Jamus Lim gets called out for blatant lying

 

Jamus Lim's inconsistent position on protecting the environment

Back in Oct 2020, Jamus Lim suggested in Parliament an environmental tax on SIA because the environment must 'not be a casualty to business considerations'.

At that time SIA (and indeed many businesses) was on life support.

Fast forward one year later, conditions have improved. Businesses are no longer on life support.

BUT business considerations now take precedence over the needs of the environment, as Jamus calls for a flexible carbon tax that depends on economic conditions.

Leaders need to be consistent and make sense

WP and Jamus Lim's mixed messages on carbon tax and protecting the environment

Cover all ground. Please everyone. Chase every vote.

WP's mixed messages is meant to win everyone, never mind if these messages become incoherent when put together.

There is one message to please all who are concerned with climate change and another to please those for whom the present is more important than the future.

What is more disturbing is that the economist in WP, Jamus Lim, demonstrated that he didn't quite fully understand when he equated his suggestion of a flexible carbon tax to an uncertain interest rate.

“'I'm befuddled because even now, the Government routinely alters levers or policies, such as the interest rate when there is uncertainty on a year-to-year basis about the level of interest rate. Yet, businesses continue to invest,” he said.

This is not about the COST of doing business as interest rates go up or down. This is about the TRANSFORMATION of a business.

The carbon tax trajectory is critical in enabling the pace of transformation to a low-carbon future.

It provides certainty and impetus for businesses to plan their transition, to invest in low-carbon technologies and carbon markets.

It ensures that NEW investments and economic activities are aligned with a low-carbon future.

I'm very proud that a small country like Singapore that imports our energy needs is making effort to achieve zero emission. Kudos to the PAP Government for staying the course despite the difficult time we are in.

Jamus Lim's inconsistency. Does he want to protect the environment?

He used a different textbook this time?

Back when flights grounded to a stop, he suggested an environmental tax on SIA. Climate change was an existential issue and we must think of future generations, so he said.

After 2 years in WP, now he wants carbon pricing adjusted up and down according to economic conditions. No more existential issue. No more 'not just when it suits us'. No more thinking of future generations.

LOL

What if recession hit next year? What if another crisis follows?

WP proposes redefining education as 'soft capital' and use borrowing to fund education

Instead of taxes, WP propose to fund education through borrowing. This is the WP's way of giving you Nordic-type of benefits without the Nordic-type of taxes.

With their proposal, they can even lower taxes for you. How? By borrowing.

Free education. Free healthcare.

WHO PAYS ? Ultimately, it's still YOU and not just you, but YOUR CHILDREN as well.

The annual budget for Education is $13 billion.

Just think how taxes can be reduced when a government borrows this sum to spend instead of collecting taxes.

Singaporeans will be so happy because - unfortunately - most people live in the present and do not own their future. In other words, the future is not real to them. This is why populism will win votes. People do not see the future consequences.

The happiness will be short-lived.

Because nothing is free.

Borrowing does not give you free money to spend.

When you borrow for a recurrent expenditure like education, it is an ever growing debt that has to be repaid.

So, you borrow $13 billion in one year. The next year, while you are still servicing the loan, you borrow another $13 billion.

You now have a bigger loan to repay.

Repeat this year after year. You have a growing debt that snowballs into a monster where you are just paying off interest.

When interest rate goes up, you are done for.

Is that what you want? Do you understand what you will be getting into?

Sri Lanka is a cautionary tale for us. Sri Lanka is bankrupt today because it kept borrowing to fund recurrent expenditure.

Singaporeans have been a very disciplined people supporting policies including tough ones because we understand the rationale behind them and we care for our children and their future too.

We have the ability and the intelligence to analyse deeper the alternative proposals of opposition parties. Many of us love Singapore and want Singapore to thrive, to be a place we are proud to be, a home truly, where people are not selfish, and everyone does their part to keep Singapore a shining red dot. 

Jamus Lim: borrow at low interest rate to make your balance sheet look better

What Jamus said is something that most people know. You don't need to be an economist to know that you stand to gain from borrowing at low rates and investing for higher returns.

But that is also how many people start getting into trouble.

