Any country can beat this?
Prime minister's pay - USD 1.6 millions per year, proposed to increase to USD 1.9 millions from 2007. He has promised to put his increment (USD 0.3 million) to good cause for next 5 years.
Ministers - USD 1 million per year - tax exempted plus many extras.
General logic for such pay package - PM not concerned to pay SGD 4 millions per year, but concerned with SGD 400 millions paid under-the-table (corruption).
Is there a high correlation between well paid jobs and low corruption?
I tend to think corruption (in many forms) only get bigger and more complex with those who are paid most, and it is directly linked with the moral integrity rather than with the pay package.
This is an extract of the current parlimentary debate in Singapore, over the pay rise for the ministers, with over 90 % from the ruling party (PAP).
Any comment?
woww... thats high.....
In the UK,, Tony Blair (PM) gets roughly £180 000 + tax exempt + free trips around the world and loads of other extras.
MPs get like £50 000 plus the benefits descried above
Cabinet ministers get lke over £100 000
yea so... on the scale of highest paid political ministers... UK doesnt rank high... but im sure, Robert Mughabe's party of Zimbabwe must be amongst the highest...
Yeah, US salary for the president is like 250-500k yearly (forgot the exact figure), and we control 80% of the world's wealth.
| suntzu3500 wrote: |
| Yeah, US salary for the president is like 250-500k yearly (forgot the exact figure), and we control 80% of the world's wealth. |
America controls 80% of the worlds wealth?? 
With USD 1 million to 1.9 million per year for a minister, I guess we can seriously consider outsourcing to cut operation cost.
There is a joke going around, that Hillary Clinton, could be coming to Singapore, as the pay is good.
But I rather use what most MNC has been doing with foreign talents, by outsourcing part of their operations.
Singapore can then get the best talent globally, and yet slashing cost!
Of course they must first go through the procedure to be a Singapore citizen.
| ThePolemistis wrote: |
| suntzu3500 wrote: | | Yeah, US salary for the president is like 250-500k yearly (forgot the exact figure), and we control 80% of the world's wealth. |
America controls 80% of the worlds wealth?? |
Correction, that figure is way off. The proper value is 34% for the entire continent of North America (which is largely US wealth), with Europe controlling another 30%, and Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, Korea, Singapore, and a few other smaller countries combined controlling another 24%. China controls 3% and India 1%.
http://www.wider.unu.edu/research/2006-2007/2006-2007-1/wider-wdhw-launch-5-12-2006/wider-wdhw-figure-2.pdfWhether 34% or 80% it is still a far huge amount to be concerned for.
Yet paid only 500K per year!
Singapore has a world wealth figure far below 24% and ordinary ministers are paid more than the USA president to ensure clean political environment.
Has America been that corrupted, as US politicians are not well paid?
Considering the much larger responsibility and the smaller than Singapore pay package.
Or corruption has little to do with politicians' pay?
Thank you for the correction, and the new dimension on responsibilities of the government tied to the wealth of the economy.
| suntzu3500 wrote: |
| Yeah, US salary for the president is like 250-500k yearly (forgot the exact figure), and we control 80% of the world's wealth. |
Well i think this is actually usual matters..
________________
Barack obama | jncbuds wrote: |
| suntzu3500 wrote: | | Yeah, US salary for the president is like 250-500k yearly (forgot the exact figure), and we control 80% of the world's wealth. |
Well i think this is actually usual matters..
________________
Barack obama |
Some also get free accommodation .... not to mention perks in extended overseas trips, free accommodation, air travel, a chauffeur-driven car etc etc ... 
| deanhills wrote: |
| jncbuds wrote: | | suntzu3500 wrote: | | Yeah, US salary for the president is like 250-500k yearly (forgot the exact figure), and we control 80% of the world's wealth. |
Well i think this is actually usual matters..
________________
Barack obama |
Some also get free accommodation .... not to mention perks in extended overseas trips, free accommodation, air travel, a chauffeur-driven car etc etc ... |
Not to mention getting paid that salary for the rest of his life, even for just a 4 year term...
Now that's a retirement plan! | ocalhoun wrote: |
Not to mention getting paid that salary for the rest of his life, even for just a 4 year term...
