First published http://pijitailai.blogspot.sg/2014_02_01_archive.html
All things after 2011 that the PAP is engaging is for the next General Election, whether it is a social policy or budget. The PAP aims to maintain a 60% target share of votes in the next general election. To the PAP, a 60% share of votes is as comfortable as 75% or even 80% share of votes of the past. They continue their no transparency no open disclosures of reserve, the CPF. They can also continue to ‘fix’ their political opponents as they wish like the past.
All things after 2011 that the PAP is engaging is for the next General Election, whether it is a social policy or budget. The PAP aims to maintain a 60% target share of votes in the next general election. To the PAP, a 60% share of votes is as comfortable as 75% or even 80% share of votes of the past. They continue their no transparency no open disclosures of reserve, the CPF. They can also continue to ‘fix’ their political opponents as they wish like the past.
This is why they believe in big coefficient in obtaining
votes. Will it work? For this, we may
have to know the debate between big coefficient and the new reality (see below
video).
Big coefficient means the PAP believes there is a
strong (or big) causal relationship in obtaining or maintaining votes when they
introduce policies benefiting some groups of voters, their votes can be
increased or retained if voters are happy with these policies.
It is also an evidence-based decision making process. The PAP has all the data in their hand and
they are good at mathematics. The PM wants to see the results and so the
different ministries can easily give the projections of the votes retained or
increased.
In a simple linear equation, the Big Coefficient by Citizens
for the PAP looks like the followings:
Big
coefficient of the PAP
Vote PAP =
|
Basic
votes +
|
a%(senior
citizens) +
|
|
b%(new
citizens) +
|
|
c%(middle
age citizens) +
|
|
d%(young
voters) +
|
|
errors
correction
|
The PAP has its support point. It can range from 35%
to 45%, depending on the opponents. However,
it needs 50.1% to win but aiming a win/loss target of 50% is too dangerous and
risky. Freak election can happen. So, a
safe margin is 60%. Anything lower than
60% means there is no safety margin and will lead to a tipping effect: a big
drop in votes as in the case of Punggol East by-election.
The
2014 social budget has been described as generous, social investment and its
theme is “Opportunities for the Future,
Assurance for Our Seniors”. The
first item in the big coefficient is senior citizens or pioneer generations. By taking care of senior citizens, the PAP
hopes to retain or even increase the votes in this group of voters. The big
coefficient in new citizens is understandable. These 2 groups add together may have 1 million
voters, so if you consider total voters of 2.3 million, it is more than 40% of
the total.
The
budget also introduces affordable healthcare and promote social mobility through
more education opportunities and assistance.
Middle age citizens with children or parents will be benefited,
especially those in the lower and middle income group.
The PAP
wants to maintain the votes in this group and does not want it to drop further.
This too is a big coefficient variable. They also have the most number of
voters (considering the age group from 35 to 55).
The
only non-big coefficient item is young citizens. If a young voter is a drinker plus smoker, he
will be very unhappy with the budget. So do lower income smokers and drinkers. This
is also the social media group. Hence, it may even be a negative coefficient.
The
linear equation can also be income base.
It can be divided into very low, low, middle and high income groups. The
budget is focusing on senior citizens, health care and education. It will
benefit the very low, low and middle income citizens – the big coefficient in
the eyes of the PAP.
Big
coefficient is always the mind of the PAP. Some big coefficient equations work very
well in the past but are now not effective anymore. For example, the GRC system, the fear of
losing one or two ministers has helped to retain the votes for the PAP. The town
management and the rubbish collection have also frightened many voters. Another
one can be the bad mouth tactics and the control of mainstream media. All these past big coefficients worked very
well in the past but face diminishing return or not helpful anymore.
The
principle of the PAP is based on “no free lunch”. They are now moving to the left
and claim to be socialists. Why are they doing this? Their model thinking tells
them a social budget will lead to big coefficient effect and so they can maintain
the voting share at 60%.
But
is this a new reality? Is “Achieving
quality growth and an inclusive society go hand in hand” as claimed in
the budget a new reality?
New reality
It
may not be fair to say that the PAP fails to recognise the new reality. They have introduced SG Conversation. They
even try to engage in social media. They try to build more HDB flats and cool
down the property market. It looks like they can’t find the big coefficient in
the Conversation and in the Internet. Hence, they have to go back to the tradition
way – media control, social mobility and basic healthcare, education, targeted wages,
and caring the olds.
So
what
really is the new reality? Some may not even emerge. Social media can
be one. The population issue, the employment issue, the
HDB issue even the frequent breakdown of MRT can also be a new reality.
The
strike, the riot and the FT (foreign talents) issue are also possible
new
realities.
People’s
expectation is changing and external environment can also contribute to the new
reality. Thailand, Ukraine, Malaysia and
many other events outside Singapore are giving confusing realities. But if a conflict can be solved by voting in
a peaceful way, why don’t Singaporeans give it a try? These external realities may help or hurt the
PAP. The recent PAP’s strong reaction on
the naming of Indonesia navy ship shows they also want to try the new reality. The new low ranking of press freedom in
Singapore is another proven reality of media control here.
Some
new realities may even come from the social budget. For example the health care for pioneer
generations, it looks like they will pay nothing. However, MediSheild is a co-finance
insurance scheme. We need to know more
details and how it works. Perhaps, all
the realities of the social budget in 2014 and 2015 will only be revealed after
the next General Election.
Technical
or behavior
Big coefficient vs. new reality can also be seen as
technical analysis vs. behavior-led outcome. In economics or finance, there is now
more awareness of the role of behavior (e.g. psychology) in predicting economic
performance or stock market movements.
A change or sudden change of behavior is just like the
new reality. We are not able to predict and forecast the new reality or behavior
accurately in advance. For the PAP, the
best hope is still big coefficient and technical analysis. This model has past evidence
to support and can be calculated within the box.
For the oppositions, it is new reality and behavior
that will give them a breakthrough. The lower
the basic supporting interception, the more new realities and behavior changes are
needed.
So, what do you think? Can the election budget save
the PAP? Is 60% still a reality? If not, what will be the new reality?
Comments
Post a Comment