http://www.nationmultimedia.com/search/page.news.php?clid=33&id=30038130

Books :Lion without teeth

Published on Jul 1, 2007

Singapore is brilliant at self-promotion, says an Australian analyst, but it is no financial dynamo. Much of the world has been deluded by its hollow roars of success

Singapore, the modern city-state known for its authoritarian ways and conservative government, has a reputation for functional efficiency and capitalist success.

The smallest member of Asean geographically is often touted as one of Asia's great success stories - a gleaming city that emerged from the tropical swamps under a strict but wise autocrat, Lee Kuan Yew.

But a fascinating new book by Australian Rodney King looks deeper into the "the Singapore Miracle" and reveals that a lot of the city's supposed successes are in fact hot air.

Reports of Singapore being a dynamic commercial melting pot are, King says, simply the oft-repeated claims of a government that tolerates little dissent, and city leaders who may actually have stifled the sort of entrepreneurial dynamism you get in places such as Hong Kong, Shanghai, Taiwan and maybe even Bangkok.

King is a Perth journalist who lived in Singapore for a number of years and worked briefly at the Straits Times.

"The Singapore Miracle - Myth and Reality" casts doubt on the city-state's claims of cutting-edge efficiency, global competitiveness, economic freedom and transparency. Most Singaporeans are not as affluent as their government makes out, King says in his extensively documented, 500-page tome.

"Books about Singapore usually praise its achievements or criticise its authoritarian rule," he writes. "But few ever probe its widely publicised claims that it is a brilliant success that other countries should follow."

King argues that Singapore's workforce productivity is often mediocre and well below that of the West and Asian economies such as Hong Kong.

"The country also displays endemic inefficiencies at both macro and micro-economic levels. The performance of the construction, financial and service sectors is second-rate, while Singapore Airlines does not deserve the top rankings it receives."

Singapore, he says, has "a dependent and underdeveloped economy". Multinational companies and state enterprises predominate, and the economy has "low entrepreneurial and innovative capacities and an under-educated workforce".

The city-state's supposed affluence is also largely a myth.

"About 30 per cent of the population still lives in poverty by Western living standards," he says. And Singapore's Housing Development Board, Central Provident Fund and state-run health schemes have severe shortcomings.

What Singapore has been good at, he says, is marketing itself.

"Singapore has brilliantly sold itself to the world as an amazing success story to attract foreign investment and talent. It's managed to get most Western think-tanks and ratings agencies to give it top scores for such things as competitiveness, transparency, economic freedom, etc.

"These bodies reflect the interests of foreign capital and their methodologies are shoddy and incompetent at times. And the statistics they are fed by the Singaporean authorities are often dubious and designed to put Singapore in the best light.

"To sell itself to the world Singapore has also denigrated and patronised its lesser-developed neighbours."

Singapore was hardly an economic backwater when Lee Kuan Yew took power in 1959, says King, who has no special regard for the premier, who held office through his People's Action Party (PAP) for 31 years. Lee is now known as a "Minister mentor" and elder statesman.

"Lee is always carefully listened to, and rather too politely ... his views and lectures often receive reverential attention from opinion lenders, American think-tank experts and others who often have little direct first-hand knowledge of Singapore."

In the early to mid-'60s, Singapore had one of the highest living standards in Asia, with one of the best-educated and hardest-working populations. Its strategic location and magnificent harbour - with extensive British-built shipyard facilities - alongside one of the world's busiest sea-lanes, meant that it became a natural transport hub. And these features were a great asset for industrialisation.

The strategies Lee used to develop Singapore were an open-door policy to foreign capital and export orientation to tap into global trade. They helped the city-state enjoy double-digit growth from the '60s to the '80s.

But the Lion City became heavily dependent on foreign capital while state enterprises focused on infrastructure and "nation-building concerns".

Entrepreneurial and innovative capacities have suffered because of a lack of domestic competition and the predominance of state bodies. Public servants running state boards often have little experience of the private sector "and no idea how to run a business", King and other analysts say.

"The local private sector, normally the seedbed of innovation in most market economies, is stunted and starved of venture capital," King writes. "The country's capacity for indigenous research and development and entrepreneurial and innovative endeavours remains limited.

"Heavy state control of the economy is exercised through an extensive layer of state enterprises. The state imposes this control through layers of red tape.

