The Anti Neo-Democracy Theorist

Two book recommendation for interesting read this Christmas.

First is Mao’s Last Revolution by Roderick MacFarquhar and Michael Schoenhals

Excerpts from the Review by Orville Schell of Washington Post:
It has been enthralling to read Roderick MacFarquhar and Michael Schoenhals’s exhaustively researched new book on China’s Cultural Revolution — a sensation akin to returning to a Chinese painting in which a mist-shrouded landscape has miraculously cleared to reveal what was obscured beyond. While it was not difficult to feel the tension, even the fear, aloft in the land when I reported from Mao Zedong’s China for the New Yorker during the mid-1970s, being there gave few intimations of the dark complexity of the political struggle playing out beneath the surface. By making sense out of this opaque decade, MacFarquhar (who teaches at Harvard University) and Schoenhals (who teaches at Lund University in Sweden) have provided the most definitive roadmap to date of China’s odyssey through those tumultuous times.

But what happened is still not easy to explain completely. For complex reasons that involved Mao’s political beliefs as well as his own psychological pathologies, the communist leader felt compelled to goad China into an extended paroxysm of revolutionary madness that ran from 1966 to 1976. Both to protect his own political supremacy and to wrench China out of its “feudal” past, he made politics and “class struggle” the currency of his revolutionary realm. In his own words, he created “great disorder under heaven.” Proclaiming that “to rebel is justified,” he called on students to “bombard the headquarters” of the Communist Party and thus set in motion one of the most unprecedented upheavals of the 20th century.

Second is Michel Foucault’s “Society Must Be Defended”: Lectures at the College de France, 1975-1976)

Excerpts from the Review by Amy Allen
As Davidson points out in his introduction to the volume, “‘Society Must be Defended’ is Foucault’s most concentrated and detailed historical examination of the model of war as a grid for analyzing power relations” (xviii). Indeed, in the first lecture, Foucault distinguishes two schemas for analyzing power - the contract-oppression schema and the war-repression schema - and acknowledges that while his work up to this point has criticized the former schema it has tacitly assumed the latter. His aim in these lectures is to subject the war-repression schema to critical scrutiny. However, his focus is on the war side of this schema, as his critique of the repressive hypothesis is worked out in detail in The History of Sexuality, Volume 1.[1] Thus, the central question of ‘Society Must be Defended’ is this: “can we find in bellicose relations, in the model of war, in the schema of struggle or struggles, a principle that can help us understand and analyze political power, to interpret political power in terms of war, struggles, and confrontations?” (23)

I wish our MPs would also do something like that to lobby Beijing to release ST’s detained reporter. Even the pro-Beijing DAB has done something for Cheong. Can we be 100% sure that Singapore leaders are also doing something about this, albeit in a quieter diplomatic way? If a quiet diplomatic way doesn’t work, should our PM have brought up this issue with Hu of China during the recent APEC meeting in Hanoi, Vietnam? Since the Straits Times is from Singapore, why can’t our MPs do something similar to that of HK legislators?

South China Morning Post
November 28, 2006 Tuesday
Lawmakers asked to sign parole request for reporter
Denise Hung and Gary Cheung

The Democrats are soliciting signatures from fellow lawmakers in the hope of making a joint appeal to President Hu Jintao to release journalist Ching Cheong on medical parole.

Party lawmaker Cheung Man-kwong said they would ask all members to sign the letter, irrespective of their party affiliation and political background.

The letter, which will also be addressed to Premier Wen Jiabao , said Ching, a correspondent for The Straits Times in Singapore, should be granted medical parole on humanitarian grounds and allowed to return to Hong Kong.

“I will set Friday as the last day for collecting the signatures, as some parties may need to have meetings before they decide to give their names or not,” Mr Cheung said.

It is too early to say whether lawmakers will make a unanimous call.

Tsang Yok-sing, of the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, has previously written to mainland authorities requesting leniency, but yesterday a party lawmaker said they would have to discuss the letter once they received it.

