NST Report: Bleak outlook for Singapore

last SG · 2003-03-09T15:33:24+00:00

merveilleuse, peut la paix être avec vous

kenhor SG

To Gun,

You said, Many hadn't think twice before putting foth their simpliestic argument that defence expendition or "white elephants" should be reduced. Don't these people realise that we are living a dangerous time ?

We are living in dangerous times. But what is the MAIN danger nowadays? I fear more for terrorist attacks than a neighbour launching invasion. A hijacked airliner is a more credible threat than an invasion.

With that in mind, it is indeed foolish to spend on white elephants such as a submarine. Will that deter the terrorist from blowing up targets? Will a JSF be able to stop a plane from crashing into CBD even if we shot it full of missiles?

As we live in such dangerous times and with a new threat, as well as great disatisfaction among the populace, I see that its time to change the mindset and get rid of the white elephants.

kenhor SG

For those who think that the article above is biased, here is one by the Far East Economic Review .. enjoy

ASIAN ECONOMIC OUTLOOK: SINGAPORE

Elusive Recovery

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Trish Saywell

Issue cover-dated February 13, 2003

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN HIS ANNUAL New Year message, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong told Singaporeans that there was a "reasonable chance" 2003 would be better than 2002, but that most likely they "will have to wait till 2004 for a full recovery."

The Monetary Authority of Singapore, the country's de facto central bank, is forecasting GDP growth of between 2% and 5% this year. In 2002, the economy grew an estimated 2.2%--a rebound from 2001 when Singapore was badly stung by its worst recession since independence in 1965.

In its twice-yearly macroeconomic review in January the Monetary Authority predicted the economy will remain sluggish in the first half of 2003 before a more "firmly grounded" recovery ensues in the second half--assuming improved external conditions. "The frequency of shocks buffeting the Singapore economy has increased since the mid-1990s," it said in its report.

Weakening of global electronics demand in information-technology markets has become a particular bugbear, as Singapore, like many other Asian countries, has over the past decade increased production of semiconductors--the prices of which are highly volatile and react strongly to production cycles in developed countries. Singapore's domestic electronics industry makes up almost 10% of the trade-dependent nation's GDP; and related industries such as fabricated metals and machinery together constitute another 4.6%. Singapore's key nonoil exports rose a less-than-forecast 4.4% in December--bringing total nonoil exports for 2002 to S$98.6 billion ($57 billion), up 1.9% year on year.

Economic uncertainty and geopolitical concerns will likely impede the investment plans of both foreign and domestic companies this year, the Economic Development Board warns. The government agency responsible for attracting investments to the island says it expects fixed-asset investment in the manufacturing and services sector and total business spending to fall this year to S$9.9 billion from S$11.1 billion last year.

Concerns over economic recovery and further terrorist attacks, meanwhile, continue to dampen domestic consumer and tourist sentiments. Unemployment remains a worry. At the end of September, the unemployment rate reached 4.8%--the highest level since December 1986. The Ministry of Manpower stated recently that a record 12,900 graduates were jobless in September, more than double the 6,300 in the same period at the height of the Asian financial crisis in 1998. Worse, Singapore faces looming structural unemployment problems as the country continues to move from low-skilled manufacturing jobs to value-added industries that require smaller numbers of workers and higher skills.

In his message on the eve of the New Year, the prime minister also warned that Singapore will have to address its higher cost structure compared with other countries in the region. "Our manufacturing workers are paid 13 times more than workers in China," he said. "Our workers are more productive, but the Chinese are catching up fast. Companies are feeling the pressure to shift their Singapore operations to China to save costs."

Atobe SG

Originally posted by CX:

the amount sought in a such high risk start-up is hardly peanuts... in the 1970s, no prudent bank in Sg would've bankrolled such ventures. put into perspective, this is hardly surprising......

.....basically, there is an "attrition" rate of close to 80%... which means that 8 out of 10 of the ventures they fund, [b]flop.

and they'll make money by ripping off the remaining 20%... so that the silicon valley geek who started it all might end up owning only what? 5-10% of the company in the end Mr. Green ah... the sweet world of a vulture capitalist...

its difficult to picture Sg in the same light... u need a concentration of very bright people, the availability of easy funding and most importantly, timing......

