I was having lunch with a friend today when the topic of foreign students in Singapore came up. I have the privilege of working with some of the chaps which have riled certain segments of the population. One of the complains Singaporeans have against such students is that a significant number of them are here on scholarship where their fees are fully paid for by the government of Singapore without a bond. The disgruntled feel that the government should be spending that amount of money on Singaporean students instead.
Two of the reasons for the negative sentiments about this form of government expenditure that I can think of are:
1. The Singaporean government should take care of Singaporeans first.
2. The money that the Singaporean government spends have come from Singaporeans.
For reason one, I have always believed that by getting more foreigners into Singapore, the government is increasing both the labour and talent pool, which will lead to more (and better) companies being setup in Singapore which lead to more (and better paying) jobs for Singaporeans. The argument for how foreign students will eventually help the Singapore government take care of Singaporeans first is more nuanced than what I have written above. This post isn’t about reason one, so I’ll leave it for now.
It is reason two that this post has been written.
One of the arguments I have heard about why the Singaporean government should not spend on foreign students is that the money belongs to Singaporeans. Why does the money that the Singaporean government use for the students belong to Singaporeans? Is it because we pay income tax? However there are other forms of taxation. Two of them is GST and corporate tax.
The students that eventually work in Singapore will be paying GST every time they consume a product or service in Singapore. The companies they work for will pay corporate tax. If these students help increase the amount of GST and corporate tax in Singapore by an amount greater than their school fees and other expenses spent on them, can it be said that the investment on them was worth it?
More importantly, won’t the students eventually pay for their own education?
Daily SG: 31 Mar 2008 « The Singapore Daily | 31-Mar-08 at 11:19 am | Permalink
[...] Paying for Foreign Scholars - Ian On The Red Dot: Are Singaporeans Really Paying For Foreign Scholars In Singapore [...]
Tay Kong Nee | 31-Mar-08 at 12:20 pm | Permalink
The civil servants also believed that by getting more foreigners into Singapore, the government will increase both the labour and talent pool. But even Lee Kuan Yew himself has admitted that most of the “foreign talents” ended up using Singapore as a stepping stone for greener pastures elsewhere. Besides burning up the tax payers’ money which should have spent on Singaporeans, they also take up limited places in the universities, forcing many Singaporeans to downgrade their HDB flats in order to fund their children’s education overseas. As for paying GST, don’t forget locals are burdened by the same taxes too. To put things in perspective, these scroungers get free education and board, plus as much as $500 a month for “pocket money”, while there are Singaporean students who have to depend on charity for lunchbox money.
NSP | 31-Mar-08 at 12:37 pm | Permalink
pay GST and taxes mean foreign students will eventually pay for their own education?
You mean Sporeans dun pay GST and taxes?? LOL
Plse don’t scrape the barrel bottom too hard to come up with justifications.
iantimothy | 31-Mar-08 at 2:07 pm | Permalink
Sure, we pay GST and other forms of taxes. I didn’t say we didn’t. I’m just noting that there are many form of taxes and Singaporeans aren’t the only ones paying taxes.
What I’m asking is if the eventual amount of money the foreign students pay in the form of these taxes exceed their school fees and allowances, would it be justifiable for the Singapore government to do what they are currently doing.
If the presence of these foreign students in Singapore allow more taxes to be generated indirectly from their efforts in the labor force by allowing more companies in Singapore, can’t the expenditure on them be considered an investment?
Consider it from these perspective - Singapore has little if not any natural resources. So how do we produce goods and services? We need people. If we maintain just Singaporeans in the workforce, would we be able to attract that many companies and have the amount we currently have in tax revenues as well as surpluses?
I think when discussing these questions, we need to consider the multiplying effect of money that is injected into the economy. More companies coming in could possibly increase the base as well as the multiplying effect.
Singaporeans do pay GST and taxes. Of course we are citizens should be entitled to benefits, rights and privileges not accorded to foreigners. I believe we do. The question of course is degree and arguably that degree is currently not enough for a citizen to feel like his or her country takes care of the citizens more than foreigners.
