Saturday, January 2, 2010
Affordable Car Insurance Quote Online
The coming of internet has been a great boon for the people of today. Internet has brought the world and the various types of information very close to us at the click of the mouse. When you go for shopping online for car insurance quote online you get so many advantages and the most important thing is that you are saving on your time and energy. You don't have to wait for an agent to come and
Friday, January 1, 2010
Risk and how to manage them
Many people think of risk as "something can go wrong". Actually, risk is defined as variation from the expected.
Everyone has to die one day, so this is expected and is not a risk. The risk is that one may die at a young age, and have dependents that cannot support themselves.
As we grow older, we expect to be sick more often and to incur higher medical bills. This is not a risk, as it is expected. The risk is that the medical bills may be too high and beyond our means.
This risk can be managed by making better decisions. The medical specialists have a vested interest to get the patient to spend a lot of money on treatment, even if the chance of recovery is slim. There could be better ways of dealing with the illness that is not so costly.
Buying expensive medical insurance is not really a good way to deal with this risk, as the insured may be misled into taking expensive treatment that is not effective, and may have to bear a significant portion of the bill through the co-payments.
Many health care risks can be managed through having adequate savings, and making an informed decision on how to choose the right doctors and treatment. For most people, it is better to go to subsidized wards, as the risk of given expensive, unnecessary treatment, is minimised. The high cost can be covered by basic Medishield. This will allow us to avoid the situation in America where health care takes up 16% of the GDP.
Tan Kin Lian
Everyone has to die one day, so this is expected and is not a risk. The risk is that one may die at a young age, and have dependents that cannot support themselves.
As we grow older, we expect to be sick more often and to incur higher medical bills. This is not a risk, as it is expected. The risk is that the medical bills may be too high and beyond our means.
This risk can be managed by making better decisions. The medical specialists have a vested interest to get the patient to spend a lot of money on treatment, even if the chance of recovery is slim. There could be better ways of dealing with the illness that is not so costly.
Buying expensive medical insurance is not really a good way to deal with this risk, as the insured may be misled into taking expensive treatment that is not effective, and may have to bear a significant portion of the bill through the co-payments.
Many health care risks can be managed through having adequate savings, and making an informed decision on how to choose the right doctors and treatment. For most people, it is better to go to subsidized wards, as the risk of given expensive, unnecessary treatment, is minimised. The high cost can be covered by basic Medishield. This will allow us to avoid the situation in America where health care takes up 16% of the GDP.
Tan Kin Lian
A more caring community
We live in a community. Are we prepared to stand by and watch the weaker members of our society, including their children, go hungry or had a hard life? Or, do we want to help them, so that they also can have the hope of a better future?
Most people are generous and kind in nature, and will want to play a part to help the poor and the weak. This is where charity comes in, but there is also a selfish reason - if others have a decent life, there is no need to resort to theft or crime, and there is no need to have many criminals put into jail (which is also costly).
Mostly, people are poor as they do not get adequate wage and the cost of living is high. They will get into financial difficulty, if someone in the family falls sick and has to incur expensive medical bills. They may lose their savings through bad investments, or have been cheated by investment scams.
Some people are poor due to gambling, drinking and other vices - but they do not represent the majority of the poor. We can leave aside this problem for a separate discussion.
In a competitive world, we all have to work and compete hard to make sure that our business succeed. However, we have to balance competition with compassion. We should not push competition to the extreme, to the extent that other people (who may not be so smart as us) gets employed and helpless.
The European societies have a more proper balance in their lives. They pay adequate wages, have a shorter working hours and more holidays. They may be less competitive globally but they give a better quality of life to their people. They pay higher taxes, so that the ordinary people have better health care and old age pension. They may not be very rich, but they have better distribution of income and are a more caring community.
Recently, the Economist magazine carried out an online debate. 80% of the voters (probably from around the world) voted in favor of the European system of having more holidays. Many people feel that the competitive world force them to work too hard.
I prefer the European system (especially Scandinavia) of higher taxes, more social benefits, less working hours and a more caring community.
Tan Kin Lian
Most people are generous and kind in nature, and will want to play a part to help the poor and the weak. This is where charity comes in, but there is also a selfish reason - if others have a decent life, there is no need to resort to theft or crime, and there is no need to have many criminals put into jail (which is also costly).
