I Want Higher Taxes, Really!

[blueshift]

And Singaporean must be happy with the increase because no one protest outside parliament buidling

supposing there is a protest, there will be an object to be photographed by me..

 

[soma]

We need higher taxes.... to keep hums on someone else's Mee Siams... :bsmilie:

and we are paying million for such a capable.. rapper..

 

[feryl]

haha dkw I'm sorry to tell you that you can keep giving the most logical reasoning to everyone's gripes but the real skill in politics is actually convincing people.

actually i find this statement resonates with my feelings exactly. I may not agree with many of the points raised and certainly ppl are going to disagree with me, but i think that we are all probably arguing for nothing. In the end, it's up to the ruling party to convince the populace regardless of whatever initiatives they roll out.

However, we cannot assume that this cuts any slack to either politicians or citizens. While accurate, the statement means
1) Any good politician can get away with the worst governance as long as he is persuasive.
2) Citizens base their judgement on persuasion rather than logic.

Therefore the current rhetoric would indicate conclusions
1) The Singapore government has been persuasive enough to be in power for the past 41 years.
2) The citizens have been adequately persuaded that this is the best government.

Against this rings back to a similar conclusion an observation made many times in many similarly political discussions,

Citizens deserve whatever governement they get.

In countries where they are allowed to make a fool of their leadership - they will be governed by fools.
In countries where they are allowed to make hell for government decisions - their government would be ineffective.
In countries where they refuse to contribute and participate - their government would run their lives for them.

 

[ortega]

actually hor, the gov should increase the income tax
so tax the rich elite and give to the poor
(the really poor, don't have to pay tax)

 

[walla]

And Singaporean must be happy with the increase because no one protest outside parliament buidling

Wanna be famous??? Try that...

 

[Hommie]

To contribute to the social compact? To enable provision of help to the needy? To aid in income redistribution? Where else will the g'ment get money to fund social programmes? Partially from citizen taxation, is it not? What's so crazy about that?

Did you even read my first post?:dunno:

Where are you getting your information from? Pray tell. :dunno:

 

[dkw]

take a look at the number of poor people before the implementation of GST and now. take a look at the number of bankrupts. increasing, aint it?

you are coming in here, shooting arguments down and telling us we're from a small minority and you're thankful of that. so, which section of the party do you work in?

I work for no political party and I write in no other capacity other than an interested singaporean who wants his country to prosper and for the poor not to be left behind. It is that simple.
Your assertion that bankruptcies are increasing is wholly false. If you have read the biz times today, u would have seen that the number of applications for bankruptcies have fallen as the economy improves.

 

[dkw]

Where are you getting your information from? Pray tell. :dunno:

I don't understand your question. Information on what? If u are asking about taxes in general, is the aim of all taxes not to generate central revenue so that publicly beneficial works (parks, roads, bus shelters) and services (education, legal service, police force) can be funded? Are taxes generally not structured so that the more well off will contribute more, so that some form of income redistribution is occurring? As I understand it, these are the stated aims of taxes. Do you have a different opinion?

 

[Goondoo]

I only have one question....
Are all these contituitions written by people up there or people down here?

Two questions maybe,
Do they understand how we really live our life?

Or maybe three..
Do you mean we have to squeeze out every coins in our pocket before we are considered "poor" people?

make it four....
With the recent surge of taxes, expenses, utilities bills, transportation cost etc, anyone of you actually have a good pay revised by any of these foreign companies they have been dying to take care of, where is the Win-Win-Win situation?

OK, i promise the last one....
If ministers need to be paid like a CEOs, are the people consumers, customer, workers or slaves?

I seriously hope someone like dkw can advise me...

 

[dkw]

actually europe has strong stands on human rights, more so than america sometimes.
go look up on their record, it's quite impressive.

sorry but freedom of expression in singapore has been *******ised so badly by the government that even something like an article that people can actually agree with written by Mr Brown gets slammed to the ground on the basis of being distortion. Welcome to the world of humour! You exaggerate some points so that people can have a laugh! Open up Time magazine and look at the fricking illustrations of george bush with his big ears and tiny features! it's calle
so dkw, do you agree that the tax raise is really about maintaining competitiveness rather than helping to bridge the income gap, helping the needy, or whatever you want to call it?