I do not have the statistics to answer these questions I am posing. I am just suggesting that these are some questions we might want to consider when discussing the issue of foreign students in Singapore.
shoestring | 31-Mar-08 at 2:25 pm | Permalink
I think you are trying to tackle a very complex issue by looking at one of the many facets of the problem. Nevertheless, let’s consider your suggestion.
The point in question is, then, whether foreign students who study on scholarship generate enough taxes to cover the money spent on them. I would ask in return, “If I were a student receiving $X in fees, $Y in accommodation and $Z in pocket money, would the GST I generate exceed the amount of money I have at hand to spend? Is the amount of taxes I pay be more than the opportunity costs to Singaporeans who sponsor me?”
iantimothy | 31-Mar-08 at 2:57 pm | Permalink
hello shoestring. But is it really Singaporeans who are sponsoring the foreign students? or rather is it only Singaporeans sponsoring the students?
http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2008/index.html.
The question whether the amount the foreign students contribute is greater than the opportunity costs to the Singaporeans who are not sponsored or lose places in universities is a fair one.
A rather cold question would be to ask - if i spend the money on a Singaporean and a foreigner, who will eventually contribute more dollars to the economy.
Opportunity cost to an individual is different from opportunity cost to a whole country’s economy.
Another cold question would be - if the money is given to a Singaporean, will he be capable enough, or even willing to stay in Singapore, to help other Singaporeans. Will the foreigner without having to beat any patriotic drum be able to contribute more in helping other Singaporeans just by going about serving as a unit of labor?
shoestring | 31-Mar-08 at 4:14 pm | Permalink
Hi Ian,
The link to Mof cannot be found. You are right. We need to ask the cold questions too. But that would mean, not just looking at the issue of taxes. That was why I said it was complex question, one that should not be assessed based on just taxes.
With regard to the cold questions, can the government provide facts to substantiate that spending on a foreigner will eventually contribute to more dollars that will be EQUITABLY distributed to all Singaporeans? That is only the baseline. Then there is the issue of priorities. Is economic progress the only benchmark for a successful society? Is capitalism the goal at all costs?
The same line of reasoning would apply to your second cold question. Replace “Singaporean” with “foreigner” and the question will be directed back to you.
shoestring | 31-Mar-08 at 4:36 pm | Permalink
It’s the full-stop at the end
http://www.mof.gov.sg/budget_2008/index.html
Are you referring to the Income and Expenditure, GST approx. $3b? It would be good if the government could provide a breakdown on the taxes and GST income derived from foreign scholars. As of now, we are trying to grab at water with our bare hands.
iantimothy | 31-Mar-08 at 4:57 pm | Permalink
Lol. Apologise about the link.
Yup. Was looking at the revenue and expenses estimate as well as the amount derived from corporate and personal income tax.
I agree that even if the foreigners do contribute more, another aspect is the equitable distribution of those contributions.
I agree economic progress is not the only benchmark of a successful society. It is arguable if it is the most important one. However, I do believe it is a necessary condition for a successful society.
I agree the questions cut both ways. I’m merely raising them to entertain the possibilities that maybe Singaporeans aren’t being as shortchanged as we think we are.
Fat Boi | 31-Mar-08 at 5:00 pm | Permalink
“…udents that eventually work in Singapore will be paying GST every time they consume a product or service in Singapore. The companies they work for will pay corporate tax. If these students help increase the amount of GST and corporate tax in Singapore by an amount greater than their school fees and other expenses spent on them, can it be said that the investment on them was worth it?….”
Hello??? Have’nt I and many other Singaporeans been living in Singapore and paying GST and other taxes for decades????? Who has paid more? And who will pay more in the end? FT treats Singapore as a stepping stone. They can and will easily uproot and go where the grass is greener. Your argument is extremely weak.
iantimothy | 31-Mar-08 at 5:35 pm | Permalink
Yes, there are many, possibly a majority of, foreign talents who treat Singapore as a stepping stone. However, there are those who do make Singapore their home.
And even if they make Singapore a stepping stone, during their time here, don’t they also contribute to the country. Is it not possible during their stay, they justify the investment in them?
