Why one-party rule sucks for Xi, Lee and Heng

In Political governance, Public Administration on 10/07/2019 at 6:14 am

Heng’s recent comments on the need of GST to rise by 2 points soon despite a weakening economy (Btw, How PAP can win 65% plus of the vote), his earlier comments that we must have FT’s by the cattle-truck load (OK population of 10m) and so on show that die-die he must defend all the actions of the previous PAP govts.

He cannot blame predecessors for cock-ups because “PAP is always right, PAP never wrong”. This is said about Xi but applies to Heng and other 4G, 3G and even 2G PAP leaders and ministers (Emphasis mine):

Not only might the horizons of the leaders of the Chinese Communist party on matters of jobs and economic growth be just as short as those of democratic politicians, their choices may be more circumscribed. A democratic leader can blame a sequence of errors by previous administrations for the current parlous state of the stock market and the economy. Mr Trump can (and does) blame his predecessors for negotiating bad trade deals …

By contrast, even though Mr Xi inherited an over-leveraged economy, he cannot blame his predecessors for the difficult hand he was dealt or for the current slowdown. They too were from the party, and if the party is fallible, does it not follow that people should have the right to vote for a different regime?

He has to maintain the fiction that the party has always made the best decision under the circumstances. That means the Chinese administration has to rescue the stock market if it tanks, and flood the economy with stimulus if growth slows significantly. In fact, it has very short horizons when reacting to potentially adverse economic developments. Chinese investors, confident that the government will bail them out if too many fail, pile in to risky assets without adequate diligence or fear, preventing Chinese markets from allocating capital appropriately.

Raghuram Rajan, author of ‘The Third Pillar: How Markets and the State Leave the Community Behind’

Mr Rajan was head of India’s central bank and was also a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund.

Will resale flat owners still vote for PAP in next GE? contd

Exposed: Flaws in PM’s HDB spin

The real truths about public housing

Why 30-year old HDB flats difficult to sell/ Why PAP rule will end in 2029

And why changes in policy take so long and the explanations for change so convoluted: example welfare for us oldies, Merdeka Generation: PAP cares for u, really they do, and minor changes in education, No more streaming? Really? What a load of BS.

Here’s another reason why Lee, Heng and other PAP millionaire ministers always blame world economic conditions, never their policies:

Mr Xi’s tight control over policy also makes it hard to diffuse blame. He must defend his own departure from his predecessor Deng Xiaoping’s dictum that to prosper, China should hide its capabilities and bide its time. From his early days in power, Mr Xi asserted that “the Chinese nation has gone from standing up, to becoming rich, to becoming strong”. Some argue his actions have been tantamount to waving a red rag at the Americans, and are directly responsible for today’s trade imbroglio. To quell criticism that he has dragged China’s growth down by challenging the US geopolitically too soon, Mr Xi needs a positive resolution to the conflict.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: