How successful has your society been in embracing the old?

Singapore like many developed countries faces the issue of the ageing population. It is expected that by 2030, one in five people would have crossed the age of 65. What adds to the problem is the negative stereotypes attached to being old. Old people are often considered as weak, dependent and vulnerable. As such, it becomes very important for a country like Singapore to ensure that the ageing population remains healthy, productive and are assisted in living healthier lives. Recognising this challenge, Singapore has taken steps to embrace the aged population in various ways and have implemented measures that ensure their well-being, economic benefits and elderly-friendly environment.

The most common problem faced by ageing society is in terms of employment, where young are favoured over the older population. This is because it is often considered that elderly people are not as technologically advanced as the younger generation. However, in Singapore, The Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP) ensures that there are fair and progressive employment practices and assistance for employees. This means that ageist practices by employers are curtailed. By implementing the TAFEP, the government has addressed the root cause of discrimination against the elderly, by correcting stereotypes and educating the employers. The government also encourages elderly workers to undergo skills training so that they have the relevant employability skills. Government agencies like Workforce Singapore and SkillsFuture Singapore run a number of programmes to help workers acquire new skills and find jobs. By providing older citizens with financial independence and a sense of purpose through contributing to their workplace and society, they are more integrated, maintain stronger social bonds, and are generally happier than their non-working counterparts. Thus, Singapore has successfully taken the welfare and interests of the elderly into consideration and protected their position in the workforce.

The Singapore government has also implemented policies and programmes for elderly health care. Singapore government has set up various programmes to help seniors struggling with health problems. These include subsidies for medicines, regular doctor consultation and in case of hospitalisation. Medical insurance funds like Medishield and Eldershield are also provided by the government so that elderly people do not face any problems financially. The Singapore government has also successfully recognised the mobility needs of the elderly and helps them to stay independent. For ensuring this, they have implemented programmes like the Seniors’ Mobility and Enabling Fund which allows the senior citizens to offset costs for equipment like walking sticks, wheelchairs, hearing aid and even spectacles. These facilities enable the seniors to live a healthy life when they do not need to care about the medical expenses. Thus, Singapore has been successful in embracing the old in terms of healthcare and medical services.

Singapore not only cares about the elderly in terms of healthcare and employment but has also ensured that the elderly live a positive and active lifestyle. The government has tried its best to integrate the elderly within society and make them feel that they are not different. Singapore has introduced programmes like the Active ageing programmes where seniors are allowed to take up interesting activities like Zumba, K-pop fitness, stretch band exercises and low impact aerobics. Furthermore, these activities allow the seniors to interact with other seniors through social activities like cooking classes, health workshops, card games and karaoke. Similarly, in terms of housing and other spaces, the government ensures that the places are elderly-friendly. For example, The HDB EASE package, which stands for Enhancement for Active Seniors, helps elderly residents to install items like ramps, slip-resistant floors in bathrooms and railings in their flat to make it elder-friendly. Furthermore, The Silver Zone scheme focuses on enhancing road safety for the elderly through various safety measures. Thus, Singapore cares about the elderly living needs and ensures that the elderly live active and healthy lifestyles.

However, despite the noble efforts of the government, some groups of elderly do feel neglected and outcast in some instances. Among Singapore citizens, many youths and middle-aged workers may, understandably, frown upon the idea of spending vast amounts of resources on the elderly at their expense. The younger generation sometimes fails to understand the needs of the elderly and continue to neglect and sometimes even abuse them. This is evident from the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) report in 2016 where fifty-five cases of elder abuse were reported. In 2017, the cases rose to 77 cases. 2018 saw 126 cases. However, despite these cases, Singapore is still better in understanding the needs of the elderly. The Maintenance of Parents Act by the government mandates it that the children take care of their parents, this ensures that the rights of the elderly are protected financially. Furthermore, the government makes sure that the people abusing senior citizens are punished for their deeds. The government has also taken an initiative in that foster interaction and bonding between people of different generations. This can be seen in the form of Singapore Taskforce’s Grandparenting and Inter-generational Bonding programme. Thus, despite a few instances where the elderly are neglected, Singapore is trying hard to wipe out stereotypes about the elderly and improve understanding between the young and older generations.

