and so, everyone see, sliverfox's love and feelings for the ruling party had indeed blocked out his mental train of thought. that's why he can no longer look at things from an objective and partial point of view. :(
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Lim Swee Say: Minimum wage is an easy solution
- Thread starter Watchman
- Start date
and so, everyone see, sliverfox's love and feelings for the ruling party had indeed blocked out his mental train of thought. that's why he can no longer look at things from an objective and partial point of view. :(
You should explain what should be the minimum wage suggested, and what will happen next after minimum wage is implemented.
To be well loved in this forum is easy, you just need to be anti-PAP and everyone will be your friend. Even to the extent that certain issues are disagreed for the sake of disagreeing and not questioning the repercussions that follows.
I am not disagreeing on having minimum wage but I am telling u there are many more issues besides just implementing minimum wage and thinking the problem stops there.
Read the part on Economics of Minimum Wage
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage
According to the model shown in nearly all introductory textbooks on economics, increasing the minimum wage decreases the employment of minimum-wage workers.[13] One such textbook says:
"If a higher minimum wage increases the wage rates of unskilled workers above the level that would be established by market forces, the quantity of unskilled workers employed will fall. The minimum wage will price the services of the least productive (and therefore lowest-wage) workers out of the market. ... The direct results of minimum wage legislation are clearly mixed. Some workers, most likely those whose previous wages were closest to the minimum, will enjoy higher wages. Others, particularly those with the lowest prelegislation wage rates, will be unable to find work. They will be pushed into the ranks of the unemployed or out of the labor force."[14]
You are the one who is daft. You started by quoting Foxconn. And the whole world knows Foxconn is the biggest exploiter of workers now. While Terry gou and Steve jobs are shopping for yachts, young chinese workers are jumping off buildings and slitting wrists in Shenzhen.
Depressing wages and other forms of worker exploitation is the dirtiest way to make profit. Go and tell that to your masters.
Just food for thought;
Pegging renumeration to top earners in the private sectors is also an easy way out to combat corruption.
Then lets say Maximium wage pegged at $100,000, or $200,000 per month. Enough or not?
And Mr Lim wants the people to look beyond if minimum wage is implemented. By the same token, did the policy makers look beyond when the peg to top earners in the private sectors was implemented? And even better leh, no consultation was required prior to implementation for the latter.:(
I am not infavour for a minimium wage across the board. It would be more applicable for citizens born between WWII and mid sixties. Where the education system was not well established for the masses. But for children born beyond such a period, they were given enough opportunities to determine their own future, except those reserved for elites
But at least they can still make a reasonable living if they put in the effort.
Though minimum wage is well intentioned, it will open up a host of loop holes. Imagine one of the possibilities, FT pay for a real cert, and get citizenship so as to qualify for minimum wage as long there is a net gain for himself.
Pegging renumeration to top earners in the private sectors is also an easy way out to combat corruption.
Then lets say Maximium wage pegged at $100,000, or $200,000 per month. Enough or not?
And Mr Lim wants the people to look beyond if minimum wage is implemented. By the same token, did the policy makers look beyond when the peg to top earners in the private sectors was implemented? And even better leh, no consultation was required prior to implementation for the latter.:(
I am not infavour for a minimium wage across the board. It would be more applicable for citizens born between WWII and mid sixties. Where the education system was not well established for the masses. But for children born beyond such a period, they were given enough opportunities to determine their own future, except those reserved for elites
But at least they can still make a reasonable living if they put in the effort.Though minimum wage is well intentioned, it will open up a host of loop holes. Imagine one of the possibilities, FT pay for a real cert, and get citizenship so as to qualify for minimum wage as long there is a net gain for himself.
So do you have a solution?
Let's say Minimum wage pegged at $3000 per month. Enough or not?
Last edited:
Ground zero for the FT/Minimum wage policy debate will be in Hong Kah/CCK. Minister Gan is currently in CCk. There are expectations that he will be moved to take over Hong Kah.
Aligned against him is the Reform Party and KJ. Without openly announcing a Minister specific strategy, KJ has systematically attacked Minister Gan over issues like the FT policy. The Reform Party has also devoted the most time and effort among the Opposition parties to push for a minimum wage. Most importantly, RP has announced that they will be contesting in BOTH Hong Kah and CCK.
