segunda-feira, 15 de fevereiro de 2010
On Singapore after reading The Economist's 'Stingy nanny'
I've not been there myself but have read or heard about Singapore since my early years.
The insight I got added up to a largely positive picture of a small yet economically proportionately outsized city-State.
The very fact so much is heard of and spoken about on Singapore reveals a success story on most counts from the flagship airline to the cleanliness of the city's streets.
No small achievement over decades of strict rules and hard work as laid out by an autocratic leadership no doubt.
On balance, strong purposeful government has served Singapore and its citizens right.
It has been a home-grown model to suit a mixed population of around 5m living on less than 700 square km.
Also, there are local components to the territory's history that played an important part as to how it evolved.
I would not like to compare the beginnings, growth and implementation of Europe's, or the US's, or Canada's welfare systems to that of Singapore.
Social, economic, philosophical and political backgrounds are quite different at root which would render any conclusions underwhelming.
Nor would I be drawn into general discussions on institutionalised laziness and waste without going through relevant data first.
However, I am in no doubt that many countries in the West, including my own, should indeed look into some of the remarkable 'top-marks' Singapore has obtained by dint of its 'harsh' ways.
Not necessarily to emulate but to improve existing systems here aiming to achieve greater efficiency by developing the concept of purpose.
The welfare State as we've known it in advanced democracies was a major development in societies that embraced it measuredly.
The very concept is now increasingly questioned not for in-built flaws that likely developed.Rather it is the ageing populations and the wild economic globalisation pitching against each other countries with entirely diverging cost-structures that is a threat.
This has spawned very hard questions as to how to keep such systems self-sustaining in the future.
It would be oversimplistic to condemn Europe's cherished welfare State while overstating the pluses of Singapore's restrained model.
I strongly believe we can learn from each other.
The insight I got added up to a largely positive picture of a small yet economically proportionately outsized city-State.
The very fact so much is heard of and spoken about on Singapore reveals a success story on most counts from the flagship airline to the cleanliness of the city's streets.
No small achievement over decades of strict rules and hard work as laid out by an autocratic leadership no doubt.
On balance, strong purposeful government has served Singapore and its citizens right.
It has been a home-grown model to suit a mixed population of around 5m living on less than 700 square km.
Also, there are local components to the territory's history that played an important part as to how it evolved.
I would not like to compare the beginnings, growth and implementation of Europe's, or the US's, or Canada's welfare systems to that of Singapore.
Social, economic, philosophical and political backgrounds are quite different at root which would render any conclusions underwhelming.
Nor would I be drawn into general discussions on institutionalised laziness and waste without going through relevant data first.
However, I am in no doubt that many countries in the West, including my own, should indeed look into some of the remarkable 'top-marks' Singapore has obtained by dint of its 'harsh' ways.
Not necessarily to emulate but to improve existing systems here aiming to achieve greater efficiency by developing the concept of purpose.
The welfare State as we've known it in advanced democracies was a major development in societies that embraced it measuredly.
The very concept is now increasingly questioned not for in-built flaws that likely developed.Rather it is the ageing populations and the wild economic globalisation pitching against each other countries with entirely diverging cost-structures that is a threat.
This has spawned very hard questions as to how to keep such systems self-sustaining in the future.
It would be oversimplistic to condemn Europe's cherished welfare State while overstating the pluses of Singapore's restrained model.
I strongly believe we can learn from each other.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário