Page 1 of 2

Income Inequality in Singapore

Posted: Thu, 02 May 2013 2:28 pm
by morenangpinay
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/income-inequality-singapore-annual-peek-160000067.html

Image

so do the general population want to bridge the gap of the bottom earners with the high income earners or do they just want the middle income earners to get high income?

Posted: Thu, 02 May 2013 3:38 pm
by nakatago
I'm paraphrasing here but I believe the higher bracket earners would like to say this to the lower bracket earners: "Go eff yourselves."

Posted: Thu, 02 May 2013 9:54 pm
by Wd40
I dont think income inequality is the issue. Even the US has very high levels of income disparity.

Basically the general population wants something similar to what other developed countries have i.e. minimum wages. So a waiter or driver can also lead a good life.

In Singapore what you have right now is the rich live like in a developed world while the poor live like a poor person is suddenly plucked out from a third world country and put into first world but he is still earning the third world salary. :o

Posted: Thu, 02 May 2013 10:33 pm
by sundaymorningstaple
Wd40 wrote:In Singapore what you have right now is the rich live like in a developed world while the poor live like a poor person is suddenly plucked out from a third world country and put into first world but he is still earning the third world salary. :o


Sadly, even that isn't true as the poor here still have concrete floors, a roof over their heads, most have a mobile phone and a color TV, electricity, running water and a proper toilet system an not a nightsoil collector or throw the bucket in the canal, swim in the canal to have a crap.

Posted: Fri, 03 May 2013 10:59 am
by ecureilx
sundaymorningstaple wrote:Sadly, even that isn't true as the poor here still have concrete floors, a roof over their heads, most have a mobile phone and a color TV, electricity, running water and a proper toilet system an not a nightsoil collector or throw the bucket in the canal, swim in the canal to have a crap.


and I may add while there is no dole, or cash handouts, more than enough avenues are open for those who need help .. as long as they are willing to move their ass a bit .. and that's what makes me wonder whether the 2 % unemployed really exists or that is the number of guys who are in residual income and claiming to be unemployed !!!

Posted: Sat, 04 May 2013 6:49 pm
by zzm9980
ecureilx wrote:
sundaymorningstaple wrote:Sadly, even that isn't true as the poor here still have concrete floors, a roof over their heads, most have a mobile phone and a color TV, electricity, running water and a proper toilet system an not a nightsoil collector or throw the bucket in the canal, swim in the canal to have a crap.


and I may add while there is no dole, or cash handouts, more than enough avenues are open for those who need help .. as long as they are willing to move their ass a bit .. and that's what makes me wonder whether the 2 % unemployed really exists or that is the number of guys who are in residual income and claiming to be unemployed !!!


Another post (I think by JR8) hit the nail on the head - that 2% likely aren't unemployed, so much as unemployable. Just think of 50 random people you might see every day here - On the MTR, the bus, in a hawker center, your office, etc. I would expect more than one of those people to be incapable of holding a job due to a lack of mental aptitude or laziness, so I guess that 22% figure is pretty good.

Posted: Sat, 04 May 2013 7:38 pm
by sundaymorningstaple
Actually, I beg to differ. Those you see on public transport, e.g., buses & MRT are generally both employable or retired and on a residual income of one form or another. Those that aren't employable you will find in the void decks of HDB estates all hours of the day or night or they stay cooped up in their homes. Some of the scroungiest looking are still security personnel but don't put their uniforms on till they get to work, or they are FWs in transit. They all are not transported like cattle in the back a trucks but the majority are. How to tell the difference between a local or FW?

Posted: Sun, 05 May 2013 10:22 am
by zzm9980
sundaymorningstaple wrote:Actually, I beg to differ. Those you see on public transport, e.g., buses & MRT are generally both employable or retired and on a residual income of one form or another.


I just meant everywhere really, and was naming examples. If I only consider the scroungy guys lounging in the void decks, then that's still more than 2% of the people I may see on a given day.

And does the 2% include all residents (Sc, Pr, Long term pass holders)? Or just SC and/or PR? I assumed the former. Unless it's a Sunday at the beach, anyone I assume is a FW I see usually appears to be working.

