Foreigner VS Local
-
holy crap... i still don understand wads so fun bout piercing or to be exact... wads so COOL bout piercing soo mani holes in ur body...
-
many peoples, especially guys, they like holes, the more the merrier..afterall, they also come out from a hole..so, what do you expect, we gals got to give them more holes
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
many peoples, especially guys, they like holes, the more the merrier..afterall, they also come out from a hole..so, what do you expect, we gals got to give them more holes
Uncle Pimp, as a man do you have it in your body to offer the man? Unless you are also catering to the gays I will believe .YOU kidding who.
-
Originally posted by Dondontan:
Uncle Pimp, as a man do you have it in your body to offer the man? Unless you are also catering to the gays I will believe .YOU kidding who.
kidding you lor
, everytime makes me laugh,..me man lor.. -
hole... not onli they wan more hole... their hole is getting bigger and bigger.... u no thos like bubble tea straw size holes.... wooo... can put a 8====D in it man...
-
u plays nine or 18 holes.
-
huh ? 9 or 18 holes? hole can play 1 meh?
-
can, u can also play yr own hole, the 19th hole
-
Being a Singaporean working in PRC I am not incline to speak against the hand that feed me. I am not against foreigners working in Sg but I want ppl that are able to contribute and build on Singapore. I am dead sure labourer will any add to the downfall of this country cause we CANNOT compete in cost against make in PRC!
If we continue to take the way spiral downward, we have nothing in the end to offer, no more innovative products, no more knowledge and no more 'brians' caused will be stolen away.
It not the feel good factor abt now ppl behave toward each others in the work place, it abt how in the end the company able to compete in the market. The 90% ratio of foreginers in a company in Spore means this company is failing. Why on earth would a company want to continue to stay in spore with cheap 90% labourers+expensive land+ expensive direct cost????? I dont understand the economic.
If you really think PRC colleagues are really nice, welcome to CHINA. Come and join me and understand the mentality and cultural gap. Spore workers are not hardworking???Spore girls dont work long hours...bullshit..I can testify how intelligent my buddies are and respect we command, otherwise, why employ us that paid 10-20 times more than the local PRC in CHINA.
-
During a polytechnic forum in September last year, a student asked Dr Vivian point-blank in his face why the government is allowing foreigners to compete with Singaporeans for job.
The feisty Dr Vivian shot back immediately:
“Would Singaporeans be willing to be taxed heavily to support the country’s ageing population in 20 years’ time? This would be the case if Singapore did not bring in foreign talent.”
Dr Vivian’s conjecture will only hold true if the immigrants have a higher birth rate than native Singaporeans and if they consume less public resources than them.
Both scenarios are unlikely to happen.
In 2003, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced his most ambitious plan to increase Singapore’s population to 6.5 million people by 2030.
(To put things in perspective, New Zealand, which is more than 370 times the size of Singapore has a population of only 4.3 million people.)
All of sudden without warning, the floodgates were flung open without any proper screening and Singapore was swarmed by foreigners who now make up 36 percent of Singapore’s population.
A population will only grow if its total fertility rate exceeds the minimum replacement rate of 2.1 which means that each woman should have two children on average.
Though the inflow of immigrants will increase Singapore’s population in the short-term, it will not boost its birth rate unless the newcomers and their descendents have more children than the locals.
The key reason behind Singaporeans not wanting to have more children is economic, due to a combination of five factors: unstable job, stagnant wages, increased cost of living, sky-rocketing HDB prices and increased stress.
Unless the new citizens live in the offshore islands or in ghettos, they are likely to be subjected to the same conditions as Singaporeans.
Not all immigrants are as rich as Jet Li. In fact, most of them are like middle-class Singaporeans living in HDB flats.
Will they be able to afford to have more children than Singaporeans?
It is highly improbable that the new immigrants will bear two or more children in Singapore given the same constraints in financial resources.
Their children will have a fertility rate closer to the national average of 1.2 rather than 2.1.
