Talk:Economy of Singapore

Vandalism

There is nothing about the Total Factor Productivity debate started by Paul Krugman, Alwyn Young and others. That's pretty crucial to This article doesn't seem to contain anything about the Singapore Exchange (SGX)...I really find this quite appalling. Are we so deficient in so many articles? *puts one more item down on million item long to-do list* - this I feel is the deficient issues:hehehe

Get at the gist - what is the main foundation of Singapore's economy? The port, and from that, a lot of other things. Don't just gnaw at the surface area of transparency and all, those are important details, but something as analysing what the economy comes down to is even more important. This I will try to work on. -- Natalinasmpf 00:41, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

5 years later, still no improvement on that front. That ones not just important, it should also be, uhm unctroversial, in contrast to everything that would hint Singapore is not libertarian paradise. 22:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.56.84.118 (talk)

"The state has a minimal role in the economy" yet the government owns half the economy through Temasek. Something's fishy here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.165.95.5 (talk) 20:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Paul Krugman is a joke and the government does own much of the economy through an agency but is very laissez faire in the way it handles the economy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabaton10 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm uncertain of the terminology but wouldn't it make more sense to say that the "economy of Singapore is OF a developed country" or the "economy of Singapore qualifies it as a developed country" rather than the "economy of Singapore is a developed country"?

Also I don't think many people here understand the concept of State Capitalism very well. They don't heavily regulate industries in such a way as to stifle entrepreneurship, rather they invest taxpayer money in a sensible manner in key industries. They don't control the market, the State merely acts as the largest participant within the market economy, for better or worse. (In this case, for the better largely as a result of Lee Kuan Yew's phenomenal leadership) And because the only real assets the elected officials have is THEIR WORKFORCE, they have a great deal of motivation to treat their working class well.

Temasek Holdings

We need reliable, up-to-date sources and be clear about what is fact and analysis. Temasek Holdings has around S$60 billion of stock in Singapore companies, a small fraction of the total market cap of the SGX, and it takes some analysis to come up with these figures in the article, about what defines a GLC, how much the companies produce, and what the effect is since Temasek is in theory independent and not used by the government to direct capital or influence the management of the companies they hold stock in. Karpouzi (talk) 15:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Economic freedom

It would be better to just describe it as a "market economy" instead of putting contradictory descriptions around. Free is a relative term, the government plays an important role in any economy.

Per the sources, the economy is described as free-market by the CIA and Singapore government, is ranked top with Hong Kong on both indexes of economic freedom, is ranked as the most free-trade economy by the World Economic Forum, and ranked first for business freedom by the World Bank. On the other side the 1993 opinion of "W Huff" describes "extensive government intervention and planning", which should be presented as his own POV. Karpouzi (talk) 16:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikiecon

I would love to see a Wiki project map out the global economy. In an organized format all local/country economic data would be collected. All authors would be required to write articles according to a standardized and cited format. The model revolves around publicly released economic data: GDP, employment, industries, corporations, fiscal policy, etc. Economists and volunteers can help determine which economic data accounts are most appropriate to be required under the standardized format. There is nothing in the world that resembles this model. There is no Wiki that allows economists to add economic data under a standardized format. I have already written the article for 'Economy of the United States'. It is 7 pages long. This article contains what I believe is the most important economic data available to the public. The data is almost entirely in table format. Citations include the U.S. Census Bureau, the World Bank, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Yahoo Finance, CNN'S Money's Fortune 500 list, U.S. treasury releases, Federal Reserve websites, company SEC filings and the IMF. The article can be seen in PDF format at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Economy.pdf The Contents are: 1. States, 2. Industries, 3. Corporations, 4. Employment, 5. Fiscal Budget, 6. Monetary Policy, 7. Creditors, 8. Cities, 9. International Accounts 9. History All articles would be standardized and connected in an organized network. This model would go down to the most local level. All 196 countries would have a standardized country article to have the same exact format used in the attached file. This project would evolve as economists determine better ways to present the data.

The 'Economy of ______' pages would be a very educational collection of economic data. I think that these articles would be greatly improved if they were modified to become uniform. This would allow for greater comparability. I believe that these pages would be improved with a standardized and simplified format. This would allow for greater comparability and public understanding of the economy and fiscal budgets. Below are the Wikipedia Contents of the four biggest economy articles. As you can see, the Contents are inconsistent between them. I believe this can be fixed with my Wiki project proposal. 1. Economy of the United States 1 History 2 Overview 3 Employment 4 Research, development, and entrepreneurship 5 Income and wealth 6 Financial position 7 Industry Sectors 8 Notable companies and markets 9 Energy, transportation, and telecommunications 10 Finance 11 Health care 12 International trade 13 Currency and central bank 14 Law and government 15 See also 16 References 17 External links 2. Economy of China 1 History 2 Government role 3 Regional economies 4 Development 5 Macroeconomic trends 6 Financial and banking system 7 Industry Sectors 8 Labor and welfare 9 External trade 10 Foreign investment 11 Demographics 12 Transportation and infrastructure 13 Science and technology 14 See also 15 References 16 External links 3. Economy of Japan 1 Economic history 2 Infrastructure 3 Macro-economic trend 4 Services 5 Industry 6 Mining and petroleum exploration 7 Agriculture 8 Labor force 9 Law and government 10 Culture 11 Other economic indicators 12 See also 13 Notes 14 External links 4. Economy of Germany 1 History 2 Macroeconomic data 3 Economic region 4 Natural resources 5 Sectors 6 Infrastructure 7 Technology 8 See also 9 References 10 External links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcnabber091 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Intro

This article is cited as promoting the subject in a subjective manner, and the second sentence seems a major reason why:

"Singapore's economy has been ranked as the most open in the world, least corrupt, most pro-business,with stable prices, low tax rates (14.2% of GDP) compared to other developed economies, and one of the highest per-capita gross domestic products (GDP) in the world."

Not to mention it's an extremely long and slightly confusing sentence, objectivity nonwithstanding. Suggest reducing length and/or moving some ot the rankings to different sections of the article. Importemps (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

The first three points are relevant hard facts with good sources. The next three are slightly POV and/or unsourced, though hardly peacock terms. I would remove the stable prices as an unsourced pov. Would keep the other two. Karpouzi (talk) 07:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Link is broken

The link to reference 10 is broken and needs to be fixed. But I was not able to find the article again. EikeLe (talk) 08:43, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

External link to tariff data

Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC), a UN/WTO agency that aims to promote sustainable economic development through trade promotion. I would like to propose the addition of an external link (http://www.macmap.org/QuickSearch/FindTariff/FindTariff.aspx?subsite=open_access&country=SCC702%7cSingapore&source=1%7CITC) that leads directly to our online database of customs tariffs applied by Singapore. Visitors can easily look up market access information for Singapore by selecting the product and partner of their interest. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations, and aims to share trade and market access data on by country and product as a global public good 2) No registration is required to access this information 3) Market access data (Tariffs and non-tariff measures) are regularly updated

Thank you, Divoc (talk) 09:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Dr.(PhD) Christopher Balding's claims

Removed comments by Dr.(PhD) Christopher Balding, as well as the link to the source [1]. This gives undue weight to a purported claim. Furthermore, the source was a self-published blog, not a third party source as required for Wikipedia's policy on verifiable sources. --82.28.198.237 (talk) 22:58, 7 April 2015 (UTC)