TR EMERITUS

How the arguments advanced to explain nations that have rapidly transformed are the same for the nations that failed Having a strong leader, like Gen. Park Chang Hee in South Korea, Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore or Chiang Kai Shek in Taiwan, is what drives rapid development... (15 Jun) - What made South Korea (and Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia) develop so rapidly that was absent in sub-Sahara Africa and South Asia (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Burma and Nepal)? I argued last week that while we have an idea about the factors that produce rapid social and economic transformation, we do not know how these factors interact with one another to bring this about. This is because even the worst development disasters have similar factors as the success stories. Let us do a roll call of some of the arguments we often raise to justify our criticism of governments that have failed or in praise of those that have succeeded. I admit from the beginning that I am as guilty as everyone else of making these assertions, which on close examination turn out to be false. First: Having a strong leader, like Gen. Park Chang Hee in South Korea (just like Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore or Chiang Kai Shek in Taiwan) is what drives rapid development. Park was a tough guy who killed opponents, rigged elections, ruled by decree under martial law from 1972-79. He extended subsidies, cheap loans and tax waivers to businesses owned by his cronies, suppressed the media, cracked on trade unions and gagged students. Yew and Chiang did similar things. These actions can also be used to make the case against leaders who presided over developmental disasters such as Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire, Idi Amin of Uganda, Samuel Doe of Liberia, Sani Abacha of Nigeria, Siad Barre of Somalia etc. Second: Park (like Lee and Chiang) was a benevolent tyrant with good policies i.e. openness to trade, massive investment in education and supporting local entrepreneurs. However, the policies Park pursued in South Korea like export-led industrialisation by supporting a select group of domestic industrial houses and in alliance with America were also pursued by other countries led by strong men like Kenya (under Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi), Pakistan (under Field Marshal Mohamed Ayub Khan), Philippines (under Ferdinand Marcos), Nigeria (under Yakubu Gowon and Olusegun Obasanjo) and Zaire (under Mobutu). There may have been variations in detail but not in substance. And as Harvard’s Lant Pritchette has shown, many of the failed countries in Africa (e.g. Zambia and Angola) enjoyed faster expansion in human capital than South Korea. Third: the problem with African leaders is that they tend to overstay in power: Mobutu (32 years in Zaire), a Paul Biya (32 years in Cameroon), an Eduardo Dos Santos (35 years in Angola), a Yoweri Museveni (28 years in Uganda), a Robert Mugabe (34 years in Zimbabwe), an Omar Bongo (42 years in Gabon) or a Gnassingbe Eyadema (42 years in Togo). Well leaders in East Asia overstayed in power as well. Park ruled from 1961 to 1979 (18 years) when he was assassinated (and he was not planning to retire; Malaysia (24 years of Mahathir Mohamed), Taiwan (30 years of Chiang Kai Shek), Singapore (32 years of Lee Kuan Yew) and Indonesia (32 years of Suharto). If longevity is responsible for the failure of sub-Sahara African countries to transform as rapidly as East Asian countries did, then we must understand the specific way in which it played this dysfunctional role. Read more: www.independent.co.ug/the-last-word/the-last-word/9054-what-produces-success-or-failure-of-nations#sthash.WKkQqhZz.dpuf  Read More →

Suitcase murder suspects (Photo: ST) I refer to the recent news that 3 impoverished men came into Singapore for weeks and survived by selling tissues. I want to ask ICA the following questions: 1.  How could these men get visas for so freaking long? 2.  We have seen many regional beggars coming into SG to beg and sell tissues also. Are they given long-term tourist visas too? 3.  Recently, my PRC friend applied for a single entry tourist visa, he was given 9 weeks multiple entries by ICA. Why is ICA giving such long-term tourist visas without valid reason? Who is a tourist for 9 weeks? 4.  In the above news, these people are "impoverished" and they get to stay so many weeks and in the end, committed murders. Are our visa application appraisals really so lax? I really wonder why ICA is so generous in approving long-term visas whether or not an applicant really needs one. I see more and more foreigners parking themselves here to look for jobs. Is ICA approving long-term visas without them asking for it an indication that government wants to help foreigners get jobs in Singapore? It is so strange that when Singaporeans go overseas, other governments are very strict with their visas but ours has made Singapore like a tourist hotel. And government keeps saying they are curbing the inflow of foreigners. Do you see the hypocrisy and that they are not doing what they say? Concerned Singaporean * Submitted by TRE reader. Editor's note: According to the Straits Times ('Body in suitcase: Murder charge for two Pakistanis', 15 Jun), the 2 Pakistani suspects and the victim were from the same Pakistani village, and had come to Singapore last month to sell tissue paper. The victim and 1 suspect came on 17 May. The second suspect came 11 days later on 28 May. The second suspect were accompanied by 3 other Pakistanis - 2 women and a man. Together, there were 6 of them. They were supposed to leave together on 27 June. What this means is that the victim and the first suspect were probably given extensions to stay in Singapore as they were here for more than 1 month. Typically, social visit passes are only granted for 1 month. The Chinese media reported [Link] that they are from a begging syndicate. Each worked for 12 hours a day earning at least $1K a day. The victim was said to be the ring leader. He was said to be killed over the distribution of earnings. It was reported that the members would either beg or sell tissue depending on the circumstances.  Read More →