Likewise, there are a number of Singaporeans who also use Singapore as their stepping stone. You could argue that Singapore is such a shit place that they don’t want to stay here. Maybe. But if you ask me, they are just looking out for number one. Which isn’t wrong.
Of course, intuitively, it seems that if we invest in Singaporeans, in the long run we might benefit because they are less likely to run. Really? Let’s just say I’m not so bold to wager anything on Singaporeans helping Singaporeans.
While the success of Singapore has in a large part been due to the endeavor of Singaporeans, it would be naive to say non-Singaporeans did not contribute to our success. True, Singaporeans have also been paying the mentioned taxes. I’m not downplaying the contributions of Singaporeans, I’m just saying Singaporeans aren’t the only variables in the tax/revenue equation past present or future.
This post was merely raising one question out of many in considering the issue about foreign students and the government’s support of them.
This post isn’t implying that Singaporeans should be contented with the current level of rights, privileges and benefits of citizens. It is merely suggesting that the right of a citizen to get what the foreign scholars are getting may not be as strong if we consider that not all the money collected by the government is just due to Singaporeans and that the best thing for Singaporeans and the economy may not be to give Singaporeans what is given to foreign scholars. Of course, shoestring’s point about which Singaporeans actually benefit is an important one.
Kaffein | 31-Mar-08 at 6:32 pm | Permalink
In the first place, the government should not be sponsoring students to study in Singapore. The initial opportunities are lost to her own citizens.
Take for example, you wish to start a .com company. You have to raise your own capital, sell your ideas and business models and then go through the admin and pains in setting your company up.
The government, on the other hand, gives an initial $50k to another .com company selling the same product category as you and cuts the process for him to set up the company.
How would you feel? Is the initial playing field the same?
Second, once the bond is over, the overseas student can choose to go to another country, using your initial funding and given job opportunity as a stepping stone. What about you? You have been lagged behind. Unless other countries sponsor you (which they won’t because they aren’t stupid), you have nowhere to go unless your parents can sponsor you overseas. Yet why are your parents sponsoring you when the government can sponsor you?
Third, my grand parent, my parents, even I pay taxes, contribute to CPF, go through NS, try to be a good citizen, etc. Shouldn’t my government treat me well? Perhaps the money that go to these students can be used to lower our education fees, yes? Why not invest in your own citizens to bring up the skill level instead of using it to help others who disappear once the bond is up?
Fourth, the government is bringing in elite students (at least I hope so) in numbers. The good thing is the academic level goes up. But reality is, your kids or the next generation will be fighting tooth and nail against these students academically. What happens if he is just an above average student? What’s next? It’s not as if ITE is a good option as compared to places like Australia where plumbers, electricians, mechanics earn more than doctors and lawyers. So what’s next for your kids?
Fifth but not last, why should I be at a disadvantage when I am a son of Singapore? It’s like your own father treating other kids better than you. Look, I’m not expecting handouts. But I expect the government to implement policies that assist me while I focus in in reaching my goals in life, be it being a good, hardworking employee, thinking new ideas, be a housewife in raising my kids up well, teaching them about good morals and character building, able to see my parents and grandparents smile in their twilights years and enjoy the fruits of their labour, etc.
Not friggin’ juggling and balancing my life to be No. 1 in everything - role citizen, good NSF, good parent to kids, good worker, good neighbour, good driver, kind and compassionate heart, healthy lifestyle, work smart, be productive, good sex life to produce more children for the nation, and with every other day the government telling me I haven’t done enough or I need to do more.
I should not be doing more overtime so that I can pay bills which are now sky rocketing to insane inflation with the bulk due to GST and at the whims and fancy of some ministers who sit in their ivory white tower and also paying them their million dollars salaries when they are goofing up simple policies and singing spin stories about a toilet break.
I should not worry if my (grand)parents who had worked their lives off to contribute to the economy and then for a government who never appreciates them and turns around and tell them they cannot retire. And the burden is placed upon me to feed them when I cannot even feed my own family.
