The 10 highest paid politicians in the world
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Too sleepy to respond in length to both of you (Speakup and Stevenson101), but I appreciate the debate that is going on between us here.
We may have disagreements but it's fine. I just want to summarize a few things here:
- How much is enough? Stevenson, you yourself said so, they are happily adding more and more ministers to their list of redundant people. So long as there is no check in place, our leaders will continue to reward themselves needlessly. Think AIG.
- I am not naive to think of ideal leadership. Without ideals, there is no vision. Without vision, there is no progress to implementation. I just feel that our Singaporeans are too programmed to think that there is no other alternative but to pay crazy salaries to ministers to ensure they are not corrupted. But the irony is that these people who hold high posts are supposed to be men of integrity. The way we do it, is like saying that if they are paid any lesser, they will immediately become corrupt. Then, we have chosen the wrong leadership in the 1st place, din we not?
- Sometimes the path less travelled may well be the better option. Our leaders have reached a stage of contentment that they think they have every right to sit there and take the $$$. It's like Newcastle saying that they do not deserve to get relegated because of their proud tradition. So what if you have a proud tradition, or if you have done a lot for Singapore in the past? The past is the past. We appreciate the past, but it does not mean that automatically, you can continue to sit on that position for the future.
- Speakup, I too like you, appreciate the country we are in. But it does not mean we make compromises just because the past was all glory.
- Negative policies: ERP gantries, GST upped to support the poor (huh???), COE, etc.
- Commendable move: Job Credit, commendable, unsure if it's very useful, but at least we don't dump $$$ direct into companies like AIG without any control.
Either way, continue discussion tomorrow
Think i'd just respond to the portion that directly refer to me. I am still part of the working class after all!
My issue is not the salary itself, my main issue is the increasing amount of positions, especially when they're redundant and serve no understandable purposes.
I'm fine with the positions of Minister Mentor and Senior Minister if they're a 1 time only thing for LKY and GCT. But the recent appointment of Jayakumar to SM and ` more bloody DPM is obvious they intend to furthur increase the amount of useless positions, that's my main beef. The world is already changing so fast, continuing to retain the old guards is going to stop new blood from revitalising the system.
Perhaps your work in IT/Financial industry make you interact with people that's more pragmatic/realistic and regard idealism as a joke.
But i work in the creative/game industry where Idealism is the motto here. However, being realistic in your planning and not following your slightest whimp are the traits that is lacking here. Where the guys in charge of you seems to hop on the latest technology and cool graphics but ignoring whether it can be integrated into the system, or even worth the effort.
So basically i have seen the other end of the spectrum and do not fully believe in ideals and visions, feeling no matter what it still needs to be anchored by reality.
Personally i think reality is the abused child here, not ideals and visions. The current stituation is that the system believes in the Ideals and Visions of high pay to retain talent and prevent corruption.
But the reality is that corruption is more than just bribery. Sitting there high up in a system where there is no constant renewal will create the same rotting system as one filled with bribery.
The problem is that the anti PAP camp here wants to travel on the route more commonly travelled, that which is liberal democracy.
But i find that system even more offending because i believe that Engineers and Scientists should be the ones being appointed into government. Liberal democracy favours lawyers and movie stars because of the fancy speeches they make and how appealing they look.
They would ignore numbers and facts simply because they are not schooled in it. The PAP government may have oppressive, but at least people who understand numbers get to be in position. I'm sure with your working experience you would meet people who can spin off really great presentations but anyone with enough experience can poke enough holes in it to build a fly swatter.
However, these people are the ones that get the funding and authorisation. These people are the ones getting credit and adoration. And these are the people who could potentially waste all the money on feel good schemes and destroy our long term prosperity.
Maybe i'm just a pessimist, but i do believe that it is a valid concern. Democracy is far harder to upkeep than a "despotic" country because every citizen would have to have the responsibility to fend off the charlatans and demogagues.
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
Think i'd just respond to the portion that directly refer to me. I am still part of the working class after all!
My issue is not the salary itself, my main issue is the increasing amount of positions, especially when they're redundant and serve no understandable purposes.
I'm fine with the positions of Minister Mentor and Senior Minister if they're a 1 time only thing for LKY and GCT. But the recent appointment of Jayakumar to SM and ` more bloody DPM is obvious they intend to furthur increase the amount of useless positions, that's my main beef. The world is already changing so fast, continuing to retain the old guards is going to stop new blood from revitalising the system.
Perhaps your work in IT/Financial industry make you interact with people that's more pragmatic/realistic and regard idealism as a joke.
But i work in the creative/game industry where Idealism is the motto here. However, being realistic in your planning and not following your slightest whimp are the traits that is lacking here. Where the guys in charge of you seems to hop on the latest technology and cool graphics but ignoring whether it can be integrated into the system, or even worth the effort.
So basically i have seen the other end of the spectrum and do not fully believe in ideals and visions, feeling no matter what it still needs to be anchored by reality.
