laughingcat:

mum_sugoku:

I find you scary... you actually digged out my 2012 post to use it against me! :yikes:

You have been tracked! :yikes: So am I. :rotflmao: ok I better :siam: before my identity is disclose.

(OT)

:hi5: I was a little puzzled when I saw \".zeit\" and her (very recent) joined date. Initially, I thought this \".zeit\" was a 'pirated' :evil: version of \"Zeit\".. But some exchanges later, I found their posting styles pretty similar, so I thought perhaps Zeit had forgotten her password and had to create a new account (again)..

And the difference between Zeit and .zeit? Their joined date.. and their post counts (far far fewer posts from the later)...

Anyway, this thread shall be the last thread I'll post using my current nick. To prevent my \"history\" from being dug out again (yes, I find it utterly creepy), I shall request forum admin to cancel my existing account, and if necessary, create a fresh username to post.

.zeit:

mum_sugoku:

1. Yes, we peasants compare as well.. Which is unsurprising since we are seeing our political leader comparing himself (in this case, to POTUS).. No reason why only the PM is entitled to compare while others - particularly the taxpayers who are paying him - are not entitled to, right?

But fact is PM didn't compare himself, in this case, to POTUS, right? My dear, this comparison was started by you a few pages above on p6 in your reply to me, not me hor! :imanangel:
[quote](And luckily for US taxpayers, their political leader POTUS doesn't, like ours, benchmark his remuneration to US top executive's.. Else US taxpayers, instead of paying their president just 1/4 of what our PM is getting, may have to end up paying their president tens of millions of salary! )

You also compared to other G8 countries' leaders in 2012, to which another forummer later 'counter-compared'. Interestingly, you responded with the very same revenue source /post-retirement perk I mentioned above. How can you now say it's 'not convincing'? :spank:

https://s15.postimg.cc/lb939r23f/POTUS.png\">
[quote]... the then PM LKY was never paid the kind of salary his son the incumbent PM is getting..[/quote]Hmm, I think after the 2007 salary revision, MM was paid over S$2.7m (TBC); more than his son now. PAP has responded on Fri wrt PM's past and present salaries. Circulating on FB.

https://papinreview.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-million-dollar-fake-news-separating.html?m=1
[quote]Having said that, may I repeat, in the first place, why compare? That our politicians (OK, the PM) can/should because some disgruntled Singaporeans are also comparing sounds just as unconvincing.[/quote]You can compare, you can reference, you can also benchmark. But make sure it's a fair one with the right variables. In 2007, when LTK compared us with the Nordic countries and Switzerland like you did, he got a long response from late MM Lee in parliament. MM went on to explain our unique situation, and so on. The transcripts can be found on Hansard for that year's parliamentary debate on ministerial salaries.
[quote]3. Why did you suspect that I was suggesting \"corruption\"? Being the spouse of PM certainly raises the spouse's profile, making her talent more visible; wasn't she appointed CEO of TH because Dhanabalan saw her talent? If you disagree, then what is your suggestion on why she was offered the job? Anyway, if you disagree that this is a kind of \"perk\", so be it.[/quote]Are you suggesting nepotism? Look, I know you're still upset about the revised salaries, but you need to stay focused on PM's current perks.
[quote]4. No idea what quora said (too long; didn't read, sorry)....(BTW I would take what's posted in quora with a pinch of salt. It's after all just posters' own opinions, no reason for me - or anyone else - to take their own opinions as the gospel truth, is there?)[/quote]I prefer to read working men's comments in that forum. They tend to be less emotional and having been around, they are able to provide readers with more refreshing, worldly-wise and objective insights. Moreover, they don't seem like PAP people![/quote]I find you scary... you actually digged out my 2012 post to use it against me! :yikes:

Anyway, do you know why I wrote that in 2012?

Because, a year earlier, in 2011...

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/blogs/singaporescene/pm-lee-don-t-upgrading-pay-less-tax-20110405-231901-526.html[quote]..The contentious issue on ministerial salaries was also discussed at the forum after a Nanyang Technological University (NTU) accountancy student brought it up, comparing the salaries of leaders from Singapore and the United States.

