Lucky Tan makes two interesting points that challenges the prevailing PAP point of view:
- Some people abuse welfare, so we have to make it difficult for people to abuse the system (Lucky Tan said that this makes it more difficult for genuine cases to get help).
- Europe has fallen due to its welfare stage (Lucky Tan said that the problem in Ireland and Spain is due to the bursting of the property bubble).
I agree with Lucky Tan on both points. We have to be careful that Singapore is also riding on a property bubble. While it is still going up, we may feel happy. But, we cannot escape the fate that has happened in many countries.
Read more in the article by Lucky Tan. And share your views here.
11 comments:
Hi Mr Tan. Is there a country that is similar to Singapore in terms of size and population that adopts the type of governance that you advocates?
Reason: I wish to see compare that country with Singapore.
@ cdrom
Don't understand your question. Sorry, can't reply. If you wish to study Hong Kong, there are many areas that they are better off than Singapore - but perhaps some areas they are worse off also.
@ cdrom
In the area of public transport and social welfare. Hong Kong is better off than Singapore. Furthermore, their tax rates are quite attractive also.
I agreed with Lucky Tan on his views. Ms Sim, as I wrote in Lucky Tan's blog is part of that "Group think" where the word "welfare" is taboo.
Yes, Hong Kong once a British colony like Singapore can be a good candidate for comparison.
Funny thing about it, is that Hong Kong, now a part of Mainland China apparently is more social welfare friendly than Singapore !
Thank you, Mr Tan.
I just want to see some empirical data on how Singapore can change for the better if it were to adopt some of your proposals. Which I think you were able to justify in many instances.
The argument for and against State welfare has been debated since its inception. Both sides have convincing evidence to support their case. Personally it is an exercise in futility because we are focusing in the wrong direction.
Without a doubt, welfare is a necessity in civilized and developed countries. To deny welfare to the needy is inhuman. What we need is to develop a culture not to abuse the system. A good example is Japan during the recent tsunami disaster. Japanese queued orderly for aids and did not take more than necessary. When electricity was cut off in a supermarket and the cashiers could not collect money, the citizens instinctively returned all the items they had back onto the shelves. There were no chaos, no looting, no complaints. Citizens from nearby towns, not affected by the tsunami, did not rushed in and abuse the system.
Singapore’s education system should develop such an advance culture. Right now the gap between the rich and poor is getting wider and wider. As long as we have a huge gap between the rich and the poor, Singapore can never inculcate such virtue in society. The leaders are the elite class who are too comfortable to see the plight of the poor.
There will always be abuse but as long as it is minimal, it should be tolerated. It is better than spending 10% of welfare budget to filter out 5% of abuse.
I shall be writing an article on the Canadian welfare system vs Singapore welfare system soon.
Those in the know will sell well ahead of the masses. If property fails to drop, they have the power to engineer a fall. Then they will be there picking up the windfall and low hanging fruits.
Reference Wing Lee Cheong;
"Singapore’s education system should develop such an advance culture."
Values do not develop bottom-up.
Values trickle down from the top.
The ones at the bottom of the hierarchy observe and mimic the behaviour & culture of the successful leaders at the top.
Leaders also promote subordinates who share their values & behaviour.
Please stop dumping more "things to do" on our over-worked education system & teachers.
We do not have a strong welfare system here in Singapore because our leaders believe in "might is right" ... social eugenics if you will.
If you ask for welfare, you are weak and unworthy.
If you are truly worthy, you will just take ... no need to ask.
Someone said that desperate people in financial trouble commit suicide in Singapore. But perhaps this also happens in other countries.
On reflection, I guess Wing Lee Cheong inadvertently hit one of my hot buttons.
If I may clarify.
If Singapore's Education Ministry believes "values" are an important part of a person's education.
Very good.
Start first by running courses on the value of public service for Members of Parliament and the Cabinet.
Next, the courses should then be conducted for the civil service, starting first at the top of the civil service hierarchy.
Finally, introduce the course to teachers and students.
Every course has its own unique language, jargon and paradigms.
No point teaching "the lower levels" first.
When the lower levels try to operationalize the ideas, they will be fraustrated by their leaders who will keep asking "what do you mean by that?"
This is basic human psychology.
Everybody wants to attend a course that the CEO has attended.
No leader wants to attend a course that his subordinate attended first.
Change has to come from the top.
Leaders must lead from the front.
Just for the fun of it. Who in MOE is going to write & conduct that very first flute on Values for the PM & his Cabinet ?
My suggestion is , if the PM is serious, he should conduct that first lecture himself. I assume his choice of Values include Intergrity, Honesty among many others.
Post a Comment