Posted: Sun, 05 May 2013 12:57 pm
by movingtospore
Hmm the info graphic had me going for the first bit. If their aim was to start some engagement and discussion about certain government pay policies...but major fail at the end when they brought it all back to what it should cost for the poor babies to have a Lexus. :roll:

Posted: Sun, 05 May 2013 2:19 pm
by sundaymorningstaple
zzm9980 wrote:
sundaymorningstaple wrote:Actually, I beg to differ. Those you see on public transport, e.g., buses & MRT are generally both employable or retired and on a residual income of one form or another.


I just meant everywhere really, and was naming examples. If I only consider the scroungy guys lounging in the void decks, then that's still more than 2% of the people I may see on a given day.

And does the 2% include all residents (Sc, Pr, Long term pass holders)? Or just SC and/or PR? I assumed the former. Unless it's a Sunday at the beach, anyone I assume is a FW I see usually appears to be working.


I've have seen various figures bandied about. Mostly you will see the figures of 2% referring to the resident population of Singapore or the 3% referring to Citizens & PRs. Depends on who's making the points and whether they are trying to make points for or against. Anybody on a work visa would they would keep in the employment but the accompanying family members would load it artificially as they are resident population but they are NOT employable. Whereas all the Citizens and PRs ARE employable. Anything below 2.8%, I believe, internationally is considered structural unemployment anyway, so for all intents and purposes, full employment already. This is why the whole thing would be funny, if it weren't so sad that those with eyes still cannot see. Okay, I know, they also have the largest percentage of myopia of any country in the world. So, that could help to explain their shortsightedness. :-/

Re: Income Inequality in Singapore

Posted: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:52 pm
by Chantikki
morenangpinay wrote:http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/income-inequality-singapore-annual-peek-160000067.html

so do the general population want to bridge the gap of the bottom earners with the high income earners or do they just want the middle income earners to get high income?


They all want to be in the 1%. I once joined "occupy singapore" and basically they all wanted to be one percenters

Posted: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 12:36 am
by Wd40
Seriously $11,495 for company directors and senior management? To me that looks like middle level income. Senior management easily make 300k per annum and above.

Think about it, if you are director of a company and the lowest rung executive earns 5k a month, would you be happy earning just double that? I would like to earn atleast 5 times that or else why take all the pressure of being a director. :o

Posted: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 8:44 am
by the lynx
Wd40 wrote:Seriously $11,495 for company directors and senior management? To me that looks like middle level income. Senior management easily make 300k per annum and above.

Think about it, if you are director of a company and the lowest rung executive earns 5k a month, would you be happy earning just double that? I would like to earn atleast 5 times that or else why take all the pressure of being a director. :o


Obviously the said company directors and senior management belong to the SME clutter. By paying their cheap foreign labour under $3000, these 'directors' and 'senior managers' are proportionally earning close to 4 times their wages like that.

Posted: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 9:03 am
by sundaymorningstaple
^^This.

Posted: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 9:51 am
by PNGMK
I've been involved peripherally with a Singapore charity. Up until a year ago we used to get a regular newsletter with stories in it. The stories all involve ghastly levels of poverty and sometimes abuse.

The poor here - do it very, very hard. Regardless of what SMS says there are people here who are still forced to give up their children for adoption because they literally cannot feed, clothe or educate them. I'm not talking about babies either - but 6 year olds and even teens. These people are earning money but sometimes only $500 and having to rent a room out of that and keep their four kids in it. We don't see that unless you're directly involved with these people. That's the problem with income equality here. I know this is not quite india levels of poverty but it's close.

As for the government helping there was a case recently where a homeless applicant go so frustrated with the paperwork (as he said - "how can I have my brothers and sisters NRIC and all their tax statements and education docs? I am homeless and on the street") he ended up being arrested for assault. The mother freaks who dole out the welfare are so up themselves with making sure that only the 'deserving get it' that in my opinion a lot less is given out than should be.

The Gini coefficient here is shameful and led in the main by the greedy PAP.