Ministerial Salary Review

[hquek]

Thanks for the link. halfway through the video, I started to feel an urge to sing Majulah Singapura!

[limlim]

Musings:

While I applaud his decision to enter politics and on the side of the opposition, please note that CSM has already made his millions as a partner in an international law firm. So like it or not, he has a safety net. I would not want him to be too poorly paid compared to what he used to earn either.

Yes. If he deserves it, it's only right that he be paid reasonably.

Same for the MIW MPs.. I feel it's ok to pay them adequately.. provided that they delivers..

I guess pegging their salary to the citizens median wage or bottom 20% is good move. When the country (Not a few individuals or companies) progresses, so does their salary.

And no one will say anything..

[MMM]

Musings:

While I applaud his decision to enter politics and on the side of the opposition, please note that CSM has already made his millions as a partner in an international law firm. So like it or not, he has a safety net. I would not want him to be too poorly paid compared to what he used to earn either.

I personally feel that safety net of his past earnings (millions) is besides the point. It's his passion that drives him. I've seen him at the heartland couple of times talking to man on the street and it's after election. All by himself without a gang of helpers/ supporters who need to get the \"commoners\" ready just to meet him. I really applaud this man for his passion. This is the kind of talent we need. It's not about $$$.

[corneyAmber]

MIW may be feeling regret not to get CMS on their party as he can even convince people to pay him the obscene salary. wow from me


Yes his speech in English and Chinese are totally differently written as he quotes from different apt sources. This is indeed impressive because his speeches are not direct translation but he writes his speech according to the appeal of the language that the audience masters and hence exposure.

If we have a differing voice like CSM and in the past GKS who gave constructive differing views within MIW, we have hope.

[concern2]

Musings:

While I applaud his decision to enter politics and on the side of the opposition, please note that CSM has already made his millions as a partner in an international law firm. So like it or not, he has a safety net. I would not want him to be too poorly paid compared to what he used to earn either.

Hm...I do not quite agree with this, Musings. Precisely because he could be earning much more elsewhere that he did not have to enter politics in the first place, not to mention joining the oppositions.

Your argument brushes aside one of the key arguments for paying Ministers highly, which is that it is difficult to attract people of high calibre (and thus highly paid) to join politics in Singapore. When a character like CSM emergences, it crushes that argument. You may say, yeah, how many people are like CSM? That is true, he is unique. But he brings hope. He inspires children and many young people, who may one day be our future leader. CMS balances the extreme attitude that one should be \"realistic\".

It's about time we strike \"a sense of proportion\".

[Musings]

concern2:

Musings:

While I applaud his decision to enter politics and on the side of the opposition, please note that CSM has already made his millions as a partner in an international law firm. So like it or not, he has a safety net. I would not want him to be too poorly paid compared to what he used to earn either.

Hm...I do not quite agree with this, Musings. Precisely because he could be earning much more elsewhere that he did not have to enter politics in the first place, not to mention joining the oppositions.

Your argument brushes aside one of the key arguments for paying Ministers highly, which is that it is difficult to attract people of high calibre (and thus highly paid) to join politics in Singapore. When a character like CSM emergences, it crushes that argument. You may say, yeah, how many people are like CSM? That is true, he is unique. But he brings hope. He inspires children and many young people, who may one day be our future leader. CMS balances the extreme attitude that one should be \"realistic\".

It's about time we strike \"a sense of proportion\".

I don't disagree with your views or CSM's sincerity. I do think it is laudable for him to join politics on the opposition side no less and give up a lucrative career. There is no doubt he joined not for the money but with a desire to serve. But we should note that it is much easier for one to make this sort of decision when you already have millions in the bank account and not struggling to be financially secured.

[Strparent]

Musings:

I do think it is laudable for him to join politics on the opposition side no less and give up a lucrative career. There is no doubt he joined not for the money but with a desire to serve. But we should note that it is much easier for one to make this sort of decision when you already have millions in the bank account and not struggling to be financially secured.

so, what does that say about those 'high flyers' who had to be enticed into MIW with high pay ? and those who said if pay is tweaked further down, would be difficult to attract good ppl to join ?

most of these high flyers also make millions per year in pte sector for years, are they also not with 'safety net' as you termed ? So, are they less committed and passionate than CSM ? :scratchhead:

Paiseh, I find your line of argument flawed. :oops:

Actually, for those with no safety net, it was presumed last time that getting INTO the cabinet, would actually enhance the quality of the net. :evil:

[Musings]

Strparent:

Musings:

I do think it is laudable for him to join politics on the opposition side no less and give up a lucrative career. There is no doubt he joined not for the money but with a desire to serve. But we should note that it is much easier for one to make this sort of decision when you already have millions in the bank account and not struggling to be financially secured.

