Signup
LoginIs the government good value for money?
53 posts
-
-
Whether in the civil service or the private sector, we are always told to provide good value for money. Often that means cutting costs...if 9 persons can do the work of 10 previously, surely that is good value for money.
Is there a way to measure if our government is good value for money? Can we generate an index based on the cost of the civil service and particularly senior civil servants relative to GDP growith, new jobs created etc... and compare those figures with other nations? How will we compare? Does our government provide good value for money and do they deserve their pay as among the highest in the world for politicians?
-
-
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Whether in the civil service or the private sector, we are always told to provide good value for money. Often that means cutting costs...if 9 persons can do the work of 10 previously, surely that is good value for money.
(A wee bit off-topic) Workers aren't like machines...if fewer people doing more work is going to take a toll on their health and family life it'll eventually defeat the whole purpose. So there's a limit to how much VFM you can get without backfiring.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:(A wee bit off-topic) Workers aren't like machines...if fewer people doing more work is going to take a toll on their health and family life it'll eventually defeat the whole purpose. So there's a limit to how much VFM you can get without backfiring.
If we complain, they will hire foreign talent...5 Bangla for the pay of one of us..no more manpower shortage and still cost savings..
-
-
-
Since the Politcal Leadership of the Ruling Party - that form the Singapore Government - is always thrilled about insisting that Singaporean Leaders be paid the salary of US Corporations, should we not compare the performance of Singapore with that of two major US Corporations.
Based on the CIA Fact Book, Singapore's economy did quite well in 2005
Current Account Balance was at US$8.8 Billion
Exports : US$174 Billion
Imports : US$155.2 Billion
Compare this with the results of Exxon and Wal-Mart:
Exxon - 2005 Financial Results
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/business/3556661.html
Wal-Mart 2005 Financial Results
http://investor.walmartstores.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=112761&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=782163&highlight=
The Chief Executive and Chairman of EXXON was asked by the Board of Directors to delay his retirement plans and help to lead EXXON-Mobil forward - the reason being the very positive results of US$8 Billion from an ever increasing Sales.
Under his guidance, EXXON made a Third Quarter 2005 profit of about US$25.42 Billion for the FIRST NINE MONTHS of 2005 - (compared with US$25.33 Billion for all of 2004).
While the Chief Executive and Chairman of EXXON has been reputed to be LOYAL to SHAREHOLDERS, who were often rewarded with stock dividends for TWENTY-THREE Straight Years, and with buybacks in the last three last quarter of 2004 had amounted to US$5 Billion - what is the position of the Political Leadership of the Ruling Party aka the Singapore Government ?
Firstly, what has the Ruling Party aka the Singapore Government done for the stakeholders of Singapore Incorporated ? Having collected similar salary levels of US Corporations, has the Singapore Government rewarded the stakeholders of Singapore Incorporated for the last TWENTY THREE YEARS ?
Secondly, PM LHL, who once told the Labor Movement (in 2003 or 2004), that it is NOT the Singapore Government's responsibility to find jobs for jobless Singaporeans.
The audacity of this statement from a PM of a small 4.5 million population in Singapore is to be compared to the statement made by the PRC Prime Minister, who govern a population of ONE Billion - "it is the responsibility of the Central Government to generate opportunities that will lead to jobs."
Thirdly, the Singapore Cabinet is the highest paid Government in the whole world, after comparing the financial data in Singapore - despite being paid the highest salary, the members of the Ruling Party are grossly overpaid for running a country that has achieve the same result as ONE foreign corporation.
Based on these criteria, is the Singapore Government value for money ?
Edited by Atobe 02 Jan `06, 12:07PM
-
-
-
Atobe,
There is a major difference between corporations. In corporations, the bosses must come out with their own monies or capital and they have to make monies with good products or services through genuine efforts and talents.
Corporations are managed with talents well versed in technologies and services creating profits and jobs but the government is only concerned to collect taxes and spend monies of the people for the benefits of the people.
Government is not a difficult job for at the end of each month, it will have citizens' taxes for payments to government employees and ministers. It is not entrepreneurial like in running of a club or management corporation where funds and monies are readily available and provided by members. Monies are of no problem - just collect funds and spend them and at most by raising fees and taxes or spending as little as possible through cost-recovering system.
