...Continued from previous post:
For a start, some of the old elitist meritocracy and high-cost
essential service corporatization policies need to be debated
without any pretentions.
It is not good enough to induct people into the system based on
some exclusive stringent pupilage and control admission process. It
is not enough to invite a few journalists for dialogue or debates
on policies and issues as these people are controlled by someone
and cannot be objective and independent citizens like the forumers
who posted here.
One example of a good debate will be about minister's own
assessment of their own worth or pay. They think that they need to
be paid by comparison against the bests but are the criteria of
comparison fair and above board. In the first place any such salary
comparison should have been benchmarked against the wage or
remuneration and not the capitalist or boss categories.
There has been a fundamental error in the way ministers have made
comparison of their pays with those of CEOs or successful
entrepreneurs in the private sector.
Similary, if Singaporeans indeed must expand overseas and go
regional there has to be certain accountable and transparent
guidelines and principle.
If government must use the public taxes to invest them in overseas
projects, like Shin Corp, Global Crossing or Bangalore, or Russian
Townships, ministers must exercise great care to make sure that it
will not result in huge losses as has happened in Shin Corp.
No companies or governments in this world will ever retain the
services of any of their CEOs or managers who have caused such huge
losses and yet go on to promote them in higher offices or grant
them bonuses after such disastrous records.
So something is seriously wrong in the present investments of
public taxes in overseas project. There will be more losses and
disasters if there is no action taken to redress such huge
losses.
Moreover a policy should be implemented to benefit all or majority
of citizens. If such foreign investments should benefit only the
government in hoarding surpluses to look good and give more bonuses
to their own MPs, ministers and civil servants, the country will
not gain the support of the people.
For the past 41 years, the government only governs to tax and
recover all costs to the fullest degree even by way of creative
accounting, double-charging on lands or rentals on public buildings
or transport or utilities.
There has been a lack of accountability and transparency in the
running of the government so far in public taxpayers' investments
overseas.
There has to be clear policy to benefit the people in such areas of
government. If there is none, and everything has to depend on
summary statements of ministers or insight or foresight of leaders,
there is no point to go on investing their tax monies in such
overseas projects.
If government must practise avoidance of welfarism, fine. Then if
such a policy is adopted, then government must take care not to
over-tax and recover all costs. It should try to let citizens
survive on their own economic competitiveness and not jeoparidize
their retirements or medicare. The principle in a non-welfare state
should be spelt out - if government does not help its people in
creating jobs or social and cultural benefits then don't over tax
and squeeze them dry.
But Singapore seems to have gone to the other extreme of taxing the
citizens fully such as double charges on land or triple charges on
vehicles and recovering all costs of essential services against the
people by corporatization of such services to give them excuses in
increasing fees and charges.
In a welfare state, government has the right to tax and recover all
costs to pay for welfare. In a anti-welfare state like Singapore,
its government spends only the minimum on citizens so there is no
justification on principle or facts to charge the citizens more
than nominal administrative fees.
In a non-welfare state, it would be immoral then for the government
to refuse to help the citizens to keep increasing taxes and
recovering all essential expenditures as Singapore has done and has
been doing.
Let the comparison be fair if Singapore ministers want to quote
welfarism as the excuse for its policy of not helping citizens in
times of crisis.
It surely cannot have the cake and eat it. It is now enjoying all
the benefits of not having to help its citizens and at the same
time accumulating all the taxes into surpluses and reserving all
rights to squeeze the citizens through all forms of taxes, direct,
indirect and using excuses of all kinds to get them to pay.
So think again if anyone wants to talk about the danger of
welfarism as practised in Australia, UK, Europe. We are certainly
not having a welfare state but we may be producing a monster of
government which keeps increasing its own surpluses while not
lifting a finger to help them and squeezing them dry.
Even if we need to recover some costs the govenment should first
only be entitled to recover only the consumption items but it has
reserved its fullest right to recover any costs it likes until the
citizens cannot survive resulting in so many family problems now
...suicides, low child birth, migrations, family disharmony,
divorces etc.
