How much are you earning per annum?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I think he's overpaid too.

I'm 28 year old and have 3 years of experience as a software technical support engineer. I'm only earning $160K. I guess it's time to look for another job. Seems like plenty of better paying jobs out there.

How much tax did you pay to IRAS? We will investigate your post.

Recently, a discussion with my friend entailed a conclusion that one's pay is inversely proportional to one's intellect.

How else do you explain that a journalist earns way less than say, someone in the property arena? Being a doctor / lawyer doesn't necessarily translate into a fat pay cheque as well as I see some of my peers struggling in these vocations. Granted there are peers who are registrars or hold positions in the Law Society, they are but a few.

My friends are mostly scholars and they don't earn as much as one would have expected them to, especially those in SPH. (We're talking about being educated in LSE, Cambridge, etc)

It's especially disheartening to note that we've been indoctrinated with the value of education and how being part of the academic elite would pay off in the future only to realise that some Ah Beng delving in property can easily earn more than the purported elites in education.

I am a prime example of this disparity. My intelligence ranks way above my partner but he's drawing close to twice my income with a 6-figure salary. Both of us are not civil servants.

We live in a prime district condominium and he is driving an Audi coupe. (I can't drive.)

It frustrates me immensely that having intelligence results in nought. Being able to partake in debates and charm in argumentative essays are skills that don't translate into huge dollops of money. As for the peers who have leapfrogged into the million-dollar annual salary range, they are primarily lawyers with connections or are lucky to be born into a family of wealth (CEO of MNC, family with a string of law firms, etc).

I wasn't born into poverty. I was of an upper-middle class breed. My family had political connections and friends. Relatives were somebodies in various industries. I have two properties to be inherited. But to me, that isn't my trumpet to blow. Those were not earned under my watch. An inheritance says nothing about the purpose of your existence. It doesn't count in my basket. One should not hang up one's laurels and wait for someone to die in order to live on that sum of money. That said, having pride and being independent has resulted in drawing a lower salary than someone who is a yes-man.

I apologize if I do seem to be ranting and appear to be digressing from the thread but this disparity is just not right. While I'm cheering on those who have fallen from the academic path and admire their success in alternative avenues, I cannot help but feel that those, like us, who have invested wholly in our education have been misled.

Please feel free to engage in a meaningful discussion but kindly refrain from simply name-calling. It's rude and uncouth. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Originally Posted by if_i_may_say_so

Recently, a discussion with my friend entailed a conclusion that one's pay is inversely proportional to one's intellect.

How else do you explain that a journalist earns way less than say, someone in the property arena? Being a doctor / lawyer doesn't necessarily translate into a fat pay cheque as well as I see some of my peers struggling in these vocations. Granted there are peers who are registrars or hold positions in the Law Society, they are but a few.

My friends are mostly scholars and they don't earn as much as one would have expected them to, especially those in SPH. (We're talking about being educated in LSE, Cambridge, etc)

It's especially disheartening to note that we've been indoctrinated with the value of education and how being part of the academic elite would pay off in the future only to realise that some Ah Beng delving in property can easily earn more than the purported elites in education.

I am a prime example of this disparity. My intelligence ranks way above my partner but he's drawing close to twice my income with a 6-figure salary. Both of us are not civil servants.

We live in a prime district condominium and he is driving an Audi coupe. (I can't drive.)

It frustrates me immensely that having intelligence results in nought. Being able to partake in debates and charm in argumentative essays are skills that don't translate into huge dollops of money. As for the peers who have leapfrogged into the million-dollar annual salary range, they are primarily lawyers with connections or are lucky to be born into a family of wealth (CEO of MNC, family with a string of law firms, etc).

I wasn't born into poverty. I was of an upper-middle class breed. My family had political connections and friends. Relatives were somebodies in various industries. I have two properties to be inherited. But to me, that isn't my trumpet to blow. Those were not earned under my watch. An inheritance says nothing about the purpose of your existence. It doesn't count in my basket. One should not hang up one's laurels and wait for someone to die in order to live on that sum of money. That said, having pride and being independent has resulted in drawing a lower salary than someone who is a yes-man.

