Tuesday, April 28, 2015

The Facts Of Life: Singapore’s Monetary Policy And The SGD Exchange Rate

Since the Ringgit has recovered (a little) there’s probably less of a need for this post. But given how angst ridden Malaysians are about Singapore and the Singapore Dollar (one commentator described it as humiliating), it’s probably still appropriate.

So here’s my take on this subject, and given how TDM is in the news so much these days, done “che det” style:

1. Once upon a time, the SGDMYR exchange rate was at parity. Now however, SGD1 buys MYR2.67. This is popularly viewed as a barometer of how badly the Malaysian economy has done vis-a-vis Singapore.

2. However, this would only be true if the SGD was a free floating currency. It is not; it is in actuality a policy variable.

3. Bank Negara Malaysia conducts monetary policy by regulating the short term interest rate. Therefore, the overnight interest rate in Malaysia is the monetary policy variable. BNM regulates the overnight rate by buying and selling MYR versus BNM Bills in the interbank market, so that it hits the Ovenight Policy Rate target. The implication of this is that the MYR exchange rate “floats” – it is largely determined by inflows and outflows of capital as well as trade in goods and services.

4. The Monetary Authority of Singapore does not do this. It uses the exchange rate instead. MAS regulates the exchange rate so that the SGD achieves, quote “a modest and gradual appreciation” unquote. This has a similar effect on money supply and inflation in Singapore, as interest rates do in Malaysia.

5. MAS targets what is called the nominal effective exchange rate (NEER) of the SGD, which is the trade-weighted exchange rate of the SGD. MAS buys and sells SGD against other currencies so that it engineers a “modest and gradual appreciation” of the SGD against the currencies of Singapore’s trade partners. The implication of this is that interest rates in Singapore “float” – they are determined by inflows and outflows of capital, as well as trade in goods and services.

6. One other interesting implication is that this policy helps underwrite Singapore’s development as a financial centre. A gradually appreciating currency means you have a return built into holding the SGD, irrespective of anything else.

7. Since Singapore is an island nation with no natural resources or agriculture, almost everything consumed in Singapore has to be imported, from petrol, to food, to sand, to water.

8. The SGD NEER targeted by MAS is not disclosed, nor are the parameters involved: neither the centre target, the intervention band, nor the slope of appreciation are publicly known. These are state secrets.

9. However, the methodology of constructing an NEER is not a secret, and we can guess at the components of the NEER, as well as the parameters.

10. Malaysia is Singapore’s second largest trading partner, at 11.3% of Singapore’s total trade, and only just behind China, and ahead of the EU and the US (all data from 2014). The currencies of all these nations/regions are thus subject to buying and selling by MAS, either directly (USD, EUR) or by proxy (CNY, MYR).

11. To put it simply, the Ringgit depreciates against the SGD, because it is MAS policy that makes it so.

12. Let’s take a look at the charts (SGD-based exchange rate; 2000-2015):


Note that of the four major trading partners, only CNY appears to have kept its value against the SGD, while the MYR appears to have depreciated the most. The reason for this is that of all the countries involved here, the Singaporean trade partner with the highest trade in consumables is probably Malaysia.

13. I once read a research paper from the 1990s that described the SGD exchange rate regime as a “Ringgit peg”. That is a very apt description. The SGD will follow where the MYR goes, even as it “modestly and gradually” appreciates against it.

14. Another possibility is that MAS’ policy of “modest and gradual appreciation” is in reality a soft peg against the CNY, in which case Singapore’s monetary policy is actually being run by the People’s Bank of China (PBOC). I prefer the former explanation, as the variance of the SGDMYR exchange rate is orders of magnitude lower than any other SGD cross rate, and it more closely fits MAS’ description of its exchange rate regime.

15. In a very real sense, also due to this exchange rate regime, interest rates in Singapore are determined by Janet Yellen (FRB), Mario Draghi (ECB), Zhou Xiaochuan (PBOC), and Zeti Akhtar Aziz (BNM).

16. Singapore’s exchange rate regime is unique. What makes it even more unique is that it won’t work for anyone else. This is not to say that Singaporeans are smarter than everyone else. It is because if more than one country tries this, it won’t work for anyone, Singapore included.

17. Two countries trying to appreciate their currencies against each other will only destroy both economies, as the attempt will progressively raise interest rates in both countries (remember, under this regime, interest rates “float”). During the Cold War, they had a term for this – Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD).

