Connect with us

Comments

You can disagree with minimum wage, but do not trivalise the suffering and circumstance of others, says blogger Jeraldine

Published

on

Millennial blogger Jeraldine Phneah recently has raised concern and voiced disappointment over the online comments that trivalise the circumstance of low-wage workers in the midst of public conversation about minimum wage policy.

Writing in a Facebook post last Thursday (22 October), Ms Phneah said that she came across a comment on Seedly Personal Finance Community Facebook page saying, “If you only earn $1000/month, most of your stuff nearly free cos [because] subsidized. You only need to worry about food and death.”

The comment, according to Ms Phneah, was a response to The Straits Times article discussing whether it was possible to survive on less than S$1,300 per month, which shared by an online user on the community page.

“I wonder if that is truly the case?” she said, expressing skepticism towards that comment while citing an article reported by Channel News Asia about the plight of cleaner Mdm Rosmah who takes care of her husband who is recuperating.

The article mentioned that Mdm Rosmah earns S$700 a month, but the salary “is easily outstripped” by the couple’s monthly spending of about S$1,000, which included groceries (about S$420), electricity and conservancy charges (about S$120), medical expenses (about S$100), transport (about S$100), rent (S$33), and prepaid phone cards (S$18).

It also said that when their finances run out month-end, the couple would cook less or eat with their neighbours, and while they had a water supply cut, they had to put pails and bottles under their taps to collect the water to shower and drink.

Referring to the case, Ms Phneah then said, “Sure, they may have some social assistance. However, if it was truly enough to ensure ‘most of your stuff nearly free’ and ‘only need to worry about food and death’, I wonder if they would have to put up with the circumstances above?”

She went on to express that it was “indeed disappointing and saddening” to read some of the comments in that thread.

“The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted many people, particularly the lower income group. If someone who earns less than $1,300 and was facing hard times saw these comments, I can’t imagine how hurt and humiliated he or she would feel,” she added.

She continued, “You can disagree with minimum wage, but I hope that you do not trivialise the suffering and circumstances of others.

“Let’s try to have more empathy for others, and treat those who are struggling with respect and dignity. Singaporeans, we can do better.”

An online user, who believed to be the one shared the article to community page commented that his posting was initially meant to “have a balanced, fair discussion” on whether S$1,300 is a living wage in Singapore.

However he said it was unfortunate “how some individuals can’t give just a little empathy” for the low-wage earners.

A number of online users also appreciated Ms Phneah for voicing this issue as some people are so “callous” that “do not care for their fellow human beings in need”.

An online user also pointed out that it is needed to push for minimum wage and “not so folksy tales of upgrading”. He said he understands how the mental stress over money and it may lead to lots of negativity which to some people, maybe fatal.

The minimum wage policy has become hot topic of discussion among the citizens following the heated debate that sparked in Parliament on 15 October between Member of Parliaments (MPs) from People’s Action Party (PAP) and Workers’ Party (WP) on whether a universal minimum wage of S$1,300 should be implemented.

During the debate, PAP’s MP Koh Poh Koon argued that the WP’s proposal of implementing a minimum wage of S$1,300 could result in a worse situation for businesses and workers, and also become a politicised issue.

Dr Koh added that Government initiatives like the Progressive Wage Model have already helped increase the wages of lower-income workers.

This was in response to the WP’s chief Pritam Singh’s call for implementing a universal minimum wage with S$1,300 as a base for Singaporean workers. Pointing it out in a Facebook post on 12 October, Mr Singh said that this is not a “moral imperative” but “an act of national solidarity”.

Mr Singh noted that the Government’s current ‘Minimum Wage Plus’ sectoral approach which also covers productivity and career progression within specific sectors has taken “too long” to implement.

“It has been eight years, with three sectors covered. This is far too long for Singaporeans who work outside these sectors. How long are they to wait?” he questioned.

Continue Reading
15 Comments
Subscribe
Notify of
15 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Comments

Dr Chee Soon Juan criticises Ho Ching’s vision for 8-10 million population

SDP chief Dr Chee Soon Juan criticised Ho Ching’s claim that Singapore could support a population of 8 to 10 million through effective city planning. He expressed scepticism, citing adverse effects like rising living costs and mental health issues. Dr Chee argued that smaller populations can thrive, referencing Scandinavian countries that excelled internationally and produced Nobel laureates.