The DAB’s Tam Yiu-chung said: “We need to discuss it first, as we rarely express our views through signing letters like this. We have all along been expressing our concern through our own channels.”

On Friday, a Beijing court rejected Ching’s appeal against his conviction for spying for Taiwan, quashing the Hong Kong journalist’s attempt to clear his name. Ching was jailed for five years by a lower court in August.

Ching, 56, has lost more than 4kg and suffered stomach pains almost every night, according to the Ching Cheong Incident Concern Group.

Mary Lau Man-yee, the journalist’s wife, said Ching’s family planned to write to the Hong Kong government this week to ask it to pass a letter to the mainland authorities.

The letter would call on the central government to release Ching on medical parole or allow him to serve out his sentence in Guangzhou, she said.

Lau, who is also a journalist, said the family would discuss the issue with security officials this week.

I have been interested in good old (some say boring) economic news on Singapore recently. Our “Singapore Fund” seems to be doing well internationally. Will the good times last?

Dow Jones Newswire
20 Nov 2006
Jessica Tan

Will the Tide Soon Turn in Singapore?

FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS, THE SINGAPORE STOCK market has been posting positive annual returns, due to factors including a recovery in market sentiment after 9/11, economic restructuring aimed at attracting foreign investments and an improved global economy.

However, many investors in Singaporean stocks are now growing cautious and beginning to look for signs of a possible change in the tide. But that might not occur soon-at least not in the next three to six months, offers Ng Guan Mean, a portfolio manager at DBS Asset Management. DBS runs the Singapore Fund, a closed-end fund listed on the New York Stock Exchange (ticker: SGF).

“We continue to be positive on Singapore equities market in the short term-mainly because of the various government initiatives that have been implemented to increase the population, be it organically or via immigration,” he says.

He also cites other government initiatives like the rejuvenation of the city-state’s major shopping strip, Orchard Road, and the proposal to build two multibilliondollar integrated casino-resorts, with the aim of drawing as many as 17 million tourists annually by 2015. The Singapore government last year lifted a four-decade-old ban on casinos.

The Singapore Fund, which has $139 million in assets (all the figures in this column are in U.S. dollars), invests mainly in Singapore equities. Its shares recently were changing hands at an 8% discount to the value of their underlying assets.

At Wednesday’s close, the fund was trading at $13.85, up 44.1% this year and outpacing the 34.6% rise in the NYSE-listed iShares MSCI Singapore Index fund. During the same period, the S&P 500 climbed 12.1%, while Singapore’s benchmark Straits Times Index was up 19.2%.

Further out, however, Singapore investors will be closely watching the U.S. economy. “Over the longer-term horizon, we would have to take into account factors such as a potentially worse-than-expected slowdown in the U.S. housing market and what it means for the U.S. consumer expenditures,” Ng explains.

“As Singapore is a small open economy-a substantial part of our exports goes to the U.S.-obviously if there’s any worse than expected slowdown [there], that will impact us.” He also notes that Singapore’s economy for 2007 may not be as strong as the current year’s. The government has indicated that the city-state’s 2006 gross domestic product is expected to grow by 6.5% to 7.5%. “In all likelihood, it will come in on the upper end of that range because the GDP numbers in the first quarter were quite strong,” he says. “For 2007, we expect softer but still positive GDP numbers, due to exogenous factors taking place in Singapore’s major trading partners, such as the U.S.”

Barring external factors, the Singapore economy is expected to be supported by strong fundamentals, namely sharp growth in foreign direct investments, he says. Such investment in Singapore totaled $20 billion in this year’s first half. “This is pretty significant if you look at Singapore’s GDP for last year-which was about $130 billion,” Ng adds. “Taken in that light, the FDI numbers are very material.”

Historically, in a good year Singapore has attracted just $5 billion to $10 billion in foreign direct investment. The government has been active in expanding the biomedical and petrochemical industries. The tourism industry is also expected to get a huge injection of foreign money to develop the two new integrated resorts that are expected to be ready by the end of 2009. The resorts are expected to create more than 40,000 jobs.