You can put down people's reasoning with all the logic in the world, you can tell us that it's necessary, you can tell us that ministers should be paid this much, etc etc etc, but I think most people are not stupid. When they feel something is wrong it stays in their gut. Have you considered that since up till now, even after all the official explanations, people still feel some things are wrong? (ministers' pay, CPF, GST)
You can't run a country clinically, and yes you need passion to run a country! I don't care how many capable people there are, Wee Shu Min is probably a very capable person but I don't want her running my country. You can train people to be capable, it's much harder to train people to have dedication and love.

let me be an old man and share a little talk I had with a heart surgeon here in New York
he said that the education system in america was getting worse and worse, being all about tests and whatnots
He said that it is easy to train a person in the technical skills of being a surgeon, but what they should be looking for is people with compassion to become doctors, because it's very hard to teach that.

btw, I HATE the term "first world nation"
it only came up during the last election, and now people keep using it. For the record I think that most of us singaporeans are more sophisticated than most Americans, and more "first world"


haha dkw I'm sorry to tell you that you can keep giving the most logical reasoning to everyone's gripes but the real skill in politics is actually convincing people.

Dang! I can't quit my day job! Truthfully, this is the internet, nuance and humour don't transmit well, as wee shu min has found out at her cost. This is an emotive issue, IMO, the best way to deal with it is in a dispassionate, factual and analytical manner. Gut feel? Yes, there is a place for it, once u are in possession of all the facts and are making a judgment call. Randomly venting is not gut feel, its laziness. We all owe it to ourselves, families and children to deal with these difficult issues in a mature and informed manner. Unfortunately, not many seem to be prepared to do that. As I have stated many times, I am not convinced about this hike, I have merely stated the reasons as to why it MAY be a good idea and speculating on what the g'ments reasons for it may be, for which I have some sympathy. As for passionate leaders, history is litterd with them. Hitler, mussolini and pol pot come to mind. Truly passionate about what they believed, but all horribly misguided. Give me a dispassionate technocrat any day of the week. Same thing with surgeons, seriously.
Have a good evening!

 

[nightpiper]

my personal opinion:

1) dkw is 'zeng hu lang' in disguise ;p (no offence intended)

2) increasing GST will also increase the cost of operating bizz here directly or indirectly. since coporate tax is a one time payment, whereas GST is on going whole year round, companies might end up paying more tax. penny wise, pound foolish? maybe...

3) whenever ministers r thirsty, they simply go & help themselves with a dip in the ocean.

4) looking at Ho Ching's track record of running companies, i m very worried now that she's in charge of temasek investment arm. running down a country is not impossible...

5) this tax thing is really not fairly compared with other countries, its always one aspect out of the whole thing. whatever the outcome, we the citizen of singapore, pledge ourselves as one united losers... cos of all the points mentioned by "opposition party" in this thread.

6) besides lower income, what about no income group?
oh well... time to zzzz... see u guys in the morning.

 

[CYRN]

actually hor, the gov should increase the income tax
so tax the rich elite and give to the poor
(the really poor, don't have to pay tax)

At the first glance, it seems like a good idea. But there are some flaws in taxing the rich too much... both politically and economically.

However, the real question is.... how much can and should be taxed.

 

[CYRN]

Cabinet's pay is transparent, a matter of public record. A generous extrapolation puts it around $40 million. They don't need to put up the GST to raise $40 million, it is not a very large amount as operating costs go. Are they self serving? Perhaps some. But we get results on the whole, do we not?

It's the pay pegging that begs to question.

Furthermore... I doubt the populace have a lot of say regarding it.

 

[Parchiao]

It will be silly for anyone to think that GST will not go beyond 10%.

 

[CYRN]

It will be silly for anyone to think that GST will not go beyond 10%.

Looking at the benchmarks... it should end up hovering about 20% :think: :sweat:

 

[waileong]

my personal opinion:

1) dkw is 'zeng hu lang' in disguise ;p (no offence intended)

More likely he's Young P A P....

 

[dkw]

More likely he's Young P A P....

Why does anybody who support a government policy, or at least tries to engage in a reasonable discussion about one, suddenly gets painted as a P A P sycophant??

I am in no way affiliated with the g'ment or ruling party, and I have no affinity for either. I have traded lenses on this forum and some members here know me personally, they can tell you who I am and I have nothing to hide.

Truth be said, I dislike many many g'ment positions on issues, and particularly with regards to press freedom and political discourse, and healthcare (an issue close to my heart).

Why do I do this? I have written in a different thread, I believe the internet can be a source of good and bad. The contributions of the participants in forum will determine the quality of its content. In a few short years, my boys will be surfing the net and maybe trawling through CS. Are some of the posts here the most well considered or thought through? Have some folk even attempted to consider the larger picture before venting their spleen? I hope that my little drop in this ocean will prompt at least a few people to consider an alternate point of view other than the mass stampede to condemn the g'ment. That is my motivation.

