Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[limlim]

3Boys:

That's what I meant. You made all kinds of allegations that the rich folk can just skip out of town and buy their luxury goods outside the country and skip GST, therefore not contributing to the tax base. You have said this in more than one thread.

It is a possibility mah. Allegation.. not sure if it is too serious a word to use..

If I am rich I would do that. :evil:

[pirate]

limlim:

\"Low Class\"?


They already send a man to space, SG didn't even come close to that. What kind of childish remark is that..

Sarcasm cannot detect meh?

[WeiHan]

Irrelevant:

WeiHan:

This issue is well known and has been raised many times by both NMP and opposition party members.


I think we don't have to rank it. Singapore is among the last in the world comparable to oppressive regimes that don't give a hook to their citizens in term of health care spending.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthcare-spending-world-country

WeiHan

Great that you've got some data. Incidentally, what % of our GDP do you reckon we should spend on healthcare since you think 4% is too low.

P.S. Every 1% of GDP is 3 billion. GST at 7% only collects slightly more than 8 billion.

Actually, the data provided in this article is slightly higher than reality. The real number was 3%. I have read an article which says that we will reach 3.5% by 2030.

I have no in depth research on health care system so I do not have a hard number to suggest. It appears to me that many developed nations that spend more than 10% or even 20% of GDP has a universal healthcare system. You suggest GST above. Looks like you are trying to trap me into suggesting a number and then a corresponding hike in GST will be justifiable. But.....I am also in the camp who think that we have spend too much on defense in term of absolute term and also in term of percentage of GDP.

[Irrelevant]

WeiHan


Another datapoint for you:

Government spending as % of GDP

Singapore 17.0%
USA 38.9%
Canada 39.7%
UK 47.3%
France 52.8%
Germany 43.7%
Italy 48.8%
Spain 41.1%

[Irrelevant]

WeiHan:

But.....I am also in the camp who think that we have spend too much on defense in term of absolute term and also in term of percentage of GDP.

Very good - cut defence to fund healthcare. Defence spending for FY2012 is estimated to be 12.3 billion. How many % do you think we can/should cut from defence spending?

[pirate]

limlim:

3Boys:

But to what end???

Be patient..

You're talking abt LTVP rite? Maybe not more than 2 years.. Again, I believe LTVP is not that difficult to get. Not sure where those horror stories come from..

Statistics..?

Statistics doesn't show the the full story. Such as background of the applicant.

Forum letters, isolated cases w/o revealing anything that they do not want to reveal.

No, I am talking about LTVP+ and PR. Not a :censored: LTVP. What's the logic? Before giving birth to Singaporean babies qualified to work in Singapore. After giving birth to Singaporean babies not qualified? I want to know the logic.

Or is the logic that after the children grow up, better to kick the foreign spouse home and hopefully the low income Singaporean spouse will follow too and we are rid of two old people at the same time?

[limlim]

My reply to you is, there is not enough information for 3rd parties to make a fair judgement.

[limlim]

pirate:

No, I am talking about LTVP+ and PR. Not a :censored: LTVP. What's the logic? Before giving birth to Singaporean babies qualified to work in Singapore. After giving birth to Singaporean babies not qualified? I want to know the logic.

Or is the logic that after the children grow up, better to kick the foreign spouse home and hopefully the low income Singaporean spouse will follow too and we are rid of two old people at the same time?

How many cannot get PR after 5~10 years and with SC kids?

How much, how well do you know about them?

Any statistics on the no of pple w/o LTVP+ or PR after 5~10yrs?

Did they leave the country during those period?

[JannettLee]

3Boys:

I've have answered your question in the post above. How about you return the courtesy and answer mine here?

I am still waiting for 3Boys to reply to the below, i.e. isn't it true that \"majority of lower and middle and upper-middle income families are worst off with GST because they don't benefit from income tax reduction, they don't get GST rebate every year for eternity, but they get hit with GST for eternity\"?

JannettLee:

You bring up something very interesting and often overlooked. Now, come to think of it, who benefits from GST implementation?

It seems that the only beneficiary of GST implementation and top-tier income tax cut is the rich, since their income tax cut from 25% to 20%.

