Sammyboy RSS Feed
07-01-2017, 06:40 PM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
Heart attack survivor because of his good karma, Khaw Boon Wan already said $1,000 a month salary is enough to afford HDB flat.
HDB has also provided all the calculations. Leong Sze Hian should pay more attention.
The real question is: Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?
http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/01/03...200-after-cpf/ (http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/01/03/407400-earn-less-than-1200-after-cpf/)
Narrative always on median gross income of full-time employed residents?
In this connection, the narrative in the labour and media reports are always talking about the median gross income of full-time employed residents, which is $3,949 (including employer CPF) in June 2015.
Median gross income of all employed residents (excluding employer CPF) is much lower?
However, if you look at the Ministry of Manpowers (MOM) Yearbook of Manpower Statistics 2016 the median gross income of all employed residents (excluding employer CPF) is much lower, at $3,125.
407,400 earn less than $1,500?
There were 407,400 residents (about 19.4 per cent of the total workforce of $2.1 million) whose median gross income was less than $1,500 monthly.
After CPF = less than $1,200?
If we deduct the maximum employee CPF contribution of 20 per cent the net take-home pay may be less than $1,200.
Arguably, most of the 407,400 people with take-home pay of less than $1,200 may be struggling to make ends meet.
47,000 earn less than $500?
If we breakdown the 407,400 earning less than $1,500 into 47,000 earning less than $500, 125,900 earning less than $1,000 and 234,500 earning less than $1,500 the financial stress that lower-income workers may be facing may be even worse.
No breakdown into Sporeans & PRs?
Moreover, since permanent residents (PRs) generally earn more than Singaporeans I shutter to think what the above statistics may look like for Singaporeans.
Work 35 hours a week defined as part-time?
(Note: When we changed the definition of part-time workers from up to 35 hours a week from 30 hours we may arguably have by the stroke of a pen increased the median income of both full-time (more than 35 hours) and part-time (35 hours and less) workers at least from a statistical sense).
2007 495,800 earn less than $1,200?
Well, in 2007 there were 495,800 employed residents earning a median gross income of less than $1,200, which was about 25.7 per cent of the total resident work force of 1,928,300 (No salary increase for part-time workers in 9 years?).
$1,200 in 2007 is $1,518 now after inflation?
After adjusting for inflation of about 26.5 per cent from June 2007 to June 2015 (CPI 99.67 divided by 78.778) the equivalent of $1,200 in 2007 is $1,518 now.
$1,200 in 2007 is $1,838 now after inflation + 3% pay increase?
However, the above analysis is on the basis that there was no pay increase at all in the last seven years or so. If we assume a pay increase of say three per cent per year $1,200 in 2007 would be about $1,838 now.
Less than $36 pay increase per year?
Let us not forget that in absolute terms even a three per cent increase per year is only less than $36 monthly per year for such lower-income workers.
550,000 earn less than $1,838?
Since there are another 203,900 residents earning between $1,500 to $1,999 I estimate the number earning less than $1,838 to be about 550,000 or about 26 per cent of the workforce (550,000 divided by 2.1m).
More lower-income workers worse off than 8 years ago?
So, do we have even more lower-income workers (about 26 per cent of the workforce) who may not be better off now compared to eight years ago (25.7 per cent of the workforce)?
Higher inflation for the lower-income?
Moreover, as I understand that inflation for the lower-income has historically, generally been higher than inflation for the general population the situation analysed above may be even worse for the lower-income.
Even more than 550,000?
Or to put it another way there may be even more than 550,000 workers who may be worse off. compared to eight years ago.
What are your thoughts on this?
No minimum wage?
By the way, we still do not have a minimum wage and there are still workers getting as little as $5 an hour!
Leong Sze Hian
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?239811-407-400-Sinkies-earn-less-than-1-500-but-nvm-govt-said-1-000-a-month-can-buy-HDB&goto=newpost).