I apologize if I do seem to be ranting and appear to be digressing from the thread but this disparity is just not right. While I'm cheering on those who have fallen from the academic path and admire their success in alternative avenues, I cannot help but feel that those, like us, who have invested wholly in our education have been misled.

Please feel free to engage in a meaningful discussion but kindly refrain from simply name-calling. It's rude and uncouth. Appreciate it. Thank you.

You have mentioned that your husband earns twice as you - was that the reason why you chose him over some other scholar who is intellectually bright but earns less?

Also, if you have political connections, you consider yourself only to be a upper-middle class?

Originally Posted by if_i_may_say_so

Recently, a discussion with my friend entailed a conclusion that one's pay is inversely proportional to one's intellect.

How else do you explain that a journalist earns way less than say, someone in the property arena? Being a doctor / lawyer doesn't necessarily translate into a fat pay cheque as well as I see some of my peers struggling in these vocations. Granted there are peers who are registrars or hold positions in the Law Society, they are but a few.

My friends are mostly scholars and they don't earn as much as one would have expected them to, especially those in SPH. (We're talking about being educated in LSE, Cambridge, etc)

It's especially disheartening to note that we've been indoctrinated with the value of education and how being part of the academic elite would pay off in the future only to realise that some Ah Beng delving in property can easily earn more than the purported elites in education.

I am a prime example of this disparity. My intelligence ranks way above my partner but he's drawing close to twice my income with a 6-figure salary. Both of us are not civil servants.

We live in a prime district condominium and he is driving an Audi coupe. (I can't drive.)

It frustrates me immensely that having intelligence results in nought. Being able to partake in debates and charm in argumentative essays are skills that don't translate into huge dollops of money. As for the peers who have leapfrogged into the million-dollar annual salary range, they are primarily lawyers with connections or are lucky to be born into a family of wealth (CEO of MNC, family with a string of law firms, etc).

I wasn't born into poverty. I was of an upper-middle class breed. My family had political connections and friends. Relatives were somebodies in various industries. I have two properties to be inherited. But to me, that isn't my trumpet to blow. Those were not earned under my watch. An inheritance says nothing about the purpose of your existence. It doesn't count in my basket. One should not hang up one's laurels and wait for someone to die in order to live on that sum of money. That said, having pride and being independent has resulted in drawing a lower salary than someone who is a yes-man.

I apologize if I do seem to be ranting and appear to be digressing from the thread but this disparity is just not right. While I'm cheering on those who have fallen from the academic path and admire their success in alternative avenues, I cannot help but feel that those, like us, who have invested wholly in our education have been misled.

Please feel free to engage in a meaningful discussion but kindly refrain from simply name-calling. It's rude and uncouth. Appreciate it. Thank you.

I get what you mean. However, my main gripe with the pseudo-meritocracy is not that intelligence is not rewarded but rather hard work isn't. You don't have to be highly intelligent to do well in school but you have to be very hardworking, yet at the end of the day people just born into wealth, born with intelligence, born with eq or even those who just got into the right industry will triumph your earnings with incommensurate effort.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I get what you mean. However, my main gripe with the pseudo-meritocracy is not that intelligence is not rewarded but rather hard work isn't. You don't have to be highly intelligent to do well in school but you have to be very hardworking, yet at the end of the day people just born into wealth, born with intelligence, born with eq or even those who just got into the right industry will triumph your earnings with incommensurate effort.

You fail to take into account the element of luck. Many people underestimate the effects of luck and blame other factors for their lack of achievement.

Suppose a young person excels in school or sports -- both areas where luck plays a relatively minor part as compared with the game of life and career advancement. He will surely feel dejected when he steps out to the society and finds that hard work and innate ability are not good predictors of success (high positions, high income above 300k pa).

Copied from the main page of Salary.sg - Your Salary in Singapore :
"Hard work will get you a professorship or a BMW. You need both work and luck for a Booker, a Nobel or a private jet. (UK Sunday Times, Jun 1, 2008)"

I would say you need lots of luck to even just hit 300k pa in pay. Hard work will at most bring you 100k.

