What is PAP’s long term economic vision?
-
I think they have no long term economic goals anymore (other than the most obvious "make as much money for themselves first").
Every now and then, they come up with all sorts of hubs and ideas which falter and fail to take off after a few years. And then they come up with more ideas.
It's like shooting in the dark hoping that one day you hit the target.
-
Our PAP govt tells us we cannot have social welfare because it makes the people
lazy.The scandinavia countries of Finland, Norway and Denmark have populations like us - around 4 to 5 millions.They all have high social securities, and yet, high birth rates (healthy population replacement rate).
So when our people are busy making end meets; just surviving with no time for making babies, what happens to our population?
Should we be so concerned about the lazybums around us that we are willing to murder our unborn babies - lock, stock and barrel?
Our PAP govt tells us we need GLC to grow our economy. But the scandinavians have no GLC to grow their economies but only private companies, like NOKIA, IKEA.
And these private owned entities are doing hugely successful jobs in growing the economies. Together, they drive the domestic economies (and the economies around the world) and create plentiful of jobs (both domestically and internationally).
Our PAP govt tells us we need meritocracy because it is a fairer system of rewarding talent and effort.But Denmark, with a population around us, has no such obsession on meritocracy. Yet they have consistently been producing Nobel prize winners - again and again!
-
The public housing crisis has revived the question whether Singapore, with only 700sq km of land, can continue to accommodate the current five million residents, let alone increase it by a further one-third.
HOW is this land-squeezed island coping with housing an enlarged population of five million, including hundreds of thousands of recent foreign arrivals?
The answer gleaned from public comments about the Housing Development Board (HDB), the national icon that builds homes for 80% of the people is: “surprisingly poor”, given its sterling track record.
For 50 years, the HDB has helped to transform this former squatter colony into a global city of fine homes. At early times, it set a world record of building an average of one flat every 45 minutes.
The recent unprecedented intake of foreigners has, however, dealt a blow to its reputation, judging by the widespread complaint of poor anticipation, insufficient flats and spiralling prices.
As a result, resale subsidised apartments, which are still cheaper than private ones, have moved out of reach of many young fresh graduates planning to get married and settle down.
With affluent foreign PRs joining in the rush – some for profits – resale prices of HDB apartments have increased by some 45% in the last few years. The government, which usually plans ahead, is finding itself in hot soup for being under-prepared by the explosive demand. An indication of this: In 2008, HDB built only 3,183 new flats when there were over 90,000 PRs and 20,000 new citizens in the same year, according to official statistics.
Only Singaporeans – not foreigners or PRs – are allowed to buy new government flats, which are generally well designed and planned. Because of the long waiting time, however, many Singaporeans opt to pay more for resale units in the open market, where they run into competition from PR buyers.
Some commentators feel it is unfair just to blame the HDB, since the problem covers a wide range of population, immigration as well as manpower policies that involves the entire government and not just public housing.
The top leadership has drawn up plans and an overall strategy for a 6.5 million population without fixing a time-frame.
But with public unhappiness rising over the perceived costs, over-crowdedness, rising prices, the immigration inflow is being slowed down.
“This probably means that if the authorities want to stick to its 6.5 million population, it will have to take a longer time – probably more than 20 years,” one business executive commented.
The public housing crisis has revived a question whether Singapore, with only 700 sq km of land, can continue to accommodate the current five million residents, let alone increase it by a further one-third. The high density may already have affected some quarters overseas.
The Ireland-based International Living magazine recently ranked Singapore, one of Asia’s wealthiest states, a lowly 70th position among top places to live in.
The city scored well on safety and risk, healthcare, leisure and culture, but was penalised for its environment which included considerations of density and population growth.
The demographic change in Singapore has been dramatic. Twenty years ago, it was a more pleasant city of 3.05 million, some two million fewer people than 4.99 million reached last year.
This expansion of 64% (mostly through immigration) in 20 years is a rate matched by few countries in modern history. It succeeded in pushing out Hong Kong as the world’s third densest-populated place.
On average of 7,023 persons live in each square kilometre of this city, compared to 6,349 in Hong Kong. Both are behind Macau (18,534) and Monaco (16,923).
