TR EMERITUS

By Damon Yeo, Business Correspondent It is not difficult to hear Singapore and Hong Kong being mentioned in the same breath. The general consensus is that these two states are similar in many ways except that life is more stressful in Hong Kong. This article will seek to unravel if there is any truth in this particular generalisation. Singapore and Hong Kong are almost identical culturally, historically and economically, thus warranting a comparison of lifestyles in the two states. Both states are Chinese-dominated in terms of population. Chinese make up about three-quarters of Singapore’s population and about 100% of that in Hong Kong. Traditional Chinese beliefs, customs and practices influence a large portion of the people in both states. Also, population density is high both fully urbanised states, with Singapore being the 3rd most densely populated in the world and Hong Kong being the 4th. The colonial histories of both states are heavily linked to the British. Both states thrived as important trading ports for the British Empire in the Far East because of geographical location, with Singapore the centre of command for trades through the Straits of Malacca and Hong Kong, the South China Sea. Entrepot trade is a main driver of development of both ports. Economically, we could not be more similar. Lack of arable land and natural resources meant that both states are heavily reliant on the labour force to succeed. Over the last thirty years or so, both economies had progressed rapidly from relying on light manufacturing in the 60’s and 70’s to services from 90’s onwards. Both Singapore and Hong Kong are now important financial centres in Asia. To measure stress levels is highly subjective and debatable. Naturally, different people worry about different things. To make any sense for comparison, we are hypothetically creating a protagonist named Joe. He is from middle-class background and employed in the financial services industry (39% of labour force in Singapore and 21% in Hong Kong). He is 35-years-old, married and have two kids (one at primary education level, the other at secondary). The main drivers of stress levels for Joe are financial well-being and the well-being of his young family. Two publicly available reports are used for this article – WEF’s Global Competitiveness Report 2009 and UBS’ Prices and Earning Report 2009. Joe is likely to worry about the stability of job and his financial well being. In a previous article (read http://temasekreview.com/?p=13529) , it was noted that Singapore had been ranked number one in labour efficiency by the WEF, somewhat implying the most stressful working conditions for Joe. Hong Kong is not very much better for Joe in this aspect (overall 4th in the world). However, Joe can feel slightly more assured in Hong Kong, because he can expect a redundancy payout of about 62 weeks of wages should he be made redundant there (just 4 weeks in Singapore). In terms of wage levels, Joe in Singapore will only take home (post-tax) 74% of that Hong Kong Joe. This means very little of course, but if we look at domestic purchase power, Singapore Joe only earns 69% that of Hong Kong Joe (hence can afford less – this will be explored in detail below). When we look at average working hours, we can conclude that Joe in Hong Kong works about an hour a day longer than if he was in Singapore. In Singapore, Joe will enjoy a day more in annual leave but it is important to bear in mind that there are 17 public holidays a year in Hong Kong and just 14 in Singapore. Also noteworthy is that Joe is much more likely to delegate authority in Singapore (19th) than in Hong Kong (39th). We can only assume that he is likely to be less stressful at work if he is able to delegate some work to his subordinates. Female participation in the labour work force is higher in Hong Kong than in Singapore, indicating that Hong Kong Joe is less likely to be the sole breadwinner, hence less stressful. As a family man, Joe is concerned about the well-being of his family. For his children, Joe will be losing sleep over how well they are taught in schools and if they can move up the education ladder. This is where Singapore Joe will have a lot less to worry about. Quality of primary education is third best globally in Singapore and only 34th best in Hong Kong. Level of secondary enrolment is 17th highest globally in Singapore and tertiary enrolment is 29th. The same benchmark for Hong Kong is only 73rd and 66th respectively. It means that Singapore Joe’s kids are significantly more likely to enjoy secondary and tertiary education. Quality of the overall educational system in Singapore is in fact ranked number one globally. Singapore Joe can also feel safer about his family. Organised crime is significant less of a problem in Singapore (9th versus 33rd), while the police force in Singapore is the third most reliable in the world (8th for Hong Kong). To relieve stress from work and family, Joe can purchase modern items of entertainment or engage in other social activities. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that the more entertainment Joe can afford, the less stressful he will feel. Electronic appliances are clearly more affordable in Hong Kong. On the average, it takes 19 working hours for Hong Kong Joe to buy an iPod Nano (8GB) and 27.5 hours for Singapore Joe. A basket of electronic goods (including an electric steam iron and a personal computer among others) costs 5% cheaper in Hong Kong. Eating out in a very classy restaurant costs about the same in both states (~US$50), while Singapore Joe is expected to pay USD40 more if he decides to stay in a five-star hotel locally for a night as a way to relax. Although both states face similar issues in traffic congestion, a car is likely to cost about US$17,400 less for Joe in Hong Kong. However, Hong Kong Joe is expected to pay more in tax and fuel for his car. When it comes to luxury shopping in Singapore ,Joe can expect to save about 8% (the indicator here is a full set of men’s and women’s business wear from head to toe). Judging by social norm, this is more likely to make Singapore Joe’s wife slightly happier than her counterpart in Hong Kong. In summary, it does look like there is little to distinctly state if Singapore Joe or Hong Kong Joe has a more stressful lifestyle. Singapore Joe has less to worry about the general well-being of his family but is less likely to afford entertainment than Hong Kong Joe. In terms of working conditions, there is very little difference in both states as it looks like Hong Kong Joe is paid slightly more to compensate for slightly longer working hours. Perhaps we can now sadly admit that Singaporeans have a lifestyle as stressful as our Hong Kong counterparts.   Other articles by Damon Yeo: >> DBS and a series of ‘unfortunate events’ >> Sale of Chartered – An Anatomy >> 3rd most competitive natio in the world and what it means to the average worker   About the Author: Damon is a proud graduate of Nanyang Technological University in 2004 with a degree in Accountancy. He is currently working in the finance department of a UK Bank. He is also a regular contributor at redsports.sg.    Read More →

