Will minimum wage laws work here?

[Iamnotib]

Quite interested to know from WP's figures.

How many of them are drawing workfare, and how much are they getting workfare?

After factoring in workfare....how much do they earn when compared to that $1,300 figure.


I have family member who works part time after retirement. And believe me, that workfare topup is nothing to laugh about when u calculate the $/hour. Its really quite significant.

Min wage advocates really need to address workfare vs minimum wage and not pretend that workfare doesnt exist.

If they donch pretend workfare does not exist, then how to put forth their proposal?

 

[RAWR!!]

I had previously held a negative impression on the proposal of having a minimum wage during the GE when I briefly went through WP's manifesto. However, after reading through your discussions and arguments on the web, I came to a realisation that minimum wage may indeed work in our country.

The translation and transfer of costs is the main reason for the proposal to leave a bad taste for me and i guess for most people. Hence, let us look at the cost aspect at face value (1 tier thinking).

-
Argument 1:
Increase in cost of living as the companies will pass it on to consumers.

As mentioned, companies in singapore are hardly monopolies. As much as we interfere with the wage, we are not interfering with the free market in a macro view. Consumers are allowed to buy from cheaper alternatives. If the companies were to fail, it SHOULD fail as in a free market, capital should always be used and relocated into more productive avenues. Also, an increase in wage will not signify the same amount of increase in prices.

-
Argument 2:
Inflated wage for the employee, creating inflation.

Wage push inflation in this sense, is minimal considering only 100k people are going to contribute to this inflation. Then again, there will not be any inflation if the employee is earning the improved wage based on value. Companies are ALWAYS allowed to dismiss the employee if the employee is not performing as our main concern here is just to deter exploitation.
-

Bonus (2 tier thinking, i suppose):
Considering the effect of market forces, I do not see much negative effects as ultimately, the economy will be balanced accordingly. In fact, I see it as a way to attract more locals to take up the jobs. With more locals taking up the job assumingly, the companies will be able to expand their FW numbers, allowing companies to expand to gain the benefit of economies of scale. Should minimum sum not work in attracting locals, MOM can further adjust the FW Quotas so that the cost savings from FW could be used to pay the overpaid local. And the locals cannot complain that they cannot find "good" jobs.

I would rather implement minimum wage to let the market work its magic than going through a workfare scheme where money is passed from left hand to right hand to dont know whose hand before a certain percentage is used to help the low income workers. Also, you are increasing cost in terms of the administration of these schemes since it will go through many processes. Hence, i believe that it may actually be cheaper if the "subsidy" is done directly by the market itself.

My reply in another thread and i disagree with TS.

 

[maniamcool]

I guess populist policy is how WP manage to get 10 seats today.

It also shows the dangers of making candidates go viral on social media.

Young voters really vote with emotion.

 

[ponpokku]

not taking anything away from MP Jamus.

but there are alot of very prominent Austrian school/Chicago school economists who have compelling arguments against minimum wage and governmental intervention in the free market as well.

so....your point being?

but aust ish having both workfare and min wage.

 

[LKY156]

Eh, I kind of agree with Jamus.

Every tender that G puts out, it gives to the lowest bidder. The lowest bidder needs to make a profit. So the simpliest way to cut cost is manpower.

Also, business also do the same. Got to Pay rental (REITs really driving the rental up), pay taxes, pay for material cost, make a profit. Easiest way again is to squeeze the manpower cost.

Not sure if it’s related to the every $1, only 42cents go to the labour. But the salary is always being sacrificed.

 

[Swisspers]

I find it immaterial to talk to a person who likes assumptions. Then we don't need economists, researchers, statistician to look at actual numbers already.

Even engineers, statisticians, researchers, economists have to make assumptions when trying to analyse what will happen when a policy is implemented.

You should state your case and reasons whether you agree or disagree with the assumptions made.

I've used what I argued as the lowest meaningful increase in price $0.20.

If you believe that a bowl of noodles will cost $0.03 more after the min wage law, you are free to present your case. (Sorry i don't carry 1 cent coins around)

 

[Sanguoshitaisen]

if you had seen the MNC i was in before i got retrenched...

their labour mostly from "foreign talents".

Which wafer fab? Lol

 

[Starfruit哥哥]

Do note. Even without jamus, the workers party would had already been a very close fight with the pap across other spots besides sengkang.

Don't push the loss to jamus. They won because people are unhappy with the ruling party.

Ownself play dirty politics, smear oppositions, control state media, lose already now push blame to oppositions

Look like the ib money really hard to earn nowadays.

