Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[pirate]

WeiHan:

Since government tax is extracted solely from the economic activities of the citizens of Singapore (because Singapore has no natural resources so all wealth must have solely came from the economic activities and hard work of its people), shouldn't they deserve better?

No. Some tax is derived from the economic activities of foreigners. Who do you think is really paying that FDW levy? Hint: not the employer.

That is not to say that I disagree that the govt can do more to make things like healthcare better and more affordable. I prefer to just say that the gov should spend more on public healthcare, without arguing this through GST or whatever tax. It is a healthcare problem, not a tax problem.

[3Boys]

pirate:

WeiHan:

Since government tax is extracted solely from the economic activities of the citizens of Singapore (because Singapore has no natural resources so all wealth must have solely came from the economic activities and hard work of its people), shouldn't they deserve better?

No. Some tax is derived from the economic activities of foreigners. Who do you think is really paying that FDW levy? Hint: not the employer.

That is not to say that I disagree that the govt can do more to make things like healthcare better and more affordable. I prefer to just say that the gov should spend more on public healthcare, without arguing this through GST or whatever tax. It is a healthcare problem, not a tax problem.

Actually a hell of a lot of tax and economic value is extracted from foreigners.

[Irrelevant]

JannettLee:

Think you have got all mixed up with median individual income and family. You should be talking about family because in a family, nowsdays both spouses work, hence median family income is about $5500 per month. However, the family has 2 kids and 2 elderly to take care of, i.e. 2 incomes but 6 persons in the family spending money all things, including basic food necessities, medicines (big costs for elderly) etc. With such a family, they probably spend >$5000 pm, or say spend $60k a year and $4200 in additional GST.

I must hire you to be my accountant wor.

2*2633=5266
Less 20% CPF=4213

How they spend >$5k when the net take home pay is just 4213? :siao:

[JannettLee]

pirate:

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:

Finally, you get it. Your income is somebody else's cost. Your cost is somebody else's income. It is not possible to have a high income low cost economy, unless you bring in lots of cheap foreign labour.

Since when I don't get it! :? I don't even mention it. You are the one who mention the manpower cost.
What has this Manpower cost got to do with the GST cost that I mentioned.

[WeiHan]

pirate:

WeiHan:

Since government tax is extracted solely from the economic activities of the citizens of Singapore (because Singapore has no natural resources so all wealth must have solely came from the economic activities and hard work of its people), shouldn't they deserve better?

No. Some tax is derived from the economic activities of foreigners. Who do you think is really paying that FDW levy? Hint: not the employer.

That is not to say that I disagree that the govt can do more to make things like healthcare better and more affordable. I prefer to just say that the gov should spend more on public healthcare, without arguing this through GST or whatever tax. It is a healthcare problem, not a tax problem.

I am not arguing about tax and GST here. I am talking about doing more in health care by justification that we still have 10% of GDP surplus each year and that our expenditure for defense is probably abit too high.

just a side point. For decades when we boast 20% surplus of GDP, we don't have a lot of foreigners at those time. It is generally acceptable to say that tax is extracted from a citizens for a country with no natural resources. Unless you are admitiing that our foreigners has become disproportionately out of size.

[Irrelevant]

WeiHan:

Budget surplus was at approximately 7-10% of GDP for the last 2-3 years and even more for the last few decades.

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.BAL.CASH.GD.ZS

I believe the \"surplus\" was arrived at after counting land sales as income. In Singapore, the government prefer to count land sales as capital instead. You reckon we should adopt Hong Kong's practice of counting land sales as income too?

Incidentally, you are still avoiding my question on how many % of GDP to spend on healthcare wor. If we wish to spend 10% of GDP on healthcare (a number u like to mention), we need another 20 billion. Where can we find 20 billion?? Cut defence and education by 80%?

[pirate]

JannettLee:

Since when I don't get it! :? I don't even mention it. You are the one who mention the manpower cost.

What has this Manpower cost got to do with the GST cost that I mentioned.

You were the one who were going on and on about how GST is the reason why the cost of living is going up in Singapore. You put it at No. 1 some more.

I'm just pointing out that part of the reason that cost of living has gone up is because income has gone up. And it will go up some more as the gov tighten the foreign worker dependency ratio.

You think all this \"FT go home\" xenophobia got no cost meh?

[pirate]

WeiHan:

It is generally acceptable to say that tax is extracted from a citizens for a country with no natural resources. Unless you are admitiing that our foreigners has become disproportionately out of size.

Dunno leh. Maybe the foreigners are generating a disproportionately large part of our economic activity.

[JannettLee]

I still stand my point: GST is hitting everyone very hard. While you save money with cutting income tax (saving only for your self while you’re still employed) but you are incurring GST cost for whole of you family members costs even for those who are SAHM, unemployed, children, old retired or old sick parents).


No amount of saving from your low income tax is sufficient to offset the high cost of living? That’s why people is complaining.

I’m not saying the they should totally remove GST but rather do something to alleviate the impact from GST for those who are SAHM, unemployed, children, old retired or old sick parents.

[pirate]

Irrelevant:

In Singapore, the government prefer to count land sales as capital instead. You reckon we should adopt Hong Kong's practice of counting land sales as income too?

Theoretically, since gov land sales are on 99 year, 60 year, 30 year etc leases, we should be amortising the land sales at 1.01%, 1.667%, 3.333% and transferring that from capital reserves to income every year.