Personally i think reality is the abused child here, not ideals and visions. The current stituation is that the system believes in the Ideals and Visions of high pay to retain talent and prevent corruption.
But the reality is that corruption is more than just bribery. Sitting there high up in a system where there is no constant renewal will create the same rotting system as one filled with bribery.
The problem is that the anti PAP camp here wants to travel on the route more commonly travelled, that which is liberal democracy.
But i find that system even more offending because i believe that Engineers and Scientists should be the ones being appointed into government. Liberal democracy favours lawyers and movie stars because of the fancy speeches they make and how appealing they look.
They would ignore numbers and facts simply because they are not schooled in it. The PAP government may have oppressive, but at least people who understand numbers get to be in position. I'm sure with your working experience you would meet people who can spin off really great presentations but anyone with enough experience can poke enough holes in it to build a fly swatter.
However, these people are the ones that get the funding and authorisation. These people are the ones getting credit and adoration. And these are the people who could potentially waste all the money on feel good schemes and destroy our long term prosperity.
Maybe i'm just a pessimist, but i do believe that it is a valid concern. Democracy is far harder to upkeep than a "despotic" country because every citizen would have to have the responsibility to fend off the charlatans and demogagues.
There is always a place for the visionary and the implementer. Oracle is strong in vision but weak in implementation, whereas SAP is strong in implementation, but weak in vision.
Both are just as important. You cannot replace one over the other. Just as you cannot go 100% (or 90%) pro-business and neglect the citizens' direct concerns. I know PAP thinks that the moment they are pro-business, it would open up opportunities for citizens, but I would say they are also weak in implementation (just look at how Foreigners just come in without much control)
And democracy, is, well, democracy. It has its benefits and its flaws. However, democracy to date is still the most suitable tool in terms of balancing the concerns of many different camps. To allow one party to go without a check on its power (absolute power corrupts absolutely) results in endless unjustifiable rewarding.
I have issues with the pay, because just how they justify their pay (by pegging to the private sector, just as how some countries tried to peg their currency to the US dollar artificially) is not realistic, and expands the divide between the haves and the have-nots.
It's the same as you having issues with the number of ministers in the cabinet. Just why do we have so many ministers for such a small country? MM, SM(with an "s" now), PM, DPMs, Ministers, 2nd Ministers for ministries, ministers in the PM office (high-class teaboy and teagirl), ministers of state.
The way their pay goes up, and the increasing no. of ministers are all from the same root cause. The lack of a check in power, allowing them to continuously rewarding needlessly.
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Okay after like half a day and a night being away from the forums, at least i see some common ground established between soul_rage and i (dude the discussion yesterday was painful lol but yes fruitful nonetheless ;)) and of course stevenson who just joined into this intellectual discussion too (welcome :)).
Yes soul_rage i particularly like your point about appreciating 'the country we are in. But it does not mean we make compromises just because the past was all glory.' I believe there is a need to renew the faith that the people have in the leaders. Many may not agree but as far as im concerned, i dont see Singapore sliding back where we come from. Instead i see our economy growing better to face tomorrow's challenges. Perhaps the lay person still feel left out from the plans of the government and that they arent taking care of us enough. But things i mentioned earlier bout the safety and such about your country are still being maintained today. Maybe our leaders can do more to improve the lives of the people and make more pro-people changes. But honestly i still do not get a sense of what most of you here want when asking for 'better' policies maybe you all can mention bout that.
Using high pay to deter politicians from corruption is sound based on the concept of opportunity costs. By increasing their pay, you are increasing the opportunity costs of losing the job. Rationally people would not risk $2 milllion to gain $50k (either they are damn poor with math or they are just plain stupid). The odds are not right. For people who play poker and other gambling games you will understand the significance of odds. This is one of the reasons why i support the high pay of politicians. Maybe to some greed is insatiable and no matter what you pay the politicians they are prone to corruption. True. Its just like no matter how harsh the penalty for murder is, people still kill. But by raising the pay, you lower the probability. Thats all we can do really, we cannot read minds, we cannot constantly supervise our politicians. So all we can do is to put the right incentives in place and hope they respond to them.
What im definitely critical of is the unnecessarily many minstrial posts as brought up by stevenson. While it is necessary to retain many 'brilliant minds' ( i know this is contentious) in the government, i agree there should be more forced retirements and allow these people to flex their brains in the private sector to contribute more directly to the economy as they close in on retirement age. It makes no sense to keep someone for 2 over decades drawing high pay and still expect him to churn out the same quality of work as he was in his younger days.
-
I think your final idea is good. It's similar to what George Washington did when he was the President of US. The very one thing he did (and thus far became the most important in US history) was to put into the constitution that the president cannot hold office for more than 2 terms. This allows for consistent renewal, and the prevention of individuals tightening their grip on power.
I am always for the renewal process. People who have passed their prime should step aside and provide an advisory role, and allow the young blood to grow and mature. For info, I don't see MM Lee as stepping aside. Most major decisions still go through him.