The government should be helping me. So that it is worthwhile to stay and invest my time and effort in the country.
So tell me which part do you not grasp when my (grand)parents and I pay taxes but in the end, I do not a voice to decide how a policy should be implemented?
Just ask any Singaporean-bred citizen if they are willing to sponsor sons of other countries to study in Singapore.
‘Nuff said,
Kaffein
PS. I have nothing against foreign students or workers. They are my colleagues in my previous workplace and I have lots of respect for them. But I do not like how the government shaft policies down our throats and expect us to swallow without taking into account how we feel.
Disgusted Reader | 31-Mar-08 at 6:53 pm | Permalink
I have been reading your posts quite regularly but have so far made only one comment in the past because I’d thought they were good. This time, I can’t help but to chip in.
I think you are either being very naive or intentionally myopic to have come up with such a justification.
Do you expect Singaporeans to so easily buy your justification?
Come on, try harder.
iantimothy | 31-Mar-08 at 8:14 pm | Permalink
Hello Kaffein. I do believe there are other countries which sponsor foreign students. Off hand, I can think of Germany although I am not sure if their terms are as generous as Singapore’s.
Hello Disgusted Reader. I apologize for offending you. I don’t think I’m being intentionally myopic or just plain myopic. Neither do I think I’m being naive. I concede that my post is only covering one aspect of this debate and recognize that the issue is bigger than the way I have framed my argument.
My argument is this - the initial amount of money spent on these students are not only just from the work of Singaporeans and there is eventually a possibility that these students will contribute to the economy more than was spent on them although quantifying and measuring the contribution against the opportunity costs incurred by Singaporean students is difficult if not outright impossible.
I guess, actually, I know in such times, it is easy to look inward and just say, in the event of uncertainty, just spend the money on Singaporeans first. Yet even that policy could entail risks that we are not aware of.
I admit that when I wrote the post, I was looking from an investment point-of-view - instead of buying shares in another company, our government buys talent. If we spend X amount and get back Y amount, would the investment not be justified? Yet, reading the comments, I am reminded the opportunity cost is not in just terms of how the money was spent but how these foreign students affect the enrolment, morale and grades of Singaporean students. Thank you commentators.
I think the government has been trying to tackle the issue of students not being able to get a place in universities by starting more universities and increasing intake. They are also trying to increase the options and improve the offerings of these institutions. Have you seen the new ITE buildings? Have you seen Republic Poly? Of course, nice buildings don’t mean a thing and could just be plaster to hide much deeper wounds, yet I would take such a start then nothing at all.
How do we lag behind besides in the amount of money paid for fees? For the guys, we might lag behind because of National Service but even in that respect we lag behind other people just in terms of our age in reaching milestones. When we enter tertiary education as well as the workforce, we are competing with people in the same batch not people in the same age category. It feels like shit when some guy is the same age and doing better just because he didn’t need to go for NS but how well we do against the current batch really depends on our own effort.
I can understand how reservist might make us less competitive especially during your student days. It can be really disruptive when you have to report back to camp during your holidays for training. However, I have seen students squander the other days of the holidays outside of reservist so how big is the impact of doing reservist as a student? Are we just trying to find an excuse?
How do we decide or how do we know where every single cent in the government coffers come from? Even if every single cent was paid by a Singaporean, was the ability to pay that single cent solely the result of the efforts of Singaporeans?
Where do you draw the line? How could you possibly account who was responsibility for generating that dollar paid in tax.
I think it would be extremely arrogant to think it is solely a Singaporean effort.
Now, make no mistake. I believe Singaporeans ourselves have played the biggest part in making Singapore what she currently is. I also know we as a country ( people and government included ) have not done enough to help those left behind. However, a lot of the things shared by Kaffein does not seem to be the result of the specific policy by the government to give such generous benefits to foreign students.
