TR EMERITUS

A free rider, as defined in economics, is an individual (or group) that reaps the benefits of the actions of others, without paying the cost (or underpaying for it). It is a form of market failure, and characterizes nonexcludable goods (those whose use cannot be restricted). ‪In his opening address to the 14th Parliament, PM Lee spoke of a number of issues. Many points he made were thoughtful, and drew on his deep experience in government, and as Prime Minister. I appreciated his insight and candor. PM Lee also suggested (and I paraphrase) that the argument that voting for the opposition because others will still return the PAP to power is what the economist will associate with being a free rider. In his response, LO Pritam Singh rejected this claim, pointing out that the voters in wards that voted for the WP were reflecting a genuine desire for an alternative voice, and were not free riding off anyone. He also suggested that there were aspects of politics where the WP even experienced higher costs, such as the lack of access to grassroots functions operated under the auspices of the PA/RC. ‪Setting aside the fact that the #workersparty would not have formed government even if it did win every single contested seat (and the PAP would have formed it, assuming no other opposition gains), the free rider claim is worth exploring from an economist’s view.‬ Parliament seats are excludable: when a PAP MP is elected, the opposition is necessarily prevented from accessing it. Moreover, in Aljunied, Hougang, and Sengkang, the votes were potentially costly: it required trust in our candidates, that we would be good town councilors and MPs. Yet voters were willing to do so. This does not strike me as consistent with free riding. Moreover, our sense—having spoken to voters in the aftermath—is that they did not vote tactically (for the WP, hoping that the PAP would still form government). If anything, they overcame their fear of the untested, and voted for the WP regardless. What is true is that they voted with their hearts, and with the conviction that some alternative voices were needed. Sure, they did so with some reassurance that the PAP would likely continue to form government. But it certainly wasn’t because they were looking for a free ride.   * Facebook post by MP for Sengkang GRC, Jamus Lim.      Read More →

I’ve mentioned it in a previous posting and I’ll happily say it again, but of all the “isms” that we have, ageism is probably one of the worst. Racism and Sexism are good at grabbing headlines. It’s been especially so since the current Occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania got himself plonked into the Oval Office and we got a range of news headlines relating to those “isms.” Nobody seems interested in “ageism,” particularly when so much of the world’s attention is focused on the two Septuagenarians battling for the Oval Office. However, as any job seeker will tell you, ageism is particularly rife and here in Singapore. To put it crudely, people after a certain age (In Singapore it’s around 35) are unlikely to get a job if they lose their current one. The situation has gotten so bad that it has taken one of our more senior and popular politicians to get out and announce that “Nobody is too old to be hired.” Yet, the problem persists. Just visit any food joint and you’ll notice that the staff are inevitably over 45. When I grew up in the UK, I understood the job at the fast food joint was what you did as a student so that you had a few extra bucks. Here in the “Land of Asian Values and Filial Piety,” working in a fast food joint is what you do when you’re too old to run around because no one else will hire you. When I got hired by the liquidator in 2014 (my 40th birthday) everyone told me that I had to stick onto it because it was the only job, I was likely to ever have. I was 40 and had worked mainly freelance for most of my working life and nobody was rushing to hire someone with my track record. So, I held on for five years in an industry that required me to have the one thing I refused to have – paper qualifications and regulation. In the five years of working in an accounting practice, the only job offer I received was from Burger King, which I ignored because, well they wanted me to work exclusively for them, which would have meant I’d be stuck with them for the rest of my working life. Sure, I get that employers want young and impressionable fresh graduates that they can mold. Old Farts like me can be expensive. We’ve been round the block a few times and we’re a little less likely to get conned. When I had my first agency job, working 24/7 was all about learning the ropes and part and parcel of laying the ground work if you wanted to succeed in life. At 40, when you’re required to work 24/7 all the time, you start to question if you’re working for someone who is obsessed with being inefficient and hates productivity. The only way you’re likely to accept doing this at 40 and dare I say 50 is because you’re paid a criminal amount of money. At 20, you accept things like “sacrifice” for the company and job as being good for you and your future. At 40, it’s a different story. Yet, if I take myself as an example, I have to question why old farts like me should become less employable. May be its because Covid-19 and the circuit breaker changed my lifestyle but I am healthier than when I was in my thirties. Just take a look at me eight years ago when I was on my first holiday in Vietnam. In the words of my mother “Your tummy is enormous.” By contrast, I am significantly lighter at 46 than when I was at 38 and I feel better for it. While I had significantly less responsibilities then, I actually feel more energetic and a little more confident about taking on the world. Here’s me at 46. Incidentally, my situation is not a freaky one. I work in an office where the only other person who could last more than five minutes on an escalator is three weeks older than me. Back when I was in my last agency job (Bang PR in 2005), my main director used to make the point that he was significantly older but at the same time healthier. So, the question stands – if our aging population (ie people like me) are healthier than ever before, why is it so difficult for us to get a job. I put it down to employers having a “feudal” mindset. They still want employers who will “fit in” and stay with them for years. They still want employees that can be molded into a certain image and are dependent on the employer to provide a livelihood. I can understand this mindset and it worked well for so long. It’s like the weird obsession with the office and all the gatherings that people have. In this frame of mind, you worry that the person over 40 may not fit into your cog. While this may have been the case in the industrial revolution, we need to understand that we are no longer in that era. I hate this mindset that in order for the economy to function you need lots of people whom you can work for long hours and for cheap, which was precisely the argument that everyone used when it was suggested that foreign workers should not live in conditions that caused disease. You have a growing population of over 40s. They have skills and the capability of doing work. Sure, if you can’t give them the same full-time job, outsource things to them. May be its less money but it’s better than nothing at all and you can let them find other paymasters concurrently. You have an army of growing and still capable people. Why can’t you find a way of using them? Surely that would help productivity.   Tang Li *Although I’ve been based mainly in Singapore for nearly two decades, I’ve had the privilege of being able meet people who have crossed borders and cultures. I’ve befriended ministers and ambassadors and worked on projects involving a former head of state. Yet, at the same time, I’ve had the privilege of befriending migrant labourers and former convicts. All of them have a story to tell. All of them add to the fabric of life. I hope to express the stories that inspire us to create life as it should be.        Read More →

The most important landmark statistics in S'pore's history? (ST, Sep 3) "'Free rider': PM Lee, LO Pritam cross swords on election tactics" (ST, Sep 2) "Govt always on the side of citizens on jobs, but S'pore cannot send signal it is no longer welcoming: PM Lee" Ratio of 1 Non-S'porean PMET (EP/S-Pass/PR PMET/WP($1,800-$2,500)) to 1.8 S'porean PMET (estimate) Jun2020 111,100 unemployed S'poreans divided by 5.6% unemployment rate = 1,983,929 S'porean workers x 60% PMETs = 1,190,357 divided by 379,000 EP/S-Pass (Jun2020) = Ratio of 3.1 : 1 1,190,357 divided by 606,002 EP/S-Pass/PR PMET (estimate) = Ratio of 2 : 1 1,190,357 divided by 650,000 EP/S-Pass/PR PMET/WP($1,800'$2,500) (estimate) = Ratio of 1.8 : 1 S-Pass started 2004 $1,800 - $2,500 increasing to $2,500 - $4,500 now (from 1 Sep) Are Work Permits from $1,800 to $2,500, arguably, also competing with S'porean PMETs, when Poly median starting pay was $1,600 in 2004, $1,850 in 2011 to $2,400 in 2019?   Leong Sze Hian      Read More →