The other, as you mentioned, is about better policies. Let's start with my pet issue, the GST, which is increased to 7% for the crazy reason of providing help to the poor. To date, I don't see how that works. Tax the poor to help the poor?
Why don't we do something more adequate, like for example, my suggestion to place public transportation under a non-profit org (or a cooperative) to run, instead of putting it in the hands of private organizations.The objective of the public transport is to provide for affordable and cheap mode of transportation. Whereas the objective of the private org is to maximize profits. These 2 objectives are what I meant about pro-business clashing against pro-people. There is really not much incentive for our transport operators NOT to raise fares.Don't talk to me about PTC. The people sitting on the PTC have conflicts of interests, because they have representatives from SMRT and SBSTransit.
Why not put public transportation under the control of a non-profit org so that profits are no longer a focus, but the focus is on affordable transport? This would definitely benefit the poor. And at the end of the year, any surpluses from transportation can be used to directly give to the poor. I am sure Singaporeans won't mind distributing such surpluses to the poor. It would be likened to us donating cash to charity.
Wouldn't the above help the poor, much much better than the silly increment of GST? -
Interesting logic, by encouraging politicians not to be corrupt, we give them higher pay so that they won't accept bribes, instead of enacting tougher laws and more stringent monitoring. The salaries of our politicians are not low by global standards even before the increase.
Maybe we should start giving out large sums of money to thieves, robbers, arms dealer and drug traffickers, so that they can desist in their illegal activities.
What's the point of having CPIB and anti-corruption laws? We should start paying civil servants and politicians their maximum annual bribe amount.
-
Thanks for recognizing my point. I think this kind of healthy exchanges is what motivates me to keep posting despite all the intellectual skirmishes which i find particularly enjoyable. I think you cant blame MM too much. HIs attachment to Singapore (or dogmatism whatever people wanna call it) is like a parent to child. When a child has matured at 16-18, he craves freedom from control. Yet a parent despite recognising this fact is still very protective of the child. Afterall they raised them and loved them and gave all they got to make sure the child grows up strong and independent. Such humane feelings and to a certain extent irrationality, is innate to humans and you cant blame MM if you actually agree with the parallels im trying to draw. Im not hoping he dies soon, cause i honestly think the short term impact on our political and economic stability would be kind of catastrophic (you dont have to agree with me on this). But when he really does pass away, I think we can expect the rise of a new era. Possibly at that time we can see greater changes and more daring moves away from the shadows of our MM's style of governance.
Sorry I have to disagree fervently with your suggestion of putting public transport into the hands of a non-profit organisation, akin to a move to nationalise the industry. I am a strong believer of the lasseiz-faire market system and such a move whether you believe it or not is going to increase the costs of public transport, in ways not conspicuous to you. There is quote that goes 'If you think healthcare in the US is expensive now, wait till you see it when its free'. This is counter-intuitive but upon close inspection very true. Most economists and economies have acknowledged the importance of a free and capitalist market system. When a company is privatized, profit incentives is a very real and reliable mechanism to get the best out of the company. They have a strong motivation to cut costs and provide the service at most competitive prices to the citizens. This may not be immediately apparant to you. Take the NS medical services for example. It is free right? Thus it is cheap. Right? You cant get much further than that. The inefficiency arising from giving a service free cannot be seen by the naked-eye of the lay person. The reason why poly clinics are always crowded and you wait months to go to the MMI (Military Medical Institute) for specialists appointments is precisely because there are no incentives to increase efficiency. Perhaps a non-profit organization/nationalized organisation can serve consumers at a fraction of what we are paying now. But there are other costs apart from monetary ones. Have you thought of the waiting time? The quality of service? These are important aspects of service apart from just the price you pay.
Thus the conclusion is that the more rational thing to do is to introduce competition to the sector just like what they are going to do for the bus service industry. The first theorem of fundamental welfare economics state that the most efficient outcome is one that is borne out of a competitive market. That state of equilibrium is what maximizes the welfare for society not only in terms of monetary costs but other aspects of efficiency as well.
And yes honestly I have no idea why the GST was increased idea. i wouldnt say the government did nothing for the poor since they did give out handouts and other kind of benefits (vouchers and stuff is it? im not too sure bout those cant really rmb) at the beginning when it was first implemented. All i can say is that taxes are supposed to be of a redistributive nature. Perhaps what is neccessary now is more amenities and subsidies for the less well-off to achieve a truly distributive effect.
-
You got your reasoning all wrong bynari. Clearing you do not understand the concept of opportunity costs. The freedom 'given' to potential criminals, is already their renumeration. That freedom is the opportunity cost to be incurred in the case of a crime committed as they are robbed of the freedom since they have to be confined in jail. More stringent laws for murder and kidnap is to serve as a greater deterrance as it increases the opportunity costs for these potential criminals, by dishing out punishments such as the death sentence. Under rational conditions a criminal would only commit a crime if he view his potential benefit to outweigh his costs and often it is those who are really desperate.
