Lim Swee Say: Making the economy and workforce cheaper
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I agree fully with what you said, except about the part with 'employers laughing all the way'.
They too are equally squeezed by competition in this crisis, customers demand and overheads. Most Singaporean bosses are a responsible lot, but there is undeniably exist among them the more irresponsible ones.
Democratic private enterprises brook no inteference from govts, unless it intends to become communistic in politics. But I agree that there must be a higher layer of regulation to protect workers from exploitation.
On our part as citizens, we will have to shame them, dont work for them, dont support them and let them die out a natural biz death, so that our limited resources in land and human capital be put to better use working in better run organisations.
But after what is said and done, having a job, performing well in it, as well as a cheaper but higher quality producation/packaging done in the fastest time, which is within our intelligent workforce's capability is the way to compete and put food on our tables.
We have run out of options in the face of the commie economic revolution.
Addeum: But we are not without other assets and weapons of our own. They are our geographical location, our close ties with neighbours built upon by bizmen and citizens for guanxi, as well as being friends with every other nation on Earth - 'you scratch a bit of my back, i scratch yours' tradeoffs. Its not all doom and gloom.
This is a gentle reminder to the dumbass that he has not replied to the questions. If he doesn't reply, it further shows his lack of graciousness and blind egoYou still haven't answered the questions arising from your own self-limited knowledge (stupidity).
To date, it really says a lot about you. Continue humouring all of us with your monkey antics :D
I repeat a few of them here again just in case you feign dementia
Did you or did you not say the Thai Canal is a pipe dream when in fact, it's a real risk? Yes or No.
Did you or did you not say that Statistics is NOT a Science, when in fact, it's part of Mathematics which in turn is part of Science? Yes or No.
I gave you 2 SIMPLE questions to answer. Make it SO simple that even a fool can answer. If you STILL cannot acknowledge your errors, it speaks volumes about your graciousness and your blind ego. :D
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
This is a gentle reminder to the dumbass that he has not replied to the questions. If he doesn't reply, it further shows his lack of graciousness and blind egoYou still haven't answered the questions arising from your own self-limited knowledge (stupidity).
To date, it really says a lot about you. Continue humouring all of us with your monkey antics :D
I repeat a few of them here again just in case you feign dementia
Did you or did you not say the Thai Canal is a pipe dream when in fact, it's a real risk? Yes or No.
Did you or did you not say that Statistics is NOT a Science, when in fact, it's part of Mathematics which in turn is part of Science? Yes or No.
I gave you 2 SIMPLE questions to answer. Make it SO simple that even a fool can answer. If you STILL cannot acknowledge your errors, it speaks volumes about your graciousness and your blind ego. :D
-
-
This must be another light entertainment provided by the X-rated rat planning to retire as a bozo in this Speaker's Corner.
It certainly reveal that it will take the idiocy of a X-rated bozo to interprete the imbecilic message in the speech of a Ministerial Bonzo.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Why the need to twist what Minister Lim ACTUALLY said?
Had our english detoriated to such low levels that we no longer understand simple words? Or a deliberate attempt to feel better by venting at others, even to the extend of twisting what had been candidly said?Is it ironic that the bozo who has been proven for its poor language and reading skills should be asking - "Had our english detoriated to such low levels that we no longer understand simple words?" ?
Should this low level of English not be obvious in the X-rated pseudo-intellect, when it can be so brilliant as to find "civil obedience" to be a crime.
The language skills of the X-rated pseudo-intellect has certainly deteriorated to such low levels that the X-rated bozo could find questions and errors in the last response from the Shotgun when none existed.
It now seems that the Shotgun had found it a waste of time to continue indulging the X-rated pseudo-intellectual bozo, as it never tire in its pretense to ride its high horse - that is no taller than a mole which is slightly taller then the X-rated rat.
Mr Lim said: "We are now upturning the downturn. As we move forward, let us go on the offensive. So let us move towards a cheaper, better, faster Singapore economy."Mr Lim said that to be cheaper Singapore must improve its productivity. And that means producing better quality products and services in a more cost effective manner while being better meant nurturing new markets and broadening capabilities.
How does one achieve "cheaper" by producing better quality products and services in any "more cost effective manner" ?
Is the X-rated intellect crossing-its-tongue again with its X-rated intelligence that now conveniently forget that Singapore has no natural resources and has to import all materials with costs beyond our control ?
With costs of imported raw materials beyond our control, high property prices subject to the scarcity of Singapore land, and utilities are subjected to foreign price fluctuation - what other factor is within our control that will allow us to produce better quality products and services in a "more cost effective manner" ?
If it is not cheaper labor - what else ?
I hate reality and truth just like you. It jettisons and jerks us from our comfort zone because ultimately, one way or another, we eventually would have to face reality. Better early than latter, as there will be more time to prepare ourselves mentally.
How ironical that this should be said at this stage, when it should have been realised in its conclusion with the earlier paragraph ?
All the hot gas that continue to permeate from the X-rat that shroud itself with so much self-importance that it simply cannot appreciate its brilliant skills at crossing itself into irrelevance with its own ironical statement.