so, what does that say about those 'high flyers' who had to be enticed into MIW with high pay ? and those who said if pay is tweaked further down, would be difficult to attract good ppl to join ?

most of these high flyers also make millions per year in pte sector for years, are they also not with 'safety net' as you termed ? So, are they less committed and passionate than CSM ? :scratchhead:

Paiseh, I find your line of argument flawed. :oops:

Actually, for those with no safety net, it was presumed last time that getting INTO the cabinet, would actually enhance the quality of the net. :evil:

This is not a comparison between MIW and CSM but a point made about those who are already very successful in their careers. I still think a good salary is important for officer holders because they should not be 'penalised' too much for their desire to serve. It may not be easy to attract a talent like CSM if not for the fact that he is already well provided for and financial issues are less of a concern. So I do believe paying below a certain threshold will deter talented people from joining. The question of course is what is the threshold? The jury is still out on that one.

[concern2]

Musings:

concern2:

[quote=\"Musings\"]While I applaud his decision to enter politics and on the side of the opposition, please note that CSM has already made his millions as a partner in an international law firm. So like it or not, he has a safety net. I would not want him to be too poorly paid compared to what he used to earn either.

Hm...I do not quite agree with this, Musings. Precisely because he could be earning much more elsewhere that he did not have to enter politics in the first place, not to mention joining the oppositions.

Your argument brushes aside one of the key arguments for paying Ministers highly, which is that it is difficult to attract people of high calibre (and thus highly paid) to join politics in Singapore. When a character like CSM emergences, it crushes that argument. You may say, yeah, how many people are like CSM? That is true, he is unique. But he brings hope. He inspires children and many young people, who may one day be our future leader. CMS balances the extreme attitude that one should be \"realistic\".

It's about time we strike \"a sense of proportion\".

I don't disagree with your views or CSM's sincerity. I do think it is laudable for him to join politics on the opposition side no less and give up a lucrative career. There is no doubt he joined not for the money but with a desire to serve. But we should note that it is much easier for one to make this sort of decision when you already have millions in the bank account and not struggling to be financially secured.[/quote]Um...I don't know the last sentence there. It sounds the same as the argument of whether to start a business venture if you already have a job that pays well ( and hence have the financial backing) Or whether you should hang on to the job since it already pays well (why take the unnecessary risk). I think it boils down to a personal choice of which one is more important to him/her, which one will bring one more fulfillment, and like many has mentioned, \"a calling\". More more so because CMS has chosen to join the opposition, which runs him the risk of being sued, having his history/personal life dug up, being interrogated by reporters, and losing everything (like in the cases of those before him). Yes, he may have a better back up, but he didn't even have to consider joining in the first place, hence I don't think it is any easier decision to make on his part. Just my thoughts.

To me, joining the opposition is a difficult decision to make, whether you have money or not. Just talking about in extremes to illustrate - if you have nothing, what have you got to lose then?

[corneyAmber]

Musings:

Strparent:

[quote=\"Musings\"]I do think it is laudable for him to join politics on the opposition side no less and give up a lucrative career. There is no doubt he joined not for the money but with a desire to serve. But we should note that it is much easier for one to make this sort of decision when you already have millions in the bank account and not struggling to be financially secured.

so, what does that say about those 'high flyers' who had to be enticed into MIW with high pay ? and those who said if pay is tweaked further down, would be difficult to attract good ppl to join ?

most of these high flyers also make millions per year in pte sector for years, are they also not with 'safety net' as you termed ? So, are they less committed and passionate than CSM ? :scratchhead:

Paiseh, I find your line of argument flawed. :oops:

Actually, for those with no safety net, it was presumed last time that getting INTO the cabinet, would actually enhance the quality of the net. :evil:

This is not a comparison between MIW and CSM but a point made about those who are already very successful in their careers. I still think a good salary is important for officer holders because they should not be 'penalised' too much for their desire to serve. It may not be easy to attract a talent like CSM if not for the fact that he is already well provided for and financial issues are less of a concern. So I do believe paying below a certain threshold will deter talented people from joining. The question of course is what is the threshold? The jury is still out on that one.[/quote]I suppose the quantum of comfort is not based on how much they have made but how much is their expenditure. Perhaps someone like CSM has better financial management, he does not live extravagantly so to pursue his passion, he has lesser worries. This also speaks volumes of his character. When one makes alot and still frugal, it is a virtue. As for those who make obscene amounts like CSM from the corporate world and still expect the same in the political world due to maintenance of current living standards, then I am afraid they have problem empathising the problem of the commoner if their lifestyle is too far off. If they are heavily investing in properties and need the same kind of income to pay off the investments, then I think it is better they remain in the corporate business world to use money to make money instead of using politics to maintain the money. I see a conflict of interest.