Tag: failure

Commentary – The Baby Bonus Scheme Will Only Fail

9 comments

According to news reports, S$230 million in baby bonuses were handed out by the Singaporean government gahmen in 2008, yet there appears to be no corresponding rise in the number of Singaporean babies born. Singapore’s National Population Secretariat statistics revealed there were only 32,423 citizens born last year, just 129 more than in 2003, the year before the government extended the Baby Bonus Scheme to include the first and fourth child.

Many factors have been cited to explain the fall in fertility rate. Some of these factors include: the 2-child policy implemented in our nation’s early years, women being more educated and thus more career minded and not resign to being a mere housewife, materialism in our younger generation resulting in more “double income no kids” couples, and the rising cost of living. To be specific, the main component driving up the cost of living, is the cost of housing and foreigners are the main cause. That being the case, it is thus obvious that the Baby Bonus Scheme is doomed to fail from the beginning. Here’s why I think it is so.

According to the Department of Statistics site, Singapore’s population in 1995 is approximately 3.53 million. If I recalled correctly, that is year I bought a brand new HDB 4-room flat in Jurong West (to be delivered in 1997). A new 4-room flat then is about 98 ~ 102m2, and they go at between roughly $130,000 ~ $165,000 a piece depending on location. Currently I pay about $475 per month to service a 25-year loan at fixed interested rate of 2.6% p.a. (4-room flats built in the 80s can be as large as 130m2, if I am not wrong, and they are even cheaper!)

In 2009, population is approximately 4.99 million – an increase of 41.5% over 14 years. A brand new HDB 4-room flat (at a pathetic 91 ~ 96m2) now goes at $264,000 ~ $322,000 a piece. HDB prices has almost gone up a spectacular 100%. And if that isn’t bad enough, loan periods have now gone up to 30 years, and that amounts to a monthly loan of between $800 to $1,200 depending on the type of interest scheme. The monthly loan is almost 1.68 ~ 2.53 times that of mine, for a smaller flat and a longer term.

Here’s how HDB flat prices are derived. A new one is peg to the prices of private properties via some arcane formula hitherto unknown to the public, while that of resale flat is determined by the latest transaction of flats in the neighbourhood. So, when 95% of Singaporeans own a HDB it is then logical to see they have no part to play in the determining the prices of a new HDB flat. Yet, it would be absurd that 5% of Singaporeans who are private property owners could create so much demand that the price skyrocketed. Even if you think with a rat’s ass, the conclusion is that the culprit are foreigners is pretty obvious.

Now, as the cost of a new flat increases, the prices of resale flats will inevitably follow. No one would want to sell their flats at a loss unless they are forced to by certain circumstances – such as long term loss of job requiring a downgrade, divorce etc. Are Singaporeans to be blamed for the rising cost of resale HDB flats? Again very unlikely, since there are laws that curbs speculation requiring one to occupy a flat for at least 5 years. Furthermore, young couples typically do not have much savings to offer a large COV [Cash Over Valuation] for a resale flat, and Singaporeans are increasingly upset with the ever increasing COV. In other words, that supply of cash has to come somewhere else. Needless to say, the culprit are foreigners again. I recently received a small leaflet in my letterbox where a foreigner offered $50,000 ~ $80,000 depending on the size and renovation condition of the flat.

But why are there so many foreigners here? Well, to make up for the population replacement shortfall, the gahmen has a lax immigration policy. On top of which, to continue attracting foreign investments, Singapore opened its doors with its so-called ‘Foreign Fallen Talent’ policy (In layman terms, this policy is simply this: “Since we can’t swallow the entire pie, we will share this pie with others. If not the guy who is making the pie will take it elsewhere we won’t even have the pie at all”.) All of these are done in the name of ‘sustaining our economic growth’ . It doesn’t matter the influx of foreigners will thus put a strain on our infrastructure from housing to roads and public transport. The gahmen believe that we the citizens can manage on our own and if we can’t then we have either overreached ourselves or we are simply being lazy or just too stupid.

