Skip to main content

When our maids are richer than our poor …..



In this richest nation in the world, our low income needy families have to seek assistance from the government to employ a maid.  At the same time, our maids, with higher starting pay, will likely to have more savings than our low income families.       

Is this a happy dilemma? Is this an unavoidable dilemma?

Some may argue that our poor and low income families are luckier than their American counterparts.  These Americans have no subsidy at all, not to mention a maid grant.  So, in Singapore, the government does help the poor and low income families.  However, it also proves that it is very difficult to uplift the livelihood of lower 20% of the families in Singapore. Otherwise, a pragmatic PAP government, whose principle is against welfare state, will not adopt this last resort to help the needy families.

The government is now caught between the rich and the poor, successful and not successful persons, the Haves and the Have Nots.   They are balancing it and monitoring it with the hope that they can influence their votes in the next election.   

Here are the headlines:



It is not sure whether the government knows the maids will have higher salary in advance or not and the maid grants are just to cover the increase.  Earlier in the years, the Indonesian government had indicated their intention and some maid agents had implemented this already. So, the maid grants are only a cushion. Have the grants really solved the problems of needy families?   

The higher salary shows that the Indonesian government wants to protect their maids by imposing a higher minimum salary and off day compensation.  They are doing this for the welfare of their workers, however, in Singapore; we leave the market forces to decide the wages of our local workers even though their income cannot meet their end needs.  

We may complain and comment the Indonesian government is corrupt, inefficient, and slow in action.  However, in some ways, they are moving faster than us and possibly in the right direction.

We are the richest in the world, but certainly not our low income families.  As we say we must respect our maids with dignity, so do the poor and needy in Singapore.

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

因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。

  因为有比较, 才知道做得不够, 才明白什么叫做易通。 如果只有一套解决方法,很难看出好坏,方便还是不方便,易通还是不容易通。用新方法代替旧的系统,人们当然会做比较,尤其是科技产品,使用的人很多,一用就马上看到结果。 这是一个竞争的世界,即使一党独大,也要考虑到便民。当人民觉得不方便,不好用,不易通,就会反映,发声,不满。为什么没有预先想到,最可怕的是测试时,已经接到反应,还是不加改善。或许,行动党还抱着“令伯”最大,用者自行解决问题。 易通公交收费系统的整合,似乎缺少一种人文,沟通,反而更加多表现出政府的独断独行。尤其重要的是,如果只有一套系统,我们是看不出问题,做不出好坏的评价。 这其实证明国会里不可以只有一把声音,没有比较,没有进步。

After 60 years, after 3 failed political imaginations, the PAP is deteriorating...