My thoughts on Ministerial Pay Hike

I was utterly wrong. I have been harbouring this thought that the PAP government will not announce a 2^nd ministerial pay hike but they did as “promised” in the end.

In my previous post “Glory for Nation or Money”, I mentioned many people are unhappy with the rising cost of living and the few unpopular policies (Annuity Scheme, GST Hike etc) that were announced some time ago and the ruling elites are running a risk of losing that delicate “bond” with Singaporeans. So I wonder, why would they even think of pushing through with the 2^nd wave of ministerial pay hike now?

To be frank, I cannot accept the government’s repeated justification that it must pay high to match the average salary of the top 8 professions’ earners to attract and retain talents in the government. As many bloggers have pointed out, if there is a need to entice potential candidates of ministerial quality with huge monetary rewards to join the government, it might as well be better for these people to remain where they are in the private sector as serving the nation is ultimately different from “serving” shareholders.

But why is the government unable to attract and retain talents? I think the main reason is not because good people are put off by the “low ministerial salaries”. Neither is it because good people dislike PAP. It is a problem with Singaporeans who are generally politically apathetic, unpatriotic and greedy. Imagine if we have the entire population who is truly concerned about the running of the country, theoretically there would be more elites who are willing to serve the nation whether or not the government provides huge monetary rewards.

What we need to do now is not to continue increasing ministerial salaries to obscene levels but to make more Singaporeans engage in discussions on social issues. When more people care about what’s going on in Singapore, surely some of them would feel the urge to come forward to do something about the problems that the country faces. An active citizenry is important for the survival of Singapore in the competitive world of the 21^st century.

The new ministerial pay structure can be found on The Straits Times "Ministers, top civil servants to get 4% to 21% pay rise in Jan"

Why Press Freedom in Singapore matters?

I think we are taking the values of free speech and free press for granted. While I do not deny we need to engage in self-censorship for issues like terrorism and official secrets to maintain Singapore’s national security, it is however our mainstream media’s role to provide the most accurate and the most unbiased information for all Singaporeans without any risk of intimidation by our government to prevent our journalists from writing about sensitive or embarrassing issues such as Singapore’s fast widening income gap, rising cost of living, foreign talent policy and Temasek’s foreign investments etc.

However, if our journalists decide not to take on an investigative role but instead adopt self-censorship in their news reporting in the name of “nation-building”, allowing the government to control any information to release to the public or withhold any undesirable piece of information so that the government can carry on with their agenda without any external pressure, the journalists are doing their readers a disservice as they are assuming the released information they have in hand is 100% accurate. And when they publish those “facts and statistics” in the newspapers, people will believe every single word that they read as truths.

Therefore, in order for our mainstream media to remain objective, it must be able to legitimately criticise the government and inform the public in the most complete and responsible manner. It is more important that we suffer small ailments or hiccups as early as possible than to cause Singapore to suffer major setbacks should any government policy fails in the future.

Glory for Nation or Money?

The 24^th SEA Games opened yesterday in Thailand but Singapore has already won 10 of its expected 45 gold medals. Two questions came to my mind: First, do our sportsmen compete for the prize money or for personal and national glory? Second, how should the spirit of sporting excellence be similar to the spirit of public service of ministers?

For the first question, I believe it’s the winning of a gold medal, standing on the podium receiving applauses from the spectators and the singing of Majulah Singapura that matters most. I really don’t think any sportsman would say “I am going to win the Olympic gold medal because I want the $1,000,000 prize money”.

Yes, the prize money is certainly an added incentive but I think nothing beats the nobility and glory of striving for victory with passion and dedication. When Joscelin Yeo won a swim race, I felt I was the winner too because there was this special spiritual “link” between us as I could sense the passion for swimming in her and I knew her primary motive for a swimming career was not money.

