Why remove hospital subsidy from middle class when rich don't
pay tax?
Facts:
Inordinate Estate tax exemption: "Property owners have additional
$9M tax exemption":
http://www.iras.gov.sg/ESVPortal/others/estate/estate+duty-estate+duty+exemption.asp
; So given that the upper limit of estate duty is 10% (http://www.iras.gov.sg/ESVPortal/others/estate/eatate+duty-tax+rates+and+interest+on+estate+duty.asp),
a well to-do family would have 'evaded' $900K in taxes. They could
also further benefit from the fact that "CPF balances, regardless
of the amount, are exempted from estate duty" (http://www.iras.gov.sg/ESVPortal/others/estate/estate+duty-faq_cpf.asp#Estate%20duty-FAQ_CPF_Q1).
I may not be an expert on estate duty but sth tells me that the tax
exemption could easily be >$1M/ incident leading to much govt
tax losses. [Inordinate exemptions also increase property prices
btw].
Multiple problems are foreseeable with means testing.
1) What are the income benchmarks to work by? For instance: the
$500 'per capita family income' (PCFI) is too low, not when medical
bills in SG can be astronomical in 'unforeseen circumstances' . . .
(PCFI<$500 to downgrade: http://www.todayonline.com/articles/182916.asp
). Will the criteria be transparent or shrouded in secrecy- like I
find the new NKF guidelines: e.g. "Patients who show their
motivation, desire to improve their circumstances will be further
assisted, . . . we also review . . . the children's academic
progress. . . patients under extenuating circumstances can be
considered on a case-by-case basis"; (http://www.nkfs.org/subsidies.php
- any how thats a different story). Helping everyone, especially
those whose PCFI falls below the 50% in society: (PCFI 2005 was
approx $1035- $1459 if ave is used) should be the priority of a
progressive society, can the gov publish it's bench marks before
implementation?
2) How would 'assets' be considered:
i . What is the median PCFA (assets) and how is this derived.
ii . Does staying in pte property automatically fail one in the
means test? Who values the property? (Some patients may reside in
cheap pte properties/ with distant family, themselves unable to
afford even HDB).
iii . What about a property owner pending bankruptcy proceedings.
(similar= high income earner in the same predicament)
iv . What would happen if family members are too busy working/
refuse to meet the means test staff?
v . Who administers the means testing: trained accounts or
'information counter' clerks, would they all be as confused as the
possible guidelines are?
3) Currently those seeking 'downgrading' consult the medical social
worker (MSW) for an assessment
(http://www.todayonline.com/articles/182916.asp ) would MSWs get
overworked with administration as they currently also have the
following duties:
i . Counseling the newly diagnosed cancer patient who is
suicidal?
ii . Advising aged patient's overwhelmed relatives about nearby
aged homes?
iii . Finding out more about the social background of: a child who
has been admitted with suspicious bruises/ pregnant teen?
iv . Will more be counselors be hired to provide counseling svcs/
to advise.
Finally, I feel that SG gov [as a defender of unity and a moderator
of progress (PAP manifesto: see below)] should make the welfare to
SGporeans (and not the bottom-line) its priority.
Finally, finally, if all else fails, then maybe the 66.6% of voters
in the 2006 SG elections will realise the need to have balanced
debate viz more 'opposition' members in parliament viz a correction
of the unfair GRC system of elections: 75.2% of SG people are
Chinese (2006): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore
- so to ensure 25% minority rep in Parliament (at least 20 out of
81 elected MPs must be non-Chinese): then have 20 GRCs of 3
candidates each (one must be non Chinese) and 21 Single seat
constituencies (any race qualifies): NO MORE to this nonsense,
illogical, and dishonest 6 person GRCs that allow PAP favoritism
and monopoly power. -> More single seats (= keener competition)
to elect first class candidates. ( ref:
http://www.singaporeangle.com/2006/06/why-make-grcs-easy-route-to-parliament.html
)
The PAP election 2006 manifesto:
http://www.pap.org.sg/uploads/ap/587/documents/papmanifesto06_english.pdf
, "do more for lower income SGporeans", "helps its weaker members
to succeed . . . keep SG a safe, stable and harmonious society". .
.
Actually: the Only Way Fwd in Gov is thus to Benchmark Welfare to
the Median.
