Zhng

I used to think that instead of spending money to zhng your car, might as well save up the cash to buy a better car, but after looking at these photos, I have totally changed my mind, it really IS possible to zhng until very nice...

This must surely be one of the best looking Vios around...

Hell hath no fury a roof leaked

Today my bunk got flooded by the torrential downpour ---- AGAIN. The first time we were having a long weekend and I didn't manage to see nature unleash its fury, that is until today. My poor bed was in the way of an almighty waterfall. The apparently concrete ceiling proved no defence against the waves and waves of attack by the rainwater. When I saw it, I could only respond in the simplest way I knew --- SIMI LAN JIAO? Somehow I felt glad that I am able to book out and sleep on my dry bed at home.

You know something? As cadets, we can just run off to kbkb to the instructors and you can almost confirm plus chop plus guarantee it will be fixed. Now with the heavy bar on our shoulders, we are expected to settle this kind of stuff by ourselves.

I think I can make it as a telemarketeer if I ever get kicked out of the teaching profession. Over the course of these few weeks I have made calls to random people requesting for this, enquiring about that. Think I have almost eliminated my innate fear of calling people I don't know....

Yeah our boss bringing us on a branch outing tomorrow! Woo hoo! Really do think that I have the best boss among all the PSOs and OCs that I could have been placed under. Just a bit of a shame that my personality doesn't really suit the job scope, but I am not complaining. Life has been pretty good so far...

Anyway just for my records...

From The Straits Times

May 25, 2006
REGULATION OF PAY TV INDUSTRY
MDA should give fuller picture

By Burton Ong
FOR THE STRAITS TIMES

DECISIONS issued by industry regulators responsible for promoting competition in specific sectors of Singapore's economy in response to complaints against dominant market players have never been particularly illuminating.

MDA should give fuller picture

Apart from short press statements outlining the substance of their final decisions, these regulators have not made public complete grounds for their rejection of allegations that market incumbents in the telecommunications and media industries have engaged in anti-competitive behaviour.

Neither have they disclosed the legal analysis which they have employed in each case to arrive at their final decisions, often citing reasons of 'commercial sensitivity', thereby making it difficult for the public to scrutinise the soundness of these decisions.

A recent example of this regulatory obscurity can be found in the Media Development Authority's (MDA) decision to allow the incumbent pay-TV service provider, a monopolist, to continue striking exclusive-content arrangements with cable television channels.

This was in response to a complaint from a potential new market entrant alleging that such practices made it more difficult for it to enter the pay-TV market because it would not have access to popular channels that customers would want to subscribe to.

Under the Media Market Conduct Code (MMCC), which sets out the legal framework for regulating competition in the various segments of the media industry, Paragraph 7.5.6 prohibits 'agreements with providers of Ancillary Media Services which substantially foreclose access to an input, or a channel of distribution, where this would prevent, restrict or distort competition in any Mass Media Services Market'.

Whether or not a foreclosure is 'substantial' or not depends on the percentage of the market foreclosed, the duration of the agreement, whether the agreement has a 'legitimate business purpose' other than foreclosing competitors' access to business inputs, and whether competitors have access to comparable inputs from other suppliers.

Conspicuously absent from this list of considerations is the degree of market dominance possessed by the media service provider engaged in such exclusivity arrangements with providers of these business inputs: A monopolist would be in a much stronger position to lock in upstream suppliers with exclusivity arrangements, and make it more difficult for would-be competitors to gain access to these inputs, compared to a market player with a lesser degree of market power.

Without publishing a full report of its decision, the MDA offered a number of less than convincing reasons for its unpopular decision to allow the incumbent to continue making exclusivity arrangements with various unnamed channels - though speculation has been rife that they include ESPN, the Discovery family of channels and HBO.

Firstly, would-be market entrants were said to be able to secure alternative content (other than these channels) for themselves. Secondly, the duration of these contractual exclusivity arrangements was said to be too short to act as effective barriers to market entry. Thirdly, the scope of these exclusivity arrangements was limited to the cable-TV platform, allowing other operators to gain access to these channels if they utilised other broadcast methods such as the Internet.

It is true that alternative content is available - there are probably hundreds of channels from around the world which other pay-TV operators could have access to, but the real question which needs to be answered is whether these other channels are real substitutes for the 'key content' in respect of which the incumbent has obtained exclusive broadcast rights. No cable-TV subscriber is likely to view a cable channel specialising in non-English arthouse films as a substitute for blockbuster-driven HBO. Neither is a cable channel focused on US college football and baseball games going to be treated as an effective substitute for ESPN.