Now that's a retirement plan! |
I did not know that. Do the Presidents get paid this salary for the rest of their lives? Now that should then show up differently with Singapore, maybe the salaries they get are one-off for the terms they are serving, whereas the US Presidents get paid for life? So perhaps the US Presidency is still the highest earner in the world in total? | deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | Not to mention getting paid that salary for the rest of his life, even for just a 4 year term...
Now that's a retirement plan! |
I did not know that. Do the Presidents get paid this salary for the rest of their lives? |
Yes, they do. It started after a shameful episode where one former president ended up homeless on the streets. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | ocalhoun wrote: | Not to mention getting paid that salary for the rest of his life, even for just a 4 year term...
Now that's a retirement plan! |
I did not know that. Do the Presidents get paid this salary for the rest of their lives? |
Yes, they do. It started after a shameful episode where one former president ended up homeless on the streets. |
I don't know why, but as I was reading your comment, I had this flashback to Clinton during the scandal days and when he and Hillary had almost been bankrupted by all the legal fees. I wonder whether they would ever allow a President to go bankrupt?Singapore ministers are paid only while they are holding the position.
But they keep creating positions so that some ministers can remain almost forever.
Prime Minister is promoted to Senior Minister, and Senior Minister promoted to Mentor Minister.
This happen to our Mentor Minister Lee Kuan Yew, and our Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong.
They hold different post and enjoy even greater pay.
How about that compare to US presidents?
Oh, I am not sure our our Singapore presidents - they might be paid after they end their terms?
The ruling party has been around for 44 years - and some ministers are around for 44 years.
Of course our opposition members don't stay that long.
Yes, US presidents still enjoy a good retirement packages. That makes it easier for them to retire rather than worry about their retirements. It will be fine just to serve one term and go on retirement. Why bother to go for a second term?
With best regards.
| shenyl wrote: |
Why bother to go for a second term?
|
Power.
People don't run for president for the money... It costs a lot to run, and there are better paying jobs that are easier to get.
Those other jobs don't have the power though.
That's how you know that the first lie any politician will tell you is that they're not after power.The President of the United States of America now makes something like $600,000 dollars.
| gandalfthegrey wrote: |
| The President of the United States of America now makes something like $600,000 dollars. |
I guess with working with 1.2-trillion packages, the salary must be quite low in comparison ... | deanhills wrote: |
| gandalfthegrey wrote: | | The President of the United States of America now makes something like $600,000 dollars. |
I guess with working with 1.2-trillion packages, the salary must be quite low in comparison ... |
That's what kickbacks are for. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| That's what kickbacks are for. |
Wish you would stand for President? But I guess the shenanigans that go with the position would not work for you? 
| deanhills wrote: |
| ocalhoun wrote: | | That's what kickbacks are for. |
Wish you would stand for President? But I guess the shenanigans that go with the position would not work for you? |
A zoophile, individualist, loner, who doesn't like people wouldn't have any chance of getting elected, especially if he (I) refused to join a mainstream political party. Nor do I have the requisite millions of dollars to spend on (likely) futile campaign. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| A zoophile, individualist, loner, who doesn't like people wouldn't have any chance of getting elected, especially if he (I) refused to join a mainstream political party. Nor do I have the requisite millions of dollars to spend on (likely) futile campaign. |
Right! Probably better to find a "home" away from "home" where you can roam freely without Government intrusions corruption is low in think well payed job
| remshad wrote: |
| corruption is low in think well payed job |
Wish that were true. Quite a number of well paid people could be big spenders, who always need more money to keep up with wealthy people, and that may make them targets for corruption. I think everyone, whether poor or rich could potentially become corrupt. Some rich people do it even legally. They have expensive lawyers who find all the loop holes. They then figure it is OK, as it is legal and technically not corrupt. So quite a number of them pay much less taxes than are expected when you look at their income and eyeball revenue for the Government, i.e. taxes.that is quite ironic, having a former president ending up homeless on the streets...
| LimpFish wrote: |
| that is quite ironic, having a former president ending up homeless on the streets... |
Is this for real, has there been a former president ending up homeless in the streets? I can't think of one? 