Last point - a flawed analogy but one that I hope will help explain why I think spending money on foreign students is necessary. Say the government spends the money on a Singaporean. The net result is one pair of hands to make bread. If the government spends money on the foreigner, we now have two pair of hands to make bread with the Singaporean’s ledger having a negative amount equal to the amount of money spent. If eventually the amount of bread made is double, then it was probably foolish to have spent the money on the foreigner. However, if with an addition of one more individual, the amount of bread made does not increase linearly but say increases by 3 times, then in the long run, the Singaporean might be better off if like shoestring says, there is equitable distribution.
Having said that, I still believe that every single cent spent on a foreigner is not just because of the efforts of Singaporeans. The system is more complex than that and all our fates are linked in ways none of us could possibly understand fully.
iantimothy | 31-Mar-08 at 8:20 pm | Permalink
Oh…after reading thru my post and comments, I realize that it sounds like I’m saying just because foreigners contribute so only fair we give them back something by paying for the education of other foreign students.
I’m not saying that. My argument for the generous benefits to foreigners is more selfish than anything. I believe we need them to grow the pie. Dividing the pie is another matter and that’s something all Singaporeans need to fight for together (just don’t protest hor).
I’m also arguing that for us to even have the luxury to consider the spending of such amounts of money is not just due to the efforts of Singaporeans although we probably contributed the most and got whacked the most along the way.
Fox | 31-Mar-08 at 11:09 pm | Permalink
It’s very simple to estimate the total amount of subsidies given to a single foreign scholarship holder in one of our local universities during his 4-year studies.
Tuition fees: 4 x $24000 = $96000
Living expenses: 48 x $500 = $240000
Other expenses (air tickets, foundational classes) ~ at least $5000
Each foreign scholar would cost Singapore at least $125000.
Darkness | 01-Apr-08 at 4:16 am | Permalink
There is a reality you may not have considered Ian. How does any oligarchy propose to control the future? It can only do so by controlling the present and if possible the past. Let me put it another way, how did the Romans or for that matter the British or French perpetuate their empire? They did so by leveraging on the locals, that’s to say they saw the long term value of inducting them into their institutions of higher learning and what did they do after that? They allowed them to return home and start turning the wheel of life. What many failed to realize is these empire trained technocrats carried with them a very specific understanding of how to define both personal and organization success along the same lines which made possible the whole idea of sustaining empire as a concept – they were in effect proxies which extended the raison of empire. This is a very subtle way for any government to extend not only their strategic reach, by ensuring the elites of tomorrow regionally at least share a common set of values which are consistent with those who propose to control the future – so in real terms perhaps using standard bean counting methods may not yield the desired results to your question Ian. To me these are very long term strategies and one simply needs to understand the pay outs may not even be direct. The question we need to ask is this; what is the most efficient way for any govt, not only the Singapore govt to control the social, economic and political outcome of lets say country A, B and C? Let me put it this way, did you know Pontius Pilate, was not a Roman citizen? He aspired to his position as pro-consul of Judea by way of sponsorship through a Roman scholarship program. When Claudius the commander of the Legio VIII sailed into Caesarea Maritima to quell the Jewish uprising in Judea, he did not need to present his credentials to Pilate, they went to the same school. Neither was his gift unusual, a chalice with the words inscribed, “ora et labora,” a souvenir from their alma mater – you see historians have since speculated why Pilate bowed so easily to the will of Rome / as pro-consul, he had a right to even veto the Roman senate – he was after all trained as a diplomat, he had his own ideas of how to quell the Jewish insurrection, but till then none of them included violence – but in the greater scheme of things, even he would have realized how futile it would have been to resist the will of Rome, you see he realized this at the very moment when Claudius reminded him of his roots, “are we not cut from the same cloth Brother?” He was after all one of them ; no man can turn against it’s own kind. I wonder how much is that worth Ian? How much?
My feel is very little has changed since those days.
Charles | 01-Apr-08 at 4:39 am | Permalink
Quick question on your “buying talent” analogy:
When I buy a DVD player, I expect to get some use out of that DVD player (obviously). So why no bond?
Is it because Singapore is not really as attractive a location to study?
It is almost like: “Well I can’t get into stanford so what the heck, let me study in Singapore. It is free anyway” mentality.