He is not saying we became a cheap labour force, only a more productive one whereby it would be worth the higher money paid to us to do a job, then to pay 2 or 3 lazy bickering uneducated indians or chinamen to do it for the same job at a lower price.
Is this an interpretation by the X-rated bozo of what the Ministerial Bonzo had said, or were the meaning deduced as a result of making assumptions of a series of words from the Bonzo that was designed to obfuscate without meaning what the message had intended ?
Which part of the Bonzo statement has the X-rated bozo found that explicitly state that "it would be worth the higher money paid to us to do a job, then to pay 2 or 3 lazy bickering uneducated indians or chinamen to do it for the same job at a lower price" - or is this not another one more of the characteristic pretentious verbiage of the now infamous X-rated intellectual riding its pretentious high-horse ?
At no time did he say we be paid as an indian or chinaman worker. It would be impossible to live on those wages. $100 a month will not even pay your transportion costs to get to work for a production worker. $500 a month as a supervisor or technician is not going to pay even rent for your house in Singapore.The Ministerial Bonzo did say the following ‘in an additional press release on 15 October 2009’ (*1) - which was the next day after his infamous "cheaper, better and faster" speech:
He said two key performance indicators were met: Avoiding record layoffs and preventing a rapid rise in joblessness. However, saving jobs will no longer take centrestage as Singapore looks ahead, said Mr Lim.
NTUC's primary concern now is to match, if not outrun, countries facing record-high unemployment.
In trying to overcome their unemployment, some will resort to protectionism while others will try to be cheaper. At the same time, cheaper places like China and India, will also become better.
'We are being squeezed on both sides,' said Mr Lim, adding that global competition will intensify in the next two to three years before the world's employment situation returns to normal.The Ministerial Bonzo will not dare to come clean and say so about lower wages for Singaporeans, and yet the X-rated bozo can be depended on to miss the best part of the Bonzo's speech :-
that being cheaper did not mean lower wages, but higher productivity.
It means making better use of every worker, including foreigners, he added.
Calling on bosses to train foreign workers, he said: 'Up to now, many employers look at low-wage, unskilled foreign workers just as another pair of hands and legs. As we move to a CBF economy, upgrading and capability enhancement must also apply to foreign manpower.'With cheap foreign labor being upgraded as well - where do trained and upgraded but unemployed or retrenched Singaporeans stand in the call to higher productivity ?
Only a X-rated pseudo-intellectual rat will accept this new environment that allow cheap foreign labor to be upgraded to compete with other Singaporeans.
But no employer will pay a supervisor or manager $2000 a month if he idles more than he works, take long lunch breaks, disappears for hours on supposed outdoor jobs, long smoke breaks, reluctance to work long hours, avoid emergencies that may occur at work, and yet stay profitable. Worse if it is a critical production line where time loss is highly significant, where mistakes are costly in the range of thousands.We can depend on the X-rated intelligence of a X-rat to be at its best when playing a pretentious superiority role in its condescending tone when its intellect has been exposed for its imbecilic idiocy to state the obvious.
Along with the rest of what he said, this is the only practical solution left till something better comes along, as the world reacts and we adriotly adapt to its changes. What he said and appealed is something to help us all put food on our tables.Is this the best solution from a Ministerial Bonzo - who is paid $2 Million per annum -and which a X-rated pseudo-intellectual bozo find to be satisfactory for regurgitation ?
What higher standards of expectations can be expected from a X-rated rat with such pretentious self-effacing low esteem as being a self-declared insignificant nobody ?
This is a battle of survival, for we, both employers and employees are in this crisis suffering together, threatened by cheap charlies. I am prepared to put in the hours and the sacrifices, but alone, I cannot help the economy or myself. It needs you to pitch in as well for the sake of our soceity made up of your family, relatives and friends and mine.
But if you prefer to sit at home, rant and blame everyone else, then good luck. No one will force you. But it will not stop the rest of us from courageously doing what needs to done to get out of the crisis, and hope you too will join us soon.Our forefathers and even mothers had done it before in the 60s to give us what we have today. That courage and resilience is still in our blood even though pampered by the boom years of this generation.
Thus we need not face our tomorrows with fear, doom and gloom. We are the captain of our lives, and the choices we make today determines who we will be tomorrow.
Good luck.Is it possible that an insignificant nobody will have anybody's interest in its heart when it claims that "no one owes anyone a living" ?
Why would it bother to even obfuscate the real issues by making all the pretentious statements that will already contradict its original premise that "no one owes anyone a living" ?
It is obvious that the X-rated rat is at its best in its pretentious superiority role to seek attention when largely driven by its low self-esteem as an insignificant nobody.
All the high-fallutin words that were used were not even its own but were plagiarized without even the slightest clue to their appropriate application and timing in use.
It does not take too much thought to wonder if the X-rated rat even has any clue as to the veracity of what it had boastfully printed.
These words stated by the X-rated rat that "We are the Captain of our lives and choices we make today determines who we will be tomorrow" - is no more then the characteristic hot gas that the X-rated intellect needs to stay relevant.
The alternative is for it to sink into its low esteem as a worthless insignificant nobody.
Do Singaporeans have a choice of any kind when 40 years of PAP governance had demanded uniform conformity ?