The Minister of National Development, Mah Bow Tan, one of the staunchest advocates of a bigger population, regularly reassuring the people that Singapore has enough land for 6.5 million people. There was no need for a massive across-the-board change in development intensity, he added, as there was sufficient supply to meeting needs for the next 10 to 15 years.
Some government officials say the Government had drawn up plans for future housing, creation and land transport needs for the next 20 years when the population reaches 6.5 million.
In its latest move that shows its determination in carving out more space for a larger population, the Government plans to move much of the city underground. A government strategic committee has called for the creation of more underground space to accommodate shopping malls, train networks, civil defence shelters, pedestrian links as well as ammunition and oil storage. It has been reducing the average size of residential flats, both private and public, as well as stacking them higher.
Matching the government’s enthusiasm for a bigger population, however, is an alternative voice against it.
“Why do we need 6.5 million people?” asked a private doctor and former opposition candidate Dr Wong Wee Nam in an article warning about the consequences for his fellow citizens.
“A city needs to rejuvenate, transform and re-create itself continually in order to stay healthy and alive,” he said.
“How can an over-crowded place with all the ills of high density be able to do that?”
Reclamation could expand the country’s size from 700 to 708 sq km, according to Dr Wong, but it would not reduce density very much.
With a 6.5 million population, Singapore could well become the most densely populated place on earth, with 16,640 persons per sq km.
Another critic of mass immigration is the former top civil servant Mr Ngiam Tong Dow, who feels that Singapore is better served by investing in its own citizens than importing large numbers from abroad.
“We risk having them (talented foreigners) use us as a stepping stone... Singapore will be left with the second tier of average people,” he added.
-
how good are these foreign talents that inflow into out tiny dot?
if one foreign talent could help create hundreds or thousands of jobs, then that talent is very much needed than say, tens and thousands of such foreign talents could produce ordinarily what we the first class citizens could also do, then they r eating up our space and pies...
there should be a very high benchmark in which such talents are accepted...the rest can queue up abroad till something promising they can contribute
-
The long term economic vision of the PAP is to line their own pockets legitimately by passing legislations without any consultation with the Singapore constituents.
The foreign talent and foreign workers policy that benefit Singaporeans would have been more credible if the government does not place a foreign worker levy for every foreign labor employed - which only burdened the employer, who will pass on the cost to Singaporeans.
If there is any true intention to limit the dependence on foreign workers, then it is as simple as putting a quota for every company that apply for foreign workers.
Every single policy that the PAP government can think off has always resulted in new and additional costs that will end up being passed onto Singaporeans.
What else is new that can possible be expected from the PAP's policies ?
Even the efforts to rein in the prices of homes have ended up as costs being imposed on Singaporeans - while the root cause of the problems remain unresolved as these lay with a Government that is unable or refuse to dampen the housing market speculation by lowering its own HDB prices.
To worsen the situation, the government will refuse to accept the project development plans based on design merit, and will award to the highest price offered for land that are released by URA for development
-
Increase In Citizenship Privileges – A Carrot We Have To Bite
Temasek Review
The following article was originally written by the writer at myhometown.sg .
Comparing the newspaper headlines of a few months ago and now, one can certainly see the stark differences.
A few months ago, a prevalent theme in The Straits Times was MM Lee’s calls for Singaporeans to put up with the increasing presence of foreigners, and his emphasis that Singapore would be nothing without them.
Now, in what seems to be a sudden turnaround, reports on the government putting Singaporeans first by enhancing their privileges in issues like housing, healthcare and education are coming fast and furious.
Adding on to the flurry are goals to make Singapore a more productive nation which depends less on the mass imports of foreign labour.
If a Singapore citizen was to read the news, what would he make out of it?
It would be tempting for us to feel complacent and pompous, now that the government’s focus has turned to us. “The citizens always come first,” the government now says, an avowal that sounds pleasing and almost refreshing to the ears, considering the government’s past remarks that “Singaporeans should learn to mix with the foreigners and fight hard so we would not lose out to them”.
It’s like after giving attention to the newly-adopted baby, the parents remember their first-born biological child and his pressing needs.
But to feel loved again – that would be the first step in the major mistake of becoming spoilt citizens.
While it is encouraging to be reminded that we are not forgotten, do not forget the responsibilities of a first-born child.
As the oldest, he is ultimately the caregiver of the entire family.
