Lolbertarians cry at Singapore new Budget

[PainRack]

For some odd reason, Libertarians like to quote Singapore "liberal" economic policies.... From immigration(http://www.reason.com/news/show/123474.html) to "Singapore spends less money than the US and achieves better healthcare/public services" and has less government economic interference.......... Other than the fact that this is outright distortionist idiocy, here's some news for them to cry over.

SINGAPORE: Small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) have welcomed the Jobs Credit scheme announced in the Singapore Budget.

The scheme helps employers keep their workers by offering each employer cash grants amounting to 12 per cent of the first S$2,500 of an employee's wage.

Expand Construction has about 100 Singaporean workers at the executive level. So far, it has not taken any strong cost-cutting measures, but it is cautious about the tough months ahead. So the Jobs Credit scheme is something the company is looking forward to.

Von Lee, group executive chairman of Expand Group of companies, said: "It's a lot of assistance, because we employ a lot of local staff, and like what the minister says, the strategy is to reduce costs and save jobs, rather than cut jobs to save costs. So that sends out a very strong message and effectively because it's a grant back to the company, it definitely makes a strong impact."

Lau Kok Wah, general manager of Expand Construction, said: "At the same time, you also remove the uncertainties of many people about job security. That's the most immediate concern of many people at this point in time."

In fact, the company said that with help from the scheme, it will be able to hire more staff.

Besides the Jobs Credit scheme, the government had earlier announced that it intends to roll out more public construction projects this year.

Von Lee said: "We are more than willing as a construction company to invest in people and employ more people and prepare ourselves for the jobs coming on line."

The company also welcomed the lower corporate tax rates announced in the Budget, saying it would help during these tough times.

- CNA/ir

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/ ... 89/1/.html

In other words, the government is outright paying 12% of your wages, as calculated by the person CPF.
And while its "intended" to go towards the wage earner CPF account, the fact that its being doled out in the form of a cash grant to the companies is........ illuminating so as to speak............

[bobalot]

For some odd reason, Libertarians like to quote Singapore "liberal" economic policies

Isn't 25% of Singapore GDP come from government owned companies? Doesn't Singapore have a MASSIVE PUBLIC HOUSING SCHEME that covers 80-90% of its population? Doesn't Singapore restrict the amount of cars that can be imported into the country?

What the fuck are these people on?

[PainRack]

For some odd reason, Libertarians like to quote Singapore "liberal" economic policies

Isn't 25% of Singapore GDP come from government owned companies? Doesn't Singapore have a MASSIVE PUBLIC HOUSING SCHEME that covers 80-90% of its population? Doesn't Singapore restrict the amount of cars that can be imported into the country?

What the fuck are these people on?

Oh, it gets better yet. I met posters on SB, and IIRC, two posters here who had quoted Singapore as how the US Federal Government can improve spending on healthcare by incorporating better liberal policies as opposed to socialised medicine. We just ignore the 80% government owned hospitals(Well, the technical term is restructured hospital, which means government owned corporations which owns the hospitals) and 50% subsidies of the bills.........

The only bit "libertarian" in Singapore economic policies is the recent abolishment of the death tax and weak capital gains taxes......................... That's it. Hong Kong itself is more libertarian under China............ At least they don't enforce conscription mandates and increased pays to males due to them being citizen soldiers.
Hell, if we were so libertarian, someone please explain why I need to pay 50 dollars to register ANY form of business, and a highly restricted license if I'm in sales..... And yes, that registration technically applies to pimps too.

[Sidewinder]

For some odd reason, Libertarians like to quote Singapore "liberal" economic policies....

What, were they in a goddamn coma when Singapore's government had Michael P. Fay's ass caned for vandalism? In a REAL libertarian society, there would be NO LAWS against vandalism, and unfortunately for Fay, NO LAWS against the vandalized cars' owners taking justice in their own hands and LYNCHING the kid.

Singapore has a reputation as a nanny state. If it had a libertarian "government" (i.e., NO EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT), it would have a reputation as a kleptocracy.

[ray245]

For some odd reason, Libertarians like to quote Singapore "liberal" economic policies....