\"The US president is actually paid less than a Cabinet minister in Singapore. I'm sure we agree his job is a lot tougher than our Cabinet ministers,\" said the student.

In his response, PM Lee said that US President Barack Obama may be earning less than a Singaporean minister, but the American system is not without its flaws.

For example, he highlighted that the US had different ways of rewarding its presidents and that the low salary of the president had suppressed salaries down the line, reported The Straits Times.

Explaining his first point, PM Lee said that former US presidents are involved in money-spinning book and lecture tours which are almost a tradition for them.

\"Retired US presidents go on book tours, they write books, they are paid US$10 million (S$13 million) advance, they get somebody to help them write a tome and they make a lecture tour…Every lecture (by former president) Bill Clinton: US$100,000 to US$200,000 for half an hour.

\"That's the system. I think that's not a good system for us. We don't want ministers to retire and go on lecture tours.\"[/quote]Unfortunately, you didn't catch my sarcasm when I cited PM's reply in my 2012 post.

Again, why did you suspect that I was suggesting that nepotism/corruption/etc was involved in the appointment of HC as CEO of TH?

Lastly, yes, I think I'm getting a tad too emotional, and I appreciate your understanding.

.zeit:

mum_sugoku:

In the first place, why compare? Why must our politicians compare how much more wealth other countries - in particular US's - political leaders can acquire from commercial deals than they could upon retirement, and use it to justify their far-higher-than-POTUS' salaries? What makes them believe they also deserve whatever benefits that their (superpower countries') counterparts stand to enjoy, and upon reckoning that they are unlikely to also enjoy similar benefit, they must therefore make taxpayer pay them more while they are still in office?

In the first place, the comparison came from some disgruntled Singaporeans. Singaporeans not only like to complain, they also like to compare. When they compare, be sure there'll be Singaporeans coming up to explain to them the differences. Did you read those Singaporeans' comments in the quora link? Methinks they are quite sound leh...

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-salary-of-Singapores-Prime-Minister-so-high-Considering-U-S-President-Barack-Obamas-base-salary-is-400-000-and-considering-Obama-governs-a-country-that-is-more-than-50-times-more-populous-than-Singapore-isnt-a-1-7m-salary-absurd

2. Our retired office holders, beside receiving a handsome pension (for those who took office before 2011), many proceed to take up well remunerated appointment in the commercial world after they retired from politics. Eg, MBT and WKS:

MBT: https://www.pacificstargrp.com/profile/mahbowtan.html

WKS: https://sbr.com.sg/financial-services/people/united-overseas-bank-appoints-wong-kan-seng-chairman-board

Is that not a \"benefit\" as well?

I don't know if our ex-PMs, not cabinet ministers like MBT and WKS, had ever become IDs in private companies and made extra income after stepping down. May I know if LKY and GCT were ever in such positions? I recall some honorary positions here and there only? Please help to CSI for us. Thanks!

In any case, I think PM of SG should be compared to POTUS, not ministers (wait, should they be MPs cos they became backbenchers from 21 May 2011) to POTUS. Not too sure if US Senators got those sorts of lucrative perks like ex-POTUSes. Gotta check then do a fair comparison.

Before retirement, MPs (office holders not likely, right?) are allowed to be IDs. Max 6 appts I recall. Personally, I do not think they get a lot of director fees, as compared to the millions of USD generated from global booksales and talks. Do you know how much the Clintons had made by travelling around the world to give talks?

Any idea how much MBT and WKS are getting based on the annual reports of Pacific Star Group and UOB? These part-time show-face roles aren't like the lucrative full-time job GY had snagged.

Edited: WKS joined UOB in Nov 2017, right? By end of this year, I think he'll get SGD158k Any more extra income, praytell. :evil:

3. Being office holders enable others to see their (office holders') spouses' talent easier. Take for instance, HC. Had she not been PM's wife/LKY's DIL, then most likely, nobody would have noticed that the engineering-trained HC possesses the talent to manage our SWF (it's meritocracy at work, of cos). And I remember you mentioning/suggesting that she's even better remunerated than her husband. Isn't that a kind of \"perks\" too?