The enhancement of citizenship privileges over that of foreigners might give us a boost in terms of “status”, but to ride on this wave of newfound glory and start basking in the sun would mean we have forgotten about our responsibilities and the government’s calls.
The calls for productivity, specifically.
With the government’s declaration to increase productivity by relying less on cheap foreign imports, and with numerous proposals that increase the cost of living for foreigners, what will happen (which is also the government’s intention) is that the proportion of foreigners in Singapore will remain stable, instead of increasing the way it has in previous years.
What this also means is that the people who will have to rise up to the government’s calls for increased work productivity are us, the citizens.
Foreigners go where the wind blows, but citizens are here to stay. The government has realized it cannot rely forever on foreigners to sustain continued growth for a country that is almost bursting at its seams.
The onus is thus upon us, the citizens, to work more productively and industriously to prove that the government’s decision to have faith in its citizens will not go wrong.
Thus, while it is tempting to give ourselves a pat of self-congratulation and assurance that the government has not forgotten about us, sitting back too far would only cause us to fall backwards.
MM Lee said, “Instead of many job opportunities and rising asset values, including prices for resale HDB flats, the reverse will happen…fewer jobs, lower salaries, lower asset prices…pay will fall and so will the number of jobs and promotion. When this happens, many of our own talents will leave for greener pastures, which will exacerbate the downward spiral and eventually lead to Singapore’s decline”.
The enhancement of citizenship rights is timely, with murmurs of a General Election up ahead, but one should also consider if it is timely because with less reliance on foreigners, the government actually has to depend more on us to spur the country on forward?
This increase of citizenship privileges might merely be a carrot dangling in front to encourage us to move forward. However, it is a carrot we have to bite to show that the government’s faith in its citizens to rise to the challenge of increasing work productivity for the economy has not gone misplaced.
-
Originally posted by speak:
Increase In Citizenship Privileges – A Carrot We Have To Bite
Temasek Review
The following article was originally written by the writer at myhometown.sg .
Comparing the newspaper headlines of a few months ago and now, one can certainly see the stark differences.
A few months ago, a prevalent theme in The Straits Times was MM Lee’s calls for Singaporeans to put up with the increasing presence of foreigners, and his emphasis that Singapore would be nothing without them.
Now, in what seems to be a sudden turnaround, reports on the government putting Singaporeans first by enhancing their privileges in issues like housing, healthcare and education are coming fast and furious.
Adding on to the flurry are goals to make Singapore a more productive nation which depends less on the mass imports of foreign labour.
If a Singapore citizen was to read the news, what would he make out of it?
It would be tempting for us to feel complacent and pompous, now that the government’s focus has turned to us. “The citizens always come first,” the government now says, an avowal that sounds pleasing and almost refreshing to the ears, considering the government’s past remarks that “Singaporeans should learn to mix with the foreigners and fight hard so we would not lose out to them”.
It’s like after giving attention to the newly-adopted baby, the parents remember their first-born biological child and his pressing needs.
But to feel loved again – that would be the first step in the major mistake of becoming spoilt citizens.
While it is encouraging to be reminded that we are not forgotten, do not forget the responsibilities of a first-born child.
As the oldest, he is ultimately the caregiver of the entire family.
The enhancement of citizenship privileges over that of foreigners might give us a boost in terms of “status”, but to ride on this wave of newfound glory and start basking in the sun would mean we have forgotten about our responsibilities and the government’s calls.
The calls for productivity, specifically.
With the government’s declaration to increase productivity by relying less on cheap foreign imports, and with numerous proposals that increase the cost of living for foreigners, what will happen (which is also the government’s intention) is that the proportion of foreigners in Singapore will remain stable, instead of increasing the way it has in previous years.
What this also means is that the people who will have to rise up to the government’s calls for increased work productivity are us, the citizens.
Foreigners go where the wind blows, but citizens are here to stay. The government has realized it cannot rely forever on foreigners to sustain continued growth for a country that is almost bursting at its seams.
The onus is thus upon us, the citizens, to work more productively and industriously to prove that the government’s decision to have faith in its citizens will not go wrong.
Thus, while it is tempting to give ourselves a pat of self-congratulation and assurance that the government has not forgotten about us, sitting back too far would only cause us to fall backwards.