IF the argument is as you have said, why not bond these scholars?
iantimothy | 01-Apr-08 at 8:53 am | Permalink
Hmmm..maybe there is no bond because we are confident of what we can offer? That once people give Singapore and Singaporeans a chance, they will want to make this place their home?
I think it might help all of us if we do not see ourselves no up. As in - we stop seeing ourselves as a second choice place. It might not always be true.
iantimothy | 01-Apr-08 at 8:57 am | Permalink
Whoa… Darkness thanks for contributing the comment. I see your point. But with such animosity among Singaporeans about these foreigners, will we ever be able to say ‘are we not cut from the same cloth Brother?’ and actually cause a foreign friend to believe in that statement.
George | 01-Apr-08 at 10:11 am | Permalink
If the govt were to spend as much as it does on foreigners, on Singaporeans, the criticism will disappear overnight, I believe!
staddict | 01-Apr-08 at 10:58 am | Permalink
Hi
Scholarships as a long term control tool? Mmmmh that’s certainly something to think over. I wonder why do the British regularly set up British Councils in the Commonwealth? Why do the French maintain scholarly outpost such as the Alliance Francaise?
Could it be for the same reason? Very interesting post I must say. I have learnt alot from this discussion.
staddict | 01-Apr-08 at 11:30 am | Permalink
Coming to think of it, is that the reason behind all these frebbie newspapers like Today. The reason why I mentioned this is I no longer see the value of subscribing to the ST. I believe my decision is quite common if I compare it with many of my peers who are doing the same.
It’s not so much the cost issue, but the whole idea of having to pay to read propaganda! Just doesnt make any sense to me.
btw I just want ask where did you get that snippet from Darkness? If you dont mind. Many thxs
KM | 01-Apr-08 at 12:34 pm | Permalink
Re: >>”Hmmm..maybe there is no bond because we are confident of what we can offer? That once people give Singapore and Singaporeans a chance, they will want to make this place their home?”<<
Going by your argument, why is the government enforcing scholarship bonds on its own citizens who receive local scholarships? (the bond is something like 4 years, isn’t it?) When the foreigner sees how the government treats its citizens, why would the foreigner want to make this his home? So that his kids can be bonded in future while another foreigner gets away with a bond-free education? Don’t try to bullshit.
Christopher | 01-Apr-08 at 1:32 pm | Permalink
The only buying point for the scholarship, would be ‘buying talent’ and improve local university ranking, (which may be solely on the administrator mind, - getting fatter pay lah) which may benefited our local alumnus in interational employment.
But for the repayment of the investment, and talking about getting back in term of their contribution, and worst referring to GST and taxes, will be very myopic.
Let us look at the ‘buying talent’ in our sportfront, what is the result at this moment?
And for those parent who downgrade their property to pay for their children oversea education, as SM Goh and PM Lee has said, the Australian Government are also buying our talent.
What you gained may not even equal to what you lose. Hopefully what you lost will at least be equal to what you gain. Hahaha!
Regards
CareBEAR | 01-Apr-08 at 1:36 pm | Permalink
Well I guess it makes perfect sense when you consider there is actually a post grad school called the LKY public admin blah blah.
iantimothy | 01-Apr-08 at 2:10 pm | Permalink
hello staddict - I think Darkness himself left the comment here.
Hello Christopher - i think the points raised by me are not myopic if they are not raised in isolation. I am under no illusion that there is more to this discussion. Not to consider these points could be myopic - just looking at it with a us against them, us or them lens is not helpful.
About studying overseas - what if we don’t allow any foreign students to come and study and also keep the current intake of local students? Will there still be disgruntlement about Singaporeans not being able to get places.
@KM - because the students may be seduced while at other places. After all, they are the best Singapore has to offer, and they will probably want to look out for themselves and not return to Singapore if they are given a better option. That doesn’t mean Singapore doesn’t have something to offer these foreign students.
Put simply - if you are Tom Brady, you can get Gisele Bundchen. If you are not, but you are maybe say Owen Wilson with still some marketability, then you get Kate Hudson. But if by chance you as Owen Wilson, get Gisele Bundchen, you want to tie her down as fast as possible so she can remain yours as long as possible - get married.