Portfolio managers at the Singapore Fund have been positive on property stocks, such as Captandum (A31.Singapore), Kelpie Land (A17.Singapore) and City Developments (CO9.Singapore), even though the sector has been hitting record highs.

Ng also favors companies in the marine, oil and gas sectors: “Largely speaking, the companies in this industry are seeing good contracts and order books.” He cites Kelpie Corp. (D02.Singapore) and Costa Corp. (Up83.Singapore) as favorites.

Ng isn’t as upbeat on the technology front, where the fund’s holdings include Sarin Technologies (Mu77.Singapore) and Memory Devices (Am45.Singapore).

“I’m cautious on techs for the rest of the year,” he says. He expects the fourth quarter, usually the strongest, to be somewhat muted this year, on slowing demand abroad. But he believes that the sector may pick up in 2007’s second quarter.

Surprise, Surprise; Two very honest articles and opinions of our economy from the Business Times. Will unemployment fall with the growth of our economy? How do we resolve structural issues of unemployment? How can workers retrain themselves for this increasingly globalised society and economy? Should our safety net be strengthened in light of future problems of structural unemployment?

The Business Times Singapore
November 24, 2006
Views and Opinions

Sure, the economy’s on a roll, but . . .

BEYOND the apparent signs that the Singapore economy is on a roll (but slowing) are a few indicators that suggest that it may be premature to pop the champagne just yet. But first, the good news. From an initial estimate of 3-5 per cent, the economy has grown 8.6 per cent in the first nine months of 2006, with forecast upgrades through the year. Momentum actually picked up in the third quarter, and all sectors turned in decent growth. The construction sector, notably, has shown signs of durably turning around, with a second straight positive quarter.

Even if the economy just trots along at a clip barely above stagnant in Q4, it will still reach the lower end of the new official 2006 growth forecast of 7.5-8 per cent. This will be the third year that GDP growth winds up above the medium-term trend of 4-6 per cent - a range that perhaps should be updated, especially if, as many economists agree, the Singapore economy’s core potential growth pace may have climbed a notch of late.

Better yet, the economic upswing this time looks like it will last longer than in the recent past, economists reckon, thanks to domestic restructuring, pro-growth policies and some decoupling from its main markets. This remains to be seen.

But already, the government’s early forecast of 2007 growth is pegged at 4-6 per cent, higher than the 3-5 per cent estimate it usually produces at this time for the next year. Meanwhile, for here and now, the robust economy and active job market mean that civil servants and private sector employees will get better bonuses this year.

And probably nothing says ’strong economy’ better than handsome bonuses.

But a few other things in the official Q3 economic report merit some mention, apart from the expectation of a slowdown. Domestic demand grew strongly in Q3, but the government can take all the credit, with its pump-priming.

Private consumption, on the other hand, remained subdued - though some rebound is likely soon, what with all the bonuses in hand, the year-end festivities, and a possible spending spree ahead of the anticipated GST hike. And, for all the strong output, the labour productivity figures remain fairly dismal. This may have something to do with the increased labour turnover in recent quarters, but it’s one early symptom of job market frenzy.

To be sure, the finance sector, for one, has been ‘red-hot’ for some time, with banks, especially, going on hiring sprees. The Association of Banks in Singapore even issued recruiting guidelines in June, and UBS and Stanchart are now reported to have an informal pact not to poach private bankers from DBS and OCBC. So dire is the manpower shortage that at least one audit firm has decided to enlarge its pool of audit trainees by hiring non-accountancy graduates. This is, from the job-seekers’ perspective, well and good. But for the economy, it could presage wage inflation in certain areas. Moreover, it is not clear that the jobs boom is broad-based, and in particular whether Singapore’s 70,000 or so jobless people can find work. Of course, an economic boom is nice to have. But it will be even better when it also benefits those at the lower rungs of the ladder.