Simply put, the gahmen has failed to address the root of the problem. If one consider the Baby Bonus Scheme, the immigration and ‘Fallen Talent’ policies to be a rower in the same boat, it is as if the Baby Bonus Scheme is rolling the boat one way, and our immigration and ‘Fallen Talent’ policies is rolling it the other way. Is it a wonder why after wasting so much effort and spending several hundred million dollars, we had just merely 129 more new born citizens? The gahmen can throw even more money at this problem and it still won’t be solved.

Yet, the gahmen seemed oblivious to the fact that while housing prices ride the rocket, the pay increment for the Singaporean worker rides the snail. As a result of the triple whammy consisting of the 1998 Asian Currency Crisis, the SARS outbreak in 2003 and the ever increasing competition from China and neighbouring countries, our pay packages have stagnated if not actually reduced. In fact, if a graduate asked for a $2,600 starting pay several months ago, he is considered as being unrealistic. That’s not mentioning that some graduates start working in debt, with at least $20,000 of study loans, and not everyone has rich parents to help pay it off. To make matters worse, the Americans so-called War on Terror, and the seemingly unstoppable bull run of energy prices until 3Q 2008 (read: Crude Oil), further increased our burden in daily living. A lot of these aren’t really noticeable because a lot of statistical wizardry has been introduced to make inflation look lower than it really is. I do not really need to go into detail explaining the meaning of the ‘Consumer Price Index’, right?

With these pressuring us from all sides, few would actually contemplate getting married to start a family, much less having children! In fact, I already envisioned a very bleak future for many Gen-X and post Gen-X Singaporeans. Regardless whether we are going to be a single old kook living alone or a childless old couple 20 ~ 30 years from now, we might simply have to sell off our HDB and go live in an Old Folks Home. The money from the sale of our flat to will then be used to pay for services provided by the home. Hopefully we’ll all die (and not suffer some serious illness) before that money runs out!

It is my opinion that the high cost of living (in the form of high property prices) is simply in itself a invisible and natural economic regulator to our population increase. In fact, I won’t be surprised by statistics showing that fertility rate is inversely proportional to economic growth, and it plunges with an increased influx of foreigners. To fight against the natural population regulator with an artificial rate of increase can only worsen the situation – and that include giving Baby Bonus to single mothers and allowing them to own flats. To put it in an analogy, when the car’s brakes are engaged and yet the driver insist on stepping on the gas, there can be only one end result – the car will break down.

The gahmen must awaken to the fact that ‘sustained economic growth’ is an insane proposition. There will come a time when all of the planet’s resources (discovered or not) will be expended in a not so distant future, and there is only so much we can recycle. With that in mind, even so-called ‘sustainable economic growth’ is impossible. Face it, if we have resources that would last us another 50 years at our current consumption rate, any growth on top of that will only hasten the inevitable.

As such, the gahmen must acknowledge the new reality in which it can no longer justify good governance simply by constant economic growth. It would do better to conserve that money to look after its aging citizens properly and not treat them like mere workers and birth machines of Singapore, Inc. Of course, our present leaders lea-duhs can also can choose to delude themselves that a future of economic contraction will never happen, or it would be someone else’s problem after our life time.

If that is so, I simply hope I won’t be around to suffer the consequences.

Recommended Reads:
Global Voices – Singapore: More Cash ≠ More Babies

Daily Discourse – Cyberspace Self Regulation?

8 comments

On the Straits Stooge Times:

Minister rues poor conduct
05-02-2009 己丑年 正月十一
By Zakir Hussain, Political Correspondent

Excerpts:
RADM Lui was replying to Ms Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC), who had asked for his views on netizens’ response to the physical attack on Mr Seng, MP for Yio Chu Kang.

He said: ‘I do not think the community itself has done enough to rebut some of these unhelpful comments delivered by fellow netizens.