Supporting KJ is of course Temasek Review with its strong anti-FT bias. The support of TR for this electoral battle is critical given the unusual demographic make up of Hong Kah/CCK.
Wth MM in hospital for a "chest infection" and a December election looking increasingly unlikely, there is now plenty of time for KJ to continue to work the ground on this issue. Hopefully it will emerge as one of the key issues of the what now must be GE2011. Voters in Hong Kah/CCK can represent ALL Singaporeans to tell the PAP what Singaporeans think of the FT policy.
Minimum Wage
http://votingrp.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/minimum-wage/
Posted on September 28, 2010 by votingrp
Since I became leader of the Reform Party in April 2009 I have made the introduction of a minimum wage in Singapore one of our main policy pledges (see the link below for RP’s 19 main policy pledges): http://votingrp.wordpress.com/about/
Why?
Since 1998 the average incomes of the poorest 20% of households have fallen by around 20% after inflation. However this is undoubtedly a substantial underestimate of how far real incomes have fallen for poorer households.
The government measures inflation by the change in the consumer price index (CPI). This measures the change in the prices of a basket of goods consumed by the average household. This basket represents the items that the average family buys in the course of a week. However the basket of goods consumed by the poorest 20% is very different from that consumed by the average household. Food, transport, housing and other basic necessities represent a much bigger percentage of household income for poorer households. These items have risen in price much more than the average over the last ten years.
Also the CPI fails to capture the rise in housing costs because in Singapore our statistics department uses a notional equivalent rent for owner-occupied housing. The UK and other countries have moved away from this to a method measuring the change in the costs of an average mortgage and also incorporating a measure of depreciation costs. Since all HDB flats are on 99 year leaseholds and the life of an HDB block may be no more than forty years this needs to be reflected in the CPI. If we take an average HDB property then it loses one year of the remaining lease with each year that passes or 1/x where x is the number of years remaining on the lease. As the prices of HDB flats rise and the average lease gets shorter depreciation costs rise as well.
Taking these factors into account, average incomes of the poorest 20% of households may have fallen by up to 30% since 1998.
Why has this been so? Here the blame must be laid on the PAP’s open-door policy towards the employment of foreign labour. What should have been a way of attracting workers with special skills that Singaporeans lacked instead turned into a means of preventing wages from rising as rapid economic growth used up the pool of available workers. As a deliberate result of PAP policy, Singapore’s potential labour supply increased from our population to include most of Asia’s unemployed and underemployed masses. Far from rising, real wages of the lowest 20% were significantly depressed. Price signals were prevented from working as they should have in a market economy and there was no incentive for employers to invest in raising the productivity of the workforce. As a result our productivity performance over this period was one of the worst in the developed world. Real GDP per hour worked grew by only 1.1% p.a. over the period 2000-2008 while US GDP per hour worked grew by 2% and South Korea grew by 4.2% over the same period.
By adopting a minimum wage the Reform Party is ensuring that there is a floor below which real wages cannot fall and that employers focus on boosting productivity rather than relying on ever cheaper labour. Asia has a huge pool of underemployed and unemployed workers and without this protection real wages of unskilled labour in Singapore could continue to fall for years, if not decades. As leader of the Reform Party, I also want to couple a minimum wage with caps on the number of foreign workers, who compete directly with Singaporeans for jobs. Exceptions will be made for those with special skills that Singapore lacks. My own philosophy is pro-market and pro-business, as is the Reform Party, and we are certainly not opposed to economic growth. The Reform Party just wants to ensure that we are focused on the right measures, e.g. growth in real median incomes or in output per hour worked, rather than just on a crude GDP measure which has no relationship to the welfare of ordinary Singaporeans.
What sections of the population would it cover?
The Reform Party intends that the minimum wage should cover everyone, with the exception of foreign domestic workers. We may have a lower minimum for students and young workers and for those over the age of 55. The incomes of the latter can then be topped up through our proposed Guaranteed Minimum Income, just as they are now by Workfare.
What level would it be set at?
The Reform Party would want to conduct further research and consultation before it set the level. A possible initial level is around $5-$6 per hour though this could be raised over time in line with the CPI and the growth in average wage rates and taking account of broader measures of unemployment among the resident labour force.