At a time when things go downhill and interest rates go up, and a government needs to focus on helping people, a WP-led Government will be scrambling to refinance all their mortgages.

Jamus made that recommendation because like his teammates in WP, he thinks good times will last forever.

That is also why their other policy proposals look at surpluses accumulated as a result of exceptional factors, and they think that year after year, the same bountiful surplus will be reaped. So they tell voters that a GST hike is not needed.

The PAP Government does not work this way.

The Government does not borrow for daily needs. These must be paid for by income earned.

By exercising prudence, and having fiscally sound policies, the Singapore Government has earned themselves a Triple-A credit rating which will alow them to borrow at favourable rates while freeing up our reserves to be invested for higher returns.

The Government may in the future, borrow for very large infrastructure projects. A new Bill introduced in April 2021 will pave the way for the Government to pay for major national infrastructure projects through borrowing, something that has not been done since the 1990s.

If a government is not prudent, even if interest rates have gone down, it will not be able to borrow at low rates. Sri Lanka is the example to look at. With its credit worthiness graded as junk, you think they can borrow billions at low rates?

Jamus Lim did not tell his residents there is help available in looking for a job

Instead of assuring his resident that help is available, WP Jamus Lim chose to echo his resident and to perpetuate the misconception that they have nowhere to turn to.

When Dr Tan See Leng offered to do a job match for the resident, he learned from Jamus that actually, the resident had already found a job.

Why did Jamus choose to highlight the resident's difficulty looking for a job while suppressing the fact that actually, in spite of difficulties, the resident had found a job?

Suppressing a part of the story allows false impressions to be formed and generates negativity against the government. Sad, isn't, it?

MPs have the responsibility to assure residents that help is available and to explain policies that they already agreed with. They should not become a mindless echo chamber. In the Jamus' case, the WP had, in Parliament, AGREED on the need for complementary talent.

Jamus Lim takes credit for MAS' strengthening of the Singapore dollar

Harsh words but very true.

It is the forex market forces at work and MAS' tightening move is in response to the strength of the USD and not as per Jamus' theoretical and hypothetical suggestion.

Does Jamus really think that MAS' move was in response to his suggestion in Parliament? He must be really naive.

 

It is so easy to be the opposition in Singapore. Jamus just claims credit.

 

It is so easy to be the opposition in Singapore..

The Progressive Wage Model is the brainchild of Lim Swee Say and Tripartite partners have been working since 2012 to implement the models for the various sectors.

But who remembers Lim Swee Say or gives him credit for it?

The model, despite it making a big difference to workers, in fact came under criticism all because it is from the ruling party.

Then came Jamus from WP who declared that the model was along the lines that the WP has been fighting for. And for good measure, he added the 'make your vote count' tag to his post..And fans were delighted. "Ya, thank you, WP, well done, this is why we need more opposition".

And then we have PSP Leong Mun Wai taking credit for conversations that apparently were started by him. It's as though before LMW appeared on the scene, no one gave a dime about PMEs.. And of course fans cheered and went "Thank you Sir. This is why we need more opposition."

Hello, Mr Leong. These engagements or conversations started more than a year ago in August 2020. It didn't start because you made a speech in Parliament.

Facebook is Jamus' research tool

 Something is clearly wrong when Facebook is your tool to guage foreign interference.

Desmond Lee tells Jamus Lim and Leong Mun Wai to read the ITM

One excuse often heard from the Opposition is that not enough information is made available to them. Yet, whatever information that is available in the public realm, they don't even bother to read.

National Development Minister Desmond Lee encouraged WP Jamus Lim and PSP Leong Mun Wai to read the Industry Transformation Map for the construction sector to better acquaint themselves with the progress and development in digitalizing the sector.

Jamus has no response to being asked to read to find out more.

Leong Mun Wai's response was that he has no time to read. So many pages of materials coming out of Parliament every day. Where got time to read?

Is there too much information? Too little information? Too little time?

Comparing class size and student-teacher ratios without comparing students' performance is telling half the story. And that's not being transparent.

Comparing class size and student-teacher ratios without comparing students' performance is telling half the story. And that's not being transparent.

Luxembourg has such a low student-teacher ratio and yet fared badly scoring even below the OECD average for all 3 subjects tested. What went wrong?

