Singapore stay or leave, leave ? where to go ?
-
That's really odd. If you don't want to get into flame wars, why write things like "brain and mind go rusty or robotic", "smart alec snob" or "monotonous phd holder"? Is anybody here forcing you to flame? If not, all you have to do is refrain, no? Given the content of your posts, how is any of that going to help to achieve the peace that you say you want?Originally posted by Phoebie:anyway, I come to this forum to chit chat, relax and help to comfort other fourmers whenever I can
I do not come here to engage in flame wars
I just want peace among all
As I've said before, it's a purely mathematical issue here, and there's nothing to get all angry about. There isn't any issue of win or lose either - the facts are what they are, and nobody's any the poorer for knowing them. Why do you keep carrying on about who's winning?
Do you see anybody on this thread agruing with anybody else besides you? Mind you, there are opposing views between other people on this thread, but they're not getting into either name-calling or calls for peace because there's no need to and they're busy dealing with the core topic matter. Everybody besides you is at peace here, so it's your issue to control and deal with, isn't it? -
Ok, I think there's a misunderstanding somewhere. What Gedanken is saying is that the highest tax rate is not what it appears to be. In a progressive tax system, the more you earn, the more you are taxed. However, the tax rate only increases for the excess that you earn, not for the entire amount. So in effect, even though the top tax rate in France is 59%, one is in effect paying 33%++.
The country that has a 10% GST and 48% top individual income tax is probably Australia, but they've revised it to 45% (from 47%) for the 2006/7 tax year, in addition to raising the tax bracket from A$95,000 to A150,000.
In effect, you are both right. It only depends on the way you look at it. -
I do not agree with you assessment of the dispute. I'll reproduce her entire post here since I was chastised earlier (unfairly I thought) for truncating her post for length:
some other countries charge 10% GST, and in these countries, those who earn around 10k and above per month need to pay 48% income tax
Look at the first 2 paragraphs. Taken together, I think it is clear that to the average person, the implication is that there are countries or at least a country that will take away 48% of your entire salary as income tax.
Most of the tax collected (in the other mentioned countries as above) are used to fund the social welfare. Also in these countries, if you are considered underprivileged, you get money from the govt, for example, if you earn like $200 a month, the govt will give you like $400 a month so you have $600, but, if you work twice as hard and earn $400 a month, the govt will give you $250 a month, so now you do have more money-you have $650 now, but, you have to work twice as hard. So if you earn more they give you less, so pple would rather work half as much and earn $50 less. Actually I feel this is not healthy. It's creating a not so encouraging mindset on people, and, those high earners may have negative impression "so what if I work hard and earn over tens of Ks per month, 48% of my salary will still go back to the govt to help those who doesn't work as hard, and or, those who doesn't as much money as I do on further studies to get good jobs"
normally people migrate hoping to seek better life and salary or education elsewhere . They don't really hope to see themselves regretting after making the decision of packing their bags and leaving their homeland.
As the saying goes "ni kang wo hao, wo kang ni hao" (You see me good, I see you good) and you'll be shocked to see the number of foreigners wanting to get PR or citizenship status here Smile
Perhaps she meant that there are countries with tax bands as high as 48%. But if that is the case, then this whole thing could have been resolved with a simple "I meant that there are countries with tax bands as high as 48%".
Its all very odd and a little exasperating.
My concern really is that there are already too many urban legends surrounding the immigration issue already. Hence, where I see what I think are more urban legends being perpetuated, I will protest very vigorously; IMO the act of transplanting yourself in a foreign land and trying to cope with a foreign culture is difficult enough as it is. -
Originally posted by ^spidee^:
You got it, Spidee. As I've said before, we can't simply look at the top tax rate, because the tax brackets affect what you end up paying.
Ok, I think there's a misunderstanding somewhere. What Gedanken is saying is that the highest tax rate is not what it appears to be. In a progressive tax system, the more you earn, the more you are taxed. However, the tax rate only increases for the [b]excess that you earn, not for the entire amount. So in effect, even though the top tax rate in France is 59%, one is in effect paying 33%++.
The country that has a 10% GST and 48% top individual income tax is probably Australia, but they've revised it to 45% (from 47%) for the 2006/7 tax year, in addition to raising the tax bracket from A$95,000 to A150,000.