So how’s it got to do with the spirit of public service of ministers? Right now, our ministers are fetching about $1.6 million-dollar salary per annum after a ministerial pay hike during April 2007. It is expected to rise to 77% benchmark by year end and 88% by end of 2008. Mr Teo Chee Hean, the Minister-in-charge of the Civil Service has said in a parliamentary statement on civil servant salary revisions:

Officers who work in our ministries and statutory boards must feel a sense of challenge and must believe that individually and collectively, they make a real difference in the lives of Singaporeans. We need to tap on their passion, energy and mobilise them to do their best, and achieve their best – for Singaporeans and for themselves.

His statement is the same as what I have been trying to explain earlier. That is the passion and dedication to strive for personal glory and the glory to serve our country. It is something which money cannot buy. But when the issue of benchmarking ministerial salaries to that of the private sector is brought into view, the government is undermining its moral authority to rule. It makes us wonder: “Do the ministers serve the nation because they want the $1.6 million-dollar prize money and more?”

So naturally when the government recently announced a slew of unpopular policies such as GST hikes, many showed their utter displease because when money is placed before passion, the ministers lose that special spiritual "link" which enables them to convince their fellow Singaporeans that the unpopular policies are deemed necessary for the betterment of Singapore.

I think enough is enough. One ministerial pay hike is sufficient. Singaporeans are already unhappy with the rising cost of living and I hope the government does not attempt to break that already delicate bond with us by forcing its way through a 2^nd ministerial pay hike.

Singapore’s property market is running a fever

Singapore’s hot property market has become the latest noteworthy conversation topic and it is not just the private property market that sees massive rises in Singapore’s house prices over the past year, even the local HDB residential market has seen record transaction prices.

It was only a month ago we read in the news that two Marine Parade 5-room flats were sold for record prices of $750,888 and $730,000, and a 3-room HDB flat was sold for $380,000. Crazy isn’t it? For $380,000, you could easily afford a resale HDB executive maisonette in areas like Bukit Batok.

Although the resale price index stated on the HDB’s website seems to show a continual healthy increase over the previous quarter in 2007, it would be interesting to note that the number of resale applications registered seems to have started to decrease across the board for all flat types in the 3^rd quarter of 2007. While I do not deny this could be a normal fluctuation, it would be a sign for concern should it continue to drop in the 4th quarter of 2007.

I must declare I am no expert in the property market but I believe there must always be a “tipping point” in the price of goods which is ultimately dependent on the supply and demand forces of the market. When the demand for resale flats come down as a result of a lack of affordability by most buyers, the price of flats would also drop naturally.

While we are still far from the 1997’s resale price index peak range of 130s, I think it is not prudent for any buyer to pay high prices for a resale flat during this period even though industry experts have been assuring us that residential property is still a good long-term investment. Why do I think so?

Scenario 1:

If we were to follow the trend on HDB’s resale price index, it is barely 1 year before the property market overheats. Give and take, let us say 2 years before the property market starts to crash, the buyers who have bought their flats recently would not be in time for their next sale if they intend to because they cannot meet the minimum occupation period (MOP) of 2.5 years from the effective date of purchase if the owners takes a loan from HDB and without CPF Housing Grant Scheme(otherwise MOP would be 5 years) . And even if they do not take any HDB loan for the purchase, the window period would still have to be a minimum of 1 year. It would thus be a risky short-term investment as no one can predict exactly when the crash will happen.

Scenario 2:

Even if the buyers decide not to sell but hold on to their newly purchased, already over-valued flats while waiting for a better price, they would be caught in a difficult financial situation where they have to finance their house loans and at the same time, see their flat values drop until asking prices are adjusted to the clearing level. The actual total loss at the next sale may be unimaginable. The 1997 property market crash victims know it.

So it’s time we take the inherent risk seriously as once the property market crashes, it is hard to stop. Potential buyers should not try to stretch themselves too much. We certainly want our money to be more liquid so that we can all survive through the impending recession and cope with the relentless rising cost of living.