That said, it is not helpful to talk about 'small' or 'big' class size because different people have different ideas of what is 'big' or 'small' and we may end up arguing when we are actually in agreement.

It is better to talk about an optimum class size where the class size depends on the make-up of the class and students' needs. That is also the meaning of channeling more resources to struggling students.

When the class is too small, there is limited friendships and social interactions, individuals can easily dominate and hence disrupt the lesson. When the class is too big, students may not get enough attention.

An optimal class size creates opportunities for for students from diverse cultural background to interact, opportunities to collaborate in problem-solving, work in teams, develop leadership and communication skills.

It’s not really difficult to understand why Luxembourg did so badly. Give a thought to it. Do some critical thinking.

Class size: how small is small enough?

Class size

How small is good enough? There is no consensus anywhere on the ideal ratio or class size.

Currently here in Singapore, the average primary school class has about 30+ students.

Let's say we halve the size of the class. This means the number of teachers will have to be doubled. Similarly the number of classrooms will have to be doubled.

Currently, there are more than 15000 primary school teachers according to Education Statistics Digest from MOE.

To double the number of primary school teachers means hiring another 15,000+ teachers.

It goes without saying that there will be trade-off in teacher quality when numbers are ramped up significantly.

And where will you find another 15,000+ new teachers to hire? There are finite manpower resources and competing demands in other sectors as birth rates fall and smaller cohorts enter the workforce.

Will teachers still be paid the same salary?

With double the number of teachers, cost of salaries will double also. There will be less money for other developments - professional development, special programmes, student development etc.

What about the physical space?

Doubling the number of classrooms means building more primary schools. There are currently 177 primary schools. How many more primary schools must be built? Another 177 primary schools? Or will every existing classroom be divided into 2 and children put into smaller rooms with less space to move around?

It is better to have a quality teacher teaching a bigger class than 2 lousy teachers teaching 2 small classes.

The education system is never better than the quality of its teachers.

In other words, an education system is as good as the quality of its teachers.

It is easy to make a proposal. A politician must imagine himself implementing his own proposal.

The OECD which has studied many education systems concluded that reducing class size is not, on its own, a sufficient guarantee to improve the quality of education systems. Increasing the quality of teaching is often a more efficient policy lever to improve student performance than reducing class size.

This is not to say that class size does not matter.

It does and this is why our class size has been reduced over the years. It used to be 40+ per class.

Class sizes also vary based on subject and students' learning needs.

For example, classes for weaker students in the Learning Support Programme and Dyslexia Remediation Programme are conducted in classes of 8 to 10, and four to six respectively.

Primary 1 and 2 pupils have smaller classes so that they can better ease into formal schooling from pre-school education.

We look for an optimum class size that benefits students according to their needs, not a big or small class size.

After GE2020, WP promised to scrutinize the Government. By outsourcing?

After GE2020, WP promised to scrutinize the Government. By outsourcing?

From Fiscal Council to Budget Office, WP's ideas are all about setting up another body to examine what the government does. There's no need for WP in parliament since they are prepared to outsource their responsibility.

There also seems to be a lack of communication between Jamus Lim and Pritam Singh. The two seems to act independently of each other. When Pritam was asked by Minister Indranee if a Fiscal Council and a Budget Office mean the same thing, Pritam wasn't able to give an answer immediately. He went from being confused to saying it was just a terminalogy to finally saying they meant the same thing.

According to economist Jamus Lim of WP, currency speculation can be stabilising for an economy.

Well, what do we know? According to economist Jamus Lim of WP, currency speculation can be stabilising for an economy.

Try telling that to countries that were deeply hurt by the Asian Financial Crisis.

So what would it be like to have a WP Government based on what they have said in Parliament so far?

Workers will be earning just the minimum wages.

Carbon tax will be raised by 25 times its current rate with costs filtering down to every household.

Popular schools will see their funding cut to make them less popular with students.

Non-violent criminal records will be expunged.

State land will be sold for revenue to spend.

The full size of the Singapore reserves will be revealed to the world and currency speculation encouraged to help stabilise the Singapore currency.

Jamus Lim suggests that criminal records of non-violent crimes be expunged

Jamus Lim has not given much thought to his suggestion to eliminate the criminal records of non-violent offenders from public records.

