http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sg_Review/message/1413
Mellanie Hewlitt
Singapore Review
20 Dec 2004
Can't Afford to Retire? That Means No Babies !!!
I was reading the article "Can you AFFORD to retire?" in the 18 Dec
2004 issue of the Straits Times and recalled that only just
recently the government was renewing efforts to encourage
Singaporeans to have more children.
Once again the severe myopia permeating the ranks of Singapore's
million dollar cabinet ministers is baffling.
The issue of affordability of retirement and dwindling babies are
related. If you cannot afford to retire then its also highly
unlikely that you can afford to have babies.
Solve the earlier problem and you would be half way there in
getting those much wanted babies. In fact this is nothing new and
has been part of the evolutionary process for thousands of years.
Many species will delay having off springs during periods of
extended famine and draught and one does not need to be paid a
million dollars to see that harsh reality.
Yet, contrary to thousands of years of evolutionary
progress/precedent, this
government is telling you to have kids even when you cannot save
enough to
look after yourself during your retirement years.
Singaporeans by and large are a hardworking, industrious, lot who
live within
their means and are unquestioningly obedient to their overlords.
In-spite of
deteriorating work conditions many still try hard to save enough
for their
golden years.
But its not that easy when decades of stingy fiscal and monetary
policies have
sapped the average person's disposable income and retirement
reserves. Only in
Singapore do you have the unholy situation where state reserves
actually
blossom to grotesque portions even whilst personal savings dwindle
and
personal incomes deteriorate. We end up with the state directly
profiteering
from the very citizens it is supposed to look after!
To make matters worse, land prices have been artificially inflated
for many
decades resulting in escalating costs of living.
Hang on, lets back track here. Was this not the same government who
was
declaring to the world that Singapore has attained Swiss standards
of living?
This government has asserted that;
a) Singaporean workers are better paid then their counterparts in
the US, UK
and Australia;
b) That Singapore also has very competitive cost of living?
c) And Singaporeans also have one of the highest savings rates in
the world?
How much of the above assertions are mere propaganda and how much
is actual
fact? If you put a) b) and c) together it implies that the average
Singaporean
should not be in the dire straits they are in now.
But the undeniable fact remains that Singapore today is no where
near being
the Switzerland of the east. You may refer to the attached
powerpoint file for
a full comparison between Singapore and Switzerland. The census
figures show
many similiarities between the two maturing economies but the
following
figures are glaring;
a) Singapore's unemployment rate of 4.8% is still higher than
Switzerland's
3.7%.
b) The Singapore Government's reserves of Foreign Exchange and Gold
is approx
USD110.8 bn, much higher then Switzerland's USD69.6 bn.
c) Singapore's physical geographic area is only 692.7 km sq which
is only
1.67% of Switzerland's 41,290 km sq
d) Singapore's population is at 4.3 mio as compared to
Switzerland's 7.45 mio
e) Taking into consideration (b) and (c) above, Singapore's
Military
Expenditure is USD4.47 bn p.a. (4.9% of GDP) as compared with
Switzerland's
USD2.5 bn p.a. (1% of GDP).
There are massive indicative signs that confirm the postulate that
a very
bloated state reserve is maintained at the direct expense of the
personal well
being of private citizens. Military Expenditure is just one glaring
area where
the Singapore Government spends more then 500% more to defend a
land area less
then 2% the physical size of Switzerland.
We posed these issues on Delphiforums as discussion threads and
have
incorporated feedback from various forum participants. More
crucial
differences between Singapore and other developed countries was
highlighted by
one forumer:
"Unlike Singapore, Switzerland, US and UK have the following;
A) UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS. This is state funded. A Swiss who is
unemployed for
the first year can still draw 80% of his original salary from the
State in the
1st year. Of cause he has to show he has actively been looking for
work;
B) From (A) there is some certainty of income and security. The
state actually
looks after the aged and the unemployed. In sillipore its the
citizens who
have to financially support the government, its GLCs and their
mistakes.