Singapore's Pump Prices Up Again

Pump prices went up again. There are more cars and drivers than there used to be. The uprising China and India demand more energy. The world is also experiencing more and more extreme weather conditions which require more energy to cool down or heat up the homes and offices but the world's oil supply is following an opposite trend. Can our government bring down the price of oil?

*You can purchase the informative "The Oil Age" poster online. It describes the world oil production and depletion problem, shows a detailed map of the current world oil reserves and explains the important use of oil in various industries like food and plastic production.

The following article titled Oil Prices: It Gets Worse was obtained from Time.com

This gloomy assessment comes from the International Energy Agency, the Paris-based organization representing the 26 rich, gas-guzzling member nations of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). The agency is not known for alarmist warnings, and its World Energy Outlook is typically viewed by policy wonks as a solid indicator of global energy supplies. In a marked change from its traditionally bland, measured tones, the IEA's 2007 report says governments need to make urgent, bold decisions on energy policy, or risk massive environmental and energy-supply crises within two decades — crises and shortages that could spark serious global conflicts.

"I am sorry to say this, but we are headed toward really bad days," IEA chief economist Fatih Birol told TIME this week. "Lots of targets have been set but very little has been done. There is a lot of talk and no action."

The reason for the IEA's alarm is its expectation that economic development will raise global energy demands by about 50% in a generation, from today's 85 million barrels a day to about 116 million barrels a day in 2030. Nearly half that increase in demand will come from just two countries — China and India, which are electrifying hundreds of cities and putting millions of new cars on their roads, most driven by people who once walked, or rode bicycles and buses. By 2030, those two countries will be responsible for two-thirds of the world's carbon gas emissions, which are the primary human activity causing global warming.

India and China have argued against enforcing strict emission controls in their countries, on the grounds that these could hinder their economic growth and prompt a global economic slowdown. But the new IEA report says working with China and India on alternative energy sources and curbing emissions is a matter of global urgency.

The bad news is not only environmental. As the world scrambles to boost energy supplies over the next two decades, an ever-greater percentage of its supplies of oil and gas will come from a dwindling number of countries, largely arrayed around the Persian Gulf, as the massive North Sea and Gulf of Mexico deposits are finally exhausted. That will leave the industrialized countries far more dependent on the volatile Middle East in 2030 than they are today, and the likes of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iran will dictate terms to companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron, which increasingly operate as contractors to state-run oil companies in many producer nations.

"Most of the oil companies are going to be in an identity crisis, and need to redefine their business strategies," Birol says. The soul-searching may have already begun, as oil executives begin sounding the alarm about the supply crunch that lies ahead. Last week, Christophe de Margerie, CEO of the French oil giant Total, told the Financial Times that even the target of 100 million barrels a day is an optimistic one for an industry that currently produces 85 million — far short of the 116 million barrels a day the IEA projects will be needed by 2030 to fuel the global economy.

And in a sharp departure from the usually reassuring comments offered by Big Oil executives, De Margerie said companies and governments now realize that they have overestimated the amount of oil that could be extracted from places difficult to reach and costly to explore. "It is not my view, it is the industry view," he said. In other words, the message is that the current sky-high oil prices may not be a temporary burden on the world economy.

Forecasting prices, however, has become an increasingly inexact science for analysts, as prices in recent months have galloped ahead of their worst predictions. Says Oswald Clint, a London-based analyst for Sanford Bernstein: "A year ago, our predictions for November 2007 were about $50 to $62 dollars a barrel" — at least $35 short of Tuesday's price. The oil-research firm predicts that expanded production will bring oil prices back to $70 a barrel by 2010. But to Birol, that sounds optimistic.

"If you want to lower prices you have to slow down oil demand growth in China and India, use cars more efficiently, use biofuels, and also convince producing countries to pump more oil," says Birol. But he is uncertain any of that will happen. "I don't see the political will." Then again, nothing fuels political will like a soaring price at the gas pump.

