Entertainment, not truth, is the priority of the media today. Discuss.

In the middle of the 20th century, media houses believed that providing news was a public service. The news was not expected to prioritise entertainment but bring true narratives to the audiences. In today’s time, however, the majority of the people believe that the media is biased and just caters to the entertainment needs of the society. However, it can be contended that media today comes in diverse forms and it depends on which media is being consumed. Mainstream media, para-journalism and introduction of new media all prioritise truth or entertainment based on what is preferred and serves the desires of the target audience.

Mainstream media at times does obscure the facts but it cannot be said that the media does it just for entertainment value. At times mainstream media does give more time to telecast or publish entertainment news rather than news that deals with issues that affect the public. For example, many newspapers today publish news related to lifestyle or the relationship status of celebrities whilst ignoring social issues.  Newspapers like The Independent publish news of squirrels storing walnuts in cars or the Straits Times publishing news of TV celebrities getting engaged and married shows that the media today only tries to entertain people. Often, the media also uses sensationalism to sell its stories but that does not mean that entertainment is prioritised and truth completely ignored. In fact, there have been instances where media professionals have tried to bring truth to the forefront. For example, newspapers like the New York Times and The Washington Post have always tried to report honestly and present news as it is. It can be said however that the media tries to fulfil their own agendas and mainstream media prioritizes entertainment and truth based on the agendas they want to fulfil. 

Parajournalism, however, does try to present their own opinions on the matter instead of preventing the truth. It can thus be said that this form of news does prioritise entertainment over truth. For example, tabloids like the Sun and the Mirror UK always present news that is pointless but piques the interest of the public. The Sun, for example, gives intense coverage to the royal family from what they wore to what they ate. Similar is the case with NY Post which showcases news about celebrities’ lifestyles and what they wore at the red carpet. This evidently shows that parajournalism in the form of tabloids show little effort in publishing news that is relevant to social issues and of importance. Rather they are obsessed with featuring news which is trivial and frivolous. Unlike mainstream media which tries to fulfil their own political agendas, parajournalists completely obscure the truth to gain readership by publishing baseless gossip. Thus, it can be said that such forms of media prioritise entertainment over truth.

With the advent of technology people, today have access to new media.  New media through interaction and debate leads to debunking of myths and prioritizes truth over entertainment. An example of this can be Wikileaks and new whistle-blower website Distributed Denial of Secrets. These websites have insisted on transparency and present truth that would otherwise remain hidden. However, social media which is included under the term can be held responsible for prioritising entertainment over the truth. For example, many websites like Facebook and Instagram based on algorithms showcase posts and news based on the preferences of the individual. A Pew research study also proved that websites like Facebook only show posts that align with the user’s view on the issue. However, new media is a broad term and which platform prioritises truth over entertainment depends on the type of new media being used.

In conclusion, it can be said that not all forms of media prioritise entertainment over truth because it serves the bottom line of the company. Entertainment value is prioritised by some types of media but there are other forms that believe in promoting the truth. In the end, it is totally dependent on the readers what type of media they like to consume. Truth has to be analysed and accepted. It cannot be blindly accepted or for that matter, expect it to come without cost.

How far do you agree that music is an important aspect of a film?

Keywords: ‘How far’ and ‘agree’ and ‘music’ and ‘important’ and ‘film’.

  • Highlight emotion
  • Excitement/suspense
  • Entertainment (e.g. musicals)
  • Indicate period (e.g. the Sixties)
  • Draws audience in – pitch/tempo/melody (especially opening/closing credits)
  • Shapes character
  • Intensifies action scenes
  • Big role in silent movies (e.g. The Artist)
  • Accompanies visual comedy
  • Helps with continuity
  • Can distract and be overbearing
  • Dialogue/drama without music is more naturalistic
  • Too much manipulation
  • Needs to be discrete/sensitive/balanced

Contemporary music has no artistic value. Comment.