....but don't get carried away by the successes... remember the stats... for every 1 successful startup, 4 flopped. and the dot.com is not the only way to succeed...
[/b]

The risks of running any investments are never too high.

If an entrepreneur is prepared to risk all that he has in a venture of his own under taking, then an Investment Bank (not just any ordinary Savings or Commercial Bank) should also be prepared to take risks for being in its declared business of Investing.

Instead of all talk and no action on the part of our Government, they should implement a safety net scheme that is similar to the Export Insurance Scheme - in which exports to high risk countries will be insured against default in payment, just so to help in the export development of local industries.

Such an Entrepreneurial Venture Capital Insurance Scheme will help any Venture Capitalist or Investment Banks that support any young budding entrepreneur to see its plans into fruition.

It is ridiculous to expect every venture to succeed, and even if the attrition rate is high as claimed by CX, should the entire venture and entrepreneurial spirit be paralyzed?

This is where the Government role should come in, to help the Private Enterprise to develop, and not coming in with their GLC to muscle out the individual enterprises.

Time is always of the essence, and this is where the inexperience of our local Venture Capitalists and Investment Banks reveal their weaknesses.

The various Government bodies are not exactly examplary in their attitudes, with the long process involve even in implementing the computerisation program of local enterprises that is encouraged by the National Computer Board.

In supporting the local entrepreneurs, the homegrown ventures will form the core of the industrial strength of Singapore, much like those of Taiwan, Japan, Korea.

The size and numbers of such core industries should be the basis in which the level of workers wages is determined.

It is amazing that in the past, the Government should have clamored for workers wages to be pegged based on higher technical skills, by stepping up the manufacturing chain to a higher value added process; even when such manufacturing chains are entirely dependent on the investment of a transient multi-national industry that will easily transplant itself to another lower alternate cost center for the same process when such a lower cost center is available.

High wage policy can only succeed when the investments are in the hands of our own local entrepreneurs, and even then the costs will have to be sensitively controlled to enable it to compete on the world stage.

The past high wage policy is based on a hollow local home grown industry.

Enticing the populace with a political goal of a Singapore Living Standards being equal to Switzerland, and a Wage Level to match, is asking for trouble when the substantive base for such a condition do not exist in Singapore as in Switzerland.

Furthermore, the Singapore Government did not educate the populace that the consequence of a High Swiss Standard of Living is accompanied by the politically sensitive Higher Costs of Living in Switzerland, when compared to the neighbors around Switzerland.

Unfortunately for Singapore, our political system do not allow for alternative views.

We have used the Swiss standards as our model for most of our endeavors, but unfortunately its political system of consultation with its citizenry was not followed as well.

In Singapore, the Government is omni-potently knowledgeable in all matters, and its views are beyond fault until proven wrong, and too late.

Atobe SG

Has matters developed so rapidly in a short period of two and a half months ?

On New Year's Eve, our PM Goh had reported that Singapore's economy will have a relatively good chance of doing better in 2003 then in 2002.

In an interview with the local press, after his recent visit to Hanoi, he warned of more job losses to come by mid-2003 - is this what he meant to be doing better then in 2002, as said in his New Year's Eve speech?

Just about two days ago, it was announced that MAS will be reviewing its forecast that Singapore's growth will need to be revised downwards to probably slightly below 1 Percent.

We have barely crossed the First Quarter of 2003, and all signs are already going downhill.

Is the picture worse then the Government is prepared to reveal ?

CX SG

Originally posted by kenhor:

We are living in dangerous times. But what is the MAIN danger nowadays? I fear more for terrorist attacks than a neighbour launching invasion. A hijacked airliner is a more credible threat than an invasion.

and how would u, oh great enlightened one, guard against hijacking?

With that in mind, it is indeed foolish to spend on white elephants such as a submarine. Will that deter the terrorist from blowing up targets? Will a JSF be able to stop a plane from crashing into CBD even if we shot it full of missiles?

a sub is hardly a white elephant... and it was bought some years ago at a BIG discount.

subs are force multipliers. its able to cover more sea than a surface vessel cos there's no easy way for u to find it. one sub in a body of water is already able to cause the crew of enemy warships to take overwhelming precautions far out of proportion to the odds placed against them.

the JSF is also helping SAVE money. it is becoming increasingly expensive to upgrade and maintain the F-5 and A4... they've reached the limits of their productivity already.

i'm sure u would prefer to live in new zealand... they're so sure of their security, that they've closed down their air force Mr. Green wow...

