Connect with us

Current Affairs

Singaporeans jobs and salaries improve with each generation says MOF report; could Sandwich Generation concerns remain?

Published

5 years ago

on

A recent Ministry of Finance (MOF) report states younger generations get higher salary and better employment than older groups, but could they still end up as the next Sandwich Generation?
Singaporeans in their 40s are more educated, earn more, are able to secure better employment, save more and are on the right path to longer healthier lives than the older age groups between the ages of 50 and 79, the new report by MOF discovered.
However, the report, which was released on Tuesday (22 October), also found that this group of Singaporeans are less likely to marry and have children.
Titled “Key Socio-economic Outcomes Across Cohorts”, the report looks at main socio-economic outcomes of Singaporeans born between 1940 and 1979, and this is done by looking at several key indicators like educational attainment, employment and savings, residential-property ownership, health as well as family support.
In order to conduct the study, Singaporeans were separated into four 10-year age bands to reveal the improvements in their quality of life over the years – first-generation Singaporeans born from 1940-1949 (70 to 79 years old), second-generation Singaporeans born from 1950-1959 (60 to 69 years old), third- generation Singaporeans born from 1960-1969 (50 to 59 years old) and fourth- generation Singaporeans born from 1970-1979 (40 to 49 years old).
As a whole, the younger generations performed better than those in the previous generations across all these key indicators.
“Each successive generation in our study has seen improvements in their lives, in tandem with Singapore’s economic growth over the past 54 years. Each group has done better than the previous across most of these different facets of socio-economic progress,” the report stated.

Better education

According to the report, larger amount of Singaporeans in the 40s received significantly higher educational attainment beyond secondary school, compared with the older groups.
It was found that only 22% of Singaporeans born between 1940 to 1949 have an education level above secondary school, compared to 79% of those born in 1970-1979.

“Younger Singaporeans who are not included in the current study are expected to attain even higher educational qualifications,” MOF said.
It added, “Today, students benefit from well-resourced schools and a large degree of flexibility in the education system, where they can choose from multiple pathways based on their strengths and talents.”

Better employment rates, salaries and savings

Due to higher educational qualifications, younger Singaporeans are able to find jobs, earn better wages and save more funds for retirement. Additionally, the Labour Force Participation Rates median gross monthly income from work and Central Provident Fund (CPF) balances have also increases across age groups.
The Labour Force Participation Rate for those born in 1970 to 1979 is 89%, an increase from 79% for those born in 1950-1959. This happened as more women began entering the workforce, since male participation rates remained steady across three generations.

On the other hand, the median real gross monthly income from work, which includes employer CPF contributions, also rose across all generations.
Singaporeans born between 1970 to 1979 earned S$5,900 in their 40s, and this is more than double of the S$2,800 earned by those born between 1950 to 1959 when they were in their 40s.
If that’s not all, the median CPF balances in Ordinary and Special Accounts for Singaporeans in their 40s has also risen, with the younger group saving three times more of those in the oldest group, after adjusting the inflation.
“Today, the Government intervenes actively to support Singaporeans who want to work, such as by supporting skills development and employment facilitations. For example, the Adapt and Grow initiative helps jobseekers affected by economic slowdowns to get back into employment as soon as possible. Employers also benefit from various grants and programmes to upskill their workers,” MOF said.

Higher residential property ownership rates

The report also revealed that the residential property ownership rates have gotten better, increasing from 76% for Singaporeans born between 1940 to 1949 to an average of around 85% for the three younger age groups.
The report stated that this was due to higher wages and savings. Additionally, the majority of Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat owners also have leases that are long enough to cover them until they reach the age of 95.
“This also means that they have an asset that can be monetised if necessary, to supplement their retirement needs (for example, by right-sizing or through the Lease Buyback Scheme),” MOF said.

Longer life expectancy but decrease in family support

The MOF report said that Singaporeans are living longer, healthier years. It added that both life expectancy and Health Adjusted Life Expectancy have gotten better for the younger generation.
“The life expectancy at age 45 has risen from 35 years in 1991 to 41 years in 2017, accompanied by a similar rise in Health Adjusted Life Expectancy at age 45 from 29 years in 1993 to 33 years in 2017,” the report noted.