Cracks appearing between Singaporeans and Immigrants

Cracks are already appearing between Singaporeans and the new settlers who have come as permanent residents, not just between different ethnic groups, but also within races.

Ill feeling towards foreigners is beginning to surface in this most unlikely of places – cosmopolitan Singapore – attributed to the record influx of immigrants. By tradition, Singaporeans with their own migrant history have been open about foreigners from east or west, which has led to a recent mass arrival of settlers and visitors.

More than a million have arrived, mostly during the past decade, and although they have brightened the economy, they are also starting to incur a social cost as well as increasingly sparking friction with locals. Despite land reclamation, Singapore remains a small city, one of the densest in the world. The pressure is testing the tolerance level of Singaporeans, who are struggling to cope with a widening income gap and rising prices. Already one third of the 4.68 million people here are foreigners, not to mention the nine million tourists who arrive annually.

It has prompted warnings from leading figures, the latest from Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong. According to him, cracks are already appearing between Singaporeans and the new settlers who have come as permanent residents “not just between different ethnic groups, but also within races.” People are showing less trust towards one another. Goh said “the new residents did not mix easily with Singaporeans” and the latter, in turn, “tended to leave the new-comers alone.”

Earlier, retired and respected civil servant Ngiam Tong Dow said if he had his way, Singapore would think twice before pushing for a 6.5 million population. Questioning the rationale, Ngiam said in an interview published in the governing party newsletter that Singapore does not need numbers but talent.

The 70-year-old said: “If we do it wrongly, it will change our economic and social system.” He stressed the need to appeal to people’s hearts. “Otherwise, Singapore will become just a six-star hotel where guests stay in good times and flee when times are bad. We will never become a nation,” he said.

Singapore’s mainly middle class, stressed by a widening wealth divide, is deeply worried about the large inflow. “Foreigners are viewed as threats to locals’ livelihoods, they are viewed with suspicion and envy,” a surfer posted.

A pivotal part of immigration is the successful luring of wealthy foreigners to settle here. It is doing wonders for the economy, but is also aggravating inflation and widening the income divide. If Singapore were not careful, it could split into two or three parts, warns Foreign Minister George Yeo. “And that third Singapore is the big chunk of people squeezed in the centre, between the poor and the rich,” he said.

“This group is the most vulnerable. If they feel the high life is out of their reach, frustration can set in. And being more mobile than the lower-end group, they can be tempted to vote with their suitcases. That is an option the other group doesn’t have.”

These warnings show growing government awareness that the speed to expand the population, if not the strategy itself, may threaten social harmony. Several incidents between foreigners and locals have stirred emotions, reflecting the current sensitivities.

These are minor everyday happenings in a crowded city that would have gained little attention if they had involved only locals, but were blown up into hot issues because foreigners were involved. In the latest case, Singaporean Michelle Quek said a Caucasian and his wife or girlfriend attacked her and her friend after her schoolbag “accidentally hit the woman”.

She said a quarrel ensued, which resulted in the Westerner holding up her friend by the arms, lifting her off the floor and dropping her onto the floor. She herself was punched on the nose. A couple of angry bystanders confronted the Westerner and stopped him from leaving, nearly causing more mayhem.

Singaporeans were also enraged when three young British tourists mocked an elderly rickshaw rider because he couldn’t pedal fast enough for them, then posted a video of the struggling old man on You-Tube.

Titled “The Slowest Taxi in SE Asia” it showed the trio squeezing into the small rickshaw, poking fun at the 76-year-old rider throughout the 10-minute trip. One remarked, “God, he’s in fifth gear” and every one laughed. They ran off without paying. Scores of Singaporeans bombarded the visitors, expressing what they would like to do to them. “Don’t come back to Singapore,” wrote one. “We will be waiting for you.”

Westerners are, of course, not the only people who are affected. In fact the bigger issue is the tens of thousands who have flocked here from China and India. Last year a record 70,000 foreigners were admitted; this year the figure is set to be higher.