C) There is CPF in Switzerland but the funds are managed in a clear
and
transparent manner. There is no such shit where GLCs can dip their
hands into
state reserves;
D) The Swiss and US and UK have a less bloated cabinet then
Singapore. They do
not have to pay ministers USD1.1 mio a year to spin them
propaganda;
E) Switzerland also spends less then 1/2 what Singapore spends
(USD2.4bn as
opposed to USD4.2bn) on defence and this is to defend a land area
and
population more then 7 times the size of Singapore;
F) Switzerland already have carved a niche in the following
established global
industries: a) Private Banking b) Insurance and c) Chemicals/Health
care and
d) Precision tooling and watches. What industry has our million
dollar
ministers carved? The Biopolis? Pls don't make my toes
laugh."
(You may view the full discussion thread at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=62281.1)
Are Singaporeans living with the mistakes of previous attempts by
the
government at "social engineering" and playing God?
According to the latest estimates from the Straits Times article,
if you
decide to retire at the age of say 60 and have a life expectancy of
80 years,
you would need at least SGD1 to 2 million in cold hard cash.
Needless to say
this is beyond the means of most Singaporeans who earn an average
mean/median
monthly household income of between SGD3,000 to SGD4,000/-.
That means that most Singaporevereans will face very bleak
retirement years
with a substantive reduction in quality of life and standard of
living. As one
forumer sums up:
"unless you have cold hard cash of at least SGD1-2mio at
retirement, this is
what our twilight years will look like for most of us :
a) Downgrade from private transport to public transport. Imagine at
age 60
running for bus or MRT;
b) Downgrade to 2-1 room HDB flat (also affectionately known by the
locals as
"Pigeon Holes") assuming this is still affordable in 20-30 years
time;
c) No holidays overseas and no clubs;
d) No entertainment. Entertainment is watching grass grow and a
once a yr
visit from a PAP ministar.
e) No friends, not mobile, no credit card, no gym etc.
f) Food is bread & water, no restaurants no nothing.
g) And of cause NO KIDS and other long term liabilities we can't
afford "
(You may view the full discussion thread at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=62281.1)
Singaporeans will be living hand to mouth in what are supposedly
their golden
years. After spending all of their adult lifes working 12 hour
work-days, they
will have barely enough to live out their sunset years at
subsistence level.
Some may even face the undignified prospect of flipping burgers at
Mac
Donald's to make ends meet.
And this is a situation the government is well aware of. Said MP
Lily Neo:
"People are living longer, life expectancy is about 80. So if you
retire at
62, you still have a long way to maintain yourself. The majority of
people
don't have enough savings."
According to Dr Neo; "Medical costs will go up as new technologies
and
medicines are developed. As you grow older, you'll have more
medical needs
that will add to your expenses."
http://newpaper.asia1.com.sg/topstories/0,4133,TopStories-1100793540,00.html
If this is the case, would lt not be morally and socially
irresponsible for a
government to encourage its citizens to assume obligations
and
responsibilities (of having children) that are beyond their
financial
capabilities?
Why are they doing it? That's because Singapore's only real growth
engine is
its population. And the government needs to see a growing mass
population to
fuel its economic growth. This is strangely reminiscient of the
scene in The
Matrix where humanity is reduced to the plight of a duracell
battery.
Below was the sinister scenario potrayed by another forumer:
"Things have changed alot in singapore and not all the changes are
positive.
The following is simple logic. We start on the premise (given by
Lee Kuan Yew
himself) that Singapore has no natural resources.
The only resource it had 30-40 yrs back was man-power. So the govt
could only
sell one thing and one thing only.....manpower to attract foreign
investments.
Fast forward 3-4 decades later and little has changed. We still
have only
manpower to selll and what's worse is the fact that other countries
are fast
catching up in that area.
The only thing the PAP can think of is to keep the price of its
only product
cheap. Make this place as attractive as possible for the MNCs but
that also
means exploiting the labour market to its fullest. That means
squeezing every
last drop of blood from workers (run those duracell batteries
dry!!!)
