myth 91

‘$5000 household income is rich’

Is this really true? It should be. $5000 is a big sum of money. And a household income of $5000 must be middle class. Let’s look at the details. A family of 5, father, mother and three working children, father earns $1,600, mother $1,000, 3 children each earning $800.

After CPF and a $200 monthly transportation cost for each member, the disposable income left will be: father - $1080, mother - $600, each child - $440. Assuming each member needs $200 for his/her personal expenses eg taking lunch or dinner at workplace, the disposable income will be further reduced to: father $880, mother $400, and each child $240. For a family of 5, the household expenses will probably be $1500 plus $250 for utilities and conservancy fees, or a sum of $1750.

Now the combined balance available of the family, $880, $400 and 3 x $240 is $2000. This would mean that the family will have a balance of $250 to spare. Would this amount be adequate to pay for all the social obligations, more bills and a little eating out or entertainment? In reality, it is likely to be nothing left as there are many things that will eat up $250 a month easily.

Is a $5000 household income sufficient to qualify a family as being comfortable? No car or motor cycle definitely. Very likely the family will be living on a hand to mouth existence. That is how the cost of living in Singapore affects the apparently high income of Singaporeans and making the value of money so small.

A $5000 income is quite handsome if it is the income of 1 or 2 bread winners with a couple of young children. If the income is contributed by every working adult who needs to feed and cloth themselves, and also incurring expenses while working, a $5000 monthy family income is bearly enough to live on.

inspired by mah bow tan

After listening to Mah Bow Tan’s plan to build more rental flats for the less well off citizens, I am truly inspired. The govt is now actively tackling the problem of the poorer Singaporeans and to help them. More empty flats will be converted to 1 rm and 2 rm rental flats to solve the problems of housing for the poor. And the rentals will definitely be affordable, calculated with computer precision to fit the income of the poor Singaporeans. This is to prevent the more well off Singaporeans from taking advantage of the system and deprived the more needy Singaporeans of rental flats.

So what will happen is that the household income of the family will be carefully scrutinized not only on eligibility but also to determine how much each family will pay for the rental of the flat. A family with a higher income will have to pay more than a family with a lower income. This kind of micro management to ensure that the poor cannot abuse or cheat the system is one of its kind in the world. It is an obsession to make sure that the poor are managed to every detail of the little money they have. Put them under the microscope. And once they earn a little more, they should be made to pay a little more. This is absolutely fair and righteous. This is equitability at its best. Means testing was not mentioned, but means testing will have to be done to assess affordability.

This principle of paying according to income or affordability is the most ingenious part of the solution. It convinces me that means testing is important and relevant in the Singapore context. Though I have always been against means testing, I am now a convert for means testing. It is the fairest and most equitable way of distributing national resources and be paid according to one’s ability. I would like to see Mah Bow Tan proposing this formula in Parliament to apply to all govt services, including tuition fees in schools and tertiary education, ward charges for hospitalization, utilities, road taxes etc.

And for this scheme to be effective and implemented across the board, all Singaporeans must be means tested. Testing only the poorer Singaporeans is discrimination by wealth and is disgusting. Also, since all govt services and fees are to be paid according to affordability, it is necessary to means test the more affluent Singaporeans to ensure that they pay more for the same govt and public services. As an example, the price of a 5 rm flat should vary according to the family income of the buyer. Or hospital ward charges shall be computed according to the patient’s family income and applicable to A, B and C wards. School and university tuition fees shall be also payable according to the family’s income. The higher the family income, the higher should be the fees. It is the fairest and gracious formula for the better off citizens to cross subsidise for their poorer counterparts.

With such an equitable scheme where those who can afford more pay more and those who can afford less pay less, the govt will be seen as fair and progressive instead of being mean and petty if means testing is only applicable for the poor. I will definitely support such a great scheme.

Changing Strategy or changing horse?

Changing Strategy or changing horse? While the new PAP strategy is to woo the young, the post 65ers, which is expected given the young being the future, the latest speeches in parliament exhibited a fear of the old. There seems to be a feeling that the oldies have got the message that they are being abandoned and they might form a political party to look after themselves. The oldies were the nation builders, growing up in a poor underdeveloped island, slogged and toiled, and supported the PAP all these years, till today. They are the backbone of this nation and of PAP. Now where to put them? Outlive their usefulness?

chia ti lik also resigned from wp

And now Chia Ti Lik has also resigned. The reason is the curb on internet postings on WP members. I fully support Chia Ti Lik's resignation. And probably Goh Meng Seng resigned for the same reason. They should get together and form a new and progressive party that is up todate with a new technological world. Trying to live the 21st century like kampong folks of the 1960s is sure to dig deeper into a hole to cover oneself up. The internet is the most advanced and progressive and effective tool that a political party in the Singapore environment can depend on. It is only a matter of how to use it and maximise its effects to benefit the party. The problem at the moment is the lack of discipline and to fall into the traps of tauntings by people masquerading as friends or innocent trawlers. As long as the politicians or would be politicians conduct themselves well and with decorum, they must not be gagged from posting in the net. Gagging people from posting in the net is regressive and living in a fictitious world of the three monkeys, covering their eyes, ears and mouths, and think everything is fine. Goh Meng Seng and Chia Ti Lik, go and form your own party with the youth of today, and capitalise on technology and the internet to push your agenda and views. Technology is a friend and not an enemy.

The whiners must do some soul searching

The whiners must do some soul searching Mohammad Maliki Osman, a new MP, pointed out that Singaporeans were whiners and complainers. A little variation from quitters. Name calling is quite fun. For every little wrong they would call up a govt agency to deal with it. He would rather the Singaporeans take actions into their own hands, take ownership of their actions to make the island a better place to live rather than depending on the govt. Why is this so? Why are the Singaporeans all so like dat? Whose fault huh?, so asked robertteh. Who should be doing the soul searching? Matilah had on many occasions complained about too much govt. For when there are too much govt, it is only natural and expected that if the govt wants a hand in everything, wants to interfere in everything, then the people will just let the govt to take over, even their lives, reluctantly or legally. And first thing is to stop telling people what to do and what not to do in bed. Or should the govt step back a little? Return more freedom, initiative and more funds and resources back to the people to lead their own private lives? Now, it is always easy to blame the people or some other people isn't it, especially when one thinks one is now god, in the highest body of the state, to tell the people who is the boss?