[GPGT] GOH MENG SENG criticise Chen Show Mao speech + responses from netizens

[Leongsam]

Firstly, a country is not like a company. So a government is not like a board of management. The production operator is also not like a citizen. A company is in it for profits. A country has many more externalities and stakeholders.

Production operators do not vote for the CEO. If so, then there is some analogy.

That may the case with some countries such as Australia, Brunei and a handful of other nations blessed with natural resources. Unfortunately, with a city state such as Singapore, the only way to ensure that the country stays afloat is to run it according to sound economic principles. That means it has to turn a profit on a regular basis. If it doesn't, it'll turn into a basket case in no time at all.

Singapore has about 690 square kilometers of land. That is its production floor. With this limited area, it has to create sufficient economic activity to feed its population, defend its airspace over a 500 km radius, defend its sea routes, invest for the future and grow its economy without any options for any major expansion.

All this has to happen while the rest of the world is nipping at its heels eager to steal Singapore's slice of the pie at a moment's notice at the first signs of weakness.

If you think Singapore can afford to run its economy along some touchy feely principles while ignoring harsh economic realities, you're living in some sort of dreamland. Welfare, democracy, social justice are words which will ring hollow when there is no food on the table.

 

[Nice-Gook]

Many here seem to have a topsy turvy view of what it takes to manage a country or a company for that matter.

Let's do an analogy. You are a manager in a factory. You have been told by the CEO that the salary you earn is set at 10 times that of your worst performing production operator so if she earns $800 per month, you get $8000.

You have many talented engineers in your team too but their performance and their salaries don't affect you at all because you aren't measured according to how well they perform. Your salary review every year is based solely on the performance of that dumbest and laziest member of your team.

How would you manage the situation? Would you reward her with a nice increment?

I know you will paint yourselves into a corner.But you surprise me with this analogy;I expected far better from you.Let me answer.

You forgot that a production based factory is also a team work.No point having the best of engineers and worst of production workers...same as having the best of production workers and worst of engineers.The productivity still suffers the same.

Let me tell you where the difference lies.In numbers lah.I am sure the numbers of factory workers will far exceed the number of engineers.Since there cannot be a factory that has more engineers than production workers.

Therefore,the method of rewarding the CEO is easily measurable.Productivity.Which means higher quantity with lesser cost.

This is exactly what the PAP is doing; by rewarding their ministers on GDP index,But the chink is; in a factory situation you have the option to adjust many variables.You can hire and fire at will,you can shift the operation elsewhere,you can expand or reduce the production based on profitability.

You can't do that to a nation.It comes with all it's warts.Just like your children because you cannot trade your child for a better or smarter one.You have to make the best out of what is given to you.Hence you ought to performance to make the best out of the entire lot.

Ok,why the bottom and not the top?

Because even without your management skill,there always will be someone in the top-always.It could be a lawyer earning top dollars today but a businessman tomorrow--who may go bankrupt after tomorrow because of financial crisis to be replaced by a top doctor who makes a bomb very much because of bad times.Hence benchmarking PAP ministers pay to top earners is fundamentally flawed.Since in no way it reflects their own performance or managerial skill.

But benchmarking the ministers salaries to the bottom of 10 % or 20 % income brackets reflects the performance of the cabinet more accurately.Since a line is already drawn from which the upliftment of this lot has to come from by the ways how the cabinet administers by introduction of new measures .

 

[Nice-Gook]

That may the case with some countries such as Australia, Brunei and a handful of other nations blessed with natural resources. Unfortunately, with a city state such as Singapore, the only way to ensure that the country stays afloat is to run it according to sound economic principles. That means it has to turn a profit on a regular basis. If it doesn't, it'll turn into a basket case in no time at all.

.

I think you have a problem understanding the concept of management.A manager manages.It does not matter if it'a resource rich country like Australia or a piece of rock like HK..Likewise,a cabinet has to mange a country's resources as citizen's trustees.Managing is both an art and science.