18. Malaysians should not be concerned or humiliated over MAS policy or the role of the SGD as a policy variable – it is what it is and it (mostly) works well for Singapore. BNM’s policy on the other hand, works well for Malaysia. But the result is that the SGDMYR exchange rate is not in any way, shape, or form, a reflection of the relative performance of the two economies.


  1. Understood and thanks so much. Never thought the exchange rate was that indicative of comparative performance anyway. Can't say I'm complaining though...Petrol, food, more importantly the cost of my Malaysian property, all are cheaper... But oh the Causeway tolls...

  2. Ever since ETP was released I've always wondered...

    If Malaysia's GNP per capita trends to the wrong income level in 2019 (i.e. miss the USD15,000 mark), would there be a change in exchange rate policy on 4Q 2020 just to fulfill a political target?

    1. I'd like to see that happen, just coz' it'd be funny.

      But I understand that Senator Idris Jala said that the idea is to be sustainable, so I guess not :(

    2. Hey Jason

      Nah, doubt it. But then, the World Bank high income threshold seems to be coming back to us as much as we are going forward to it.

  3. you meant the jam .....

    TDM wanted the crooked bridge to solve it. But .....

    Zuo De

    1. The tolls. They have been increased and look set for a further round. On the flip side once JB implements the VEP and Singapore reciprocates by increasing theirs that should take care of the jams at least in the short run. Not sure how the bridge would help as the number of counters at customs would still be the same.

    2. The Slug,

      Everytime you pay toll, think of the huge saving from your housing, daily necessities, fuel etc - it should most certainly help. You can't win them all mah.

      And also, everyyear you continue working in Singapore, you will continue to get a pay rise of at least 1.5 to 3% courtesy of MAS, that is on top of pay rise if you are an employee.

      Zuo De

    3. BTW The Slug, you do not consider the value of the time spent every working days to and fro at the causeway waiting for the jam to clear??

      Would that "cost" be better spent with your family / girlfriend / boyfriend / hobbies / etc.

      Zuo De

    4. Hi Zuo De, I am Singaporean. But I really enjoy spending time in Malaysia and have been to all the states of Malaysia except Sarawak...Go there every weekend for petrol, food, groceries etc... Got my Malaysian properties in the "Great Iskandar Rush"...

    5. Woh, welcome to Malaysia then. You should also visit East Malaysia - spread the wealth a bit.....

      Zuo De

  4. Apple now has US$194 billion in cash and cash equivalents.

    That is more than Malaysia's official forex reserves!

    It makes you wonder, doesn't it - the way the big US corporations are piling up cash.

    What are they going to do with all that money?

    1MDB's RM42 billion in debt looks positively miniscule by comparison!

    1. Yes, but this is no excuse to sweep it under the carpet.

      While we are not a failed state/nation yet, we will become one if this is the type of attitude we adopt. We must as a society aim for higher ideals to progress and progress we must, not dragged back to the dark ages.

      So cut through all the crap and let us agree that it is important and by example show everyone that this is important and we do not condone this type of "financial engineering" ever again (Bank Bumi - TDM time, etc etc etc)

      Zuo De

  5. The typical Malaysian doesn't care about the explanation how the Singaporean Monetary Policy works or logic. All he cares is to use any issues to show that Malaysia is a failed state and we are a corrupted nation that are far inferior to our counterparts down south.

    It is not just the monetary policy or the forex rate that Singapore tightly controls but if you lived in the Lion City you would know that the government regulates every facets of the country.

    The below is an excellent article that adds a few more interesting points to Hisham's excellent analysis.


    1. @calvinsankaran 7:07 PM

      We are digressing from the subject of this particular thread, but let me ask you this - in the ratings of crime and personal security, which is rated higher - Malaysia or Singapore?

      And in all the published international ratings of competitiveness, good governance, education and healthcare, who is ranked higher - Malaysia or Singapore?

      If the Singapore government "regulates every facets(sic) of the country", is that such a bad thing? Trading off absolute freedom against tight controls? Espousing a policy of "anything goes" in a multiracial and multi religious society where one ethnic group is the majority?

      Coming back to Hisham's analysis in this thread, it is a succinct explanation of Singapore's monetary policy.

      The key point to note is that the MAS has control over whether the SGD should appreciate or depreciate against the currencies of its major trading partners.

      In that sense, "managing" the SGD is one more tool in maintaining Singapore's competitiveness.

      You should peruse MAS's April macroeconomic review to get a better idea of the situation.

