wmw999 2,588 #1 March 20, 2013 Interesting article on Singapore's deliberate efforts to address income inequality. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #2 March 20, 2013 Liberals would never allow such a system here. One reason is that Singapore has a Meritocracy in regards to education. This concept flies in the face of Liberal ideology. Another is that the government forces people to take responsibility for themselves and their children. Did I mention that drugs are illegal? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #3 March 20, 2013 It's a very interesting model; most worthy of serious discussion, based upon thought, reflection and mature demeanor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #4 March 20, 2013 Great, when are you going to provide some? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Quagmirian 40 #5 March 20, 2013 QuoteGreat, when are you going to provide some?A soon as you stop throwing the term 'Liberal' around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #6 March 20, 2013 QuoteQuoteGreat, when are you going to provide some?A soon as you stop throwing the term 'Liberal' around. Oh, excuse me, "Progressives". Feel better now? How about addressing my comments regarding a Meritocracy educational system compared to the "every child is equal and we must dumb down our educational system so they don't develop self-esteem issues"? You do understand that the success and failure of a society is directly attributable to the education level of their citizens, don't you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,588 #7 March 20, 2013 While the pinnacle of their education system is a meritocracy (rather than a money-ocracy), it nevertheless makes room for nearly everyone. I'm not sure that's a traditional US conservative value -- they tend more towards the "you can have a space at the table as long as you can kick someone else out of their seat." I think the most interesting part of the article is the assertion that Singapore recognized that income inequality is a problem, and tried to address that. I don't think anyone thinks that US education is top in the world, but an approach that corners people and leaves them fewer and fewer options is going to end up with people behaving like any other cornered creature. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #8 March 20, 2013 I think Singapore recognizes that fully educating all of its citizens based on merit is a much better approach than the model currently being used in the US. Everything else that leads to success starts there. I think you have a very distorted view of Conservative ideology in regards to education. Which party has been pushing for vouchers to allow parents to send their children to better schools? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,588 #9 March 20, 2013 What kinds of changes do you think would need to be made to US education? Note that Singapore educates virtually everyone, so saying that you'd kick out everyone who doesn't comply wouldn't be an option. And I think you have an exceedingly partisan view of nearly anything that happens in the US; anything that you think is good you find a way to identify as conservative, and anything bad as liberal (or progressive). Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #10 March 20, 2013 I think the Singapore model works for them. It is a good model but it could never be implemented in the US for the reasons I have already given. Back at you at the partisanship. At least I admit it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #11 March 20, 2013 most worthy of serious discussion, based upon thought, reflection and mature demeanor. QuoteGreat, when are you going to provide some? Speaker's Corner really isn't the place for any of that, is it?"What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #12 March 20, 2013 Quote Quote Great, when are you going to provide some? A soon as you stop throwing the term 'Liberal' around. "There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #13 March 20, 2013 Weren't they also caning citizens when they fucked up? I think that'd be fun to put in place here.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,590 #14 March 20, 2013 QuoteWeren't they also caning citizens when they fucked up? I think that'd be fun to put in place here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_P._Fay They also have a criminal "justice" system that is a rubberstamp for the police force, based on the philosophy that punishment is for the purpose of discouraging others, as opposed to our philosophy that it is to punish the actual perp."There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #15 March 20, 2013 QuoteInteresting article on Singapore's deliberate efforts to address income inequality. seems plagued with misstatements, and odd comparisons. In his conclusion where he tries to address obvious complaints about his thesis, he makes singular comparisons for each argument of how Singapore really isn't a special case. And yet it is. It is a import/export nexus- that funds this micro nation. It would not scale. Only 63% of the residents are citizens, which I'm sure helped some of his metrics. Tax rates are very low, even for those making good money. (11%, iirc when I was offered a package to work there). It is one of the most expensive places in the world to live, much worse than San Francisco. Noted statements by author: Singapore doesn't beat down the wages of its lower income workers. Wiki notes that in spite of the high cost of living, Singapore does not have a minimum wage, due to competitive pressures. "Despite its relative economic success, Singapore does not have a minimum wage, believing that it would lower its competitiveness. It also has one of the highest income inequality levels among developed countries, coming in just behind Hong Kong and in front of the United States." He also asserts that 90% are home owners. Wiki notes: "Due to scarcity of land, four out of five Singaporeans live in subsidised, high-rise, public housing apartments known as HDB (for Housing and Development Board) flats." But worst, he lumps Singapore in with countries like Sweden and Germany as examples of better income equality than the US, but if you look at the classic GINI measure, not only is it not close to those two, it's worse than the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality So I have no idea what he's talking about. But it makes sense he's writing it for the NYT Opinion Section. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #16 March 20, 2013 Quote So I have no idea what he's talking about. But it makes sense he's writing it for the NYT Opinion Section. We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
