By Benedict Chong

“A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.” – Milton Friedman

LHL Sg Summit 2014 income inequality - ST
Image – STOnline
In a recent dialogue session during the Singapore Summit Conference, PM Lee touched on how “concrete solutions” are needed to “deal” with income inequality. In so saying, PM Lee is advocating a “redistribution” of wealth through government programs aimed at ensuring everyone has “chips to play with”. The rich should contribute more to State coffers through progressive tax systems, the poor would essentially pay no taxes and consequently, every citizen would be better off than before.
Regrettably, such an illusion of universal prosperity constructed by the State is the penultimate nonstarter. Politicians worldwide often trumpet the noble and populist goal of fighting for the “little guy”. Yet, far from lifting millions above the poverty line, governments have instead brought millions down to live a life of destitution through flawed policies. In the end game, instead of unequal sharing of blessings, there now exists equal sharing of misery.
Politicians and academic intellectuals worldwide typically talk a very good game when calling for State policies to tackle and resolve income inequality. Yet, when it came to actual delivery of goods, the results are always never anywhere near a stipulated target and in most cases, counterproductive.
In Singapore, it can even be argued that the cause of burgeoning income inequality is due to government intervention in the economy. The shadow of the State in almost every sector in the economy has very possibly stifled the entrepreneurial spirit credited with lifting the income levels of numerous individuals globally.
The education sector, an undoubted strategic pillar of society and thus tightly regulated by the State, robotically teaches students not how to discover or question authority and the status quo, but instead to accept and recognise it. While obedient and passive citizens may be celebrated as living ‘trophies’ moulded by the State, they ultimately do not exhaust their full economic potential.
In secondary school curriculums, we are taught in Social Studies how government programs take centre stage in helping raise the living standards of the poor, notwithstanding an illusory State belief in individual self-reliance when CPF is itself a government mandated program. In Pre-U economics, we learn about the Gini Coefficient and how keeping it as close as possible to zero is amongst the noblest of tasks undertaken by the State. In such instances, the default premise would be that the government is universally expected to do something for low income earners.
And indeed, socialists and leftists advocating big government agree. They would denounce the capitalist system as rigged with the poor being endlessly exploited. The impoverished are said to never be able open the trapdoor out of poverty due to greedy and cruel corporations who only care about profits at their expense. But such statements do nothing to help the poor, serving only to hold them back by telling them that there is no hope of breaking out of poverty without ‘assistance’.
Such impossibly pessimistic assertions are also propagated by government bureaucrats as an excuse to govern and manage more. Socialist legislators would argue that the rich unfairly receive a disproportionate size of the economic pie, falsely assuming the economy to be a zero sum game when studies point otherwise. The rich actually create more individual wealth by baking more pies for everyone to enjoy.
In a recent article published by Roy Ngerng, he highlighted a most unflattering statistic putting Singapore high on the crony capitalism index. However, Roy did not elaborate on the meaning and consequence of crony capitalism, which this article believes to be the main cause of the economic malaise faced by the Singapore economy today. Examples of such quandaries include falling or stagnant wages and loss of economic competitiveness.
A free market involves voluntary exchange and entrepreneurship, a bastion of free will and morality. It leads to the creation of wealth and value, resulting in a general rise in living standards. Crony capitalism on the other hand involves the indiscriminate use of a coercive State apparatus to display economic favouritism, enforce a zero sum game of ‘redistribution’ to retain political power and ultimately destroying value.
6490813449_f0c51a7cc0There is a pressing need to distinguish between free market capitalism and crony capitalism. The free market has always been unfairly condemned intellectually and politically for excessively growing income inequalities and economic crises such as the recent financial recession when in fact, crony capitalism was responsible.
The crash had led to calls for more government intervention to combat the evil of corporate greed when government policies originally caused and exacerbated the effects of the crash. Economically, such economic interventions increase the likelihood of cronyism, largely explaining why the global economy remains in the doldrums after the banking crisis more than half a decade ago while precipitating an ever widening income gap.
Income inequality is a natural consequence of entrepreneurship. That is undeniable. Yet, to decry the existence of income inequality is to refute the benefits of entrepreneurship. And it is logically incoherent to reject entrepreneurship, given that the individual scrutinising this article would be doing so through a machine created in the image of an entrepreneur.
Since it has already been proven that entrepreneurship raises the general standard of living regardless of distributive fairness, the only plausible reason for a reverse would be government intervention. Government is not only unable to solve income inequality, they actually make it worse. And to compound it, they appropriate resources through the use of force, begetting a question of morality even if it is for the perennial greater good.
It is the very notion of freedom to create and produce that has lifted millions out of poverty; not State redistribution efforts. The State may be helping the poor take the road to success by simply staying out of the way, though inaction would hardly justify unjustifiably high salaries, highlighting the remoteness of such a possibility in Singapore.
Anecdotal evidence from successful entrepreneurs has never before credited government programmes for improving their lives. Instead, the moral virtues of hard work, a can-do attitude and an entrepreneurial spirit were most commonly attributed as reasons for uncommon success.
If legislation was all that was required to lift populations out of poverty, why are there still billions poor today? The answer is simple: There is no panacea to poverty. It all depends on the individual and however much resources the State may confiscate from the more productive for reallocation to lower income percentiles, poverty (and income inequality) remains an unsolved problem in and itself.  Sometimes, doing less may actually be yield greater results and in this instance, that is the case.

