Singapore PM To Earn Almost 2 Million Dollars - After Pay Cut

[tim098]

Bro, dont be too quick to insult the wall street CEOs. Temasek Holdings made huge losses recently, being a major stakeholder in Merril Lynch just prior to the huge breakdown. And this among other investments gone wrong.

 

[a beautiful world]

Just to reinforce Weiht and SOFT's point, Singapore has some of the lowest taxes for any developed country, and a very low cost of living. The majority of Singapore's population does not pay more than several hundred dollars of tax a year, some even paying nothing. We live in a pretty good place.

However, I regret to say i disagree with the level of damages of defamation suits being completely appropriate. Singapore has the highest defamation damages in the entire commonwealth. Giving your assets to your spouse or direct family doesn't solve anything, as in Tang Liang Hong's case, the high court froze the WORLDWIDE assets of Tang and his WIFE. I think that while defamation laws should be strictly enforced where appropriate, perhaps the damages imposed should be lower, at a level similar to the rest of the commonwealth.

As for the Merril-Temasek deal, thankfully, due to good drafting of contract terms, and what must have been astute risk management, Temasek stands to MAKE quite a bit of money with Bank of America's acquisition of ML (assuming share prices stay stable). At the very least, some of their losses will be mitigated. That said, I think many people will agree that Singaporeans do desire greater transparency in Temasek's actions -- perhaps an audited annual report available online.

 

[ymmak]

shinobi, while ur argument seems logical at first glance, however on second look, i notice that u've based some of ur premises on assumptions that you have not or vaguely clarified. i think ur argument will undoubtedly be more wholesome if these assumptions are clarified.

GST however taxes goods and services that he consumes. and all people consume roughly the same amount of basic necessities.

u r assuming that all people consume the same amount of basic necessities. r u sure? what is necessity, what is need? according to maslow's heirachy of need, there are many levels of need, such as physiological need, safety need, social belonging, self-esteem and self-actualisation. different people will have different requirement and expectation of these needs. so u cannot glibbly assume that everyone has the same need. at most, u may assume that we have the same physiological need, such as the need to eat, drink, sanitation, clothes and shelter, but it is errorneous to assume that everyone shares the same other level of need.

this is why the richer you get, the more you save (savings). on the other hand, the poorer you get, the more you will start digging out of your own savings (dissavings).

u r assuming that everyone spends the same amount whether or not they r rich. look, everyone spends different and has different expenditure.

when the government paid growth dividends and gst bonuses, most singaporeans used it to offset their bills. this shows that singaporeans are consuming beyond what their income allows, and are in debt (car, mortgage, utilites etc)

what kind of debt r u refering to? housing mortgage, car loan, credit card bills or what? if u r talking about housing loan, i believe many young singaporean couples are in some kind of debt when they purchase their first hdb, whether or not the government raises gst or income tax.

the income tax system in singapore is progressive, if say it is cut across the board, then middle and high income earners will benefit.

another simple example, if everyone one needs $200 simply to survive, what does that $200 mean to someone who is poor compared to someone who is rich? the same dollar is valued differently by people of different income groups.

again, u r assuming that everyone needs the same amount to survive. a rich diabetic may need a daily dose of insulin, will definitely have a higher expenditure than a poor but healthy man. unless u r saying that insulin is not a necessity for a diabetic.

 

[Weiht]

well, the dif is temasek made a call which is gg thru some volatile times now, even if u factor in all their losses over the yrs and compare to their returns, its still pretty gd. Find me a guy whom NEVER lost $$$ in investments, and if u think that there is no risks involved and that its a sure win then maybe u shld be president. Even the great sage warren buffett has lost alot recently, but the thing is u wont make or lose $$$ until u sell or the company goes bust!!! Many made alot of gains on paper the alst few yrs, but didnt cash in and now are broke too.

Mr Peter Lim in the 90s invested 10m into a company in indonesia and when the indonesian currency and economy went down, he treated it as written off. But 10 yrs later, that 10m that he considered as gone earned him $2 BILLION dollars!!!

If you study the deals that temasek and GIC made, some are pretty gd deals.