Forty years of LKY's interference and the PAP monopolistic control over every aspect of Singapore's political, economic, social and cultural activities, and now when the overpaid self-acclaimed elitist talent face the depths of stark reality it can only make pathetic calls for Singaporeans to be "cheaper, better and faster".
Only the X-rated intellect of a bozo will console itself to willingly accept the call from its Ministerial Bonzo - "until something better comes along".
Clearly, even as the resident bozo pretentiously parrot the call of its Ministerial Bonzo, it has no clue to even resolve its own mess that is littered across
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
Being old is not going to able to perform multi tasking, even if employers are willing to redesign jobs to suit the old, the old age labour forces will not be able to handing the physical attributes in it.
Re-reading your meaningful post again instead of even looking into the egoistical babble from others that offers nothing as usual, long given up hope on them, but with some time to spare, I would like to share an insight on the 'old' issue.
In the 19th century, it was believed that not many would live past 70. Thus it was expected that a person in his/her 50s should be allowed to retire and enjoy what's left of life with pension and retirement funds, provided they had saved it in the first place or dependent on their children for assistance.
However, modern science had evolved much beyond the ancients. Today, armed with DNA knowledge, we are in the cusp of curing common diseases such as cancer, alzhimer, etc, and even aging itself.
Botax, lasik,Propecia Finasteride are those that can enhance physical appearance. Healthy living comprehension is avaliable to all. Even supposedly 'old men' are capable of performing marathons. Supposedly 'senile' old men are flying around the world helping societies...
The 'old' is no longer what it is perceived to be anymore. The ancient standards no longer applies to aged humans in this day and age of modern science. We are living longer, and fully capable of even better performance based on one's experience.
The only issue is the mental attitude of the aged. Do they think themselves old and senile, and let their bodies start to rot, or should they live healthily, with moderate drinking, food, and simple excercises such as swiming and jogging?
Retire by all means, at even 30 years old, but one needs to eat to survive. Only by having a job can one put food on the table. The modern 'old' men are fully capable of performing what the young men can do, and with the necessary experiences to avoid pitfalls, which the young assumed are stubborness and unwillingness to change, till too late when the company fails.
The young need not fear the aged or being unable to move up in the hierachies, for with the capable aged's guidance, more wealth can created instead of being fritted away on senseless 'change' strategies. With more wealth, more companies can be formed and created for expansion which will lead to more hirings.
Whichever society can comprehend this concept will end up rich and propersous.
It is time to change mindsets of both employers and employees, and our society as well on views of ' old'. Modern science and its capabilituies to enhance our lives is a reality and our friend to embrace. We are living longer today, if we do it right, and would bring meaning to life itself and others who love us.
-
-
The X-rated has been so badly exposed for its stupendous ignorance and poor language skill that it has to sink to the level of talking to a foolish 'hum' that has the insufferable tendancy of being consistently irrelevant.
It is perhaps a sign of belated recognition by the X-rated pseudo-intellect of its own irrelevance and finding some hope to talk to another that is mutually as irrelevant.
Originally posted by xtreyier:Re-reading your meaningful post again instead of even looking into the egoistical babble from others that offers nothing as usual, long given up hope on them, but with some time to spare, I would like to share an insight on the 'old' issue.
In the 19th century, it was believed that not many would live past 70. Thus it was expected that a person in his/her 50s should be allowed to retire and enjoy what's left of life with pension and retirement funds, provided they had saved it in the first place or dependent on their children for assistance.
How ironic that the one that has been indulging in high fallutin prose and taking on a condescending tone when addressing from its own imaginery high position riding on the back of a mole - would recognise so quickly the "egoistical babble" that it has no answer to the various simple questions that WERE asked of it ?
It is even more amazing that while it avoids answering real questions that were asked for its X-rated pseudo-intellectual replies, it will explicitly avoid imaginery questions that never existed in simple sentences made.
Has the X-rated pseudo-intellect of an X-rated rat seen some deterioration in its mental capacity, from being constantly exposed for the sheer imbecilic idiocy in each and every single response posted - AND is aging faster then most other rats ?
However, modern science had evolved much beyond the ancients. Today, armed with DNA knowledge, we are in the cusp of curing common diseases such as cancer, alzhimer, etc, and even aging itself.
Botax, lasik,Propecia Finasteride are those that can enhance physical appearance. Healthy living comprehension is avaliable to all. Even supposedly 'old men' are capable of performing marathons. Supposedly 'senile' old men are flying around the world helping societies...
With all the advancement made in Science and Technologies that are supposed to benefit the aging population - is there any use for the larger population of aged Singaporean population, when they cannot even afford to look after themselves in their present capacity ?
Without the ability to even fend for themselves, 'senile' old men are flying around the world helping societies will certainly exist ONLY in the mind of a X-rated pseudo-intellect that is addicted to its hot gas produced by its consistent indulgence in his misplaced delusions of what reality should have been.
The 'old' is no longer what it is perceived to be anymore. The ancient standards no longer applies to aged humans in this day and age of modern science. We are living longer, and fully capable of even better performance based on one's experience.
The delusions of a X-rated intellect fail to even see the younger Singaporeans, who are supposedly fit and in their prime of 30s, 40s and 50s with successful careers and leading healthy life style - only to suddenly fall as their body parts fail without warning.
