cost of living and job loss watches

i have created two threads in redbeanforum.com to monitor these two issues that are close to the hearts of the people as these affect them directly and can be very painful. also, both are issues that the elected govt has promised to do for the people. the two threads will monitor the developments in these areas and all of you are encourage to contribute to these threads. primarily we want to see what the govt is doing to reduce the cost of living and to create jobs and not destroying jobs or offering jobs to foreigners at the expense of the citizens. PRs are not citizens and should have lower priority in terms of benefits from govt policies vis a vis citizens. the govt must not forget the contributions and sacrifices of citizens towards the nation and the people who voted them to power.

before smrt raises its fare again

The SMRT is making huge profits again. It has been making profits for many years in the hundreds of millions. And all along it has been claiming that cost is rising and it will lose money if transport fare is not raised. And that they are accountable to theirshareholders as a private company. Is it really a private company in the true sense? Can anyone remember that $6 billion was used from taxpayers money to build the infrastructure which has since been written off. (I stand corrected if anyone can prove to me that I am wrong on this.) Now the management of the SMRT are happily managing the company for profits made from none other than the taxpayers who contributed the $6 billion to its initial cost. If the SMRT is to regard itself as a purely private company, and making money for its shareholders as its primary objective, then it is only right and fair that SMRT make provisions to repay the $6 billion back to the people as it has no obligation to the people. For being given the right as a monopoly business, it cannot lose money like any other business. It only needs to raise fares to cover whatever it wants to cover and whatever profits it wants to make. Where else can there be such a sure to profit business? Where is the business risk? The privatisation does not really benefit the people except shareholders. It is a misnomer to claim that without privatisation it will be inefficient and will run at a loss. This is an insult to all govt andstatutory boards, that they are inefficient because they are not privatised. And in case of a stats board, if the management isinefficient they should be fired and replaced with a new management team. Turning it private is a lousy excuse to improve efficiency. I don't believe that stats board are inefficient just because they are not privatised.

better than pyramid scheme

If I can get hold of the people's money, say $100k per person and guarantee them a small return, maybe 2% better than the bank rate, and they have no right to ask them back, wow, won't that be nice? Then I can use it to invest in anything I want. If I make money, I will reward myself with big fat bonuses, and pat myself on the back and tell everyone how clever I am. If I lose money, I will just call it a bad business decision beyond my control. I still collect my management fee, and even give myself a big raise. And If I cannot afford to pay the dividends, I will only rewrite the terms and extend the payout later, or make them contribute more. This provision will make chit funds and pyramid schemes so amaturish. And also, I will make sure that nobody knows the account. It is only for me to know. Won't that be nice?

lowering medical cost or how to pay

BoonWan is tackling the 'how to pay expensive medical bills again.' I sense that the issue is not how to reduce medical cost, but how to pay the ever increasing cost, through group insurance. I think the root to this problem is high medical cost. And this must be tackled first. Medicare must be rightly divided into those who can afford and don't mind paying and those who cannot afford and needed help. That is why we have a govt and not an anarchic society where there is no govt and if one cannot afford it, just too bad. Another area is for the govt to provide choice for the people to decide what they want to consume and pay for. The govt shall not pre decide who should consume what and pay what. The third area is to educate people to prepare to die. Anyone who passes 65 or 70, must be prepared to die, gracefully, with minimum discomfort, through ageing. The medical service must not play the role of extending life at all cost, thus raising medical cost to an astronomical height. For those who can afford it, they can pay for whatever to extend their life for as long as they want. For many who cannot afford it, and without the means, extension of life is an extension of suffering, a burden to themselves, family and society. The expensive medical procedures and medicine are not doing them any good but increasing their misery. And hopefully, with a review of the objectives of medicare and its role in society, and with a proper insurance scheme tailored to different individual needs, with choices and not a straight jacket formula, no one need to have all their money locked up in medisave and CPF when these can be used to provide them with a better quality of life. Not everyone needs the heavy insurance, not everyone wants to extend their life mindlessly. And many will have other means to pay for their medical needs, including family support. The medisave and medical insurance must allow for flexibility and choice. Otherwise, there is no need for all the supertalents if a simple straight jacket solution is all that the ministry can come out with.

taxing the poor efficiently

Income tax dept should rethink unequal tax cut policy to narrow divide between rich and poor I am an income tax payer. Income tax dept should rethink unequal tax cut policy to narrow divide between rich and poor. However, I am pleasantly surprised to discover that my income tax burden is reduced for assessment year 2006. I gather this information from the IRAS website: Singaporean, individual, salaried earner, top income tax contributors will pay 1% less tax while medium income earner will pay 0.5% less tax compared to last year. But low income earners get no benefit. I would like the IRAS to reconsider unequal income tax reduction. I propose that the system of income tax in 2003 be reinstated with reduction in Goods and Services Tax by at least 3 percentage points. My arguments are simple. Firstly, our system taxes us in an inverted pyramid form, ie. the more I earn, the heavier my tax burden. I find this sensible, reasonable and logical. Secondly, GST is non-discriminatory and it effectively taxes our fellow lower income Singaporeans. In my opinion, this has contributed to the rich and poor divide. Not too low income earners like me should not complain about paying taxes as it is our duty as Singaporeans to contribute and move together forward as a nation. No man gets left behind in my Singapore. Ng Swee Kai The writer's article was published in the Sunday Times forum page. I fully agree with his suggestion. The GST is unjust to the poor through its reasoning that everyone must pay tax, rich or poor. Only rich people will support such a taxation policy where the poor, including the very poor, have to pay tax. Thus the rich gets richer and the poor gets poorer.