1. I refer to Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam’s take during his budget wrap up-speech on a cost-of-living report from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) which just ranked Singapore as the most expensive city in the world. Read here.
2. To nobody’s surprise, the Finance Minister said,
“Cost of living reports…are aimed at comparing costs of living for expatriates and thus do not reflect the cost of living for a local resident”.
Read here.
“Strengthening of Singapore dollar”
3. Mr Tharman explained,
“An important reason why we’ve become expensive for expatriates is that the Singapore dollar has strengthened… that makes things pricier for an expatriate who is paid in a foreign currency. But it improves Singaporeans’ purchasing power, both at home when buying imported goods, and abroad.”
4. However, Mr Tharman didn’t point out that most of the “strengthening of the Singapore dollar” took place before 2011.
5. The Singapore dollar exchange rate movements against the US Dollar and Euro are more accurately characterized as being ‘locked in a stable range since 2011′, not ‘strengthening since 2011′.
6. If Singapore dollar exchange rates are overlaid on Singapore’s cost of living ranking from the EIU then it becomes clear the “strengthening Singapore dollar” isn’t a good reason why Singapore took the number one spot in the 2014 report. See charts below.
7. From the charts above, Singapore dollar has stopped appreciating as early as 2010 (vs Euro) and 2011 (vs USD) respectively.
8. Meanwhile, Singapore remained as the 10th and 9th position according to the EIU reports in 2011 and 2012.
9. It is safe to say the stable Singapore dollar since 2011 isn’t an important reason why Singapore most recently jumped to 1st (2014) and 6th (2013) from 9th (2012) and 10th (2011).
“Basket of Goods Consumed by Singaporeans Differ from Expatriates”
10. In addition, Mr Tharman said the basket of goods and services consumed in the EIU report are
“… quite different from the goods and services consumed by ordinary Singaporeans.”
11. Mr Tharman listed some of the goods which included,
“…imported cheese, fillet mignon, “Burberry-type raincoats”, the four best seats in a theatre, and three-course dinners in high-end restaurants for four people. In addition, when it comes to transport, these expatriate cost-of-living surveys only take into account the cost of cars and taxis, not public transport.”
12. However, the above is an example of cherry picking by Mr Tharman to fit his argument that the goods and services which expatriates and ordinary Singaporeans consume are “quite different”.
13. For example in the EIU 2011 report, EIU listed in its report some of its 160 representative goods consumed in its basket:
14. For example in the EIU 2012 report, EIU listed in its report some goods consumed in its basket:
15. I need to state categorically that the above lists of goods weren’t cherry picked out of the 160 products and services.The above lists were the only such tables inside those publicly available EIU reports. See 2011 EIU report here.
16. In other words, it is easy for anyone to cherry pick several items out from the list of 160 items. Clearly, many Singaporeans consume most of the above listed of goods and services like rice, milk and white bread.
17. It is another matter for Mr Tharman to state categorically, which he didn’t, that the significant majority of those 160 items are not consumed by the average resident here.
The argument that “Basket of Goods Consumed by Singaporeans Differ from Expatriates” is actually a Red Herring
18. According to a Financial Times article,
“The EIU singled out the COE system as one of a few “structurally expensive items” that skew the overall cost of living upwards in Singapore. As a result, transport costs in Singapore were almost three times higher than in New York.”
19. We know note that “… [Singapore] has one of the highest car ownership populations in the world for a city. (Repeat: For a city, and not for a country.)”, according to Kishore Mahbubani, dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, in a Straits Times article.
20. In the same article, Mr Charles Chow, who blogs on transportation issues, said
“There are roughly 550,000 to 600,000 private vehicles in Singapore.Forty-five per cent of households in Singapore own at least one car.This implies that out of the approximate 1.25 million households in Singapore, about 560,000 households have at least one car.“
21. If it is known that appreciation of COE prices is main factor that “skewed” the results propelling Singapore to top spot then it becomes illogical and irrelevant for Mr Tharman to suggest that “Singapore dollar has strengthened… it improves Singaporeans’ purchasing power.”
22. Simply put, when the high price inflation is skewed towards big ticket items that are not imported like COE as in Singapore’s case then exchange rates should not be even mentioned as a reason for Singapore’s higher cost of living since 2011 for both residents and expatriates.
23. Price inflation on COE hurts many resident households and also expatriates not only in the same amount but also hits their wallets the most since 2011.
24. Thus, it is a mistake to put emphasis on much smaller ticket imported items like ‘cheese and raincoats’, as compared to big ticket non imported items like COE which have skyrocketed since 2011.
“Report on Purchasing Power, Cost of Living & Wages Index 2012 from the Asia Competitiveness Institute??“
25. Lastly, Mr Tharman cited a 2012 survey Asia Competitiveness Institute that attempts to measure the cost of living for residents and expatriates separately.
26. According to the Straits Times citing the 2012 ACI report,
for expatriates, Singapore was the 5th most expensive city out of 109. But for residents, it ranked only 61st, comparable to cities such as Hong Kong which ranked 58th, and Seoul which ranked 60th.
27. However, neither Mr Tharman nor the Straits Times mentioned the background of the ‘Asia Competitiveness Institute (ACI)’.
28. According to Asia Competitiveness Institute (ACI), read here,
“The Asia Competitiveness Institute (ACI) was established in August 2006 as a research center at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (LKYSPP), National University of Singapore (NUS). It aims to build the intellectual leadership and network for understanding and developing competitiveness in the ASEAN region.”
29. Reports from the ACI and LKYSPP are much less widely cited and well known worldwide compared to reports from EIU and Mercer.
30. Reports from the ACI and LKYSPP tend to be cited by the Singapore Government.
31. In addition, ACI is a Government-funded school of learning while EIU and Mercer are business advisory firms.
32. The objectives of the ACI and EIU/Mercer reports are different to begin with because the reports serve different constituents.
33. For example, ACI had also published a critique pointing out the ‘fallacies’ of other international reports, for example, the UBS Prices and Earnings report of 2009 – A Global Purchasing Power Comparison. Read ACI’s less well known rebuttal to the UBS report here.
34. While comparisons can be made between reports from EIU and Mercer on cost of living, findings of the ACI report 2012 cannot be compared for consistencies or discrepancies because no other such similar reports on cost of living for residents are known to exist.
Conclusion
35. The EIU annual report on cost of living continues to serve as a reasonable proxy to the cost of living for Singaporeans because the reasons offered so far against the applicability of EIU report in this specific instance simply do not pass the spin test.
PassTheSpin
* The author blogs at http://passthespin.wordpress.com