An even more fundamental question appears to have been glossed over: Before determining whether or not the exclusivity arrangement substantially forecloses the market, how is the relevant market defined to begin with?

There are at least two possible markets which ought to have been investigated - those pay-TV customers who sign up primarily for single channels, and those who sign up for a suite of channels. Even though the incumbent pay-TV operator is a monopolist in both these markets, the substantiality of the foreclosure effects may differ in each case and warrant a more finely tuned response from the competition regulator.

Even if the duration of the exclusivity arrangements is viewed as relatively short, such that potential competitors have a theoretical opportunity to gain access to these channels when they expire, the reality is that the incumbent will have an enormous advantage when renewing their exclusive content with these channels because of its monopolist status and existing subscriber list, which comprises 40 per cent of all households in Singapore.

Exclusivity arrangements involving highly sought-after channels invariably require the pay-TV operator to fork out a premium which will almost always find its way, ultimately, into the cable-TV viewer's subscription bill.

Finally, the fact that newcomers may gain access to these channels by broadcasting them via the Internet or other new technologies does not mean very much if these emerging high-tech content distribution channels are not even in the same market as the established cable-TV market. The picture quality, stability and other product characteristics of the former may not be comparable to those possessed by the latter. The former is likely to have niche appeal only to technologically savvy individuals and not to average television viewers. If these two modes of content delivery are in separate and distinct markets, the emergence of the former does not in any way detract from the anti-competitiveness of exclusivity arrangements being practised in the latter.

In reaching its conclusion that exclusive content agreements in themselves will not prevent new entrants from entering the pay-TV market, but without releasing a full report on how it analysed the issues arising from its interpretation of Paragraph 7.5.6 of the MMCC, the MDA's decision is difficult to justify to the 453,000 cable-TV subscribers in Singapore.

As with some of its earlier decisions in relation to other sectors of the media industry, a shroud of mystery - and cynicism - will envelop this episode until the regulator changes its disclosure policies.

In the meantime, existing cable-TV customers will continue to be deprived of the alternative packages and pricing plans which the would-be competitor may have offered if it had entered the pay-TV market, while potential cable-TV customers unwilling to pay the high subscription fees currently charged by the incumbent monopolist will continue to remain on the sidelines.

The writer is a member of the law faculty at the National University of Singapore.

----------------------------------------------------------------

From The Straits Times

Singapore politics, from an economist's viewpoint

I REFER to the letter, 'Is politics all about pursuit of party interests?' by Mr Jason Phan Shiaw Hwa (ST, May 16). Mr Phan raised a long-debated issue: 'Is politics ultimately about the pursuit of party interests, with the interests of citizens being incidental?'

In the study of political science, it is generally assumed that formation of policies rests in the hands of elected officials and their appointees, and that these officials form policies to maximise votes and thus remain in office. The result is a bias in the political system towards non-political parties that have strong lobbying power.

As an economist, I have to agree with the above generic assumption to a large extent. History has proven so, and many conspiracy theories have since evolved, about how countries' ruling parties manipulated the economy to gain favour with the electorate. Empirical evidence has also demonstrated that the economic cycle has a strong correlation with the political business cycle. Governments can manipulate the economic cycle by engineering booms and recessions with the use of fiscal and monetary policies to seek favour with the electorate. That is why in many countries, it is not unusual to observe the political business cycle where rapid growth precedes elections, and recessions follow elections. In this way, through tactful economic management, the government can make the economy look good at the time of election.

However, in Singapore, this is not the case. Although critics claim Singapore is a de facto one-party state, to a large extent this has allowed the Government to prioritise long-term growth rather than be concerned with short-term economic boom to win elections. It is always easier and more convenient to manipulate myopic short-term growth using fiscal and monetary tools.

However, in Singapore, the Government practises prudence and adopts supply-side policies such as education, training, investment and economic infrastructure development. This is to increase productive capacity to ensure there is sustainable economic growth. We are always looking out for niche areas to develop in as well, as shown by the number of 'hubs' we are trying to establish, such as 'IT hub', 'life science hub' and 'education hub', so we can always stay ahead in the face of global competition.

That is why I believe the Government truly subscribes to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew's principle that politics is 'not a business of just voting, or not voting. Politics has got to do with your life, your job, your home, your Medicare, your children's future'. This is possible because, in Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's words, 'Singapore succeeded because it had a dominant PAP government which could think long term and run the country without being distracted by the opposition'.

