A couple of weeks ago I wrote a post, "Inequality, Again," that reflected upon the large and growing gap between the incomes of the richest US CEOs and the average worker, using Mencius and the Tao Te Ching as points of reference.  Well, it seems that I should have included the Prime Minister of Singapore, and his band of merry, grossly overpaid, ministers in the ranks of the most greedy and grasping of global fat cats.  Here’s a news item from Singapore Election Watch today, May 1st, international workers day:

The below table puts things back in proper perspective: (these are
basic figures as of July 2000 and did not include last year’s pay hikes
or other benefits. Otherwise the updated numbers may well be much
larger)

1. Singapore
President’s Basic Salary US$1,483,000 (SGD$2,373,100)*a year Singapore
Prime Minister’s Basic Salary US$1,100,000 (SGD1,958,000) a year

Minister’s Basic: US$655,530 to US$819,124 (SGD1,166,844 to SGD1,458,040) a year

2. United States of America President: US$200,000 Vice President: US$181,400 Cabinet Secretaries: US$157,000

3. United Kingdom Prime Minister: US$170,556 Ministers: US$146,299 Senior Civil Servants: US$262,438

4. Australia Prime Minister: US$137,060 Deputy Prime Minister: US$111,439 Treasurer: US$102,682

5. Hong Kong Chief Executive : US$416,615 Top Civil Servant: US$278,538 Financial Sec: US$315,077

Source:
Asian Wall Street Journal July 10 2000 *Singapore President’s salary
which was updated in 2005 from the Singapore Straits Times

In relative terms, less then 20% of Singaporeans here have take home salaries exceeding SGD100,000/- A YEAR.

In stark contrast, BASIC SALARY FOR A MINISTER STARTS AT SGD1,166,844 A YEAR,OR JUST UNDER SGD100,000 A MONTH.

What these ministers earns in just ONE MONTH exceeds the ANNUAL TAKE HOME salary
of 80% of Singapore’s income earning population. Lets not even begin to
compare annual packages which will exceed SGD1 million easily.

     The unjustifiable over-compensation of PAP power-holders is another reminder of the corruption of the political system.  They rationalize their riches in business terms: they are CEOs receiving the "industry standard" for excellent performance in high-stakes, high-stress jobs.  But this is just so much fancy talk.  Their overblown pay is really the result of their monopoly on power.  Not only are they the judge and jury for the compliant judiciary, but they are also their own paymasters, effortlessly spooning funds from the public treasury into their own personal bank accounts.  Let’s cut through the business school rhetoric and see their self-interested materialism for what it is, as this Singaporean does:

A 29 yr old executive who requested to remain anonymous admitted
sheepishly ; "The numbers (ministerial salaries) are a national
embarrassment really, because it reflects the underlying materialistic
value systems of Singapore Ministers. No matter how you look at it, the
fact remains that our ministers are money faced, and these are supposed
to be Singapore’s leaders, with value systems that Singaporeans should
follow." "It (the ministerial salaries) puts Singapore in a bad light
in the eyes of the world. The rest of Singaporeans really put in an
honest days work for every penny they earn. And the process for review
and approval of the ministerial salaries is also a joke. Imagine
sitting on the board and approving (on White Paper)your own salary
increments! Its all a wayang show".

     All of this is yet another indication of how far PAP reality is from the Confucian ideals they sometimes invoke.  Mencius, for example, would certainly advise them to drastically cut their salaries:

"There’s plenty of juicy meat in
your kitchen and plenty of well-fed horses in your stable," continued
Mencius, "but the people here look hungry, and in the countryside
they’re starving to death.  You’re feeding humans to animals.  Everyone
hates to see animals eat each other, and an emperor is the people’s
father and mother – but if his government feeds humans to animals, how
can he claim to the people’s father and mother?" (7)

      People are not starving in the streets in Singapore.  But inequality is obviously stark and exorbitant PAP salaries, and the perquisites they bring, are the modern equivalent of "feeding humans to animals," as suggested in this report on a massive Worker’s Party rally by Yawning Bread:

Soon after, Sylvia Lim, the Chairperson of the Workers Party, took the stage and spoke in English. For the next 10 minutes, she dealt with just one topic, hammering the point home. She spoke about rising healthcare costs, and how, instead of thinking of ways to help people, the government was thinking of ways to limit the use of
subsidies.      

Even if you’re prepared to put up with C class wards (the lowest of three categories of comfort), she said, you might not get C class. The government has already indicated that they would implement means-testing. Only the truly needy would get C class, she told the crowd.

Then she went on a bit about the various ways of means-testing, and how no way is truly fair, before coming back to the point that the People’s Action Party (PAP) government really isn’t in sync with the people’s concerns.

  The PAP lives large, while making life more difficult for people on the bottom of the socio-economic heap.

     I know how the PAP would respond: Singapore was a poor place in 1965; we managed economic development that improved the living standards of most Singaporeans; our authoritarianism is necessary to provide basic needs to the people.  And the response, from the 2006 perspective is this: it’s 2006!  The "Singapore was poor" argument faded into irrelevance at least 15 years ago.  The current elections are not about 1990 or 1980, they’re about 2006.  And in 2006 the PAP has hardened into a sclerotic, corrupt power structure that is used to transfer wealth from average workers to the authoritarian elite. 

     The Tao Te Ching gets at the underlying problem nicely:

Understanding sparse and sparser still I travel the great Way, nothing to fear unless I stray.

The great Way is open and
smooth, but people adore twisty paths: Government in ruins, fields
overgrown, and granaries bare, they indulge in elegant robes and sharp
swords, lavish food and drink, all those trappings of luxury.

It’s vainglorious thievery – not the Way, not the Way at all.   (passage 53)

      The PAP is not about "Asian values" or "Confucian virtues."  It is about a leadership that adores "twisty paths."  It’s about old-fashioned human greed.  PAP leaders do not lead by example, they do not practice what they preach; they are not following Confucian principles and are not in keeping with Way. 

     So, here are some campaign slogans we can use:

    PAP: Feeding Humans to Animals!

    PAP: Vainglorious Thievery!

    And here’s a picture of that Worker’s Party rally, from Yawning Bread.  Maybe something can change: