Latest news with #Dizzy_Boysenberry499
New Paper
5 days ago
- Business
- New Paper
'Should CDC vouchers be per pax or per household?': Scheme sparks debate on fairness
A new batch of Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers was rolled out in May, with Singaporean households receiving an additional $500 to help with daily expenses. But public response to the long-running scheme has been mixed, sparking renewed debate online over whether its distribution model is fair and effective. While many households welcomed the payouts amid rising costs, others argued that the current system, which allocates vouchers per household, disadvantages larger families. A Reddit post by Dizzy_Boysenberry499 in May titled "Opinion: CDC vouchers should be per pax and not per household" quickly gained traction on r/singapore, garnering over 1,400 upvotes and more than 300 comments. This was before the announcement that the one-off SG60 vouchers - meant to recognise all Singaporeans' contributions in the nation's 60th year of independence - would be given to individuals in July. These vouchers are also usable at all CDC voucher-accepting merchants. Netizens express scepticism "Imagine if a household has 5 people living in one address. This household is taking up less 'space' and yet they are being 'punished' because they get less voucher support per capita," wrote Dizzy_Boysenberry499. Redditor Auph agreed: "We vote as individuals, not by households. CDC vouchers should also be given to individuals, not by households. It doesn't make sense when $500 is shared among five house members vs $500 shared by a married couple." Some users went further, suggesting that wealthier households should receive less, and that financial assistance should be more targeted. "People that are doing well actually don't need it as much as the less well off," commented Redditor Ok_Set4063. Netizen CommieBird agreed: "This can't be emphasised enough. I'm okay with the principle of distributing vouchers and GST relief to those who need it the most. "Eventually the tax revenue has to come from somewhere, and the government shouldn't be building a society reliant on handouts." Questions were also raised about the long-term sustainability of the scheme. Some view it as a symptomatic response to the larger issue of rising costs of living, without actively preventing costs from skyrocketing further. Netizen ZaroPauper asked: "How sustainable is this voucher handout scheme that's touted to be a long-term plan?" "These vouchers are a band aid and lack proper targeting mechanisms," added Redditor ceddya. "No one's saying we should rush it, but I don't see why we can't have more discussion around other ways, like wealth taxes or making our income tax more progressive, to address the funding gap." Responsive measures are timely and effective Others, however, had a more positive take. Some defended the payouts as timely support that helps alleviate immediate pressure from inflation and strengthens local businesses. One user, InspiroHymm, suggested that the CDC vouchers are in fact a long-term measure to curb cost of living, by funnelling more money into the economy. "People always say 'do something permanent about cost of living'. In modern economics the only permanent measure is economic (GDP) growth, which boosts wage growth." "There is value in using band aids, especially when the source of the wound is by and large out of your control," quipped Reddit user vecspace. Government's decisions are for the benefit of Singaporeans In a press release issued on April 15, the Ministry of Finance announced that each household will receive $800 in CDC vouchers in FY2025 - $500 in May and $300 in January 2026 - on top of the $300 disbursed in January 2025. At the scheme's launch event in May, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said the Government was committed to helping Singaporeans cope with rising costs. He also addressed concerns about sustainability and such financial assistance as temporary measures. "I assure all of you that this is not a one-off exercise. The Government will provide the help for as long as it is needed. "We want to make sure that when we spend more, we are doing it for the benefit of Singaporeans, but the spending is also sustainable over the medium to longer term."
Independent Singapore
14-05-2025
- Business
- Independent Singapore
‘Not all households are the same' — Some Singaporeans wish CDC vouchers were given per person instead of per household
SINGAPORE: While there is no doubt that most Singaporeans are grateful for the extra help that CDC Vouchers give, in the face of high living costs, some have expressed the wish that they would be given per person instead of per household. On Tuesday (May 13), Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced that the latest tranche of CDC Vouchers worth $500 has been made available . These are part of the government's commitment to help Singaporeans cope with increased prices, especially for food and other essential items. Each household with at least one Singaporean may avail of the vouchers, which are split into $250 that may be spent at participating heartland hawkers and merchants, and the other $250 at participating grocery stores. On Reddit, however, u/Dizzy_Boysenberry499 expressed their opinion that vouchers should be given to individuals and asked others to weigh in. ' I understand that there is much criticism about CDC vouchers. Some are more valid than others. I can accept that CDC Vouchers are given as a 'voucher' and not cash so as to ensure that spending goes to support legitimate household expenses, doesn't just flow out to support JB's economy, but to support legitimate local businesses,' they wrote. However, they disagree with the vouchers being distributed per household, arguing that if a household has five members in one address, they take up less space but receive less voucher support. The post author also believes that not giving out CDC Vouchers per person may end up affecting Singapore's birth rate. ' Additionally, isn't the government trying to encourage having children? I understand that a child under 18 may not need as much as an adult, but maybe we could have half the value for under 18 and full value for above 18?' they wrote. In the same vein, there should also be extra consideration for those in the sandwich generation who are looking after their elderly relatives at home instead of entrusting them to the care of institutions. Families in these situations should also not be 'punished' with less voucher support. The post spawned a lively discussion, with the top comment being one involving another kind of solution for high prices. 'I think most would agree. I think the real controversial opinion is on whether most need the CDC Voucher at all. Would rather they do something permanent about cost of living issues,' a Reddit user wrote. 'Totally agree. In fact, I just wrote feedback to MOF on exactly this right before I saw this thread,' chimed in another. 'Agree. Bigger families should have a higher quantum, seeing that the primary purpose of this is to aid in the costs of living,' one added. Some, however, pointed out that individual vouchers will be distributed by July. For many, the bigger issue is finding a more permanent solution to increased living costs. 'Just hope to earn more by myself without needing to depend on these CDC Vouchers,' one sighed, which caused another to respond with 'Yes, this is the ideal scenario for me too. I was legit happy buying fruits with the supermarket vouchers until I suddenly realised I am on 'food stamps'. That gave me a shock.' /TISG Read also: 'My whole chicken is here' — Singaporeans react to latest tranche of CDC Vouchers worth S$500