 

[approx]

pls have min wage so that CPF can have more money

 

[Misuta]

Your are aware that SG is rare few of the developed world that does NOT have min-wage law?

If the min-wafe concept is that bad, why is it adopted by most (if not all) first world countries?

pls, go expand your horizon. there are developed countries with no min wage. sweden, switzerland, denmark, norway etc.

https://www.investopedia.com/articl...developed-countries-without-minimum-wages.asp

and you realize SG is one of the rare few of the developed world that have very low unemployment and have seen real income growth over the past decade, while many other developed countries have stagnant or even declining real income even for the middle class?

if min wage so satki, how many developed countries have seen their bottom 20% have a real income growth of 40% over the past decade?

In terms of the median wage, Mr Tharman noted that this has also increased by about 32 per cent in the last decade after adjusting for inflation, from S$2,900 to S$4,600 in nominal terms.

“This has been a success story,” he said. “We have moved into the upper tier of advanced countries in productivity and incomes.”

Mr Tharman reiterated that the past few years have also shown that the progressive wage model is working.

Lower wage workers have been able to climb the income ladder, he added, with the bottom 20 percentile seeing a 40 per cent increase in real wages over the past decade — from about S$1,500 to S$2,500 per month.

This is before accounting for Workfare and Special Employment Credit.

The progessive wage model will be implemented over the coming years for all sectors in Singapore, he said.

Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapo...productivity-decline-spells-out-ruling-partys

 

[cheesepiejhj]

TS must be business owner
That’s why create so many threads to kpkb

 

[sCuzzZy]

the MW proposal doesn't even affect the large majority of voters.

 

[maniamcool]

Do note. Even without jamus, the workers party would had already been a very close fight with the pap across other spots besides sengkang.

Don't push the loss to jamus. They won because people are unhappy with the ruling party.

Ownself play dirty politics, smear oppositions, control state media, lose already now push blame to oppositions

Exactly, which is why this "Vote oppo because I'm anti-pap" mentality really need to stop

ask yourself if dirty politics, opposition smearing etc will actually affect your livelihood?

If min. wage is actually implemented in Singapore by WP, the effects on your job and lives would be much more tangible than reading news about POFMA.

Please wake up. Don't let your hatred against PAP blind you.

 

[worcer]

I regret no buy toto... Haiz...

Oh this thread about pap?

Election over still talking?

Economy crisis liao lah!

 

[ponpokku]

I had previously held a negative impression on the proposal of having a minimum wage during the GE when I briefly went through WP's manifesto. However, after reading through your discussions and arguments on the web, I came to a realisation that minimum wage may indeed work in our country.

The translation and transfer of costs is the main reason for the proposal to leave a bad taste for me and i guess for most people. Hence, let us look at the cost aspect at face value (1 tier thinking).

-
Argument 1:
Increase in cost of living as the companies will pass it on to consumers.

As mentioned, companies in singapore are hardly monopolies. As much as we interfere with the wage, we are not interfering with the free market in a macro view. Consumers are allowed to buy from cheaper alternatives. If the companies were to fail, it SHOULD fail as in a free market, capital should always be used and relocated into more productive avenues. Also, an increase in wage will not signify the same amount of increase in prices.

-
Argument 2:
Inflated wage for the employee, creating inflation.

Wage push inflation in this sense, is minimal considering only 100k people are going to contribute to this inflation. Then again, there will not be any inflation if the employee is earning the improved wage based on value. Companies are ALWAYS allowed to dismiss the employee if the employee is not performing as our main concern here is just to deter exploitation.
-

Bonus (2 tier thinking, i suppose):
Considering the effect of market forces, I do not see much negative effects as ultimately, the economy will be balanced accordingly. In fact, I see it as a way to attract more locals to take up the jobs. With more locals taking up the job assumingly, the companies will be able to expand their FW numbers, allowing companies to expand to gain the benefit of economies of scale. Should minimum sum not work in attracting locals, MOM can further adjust the FW Quotas so that the cost savings from FW could be used to pay the overpaid local. And the locals cannot complain that they cannot find "good" jobs.

I would rather implement minimum wage to let the market work its magic than going through a workfare scheme where money is passed from left hand to right hand to dont know whose hand before a certain percentage is used to help the low income workers. Also, you are increasing cost in terms of the administration of these schemes since it will go through many processes. Hence, i believe that it may actually be cheaper if the "subsidy" is done directly by the market itself.

workfare in most countries ish for a diff objective. workfare ish more on enticing those ppl already out of the workforce to come out and work instead of depending on welfare. so in this way these ppl from dependent on the welfare system (and leeching the society) becomes contributor.

whereas min wage ish to make sure those in the workforce, but earning low income, gets a fair income.

thats why in angmoh countries both scheme can work together. their target ish different.