‘It is a squandered opportunity for a higher degree of self-regulation.It would have been an example of the genesis, of the first steps, towards a more responsible, greater, self-regulatory regime.

‘But many of those responses were not rebutted or answered, and I think it is not healthy for some of this to remain on the Net unchallenged, unquestioned and unanswered.’

First of all, I am rather amused with the correspondent’s comment that the attack on Yio Chu Kang MP has drawn many online attacks. I will not nitpick on this, but I politely disagree, as many or few depends on the yardstick used. Personally, I would consider the number of such opinion (i.e. the vicious attacks) to be in the minority when measured against the deafening silence or simple indifference from the majority of the netizens, if not the entire population itself.

I am even more amused with His Excellency, Rear Admirer Admiral Lui’s remarks. How does he define ‘self regulation’ in this case? ‘Self regulation’ as characterised by an uncountable number of flame wars between bloggers and forummers?

Here’s something on this matter perhaps His Excellency should hear about:

A friend of mine found it funny and couldn’t bring himself to sympathise with MP Seng when he read the news, even though he couldn’t bring himself to voice support for the old man who committed the atrocity. Some even felt sorry for the old man, when they heard he might be given a life sentence for his actions and I personally wondered whether some the vicious attacks weren’t in part generated by the very report stating this fact! In fact, even now it is still not clear to us whether he will still be charged for this attack and sentenced severely after he has been remitted to IMH.

On top of that, some simply pointed out that without more details on the matter, one has nothing to stand on to speak up for MP Seng, even though they felt indignant and agreed that no such thing should be committed against any human being. Among some, there is also the considered opinion that ‘there cannot be smoke without fire’ – i.e. they believed there is actually a ‘slim chance’ the old man has good reasons for the attack.

As to my personal opinion, I found no reason to play mata-mata (policeman) and a part in self regulating cyberspace. In fact, I was clearly under the impression that unabated flame wars was the reason why a decade ago, His Excellency George Yeo (is he still BG now?) said that the Internet is so full of rubbish and it is almost like reading graffiti on a wall!

Now, is His Excellency the Grand Rear Admiral Lui faulting some of us for taking your colleague’s words to heart and doing our part by not participating in flame wars? Or are we now to participate in such senseless and rather meaningless endeavors when there are ‘good moral reasons’? Whatever gave His Excellency the idea that mere words (a lot of them, actually) from other netizens will have any effect at all in stopping a vociferous muthafxxka the vicious comments? I suggest His Excellency hire someone to do this if he does not see the futility in doing so.

That’s not forgetting, most net denizens (aka “netizens”) dislike regulation, be it state implemented or even community enforced. While most generally try to abide by a set of socially acceptable net etiquette (aka “netiquette”), much is left to the netizen to ‘police’ himself. There is nothing much anyone of us could do if another netizen is being an irresponsible prick. As much as I would say no to state regulation, I would say no to community regulation or another person attempting to shut me up. Putting myself in another person’s shoes, when I don’t appreciate another self righteous prick enforcing his personal code of behaviour upon me, I don’t expect myself to do the same to another person.

Beyond that, His Excellency the Admiral might want to look at just why the general populace finds less reason to be indignant about the attack on a Member of Parliament compared to that of an old trishaw-man getting bullied by 3 foreigners. Is it because that the populace no longer consider respect a part of the package in view of the salaries of your esteemed colleagues are already earning? Is the numbers in the elections all there is to consider one as ‘having the mandate’?

We Chinese have a saying: 将心比心 [meaning: to treat another person as he treats you]. Perhaps it is time for the Tali-PAP to reflect upon itself whether its ‘heart-ware’ has suffered a catastrophic failure to the point the people no longer respond in kind.

In short, while speaking the truth frankly may be the best option at times, consider how the people would feel hearing it. I am not proposing implement popular policies or running the government gahmen by popularity, but a lot more humility when speaking to the very people who put you in power would go some way in gaining their respect.