The hot gas of the X-rated intellect has the stupendous inability to relate what little it possess in knowledge to craft a suitable relevance with reality in Life.
It boils down to its immature and little experience as a result of its "insignificant being as a nobody" which it recognise by its own self-admission but will not have the modesty to rein in its insistence to impose its insignificant self on others.
The only issue is the mental attitude of the aged. Do they think themselves old and senile, and let their bodies start to rot, or should they live healthily, with moderate drinking, food, and simple excercises such as swiming and jogging?
This is another clear example of the characteristic arrogant condescending attitude of an immature X-rated pseudo-intellect, who will believe that the Aged will be in control of their ageing process by thought alone, that the Aged will not allow themselves to live a healthy life if they can afford to do so - as if all that needs to be done is only the private knowledge in the mind of a X-rated rat that is admittedly insignificant nobody.
One can delay one's ageing process in the manner that MM LKY has attempted to do, yet even he cannot deny that the ageing process has made him senile without himself even realising the onset of ageing - despite his best efforts with his overpaid wages from public funds to help him to stay relevant.
Can the X-rated intellect in the resident pseudo-intellectual rat do better than LKY ?
Retire by all means, at even 30 years old, but one needs to eat to survive. Only by having a job can one put food on the table. The modern 'old' men are fully capable of performing what the young men can do, and with the necessary experiences to avoid pitfalls, which the young assumed are stubborness and unwillingness to change, till too late when the company fails.
It is obvious that the X-rated pseudo-intellect is bankrupt of any other message but is stuck on a single piece of data that it has burnt into its memory and repeatedly played back the single line of "needing a job to put food on the table".
It is obvious that the only one that is "stubborn and unwilling to change" is the X-rated pseudo-intellectual rat, who despite admitting to its insignificance and is a nobody - will insist on being more righteous over everyone, and will push its bankrupt message repeatedly in all his last four responses, and all of which have been easily debunked for its hollow content.
The pseudo-intellect is attempting to build an illusionary tall tower of hot gassed ideals but forgot to build a strong foundation for its desired tall tower - as it had all the contents being plagiarized from others who are more intellectually capable than itself.
The young need not fear the aged or being unable to move up in the hierachies, for with the capable aged's guidance, more wealth can created instead of being fritted away on senseless 'change' strategies. With more wealth, more companies can be formed and created for expansion which will lead to more hirings.
With all the motivation and positive vibes that the X-rated pseudo-intellectual Rat attempt to display and impose on others, it is amazing that it will not relate such efforts with the reality of the present situation.
Did Singaporeans benefit from the loss of US$100 Billion by GIC and Temasek - or was it not a fact that the US$100 Billion was poured into the failed foreign banks to buy some minority stakes, and which had actually benefitted the top 10 per cent of the executives of those failed banks - who continue to receive their multi-million dollar wages and bonuses despite their incompetence in managing their institution into the grand failures of 2008 ?
The X-rated pseudo-intellectual should join a self-motivation Rah-rah team to help itself overcome its own disillusion of being an "insignificant being and as a nobody" - as it wll have more direct benefit to everyone that has to bear his insufferable senility while stuck as an infantile self-centered teenager.
Whichever society can comprehend this concept will end up rich and propersous.
It is time to change mindsets of both employers and employees, and our society as well on views of ' old'. Modern science and its capabilituies to enhance our lives is a reality and our friend to embrace. We are living longer today, if we do it right, and would bring meaning to life itself and others who love us.
This part of the message must surely reflect the infantile efforts at sounding wise and experienced but without the substance of reality, especially when the pseudo-intellect has the innate ability to consistently double-Cross itself with its X-rated qualities.
In the earlier response in this thread, the X-rated pseudo-intellect had cleverly stated that: - "I would disagree with you on science and tech part. Studying it and regugitating facts will not create the 'next big thing', otherwise anyone else would have created windows OS or handphone tech long time ago. It takes many factors for it to happen, but the most critical one is human ingenuity, which cannot be taught but nurtured by environment. Our 4th uni is the way to go to develope and nurture such talents."
Obviously, the X-rated intellect had merely regurgitated what it presume to be facts about "modern science and technology part" and had disputed the ideas behind it.
It is amazing that it will now find any relevance from modern science and technology to benefit the aged in Singapore, and hoped that the critical human ingenuity can be nurtured by the environment.
The X-rated pseudo-intellect is evident of a bad gamble by its parent to bring it into existence and hoped for the environment to nurture its critical human ingenuity - as its present final result is clear for all to view and assess, reinforced by its self-admitted declaration as an "insignificant nobody".
Can "modern science and its capabilituies to enhance our lives" be a reality ?
What reality is there when the advancement made is at a high price that makes it unaffordable to the Singaporean aged ?
The only one that need urgent treatment from advancement made in modern science and technology will be the resident X-rated pseudo-intellect.
-
-
-
I saw this really in your face cartoon about wage cuts on ST yesterday. I believe it was the home section.
First frame showed the boss cutting everyone's wages during a downturn.
The Second frame showed everybody hoping the boss restores the wages when the economy was getting better... of course the boss was a bit nonchalance about it.
