Salaries must commensurate with the task persons are being paid to perform.

For a glaring instance, why are brows raised when pastors take million dollar salaries?

However "talented" they might claim and need to be, and whatever equivalent pay they might claim capable of getting elsewhere, we think million dollar pay would ill-suit them for the function of their calling, which require them, say, to be living examples and inspirational of their wards towards love and sacrifice for others, following the One they preach who "had nowhere to lay his head".

So, too, political leaders are to be "dedicated", whose function is importantly also to identify with and inspire the people, the vast majority being common earners of, in Singapore, one to two thousand dollars a month. Taking a pay of eight million a year (bonus and all added), rather than support their performance (which is what salaries are meant for), instead disqualify for it.

True, we need people who "can do" at the top, but those unwilling to serve with moderated pay suited to their calling CAN'T DO in a crucial aspect of their office.

True, the CEO of Singtel and Keppel earn the same, but it isn't their essential task to, for instance, carry the ground with them, visiting two room or three flats empathising with the problems and sharing the suffering of the common man.