A Great Leap Backward
The 2006 Budget though packed with goodies actually revealed that the economic health of Singapore is not as rosy. Singapore has actually taken a great leap backward - from 2006 to 1970s.
The most telling sign is the decision to build 2-room flats for sale. The government had stopped building two- and three-room flats for sale in the 1980s as Singaporeans became well off and wanted to live in bigger flats. But in 2004 many of us lost our jobs and needed to downgrade to smaller flats, the government then started to build 3-room flats for sale. And now some of us can only afford a 2-room flat. Are we not back to the pre-1980s days?
The workfare bonus seems to suggest that the government is unable to create good jobs for the over 40-year-old. By offering bonus to all middle-age persons who worked for at least 6 months in 2005 and 2006, the government seems to be trying to get them to take up whatever job available, whether it is menial, low pay, part-time or without any CPF contribution. This isn't much of a difference from the 1970s where mainly unsecured low-paying jobs were available.
While getting the middle-aged to accept any job maybe good for the employment figure, it will not be beneficial in the long term, especially to the ruling party. This group of people may become disillusioned with the party and withdraw their support for the party.
The most telling sign is the decision to build 2-room flats for sale. The government had stopped building two- and three-room flats for sale in the 1980s as Singaporeans became well off and wanted to live in bigger flats. But in 2004 many of us lost our jobs and needed to downgrade to smaller flats, the government then started to build 3-room flats for sale. And now some of us can only afford a 2-room flat. Are we not back to the pre-1980s days?
The workfare bonus seems to suggest that the government is unable to create good jobs for the over 40-year-old. By offering bonus to all middle-age persons who worked for at least 6 months in 2005 and 2006, the government seems to be trying to get them to take up whatever job available, whether it is menial, low pay, part-time or without any CPF contribution. This isn't much of a difference from the 1970s where mainly unsecured low-paying jobs were available.
While getting the middle-aged to accept any job maybe good for the employment figure, it will not be beneficial in the long term, especially to the ruling party. This group of people may become disillusioned with the party and withdraw their support for the party.
posted by locky2ky at 11:12 AM
3 Comments:
Perhaps 2-3 room flats are a good thing for the new generation of working class 20-somethings. It would definitely be a good thing if cultural change was shifting towards the working youth moving out of their parents' roofs and becoming more financially independent. Most working single Singaporeans I know seem to prefer staying with their parents for the obvious reasons of cost-cutting and mum's homecooked dinners.
It's just my guess, but 2-3 room flats would be cheaper and more affordable for singles or new couples, plus the added privacy of living away from your parents. At the moment I dont see any other feasible alternative for a person in such a scenario. Maybe it's actually a good indicator that working youths today have the financial power to make such decisions...
Hi clyde
Thanks for dropping by.
Yes I also look forward for a cultural change whereby our young adults learn to live on their own and not dependent on their parents. Unfortunately, I don't think that is the case. Most of these 2-3 room flats are taken up by families( and usually with 2 or 3 kids) whose incomes have been reduced drastically because of job loss or salary cut.
Also, during our better times(1980's to early 1990's) most new couples would opt for the biggest flats, 5-room or executive, and not 2 or 3 room flats. That was one of the reasons why there was no demand for 2-3 room flats in the 1980's
This is a great post, thanks for sharing it.
Post a Comment
<< Home