Published

on

Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), slammed Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s spouse, Ho Ching, for her assertion that Singapore could accommodate 8 to 10 million people with proper city planning and land reclamation.

In a video message published on 1 October, Dr Chee expressed strong scepticism regarding the narrative of increasing the population, highlighting that the current surge past the 6 million mark had been largely driven by the influx of foreigners, which led to several adverse consequences.

He further highlighted that smaller populations were not inherently negative, drawing examples from some Scandinavian countries that had flourished on the international stage despite their smaller populations and had even produced Nobel Prize laureates.

Ho Ching expressed confidence that with proper city planning, Singapore could accommodate up to 8-10 million people

Last Friday (27 September), in a Facebook post, Madam Ho, who was also the former CEO of Temasek Holdings, highlighted the growing demand for caregivers as the population aged and the need for workers to sustain sectors like construction and engineering, particularly as the workforce shrank due to lower birth rates.

“As we have less children, we need more people from elsewhere to join us to keep this city functioning, from repairing train tracks through the night to serving patients in hospitals through the night. ”

Dr Chee Highlights Risks of Population Growth

In response, Dr Chee recalled his experience of being reprimanded by Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr Vivian Balakrishnan during the last General Election for raising concerns about the implications of a rapidly growing population.

He questioned why Madam Ho, who shared similar views, had not faced the same scrutiny.

In his video, Dr Chee articulated several concerns regarding the proposed increase in population, highlighting the potential negative impacts, including increased demand for food, housing, and transportation, which would result in a significant rise in living costs.

With a larger population, Dr Chee pointed out that more flats, roads, hospitals, and public transportation would need to be constructed, which would ultimately require higher taxes and fees to maintain the necessary infrastructure.

The SDP leader emphasized that an influx of residents would intensify competition for jobs, exerting downward pressure on wages and potentially leading to higher rates of unemployment and underemployment.

Dr Chee further expressed concern over the environmental degradation that would accompany population growth, citing the recent clearing of forests for housing and industrial developments, including Tengah and Kranji Forests.

Dr Chee questioned the ability of existing infrastructure to cope with a growing population, referencing the persistent issues with the MRT system, including breakdowns and safety hazards.

He highlighted the toll that congestion and overpopulation take on the mental health of Singaporeans, noting a rise in reported mental health challenges.

“All this while the ministers live in secluded and luxurious bunglows and villas, far from the madding crowd which we are subjected to every single day.”

“So, when Ho Ching says that we can accommodate up to 10 million people, I’d like to ask her, where and what type of house she lives in?”

Dr Chee Argues for Innovative Economic Solutions Over Traditional Urban Expansion

Regarding the ruling government’s persistent push to increase Singapore’s population to what he considered “unhealthy levels,” Dr Chee suggested that the PAP lacked viable alternatives for fostering economic growth.

He implied that the government resorted to traditional methods of expansion, such as construction and urban development.

He highlighted that the government is fixated on physically expanding the city—“digging, pouring concrete, and erecting structures”—to sustain GDP growth.

This approach, he argued, creates an illusion that Singapore remains a productive economic hub, despite potential downsides.

Dr Chee Advocates for the Value of Smaller Populations: Cites Political Freedom as Key to Innovation and Success

Dr Chee further contended that a smaller population did not necessarily hinder a nation’s success.

He cited several Scandinavian countries and Taiwan, emphasising their global brands and innovations despite their relatively small populations.

Dr Chee connected the success of these nations to their political freedoms, arguing that the ability to think and express oneself freely fostered innovation and societal progress.

He contrasted this with Singapore, where he claimed that the government controlled media and stifled freedom of expression.

He criticised the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP) for its centralised control and for limiting the potential of Singaporeans. Dr Chee used the metaphor of a “grotesque monkey” clinging to the nation, suggesting that the PAP hindered progress and growth.

Dr Chee emphasised that the quality of a population—its talent, energy, and potential—was far more important than its size.

He suggested that Singapore possessed the necessary attributes to succeed on a global scale but was held back by the current political landscape.

He urged Singaporeans to engage in critical thinking rather than passively accepting government narratives.