Mostly, people are poor as they do not get adequate wage and the cost of living is high. They will get into financial difficulty, if someone in the family falls sick and has to incur expensive medical bills. They may lose their savings through bad investments, or have been cheated by investment scams.
Some people are poor due to gambling, drinking and other vices - but they do not represent the majority of the poor. We can leave aside this problem for a separate discussion.
In a competitive world, we all have to work and compete hard to make sure that our business succeed. However, we have to balance competition with compassion. We should not push competition to the extreme, to the extent that other people (who may not be so smart as us) gets employed and helpless.
The European societies have a more proper balance in their lives. They pay adequate wages, have a shorter working hours and more holidays. They may be less competitive globally but they give a better quality of life to their people. They pay higher taxes, so that the ordinary people have better health care and old age pension. They may not be very rich, but they have better distribution of income and are a more caring community.
Recently, the Economist magazine carried out an online debate. 80% of the voters (probably from around the world) voted in favor of the European system of having more holidays. Many people feel that the competitive world force them to work too hard.
I prefer the European system (especially Scandinavia) of higher taxes, more social benefits, less working hours and a more caring community.
Tan Kin Lian
Singaporeans are able to see beyond racial lines
Dear MR TAN KIN LIAN
I like to share with you a hearty observation about Singapore Idol competition results. This competition showed that Singaporeans are able to see beyond racial lines, when choosing their singing idol.
In the Singapore Idol competition, we saw Malay topped the competition consecutively from Season 1 in year 2006 to Season 3 in Y2009. This is a 100% winning streak for Malay singers, who won by on-line polling. This is despite the fact that Malays are minority in Singapore. This shows that Singaporeans have grown beyond racial line. Nobody entered the competition with preferential treatment. No single race is protected by any preferential arrangement”. Yet, our Malay fellow brothers won in three clean sweeps.
This showed that Singaporeans will vote for you if you are good and continue to improve.
I think this is another example Singapore Government should seriously consider setting a timeline to eliminate GRC for general election. In the future, it may be even difficult to define who is an Indians, for example. I see many inter-racial marriages in Singapore today.
** Record of winners for Singapore Idols **
Singapore Idol 1 (Y2004) Taufik Batisah beat Sylvester Sim.
Singapore Idol 2 (Y2006) Hady Mirza beat Jonathan Leong
Singapore Idol 3 (Y2009) Sezairi Sezali beat Sylvia Ratonel
CASHEW NUT
I like to share with you a hearty observation about Singapore Idol competition results. This competition showed that Singaporeans are able to see beyond racial lines, when choosing their singing idol.
In the Singapore Idol competition, we saw Malay topped the competition consecutively from Season 1 in year 2006 to Season 3 in Y2009. This is a 100% winning streak for Malay singers, who won by on-line polling. This is despite the fact that Malays are minority in Singapore. This shows that Singaporeans have grown beyond racial line. Nobody entered the competition with preferential treatment. No single race is protected by any preferential arrangement”. Yet, our Malay fellow brothers won in three clean sweeps.
This showed that Singaporeans will vote for you if you are good and continue to improve.
I think this is another example Singapore Government should seriously consider setting a timeline to eliminate GRC for general election. In the future, it may be even difficult to define who is an Indians, for example. I see many inter-racial marriages in Singapore today.
** Record of winners for Singapore Idols **
Singapore Idol 1 (Y2004) Taufik Batisah beat Sylvester Sim.
Singapore Idol 2 (Y2006) Hady Mirza beat Jonathan Leong
Singapore Idol 3 (Y2009) Sezairi Sezali beat Sylvia Ratonel
CASHEW NUT
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Apply foreign worker levy to other jobs
Hi Mr Tan
The large immigration of foreigners into Singapore is one of the most divisive issues in Singapore today. There are many Singaporeans who are unhappy and bitter about the large number of FT that have been allowed into Singapore. They feel threatened by these foreigners as many of them have proven themselves to be as hardworking and capable as Singaporeans. Their salary expectations are significantly lower. A fresh graduate from NUS for example expects to earn $2,500 to $2,800. A graduate of similar calibre from China or India is willing to work for between $1,500 to $1,800.