OK, back to the wall st CEOs, the dif between them is that Temasek is not responsible for the mess but according to ur arguement lost $$$ in this crisis. So that means anyone who lost $$$ in this is evil? The man in the ST is also bleeding yet we sympathise with him, so cut ur govt some slack... The CEOs on wall st however are responsible for this mess thru greed and thinking they can beat the system.

OK, the rich doesnt really get richer and the poor doesnt really get poorer. There are many RICH ppl i noe who lost tens of millions. And the return on equity is the same for all. Some ppl are rich because they work hard and earn their wealth, n some remain poor cuz we are lazy and choose to blame society or give excuses for not wanting to put in wat is needed.

 

[visa]

ymmak:

of course different people have different levels of necessities.

GST hurts the poor more than the rich, because for a family of 5-7 who is living off say about $1200 take home pay, 7% GST on stuff like rice and vegetables hurts much more than for someone who is more well off.

If you raise income tax and lower GST, the poor will suffer less because income tax is progressive- the poor will pay less income tax than the rich, and will struggle less because of the prices of their basic necessities.

I'm not saying that GST should be reduced and income tax should be raised, or vice versa. Both systems have their pros and cons, and I'm certain that in the grand scheme of things, the people in charge of the policies have it much more well thought out than us- especially in the long run.

 

[ymmak]

visa, i have not disagreed that gst hurts the poor more than the rich. in fact, i have not disagreed with any of shinobi's arguments. in reality, i m a closet believer of some of shinobi's arguments. however, i've pointed out some of his premises that are underlined with assumptions, that need more clarification.

as a forumer, when i saw ur opinion on gst and income tax, and compare it with shinobi's response, i will have an inclination to absorb what u say, y? cos ur premises seem less dubious and make lesser assumptions, while shinobi makes more assumptions.

i m not arguing against shinobi's opinions. i m not evaluating the content of his argument, rather i m critiqueing the validity of his conclusions based on the sub-claims and assumptions that he has made. that's why, in my first paragraph, i have included the sentence, "ur argument will undoubtedly be more wholesome if these assumptions are clarified."

 

[visa]

Haha. I see.

I think for the purpose of casual discussion, we don't really bother to spend too much time refining our arguments, as long as the general gist of the idea goes across.

But yes, you are right there.

 

[fuzztremecho]

in the aftermath of the Mumbai tragedy...if $ 2 million buy for me peace,security and the GASsing to ogle at SOFT buy and sell section, I'd say it's alright by my standards...

 

[Whitestrat]

in simple layman's english, rich people don't eat 10 bowls of rice per meal because they are rich.

this is why the richer you get, the more you save (savings). on the other hand, the poorer you get, the more you will start digging out of your own savings (dissavings).

Sorry ah, I just want to interject and say something about this.

The poor will eat a 10kg bag of NTUC no frills rice at about $28 per bag? The rich will eat a 10kg bag of rice from Umbrella Brand Fragrant Rice at $45 per bag.

So, unless my maths is severely lacking, 7% of the $45 bag is more than 7% of the $28 bag?

 

[Whitestrat]

since we like to regard our government as a profit making institution i.e. company, lets use a corporate analogy;

Q: if your boss gets fired, does your company collapse?
A: no. someone else will do his job.

could it have been worse if this were done differently? maybe. we don't know.

This depends on who the Boss is, and how crucial his role is. In my case, if my boss leaves, the company WILL fall. There's more to being a boss than just fulfilling a role and doing paperwork.

 

[Whitestrat]

i'm abit SLOW, but nvm, there is something interesting about this. income is taxed no matter how an individual chooses to use it. GST however taxes goods and services that he consumes. and all people consume roughly the same amount of basic necessities.

The poor consume basic necessities. The Rich consume excesses. Why? Because they can pay for it. The basic necessities you take forgranted like Rice, are subsidised at the import level for certain groups of Rice. In this way, you could say the subsidy comes from a majority of the rich to help the poor.

this is why the richer you get, the more you save (savings). on the other hand, the poorer you get, the more you will start digging out of your own savings (dissavings).