Verbal insults have become a frequent phenomenon on the Internet between Singaporeans and some of the better-educated permanent residents. So far there have been no major incidents but the underlying resentment has given rise to fears that a small incident may one day flare up into big trouble.

Some aliens find it difficult to find accommodation; others get a cool reception from office colleagues. The government and community representatives have organised citizenship ceremonies and social gatherings to make the newcomers feel welcome. Leaders often extol the role of foreign talent in nation building.

Respected blogger redbean wrote of a growing potential for xenophobic tension. “For those who have to face the foreigners daily in all his living activities, when every citizen has to fight for his space and the air he breathes, tension is likely to build up and break out.”

The article was written by Seah Chiang Nee and obtained from The Star

Taxi Problems in Singapore and Possible Solutions

How often are we not able to hail a taxi in Singapore during peak hours or rainy days? During those times, we often see many taxi drivers driving their empty taxis on the outer lanes of the roads, putting on “ON CALL” signs, apparently waiting for the next caller willing to fork out weekend taxi peak hour surcharge of $2 and/or the call booking charges of between $2.80 and $4.

And now there is another problem. It was reported in the news that some taxi drivers are touting and demanding exorbitant flat fees from taxi passengers especially tourists visiting Singapore. While I condemn these “market spoilers” for their touting activities, there might be a need to understand why there has been a rise in such activities recently.

Two days ago, I took a taxi from Choa Chu Kang to Jurong Point. The moment I got on, the taxi uncle started a conversation with me. He complained to me how difficult it is to earn money these days and how the few “black sheep” (he was referring to the taxi drivers touting for business) have portrayed a bad image for the rest of the law-abiding taxi drivers. He mentioned some of them did touting at places like Clarke Quay because it was getting more difficult to find customers at night. How true this is I do not know but I agree that many drivers including the taxi uncle himself earn less these days as a result of the rising diesel prices and taxi rental costs. To worsen the situation, their diminished net earnings cannot keep in pace with the rising cost of living in Singapore.

I think the root of all these problems is with the complicated system of surcharges. The taxi companies should seriously consider lowering the midnight surcharge rate to a more reasonable one to help the taxi drivers attract more customers while reducing the possibility of a “hide-and-seek game” with passengers especially during the time between 11.30pm to midnight as it will not benefit them much if they do so.

The taxi companies could put in place a point system to allow some rental fee deductions if they make, say 2 trips during the “hideout” period. The peak hour surcharge rules should also be scrapped and instead, the same rental fee deduction system could be used for certain number of trips made during peak hours to alleviate the problem of a lack of taxis on the roads. In addition, more efforts should be put in to promote the “Share a cab” scheme to free up more taxis for other passengers.

At the same time, the daily taxi rental fee should be adjusted periodically in conjunction with any major fluctuations in the diesel price to give their drivers more “breathing spaces” in midst of the rising cost of living in Singapore.

Yes. All these solutions seemed to be benefiting the taxi drivers and their passengers, not the parent taxi companies but if volume of passengers pick up as a result of better efficiency of the whole taxi industry, sacrificing a small percentage of profits initially to earn a lasting goodwill from their passengers may not seem to be a bad idea after all.

Cost of Living vs Standard of Living

A million-dollar solution from Mr Lim Hng Kiang, our Trade and Industry Minister who is on a million-dollar salary:

“First, the CPI measures average changes in prices across all households. Whether there is an increase in the cost of living for a particular household depends on that household’s spending patterns. Switching to cheaper products can reduce the cost of living despite a rise in the CPI.”

I agree with him on the first part that the extent of the increase in the cost of living for a particular household does depend on that household’s spending patterns. There are indeed families or individuals who are spending beyond their means on material items. The increased cost of living would likely hurt their pockets more than ever.