Yes laws are important but ask yourself how reliable or how difficult it is to monitor every action of criminals or for that matter politicians. All that we can do under any judiciary system is to set the right incentives or disincentives for the rational being to do their own calculations.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
oi auntie, you like calling everyone uncle hor, must be very young hor?
Well, why I am so vocal about my opinions is because I care for this country. If I don't care, I would just shut up. Seriously, as I said, I could just shut up coz I have very strong earning power, but I somehow still have that overriding urge to raise my opinions because I feel the need to. I don't raise just to this forum, I raise it to my PAP friends in the hope they can bring it up.
Calling you Uncle is a respect, if not, call you Ah Lau kok kok u want or not?? Funny leh, call Uncle cannot meh, Singapore teaches courtesy and to be gracious, so we young ones start to respect the older ones, but you peoples dun appreciate it, ok lor, call you ah siao lor.Woei ah siao, it is good that you care for the country, but dun be too extreme of thinking your own way, whether PAP is gd or not so gd in your perspectives, they sure had done some popular decision and some unpopular ones. But we are taught that everything is down to the baseline, bosses do that, the bottom line is a surplus or deficit will determine his next decision and the organisation health. In the context of a country like Singapore, so far nobody is really complaining, voices there might be, feedback there will be, but nobody is making a ruse of anything yet. A mere 5 to 10% dissatisfaction in the bottomline is good result in term where political science is concern, and % of votes given during election do provide a good mandate to our govt.
Caring for a nation does not mean you need to remove or condemn the ruling govt, protesting will result in ugly scene that might hurt the public and become a laughing stock for other countries. If you really Care for the nation, join the PAP, be a part of it, from there the govt be more willing to listen to you during their PAP or cabinet meeting, your contributions will be well known, and who knows, maybe one day, you become our next PM...by then, remember me hor, i dun mind be your secretary. I think i am going to be a MP for my joo chiat here, the current MP is like a lazy bum
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Thanks for recognizing my point. I think this kind of healthy exchanges is what motivates me to keep posting despite all the intellectual skirmishes which i find particularly enjoyable. I think you cant blame MM too much. HIs attachment to Singapore (or dogmatism whatever people wanna call it) is like a parent to child. When a child has matured at 16-18, he craves freedom from control. Yet a parent despite recognising this fact is still very protective of the child. Afterall they raised them and loved them and gave all they got to make sure the child grows up strong and independent. Such humane feelings and to a certain extent irrationality, is innate to humans and you cant blame MM if you actually agree with the parallels im trying to draw. Im not hoping he dies soon, cause i honestly think the short term impact on our political and economic stability would be kind of catastrophic (you dont have to agree with me on this). But when he really does pass away, I think we can expect the rise of a new era. Possibly at that time we can see greater changes and more daring moves away from the shadows of our MM's style of governance.
There will come a time when the child must 'rebel' against the parent, and then demonstrate to the parent that it's time to let him fly.
Being too lovey-dovey to a kid is detrimental to a kid. Just as leaders who refuse to give up their power way past their prime hurts the country by holding it back from its full potential. Though I feel you can't compare this way, coz most leaders who hold power are thinking for themselves.
As for MM Lee, I pray he will be with us until at least after the global mess. The reason is, I am unsure how experienced our current generation of leaders are, since he has played a major hand on decisions made even today. Best this mess is over, and then our current generation of leaders can grow in a less painful environment.
Of coz, I am hoping for a new public holiday...
-
Originally posted by bynari:
Interesting logic, by encouraging politicians not to be corrupt, we give them higher pay so that they won't accept bribes, instead of enacting tougher laws and more stringent monitoring. The salaries of our politicians are not low by global standards even before the increase.
Maybe we should start giving out large sums of money to thieves, robbers, arms dealer and drug traffickers, so that they can desist in their illegal activities.
What's the point of having CPIB and anti-corruption laws? We should start paying civil servants and politicians their maximum annual bribe amount.
CPIB and anti-corruption laws exist in all countries...the Maslow laws of hierrachy apply here, once a person, say a Minsiter is satisfied with his paid and power and position, he will perform to his very best to achieve the next level and so on. He will not do funny things to discredit himself and the CPIB is alway there watching.
Security is not necessary to be there just to catch people, but its present, laws and orders will further get enhanced. Just like parking a traffic police bike on the shoulder of a road will slow the cars in the highway down to it proper speed limit.