In summation, it can be concluded that Singapore does a great job of embracing the old in society. The government plays an instrumental role in integrating the elderly in the society by providing them assistance in employment, healthcare and living active lifestyles. There are ageist attitudes in the society to some extent but the government is taking initiatives to correct this too. Singapore has indeed created a society largely embracing the old.

How justified are the high salaries and bonuses paid out in some professions?

Possible arguments in favour of paying high salaries

Possible arguments against paying high salaries

  • Gap top/bottom.
  • Marxist theory of value.
  • Does not necessarily bring in the talent
  • Encourages greed
  • When combined with bonuses, encourages excessive risk-taking

‘Most migration is caused by economic desire.’ How far do you agree?

For and against points for most migration is caused by economic desire

  • Some might fear torture and imprisonment
  • Some civilians are caught up in war
  • Some in wealthier nations encourage migration to fill low skilled, low pay jobs (eg Canada)
  • Some are fleeing religious persecution
  • There could be gender issues
  • Educated migrants e.g. doctors may migrate for economic reasons which can benefit host countries but create ‘brain drain’ in other countries
  • The well-off also migrate to third world countries as it has a lower cost of living
  • The developed world has a huge responsibility for the conditions that drive the need to migrate

The pursuit of money results in an ungracious society. Discuss.

Where money is coveted, the pursuit of it necessarily involves evil deeds which tear families apart and destroy society, or so the quote ‘money is the root of all evil” suggests. This adage has been widely depicted on the silver screen. The depiction of moral degeneration that accompanies the pursuit of money in ‘The Wolf of Wall Street’ which casts Leonardo DiCaprio as Belfort, the stockbroker, who became more immoral the richer he got is one example. These downright unkind acts have admittedly occurred in real life, but it is not necessarily inevitable that society is therefore devoid of kindness and consideration of others. To debunk that, several commonly held assumptions about the pursuit of money have to be evaluated.

To claim that the pursuit of money necessarily results in a society devoid of consideration for especially the less fortunate is to assume that such endeavours seek to benefit only the individual and disregard the impact on the rest of society. The pursuit of money is assumed to be a single-minded end pursued without regard for the means adopted. The Lehman Brothers Minibond saga is often cited to illustrate how in a desperate bid to sell these structured investment products, financial consultants chose to omit critical information about risk exposure to retail investors, many of whom were elderly and less educated. This example underscores the merciless and even underhanded corporate tactics employed in a bid to meet performance targets. To agree with this is to allow an over-generalisation to obliterate the corporate philanthropic endeavours in society. These philanthropic acts are not random sporadic feel-good efforts but coordinated and sustained corporate initiatives. Encouraging corporate social responsibility has in fact become an integral part of many companies’ culture and values. MasterCard runs financial literacy programmes to educate the public to promote financial inclusion and literacy so that the layperson could also benefit from financial services. The DBS (Development Bank of Singapore) has backed numerous community development initiatives. DBS nurtures social enterprises that creatively and effectively address social needs and provide jobs, goods and services to the disadvantaged and marginalised. With responsible corporate philosophy, the pursuit of money does not necessarily result in a cold-blooded pursuit of money. Graciousness is evident when corporations pursue money yet also give back to society in a win-win partnership.