Finally, with all due respect, it is my considered opinion that His Excellency will do better pondering about whether the trade off between monetary remuneration and the respect of the people is an acceptable one, instead of talking about how a failure on the part of netizens to self regulate.

Video: Drama at the Singapore Flyer

3 comments

Frankly, I don’t know what to say about the Singapore Flyer Fiasco. It’s probably another first for Singapore, and two firsts at one go too. A first in having a large ferris wheel – the largest in the world – not to mention a supposed tourist attraction, having a major failure in less than one year. Then, another first in having people trapped in it for six solid hours before they get things moving again!

And since a picture says a thousand words, I’ll let this video express how I felt really about the entire incident.

Comics:

Recommended Reads:
Endoh’s Dungeon: Pakistan is innocent… or not?

Just ranting…

One comment

I had a conversation with a fellow blogger earlier today on Windows Live Messenger, and we talked about some bloggers being hard up for publicity events. In it I mentioned that such events may never obtain the kind of success locally as it had elsewhere.

For starters, I told him I felt that way because I ain’t really interested in such blogger’s events. I also have a very small social circle as far as bloggers are concerned so it is even more unlikely I will be invited. Most of my friends and acquaintances are known primarily through more conventional means – e.g. in gatherings and functions or from courses and friend / colleague introductions. I also have to admit my blog is hardly interesting nor does it have the reach and audience base to warrant any attention. Furthermore, I find certain people active in Internet PR or social media hypocritical, pompous, shallow and repulsive (and that feeling is mutual). It sometimes give one the feeling they are more interested in gathering personal power or pursuing a personal agenda instead of doing what they claimed to be doing.

Not being sour grapes here (since I was lucky to be invited to two of the events), it appears to me that all these publicity activities are not very successful nor useful anyway when one consider the effect of the event vs effort put into the event.

First of all, I see a lot of the same old faces attending these events and thus only they write about them. And surprisingly, the more well known local bloggers are normally never present in these events. One may argue that the objective is achieved more by the quantity and not necessarily by the quality of the bloggers invited. But some bloggers really wrote nothing meaningful or useful of the event. Many a time, when one look at their posts, their knowledge of the event / product is obviously questionable, not to mention also their main objective of attending the event. In the worst case scenario, the entire ‘report’ can sometimes be nothing more than an orgy of cam-whoring. And in one such example, the photos only caught my attention because of Wong Lilin, and by then my attention is no longer on the event itself.

As far as that particular event is concerned, the organiser can some what be blamed for giving the wrong impression to those invited. If I am not wrong, dk told me that Mediacorp and SPH thought a TV series is being launched and sent the reporters for entertainment instead of the ones for gadgets. In the end those reporters end up focusing on the celebrities who are present. But what sealed its fate is when whatever bloggers’ reports produced also failed to pass on the relevant information.

Now, that’s only one of the ways how a publicity event fails to meet its objectives. In some other cases it may simply be just attendees not even writing about the event after attending. You will come to know they are there but didn’t blog because you see them in the photos of other bloggers. And that shows another serious problem… what happens if they maybe the only people reading one another’s blogs actively and constantly, with not much real traffic beyond that?

Anyway, can we blame the bloggers for not blogging about the event when they also have a life of their own beyond? After all, it was never explicit that a blogger must write about the event after they have attended. But it is my considered opinion that failing to do so would defeat the objective of the event – i.e. to have bloggers participate in the publicity drive and to reach out to their readers.

So, the combination of freeloaders at events, the lack of quality reports from attendees, plus the possibility that everyone is only linking to everyone else who are present at the event, would be sufficient enough to kill such events locally.

Consider then.. how to build a reputation as some one who can effectively utilise this form of media, when sooner or later it becomes obvious to corporates and companies that the reach from this is not only negligible but their writings (just like my piece here) are really worth shit on their own to be of any good? Where only the bottom line matters, why should more money and effort be spent to take seriously such ‘outreach’ programs locally?