However, the widespread inflation causing an erosion of purchasing power of Singaporeans as a result of the spiraling cost of living affects all people especially the lower-income people in Singapore. Although switching to cheaper products does help to reduce the cost of living, it also reduces the standard of living. How do you expect the lower middle-class and lower-incomed earners who are already on a not-so-high standard of living to lower their standards further?

As our fellow blogger Mr Wang has pointed out, the minister does not seem to understand the difference between the cost of living and the standard of living. In my opinion, he seemed very concerned with the monetary aspect of this whole issue and that keyword in his mind is cost so he does not seem to worry too much about our quality of living in Singapore.

The minister’s statement makes me feel so disillusioned. We have worked hard hoping for a better standard of living but now the government tells us to switch to cheaper alternatives? The 2% GST hike this year, which was uncalled for, has already affected us to some extent. I really do not see the point of sacrificing our living standards further. And is he again going to suggest lowering our standard of living further during the impending economic crisis which might happen in a year or two and a more or less confirmed GST hike after the 2010/2011 elections?

If that were to happen, there are probably many who might have to heed his advice and own smaller flats, buy more house brands thus sacrificing taste for price, do without maids or perhaps eat one less meal per day.

Cost of Living and the Need to Limit Spending in Singapore

The recent sharp increase in house prices and general cost of living have caused Singapore’s ranking on the latest Cost of Living Survey by Mercer Human Resource Consulting to climb from 17^th to 14^th, just ahead of New York, US. Although the Singapore government has stated the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of Sep 2007 to be only 2.7% more than the same period last year, I believe the figures do not reflect reality as it does not seem to give an accurate picture of Singaporeans’ expenditures.

In Singapore, if you are not earning a lot and unmarried thus may not see the need of owning a property to start a family, I think it is still “liveable” if you stay with your parents. However, life changes once you have a family to raise. Financially, it becomes more challenging: There is now a need to pay for your own HDB flat, buy a family car, pay for your kids’ necessities and tuition fees, take up essential insurances for all family members etc. It becomes harder to maintain a family with 2 or 3 children under the same roof.

And without conscious efforts to limit spending and to keep a close eye on your money, expenses can balloon to unexpected amounts if the rising cost of living were to continue uncontrollably. No wonder more and more Singaporeans find it hard to survive in Singapore:

Grocery bills increase as prices for foodstuffs go up

ST check finds that basic items in random basket of goods now all cost more By Marcel Lee Pereira & Lin Xinyi, Straits Times.

A TRIP to the supermarket will cost more now than it did at the beginning of the year. A Straits Times check on a random basket of basic goods sold at supermarkets here revealed price increases in almost every category, from fresh chicken to coffee and milk formula.

For instance, a popular brand of luncheon meat cost $1.70 in January, but now costs $2.50. Then, fresh whole chicken sold for about $4.50; the price is now closer to $5.20. This, on the back of news last week that noodle and bread prices were on the rise. But Singapore is not alone: Prices of bread, pasta, potatoes and meat are going up, putting pressure on family budgets around the world.

Russia imposed Soviet-style price controls on a range of foodstuffs last month. China has released stockpiles of pork, while Bangladesh, Jordan and Egypt are raising subsidies or slashing import tariffs. Suppliers The Straits Times spoke to said droughts in Australia, crop failures in the US, reduced milk production and higher cost of tinned food cans are all contributing factors.

Globally, prices of wheat and milk are at historic peaks. Corn and soyabean prices have also risen steeply, and international wheat prices have risen nearly 74 per cent since January. With higher grain costs, feed will become more expensive, and suppliers say this will mean a rise in meat and milk prices.

Rising food prices have contributed to inflation here. September's overall Consumer Price Index showed that prices generally retreated by 0.3 per cent from the previous month, but the food component - the biggest item at 23 per cent - rose 3.7 per cent as the cost of fresh vegetables, fruit, seafood and milk powder, as well as hawker and restaurant food, went up.