      But, speaking as a layperson, the Malaysians that I come across who are working in Singapore are generally cock-a-hoop that the SGD fetches MYR2.60+ at the moneychangers in JB or Singapore.

      Anecdotal evidence, maybe, but true nonetheless.

    2. Anon@3.43pm

      I am not sure why we need to go off tangent here and discuss about non related issues. I am also perplexed that you have taken upon yourself to defend Singapore even though I wasn't criticising the country. I suggest you read my post.

      I don't wish to get side-tracked here but let me re-state my position. I lived and worked in Singapore long enough and have a very good understanding on how the country works on just externally but also how their secretive and opaque government makes policies and operates.

      There is hardly anything worth mentioning that is NOT being regulated or controlled by the government. This extends to things like precise quota by race and nationalities for foreigners allowed to work in Singapore, HDB quota by race, control on the leadership of NGOs, religious groups, mosque/temple committees, etc, etc. It has the most CCTV per capita in the world and even websites are required to get approval to operate and have to disclose ownership, funding, etc. I could go on and on.

      Outside of North Korea, I don't think any other country has similar level of control over its citizen and country.

      Perhaps such control works for Singapore and has contributed to its success . That's not my concern or business. It is up to the Singaporeans to decide if this is an acceptable trade-off.

      I am happy for those Malaysians who work in Singapore as the exchange rate has been good. This in fact helps Malaysia as it brings in more money while discouraging Malaysians from spending too much in Singapore.

    3. @Calvin

      Thanks for the link, that's an excellent article. I had thought to comment on the increasing role of domestic sources in Singapore's inflation, but that would have complicated a blog post intended to explain in a simple way SG's monetary policy.

      Note that the current strategy of enhancing the growth contribution of the service sector will certainly increase that influence, which may mean that there will almost certainly needs to be a rethink of a policy regime based on external sources.

  6. This article "hurts" my little brain the most compared to other previous articles. But among the most enlightening one. Totally changes my view regarding this matter.

  7. Hisham, just to be clear, please correct me if I'm wrong:

    1. Central banks normally use interest rates as a tool to regulate / control inflation
    2. By the mechanism described above, does this mean that MAS uses the exchange rate to regulate / control inflation as well?

    1. @Rodger

      Not "as well", but "instead of". Otherwise, what you're saying is correct.

    2. Btw how does the MAS regulate their domestic borrowing costs?

    3. @Rijal Ishak

      They don't. And as long as the exchange rate is the primary instrument of monetary policy, they can't.

      Domestic borrowing costs in Singapore will be set by the central banks of the currencies the SGD tracks. That would effectively be the US, China, and Malaysia.

  8. Part 2 of 4

    The nature of the Exchange Rate Systems.

    An ancillary to determining appreciation/depreciation dynamics is exchange rate flexibility. Given that Malaysia adopts a more flexible exchange rate compared to Chingkiepork, the chances of appreciation are biased in the SGD's favour:

    “The results are robust with these alternative definitions of exchange rate flexibility (Table A.5). In all cases, exchange rate flexibility helps to dampen the real appreciation effect of capital inflows”


    In other words the more flexible your exchange rate system is, the reduced chances there are for exchange rate appreciation.

    To surmise, I humbly and respectfully aver that capital inflows and exchange rate flexibility are probably the main factors for the exchange rate discrepancy rather than your exchange float vs interest float narrative, though that too plays an important role.

    Time permitting, I will proffer solutions (Part 2) to the Cap Inflow problem before touching upon the Industrial Output aspect.

    Warrior 231

    1. @Warrior,

      You're absolutely right - capital inflows are a big part of the story behind the SGD's appreciation. It's actually a pretty compicated story, but I dumbed it down for a non-technical audience.

      Given this policy regime, this pressure for appreciation is not reflected in the SGD's cross exchange rates. Far from it - operationally, the main impact of what MAS has done this past decade is to actually slow down that appreciation.

      To figure out what's going on, don't look to the exchange rate, since it is effectively fixed (in the econometric jargon, the "modest and gradual" appreciation is trend stationary, and not stationary as it would be under a pure fixed rate regime). Rather, you'll probably find it educational (and entertaining) to read MAS' balance sheet.

