Income Inequality in Singapore: Our Annual Peek (2013) by Money Smart

[arthur]

Was just browsing through till I caught sight of the pay comparision category using Govt Ministers vs Snr Mgrs vs Bottom earners.

Wow. To think this picture escape the censorship cut.

[Image: Income-Inequality.png]

http://www.moneysmart.sg/

[paullow]

but the bottom 10% will NEVER save up all their income. chances are they will have little or no savings or even increasing debt for some. so they will NEVER match up to the top 10% whatever the time frame, realistically speaking. even with expensive toys, the real rich will get richer far easier than any other class.
except in exceptional cases like the poor striking toto etc.
the rich poor gap will inevitably widen.

[NTL]

It is unavoidable. Maybe in a true communist country, then maybe there is no gap, or a more constant gap?

I believe if someone who is consider poor continue to do a poor-paying job, he or she will forever be there. He or she will need to find the opportunity to move up to avoid being stuck there.

[Dividend Warrior]

I ish in middle income......

[shareinvestor1]

Income inequality is unavoidable and acceptable.

However govt pay is too much to the extreme. The growing of GDP is more meaningful for their pocket than anyone.

We need ubah!

[CityFarmer]

Income inequality is unavoidable and acceptable.

However govt pay is too much to the extreme. The growing of GDP is more meaningful for their pocket than anyone.

We need ubah!

I recalled a story from a social scientist on people choice of the following two (2) scenarios

Scenario (1): Everyone is earning $0.50
Scenario (2): 80% earning $1.00, but the rest earning $2.00

Most people will chose scenario (1), even scenario (2) is earning 100% more.

So, shall we focus on the inequality, or overall improvement of each individual... Hmm...

[shareinvestor1]

scene 2 make sense to me.. Those who work hard should deserve more..
However the top 10% should be real enterprising people that really work for it.. I am ok PM get 2 to 3M. Some of the Ms deserve that.. maybe top 1-2% of the govt.. but not all of them..

Income inequality is unavoidable and acceptable.

However govt pay is too much to the extreme. The growing of GDP is more meaningful for their pocket than anyone.

We need ubah!

I recalled a story from a social scientist on people choice of the following two (2) scenarios

Scenario (1): Everyone is earning $0.50
Scenario (2): 80% earning $1.00, but the rest earning $2.00

Most people will chose scenario (1), even scenario (2) is earning 100% more.

So, shall we focus on the inequality, or overall improvement of each individual... Hmm...

[CityFarmer]

Well, Singapore government effectiveness is among the top 3, base on World Bank report. The credit is for the team, rather than selective individuals IMO.

The real issue is the effectiveness should be aligned with "real" objective of shareholders (Singaporean)

scene 2 make sense to me.. Those who work hard should deserve more..
However the top 10% should be real enterprising people that really work for it.. I am ok PM get 2 to 3M. Some of the Ms deserve that.. maybe top 1-2% of the govt.. but not all of them..

[specuvestor]

Income inequality is unavoidable and acceptable.

However govt pay is too much to the extreme. The growing of GDP is more meaningful for their pocket than anyone.

We need ubah!

I recalled a story from a social scientist on people choice of the following two (2) scenarios

Scenario (1): Everyone is earning $0.50
Scenario (2): 80% earning $1.00, but the rest earning $2.00

Most people will chose scenario (1), even scenario (2) is earning 100% more.

So, shall we focus on the inequality, or overall improvement of each individual... Hmm...

The above is the main reason why the triangular cooperation mooted by LHL between Indo, Malaysia and Singapore didn't take off.

Here's my post in another thread that wealth redistribution is very much misunderstood:

Redistributiion of wealth is much more powerful than most estimates. Economists frequerntly underestimate the purchasing power of free choice and fiscal policies (IMF admits underestimating fiscal multiplier) And people MISTAKEN it by the "Robin Hood" theory of stealing from rich giving to poor (Just read the media). The idea behind it is to GROW THE WEALTH and share the fruits more equitably, and specifically the middle class. We as Asians have seen it in China 10 years ago when the middle class boomed and now in our neighbour Indonesia. India would be next if it gets its policy right. Having a strong aristocratic or super rich NEVER HELPS, socially or financially. There's only that many number of shoes that Imelda Marcos can buy

http://www.valuebuddies.com/thread-3106-...l#pid48841

[godjira1]

Specuvestor - despite being a pretty hardcore capitalist I agree with you that wealth redistribution brings to the overall table a bigger pie.

However the NIMBY problem comes in, as someone with high income will feel that estate tax/capital gains to fund it is the best way, high wealth will ask for higher income tax because estate duty is some way is a form of double taxation etc. Basically a "tragedy of the commons" dilemma.