While the wholesome songs of John Denver, Kenny Rogers, or Stevie Wonder do not attract young audiences, they have John Legend, Kanye West and Selena Gomez to keep them entertained and grounded to modern day dilemmas.

Traditionalists hold the view that contemporary music spreads violent messages, citing Watain and other black heavy metal bands besides gangta rappers like Easy-E, Tupac and Ice Cube. Contemporary music, though rambunctious and eclactic, does not lack artistic value because it connects with people in today’s society. It would be superflous to say that it lacks originality and creativity. It is incorrect to accuse contemporary music for not having any artistic value.

Today’s music does not lack creativity.  Many musicians create music which has a lot of artistic value.  Singers like Adele,  Nick Jonas and less known Rachel Yamagata and Angie Mattson are musicians who create music which is original and artistically of high-quality. The music created by them is touching and can connect with people on an emotional level.  Today’s music does have artistic value in many ways.

Today’s music also has lyrics which are highly poetic, crafted in a unique style. An example of this can be Nerina Pallot’s Idaho which is beautifully crafted and has a melodious rhyme. The song is often considered as a representation of life.  Contemporary musicians have also used their music to touch the souls of many individuals. For example, Taylor Swift’s song ‘You need to calm down’ raised awareness about social media trolling and the LGBTQ community.  Therefore, if the artistic value is equated with meaning, then-contemporary songs are equally artistic to folk music.

Even mainstream commercial artists create music that is meaningful and incredible. Contemporary music also provides a unique spiritual and emotional experience.  An example of this can be Lady Gaga, who uses the word ugly in multiple ways in her music. Similarly, contemporary K-pop music like the music by Korean boy-band, BTS, have songs with social messages. It is considered that their music emphasises on sound songcraft rather than experimentation for the sake of it. Thus, it proves that contemporary music is meaningful in an artistic way.

Contemporary music is also driver of social change. In the majority of the cases, the success rate might be very slow but we cannot deny their artistic value in moving masses with their songs and music into action. For example, Beyoncé has one of the largest platforms in the world and frequently uses it to champion the polarising Black Lives Matter movement. Similarly, pop stars like Lil Dicky and Grimes are using their music and their huge followings to gain vital coverage of climate change.  Contemporary music is a medium through which people expresses their feelings, aspirations and fears. As music can very broadly be defined as a means to convey an artist’s message to the audience. Under this definition, contemporary music has artistic value.

There is no denying that there is music that is meaningless and distasteful. Some artists are purposeful in their choice of song, so that media can create the buzz for them to stay relevant. For example, various songs by Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus can come under this category. Avril Lavigne’s song “Dark Blonde” is a failed attempt at a girl-power anthem and proof of artistic snobbery. All these issues may result in the belief that there is a lack of artistic merit in contemporary music. However, not all songs can be judged on the basis of a few bad songs. Therefore, though there are songs that lack in artistic value, not all contemporary songs are similar. Modern people also want to be entertained by music. They are not different from the people of the past; they too crave for music that feeds their soul and connects with them on an emotional level based on present world challenges.  The good part about contemporary music is that it has songs that cater to varying tastes and moods of people. Contemporary music has artistic value.

Music is about evolution of social issues and dreams of people. While the wholesome songs of John Denver, Kenny Rogers,  or Stevie Wonder do not attract young audiences, they have John Legend, Kanye West and Selena Gomez to keep them entertained and grounded to modern day dilemmas. Contemporary music has artistic value.

Have multi-national businesses had a positive or negative impact on your society?

In the present era, ubiquitous globalisation has bestowed the greater mobility of human, capital, as well as technology. It has allowed businesses to run not only in the domestic market but also in the global market. Therein lies the contentious issue that whether Singapore has experienced a positive impact from the cooperation in businesses between Singapore and other countries. Multi-national businesses have certainly had benefits such as economic growth, better standard of living and a competitive workforce to Singapore. Nevertheless, it would be a myopic view and turning a blind eye to reality because such businesses may cause negative impacts too if it is left uncontrolled. But, despite the above-mentioned problems, measures have been put in place to mitigate the ill effects of multi-national businesses and to ensure that Singapore continues to accentuate the positive impacts derived from having multi-national businesses.