Second Article:
Academic sheds light on S’pore’s growth volatility;
Vagaries of external demand, global electronics cycle figure large in his findings
Anna Teo

Forget voodoo economics - Singapore’s prosperity is largely down to the popularity of computer chips, it seems.

The increasing volatility of Singapore’s economic growth since the 1990s was yesterday attributed largely to the vagaries of external demand and the global electronics cycle.

Other factors - such as world interest rates, oil prices and terms of trade - apparently have little or no bearing on Singapore’s growth cycles, a study by Nanyang Technological University’s Choy Keen Meng finds.

Dr Choy, from the economics division of NTU’s School of Humanities and Social Sciences, presenting a paper on ‘Business Cycles in a Small Open Economy: Stylised Facts from Singapore’ in a forum yesterday, said his findings show a simultaneous rise in volatility in Singapore’s GDP, world GDP and global semiconductor sales - the proxy for the electronics industry - over the study period 1975 to 2004.

The cyclical electronics swings, in particular, lie behind the recent rise in macroeconomic fluctuations, he said. Singapore’s high reliance on the chip industry means that the economy is vulnerable to the increased frequency and amplitude of global electronics cycles.

Still, while global economic fluctuations wend their way into the Singapore economy ‘very rapidly’, in contrast, it appears that the maximum impact of world electronics cycles hits home here after a one-quarter lag.

Ruling out other major influences, Dr Choy’s paper says: ‘There is no convincing evidence of self-fulfilling cycles driven by the ‘animal spirits’ of local investors, nor of self-inflicted cycles stemming from wage cost increases that have spiralled out of control.’

The increased volatility in the Singapore economy also stands in contrast to the case of the G7 countries, where business cycles and output swings seem to have moderated over the years, he notes.

Since the 1985 recession, the Singapore economy has had about half a dozen major and minor growth cycles, including an early-90s downturn, the Asian financial crisis of 1997-98, the IT debacle of 2001, and the Sars scourge in 2003.

Other economists have variously attributed the increased fluctuations to domestic sources as well, including market excesses, speculative bubbles and asset price pressures.

Yesterday, at the Singapore Forum 2006, organised by the Economic Society of Singapore and the Singapore Economic Review, it was also a matter of debate - whether Singapore’s increased volatility is entirely due to external factors.

But Dr Choy’s study is, as he pointed out, an ‘empirical exercise’ to delve into the nature of economic fluctuations of a small open economy.

Another paper on ageing and economic growth in Singapore by two NUS economists finds that the ‘quality’ of Singapore’s workforce has declined in the 1998-2004 post-crisis period because of an ageing population.

Unless more is done to improve labour quality growth through education and to stem the decline in ‘quality’ by age, Singapore could see a fall in productivity in the years ahead, with adverse effects on economic competitiveness and growth.

Tension looms in National University? Is it a Public Relations issue? Can more be done to foster interactions between foreign students and local students? Should local students make more efforts to interact with foreign students? Should local students appreciate more the diversity that foreign students bring ? Do some of the Singaporean students’ reactions merely reflect the national psyche? How much should the tuition fee be charged? Why not the same? Why different? Difficult questions with difficult solutions

The Straits Times
Foreigners get 4 in 10 bursaries given by NUS this year;
But S’pore students come first, it says in response to some rumblings

Sandra Davie, Education Correspondent

FOUR in 10 bursaries awarded by the National University of Singapore (NUS) this year went to foreigners, a move by the university to signal that it embraces talented students from anywhere.

But Singapore students will be catered for first, before the funds go out to foreign students.

The NUS financial aid office has offered 1,500 bursaries so far this year, with 60 per cent, or 900, going to Singaporeans. No local applicant who met the eligibility criterion of per capita monthly household income of up to $900 was turned away.

They were awarded bursaries ranging from $1,000 to $2,000.

Foreigners who could show proof of hardship took the rest of the bursaries, with each getting about $300 less than their local counterparts.

The move by NUS has led to rumblings among some alumni, students and parents, who called The Straits Times to complain about what they see as an ‘inappropriately large number of bursaries’ going to foreigners.

