Give with one Right Hand, Take back with two Lefts

Atobe SG

First, the supposedly generous handout of ERS shares is to dampen the increase of another ONE PERCENT to the 4 Percent GST, bringing it to an all time high of 5 Percent GST to be effective from January 1, 2004.

The ERS payout will vary from $250 to $800 for most Singaporeans - for ease of calculation we shall assume an average of only $500 payable to every elligble Singaporean.

Unfortunately, before ERS is paid out, firstly, those who do not contribute to the CPF regularly, must deposit a minimum sum of $50.

There are at least 1,000,000 Singaporeans above 16 years, who are either self-employed, or not working, retrenched, unemployable, retired, or in old age.

Before handing out anything, the Government will already collect $50 million dollars into the CPF.

The ERS will then pay out an average of $500 to every eligible Singaporean, and this will amount to about $1.75 billion.

Here is the big surprise in collection.

With an annual business turnover in Singapore of more then $250 billion, 1 PERCENT GST on this turnover will allow the Government to collect an EXTRA $2.5 billion before creditting the businesses their due GST refunds.

On top of the ONE PERCENT INCREASE to the GST, from January 1, 2004, there will also be a 1 PERCENT increase to Electricity Charges.

The average household electricity bill of $90 PER MONTH, will be increased by 90 cents per HOUSEHOLD.

This small 90 cents increase to the monthly domestic electricity bill for each home will translate into $900,000 PER MONTH, or an additional $10.800,000 PER YEAR.

This is based on an assumption that a Singaporean population of 4.5 million will form 4 persons per household - there will be about ONE Million households.

While Singapore Powers picked up an extra $10.8 million per year with a ONE Percent increase to the Domestic Electricity Rate, the GST also will pick up an extra $10.9 million per year from the extra collected by Singapore Powers.

In summary, while Singaporeans will seemingly benefit from an ERS pay out of $1.75 Billion, the Government will take back an EXTRA $50 million paid first to the CPF; the GST will pick-up an EXTRA $2.51 billion, Singapore Powers will pick-up an EXTRA $10.8 million.

Note that the amounts are not the TOTAL but only the EXTRA being collected from a ONE Percent increase to the GST and the Domestic Electrical Rate.

This calculation have not taken into consideration the increases to the hospital charges, school and university fees, domestic water rates, fares to taxi, bus service and MRT - all effected during 2003.

Did the Government sanctioned 'Opposition back benchers' - (from its own 'Pay And Pay' Political Party) - raise any EFFECTIVE objections to such increases GST and Domestic Electricity Charges at this time when deep cuts are made to salaries and CPF, and with more then 5 Percent Unemployment still continuing in Singapore ?

Happy New Year to All who still believe in the infallible politics and governance of the 'Pay And Pay' Party.

lowem SG

Excellent analysis! If only the sheeple were more aware.

oldbreadstinks SG

thats what i thought too
and some shops are increasing the price by at least 10 percent not 1 percent with 90 cents items now 1 dollar

Atobe SG

SPH cover prices up after nine years
After keeping a tight rein on costs, it can no longer absorb them fully

FROM next month, subscribers to The Straits Times will pay 10 cents more, while The Sunday Times subscribers will pay 5 cents more.

The price increase, the first in nine years and only the second in 19 years, will also affect seven other newspapers in Singapore Press Holdings' (SPH) stable.

Explaining the rationale yesterday, SPH chief executive officer Alan Chan said that the company has kept a tight rein on costs for some time, adding that few firms have managed to keep prices unchanged for as long.

Even as SPH held off on price increases, it invested more than $500 million to upgrade printing facilities, improving the group's colour capabilities, enhancing quality, and allowing for later printing times so readers get the latest news.

The company has also absorbed the Goods and Services Tax - which went up to 5 per cent this month - since its introduction.

However, despite concerted efforts to contain cost, Mr Chan said newspaper production has grown significantly more expensive over the years, and the company 'can no longer continue' to absorb fully the rising cost.