This is a misconception. You have not understood how proportions work. Lets say you have 100 citizens. 40% are low income. 40% are middle income. 20% are high income. The low income people contribute little to none of their income to taxes, yet they consume basic necessities, paying only GST. The middle income consume necessities, playing GST, but they also drive, and pay HDB property taxes. They also pay about 10% of their income in taxes. The 20% of rich, who are only 20%, usually contributes to about 50 to 60% of the total revenue stream. They pay GST, MORE road tax (because the tax on an S class and on a Mazda 3 are very different), MUCH MUCH MORE property tax, about 35 to 30% on income tax, AND still have to give to Charity. Note, these 20% rich people are already contributing to 50% of the revenue in taxes. If you tax them any more, they will leave the country (which they absolutely can, and OTHER countries will willingly accept them), leaving the middle and the low behind to struggle harder to make up for that missing chunk in revenue. You want that stress? If they leave, you pay MORE.

This might be a hypothetical scenario, but this is actually how Singapore functions, as we are a Socialist Republic. You do know what Socialism means right?

when the government paid growth dividends and gst bonuses, most singaporeans used it to offset their bills. this shows that singaporeans are consuming beyond what their income allows, and are in debt (car, mortgage, utilites etc)

Cars are not necessities. Let's get that straight. Guitars are not necessities. If you do not overspend and save, what bills do you have to clear that needs using up of your extra cash from the govt?

So, if living in Singapore is so hard, and you must pay bills everyday, why was there 3,000 car orders in the last 2 weeks? Especially in a financial crisis?????

another simple example, if everyone one needs $200 simply to survive, what does that $200 mean to someone who is poor compared to someone who is rich? the same dollar is valued differently by people of different income groups.

The poor will spend that $200 to survive. The rich will spend $20,000 to enjoy. See the difference? You think the rich will ONLY spend $200? If so, then unfortunately, you don't know many rich people.

conclusion: rich people benefit
it so happens that: ministers are rich
ministers form the government
the government implemented this policy

This is the part I really have trouble reconciling. Define rich. Do you know who the rich in Singapore are? Do you know how much they earn? Do you know that compared to these Rich people (who buy $300,000 watches from me at a whim) the ministers don't have that much? Yes, to the 3 roomer, the minister is wealthy. But you must have a proper perspective if you wish to judge. According to their income brackets, I can safely tell you that Ministers are NOT considered top earners. They are actually upper middle income earners. You really should see how rich the rich singaporeans are.

And if you really think that Rich people still benefit, then why are there so many rich people (Mr Chua Thiam Po, Mr Oei Hong Leong, Mr Sam Goi, Mr Tommy Goh, The Khoo Foundation, etc etc) with more money than I'd know what to do with still working and not sitting back reaping benefits? Why are they getting their hands dirty in various grassroots groups? Why are they still donating millions and millions of dollars per year to charity? Surely they're too selfish to not share what they've been given?

Also, do these rich people work any less hard than you or I? Is their job any less stressful? Do they deserve every cent they make? Mr Sam Goi, Mr Chua Thiam Po and some others I didn't mention are self-made billionaires. They started from SCRATCH. Are you going to tell them that they don't deserve their successes?

why of course, i'm sure that someone else couldn't have done the same job for lesser pay, and i'm sure that if the same people that form the government today were not there, other people couldn't have done equally as good a job. and of course, everything that has been achieved by this country is the best possible outcome and is the fullest of our country's potential.

and most importantly, the success of this country is built single handedly by the GOVERNMENT, and not WE, THE PEOPLE, who finance everything the government does with taxes, no matter who we vote for during the elections.

Wah... No need to be sarcastic lah. I'm sure things can be better. But can you tell me who should be doing the job? Who in Singapore do you know would fit the governing role better? Or do we stop going on a wild goose chase and secure our foundations first?

The success of this country is built by EVERYONE. and that INCLUDES the government. Why? Does being in power mean they are no longer citizens? Does that mean they have no more contributions to the country, and are just sitting there sucking up money and power?

but it would be WRONG to say that it could NOT have been BETTER

Yes, that is true. I'm sure someone out there could have done a better job. The operative word here is COULD. Meaning we don't know, nor will we ever find out. So, wasting time on hypothetical "COULDS" will not achieve anything.

