Skip to main content

High Ministerial Salaries: Wrong Assumptions For Wrong Pay?


{The art of making yourself rich, in the ordinary mercantile economic sense, is therefore equally and necessarily the art of keeping your neighbour poor.  ….. John Ruskin}


The reasons for paying very high salaries for Singapore ministers are based on various wrong assumptions.

They assume ministers are super human beings that can work 24 hours a day 7 days a week. They assume these political holders are productive and efficient every seconds, no sick leave, no emotional problem, like machines operating without any maintenance.  Furthermore, they assume these people are as enterprise as entrepreneurs, risking and scarifying their carriers, family and friends.

The PAP government got the assumptions so wrong that they pay the wrong salaries to their ministers.  If you examine the reasons and assumptions, they are all wrong.  Why wrong?

Perhaps only a robot can justify for the assumptions of the working conditions described above.  Even that, a robot still needs some maintenance and definitely, a robot will not have the enterprise spirit of venturing out and risk powerless to function effectively and efficiently.

Hence, if you can’t fulfill these assumptions, it is better not to assume high salaries for the wrong reasons.  You have overpriced your intelligence, capability, productivity, judgments, body and mental condition, and most importantly your power base.     
  
This is like the corporate world.  The top corporate leaders are pricing themselves above the market rate, especially in the financial and property sectors.  They think that they are top talents in the world and so they demand top world class salaries. However, they create crisis after crisis, debts after debts, and so we see the results of ‘Occupy Movements’.   

To protect themselves and justify for their top salaries, these CEOs, CFOs, Chairmen and Presidents have to engage in many PR activities which are not productive in their works. 

To be fair, we have to differentiate business corporate managers and entrepreneurs.  There are justifications for entrepreneurs getting high rewards and compensation.  Entrepreneurs are taking risks and they may end up as a bankrupt.  This is why people are admiring entrepreneurs like Bill Gate and are not so against their richness. 

The government is paying high salaries to our ministers. They are only able to do it because they assume that they have the mandate from the people.  However, the mandate is not always in your favour, and it is subject to change.  Even there is a review in the ministerial salaries; it may still keep and continue with the wrong assumptions.  As a result, the old problem of high and wrong salaries is still there. 

Who know one day more and more will see the wrong assumption for the wrong pay. When more and more people disagree with the wrong assumptions of the PAP, more will like to see the change to take place. 

Comments

  1. Most of the assumptions sound quite convincing. And these too apply to bonuses and retirement compensation.
    http://www.youtube.com/user/li345feng/

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sub-standard PAP and the Singapore education system

I make a 'policy shift' when I hear the debate of right politics, constructive politics and sub-standard opposition. My original aim is to discuss about “Su Dongbo, Zhang Juzheng and Singapore education system”. The discussion will end with a sub-standard PAP, in particular from the assessment of the quality of PAP potential candidates. Another policy shift is to discuss it like a play, a drama and make it more entertainment rather than a sub-standard political discussion. Act 1 Gangster’s demand Imagine a sense in the Hong Kong's gangster movie (or a godfather movie), the gangsters' master is shouting at his poor opponent and demand him to give a price for his wrong act. The poor guy without any resources can only offer his body or his service to work for the master. Back in his own chamber, the master is still not satisfied and continues to shout 'don't play, play, you think you are hero, you think you are tiger, or superstar or acting ...

EBRC objectives: Stop “Out of Aljunied”, Stop SDP Breakthrough and “Negative-Asset” Ministers.

First of all, we have to congratulate the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee for creating more competitions, especially, multi-cornered competitions in the East. When making changes, EBRC aims to achieve 3 goals: To prevent “Out of Aljunied” for Workers’ Party.  This is the most important objective. To prevent Singapore Democratic Party making any breakthrough in the North and Central.   To look for a solution to retire “negative-asset” ministers or reduce PAP damages. From the reported claims from different political parties, we will expect multi-cornered contests not only in single constituencies but also in group representative constituencies. The PAP hopes to have a repeat of 2011 Presidential Election. Then Tony Tan won the Presidency when he got only 35% of the votes, a narrow win.However, a win is still a win. He did in even in the very last minute, after recounts of votes.    How to achieve multi-cornered contests? By i...

Is Prism Project Another Central Planning of the PAP?

There are 3 scenarios under the Prism Project#1 of Institute of Public Policy.  However, it looks more like the central scenario planning of the People’s Action Party. From the instructional menu of Prism Project Primer #2, participants were guided to a situation in 2022 and they have to imagine, within the Primer framework, to come out with 3 possible scenarios in Jun-Aug 2012.  2022. What a coincidence! Not long ago, PM Lee declared that he would like to hold the prime minister post for another 10 years. The other coincidence is the similarity between the 3 scenarios and the candidates of PE2011. How competitive and sustainable are the 3 scenarios to the people of Singapore and to the PAP?   Will the scenarios produce competitive and sustainable Singapore, Singaporeans or the PAP?  Perhaps, as what the Chinese say: planning cannot always catch up with changes.   And planning sometimes turns out the wrong, bad and unexpected results, espec...