Home and office subscribers, who form most of the readers of The Straits Times and The Sunday Times, will be less affected by the increases.

While subscribers will pay 70 cents for their paper from Feb 1, the news-stand price of The Straits Times will go up by 20 cents, to 80 cents, from Friday.

The news-stand price of The Sunday Times will go up by 15 cents from Sunday.

The cover price for subscriptions to seven other SPH newspapers - Lianhe Zaobao, Lianhe Wanbao, Shin Min Daily News, The New Paper, The New Paper on Sunday, Berita Harian and Berita Minggu - will go up by 5 cents, while news-stand copies will cost 10 cents more.

The Business Times and Tamil Murasu will not be affected by the increases.

Newspaper distributors pointed out that it has been nine years since the last price increase.

Mr Low Thiam Boon, 54, president of the Singapore Newspaper Distributors Association, said: 'In the last nine years, many other costs have risen, including transport and labour charges.

'The increase will help our members cover their costs, while encouraging them to offer a higher level of service to readers.'

The association represents 200 vendors across the island.

SPH's Mr Chan said: 'Despite the hikes, SPH newspapers are still among the cheapest in the region and the world.

'I believe that 70 cents for a subscriber copy of The Straits Times or Lianhe Zaobao is excellent value for money.'

Mr Cheong Yip Seng, the editor-in-chief of SPH's English and Malay Newspapers Division, reiterated the company's commitment to its readers.

'We continually strive to improve our products with regular redesigns and content improvement,' he said.

'This has been, and remains, our commitment... to ceaselessly aim for higher standards to meet their growing expectations.'

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,229992,00.html?

Atobe SG

From the above news report, it tells of another GOVERNMENT LINKED COMPANY extracting the hard pressed pocket of Singaporeans.

A THIRD HAND is now extended to take back the Government 2004 ERS handouts.

Now, fourteen days into January 2004, Singapore Press Holdings has announced that subscription price for daily newspapers delivered to homes will be increased by 10 cents - from 60 cents to 70 cents.

However, the same newspaper sold at the newstand will be increased by 20 cents for dailies, and 15 cents for Sunday papers.

This will result in price increases of over 16 PERCENT for home subscribers, and over 33 PERCENT for those buying their daily papers at the newstand.

With deep cuts to Employer's CPF contributions to workers' CPF accounts, and also deep cuts to workers' salary, it is surprising that the Singapore Press Holdings cannot achieve cost savings that make it unnecessary to make such increases.

It is also surprising that they were unable to achieve efficiencies in operational and production costs with their multi-million dollar investments in high-tech machinery; and with such high-tech equipment allowing them to increase revenues by taking in more pieces of higher value added contracts.

Are Singaporeans now made to swallow another bitter pill, since there has been no public outburst to the two earlier increases in December 2003 ?

lowem SG

My take on this :

http://www.jroller.com/page/lowem/20040113#inflation_hits_the_local_newspapers

claudetnt SG

Very Good analysis by Atobe but sad to note that we Singaporeans have yet to learn, most of us cannot comprehend beyond receiving the "goodies" - this is the reality in singapore!

claude

Atobe SG

After remaining significantly silent since the announcement by SPH to increase newsprint prices, CASE has now stepped in to speak on behalf of consumers, who have called to voice their complains.

It is also noteworthy that after all the denials, the prices of other goods and services are now finally said to have seen increases from FORTY to FIFTY PERCENT - as brought up by the CEO of SPH to justify their own increase in newsprint prices.

Will we see only a wayang that is being put up ?

Much will depend on the weight of Political Appointee behind the respective chair of CASE and SPH.

Case takes issue with higher news-stand prices of SPH papers

SINGAPORE Press Holdings yesterday elaborated on the reasons for raising the cover prices of its newspapers, following criticism from the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) that the move was too sudden and unjustified.

Case president Yeo Guat Kwang said the association has received 'numerous complaints', mostly from people unhappy that news-stand buyers have to pay more for the same paper than readers who subscribe.

They found that differential pricing 'unreasonable', he said.

Prices of nine newspapers - The Straits Times, The Sunday Times, Lianhe Zaobao, Lianhe Wanbao, Shin Min Daily News, The New Paper, The New Paper on Sunday, Berita Harian and Berita Minggu - went up by between five and 10 cents for subscription copies, and between 10 and 20 cents for news-stand copies.

Case said that raising the news-stand prices three days after SPH announced the changes was too sudden.

Mr Yeo felt SPH should have taken into account the fact that the economy is just recovering and many people are still feeling the impact of the downturn.

He noted that the company had reported a 23 per cent increase in its net profits of $378 million last year, and there were 'no compelling reasons for SPH to push prices up at this point in time'.

He said the increases seemed aimed at encouraging readers to subscribe rather than buy their papers at news-stands, and if that were so, SPH should look at incentives other than differential pricing.

While urging SPH to reconsider its decision, he suggested that consumers turn to other sources of information, including online newspapers, freesheets, television and radio.

Responding to Case, SPH chief executive officer Alan Chan said that SPH has received 1,100 hotline calls in the last three days but more than 95 per cent were inquiries on subscription details.

There were only 56 complaints, and some of these callers were persuaded by the reasons why regular subscribers pay less.

He said: 'The price differentials between news-stand and subscriber copies are meant to favour daily subscribers who comprise the majority of those who buy our papers.

'This is a common international practice to reward loyal subscribers who form a consistent readership base and reduce wastage in unsold copies.'

He said SPH has not raised prices since 1995 and has held off increases through difficult economic conditions since the 1997 Asian crisis, even as prices of most consumer items went up - bus fares by 40 per cent, taxi fares (50 per cent), white bread (47 per cent) and a cup of coffee (40 per cent) .

'Despite concerted efforts to contain costs, our newspaper production costs have gone up significantly. We can no longer continue to fully absorb the rising cost,' said Mr Chan.

He explained that the company's profit last year included a one-time exceptional gain of $188 million from the partial sale of its stake in telecommunications company MobileOne.

For its core newspaper operations, profits had in fact been declining in line with difficult market conditions.

Its latest first-quarter results registered a net profit of $83.8 million because contributions from its property arm made up for the weak showing from its newspaper operations.

He noted that SPH not only produces paid newspapers, but also provides free alternatives, such as the online editions of several of its publications including The Straits Times. It puts out a free morning daily, Streats, and daily news bulletins on Channel i and Channel U, its two free-to-air television channels.

'SPH strongly believes that our paid products continue to provide value for money, even at the higher prices.'

Straits Times - Saturday, 17 January 2004
http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/singapore/story/0,4386,230490,00.html?

BillyBong SG

Before reading on, i just wanna say this is not a compliment. Wink

Atobe: i have read most of your articles and the scope of your general knowledge is enormous. More so is your in-depth understanding and analytical view of current affairs and political science.

Would you ever consider joining an opposition party and expressing your views? I frankly think you could give our ministers in parliment a good run for their money. With your detailed arguments, they will have to refrain from providing simplistic answers which barely scrap the surface.

boy in blues SG

Mr. Green i second that! vote for Atobe!

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

I believe the very reason that he knows alot about how the gar’men works is that he will not join an opposition party, which is prehaps the quickest way in Singapore to discredit yourself. Being in the opposition gives you a soapbox but no credibility… observe how easy it is for you to be silenced, even when you are making sense…

thinkloud2004 SG

What if they dont give any ERS shares AT ALL? What will YOU do? Flood this site with more mammoth figures? Go on hunger strike?
Laughing

thinkloud2004 SG

Originally posted by Atobe:
[b]SPH cover prices up after nine years
After keeping a tight rein on costs, it can no longer absorb them fully

FROM next month, subscribers to The Straits Times will pay 10 cents more, while The Sunday Times subscribers will pay 5 cents more.