Are you suggesting there's corruption involved?

Yes, it's a fact she's certainly making more money than her hubby. That's a fact recorded in the annual reports and Forbes' List. She's not a politician but a career woman earning her own keep. Since when has it become a 'perk' of her PM hubby?

We're talking about PM's post-retirement perks, not the missus' own salary.

Lastly, I find the \"high pay to prevent corruption\" justification just as unconvincing: When you goggle \"world's least corrupt countries\", you'll find 5 countries ranked higer (less corrupt) than SG: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-6th-least-corrupt-country-in-the-world-annual-index-9979996

None of the listed 5 countries need to pay their politicians such high salaried to achieve that.

Also, political leaders of these 5 countries also do not normally get the lucrative commercial deals that ex-POTUS normally get, do they? If ours want to compare, why not compare with them instead? Why must we compare only with US - or whichever countries whose politicians receive more perks/benefits than ours do?

mum_sugoku, are you serious? The other 5 countries? Why don't you spell out so people know which 5 countries you're referring to?

'Nordic countries dominated the top of the table, including Denmark at second place, Finland and Norway tied for third with Switzerland, and Sweden in sixth alongside Singapore.'

I think it's a no brainer. Someone from that quora link can explain to you why leaders there don't need to be paid that much. I shall leave you to pore over this, as I'm not very convinced that our Cabinet ministers and PM are overpaid.

1. Yes, we peasants compare as well.. Which is unsurprising since we are seeing our political leader comparing himself (in this case, to POTUS).. No reason why only the PM is entitled to compare while others - particularly the taxpayers who are paying him - are not entitled to, right?

As to whether SG PM can get what POTUS could upon their retirement.. We can't include LKY cos no such comparison was needed during his time, and the then PM LKY was never paid the kind of salary his son the incumbent PM is getting.. GCT was promoted (I assume) to SM after stepping down as PM, and is still serving as Emeritus SM. LHL hasn't retired, so we won't know yet.

Having said that, may I repeat, in the first place, why compare? That our politicians (OK, the PM) can/should because some disgruntled Singaporeans are also comparing sounds just as unconvincing.

2. No idea how much WKS and MBT were currently paid, or the pension sum they are receiving now, but these are certainly perks they get to enjoy by virtue of them being ex-office holders.

3. Why did you suspect that I was suggesting \"corruption\"? Being the spouse of PM certainly raises the spouse's profile, making her talent more visible; wasn't she appointed CEO of TH because Dhanabalan saw her talent? If you disagree, then what is your suggestion on why she was offered the job? Anyway, if you disagree that this is a kind of \"perk\", so be it.

4. No idea what quora said (too long; didn't read, sorry). But I'm pretty sure quora posters are unlikely to suggest that if those countries' politicians were in SG, they risk becoming corrupted if we don't pay them high enough. Which is why I find the \"high pay to prevent corruption\" justification unconvincing.

(BTW I would take what's posted in quora with a pinch of salt. It's after all just posters' own opinions, no reason for me - or anyone else - to take their own opinions as the gospel truth, is there?)

Lastly, yes, I do agree with you that NOT ALL ministers are overpaid. One good example would be our DPM Tharman. I also think he isn't overpaid at all.

.zeit:

Mentioned vaguely in the 2012 White Paper under Clean Wage (Pg11). In US, there's the Former Presidents Act.

https://s15.postimg.cc/l1pf1xesr/2018-09-13_10.png\">

A lot of pp appear to agree with this state argument as well.

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-the-salary-of-Singapores-Prime-Minister-so-high-Considering-U-S-President-Barack-Obamas-base-salary-is-400-000-and-considering-Obama-governs-a-country-that-is-more-than-50-times-more-populous-than-Singapore-isnt-a-1-7m-salary-absurd

1. No one wants to listen to our retired PM talk lah. So boring... Let's see whether ESM's new book can top the Times and Popular bestseller charts.

Not a convincing justification.