      Pressure for appreciation within the fixed FX path manifests itself in accumulation of foreign exchange reserves, since MAS will intervene to keep the exchange rate within its defined policy path. This results in some convoluted machinations to keep domestic liqudity from exploding - this FX intervention has to be sterilised through issuance of debt securities (originally short term SGS, now increasingly MAS Bills). Something like 40%-50% of government debt is actually from these sterilisation operations. That's why Singapore's govenment debt has been increasing much faster than nominal GDP growth, and for no apparent reason.

      (For the consipracy minded, this type of approach is usually costly, as yields on FX assets will typically be lower than domestic yields, which entails the intervening central bank having to pay a net positive interest cost on the securities it issues. However, given that the SGD is within a fixed appreciation path, which causes domestic yields to be equal if not lower than foreign yields, the SG government might actually be making a profit off this).

      As I said, if you really want to find out what's going on in Singapore, read MAS' balance sheet.

  9. Ah for the whimsies and fancies of Cyberspace...the moment I put the second one up, this disappeared hence the re-post. My Apologies.


    I am deeply saddened by your “gentle” threat to me to desist from abusing the other commentators here. Guess, I will abide by the request and refrain my darndest from doing so though that may be a tad too impossible given the ground realities. I never pretend to be an ultracrepidate and the last thing I can bear is a plethora of ultracrepidates ranging from garden slugs to bona fide trolls who have made a mess of much of the discourse in these parts with their inane takes, pro-Chingkiepore claptrap etc. Hence, my profanity laced diatribes, which may not make pretty reading for queasy tummies and queasier morals, but effective nonetheless in getting them trolls to scram. But since it is your blog, I will defer to your requests although I strongly feel you are looking at the wrong end of the stick with regard to inequality, MYR depreciation and even your decision to engage them Chingkieporkian trolls. But again,its your time to waste……..

    This comment of mine may appear pro-Chingkiepore but appearances can be deceptive. Read on.

    Main Course:
    This latest post of yours is a nice saccharine laced one but the actual scenario is not as simplistic as the exchange float vs interest float narrative seemingly suggests. My take is that the SGD-MYR relationship is beholden to two important factors (there is one more, actually, wages (more on that later) that is being inadvertently overlooked here. Those factors are:

    a. Capital inflows
    b. Industrial output differences.

    Capital inflows: try as she might, Malaysia is never going to match the FDI and portfolio inflows (hot money aka suspicious filth money) garnered by Chingkiepork. As a result of the massive inflows of capital which emerged in the late 1980s courtesy of the Chingkieporkian switch to being a financial boutique ala Switzerland, Malaysia has lagged behind and that gap accelerated from 2005 onwards when the island republic chalked double or even tripled capital inflows of both the FDI and the portfolio investment variety to that of Malaysia. The data doesn’t lie on that so you can do the modeling to generate the outcomes for all you care:

    1. https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12130.pdf (Fig. 4)

    and that surge in capital inflow does have an impact on exchange rates:

    2.“The highest level of appreciation from portfolio investments is statistically significant compared to the effect of FDI (χ2(1) = 26.7 [0.000]), private transfers (χ2(1) = 46.4 [0.000]), and bank loans (χ2(1) = 33.8 [0.000]). A 1 percentage point increase in the ratio of portfolio investments to GDP is associated with a 7.8 percent appreciation of the REER. Compared to other private flows, portfolio investments are more volatile and speculative—something generally associated with macroeconomic instability and no improvement of productivity……”


    The last line in (2) above in a way explains Chingkieporkian stagnating productivity numbers that are of recent vintage. I say ‘in a way’ as I have this nagging suspicion that much of the officially classified FDI there, are actually portfolio capital in disguise, which cumulatively with the foregoing sentence explains the whys and wherefores of low Chingkieporkian productivity numbers.

    (Remember; FDIs are supposed to be productivity positive not regressive)

    Warrior 231

    1. But Malaysia's productivity numbers are nothing to shout about, are they?

      And if there weren't a large pool of cheaply-paid illegal immigrants in the country, Malaysia's productivity would be even lower.

    2. @Warrior

      On your main course, I disagree with your suspicions on FDI. The components of FDI matter.

      I don't think it's disguised "portfolio" capital - I think it's evidence of profit and tax base shifting. If you look at the components of Singapore's "FDI", a greater portion is in "retained earnings", rather than greenfield or M&A. Only greenfield FDI is really production and productivity boosting. M&A is just an ownership transfer, while retained earnings may or may not be "invested" in real capital. And there's no reason for investing that capital in productive assets, when a foreign company would gain 1%-2% in foreign currency terms by just sitting there in SGD.