| deanhills wrote: |
| LimpFish wrote: | | that is quite ironic, having a former president ending up homeless on the streets... |
Is this for real, has there been a former president ending up homeless in the streets? I can't think of one? |
I forget which one, but yes, it did happen once. The lifetime pension was put into place to prevent that after it was brought to public attention. | ocalhoun wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | LimpFish wrote: | | that is quite ironic, having a former president ending up homeless on the streets... |
Is this for real, has there been a former president ending up homeless in the streets? I can't think of one? |
I forget which one, but yes, it did happen once. The lifetime pension was put into place to prevent that after it was brought to public attention. |
The legislation is dated 1958. I did searches all over the place but could not find a "homeless" President in the list of Presidents dating before 1958:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States
Eisenhower was President at the time of the signing of the Bill, Truman preceded him and seemed to have been OK financially. Roosevelt died quite early. That leaves basically Hoover who seems to have been a wealthy man himself.Just for clarification:
| Quote: |
President’s Salary
Effective January 1, 2001, the annual salary of the president of the United States was increased to $400,000 per year, including a $50,000 expense allowance. |
US GOV INFO
Ulysses S. Grant is the only President I can think of that went broke.
When he left the White House in 1877, he became a partner in a financial firm that eventually went belly up. He ended up with throat cancer at the same time, so he decided to write his memoirs to cover his debts and support his family, but he died shortly after finishing it. The book went on to make a good bit of money, but he died in debt. I'm not sure if that's the guy ocalhoun is talking about, but it's the only one I can think of who was broke when he died. | Ophois wrote: |
Just for clarification:
| Quote: | President’s Salary
Effective January 1, 2001, the annual salary of the president of the United States was increased to $400,000 per year, including a $50,000 expense allowance. |
US GOV INFO
Ulysses S. Grant is the only President I can think of that went broke.
When he left the White House in 1877, he became a partner in a financial firm that eventually went belly up. He ended up with throat cancer at the same time, so he decided to write his memoirs to cover his debts and support his family, but he died shortly after finishing it. The book went on to make a good bit of money, but he died in debt. I'm not sure if that's the guy ocalhoun is talking about, but it's the only one I can think of who was broke when he died. |
Maybe it is. But then it must have taken quite a long time for them to get to finally do a Bill in 1958 for Life-Long Pensions for Presidents.
Interesting story however. I'm always curious about stories like these, and I would have thought a "homeless" President would have really justified a good movie. | deanhills wrote: |
| Maybe it is. But then it must have taken quite a long time for them to get to finally do a Bill in 1958 for Life-Long Pensions for Presidents. |
Sounds about right. We rarely get anything done quickly within this massive Rube Goldberg of a machine that we call the US Government. | Quote: |
| Interesting story however. I'm always curious about stories like these, and I would have thought a "homeless" President would have really justified a good movie. |
Yeah I always love movies about historical figures. But just once I would like to see one made that doesn't take extreme artistic license. I mean, Johnny Cash hasn't been dead for 10 years yet, and they just couldn't wait to kick out a movie about him, choc-full-o-lies and all(he never once collapsed on stage from a drug overdose, for example). | Ophois wrote: |
| deanhills wrote: | | Maybe it is. But then it must have taken quite a long time for them to get to finally do a Bill in 1958 for Life-Long Pensions for Presidents. |
Sounds about right. We rarely get anything done quickly within this massive Rube Goldberg of a machine that we call the US Government. | Quote: | | Interesting story however. I'm always curious about stories like these, and I would have thought a "homeless" President would have really justified a good movie. |
Yeah I always love movies about historical figures. But just once I would like to see one made that doesn't take extreme artistic license. I mean, Johnny Cash hasn't been dead for 10 years yet, and they just couldn't wait to kick out a movie about him, choc-full-o-lies and all(he never once collapsed on stage from a drug overdose, for example). |
I remember quite a number of years ago a biography series of the Presidents that was produced by PBS. That really had me rivited to the screen. PBS really is a good TV channel. Regrettably I can't get it in the Middle East.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/ | deanhills wrote: |
| I remember quite a number of years ago a biography series of the Presidents that was produced by PBS. That really had me rivited to the screen. PBS really is a good TV channel. Regrettably I can't get it in the Middle East. |
I love PBS. My dad got me watching it when I was a kid, and I fell in love with Carl Sagans' series, NOVA. Every now and then I catch a show, but honestly, I rarely turn on the TV for anything more than a movie, or the occasional video game.
