Singapore – Home to the World’s Richest People

Associated Press

A man is silhouetted against the skyline of Louis Vuitton’s floating store and the financial district of Singapore.

Yet another wealth report has put tiny Singapore on the top of its charts – this time, as the wealthiest nation in the world by GDP per capita, beating out Norway, the US, Hong Kong and Switzerland.

The report, released this week by Knight Frank and Citi Private Wealth, estimates that Singapore’s GDP per capita – at US $56, 532 in 2010, measured by purchasing power parity – is the highest in the world, topping Norway (US$51, 226), the US (US$45, 511) and Hong Kong (US$45, 301). The report also predicts that Singapore will hold its place as the world’s most affluent country in 2050 (by GDP per capita), followed closely by Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea who will displace Norway and Switzerland as the world’s richest places.

This figure is no doubt bolstered by the staggering number of millionaires in the city-state, which Knight Frank and Citi Private Wealth predict will only keep growing. According to their estimates, Singapore will see a 67% increase in centa-millionaires over the next four years – an über-wealthy class with over US$100 million in disposable wealth. Earlier reports, like the Boston Consulting Group’s Wealth Report released in June, said Singapore has the highest percentage of millionaire households in the world, a title the city-state has held on to for two years running.

Singapore is not the lone beneficiary of Southeast Asia’s wealth explosion, and according to the report the number of people in the entire region with more than US$100 million in disposable assets (excluding property, for example) has increased by 80% in the past five years. Between 2010 and 2011, the number of these centa-millionaires grew 13% — higher than the global average at 6% — and will grow by 44% by 2016. Correspondingly, some Southeast Asian cities have seen property prices increase significantly in the past year, including the Indonesian island of Bali where property prices increased 15% and Jakarta, where they increased by 14.3%.

There are now 18, 000 people with US$100 million or more in disposable assets in Southeast Asia, China and Japan, according to Knight Frank’s estimates – more than North America, which has 17, 000, and Western Europe with 14, 000.

Still, these ultra-high net worth individuals are not completely confident that their large masses of wealth will be completely unaffected by turbulence in the world economy and changing political situations, according to surveys conducted by Knight Frank. In Singapore, the wealthy are most afraid of the impact of the global financial crisis on their wealth, but those in Hong Kong are more worried about the devaluation of currency and those in India are most worried about domestic inflation.

With its high density of Louis Vuitton boutiques, luxury nightclubs and multi-million dollar property, Singapore is also growing in importance as a city for the world’s high net worth individuals. Surveys asking über-wealthy individuals to rank cities in terms of “economic activity, political power, quality of life, knowledge and influence” found that Singapore was the fifth most important city for the world’s wealthiest individuals. Here, the city-state was beaten by London, New York, Hong Kong and Paris, indicating that the world’s most global cities continue to lure the rich.

According to Knight Frank, even respondents in Asia-Pacific put London and New York ahead of Hong Kong and Singapore – an indication that economic growth may not be the most important factor when a high-net worth individual chooses his city of residence.

In the next 10 years, according to the report, Shanghai will be the fourth-most important city for the world’s wealthy with the “relative anonymity of… secondary cities” like Chongqing and Dalian likely to change in the near future, evidenced by an explosion of a luxury goods market in cities that are not yet on the map of the world’s wealthy.

The Knight Frank and Citi wealth report notes that “many of those fast-growing Chinese cities… performed significantly less well for freedom of expression and human rights – something that may hinder any future ascent to the top of the overall ranking.”

By Shibani Mahtani

• GDP, 
• HNWIs, 
• Hong Kong, 
• Singapore, 
• Wealth

Singapore NDP 2012 Grand Finale

Universities, ours and theirs KRISHNA KUMAR

As long as we discourage young talent, encourage an obsolete examination system and remain indifferent to research, we will continue to lag behind the West

There are four critical differences between universities of the western world and ours. Thefirst is that they do all they can, when they recruit young faculty, to make way for excellence. We do everything to block its entry. We start discouraging talent early, but a few bright youngsters manage to come up despite our best efforts. They are the ones who face the greatest resistance from our institutions at the time of selection for vacancies. The norms and standards that western institutions apply for selecting young faculty focus on individualised assessment of potential. Senior people and administrators who make decisions make sure that the aspirants are assessed on the basis of what they have published, the quality of research they have done, and how passionate they seem about the pursuit of knowledge and teaching.

MECHANICAL CRITERIA

In our case, the initial criteria applied are purely mechanical. Any hint of trans-disciplinary interest means that the candidate loses the chance to be interviewed. And those who somehow escape this fate are ultimately sized up at the time of interview in terms of the lobbies they might belong to. Someone rare enough to be independent of personal as well as intellectual lobbies is the first to be eliminated. In the semi-final act of short listing, those lacking support from the dominant lobbies get weeded out. Then, in the ultimate moment, hard bargaining takes place and the institution’s future gets sealed. If there is someone with an unusual background or achievement, you can depend on the selection committee to find a technical ground to reject him or her. The only way he or she might get appointed is if a determined Vice-Chancellor forces the person in. Democratic procedures and correctness have become incompatible with respect for quality. Our universities feel comfortable with the labyrinth of eligibility norms that the University Grants Commission has nurtured with relentless energy to issue circulars over the decades. Selection committees debate over the finest of technicalities to justify the selection of the average, allowing anyone with sheen to get stuck and lost in the maze of criteria.