The large gap in salary expectations has led to large amount of economic pressure to employ foreigners rather than Singaporeans. The common thinking among many Singaporeans who are employees is that businesses are greedy and immoral. In the pursuit of profit, they would sack their own countrymen and employ foreigners.
The truth however is a lot more complex. All businesses have to operate in a competitive global environment. Consumers value goods based on quality and price; they do not take into account who made them. Within Singapore, if you employ only Singaporeans while your competitors use foreigners, you will not be able to compete. Outside of Singapore, you will lose to global competitors who are willing to use the cheapest source of labour to produce their goods. Hence ultimately if you use a Singaporean only policy to run your company, then your business will most likely fail.
Recently, in response to negative sentiment on the ground, MOM has begun to tighten the issue of the various types of passes. Many speculate that this is window dressing ahead of a widely anticipated election. Regardless of the intent, this is not a viable long term strategy. This is because technologies like the Internet have made it very easy for business to cross national boundaries. As such, if MOM persists with a policy of not allowing foreigners into Singapore, the Singapore economy will eventually be hollowed out.
The emergence of an abundance of cheap and capable foreign labour means that the income of Singaporean workers WILL fall over the next 5 to 10 years. The unemployment rate among workers who are Singapore citizens will also rise. There is no known economic theory or policy which can stop or reverse this. This fall will continue until a new equilibrium is reached. This equilibrium is such that the income of Singaporean workers is comparable to that of workers from India and China. Here it should be noted that there is no magic economic law which states that the income of Singaporean workers must always be higher than those from India and China.
This unpleasant economic truth needs to be communicated to Singaporeans so that they can understand and accept the new economic reality. If the economic reality is hidden behind half-truths like “job redesign” and “productivity improvement”, then the bitterness and resentment will be even greater then the truth is known. I label “job redesign” and “productivity improvement” as half truths as they are completely ineffective ways of addressing the problem. This is because any training or re-design improvements that you do for Singaporeans, you can also apply foreigners. Singaporeans are not so special so that the training or job re-design can only apply to them.
Open and honest communication is also necessary so that Singaporeans do not make the wrong decisions based on unrealistic expectations. At present, there is a property boom in Singapore. Many Singaporeans are borrowing large sums of money to buy property in anticipation of “More Good Years” and the ability to sell the property at a higher price. Eventually the property bubble will burst and there will be a sharp decline in prices. If we superimpose this against higher unemployment and lower wages, then we are setting the stage for a very painful and bitter period for Singaporeans.
Other than open and honest communication about the future, what we also need are policies which moderate or slow the expected decline in income. Also useful would be policies which help people cope and adjust. The following is a policy recommendation which will address many issues simultaneously.
The root of the problem is the salary gap between Singaporeans and foreigners. In recognition of this gap at the low skill level, MOM has implemented a foreign workers levy for maids and other foreigners that work in Singapore under the work permit system. Given the success of this policy, it would now be timely to extend this levy to those in Singapore under the employment pass or permanent resident scheme. The successful implementation of the foreign workers levy for so many years suggest that if it were applied to the employment pass/permanent resident scheme, it would not “chase away the talent”.
With the money collected from the levies, we can then move to restructure the CPF scheme. The Employer CPF contribution can slowly be reduced to 0%. This would be replaced by payment made from the levies collected from foreigners working in Singapore. As the number of foreigners in Singapore increases, this CPF contribution would increase.
By implementing a policy like this, we put substance into the nice-sounding policy announcements that “foreigners are in Singapore for the benefit of Singaporeans”. It would help heal our society which is increasingly being polarized along the lines of Singaporean and Foreigner. Also we moderate the narrowing of the wage gap between Singaporean and Foreigner in a manner that is least painful to Singaporeans.
Aurvandil
The large immigration of foreigners into Singapore is one of the most divisive issues in Singapore today. There are many Singaporeans who are unhappy and bitter about the large number of FT that have been allowed into Singapore. They feel threatened by these foreigners as many of them have proven themselves to be as hardworking and capable as Singaporeans. Their salary expectations are significantly lower. A fresh graduate from NUS for example expects to earn $2,500 to $2,800. A graduate of similar calibre from China or India is willing to work for between $1,500 to $1,800.