Consumers The Straits Times spoke to said that while increases for each item may seem like a token sum, together, they add up to a much bigger grocery bill. Housewife Cynthia Leow, 30, told The Straits Times she noticed she was paying about $10 more during her weekly supermarket trips.

Similarly, Ms Huang Ya Li, 60, said she needed to set aside an additional $20 a month for groceries, compared with the start of the year.

Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, president of the Consumers Association of Singapore, said that price increases were inevitable, with the climate playing a major role in food shortages. But he said things were not as bad as they seemed. Consumers, he said, had the option of buying house brands from supermarkets, and these were generally cheaper. Supermarket chain NTUC FairPrice said its house brand products are, on average, priced 10 per cent to 15 per cent lower than comparable national brands.

Checks revealed that bread and butter prices for FairPrice's house brands have remained steady over the past 11 months, but there have been 15 cent to 25 cent increases for coffee and cooking oil. Besides food, prices of tyres and batteries are also going up. The past 11 months have also seen increases in the goods and services tax, public transport fares, fuel prices and rents.

And now, more hawkers are giving notice that they may not hold out on price increases much longer as they are also feeling the pinch. The owner of a handmade noodles stall at the Gourmet Paradise foodcourt in the Toa Payoh HDB Hub said she is hoping to charge 20 cents to 30 cents more for every bowl of noodles from next year to cover costs. She said that rental on her stall, which is now $4,500 a month, is set to rise to $5,500 at the start of next year, and then to $6,500 in 2009.

In the meantime, Ms Huang said she was doing her best to be cautious with her spending: 'If a meal at a coffee shop is $3 or more, I will look for something cheaper. I eat to fill my stomach, so it does not matter whether the food is nice or whether I am given more ingredients.'

Also see my article on The future is bleak: Rising Prices and Widening Income Gap

The future is bleak: Rising Prices and Widening Income Gap

The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has announced on Tuesday that Singapore’s economic growth is expected to slow to 4 to 6 percent in 2008. So what is in place for us? The weakening economy, rising costs in goods and services and an ever widening income gap between the rich and poor are together constructing a bleak future. As the article written by Wolfgang Reuters on Spiegel Online International noted: “It inevitably brings higher unemployment, a decline in government revenues and growing poverty.”

Our country is becoming more and more globalised but the onslaught of globalisation has caused many who are older, unemployed, less educated and less privileged to become the state’s rising disenchanted in an environment of rising costs and widening income gap.

Goods and services are getting more and more expensive. Every now and then, we hear news about increased prices of products. Online media has also aggregated list of price increases. This apparently high inflation which our government has constantly denied always has the most drastic impact on people with lower incomes, who need to spend a larger percentage of their disposable income on ordinary consumer goods than high earners. In addition, prices of oil have also hit record high levels. When oil prices go up, everything else will follow. As if coping with all these hikes is not bad enough, to rub salt into the wound, the government hiked the GST from 5% to 7% since July this year. Till now I still do not see how the GST hike could have benefited the poor as what they have claimed.

As Singapore becomes more affluent with record number of millionaires, poverty is still not something of the past. As much as our leaders try to convince us that Singapore does not have beggars, we still see them roaming the streets. Many seemed to have “evolved” into empty can and used cardboard collectors for resale back to manufacturers to earn mere pittance.

Some people have raised the inequality flag. Mr Brown, for one, has written an article “S’poreans are fed, up with progress!” for Today newspaper sometime ago to illustrate the whole issue. Martyn See, who is another, created a very touching short film named “Nation Builders” and brought out the harsh reality of how the poor eke out a living in our cosmopolitan society.

We may have lived in illusion, dreamed that we live in a wonderland, but the worst is yet to come: When the economic crisis strikes, more Singaporeans will join the league of poor and bankrupted. Let us hope you and I will not be the unfortunate ones.

Other related articles:

A bane for middle-class: On Inflation and recent Price Hikes