Dr Chee advocated for a more mature and sophisticated approach to governance and civic engagement, encouraging citizens to take an active role in shaping their society.

Continue Reading

Comments

Netizens criticise PM Wong’s video, urge Govt to address root causes of cost-of-living crisis

Netizens have voiced concerns over PM Wong’s approach to addressing the cost-of-living crisis. Many argue that distributing CDC vouchers provides only temporary relief and are calling for more substantial action on issues such as transport and rental costs.

Published

on

By

SINGAPORE: In response to Prime Minister Lawrence Wong’s video titled “Tackling Cost of Living Concern,” uploaded on 2 October, netizens expressed that the Singapore government should address fundamental issues like transport and rental costs, rather than relying on measures such as distributing Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers.

In the six-minute video, PM Wong acknowledged that although inflation has moderated, the cost of living remains a significant issue for many Singaporeans.

PM Wong assured Singaporeans that his team is committed to helping them through this challenging period.

He emphasised that while inflation is expected to decline further in 2024, prices will still rise from time to time.

He explained that delaying price adjustments would only worsen the situation in the future, but the government will work on mitigating the impact of any necessary increases.

The prime minister outlined that the long-term solution to managing living costs is to ensure Singaporeans have access to good jobs with better wages.

He added that higher wages should outpace inflation, allowing citizens to improve their living standards in real terms.

PM Wong also provided an economic outlook for 2024, predicting higher growth and lower inflation, which could lead to increases in real incomes for workers.

He noted that the government is closely monitoring economic conditions for 2025 and will reveal more of its plans in the upcoming Budget.

Recapping earlier initiatives, PM Wong said the government has allocated over $10 billion through the Assurance Package to help Singaporeans cope with rising living costs, including enhancements to the package.

He highlighted that this year, every household has received S$800 in CDC vouchers, alongside utility rebates and cash payouts.

PM Wong also touched on global inflation trends, explaining how disruptions from the pandemic and global conflicts affected prices.

He assured Singaporeans that the government has taken measures, such as strengthening the Singapore dollar, to shield them from the worst of these effects.

Netizens criticise government’s approach to rising cost of living

Hundreds of netizens have voiced their concerns under a Facebook post by The Straits Times on PM Wong’s video, criticising the government’s approach to addressing cost-of-living issues.

Many users expressed frustration, noting that despite the government’s repeated reassurances about helping Singaporeans, there has been a lack of action to address the ongoing increases in utility and transport fares.

Others echoed similar sentiments, with one user blaming the increase in GST to 9% as a major factor contributing to the rising cost of living. As Finance Minister, PM Wong was the key advocate of the GST hike and defended it when the opposition called for a deferment.

One netizen criticised the government’s actions as being counterproductive.  They pointed out that while the government raises prices in several areas, it simultaneously claims to be providing help, which they view as contradictory.

Netizens call for action on rising rental costs, criticise reliance on CDC vouchers

Many commenters also criticised the distribution of CDC vouchers as insufficient, urging the government to tackle root issues such as high rental and housing costs.

One netizen argued that CDC vouchers provide little relief, and reducing rental, medical, and food costs would be a more effective solution.

Another user called for standardised rental prices for hawker stalls and suggested that the government should fine landlords who raise rents excessively.

Other commenters focused on the need for more substantial measures, such as controlling hawker stall and coffee shop leases.

They argued that skyrocketing rental prices directly affect consumers through higher food costs.

One user proposed reducing government officials’ salaries and reforming other key policies such as lowering the GST and making housing more affordable as real solutions.

Additionally, some netizens highlighted the need to address transport and rental costs, noting that higher transport and raw material costs will continue to drive up consumer prices.

They urged the government to reduce rent for commercial shops and food stalls.

Netizens call for concrete measures in addressing cost of living

Some netizens expressed doubts about the government’s efforts to address the cost of living, calling for more transparency and concrete actions.

Many have called for clear metrics, such as housing prices, Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices, transportation costs, and population growth, to be presented as proof of the government’s commitment to tackling these issues.

Other commenters urged the government to avoid short-term solutions such as payouts, which could ultimately lead to higher taxpayer costs.

They suggested more long-term measures, including lowering CPF contribution rates, which they view as a financial burden on lower-income earners.

 

Continue Reading

Trending