[lvlrsSTI]

[sgbuffett]

4 countries beat us. We should learn from them

1. Provide high welfare benefits. Medical, retirement etc.
2. Ensure workers are unionised and empowered.
3. Implement minimum wages and generous support system.
4. Implement high taxes for rich corporations and individuals.
5. Ensure that top management and leaders are not overcompensated.

[lvlrsSTI]

4 countries beat us. We should learn from them

1. Provide high welfare benefits. Medical, retirement etc.
2. Ensure workers are unionised and empowered.
3. Implement minimum wages and generous support system.
4. Implement high taxes for  rich corporations and individuals.
5. Ensure that top management and leaders are not overcompensated.

Well said….

[maxsanic]

4 countries beat us. We should learn from them

1. Provide high welfare benefits. Medical, retirement etc.
2. Ensure workers are unionised and empowered.
3. Implement minimum wages and generous support system.
4. Implement high taxes for  rich corporations and individuals.
5. Ensure that top management and leaders are not overcompensated.

I don't think the world competitiveness index implies any of the above factors you have mentioned.

IMD publishes in detail the 335 criteria which it uses to rank the countries here https://www.imd.org/link/ca00a8b4d6b4414...fb5ab.aspx

1. There is no mention of high welfare being a criteria for high ranking. Retirement and pension takes up only 1 of the criteria 2.1.09 and the emphasis is on funding levels vis a vis payout liabilities rather than how much payout or support to workers.

2. There is no criteria that has anything to do with worker empowerment or unionization. In fact, the all employment and labour criteria under 1.4.XX and 3.2.XX are all macroeconomic indicators. The closest thing to union is days lost to industrial action, i.e. the more strikes (a.k.a. empowerment) you have, the worse your ranking becomes!

3. Minimum wage is not one of the criteria. The only criteria that has some relation is 3.2.01 under compensation levels, but that's not subject to a requirement for minimum wage as they simply do a summation of average wages in manufacturing, i.e. a high wage country w/o minimum rate will still rank higher than a slightly lower wage country with minimum rate. This criteria is probably affected more by cost of living than anything else.

4. Under tax policy criteria 2.2.XX, there is nothing about taxing the rich or big companies. Most of it are tax ratios as a percentage of GDP and some qualitative stuff like whether it discourages people from working. The way it's worded the opposite is true, the lower the tax rates in general the higher ranking and more competitive score a country will get in this criteria.

5. There is only one criteria dealing with top management pay equality - 3.2.05 Remuneration Spread which measures the CEO pay vs PA. There is a more generic 3.2.04 that deals with general management pay (more like PME rather than top management per se)

[debono]

I don't understand the ranking chart., cos Switzerland with a score of 100.000 is ranked 3, while Singapore with a score of 94.703 is ranked 1....

[sgbuffett]

I don't think the world competitiveness index implies any of the above factors you have mentioned.

IMD publishes in detail the 335 criteria which it uses to rank the countries here https://www.imd.org/link/ca00a8b4d6b4414...fb5ab.aspx

1. There is no mention of high welfare being a criteria for high ranking. Retirement and pension takes up only 1 of the criteria 2.1.09 and the emphasis is on funding levels vis a vis payout liabilities rather than how much payout or support to workers.

2. There is no criteria that has anything to do with worker empowerment or unionization. In fact, the all employment and labour criteria under 1.4.XX and 3.2.XX are all macroeconomic indicators. The closest thing to union is days lost to industrial action, i.e. the more strikes (a.k.a. empowerment) you have, the worse your ranking becomes!

3. Minimum wage is not one of the criteria. The only criteria that has some relation is 3.2.01 under compensation levels, but that's not subject to a requirement for minimum wage as they simply do a summation of average wages in manufacturing, i.e. a high wage country w/o minimum rate will still rank higher than a slightly lower wage country with minimum rate. This criteria is probably affected more by cost of living than anything else.

4. Under tax policy criteria 2.2.XX, there is nothing about taxing the rich or big companies. Most of it are tax ratios as a percentage of GDP and some qualitative stuff like whether it discourages people from working. The way it's worded the opposite is true, the lower the tax rates in general the higher ranking and more competitive score a country will get in this criteria.

5. There is only one criteria dealing with top management pay equality - 3.2.05 Remuneration Spread which measures the CEO pay vs PA. There is a more generic 3.2.04 that deals with general management pay (more like PME rather than top management per se)

The 5 factors I cited are not criteria but approaches and policies that help the 4 countries do well on the criteria. Ahead of Singapore.

Why? The 5 factors enable a high degree of human development that enhances the human capital in these countries to a point they can do much more with their people.

All the 5 things I cited are common across the 4 countries and have proven across time.

[lvlrsSTI]

I don't understand the ranking chart., cos Switzerland with a score of 100.000 is ranked 3, while Singapore with a score of 94.703 is ranked 1....

Spore was no 1 in 2020 but drops to no 5 in 2021 with total score of 94,703. Switzerland was no 3 in 2020 but no 1 in 2021.

[maxsanic]

The 5 factors I cited are not criteria but approaches and policies that help the 4 countries do well on the criteria. Ahead of Singapore.

Why? The 5 factors enable a high degree of human development that enhances the human capital in these countries to a point they can do much more with their people.

All the 5 things I cited are common across the 4 countries and have proven across time.

It's overly simplistic to just declare the 4 countries ahead of us have these 5 factors thus they are ahead of us. There are even more countries below us with these 5 factors, isn't that even more proof we should not do so? Also as Mr STI noted these rankings fluctuate year to year and we were #1 last year as well, going by your rationale shouldn't these 4 countries be learning from us by dismantling the 5 factors last year instead?

Also what you believe is true might be true, I personally agree with most of the 5 factors as well. But this is different from using the IMB ranking as a basis and evidence to support your personal views - from the detailed methodology and criteria IMB disclosed, they definitely did not say anything of the sort you are implying.

Carelessly grabbing cursory evidence to support your views, even if they turn out to be incidentally right does not help public discourse in any way.

[Scythian]

It's all Bullshit

Don't believe anything at all

[Scythian]

Spore was no 1 in 2020 but drops to no 5 in 2021 with total score of 94,703. Switzerland was no 3 in 2020 but no 1 in 2021.

In April, 2021,  Bloomberg started Resilience during pandemuc reports with Singapore No. 1

Then, it slides away month after month.
6 Months later, Singapore dropped to No. 35

And then, climbed 19 notches higher the following month.
Why the swing?

It's all rubbish

[Scythian]

The Economist started a survey entitled :
Crony Capitalism
Singapore was ranked No. 3

Supposedly, a few countries disagreed, and they stopped reporting.

[Scythian]

A reputable magazine s World's Smartest Countries ranking of 25  advanced countries.

Singapore was ranked No.25
- the stupidest among the smartest. Why?

A month or so later, there was a revised ranking and Singapore was ranked among the top 3

How come?
Only God knows

[Scythian]

Singapore Literacy World's ranking @ 70th position.

Singapore 96.0%

Why Singaporeans falling behind the rest of the developed countries?

Focus on $$$ alone, Govt is climbing up the wrong tree

What are you ( or SG govt,) going to do about it,?