Their beef is that the bursaries are funded out of the NUS budget, which comes from taxpayers, and alumni contributions, which come mostly from Singaporeans, so why should so much of it go to foreigners, they ask.

When asked to comment, NUS reiterated that local students are given priority for bursaries, noting that all Singapore applicants who applied received them.

Foreign students also get less than locals, it said.

NUS vice-provost Lily Kong said its bursary scheme is in line with the university’s commitment to ensure that no student is denied a university education due to financial difficulty.

She said: ‘If we believe that foreign students add diversity and enrich the learning environment, then we must be prepared to extend help to them if they are in need.’

She added that the foreign students at NUS are among the best, and have offers of places from top American and British universities.

‘Our students gain from having them here, because they challenge them to perform better.”

Some NUS alumni feel that the university is right to extend financial help to foreigners, and pointed out that top universities elsewhere do the same.

America’s Harvard University, for example, expanded its aid scheme further this year, exempting students from low-income families from anywhere in the world from paying for both tuition fees and accommodation.

But the detractors think too many foreigners are getting help.

They feel foreign students are already subsidised by the Singapore Government, as they pay only 10 per cent more in fees than locals.

Mr N. Riva, 44, a businessman and donor, added: ‘I decided against giving after I found out that it went to foreigners as well. Just last year, NUS said it did not have enough to help all needy students.’

NUS came under fire last year when it revealed that only 492 out of 1,074 bursary applicants had received funds. It responded by pledging to top up alumni donations with its own money.

NUS bursaries are the only free form of financial help for needy students.

Its other aid schemes are mostly loans which are generally interest-free until the students graduate.

Foreign students receiving the NUS bursaries were grateful for the help.

Mr Ushan Premaratne, 21, from Sri Lanka, a second-year law and business double degree student, takes on loans and temporary jobs to support himself. By the time he graduates, he would have taken about $50,000 in loans for his NUS education.

Said Mr Premaratne: ‘I am thankful for the bursary, I don’t have to work more hours and I can keep up with the demands of my double degree programme.’

sandra@sph.com.sg

Are Singaporeans willing to be interested in current political affairs?

It seems that there are more people aka newbies in blogsphere sharing their thoughts on current affairs.

x avalanche writes about the recent new parliament.
A new blog on Sylvia Lim in Parliament
The Active Chongster on the GST
otiosity on GST

Technorati throws up much search on such blogs over the debate on GST hike.

While they might not be the most eloquent nor the most interested in capturing the nuances of political debate and policies implications, at least this represents that people are also interested in policies that affect them; and can engage in civil and rational discourses on issues. Or am I wrong?

Something interesting to attend if you are interested….

RoundTable Discussion: Singapore Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism

(Think Centre)

by Sinapan Samydorai

The Singapore Working Group’s primary objective is to support the Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism to establishment an intergovernmental human rights mechanism in Southeast Asia.

Topic: Establishing the Singapore Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism

Date: Saturday, 2nd December 2006
Time: 2.30 pm - 4.30 pm
Venue: Seminar Room, SCWO Centre,

Read more here.

Kudos to CNA for showing parliamentary speeches by PAP and opposition MPs. After more than 40 years of independence, we are able to watch “complete” parliamentary speeches. In US and UK, there have been for a long time live parliamentary channels or online videos available.

Singaporeans are now able to watch their MPs in parliament.

After watching the videos, I realized that there are so many parts of MPs speeches that the mainstream media does not report on –especially on the opposition MPs’ speeches. Chiam See Tong’s initial criticism in his speech in parliament on the government’s “inclusive society” was totally blacked out by the mainstream media. I also realize for the first time that Low Thia Khiang speaks very well in parliament. His grasp of Chinese to plod various PAP’s weakness as well as to advocate a “good system with check and balances” rather than “a benevolent government without any oversight” is in my view, first world speaker . No wonder MM Lee spoke so highly of him.