The price increase, the first in nine years and only the second in 19 years, will also affect seven other newspapers in Singapore Press Holdings' (SPH) stable.

Explaining the rationale yesterday, SPH chief executive officer Alan Chan said that the company has kept a tight rein on costs for some time, adding that few firms have managed to keep prices unchanged for as long.

Even as SPH held off on price increases, it invested more than $500 million to upgrade printing facilities, improving the group's colour capabilities, enhancing quality, and allowing for later printing times so readers get the latest news.

The company has also absorbed the Goods and Services Tax - which went up to 5 per cent this month - since its introduction.

However, despite concerted efforts to contain cost, Mr Chan said newspaper production has grown significantly more expensive over the years, and the company 'can no longer continue' to absorb fully the rising cost.

Home and office subscribers, who form most of the readers of The Straits Times and The Sunday Times, will be less affected by the increases.

While subscribers will pay 70 cents for their paper from Feb 1, the news-stand price of The Straits Times will go up by 20 cents, to 80 cents, from Friday.

The news-stand price of The Sunday Times will go up by 15 cents from Sunday.

The cover price for subscriptions to seven other SPH newspapers - Lianhe Zaobao, Lianhe Wanbao, Shin Min Daily News, The New Paper, The New Paper on Sunday, Berita Harian and Berita Minggu - will go up by 5 cents, while news-stand copies will cost 10 cents more.

The Business Times and Tamil Murasu will not be affected by the increases.

Newspaper distributors pointed out that it has been nine years since the last price increase.

Mr Low Thiam Boon, 54, president of the Singapore Newspaper Distributors Association, said: 'In the last nine years, many other costs have risen, including transport and labour charges.

'The increase will help our members cover their costs, while encouraging them to offer a higher level of service to readers.'

The association represents 200 vendors across the island.

SPH's Mr Chan said: 'Despite the hikes, SPH newspapers are still among the cheapest in the region and the world.

'I believe that 70 cents for a subscriber copy of The Straits Times or Lianhe Zaobao is excellent value for money.'

Mr Cheong Yip Seng, the editor-in-chief of SPH's English and Malay Newspapers Division, reiterated the company's commitment to its readers.

'We continually strive to improve our products with regular redesigns and content improvement,' he said.

'This has been, and remains, our commitment... to ceaselessly aim for higher standards to meet their growing expectations.'

http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,229992,00.html?

[/b]

Dear Atobe.......I agree with you on this one but I dont understand why you must repeat things that have been said. Saying the same thing twice does not make the impact any lesser. My response is - I terminated my subscription to the Straits Times immiediately, and stopped throwing money for a copy of Wan Bao or New Paper. There are many ways to get the news......and gossips.

thinkloud2004 SG

We are going nowhere but in circles, aren't we.........?

1. The Government is no good >
2. There must be a change >
3. We want to change >
4. We cannot join an opposition party >
5. The Government will "discredit" us. >
6. Go back to 1.

Isn't it lamentable that a group of "articulate", |"well-knowledged" and "well-analysed" individuals have to gather in this small corner to express their mutual self-pity and exchange sobs (Same Old Boring Stories). Embarassed

Atobe SG

What is the intent of your post ?

For a supposedly learned mind, the significance of events in Singapore seems to be lost.

Mammoth figures ? Surely the figures cannot be so mind boggling, or do you prefer that the truth not be told, as it may embarass the Masters who are paying your salary ?

Atobe SG

Hi 'thinkloud2004',

Congratulations for taking action, and I will take your word for it.

Did you read the same thing twice, or did you not discern the difference in the post ?

If you prefer to view matters with an insisted tone of colored glasses based on your preferred views of events around you, there is little that one can do to help you to see differently.

Less I will be accused of trampling on your rights to hold a different view from mine, so be it, if you prefer to view events in Singapore as mere gossips.

