Avoid posh projects - go for job and wealth creations

last SG · 2005-03-31T06:18:46+00:00

Originally posted by stupidissmart: I said before, tis is not a thread about foreign talents. If u attack about indian IT engineers or china ones, frankly t...

robertteh SG

Instead of spending billions on more government buildings, community projects of all kinds and running up costs, all such extravagant spending should be frozen.

Singapore already has too many community organizations from PA to CDCs, RCs, CCCs. Let these grassroot organizations handle community projects from existing buildings or empty spaces below void decks. Community clubs are mostly empty now due to lack of participation.

The latest attempt to build posh community projects in Jurong has fallen flat with lack of support from people supposed to be renting the premises.

These projects were built under the "Depolitisation" , "Co-option" and "Machination" policy for political purpose. A lot of hard-earned monies were already spent away which hardly achieved any useful pro-Singapore objectives.

At the end, because of running expenditures, bus fares, utilities and medical fees have to be raised to cover such additional running costs.

Government should govern the country simply and prudently and avoid spending on more unnecessary projects, posh government buildings when there are so many empty office spaces to house every department.

Government should pool the surpluses of all departments and put them into a common funds to be used for creating job creations and long-term wealth for people. Avoid building expensive arches, clay-roof walkways, gardens and put all budget surpluses to capitalise on our older and younger unemployed labor force to create jobs and wealth for citizens. Laughing

robertteh SG

From 1965, the government has been preaching prudence, diligence and hardworks.

Initially, such policies of hardwork, prudence etc were working. Monies were spent wisely on education and other basic needs like medical and hospitalization and utilities.

Then came elitism called meritocracy in the 1970s. Government believe that they are the talents or elites with non-stop upgrading of civil servants to all kinds of sinecure superscale positions with double- and triple- promotions driving up the costs of running the government across the board.

In order to maintain such high costs, all basic services were charged at market prices with corporatisation schemes of all kinds to farm out services to private companies who then charge citizens at market prices. As a result, much of the Taxes become accumulated as surpluses.

The whole economy began to go down and become uncompetitive because such budgetary surpluses of S$2 billions per annum and further off-budget surpluses by individual statutory boards like HDB, JTC, URA etc amounting to another S$1-2 billions per annum sucked away monies from the economy.

It is not possible to make the economy competitive as no matter how the government tries to promote entrepreneurship or value-adding economic strategy, its own domestic economy simply cannot make monies and citizens cannot survive in a place with such high-costs.

Unless urgent actions are taken to address such high costs due to corporatization schemes, double charges on land and triple charges on vehicles and avoidance of extravagant spending, it is of no use talking about building an open or all-inclusive society, calling on youths to participate in justifications, promoting more elitism or new elitism or asking people to sacrifice more fee increases. Laughing

stupidissmart SG

I thought it was conventional economic theory that the gov should spend and spend to boost up the country economy Rolling Eyes Tat is why there r arguments asking gov to spend its reserves to bolster up the economy during the economic crisis...

robertteh SG

Wastage is wastage. It is spending more to achieve same or lesser benefits. It is usually a one-time consumption when expended make people poorer. It is careless spending that will bring back nothing or little in any returns. It is indiscriminate and unproductive and may cause bankruptcies.

In the past, our ancestors got to where they are because they know the value of monies and how to spend on productive activities to grow future incomes or create jobs. They will not spend on luxuries or extra community clubs or white elephant projects that do nothing economic or productive.

Utilitarianism and functionalism for infrastructures and buildings will be the right way to go. Spanking and posh aesthetics cost more monies and cannot bring about profits for returns. Schools and university buildings should be functional not excessively extravagant.

The monies earned or saved from wise investments will go at the end into investments and other critical activities to help people to overcome problems during occasional eocnomic recessions and business failures.

Sad to say, many people have forgotten simple common sense about what is productive or competitive. They spend monies because they are available or surpluses and do not worry about tomorrow as if there is no tomorrow. Singapore is on the way downhill because our economists do not know how to be practical and have forgotten simple virtue nowadays especially in the public sector.

There should be more emphasis in investing on supportive engineering and production facilities, automations, robotics, ITs, business call centres for marketing of Singapore products overseas as the monies spent in such facilities will build capabilities and create spin-offs.

No more expensive buildings for government departments and no more expensive projects. No more arches, signboards, more stainless steel handrails and expensive bus-stops or rainshelters

If government wants to spend monies to spin the economy, it can do so selectively with productive quality-time-cost considerations. This spending to bring about economic activities is right only in the sense that it will not suck up or hoard monies from the private sector into idling surpluses or monies will be stifling the economy. However spending it on any activities especially concrete and consumption is wasteful.