As we live in such dangerous times and with a new threat, as well as great disatisfaction among the populace, I see that its time to change the mindset and get rid of the white elephants.

its only a white elephant to u... and getting rid of the SAF won't solve your problems. as much as u hate it, it also provides livelihood to tens of thousands of singaporeans... regulars, defence contractors and people in related industries.

don't be so narrow minded.

everybody knows that times are tough... u're not the only one hit.

me? i'll rather expend my efforts to solve my problems than to complain that the idiot gov't is not doing enough to help me... they can't possibly do enough anyway.

tripwire SG

Originally posted by kenhor:
To Gun,

You said, [b]Many hadn't think twice before putting foth their simpliestic argument that defence expendition or "white elephants" should be reduced. Don't these people realise that we are living a dangerous time ?

We are living in dangerous times. But what is the MAIN danger nowadays? I fear more for terrorist attacks than a neighbour launching invasion. A hijacked airliner is a more credible threat than an invasion.

which threat is more credible is not for you to say... cos you are not in the in group... the top group... u dont know everything... thus your opinion is not gonna worth much... Mr. Green

With that in mind, it is indeed foolish to spend on white elephants such as a submarine. Will that deter the terrorist from blowing up targets? Will a JSF be able to stop a plane from crashing into CBD even if we shot it full of missiles?

the investment in subs and JSF will enable singapore to gain new insights into technologies and enchance singapore's deterence value.... Mr. Green

so if missiles cant prevent a plane from crashing into the CBD... should we then invest money in phasers or veritech robotech fighters that can??

As we live in such dangerous times and with a new threat, as well as great disatisfaction among the populace, I see that its time to change the mindset and get rid of the white elephants.[/b]

i see one big white blur elephant... and yes,.... its you.. Mr. Green

Gun SG

[size=large]True White Elephant(s)[/size]

White elephant #1 Bakun dam

White elephant #2 KLIA

White elephant owner

White elephant lineups.

A complain about these white elephants.

But pls do not be dispair. Singapore has her own one too Embarassed
Suzhou Industrial Park

Gun SG

ECONOMY: Singapore, Malaysia Most 'Globalised' Developing Nations

WASHINGTON, Jan 7 (IPS) - Led by Ireland, Switzerland, and Sweden, the countries of northern and western Europe are once again the world's most ''globalised'' nations, according to the third annual edition of Foreign Policy magazine's 'Globalisation Index', released Tuesday.
Singapore (4) and Malaysia (18 ) topped the list of developing countries, says the report,

Oddly Singapore is placed under "developing" country category
eventhough Malaysia is the second Asian nation at a distance 18th.

Gun SG

Even PricewaterhouseCoopers' Malaysian office gets nationalistic
in their report

Budget 2003: How Do We Stack Up Against Singapore?
By Jennifer Chang
Executive Director, Tax and Business Consulting Services PricewaterhouseCoopers Malaysia report

Gun SG

Originally posted by kenhor:

We are living in dangerous times. But what is the MAIN danger nowadays?

Today's main threat ?
IMO, the real threat will be the ignorance and complacency that can
set in after years of peaceful existence having benefited from the
aggressive development of military capacity during early days of
independence. Failure to appreciate this capacity of deterrence is
itself a THREAT.

Such shallow notion that Singapore's military acquisitions are
ased solely on showmanship or national pride (hence "white
elephant"), reflects the inability to understand why Singapore's
defence doctrine consistently commands international respect.
Did SAF earn its recognition through hardware assets alone
eventhought it has yet to engage a single major conflict ?

No. It is her ability to maintain focused and integrated system
based approach that allow every single cent spend to enhance its
existing capabilities. E.g. JSF will be THE LARGEST development
of a single basic multi-role fighter in the next decade or more and
Singapore's involvement will allow previledged access to the
critical stages of planning and development. The JSF base system
of Lockheed's design borrows heavily from two of her existing
products, F22 Raptor and the proven F16, which Singapore has
already operating experience on.
White elephant it certainly not.