Heart attack survivor because of his good karma, Khaw Boon Wan already said $1,000 a month salary is enough to afford HDB flat.
HDB has also provided all the calculations. Leong Sze Hian should pay more attention.
The real question is: Do you want three meals in a hawker centre, food court or restaurant?
http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/01/03...200-after-cpf/ (http://www.tremeritus.com/2017/01/03/407400-earn-less-than-1200-after-cpf/)
Narrative always on median gross income of full-time employed residents?
In this connection, the narrative in the labour and media reports are always talking about the median gross income of full-time employed residents, which is $3,949 (including employer CPF) in June 2015.
Median gross income of all employed residents (excluding employer CPF) is much lower?
However, if you look at the Ministry of Manpowers (MOM) Yearbook of Manpower Statistics 2016 the median gross income of all employed residents (excluding employer CPF) is much lower, at $3,125.
407,400 earn less than $1,500?
There were 407,400 residents (about 19.4 per cent of the total workforce of $2.1 million) whose median gross income was less than $1,500 monthly.
After CPF = less than $1,200?
If we deduct the maximum employee CPF contribution of 20 per cent the net take-home pay may be less than $1,200.
Arguably, most of the 407,400 people with take-home pay of less than $1,200 may be struggling to make ends meet.
47,000 earn less than $500?
If we breakdown the 407,400 earning less than $1,500 into 47,000 earning less than $500, 125,900 earning less than $1,000 and 234,500 earning less than $1,500 the financial stress that lower-income workers may be facing may be even worse.
No breakdown into Sporeans & PRs?
Moreover, since permanent residents (PRs) generally earn more than Singaporeans I shutter to think what the above statistics may look like for Singaporeans.
Work 35 hours a week defined as part-time?
(Note: When we changed the definition of part-time workers from up to 35 hours a week from 30 hours we may arguably have by the stroke of a pen increased the median income of both full-time (more than 35 hours) and part-time (35 hours and less) workers at least from a statistical sense).
2007 495,800 earn less than $1,200?
Well, in 2007 there were 495,800 employed residents earning a median gross income of less than $1,200, which was about 25.7 per cent of the total resident work force of 1,928,300 (No salary increase for part-time workers in 9 years?).
$1,200 in 2007 is $1,518 now after inflation?
After adjusting for inflation of about 26.5 per cent from June 2007 to June 2015 (CPI 99.67 divided by 78.778) the equivalent of $1,200 in 2007 is $1,518 now.
$1,200 in 2007 is $1,838 now after inflation + 3% pay increase?
However, the above analysis is on the basis that there was no pay increase at all in the last seven years or so. If we assume a pay increase of say three per cent per year $1,200 in 2007 would be about $1,838 now.
Less than $36 pay increase per year?
Let us not forget that in absolute terms even a three per cent increase per year is only less than $36 monthly per year for such lower-income workers.
550,000 earn less than $1,838?
Since there are another 203,900 residents earning between $1,500 to $1,999 I estimate the number earning less than $1,838 to be about 550,000 or about 26 per cent of the workforce (550,000 divided by 2.1m).
More lower-income workers worse off than 8 years ago?
So, do we have even more lower-income workers (about 26 per cent of the workforce) who may not be better off now compared to eight years ago (25.7 per cent of the workforce)?
Higher inflation for the lower-income?
Moreover, as I understand that inflation for the lower-income has historically, generally been higher than inflation for the general population the situation analysed above may be even worse for the lower-income.
Even more than 550,000?
Or to put it another way there may be even more than 550,000 workers who may be worse off. compared to eight years ago.
What are your thoughts on this?
No minimum wage?
By the way, we still do not have a minimum wage and there are still workers getting as little as $5 an hour!
Leong Sze Hian
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?239811-407-400-Sinkies-earn-less-than-1-500-but-nvm-govt-said-1-000-a-month-can-buy-HDB&goto=newpost).