You know, you speak like 100 other young chaps on the street who believe they have an axe to grind. I urge you to do more research, open your eyes a bit wider, and get a broader perspective. You'll find that axe doesn't exist.

 

[Whitestrat]

in the aftermath of the Mumbai tragedy...if $ 2 million buy for me peace, security and the GASsing to ogle at SOFT buy and sell section, I'd say it's alright by my standards...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good one!:mrgreen:

 

[Ized]

now you know the power of a starving musician....hur hur hur.....

 

[visa]

first of all, I loved your post and completely agree.

The low income people contribute little to none of their income to taxes, yet they consume basic necessities, paying only GST. The middle income consume necessities, playing GST, but they also drive, and pay HDB property taxes. They also pay about 10% of their income in taxes. The 20% of rich are already contributing to 50% of the revenue in taxes. If you tax them any more, they will leave the country (which they absolutely can, and OTHER countries will willingly accept them), leaving the middle and the low behind to struggle harder to make up for that missing chunk in revenue.

While this is true, poor people still do feel the sting from GST on their necessities harder than rich people feel from the taxes on their luxury goods.

Not much that I can suggest we do to correct this. Sucks to be poor. At least in Singapore, we're a fundamentally meritocratic society and if you work hard, you can pull yourself out of the poverty cycle. Rich kids have bankrupted themselves, and poor folks have hit the billions too.

 

[Whitestrat]

Thanks. It feels good to be understood.

Yes, this is something that is not easy to change. Proportions aren't easy to manage. They're not as simple as balancing numbers on a sheet. I think one of the few ways to sort this out would be the GST packages the Govt currently employs. The poorer you are, the more you receive. My grandma who stays in a 3 room HDB got 3 times as much as me, who stays in a private apartment. Is this enough? I don't know.

But you hit something when you emntion that rich kids have bankrupted themselves. This is true man... I've know of some cases where the REALLY rich with huge inheritances went bankrupt after decades of excess, mismanagement and overspending. I mean, how can one logically blow 50 million in 10 years? That's like 5 million per year! What? Every year buy one big house and a few cars? The properties should have appreciated some right? No. Of all things, they lost it GAMBLING! Wah lan eh...

 

[super_punk]

damn whitestrat, you got tooo much time sonn. how do you write such posts of epic proportions that it takes 25 gad-dayum mutha-funkin (im not wilfully self-censoring myself, ive been banned enough already) minutes to read one post then when you're finally done with one you realise there's 7 pages worth of Whitestrat shit to read arrrggghhhhhh...

 

[SecondBest]

What's relevant here is that Whitestrat has a sound argument.
What's unfortunate here is that you haven't understood it too well.

IMO, you should be thanking him for attempting to knock some sense into you.

 

[THOA]

damn whitestrat, you got tooo much time sonn. how do you write such posts of epic proportions that it takes 25 gad-dayum mutha-funkin (im not wilfully self-censoring myself, ive been banned enough already) minutes to read one post then when you're finally done with one you realise there's 7 pages worth of Whitestrat shit to read arrrggghhhhhh...

Okay.

Any thoughts to contribute on this so as to break the monotony of the "Whitestrat shit"?

 

[Ized]

I say...get a Blackie Strat....breaks the monotony!

 

[super_punk]

What's relevant here is that Whitestrat has a sound argument.
What's unfortunate here is that you haven't understood it too well.

IMO, you should be thanking him for attempting to knock some sense into you.

Haha all I said he has alot of shit. Didn't say that it was bad shit now did I?
What's unfortunate here is that you haven't understood me too well.

OKay cool. Just wanted to say that Whitestrat got a lot of posts on this forum is all. Peace everybody let's not flame or fight cos in real life we're all losers and geeks seeing that we try to act tough on SOFT when really we don't know how to get into fistfight outside.

So ignore this post and get on with the topic Whitestrat...we need more of your shit