 

[tth1311]

WP party win by fielding one ace Jamus strategically, period.
If he is fielded in EC, then bye 2 Fumble

 

[pureice]

I had previously held a negative impression on the proposal of having a minimum wage during the GE when I briefly went through WP's manifesto. However, after reading through your discussions and arguments on the web, I came to a realisation that minimum wage may indeed work in our country.

The translation and transfer of costs is the main reason for the proposal to leave a bad taste for me and i guess for most people. Hence, let us look at the cost aspect at face value (1 tier thinking).

-
Argument 1:
Increase in cost of living as the companies will pass it on to consumers.

As mentioned, companies in singapore are hardly monopolies. As much as we interfere with the wage, we are not interfering with the free market in a macro view. Consumers are allowed to buy from cheaper alternatives. If the companies were to fail, it SHOULD fail as in a free market, capital should always be used and relocated into more productive avenues. Also, an increase in wage will not signify the same amount of increase in prices.

-
Argument 2:
Inflated wage for the employee, creating inflation.

Wage push inflation in this sense, is minimal considering only 100k people are going to contribute to this inflation. Then again, there will not be any inflation if the employee is earning the improved wage based on value. Companies are ALWAYS allowed to dismiss the employee if the employee is not performing as our main concern here is just to deter exploitation.
-

Bonus (2 tier thinking, i suppose):
Considering the effect of market forces, I do not see much negative effects as ultimately, the economy will be balanced accordingly. In fact, I see it as a way to attract more locals to take up the jobs. With more locals taking up the job assumingly, the companies will be able to expand their FW numbers, allowing companies to expand to gain the benefit of economies of scale. Should minimum sum not work in attracting locals, MOM can further adjust the FW Quotas so that the cost savings from FW could be used to pay the overpaid local. And the locals cannot complain that they cannot find "good" jobs.

I would rather implement minimum wage to let the market work its magic than going through a workfare scheme where money is passed from left hand to right hand to dont know whose hand before a certain percentage is used to help the low income workers. Also, you are increasing cost in terms of the administration of these schemes since it will go through many processes. Hence, i believe that it may actually be cheaper if the "subsidy" is done directly by the market itself.

Your argument is on point ... if the numbers is as stated limited to 100K people, den the real context is if it's better than the workfare now?

Another impact is the unemployment effect cause to this 100K people, are we harming more than helping? Because in this bracket got many diff job scopes/age groups. A blanket minimum wage imho will not be better than a targetted workfare. Since it has better control, easier to give/adjust. I think the the main aim is to ensure low income gets a rise in income - without jeopadising their employability.(and others who wants to enter the labour market).

 

[slashershot]

Exactly, which is why this "Vote oppo because I'm anti-pap" mentality really need to stop

ask yourself if dirty politics, opposition smearing etc will actually affect your livelihood?

If min. wage is actually implemented in Singapore by WP, the effects on your job and lives would be much more tangible than reading news about POFMA.

Please wake up. Don't let your hatred against PAP blind you.

What talking you? Pofma affects everyone. Just because you happy with an authoritian government doesnt mean everyone is

 

[skylink67]

I guess populist policy is how WP manage to get 10 seats today.

It also shows the dangers of making candidates go viral on social media.

Young voters really vote with emotion.

TS is pappy IB? So u sapported Population White Paper (from pappy) blindly? It shows the dangers of blind pappy IB.

Pappy IB really vote with emotion.

 

[RAWR!!]

Even engineers, statisticians, researchers, economists have to make assumptions when trying to analyse what will happen when a policy is implemented.

You should state your case and reasons whether you agree or disagree with the assumptions made.

I've used what I argued as the lowest meaningful increase in price $0.20.

If you believe that a bowl of noodles will cost $0.03 more after the min wage law, you are free to present your case. (Sorry i don't carry 1 cent coins around)

Bro, how you arrive at 20 cents increase? 100,000 low income workers assumed to be requiring $650 increase (100% increase, conservative) to reach $1300 min wage will require additional $65 million cost per month. Dividing by the total population of singapore of 5.639 million, each person requires to pay $11.50 per month based on total consumption per person per month. At most $0.10 only. With or without min wage, prices are already creeping up, might as well increase for a good cause?