Hsien Loong is still thinking about promotion and career development of his employees. This kind of anomaly only exists in one country and no where else. No where in a democratically elected govt does a head of a political party has the privilege of career planning and development, and a salary scale for politicians as if they were employees of the state. In a normal healthy democracy every term of appointment could be the last term before the next general election.
Would Obama or Cameron be talking about career planning for their ministers with salary increment and promotion to come with it? What is happening here is a unique situation that could no longer exist in the next general election. It is not going to be the same anymore looking at how things are developing. Any political party that is elected to power should count themselves lucky. And to be reelected again, is not going to be a sure thing. In many countries, a two term party is a great achievement that many could only hope for.
What happens if a new govt is elected to power in 2016 and subsequently political offices change hand more regularly? It is something that can happen. To be elected again and again is no longer going to be a guarantee as the political system matures, as the people get wiser and more demanding and more selective.
1/18/2012
Confirmed, Sinkies are not good banker/CEO material
David Conner is retiring from OCBC after 10 years. He took over from Alex Au, the previous CEO. Alex was a Hongkie. The successor to David Conner is none other than another Hongkie, Samuel Tsien. DBS too did not have a local bred CEO for nearly two decades. The only local bank that still has a local in charge is UOB, which surprisingly is out performing the foreign run local banks if the value of its share price is an indicator.
What should be done to get our local boys and girls to be good enough to be the top dog of local banks in the banking industry? Why is it that they are all found wanting? What is so lacking in the local talents. Maybe the real talents are all into politics, making sacrifices to serve the people.
One way to make this situation less embarrassing to the Sinkie bankers and Singaporeans in general, is to include a citizenship application form when a foreigner is offer a CEO position in any large Singapore corporation. And the appointment will only be confirmed on approval of citizenship. Then all can be happy that the CEOs are Singaporeans, that Singaporeans also got talent.
What should be done to get our local boys and girls to be good enough to be the top dog of local banks in the banking industry? Why is it that they are all found wanting? What is so lacking in the local talents. Maybe the real talents are all into politics, making sacrifices to serve the people.
One way to make this situation less embarrassing to the Sinkie bankers and Singaporeans in general, is to include a citizenship application form when a foreigner is offer a CEO position in any large Singapore corporation. And the appointment will only be confirmed on approval of citizenship. Then all can be happy that the CEOs are Singaporeans, that Singaporeans also got talent.
Filling the ocean
This guy was at a public tap with a big hose and filling water into a big tanker. Standing beside him was a long queue of human beans each with a pail or plastic container waiting for their turns.
They have been waiting for hours but the tanker is so huge and may take several hours to fill it up. And several tankers were also waiting. Occasionally the guy at the tap would turn around and slosh a few seconds of water into a couple of empty pails and then turn back to fill the tanker.
Just for a few minutes, many of those in the queue would have their pails filled and can go home happily to continue with their lives. But because the tankers must be filled, probably owned by some big shot, the rest of the peasants would have to wait for their turns, and a little mercy from the dispenser.
The moral of this incident is similar to someone trying to fill the ocean that is full of water and ignores the little ponds, rivers and streams, leaving them high and dry. This is what is happening in countries that believe in pure meritocracy, when the more the merits, the more deserving one should be, and their bank accounts should be continuously be filled even when they have no time to spend the money. The lesser merit or undeserving ones can go on and be hungry. Randians? Wide income gap is natural and nothing can be done about it, so said the meritorious and deserving. Get out of my elite uncaring face.
This is the basic pillar of a pure meritocratic system, pure capitalism. This is the road we are marching on.
They have been waiting for hours but the tanker is so huge and may take several hours to fill it up. And several tankers were also waiting. Occasionally the guy at the tap would turn around and slosh a few seconds of water into a couple of empty pails and then turn back to fill the tanker.
Just for a few minutes, many of those in the queue would have their pails filled and can go home happily to continue with their lives. But because the tankers must be filled, probably owned by some big shot, the rest of the peasants would have to wait for their turns, and a little mercy from the dispenser.
The moral of this incident is similar to someone trying to fill the ocean that is full of water and ignores the little ponds, rivers and streams, leaving them high and dry. This is what is happening in countries that believe in pure meritocracy, when the more the merits, the more deserving one should be, and their bank accounts should be continuously be filled even when they have no time to spend the money. The lesser merit or undeserving ones can go on and be hungry. Randians? Wide income gap is natural and nothing can be done about it, so said the meritorious and deserving. Get out of my elite uncaring face.
This is the basic pillar of a pure meritocratic system, pure capitalism. This is the road we are marching on.
Exceptional country, exceptional solution
We must see ourselves as the number one place to live for exceptional people. We must be an exceptional country and for that, the pay of our political leaders must be exceptional. We want the best and we shall pay the best salary in the world to get the best talent the world can provide.
So far every suggestion and proposal for the minister’s salary is arbitrary. The logic is arbitrary logic, selective and some may say self serving. The team making the recommendation chose who they want to compare with, chose the criteria they want to ensure that the pay is still in the millions. Chose to treat ministers like employees, call it pragmatic or to be unkind, mercenary. Chose to motivate them like employees of a company instead of leaders of a country leading the people by their exemplary conduct and dedication.