MM Lee said, “Instead of many job opportunities and rising asset values, including prices for resale HDB flats, the reverse will happen…fewer jobs, lower salaries, lower asset prices…pay will fall and so will the number of jobs and promotion. When this happens, many of our own talents will leave for greener pastures, which will exacerbate the downward spiral and eventually lead to Singapore’s decline”.
The enhancement of citizenship rights is timely, with murmurs of a General Election up ahead, but one should also consider if it is timely because with less reliance on foreigners, the government actually has to depend more on us to spur the country on forward?
This increase of citizenship privileges might merely be a carrot dangling in front to encourage us to move forward. However, it is a carrot we have to bite to show that the government’s faith in its citizens to rise to the challenge of increasing work productivity for the economy has not gone misplaced.
Seriously, I do not believe it's a change in PAP's heart, to treat the citizens better.
Rather, it's the impending elections that they are singing a different tune.
Mark my words. I dare say they will reinstate the liberal immigration policy once the elections are over and they win again by a big margin.
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Seriously, I do not believe it's a change in PAP's heart, to treat the citizens better.
Rather, it's the impending elections that they are singing a different tune.
Mark my words. I dare say they will reinstate the liberal immigration policy once the elections are over and they win again by a big margin.
Well, you can jolly well Rage on with your soul on it, it is not the first election of the 50s, i guess you Uncles and Aunties had witnessed so many election throughout the last half century, it is the same old tactics, just a different environment with a different strategies, the whole ingredient can even be change, but the cooks are still the same.Govt has throughout the years, governed this place base on 3 priorties,
1st priorty, to satisfy themselves and the elites first
2nd priorty, to satisfy the employers, foreign investors and talents
3rd priorty, to satisfy the middle class.
There is in fact no priorty for the lower class, bear the words LKY said "if you cannot make a life in Singapore, dun blame anyone, blame it on yurself" In another words, if people can do it, why not you? Singapore have alway provide the neccessities condition for one to be educated, trained, or even re educate and re train in a very peaceful and affordable environment. And if some people just want to sit back and watch the show, he/she would be left behind to rot, and the funniest part is that these peoples even dare to come out and complain about government policies and immigration policies etc etc without a blink of an eye to look at themselves first, that is a shame.
-
but bar owners are classed under low class!!!??
if singapore sink or explode.....there will be no plane ride for u.u just wave good bye to those evacuated in airplane!
-
no lah, doen't mean we wear abit low cut , we are low class ya. and if singaproe sink, dun worry, i can swim ya, my swimming coach is Mr Ang ok, at the Singapore swimming club.
I am a qualify lifeguard and 1st class First aiders ya. I have saved many uncles from minor heart attack inside the ,,eh.. rooms ya. Dun want peoples to die here end up close shop for a week due to investigation
-
Each Millionsters for themselves - that is the long term vision.
To ensure that every one in a clan can obtain a scholarship and leech on the people tax payer money.
To increase cost on pretence of helping but to obtaining more money from business and people so as to justify KPI for their performance increment and bonus.
To build a white army by surrounding the prince with lots of yes man to boost his minute ego.
Productivity - Please perform a serious assessment of your hierachy before you tell the people to do it or else it end up as a big joke.
-
Beware the Taiwanese 'hum' pretending to be a lifeguard - it will be too happy to use its ‘Labia Majora’ and ‘Labia Minora’ to resusicate anyone with its first AIDS.
As the resident 'Attention Seeking Whore' it will have no qualm to put its labia on public display.
-
angel70,
????!!!!!u mean if spore sink...u wave to them in their evacuation airplane while u swim and try to rough it out against the crocodiles and sea creatures that are hungry for food???without food n fresh water u would die in less than 1 month and dont ferget currents would drag u out into south china sea too where finding u would be impossible!
was it all worth it?
-
Originally posted by soul_rage:
Seriously, I do not believe it's a change in PAP's heart, to treat the citizens better.
Rather, it's the impending elections that they are singing a different tune.
Mark my words. I dare say they will reinstate the liberal immigration policy once the elections are over and they win again by a big margin.
I think a lot of people know this fact for sure too.
Lots of formerly pro incumbent supporters are starting to regret voting for the incumbent party for the past few elections.
-
Angel,
Please, 80% of Singaporean live an ordinary life, with a HDB, a family of 4 , a decent job to pay for their family home until they retire. Only a few will make it in life and enjoy financial freedom before they retire.
No one is jealous abt the success of the top 5%. However the problem with Singapore is that the middle class citizen that make up 80% of ordinary citizen are feeling the stress, uncertainty from rising cost of living, lowering of salary and wages, unfair competition from foreign low skill labourers and increasing alienisation of the population from immigrant influx.
It is absolutely clear that sg had deteriortated since the last election with the brian drain of capable Singapore overseas, import of low and less skill labourers, lowering of living standard, wages and salary reduction, failed and plummeting productivity, runaway public housing prices and increasing tension and division btw the ppl and the government.
-
How PAP screws up Singapore’s labor productivity with its “open door” policy to foreign workers
TRThere is a lot of hype in the media lately about “productivity” which reflects a subtle shift in the PAP’s labor policies. What makes the change unusual is that the PAP leaders have been harping on the need for Singapore to continue importing foreign workers during the last few years.As late as January this year, PAP’s octogenarian leader Lee Kuan Yew said in an interview with the National Geographic magazine that it is a “good thing” that Singapore welcomes so many Chinese immigrants as they are more “hard-driving” and “hard-striving” than locals.
Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong added that the number of foreign workers may increase in the next few years though the rate of inflow may slow down.
DPM Teo Chee Hean said yesterday that Singapore has made “good progress” in the past in its productivity drive which is why ”we have been able to move our economy forward and have good jobs for many Singaporeans.”
What “progress” is DPM Teo talking about when Singapore’s productivity had hardly grown during the past decade?
According to a press release from the Reform Party:
“In manufacturing alone our productivity grew by an average of 0.7% p.a. over the period 2000-08 whereas South Korea, Taiwan, Sweden and the US managed 7.4%, 5.2%, 4.8% and 4.6% respectively over the same period. Out of a group of 17 economies we were second from bottom.”
A recent Wall Street Journal editorial revealed that Singapore’s low labor productivity is a direct result of the easy availability of cheap foreign labor.
Companies have few incentives to invest in innovation and research to boost productivity as they can easily cut labor cost by employing foreign workers.
While in other developed countries, safeguards are put in place to protect the interests of local workers, Singaporeans are expected by the PAP to compete directly with the foreigners who are definitely cheaper than them, but not necessarily faster or better.
As noted in the graph below, Singapore’s labor productivity took a plunge from 2004 onwards when the inflow of foreigners started to pick up:
[Source: Kojakbt, 3in1kopitiam forum moderator]
This coincided with the beginning of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s tenure when he announced his ambitious plan to increase Singapore’s population to 6.5 million people by 2030 via immigration.
Without warning, the floodgates were opened to allow foreigners into the country indiscriminately. Whereas in the past, the foreigners given a permit to work in Singapore were either highly qualified or filled positions shunned by Singaporeans, they are now competing directly with them for limited jobs.
The foreign levy for foreign workers is so low that it hardly deters employers from hiring foreigners. The quota or dependency ration placed on the number of foreigners a company can employ is easily circumvented by getting earlier arrivals to take up PRs.
As citizens and PRs are both lumped together under the same category of “residents”, a company can theoretically employ 100 per cent foreigners without a single citizen so long the quota of PRs is met.
Now all of sudden, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong wants to raise Singapore’s productivity rate from 0.7 per cent to 3 per cent per annum – how is this target possible when our productivity has been falling consecutively for the past three years no thanks to the influx of foreign workers?
It is highly unlikely that Singapore can boost its productivity and growth rates which have been popped up artificially by cheap foreign labor.
Prominent economist Paul Krugman described Singapore as a “Paper Tiger” way back in the 1990s in his landmark article – “The Myth of Asia’s miracle”
Krugman wrote that Singapore’s productivity and growth were achieved through a “mobilization of resources that would have done Stalin proud”. but as they are based largely on one-time changes in behavior, they are unlikely to be repeated:
“Over the past generation the percentage of people employed has almost doubled; it cannot double again. A half-educated work force has been replaced by one in which the bulk of workers has high school diplomas; it is unlikely that a generation from now most Singaporeans will have Ph.D’s. And an investment share of 40 percent is amazingly high by any standard; a share of 7O percent would be ridiculous. So one can immediately conclude that Singapore is unlikely to achieve future growth rates comparable to those of the past.”