In our case, government collects $500,000.00 - $800,000.00 from each Singaporean household in each lifetime of 30 years or so and spends as little as possible creating reserves or surpluses which they claim as success stories of their own. They are seen so far using the reserves and surpluses not to benefit all but mostly to carve out the best opportunities for the few of their own elites in the form of good salaries and bonuses like in the NKF.
-
-
-
Originally posted by robertteh:Atobe,
There is a major difference between corporations. In corporations, the bosses must come out with their own monies or capital and they have to make monies with good products or services through genuine efforts and talents.
Corporations are managed with talents well versed in technologies and services creating profits and jobs but the government is only concerned to collect taxes and spend monies of the people for the benefits of the people.
Government is not a difficult job for at the end of each month, it will have citizens' taxes for payments to government employees and ministers. It is not entrepreneurial like in running of a club or management corporation where funds and monies are readily available and provided by members. Monies are of no problem - just collect funds and spend them and at most by raising fees and taxes or spending as little as possible through cost-recovering system.
In our case, government collects $500,000.00 - $800,000.00 from each Singaporean household in each lifetime of 30 years or so and spends as little as possible creating reserves or surpluses which they claim as success stories of their own. They are seen so far using the reserves and surpluses not to benefit all but mostly to carve out the best opportunities for the few of their own elites in the form of good salaries and bonuses like in the NKF.While it is true that the difference between Corporations and Government is in the source of CAPITAL used; unfortunately, Governments are run on similar lines as Corporations - in that various levels of the Government are managed also by individual "talents" similar to your description of the Corporations.
If our Singapore Political Leaders insist on being paid at Market Rates comparable to that paid for TOP EXECUTIVES in Private Corporations, then they should also be measured by the same yardstick for effectiveness and returns on investments.
With multi-billion dollars spent on a mind boggling portfolio of foreign investments, and the funds taken from the accumulated TAXPAYER'S monies transferred from the Finance Ministry to the GIC and Temasek - what is the rate of return to the vast sums spent ?
How effectively have the funds been utilised and how has the returns benefitted Singaporeans directly - when much of the Government Serivces are NOT subsidised ?
Some interesting reading can be made from the following post:
GIC Investments - any good news ?
http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/SGIC/8_cases.html
Securing the Singapore Nest Egg
http://www.sfdonline.org/Link%20Pages/Link%20Folders/01Pf/cpfaw170501.htmlEdited by Atobe 02 Jan `06, 12:05PM
-
-
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Whether in the civil service or the private sector, we are always told to provide good value for money. Often that means cutting costs...if 9 persons can do the work of 10 previously, surely that is good value for money.
Is there a way to measure if our government is good value for money? Can we generate an index based on the cost of the civil service and particularly senior civil servants relative to GDP growith, new jobs created etc... and compare those figures with other nations? How will we compare? Does our government provide good value for money and do they deserve their pay as among the highest in the world for politicians?For the technology part, definitely.
Human resources part, I think not. You compare their pay and civilians' pay will know the answer. Such a big difference.
-
-
-
I agree with the salary scale of our govt. We need to be competitive to attarct good people to run the country. I think its actually a very small price to pay.
I came across Indonesian, Indian Chinese and Philipino friends who seperately told me they would pay LKY millions to run their countries.
In the USA, corporations, unions & special interest groups get involve in politics too much because they fund the politicians. Singapore would be a sorry state if we follow the USA model.
If you compare us with India and Msia, the politicians may have officially low salaries but are better paid because of coruption.
-
-
-
Originally posted by Salman:I agree with the salary scale of our govt. We need to be competitive to attarct good people to run the country. I think its actually a very small price to pay.
I came across Indonesian, Indian Chinese and Philipino friends who seperately told me they would pay LKY millions to run their countries.
In the USA, corporations, unions & special interest groups get involve in politics too much because they fund the politicians. Singapore would be a sorry state if we follow the USA model.
If you compare us with India and Msia, the politicians may have officially low salaries but are better paid because of coruption.
While you may be right on this, but is there a need to pay millions?