Firstly, multi-national businesses such as having Multi-National Corporations (MNCs) in Singapore have promoted wealth and success in Singapore. In the past, especially before the 1970s, Singapore was considered a developing country and even a Third world country due to the poor states with the high unemployment rate. The pervasiveness of globalisation has granted greater mobility of capital where MNCs such as Microsoft, Adidas from the west invested in Singapore to open up their businesses in the Asia region. Statistics have shown that the presence of such MNCs in Singapore has contributed significantly to the wealth and success of the Singapore economy. The presences of thousands of MNCs have boomed the Singapore Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by more than tenfold since after Singapore was granted independence decades ago. On the national level, Singapore’s society has had indeed benefited from such multi-national businesses.

Moreover, on the individual level, the MNCs create employment for the locals such that Singaporeans enjoy better material standard of living. MNCs require the locals to help them to operate their machineries and to do work so as to produce goods and services for them. This has brought down the high unemployment rate in the 1970s and 1980s – where MNCs were uncommon – to the current low and healthy unemployment rate of 3%. In addition, GDP per capita that measures the average income of a household has increased remarkably over the past decades. On average, this implies that every household are earning more than the past and able to afford more goods and services to satisfy their needs. With the absence of humongous number MNCs, the improved employment rate and better standard of living would not have been possible.

Secondly, multi-national businesses have created greater social diversity and tolerance in Singapore. The increasing interaction among countries has allowed greater levels of cultural exchange and diversity. This leads to a greater understanding and tolerance of other cultures, thereby promoting social cohesion in the country and more importantly, better cooperation at the international levels. Multi-national businesses have allowed Singaporeans to communicate and socialise with other ethnic or racial groups. This has narrowed the misunderstanding or the misconceptions among the groups, leading to a greater mutual understanding and respect towards each other. Take, for instance, the well-known racial tension in the 1970s, among different ethics and religious groups in Singapore. This riot consequently caused great social instability as they were lack of understanding and sensitivity towards one another. Today, coupled with the government’s capability in leading the country by promoting appropriate policies such as to celebrate racial harmony, the MNCs has also attributed Singaporeans to be more tolerant about other races as interactions with other countries increases, thereby bringing in a positive impact on Singapore’s society.

On the other hand, environmental and health issues are the ill effects of multi-national businesses. The multi-national businesses, especially in the 1980s, set up manufacturing industries in Singapore to produce textiles and many other electronic products. Such productions of goods are evidently burning fossil fuels that are contributing to the rise in air pollution level. It has caused severe health problems to the locals such as the increased risk of having breathing difficulty and even cancer. ‘Sick’ workforce may adversely impact the economy as people tend to be less productive.

Moreover, multi-national businesses can diffuse the national identity of Singapore and disrupt social cohesion as well. The increasing interactions between countries have inevitably made the locals be vulnerable to foreign values and lifestyle as globalisation continues to take place. The world has become borderless. Singaporeans comprising of the young professional and entrepreneurs no longer limit their capacity within Singapore only. The world has become what they think they belong to. Moreover, the indispensable new media such as the internet has been effective in influencing people to seek opportunities or better lives in other countries. This loss of national identity may cause these young talents in Singapore to move overseas to venture for a better life and thus causing a brain drain in Singapore society.

Nevertheless, the government of Singapore has unremittingly implemented appropriate policies to tackle such ill effects of multi-national businesses. Structural changes to the economy to the knowledge-based economy are evident to reduce pollution. The building of Biopolis and Fusionpolis to conduct Research and Development has enhanced the searching ‘cleaner’ fuel to replace fossil fuel. Furthermore, a national event such as the National day parade has reinforced what is meant to be a Singaporean which simultaneously reinforcing national identity. All these efforts made by the government are to mitigate the problems that outsiders may bring into Singapore.