It should encourage businesses to use available resources that cost little or nothing like the empty land or unemployed people. All these resources can be used to grow investments that will create jobs and products and services that can be sold overseas or locally to reduce imports.

The old economic theories that encourage spending for the sake of spending is indiscriminate and will not bring any future returns or benefits except pure emptying of coffers. I am surprised anyone believe in such a fallacy. It is common sensical that only quality investments which will build up capabilities or facilities for manufacturing and services that will really create jobs. Taxpayers' hard-earned surpluses may go back into the economy to create jobs but the way to do it is certainly not to pour monies into concrete or static consumptions and wastages. Laughing

iamgoondu SG

Government seems to have heeded the advise and had shelved the LTA HQ project in Buona Vista. And the cutwaste initiatives (http://www.cutwaste.mof.gov.sg) seem to have the civil sector to be prudent on their expenses.

When the first air-conditioned bus interchange opened in Toa Payoh, some doubt on the needs of such facility. Anyway that bus interchange was initiated at the time when the economy was roaring and when we started to have the 7 (or 8?) wonders of Singapore. And that bus interchange was part of a commercial (statutory) building. And next we had the second air-conditioned bus interchange in Seng Kang.

A year went by since the opening of Seng Kang bus interchange, and now in 2 days we are told that there will be 2 air-conditioned bus interchanges, one in Ang Mo Kio and another in Clementi.

Have they forgortten the needs to be prudent?

At the time when a barrel of oil hits USD56.5, it seems a fare modification is probable and valid. At the time when our economy still going nowhere (maxtor cuts 5500, factory output down 10.2% on year in Feb 05), what's commuters priorty? An air-conditioned bus interchange or some form of subsidy to offset further rise in crude oil?

A vibrant town centre coupled with hypermart, library, air-conditioned bus interchange is a definite welcome to all. One would probably interpret as freebies. Freebies to hijack. GE may be anytime.

A higher standard of living comes with a proportional rise in cost. All definitely welcome a higher standard of living, however are we prepared to pay for a higher premium? Instead of providing an air-conditioned bus interchange, what other alternatives the authority may consider to distribute the 'WEALTH'?

a. Provide 'oil' subsidy when a barrer of oil had hit USD54?
b. Provide more concession to elders?
c. Provide more concession to tertiary students?

Singapore has really lost her competitiveness. Or rather some Singaporeans may have lost her drive. My former employer pays SGD720 for production operators, my former Malaysian diploma holder colleagues accepted SGD800 for CAM Support positions. If Singaporeans are picky, fussy about job search or they are lazy, bochap, bohui during their work, one's altitude towards work may not solely to be blamed. My fellow Malaysians are motivated and keen to learn despite their megre pay. And my other Singaporean colleague, despite a slightly higher salary, still grumpy and harbour negative thoughts.

Yes, out of 8 CAM Supports, 7 are Malaysians and 1 is Singaporean. It is obvious that living expenses is much lower in Malaysia than in Singapore. In JB, you can get to rent a terrace house at 500RM. In Singapore, you can't even rent a HDB room with the same amount. I giggled when the NTUC make study trips to China, and how unions are convinced that their wages are relatively high compare to their counterparts in China.

Who's to blame?

We have attracted many MNCs, we have granted them many previledges and subsidy (land, competetive and lowest corporate tax), and yet Singaporeans may not be necessary the first benefitary. Singaporeans still have to compete with the many Malaysians, and PRs for those jobs.

We had talked a betterment in economy if Singapore is to have a casino. We had talked of the many more visitors visiting our shores for the casinos. We had talked about the big spenders visiting our casinos. Singaporeans still have to compete for jobs in the gaming industry, however Singaporeans may have to bear the rise in inflations, bear a higher cost of livings and more social problems.

To 'increase' the wealth of Singaporeans, shouldn't our government 'bring down' the high cost of livings?

Subsidy seems a nice word. We opt to be thankful to our government for giving us subsidy in housing, education, medical.

In housing we have subsidy for first timer buyer, we have subsidy for upgrading, we have subsidy for buying resale flats. An upgraded neighbourhood/estate would only allow HDB to value a higher amount for her new flats in the vincinity/estate thus granting a 'higher subsidy' to those first time buyers. HDB had embarked Estate Renewal Schemes to renew mature estates likes Toa Payoh, Ang Mo Kio and now Clementi, ultimately it would only push valuations for those new flats in those estates higher. Likewise providing subsidies to resales flats could only artificially inflat HDB flat.