In effect, you are both right. It only depends on the way you look at it. [/b] -
Hear hear, scabstermooch. It's all well and good if someone takes a look at the facts and decides that moving isn't for them, but those facts must be correct.Originally posted by scabstermooch:My concern really is that there are already too many urban legends surrounding the immigration issue already. Hence, where I see what I think are more urban legends being perpetuated, I will protest very vigorously; IMO the act of transplanting yourself in a foreign land and trying to cope with a foreign culture is difficult enough as it is. -
Well well lastfall
One must do the relevant homework and be careful on your statements Australia? discimination ? 40% income tax?
some answers to this question
Australia?
Yes the lucky Country
discimination ?
Take a good look at yourselves Singaporeans.This country (and I have travelled far and wide )discrimination is rampant so blatantly so look at yourself in the mirror and answer this question before you start calling Australians a racist lot.
40% income tax? please look up the website it depends on income earned
If I was you stay here you belong with your fellow countrymen
Remember your tourism advertisement states Uniquely Singapore ( I just laugh when I see this)
hi there, based on my comprehension of your statement, you don't seem to be either singapore resident, immigrants from or to singapore who cares about Singaporeand the countryman. If you are patriotic to your country Australia which i presume you are then hey i have to apology for my sweeping statement, i think there isn't a need for much intelligence to know that my statement is rather generalised so that people can further explain and discuss about it. I must say Singapore has its got discrimination and tax rate. If i have to mention in detail all pro and cons of all possible migrating countries, i would have written a novel... Lastly my apology once again, australia after all is where most singaporean including me would like to go. -
hey Phoebie and Gedanken,
Although the point of your discussion has rather sidetrack from the original thread of 'where to go?'. I sincerely appreciate both of you guys for giving rather useful insides.
i thank you all. after all, it seems that the stake goes nearer to leaving this country i have grown up for 25 years. it is just a matter of time for people like me to became more financial capable and leave this place. everyway has its pros and cons yes i agree and it is a matter of adaptation. i believe this place could get inadaptable in the near future. -
My pleasure, lastfall. Now as we've discussed, moving's not for everyone and you really will have to do your homework and make sure you don't end up regretting it. If you do have any questions about Australia, I'd be happy to provide any facts you might need.
-
Yes, I was confused myself before I realised that it's the tax band that matters after reviewing Gedenken's calculations. Besides, displaying the top tax rate is kinda misleading given that laymen like myself will mistake it for the actual amount of tax payable. Can we safely assume that Phoebie made the same mistake?Originally posted by scabstermooch:I do not agree with you assessment of the dispute. I'll reproduce her entire post here since I was chastised earlier (unfairly I thought) for truncating her post for length:
Look at the first 2 paragraphs. Taken together, I think it is clear that to the average person, the implication is that there are countries or at least a country that will take away 48% of your entire salary as income tax.
Perhaps she meant that there are countries with tax bands as high as 48%. But if that is the case, then this whole thing could have been resolved with a simple "I meant that there are countries with tax bands as high as 48%".
No offense, just trying to alleviate the tension..
-
Go to one of the mountain in China to stay and rear sheep lar....simple life and i think no tax too. China nowadays have got nice houses too, and their cost of living are presently affordable.(dono in future).
-
Well, spides, it's a natural mistake to make, and there's no problem with that at all. Hell, anybody who hasn't worked out their own taxes before would be expected to come to the same conclusion.Originally posted by ^spidee^:Yes, I was confused myself before I realised that it's the tax band that matters after reviewing Gedenken's calculations. Besides, displaying the top tax rate is kinda misleading given that laymen like myself will mistake it for the actual amount of tax payable. Can we safely assume that Phoebie made the same mistake?
No offense, just trying to alleviate the tension..
On the other hand, what's the rational course of action when the other party stomps her feet and insists that the mistaken conclusion is indeed the case? You work out the figures and demonstrate the cae, right? -
I agree that there is discrimination in Singapore - against Singaporeans. If you're a foreigner, you're perceived to be talented. Whereas if you're a Singaporean, you're discriminated against because there's only a term "foreign talent" here in Singapore and there's no such thing as a "local talent".Originally posted by malsing:discimination ?
Take a good look at yourselves Singaporeans.This country (and I have travelled far and wide )discrimination is rampant so blatantly so look at yourself in the mirror and answer this question before you start calling Australians a racist lot.