      My take on Singapore's productivity malaise is that the stock of "capital" (and for that matter GDP) is over-inflated by profits shifted from Malaysia, Indonesia, India and elsewhere. That makes real productivity improvements look much smaller than they would otherwise be.

    3. @anon 12.27

      Malaysia's productivity level is lower than Singapore's, but productivity growth is actually pretty decent. Singapore's productivity growth is extremely poor, even for an advanced economy.

      Much of the "growth" in SG's economy this century has come from immigration and longer working hours, not growth in output per worker.

    4. But the Singapore authorities are trying to increase labour productivity, aren't they? Even their trade unions (NTUC) has been roped into the national effort?

      Who in the Malaysian government has been pushing for the need to increase productivity and skills?

      And the Malaysian trade unions haven't even bothered to address the issue.

    5. Side note : NTUC isn't exactly an independent body. Lim Swee Say used to be their Sec Gen while being a cabinet minister. I guess such thing can only happen in Singapore.

    6. @calvinsankaran

      I believe they call it the "tripartite approach" in Singapore - employers, workers and trade unions working together.

      Regardless of terminology, the Singapore authorities are perceived to be doing "something" to address the perennial problem of labour productivity.

      The point that I am trying to make is whether employers, workers and trade unions in Malaysia are similarly engaged or whether it's a "free for all" pitting one against the other.

    7. Personally, I'm not sure the improvements would work. There has to be a change in mindset and the education system. I like the Star Wars analogy. First there were Drones and Singapore quickly reached that level - discipline, consistency, comprehension etc. And then for the next phase, the workforce was able to scale up to Clones - some creative thinking within parameters. Very good execution.(Throw a stone into a 20-30 something crowd and you hit a degree holder). But like the Clones in Star Wars there is a gene removed which prevents them from questioning orders. But "Begun the Clone Wars Have" and now many other countries have better Clones asking for lesser wages.. The answer I think has to be the Return of the Jedi - discretion, the ability to question boundaries and think outside the box, to depart from protocols, templates when needed... Tough task. Which is why I think Singapore's productivity has stagnated...I think Japan, Korea faced very severe crossroads as well in recent decades. As a result, there was upheaval in society and the miracle machine dried up. There was talk of 'decadence', uninspired youngsters, disillusioned middle management etc... But out of that sprung a new life through innovation and creativity. When I was growing up, the common connotation for Japan was that they were great at copying and improving upon others' inventions... Nowadays, they are known equally for their innovative products.. Just my 10 sen

    8. Anon @ 3.17pm Some very insightful view of Paul Krugman back in 1995 about Singapore. A gentle warning - it might cause some indigestion and discomfort for Singapore cheerleaders.

      Consider, in particular, the case of Singapore. Between 1966 and 1990, the Singaporean economy grew a remarkable 8.5 percent per annum, three times as fast as the United States; per capita income grew at a 6.6 percent rate, roughly doubling every decade. This achievement seems to be a kind of economic miracle. But the miracle turns out to have been based on perspiration rather than inspiration: Singapore grew through a mobilization of resources that would have done Stalin proud. The employed share of the population surged from 27 to 51 percent. The educational standards of that work force were dramatically upgraded: while in 1966 more than half the workers had no formal education at all, by 1990 two-thirds had completed secondary education. Above all, the country had made an awesome investment in physical capital: investment as a share of output rose from 11 to more than 40 percent.

      Even without going through the formal exercise of growth accounting, these numbers should make it obvious that Singapore's growth has been based largely on one-time changes in behavior that cannot be repeated. Over the past generation the percentage of people employed has almost doubled; it cannot double again. A half-educated work force has been replaced by one in which the bulk of workers has high school diplomas; it is unlikely that a generation from now most Singaporeans will have Ph.D's. And an investment share of 40 percent is amazingly high by any standard; a share of 7O percent would be ridiculous. So one can immediately conclude that Singapore is unlikely to achieve future growth rates comparable to those of the past.

      But it is only when one actually does the quantitative accounting that the astonishing result emerges: all of Singapore's growth can be explained by increases in measured inputs. There is no sign at all of increased efficiency. In this sense, the growth of Lee Kuan Yew's Singapore is an economic twin of the growth of Stalin's Soviet Union growth achieved purely through mobilization of resources. Of course, Singapore today is far more prosperous than the U.S.S.R. ever was--even at its peak in the Brezhnev years--because Singapore is closer to, though still below, the efficiency of Western economies. The point, however, is that Singapore's economy has always been relatively efficient; it just used to be starved of capital and educated workers.