Originally Posted by if_i_may_say_so

Recently, a discussion with my friend entailed a conclusion that one's pay is inversely proportional to one's intellect.

How else do you explain that a journalist earns way less than say, someone in the property arena? Being a doctor / lawyer doesn't necessarily translate into a fat pay cheque as well as I see some of my peers struggling in these vocations. Granted there are peers who are registrars or hold positions in the Law Society, they are but a few.

My friends are mostly scholars and they don't earn as much as one would have expected them to, especially those in SPH. (We're talking about being educated in LSE, Cambridge, etc)

It's especially disheartening to note that we've been indoctrinated with the value of education and how being part of the academic elite would pay off in the future only to realise that some Ah Beng delving in property can easily earn more than the purported elites in education.

I am a prime example of this disparity. My intelligence ranks way above my partner but he's drawing close to twice my income with a 6-figure salary. Both of us are not civil servants.

We live in a prime district condominium and he is driving an Audi coupe. (I can't drive.)

It frustrates me immensely that having intelligence results in nought. Being able to partake in debates and charm in argumentative essays are skills that don't translate into huge dollops of money. As for the peers who have leapfrogged into the million-dollar annual salary range, they are primarily lawyers with connections or are lucky to be born into a family of wealth (CEO of MNC, family with a string of law firms, etc).

I wasn't born into poverty. I was of an upper-middle class breed. My family had political connections and friends. Relatives were somebodies in various industries. I have two properties to be inherited. But to me, that isn't my trumpet to blow. Those were not earned under my watch. An inheritance says nothing about the purpose of your existence. It doesn't count in my basket. One should not hang up one's laurels and wait for someone to die in order to live on that sum of money. That said, having pride and being independent has resulted in drawing a lower salary than someone who is a yes-man.

I apologize if I do seem to be ranting and appear to be digressing from the thread but this disparity is just not right. While I'm cheering on those who have fallen from the academic path and admire their success in alternative avenues, I cannot help but feel that those, like us, who have invested wholly in our education have been misled.

Please feel free to engage in a meaningful discussion but kindly refrain from simply name-calling. It's rude and uncouth. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Being able to do well in education is a function of IQ, but to be able to make mega bucks is a function of EQ, luck...ok it is a sweeping statement but you know what i mean

I think it is a tad too presumptious to equate academic success to financial success. It is a line of argument used frequently by Asian parents to motivate their children. After all having academic success is like giving you a headstart in the race, but in a marathon there are many factors that come into play.

One could be risk averse and choose to take the well trodden path (read: join a MNC and toe the line) and if you are lucky you will be paid reasonably but you will not be rich. Alternatively join the civil service, qualify for the elite Admin service and you are set for life

Or like some my friends who are less inclined academically, but their EQ, risk appetite, motivation have seen them starting their own business and growing it to sizeable enterprise and making amounts way above what their batch boys are raking in.

I think you are coming from the angle why there are jobs that pays much more but does not seem to require that much intellect.....yes its unfair but hey its life. Compare a nuclear physicist to a property agent, you probably need an IQ of 150 to be a nuclear scientist but a property agent might not even be able to add properly and the nuclear scientist might not be able to make it as a property agent...Look at the responsibility of a production manager in an industrial facility vs a trader. A wrong decision from the production manager could result in loss of lives while a wrong decision from a trader is just $$$$, but who is paid more? The reason is ....at the end of the day who makes more money for the company.

Originally Posted by if_i_may_say_so

Recently, a discussion with my friend entailed a conclusion that one's pay is inversely proportional to one's intellect.

How else do you explain that a journalist earns way less than say, someone in the property arena? Being a doctor / lawyer doesn't necessarily translate into a fat pay cheque as well as I see some of my peers struggling in these vocations. Granted there are peers who are registrars or hold positions in the Law Society, they are but a few.

