Monday, March 08, 2010

Budget Debate 2010 - Myths of HDB and 460K for poor over 60 years?

I have written to the Ministry of Finance to ask for a detailed breakdown of their numerical calculations on how they actually come to that assertion that the Minister of Finance Tharman made in recent parliamentary sitting on the Budget Debate.

It is hardly believable that the PAP government is so generous when it comes to providing basic welfare to our needy citizens. It was not so long ago that our memory is still fresh about the "heated" argument presented in parliament over a mere $30 increase in monthly allowance for the needy. Thus, I am really curious to know about the methodology and assumptions made in Minister Tharman's assertion on the seemingly HUGE handouts that the PAP government is going to give every year over the next 60 years (well, providing PAP could be the ruling party for that long) is going to be a "INFLATION ADJUSTED" of a total $460K.

As far as I know, there isn't any "inflation adjusted" methodology in PAP's very limited welfare approach (remember the debate on the increase of mere $30?). So I am all open and curious about the new methodology that they are putting in place.

On the other hand, I know my readers are eager to know what I think about Minister Mah Bow Tan's Mtyhs. I would say that he is living in his own Myths after I read his responses in parliament. I shall devote a few articles in subsequent days on talking about his Myths.

But let's wait for Ministry of Finance response first.

Goh Meng Seng


Alan Wong said...

What we want to know is more than the calculations and methodology ?

We want real life examples of such low income families who have benefitted from the PAP govt's generosity.

What is the use of giving us the calculations if no such low income familly in Singapore CAN ever meet the criteria to qualify for such benefits ? And for that matter, what is the use if the odds is 1 in 3 million ?

If they can provide us with real life examples, does it implies that they are only liars ? Afterall nobody needs to be accountable for telling a white lie.

Anonymous said...

It was a rather insulting to use the phase "Budget Debate" since there wasn't any.....

Xtrocious said...

Hmm...most of the time, the headline numbers look very good...

But the devil is always in the details...sigh

And seriously hope they don't do a "Zhang Ziyi" stunt...