Skip to main content

借生产力压低工资 行动党的良心被钱吃掉


如果深一层的看待林崇椰的二次经济重组建议,在字里行间,我们看到的是过去十几年来,行动党政府有计划的利用生产力作为借口,有计划的压低低薪工友的薪金。因为和国外(香港,日本,澳大利亚)同行相比,我们工友的薪金竟然比他们的工友少拿了50%的收入,即使建议中的连续三年加薪,这些工友还是少拿50%。(见下)

这难道是一个有良心的政府,所应该做的事情吗?这难道是一个为人民而行动的政党所应该做的事情吗?它的良心跑到哪里,它的行动为谁而动,看来是被钱吃掉,为钱而行动。看来在所有发达国家中,人均收入最高的国家和地区中,我们是道道地地的资本主义信奉者,百分百的执行资本主义的教条。所以,才会走入极端,不能自拔。

看看早报是如何报道的:

  首先,虽然他能完全理解加薪幅度得跟生产力增长挂钩,但据他计算,和其他同等富裕的地区如香港、日本和澳大利亚相比,我国最低薪者的工资少了超过一半。  他还说,即使是拿其他人均收入较低的地区如韩国和台湾来比较,我国最低薪的工人多年来领取的薪水仍然过低。林崇椰指出,本地低薪员工少领超过一倍的薪水,只是保守估计,真实情况更严重。因此,假定未来三年为他们加薪50%,他们届时的工资仍然少了50% (早报 417日)】

去年大选已经证明低薪的事实

林崇椰因此说,压低工资的做法,其源头主要是:
【在他看来,这主要是因为我国引进大量廉价外劳所致。1991年,非居民劳动队伍共有30万零800人,10年后扩大超过一倍至686200人,到了2011年,外劳人数迅速增至1157000人。而在外劳人口当中,只有1.7%的薪金,符合缴交所得税条件的工资水平。(早报)】

低薪所引发出来的问题很多, 如,房价,物价,交通费用,医药费用,等等,这些不都是民怨吗?

林崇椰提出的这个原因,已经在去年的大选中得到证明,不然,行动党的得票怎么只有60%。只是当时没有一个像林崇椰这样的权威站出来肯定这个结论。如果,当时林崇椰能够出来说真话,相信行动党的得票肯定不到60%,失掉多几个议席,几乎是肯定的事。他在事情大约隔了一年后,才说出震荡的建议,事实上也是帮了行动党一个大忙,也让行动党有时间做出调整,应对下一届大选。

谁在模糊事件的焦点?

我国低薪工友的生产力真的比国外同行低上50%吗?所以,应该比国外同行拿的低,拿的少,不能怪政府故意压低工友的工资。这当然是行动党政府的立场,因此,才会说林崇椰在模糊焦点:

【林瑞生指林崇椰教授只谈提高薪金,却不谈生产力,是在模糊事件的焦点。(omy.sg 18 April)】

到底是谁在模糊焦点?政府是怎么算出来,我们的工友的生产力,竟然不到香港,日本,和澳大利亚的50%。这意味着,当你在新加坡等待吃汉堡包时,和香港相比,你必须要多等上超过50%以上的时间。当你在机场方便时,和香港相比,你必须多等50%以上的时间,才能等到一间清洁过的卫生间。因为,这两个工作场所,在新加坡都有大量的本地低薪工友,他们还是上了年龄的人。我们在新加坡吃一个汉堡包,方一个便,真的要花上多50%的等候时间吗?

这个比喻未必反映出新加坡和香港两地工友的生产力的真实情形,但是,说新加坡低薪工友的生产力比香港同行低了50%,却是对新加坡工友的极大侮辱。况且,我们年轻工友的教育程度,很可能比这国家和地区都来得高。如果,教育比他人高,生产力却比人家低,人家的培训也没有我们这样好。那么,这样一来,我们真的要好好检讨我们教育和培训制度了,怎么教育越高,培训越多,反而生产力不如他人。这笔费用和开支,不知是否又转移到想出这些教育培训点子的高薪高生产力的人士手中。哦,原来,生产力是这样的计算出来的 高薪和低薪人士之间,还有一个转移生产力的游戏。

既然不用花上这么长的等候时间,为何薪水却是如此的低?除非,这个计算方法本身,就是要模糊视线,转移焦点。因为它根本没有考虑新加坡的生活费用,同时,还高估了高薪人士的生产力。借着生产力为理由,从工友的低薪中再压低薪水,然后,将多出来的,压出来的油水,再转移到高薪人士身上。这样一来,就符合政府的说法,生产力高的人,拿高薪,生产力低的人,拿低薪。最终的结果是,我国是世界上,贫富差距最严重的国家之一。

行动党政府当然会继续坚持生产力和薪金挂钩,继续用它的老算盘,计算低薪工友的生产力。但是,这个老算盘,在计算的时候,越算就会离行动党的人民行动的理念越远,最后,终于被人民所遗弃。

我们期待,林崇椰和其他经济学者能够提供更多的数据,因为低薪人士的低生产力,不能单单只靠政府单方面的数据。我们希望看到更多,更具有建议性的理论数据的出现。过去几十年的单方面的,填鸭式的,教条式的报道分析我国经济,政治,社会的情形,不就是造成今天,教育高,培训多,生产力却低的原因吗?

Comments

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...