ValueBuddies.com : Value Investing Forum - Singapore, Hong Kong, U.S.

Friday, November 01, 2013 (copied fr tan kinlian web)

Singapore is an affluent country. Based on GDP per capita, she is one of the richest countries in the world.

Hence logically, one would expect all her citizens to live comfortably, well above the poverty line (wherever that might be since it has never been officially defined). Yet ironically, there is a small group of Singaporeans who are living in “poverty”. With the country’s vast wealth, both in terms of revenue and savings, it should not be a financial issue to bring this group out of poverty. Further, the government has implemented the “minimum sum” and “CPF Life” schemes which are designed to ensure her citizens would have sufficient savings to spend on necessities during retirement. So it is not as though the government is not aware of the amount required for sustainable living at the minimum level for life. So, if it is not a financial problem to bring people out of poverty, then what could be the problem?

Ideology. In Singapore, welfarism is seen as a “dirty” word. Instead of encouraging the rich to help the poor, she encourages everyone to make their own living. This ideology is fine when everyone is able and there are sufficient jobs. But when some are less able and the job market is challenging, it can lead to a state of “us and them” and "everyone for himself (or herself)". With such an ideology, Singapore indeed has one of largest income gap in the world. In the present economic structure, the rich also tend to get richer while the poor get poorer. So, is there an ideology that is more friendly to the poor so that they can live a dignified life?
We are all one. The power of this ideology leads us to feel for others - "we are not separate" and “your pain is my pain”. To implement this ideology in the practical world, we may have an inverse relationship between the salary of senior political and administrative leaders and the number of people living in poverty. With such an arrangement, it is then to the interest of the leaders to ensure that poverty is erased. Yes, with the “right” ideology and practical approach, poverty can literally disappear from the islands of Singapore overnight!

Dr. Tommy Wong
Author of book series "Wisdom on How to Live Life"

I have not read the book but based on above, it seems like a lot of motherhood, feel-good statements. Ideology and words are not sufficient and certainly inversing the salaries of the political leadership versus the number of people living in poverty is challenging as we cannot even have a consistent definition of poor in Singapore.

"Hence logically, one would expect all her citizens to live comfortably, well above the poverty line (wherever that might be since it has never been officially defined)."

I don't see what's so "logical" about that. That's just idealism. Name me an affluent country without a single person living in poverty. If there's no such thing as poverty, then where is the incentive to work hard?

Quote: To implement this ideology in the practical world, we may have an inverse relationship between the salary of senior political and administrative leaders and the number of people living in poverty.

I am not sure is there a way to define poverty. Most people seems to be fixated by a fixed number - eg. a family income of $2000 is considered as poor or whatever.
But, in real life, poverty is a moving standard depending on the wealth distribution and prices of good and services. However, to the poor people, only the affordability of the basic necessities matters.

And.. some segment of the society seems to detest poverty so much that they want policies to be implemented to get rid of it.
Personally, as long as poverty does not affect the basic necessities of life to the poor people, I am ok to let poverty exists in some segment of society.

These segment of society is likely to produce people with greater hunger for success than the rest. The poverty experience can never be simulated, trained or taught. It is ingrained to the brain of the person after years of hardship.

So, it is no surprise that many successful people came from poor family and we also need these people to become leaders of the future so that they can empathize those that are poor.

The article definitely offer a solution that's debatable in one glance ... and politically driven if you pay a little bit more attention.

Such solution is so easily done that I am sure any country with this simple KPI will have politician rewarded handsomely.

I wonder what's the motive behind the suggested solution to eradicate proverty?

+++++++
I asked myself what's wrong with being poor in Singapore?

I recalled few years ago, a vagabond old lady donates money to infamous NKF during the fund raising shows.
I think despite being poor, the old is actually being generous.
She has a kind heart and she felt that someone else will need her money more than her.

I don't see what's wrong being poor?
We only need enough $$$ to feel happy.
:-)

++++++++
Looking back at our own stories, most of us were not born with a silver spoon...
Although we are not as rich as those headline rich people, we are doing well.
We need to appreciate what we have and do what it's needed to make the world a better place to live (for many many years)







A Life not Reflected is a Life not Worth Living.

I usually take what written, or reproduce, by Tan Kin Lian with a pinch of salt. Good to have, but are they practical?

Most people who are well-off will care little on those who are left behind.
Just like the school system, unless one has kids, they will not think much about how stressful the exam-oriented system has created to children. Nowadays schools jus train student to take exams.
It's simply human nature to care about themselves first, and more so in this material city. But hope things will change for good.

so suddenly we have a magic pill to eradicate poverty?

i thought this forum frowns on things like genevva gold, etc. i would class this in the same category.

my friend is always commenting that some of his students on Financial Assistance, carries Iphone.

social workers also say that some low income families has big LCD TV..

Poor in SG is not destitute. Destitute is living in slums by the sludgy river with threat of eviction from Govt.

The poor in Singapore is of course so much better than the poor in Third WORLD Countries. But the poor in Singapore have to compare with the other better off people in Singapore not the Third World Countries. So you can say the poor in Singapore may be considered rich in Third World Countries.
Anyway, is that why our ChengHu shys away to set a mark to determine who is the poor as a group in Singapore?

Have you noticed almost every FT cleaner or maid can afford HPs in Singapore after working only one or two years here?
If they can, why can't the poor in Singapore?
But we still can't just walk in and walk out of our casinos as freely as we like- FOC.
In a sense, the FTs (those working and staying here) are better or higher class as far as the casinos are concerned.
Singaporeans are still not ready to responsible for themselves yet?
True?
i think so.
Why?
No voice in Parliament for all these 50 years makes me think so.
This is only my opinion.
You may have yours.