Almost half of unemployed residents are aged 40 and above The Ministry of Manpower released the Labour Market Report for 1Q 2014 [Link] last Friday (13 Jun). The quarterly release analyses the labour market situation of Singapore, covering topics like employment, unemployment, redundancy, re-entry into employment, job vacancy, labour turnover and hours worked. The report said that the overall seasonally adjusted unemployment rate rose from 1.8% in December 2013 to 2.0% in March 2014. For residents (i.e. Singaporeans plus PRs), the unemployment rate increased from 2.7% to 2.9%. For Singaporeans, it went up from 2.8% to 3.0%. The report said that despite the increase in unemployment rates, they were still low compared to earlier quarters. There were 59,300 residents, including 52,300 Singaporeans, who were unemployed in March 2014. The seasonally adjusted figures were 62,500 for residents and 55,700 for citizens. The long-term unemployment rate was said to be low at 0.6% in March 2014. Total employment grew by 28,300 in the first quarter of 2014, lower than the seasonally high increase of 40,600 in the last quarter of 2013 but broadly comparable to the 28,900 in the first quarter of 2013. This brought total employment to 3,552,200 in March 2014, which was 4.0% higher than a year ago. However, the report did not say how many of these jobs went to Singaporeans. Based on CPF records, about half (51%) of the residents made redundant in the 4th quarter of 2013, secured employment by March 2014. This rate of re-entry within 6 months of redundancy was lower than the 59% experienced by the previous cohort (laid off in the 3rd quarter of 2013) in December 2013. A lower percentage means it is harder to get a job after the residents are retrenched. Job openings continued to increase. Seasonally adjusted job vacancies rose for the 3rd consecutive quarter, though the rate of increase over the quarter moderated to 3.0% in March 2014 from 9.2% in December 2013 and 5.8% in September 2013. Job openings continued to outnumber job seekers, the report said. The seasonally adjusted ratio of job vacancies to unemployed persons declined from 1.43 in December 2013 to 1.33 in March 2014. Residents aged 40 & above made up the largest share among the unemployed residents in March 2014 at 29,000 or 49%. Percentage Of Residents Made Redundant (1Q 2014) Mature workers aged 40 & over: 66.9% (by education) Those below secondary education: 16.0% Those with secondary education: 15.0% Those with post-secondary (non-tertiary) education: 6.6% Diploma & professional qualification: 18.3% Degree holders: 44.1% (by occupation) PMETs: 65.5% Clerical, Sales & Service Workers: 15.7% Production & Transport Operators, Cleaners & Labourers: 18.8% Labour market watchers said companies in Singapore may increase headcount in the coming months, as economic activity picks up but they expect that the hirings will lean towards short-term contracts. Former MP West Coast GRC MP and Chief Executive of Human Capital Singapore [Link] Ms Ho Geok Choo said, "What is very fashionable nowadays is where, they are beginning to bring in people on a short-term basis - that means contract-for-service, rather than contract-of-service. So they might hire them for six months to 12 months." Meanwhile, after analyzing the report, prominent financial blogger Leong Sze Hian remarked, "Don’t you find it rather strange that whilst job vacancies continue to rise – the unemployment rate has also risen? As well as the drop in the number of retrenched who were able to get re-employed?" "Shouldn’t the unemployment rate be coming down, and the re-entry into employment rate improve, if there are really more job vacancies?"  Read More →