As we live in such dangerous times and with a new threat, as well as great disatisfaction among the populace, I see that its time to change the mindset and get rid of the white elephants.

You can't be any more wrong.+++++++++++++++++++

One of Singapore 2003 Defence budget objective:
The capabilities derived through this expenditure will enable the Government to increase Singapores preparedness to handle both conventional and unconventional threats.

Gun SG

Originally posted by kenhor:

For those who think that the article above is biased, here is one by the Far East Economic Review .. enjoy
ASIAN ECONOMIC OUTLOOK: SINGAPORE
Elusive Recovery

I don't see any new thing in this article other than a regurgitation
of what was publicly said by the Singapore's government. However, the title of this article is notably less "bleakish" than the Malaysian one. Bias ? Well, based on their reporting style of
past several months on Singapore's position, I rather let the readers decide .

CX SG

well, most of us are able to accept that things aren't going as well as it used to, and some of us are confident of riding the waves (or the lack of it Mr. Green )

but we have to bear in mind that many people are badly hit and pissed off... and its not that they're not willing to get themselves re-employed, but that they face genuine problems getting another job.

the gov't shouldn't just brush them aside by saying that its "structural unemployment" and leave them to their own devices with little assistance.

anyone got any comments about how older workers can remain relevant in the "new economy"?

(personally, i think that getting screwed by the economy is nothing new Mr. Green still, its what everyone likes to call it so what the heck...)

gasband SG

I am a recent graduate, i have heard of all recent unemployment rates increasing. But I am not worried, I am willing to go low, real low, albeit temporily. I am willing to take $1400 - $1500 gross a fren company is offering. Such pay will seem obscene to some graduates, some diplomas holders may even reject it. I however am more than willing to take it and they are arranging an interview. Who doesnt want a job that pays what u deserve but If i never work, how on earth will i ever get the "relevant experience" that so many jobs are demnading now? If I never work, I would be income=0, but i rather have $1400 than 0. Men whines. Real men adapts.

But for the sake of discussion, current situations, what can the government do more to help us?

CenturionMBT SG

Thats the way.Better to have something than to have nothing.BTW gd luck to the future.

CenturionMBT SG

From your logic, i managed to decifer yr point of view.

THERE ARE SOME MAD PPLE UP THERE WHO MIGHT THREATEN WAR. LETS ABOLISH THE SAF TO CUT COST ,

sounds totally illogical.Bah

gasband SG

Originally posted by kenhor:

With that in mind, it is indeed foolish to spend on white elephants such as a submarine. Will that deter the terrorist from blowing up targets? Will a JSF be able to stop a plane from crashing into CBD even if we shot it full of missiles?

If just strictly on the issue of terrorism, which close aide of osama told you that they cant committ acts of terrorism by sea? If you cant confirm that, then buying a submarine to protect our waters is crucial.

greengoblin SG

First World Person....Third World Mentality...

CX SG

WHOA!!!

back to the point... lets not start a flame war here... and Moderator, shame on you for your inflammatory comment Mr. Green

the dude has a right to his comments even though we may not agree and some of his points DO have some merit. the gov't can never do enough to help those badly screwed by the economy.

failure to keep their ears on the ground can have serious repercussions.

what can be done to help those badly hit by structural unemployment besides the gov't peptalk.

lets be a bit more constructive here... hypothetically... what more can be done... not just to help workers help themselves, since many are middle aged, with families and might not know where to start to pick up the pieces of their shattered dreams... but to help them more directly.

seriously... welfare state anyone?

gasband SG

Originally posted by CX:
WHOA!!!

back to the point... lets not start a flame war here... and [b]Moderator, shame on you for your inflammatory comment Mr. Green

the dude has a right to his comments even though we may not agree and some of his points DO have some merit. the gov't can never do enough to help those badly screwed by the economy.

failure to keep their ears on the ground can have serious repercussions.

what can be done to help those badly hit by structural unemployment besides the gov't peptalk.