In fact, our unique tripartite system, where there are strong ties between labour, management and the Government, is a key element of Singapore's success and an envy of many countries, but their governments cannot simply replicate it due to strong political competition there.

The flexi-wage system also defies the common economic notion that 'wages are rigid downwards', as we allow wages to be pegged to performance. Thus in times of recession, wages can be adjusted downwards without much resistance from the labour force, unlike many other developed countries with strong trade union presence. This helps to keep the economy competitive.

Although I was born post-independence, when Singapore experienced rapid economic growth under then prime minister Lee Kuan Yew and his administration, I have never doubted Singapore's imperative need for political and internal stability, especially in a country which lacks natural resources such as land, water and petroleum and practises multiracialism.

As a small and open economy, we are highly susceptible to external shocks, as evidenced by the Asian financial crisis, 9/11 terror attacks, Sars, and more recently, the world-wide bird flu epidemic. Nonetheless, our strong and capable Government has time and time again steered us through these turbulent times, with speedy economic recovery. In fact, the World Trade Organisation praised us recently for our swift response to the Sars crisis, which allowed the global epidemic to be resolved in a relatively short time.

On the other hand, proponents of the opposition have called for more alternative voices in Parliament to keep a check on the Government. I beg to differ. Like every economist, I believe only with competition comes creation. The theory of contestable markets should be applied to politics as well. The essence of the theory is that what is crucial for consumers' welfare is not whether an industry is actually a monopoly or competitive, but whether there is a real threat of competition. This can actually bring about improvement to consumers' welfare.

The key term here is real 'threat of competition', that is, credibility of competition. As long as the ruling party cannot deter entry of opponents, the incumbent party can still be forced to discipline itself, even without the opponents actually entering the political scene. Thus, as long as the Government can continuously prove itself through sustainable good economic performance, it will still function well even without the opposition keeping a check on it.

Finally, my vision of an ideal political system is one where the ruling party and the opposition party both act sincerely in the best interest of the country. Only then will there be no wasteful political competition (as seen in many countries that supposedly practise democracy) that poses immense opportunity cost on our limited resources. At the moment, Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr Low Thia Khiang have proven themselves to be worthy opposition in the parliament, and hopefully Ms Sylvia Lim will do so as well. Then my vision is not that far away.

Yan Yueling (Miss)

Time to take stock of housewives' economic worth

More for my own records...

From The Straits Times

May 20, 2006
Time to take stock of housewives' economic worth

Study shows value of home production last year was 8.4% of S'pore's GDP
By Euston Quah
For The Straits Times

MUCH of what goes on within households is unrecorded. One obvious example is household work and child rearing.

The amount and value of time and effort used to provide the day-to-day services of cooking, cleaning, grocery shopping, child support and the myriad other chores that need to be done in any household are clearly not insignificant. It is time society took stock and recognised the worth and contributions of housewives.

A study I did more than 10 years ago found that the value of home production was some 5.4 per cent of Singapore's gross domestic product (GDP) in 1986. A subsequent study by one of my students at the National University of Singapore, Ms Ong Qiyan, showed that home production last year had risen to 8.4 per cent.

This value, while lower than estimates for countries such as the United States and Britain - about 30 per cent of GDP - is however not insignificant in absolute terms, amounting to about $4 billion.

Furthermore, the Singapore estimates exclude work done by paid domestic maids which is a feature not prevalent in other countries. That portion of home production done by domestic maids is already captured by a country's GDP.

If one adds this to work done by unpaid housewives, the estimates will be along the same magnitude as those in North America and Europe.

The original and continuing impetus for valuing housework stems from the observation that estimates of total production of goods and services in a country neglect to take into account the unpaid and significant amount of production that occurs in the home.

Diligent recording of activities in households have shown that housewives contribute more than 80 per cent of total housework time.

It is often argued as such that housewives, by providing services to their homes, are engaged in productive activities no different from any other market occupation. Thus, the services provided by them warrant inclusion with other components of GDP.

As early as 1898, Alfred Marshall, a pioneering giant in economics, observed that 'a woman who makes her own clothes, or a man who digs his own garden or repairs his own house, is earning income just as would the dressmaker, gardener, or carpenter who might be hired to do the work'.

Another celebrated economist, Arthur Pigou, raised what has become a well-known paradox in national income accounting, that 'the services rendered by women enter into the dividend when they are rendered in exchange for wages, whether in factory or in the home, but do not enter into it when they are rendered by mothers and wives gratuitously to their own families. Thus, if a man marries his housekeeper or his cook, the national dividend is diminished'.

