by Leong Sze Hian

I refer to the Key Household Income Trends 2010 report released by the Department of Statistics, on 14 February.

Income increase only 0.3%

It states that “among resident households, median monthly income from work increased by 3.1 per cent from $4,850 in 2009 to $5,000 in 2010; in real terms, the increase was 0.3 per cent”.

After last year’s record 14.7 per cent GDP growth, this 0.3 per cent real increase is very small indeed.

From 2000 to 2010, the real increase per annum was only about 1.7 per cent.

Does this mean that about half of all households had a real increase of less than 1.7 per cent per annum from 2000 to 2010?

Lower-income households negative increase?

What was the real increase for the bottom 20 or 30 per cent of households? – Negative real increase?

Although the household flat-type which increased the most was HDB 1- and 2-room flats  { “Median monthly household income from work increased by 10 per cent (7.0 per cent in real terms) among employed households living in HDB 1- and 2-room flats}, the median household income for this group in 2010 was only $1,200.

This is a nominal increase of only about 0.4 per cent from $1,190 in 2008 to $1,200 in 2010. In real terms, its is a decrease of about minus two per cent.

Income down, HDB increase rental?

So, if your income is not increasing, and HDB changed its policy some time back to gradually increase the rental of HDB rental flats as tenants’ income exceed $800 and more than two years of staying in a rental flat, our HDB policies may be making the lives of these poorer Singaporeans even harder.

As the HDB recently announced that it would build another 7,500 rental flats to meet demand, in addtion to the 40,000 plus rental flats now, does it mean that the total number of households in 1- and 2-room flats in Singapore is growing?

With half of those living in such flats earning less than $1,200, how do they manage?

Survive on $354 a month?

The Average Monthly Household Income from Work Per Household Member Among Employed Households by Deciles”, for the 1st – 10th decile in 2010, was only $354.

This is a real increase of only about 0.5 per cent per annum, from 2008 ($340) to 2010 ($354).

How does a family survive on $354 per household member? In this connection, the Comcare benchmark for financial assistance is $450 per household member.

I estimate the total number of households in the 1st to the 10th decile to be about 100,000.

Income gap less due government benefits?

As to “The disparity in household income from work per household member among employed households increased marginally in 2010. The Gini coefficient, which is a summary measure of income inequality, increased slightly in 2010. In particular, including employer CPF contributions5, the Gini coefficient was 0.472 in 2010, compared to 0.471 in 2009. Adjusting in addition for government benefits and taxes, the Gini coefficient was 0.452 in 2010”, what this means is that the income gap has continued to widen.

Also, the ratio of average income of top 20% to lowest 20% employed households increased from 12.7 to 12.9, from 2009 to 2010.

Everyone got government benefits?

The report also mentioned that on average, the various government schemes added “$1,110 per household member to resident households in 2010”, I would like to ask the following questions:

How can “schemes relating to healthcare, such as subsidies for medical bills incurred at A&E, day surgery, hospitalisation episodes from 2002 onwards” and also “subsidies for medical bills incurred at specialist outpatient clinics and polyclinics, and Medifund disbursements” from 2006 onwards be counted as “government benefits and taxes” to reduce the Gini coefficient?

Do any countries in the world adopt such a computation?

How can the so called “80 per cent subsidy”when anyone is hopitalised in a Class C ward be counted as a “government benefits” to all residents in Singapore?

How can such public spending on healthcare be counted, when according to the Ministry of Health’s web site, Singapore’s public healthcare spending at about 1 per cent of GDP, is one of the lowest in the world?

How can “GST Credits” be counted – isn’t it for offsetting the GST increase?

How can “Workfare Income Supplement disbursements” be counted, when the bulk of it is to your CPF, which you cannot use now?

How can “rebates on utilities, rental and service and conservancy charges”, be counted, when the electricity tariff and S & CC keep going up over the years?

How can “Edusave Merit Bursary, Edusave Awards and Edusave Scholarships for Government or government aided schools”, be counted as a benefit to all residents?

How can “post-Secondary Education Accounts Top-up and government’s matching grant from 2008 onwards”, be counted when you can’t use the money now – only when your children go for tertiary studies?

