A budget for expats?

[Kubes.SG]

Let the backlash against FTs and EP holders begin.  Singapore for Singaporeans.  Why should Singaporeans have to compete?   Singaporeans lives should be easy. 

Its all here in an ST Forum Letter: 

Budget 2009: Consider levy for hiring workers on employment pass
BUDGET 2009 has unprecedentedly introduced a Jobs Credit scheme for a year to encourage businesses to retain Singaporeans in this economic downtown. This is achieved by giving up to 12 per cent worth of cash grants to employers with employees who are paid Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions. It is encouraging to see such an initiative rolled out to help Singaporeans keep their jobs in this highly competitive environment.

However, the Government has also emphasised the need for foreign workers to keep operating costs low. They are here to supplement jobs that Singaporeans are unwilling to do, so companies remain competitive.

The Foreign Workers Levy and dependent ratio systems were introduced in order to manage the number of foreigners in the workforce. The levy for taking skilled workers on Work Permit (WP) in the manufacturing, construction and marine industry is $5 per day. On the other hand, there is no levy employing foreigners on employment pass or EP. (Those who qualify for the pass earn more than $2,500 a month or have a recognised qualification.)

Since most Singaporeans do not want to be construction workers due to relatively low pay and harsh conditions, they will most likely compete with foreigners on EP rather than WP.

In view of that, what is the rationale in introducing a levy and dependent ratio for workers on WP, while employers are free to hire foreign workers on EP?

I suggest that the authorities reduce the levy for employing foreigners on WP and consider introducing a levy for recruiting foreigners on EP, considering the fact that employers need to pay 13.5 per cent more to hire a Singaporean to do the same job.

Lu Qimin


Presume Mr Lu is referring to the Company CPF contribution.  This heartlander peasant does not even know that the CPF contribution is capped at $4,500 and seems to assume that everyone earns less than that amount.  Imagine what he would think if he knew the typical FT/EP salary, plus other benefits many get or are rolled into the salary like housing, schooling, car, home-leave, etc. 

I was think Singapore is looking a lot like Japan circa 1989,  but sensing it may also be moving towards Germany circa 1936 with some of the attitudes out there.


 

[Kubes.SG]

To summarize this letter, same day, same Forum: 

1) Singapore is by far best country in the world, only foreigners who become citizens should be welcome; 
2) Force foreigners to pay more for everything, screw them out of every cent until they can't afford to stay, that'll show them; 
3) Why should Singaporeans have to compete - life should be easy.  That is why we vote for the PAP.  Do something.
4) Inferred:   Just like the Govt says, Singapore has been screwed royally by the rest of the world.  We should screw the foreigners here, they are the cause of our all problems.



Budget 2009: Cash grants should benefit citizens more than others
I REFER to last Friday's report, 'Cash grants to subsidise wage bills'.

In this economic downturn, I would like to see this cash grant benefit Singaporeans rather than permanent residents (PRs). A clearer distinction between companies that hire more Singaporeans and those that do not is needed.

In the figures released by the Ministry of Home Affairs, more than 50,000 foreigners became PRs in 2005 and 2006. But in the past 10 years, an average of just 8,500 a year became citizens.

In addition, many expatriate couples, with husband and wife equally qualified, have one spouse taking up Singapore citizenship to enjoy subsidies, while the other retains home country citizenship.

Many foreigners come here because they see Singapore as a land of opportunity which is clean, safe and good for families. But going by the number who become citizens, not many think of Singapore as their only home.

I know of Americans who cannot imagine giving up their US citizenship for a Singapore one. I presume US citizenship is something one is more inclined to take up than give up. I also know of a friend from India who, after living here for more than 10 years, decided to give up Singapore PR because she is concerned that her son would have to do two years of national service when he finishes his A levels.

To be sure, the Government has recently tried to draw a thicker line between PRs and citizens.

For example, non-citizens will have to pay more for education. They also pay more for health care. But many PRs consider these increases a small price to pay compared to other countries where they enjoy little subsidy at all.

As things stand, Singaporeans are losing jobs to foreigners in the face of competition for work. This affects even skilled workers and professionals.

Singapore workers feel vulnerable with the double whammy of globalisation and liberalised immigration. PRs choose to live in a place because it offers a certain standard of living, but they leave for another place if it makes a better offer. In applying this logic, I see using cash grants to subsidise wage bills as of little help to Singaporeans.

Edmund Lin

[Foreign Talent Lah]

The decrease in company tax doesn't help me. A cut in the income tax rates and GST would have been better. Perhaps it might have stimulated demand a little, too.

This Government gives me Jack Shat. It should do more for FT like me, since FT is the future of this country.

Anyone want to join me at Speaker's Corner on Saturday morning to discuss this issue?