In principle, most economists recognise that housework has value in the same way as market work, but point out the difficulties in estimating such a value, and with the lack of information on intra-household activities they are prepared to exclude it from the accounts altogether.

The last few decades, however, saw increasing criticisms of the methods of national income accounting. These criticisms centre on three areas of contention: inadequate measurement and erroneous designation of some national income components, incorrect use of GDP measurements, and omission of non-market goods and services.

Today, the possibility of constructing a set of household accounts as part of an overall national income accounting system has become more feasible, given the improvements made in data availability and structural changes in most economies.

Housework has become more commercialised with easy access to maids - at least in Singapore and certain other parts of Asia. This, with the spread of commercial launderettes, daycare centres, and home-cooked-meal caterers have all allowed for more empirical data to be collected.

The need for the measurement and valuation of housework lies not only in a desire to provide a better estimate of the total economic production for an economy, but also in providing a better basis for growth calculations and for international comparisons of national income.

This, in fact, was shown by another student of mine, Mr Lim Sze How, now an economist with DBS, that over the past three decades, Singapore's growth rate was cushioned by household production activities in periods of reduced growth.

High GDP growth rates may be misleading as this may come from a diminishing household economy. This is because the labour force participation rate of women has been increasing over time, and with increasing commercialisation of housework activities, it is possible that the total production of goods and services over time may not have changed that much.

Similarly, in periods of economic downturn, falling growth rates may not be indicative of the total production of goods and services because women may have returned to their households and now generate increased home production.

High or low growth rates as reflected in a country's GDP may be inaccurate as they ignore changes in the household economy. To the extent that home production is not measured in conventional income accounts and to the degree that the household output omitted changes over time, then both the quantity and total output are mis-measured.

While valuing housewives' work is a useful exercise, by no means does it need to be fully incorporated into the GDP estimates. A more meaningful way might be to have a separate reporting of both GDP and home production.

Research is needed to determine how home production estimates can be derived. There already exists a number of methods proposed by economists. These might be refined for Singapore.

The writer, an environmental economist, is head of the economics department at Nanyang Technological University.

The saga that is Ike

Resurrected my blog before I had eliminated all my past posts just for the letter below.

From The Straits Times

May 19, 2006
Consider NS deferment for those with exceptional family burdens

When I was serving my full-time national service a decade ago, I encountered many heart-wrenching personal accounts from lower-income Singaporeans about the serious disruptions that NS had caused to their families.

At the age of 17 or 18, many of them had to shoulder exceptional family responsibilities. Some had to care for aged or disabled parents while others were sole breadwinners.

Some of my friends were already young fathers at the time of enlistment.

Even though the Singapore Armed Forces was generally flexible in giving them nights-off or stay-out privileges to care for their families, the low pay of $250 a month and the time-consuming demands of training were nevertheless huge problems to these people.

If deferment is to be granted, it is these ordinary people with extraordinary burdens who should be considered instead of the potential careers of teenage prodigies like violinist Ike See.

To me, rather than an outstanding Singaporean on the world stage, it is the countless batches of NSmen at home who, in spite of the exceptional demands of their families, served their duties honourably that make Singapore a place worth fighting for.

Liew Kai Khiun, London

------------------------------------------------------

So far all the letters to the Forum had been those pleading for flexibility to allow Ike See to complete his music education before returning to Singapore to serve his NS. I guess for one who was able to disrupt his NS for his studies, I don't have much of a moral ground to stand on but I do feel that the letter above provides a breath of fresh air. While I do not support the person's stand of asking for deferment because of family circumstances etc, it does bring out the fact that NS is a very big sacrifice and a lot of people have plenty of valid reasons to ask for deferment, disruption whatever. But yet those which see the print of media are always those at the top. Those who has this talent or that competition which is once in a lifetime blah blah and if they miss it they might never have a chance again. What about the guy who is his sick mum's sole caregiver? A mother who is gone will never come back too you know?

So exactly what is my point? I also don't know. I do see the point in allowing Ike See to finish his music education first. But yet sometimes a one size fits all approach is taken PRECISELY because there are too many unique circumstances and where do you draw the line between yes and no? It's a Pandora's Box. And are you being fair to those at the bottom of the social strata? The best and brightest are allowed to go and benefit themselves first but those at the bottom can't even defer to save their family? (Just don't tell me about me being a government scholar was able to disrupt blah blah. The government has its reasons for doing so which I shall not write down here lest I need to delete my old posts again...lol)