In the same manner, the room for Singapore’s continued growth in the next few decades is limited unless there is a giant leapt in labor productivity and innovation.
As the economies of China, India and other Asia countries become more advanced, it will be more difficult to lure their citizens over to Singapore.
For example, Malaysians and Filipinos workers are getting more expensive now and Singapore employers have to switch to Chinese, Indian and Burmese workers to keep the labor costs low.
Unfortunately, given Singapore’s export-oriented economy and its over-dependence on foreign direct investments, it will not be easy for the Singapore to wean off its chronic addiction to foreign labor.
The investments made in R&D are unlikely to bear fruits without a major revamp in Singapore’s political economy which is dominated by state-linked companies thereby stifling the emergence and growth of a vibrant SME sector.
In a recent speech made at the Civil Service College, prominent MIT political economist Professor Huang Yasheng urged Singapore to “rethink” its state management model which has “milked this system for all it is worth.”
“The private sector is the best way to grow the economy. It has the most productive, most innovative and entrepreneurial culture. The state-owned enterprise system doesn’t give you that….You are already hitting the wall. Retaining this strategy could mean sacrificing future growth that is possible only through a bigger, more dynamic private sector,” he said.
He also opined that Singapore should expand its private sector in order to compete with China and India:
“Maybe a better way is for the government to fund more basic research and then allow universities, private equity firms, venture capital firms and rich individuals to take care of the rest. That is because even when the state sector is well managed, it is not as innovative as the private sector, he says. From a technological development point of view, you need a bigger private sector to compete, to come up with new products, processes and technologies, to better compete with India and China.”
Without liberalizing both the economy and political landscape to allow for freedom of speech and independent thinking to thrive, it is foolhardly to expect the PAP’s one-dimensional and unimaginative approach to boost productivity to work.
It is time the PAP realizes that it is part of the problem itself and that it is becoming a stumbling block in Singapore’s future development.
-
if your hide gets stuck in your spurs, that is your problem......wah damn qeem la! LOL that is their economic vision
-
PAP should ask themselve this question:
1) Are the pple happy with your policy? Are the pple really struggling to meet the ends? Are the pple still searching for jobs that can feed the family with the NEW salary?
-
1) Are the pple happy with your policy? Are the pple really struggling to meet the ends? Are the pple still searching for jobs that can feed the family with the NEW salary?
Seriously, have you seen the q at your nearby mid-range restorans?
Tell me about struggling
Have you seen the massive crowd at NATAS travel fair?
Tell me about Singaporeans struggling
Hav you seen the massive jams at CTE every mornings and evenings?
Tell me about Singaporeans not meeting the ends with their flashy cars
Sillypore...complain behind PC niah....
-
Originally posted by dotaro:
Seriously, have you seen the q at your nearby mid-range restorans?
Tell me about struggling
Have you seen the massive crowd at NATAS travel fair?
Tell me about Singaporeans struggling
Hav you seen the massive jams at CTE every mornings and evenings?
Tell me about Singaporeans not meeting the ends with their flashy cars
Sillypore...complain behind PC niah....
In this recession there are still people who are doing well. YOu will not see those without jobs at NATAS fair, queuing outside restaurants.
Sillypore, you are one of those who complain behind PC.
-
The future do not just happen with a big bang. Any forecasters will know that the future is charted based on present signs and activities.
Sg is no diff and if the govern chart the country future based on lobsided worship of western idology and believes, than sg is heading for big trouble. 2020 belongs to Asia and sg future lie with the countries neighbouring us. We don need 6.5m ppl, we need quality, innovatives and knowledgeable people. The past policy of importing Indian, baga and others from 3rd world countries as PR or 'New Citizen' is a flaw. The issue is not abt the genes that differentiate the country competitiness but the quality, cultural and educations of the ppl of the country. Having a large exodus of educated, experience and knowledgeable Citizen and replaced with a tsunami influx of inferior qualified immigrants..sg is heading for a big disaster.
-
Why start on the premise that we need a government to set economic goals for us? In my opinion the government should stop trying to artificially prop up GDP figures and just let the people be
-
Long term economic goal is to make Singaporeans incur a large debt, so they can work all their lives.
The higher your pay, the more debt you incur when you purchase your HDB.
Hello serfdom.