All in all, multi-national businesses have had both positive and negative impacts on Singapore’s society. However, upon closer scrutiny, the negative impacts have been tackled effectively by the government so as to highlight the positive impacts with having minimal problems to the society. In addition, the Singapore government and the citizens should ceaselessly be prepared and be alerted upon the unprecedented challenges ahead in the future to reap the maximum benefits and negligible harms that multi-national businesses may bring about.

‘Although tourism may have damaging effects, it should still be encouraged.’ How far do you agree with this statement?

  • Tourism is vital for economic growth throughout the world (eg Cuba, China)
  • It can promote social and cultural understanding (eg, Ireland, India)
  • It is much-needed income for parts of the world under various forms of environmental threat (eg, Maldives, Mauritius)
  • The tourist industry could provide a cleaner alternative than highly polluting industries (eg, leather, firecrackers)
  • Travel philanthropy could bring about greater volunteerism (eg Cambodia, Laos)
  • Eco-tourism could be a potential (eg Peru, Ecuador)
  • People can make responsible travel choices
  • The purchase of voluntary carbon offsets
  • Tourism is not just foreign travel and can bring local benefits

A picture is more powerful than words. Discuss.

Though many might believe that pictures hold a greater power, the claim is not completely justified. This is because words tend to be more influential as it has the power to influence people mentally and emotionally.

Technological advancements in the modern age have allowed people to have access to media more than ever before. Through apps like Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook and Tumblr, people can share and view images which are mundane to the mind-boggling. A picture is more powerful than words.

Critics of words suggest that images have more power than words because they capture the imagination of society in an impactful manner. There is little doubt that images are considered more creative than words and have contributed largely to the society in positive ways. For example, the artist Banksy is known to highlight powerful messages through his art. Similarly, in the earlier times many artists like Goya, Picasso and Jacques Louis David had tried to revolutionize the world through their art. Photographs like A Man on the Moon or Steve McCurry’s Afghan Girl are considered important images that has changed the course of history. Photographs have also captured the horrors of war which has led to huge emotional response. Notable photographs include the Napalm Girl, which showed the impact of American war in Vietnam. Thus, it can be said that images have exposed the horrors that exist in the world. As such, a picture is more powerful than words.

Critics  of pictures valiantly promote the view that despite the allure of pictures and videos, words still hold a significant place. They explify their stand by citing the ever increasing sales of novels, books and magazines. For example, J.K Rowling’s Harry Potter is still popular; books like 1984 by George Orwell and Killing a Mockingbird by Harper Lee continue to leave a lasting impact on new audiences. Words are a powerful medium is also evident from the fact that, people continue to buy self-help books. For example books like “You can heal your Life” by Louise Hay and “The Alchemist” by Paulo Coelho have sold millions of copies and continue to inspire people and guide them to live a successful and happy life. Words are an elixer that soothes the mind and soul. Hence, pictures are not always more powerful.

However, pictures do not always convey the intended meaning and sometimes the people fail to connect with pictures on an emotional level. Words have a more lasting impact and can stand the test of time. For example, Shakespeare’s plays like Hamlet, The Last Lear and As you Like, use words that evoke a series of emotions that people can still relate to in present times. The mastery of his words continues to inspire and impress people around the world even today. In fact, many phrases used by people in daily life are actually from Shakespeare’s plays. His dialogues like “All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players” are repeated and considered a metaphor for life even today.

