Draft 1: Essay writing

How can the Singapore government solve the problem of income inequality in Singapore?

The last few decades have seen the rapid expansion in the trading of goods and services. Free trade areas were formed and trading between countries has increased dramatically. Taking Singapore as an example, globalization has transformed her from an undeveloped country in the past into a leader in global commerce today. No doubt globalization has brought many benefits to the world but with benefits come costs. The expansion in global trading has led to the worsening of income inequality in Singapore. This was also covered by Goldin in his TED talk. According to him, rapid globalization has resulted in a number of problems and one of them is income inequality. This is further supported by the Singapore’s Gini index rating (a measure of income inequality) which has risen to a value of 0.478 in 2013, up from 0.454 a decade ago.

By embracing trading, companies in Singapore are able to displace domestic production and employment to cheaper labor markets like China and India. This has pushed down the demand for unskilled labor in Singapore. This coupled with the inflow of foreign labor has further forced down the average lower end wages. On the other hand, rapid technological improvements due to globalization have led to an increase in the demand for skilled workers resulting in high end wages to rise. These two end results have led to the widening of income inequality in Singapore. The Singapore government has acknowledged the problem and has since implemented several measures to tackle the issue of income inequality.

Firstly, the Singapore government has implemented changes by reducing foreign workers quotas and hiking levies. By doing so, it will reduce the supply of low skilled worker in Singapore, allowing for the rise in real income for this group of workers. Furthermore, the government has partnership with multinational corporation (MNCs) to train lower skilled Singaporean workers to take up higher post. Government scheme like the workfare training support also provides a platform for unskilled worker to learn new skills. By doing so, it will raise the productivity of the workers and thus increase the demand for them.

In addition, Singapore uses a progressive tax system which taxes more on the rich as their income increase. The government also provides subsidies and help to the poor through schemes like the GST Voucher scheme and Workfare Income Supplement. This helps to redistribute income from the upper income group to the lower end, thus narrowing the gap between the top and the bottom earners.

Lastly, the Singapore government has been encouraging companies to increase the salaries of middle to lower income employees. During Budget 2013, the government came up with the Wage Credit Scheme (WCS) in order to encourage companies to increase the wages of employees. They promised to subsidy 40% of the wage increment up to $4000. This will help to increase income at the lower end and therefore narrowing income inequality.

On top of these actual measures, I feel that the government could actually implement a minimum wage law. Currently, Singapore is the only country among the developed Asian economies that does not have a minimum wage law. I believe that this law is truly beneficial in itself. For instance, it will help to close the income inequality gap in Singapore and also prevent exploitation by employers who tend to pay employees far below the market price.  

To sum up, income inequality in Singapore has been worsened by globalization. The fall in demand for unskilled workers locally due to the shifting of production base has led to the drop in their real income. This has caused the widening of income gap as the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. As such, the Singapore government has come up with a number of measures in a bid to try to alleviate the problem. Nevertheless, more could be done to help tackle the problem. Overall, I feel that the problem of income inequality will continue to persist as the world gets more inter-connected. There is no way to achieve perfect equality unless we are practising communism. The only thing we can do is to try to reduce the gap and the best method to this is to encourage low skilled workers to upgrade themselves. By doing so, it will move the lower income group higher up the chain and thereby closing the income gap with the upper class.

References:

Jeanette Tan (Feb 1, 2013). How govt could tackle Singapore’s income gap problem: panel

Retrieved from http://sg.news.yahoo.com/how-govt-could-tackle-singapore%E2%80%99s-income-gap-problem--panel-095938746.html

Robin Chan (Nov 6, 2012). Tackling income inequality
Retrieved from http://www.singapolitics.sg/fast-facts/tackling-income-inequality

Roy Ngerng (Feb 21, 2013). Singapore Has The Highest Income Inequality Compared to the OECD Countries
Retrieved from http://thehearttruths.com/2013/02/21/singapore-has-the-highest-income-inequality-compared-to-the-oecd-countries/

Reader Response Final

Kraidy (2002) in his article "Globalisation of Culture Through the Media" analyses the debate of media impact on globalisation. He highlights the opposing views towards cultural imperialism and the argument of a shift of cultural imperialism to globalization of cultures. He then comes to a conclusion that cultural hybridity is not a new phenomenon but one that is enhanced by transnational media.

I am in agreement with the author that globalization of culture is not new and that transnational media has played an important role in enhancing cultural hybridity in today's world. In addition, I also feel that there has been a shift from cultural imperialism to cultural globalization. I will be explaining my views in the subsequent paragraphs.

In his article, Kraidy addresses the argument regarding the shift of cultural imperialism to globalization of cultures. Personally, I believe that cultural globalization is much more relevant in today’s world. Countries have become more equal in standing, making cultural imperialism less likely. In the past, western nations have had a strong influence on eastern nations. However, it is no longer a one-way route today. Eastern countries are also exerting an equally strong influence on their western counterparts. For instance, Korean culture is also being reached out to the west. To me, the direction today is less clear than in the past. Hence, I feel that globalization of culture is a better term compared to cultural imperialism.  

In the article, Kraidy also discusses cultural hybridity. I agree with the writer’s view that cultural hybridity is not a new phenomenon; it is “already in existence”.  This is because cultures are never stagnant and have been evolving and changing to the environment. Even before the birth of media, there has been contact of cultures through various platforms. Hence, hybridity should not be a new ‘event’. To me, transnational media is only a factor that facilitates the evolution of culture. In other words, it did not cause culture hybridity, it merely speeds up the evolution.

In conclusion, this article brings to our attention the reality of cultural globalization in today’s world. It highlights to us the impact media has on cultures and the debate concerning cultural imperialism. Last but not least, we are brought to the attention that there is a shift of cultural imperialism to globalization of culture.

(384 words)


Reference

Kraidy, M. M. (2002). Globalization of Culture Through the Media. Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1333&context=asc_papers

Reader response (draft 1)

Kraidy (2002) in his article "Globalisation of Culture Through the Media" analyses the debate of media impact on globalisation. He highlights the opposing views towards cultural imperialism and the argument of a shift of cultural imperialism to globalization of cultures. He then comes to a conclusion that cultural hybridity is not a new phenomenon but one that is enhanced by transnational media.

I feel that this is an excellent article as the writer analyses various viewpoints of the issue and gives his opinion regarding cultural globalization.

In his article, he addresses the argument regarding the shift of cultural imperialism to globalization of cultures. Personally, I believe that cultural globalization is much more relevant in today’s world. Countries have become more equal in standing, making cultural imperialism less likely. In the past, western nations have had a strong influence on eastern nations. However, it is no longer a one-way route today. Eastern countries are also exerting an equally strong influence on their western counterparts. For instance, Korean culture is also being reached out to the west. To me, the direction today is less clear than in the past. Hence, I feel that globalization of culture is a better term compared to cultural imperialism.  

In the article, Kraidy also discusses cultural hybridity. I agree with the writer’s view that cultural hybridity is not a new phenomenon; it is “already in existence”.  This is because cultures are never stagnant and have been evolving and changing to the environment. Even before the birth of media, there has been contact of cultures through various platforms. Hence, hybridity should not be a new ‘event’. To me, transnational media is only a factor that facilitates the evolution of culture. In other words, it did not cause culture hybridity, it merely speeds up the evolution.

In conclusion, this article brings to our attention the reality of cultural globalization in today’s world. It highlights to us the impact media has on cultures and the debate concerning cultural imperialism. Last but not least, we are brought to the attention that there is a shift of cultural imperialism to globalization of culture.

(351 words)