Comparing Master and PhD holders with thieves and robbers is a totally diffferent perspectives. Just like me, i cannot compare myself to international fashion models, but maybe Media Corp female stars, i still can win them. Both in term of look and body.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Calling you Uncle is a respect, if not, call you Ah Lau kok kok u want or not?? Funny leh, call Uncle cannot meh, Singapore teaches courtesy and to be gracious, so we young ones start to respect the older ones, but you peoples dun appreciate it, ok lor, call you ah siao lor.Woei ah siao, it is good that you care for the country, but dun be too extreme of thinking your own way, whether PAP is gd or not so gd in your perspectives, they sure had done some popular decision and some unpopular ones. But we are taught that everything is down to the baseline, bosses do that, the bottom line is a surplus or deficit will determine his next decision and the organisation health. In the context of a country like Singapore, so far nobody is really complaining, voices there might be, feedback there will be, but nobody is making a ruse of anything yet. A mere 5 to 10% dissatisfaction in the bottomline is good result in term where political science is concern, and % of votes given during election do provide a good mandate to our govt.
Caring for a nation does not mean you need to remove or condemn the ruling govt, protesting will result in ugly scene that might hurt the public and become a laughing stock for other countries. If you really Care for the nation, join the PAP, be a part of it, from there the govt be more willing to listen to you during their PAP or cabinet meeting, your contributions will be well known, and who knows, maybe one day, you become our next PM...by then, remember me hor, i dun mind be your secretary. I think i am going to be a MP for my joo chiat here, the current MP is like a lazy bum
Then call you auntie is to respect you lah, or Ah Ma also not bad? Come on, I am not so much older than you, I only just had my 2nd niece last year.
And, it's 33.3% people not happy with the govt, not 5-10%. And again you are tagging corporate mentality to a nation's leadership, which still is not agreeable with me.
Anyway, unlike certain extremists in the forum, I am not calling for removal of the ruling govt, but I am calling for instilling more opposition members so that there is more checks in place, which will prevent PAP from rewarding themselves endlessly and needlessly, and also learn to listen more to the people
I don't deny that the PAP has done a good job (corporate-wise), but it leaves much to be desired in terms of welfare to the people.
You can forget about me joining politics. I have decided when my friends approached me 2 years back not to get involved in politics. But I don't mind giving them my ideas for them to think through. So you have to try to be someone else's secretary :)
-
Totally agree with you on your latest post about holding on to a country past the prime period and stuff. hahah and who wouldnt like a public holiday but yes definitely useful to have him around under the economic turbulence is over. what i can sense from you here is that you afterall respect his presence and prowess as pioneer of our country and the kind of influence that you believe he can still exert over our economy and ties on the global stage. This at least is some change in tone and show that you afterall have some faith in our politicians, especially MM
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Sorry I have to disagree fervently with your suggestion of putting public transport into the hands of a non-profit organisation, akin to a move to nationalise the industry. I am a strong believer of the lasseiz-faire market system and such a move whether you believe it or not is going to increase the costs of public transport, in ways not conspicuous to you. There is quote that goes 'If you think healthcare in the US is expensive now, wait till you see it when its free'. This is counter-intuitive but upon close inspection very true. Most economists and economies have acknowledged the importance of a free and capitalist market system. When a company is privatized, profit incentives is a very real and reliable mechanism to get the best out of the company. They have a strong motivation to cut costs and provide the service at most competitive prices to the citizens. This may not be immediately apparant to you. Take the NS medical services for example. It is free right? Thus it is cheap. Right? You cant get much further than that. The inefficiency arising from giving a service free cannot be seen by the naked-eye of the lay person. The reason why poly clinics are always crowded and you wait months to go to the MMI (Military Medical Institute) for specialists appointments is precisely because there are no incentives to increase efficiency. Perhaps a non-profit organization/nationalized organisation can serve consumers at a fraction of what we are paying now. But there are other costs apart from monetary ones. Have you thought of the waiting time? The quality of service? These are important aspects of service apart from just the price you pay.
Thus the conclusion is that the more rational thing to do is to introduce competition to the sector just like what they are going to do for the bus service industry. The first theorem of fundamental welfare economics state that the most efficient outcome is one that is borne out of a competitive market. That state of equilibrium is what maximizes the welfare for society not only in terms of monetary costs but other aspects of efficiency as well.
And yes honestly I have no idea why the GST was increased idea. i wouldnt say the government did nothing for the poor since they did give out handouts and other kind of benefits (vouchers and stuff is it? im not too sure bout those cant really rmb) at the beginning when it was first implemented. All i can say is that taxes are supposed to be of a redistributive nature. Perhaps what is neccessary now is more amenities and subsidies for the less well-off to achieve a truly distributive effect.
Your argument is sound, except for a few counts.
Most importantly, introducing competition to our public transportation is not a good idea, because you can see that our transport operators collaborate to ensure that they remain profitable. There is not much competition in terms of taking a bus from Toa Payoh to a specific part of Ang Mo Kio, after all, the division of territory results in SMRT buses serving the north mostly, while other areas are served by SBSTransit. Therefore, there is almost no competition per-se.
Competition only benefits for competitive products, such as electronic products, because they are almost perfect substitutes of one another, and companies must consistently upgrade in order to keep their consumers. This serves as beneficial to both consumers and the general progress of technology.