Arguments against the Minimum Wage
Recently there has been a lot of discussion in the Main Stream Media of the arguments for and against a minimum wage. Again this follows a pattern that has been established since the PAP government’s Productivity Budget of 2010. Since 2009 as leader of the Reform Party I had been pointing out the productivity problem and stating that it was to a large extent due to the PAP’s cheap foreign labour policy. When the Budget came out it ignored what we had been saying and presented it as the government being aware of the problem all along and now moving swiftly to correct it. As usual there was no credit given to the Reform Party or acknowledgement that without political competition or an Opposition mistakes by the government would never get corrected.
Thus it is no surprise to see discussion of the merits of a minimum wage in the MSM given that I have made it one of the Reform Party’s main pledges since last year. It is also not surprising to see Minister of State Lee in his blog on the Ministry of Manpower website rejecting a minimum wage on the grounds that it may hamper the employment of low-skilled workers. However I find his arguments misleading given the fact that the labour market in Singapore is not restricted to Singaporeans but in fact encompasses much of low-wage Asia. On our house to house visits we meet many older workers who are unable to find jobs anymore because of competition from younger cheaper foreign workers and reduced to driving taxis. These people may not be directly helped by our minimum wage proposal though they would be by our proposed curbs on foreign workers where their skill set is already readily available in Singapore. Many Singaporeans who have been discouraged from looking for work may come back into the labour force once wages stop being artificially depressed by the foreign labour influx. And employers will have a greater incentive to use labour-saving machinery and automation, thus raising productivity.
The Minister says that low-skilled workers are better helped through Workfare. However the Workfare scheme is not only costly for the taxpayer. It is not related to need as it increases directly with earnings from employment in an effort to preserve the incentive to work. Most of it goes into CPF so it does nothing to help lower-income workers immediately who may be struggling to get by. The Reform Party prefers a minimum wage which preserves the incentive to work and puts a floor under wage costs for employers rather than perversely providing an incentive for employers to cut wages further. The Minister also mentions the Workfare Training Scheme. The Reform Party has put increasing spending on education and training at the forefront of its policies and we would continue to expand schemes for the retraining of low-skilled workers provided they could be shown to be of real benefit.
Conclusion
Without a minimum wage the real incomes of the bottom 20% of households could continue to decline. In addition the effects of the PAP’s liberal foreign labour policy are being felt only by this group but by all those below the top 20-40% of households.
The Reform Party is committed to the introduction of a minimum wage. We also want restrictions on the entry of foreign labour where Singaporeans already have the necessary skills.
The coming election will probably be a watershed. Which vision of Singapore do you prefer?
• The PAP vision which increasingly seems to be of Singapore as a low-cost low-wage economy run as a company where the population of foreign workers outnumbers substantially the Singaporean element. Though the government talks about a limit on total population size of 6.5 million, it is clear that the dynamic of the PAP model requires that our population continue to expand indefinitely; or
• The Reform Party vision which is of a high-wage high productivity economy where less emphasis is put on GDP growth and more on increasing GDP per hour worked. A country not a company where the welfare of Singaporeans comes first. It‘s up to you to decide. Vote wisely.
Aligned against him is the Reform Party and KJ. Without openly announcing a Minister specific strategy, KJ has systematically attacked Minister Gan over issues like the FT policy. The Reform Party has also devoted the most time and effort among the Opposition parties to push for a minimum wage. Most importantly, RP has announced that they will be contesting in BOTH Hong Kah and CCK.
Supporting KJ is of course Temasek Review with its strong anti-FT bias. The support of TR for this electoral battle is critical given the unusual demographic make up of Hong Kah/CCK.
Wth MM in hospital for a "chest infection" and a December election looking increasingly unlikely, there is now plenty of time for KJ to continue to work the ground on this issue. Hopefully it will emerge as one of the key issues of the what now must be GE2011. Voters in Hong Kah/CCK can represent ALL Singaporeans to tell the PAP what Singaporeans think of the FT policy.
