Archivist
Nguyen Anh Tuan
HCM City
Singapore


With thanks to:
The Economist
Time Asia
The New York Times
BBC News
Yale Global Online
American Heritage
Foreign Affairs
Military History
Mother Jones
National Geographic
The New Republic
Project Syndicate
Japan Times
Heritage Foundation
Amnesty International
Human Rights Watch
Far Eastern Economic Review
Rethinking Schools Online
Europa World
International Herald Tribune
History Today
Wikipedia
Newsweek
The Korea Times



Friends
friend
friend
friend
friend



Tagboard
your tagboard code here


Archives September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 February 2008 March 2008 May 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 January 2009 March 2009 April 2009 September 2009 October 2009 March 2010 March 2011 April 2011 September 2012

Credits
Acoustict.blogspot.com
Picture
Brushes
Blogspot
Blogskins

Thursday 5 March 2009
a familee affair

2009 is like the sick cousin of the high-time 2006. Singapore’s GDP was first projected to slide by 2 to 5%, before the gloomy Lee Hsien Loong admitted in Hua Hin, Thailand, that the economy could decline by up to 8%. And to further pepper an already too spicy crab served at the Thomson Reuters dialogue, MM Lee raised a doom scenario of a 10% contraction this year.

Though probably a pain to the upcoming graduates, the hard landing of Singapore is hardly surprising. The Republic has developed strong economic dependent links with the U.S., Europe and Japan since 1965. And as these hegemons come crashing, so does the little red dot. Export revenue dropped by 35% in January 2009, and MM Lee mentioned a possible further steep drop of 30 to 40% in the second quarter. We should seriously tighten our safety belts, noting that exports account for “three-and-a-quarter times” of Singapore’s GDP.

The silver lining to this is that, according to MM Lee, Singapore will bounce back faster than any other economy as soon as the U.S., Europe and Japan recover. Not to mention that Singapore is at the centre of economically dynamic East Asia. Still, such severe volatility is absolutely no good; why should the extremely good times be mired with the extremely bad times? There is basic economic rationale when Lee Hsien Loong recently suggested a de-emphasis on the U.S. and Europe and Japan now that risk reduction through diversification has become like investment wisdom.

Actually, in retrospect, Singapore has a lot of resources (that’s right, it does) to weather the crisis. Even a 10% shrink, which is roughly US$19 billion as of 2008, is almost matched by the S$20 plus billion offered by Budget 2009. And for fiscal stimulus to multiply its way through the economy there needs to be a functioning financial system. This is the point when we come to appreciate DBS’s 28th and UOB’s 37th and OCBC’s 38th rankings among the world’s 50 safest banks by U.S. Global Finance magazine.

Anyway, the potential loss of US$19 billion pales in comparison with the actual 25% fall in behemoth GIC’s US$300 billion portfolio and the actual 31% “paper” loss, totalling S$58 billion, of Temasek Holdings. Gosh, how I condemn the fact that the media keeps stressing the word “paper.” Singapore may have a lot of financial muscles to withstand the crisis for even 10 more years, but it kind of lacks accountability. Strange, doesn’t MM Lee, or the government, propose higher-than-U.S.-President’s salaries to its civil servants precisely for accountability? Well, ask this: do we remember who was responsible for the jail escape from the Whitley Road Detention Centre just last year? I for one can’t even recall the name of the escapee (should it be shame on me?).

And this: as Ho Ching leaves Temasek Holdings, who should be answerable for the losses? Well just ask ourselves k, because I don’t think anyone dares ask that in Parliament. MM Lee comments as Ho Ching decided to resign that “she thinks it is time.” This frenzied the blogosphere: so Ho Ching could have stayed on for 10 more years if she simply decided so? Onto the losses at the GIC, handsomely paid ministers and members of parliament fervently defended the US$6.88 billion investment into Citigroup as good buys. The reason is, share prices were under-valued then. Indeed, were the financial crisis not wrecking havoc everywhere now.

And so one has to wonder, wouldn’t it be wiser to buy even more Citi shares now as they are dirt cheap? For every dollars and cents paid to every man and woman in Parliament, there was no ear to the idea that share prices might be too good to be true, or that the GIC and Temasek Holdings should manage Singapore’s assets prudently instead of mirroring the practices of global investment banks. A side note to this, the safest bank in the world, according to Global Finance, is KfW Bankengruppe, which had been mocked “Germany’s dumbest bank” by Bild, the country’s leading newspaper. I guess for every dumb person out there, there lives a dumberer.

Well, I am not disqualifying Lee Hsien Loong or MM Lee or Ho Ching for the matter. I may sound like it, but I seriously am not. Against all the underground battings, I have always admired Lee Kuan Yew, and I trust that the Singapore government has the right calibre to manage the country. I am not condemning anyone for mistakes. People make mistakes everywhere and under any circumstance, let alone this the-day-the-earth-stood-still crisis that no one saw coming (maybe except Warren Buffet). If one is bent on criticising the Singapore and its leaders on the basis of poor performance, please be more informed and look elsewhere to satisfy the thirst of illiteracy.

But I don’t like the general lack of accountability in Singapore. It’s not that bad, but there is still plenty of room for improvement to be up to the Singapore brand. like this, admit it when one screws up, and be adult about the consequences.


Tuan ♥ 11:07 am link to post 0 comments