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. -- Thomas Jefferson
-
Originally posted by Wmyongj:
Angel,
Please, 80% of Singaporean live an ordinary life, with a HDB, a family of 4 , a decent job to pay for their family home until they retire. Only a few will make it in life and enjoy financial freedom before they retire.
No one is jealous abt the success of the top 5%. However the problem with Singapore is that the middle class citizen that make up 80% of ordinary citizen are feeling the stress, uncertainty from rising cost of living, lowering of salary and wages, unfair competition from foreign low skill labourers and increasing alienisation of the population from immigrant influx.
It is absolutely clear that sg had deteriortated since the last election with the brian drain of capable Singapore overseas, import of low and less skill labourers, lowering of living standard, wages and salary reduction, failed and plummeting productivity, runaway public housing prices and increasing tension and division btw the ppl and the government.
Agreed.
Sporean already feel the stress (loans, loans, bills and bills).
-
Originally posted by Wmyongj:
Angel,
Please, 80% of Singaporean live an ordinary life, with a HDB, a family of 4 , a decent job to pay for their family home until they retire. Only a few will make it in life and enjoy financial freedom before they retire.
No one is jealous abt the success of the top 5%. However the problem with Singapore is that the middle class citizen that make up 80% of ordinary citizen are feeling the stress, uncertainty from rising cost of living, lowering of salary and wages, unfair competition from foreign low skill labourers and increasing alienisation of the population from immigrant influx.
It is absolutely clear that sg had deteriortated since the last election with the brian drain of capable Singapore overseas, import of low and less skill labourers, lowering of living standard, wages and salary reduction, failed and plummeting productivity, runaway public housing prices and increasing tension and division btw the ppl and the government.
Wmyonqi,
Please, out of 80% middle class, the top 40% are upper middle class doing very well, and they are reaching the status of the rich class of 10%. In fact if you talk about assets, most singaporean are millionaires in term of their house value, saving and CPF. On the part of whether they can enjoy life or make a life out of it is mainly on each individual way of thinking, but if you said that you must be rich then can enjoy life, that is not true, rich got more problem in life. There are two kinds of way in enjoying life, one goes for materialism which is not real, the other goes for humanity, happy, kind and just enjoy life be it poor or rich. And i think i fall under the later.
Since foreigner is a pain in the ass for most Singaporeans, why do you think the Govt still bring them in??? Aren't they not worry about losing votes, about losing popularity. Well some may said, because Govt can get more taxation and more levies, maybe. But seriously, if you look at our demography of old and young, population and the education we put into our system, we cannot survive without foreign workers, no one will make road and building for you in 10 years time. You hv an old age population, less birthrate getting lesser, an influential young peoples who are now mostly like me, poly grad and above, you expect them to dig the ground and get dirty??? That is the critical issue that Govt is trying bring foreigners in, it is a long term vision. Perhaps, in the initial start, the govt had open the gate too big and wide, so many came in and suddenly they realize it need to be control, so they will scan and make quotas of it, other than that, foreigners will still be in, just that it will be better foreigner instead of those who come here causing trouble.
I agreed that Foreign workers do curb down those low wage jobs wages, but Singaporeans must not look toward those jobs, it is gone for them, so instead they should go upgrade, skill themselve and match the market, by the rules of thumb, singaporeans should be at least supervisor or head of foreign workers, and not working together with them, or worst, report to them. There are supervisory courses at e2i, spur etc etc to tap on, but peoples of Singapore are not moving. Their accuses is alway i am 50s or late 40s liao, old liao , train for what??/ but remember the retirement is going to be 65 and so on until 72yo, because our life expectation is longer, so you got another 22 years to go ya, and 22 years can bring up a son if you remarried at 50yo, so that is a long period, they need to plan for themselves, instead of being guard, go for guard supervisory course, instead of drive taxi, go for tour taxi courses, instead of cleaning toilets and foodcourt, be the supervisor or share owners of a cleaning Company. That is the direction of how Singaporean should go about, otherwise, dementia and Azhemier may take over them.
In term of spending, it entirely depend on one spending habits, you can spend $800 on food for the family and still eat happily while earning a median wage of $2.6k, or you can eat lavishly, which is infact the same food, but better environment and atmosphere, and end up complaining salary not enough, of course not enuf lah, give you $5k also not enuf if you keep Q up buy toto, 4D, drinks, pubbings, clubbings, socialising etc etc...