  10. Re the statement: "Who in the Malaysian government has been pushing for the need to increase productivity and skills?"
    1. Vast investments in education and training
    2. Reinvestment tax allowance
    3. Special public funds for re-tooling
    4. Special agencies to look at productivity (e.g. National Productivity Council)

    1. Any measurable results that have been published?

      And if there have been "vast investments in education and training", as you have claimed, why aren't wages in Malaysia for skilled labour not going up?

    2. Anon@4.32pm, you are not just remarkably uninformed about your own country but also plain lazy. A Google search would have pointed you out to MPC's website and their annual productivity reports and their voluminous and excellent work.

    3. And if there have been "vast investments in education and training", as you have claimed, why aren't wages in Malaysia for skilled labour not going up? Answer: Because they work in Singapore :-)

    4. @anon 6.06

      Wages for the skilled in Malaysia are going up, and wages for the unskilled are zooming. It's the semiskilled who appear to be losing out (the hollowing out of the wage distribution?).

      Ironically, Singapore's wage growth is lagging Malaysia's.

  11. 1.Thanks but no thanks Mr Hisham, you sort of beat me to it with your observation of MNCs parking their gains in Chingkiepore and the latter gaining double through increased CI and by default, SGD appreciation.

    2.I have a few links in that regard (supposed to be in my part 3):




    3.But Mr Hisham, I opine that the above only tells half the tale. Chingkiepore’s inflow via the corporate sector was roughly 750 billion in 2012.


    4.The data in the above shows that (drum roll please)the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Bahamas, Bermuda which accounted for roughly 154 billion. Throw in the usual suspects of Switzerland, Luxembourg and Hong Kong and you have the amount tipping 220 billion or roughly 30% of the overall total.

    5. As manufacturing accounted for 17% of the total, one can compute that investments in that sector amounted to roughly 127.5 billion of the whole:

    “Almost half of Singapore’s FDI were in the financial & insurance services sector (48.2 per cent or $359.6 billion). Manufacturing and wholesale & retail trade were also major sectors of foreign investment, with shares of 17.2 per cent and 17.0 per cent respectively.”

    6. So how much greenfield investment you have there and how much else is sluice money courtesy of the Caymans et al ….I leave it to you and your readers’ imagination to work out. And better throw in some round-tripping as well for if you are on a round the world trip, you might as well throw in the whole hog, right?

    Warrior 231

    1. @Warrior,

      Sorry, I don't see where we're really in disagreement. Greenfield FDI is relatively minor in Singapore.

      The irony: I'm hearing that the government is actually encouraging SG companies to shift their production bases to Iskandar.

    2. Is Rolls Royce's plant in Singapore a "greenfield" investment?

      Ditto the billion dollar investments by ExxonMobil and Shell in Singapore?

      Or the Big Pharma investments in plants in Singapore?

      Those are investments that could have gone to Malaysia. They didn't.

      So, who are we kidding here?

    3. Mr Hisham dude,

      The stats from Chingkiepore itself speaks for the paucity of greenfield investments unless the Dept of Stats of Chingkiepore are putting up fake numbers......hahahaha so i will leave it at that and not resort to tomfoolery as being peddled by some trolls here to cover up the obvious.Enough said.

      And given the data, I think some idiots down here should look in the mirror as they spout inanities like 'who are we kidding here' and therein the reflected glory would lie their answer. Again, enough said.

      Getting pretty tiresome and pathetic aren't they especially when confronted with data from their own DOS? Yet again, enough said.

      That is why I always feel that the SB trolls trained across the causeway must be surely reflecting the low standards of their education system, paid ratings notwithstanding.

      Warrior 231

    4. "Greenfield investments"?

      Pardon the pejorative - but that is a load of bollocks.

      Exactly how much "greenfield investments" has Malaysia attracted?

      Let's see the stats from Miti, Mida or the folks overseeing the ETP.

      The fundamental fact is that FDI investors have choices where to site their investments, be those "greenfield" or "repeat"?

      How are Rolls Royce, ExxonMobil, Shell and Big Pharma investments in Singapore's manufacturing sector not significant?

      How much are these investments contributing in terms of value added and jobs created to Singapore's economy?

      Your criticisms are getting to be tiring, if not paranoid. The erstwhile target of your criticism is still there, still growing and still having a place at the table instead of being on the menu - read Jayakumar's latest book.