You may have noticed a trend of more and more routine Government spending being counted as “benefits” for all residents, such as “Baby Bonus from 2001 onwards, Centre-based Infant and Childcare subsidies from 2002 onwards, and schemes relating to ComCare programmes from 2004 onwards”, etc.

How can “CPF Deferment Bonus from 2008 onwards, CPF Life Bonus and Voluntary Deferment Bonus from 2009 onwards” be counted, when these are top-ups to your CPF in exchange for your voluntary deferrment of your CPF withdrawal until age 65? It is money that you can only see use when you are 65, vide a monthly life annuity.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Singapore International Festival of Arts 2017 set to enchant and invigorate participatory experience

The Singapore International Festival of Arts (SIFA) returns for the final year…

评论:持有权力的暴力更危险

文:刘婉贞 无数的警察暴力,还有青年人“被自杀”案件多不胜数难道是巧合?这些伤口“蚊髀同牛髀”(广东谚语,意指小巫见大巫),蓝丝又或者政府机关,最擅长用这些去夸大民宣,但从未见过蓝丝或政府讲或指出无数的警察暴力事件。 你经验过接触示威者的害怕;亦有无数市民无辜受到警察的粗暴,见到警察就惊、到街上吃东西也会被搜身、一群市民被无理地当面喷胡椒剂,当然还有无数、我相信是乔装者制造的暴力嫁祸示威者。 这种种我自己亲眼由直播看到、但是蓝丝不会说,也视而不见,(香港)政府不提,当无一回事。但就偏偏放大、尽量抹黑任何他们所能抓到的示威者痛脚、蓝丝就完全受落。 我就以上和您分析,两方面都有暴力,但并不对等。相信任何人都不会支持暴力,但您要知道的是,持有权力的暴力,更加可怕、更加危险。这样的暴力如被政府包容以及不用负责任,这社会与市民就会失去了任何的保障安全和自由。 两者相比之下、持有权力的暴力是最恐怖的,因为你什么都办不了,到最后只会剩下两个字 :无奈。 我不支持暴力,但我会理解现在的反抗,皆因受到太多的私刑与无缘无故的死伤(但政府可以声称包括裸体浮尸等案件无嫌疑,侮辱人的智商)。“一个巴掌拍不响”,世上不会有无缘无故的行为,除了那些有精神问题的人士。 “香港已成极权主义统治” 香港已变成一个极权主义统治,就这反送中事件,过去这几个月已让整个世界看清楚共产政权的恶毒面貌、不把市民当一回事的极权思维,政府持有所有的资源与政府机关,试问又怎能斗会得过呢? 之所以我绝对会佩服还肯、还愿意出来发声出来示威的所有人,因为这是绝对不容易的。勇气与冒着个人牺牲的代价,超越个人利益,为了要维护基本市民的权利去阻止政府“奉旨”(香港俗称“老冯”)。 遗憾的是,人已盲目已麻痹的渐渐受落。捧着整个国家送给一个党派,最终是市民允许统治者,去忘记国家的所有是属于每一个市民的。而我正正活在这种政权统治之下,就我所讲两个字:无奈。…

高级律师及爱国者G拉曼博士安祥过世 享年82岁

文:前学运领袖、维权律师陈华彪 翻译:万章 2020年12月8日高级律师及爱国者G拉曼博士安祥过世,享年82岁。 新加坡法律界称呼他为可靠先生。 他以诚实,公平磊落,绅士风范和个人品德赢得了2014年新加坡律师协会CC Tan奖。 资深大律师Thio Shen Yi宣读表扬书时,形容拉曼博士是一位资深的律师,他以正直和坦率著称,他“无论对方的身份如何,都毫无疑虑的表达自己的观点。” 自1974年起,我很荣幸与拉曼律师成为朋友。拉曼一直是我多年的好友和同志。 尽管已经在政治上付出了沉重的代价,勇敢的他仍然对我这么说:“华彪,你须要我帮上什么忙,尽管让我知道。” 1974年,大卫·马绍尔(David…