A second assumption is that competition for limited funds is exclusive and it necessarily aims to drive out competition. Graciousness stands in the way of unfriendly and even hostile tactics to drive out competition. Classic examples of ungracious behaviour towards those that society deems to be a threat can be seen in hostility towards unwelcomed immigrants, often regarded as competitors for scarce jobs and whose appeal lies in their willingness to settle for lower pay. This is evident in the hardening of attitudes towards immigrants among the British. Those surveyed indicated that the resentment towards immigrants arose from the belief that they came to claim welfare benefit for which the British have to fund. This assumption fails to recognise the real cause of the hostility and reluctance to be inclusive. It is not the pursuit of money that drives such ungracious behaviour towards immigrants; it is the insecurity borne out of fear that the privilege and rights that come with citizenship are compromised by the presence of a large population of immigrants. These ungracious acts should be addressed, not by regarding it as an inevitable consequence of the pursuit of money, but as a reflection of a need for clearer policy communication of how immigrants benefit the British economy. According to a report released this year on London’s economic future commissioned by its mayor, the pressure to reduce immigration is threatening London’s status as one of the world’s leading cities. It is understandable for ungracious acts to manifest due to growing insecurity in the face of competition that threatens bread-and-butter issues. However, to attribute it to the inevitability of pursuit of money is to disregard the deeper underlying cause of the insecurity which, when addressed, could temper emotions and reduce the incidence of ungracious behaviours.

It is also assumed that because the pursuit of money seeks to maximise profit and stretch every single dollar, all eyes are trained on the bottom line and exploitative acts are ignored or even deemed justified. This mentality is said to manifest in a less empathetic society and in extreme situations, have a dehumanising effect on how labour is regarded: labourers as money-making tools. Regarded as such, workers’ exploitation is evident. Sweatshop exploitation of workers and abuse of live-in domestic workers are not unheard of depictions of an ungracious society’s treatment of menial labour. The tragedy of Rana Plaza in Bangladesh drew the international spotlight on an industry where workers are not just subjected to harassment, violence and abuse, but whose basic guarantees of safety have also been thrown to the wind, to the extent that a building can collapse on top of thousands of workers. Closer to home, news reports of unkind treatment of domestic helpers are not unheard of. Yet, for a very long time, Singapore society fails to recognise such ungracious acts practised in theirs and their neighbours’ homes. Are these acts an inevitable outcome of the pursuit of money? Could the lives lost at this garment factory not have been prevented? Has society been so bent on making every dollar paid to the domestic helper count that it would not even allow her a day off a week? Thankfully not. What is witnessed is a twin trend of ground-up initiatives to check such behaviour and both national and international efforts to institute safeguards. Transient Workers Count Too (TWC2) in Singapore is one non-profit organisation that seeks to improve social attitudes towards transient workers and advocate the protection of migrant workers. Increasingly, we also see society being more forthcoming in showing appreciation to construction workers in the form of lunch treats on special occasions. Even as the Singapore society strives to develop her economy and pursue money, there are visible efforts by pockets of people in the society to counter acts of ungraciousness and drive the development of a gracious society. Laws are also important to ensure inclusivity and check exploitative acts in the absence of natural graciousness in society. A combination of civil group advocacy and legislation will act to counter the development of an ungracious society even as society pursues money, however obsessively.

It assumes that the pursuit of money and graciousness are mutually exclusive notions. The two endeavours are deemed to be at odds because while one seeks to accumulate wealth, the other seeks to share the wealth, thereby reducing rather than increasing one’s possession of it. In fact, they can be complementary and the pursuit of money, in turn, encourages acts of graciousness. The pursuit of money is perhaps necessary to engender a gracious society as it places more individuals in positions to exercise grace to uplift society. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs demonstrates that when the physiological and safety needs are fulfilled, individuals seek to fulfil higher-order needs of love and belonging, esteem and self-actualisation, with the highest level being self-transcendence when the self only finds its actualisation in giving itself to some higher goals, in altruism and spirituality. Love and belonging, esteem and self-transcendence are concomitants of acts of graciousness when the individual looks beyond the self to enrich the lives of others. The public outpouring of support in words or in-kind whenever disasters strike, as seen in the regional aid for the victims of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, or Nepal’s earthquake; and the generous donation garnered at the last minute to make it possible for the Lee Kong Chian Natural History Museum to purchase the three dinosaur fossils to contribute to the education of natural history heritage are all evidence of how wealth amassed is used to display care and consideration for others.

