Budget: Which are the more severe implications?

I refer to the article “‘Severe implications’ if Singapore does not have sufficient reserves as buffer: Chan Chun Sing” (Channel NewsAsia, Feb 25).

It states that “The use of Singapore’s reserves should not be taken lightly as there are “severe implications” if the country does not have sufficient reserves as buffer, said Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Chan Chun Sing on Saturday (Feb 24).”

Our reserves which are estimated to be about $1 trillion, are already the highest reserves per capita in the world. So, what more do we want?

As to “Apart from the need to grow the reserves for the increasing needs of the next generation, Mr Chan said Singapore’s fiscal policy impacts the strength of its currency as well.

“How much we spend and how much we save will also signal to the currency markets what they can expect the strength of the Sing dollar to be” – the Sing dollar has been one of the strongest currencies in the world. So, what more do we want?

With regard to ““If the world thinks we are running an irresponsible or unsustainable fiscal policy, you can well imagine what they will do to the Sing dollar” – our overall Budget surplus for FY2017 and FY2016 (revised) was $9.6 and $12 billion, respectively. So, what more do we want?

As to ““There are severe implications on what it means to not have a strong Sing dollar or not have sufficient reserves as our buffer”” – aren’t arguably, the following implications of our fiscal policies even more severe:-

… “32,000 out of 405,000 HDB households in mortgage arrears of over three months” (theonlinecitizen, Feb 22)

… “one in four freelancers falls behind on Medisave contributions, despite the risk of penalties”

… “Budget: Lower-income’s real pay up $2.80 a year, last 15 years?”

… “Budget: 587,200 lower-income workers worry about GST hike?”

… “Singapore’s % debt to GDP at 116.6 (2017 estimate) is higher than Malaysia (50.9%), Sri Lanka (79%) and the United Kingdom (91.1%)”

Leong Sze Hian