Accomplishment.

I tend to get lazy in doing things. Things that I don’t usually like to do. Some are rather necessary yet are just found to be undone, for example:

•  Exercising/Keeping Fit
• Constantly updating my blog
• Writing on certain issues
• Reading up on current affairs
• Making myself breakfast
• Researching what uni is all about
• Getting out of the room

And I hate it when my windows and tabs get messy, cause my life gets messy as well. It doesn’t really matter that physical things are messy, my hard disk must be neat and tidy.

And anyway, I was thinking about my A-Level times. Those were the most defining and reforming moment in my life so far I guess. It is only when one is put through something out of the norm that he grows and learn, and believe I have done so too.

Here’s one song that accompanied me through the gruesome A-Levels.

I find the tune exceptionally soothing and the lyrics somewhat meaningful, especially those at the chorus. It was once on loop and pushed me through my study sessions.

Today was pretty much lazing around albeit culminating in a 21km run around my area. The run was refreshing, and much less painful than previous ones possibly due to proper and adequate warm-up.

I can’t wait to have a purpose in life.

People and Achievements

On the evening of 12th April, I received one of the best pieces of news in my life so far: SMU’s School of Law decided to interview me. I had minimal time to prepare for it, as the only available date was on Saturday, 14th April. My path to the interview was a unique one, and I would say I’m fortunate to have got it, or even the course itself. I appealed for a change in course to hopefully a Double Degree in law and economics and much to my surprise I got called up for the Law interview. I was overjoyed. I was thrilled.

I went to buy my clothes and cut my hair on Friday, after successfully getting rid of that duty. I would say that I’ve been rather lucky so far to meet nice people in Singapore’s service line, such as the G2000 store assistant, the taxi driver or the hairdresser. It’s great that I’ve learnt to appreciate little things like this. For instance, the hairdresser, a middle-aged woman, was really friendly and advised me on the various hairstyles for the interview. I’m glad, I’m blessed.

Then came the big day. I procrastinated at home again before leaving for SMU. Once there, the atmosphere was not as tense as expected, surprisingly. I first chose the essay “Authority proceeds from true reason, yet true reason does not proceed from authority. Discuss.” and I think I wrote quite well. What I really screwed up was the interview.

I felt rather insecure as I was posted to an interview group with the other two girls knowing each other (the male:female ratio was like 2:1) and coming from much ‘superior’ backgrounds. Sensing an uphill battle, I answered first for the first discussion question – the impacts of social media on people’s privacy and society; but gradually stumbled along the way. My individual question was worse – whether the defence budget was justified. My response – it has to be, for the internal threat remains real, and full stop. I mean, what else can you argue for?

Well, so be it. At least I tried. Just treat it as an experience gained.

And then I bumped into Daphne and caught Battleship before heading to Indoor Stadium, where I returned to a spiritual home, albeit the wrong physical environment.  It was a real pleasure being able to return to an NCC event and meeting old friends and buddies, despite outgrowing some of their age and not knowing more people. But it’s still heart-warming, to see that it’s the same faces who stay dedicated, be it for the higher calling, or be it for the people around them. These are the people who treasure the things around them and even after many years, still hold on to it and are able to relive it no matter how old they’ve gotten or how long they’ve left service.

These two events essentially made the other two days of my weekend (Monday was an off-day) feel boring. Well, I guess life is about two key things – people and achievement, although not all, certainly.

A Thought on Wage Shock

I first came across this term today, to be honest. And I was badly surprised when I learnt that a prominent intellectual actually proposed a direct method of income gap reduction, which, in my opinion, fundamentally undermines liberal capitalism.

The issue our economy has been facing is that though incomes were rising across the board, those in the upper quartile were getting richer much quicker than those on the polar opposite, which leads to the misconception of the “rich gets richer, poor gets poorer”. Yes, income gap today is indeed a problem not just in economics, but also in business, politics, or society. And yes, this paragraph is meant for people who haven’t been exposing themselves.

A wage shock seems legitimate for its candid approach to curb a perpetually widening income gap, but firstly, it poses a danger by freezing top earners’ wages. The richest are the petrol kiosks of the economy – they consume, they invest, they run businesses, they save, they withdraw. They provide livelihood to various sectors. If they were to know that their incomes would not rise, would they fuel the economy as they are doing so now? These millionaires would surely start to save more, invest less, pull out of markets – conclusively, they have a propensity to halt their inputs should they see no security in income.

On the other hand, should the poorest be rewarded with a relative wage increase, there would bound to be a few doubts on the serviceability of the wage shock policy. First, what would the poor do with the additional cash? Does purchasing power essentially increase? And if it does, is it in line with the wage shock suggestion? Well, negative answers to all of those. Disposable income increases but would likely not be tapped on, for they would be, similar to the rich, saved in bank accounts. All these point to the worst nightmare in the demand-centric Keynesian theory – massive withdrawals of money from the circular flow of income.

Banks must then be counted on to multiply these increases in savings receipts by structured financial engineering, i.e. inter-bank or inter-corporation investment. But then again, how would the new (or rather, re-created) equity be returned to society? Simple – dividends. And sadly, I put forth that only the rich are capable of receiving stock dividends and continue to engage in stock manipulation (note that they have part of their net worth in stocks, bonds and other financial products so curbing the rise of their incomes is largely superficial), which essentially undoes the efforts of the wage shock ‘therapy’.

Second, there would then be questions on where the additional 50% increase in the average Joe’s paychecks over three years would come from. Certainly not the government – for it would then be explicit income redistribution. And so employers? Well, what about keeping Singapore’s labour market competitive – when many of the lower income group work at plants or stores with an option of relocating overseas?

And then we talk about boosting productivity as a long term solution for rising costs of production and hence living. How can we boost productivity when the lower-income bracket, mostly engaged in intermediate or penultimate stages of producing consumer goods and services, are ordered to be payed ‘more justifiably’? Surely we don’t want that to happen, and much less losing our competitive edge.

This presents another issue with our economy – it has become to globalised, too international. What is moving our modest consumer market forward are large multinationals based in Singapore, securing inputs from Singapore, merchandising output in Singapore. Should there be any inbalance in either door of the factory, possibilities are the firm would pack up and leave for Changi. In this case, rising overheads due to a forced increase in wages are forcing them out. Should both income groups start to save more as described earlier, a cost-output spiral would be inevitable.

Should we really decide to go ahead with the wage shock, then I must put right hand up and say that three years, as suggested by the mastermind Lim Chong Yah is too long a time period. Within a shorter time span, say, one year, there must be proactive efforts in increasing worker’s wages; while ensuring the richer get lesser or no perks, not curbing any slight incremental behaviour. Policies have to be a moderation of extremes, for no bird can take flight with only one wing.

What it seems now is that the rich should be punished for being so, and the poor are an unfortunate group that ought to be sympathised by policymakers and receive help. I urge everyone out there to be slower in reaching this conclusion. We can also put it such that the rich have been working hard and smart enough to reach where they are, and it’s time for the poor to learn how to lead a new lifestyle.

But just as army recruits are not left out in the field to fight without a commander, this group of people need guidance. The government has to take a more frontseat role in developing and executing income redistribution techniques, especially those built on the basis of self-help. One of the issues to resolve is the lack of proper economic knowledge among the masses, for mindsets that have been bred across generations tend to be ill-informed ones and end up producing unfavourable results for the economy as a whole. Families could be educated on financial management, be engaged in actively contributing to the workforce, and how their subtle actions could have implications on the economy which would in turn affect their own livelihoods.

All these flak about how our economy has become, what are the issues, how should we resolve them, are all a layer of soil which have much more than meets the eye under them. In my opinion, our world has had enough economic reform, and since it has proved to be largely ineffective, it is timely to bring our attention to social reform, communal reform, behavioural reform, and even cognitive reform. That is the root of the problem.

References:
http://asiancorrespondent.com/80604/wage-shock-in-singapore-yay-or-nay/
http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120414-0000055/Wage-shock-therapy-too-risky–Lim-Swee-Say

Destination.

After much deliberation I decided to blog regularly on WordPress, so that I make sure I chronicle significant moments and not let them become a distant memory in time to come.

Once again, WordPress has an irritating “follow” function which I guess I’ll use on my other blog. Follow functions are too damn annoying for the fact that they tempt one to follow another. Well, it takes one to know one. Our society have become less articulate in own opinions, and then end up easily accepting (or say blindly adopting) others’.

At the moment, there are are number of topics I would want to write about:

• The recent bunch of young soldiers I have influenced
• My immediate past weekend, people, and acquaintances
• Random miscellaneous thoughts jotted down in every location

It is of utmost importance, at least to me, to be constantly in writing or reading and hence engaging the mind. For success is not a destination, and excellence should be a habit.