Minimum Wage
http://votingrp.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/minimum-wage/
Posted on September 28, 2010 by votingrp
Since I became leader of the Reform Party in April 2009 I have made the introduction of a minimum wage in Singapore one of our main policy pledges (see the link below for RP’s 19 main policy pledges): http://votingrp.wordpress.com/about/
Why?
Since 1998 the average incomes of the poorest 20% of households have fallen by around 20% after inflation. However this is undoubtedly a substantial underestimate of how far real incomes have fallen for poorer households.
The government measures inflation by the change in the consumer price index (CPI). This measures the change in the prices of a basket of goods consumed by the average household. This basket represents the items that the average family buys in the course of a week. However the basket of goods consumed by the poorest 20% is very different from that consumed by the average household. Food, transport, housing and other basic necessities represent a much bigger percentage of household income for poorer households. These items have risen in price much more than the average over the last ten years.
Also the CPI fails to capture the rise in housing costs because in Singapore our statistics department uses a notional equivalent rent for owner-occupied housing. The UK and other countries have moved away from this to a method measuring the change in the costs of an average mortgage and also incorporating a measure of depreciation costs. Since all HDB flats are on 99 year leaseholds and the life of an HDB block may be no more than forty years this needs to be reflected in the CPI. If we take an average HDB property then it loses one year of the remaining lease with each year that passes or 1/x where x is the number of years remaining on the lease. As the prices of HDB flats rise and the average lease gets shorter depreciation costs rise as well.
Taking these factors into account, average incomes of the poorest 20% of households may have fallen by up to 30% since 1998.
Why has this been so? Here the blame must be laid on the PAP’s open-door policy towards the employment of foreign labour. What should have been a way of attracting workers with special skills that Singaporeans lacked instead turned into a means of preventing wages from rising as rapid economic growth used up the pool of available workers. As a deliberate result of PAP policy, Singapore’s potential labour supply increased from our population to include most of Asia’s unemployed and underemployed masses. Far from rising, real wages of the lowest 20% were significantly depressed. Price signals were prevented from working as they should have in a market economy and there was no incentive for employers to invest in raising the productivity of the workforce. As a result our productivity performance over this period was one of the worst in the developed world. Real GDP per hour worked grew by only 1.1% p.a. over the period 2000-2008 while US GDP per hour worked grew by 2% and South Korea grew by 4.2% over the same period.
By adopting a minimum wage the Reform Party is ensuring that there is a floor below which real wages cannot fall and that employers focus on boosting productivity rather than relying on ever cheaper labour. Asia has a huge pool of underemployed and unemployed workers and without this protection real wages of unskilled labour in Singapore could continue to fall for years, if not decades. As leader of the Reform Party, I also want to couple a minimum wage with caps on the number of foreign workers, who compete directly with Singaporeans for jobs. Exceptions will be made for those with special skills that Singapore lacks. My own philosophy is pro-market and pro-business, as is the Reform Party, and we are certainly not opposed to economic growth. The Reform Party just wants to ensure that we are focused on the right measures, e.g. growth in real median incomes or in output per hour worked, rather than just on a crude GDP measure which has no relationship to the welfare of ordinary Singaporeans.
What sections of the population would it cover?
The Reform Party intends that the minimum wage should cover everyone, with the exception of foreign domestic workers. We may have a lower minimum for students and young workers and for those over the age of 55. The incomes of the latter can then be topped up through our proposed Guaranteed Minimum Income, just as they are now by Workfare.
What level would it be set at?
The Reform Party would want to conduct further research and consultation before it set the level. A possible initial level is around $5-$6 per hour though this could be raised over time in line with the CPI and the growth in average wage rates and taking account of broader measures of unemployment among the resident labour force.
Arguments against the Minimum Wage
Recently there has been a lot of discussion in the Main Stream Media of the arguments for and against a minimum wage. Again this follows a pattern that has been established since the PAP government’s Productivity Budget of 2010. Since 2009 as leader of the Reform Party I had been pointing out the productivity problem and stating that it was to a large extent due to the PAP’s cheap foreign labour policy. When the Budget came out it ignored what we had been saying and presented it as the government being aware of the problem all along and now moving swiftly to correct it. As usual there was no credit given to the Reform Party or acknowledgement that without political competition or an Opposition mistakes by the government would never get corrected.
Thus it is no surprise to see discussion of the merits of a minimum wage in the MSM given that I have made it one of the Reform Party’s main pledges since last year. It is also not surprising to see Minister of State Lee in his blog on the Ministry of Manpower website rejecting a minimum wage on the grounds that it may hamper the employment of low-skilled workers. However I find his arguments misleading given the fact that the labour market in Singapore is not restricted to Singaporeans but in fact encompasses much of low-wage Asia. On our house to house visits we meet many older workers who are unable to find jobs anymore because of competition from younger cheaper foreign workers and reduced to driving taxis. These people may not be directly helped by our minimum wage proposal though they would be by our proposed curbs on foreign workers where their skill set is already readily available in Singapore. Many Singaporeans who have been discouraged from looking for work may come back into the labour force once wages stop being artificially depressed by the foreign labour influx. And employers will have a greater incentive to use labour-saving machinery and automation, thus raising productivity.
The Minister says that low-skilled workers are better helped through Workfare. However the Workfare scheme is not only costly for the taxpayer. It is not related to need as it increases directly with earnings from employment in an effort to preserve the incentive to work. Most of it goes into CPF so it does nothing to help lower-income workers immediately who may be struggling to get by. The Reform Party prefers a minimum wage which preserves the incentive to work and puts a floor under wage costs for employers rather than perversely providing an incentive for employers to cut wages further. The Minister also mentions the Workfare Training Scheme. The Reform Party has put increasing spending on education and training at the forefront of its policies and we would continue to expand schemes for the retraining of low-skilled workers provided they could be shown to be of real benefit.
Conclusion
Without a minimum wage the real incomes of the bottom 20% of households could continue to decline. In addition the effects of the PAP’s liberal foreign labour policy are being felt only by this group but by all those below the top 20-40% of households.
The Reform Party is committed to the introduction of a minimum wage. We also want restrictions on the entry of foreign labour where Singaporeans already have the necessary skills.
The coming election will probably be a watershed. Which vision of Singapore do you prefer?
• The PAP vision which increasingly seems to be of Singapore as a low-cost low-wage economy run as a company where the population of foreign workers outnumbers substantially the Singaporean element. Though the government talks about a limit on total population size of 6.5 million, it is clear that the dynamic of the PAP model requires that our population continue to expand indefinitely; or
• The Reform Party vision which is of a high-wage high productivity economy where less emphasis is put on GDP growth and more on increasing GDP per hour worked. A country not a company where the welfare of Singaporeans comes first. It‘s up to you to decide. Vote wisely.
Last edited:
Thiat was the argument when minimum wages was introduced some 10 years ago in western countries, according to Dr Vincent during SDP rally last saturday this was proven wrong and not true. So what is your fear? As I have said early the world has moved on with 90% of world's population with minimum wage and here you insist is not workable. We have so many unemployed without minimum wage and the government will import another 80k foreign workers, I don't know what you are talking!!!
That is the stupidest argument I have come acrossed. The same one used by Lim and Lim because they don't even know the basics.
That theoretical minimum wage is above the equilibrium wage. But in Singapore, the wage has been depressed way below the equilibrium wage due to the influx of foreign workers.
Even with a minimum wage of $6.80, it is still below equilibrium wage.
The recent SLA saga gave a lot of people opportunity to say, "See high pay also can corrupt" So combating corruption is a better phrase. Critics are expecting 0 corruption. Corruption free, which is impossibleJust food for thought;
Pegging renumeration to top earners in the private sectors is also an easy way out to combat corruption.
Then lets say Maximium wage pegged at $100,000, or $200,000 per month. Enough or not?
And Mr Lim wants the people to look beyond if minimum wage is implemented. By the same token, did the policy makers look beyond when the peg to top earners in the private sectors was implemented? And even better leh, no consultation was required prior to implementation for the latter.:(
I am not infavour for a minimium wage across the board. It would be more applicable for citizens born between WWII and mid sixties. Where the education system was not well established for the masses. But for children born beyond such a period, they were given enough opportunities to determine their own future, except those reserved for elites
Though minimum wage is well intentioned, it will open up a host of loop holes. Imagine one of the possibilities, FT pay for a real cert, and get citizenship so as to qualify for minimum wage as long there is a net gain for himself.
When we see low paid workers, people want to help them. The fastest solution is to increase their pay, set a minimum wage. So let's say set it at $7 per hour. 5 years down, people will start saying $7 per hr not enough, let's increase the minimum wage. increase to $9 per hr. Another 5 yrs again same problem, so the easiest way is to increase it to $11 per hr.
I am not against of minimum wage neither for minimum wage. But I forsee that if there is a minimum wage, employers will prefer workers who are more skilled than those unskilled. The example you mentioned, FT paying for a cert don't even need to apply to FT. Singaporeans are also buying certs. All for qualifying for the minimum wage. The really poor and unskilled ones will still be at the unwanted end. In the end, implement the solution but the problem is still not solved. Yet not forgetting the cost issues being passed on somehow or another to consumers.
So far many of the extreme cases of low wage workers belongs to the category of unskilled. If they are skilled, they can find better pastures. What I was thinking is identifying those who belong to these category to equip and train them to be skilled and can allow them to find better jobs and get higher pay. To identify them is via their income and financial status, living conditions. However this solution is not perfect, identified workers must still embrace the scheme to help themselves.
Arguments in favor of Minimum Wage Laws
Supporters of the minimum wage claim it has these effects:
* Increases the standard of living for the poorest and most vulnerable class in society and raises average.[1]
* Motivates and encourages employees to work harder (unlike welfare programs and other transfer payments).[27]
* Stimulates consumption, by putting more money in the hands of low-income people who spend their entire paychecks.[1]
* Increases the work ethic of those who earn very little, as employers demand more return from the higher cost of hiring these employees.[1]
* Decreases the cost of government social welfare programs by increasing incomes for the lowest-paid.[1]
* Encourages the automation of industry. [28]
* Encourages people to join the workforce rather than pursuing money through illegal means, e.g., selling illegal drugs [29] [30]
Arguments against Minimum Wage Laws
Opponents of the minimum wage claim it has these effects:
* As a labor market analogue of political-economic protectionism, it excludes low cost competitors from labor markets, hampers firms in reducing wage costs during trade downturns, generates various industrial-economic inefficiencies as well as unemployment, poverty, and price rises, and generally dysfunctions.[31]
* Hurts small business more than large business.[32]
* Reduces quantity demanded of workers, either through a reduction in the number of hours worked by individuals, or through a reduction in the number of jobs.[33][34]
* May cause price inflation as businesses try to compensate by raising the prices of the goods being sold.[35][36]
* Benefits some workers at the expense of the poorest and least productive.[37]
* Can result in the exclusion of certain groups from the labour force.[38]
* Is less effective than other methods (e.g. the Earned Income Tax Credit) at reducing poverty, and is more damaging to businesses than those other methods.[39]
* Discourages further education among the poor by enticing people to enter the job market.[39]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage
Supporters of the minimum wage claim it has these effects:
* Increases the standard of living for the poorest and most vulnerable class in society and raises average.[1]
* Motivates and encourages employees to work harder (unlike welfare programs and other transfer payments).[27]
* Stimulates consumption, by putting more money in the hands of low-income people who spend their entire paychecks.[1]
* Increases the work ethic of those who earn very little, as employers demand more return from the higher cost of hiring these employees.[1]
* Decreases the cost of government social welfare programs by increasing incomes for the lowest-paid.[1]
* Encourages the automation of industry. [28]
* Encourages people to join the workforce rather than pursuing money through illegal means, e.g., selling illegal drugs [29] [30]
Arguments against Minimum Wage Laws
Opponents of the minimum wage claim it has these effects:
* As a labor market analogue of political-economic protectionism, it excludes low cost competitors from labor markets, hampers firms in reducing wage costs during trade downturns, generates various industrial-economic inefficiencies as well as unemployment, poverty, and price rises, and generally dysfunctions.[31]
* Hurts small business more than large business.[32]
* Reduces quantity demanded of workers, either through a reduction in the number of hours worked by individuals, or through a reduction in the number of jobs.[33][34]
* May cause price inflation as businesses try to compensate by raising the prices of the goods being sold.[35][36]
* Benefits some workers at the expense of the poorest and least productive.[37]
* Can result in the exclusion of certain groups from the labour force.[38]
* Is less effective than other methods (e.g. the Earned Income Tax Credit) at reducing poverty, and is more damaging to businesses than those other methods.[39]
* Discourages further education among the poor by enticing people to enter the job market.[39]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage
Why isn't there something like helping poor unskilled workers to help them achieve Minimum Qualifications, or Minimum Skills?
He is the son of ex Principal of Raffles Institution
when the cost of living goes up ...there must be minimum wages ...just like japan .
if singapore dont have minumum wages ..then why did the cost of living goes up ? it does not make any sense .
i give you an example ..if you are selling chicken rice but your rental and cost go up ( of course you have to sell expensive ), but if your customers salary dont go up ..why do you get customer ( because your customers cannot afford to spend money ) ? sonner or later your business also have to close . if you wind up your business and cannot make money , can you buy iphone ? and indirectly will affect on steve job business ...
rememeber in business there is also cause and effect .
if singapore dont have minumum wages ..then why did the cost of living goes up ? it does not make any sense .
i give you an example ..if you are selling chicken rice but your rental and cost go up ( of course you have to sell expensive ), but if your customers salary dont go up ..why do you get customer ( because your customers cannot afford to spend money ) ? sonner or later your business also have to close . if you wind up your business and cannot make money , can you buy iphone ? and indirectly will affect on steve job business ...
rememeber in business there is also cause and effect .
Last edited:
The concept of minimum wage that 90% of countries is based on the simple principle of eliminating ecploitation of the meek and weak. It has nothing to do with the right pay scale or equilibirum which typically refers to supply and demand.
Lim has alway been an idiot and no different to his predecessor Lim Boon Heng who was an even bigger idiot who came up with the expiry date for tertiary qualification.
In simple terms, a body of professional and independents will use statistical analysis to determine the lowest wage to sustain oneself.
And it is certainly not 3,000 or 30,000. It has nothing to do with the wages and remuneration of 90% of the workforce who won't be affected by minimum wage. No country has a minimum wage law for all vocations let alone for the lower rung jobs.
Lim is right that minimum wage will result in unemployment but that is the fault of the government of the day for not creating jobs for those who are committed to work. The fact that they are bringing in FTs by the shiploads makes his argument even dumber.
The PAP has spent so much time looking at high brow stuff via EDB and their fancy offices in NY and London that they forgot about industries and services for the lower end of Singapore.
Its known fact that wages have been unusually depressed even idiot will tell you that. Notice how property prices are very high. Try bringing that down and you will have clients from Lee and Lee calling up the PAP for an explanation.
Many people forget that its is capitalist that introduced minimum wage. We can't the weak and the meek earning pittance while the rest of go to church, temple, mosque etc and then head to Tanglin Club for supper.
Lim has alway been an idiot and no different to his predecessor Lim Boon Heng who was an even bigger idiot who came up with the expiry date for tertiary qualification.
In simple terms, a body of professional and independents will use statistical analysis to determine the lowest wage to sustain oneself.
And it is certainly not 3,000 or 30,000. It has nothing to do with the wages and remuneration of 90% of the workforce who won't be affected by minimum wage. No country has a minimum wage law for all vocations let alone for the lower rung jobs.
Lim is right that minimum wage will result in unemployment but that is the fault of the government of the day for not creating jobs for those who are committed to work. The fact that they are bringing in FTs by the shiploads makes his argument even dumber.
The PAP has spent so much time looking at high brow stuff via EDB and their fancy offices in NY and London that they forgot about industries and services for the lower end of Singapore.
Its known fact that wages have been unusually depressed even idiot will tell you that. Notice how property prices are very high. Try bringing that down and you will have clients from Lee and Lee calling up the PAP for an explanation.
Many people forget that its is capitalist that introduced minimum wage. We can't the weak and the meek earning pittance while the rest of go to church, temple, mosque etc and then head to Tanglin Club for supper.
It is the fascists that can't stomach the idea of minimum wage. To allow low waged earners a comfortable and decent living is beyond their dogma.
If foxconn is so easily replaced, its top executive don't deserve to earn the millions they are earning now.
Just like Singapore.
:oIo:
Is these your solution to minimum wage, come on! you can do better than that. Employers will still pay $4.40 for eight hours work.