Images of Mahatma Gandhi exemplify peaceful resistance. The famed head portrait of Che Guevera subliminally depict the fight against oppression. When Malala Yousufzai’s or Greta Thunberg’s stand to deliver the views, it is images that we first connect to, not words. Historically, the mushroom cloud over Hiroshima is still etched in all our minds. In more contemporary times, the incessant media coverage on Trump has painted in our minds a certain view of him. It is pictures that move and mould our thinking. Not words. A picture is more powerful than words.

No single word has changed the world, but a single picture has.

Technology has had a negative impact on people’s skills? Discuss.

Without a doubt, technology has majorly impacted skills of people in the world. While the progress of technology is important, people should be careful in not being overly-reliant on it.

Human beings have always discovered and invented devices and machines for their convenience. Today, technology has taken an important place in people’s life and has made their lives easier. However, with technology, there are also problems that have risen. Machines which were created for helping humans, have made humans lazy, unskilled and redundant. Today people are overly-reliant on technology. Though many skills have been replaced by technology, there are new skills which have gained prominence today. Hence, technology has a negative impact on people’s skills.

Automation has led people to lack many skills and has caused their role to minimise in many industries. In manufacturing, from making the dough for different cookies, to cutting them in different shapes and packing them, all tasks are now performed by machines and robots. In aviation, pilots use the auto-pilot function and use electronic interface to control the flight. The pilot’s role today is limited and skills required to become a pilot have reduced significantly. With so much being done by machines, it is a logical conclusion technology has a negative impact on people’s skills.

New and advanced technology has attracted people to games that involve virtual reality and advanced graphics. Unlike earlier times, where people, especially children took time to go out and play sports like cricket, badminton or swimming, children today are glued to their Playstation, X-box, computer screens and mobile games. In today’s times it is getting difficult to find young players who are genuinely interested in playing sports as opposed to just playing sports for fame and money.  Technology has given rise to new forms of sports as e-sports but these sports are not considered as sports by many because, who play these sports do not have great skills and are of little value in the real world. While playing real sports like football and tennis may build character and give one confidence, electronic sports do not provide any such benefit. Therefore, technology has also had an impact in sports creating a negative impact on people’s skills.

Technology has also impacted people’s soft skills and communication skills. Smartphones have given people a platform to connect with people from across the world however, people have lost their ability to communicate with people with mindfully and articulately. This is evident from the chat language people use in their daily communication. For example, using just “gn” for good night, “tc” for take care and “gbu” for god bless you. Similarly, people’s friendships today are limited to the extent of liking and commenting on a picture. It can thus be said that the art of communication has been lost significantly in present times. Applications like Twitter, have given people a stage to put forth their view but it has also made them intolerant towards other people’s views. People today are quick in jumping to conclusions and make their judgements based on limited facts, which sometimes are even fake. It can be said that technology has made people lose their reasoning skills and degraded human relationships, in turn. Therefore, technology has also had a negative impact on people’s skills and the ability to communicate rationally.

Though supporters of technology often say that people have replaced older skills with newer skills. They argue that people today are more well-versed in technology-based applications. However, these skills are not as intricate and lack in finesse as well. In earlier times people used to create handicrafts and painting with hand but with technology all that has changed. Skills like stitching, embroidering, fact-checking and map reading are being forgotten in our technological driven world.

Without a doubt, technology has majorly impacted skills of people in the world. While the progress of technology is important, people should be careful in not being overly-reliant on it. Over-reliance on technology will only lead to deterioration of people’s skills be it in the field of labour, communication or social interaction. Technology has had a negative impact on the skills of people.

Does global warming pose a serious threat to ecological conservation?

This document may be used for private study or research purpose only. This document or any part of it may not be duplicated and/or distributed without permission of the copyright owner.

The connection between ecological conservation and the economy has been a subject of severe disputation for decades. Market analysts and policymaking committees of every vantage point seem to concur that a strong linkage prevails between environmental protection and the fiscal state; the controversy arises over the sign of the correlation coefficient. Conservationists contend that environmental protection facilitates economic growth and generate employment whereas detractors argue that environmental protection tends to be adverse towards economic development. In the latter case, environmental regulation stands accused of precipitating an extensive array of disadvantageous monetary consequences and resulting in a loss of global competitiveness. The conviction that ecological conservation gravely impairs the economy has become the centrepiece in the series of attempts of late to annul environmental legislation which aims to amend environmental quality. Concurrently, there is some significance in these animadversions of environmental policies. This essay intends to examine a diversity of claims concerning the economic costs as well as financial profits of ecological conservation. I champion for ecological conservation although it comes with several short-term sacrifices of economic returns. In the long run, the merits of ecological conservation should outweigh the fiscal loss.

Each claims that environmental regulatory expenditure does significant economic detriment rest upon the hypothesis that the costs are substantial. After all, relatively minuscule environmental funding would not give rise to association with negative implications. However, there are numerous possible interpretations of the term “large regulatory budget”, determined by the context. One definition of the term is compliance figure that is disproportionately astronomical to lead to retrenchment, plant closures, and enervate international competitiveness. This clarification involves hefty regulatory funding approximate to the economic influence of firms. Critics chronically assert that conservation expenditure is overly substantial in a macroeconomic gist, deviating considerable state fiscal resources from productive pursuits into abiding by ecological policies. On the contrary, evaluation of states’ estimated ecological investments amount to negligible single-digit totals respectively. Allocating two to three percent of gross domestic product on ecological conservation is implausible to give rise to any major detrimental economic implications.

Bearing in mind the dire conditions of the ecology, environmental expenditures aggregate to a trivial amount relative to similar national priorities such as health care, education and military defence. Developed countries budget an average of 25 percent of respective gross domestic product to protect individual health and the security of states, therefore it is pathetically meagre to invest only two to three percent in the health of the ecosystems upon which the economy really depends. Considers surface since certain benefits such as enhanced quality of life derived from conservation efforts are non-quantifiable whereas there are perceptible tangible economic costs.

Nevertheless, despite sizeable environmental protection costs, these regulations collectively yield significant counterbalancing advantages to a society. In addition, characterizing these admittedly substantial funding in definite values as a drain on the economy, siphoning off capital which could be consumed prolifically elsewhere, is off the mark. It is more accurate to infer these expenditures as outcome of citizens’ demands for ecological quality ameliorations. Apportioning resources to meet the market for environmental regulations should not be surmised as economic inefficiency. Hence, given that ecological conservation produces considerable offsetting benefits and is publicly appealed for, the state should revise its disapproving standpoint.

As ecological conservation entails enduring efforts and financing, transitory drawbacks are to be expected in the short run. When governmental bodies embark on protection schemes in the early stages, implementation of laws and measures such as sound development and consumption of water resources, agricultural restructuring, biodiversity conservation, as well as urban forestation and landscape upgrading will lead to layoffs and plant closures. Firms, primarily pollutive and energy-intensive money guzzlers, will be displaced to countries with less binding guidelines. Furthermore, the high preliminary capital elemental to reform pollutive practices will inflate cost of manufacture of exports hence enervating the competitiveness of local sectors in the global marketplace. For example, logging restrictions in Pacific Northwest region in the United States has irrefutably retrenched the masses in the indigenous timber industry. However, it would be ill-advised to forgo introducing ecological conservation programmes due to several intermediate challenges. Thus, ecological conservation should be pursued despite the primary economic deficit.

Therefore, traditional economics shows that ecological conservation does not prompt irrevocable pervasive detrimental fiscal effects in contrary to conventional wisdom. Nonetheless, detractors of ecological conservation raise moderately factual polemics. Pinpointing and deciphering these problem areas would be a laudable objective in ecological conservation hereafter. Administrations should repetitively scrutinize the marginal costs and benefits of ecological conservation course of actions as means to increase their net merits. There is undeniably leeway for development in ecological conservation but it is mercifully not the economic Frankenstein some would have us believe.


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