Are our Generation Y so money-minded?
littlespeck.com
Money culture
Spreading to the young
Affluence has its side-effects as Singaporeans discover. By Seah
Chiang Nee.
Jun 27, 2005
A PRE-TEEN pupil offered $1 to his classmate to do his homework.
Another gave his friend 10 cents as a tip to buy canteen food for
him.
These Generation Y tales told to me by a mother over lunch recently
touch on one of Singapore's maladies after years of
affluence.
This wealth has given Singaporeans a good life but has also moulded
a lopsided view that money is a quick fix for all problems.
But these schoolboy horror stories have been around for
decades.
In the early years, even when Singapore was less wealthy, some
students in elite schools were known to flash Rolex watches, Gucci
bags and other branded goods.
Dr Tony Tan, the current deputy prime minister, once spoke of a
spoiled brat who burned a $5 bill to show off how "successful" his
parents were, and his friend promptly replied by torching a $50
note.
Since then, of course, the school involved had banned students from
bringing or wearing to school any branded watch, pen, shoes, or
more than $50 in cash.
Some time ago, a friend told me his son had come home one day
complaining about his pitiful pocket money after being shown a
classmate's birthday present from his father.
It was a $200,000 deposit in the 12-year-old's Post Office Saving
Bank (since taken over by DBS Bank) account.
The stereotype of youth is someone who knows the price of
everything but the value of none. It is, of course, exaggerated and
hardly fair since he lives in his parents' mould.
The rapid transformation from Third to First World has created an
attitude towards money more profound than in many other comparable
cities.
"If you have a problem, just throw money at it and it will go away"
seems to be a viewpoint that has been passed on to the young
generation.
To an extent, it has distorted society. People often see money as a
quick fix for all problems.
Take the case of nine-year-old Jeremy Tio, who was lost for three
nights recently in Fraser's Hill with his three Malaysian
cousins.
When he was found, he emotionally hugged his rescuer and said, "I
love you."
But he revealed his Singaporean upbringing when he told his
Malaysian rescuers, "If I give you money, can you take me
home?"
His gracious rescuer Rapi Bata replied: "No need to pay us. We are
here to help you."
This episode raised concern at the direction in which Singaporeans
are being raised. Very few people blame Jeremy for the remarks
because of his age and the severe fatigue he was under.
But spoken so matter-of-factly by one so young, it has placed the
whole society, the education system and his parents under the
critical spotlight.
One Internet writer said, "It belies a very serious problem with
our society at large. From such a young age, little Jeremy knows
the power of money."
Another cynical response: "Can't blame little Jeremy. He is only
money-minded, that's all. This is a true blue Singaporean. Money
talks every time. I think Jeremy will be an exemplary Singaporean
when he grows up. He appreciates the value of money."
Others were less judgmental, pointing out his tender age. One
defended him, "When you're cold, hungry, desperate, afraid ...
would you will still be thinking straight?"
But the general view is: "He thinks money can solve everything or
it can make people work!"
It flows down from the highest level of leadership, which has long
used money as a weapon to fight corruption. Singapore's Cabinet
ministers (and senior civil servants) are among the world's most
highly paid.
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew often says that giving high salaries
to government ministers and officials is the best way to keep graft
at bay.
Even a junior minister in Singapore earns more than $1mil a year,
with the Prime Minister and other senior leaders making at least
twice the amount. By comparison, the US President earns US$400,000
or about S$700,000.
Several years ago, the son of one of Singapore's billionaires said
in a public speech that "greed is good" because it served as a
builder of human enterprise and wealth.
He is evidently not the only businessman to think in this way. A
rising number of executives of publicly listed companies do more
than just think; they are facing fraud or corruption charges in
court.
The money culture is spreading but not every one is against it. In
the name of pragmatism and reality, some support the principle that
"if you want good service, you pay for it".
Want Olympic winners? Give a $1mil reward. In some charity bodies,
$3 out of every $10 you contribute may end up as commissions to
professional collectors.
Thank goodness we have not reached America's level of
money-mindedness - yet! We don't have to tip our taxi-drivers or
anyone just to make a dinner booking, but for how long?
Under a headline: "Tipping culture key to better service" a Straits
Times columnist suggested recently we should go the US way.
Many American restaurants, she said, have a habit of assigning one
server to each party of guests, and he tends to provide good
exclusive service because he knows he will get a 15-20 per cent
tip.
Needless to say, her idea to do it here hasn't been greeted with
any overwhelming enthusiasm.
What the society needs is less talk of 'Want good service? Pay me
well!'