I believe one of the forumers here echoed my sentiments towards this entire "cheaper, faster, better." It was the hokkien saying of "want fresh, want cheap, want big boobs."
Face the facts: People are not going to work faster, better or more efficient if you keep giving them disincentives to work slower and sloppier. Naturally, such workers might get the sack, and raise unemployment instead.
This may be unrelated, but interesting. The US Republicans start off their new 4 year terms with constraints that raise unemployment and retard growth a bit. Then, halfway through the term, the release these constraints. Growth and employment follows. Final step, claim the accolades for economic performance. Just food for thought.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
I saw this really in your face cartoon about wage cuts on ST yesterday. I believe it was the home section.
First frame showed the boss cutting everyone's wages during a downturn.
The Second frame showed everybody hoping the boss restores the wages when the economy was getting better... of course the boss was a bit nonchalance about it.
I believe one of the forumers here echoed my sentiments towards this entire "cheaper, faster, better." It was the hokkien saying of "want fresh, want cheap, want big boobs."
Face the facts: People are not going to work faster, better or more efficient if you keep giving them disincentives to work slower and sloppier. Naturally, such workers might get the sack, and raise unemployment instead.
This may be unrelated, but interesting. The US Republicans start off their new 4 year terms with constraints that raise unemployment and retard growth a bit. Then, halfway through the term, the release these constraints. Growth and employment follows. Final step, claim the accolades for economic performance. Just food for thought.
I respect your individual opinion, but it is interesting that you would want others to 'face the facts'.
What 'fact'?
Let's face this instead: Put yourself as a consumer now instead of a worker. Will you:-
a.) want to pay for fresh, cheap and big boobs (to put it in a hokkien crude manner)
b.) or pay for stale, expensive, and small boobs? And if you are THAT loyal, where will your money come from to support such loyalty?
Economics does not end at the factory floor or the unloading of goods into the port. It ends in the hands of the purchaser/consumer, from which data is gathered as evidence of economic performances. Just equally some food for thought.
PS: In response to your US republican ploy, an equally interesting food for thought though it may be, but rest assured that the 'cheaper, faster, better' products isnt going to last forever.
Unless China is absolutely self sufficient in resources, needs no raw material imports and patented tech, and can teleport products directly into the homes of consumers, then the world will have to use CBF to compete forever.
Fortunately, no. China is not self sufficient, its political idealogy while useful now to make its citizens automaton commie cheap charlies, but will face an increasing demanding educated large middle class thru its growing wealth for spoils and political dignity within another decade or so, nor have teleport tech for more years to come.
Thus CBF will not be forever. There is hope. And no, I do not presume to be right or made any claims so, nor impose my views on anyone, but offering only an insight for consideration.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
I saw this really in your face cartoon about wage cuts on ST yesterday. I believe it was the home section.
First frame showed the boss cutting everyone's wages during a downturn.
The Second frame showed everybody hoping the boss restores the wages when the economy was getting better... of course the boss was a bit nonchalance about it.
I believe one of the forumers here echoed my sentiments towards this entire "cheaper, faster, better." It was the hokkien saying of "want fresh, want cheap, want big boobs."
Face the facts: People are not going to work faster, better or more efficient if you keep giving them disincentives to work slower and sloppier. Naturally, such workers might get the sack, and raise unemployment instead.
This may be unrelated, but interesting. The US Republicans start off their new 4 year terms with constraints that raise unemployment and retard growth a bit. Then, halfway through the term, the release these constraints. Growth and employment follows. Final step, claim the accolades for economic performance. Just food for thought.
Actually you can achieve a cheap, better, fast economy, IF you make the cost of living proportionate to cheap.If it costs $1.50 to have lunch, $2 to have dinner, and cars and houses are a fraction of the inflated prices they are now, then yes, people can accept lower wages.
However, as far as I see:
- ERP goes up
- Transport costs go up
- Food costs go up
- Hawker centre rentals (the VERY thing that the govt CAN control) goes up after a makeover
- Housing costs go up
- Car costs go up
- Wages stay flat
Just some examples above. How do you expect people to be cheaper, better, faster?
Simply, the PAP just wants to have the cake and eat it. Spiraling costs of living, and yet asking the locals to accept lower wages.
Only stupid people will accept such an arrangement.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I respect your individual opinion, but it is interesting that you would want others to 'face the facts'.
What 'fact'?
Let's face this instead: Put yourself as a consumer now instead of a worker. Will you:-
a.) want to pay for fresh, cheap and big boobs (to put it in a hokkien crude manner)
b.) or pay for stale, expensive, and small boobs? And if you are THAT loyal, where will your money come from to support such loyalty?
Economics does not end at the factory floor or the unloading of goods into the port. It ends in the hands of the purchaser/consumer, from which data is gathered as evidence of economic performances. Just equally some food for thought.
PS: In response to your US republican ploy, an equally interesting food for thought though it may be, but rest assured that the 'cheaper, faster, better' products isnt going to last forever.
Unless China is absolutely self sufficient in resources, needs no raw material imports and patented tech, and can teleport products directly into the homes of consumers, then the world will have to use CBF to compete forever.