This is a situation the PAP is quite happy with but there is one
big kink.
They never foresaw the obvious eventuality that their pro MNC
anti-labour
policies has made life so difficult for average workers that it has
resulted
in a mass exodus of talent from the island and also a massive drop
in birth
rates. In effect they are killing their only scarce resource.
The idiots were so oblivious to this development that 10-15 yrs
back they even
had a stop at 2 policy and also the infamous Graduate Mother scheme
policy.
The message to the masses; "If you do not have a degree please do
not
contanminate the pure stock with inferior genes." Only graduates
were fit to
have kids. And to this day this unholy idea has survived as we see
the
distinction between SDU and SDS.
I can say with certainty that singaporeans (the intelligent ones)
who plan
their future will have worked out the numbers for themselves and
they know
they do not have enough to retire comfortably especially if they
have kids. So
you will not see a reversal in the plumetting birth rates.
The PAP also realises it so they now look to foreign imports to
make up the
shortfall. But who wants to move to a Disneyland with the death
penalty where
you work 12 hour days in a sterile pressure cooker society where
your every
move is monitored and controlled? Only the desperate cases.
If you had money and talent Singapore would be the last place you
would move
to. Sure you may set-up a bucket shop office here to take advantage
of the
cheap labour and even work here. But to live here personally,
retire and call
this place your home? No Way. That's why most of the mega rich
businessmen
still live even in Indonesia, China and even Thailand and of
cause
Switzerland. All of these countries have a higher concentration of
high
networth people then Singapore (and that includes Indonesia,
Thailand and
China, supposedly lagging behind singapore).
So my final point is that there is no future for this island unless
there is a
real change of policies (and government)."
Fortunately most levelheaded Singaporeans are able to see beyond
the short
term incentives offered by Singapore's ruling party and many have
questioned
the feasibility of raising a family on this expensive island in the
sun.
Said another long time forumer:
" Singapore's mass media have always afforded us a very
enthusiastic picture
of our future, especially via reporting of key messages from our
leaders.
Is the picture really that beautiful? Civil servants getting big
bonuses! Was
there a hidden agendum somewhere? Does that really assure us of the
bright
horizon ahead? I really have my doubts.
Can Singapore really establish itself as a key hub? Even if it
succeeds, how
long can that be? Just looking at Thailand and Malaysia, and I get
a funny
feeling down my spine. sigh......"
Another forumer was less kind when he wrote:
"million dollar ministers and million dollar permanent secretaries
naturally
can't see that "relatedness"' [between affordability of retirement
and making
babies] you mentioned.
Why? Because you see in Singapore these policy makers can only
understand an
issue in its proper perspective only when they are personally
affected. or
afflicted as in the case of illnesses. [How can ministers who earn
SGD1.6 mio
a year understand and relate to the plight of a family who has to
survive on a
monthly household income of SGD3,000 a month?]
If a system of compensation of paying Ministers currently exist ,
based upon
benchmarking against the top 5 earners of the community regardless
of ""how""
they earn their money( remember rogue trader Chen of CAO was the
4th top
earner in the list) then what can we expect from them? logical
thinking? Nah!
And really why produce another generation of media and state
socialised
unthinking unanalytical slaves for THEM and their pre-assigned
elite status
children?"
Conclusion:
It looks like for now Singapore's battery producing factories (oops
I mean
baby making families) will be closed for the duration and the
Matrix (oops I
mean the Singapore Government) will have to look off-shore for
other sources
of raw material for the reproduction process. Needless to say
these
alternatives are already being explored.
Acknowledgements:
The editor wishes to express her thanks to the participants in
Delphiforums
who have contributed substantively by providing feedback and view
points for
this article.
Non-Members of Delphiforums may enter the discussion forums as
"Guests"
(You may view the full discussion thread at:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/sammyboymod/messages/?msg=62281.1)
Attachment: 34k (application/vnd.ms-powerpoint) Singapore
Switzerland.ppt