"The government also manages a big chunk of the people's savings through forced savings … and owns 72 per cent of the city-state's land. Moreover, the government controls the unions and most of the labour force. Equally mythical are Singapore's claims to being transparent. Nothing could be more untrue. The operations of Singapore's government and bureaucracy are swathed in secrecy." 

King counters claims of high home-ownership levels, saying 86 per cent of Singaporeans rent government flats from the Housing Development Board on 99-year leases.

The author is provocative but very thorough. Every aspect of life in the city-state is analysed in detail.

"Singapore's flaws are hidden by the PAP state's vigorous marketing campaign," he says. And most local and foreign journalists "are usually too restricted or intimidated by government defamation laws and other penalties to challenge or refute" the "river of statistics" promoting Singapore's achievements.

There is a wealth of statistical and anecdotal material in this book to counter the official lines - or lies. Economists and anyone with an interest in Singapore should take note. This book could change the way you view our industrious neighbour.

But, perhaps the saddest facet of King's work is not what he's written, but the fact that the people who most need to read his book may find it hard to get, if Singaporean bookshops refuse to stock it, as he expects.

singapore not only denigrated and patronised its lesser-developed neighbours but also like to teach leaders of big countries with thousands of years of civilisation, like china and russia, how to govern their countries!

got leh. got teeth leh.

that's not a lion it is a mere lion.

I thought this thread was referring to lionnoisy.

Just finished dinner, will read this later.

Originally posted by lotus999:

that's not a lion it is a mere lion.

she means only the head la..haha

Well I seriously hope Singapore is not like the lion in here... noisy but cannot make it and crumbles whenever he's taken to task.

Originally posted by maurizio13:

I thought this thread was referring to lionnoisy.

Just finished dinner, will read this later.

 

dat's wat i thought too.

empty vessal make the most noise here. :P

The author seems to have read CSJ's book "Dare to Change" - written in 1992 - in which CSJ had also similarly analyse the weaknesses in the Singapore system : education, economy, social welfare, health, and politics.

In the S21 remodellng of Singapore for the 21st Century, there were many similarities in the policy changes that were first recommended in CSJ's book written some ten years earlier.

A whole ten year had transpired before this Government was prepared to change, and had it not been the economic downturn that struck Singapore in 1997 and again after the 9/11 incidences - the status quo would have continued.

In the words of the retired Senior Civil Servant - Ngiam Tong Dow - the present government would have continued flying on auto-pilot.

Now that an outsider has seen through the thin veil that protect the real fragility of Singapore - perhaps we can see the reasons for this Ruling Party a.k.a the Government for being so harsh and sensitive in maintaining the aura and exclusiveness of Singapore politics for Singaporeans.

Having excluded foreigners from commenting on local politics, the Ruling Party will designed a tough set of rules that prevent Singaporeans from freely involving ourselves in the political process - requiring commentators to join political parties if they wish to be involved in politics.

Those Singaporean who enter into politics by joining alternative political parties will open themselves to subtle government moves at marginalising these citizens and their families - treating the entire clan as pariahs of the State and prevented from entering into any contract that involve State security.

This is the kind of pseudo 'open' society based on a self-deceiving Swiss Standard of Living and First World Status for Singapore as claimed by SM and MM.

A synopsis of an “interview with CSJ”. - from Sintercom is revealing.

LOL PWN-ED

that writer obviously doesnt realise that marketing is half the product.

guess who will suffer if the writer's view is accepted globally and that singapore's nasi lemak is no different from the 10,000 other cities out there also selling nasi lemak?

him? or us in singapore?

People from other place can see for themselves.

But I agree certain areas, we are only have form but not substance.

we need an aussie that stayed in sg for a few years to tell us situations about how f up sg is despite we already know that???

amazing..amazing..

Originally posted by lotus999:

....
The city-state's supposed affluence is also largely a myth.

"About 30 per cent of the population still lives in poverty by Western living standards," he says. And Singapore's Housing Development Board, Central Provident Fund and state-run health schemes have severe shortcomings.
.....

Entrepreneurial and innovative capacities have suffered because of a lack of domestic competition and the predominance of state bodies. Public servants running state boards often have little experience of the private sector "and no idea how to run a business", King and other analysts say.

"The local private sector, normally the seedbed of innovation in most market economies, is stunted and starved of venture capital," King writes. "The country's capacity for indigenous research and development and entrepreneurial and innovative endeavours remains limited.

"Heavy state control of the economy is exercised through an extensive layer of state enterprises. The state imposes this control through layers of red tape.