The large gap in salary expectations has led to large amount of economic pressure to employ foreigners rather than Singaporeans. The common thinking among many Singaporeans who are employees is that businesses are greedy and immoral. In the pursuit of profit, they would sack their own countrymen and employ foreigners.
The truth however is a lot more complex. All businesses have to operate in a competitive global environment. Consumers value goods based on quality and price; they do not take into account who made them. Within Singapore, if you employ only Singaporeans while your competitors use foreigners, you will not be able to compete. Outside of Singapore, you will lose to global competitors who are willing to use the cheapest source of labour to produce their goods. Hence ultimately if you use a Singaporean only policy to run your company, then your business will most likely fail.
Recently, in response to negative sentiment on the ground, MOM has begun to tighten the issue of the various types of passes. Many speculate that this is window dressing ahead of a widely anticipated election. Regardless of the intent, this is not a viable long term strategy. This is because technologies like the Internet have made it very easy for business to cross national boundaries. As such, if MOM persists with a policy of not allowing foreigners into Singapore, the Singapore economy will eventually be hollowed out.
The emergence of an abundance of cheap and capable foreign labour means that the income of Singaporean workers WILL fall over the next 5 to 10 years. The unemployment rate among workers who are Singapore citizens will also rise. There is no known economic theory or policy which can stop or reverse this. This fall will continue until a new equilibrium is reached. This equilibrium is such that the income of Singaporean workers is comparable to that of workers from India and China. Here it should be noted that there is no magic economic law which states that the income of Singaporean workers must always be higher than those from India and China.
This unpleasant economic truth needs to be communicated to Singaporeans so that they can understand and accept the new economic reality. If the economic reality is hidden behind half-truths like “job redesign” and “productivity improvement”, then the bitterness and resentment will be even greater then the truth is known. I label “job redesign” and “productivity improvement” as half truths as they are completely ineffective ways of addressing the problem. This is because any training or re-design improvements that you do for Singaporeans, you can also apply foreigners. Singaporeans are not so special so that the training or job re-design can only apply to them.
Open and honest communication is also necessary so that Singaporeans do not make the wrong decisions based on unrealistic expectations. At present, there is a property boom in Singapore. Many Singaporeans are borrowing large sums of money to buy property in anticipation of “More Good Years” and the ability to sell the property at a higher price. Eventually the property bubble will burst and there will be a sharp decline in prices. If we superimpose this against higher unemployment and lower wages, then we are setting the stage for a very painful and bitter period for Singaporeans.
Other than open and honest communication about the future, what we also need are policies which moderate or slow the expected decline in income. Also useful would be policies which help people cope and adjust. The following is a policy recommendation which will address many issues simultaneously.
The root of the problem is the salary gap between Singaporeans and foreigners. In recognition of this gap at the low skill level, MOM has implemented a foreign workers levy for maids and other foreigners that work in Singapore under the work permit system. Given the success of this policy, it would now be timely to extend this levy to those in Singapore under the employment pass or permanent resident scheme. The successful implementation of the foreign workers levy for so many years suggest that if it were applied to the employment pass/permanent resident scheme, it would not “chase away the talent”.
With the money collected from the levies, we can then move to restructure the CPF scheme. The Employer CPF contribution can slowly be reduced to 0%. This would be replaced by payment made from the levies collected from foreigners working in Singapore. As the number of foreigners in Singapore increases, this CPF contribution would increase.
By implementing a policy like this, we put substance into the nice-sounding policy announcements that “foreigners are in Singapore for the benefit of Singaporeans”. It would help heal our society which is increasingly being polarized along the lines of Singaporean and Foreigner. Also we moderate the narrowing of the wage gap between Singaporean and Foreigner in a manner that is least painful to Singaporeans.
Aurvandil
Treat immigrants fairly and well
Many Singaporeans disagree with the recent policy of the Government to allow a big influx of foreigners into Singapore for whatever reasons, i.e. to boost our economic growth or to compensate for our low birth rate. This has created a lot of problems for the locals, which has not been properly recognized, i.e. competition for jobs, over-crowding and other social problems.
Some have suggested measures to differentiate between "old" and "new" citizens, between citizens and permanent residents and so on. I think that it is better to adopt a policy of treating everyone equally, as far as possible, in the daily lives.