It continued, “With enhanced healthcare schemes like MediShield Life, CareShield Life, Community Health Assistance Scheme, Screen For Life, younger Singaporeans will be better prepared for their healthcare needs, including the early detection and management of conditions.”
Despite having better quality of life and more personal resources for retirement, the younger Singaporeans have lower marriage rates and smaller family sizes. This could possibly be due to “less available support from the immediate family”, MOF said.
According to the ministry, marriage rates dropped from 92% for those born between 1940 to 1949 to 82% for those born between 1970 and 1979.
Apart from that, the average number of children per ever-married female also deteriorated from 2.5 children for first-generation Singaporeans to 1.8 children for the fourth-generation children.
“The Government will continue to work closely with community partners to support those who may need additional assistance, even as we encourage the strengthening or inter-generational family bonds. The Government will also do more to help Singaporeans to upskill, earn and save more,” the report said.

Risk of becoming a Sandwich Generation

Although the younger age group fared well in all the key indicators as compared with the older generations, they are described as a Sandwich Generation as they have to support their growing children and ageing parents.
According to the findings released by insurance company NTUC Income in August this year, it was found that 94% of parents (aged 35-55 years old) surveyed said that they were currently pressured between having to financially support their children and their old parents as well. The majority of these parents also believed that their children and grandchild will continue to get caught in Sandwich Generation trap.
Meanwhile, when young Singaporeans (aged 21-29 years old) were asked if they believed that they will become the next Sandwich Generation, nearly 80% of them responded affirmatively.
Their top reasons for this included feeling responsible to financially support their retired parents, longer life expectancy of their parents, and the belief that their parents will not have sufficient savings for retirement.
Another thought-provoking result from the survey was that young Singaporeans, in addition to making more financial investments for the future, were also prepared to make big personal sacrifices such as not marrying, or have fewer or no children to avoid becoming ‘sandwiched’ in the future.
In response to the research data, Assistant Professor Tan Poh Lin from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, said that the information was consistent with the stresses faced by society brought about by multiple factors, which may include higher costs of living, depressed wages and also the fact that people were starting their families later and were not beginning the push to save up enough for their retirement.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Reforming Singapore’s defamation laws: Preventing legal weapons against free speech

Opinion: The tragic suicide of Geno Ong, linked to the financial stress from a defamation lawsuit, raises a critical issue: Singapore’s defamation laws need reform. These laws must not be weaponized to silence individuals.

Published

1 week ago

on

9 September 2024

By

by Alexandar Chia

This week, we hear the tragic story of the suicide of Geno Ong, with Ong citing the financial stress from the defamation lawsuit against her by Raymond Ng and Iris Koh.

Regardless of who’s right and who’s wrong, this Koh/Ng vs Ong affair raises a wider question at play – the issue of Singapore’s defamation laws and how it needs to be tightened.

Why is this needed? This is because defamation suits cannot be weaponised the way they have been in Singapore law. It cannot be used to threaten people into “shutting up”.

Article 14(2)(a) of the Constitution may permit laws to be passed to restrict free speech in the area of defamation, but it does not remove the fact that Article 14(1)(a) is still law, and it permits freedom of speech.

As such, although Article 14(2)(a) allows restrictions to be placed on freedom of speech with regard to the issue of defamation, it must not be to the extent where Article 14(1)(a)’s rights and liberties are not curtailed completely or heavily infringed on.

Sadly, that is the case with regard to precedence in defamation suits.

Let’s have a look at the defamation suit then-PM Goh Chok Tong filed against Dr Chee Soon Juan after GE 2001 for questions Dr Chee asked publicly about a $17 billion loan made to Suharto.

If we look at point 12 of the above link, in the “lawyer’s letter” sent to Dr Chee, Goh’s case of himself being defamed centred on lines Dr Chee used in his question, such as “you can run but you can’t hide”, and “did he not tell you about the $17 billion loan”?

In the West, such lines of questioning are easily understood at worse as hyperbolically figurative expressions with the gist of the meaning behind such questioning on why the loan to Suharto was made.

Unfortunately, Singapore’s defamation laws saw Dr Chee’s actions of imputing ill motives on Goh, when in the West, it is expected of incumbents to take the kind of questions Dr Chee asked, and such questions asked of incumbent office holders are not uncommon.

And the law permits pretty flimsy reasons such as “withdrawal of allegations” to be used as a deciding factor if a statement is defamatory or not – this is as per points 66-69 of the judgement.

