YOUR VIEW: 'S'pore government trying its best to level playing field'

This email by a reader was sent to us via reachus@yahoo-inc.com. We welcome your views. Please include your full name, age and occupation if you want your emails to be considered for publishing. Please note that all submissions will be subject to these terms.

Allow me to share Joseph E. Stiglitz's article titled "Singapore's lessons for an unequal America" published in New York Times on 18 Mar, as well as some personal experiences.

Many years ago, my primary school classmates were caught stealing exam answers from the staff room.

My maths teacher, Mrs. Chan, reprimanded him and told the class, “I’ll rather teach you how to fish so that you may survive in the long run, than always giving you the fish freely that you learnt to depend on it.”

That memory came to me when I was reading the article by Stiglitz. Stiglitz made a few observations about the Singapore:

1.       The system compels individuals to take responsibility for their own needs.
2.       The government invests heavily in education and scientific research so that every child, regardless of background,  would have access to the best education for which they were qualified.
3.       The government breaks the pernicious, self-sustaining inequality cycle by propagating universal but progressive government programmes.
4.       Government intervention in the distribution of pretax income with help to those at the bottom rather than those at the top.

These observations by a foreign Nobel Prize winner in Economics have brought me a greater level of confidence in our country.

Yes, there is inequality in Singapore. This is prevalent in many developed and developed countries; there will always people who are deemed to be the poor, the average, the rich and the richer in every society. What is more critical then, is what that is done to close this inequality gap, to help make the playing field more equal so that there is social mobility within the system. That is where sound governance comes into play.

Encouraging independence for our citizens in Singapore is not a bad thing, by inculcating a culture of taking ownership of our own lives as well as through education opportunities.

According to Stiglitz, 36% of our wages go into our CPF which is used for healthcare, housing and retirement benefits. While ensuring that we do not squander our monies away, we are able to save up for the houses that we want to buy, and to pay for our bills if we fall sick one day.

My dad told us once, how he got our home, a humble flat in the north of Singapore. He used up all his CPF savings and had taken a loan to buy that house, where my brother and I grew up in. For the next 14 years, he paid off the loan slowly but surely, till the flat became completely his.

The heavy investment in education is worth mentioning as well. I read about an inspiring story of a young man in the papers once. He had grown up in a single-parent family and faced financial difficulties all through his primary and secondary school life. Having to supplement family income with odd jobs even through primary and secondary school, he could not keep up with his studies. However, through a series of financial aid as well as academic support through his schooling years, he moved from 'N level, to 'O’ level before entering Junior College. After his 'A’ level, he accepted a government scholarship which funded his university education.

This is just one example of the opportunities that are provided by the system, in which children are given fair opportunities to pursue education. Education allows the development of the mind and strengthening of character; and this is available to every child. The recent pre-school announcements are even more heartening, as MOE attempts to ensure fair opportunities to even pre-schoolers. There is an income gap, but there are efforts to close this gap.

This is not all. The pursuit for economic growth and prosperity is done, always keeping people in mind, and people at the heart of the plans. Progressive taxes helped to support programmes for the lower income, including the Com Care and Public Assistance schemes, so that those in dire states will not be left behind, un-helped and forgotten.

I remember this girl from my university who met with a car accident and suffered severe head trauma, requiring multiple surgeries and recuperation programmes. Her family was not rich and could not afford the medical bills, nor did they have any insurance. But I remember that social worker who came to the hospital and helped her dad through the various procedures, suggesting to him one scheme after another, to aid with the payment. Her bills ended up heavily subsidised and she is now completely well. 

The budget of the government this year was described as a “Robin Hood” budget, with many programmes aiming at helping the less fortunate, the elderly and those trapped in the lower economic strata.

Stiglitz wrote in his piece that the Singapore government “weighed in, gently, on the bargaining between workers and firms, tilting the balance towards the group with less economic power – in sharp contrast to the United States, where the rules of the game have shifted power away from labour and toward capital, especially during the past three decades”.

Singapore is not a “nanny” state, neither is she a completely “money-first-and-only” state. As a small country, we can only depend on economic growth to sustain our heavy spending in social development.

In the past year, I sense a greater step of change in governance in Singapore and I applaud the many programmes aiming to help close the inequality gap. In my opinion, it is better for the government to acknowledge the problem of inequality and attempt to do something about it through its various policies, rather than to conveniently avoid the issue and stubbornly pursue growth at the expense of its people.

Drawing correlations to my teacher Mrs. Chan’s wise words, Singaporeans have been taught to fish, through education and the culture of saving up. More so, the government provides a fishing rod to those who had lost theirs, and free or subsidised “tuition lessons” for those who had forgotten how to fish.

Perhaps income inequality will never really be truly eradicated, but we should always try to lessen this and I believe the government is doing its best.

Wong Kai Wei, 29
Service manager

Other Your View letters:
YOUR VIEW: What right do I have to complain?
YOUR VIEW: Be thankful for what we have
YOUR VIEW: Undoing the population White Paper