Good luck to you on your continued journey in Life, remain plugged by 'the Matrix'.

Atobe SG

Congratulations again, for a very educated analysis that presumably did not take too much effort on your part, which seems to reflect your signature cynicism towards those with anti-establishment views.

Congratulations too, for your clever ability to discern the helpless discontent of Singaporeans - amongst both the educated and uneducated.

Being in academia, would you not care to dig a little deeper to understand the cause for this state of mind, or will that be too much trouble and unsafe for your position in showing your political leanings ?

Or do you prefer to hide in the safe cloister of being politically correct, in order to preserve your occupation ?

Leave politics to politicians, and allow others to determine the fate of your future and that of your succeeding generations - (unless you prefer to remain celibate) ?

As was mentioned in my last post, in the thread 'Singaporeans are fools' - initiated by 'Relevation' - this discussion in sgForums is part of the Singapore Political Process, in which views are exchanged without threading on the paranoia of the Authorities.

It is surprising that for someone with such high intellectual leanings, you will want to participate in the lamentable preferences of all those who prefer 'to gather in this small corner to express their mutual self-pity and exchange sobs (Same Old Boring Stories)'.

Even when you belittle our efforts by describing the exchanges in the manner that you did, it is surprising that you continuously find it interesting enough to return, and burn your time here.

Perhaps you are looking for more 'sobs' - Shockingly Odious Bummer Stories concerning the Government and the Ruling Party ?

Were there self-pity on the part of any one here ?

Is this 'Political Corner' that small ?

Every fire always start with a small spark.

In the face of strong wind and inclemental climate that do not favor any unauthorised flame to exist, the fire will not be so easy to start, and will need good preparation, nurturing, and continued nursing to ensure that the flame will burn.

It does not help, when those who are cynical, prefer not to participate in helping to spark the flame, but instead will try to douse the flame for any hidden agenda that no one will ever know.

Where does your loyalty lie ?

Is it for the interest of Singapore, or for the Politics of the Party ?

SingaporeTyrannosaur SG

What matters is that I'm "unplugged". The worst thing any of us can do right now is just to take things as they are and "plug" straight back in. Why? Because if the number of these "articulate" "well-knowledged" and "well-analysed" individuals reach a critical boiling point in their number, the gar'men has two options:

A. Be ousted with a rather undignified fall from grace.
B. Forced to affect change itself.

If anything, we can see that B. is starting to work it's way out slowly. As unfair as they might be, they are far from silly like other 3rd world govts. Our social responsibility is indeed to notice their inconsistencies and do what Singaporeans do best, and that is to lament. In the absence of a credible opposition, keeping a sharp mine and being the very person you so sneer at is the only way of making sure there is some kind of a check and balance out there to avoid getting fleeced entirely.

Enjoy your stay in the Singamatrix, but I prefer to see the truth as it is. Call an injustice an injustice and not point to the past "glories" of the PAP to justify them, as if it's their right to contradict themselves and fleece us because it's their birthright.

Atobe SG

Very good observation, ST, it need not always be down that road as you have described, and which many of the more distinguished Opposition Members have gone with the setting of the sun.

Those who have fled the local political scene had posed a more serious and direct threat to the Ruling Elite, as those Opposition Luminaries were from the 'Inside', and have intimate knowledge of the many 'skeletons' in the closet of the Ruling Party.

Devan Nair was a staunch ally of LKY, having followed him obediently for more then thirty years in politics, from the days of self-rule, to independence with Malaysia, to being President of an independent Singapore, and nearly got his 'horse hide melted into glue' - (shades of Animal Farm - even blindly faithful Boxer was sent by Napolean to be melted into glue).

Francis Seow was the first Attorney General of independent Singapore, and had done many biddings for LKY - to 'fix up' any one who pose any serious political threat to the Ruling Party.