Let me suggest another selective arbitrary proposal. Pick ten of the world’s top countries, on any criteria, logically should be first world or developed advanced countries, not kingdoms or sheikdoms, and take the salary of their heads of govt for reference. Include all the perks that are measurable and relevant. Forget about Air Force One. It is a stupid comparison.
Convert all their perks into monetary terms and add them to their salaries. At the end of the exercise, take the average number, in monetary terms, and pay them to our head of govt. The rest of the ministerial salary can be a percentage of that. No one then can argue that there is no real comparison because these leaders have other perks. We add in the perks.
I think this formula should provide a handsome income to our ministers. And make it clean, no more other incomes or perks or bonuses. It is arbitrary but arbitrarily fair and logical. And like the Worker’s Party suggested, make the total payout public. It cannot be a case of clean and transparent but cannot tell. There should be nothing to be ashamed of that cannot be made public. Unless all the claims of transparency and clean wage is hogwash. Please tell.
The only unfair bit is that the talents may not live up to it as our talents come from a small pool of self proclaimed elite. Nevermind, be generous and aim to be an exceptional country with exceptional leadership. It may look like an aspiration, an idealistic goal, but we need to start somewhere. And starting with an exceptional salary for our leaders is a good start in the right direction.
So far every suggestion and proposal for the minister’s salary is arbitrary. The logic is arbitrary logic, selective and some may say self serving. The team making the recommendation chose who they want to compare with, chose the criteria they want to ensure that the pay is still in the millions. Chose to treat ministers like employees, call it pragmatic or to be unkind, mercenary. Chose to motivate them like employees of a company instead of leaders of a country leading the people by their exemplary conduct and dedication.
Let me suggest another selective arbitrary proposal. Pick ten of the world’s top countries, on any criteria, logically should be first world or developed advanced countries, not kingdoms or sheikdoms, and take the salary of their heads of govt for reference. Include all the perks that are measurable and relevant. Forget about Air Force One. It is a stupid comparison.
Convert all their perks into monetary terms and add them to their salaries. At the end of the exercise, take the average number, in monetary terms, and pay them to our head of govt. The rest of the ministerial salary can be a percentage of that. No one then can argue that there is no real comparison because these leaders have other perks. We add in the perks.
I think this formula should provide a handsome income to our ministers. And make it clean, no more other incomes or perks or bonuses. It is arbitrary but arbitrarily fair and logical. And like the Worker’s Party suggested, make the total payout public. It cannot be a case of clean and transparent but cannot tell. There should be nothing to be ashamed of that cannot be made public. Unless all the claims of transparency and clean wage is hogwash. Please tell.
The only unfair bit is that the talents may not live up to it as our talents come from a small pool of self proclaimed elite. Nevermind, be generous and aim to be an exceptional country with exceptional leadership. It may look like an aspiration, an idealistic goal, but we need to start somewhere. And starting with an exceptional salary for our leaders is a good start in the right direction.
1/17/2012
Alvin Yeo makes good sense
Be realistic and compares apple with apple. Alvin Yeo brought out an interesting point, that the political leaders of UK and US came from wealthy background and could afford to take lower salary. He quoted a few British politicians with net worth of 4 or 5 million pounds with the Cameron’s waiting to inherit a 30m pound fortune. For those with 4m or 5m pounds, actually ‘sub sub suey’ compare to our politician’s wealth.
The American leaders are worth more, in the region of $100m or $200m. So they can afford to take in lesser salaries. This is an excellent point.
I do not know how wealthy are our ministers, but I think they are worth not less than the Brits and Americans, except for a few. Or they were not that rich before joining politics.
What is important is that if we want to attract the best, the rich or big income earners, we must go for it, get the really rich to serve. And the irony is that the really rich in the US and UK don’t need to be fed more to be fatter. Are our really rich the same as them, or they are different, that they need to be fatter cats? Even without taking the calculator or computer, one can easily conclude that the top 1000 high income earners would worth as much as the British and American leaders and should not be eyeing for more money.
The whole argument seems to go round and round. They are so rich, they need not be paid so much. And then we need to attract these very rich and need to pay them more? They would not be happy with less? Maybe as a non talent, I am unable to grasp the brilliance or logic in the argument. Really pai seh.
The American leaders are worth more, in the region of $100m or $200m. So they can afford to take in lesser salaries. This is an excellent point.
I do not know how wealthy are our ministers, but I think they are worth not less than the Brits and Americans, except for a few. Or they were not that rich before joining politics.
What is important is that if we want to attract the best, the rich or big income earners, we must go for it, get the really rich to serve. And the irony is that the really rich in the US and UK don’t need to be fed more to be fatter. Are our really rich the same as them, or they are different, that they need to be fatter cats? Even without taking the calculator or computer, one can easily conclude that the top 1000 high income earners would worth as much as the British and American leaders and should not be eyeing for more money.
The whole argument seems to go round and round. They are so rich, they need not be paid so much. And then we need to attract these very rich and need to pay them more? They would not be happy with less? Maybe as a non talent, I am unable to grasp the brilliance or logic in the argument. Really pai seh.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)