Is it so incredible that someone could actually desire for a tax increase? I can tell you there are private citizens I know in the US who will only vote for politicians who PROMISE to increase taxes to fund social policies, and these are people who will be hardest hit by income tax increase. Remember, social compact?

We can always discuss issues, but lets not make this personal.

Have a good day.

 

[ortega]

At the first glance, it seems like a good idea. But there are some flaws in taxing the rich too much... both politically and economically.

However, the real question is.... how much can and should be taxed.

OK not only the rich, but everyone who has to pay tax
eventually it is the middle ground that pays the most

 

[jsbn]

1. Please check the history of how the Geneva Convention and the UN Human Rights charter of 1948 came about. There are 30 articles in that Convention. While it was driven by the West, the rights are defined by the UN and acceded to by all, including Singapore.

The convention basically called for certain rights to be innate to humans, such as freedom of religion, expression and assembly, right to a free trial in an open court of law, etc.. If you read it wholly and fully, including of how it came about (hint: had something to do with the aftermath of Nazism), you may find it more compelling and even heart-rending.

Geneva Convention? I was sleeping thru lectures for my last ICT and I know 1 thing, enemy shoot at me with 1 bullet, I'll fill him like leaded swiss cheese and a grenade. His comrades of 7 bring my platoon strength down by 50%, I'll scream to the remainder of the men to annihilate his entire Battalion down to the last man with whatever means necessary.

That's real war for a grunt. Not simply a set of laws & rules. Wars are cruel where humans lose their rights, dignity where life is being trampled upon like the sand on the beach. Geneva Convention doesn't actually make war more 'humane' but simply serves to instil the hypocritical belief in others.

If one finds wars cruel, dun start it at all. And u wun need rules like these. My 2 cents.

Do not just accept the propaganda being fed to you-- that human rights is a "western" thing or that it's an "American" thing.

United Nations? With all that scandals rocking humanitarian programs and the fact that the 'American Champion for Human Rights' trampled & spat on it right in their own backyard.

2. Freedom of expression means what it means. Anybody can go around in America saying "I hate Bush" or "Bush is Satan" and no one can arrest them. People are free to speak their mind (in this case, they hate Bush).

:bigeyes: Ok, wun comment or put an analogy on this lest it sparks a forest fire.

This does not mean they cannot be sued for libel. UK tabloids are frequently sued for libel when they cannot back up their sensational front page articles. But they can and certainly do criticise govts and govt policies, and that's a good thing-- at least better than the total absence of criticism here.

They criticise, yes. Govts come & go. What Clinton started of engaging the Middle East in dialog & peace mediation was terminated by Bush's war cries & the Axis of Evil. What was the rising star of the Opposition (Blair) now shot himself in the foot with Iraq War, public opinion against him.

The world's with all its ups and downs are enough to send the stock market in a series of heart-thumping ups and downs that saw millions becoming billionaires and millions losing big bucks.

The press & government (anywhere) have a close link & responsibility to maintain the stability of a country, the system, the policies put in place. Kick one out of balance and it becomes a freewheeling see-saw where whoever jumps the hardest gets to catapult the opponent on the other end sky high.

 

[nightpiper]

Have some folk even attempted to consider the larger picture before venting their spleen? I hope that my little drop in this ocean will prompt at least a few people to consider an alternate point of view other than the mass stampede to condemn the g'ment. That is my motivation.

Is it so incredible that someone could actually desire for a tax increase? I can tell you there are private citizens I know in the US who will only vote for politicians who PROMISE to increase taxes to fund social policies, and these are people who will be hardest hit by income tax increase. Remember, social compact?

We can always discuss issues, but lets not make this personal.

Have a good day.

i dun know, it seems many posted on this issue r looking at the big pic. this is not condemning, i view it as "room for improvement". alas, whatever issues & solutions voiced out will not likely be heard, juz like the old days.

its has a lot to do with how is the tax raised, what ground, how much, its effect, its uses, etc. before any sane person wants an increase in taxes. i understand too that tax hike is inevitable, but too soon too much. someone already suggested a "cushion" that is... 6% next yr & 7% in '08. i personally feel this is a better approach. however, i also want to see more fine tuning of the overall tax sys as the GST increases, reducing or abolish certain taxes or levies perhaps?

u have a good day too. & no, i have no intention to make this a personal attack either. :lovegrin: