The SDP's Alternative Economic Programme Part 1: The GDP, productivity and you

[Chinaporean]

The SDP's Alternative Economic Programme Part 1: The GDP, productivity and you

The SDP's Alternative Economic Programme presented herein discusses the structure and present state of the Singapore economy. It provides an analysis of the problems that beset our economic system and, more importantly, makes concrete, workable, and realistic alternative proposals.

This report is divided into three main sections:
a. Economic Growth And How It Affects You
b. Rich Man, Poor Man
c. The Trouble With Savings

These sections will be discussed in several parts with alternative proposals made at the end of each section. We begin with Part 1: The GDP, productivity and you.

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/the-party/our-manifesto/3361-the-sdps-alternatve-economic-programme-part-1-the-gdp-productivity-and-you

The SDP's alternative economic programme Part 3: A comprehensive set of measures

In Part 1 of this programme, we noted that the GDP is not a good indicator of an economy's well-being or progress. In Part 2 we presented problems resulting from our economy's dependence on foreign workers and foreign capital, much of it illicit, to bolster our GDP growth and how that has affected our labour productivity.

We present in Part 3 a set of concrete and, more importantly, compehensive proposals to remedy these problems and how we can steer our economy onto a sustainable, and less corrosive, path. It is our intent to be part of a solution to bring the Singapore economy up to speed in this post-capitalist era rather than to just propose ways to clean up the mess after it has been created by the PAP.

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/the-party/our-manifesto/3381-the-sdps-alternative-economic-programme-part-3-a-comprehensive-set-of-measures-

 

[Watchman]

http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/0...nvesting-in-failing-individuals-and-products/
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/0...nvesting-in-failing-individuals-and-products/
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/0...nvesting-in-failing-individuals-and-products/

 

[Chinaporean]

The SDP's alternative economic programme Part 4: Rich man, poor man

Whoever said that a rising tide lifts all boats obviously wasn't referring to Singapore's economic system. As the country became richer, the wealth did not spread equitably to all its people. The poor in society were firmly anchored to the bottom while the richest floated with fabulous wealth.

Was this result an unwanted side-effect of globalisation or did the PAP's policies cause the inequality? What consequences does this imbalance of wealth have for society? Is such a circumstance inevitable and unalterable? Part 4 of this programme examines these questions and makes proposals to level up the Singapoean society......

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/the-pa...-economic-programme-part-4-rich-man-poor-man-

 

[Chinaporean]

The SDP's alternative economic programme Part 5: The MNC-GLC syndrome

Topics covered in part 5 of SDP's Alternative Economic Programme:

Addicted to MNCs
Satisfying needs
The Government's business
A report card on GLCs
Urgent remedies
Let SMEs develop
Scale-back GLCs
Empower workers

The addictive reliance that Singapore has on MNCs and GLCs cannot be a long-term solution for the country’s economy. As innovation and creativity become increasingly important for economies that need to stay ahead of the curve, and as foreign investors ceaselessly search for cheaper places to do business, the MNC-GLC combination is a one-way ticket to an unsustainable economy.

Private local businesses have to play a larger, even the major, role in the economy, which currently survives on crumbs from the PAP’s table. Economist Linda Low wrote, "…local enterprises remain subcontractors to the GLCs and MNCs. As subcontractors they service rather than lead or create niches for growth and development." Catherine Paix, another academic, noted that although Singaporean entrepreneurs "have acted as agents for foreign (mainly Japanese) firms for a long time, they have not managed to set up in Japan, in contrast with their Korean and Taiwanese counterparts." Huang Yasheng warns that GLCs are “already hitting the wall” and that “retaining this strategy could mean sacrificing future growth that is possible only through a bigger, more dynamic private sector.”

Although this partnership between the foreign MNCs and the state has raised the living standards of the majority for the short term, it masks a deleterious long-term problem for Singapore’s economy. The alternatives laid out in this Part 5 will help Singapore avert this economic mishap and lead our country to greater and a more meaningful progress...

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/the-pa...conomic-programme-part-5-the-mnc-glc-syndrome

 

[Chinaporean]

Budget 2010 exposed

In his 2010 Budget Speech, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has announced that the Government will splash $5.5 billion over the next five years to help boost productivity and efficiency in Singapore.

Throwing money at the problem and making the same proposals that have been tried and found wanting, but packaged differently, will not make the problem go away. Productivity will still languish.

Let us compare what has been said and done before, with what has been proposed this year. Mr Tharman's basic approach is very similar to the strategies that the Economic Review Committee (ERC) led by Mr Lee Hsien Loong came up with in 2003:

Tharman 2010: One, to “restructure our overall economy towards higher-value activities.”
Lee 2003: “Our basic strategy is to upgrade ourselves” and “restructure our economy to strengthen our position.”

Tharman 2010: Two, to “upgrade individual industries and enterprises."
Lee 2003: Industries need to “upgrade themselves...to become more innovative.”

Tharman 2010: Three, to “raise the skills and creative potential of every worker.”
Lee 2003: “We need an environment that encourages creativity, intellectual curiosity and risk-taking...The aim is to bring out the full potential of every individual.”

Clearly the Government is re-proposing what it has been doing all these years. If after all that the ERC proposed failed to boost productivity, what makes it different this time around?

Mr Tharman also announced that the Government will set up the National Productivity and Continuing Education Council (NPCEC), to be headed by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, to “galvanise the major national effort required to boost skills and enterprise productivity.”

If that's the case, why do we have the Ministry of Trade and Industry running SPRING (Standards, Productivity and Innovation for Growth) whose aims are to “raise productivity to enhance Singapore's competitiveness and economic growth.”

Is this a tacit admission that SPRING has been a failure? Again, what reason do we have to believe that the new NPCEC can elevate productivity if SPRING could not? ...

http://yoursdp.org/index.php/news/singapore/3417-budget-2010-exposed