We have to remember that many immigrants have made big sacrifices to come to live and work in Singapore. Some have borrowed and paid large sums of money to migrate to Singapore. If we accept them, it is our duty, as decent people, to treat them fairly and well. We should not deny them the right to have proper housing and fair wages. If they become permanent residents and citizens, they should be entitled to the usual benefits that are given to residents.
We should get away from the bad policy of differentiating different groups of people according to their residency status, graduate status, type of housing, income levels and other "rules". This causes disputes and unhappiness, pits one group of people against another group and will result in a fractious society.
We have to recognize a severe disadvantage placed on our male citizens in having to serve two years of full time National Service and the continuing liability of being called up regularly for in-camp training. We need to find ways to reduce or remove this disadvantage.
Tan Kin Lian
Some have suggested measures to differentiate between "old" and "new" citizens, between citizens and permanent residents and so on. I think that it is better to adopt a policy of treating everyone equally, as far as possible, in the daily lives.
We have to remember that many immigrants have made big sacrifices to come to live and work in Singapore. Some have borrowed and paid large sums of money to migrate to Singapore. If we accept them, it is our duty, as decent people, to treat them fairly and well. We should not deny them the right to have proper housing and fair wages. If they become permanent residents and citizens, they should be entitled to the usual benefits that are given to residents.
We should get away from the bad policy of differentiating different groups of people according to their residency status, graduate status, type of housing, income levels and other "rules". This causes disputes and unhappiness, pits one group of people against another group and will result in a fractious society.
We have to recognize a severe disadvantage placed on our male citizens in having to serve two years of full time National Service and the continuing liability of being called up regularly for in-camp training. We need to find ways to reduce or remove this disadvantage.
Tan Kin Lian
Community based loans
I have suggested a "community based" scheme to provide loans to families that are need money for their daily expenses due to loss of employment, high medical bills or other factors beyond their control. I have received some questions on how this scheme can operate. I will answer them:
a) Who provides the funds? The community (i.e. the Government)
b) Who bears the loss of bad debts? The community will have the right to place a lien on the assets, e.g. CPF savings, of the borrowers. If there are insufficient assets, the bad debts will be written off and will be borne by the community, i.e. the taxpayers.
c) Who decides on the people who should be granted these loans? Loan assessors working on the set of eligibility criteria.
d) What rate of interest should be charged on the borrowings? 1% to 3% higher than CPF interest rate.
This community based scheme will operate on principles that are different from commercial banks or loan sharks, and will still aim to make the borrowers responsible for repaying the loans. However, these loans should be provided at an affordable interest rate, so that the borrowers are not burdened with exorbitant interest payments.
This scheme requires responsible people to be loan assessors to carry out investigations into the financial situation before the loan is granted. The assessor has to interview the borrower and visit the family to make personal judgement (which is a skill that needs to be developed, as many Singaporeans prefer to decide on paper and avoid taking personal responsibility to make judgement).
This will provide an alternative to borrowing from loan sharks, leading to bankruptcy, petty crimes and other social problems.
Tan Kin Lian
a) Who provides the funds? The community (i.e. the Government)
b) Who bears the loss of bad debts? The community will have the right to place a lien on the assets, e.g. CPF savings, of the borrowers. If there are insufficient assets, the bad debts will be written off and will be borne by the community, i.e. the taxpayers.
c) Who decides on the people who should be granted these loans? Loan assessors working on the set of eligibility criteria.
d) What rate of interest should be charged on the borrowings? 1% to 3% higher than CPF interest rate.
This community based scheme will operate on principles that are different from commercial banks or loan sharks, and will still aim to make the borrowers responsible for repaying the loans. However, these loans should be provided at an affordable interest rate, so that the borrowers are not burdened with exorbitant interest payments.
This scheme requires responsible people to be loan assessors to carry out investigations into the financial situation before the loan is granted. The assessor has to interview the borrower and visit the family to make personal judgement (which is a skill that needs to be developed, as many Singaporeans prefer to decide on paper and avoid taking personal responsibility to make judgement).
This will provide an alternative to borrowing from loan sharks, leading to bankruptcy, petty crimes and other social problems.
Tan Kin Lian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)