Some of the non-profit organizations these days are run like a corporation, with able management and great leadership. Therefore I have to disagree with you that making public transport operators non-profitable = drop in service, rise in costs, etc. Some of these organizations are even more able to keep things profitable than profit organizations. You might like to study more about non-profit organizations before making a hasty view such as the one above.
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Totally agree with you on your latest post about holding on to a country past the prime period and stuff. hahah and who wouldnt like a public holiday but yes definitely useful to have him around under the economic turbulence is over. what i can sense from you here is that you afterall respect his presence and prowess as pioneer of our country and the kind of influence that you believe he can still exert over our economy and ties on the global stage. This at least is some change in tone and show that you afterall have some faith in our politicians, especially MM
Of course I respect his PAST, but not his present.
He has become more of an obstacle to our country's future now.
There is also not much need to recognize his achievements, because
- He reminds us consistently about it himself
- He rewards himself sufficiently for his achievements
Again, I just emphasize here, I do not have 0% faith in our politicians. I do believe they are good corporate-wise. But this is NOT about running a corporation. This is about serving a country
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
You got your reasoning all wrong bynari. Clearing you do not understand the concept of opportunity costs. The freedom 'given' to potential criminals, is already their renumeration. That freedom is the opportunity cost to be incurred in the case of a crime committed as they are robbed of the freedom since they have to be confined in jail. More stringent laws for murder and kidnap is to serve as a greater deterrance as it increases the opportunity costs for these potential criminals, by dishing out punishments such as the death sentence. Under rational conditions a criminal would only commit a crime if he view his potential benefit to outweigh his costs and often it is those who are really desperate.
Yes laws are important but ask yourself how reliable or how difficult it is to monitor every action of criminals or for that matter politicians. All that we can do under any judiciary system is to set the right incentives or disincentives for the rational being to do their own calculations.
Ermmm.....isn't increasing the penalties for corrupt politicians concomitantly increasing their opportunity cost of committing corruption also.
Maybe we should implement death penalty for corrupt politicians (like China), that would certainly lower the level of corruption. But why isn't this avenue used? It's because if I have the reins of power, I'd rather pay myself more than to enact laws to keep myself in check, an issue of moral hazard. If you are in power, would you pay yourself more or enact laws to restrict yourself?
Clearly the interest of Singaporeans was not taken into account, but rather personal greed and self interest has taken over.It's difficult to monitor every would be criminal, but it isn't difficult to monitor a dozen Ministers.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
There will come a time when the child must 'rebel' against the parent, and then demonstrate to the parent that it's time to let him fly.
Being too lovey-dovey to a kid is detrimental to a kid. Just as leaders who refuse to give up their power way past their prime hurts the country by holding it back from its full potential. Though I feel you can't compare this way, coz most leaders who hold power are thinking for themselves.
As for MM Lee, I pray he will be with us until at least after the global mess. The reason is, I am unsure how experienced our current generation of leaders are, since he has played a major hand on decisions made even today. Best this mess is over, and then our current generation of leaders can grow in a less painful environment.
Of coz, I am hoping for a new public holiday...
At the age of 80++ and still working for the best of Singapore, what is there to complain anymore, like it or not, money is no more his issue, he can lives the rest of his life without spending a single cents. But as a nation founder, a builder, a creator, a man who struggle against all odds to be what it is today, u tell me, if you are him, are u going to give up and see the nation you built go down into the drain before your very eyes?? It will be very painful.
Therefore we must understand a man ego and his ambitious, he is a chinese, like it or not, chinese tends believe in good for the generations to come. His caring for singapore and wanted to see that singapore go on flourishing even after he is gone is something to be admire.
Sometime when i go for my beauti pedicure..manicure or facial and slimming therapy, i just ask myself while relaxing, if without this one man who rule this place, would i be enjoying myself here, or would i be better off, or would i be worst off. Then i asked my gal frens who accompanied me. They replied "U Siao liao ar?? why ask such question, relax and enjoy lah, let them do their jobs and we just do ours" So there goes my answer. Be contended
-
Maybe we should implement death penalty for corrupt politicians (like China), that would certainly lower the level of corruption. But why isn't this avenue used? It's because if I have the reins of power, I'd rather pay myself more than to enact laws to keep myself in check, an issue of moral hazard. If you are in power, would you pay yourself more or enact laws to restrict yourself?
Clearly the interest of Singaporeans was not
taken into account, but rather personal greed and self interest has
taken over.It's difficult to monitor every would be criminal, but it isn't difficult to monitor a dozen Ministers.
Yes perhaps it is possible to monitor the ministers but who would do it? And how? checking every bank transaction? every email sent? Any idea how much resources would be wasted on all these? Besides having a death penalty for corrupt politicians is like giving you 24 strokes of the cane for petty theft. Sure, its easy to make every crime liable for death penalty but that would not be fair as the punishment must be in tandem with the respective crime committed. Im not a law student so i cant argue on the technicalities of why certain laws are as such and whether they work or are they necessary. What i can say is based on economic reasoning that simply deterrence works on the basis of rationality and opportunity costs. It is unfair to accredit the failure to impose a death penalty on themselves as out of greed. Besides there is a parliament and the court to go through. Laws dont just get written by one person.