What, were they in a goddamn coma when Singapore's government had Michael P. Fay's ass caned for vandalism? In a REAL libertarian society, there would be NO LAWS against vandalism, and unfortunately for Fay, NO LAWS against the vandalized cars' owners taking justice in their own hands and LYNCHING the kid.

Singapore has a reputation as a nanny state. If it had a libertarian "government" (i.e., NO EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT), it would have a reputation as a kleptocracy.

Those people love to pick and choose their examples. They would conveniently ignore the example of Somalia for example.

[Rogue 9]

I've never heard any Libertarian particularly uphold Singapore as any kind of example. And to answer Ray, there's a subset of anarchocapitalists that doesn't so much ignore Somalia as hold it up as a success, saying the country has greatly improved since the downfall of its government. This may or may not be true; it's not particularly difficult to have a government that's worse than no government at all, especially, it seems, in Africa, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a shithole.

[ray245]

I've never heard any Libertarian particularly uphold Singapore as any kind of example. And to answer Ray, there's a subset of anarchocapitalists that doesn't so much ignore Somalia as hold it up as a success, saying the country has greatly improved since the downfall of its government. This may or may not be true; it's not particularly difficult to have a government that's worse than no government at all, especially, it seems, in Africa, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a shithole.

Wait, are they really high or something? Somalia actually improved without a government? Really, I want to see them actually talking to one of the Somalia refugees and see how will those refugees respond.

A weak government does not mean all government are bad. Do they really see the world like a child, acting like an adult?

[PainRack]

I've never heard any Libertarian particularly uphold Singapore as any kind of example. And to answer Ray, there's a subset of anarchocapitalists that doesn't so much ignore Somalia as hold it up as a success, saying the country has greatly improved since the downfall of its government. This may or may not be true; it's not particularly difficult to have a government that's worse than no government at all, especially, it seems, in Africa, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a shithole.

For some odd reason, Libertarians like to quote Singapore "liberal" economic policies....

What, were they in a goddamn coma when Singapore's government had Michael P. Fay's ass caned for vandalism? In a REAL libertarian society, there would be NO LAWS against vandalism, and unfortunately for Fay, NO LAWS against the vandalized cars' owners taking justice in their own hands and LYNCHING the kid.

Singapore has a reputation as a nanny state. If it had a libertarian "government" (i.e., NO EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT), it would have a reputation as a kleptocracy.

Pardon me if I gave the impression that libertarians were using Singapore as an example of a libertarian state......
What I meant was that libertarians believe that Singapore economic policies were libertarian, not her democratic and social policies. I have to go dig up the relevant blogs again, but there are libertarian blogs asking the question
"would you prefer to live in Singapore with her libertarian economic policies but no democracy or in the US, where it isn't libertarian in economics but is a democracy".

[ray245]

"would you prefer to live in Singapore with her libertarian economic policies but no democracy or in the US, where it isn't libertarian in economics but is a democracy".

What? This doesn't even make sense? Seriously, how many people in Singapore is even aware or willingly to accept a libertarian economy, with all our cries on subsidizing our public transportation fee for instance.

[PainRack]

Ray, the issue is that the "proponents" of this Libertarian are the American lolbertarian types, in which there is little or no government regulation of economic activity. Or simply, no tax, no interference, no regulation.

Given a history of pro business policies, that impression is certainly understandable. Afterall, there are still lolbertarian types who argue that Hong Kong under China as a libertarian society has done better than the US(read economics wise).

So, when lolbertarians pose that question, they're essentially arguing, which do you find more important? Economic freedoms, or social freedoms?I'm just glad that sofar, I haven't found anyone who believes the first so severely outweighs the second yet.

As for our own people, the propaganda is certainly leaning that way. Look at the arguments against universal healthcare delivered against Chiam See Tong by some bloggers, the arguments for "personal ownership and responsibility" with regards to government social nets and charity. The propganda that private charities will be better than government charities is often epoused by some politician or another.... This even though one suspects the sole reason why the government refuses to be involved further is so it won't be trapped in a finanicial problem.