While there are seemingly persuasive grounds to suspect that the pursuit of money must mean giving little consideration to others, they are premised on debatable assumptions that the pursuit is singular, the tactics employed are cut-throat and the pursuit is an end in itself. This pursuit does not necessarily breed evil because of the existence of social and legal mechanisms to counter any such evil and to cultivate desired graciousness. We should also not doubt the human capacity to both seek to enrich the self and others at the same time.

The value of water is more important than the value of oil. Discuss.

  • The value of water cannot be pegged to a price.
  • Huge palm oil plantations are increasing water toxicity
  • Water supplies could be dramatically reduced if ‘fracking’ becomes more common
  • The water needs of industry are growing all the time.
  • Water shortages show the need for ensuring a clean water supply
  • Treatment of wastewater for irrigation and the recycling of sewage water for personal consumption
  • The threat of water wars is very so prominent.
  • Oil can be replaced but not water and the former may not be a necessity in the future
  • Oil may soon be neutralised by alternatives being found
  • Large swathes of the world are facing decreased rainfall, a severe drought so the management of water is of urgent strategic importance.
  • Desalination can be employed to solve the value of water.
  • Freshwater is essential for life. Rationing will not work.

Should everyone have access to free medical care?

Key words: ‘should everyone’, ‘access’, ‘free medical care’

• A basic human right
• Medicines/vaccines should be stock-piled in developing countries (depending on the need)
• Efforts should be made to check everyone’s health
Role of the WHO
• Free immunisation programmes (Ebola)
• Cheaper generic medicines are delayed through pharmaceutical patents
• Wealthier nations should fund
• The pharmaceutical industry requires a return on their investment to fund further research
• Problems of logistics/corruption/recruiting qualified professionals to administer
• Responsibility of individual governments to provide some funding and organised programmes
• Should not: to avoid people abusing the system; having a carefree life; creating dependency and not leading a healthy lifestyle

How far can poorer countries benefit from scientific developments?

For and against points for poorer countries benefit from science

  • Present a broad interpretation of ‘poorer’.
  • Present a broad interpretation of ‘scientific’ to embrace technology/medicine etc.
  • the extent to which difficulties posed by pricing are insurmountable/avoidable, eg, declining prices; increasing affordability of new technologies; pricing of medicines may be slower to decline
  • ways in which companies/countries might not see it in their financial/political interests for poorer countries to profit
  • the problem of the ‘brain drain’ of talented scientists being attracted to richer countries for study, practice and research
  • the main beneficiaries actually are within a country – the state/individuals/particular groups
  • Poor countries may have other urgencies

How far can it be argued that wildlife tourism and zoos are the only ways to protect wild animals?

  • Observing animals in conservation areas and zoos can encourage practical concern for their cousins in the wild
  • Tourism can be vital for local economies
  • As last resort zoos can keep populations of wild animals that may disappear in the wild (provided zoo’s have the expertise)
  • Zoos cannot retain the genetic variability of a wild population
  • Threatened species need to attract cash to justify their protection and existence
  • There can be zoos without bars (but this is a weak argument since even with open spaces, a zoo is enclosed)
  • Opportunity for scientific research
  • Questionable when animals are simply kept for the entertainment of the public
  • The assumption of species superiority
  • Animals have consciousness, sentience, and intentionality
  • Their “natural” behaviours have to be recognised and catered for
  • The captive breeding of threatened species
  • Intense viewing of creatures can interrupt feeding patterns and cause stress
  • Captive animals can provide a genetic “lifeboat” for those in the wild
  • Opportunities to adopt an animal

How important are brand names to consumers?

  • a range of techniques, including promotions, strap-lines and advertising are used to persuade us to buy (Read Article)
  • peer pressure influences conformity to consumer norms
  • role models and celebrities are used to endorse products
  • some consumers resist brand name marketing strategies
  • many consumers assume that brand names offer the best products and service and, therefore, remain loyal to the brand (Read Article)
  • many see brand names as a reflection of lifestyle choices.
  • Study on Car Buyers