Fortunately, no. China is not self sufficient, its political idealogy while useful now to make its citizens automaton commie cheap charlies, but will face an increasing demanding educated large middle class thru its growing wealth for spoils and political dignity within another decade or so, nor have teleport tech for more years to come.
Thus CBF will not be forever. There is hope. And no, I do not presume to be right or made any claims so, nor impose my views on anyone, but offering only an insight for consideration.
Its true that consumers want low cost, high quality n quantity. And I don't have a problem with that. I have a problem with Trade Unions, trying to drive down wages, while pushing people to work harder and faster.
To me, paying them less for more labor is tantamount to slave driving. Outside Singapore, eg Europe, US, trade unions help to negotiate better wages. In places like Sweden, they negotiate for higher wages, while binding the workers to a level of performance. But over here, they seem to advocate wage cuts instead!
China will be interesting in the next 50 years, that I agree. But however their wage levels rise, there are 2 factors that casts doubts on your predictions that CBF will not last forever. 1, the Chinese Central Government may push down wages levels. 2, China's production capabilities will always achieve greater economy of scale than ours. Hence, if we were to directly compete against China, we may end up in CBF for quite a long time.
Finally, when it comes to "CBF", it should not be limited to just the employees. Employers and firms themselves need to restructure themselves to be more efficient, faster and raise standards. Why should the workers alone shoulder cost-reduction measures? Companies are inefficient and expensive not just because of their workers, but also because they are badly organized, and inefficient and generate greater overheads. Some spend too little to retrain their workers and thus not improving the quality of their work force. So why is it that it is just the workers that need to be cheaper, better faster?
I suppose "CBF" is just a bit too broad of a sweeping stroke in my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Shotgun:
Finally, when it comes to "CBF", it should not be limited to just the employees. Employers and firms themselves need to restructure themselves to be more efficient, faster and raise standards. Why should the workers alone shoulder cost-reduction measures? Companies are inefficient and expensive not just because of their workers, but also because they are badly organized, and inefficient and generate greater overheads. Some spend too little to retrain their workers and thus not improving the quality of their work force. So why is it that it is just the workers that need to be cheaper, better faster?
I suppose "CBF" is just a bit too broad of a sweeping stroke in my opinion.
I agree fully with you on the qouted passage above. Yes, CBF MUST include the employers as well, or our workers' effort would go to waste. Thus there is a need to weed them out. The market will determine which company will survive or fail.
We, the citizens, can accelerate that if we know of any badly organised or abusive companies and shed light on them, so that they may free up resources and human capital to better organisations in this battle.
As for soul_rage's comment that the cost of living is high here and thus CBF would be unworkable, I would like to take this opportunity to share my insight with him.
1. The cost of living is within our control. Do we need the aircon to be turned on the whole night and cover ourself with thick blankets? Do we need to take a bus after a MRT ride for that last 1-2km walk? Do we need to eat at restaurants everyday. Must our kids be given money to splurge on lux items and food? I can go on with more.
But the point is - we are in a financial crisis, thus our mindsets cannot expect to hope to maintain the standard of living during the boom years. If we persist, we will only doom ourselves by demoralization. The boom is ahead when CBF succeeds, but not now.
2. Transportation is too a factor to achieve productivity. If our trucks and management are held up in traffic jams due to the rise of cars daily, our productivity gains on the workfloors will loose out on the roads. Thus there is a need to clamp down on our roads today, and make it costly for those who do not prosper by the roads and have no need for cars except as a status symbol. This is a crisis.
3. I agree that hawker stalls rental are high and can be controlled. However, will the hawkers sell their food at a lower price. No, even when food and petrol prices had dropped, they had not lower their prices. Even those with rents at $300/mth continued to charge high fares for their wares, and splurge it on boy racer WRX for their sons, and ipods for their daughters.
These hawkers, majority of them do not have academic background, nor the patience for it to comprehend the necessity for philosophy and humanities. They pay little or no taxes, which IRAS is impossible with its resources to keep track of. Thus, the higher rental is the only way to ensure they are made to pay back to society the profits they had squeezed out of us.
4. Housing is another issue. I agree and would seek a morantorium on prices during this crisis, but let it be known that for each cheap hdb built and sold, it means lesser sqft space for our next generation. They will be paying the ultimate price, not us.
In summary, the control on cost of living is in our hands. This is a crisis, and not boom times. Sacrifices and measures are needed to do battle from each and everyone of us.
Again, I will NOT claim my insight is right, nor egoistically claim that if anyone who disagrees with me is stupid or intellectually challenged. I only write so that readers may CONSIDER what had been written by me, and formulate their own perceptions and actions.
Cheers.
-
It is true to say that lower down our expenses would be a solution towards cheaper labor but it is easier to say than done. The answer lies between human nature and the phenomenon of “NEW poor” and “the poor”. In human nature, it is often difficult or rather it is painful to take away the luxuries of people. Even if I can do it, can my love ones do it? You must remember the fact that I do have my love ones to support.
I believe the productivity has a correlation with working culture. Our working culture is practically business with little compassion. Do you think this kind of working culture can maximize productivity? Take for example in the manufacturing sector
1) Seagate and Maxtor are moving out of Singapore leaving behind thousands of specialized worker. And that is the phenomenon of manufacturing in Singapore. Can these specialized workers get the same pay again? This specialized workers would be under the knife of other employers by claiming them they do not have any relevant experience at all. After knowing that they would be deserted sooner or later, do you think workers will work their life for the company?