So,when we are talking about PAP ministers salaries ,it that aspect about managerial skill we are talking about.Because many country with vast natural resources can still be run down to the ground as a pariah state.Burma is a classical example.And there are others who is hardly a speck on the atlas but punches above it's weight.Monte Carlo is a classical example---an improvised stretch of barren land whose real estate is the most expensive on this earth now.

 

[kingrant]

Precisely because we want to run Singapore on harsh economic realities, we demand that political leaders must match their rewards with performance. And they must do it while running the entity as a country, not a corporation. Even the U.S. does not run wholly along corporatist lines, altho some have tried but they have failed.

Being mindful of externalities and areas where the market mechanism does not always work, that is good government, not touchy feely stuff. Though I know of not a few Ministers who love that touchy feely feeling of money, unabashedly smiling at their CPF while the peasantry wallow in poverty and privation.

If you think Singapore can afford to run its economy along some touchy feely principles while ignoring harsh economic realities, you're living in some sort of dreamland. Welfare, democracy, social justice are words which will ring hollow when there is no food on the table.

 

[kingrant]

Unfortunately for the PAP and diehard lickers like you, the geography of this place and its place in the world has always been the same. So you cannot use that as an excuse. The British and our 1st gen leaders could run this place without having to turn a profit at every turn, and it never was a basket case. In fact the PAP once was proud to declare its socialist bent until they got greedy knowing that they wouldnt be able to ask for million dollar salaries if they continue to remain socialist. So they cast off their socialist skin to morph into greedy profiteering capitalists.

Unfortunately, with a city state such as Singapore, the only way to ensure that the country stays afloat is to run it according to sound economic principles. That means it has to turn a profit on a regular basis. If it doesn't, it'll turn into a basket case in no time at all.

Singapore has about 690 square kilometers of land. That is its production floor. With this limited area, it has to create sufficient economic activity to feed its population, defend its airspace over a 500 km radius, defend its sea routes, invest for the future and grow its economy without any options for any major expansion.

All this has to happen while the rest of the world is nipping at its heels eager to steal Singapore's slice of the pie at a moment's notice at the first signs of weakness.

 

[GoldenDragon]

This forum may not be full of insects but it's certainly populated by an unusually large number of morons and ignoramuses.

As boss, you are doing fine - leading by example. We need to catch-up with you, tuan.

 

[Windsor]

I would not want to go overboard with lowering the absolute dollar value of the salaries for the time being at leashave been enjoying obscene salaries for too long. The top civil servants might also get their pay adjusted. Honestly, do you really want to make even further reduction? When you do that, that reduction would filter down to even the middle ranks in the GLCs and the civil service

Bro...your wall of text is very diificult to read and puts readers off. You spent so much time and effort to write a piece and you cannot be bothered to make it readable. I for one will not bohter reading any of your posts if you too cannot be bothered.

 

[Seee3]

Whatever the formula maybe, I will only be satisfied if the salary is peg to his worth. As an untested new guy, the only way to gauge his worth is to base it on his last drawn pay. Just peg it to the last pay and put a cap to it. No one can challenge it if the % increase is reasonable.

 

[sleaguepunter]

while i voted for WP before, i must say i no fan of CSM. to me, CSM machiam become Spore Ma yingjeong. everything he do seems to be correct while pap who said the same thing abet in a different way is nonsense. It turning into a circus. personally, i think WP numbers are too big but having said that, i happen to know how much those management level excutives from ex stat boards but now claim to be privatise companies receive annually. the numbers are mind blogging. these ex stats board which may not be turning a profit annually yet their ceo aka ex generals are getting close or in some case more than some ministars. like one pap mpee once remarked, liddat the ministars (ie ccs) where got face to talk to their ex kar kias in saf. hehe..

but having said that, i can understand where WP coming from on its ministar wage adjustment. it not the how much the wage was reduce but the way it was reduce. by pegging to the civil servant wage grade, WP is telling singaporean that the ministars are not talent the pap claim they are but just some brown noses who got lucky enough to be notice by the familee during their stint in the civil service or uniformed agencies. WP do not need the liberal votes which account maybe to the 10% but the huge 40% middle ground which i sad to say are as daft as lky said they are. so by giving something similar to blur the line, WP is trying confuse the middle ground. until sdp is a credible force, the liberal vote may still go to any AP that contest against the pap.

