CDC Vouchers

[Wind30]

9 hours ago, Stratovarius said:

eh... the vouchers are there to limit what you can spend on. They dont want you to spend on a bag or watch but rather on the necessities. It is also targeted at local small business so that people are more willing to engage them with the vouchers. win win. What i dont agree is they issue to all household. i rather they give the lower income group only with a bigger share. Better well off families dont need that $300.  

Actually I am saying the same thing as you which is broad based support is bad. But nobody shoot u leh?? Sigh…

 

[Wind30]

2 hours ago, Lala81 said:

Hopefully interest rates stay middling to high for years to come. I think that's the only way to slow down this disastrous cycle (note that I don't say reverse). 

Cos surely when the next financial crisis comes, rates will go to zero in USA. Real estate, asset prices sky rocket again. 

For a normal Joe, without significant leverage (and hence significant risk), there's no way the middle or lower class can keep up with the upper 10-20%.

I'm not very optimistic of any other scenario coming out. 

Actually prudent gov spending can work with high interest rate to slow down inflation, imf say one, not me. 
“With many people still struggling, governments should continue to prioritize helping the most vulnerable to cope with soaring food and energy bills and cover other costs—but governments should also avoid adding to aggregate demand that risks dialing up inflation. In many advanced and emerging economies, fiscal restraint can lower inflation while reducing debt.”

U feel that current inflation is disastrous and I think so too. That is why I feel everything should be done to try to slow down inflation, like spending prudently. 

Edited January 27, 2023 by Wind30

[Lala81]

29 minutes ago, Wind30 said:

How did u arrive to the conclusion that the cdc vouchers has worked because it part of an overall package? It is hard enough to understand individual measures and its effects adequately, I feel it’s close to impossible to know the interactions between different measures. At the end of the day, u just have to either trust the gov or don’t trust them. Just like in mcf, u see people blaming the gov for everything even when the gov is on their side in an issue. 

Of course some of the inflation are external causes, but that does not mean there is no internal ones or bad policies cannot make the inflation worse. The imf article states a general principle about Broad based support and how it’s bad for inflation, not just for USA but also valid in general. U can argue Singapore is an exception but in that case, the burden of proof really lies on the person claiming that Singapore is so different. 

ok I am not saying we will go bankrupt because of cdc vouchers, just the policy is not correct at current state of affairs.  Just because we have revenue does not mean we should spend it sub-optimally. 

Are the goods you want to get at your neighborhood store showing a spike in inflation? Are you breaking down the percentage difference? Analyzing how much inflation is attributed to this increased cash injection circulation into the domestic economy. 

So show the data that the measure is causing inflation to spike in a measurable degree lor. How did you arrive at that conclusion? 

 

Or ask your mp or Jamus lim to raise the question in parliament. 

Or what? You say is waste of resources. Govt say no worries. Then your self admitted non economist want to debate what? 

 

If your cdc voucher is so worrying of a wasteful economic policy, then is this sparking a sgd run? Weakening of the sgd? Is Mas defending our currency exchange? Are rating agencies /financial analysts covering Singapore economy sounding alarm bells about inflationary policies? 

 

[Wind30]

20 minutes ago, Lala81 said:

Are the goods you want to get at your neighborhood store showing a spike in inflation? Are you breaking down the percentage difference? Analyzing how much inflation is attributed to this increased cash injection circulation into the domestic economy. 

So show the data that the measure is causing inflation to spike in a measurable degree lor. How did you arrive at that conclusion? 

 

Or ask your mp or Jamus lim to raise the question in parliament. 

Or what? You say is waste of resources. Govt say no worries. Then your self admitted non economist want to debate what? 

 

If your cdc voucher is so worrying of a wasteful economic policy, then is this sparking a sgd run? Weakening of the sgd? Is Mas defending our currency exchange? Are rating agencies /financial analysts covering Singapore economy sounding alarm bells about inflationary policies? 

 

? I base my conclusion in what I read, like the imf article. Your Tharman package quote is more general and can be applied to everything, hence my objection. 
I am not asking for measurable proof which none of us have.

Edited 

ok maybe I misunderstood u. Are U are saying on the whole the gov is prudent in it’s spending if u look at the big picture? Then my stand is there is no harm in fixing the small mistakes either. At the end of the day, we still have to decide whether the broad based cdc vouchers is a good use of gov money, irrespective on how prudent the gov is as a whole.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Wind30

[Stratovarius]

25 minutes ago, Wind30 said:

Actually I am saying the same thing as you which is broad based support is bad. But nobody shoot u leh?? Sigh…

 

I think the main point of your post is one, it drives up inflation. Which probably isn't true as the vouchers are targeted for necessities. Sellers are not going to sell a pack of rice at the higher price coz of CDC, not directly at least. 2nd, u mentioned why not cash which many others here already explained. 

I din read all the post but I think there are not much comments on the broad base implementation.

[Fcw75]

16 minutes ago, Stratovarius said:

I think the main point of your post is one, it drives up inflation. Which probably isn't true as the vouchers are targeted for necessities. Sellers are not going to sell a pack of rice at the higher price coz of CDC, not directly at least. 2nd, u mentioned why not cash which many others here already explained. 

I din read all the post but I think there are not much comments on the broad base implementation.

 

[Theoldjaffa]

2 hours ago, Wind30 said:

And yet u inevitably reply….. sigh…. 

i replied to Radx.. not u.

 

and this msg.. yes i'm replying to u.

 

there is a difference.

 

no wonder you don't understand or miscontrue a fair bit of things.

 

[Stratovarius]

55 minutes ago, Fcw75 said:

 

I believe in giving credit when due. He always kena left right centre yet still dare to voice out. Lol. Something I can't do.

[RadX]

3 minutes ago, Theoldjaffa said:

i replied to Radx.. not u.

 

and this msg.. yes i'm replying to u.

 

there is a difference.

 

no wonder you don't understand or miscontrue a fair bit of things.

 

It happens when there is a disconnect with things and the focus in inwards . Very hard to reason with such people as the narrative for them is “my way or the highway”. 
 

I dun even want to discuss the part whr “this shd not be in this thread” point that was made. A case of being very micro perspective vs macro. Could be intrinsically inherent or occupational hazard linked. I tend to lean toward the former

[RadX]

1 hour ago, Stratovarius said:

I think the main point of your post is one, it drives up inflation. Which probably isn't true as the vouchers are targeted for necessities. Sellers are not going to sell a pack of rice at the higher price coz of CDC, not directly at least. 2nd, u mentioned why not cash which many others here already explained. 

I din read all the post but I think there are not much comments on the broad base implementation.

You will get sainthood🙏🏾

[RadX]

2 hours ago, Theoldjaffa said:

i dun even want to reply.

@Tianmo kor kor and @Wt_know and @Picnic06-Biante15 very the patient to exprain.

i cannot sia.

This is you?

[Theoldjaffa]

11 minutes ago, RadX said:

This is you?

Ish dis the legendary Kangxi Emperor? Heard he can’t see very well 😎

[Fcw75]

Looks more like the last emperor Puyi.

Not Miss Puiyi ah. 🤪

[Theoldjaffa]

2 minutes ago, Fcw75 said:

Looks more like the last emperor Puyi.

Not Miss Puiyi ah. 🤪

Aiyo I wanna go Pulau liao 😋😋😋

If it’s Puyi then I think he’ll feel very pubor to have to wear so many glasses 😂

Edited January 27, 2023 by Theoldjaffa

[Fcw75]

1 minute ago, Theoldjaffa said:

Aiyo I wanna go Pulau liao 😋😋😋

See her Instagram photos can nose bleed…🤣

[RadX]

Just now, Fcw75 said:

See her Instagram photos can nose bleed…🤣

Not onlyfans meh?

[inlinesix]

11 minutes ago, Theoldjaffa said:

Aiyo I wanna go Pulau liao 😋😋😋

If it’s Puyi then I think he’ll feel very pubor to have to wear so many glasses 😂

Pulau

 

[Benarsenal]

15 hours ago, Wind30 said:

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/cdc-vouchers-claimed-within-three-weeks-3230766

I have always wondered why gov chose to give vouchers to everyone in such an inflationary environment. To me it does not make sense as it just drives unnecessary inflation and is a waste of resource setting up the voucher system.

Why don't they just give cash, Aka bank credits to the needy people like they have done it the past? So much more efficient. You can choose to save the money if you don't have to spend. by giving vouchers, people tend to just spend it straight away in case they forget about it.

To me, that scheme is a waste of taxpayers money as it is not targeted and worse it drives up inflation... 

The funniest thing about the article is that the gov benchmark the success of the scheme by the percentage of people who claimed the vouchers... duh... you give money and a lot of people claim, you say it is a job well done???? shouldn't they actually see if the money is well spent or is there a better way to spend those money instead of giving me $300 which I don't really need. I just have to go and spend it somehow.

 

They do give cash ah. The dunno what payout or something.

The CDC vouchers as I understand, the purpose is actually to benefit the businesses. The original rationale was to encourage Singaporeans to spend on local businesses when they were struggling during COVID. That's why it is limited use only and not everywhere can use.

Edited January 27, 2023 by Benarsenal