In addition, the alternative media and blogs should take this opportunity to report on excerpts of speeches by MPs that the mainstream media neglects. This could lead to a rise in the niche value of alternative political news.

For the first time in 40 years ladies and gentlemen,
watch Low Thia Khiang, WP S-Gen and MP of Hougang speech here.

Watch Chiam See Tong’s criticism of the government’s “inclusive society” and his support of government’s “cohesive society”

Also watch Halimah Yaacob, one of my favorite PAP MPs’ speeches here.

Financial Times Report on GST decision; My own take: Do not prematurely judge the government’s decision, it might turn out to be fine. Let’s wait and see if the Second Finance Minister actually puts that extra 2 % to “help the poor”. If not, the public should hold the government accountable for their justifications to raise GST

November 15, 2006 Wednesday
Asia Edition 1

Singapore’s tax proposals add to worries over its great divide
The city state’s widening income gap poses a challenge to its government, says John Burton

Plans by Singapore to raise its sales tax while lowering corporate taxes have added fuel to a debate over an income gap that is becoming the city-state’s biggest economic and political problem.

Although Singapore is Asia’s richest country after Japan on a per capita basis, it ranks 105th in the world in terms of income equality, based on United Nations data.

The income disparity poses a political threat to the long-ruling government of the People’s Action party, which lost votes in the last election in May over the issue.

Singapore has long resisted introducing a full-scale social welfare system, saying it would sap workers of initiative. “But it has got to the stage where they realise that they need to build a secure social welfare net. That’s a breakthrough,” said Manu Bhaskaran of the Centennial Group, an economic consultancy.

Lee Hsien Loong, prime minister, this week said Singapore would increase its sales tax from 5 per cent to7 per cent to help finance more government spending for the poor while suggesting corporate tax rates would be cut to enhance the country’s competitiveness in attracting foreign investment.

The proposals have not gone down well with the public, judging by postings on the internet, the main forum of local debate given Singapore’s state-controlled media. A frequent complaint is that an increased sales tax would hit low-income groups the hardest.

“A consumption tax is regressive,” said Song Seng Wun, regional economist with CIMB-GK Research in Singapore. “Inflation is higher for the bottom 20 per cent of the population, at 2.2 per cent against the Singapore average of 0.5 per cent.”

But Mr Bhaskaran believes that the government might try to tailor social welfare spending to minimise the impact of the tax on the poor. “It depends on what offsets the government offers,” he said.

Mr Lee said the government would “tilt the playing field in favour of low-income groups” by offering education and housing grants, and wage subsidies.

The government blames the growing income disparity on the effects of globalisation affecting its open economy. The income gap is now at its widest since independence in 1965, with a noticeable deterioration since the late 1980s. There are worries the gap could widen further due to an ageing population and Singapore’s low birth rate.

Pay for low-skilled workers has fallen. Singapore does not have a minimum wage or comprehensive unemployment insurance and a large influx of temporary foreign workers has put downward pressure on wages. The government says its stance is necessary to keep Singapore competitive against low-cost countries in the region.

Most welfare costs are taken care of by a mandatory savings scheme that pays for mortgages and healthcare as well as pensions. But workers who contributed to the system when wages were low are finding it difficult to survive in retirement as living costs have risen sharply.

Mr Lee said Singapore could not afford to adopt a Scandinavian-style welfare system because it would drive up costs and “no investments will come”.

Instead, Singapore is expected to adhere to its current model of combining targeted government welfare support with efforts by private charities to provide additional aid to the needy.

The government believes continued economic growth will eventually benefit low-income groups. “I don’t see the income gap widening forever,” said Mr Lee.

But some economists ask whether a higher sales tax may harm efforts to attract more tourists, since prices tend to be higher already than neighbouring Malaysia or Thailand.

Opposition groups say Singapore can afford to spend more on its poor since the government’s financial reserves are among the largest in the world when measured against gross domestic product.

CNA: GST to increase to 7%.

It is interesting that the PM brought up “I’m not going to tax 25% from GST the way the Scandanavians do”