      As for "SB trolls", I am sure that you didn't have the Malaysian education system in mind when you mentioned "low standards", did you?


    5. It is apparent that you are an idiot who does not understand what he is talking about. Go and look up "greenfield" before you talk crap. Everyone, even a child, with some knowledge of economics know what it is. Must be pathetically difficult for your pea brain to figure out, isnt it?Fact of the matter stupid bastard ultracrepidates like you think that posting inane comments makes you look clever when actually you are nothing more than a stupid bastard, no matter what.

      And nobody is interested in your uneducated garbage. Just because something doesn't fit your Chingkiepore SB defined and assigned agenda, it must be bollocks. By the looks of it even the low standard Chingkiporkian education system will kick you out if you were to peddle your holier than thou crap knowledge within their precincts.Probably that is why they assigned you the lowest paid trolling job around.

      We know your agenda..if it is Malaysia or Malay bashing that is mighty fine with you because it gives your inferiority complexed ego that almighty boost it needs for some sense of self worth. But the moment we turn the tables and show up your innate chingkie myths and crap shit tales for what they are worth ...its ouch!!...bollocks, bullshit...blah blah blah. Go burn in Hell with your mama and papa for all I care for I could not be in the least bothered if you are uncomfortable with all the exposes regarding your revered Chingkiepore and your own true selves. What an effing shameless race...tak dak maruah punya tiuniamah...and to think that Chingks go around peddling the myth that the Injuns are the real twisters....hahahaha. What a fucked up mindset you people have, no wonder cheating, thieving etc is second skin to you lot.

      Why don't you go and do one? Or grow a pair and jump off Marina towers. You are just a waste of space here spinning garbage all the while and hiding when found out. Some MoFoing coward you must be that is why you cant even get a proper woman for your wanking sessions.

      And it must be pretty galling for all lowly paid SB trolls to be showed up as one helluva pillock each time he tries to act intellectually deeeeeeeep. Yeah read Jayakumar indeed. Fuck him and his mama.

      Come to think of it, the fact that you are recommending reading Jayakumar or any one at all for that matter is a wonder when you are the first to spin lies, post uneducated opinions, write trite crap passing off as comments, deny factual data...so why should we read at all, bastard? why not recommend us to be like your bastard delusional self? To hell with Jeyakumar and all books, articles or stuff should be the motto right, bastard?

      But you cannot understand that logic because you are a certified mongoloid moron,bastard.

      And to show how stupid you are, folks here is that last sentence again from above :

      " I always feel that the SB trolls trained across the causeway must be surely reflecting the low standards of their education system, paid ratings notwithstanding"

      Warrior 231 ... time stamp:7.30pm

      Note the pronoun 'their' in there. I am sure the Malaysian educated ones amongst you will definitely recognise who that pronoun is referring to but Mr Troll 9.05am even has the gall to spin on the obvious. What a shameless stupid bastard pig. Enough said.

      Now come back with that boring rejoinder of yours....remember" its so easy to set off.......

      Warrior 231

    6. So, no comments about Rolls Royce, ExxonMobil, Shell and Big Pharma manufacturing investments in Singapore?

      What a ******* cop out!

      But that's par for the course for those who spew unmitigated crap.

      The fact of the matter, which must be acid in your craw, is that Singapore is still here, the Sing Dollar is still strong and the world still finds Singapore relevant.

      More than Malaysia?

      Now, run along and peddle your garbage to the feebleminded and credulous.....

    7. I bet you just came running along for the fifty cents candy, in mummy's panties hiding coward. And do her for she didn't educate you proper, scumbag cos you had to tag along on her business days to keep count on them customers.....hahahahaha. And dad must have been too busy filming his wifey to bother...side income mah.

      We know all about you, bastard. At one time, you will be in RB's blog as Skillgannon, at other times it will be Big Dog's blog as something else and some other times Life of Annie's as under some other male whore moniker.Why, you even change monikers midstream when caught! And your favourite game comprises the stale collection of throwing canards, writing uninformed uneducated trash, twisting facts, lying, equivocating, you know the standard Chingkipore SB fare for yer fifty cents. Self same selfsame self same....yawn......what a real Chingk boar (yes rhymes well with bore, doesnt it)

      Dei bastard, get a life and get a proper job and grow two proper balls so that you can write out real proper whatever godammn asterisk you have in mind like a MAN, not like a pondan bastard.