We are Owen Wilson. We got something to offer, but to a different tier.
Sylvester Lim | 01-Apr-08 at 3:03 pm | Permalink
All advanced countries need to consider taking in real FT, not cheap labor. Let’s face it, talented FTs can contribute to the economy of Singapore. However, a disfunctional country can be behave like a disfunctional family where the elders treat strangers better than their own family members. Own family is taken for granted just like Singaporean and outsiders are treated better hoping that they will stay on to contribute further. Over time, resentment is built up and you get attitudes such as apathy, disinsterest, attention seeking behaviour. The misconsception that people have is that with education, people can think better and behave as well. Unfortunately, our education system is academically results based and does not look at building a broad based society, a thinking citizen. You not need a degree to achieve good family relations with your family. A disfunctional family relationship will result in the same type of government/citizen relationship. A authoritarian father will have disfunctional children and start a viscious circle. While LKY is a fantastic stateman, what makes us think that he is a good family man and will take care of the country? Education? Nah….
amberlife | 01-Apr-08 at 6:30 pm | Permalink
I subscribe to Darkness’ philosophy/quote, but at the same time, we must also find out, how are these foreign talent recruited?
At one stage, I understand, especially those from China they are recruited through agents base there. We should know coruption is widespread there.
So the talent recruited, do not complete their studies in our universities here, as they are not the real bright one.
I know of a group, who uses these money to rent chalet regularly at East Coast park, merry making consuming alcohol and marjong session, did not complete their studies here.
I also know of Asean Scholarship, where the students from Philippines, came for their secondary education, out of about five students, none make it to the local university.
So, where do we see the result from the money spent?
I am always not against good policy decision, but the follow through and the deliveries by the civil servants always failed.
iantimothy | 01-Apr-08 at 7:08 pm | Permalink
@amberlife thanks for highlighting this issue.
Fox | 02-Apr-08 at 10:27 am | Permalink
If these students help increase the amount of GST and corporate tax in Singapore by an amount greater than their school fees and other expenses spent on them, can it be said that the investment on them was worth it?
Well, each foreign scholar costs us at least $125000. Probably more than that. Do you really believe that the Singapore government can recover that within the paltry six years bond period?
Astarian II | 02-Apr-08 at 2:34 pm | Permalink
I really have to go with darkness on this one. When I take into account the cummulative cost of training a scholar into full usefulness to even allow him or her to amortize the investment. i really cannot see how it can be accomplished within a period of 6 or even 8 years. We all know the first 5 yrs is learning curve, so what are you saying the entire cost can be recovered in one year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Charles | 02-Apr-08 at 3:33 pm | Permalink
Let me throw the argument back to you. If we are really a destination of choice for higher education, then regardless of bonds, they will still come.
The question I have is not so much spending money on these scholarships but why not bond them? Implement a bond and see what that does to the numbers.
iantimothy | 02-Apr-08 at 4:31 pm | Permalink
They have to work in Singapore for a certain number of years. Would that count as a bond?
jack | 02-Apr-08 at 8:29 pm | Permalink
They can work for years while they are in Singapore but the question is: are they contributing to Singapore with their so-called “super talent” and move Singapore to the next level.
Or are they dragging their feet to do the necessary years while producing so-so results and spring off when their deadlines are over.
Where are the patents?
amberlife | 03-Apr-08 at 1:39 pm | Permalink
They are foreigners, no asset; no family here, how to bond them? The most they are not allow to enter Singapore again, if they default. Do they care, if they are taking Singapore as the stepping stone?
I believed the only issue is how much of places should be provided to ‘foreign talent’ to benefit the ‘ideal’ senario, as mentioned by Darkness above, and that will not be at the expense of our own Singaporean.
SGDaily Roundup: Week 14 « The Singapore Daily | 05-Apr-08 at 1:52 am | Permalink
[...] Paying for Foreign Scholars - Ian On The Red Dot: Are Singaporeans Really Paying For Foreign Scholars In Singapore [...]