zhen1 de4 hen3 random
Yesterday, Roy and I talked Singapore politics over dinner. Or rather, we tried.
Because both of us are more Rockson than Rajaratnam, the discussion was more like between two kopitiam uncles attempting an intellectual conversation over beer and peanuts, after the conversation content had its fair share on girls. However, due to our disappointing lack of political awareness and knowledge of information, the discussion was not carried very far.
The discussion was sparked off when Roy asked me if I agreed that the Singapore government should provide pensions for old people at the expense of higher tax, say raising it from 20% to 30%. I said I would agree if there was a need for it.
He disagreed. According to him, when he was still back in Singapore more than a month back, some government official had released a statement replying to a public query on the possibility of implementing a pension system in Singapore. It stated that Singapore does not provide pensions because the current generation of Singaporeans have ample opportunities to earn enough money during their prime to support themselves off their CPF when they are old and have retired.
Roy agrees with the statement. In the true spirit of a man who has grown up under our meritocratic society, he asks, 'If you play guitar sing song everyday at the void deck, what gives you right to live off other people's money when you're old?' In addition, he feels that the reason the french economy is not doing very well at the moment is because its current working class is being overtaxed to support their retireds. Hence, no motivation to work but motivation to strikes.
For me, I think that different country finds its own way to survive in the world. What works in the US, what works in France or what works in China will not necessarily work in Singapore. Our current system of interest rate, exchange rate, taxes, CPF, Medisave and even providing our ministers with the highest pay in the world, has so far, allowed our country to prosper. At least, most of our population has no difficulty putting rice into our ricebowls. And even for the most poor-offs, there are government efforts to take care of them (or so I would like to believe).
However, halfway around the globe from Singapore and we find the Scandinavian countries doing well economically too despite taxing their people 50% of their income, which mean less money in their pockets for girls and beers. However, I acquainted 2 Swedes during my language immersion courses and I assure you the Swedes are very happy with the system in their country because their welfare is top-class. Basically, you don't pay when you see the doctor. And even if you're unemployed, you get quite a substantial amount of living allowances each month. I question myself why aren't the Swedes, who work their socks off unhappy having to substain the lives of the unemployeds whom, I imagine, just stay at home and do nothing. I guess it's a general understanding in their society that unemployment, at times, is not quite a matter of choice and everyone has a responsibility to help people in need.
I think the government statement mentioned earlier is a classic example of the mentality in a meritocractic society. The government puts in place a system to ensure that the most capable people always get the best job (which is, in the government), and that the most capable people will be capable (and hopefully, kind enough) to create jobs for the not-so-capable people. It basically puts the onus on the people to prepare for their own future. Or some would call it the strategy of imposing 'fear'. We know that if we do not work hard enough now, we are going to suffer when we're old and since most people fear suffering, we work hard. I believe this is the main reason why a lot of Singaporeans consider our lives stressful. Because we are constantly doing things in fear of the future.
This morning, I woke up to an article on 'more outreach programmes to educate youths on problem gambling' on channelnewsasia. And while I'm still politically conscience from yesterday's evening dose of conversation, I ponder our government's decision to allow 2 casinos on our land.
No doubt (even though we can never be sure) that the casinos will put more money into our pockets (or more likely, into the account of our country's reserves). However, I wonder if I can ever be proud of a country that collects its riches from casinos, that makes money by threatening to bankrupt families. Ok, arguments are forced, but I just thought that having casinos make it difficult for us to developing our arts and culture, for us to one day be mentioned in the same breath among cities such as London, Paris and New York, and for us to be morally at ease with ourselves even though I'm sure all these worries will be gone in 3 years' time because the people at Straits Times will do their best to convince us that there is every reason to be proud of our casinos.
I do not mind if there is no democracy in Singapore. I do not mind if the PAP remains at the helm for the next 100 years. I am proud of the economic progress that Singapore has achieved so far but I think the challenge right now is to maintain this economic progress, while at the same time, add a bit more wen1 du4 to our society. Global warming is already doing its part for us, but I think those of us who are benefiting from the meritocratic system should do our part by taking care of the people who have been left behind by the development of our country. I wouldn't mind paying a bit more in taxes in the future if I know the money goes to helping a neighbour in need.
That said, please forgive me if you find me in 10 years' time complaining about the rise in taxes. And I am pretty certain that I will still be visiting the casinos. I just hope that I won't run into any of my students there.
Because both of us are more Rockson than Rajaratnam, the discussion was more like between two kopitiam uncles attempting an intellectual conversation over beer and peanuts, after the conversation content had its fair share on girls. However, due to our disappointing lack of political awareness and knowledge of information, the discussion was not carried very far.
The discussion was sparked off when Roy asked me if I agreed that the Singapore government should provide pensions for old people at the expense of higher tax, say raising it from 20% to 30%. I said I would agree if there was a need for it.
He disagreed. According to him, when he was still back in Singapore more than a month back, some government official had released a statement replying to a public query on the possibility of implementing a pension system in Singapore. It stated that Singapore does not provide pensions because the current generation of Singaporeans have ample opportunities to earn enough money during their prime to support themselves off their CPF when they are old and have retired.
Roy agrees with the statement. In the true spirit of a man who has grown up under our meritocratic society, he asks, 'If you play guitar sing song everyday at the void deck, what gives you right to live off other people's money when you're old?' In addition, he feels that the reason the french economy is not doing very well at the moment is because its current working class is being overtaxed to support their retireds. Hence, no motivation to work but motivation to strikes.
For me, I think that different country finds its own way to survive in the world. What works in the US, what works in France or what works in China will not necessarily work in Singapore. Our current system of interest rate, exchange rate, taxes, CPF, Medisave and even providing our ministers with the highest pay in the world, has so far, allowed our country to prosper. At least, most of our population has no difficulty putting rice into our ricebowls. And even for the most poor-offs, there are government efforts to take care of them (or so I would like to believe).
However, halfway around the globe from Singapore and we find the Scandinavian countries doing well economically too despite taxing their people 50% of their income, which mean less money in their pockets for girls and beers. However, I acquainted 2 Swedes during my language immersion courses and I assure you the Swedes are very happy with the system in their country because their welfare is top-class. Basically, you don't pay when you see the doctor. And even if you're unemployed, you get quite a substantial amount of living allowances each month. I question myself why aren't the Swedes, who work their socks off unhappy having to substain the lives of the unemployeds whom, I imagine, just stay at home and do nothing. I guess it's a general understanding in their society that unemployment, at times, is not quite a matter of choice and everyone has a responsibility to help people in need.
I think the government statement mentioned earlier is a classic example of the mentality in a meritocractic society. The government puts in place a system to ensure that the most capable people always get the best job (which is, in the government), and that the most capable people will be capable (and hopefully, kind enough) to create jobs for the not-so-capable people. It basically puts the onus on the people to prepare for their own future. Or some would call it the strategy of imposing 'fear'. We know that if we do not work hard enough now, we are going to suffer when we're old and since most people fear suffering, we work hard. I believe this is the main reason why a lot of Singaporeans consider our lives stressful. Because we are constantly doing things in fear of the future.
This morning, I woke up to an article on 'more outreach programmes to educate youths on problem gambling' on channelnewsasia. And while I'm still politically conscience from yesterday's evening dose of conversation, I ponder our government's decision to allow 2 casinos on our land.
No doubt (even though we can never be sure) that the casinos will put more money into our pockets (or more likely, into the account of our country's reserves). However, I wonder if I can ever be proud of a country that collects its riches from casinos, that makes money by threatening to bankrupt families. Ok, arguments are forced, but I just thought that having casinos make it difficult for us to developing our arts and culture, for us to one day be mentioned in the same breath among cities such as London, Paris and New York, and for us to be morally at ease with ourselves even though I'm sure all these worries will be gone in 3 years' time because the people at Straits Times will do their best to convince us that there is every reason to be proud of our casinos.
I do not mind if there is no democracy in Singapore. I do not mind if the PAP remains at the helm for the next 100 years. I am proud of the economic progress that Singapore has achieved so far but I think the challenge right now is to maintain this economic progress, while at the same time, add a bit more wen1 du4 to our society. Global warming is already doing its part for us, but I think those of us who are benefiting from the meritocratic system should do our part by taking care of the people who have been left behind by the development of our country. I wouldn't mind paying a bit more in taxes in the future if I know the money goes to helping a neighbour in need.
That said, please forgive me if you find me in 10 years' time complaining about the rise in taxes. And I am pretty certain that I will still be visiting the casinos. I just hope that I won't run into any of my students there.
posted by le chye at
12:12 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home