Subscribe
Notify of
5 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

MOH publishes surgical procedure fee benchmarks developed by advisory comittee

Fee benchmarks for private sector professional fees for common surgical procedures has…

李显龙:暂不提升警戒级别至红色 料疫情可能持续一年或更久

我国总理李显龙第二度针对当前的疫情发表三语演说,在致词中他强调我国疫情仍受到控制,暂不打算将将警戒级别升级至红色,也不会像中国、韩国或意大利那样封城。 我国已针对中国、伊朗、韩国和意大利实施旅游管制,措施必须暂时进一步收紧,但却不能完全与世隔绝。他表示,目前我国时预先制定、试行更为严厉的措施,并确保国人已做好准备。 他坦言各地疫情爆发、病例上升,世卫组织也宣布疫情成为“大流行”,这意味着我国推行的一些措施必须可持续,例如勤洗手、保持新加坡清洁等;第二,减少社会接触的措施仍会继续。 “一直以来,我们的对策是及时发现、及时治疗,把病毒传播范围降至最低,但随着病毒在全球各地蔓延,我国预计会出现更多外国输入病例,本地也面对大规模感染群出现的风险,我国必须保持警惕,做好心理准备。” 他呼吁各界保持镇定、于政府合作,防疫措施才能保障大家安全。 他也指出,世卫组织曾提及疫情迅速扩散主要是各国未认真看待,惟他表示新加坡一直都认真看待疫情,“世卫组织也对我国努力作出表扬,誉为模范。” 数名国人出席吉隆坡宗教活动感染 他也提及,有数名国人前往吉隆坡参与大型宗教活动结果被感染。但他强调,问题不在宗教本身,而是病毒可以更快速传播,例如在宗教聚会,故此特呼吁各界减少类似聚会。 李显龙表示,我国需准备面对病例激增的现象,届时可能无法像目前那样,让所有病例住院或隔离。 “80巴仙仅出现轻微症状,其余重症患者多为年长者或先前已有其他疾病。”倘若出现大量病患,合理做法是让重症患者先住院,鼓励轻微症状病患到诊所就医和在家隔离。 但他强调任何新加坡人需要紧急治疗,肯定会受到照顾。 李显龙表示,政府将筹备下阶段经济配套,让企业能保持运营,确保疫情过去能恢复;让被裁员者、需要协助的人获得照顾。…

转移阵地!TikTok母公司拟到我国扩张业务

TikTok所属公司,北京字节跳动公司(Bytedance),正计划将新加坡作为亚洲区的抢滩首地,借此扩张业务。 据路透社报导,有消息人士称因美国总统特朗普政府的压力,TikTok被迫出售其在美国的业务。因此正寻找有潜力的国家,斥资数十亿元,为当地开近百的工作职缺。 北京字节跳动科技公司,目前是全球最具价值的初创企业(Startup),在遭遇印度、英国和美国的打击后,正推进其业务到亚洲各地。 创办人张一鸣,长期以来关注拥有6.5亿人口的东南亚,而许多跨国企业,如阿里巴巴集团控股和腾讯控股也进军东南亚。消息人士称,北京字节跳动科技公司的计划,包括在我国建立数据中心。 旗下业务包括如今火遍全球的TikTok和Lark科技。北京字节跳动在中国的业务也包括中国版TikTok抖音,以及新运营的新闻应用程式 《今日头条》,预计每月将会有15亿活跃用户。 据了解,北京字节跳动科技公司2019年的收入已超越170亿美元,并创造了逾30亿美元(约41亿元)的净利润。 而亚洲如今也是该公司锁定的目标,尤其在被迫售出美国的业务后。美国总统特朗普于昨日(10日)表示,将不会延长交易期限至15日。 除了美国的打压,印度也曾为TikTok用户最多的国家之一,但由于中印边境冲突恶化,印度政府忧心安心问题,从而禁止印度使用TikTok。 软银集团也为印度业务寻找竞购者;英国政府则对TikTok的信息安全存疑,因而禁止TikTok入驻英国。 如今北京字节跳动已组成财团向金融管理局申请数码银行执照。其中成员包括华侨银行的李氏家族。