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Yes perhaps it is possible to monitor the ministers but who would do it? And how? checking every bank transaction? every email sent? Any idea how much resources would be wasted on all these? Besides having a death penalty for corrupt politicians is like giving you 24 strokes of the cane for petty theft. Sure, its easy to make every crime liable for death penalty but that would not be fair as the punishment must be in tandem with the respective crime committed. Im not a law student so i cant argue on the technicalities of why certain laws are as such and whether they work or are they necessary. What i can say is based on economic reasoning that simply deterrence works on the basis of rationality and opportunity costs. It is unfair to accredit the failure to impose a death penalty on themselves as out of greed. Besides there is a parliament and the court to go through. Laws dont just get written by one person.
Put in an independent auditing committee for certain aspects of our government.
Just as what private corporations do to ensure good corporate governance, we should perhaps have an independent committee to perform a check on our leaders. (since there is no opposition in place to do that)
This would minimize unjustifiable rewarding to their basic nature of greed.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Then call you auntie is to respect you lah, or Ah Ma also not bad? Come on, I am not so much older than you, I only just had my 2nd niece last year.
And, it's 33.3% people not happy with the govt, not 5-10%. And again you are tagging corporate mentality to a nation's leadership, which still is not agreeable with me.
Anyway, unlike certain extremists in the forum, I am not calling for removal of the ruling govt, but I am calling for instilling more opposition members so that there is more checks in place, which will prevent PAP from rewarding themselves endlessly and needlessly, and also learn to listen more to the people
I don't deny that the PAP has done a good job (corporate-wise), but it leaves much to be desired in terms of welfare to the people.
You can forget about me joining politics. I have decided when my friends approached me 2 years back not to get involved in politics. But I don't mind giving them my ideas for them to think through. So you have to try to be someone else's secretary :)
Me 20 going 21yo, so if you are older, me call you Uncle, if you are younger me call you Siao didi. By the way, when you call me aunty, i did complain so much mah, just that i look down on my front and see that mine is still very premature to be an aunty.That 33% is the vote, not unhappiness,..if you do a survey on the gross happiness of the people, GHP, u may get a different answer.
Peoples all over the world is always complaining about their govt, normal if Singaporeans is doing that, u will learn that in pyschology that peoples tend to blame their rulers for this and that...there is no pad in the back for politicians, but on the hindsight, life goes on, and deep down each individual, we should agree that what our govt did is so far so good.
-
Originally posted by bynari:
Ermmm.....isn't increasing the penalties for corrupt politicians concomitantly increasing their opportunity cost of committing corruption also.
Maybe we should implement death penalty for corrupt politicians (like China), that would certainly lower the level of corruption. But why isn't this avenue used? It's because if I have the reins of power, I'd rather pay myself more than to enact laws to keep myself in check, an issue of moral hazard. If you are in power, would you pay yourself more or enact laws to restrict yourself?
Clearly the interest of Singaporeans was not taken into account, but rather personal greed and self interest has taken over.It's difficult to monitor every would be criminal, but it isn't difficult to monitor a dozen Ministers.
Capital punishment will create further havoc in our laws. Corruption is a white crime. If China wanted to execute its corrupted officals, by all means, they needed it to deter massive corruption, and some are just fall guy to show to the people that the govt is doing their jobs, unlike ours, which hardly get a corrupted Minister, do you think it is viable to death sentence?? -
Most importantly, introducing competition to our public transportation is not a good idea, because you can see that our transport operators collaborate to ensure that they remain profitable. There is not much competition in terms of taking a bus from Toa Payoh to a specific part of Ang Mo Kio, after all, the division of territory results in SMRT buses serving the north mostly, while other areas are served by SBSTransit. Therefore, there is almost no competition per-se.
Agreed. Cartels or oligopolies or conspiracy of some sort would inevitably lead to greater inefficiency and greater exploitation of the masses. Adam Smith recognized that 'people of the same trade seldom meet for merriment or diversion but their meeting always ends in some conspiracy against the public or some contrivence to raise prices.' This is certainly true and if its happening then there is definitely measures to be taken to stop anti-competitive behaviour which is undoubtedly detrimental. This however should not discredit the idea of liberalising the market but rather we should correct the areas of market failure to make sure the benefits come out as planned.
Competition only benefits for competitive products, such as electronic products, because they are almost perfect substitutes of one another, and companies must consistently upgrade in order to keep their consumers. This serves as beneficial to both consumers and the general progress of technology.