Remember your tourism advertisement states Uniquely Singapore ( I just laugh when I see this)
And that itself is a "Uniquely Singapore" practice because I don't think in any other parts of the world will the citizens of a country feel like 2nd rated people and that they're marginalized in their own country. -
Yes, absolutely. The sudden outburst had me scratching my head..Originally posted by Gedanken:Well, spides, it's a natural mistake to make, and there's no problem with that at all. Hell, anybody who hasn't worked out their own taxes before would be expected to come to the same conclusion.
On the other hand, what's the rational course of action when the other party stomps her feet and insists that the mistaken conclusion is indeed the case? You work out the figures and demonstrate the case, right? -
TWO months ago, futures trader Mika Sampovaara trekked for a week through the Cambodian jungle, along the famed Mekong River trail.
It was an adventure he had long dreamed of, but never had the chance to pursue until he left his homeland for Singapore two years ago.
However, being in the region was not the only factor that allowed him to indulge in his passion for travel. He also had the time and, more importantly, the money.
Before arriving here, Mr Sampovaara was part of Finland's welfare system, which taxed more than half of his income.
It caused him to flee its shores, he said in a letter to The Straits Times Forum page on Thursday.
He warned of the system's pitfalls in his letter which came amid the recent parliamentary debate here on how Singapore should avoid going down the risky road of welfarism.
When he was in Finland in the 1990s, Mr Sampovaara was a high-flying economist, stock analyst and broker.
Though he enjoyed his work, the hours were gruelling and his earnings put him in Finland's highest tax bracket of 60 per cent.
'For every $100 I earned, more than $60 was going to the state. It was frustrating because most of it went into welfare subsidies which I wasn't benefiting from,' he said.
Yet before he started working, Mr Sampovaara had in fact profited from the Finnish system.
As a master's student in Helsinki in the early 1990s, he enjoyed two years of free education and was given a housing grant as well.
Does his criticism of welfarism not strike him as hypocritical, given that he had enjoyed the fruits of the welfare state and has now left his country?
Mr Sampovaara's reply: 'Well, I contributed taxes for over five years in Finland. I've more than paid my dues to society.'
In 2000, he moved to Switzerland with his Russian wife Tanya, and worked for an Icelandic investment bank.
Four years later, drawn by the warm weather and lower tax rates, they moved to Singapore. Arriving in April 2004, they settled into a condominium apartment in Bukit Timah.
Mr Sampovaara set up his own company, trading in Japanese futures on the Singapore Exchange Derivatives Trading (SGX-DT). He pays a concessionary tax rate of 10 per cent under a special scheme for companies dealing in approved commodities.
The new arrangement allows the couple, both permanent residents, to lead a lifestyle that Mr Sampovaara says is 'much more relaxed'.
As his own boss, he puts in just three hours a day for the business, about one-fifth of the hours he clocked in as the director of an investment bank.
His earnings here are less than half of his gross income in Finland and Switzerland, yet after paying taxes, his net income is not much less than before.
'In the end, what the lower taxes have afforded me is time, which is the ultimate luxury,' he said.
Given his experiences, his serious reservations about the welfare system of Finland and other European states come as no surprise. Welfarism has also driven many of his friends to flee to greener pastures, he said.
Though the welfare system does benefit a segment of society, such as the elderly and middle-class families with children to support, Mr Sampovaara feels it has severely diminished the work ethic of the Finnish people.
It was probably a factor that crossed Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's mind last Monday when he told Parliament that the system in Scandinavian countries was not suitable for Singapore.
The Government would find other ways of 'tilting the balance' in favour of the lower-income group, PM Lee said.
One approach being considered is to give a series of offset packages to help the poor manage an impending rise in the goods and services tax (GST).
PM Lee had announced last Monday that the GST will go up from 5 to 7 per cent, and said the money was needed to pay for more Government spending to help the lower-income.
Mr Sampovaara believes the Government is on the right track in its bid to narrow the income gap.
'Giving cash to the poor is more targeted. The money goes to those who need it, without punishing the rest of society,' he said.
He insists his objection to welfare subsidies in such areas as education and health care is not because he lacks compassion for the needy.
Rather, the fault lies in the nature of the welfare system, which provides subsidies for the masses 'indiscriminately', thus becoming susceptible to abuse by those who do not need the aid.
'The welfare system impinges on those who are willing to go out and make a living while providing for others with little incentive to work.'
The Singapore system works, he said, because 'at the end of the day, people are still accountable for themselves'.
(Straits Times, 19 Nov) -
Thank you, oxford. Now we have an example of a country with ridiculous tax rates.
One thing the article didn't expand upon is how that 60 percent came about. It's federal income tax, plus muicipal tax plus church tax. On top of that you have a VAT of 22%.