My friends are mostly scholars and they don't earn as much as one would have expected them to, especially those in SPH. (We're talking about being educated in LSE, Cambridge, etc)

It's especially disheartening to note that we've been indoctrinated with the value of education and how being part of the academic elite would pay off in the future only to realise that some Ah Beng delving in property can easily earn more than the purported elites in education.

I am a prime example of this disparity. My intelligence ranks way above my partner but he's drawing close to twice my income with a 6-figure salary. Both of us are not civil servants.

We live in a prime district condominium and he is driving an Audi coupe. (I can't drive.)

It frustrates me immensely that having intelligence results in nought. Being able to partake in debates and charm in argumentative essays are skills that don't translate into huge dollops of money. As for the peers who have leapfrogged into the million-dollar annual salary range, they are primarily lawyers with connections or are lucky to be born into a family of wealth (CEO of MNC, family with a string of law firms, etc).

I wasn't born into poverty. I was of an upper-middle class breed. My family had political connections and friends. Relatives were somebodies in various industries. I have two properties to be inherited. But to me, that isn't my trumpet to blow. Those were not earned under my watch. An inheritance says nothing about the purpose of your existence. It doesn't count in my basket. One should not hang up one's laurels and wait for someone to die in order to live on that sum of money. That said, having pride and being independent has resulted in drawing a lower salary than someone who is a yes-man.

I apologize if I do seem to be ranting and appear to be digressing from the thread but this disparity is just not right. While I'm cheering on those who have fallen from the academic path and admire their success in alternative avenues, I cannot help but feel that those, like us, who have invested wholly in our education have been misled.

Please feel free to engage in a meaningful discussion but kindly refrain from simply name-calling. It's rude and uncouth. Appreciate it. Thank you.

In general, education is important for social mobility.

Other factors play a role to varying degrees depending on the circumstances.

In this brave new world of financial turmoil,
one can observe that the wealth of certain individuals
is build on unethical grounds.

Your IQ probably has net you a husband capable of giving you a comfortable life.
Your background probably will make you rich via inheritance.

Life is not fair, but you can try to be contented with it.

Your peeve is that it seems your "achievements"
has nothing to do your either your IQ or hard work,
or it pales in comparison with others you deem to have lower IQ,
or have put in less amount of effort.

In my line of work, i have seen karma in action consistently.

Are you willing to sacrifice your conscience, integrity and moral compass
for recognition and money, and maybe at the expense of
your health, relationship with kins and peers and happiness?

Originally Posted by IRAS Investigation

How much tax did you pay to IRAS? We will investigate your post.

Not much, just a little over $14K after deductions. Don't see how you can use this to verify.

You seems like a lonely wife who are just a typical woman who look for a rich husband.

Your choice of a husband with lower IQ than yours simply show your $$$ mind.

Go to the old folks home and do some go. You will feel better about yourself.

I find it highly offensive that misogynists are making assumptions and hurling groundless accusations.

Let me make myself clear - I find it disconcerting that despite being smarter than my partner, he is earning more than me or my peers who have prestigious scholarships and numerous academic accolades. That is my main gripe.

In no way did I mention that he is of a low IQ. Both of us hail from the same secondary school (ranked within the top 10) and are from the top 3 junior colleges. While he trails me in academics, he holds his own right with a whisker away from having 1st class honours. Both are academic elites to the average man.

Additionally, it is terribly misogynistic to assume that I married him for his money.

He was born into poverty. When we got married, he had just started work and there was very little that his family could have provided us. He had a relatively high starting salary that was the envy of his peers. As mentioned, most of my peers are scholars and/or are from wealthy families. His friends and relatives clearly thought that I was "marrying down". My family paid for almost every expense of our wedding which was held in one of the top hotels. Our photography alone was a 5-figure sum, paid for by myself, after slaving hours in order not to depend fully on my family.

I married him because he was a good man. It is as simple as that.

Furthermore, I had rejected his proposal for 4 consecutive years as I felt that I was too young to get married in my early 20s.