Is it what subsidy should be meant? Could Singaporeans be better off with no subsidy instead?

I am looking forward to our new leadership in bringing down the cost of livings in Singapore. We may welcome a higher standard of living, yet the premium may stiffle the lifes of many.

commonsense SG

~~=deleted=~~

commonsense SG

why would they when everything is paid for not using their million$$ salary but by taxpayers' $$?

stupidissmart SG

look like I have to refer back to my economics books to see on tat line

KumSioJui SG

The billions they spend actually put people in work, They should spend more then the money really flow to the people, thats how economy grows mah.. the buildings that are built needs raw materials like stone, bricks, steel and cement which costs money needs to be purchased from somewhere and needs to employ hundreds of ppl on the work site to build it up.

if garmen stopped these projects there will be no demand for raw materials, heavy equipment do not get leased out

architects and civil engineers, masons, plumbers out of jobs, these people will tighten their belts and buy less from shops.

these shop or small business that are many who cater to the average ppl patronage will order less from suppliers

suppliers will hire less or retrench to meet changing business environment & order less from manufacturers

manufacturers will buy less raw materials due to less manufacturing activity and due to the drop in business hire less ppl

The people who are not hired or retrench as you guessed it will spend less which affect other businesses.

And as there are less new things in the skyline why would tourists want to come if it is just to see the "same old thing"

an endless domino effect ... how does that then help the economy?

A good analogy is a shopping center, almost all shopping centers have an anchor tenant which is likely to be a supermarket, cinema, fast food or some business that is a major crowd puller, if there is no such crowd puller the other smaller retailers in the same shopping complex who also depend on walk in customers will not last long as nobody has a reason to go to such a ghost town shopping complex.

Like an anchor tentant in a shopping center any economy needs a major patron and most times it is the government coffers.

iamgoondu SG

So are those policies for people or for bussinesses?

So if it costs a million dollar to come out with HDB HUB in Toa Payoh, who are the beneficiaries?

Shouldn't the developer be more thankful to government for giving them a lifeline.

What benefits do you get from the moving of HDB HUB from Bukit Merah to Toa Payoh? Imagine if there is no prior budget for the new HQ building, where do you think the monies would come from?

Everyone aspires for a higher standard of living, however not everyone are prepared or worst can afford the premium in living in a high swiss standard of country.

It's true that our standard of living have improved, many didn't feel a pinch for a Macdonald breakfast, for an annual vacations, unfortunately there are still far many who have to scrimped and toiled to have decent meals.

Have you seen some old folks who still pick empty cans, collect newspaper, selling tissues, do you think they do those things to kill time?

How do you think the building of HDB hub may help towards these old folks? More empty cans for them to pick?

KumSioJui SG

The government spends and they tax also ... thats how it works not only for our system but every other system in the world. Or would you rather we bankrupt our system then you satisfied issit? Wink

I agree that there are many poor people in singapore as in other parts of the world but there will be even more poor people if government don't spend, ...

See those China women come here to sell themselves? No women want to do such things but that they have to do such things is because they come from a country where it is impossible for them to earn even $1 by the work of their hands.

Won't you then agree that at least those who scrimp and toil still have a chance to do so honestly rather than trying to prostitute their dotters and women on the streets in some foreign land?

As to old folks who pick up cans and sell tissues honestly I can't say anything but if you have a good suggestion pls share with us here.

stupidissmart SG

Frankly speaking all gov in the world r spending money on building infrustrature for their department. Hong Kong is also spending much money on building the police headquarters etc. Is it soem form of national pride in tis. Do u think the building of the air conditioned toa payoh bus interchange is not for the masses ? It is not as though the gov is not spending a single cent on charity either Rolling Eyes How much do u think the gov should spend to prevent old people from collecting cans ? How much do u think america had spend to prevent the homeless from sleeping on the streets ? Frankly speaking these social problems will always exists.

iamgoondu SG

Sure I am not suggesting that we don't spend, rather could we have spent more cautiously.

I am not suggesting that they they can do without a HDB building, I am wondering if the former HQ building in Bukit Merah is suffice? I am wondering the need of relocation of HDB Building.

By investing that monies in other arena, we may have a higher returns. Yes, we may, for we never know if that investment could be another Chartered.

I am just as clueless how we can help those old folks. I would hope whatever policies have their interests first in heart.

iamgoondu SG

They could have put more monies into charities if that monies couldn't be better spent elsewhere. Would you rather the monies go into Plasma TVs in HDB HUB or more food hampers for the poor and elderly?