 

[Fook Seng]

Bro...your wall of text is very diificult to read and puts readers off. You spent so much time and effort to write a piece and you cannot be bothered to make it readable. I for one will not bohter reading any of your posts if you too cannot be bothered.

I am struggling quite a bit with my iPhone's self correction. Are you referring to my English or paragraphing/punctuation?

 

[Conqueror]

Ignorance Is Bliss

Ignorance is bliss!

 

[Conqueror]

Capitalism + Socialism

Politics shouldn't be about who earns the most, unlike Olympics where it's about who finished first. Politics should be about helping those left behind to catch up to a decent line. If earning more and more and the most is the objective, the fellow should be an entrepreneur, not a politician. There's a process of law of averages and natural selection. Not everyone capable is eyeing or dying for money. Look at opposition. The most they could get with a win is about $15k pm only.

What you mean is that a republic = capitalism + socialism

But, what you are seeing now is a capitalism that benefits ONLY the upper echelons and PAP gang but low towards the lower echelons plus poor plus indebted.

Is there anything new when someone wrote "The Animal Farm" some donkey and horsey years ago ?

 

[LeMans2011]

The word "talent" is much abused by PAP and, shamelessly. No where in the world do you find politicians constantly referring to themselves as "top talents".
How successful will these "PAP talent" be in the private sector had they not entered politics? Having been in PAP and well connected to the cronies makes it a little harder to judge whether people like Lim Hwee Hua or George Yeo can run a business successfully. In all fairness the doctors (Ng Eng Hen) and lawyers (Shammugun) were high earners in the private sector... but then again coming into politics is a choice they made.

Workers' Party being a moderate party seeks to demolish the principle of pegging ministers' pay to private sector and that is indeed the first principle to be challenged. One bro rightly pointed out the 5x and 9x multiples are by no means nailed in stone suggestions and i am sure WP is not going to defend this multiple if challenged... it is up to the people in power to decide... and if they make a wrong judgement call by setting the multiple too high, the electorate will speak through their votes.

Differing views are a norm in a mature democracy... whereas name callings are reserved for losers.

 

[Leongsam]

You forgot that a production based factory is also a team work.No point having the best of engineers and worst of production workers...same as having the best of production workers and worst of engineers.The productivity still suffers the same.

Let me tell you where the difference lies.In numbers lah.I am sure the numbers of factory workers will far exceed the number of engineers.Since there cannot be a factory that has more engineers than production workers.

Teamwork is well and good but as is the case in all teams, there will be the slackers and those who refuse to pull their weight. The larger the team, the more of these sorts of characters there will be.

Running a country requires teamwork too. Each and every citizen has to play their part.

The crux of the issue is this.. do you pander to the worst performing members of the team and try to coax them into lifting their game no matter how reluctant they are to put in an honest day's work for an honest day's pay or do you concentrate your efforts on helping those who are smart, hardworking and resourceful and pull their share of the weight.

In a factory situation, the worst performers will be fired sooner or later. In a country, as you correctly point out, this is not an option. They are part of "family" and you have to live with them for better of for worse. I have no problems with that.

However, what many people are suggesting in this forum is that as a nation, not only do we have to put up with the useless members of the team, we need to go one step further and REWARD them with free money, free food and free lodging. Imagine being rewarded for being useless. It boggles the mind. Never in my life would I have thought that Singaporeans would want to go down this route. I always believed that Singaporeans had a work ethic. It seems I am sadly mistaken.

To take the ludicrous concept even further, it is now being suggested that pay levels of important jobs be determined by the income levels of the losers of society.

 

[Leongsam]

Unfortunately for the PAP and diehard lickers like you, the geography of this place and its place in the world has always been the same. So you cannot use that as an excuse. The British and our 1st gen leaders could run this place without having to turn a profit at every turn, and it never was a basket case. In fact the PAP once was proud to declare its socialist bent until they got greedy knowing that they wouldnt be able to ask for million dollar salaries if they continue to remain socialist. So they cast off their socialist skin to morph into greedy profiteering capitalists.