I am very proud of my independence. Friends query why I continue to work when I can "shake legs" and enjoy life as a tai-tai. Let it be known that this is not my personality makeup. I have been indoctrinated with firm values of wielding pride and independence. One should not depend on someone else to feed you while your existence is validated by being a mere sloth who simply rots and wastes away by lazing about.

A little insight to my family background would tell you that my mother grew up with 4 servants in the household. The family once had a string of houses (more than 10). That is the kind of background that I have grown up in but my family is not materialistic and sees money as being transient. My uncle gave a large part of his wealth away during his lifetime and thousands of people have benefitted from his philanthropy.

With this in hindsight, I am understandably peeved to be taken for a gold-digger or a materialistic woman.

While I have also mentioned that I earn less than my husband, I did not state that I am earning a meagre salary. My salary is above the median. My comparison is relative, but others have chosen to make inferences when there is none.

I had expected sound reasoning and logical deductions, which some of you have done so, and I deeply appreciate your input.

As for those who have been misguided by your own depraved assumptions of women being incapable of earning or marrying a rich man despite him having a lower IQ, I am glad that you are not within my social circle. Before more assumptions can be made about my character of having peers who are scholars and rich friends, let me put it this way to you. It is easy to bond with others of the same interests and level of intellect. Quite often, such people are from relatively good backgrounds, which hurtles them up the social ladder with connections and such. I am not one who gives a hoot about your background upon meeting you. But because of a similarity in mannerisms, upbringing and shared lingo amongst a certain breed, this has led to a cumulation of friends within this demographic over the years. Take for instance a close friend whom I had known for a decade; he recently divulged that his father is actually the CEO of a billion-dollar organization.

I do not talk shop nor take an interest in the material things which my friends own. We are not interested in talking about the financial market, statistics, property nor cars. Conversations revolve around their personal lives and shared tales. This is the basis of all my friendships and relationships. Whoever they are, what they have or who they are connected to will only be revealed after several years. These friends are humble and do not see a need for ostentatious displays. If you are truly wealthy, you will not need to find every opportunity to boast nor parade what you have, for few will be able to match up in the first place.

Naturally, I am very proud that my husband has managed to throw off the shackles of his humble background and silence the naysayers on his own. However, as mentioned, I find it hard to swallow that being smarter of the two, I am not within the same salary bracket. That is my MAIN gripe.

Despite this, I do not take a single cent from my partner nor family. I firmly advocate buying what you want with the money that you have earned. There is no pride in using other people's money.

As for the vicious remark about the old folks' home, I apologize for refuting your callous statement. If there was an ounce of filial piety within you, it would not be a point of reference, even as a joke. My family is firmly against placing any member in the old folks' home. My grandmother struggled with dementia, was incontinent and prone to random verbal outbursts. For more than a decade, my mother and aunt took it upon themselves to care for her personally. That very aunt has been bedridden shortly after the demise of my grandmother. My mother cares for her now with the help of a domestic helper. Though it is taxing to accompany her for her weekly hospital appointments, hooking her up to machinery at home and having to tend to her every need, it is strongly advocated within my family that we ought to take care of one another. This tradition of caring personally for the family will be my baton. It is one which I will inherit and run the race willingly because of the strong beacons before me that I have witnessed for the past 2 decades.

I apologize for rambling and digressing. I was hoping for a good jostle of the mind with vigorous discussions, but quite unfortunately some are more adept at sweeping statements and bearing malicious thoughts. To those who have managed to voice my thoughts succinctly, thank you for the effort.

Finally, please note that not all ladies are out to bag a rich man nor care to. There are ladies who are intelligent and absolutely independent who can marry a man simply because he is good to her.

He was the poorest of all the male friends. I married him. Our condominium in a prime district did not happen overnight based on our own efforts. I was determined to be without my family's intervention. The Audi coupe and preceding BMW were fruits of my husband's labour. When we were first married, we lived in a flat with a humble Japanese car. In the beginning, I was called foolish by some and a rare gem by others to marry the poorest man within my social circle who was born into poverty. But you cannot deem me as a gold-digger. There was none to begin with! Oh, the sheer indignance I had when my eyes first scanned the scathing replies!