-
-
-
the Singapore Cabinet is the highest paid Government in the whole world, after comparing the financial data in Singapore - despite being paid the highest salary, the members of the Ruling Party are grossly overpaid for running a country that has achieve the same result as ONE foreign corporation.
Invite the CEO of Exxon to run Singapore......
-
-
-
If you compare us with India and Msia, the politicians may have officially low salaries but are better paid because of coruption.
So you are sayong our government is so morally corrupt that we have to pay them millions to stop them from being financially corrupt..
Pay me more...or I will become corrupt...that argument can also apply to the traffic police booking motorists or the nurse taking care of patients.
-
-
-
It is reasonable to believe that by UNDERPAYING government ministers and civil servants there may arise a risk of corruption.
It is a BLATANT LIE to say that by NOT PAYING GOVERNMENT MINISTERS BY THE MILLIONS or to highest paid in the world, we will incur the risk of corruption.
Citizens !!!, do you see how a simple assumption is has been twisted into a ploy to PAY MINISTERS MILLIONS.
A lie is a lie proving that ministers are morally depraved who need to be paid the highest in the world to stop them from yielding to temptations.
What has the world come to??
To rub salt into the wound, now the latest lie is that the original lie is a lesser lie as millions are not a lot to pay ministers because we are running a GDP of billions.
SINGAPORE IS BEING GOVERNED BY LIES. There is no logic or rationale to pay millions towards ministers' salaries. It is a lie to say that by not paying ministers millions, they will become corrupted or open to corruption!!!
Similarly lies of such nature are being told to the people: e.g. Reserve for raining days, GRC (to ensure racial harmony in name but in fact to perpetuate one-party rule), Meritocracy, (protectionism of few chosen elites) Streaming of EM1, EM2 etc, (Protectionism and Class divide), Road Pricing (Triple taxes on Vehicle Excise, COE and ERP) etc etc.Edited by robertteh 03 Jan `06, 10:41AM
-
-
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:So you are sayong our government is so morally corrupt that we have to pay them millions to stop them from being financially corrupt..
Pay me more...or I will become corrupt...that argument can also apply to the traffic police booking motorists or the nurse taking care of patients.I guess our government can't help recruiting people who are inherently dishonest for higher office
?
-
-
-
Originally posted by av98m:I guess our government can't help recruiting people who are inherently dishonest for higher office
?
Usually the morally upright are people who are straight-talking without all the guile to work to the system and hope for the best.
The morally upright leaders who can do something good for the country or people in the face of all such overwhelming wrongs would have decided to do something else to sojourn this world of temporal existence.
It will be practically impossible now to find good people who want to join such a party except for their own personal benefits who will warm up to the morally depraved or convince them to change oppressive policies or human characters.Edited by robertteh 03 Jan `06, 11:08AM
-
-
-
Originally posted by Salman:We may not eliminate corruption forever, but we certainly will prevent a lot of it.
I don't think those millions are a lot for running this country with a GDP of USD120b."With a GDP of USD120b" that is the product of the sweat of the Singapore Citizenry, and with Millions being paid annually to our Ministers, and those in their families - who hold high office in Government Owned Enterprises - (shades of nepotism) - how much do you think should deservedly be returned to the Common Singaporean ?
When President Ong Teng Cheong considered the use of the Reserves to help cushion the effects of the last recession, it seems so difficult for the Government a.k.a the Ruling Party to open the Reserves that can help the hard stretched Singapore Citizens.
Yet it is so convenient and explanable to use the hard earned money to pay the Ministers to prevent them "falling prey to their own human weaknesses".
Are the Ministers not suppose to be persons of higher quality and calibre compared to most common Singaporeans ?
Is a ministerial position an opportunity to "mine" our reserves instead of simply "minding" it ?
-
-
-
Originally posted by charlize:All I want to know is under what dire circumstances will the reserves be used?
Anybody got any idea?
The dire circumstances refer to the need to bail out our GLCs or to be used to pay the ministers and mps' salaries and bonuses and pensions even when the country is dead broke. So basically its PAP reserves, not Singapore reserves
Edited by av98m 03 Jan `06, 5:54PM
-