Now, you argue that the rich will pay more for GST, really? You assumed that if the rich earns $300k, they will spend $300k and pay $21k GST?
Ok, let's say the rich earn $1m a year. He saved $50k tax from income tax cut from 25% to 20%. In fact, the rich will never be able to fully spend what they earn, so let's say they only spend $240k a year on living expenses (which is already $20k per month and is quite a lot!). For $240k expenditure they now need to pay extra $16.8k for 7% GST. Now, isn't it obvious that the rich saved $50k income tax and get hit with only $16.8k GST tax and they are the biggest beneficiary?

Next you say \"govt returns GST rebates worth say $1500 (Cash/Medisave/U-Save) per eligible households (those with high value homes need not apply), then how much are they out of pocket?\". You further stated that \"If measures are put in place that the less well off are MORE THAN adequately compensated for the GST, what's the issue with having a GST?\".
Ok, then Can you tell us:
1) how many families benefited from the GST rebate?
2) Is this rebate given every year for eternity as long as GST is present?
3) What income level below which the family is eligible?
It seems that only the lowest income quintile of the people probably adequately compensated for the GST, but majority of lower and middle and upper-middle income families are worst off with GST because they don't benefit from income tax reduction, they don't get GST rebate every year for eternity, but they get hit with GST for eternity. Need I say more?

JannettLee:

Think you can stop taking my words out of context.

May be you can tell us: Didn't you insist that GST implementation and top-tier income tax reduction benefits the majority of the Singaporeans? Did you or did you not? This is the most important issue I am interested, the majority, and is what I have been driving all along and is what you have refused to answer my questions directly but keep twisting and turning here and there and everywhere, real snaky! :slapshead:
[quote=\"JannettLee\"]If you insist on twisting facts and even what I said, please continue.

3Boys:

You originally did say that GST costs compounds, and implied that such compounding applies broadly and generally, did you not? Or do you now recant?

You then implied there was some 'business secret' (your words, not mine), that somehow companies are able to collude via anticompetitive practices to pass on GST costs to consumers, sometimes unwarranted, therefore keeping margins high and everyone in business, did you not? If not, kindly explain if you may.

You did imply, initially explicitly, and then through your example of the UK VAT system (essential goods exemption), that the lowest income group were hardest hit by GST, did you not? Or do you now deny this?

You did then in 1 posts, first conceded that the lowest quintile were probably adequately compensated via GST rebates, and then in this last post, say you were never intending to show that the poorest did not receive back their GST and more, yes?

Did you not then agree that there is not a direct link between GST rates and cost of living, and in my example and link in a prior post? Or do you deny this and insist that there is a direct link, and have evidence to back that assertion?

Is it better to have no GST? I guess so, if the government had a magic wand and could turn water into gold.

But in lieu of magic wand, and with safeguards for the vulnerable, I can't see why GST is such a bad thing. And this, you have singularly failed to disprove.

[/quote]

[JannettLee]

Manpower is our resources, and we are encouraged to be a knowledge-based economy emphasizing knowledge-based business, and you say salary become highest component of costs? Should it be the higher salary the better because that means you are doing highest knowledge-based business? Isn't that what the govt encourage us to be in? In this case, the manpower with high salary is our assets and not costs. The way you say it is mean comparing our workers with the low cost foreign workers and is very demeaning of majority of singaporeans. :roll:

pirate:

JannettLee:

You are funny! :? Since when did I call to scrap GST? You need not to justify why GST is implementing here and we all knew very well that GST is the crucial source of income for government. Why you keep making me to stress so many time that I welcome the white paper and supporter of PAP. GST does not affect you and me does not mean that it does not affect others. Otherwise, why are there so much complaints about the high cost of living from the ground? you meant people are making noise from nothing? :rotflmao: But they have to recognize the causes of problem of high cost of living and solve them. If PAP continue to use your approach to brushing people off and refuse to find the root cause of the issues, they will wake up even more in 2016.

I've to recognize that you and me are not in the same frequency or rather you like defend for the sake of defending and missed all the points that I'm trying to drive.

Off to go now.

Funny. I was under the impression that you put GST as the top cause of the high cost of living in Singapore. Here it is:

JannettLee:

In summary, why we are in this current situation - high cost of living today?
It is the consequences of Gahman's policies all these years.
1) GST
2) Commercial & industrial properties prices and hence rental escalation
3) Transportation cost

But, if you are really in business, you will know that businesses in Singapore will tell you that the highest components of their costs are actually:

1) Salaries and wages
2) Rent

At least you are right about the rent part. I won't argue with you over that.