As the Law and Home Affairs Minister Shanmugam pointed out, many serious crimes are non-violent in nature. Like sexual grooming, outrage of modesty, theft in dwelling and criminal breach of trust.

Can you imagine a convicted child molester unknowingly employed to work with young children because no criminal record? Or a person convicted of corruption being employed as a fund manager managing millions of dollars because he has no criminal record?

Law Minister Shanmugam said:

A few days ago, a 29 year old tutor was charged with molesting a 3-year-old during class.

If the MP’s suggestion is taken up, it means that this man can continue to work with children without employers being informed of his record. Would Singaporean parents be comfortable with this?

It also means, for example, that an offender convicted of housebreaking could be employed as a security officer in a condominium, without his employers knowing of his record.

Such an approach may not be wise.

The Government’s approach is to help offenders rehabilitate, find jobs. They have to be given second chances. But this is done in a transparent manner. (https://www.yellowribbon.gov.sg/partnership-programmes)

In his written reply to Jamus Lim, Mr Shanmugam also said: The Member can make a more detailed suggestion, if he wishes, and the Government will consider his suggestions.

Nobody likes taxes but let's have a 'tax and rebate' carbon tax

When it comes to their own proposal, WP thinks "tax and rebate" is a good thing for a laudable purpose.

AND YET, they oppose the GST hike even through it is also "tax and rebate" and even though it is for the laudable purposes of funding healthcare for an aged population and preschool for the low income.

A $6 billion package will be introduced when the GST rate is raised to cushion the increase. Most Singaporean households will get offsets to cover at least five years' worth of extra GST expenses incurred.

Those living in one- to three-room HDB flats will receive offsets amounting to about 10 years' worth of additional GST expenses.

Every adult Singaporean will get a cash payout of between $700 and $1,600 over five years, depending on their household income and dwelling type.

No good reason to oppose when the government wants to ensure that Singapore remains fundamentally financially sound for future generations and not just today.

 

Did Jamus even read his party's manifesto?

Nothing more than just letting the plain facts speak for themselves.

What's more interesting is that all along, it was in WP Manifesto 2020 that $1300 is minimum take-home pay.

The manifesto has disappeared from online for quite some time. But most people would already have a copy downloaded to read during the election period.

Question: Did Jamus read the Workers' Party manifesto?

Political elasticity from Jamus Lim

For someone 'full of compassion', who came to lecture the House on the need to be compassionate, Jamus Lim has clearly not given much thought to the minimum wage.

He did not even know the minimum wage proposed in his own party's manifesto. He came to give a lecture on compassion over efficiency without any idea what the minimum wage should be

It took him 2 months to discover that his party proposed $1300 TAKE-HOME minimum wage.

It is quite clear that Jamus prefers to impress with economics and economic theories and studies.

In economics, elasticity is the measurement of the percentage change of one economic variable in response to a change in another.

Andy See was spot on when he described Jamus' extraordinary transition from "don't know" to "gross pay" to "take-home pay" as political elasticity. LOL

The future of jobs and Jamus Lim

The Future of Jobs Report by the World Economic Forum is out. The pace of technology adoption will remain unabated. It will transform tasks, jobs and skills by 2025.

By 2025, work will be divided equally between humans and machines. This shift in the division of labour means 85 million jobs displaced.

97 million new roles may emerge that are more adapted to the new division of labour between humans, machines and algorithms.

And yes, that means training for new skills.

Don't believe it when politicians come along and promise you the easy way.

Like Jamus Lim telling you that good jobs are jobs that you want, jobs that pay well, jobs that don't require you train for new skills beyond school. These are election rhetoric. Empty words.

During the election, Jamus Lim said in a political broadcast:

"I wish to express how important it is that our government doesn’t just promise us jobs, but good jobs. .. Too many of the promised jobs fail to meet up to our expectations,... because they call for us to have skills that the educational system did not provide to us."

With the fast pace of technological change, you either skill-up or be replaced. This is especially so for low wage workers where machines and robots can take over easily.

The answer is not a minimum wage. The answer is how you can stay employed so that you will earn a wage.

When a politician calls for a minimum wage for you while making light of skill-training, you know he does not make sense.