to distribute, after all. Subsidies all around!

But see, now we have a problem. we're now renting out flats at ultra low prices. VERY attractive prices. Now the middle class wants in on some of that action. Those flats aren't bad, and they can cut their rents by half just by pretending to be poor! Oh no! Now we're short on housing again!

Ahhh, but we're smart, yes we are. We'll make them PROVE they are poor. Enter paperwork, stage right. But those pesky freeloaders aren't dumb either. Begin the arms war. Fast forward a few months, and now we have tons of paperwork to fill up just to buy a candy for 10 cents off.

OK the housing thingy was a bust. Let's try another idea we've been pushing around. Let's just give them the damn money and let them rent their own damn houses. Oh look what's this? More freeloaders. Just as I was getting used to a paperless afternoon. Sigh. Back to drafting up more paperwork.

It's pretty nice to find a high horse to sit on while shouting to the heavens : "FEED THE HUNGRY! LIBERATE THE POOR!" In reality, it's a slow, agonising process to help the lower class. Some of them are there because of inherent behaviors that put them there in the first place, such as gambling or just plain laziness. So when you finally get the greedy middleclass people out of the equation, how are you going to seperate the deserving poor from the undeserving poor?

Think about it.
How long would you give yourself?

maurizio13 SG

Fancy using dissipation of rents (tragedy of the commons) to explain social welfare instead of public goods.

Social welfare relates to redistribution of income to the needy, whereas public goods is associated with provision of parks, national defence, where it's zero cost to the public deriving benefits.

I am stupefied.

Shocked Shocked Shocked

In the case of a public good, there is no distinction between users, everybody and anybody can derive satisfaction from the public good. The rich can enjoy the park, so can the poor. The rich gets security from national defence, so does the poor.

In the case of social welfare, there is distinction between the different classes extracting benefits. Maybe income of less than $1,500 are entitled to social welfare, whereas those above are not eligible. The poor can get social welfare but not the rich.

HyperFocal SG

If they can trace, track, & quantify the amount in Medisave & or Income Tax owed by a small-fry Self-Employed, why can't they be just as efficient in verifying a Needy's request for Public Aid???

I think it is lame to put the weak & powerless through a "circus act" before rendering them Aid... why don't they do the same to filter out Foreigners coming here to take away jobs that would have otherwise gone to these Poor Low Income Earners???

In the first place, do you know who/what caused the plights of these Needies?

fymk SG

It is starting to sound like the infamous saying of " Qu'ils mangent de la brioche" - let them eat cake.

Or shall we change it to "Qu'ils mangent de la arachide" to suit the Singaporean context. You can get 1.67 peanuts with 1 million , you know? That is according to Mrs GCT theorem of Peanuts.

So if we divide it by 500 people - 0.00334 peanuts for everyone !

fymk SG

If you want to use this analogy - you might as well say that all those companies who move from Singapore and go to China for cheaper manufacturing costs , are also to be blamed. Those companies that employ cheaper foreigners are also to be blamed by virtue of your logic.

The government is like a tradesman and running the country is like their tool of trade. À mauvais ouvrier point de bons outils to your last statement.

^tamago^ SG

he is helping the merchants. they've been poor cos they should earn more. Rolling Eyes Laughing Twisted Evil

fishbuff SG

the only countries that allow their people to go hungry are war torn countries like iraq, sudan, ehtopia, etc.

if singapore is touting to be a world class country, then the end goal to achieve is to give a fruitful environment that decent family men and women are live and bring up their children.

however, the main goal is very different and extremely materialistic. U cut tax on the high income bracket but u raise the cost of the fundamentals. this model will only benefit the rich and tax the poor even more.

my circle of friends are mainly family men in their 40s and they are facing an uphill task to provide for their family. mental anguish over their children studies, their job securities, cost of living are constantly on their mind. This is psychologically draining and i can see the burnt out spirit in their eyes. Most had resigned to their faith, same goes to their children.

u cant break free from the chains of mental pressure. shall we say that these "weaklings" deserve their just rewards, or damn that they should be like that given their less than glorious economic background?

what is humanity when the care for others are gone?