Do you think the gov should should spend more on having more people to police the streets in preventing the old folks for collecting cans or do you think they should do nothing?

I have to admit, there are poors in all societies, however we still can't just simply ignore their existence. We must not have left them to fend for themselves, monies could have better spent to assisst them to break their poverty trap.

So how we can better spend our monies?

As for the air-conditioned bus interchanges, it is definitely not for the masses. It is only for the selected few who need commute in those interchanges.

For AMK, it benefits NTUC, for they are developers and yet the monthly air-conditioned bill for the bus interchange is foot by bus companies. And the maintenance fees is 3 times as much as a non-airconditioned premises.

Yes, having 4 air-conditioned bus interchanges, SBST has to squeeze somewhere for the expenses is equivalent to 12 non bus interchanges.

Where would the monies come from?

Are our economy back on track? Are our ecnomy at a roaring state? Are Charterered back in the blacks?

Could we have waited for a while longer? Could we have waited till the price of a barrel of oil eased?

Sure go ahead with the air-conditioned bus interchanges if bus companies and PTC can promise no fare modifications for the next 2 years.

Else don't you think the monies could better spend in stemming down the rising operating costs the bus companies would be facing?

Perhaps I am conservative. Perhaps I am not used to spending on credits.

stupidissmart SG

It can be argued tat a sum of money is indeed set aside for the elderly. Do u think tat all gov buildings should be old and badly maintained to show the gov is saving money ?

Do you think the gov should should spend more on having more people to police the streets in preventing the old folks for collecting cans or do you think they should do nothing?

there is no crime in collecting cans. If they spend more money on the police, there will be fewer crimes or less overload of work for the police.

I have to admit, there are poors in all societies, however we still can't just simply ignore their existence. We must not have left them to fend for themselves, monies could have better spent to assisst them to break their poverty trap.

Why do u say tat we had just walked and ignore their existence ? Isn't money already set to beak their poverty trap ?

So how we can better spend our monies?

tat is the million dollars question. wat do u suggest ?

As for the air-conditioned bus interchanges, it is definitely not for the masses. It is only for the selected few who need commute in those interchanges.

Tat is a pretty selfish way of thinking. just because I do not live or go to sengkang does it means they should build any road or park there ? It meant a difference to the other people living there isn't it ?

For AMK, it benefits NTUC, for they are developers and yet the monthly air-conditioned bill for the bus interchange is foot by bus companies. And the maintenance fees is 3 times as much as a non-airconditioned premises.

Mabe we should stop using airconditioned bus too since it is also more costly to buy and maintain an airconditioned bus

Yes, having 4 air-conditioned bus interchanges, SBST has to squeeze somewhere for the expenses is equivalent to 12 non bus interchanges.

Where would the monies come from?

So where should we spend the money ?

Are our economy back on track? Are our ecnomy at a roaring state? Are Charterered back in the blacks?

Could we have waited for a while longer? Could we have waited till the price of a barrel of oil eased?

Then isn't tat a good time for gov to spend some money to make the economy better ? U think keeping it at the reserves is better ?

Sure go ahead with the air-conditioned bus interchanges if bus companies and PTC can promise no fare modifications for the next 2 years.

Else don't you think the monies could better spend in stemming down the rising operating costs the bus companies would be facing?

Perhaps I am conservative. Perhaps I am not used to spending on credits.

I am just puzzled.. when gov spend the money for their buildings u r not happy. When they spend it to upgrade the facility u r also not happy. So does keeping the money in the reserves makes u happy ? Now u say tat an air con interchange is a waste of money because u r not using it. Maybe in a few years time, it will be necessary for all bus interchange to be aircon because it is too uncomfortable. It is like when aircon bus just appears, peopel r complaining tat is is a waste of money too

iamgoondu SG

Why do you think gov had shelfed the LTA HQ project in Buona Vista?

They could have realised that they need no another building to make it the 9th wonder!

I think this thread is to discuss the avoidance of POSH project.

Do you think there is a need to have a LTA HQ in BV,

and do you think there is a need to have HDB HQ in Toa Payoh?

and do you think Air-Conditioned bus interchange is POSH?

and are you expecting a fare modification within 2 years timeframe?

Would you still prefer an air-conditioned bus interchange, or perhaps you won't mind a fare adjustment ?

I won't mind an air-conditioned bus interchange, if the monthly maintenance air conditioned bills are foot by LTA.

stupidissmart SG

actually... it will very much depend on your definition of posh. Is being new posh ? I will like them to have a new working environment if it is already old. If they r spending excessively then I do not agree with their expenditure.

and are you expecting a fare modification within 2 years timeframe?

Would you still prefer an air-conditioned bus interchange, or perhaps you won't mind a fare adjustment ?

I won't mind an air-conditioned bus interchange, if the monthly maintenance air conditioned bills are foot by LTA.

Ask me wat I prefer ? Maybe lets ask wat the residents prefer. About an air con bus interchange, they do ask the feedback from toa payoh residents and they like the airconditioning there. Tat is why they r building new aircon stations.

iamgoondu SG

I am not against an air-conditioned interchage. Who would reject freebies?

I am just question if there is a better alternative to spend the monies? If the answer is no, sure go ahead and build an air-conditioned interchange.

Same goes to the HDB Hub, the government would probably have thought there isn't a better alternative to spend the monies, thus they spend the monies on a new building in Toa Payoh.

Anyway that's a million dollar decision, the brain juices may have been drained dried and all concerns may have been addressed prior spending any monies.

Remember the salary my former employer is willing to fork out for a operator, have our salary caught out with the higher cost of living? If the answer is no, shouldn't we make an honest review into our cost of living?

robertteh SG

To: stupidissmart & Iamgoondu,

From the exchanges of views, I cannot help noticing:

(1) Singapore government has always been very miserly in spending on people's medical, education, housing, utilities, transportation by recovering every cent through a system of creative accounting.

It will keep pointing out to the people the need to avoid welfarism. It acquires lands at nominal costs paid for by taxpaers yet sell flats built on such acquired lands at market prices to the citizens. Indirect taxes through double-charge on lands through HDB and triple-charge on vehicle through LTA impose great burdens on people and businesses alike. Yet, it would continue to resort to all kinds of corporatisation schemes to recover more costs.

(2) However through years of denying spending on essential services which people need for living, big surpluses are accumulated into billions by both fiscal budgeting and off-budget surpluses by various statutory boards.

So monies are available for spending. If the departments don't spend the surpluses or budget allocations, it will be presumed that the allocations are not needed so every department will try to spend any allocations or surpluses.

Coming to think of it, this kind of situation requires the leadership of the PM and whole cabinet to avoid getting into.

It may be the result of paranoid holding back of spending in essential services or corporatization schemes of all kinds that HDB, LTA, JTC, Town Councils and all departments have obtained big surpluses and will now have to spend them for obvious reasons that if they don't spend them, the monies will have to go into more surpluses or future budget allocations may get reduced.

The main reason for over-spending on posh and extravagant projects like HDB HUB, Treasury Building, Esplanade (The Durian), SIR, etc may then be psychological for the reasons as stated aforesaid.

The latest posh community clubs and air-conditioned bus interchanges and many more unreported projects are just continuing unclear thinking by the cabinet on the entire budgetary process, allocations of funds, and lack of guidances to ministries on fiscal policies and implementation.

Economists' traditional theories on 'spending for the sake of spending to stimulate economic activities are questionable. Billions were spent on big projects during last two recessions in this manner (for the sake of spending) without apparent effect to revive the economy.

There should be more discussions and feedbacks on how surpluses should be spent to avoid clinging on of such fallacious views of the past resulting in indiscriminate spending on unproductive concrete which produce little or no return to lower costs of living of citizens.

If government to begin with does not stinge so much on providing essential basic services to lower costs of living of citizens, there will be less problems or issues raised on posh projects. One will be surprised if hungry and poor citizens can stand any talks about HDB or Treasury Hubs when stomachs are hungry or if there is no more jobs. Please provide more able leadership in this regard and put a cap on unwarranted spending like on the 7 wonders (going on to 9 or more)

diggo SG

Originally posted by robertteh:
[
If government to begin with does not stinge so much on providing essential basic services to lower costs of living of citizens, there will be less problems or issues raised on posh projects. One will be surprised if hungry and poor citizens can stand any talks about HDB or Treasury Hubs when stomachs are hungry or if there is no more jobs. Please provide more able leadership in this regard and put a cap on unwarranted spending like on the 7 wonders (going on to 9 or more)[/b]

Totally agreed. I would rather the the $$$ be channel into reduction in medical cost than building a air conditioned bus interchange. I am not against the ways which the tax /revenue that the govt is collecting, however, they are not prudence in the way which it is spend.

The former HDB is still vacant... and if the building is old, why not do an "upgrading" to improve the working environment? It will definitely cost less.

BTW, on one can give a figure to public service cost per citizen... it should be the highest in the world