Tang Liang Hong was a grass-root leader, who changed his loyalty from the Ruling Party to stand for election against it - with the objective of being in Parliament to expose his 'knowledge of the sham' being pulled over Singaporeans - (see the website below).

Tan Wah Piow was the President of the NUS Students' Union, who fled Singapore after serving prison on charges which he claimed were "trumped up to fix him, and put through a 'kangaroo' court' presided by a politically compliant judge, with evidence being made-up by a Union Leader who is also a Ruling Party MP - Phey Yew Kok". After having served his prison term, Tan was enlisted for National Service into the Artillery Unit, and given 'special attention' for the duration of his NSF term - from which he AWOL to UK till this day.

It was surprising that the Singapore Government claimed to have spent US$150,000 - (to track Francis Seow across the USA, exposing his fraudulent conduct of claiming illness and not attending court sessions in Singapore on charges of tax evasion); but the Government will not spend a single cent to trace the whereabout of Phey Yew Kok - (who is a Ruling Party MP and a Trade Union leader) - to stand trial for serious charges of corruption and embezzlement of Union Funds.

It is unfortunate that the Ruling Party dare to claim First World status, when we remain shackled with a Third World Political System that work on fear and paranoia of the Rulers and the Ruled -with both sides not trusting and fearing each other.

With members of the Ruling Party being thin skinned, one has to bid one's time, one's resources, and to educate Singaporeans on the political process, before one decide to enter politics.

Like everything else in Singapore, it is MONEYTHEISM that turn the wheels of processes in Singapore - be it economics, social, cultural, legislative, or political activities.

One has to have the resources and the continued financial strength before one embark on a journey of such an epic proportion - and more so, especially for common Singaporeans like you and I.

With the cards stacked against common Singaporeans who dare to enter politics, it will require careful preparation, studies, monitoring, learning, fine tuning, and responding to each event and milestone.

It is a project that will have to surface at some time in one's Life Time, and when the time comes, it is hoped that Singaporeans will not walk away out of cynicism.

When the time comes, will anyone give help in one form or another - financial, moral, research, information, managerial, organisational, and a multitude of skills and experience - to counter the army of civil servants at the disposal of the Ruling Party in Government ?

There are alternatives available other than joining the existing Opposition Parties with their own historical baggages.

One can start a New Political Party, with fresh face, fresh mind, and fresh ideas.

It will require like minded people with common interest, and shared vision for better Politics to be practised in Singapore, for the sake of the Future of Singapore - as was envisioned by LKY and his team of Founding Fathers of Singapore during the days of Colonial Rule.

Fortunately, it will have to be more then one person to form a New Political Party.

Can you be counted to be one more in a New Team ?

Devan Nair
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw99/90329gm.htm

http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/Political%20Freedom/seapost.html

http://www.sfdonline.org/sfd/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/PressStatements/devan.html

Life on the Run - Tang Liang Hong
http://www.sfdonline.org/sfd/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/Gomez/tanggomez.html

Francis Seow - background information
http://www.escapefromparadise.com/NewFiles/seow.html

http://www.singapore-window.org/80710mj.htm

http://www.malaysia.net/aliran/monthly/2001/11g.html

http://www.sfdonline.org/sfd/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/The%20Law/judicialinstitns.html

Tan Wah Piow - background information
http://www.singapore-window.org/sw03/030916sj.htm

http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/DearSingaporean/240898bl.html

thinkloud2004 SG

You have answered my question with more questions and, as usual, added the irrelevant insinuations. My intent is simple - I want a solution. In case you got yourself lost in your own avalanche of words, let me put the question to you once again...this time in simple English - "What would you do if the Government had not given you any ERS shares?"

If your intention is simply to flood the pages and advertise yourself to be an encylopedia of sort, then I rest my case. Otherwise, lets debate on your solution, if any.

I started off quite neutral but your extreme views have driven me to take side. I think I enjoy playing the "devil's advocate".

thinkloud2004