The second major difference between our universities and the western ones relates to the concept of teaching. We calculate teaching in terms of periods taken. The Radhakrishnan Commission had bemoaned the fact that our colleges work like higher secondary schools. More than six decades after the commission gave its report, life in our undergraduate colleges is just the same. The UGC demands 18 periods of teaching per week from an assistant professor. “Isn’t that reasonable?,” one might ask. Of course, it is, if you ignore what the word “teaching” means. The practice of calculating teachers’ daily work by counting the number of periods they stand beside the blackboard exposes the hollowness of our system and the concept of education. It also shows how little we have progressed since colonial days when accountability was tied to crude measures. How far Britain has moved away from the procedures it introduced in India long ago became apparent to me a year ago when I was invited to serve on a course evaluation committee in a British institute. After examining the course content, the recommended readings and the description of each lecture session taken through the year, the committee met groups of students from the previous three years. We also read the detailed feedback each student is required to give at the end of each course.

Our discussion with students and — separately — with their teachers was frank and detailed. We learnt how students assessed their teachers in terms of preparedness for each class, personal interest in the subject, the pedagogic strategies used to arouse interest, and not just regularity — which was, in fact, taken for granted. In India, we worry about attendance records to keep the student under pressure to attend classes that may be altogether devoid of intellectual stimulation. Despite attendance norms being stringent, there are classes without much attendance. There are also numerous cases of attendancewithout classes. An obsolete system of examination helps teachers who miss classes and make no effort to relate to students. There are many who take the number of periods required, but their classes have no soul or spark.

CONCEPT OF KNOWLEDGE

The third critical difference between life in an Indian university and a university in the West arises out of the concept of knowledge embedded in the system. The crude measures our regulatory bodies such as the UGC apply in the name of accountability mask the epistemic sterility of the curriculum, the pedagogic process and examination. In the West, curriculum and pedagogy both follow the teacher’s own research interests. Even smaller universities with limited resources attempt to cultivate a research environment. Topics of research reflect the university’s concern for the social and natural world surrounding it. Research is seen as an inquiry to solve problems as well as to induct the young into a community of inquires. Keeping a record of hours spent on direct teaching becomes irrelevant in such a system, even in the case of undergraduate students. To keep their research interests alive and popular, senior professors engage with young undergraduates who bring fresh questions and perspectives to ongoing inquiries. In India, you stop teaching undergraduate classes as soon as you attain professorial status. Teaching and research are seen as two separate activities. While teaching is perceived as institutional work, research is viewed as a personal agenda for moving forward in one’s career. Not surprisingly, infrastructure and administrative procedures that might facilitate research do not exist. Obstacles do, and the teacher who makes the mistake of initiating a research project has to struggle all the way to its completion and the ritual of report submission to the funding agency. No one among colleagues or in the administration cares to know the findings, let alone their implications. Teaching goes on following the grooves of preset syllabi, like the needle boring into an old gramophone record.

The fourth critical difference lies in the library. In the West, even in the most ordinary universities, the library forms the centre of life, both for teachers and students. Librarians enjoy a high status as their contribution to academic life cuts across academic disciplines. They work closely with teachers and students in the various tasks involved in procurement of books and journals, keeping the library quiet and friendly, and ensuring speedy access. Our case is the opposite. The library exists on the margins of the classroom. In many universities, undergraduate students are not allowed to use the university library. Subscription to journals and magazines has dwindled over the years, and maintenance of past volumes is now seen as an obsolete practice because e-storage is available. We forget that the library is not merely a service; it is also a physical space whose ethos induces the young to learn the meaning of belonging to a community of scholars. Our reading rooms carry an unkempt, hapless look, with clanking ceiling fans and dog-eared books waiting to be removed. Book acquisition has been saturated with petty corruption and a crowd of spurious publishers has thrived on the outskirts of the academia.

SYMPTOMATIC

These four critical differences are, of course, symptomatic of deeper problems entrenched in structures that govern higher education in India. Those who perceive all problems in financial terms miss the barren landscape of our campuses. Inadequacy of funds is, of course, worrisome, but it cannot explain the extent to which malice, jealousy and cussedness define the fabric of academic life in our country. There is a vast chasm that separates the Indian academia from society. Let alone the masses, even the urban middle class cares little for what goes on inside classrooms and laboratories.