"The government also manages a big chunk of the people's savings through forced savings … and owns 72 per cent of the city-state's land. Moreover, the government controls the unions and most of the labour force. Equally mythical are Singapore's claims to being transparent. Nothing could be more untrue. The operations of Singapore's government and bureaucracy are swathed in secrecy." 

King counters claims of high home-ownership levels, saying 86 per cent of Singaporeans rent government flats from the Housing Development Board on 99-year leases.
.....

agree.

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

we need an aussie that stayed in sg for a few years to tell us situations about how f up sg is despite we already know that???

amazing..amazing..

We all know but what can we do. Complain will not get us anywhere. Strong mandate will always vote the group into power for the next millienium. There are certain choices we are limited to because we are small and relatively weak compared to our neighbours.

We are no different from circus animals. And circus animals will only do what it needs to do to get money for their masters or we will be punished. We are one big circus, don't you think?

Originally posted by tripwire:

that writer obviously doesnt realise that marketing is half the product.

 

guess who will suffer if the writer's view is accepted globally and that singapore's nasi lemak is no different from the 10,000 other cities out there also selling nasi lemak?

 

him? or us in singapore?

What do you propose to do when the "shit hit the fan" - with or without the efforts from anyone - {whether from CSJ or from any Aussie writer} ?

Place tripwires around yourselves and protect your exposed butt as you stick your head in the sand ?

This is the kind of useless fear factor being promoted in defense of our own interest, but will continue with the efforts in denying the obvious truth.

Is the Aussie writer telling the truth - that our fragility is so critical that it cannot withstand the truth being told ?

50 years have gone by, and yet our progress remains so brittle, so fragile.

Great job done by the MIW.

Originally posted by Atobe:

 

Is the Aussie writer telling the truth - that our fragility is so critical that it cannot withstand the truth being told ?

 

Again you dare not take responsiblity for your words, no guts maintain a stand and hope that others who dares challenge you by claiming they are taking your words out of context or make assumptions/inferences, so that you can twist your way out!

 "Is the Aussie writer telling the truth - that our fragility is so critical that it cannot withstand the truth being told ?"

You are hiding what you really meant, that truth is being told, but what truth? The writer's? By writing that statement shows you agree that he is telling the truth or shows his stupidity.

Atobe, in your own words, you totally lost your credibility and show what a piece of shit you truly are:-

 "Is the Aussie writer telling the truth - that our fragility is so critical that it cannot withstand the truth being told ?"

You had join the writer to insult 3.5 million citizens. At least the writer made money as his intention, being a conmen. But you will only earn our spittle!

If i may be allowed to be uncouth for just this once, "Atobe you are a bloody bitch!"

PS. If his work was properly researched and objective and even true, I would have accepted. But it is nothing more than a pack of twisted events to suit his arguments, lies and half truths for him to gain notorierity to obtain money from his book, at the expense of 3.5million citizens. We can accept criticism, but we will not bow before falsehoods! 

Originally posted by DeerHunter:

 

Again you dare not take responsiblity for your words, no guts maintain a stand and hope that others who dares challenge you by claiming they are taking your words out of context or make assumptions/inferences, so that you can twist your way out!

 "Is the Aussie writer telling the truth - that our fragility is so critical that it cannot withstand the truth being told ?"

You are hiding what you really meant, that truth is being told, but what truth? The writer's? By writing that statement shows you agree that he is telling the truth or shows his stupidity.

Atobe, in your own words, you totally lost your credibility and show what a piece of shit you truly are:-

 "Is the Aussie writer telling the truth - that our fragility is so critical that it cannot withstand the truth being told ?"

You had join the writer to insult 3.5 million citizens. At least the writer made money as his intention, being a conmen. But you will only earn our spittle!

If i may be allowed to be uncouth for just this once, "Atobe you are a bloody bitch!"

 

PS. If his work was properly researched and objective and even true, I would have accepted. But it is nothing more than a pack of twisted events to suit his arguments, lies and half truths for him to gain notorierity to obtain money from his book, at the expense of 3.5million citizens. We can accept criticism, but we will not bow before falsehoods! 

Do you have proof that he is lying ?

Please don't slander a person just because you don't agree with him.

Thank you.

Talking about lions...

what happened to the dream of dreaming to be in the 2010 soccer world cup ha?

On the right track right?