I don't know when you came into existence but when Singapore was still a British Colony, it looked very much like a basket case through my eyes. Sanitation was non existent. Running water was a luxury. So was electricity. The currency was worthless. Roads in the outlying areas were nothing more than m&d tracks which were unusable when it rained.

You seem to have this vision that old Singapore that is so far removed from reality that it defies belief.

 

[scroobal]

FolksThere is serious debate raging here on the pay model but the title is misleading. Would suggest in future to start a new thread once you realise that its not about GMS and mving to another subject. Other readers might skip this thread based on title.

 

[Leongsam]

FolksThere is serious debate raging here on the pay model but the title is misleading. Would suggest in future to start a new thread once you realise that its not about GMS and mving to another subject. Other readers might skip this thread based on title.

It can hardly be called a "serious" debate.

What we have here is a bunch of airheads who actually believe that the remuneration for an important job like running the country should be determined based on the income levels of a bunch of lazy, unmotivated layabouts unable or unwilling to pull their weight like the rest of the productive members of society.

However, I do not for one moment believe that when it comes to their own salaries, they'd be willing to practise what they preach. All they're doing is grandstanding in order to be in sync with the prevailing mood. If I'm wrong on this count, step up and say so. Tell me that in whatever job you're holding now, you have no problems having your pay determined by the income level of the idiots in your organisation.

 

[Leongsam]

Would you want your salary to be linked to this guy?

​

Well you're on your own. You can count me out.

 

[Nice-Gook]

However, what many people are suggesting in this thread is that as a nation, not only do we have to put up with the useless members of the team, we need to go one step further and REWARD them with free money, free food and free lodging. Imagine being rewarded for being useless. It boggles the mind. Never in my life would I have thought that Singaporeans would want to go down this route. I always believed that Singaporeans had a work ethic. It seems I am sadly mistaken.

Sam old chap,I think you got the concept of a welfare state and how to measure the managerial skills of PAP ministers and thus reward them accordingly clubbed together.No,they are two different issues altogether.

Simply put how does one measures the managerial skill of PAP ministers.That is all.

Not that I am advocating that ministers must be the caliber of top end managers.Since the premise that ministers are managerial materials itself is fundamentally flawed.Since,the administrative aspects of management itself comes from the civil service and not from political office holders.And that a skilled million dollar surgeon like say Dr.Eng could very well be a very poor managerial material is not addressed.Notwithstanding ministerships are political portfolios.But since PAP had blurred the line between political and executive office holders,and that PAP insists that it's ministers must be rewarded along market forces--so let us just stick to this aspect about PAP ministers so called managerial skills and how to reward them accordingly.

I already had explained and that you must be aware yourself that in a factory situation the numbers of unskilled labor far exceeds skilled labor----similarly with a nation.There will be far less top earners than low income earners.It's purely a number game.And politics itself is a number game since 1 man holds 1 vote.

Therefore,whether they like it or not it befalls on PAP ministers to uplift the income level of the majority of Singaporeans and not minority of Singaporeans....and majority of Singaporeans are not top earners.Hence PAP ministers pay and bonus must be bench marked to our lowest 10% or 20% income earners. This is the only way to measure the managerial skills of PAP ministers,if any.

 

[Leongsam]

Therefore,whether they like it or not it befalls on PAP ministers to uplift the income level of the majority of Singaporeans and not minority of Singaporeans....and majority of Singaporeans are not top earners.Hence PAP ministers pay and bonus must be bench marked to our lowest 10% or 20% income earners. This is the only way to measure the managerial skills of PAP ministers,if any.

I disagree with that fundamental concept. Let's put the PAP and their flaws aside for the moment. No matter what the scenario be it country or company, the best way to get the best performance out of a team is for all the members of a team to see what it's like to reach the top. It will motivate them to try harder and the whole team benefits as a result.

So when the majority of Singaporeans witness how the top players in society are rewarded, it should inspire them to achieve greater heights and the whole nation benefits from this constant tussle to be on the top of the heap.

Any govt, PAP, WP, SDP.. whoever runs the country should concentrate on ensuring that hard work and high achievement must have it's just rewards while mediocrity should be punished.