AndrewPKYap SG

.... No Singaporean will go Hungry ... and no Singaporean can escape having their hard earned money taken away ...

... relentlessly by public money grabbing despots, paying themselves and their relatives massive amounts from the public coffers...

... letting their daughter in law/wife go shopping overseas and losing the money they take from Singaporeans, to foreigners...

AndrewPKYap SG

... is the issue "No Singaporean will go Hungry" or "No Singaporean will escape having their money relentlessly taken away" ?

Rolling Eyes

Evil or Very Mad

AndrewPKYap SG

... and after taking away so much money of Singaporeans money... the best they can do is promise.. "No Singaporean will go Hungry...? "

... public money grabbing despots...

royston_ang SG

Let's say it a person need exactly $50 to survive a week. So if there are 3 men, a rich, a average and a poor travel to town to get the weekly $50 handout, what is the cost to each of them? And how much to travel from town back home? Finally, what the amount of money left the rich, average and poor will be getting? Is it still the full amount intended? (Unless you assume that rich will only take taxi, average take bus, and poor WALK).

And of cause, according to the ministers, POOR can't eat in food court, they should to eat something cheaper, maybe rice and soya source or salted fish? No, no, of course they will not go hungry, only malnutrition, but that's all right because they are POOR, isn't it?

If a poor bread winner of a family who has no saving in bank is suddenly retrenched, somehow, he and his family can survive without food, electricity, clean water, transport (of course, they can always walk even if hungry) while the authority take their time to test the family determination before deciding if they are REALLY POOR.

Rolling Eyes

BillyBong SG

Aptly put. You've suggested that a mountain of forms are needed to validate the poor from the free-loaders.

Has it occured to you that the terms 'poor' and 'uneducated' come in unison? The mountain of forms are more likely to put off the poor rather than the educated free-loaders.

And i still don't see how tasting a food sample supports your argument. I may or may not have an intention to purchase the food, but i won't know until i actually try it yes?

I'm still waiting to see a roadmap from our overpaid government as to how they plan to improve inflation and conditions for the poor. All we've heard is the usual rhetoric from the ruling party, but no REAL plan to convince the majority that they have it in the works. Cost of living is rising astromically, and it appears the govt are contend to let it max out and burst on it own.

At least Khaw Boon Wan was brave enough to put forward an unpopular policy of means testing to free up hospital beds from being 'free-loaded' by those who can well afford higher classes. We'll see how that works out in the next few years.

For the rest, maybe we should wait till the ministers lose touch with the people the same way Samy Vellu has lost the respect of his peers. Moving ahead, our million-dollar leaders should realise that meet the people's sessions are hardly sufficient to solve today's problems.

Will they learn from our neighbour's mistakes?

EarlNeo SG

Would u want a public toilet infront or ur HDB shop and it maintenances fee chargeable to u? If we dun get to have a said in it, then why must we pay? And if we are force to pay, dun u think it is only rite we get to have a say in it? Rolling Eyes

deathbait SG

I'm using the concept to explain why there a proccess to seperate the deserving from the undeserving is necessary. This was in response to the person who did not understand why paperwork was needed.

You do agree that if there were no barrier to entry, everyone would be applying for free money?

deathbait SG

Ah, here's a strawman argument if there ever was one.

Don't mix foreign talent infusion with the poor. If you start blaming foreign talents, you'll be exactly like the CEO who favors employing family and friends regardless of qualifications.

Obviously they need to verify the request for public aid. That's why there's paperwork. It's not a circus act. It's a necessity. Paying people to sift through the mountain of documents take up resources too you know.

deathbait SG

The peanut quote has been blown so far out of context it's amazing. What, you've never made a silly statement before? You have, it's just not been repeated over and over again to make you feel silly.

If your only complaint here is that Mrs GCT thought a few million was peanuts, then there really is nothing to say here. For eg, I feel 10 bucks is pretty peanut-sy. The poor and needy referenced in this thread may not agree.

« Previous Page Next Page »