Skip to main content

汽车总数零增长。老年人多过年轻人。经济如何持续成长。


2018年2月开始,新的汽车(和摩托车)数目政策是零增长。这意味汽车总数将达到饱和状态。与此同时,有关汽车的税收也不可能从量上着眼,而只能从素质上着手。如果要保持同样的汽车税收,每一辆汽车所交的税收 —— 服务费、手续费、注册费等,就要相对比以前多一些。

汽车的销售在工业化时代,象征一个国家和城市的经济力量。堵车也代表一种势力、活力,如果没有车水马龙,那么,这个地区的经济实力一定不怎么好,税收也不会理想。到了后工业化时代,我们讲环保,控制污染,因此,处处限制汽车的使用,燃料的使用,但是,越是如此,越能显现拥有汽车的身份。

零成长就把汽车变得珍贵,消费的等次也就进一步提高。

这是我们可以预见的贫富差距的一个场景。人民行动党政府现在把汽车政策摆出来,只是基于新加坡土地面积的局限,因此,不得不出此对策。贫富问题不是行动党要解决的问题,因为,没有能力拥有汽车和摩托车的人们,可以考虑公共交通 - 地铁巴士德士。不然,就是拥有一辆日渐兴起的电动自行车。这种自行车目前并不需要拥车证。说不定,将来也要交税,也要拥车证。

【老年人比年轻人多】

大华银行的一份报告显示,2018年,新加坡65岁老年人口将和年轻人的数目一样多。这归功于本地人的低生育率。

虽然,表面看来这和汽车零成长没有关系。但是,从侧面看,喜欢汽车的人之中,当然以年轻人居多。人口老化,年轻人减少,希望拥有汽车的人也会减少,这自然会影响税收。

为什么一直要提税收,因为,这是行动党政府最关心的大事。没有钱,什么事都做不了,连部长、高官、政府关联公司的领导都找不到所谓的人才、社会精英来担任。

老年人多了,年轻人少了,交税的人少了,这还得了!50、60年来行动党通过低薪、低工资推动的新加坡经济,现在面临真正的挑战。

当然,这也不是只有新加坡才会面对人口老化,低经济成长的问题。日经中文网最近有一篇文章,或许可以间接解释汽车需求减少的原因:


出门次数,20多岁年轻人比70多岁老人更少?
【随着互联网的普及,年轻人变得不爱外出,这种现象不仅限于日本。虽然原因各不相同,但这种现象却是全球都相同的。但是,老年人频繁外出,甚至超过年轻人,这却是日本特有的现象。那么,日本的老年人到底都去哪些地方呢?
     调查老年人的外出目的发现,多为工作、就医、购物、度过业余时间,而业余时间的外出包括与朋友见面、旅行、徒步、去健身房、学习技艺、上成人大学等,非常丰富。】

https://cn.nikkei.com/columnviewpoint/tearoom/28179-2017-12-04-05-00-42.html

老年人数目增加,年轻人减少,在加上年轻人由于互联网、电子经济的关系,出门消费也减少了,对于汽车的向往也将自然下降。这直接影响到政府的税收。当然,消费减少,也和年轻人收入减少有关。相对来说,年轻人的购买力、消费能力过去几年也的确下降了。

年轻人收入、购买力不如前辈,已经是资本主义社会的一个大问题,而这个问题和财富分配有密切关系。西方如此,日本,韩国,台湾,香港,和新加坡也都是如此。

这是行动党政府不愿面对的事实,年轻人购买力不足,影响税收,甚至影响公积金的存款、外汇储备。但是,对于缺乏创意的行动党政府来说,似乎唯一的选项就是增加人口。

【1000万人口】

虽然限制汽车的成长数目,但是行动党无时无刻一直梦想1000万人口。最近,这个1000万的大梦,又被提出来。一位权威的设计师认为,在技术上、在设计上,我们的领先的设计、技术,是完全可以让新加坡住上1000万人的。
   
    的确,我们需要1000万人,才可以创造更多的税收。行动党政府才可以投入更多资金在基础设施上,建设一个1000万人口的城市国家。因此,行动党政府需要更多的钱,来预先投资于未来。考虑到本土年轻人少于本土老年人,这多出四百到五百万人口,就一定要从国外引进。而这个政策也配合行动党过去50、60年的经济政策。

从这样的人口政策中,我们可以看出李显龙的创意高度,也可以看到行动党政府第四代领导人的素质。他们除了要钱——增加税收,要人——增加人口,已经没有其他创意来确保新加坡的持续性经济增长。

而所谓的经济转型,1000万人口的设计,都是建立在限制(汽车增长),垄断(国营企业),引进(增加人口),隐秘(不公开不透明)和制裁(反对意见)等基础上。这就是行动党的未来新加坡,在缺乏监督,行动党我行我素下的未来新加坡。

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...