<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>Home-grown entrepreneurs need encouragement
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I AM not sure former Economic Development Board chairman, Mr Chan Chin Bock, in his letter yesterday, "Be realistic on home-grown entrepreneurs", is looking at home-grown entrepreneurship as a broad-based issue.
One belief is that, in economic terms, the returns on resources extended to building up home-grown entrepreneurship are far less than that extended to encouraging established world industries to bring their enterprise to our country. In the shorter term, we cannot fault this assumption.
Industries come because we can offer lower cost operation due to many reasons, such as tax incentives, skilled workers and managers, excellent infrastructure, clean and safe environment, and a place where everything works. They can also leave quickly when a more competitive government can offer better incentives.
A more serious problem arises, however, when our creative entrepreneurs lack the motivation to venture out on their own.
Mr Chan mentioned that even established home-grown industries in the United States, such as General Motors and General Electric, will not hesitate to lay off workers, shrink their operations and relocate to another country.
This may not be destructive to the US economy. In fact, it may encourage the country to innovate further with whatever resources that remain, such as harnessing state of the art research, which eventually generates higher returns.
If we look at the issue from this point of view, we must move quickly to build up our own industries.
Yes, as a global economy, we must attract the best, and that means locals will have to compete to be part of it. Realistically, we can do this only if we are given additional incentives. Otherwise, I fear that we may remain a nation efficient in providing skilled workers and managerial services - in short, an established offshore service centre. Daniel Gwee
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I AM not sure former Economic Development Board chairman, Mr Chan Chin Bock, in his letter yesterday, "Be realistic on home-grown entrepreneurs", is looking at home-grown entrepreneurship as a broad-based issue.
One belief is that, in economic terms, the returns on resources extended to building up home-grown entrepreneurship are far less than that extended to encouraging established world industries to bring their enterprise to our country. In the shorter term, we cannot fault this assumption.
Industries come because we can offer lower cost operation due to many reasons, such as tax incentives, skilled workers and managers, excellent infrastructure, clean and safe environment, and a place where everything works. They can also leave quickly when a more competitive government can offer better incentives.
A more serious problem arises, however, when our creative entrepreneurs lack the motivation to venture out on their own.
Mr Chan mentioned that even established home-grown industries in the United States, such as General Motors and General Electric, will not hesitate to lay off workers, shrink their operations and relocate to another country.
This may not be destructive to the US economy. In fact, it may encourage the country to innovate further with whatever resources that remain, such as harnessing state of the art research, which eventually generates higher returns.
If we look at the issue from this point of view, we must move quickly to build up our own industries.
Yes, as a global economy, we must attract the best, and that means locals will have to compete to be part of it. Realistically, we can do this only if we are given additional incentives. Otherwise, I fear that we may remain a nation efficient in providing skilled workers and managerial services - in short, an established offshore service centre. Daniel Gwee