Since the lion's salary hiked, they performed up to expectation right? sure win world cup right ?

wah, ho say liao lor. wah, lion can also may beat italy, brazil , spain, britain , argentina, even china, thailand , australia ar?

i no no leh. anyone know?

Originally posted by domonkassyu:

we need an aussie that stayed in sg for a few years to tell us situations about how f up sg is despite we already know that???

amazing..amazing..

Compare a sglian who nebber stayed overseas and an aussie who has stayed here several years. Aussie has 2 country experience. If a sglian no other country experience, certainly not in position to comment.

lion with no teeth , ask the aust idoit if he want to be put in a cage with a lion that got no teeth ?

he sure forgot about the paws !!!

Most likely that is one sorry ass of aust - that cannot make it here in singapore. He tuck his tail and went back to aust - to write a book to vent his sorry ass.

Originally posted by jojobeach:

Do you have proof that he is lying ?

Please don't slander a person just because you don't agree with him.

Thank you.

Do you have proof that he is lying ?

Please don't slander a person just because you don't agree with him.Thank you.

You are not welcome. More so for one who cannot even read and understand just the basic things he had written. For example:-

"In the early to mid-'60s, Singapore had one of the highest living standards in Asia, with one of the best-educated and hardest-working populations."

I didn't know that in the 60s mainly coolies and light industry workers were considered best educated. 

"To sell itself to the world Singapore has also denigrated and patronised its lesser-developed neighbours."

He is now accusing that we bully msia and indonesia, but you and i know which way it had always been.

"Public servants running state boards often have little experience of the private sector "and no idea how to run a business"

If no experience, our economy would have been in ruins.

And many more i expect. I will not touch his book and dissapoint myself futher that there may be some truth in it. But as it is, just a short review, it is enough to show his flawed and subjective views. I will not contribute to his perverse aim to denigrate falsely our citizens and the choices we made as a society.

Buy his book if you are the kind that enjoys alternate history or seek escapism thru hallucinatory drugs.

Originally posted by DeerHunter:

 

Do you have proof that he is lying ?

Please don't slander a person just because you don't agree with him.Thank you.

 

You are not welcome. More so for one who cannot even read and understand just the basic things he had written. For example:-

"In the early to mid-'60s, Singapore had one of the highest living standards in Asia, with one of the best-educated and hardest-working populations."

I didn't know that in the 60s mainly coolies and light industry workers were considered best educated. 

"To sell itself to the world Singapore has also denigrated and patronised its lesser-developed neighbours."

He is now accusing that we bully msia and indonesia, but you and i know which way it had always been.

"Public servants running state boards often have little experience of the private sector "and no idea how to run a business"

If no experience, our economy would have been in ruins.

And many more i expect. I will not touch his book and dissapoint myself futher that there may be some truth in it. But as it is, just a short review, it is enough to show his flawed and subjective views. I will not contribute to his perverse aim to denigrate falsely our citizens and the choices we made as a society.

Buy his book if you are the kind that enjoys alternate history or seek escapism thru hallucinatory drugs.

So you do agree with his other observations , yes ?

Originally posted by DeerHunter:

 

Do you have proof that he is lying ?

Please don't slander a person just because you don't agree with him.Thank you.

 

You are not welcome. More so for one who cannot even read and understand just the basic things he had written. For example:-

"In the early to mid-'60s, Singapore had one of the highest living standards in Asia, with one of the best-educated and hardest-working populations."

I didn't know that in the 60s mainly coolies and light industry workers were considered best educated. 

"To sell itself to the world Singapore has also denigrated and patronised its lesser-developed neighbours."

He is now accusing that we bully msia and indonesia, but you and i know which way it had always been.

"Public servants running state boards often have little experience of the private sector "and no idea how to run a business"

If no experience, our economy would have been in ruins.

And many more i expect. I will not touch his book and dissapoint myself futher that there may be some truth in it. But as it is, just a short review, it is enough to show his flawed and subjective views. I will not contribute to his perverse aim to denigrate falsely our citizens and the choices we made as a society.

Buy his book if you are the kind that enjoys alternate history or seek escapism thru hallucinatory drugs.

LOL. He is not lying. He is just deluded with his "dont know where" facts.

Originally posted by Go:

LOL. He is not lying. He is just deluded with his "dont know where" facts.

Please do not slander a person just because you don't agree with him. Thank you.

Originally posted by jojobeach:

Please do not slander a person just because you don't agree with him. Thank you.

Please go to other forums if you disagree to the speakers here. Thank you