2) “The Local On-the-Job Training (LOT) Programme, is one of the programmes under Preparing for the Upturn (PREP-UP), an initiative by the Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB) during the downturn to help build up science, engineering and technical capabilities in areas critical for Singapore’s manufacturing and international services sectors. “
The so called “leading corporations” gives during training period:
i) 7 days annual leaves
ii) 7 days medical leaves
iii) No CPF
iv) No AWS
v) No increment
vi) Normal wages ( Half paid by EDB, the other half paid by the company)
vii) Payment of wages is given every 4 months
viii) 2 years training bond + 1year bond to company
Well… after 2 years, you would get the specialized experience for the company(only for that company). Is this the kind of working culture you would willing to waste your 3 years with or work your life out of it? The government and you do your part but look what the company is offering or rather abusing it.
Well… in conclusion, I appreciate on the government coughing out money towards the economy and helping the workers. But I do think that they have a lack of understanding towards the employee and employers. And hence, it is difficult for them to strike a balance between employers and employee. If harsh to employers, they leave for another place. If harsh to employee, it is difficult for us to survive. “in making the economy and workforce cheaper, better and faster” are just mere words without understanding.
-
Haiz...................
What have the PAP done to Singapore?
-
... a lot
-
-
Originally posted by deepak.c:
Haiz...................
What have the PAP done to Singapore?
amusement park -
PAP - MAn in white..
When can we have Man in black to rule over sg?
-
Coming soon, future PM, Singapore's Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, all blacks
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
I agree fully with you on the qouted passage above. Yes, CBF MUST include the employers as well, or our workers' effort would go to waste. Thus there is a need to weed them out. The market will determine which company will survive or fail.
We, the citizens, can accelerate that if we know of any badly organised or abusive companies and shed light on them, so that they may free up resources and human capital to better organisations in this battle.
As for soul_rage's comment that the cost of living is high here and thus CBF would be unworkable, I would like to take this opportunity to share my insight with him.
1. The cost of living is within our control. Do we need the aircon to be turned on the whole night and cover ourself with thick blankets? Do we need to take a bus after a MRT ride for that last 1-2km walk? Do we need to eat at restaurants everyday. Must our kids be given money to splurge on lux items and food? I can go on with more.
But the point is - we are in a financial crisis, thus our mindsets cannot expect to hope to maintain the standard of living during the boom years. If we persist, we will only doom ourselves by demoralization. The boom is ahead when CBF succeeds, but not now.
2. Transportation is too a factor to achieve productivity. If our trucks and management are held up in traffic jams due to the rise of cars daily, our productivity gains on the workfloors will loose out on the roads. Thus there is a need to clamp down on our roads today, and make it costly for those who do not prosper by the roads and have no need for cars except as a status symbol. This is a crisis.
3. I agree that hawker stalls rental are high and can be controlled. However, will the hawkers sell their food at a lower price. No, even when food and petrol prices had dropped, they had not lower their prices. Even those with rents at $300/mth continued to charge high fares for their wares, and splurge it on boy racer WRX for their sons, and ipods for their daughters.
These hawkers, majority of them do not have academic background, nor the patience for it to comprehend the necessity for philosophy and humanities. They pay little or no taxes, which IRAS is impossible with its resources to keep track of. Thus, the higher rental is the only way to ensure they are made to pay back to society the profits they had squeezed out of us.
4. Housing is another issue. I agree and would seek a morantorium on prices during this crisis, but let it be known that for each cheap hdb built and sold, it means lesser sqft space for our next generation. They will be paying the ultimate price, not us.
In summary, the control on cost of living is in our hands. This is a crisis, and not boom times. Sacrifices and measures are needed to do battle from each and everyone of us.
Again, I will NOT claim my insight is right, nor egoistically claim that if anyone who disagrees with me is stupid or intellectually challenged. I only write so that readers may CONSIDER what had been written by me, and formulate their own perceptions and actions.
Cheers.
As a person who believes in Science, I truly am aghast at your comments made above.
1. Are the majority of Singaporeans taking a bus just for 1km/2km? Are the majority of Singaporeans eating at restaurants?
2. Must the solution always be expensive cars? Can it not be another solution? I have provided a suggestion before in the past, ensuring the quota of cars is distributed to the population with a $10 COE (admin charges). And each person may only register up to 1 car, and each person has to use the car for a min no. of years before he can bid again. There are many better possible solutions, only that it doesn't result in a profit-making scheme by the govt.
3. You are stereotyping hawkers. As a man of science that you claimed yourself to be, such comments are irresponsible and misleading. You are suggesting that the majority of hawkers are rich millionaires when I see them slogging hours per day, and having to combat increasing rentals. True, there are always bad eggs (in your opinion), but these are only fruits of their labour (for cooking something that people love). Are you telling me that just because they are a hawker, they cannot enjoy some luxury in life?