This is not true because for markets whereby there are non-homogenous products, product differentiation account for a large part of competitive strategies. In terms of public transport such differentiation can manifest itself as more comfortable seats, shorter waiting time etc so it should still yield a beneficial result from a competitive environment.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Me 20 going 21yo, so if you are older, me call you Uncle, if you are younger me call you Siao didi. By the way, when you call me aunty, i did complain so much mah, just that i look down on my front and see that mine is still very premature to be an aunty.That 33% is the vote, not unhappiness,..if you do a survey on the gross happiness of the people, GHP, u may get a different answer.
Peoples all over the world is always complaining about their govt, normal if Singaporeans is doing that, u will learn that in pyschology that peoples tend to blame their rulers for this and that...there is no pad in the back for politicians, but on the hindsight, life goes on, and deep down each individual, we should agree that what our govt did is so far so good.
Yea you very young lah. Am 11 years your senior.
Uncle and Aunty very unglam. I still (hoping) am a young trendy yuppie.
Yes lah, everyone complains. It's normal. But still, I stick to my argument that they are too overpaid, and there are too many of them. Reduce the numbers they have, and you still have your good education.
Am getting interested actually to visit your pub one day just to see how your business is doing. It would be a learning experience for me as well on how a young lady like you is so 'garang'.
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Agreed. Cartels or oligopolies or conspiracy of some sort would inevitably lead to greater inefficiency and greater exploitation of the masses. Adam Smith recognized that 'people of the same trade seldom meet for merriment or diversion but their meeting always ends in some conspiracy against the public or some contrivence to raise prices.' This is certainly true and if its happening then there is definitely measures to be taken to stop anti-competitive behaviour which is undoubtedly detrimental. This however should not discredit the idea of liberalising the market but rather we should correct the areas of market failure to make sure the benefits come out as planned.
This is not true because for markets whereby there are non-homogenous products, product differentiation account for a large part of competitive strategies. In terms of public transport such differentiation can manifest itself as more comfortable seats, shorter waiting time etc so it should still yield a beneficial result from a competitive environment.
So shouldn't you look at the prospect of a non-profit organization, assuming it's run sufficiently well in terms of management, and is more focused on the other objective, keeping transport costs affordable?
I said almost perfect. Everything is different, because product differentiation is a psychological form of differentiation. At times, a product is judged to be better than another due to marketing efforts. But most times, competition spurs improvements in terms of per-dollar-return for consumers', and for the general progress of the sector.
However, we are talking about real private sector here. Again, for public transportation, I feel its different, and indeed, I believe there is a cartel here, which is something like an open secret (everyone knows, but cannot say)
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Yea you very young lah. Am 11 years your senior.
Uncle and Aunty very unglam. I still (hoping) am a young trendy yuppie.
Yes lah, everyone complains. It's normal. But still, I stick to my argument that they are too overpaid, and there are too many of them. Reduce the numbers they have, and you still have your good education.
Am getting interested actually to visit your pub one day just to see how your business is doing. It would be a learning experience for me as well on how a young lady like you is so 'garang'.
5 years my senior
means I hv only 5 more years to achieve 5 figures :(
-
Originally posted by speakup-:
Yes perhaps it is possible to monitor the ministers but who would do it? And how? checking every bank transaction? every email sent? Any idea how much resources would be wasted on all these? Besides having a death penalty for corrupt politicians is like giving you 24 strokes of the cane for petty theft. Sure, its easy to make every crime liable for death penalty but that would not be fair as the punishment must be in tandem with the respective crime committed. Im not a law student so i cant argue on the technicalities of why certain laws are as such and whether they work or are they necessary. What i can say is based on economic reasoning that simply deterrence works on the basis of rationality and opportunity costs. It is unfair to accredit the failure to impose a death penalty on themselves as out of greed. Besides there is a parliament and the court to go through. Laws dont just get written by one person.
If corruption is impossible to discover, then cases like Suharto, Thaksin, Chen Sui Bian, CPC members and Abe government would probably have never been exposed. You need expertise in this area to be able to do a credible job, obviously you don't expect me to tell you how to design a nuclear reactor if I don't have knowledge of nuclear physics.
I am not sure about you equating government corruption to petty theft, what's next, you going to equate drug dealers to chewing gum peddlers? In fact the effects of corruption is more widespread than a drug pusher selling to an addict, it affects the lives of every Singaporean.
e.g. A Minister taking bribe for accepting non-performing weapons in the military, the malfunctioning weapons can cause death to lots of servicemen and could even cause an unfavourable outcome in a war. The effects of a drug pusher is just on the individual itself and probably on afew victims of robberies till he is caught. What about a Minister accepting bribes to accept lower quality construction materials for public housing, if the building collapses how many lives are affected.
The laws in Singapore isn't actually humane like other developed countries, where death penalties are abolished, we have death penalties for drug addicts, why not death penalties for corrupt politicians. Who in the world imposes law to curtail himself for the benefit of his citizens? Adverse selection in the government?
Laws don't get written by just "One Person"? I think you lack knowledge with regards to the general history of Singapore.