This is not to imply or impute ill intent on Singapore courts. Rather, it shows how defamation laws in Singapore needs to be tightened, to ensure that a possible future scenario where it is weaponised as a “shut-up tool”, occurs.

These are how I suggest it is to be done –

  1. The law has to make mandatory, that for a case to go into a full lawsuit, there has to be a 3-round exchange of talking points and two attempts at legal mediation.
  2. Summary judgment should be banned from defamation suits, unless if one party fails to adduce evidence or a defence.
  3. A statement is to be proven false, hence, defamatory, if there is strictly material along with circumstantial evidence showing that the statement is false. Apologies and related should not be used as main determinants, given how many of these statements are made in the heat of the moment, from the natural feelings of threat and intimidation from a defamation suit.
  4. A question should only be considered defamatory if it has been repeated, after material facts of evidence are produced showing, beyond reasonable doubt, that the message behind the question, is “not so”, and if there is a directly mentioned subject in the question. For example, if an Opposition MP, Mr A, was found to be poisoned with a banned substance, and I ask openly on how Mr A got access to that substance, given that its banned, I can’t be found to have “defamed the government” with the question as 1) the government was not mentioned directly and 2) if the government has not produced material evidence that they indeed had no role in the poisoning affair, if they were directly mentioned.
  5. Damages should be tiered, with these tiers coded into the Defamation Act – the highest quantum of damages (i.e. those of a six-figured nature) is only to be reserved if the subject of defamation lost any form of office, revenue or position, or directly quantifiable public standing, or was subjected to criminal action, because of the act of defamation. If none of such occur, the maximum amount of damages a plaintiff in a defamation can claim is a 4-figure amount capped at $2000. This will prevent rich and powerful figures from using defamation suits and 6-figure damages to intimidate their questioners and detractors.
  6. All defendants of defamation suit should be allowed full access to legal aid schemes.

Again, this piece does not suggest bad-faith malpractice by the courts in Singapore. Rather, it is to suggest how to tighten up defamation laws to avoid it being used as the silencing hatchet.

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Man arrested for alleged housebreaking and theft of mobile phones in Yishun

A 23-year-old man was arrested for allegedly breaking into a Yishun Ring Road rental flat and stealing eight mobile phones worth S$3,400 from five tenants. The Singapore Police responded swiftly on 1 September, identifying and apprehending the suspect on the same day. The man has been charged with housebreaking, which carries a potential 10-year jail term.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

3 September 2024

By

SINGAPORE: A 23-year-old man has been arrested for allegedly breaking into a rental flat along Yishun Ring Road and stealing eight mobile phones from five tenants.

The incident occurred in the early hours on Sunday (1 September), according to a statement from the Singapore Police Force.

The authorities reported that they received a call for assistance at around 5 a.m. on that day.

Officers from the Woodlands Police Division quickly responded and, through ground enquiries and police camera footage, were able to identify and apprehend the suspect on the same day.

The stolen mobile phones, with an estimated total value of approximately S$3,400, were recovered hidden under a nearby bin.

The suspect was charged in court on Monday with housebreaking with the intent to commit theft.

If convicted, he could face a jail term of up to 10 years and a fine.

In light of this incident, the police have advised property owners to take precautions to prevent similar crimes.

They recommend securing all doors, windows, and other openings with good quality grilles and padlocks when leaving premises unattended, even for short periods.

The installation of burglar alarms, motion sensor lights, and CCTV cameras to cover access points is also advised. Additionally, residents are urged to avoid keeping large sums of cash and valuables in their homes.

The investigation is ongoing.

Last month, police disclosed that a recent uptick in housebreaking incidents in private residential estates across Singapore has been traced to foreign syndicates, primarily involving Chinese nationals.

Preliminary investigations indicate that these syndicates operate in small groups, targeting homes by scaling perimeter walls or fences.

The suspects are believed to be transient travelers who enter Singapore on Social Visit Passes, typically just a day or two before committing the crimes.

Before this recent surge in break-ins, housebreaking cases were on the decline, with 59 reported in the first half of this year compared to 70 during the same period last year.

However, between 1 June and 4 August 2024, there were 10 reported housebreaking incidents, predominantly in private estates around the Rail Corridor and Bukit Timah Road.

The SPF has intensified efforts to engage residents near high-risk areas by distributing crime prevention advisories, erecting alert signs, and training them to patrol their neighborhoods, leading to an increase in reports of suspicious activity.

Continue Reading

Trending