In the first place, why compare? Why must our politicians compare how much more wealth other countries - in particular US's - political leaders can acquire from commercial deals than they could upon retirement, and use it to justify their far-higher-than-POTUS' salaries? What makes them believe they also deserve whatever benefits that their (superpower countries') counterparts stand to enjoy, and upon reckoning that they are unlikely to also enjoy similar benefit, they must therefore make taxpayer pay them more while they are still in office?

2. Our retired office holders, beside receiving a handsome pension (for those who took office before 2011), many proceed to take up well remunerated appointment in the commercial world after they retired from politics. Eg, MBT and WKS:

MBT: https://www.pacificstargrp.com/profile/mahbowtan.html

WKS: https://sbr.com.sg/financial-services/people/united-overseas-bank-appoints-wong-kan-seng-chairman-board

Is that not a \"benefit\" as well?

3. Being office holders enable others to see their (office holders') spouses' talent easier. Take for instance, HC. Had she not been PM's wife/LKY's DIL, then most likely, nobody would have noticed that the engineering-trained HC possesses the talent to manage our SWF (it's meritocracy at work, of cos). And I remember you mentioning/suggesting that she's even better remunerated than her husband. Isn't that a kind of \"perks\" too?

Lastly, I find the \"high pay to prevent corruption\" justification just as unconvincing: When you goggle \"world's least corrupt countries\", you'll find 5 countries ranked higer (less corrupt) than SG: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-6th-least-corrupt-country-in-the-world-annual-index-9979996

None of the listed 5 countries need to pay their politicians such high salaried to achieve that.

Also, political leaders of these 5 countries also do not normally get the lucrative commercial deals that ex-POTUS normally get, do they? If ours want to compare, why not compare with them instead? Why must we compare only with US - or whichever countries whose politicians receive more perks/benefits than ours do?

.zeit:

pirate:

Not that I necessarily think that our PM and ministers are overpaid...

I think they are compensated more than their counterparts elsewhere because LKY made them do extra TC duties. Many still prefer to be a private citizen. Some months ago, I bumped into a former minister with his wife at Tangs foodcourt. He seemed so relaxed and looked radiant after retirement. No SO to tag along. No Confi Sec to bother him. He was ordering Penang char kway teow in Singlish like other ordinary Singaporeans. I felt very happy for him. Freedom at last...

No matter how high-calibre a person is, if he's not genuinely passionate about serving the people, then he shouldn't join politics. If he had joined for the money, then I wonder if he listens to the people.. or to his boss--the person who approves his promotion and his (performance) bonus..

.zeit:

Cannot be too blunt! :rotflmao:

https://dollarsandsense.sg/ceo-salaries-heres-much-biggest-listed-companies-singapore-paid-ceos-fy2017/

https://www.drwealth.com/ceo-salary-singapore/

Indeed GLC CEOs earned more. In fact, they earned 31% more than non-GLC CEOs:

DBS - $10,300,000
Singtel - $6,559,655
Keppel Corp. - $5,950,000
Capita Land - $5,250,000
SIA - $5,024,388
ST Engineering - $3,437,364
Sembcorp Ind. - $3,427,000
SGX - $3,244,837
SATS - $3,001,000
SPH - $3,000,000
StarHub - $2,782,879
CapitaCom Trust - $1,500,000
CapitaMall Trust - $1,500,000

LHL's bonuses arent high, but the same can't be said of HC's. :evil:

I think it's time to pass the baton on to the cheaper Chan or Ong. $1.5 mil max. Don't overpay these greenhorns in the first term. Also cut Mayors' salaries. $600-700k to be what? Mayor?! Don't want to name names but you go look at their faces and ok only cv.

Actually, SG top executives' remunerations still pale in comparison with what their US counterparts are getting:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2018/04/05/highest-paid-ceos-americas-100-largest-companies/488630002/

AIG - US$43.1 million
Mondelez Int'l - US$$42.4 million
Oracle - US$40.8 million
Disney - US$36.6 million
Comcast - US$33.3 million
Time Warner - US$32.6 million
PepsiCo - US$31.1 million
Johnson & Johnson - US$29.8 million
AT&T - US$28.7 million
J.P. Morgan - US$28.3 million

\"Luckily\" our CEOs here are not getting that kind of money.. Else SG taxpayers may have to pay our PM many times more than what he already is getting now..

(And luckily for US taxpayers, their political leader POTUS doesn't, like ours, benchmark his remuneration to US top executive's.. Else US taxpayers, instead of paying their president just 1/4 of what our PM is getting, may have to end up paying their president tens of millions of salary! )

Estéema:

Don't compare. 人比人会气死人

I suspect my understanding of zeit's suggestion is different from yours... And your understanding of my suggestion is different from mine.......

Estéema:

mum_sugoku:

[quote=\".zeit\"]
Yah, good point.
Something's caught my attention some years ago. LHY joined Singtel in 1994. In 1994, the govt reviewed and adjusted the salaries of political office holders, correct? Too lazy to check history.

I think prior to the TH/GLC era, no one knew CEOs of GLCs could earn that much.

I'm sure mom and pop wanted to be fair. :siam:

Er... possible..

How much was SingTel Mdm Chua's bonus last few years? She doesn't hv to manage Int'l leaders or strategize country economy, etc.

In every company, do u know staff always gripe & ''curse' their Top Mgt & CEOs for their shameless salary & bonuses, whilst they perceive being sandwiched by oppressive superiors and uncooperative colleagues always having to meet perf targets.

Same same, SingTel's staff has been griping their CEO way back to LHY's time. Mom & pop can't work out any fairness lah coz kids hv diff capabilities. They tried very hard alr, to give him breathing space after gossips of his infidelity broke out, he got his chance with F&N. Now we finger point at other child, mum & pop no power fr the ground coz no ability to place this child in ano equal size country.

I believe each must accept their lot, based on their own abilities. They cannot expect equal treatment just as managing staff, we don't give equal salary increment or bonuses to every eyees. This will not motivate the less able staff to work harder. It will in fact discourage the high performer to slack since those who give no equal effort getting as much. It'll be the downfall of such 'patriachial' treatment. That's why in HR comp & Ben, u need differentiating pay structure. Maybe to cause our eyes go green & spur to match our abilities? Not to get our eyes red & grip.[/quote] :? Your point being?

.zeit:

mum_sugoku:

Not sure if Mr Perara's \"Cabinet Minister\" includes PM as well though.

Yah, good point.
Something's caught my attention some years ago. LHY joined Singtel in 1994. In 1994, the govt reviewed and adjusted the salaries of political office holders, correct? Too lazy to check history.

I think prior to the TH/GLC era, no one knew CEOs of GLCs could earn that much.

I'm sure mom and pop wanted to be fair. :siam:

Er... possible..

.zeit:

mum_sugoku:

BTW TOC website has (IMO) a pretty detailed illustration of how our office holders (including PM)'s bonus are determined:


https://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2018/09/11/13-bonus-months-for-the-prime-minister-pm-lee-skirts-questions-filed-by-wp-ncmp-leon-perera-about-total-bonus-months-paid/

But what exactly was the scope of Leon Perera's PQ?

https://s15.postimg.cc/54xzr7kuj/2018-09-12_2.png\">

He asked for Cabinet Ministers, hence the reply excluded PM...As such, I wonder how TOC derived that many mths of bonuses for PM.

Anyway, come to think of it, 4.1 mths doesn't apply to PM, for the reasons stated above.

Author deduced it from the bonuses that Cabinet Ministers had received, I think. [quote]In the case of the Prime Minister, although there is no performance bonus as per say but note that he is given a maximum of 12 months instead of 6 months of National bonus. This means he would get 13 months of bonus instead of 11.85 months like the other ministers and political appointment holders (Using the same bonus level, 6 months x 1.75). And in 2013, he would have gotten 23.75 months of annual pay which is around $2.6 million (23.75 x $110,000 monthly pay).[/quote]Not sure if Mr Perara's \"Cabinet Minister\" includes PM as well though.