By Manisha Kumari, Managing Editor Are the opposition given equal rights in single party state? If the answer is no, isn’t it an infringement of human rights? Is single party state a blotch in the name of democracy? Not much difference can be stated between dictatorship and single state party. Wikipedia defines dictatorship as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual or a government controlled by one person or a small group of people. In single-party state, a single political party forms the government and no other parties are permitted to run candidates for election. Sometimes the term de facto single-party state is used to describe a dominant-party system where laws or practices prevent the opposition from legally getting power. Many sociologists believe that a single party state is nothing but another name for dictatorship. Single party state is just a way of legitimizing the dictatorship under that nation's constitution, or to present a veneer of democracy to other democratic nations. It is simply the dictatorship rule ‘by the will of the people’. The True Whig Party of Liberia is considered the first monopoly or single-party state in the world. The True Whig Party was Liberia's only legal political party for over 100 years, from 1878 to the coup d'etat of 1980. Under this regime, though freedom of speech was guaranteed by the constitution, restrictions were placed on the dissent and opposition candidates were subjected to official harassment. Political power was concentrated in a small number of prominent families.   Will PAP be another The True Whig Party of Liberia? If we look at the Singapore’s history, Singaporean’s politics have been dominated by the People's Action Party (PAP) since the 1959 general election when Lee Kuan Yew became Singapore's first Prime Minister. The PAP has been in government ever since. There are other parties too like the Workers' Party of Singapore and the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) but only for namesake. These parties claim that Singapore is a de facto one-party state. PAP has also being accused of employing censorship, gerrymandering and the filing of civil suits against the opposition for libel or slander to impede their success. The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) - world's leading provider of country intelligence, classes Singapore as a ‘hybrid’ country, with authoritarian and democratic elements. Freedom House - an international NGO that conducts research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom and human rights does not consider Singapore an ‘electoral democracy’ and ranks the country as ‘partly free’. Singapore has one of the highest per capita GDP in the world. It also claims to be number one in education but what happens when it comes to personal freedom, it is party free. The media in Singapore is a tightly controlled operation. Currently Singapore’s local print media is run by the Singapore Press Holdings and MediaCorp, two companies under the direct control of the state. People can in no way voice their opinion.   A single party system is heavily associated with dictatorship A single party rule does not represent true democracy. By democracy we mean, by the people, of the people and for the people. The most important principle of the democracy is not met as the voters are not given the option of ‘by the people’. If there is only one state party rule, voters have no choice but to choose the one that exists. A single party represents a single choice for a voter, which is seen to be no choice at all. One-party states or single party state have been criticized for their disrespect towards human rights too. In most cases, one-party systems have a tendency to become rigid and unwilling to accept changes. As there is only one party, political power tends to be concentrated solely within the ruling party. As a result, it is usually easy for the party in power to disregard previous laws or the constitution of the state, creating a dictatorship consisting of the party. Further contributing to the association of dictatorship and the single-party system is the fact that many dictatorships have adopted a single-party system. Other dictators may preside over a system in which political parties are legal and many exist, but the political process is slanted unfairly in favour of the ruling party and political plurality is limited. As Mahatma Gandhi said, ‘Be the change you want to see in others’. It is time for us to change our way of thinking.   About the Author: Manisha is media professional with four years experience in copy writing, editing and reporting in IT, lifestyle, entertainment and current affairs. She holds a post-graduate diploma in mass communications and journalism and worked for two years as a Reporter for Realpolitik,  an investigative, unbiased, modern and thought-provoking news magazine in India and 3 years as an editor for Century Publications.  Read More →

Recently we have seen a deluge of articles, comments and debate on the subject of Affordability of HDB Flats. The HDB and the government have come out with facts, figures and examples to show that HDB new flats are affordable and are within the means of first time flat buyers. But it seems that there are still many unconvinced souls out there judging from the numbers of articles and comments that can be seen from popular blog sites and mass media. Currently under HDB regulations for purchase of new flats, the monthly household income ceiling for 4 and 5 rooms flat type are set at a ceiling of $8000/month, 3 rooms at a ceiling of $3000/month and 2 roomer at $2000/month. This restriction is to prevent higher income groups from competing with lower income group for smaller flat size. HDB should lift this restriction as it has also effectively distorts the actual demand preferences of first time purchaser of HDB flats. HDB should build its flats based on demand of individual preferences with the above income ceiling restriction lifted within the upper limit of $8000/month. If over time the trend of purchase tends towards smaller and smaller flats, we can safely imply that affordability have decrease as wage increase have not catch up with the rise in new flats’ sale price. Options should be given for first time buyers based on their preferences. This would make for happier and more satisfied citizens. Most first time purchasers are young couple with priorities and goals for their future. Some may want to set aside a higher % of saving from their monthly pay cheque, others may want smaller loan with shorter payback period. Yet for some others, location may be a priority and they may not mind trading in purchasing a bigger flat for a smaller one with location of their chose. Another good yardstick that can be used as an indication of affordability would be from the records of rental flats. Most Singaporean who lived in rental flats do so not out of chose but because purchasing a new HDB flats is beyond their means. If HDB have to allocate more and more flats each year for rental due to increase in demand, it is a good indication that its flats is getting less and less affordable to its citizens. The above suggestions may not give a direct measure of actual affordability, but in the Singapore context it should hopefully provide ordinary folks with some idea what affordability is all about in relation to HDB flat prices.   Aik Theng Chong  Read More →