lets be a bit more constructive here... hypothetically... what more can be done... not just to help workers help themselves, since many are middle aged, with families and might not know where to start to pick up the pieces of their shattered dreams... but to help them more directly.

seriously... welfare state anyone?
[/b]

welfare state? meaning for the sake of EVERY single living soul in singapore, all other things must be sacrificed to make sure they are living well....

then we might as well turn back to communism and make everyone share their wealth....lets tok nearer to home, Australia, nice country, nice place to stay in, i was even tempted to work there and live there, but u noe something that I will forever never move there? Its that the government takes care of the people TOO MUCH. Giving out doles is simply not helping. I get people as young as 18, 19, girls and boys coming up to me begging for money and hey they are not like beggars in singapore, poor dressed, they are in clean clothings. I dun wan Singaporeeans to be spoonfed, work for your feed, if u earn enuff for porridge so be it, if u earn much for abalone, so be it, be contented, stop looking at others and u will realise how fortunate we are.

Atobe SG

Why do we have to panic and call it Welfare State, each time when the word dole is mentioned?

This can only be the result of the successful propaganda that Singaporeans have grown up with.

Why limit the "dole" to the Australian model?

There are constructive models of "dole" being handed out to help the desparate and destitute to tide over a period, and which is tied to their efforts in getting a job.

The amount that the Government allows the GIC and GLC to spend on overseas acquisitions and investments, and some of which failed spectacularly could have helped the many older workers who have lost their jobs, or who are in the Old Folks Home, and also extend some financial help to those small businesses that are facing the financial squeeze by the Banks, as a result of the bad business environment (not by way of direct bail out, but by extending soft loans to the Banks, to tide over this period; or by way of policy changes to reduce their cash deposit with the MAS).

Some of the GLCs have made mega-million dollar acquisitions of foreign companies that are suffering from the present global economic downturn; and in so doing have bailed out those Companies and preserve jobs of the foreigners, while making a strategic in-road into the foreign markets.

This can be seen in the acquisition of a failed Shipyard in the USA, and a financially strapped Australian and Indonesian Telecom Companies, cash-crunched banks in Thailand and Hongkong (which led to our own DBS bank bleeding profusely, necessitating its take over of the profitable POSB to acquire its assets - a disguised bail out in reverse).

What about the Singapore situation? What has the GLCs done in Singapore for the Singapore Workers, besides cutting wages and reducing staff?

What has the GLCs done to make themselves more competitive in a high wage cost environment that is largely the doing of the Singapore Government in its hurried goal to achieve the Swiss Standard of Living?

If the Government do not wish to be seen as interfering in the local banking transactions, and to interfere into normal banking business of dealing with bad loans, then at least ease up on the credit squeeze, and allow a return of a business climate of confidence that allow some level of stability for those businesses that are faced with a financial crunch during this bad patch.

Singaporeans are fortunate insofar as when being compared to the worst case paupers in the streets of some of our ASEAN neighbors.

Have you not seen the many families living in Single Room, Two Rooms and even 3-Room HDB Flats that have to take on second jobs to make ends meet? Have you not seen the aged pushing a trolley stacked with empty cardboard cartons just to eke out a daily meal? Did you not read of the two 60+ year old women, making a living selling "wontan" noodles, being forced to take out a loan just to buy over their rented HDB Hawker Stall; and finally going bankrupt as their meagre daily sales can hardly cover the loan instalments?

Most of the second jobs are in hawker centers, working as cleaners, sweepers, or as coffee shop assistants. Some even take on part time jobs as Relief Taxi Drivers, Trishaw Riders for down-town tours, or even as Security Guards.

Are you misleading yourself that Singapore is NOT a Communist State?

In the mid-1970s, Singapore was thrown out from being a member in the Socialist Democrat Union for being too communistic in the manner that the Singapore Government conduct its relationships with the Opposition and citizens that oppose its policies.

The supremacy of the Single Ruling Party that governs Singapore is an ideal model even for the Communist Party of China.

The manner in which the Internal Security Act, Mental Health Institutions, and a multitude of local legislations being used to suppress dissenting views and handle the Opposition Party, can only leave much to be desired, and is not unlike the situation that exist in the Stalinist period of Russia, and even in China today.

« Previous Page Next Page »