      Yes,the SGD dollar is strongfor thieves like you, and yes Chingkpore is heaven for moneylaundering, corrupt scumbag cowards and pondans. Yep, cowards and pondans who suck their nations dry before sequestering their ill-gotten gains in the premier uno cowards and pondans paradise in these parts i.e..(drum roll) Chingkiepore which by itself is helmed by cowards and pondans who have no balls to tackle the slime in their midst but lie, threaten and swindle their own coward and pondan scums too neutered to fightback and who have to resort to being part time 50 cents trolls to earn a living on the side to keep with the costs of living. All that sure rings a huge bell in your delusional mind, doesnt it faggotty chingkboy troll?

      And hey pig..just to pour some cold water on your effing Rolls Royce shit :




      and remember before you leap cock a hoop, (2) and (3)are not due to the stupid Chingkboy but Malay brained and run MIDA:



      Remember for every POS you can scrap up from the gutter, we can give you ten quality ones in return (minus the money laundering, tax cheating varieties off course):


      You deliberately didnt read all the above for that reality real hurts your unwashed worm crawling filthy arse. Now , up mummy's skirts and into her panties please and back to lil comfy delusional world, hog. You are better off dead than living a lie, bastard sonofaslutbitch.

      p/s; To think I have to "dignify" comments like this son of bitch's.Hisham, give me full rein and I will kick these effing chingkie unwashed arses coterie of scumbags and slimepoops outta here before you can say abracadabra!

      Warrior 231

    8. @anon 7.11

      You're missing the point. Greenfield investments in Singapore are significant, and higher than Malaysia's. I don't think anybody is seriously disputing that.

      But such inward FDI into Singapore is dwarfed by FDI via retained earnings, a characteristic that is shared only by other tax havens.

    9. @Warrior

      Dude, why do you let people under your skin like that? You're just showing others which buttons to push with you.

      Part of the point of debating in public like this is exposing others (especially those not participating) to your point of view. In this case, the data and evidence can speak for themselves, and people can make their own minds up.

      Some people will never accept any other viewpoint other than their own - that of course, is their right. Abusing them for that changes nothing. So why bother?

  12. The article below captures the Chingkieporkian manufacturing sector’s continued decline:


    Despite admittedly being the ultracrepidate here, I would venture to aver that the Chingkieporkian story of output stagnation is actually the net result of a perverse strand of the Dutch Disease (DD) in that it is not a natural resource acquired but rather a financialization caused ailment.

    To put it simply, the Chingkieporkians deliberately skewed the configuration of their economy towards a more financialised form ala Switzerland et al, from the mid 1980s post Plaza Accord onwards, which meant that manufacturing and thus, by default, industrial output / productivity suffered.

    In other words, the DD phenomenon in Singapore was not in the form of a petroleum, uranium or even kryptonite discovery but rather a direct result of Chingkiepork’s adoption of a secretive, opaque financial architecture that attracted in massive amounts of Capital Inflow (CI) of both the legal and dubious variety that in the long term resulted in a deindustrialization process , and therein lies the reasons for their abysmal productivity numbers:



    Perversely, those CIs also “appreciated” the currency and kept growth airborne without impacting productivity as factor reallocation from tradables to non-tradables kicked in!!

    My postulation (as borne out by several studies, that are well encapsulated in this paper):


    is plausibly an interesting phenomena that should interest economists who may use Chingkiepore as a case study of sorts.

    A key takeaway worthy of further reflection:

    “In over 80 percent of the cases a DD-shock appreciates the real exchange rate and causes de-industrialization (i.e. a decline in the ratio of tradableto non-tradable output). In over 90 percent of the cases DD shocks generates factor reallocation and a decrease in the relative productivity of the tradable sector, and in about 75 percent of the cases exports are reduced. However, and contrary to the common view, no lower growth is observed as a result of DD in close to 80 percent of the cases.”

    So given the above, what gives one may ask? Seemingly nothing at face value!. Chingkiepore still remains an affluent high income nation.

    What actually goes out of the window is the perception or the Chingkie generated LIE that all that prosperity is due to hard work, meritocracy, discipline blah blah blah. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    For the numbers and stats from Chingkiepore itself, clearly and unequivocally show that the red dot is not an economic miracle birthed from good capitalistic market ideals thats worthy of emulation but an economic ogre birthed from questionable, immoral seedy capitalism that only a certain filthy arsed slit eyed ethnic are masters in, something anyone with scruples, good morals and proper work ethics would not touch even with a barge pole!!

    Warrior 231