Sheesh, that kind of tax bill is enough to make anybody lose his lunch. Unless there's a compelling reason, it looks like most people can scratch Finland off their list. -
Just out of curiosity, I took a look at who might want to migrate to Finland.
By 2004 figures, about 30,000 of their 108,346 foreign residents are married to Finnish citizens, with 2800 more every year (source: Statistics Finland).
The largest sources of immigrants are the former Soviet Union and refugees from nations such as Somalia and Iraq. This appears to cause a few problems.
The coutry's overall unemployment rate is 8% but unemployment among foreign residents runs at about 30%. On thop of that, refugees from Somalia and the former Yugoslavia had the most children. The net result is an anti-immigration stance that makes Singapore's FT debate looks like a coffeeshop chat - I have't as yet read anything about how effective the Act on the Integration of Immigrants and Reception of Asylum Seekers has been since its introduction in 1999.
I'll let everybody draw their own conclusions from the above. -
never been a fan of refugees, unskilled or lazy migrants who don't contribute, never will
-
Regarding those arguments about tax brackets and migrating ..Yes EU is expensive but the benefits are quite good somewhat like in Australia if you are actually living there - got european friends - they quite happy with what they have ...they got alpine views , they can cross borders to visit other european countries or get treatment etc .
When you migrate - u look beyond tax brackets . You look for opportunities and a dream to fulfill - you are clearly wasting ur time about migration if you just look at the tax brackets . If I had looked at the taxes in Australia alone and listened to people about "discrimination in an ang moh society" - I would be simmering in Singapore going nowhere with my life.
I am in australia and I am happily claiming my work equipment, education and right about everything possible against the tax here . Dunno how they calculate it but heck I think I get more than what I would get in Singapore. 3k last tax year! How to argue that one? Yes they take alot from me , but I get back alot from them . Medicare - free hospital stay ...where got Income means test - need emergency op? - NO NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE BILL giving u a heart attack! If no job leh ...just collect dole lor ..easy mah! Education subsidised if the student is clever , I can opt to pay thru the progressive income tax system .....so if I stay a student forever , I can still claim alot ...down to my freaking pencils and laptops ...got 3 now ...dunno what to do with them ...
Life is good , opportunities are abound - favoritism for australian residents first ...foreign talent second choice . Why I care? I got union and certified agreements to protect my job mah ...no need to worry about job security when a young cheaper (FOREIGN) worker comes along.
As for discrimination , there is such a thing as EEO ( Equal Employment Opportunities) , for those of you who think ang moh countries are discriminatory ...I have no problem working here ....people want to be racist ..BRING IT ON and I BRING ON EEO - get them fined lor ...
Oh btw taxation in Australia is 27% if u have only one job and declared it to ATO (and this kinda thing u better not lie about) ,and it progressively goes up against each bracket . 40something% taxation rate is when u get greedy and do a few jobs at a go ...why work hard ...WORK SMART.
Another thing - when people ask me why I don't go back to Singapore and instead continue to stay in Australia ...my answer won't be because of the money or welfare or tax benefits , my answer is because Australia gave me a chance at proving myself beyond what I thought was my potential and Australia is where my heart and opportunities are ....that is why I love Australia so much. It was this big kind foreign country (now it is HOME) when I was just a young singaporean international student and from its university - I got my scholarship ,WHILE my own homeland has practically condemned me to a life of limited career expansion and my own former employer in Singapore practically dissuaded me from furthering my studies so that I will be permanently maimed in career expansion.
Of course , there will be people who are happy in Singapore and I am happy for them too . -
One more thing:
I don't mind going back to Singapore to work like those ang moh expats IF:
I get expat pay (USD or EUROS)
I get expat accomodation and BIG ARSE car (all free!)
I get living expenses TOPPED on the salary
I get free health insurance which entitles me to A1 class in a hospital
I get free travel here and there business class
Pity lar ...not foreign enuff. -
somewhere nobody know me...and lead my peaceful life
-
Me too. I feel that many of these 'asylum' seekers are in reality economic migrants. I also feel that many of these people do 'forum shopping' when deciding where to seek asylum.Originally posted by vito_corleone:never been a fan of refugees, unskilled or lazy migrants who don't contribute, never will
If there is one thing I dislike about Europe in general, this is it; I think they are too soft on asylum seekers and I think the EU ought to get together and knock out some sort of agreement about how to spread these people around.