4. I disagree with the statement you made, that having cheaper HDBs means lesser sqft. More affordable HDBs results in more affordable resale market, resulting in more affordable private market. Again you are just making baseless remarks in order to support the profit-making stance that the govt is taking now. No one asked you to build more HDB flats. The suggestion was to ensure that HDB flats remain affordable, which in turn affects the secondary market.
Of Course, for point 4, we are in a vicious cycle. We cannot afford to lower the prices of new HDB flats now, because if we do, people who have bought houses in the past stand to lose substantial value in their properties. Therefore there is no way but up for property prices in Singapore.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
As a person who believes in Science, I truly am aghast at your comments made above.
1. Are the majority of Singaporeans taking a bus just for 1km/2km? Are the majority of Singaporeans eating at restaurants?
2. Must the solution always be expensive cars? Can it not be another solution? I have provided a suggestion before in the past, ensuring the quota of cars is distributed to the population with a $10 COE (admin charges). And each person may only register up to 1 car, and each person has to use the car for a min no. of years before he can bid again. There are many better possible solutions, only that it doesn't result in a profit-making scheme by the govt.
3. You are stereotyping hawkers. As a man of science that you claimed yourself to be, such comments are irresponsible and misleading. You are suggesting that the majority of hawkers are rich millionaires when I see them slogging hours per day, and having to combat increasing rentals. True, there are always bad eggs (in your opinion), but these are only fruits of their labour (for cooking something that people love). Are you telling me that just because they are a hawker, they cannot enjoy some luxury in life?
4. I disagree with the statement you made, that having cheaper HDBs means lesser sqft. More affordable HDBs results in more affordable resale market, resulting in more affordable private market. Again you are just making baseless remarks in order to support the profit-making stance that the govt is taking now. No one asked you to build more HDB flats. The suggestion was to ensure that HDB flats remain affordable, which in turn affects the secondary market.
Of Course, for point 4, we are in a vicious cycle. We cannot afford to lower the prices of new HDB flats now, because if we do, people who have bought houses in the past stand to lose substantial value in their properties. Therefore there is no way but up for property prices in Singapore.
As you are as aghast at my perceptions based on reality on the ground true to the values of scientific principles, as my equal aghast at your lack of simple comprehension and twisting of my written words selectively to suit whatever silly agenda you have in your mind, I forsee that you and I will never see eye to eye, which is common whenever your ego is in play.
Thus I will leave whatever you and I had written stand and be interpretated as it was written, for others more discerning and less antagonistic, mine for consideration and yours - a stubborn uncompromising imposition of your beliefs upon others.
Thanks somewhat for your reply anyway. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
As you are as aghast at my perceptions based on reality on the ground true to the values of scientific principles, as my equal aghast at your lack of simple comprehension and twisting of my written words selectively to suit whatever silly agenda you have in your mind, I forsee that you and I will never see eye to eye, which is common whenever your ego is in play.
Thus I will leave whatever you and I had written stand and be interpretated as it was written, for others more discerning and less antagonistic, mine for consideration and yours - a stubborn uncompromising imposition of your beliefs upon others.
Thanks somewhat for your reply anyway. Cheers.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
As you are as aghast at my perceptions based on reality on the ground true to the values of scientific principles, as my equal aghast at your lack of simple comprehension and twisting of my written words selectively to suit whatever silly agenda you have in your mind, I forsee that you and I will never see eye to eye, which is common whenever your ego is in play.
Thus I will leave whatever you and I had written stand and be interpretated as it was written, for others more discerning and less antagonistic, mine for consideration and yours - a stubborn uncompromising imposition of your beliefs upon others.
Thanks somewhat for your reply anyway. Cheers.
Reality? Oh please. Don't make us laugh.You made a statement about Hawkers and them "charge high fares for their wares, and splurge it on boy racer WRX for their sons, and ipods for their daughters."
This is reality? That ALL HAWKERS buy WRX and ipods for their children? You are a man of Science, trust you to make a "For all" statement, when Mathematics is telling you BLATANTLY you are stereotyping. the next thing I know, you will claim Mathematics is not Science *shakes head*
Oh please, you are really a joke to all of us in this forum. I never claimed to be some great believer of Science. YOU DID. Therefore, you are falling head over your ass making stupid stereotyping like the above.
And AGAIN (This is the FOURTH time) I post the below, which you have FAILED to reply, thereby continuing to show your total lack of credibility and graciousness. It's in RED fonts now, just in case you give an excuse its not obvious enough. I can bold in as well, in case you STILL cannot read it.
This is a gentle reminder to the dumbass that he has not replied to the questions. If he doesn't reply, it further shows his lack of graciousness and blind ego
You still haven't answered the questions arising from your own self-limited knowledge (stupidity).
To date, it really says a lot about you. Continue humouring all of us with your monkey antics :D
I repeat a few of them here again just in case you feign dementia
Did you or did you not say the Thai Canal is a pipe dream when in fact, it's a real risk? Yes or No.
Did you or did you not say that Statistics is NOT a Science, when in fact, it's part of Mathematics which in turn is part of Science? Yes or No.
I gave you 2 SIMPLE questions to answer. Make it SO simple that even a fool can answer. If you STILL cannot acknowledge your errors, it speaks volumes about your graciousness and your blind ego. :D