The citizenry does not see higher education as an intellectual resource. Nor do political leaders. The only commonly understood purpose that the system of higher education serves is to alleviate — and keep under tolerable levels of discomfort — what the British economist, Ronald Dore, has called the ‘Diploma Disease’ in his 1976 classic on education in developing economies. Dore has explained why a country like ours will continue to lag behind the West in knowledge and technique so long as we keep using mark-sheets and certificates to screen the young for further education and employment. His insight that the valid goal of widening the pool of talent is defeated by bureaucratisation of selection continues to be pertinent across the colonised world.

(The writer is Professor of Education at Delhi University and a former Director of NCERT.)

News published on The Hindu

Singapore celebrates 47th birthday

Singapore celebrates 47th birthday
By Tan Qiuyi, Vimita Mohandas, Joanne Chan | Posted: 09 August 2012 2014 hrs
SINGAPORE: Singapore marked its 47th birthday on Thursday with tens of thousands of people gathered at the downtown Marina Bay area to soak in the celebrations.

The Marina Bay area was a sea of red as 26,000 spectators packed the floating platform - the centre of activity.

And it was n

othing short of fun-fare and bright smiles.

Singaporeans of all ages and families were eager to enjoy the birthday celebrations - themed "Loving Singapore Our Home".

A spectator said: "The favourite part is the parade when I see all the officers in their dresses (uniforms) - it makes me proud; they look beautiful, wonderful."

The Red Lions - free-fallers from the Singapore Armed Forces - were the usual crowd favourites.

Adding to the pomp of the parade was the Commitment to Defence March with some contingents marching in from the seating gallery amidst the spectators.

New at this year's parade was the colour dress theme - red and white - seen on many of the MPs, cabinet ministers and former Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, compared to the mainly all-white of previous years.

And making his first inspection of the parade contingent as Head of State was President Tony Tan Keng Yam, who took office in September last year.

This year's parade commemorated 45 years of National Service paying tribute to NSmen - past and present - with a 10-minute salute from the ground, the sea, and the air.

The sky was definitely not the limit for this year's fireworks display.

The Singapore SOKA Association - a long time contributor to the National Day Parade - upped the ante with a stunning display of pyrotechnics.

By sun-down, more than 4,000 performers put up a spectacular show - urging everyone to reflect on what they love about Singapore.

A spectator said: "Not only loving ourselves, our family, probably we should also love those who come to our shores to better themselves and better their lives."

A large part of the success of the parade was also due to the enthusiastic crowd who have been cheering on the participants non-stop throughout the whole day.

Mr Choo Khoon Hock, who has attended every single National Day parade since the first one in 1966, said: "Partly, I was in the Cadets Corp and I liked the marching tune, I joined the Singapore Volunteers Corp, so I got hooked! Every August, I would spend my time seeing every rehearsal."

Spectators also grooved to the medley of National Day songs through the years.

The parade culminated with a burst of colours in the sky, a fitting end to a superb birthday celebration.

- CNA/ck

Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in his 2012 National Day Message.

Happy Birthday Singapore

Graduates’ starting pay higher this year despite slowdown sentiments

Despite sentiments of a slowdown emerging in the global economy, global management consulting firm Hay Group said that fresh graduates will fare better this year, with employers in Singapore offering a higher base salary compared to their 2011 cohorts.
For immediate release
SINGAPORE, July 30, 2012 – Despite sentiments of a slow

down emerging in the global economy, global management consulting firm Hay Group said that fresh graduates will fare better this year, with employers in Singapore offering a higher base salary compared to their 2011 cohorts.
According to Hay Group’s Fresh Graduate Pay Survey 2012 conducted in June, the average starting monthly pay for degree holders across the three qualification categories — without Honors, with Honors (Second Lower and Below) and with Honors (Second Upper and Higher) — is S$2,678, S$2,766 and S$2,882 respectively.
The survey, which drew participation from 79 companies across general industries in Singapore, showed that jobs in Engineering ranked at the top, commanding the highest average starting salary of S$2,777 per month for degree holders (without honors), followed by jobs in Research & Development (S$2,764 per month) and Merchandize Operations (S$2,742 per month). See Tables 1-3.
For diploma holders, jobs in Merchandize Operations command the highest average starting salary of S$1,934 per month, with Design/Creative jobs coming in second (S$1,915 per month) and jobs in Research & Development following suit (S$1,903 per month). The average starting pay for diploma holders is S$1,866 per month.
Mr Victor Chan, Regional General Manager (Singapore and ASEAN) for Productized Services, Hay Group said, “In spite of the high volatility of international financial markets and the economic uncertainty in Europe, companies in Singapore continue to engage in the graduate talent war. Employers are setting a higher benchmark for the starting pay package for fresh graduates this year especially for engineering graduates.”
Return on investment
For diploma-holders who are considering investing in a degree, the Hay Group study shows that employers in Singapore place a premium of 48.7 per cent for average degree holders over diploma holders in terms of starting salaries.
Meanwhile, the premium which employers place on a Master’s degree over average degree holders is 11.9 per cent.
“For Master’s degree holders, the key determinant of their remuneration package will depend on the institution where they attained the higher qualification as well as the area of professional specialisation they belong to,” said Mr Chan.