At the end of the day, Singapore’s fertility rate will not increase by much so long the limiting factors remain in place.
It is myopic of the PAP to mass import foreigners into Singapore at such an alarming rate now without realizing that they are only going to create another set of problems.
Though foreigners may help to support our aging population right now and in the near future, they will also grow old themselves in 20 to 30 years’ time. Who will come and support them then?
According to figures from the Home Affairs Ministry, the number of new citizens averages around 20,000 between the years 2007 – 2009.
Assuming it remains the same for the next twenty years, we will have an additional 400,000 new citizens.
The new citizens in their 40s now will be in their 60s and those in their 30s now will be in their 50s in twenty years’ time.
Some of them may fell ill along the way and become unfit to work. Others may succumb to sudden heart attacks or strokes and a rising number will be afflicted with chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidaemia.
Will the increased taxes paid by these immigrants help to offset the expected increase in public healthcare costs?
Singapore has a progressive tax system in which the top earners may the full income tax and the lowest income group pay no taxes at all.
No statistics are available on the income status of the new citizens though it is likely that they will mirror that of Singaporeans with about 20 – 30 percent in the lower income group and 40 – 60 percent in the middle-income group.
Even now, our public healthcare system is being stretched to its limits with chronic over-crowding at polyclinics and hospitals especially Tan Tock Seng Hospital, long waits for specialist appointments and shortage of doctors and nurses due to high turnover rates.
Though no official figures are available, anecdotal evidence on the ground suggest that almost 90 percent of Singapore-trained doctors will leave for the private sector once their 5-year bond with MOH ended if they are not undergoing further training to be specialists and more than half the nurses will leave or change professions each year.
To plug the gaps in manpower, MOH has resorted to recruiting more foreign doctors and nurses overseas without exploring ways of retaining their services within the public healthcare system.
Can our healthcare professionals cope with the increased demand on their services fueled by immigration?
Increasing the population blindly via immigration without any proper planning is a stop-gap measure which does not address the underlying causes of Singapore’s decline birth rates.
Ultimately, a nation’s population will only grow from natural births and not from import of foreigners elsewhere.
The PAP should tackle the problem right at its roots by improving the standards of living among ordinary Singaporeans so that they will be inclined to bear more children instead of taking an easy shortcut by turning to foreigners.
In fact, the relentless influx of foreigners may have contributed to the declining birth rates of Singaporeans as their increasing numbers has depressed the wages and increased the cost of living for Singaporeans, especially that of HDB flats – the very reasons why Singaporeans are not having children.
Unlike other developed countries, education and healthcare are not free in Singapore.
It costs alot to bring up a child and to support him/her all the way till university in Singapore.
If the PAP wants to encourage Singaporeans to have more children, it should first control the prices of HDB flats and reduce them to a more realistic and sustainable level.
The present prices are way too high for ordinary Singaporeans earning a median monthly income of around $2,600.
After deducting the mortgage loans for their flats and living expenses, a household will have little left for the children.
Not only will the continued inflow of immigrants not improve Singapore’s birth rates, it will compound the problem and create new ones such as escalating social tension and conflict.
What is Singapore’s ideal population? How many immigrants do we need? What is a reasonable birth rate to aim for?
It is time we realize that being a developed economy like the United States and Europe now, we can no longer grow at breath-taking speed like in the past.
The use of cheap foreign workers to keep our labor costs down and GDP growth high is no longer a viable option.
We have to accept the fact our population is aging and make contingency plans to tackle the “Silver Tsunami” which will hit us 20 years from now.
Bringing in middle-aged immigrants into Singapore is tantamount to adding more senior citizens into our population later on.
We need a more directed, comprehensive and holistic approach to our current immigration policies instead of increasing the population blindly via mass importing of foreigners from elsewhere.
-
Originally posted by 4sg:
During a polytechnic forum in September last year, a student asked Dr Vivian point-blank in his face why the government is allowing foreigners to compete with Singaporeans for job.
The feisty Dr Vivian shot back immediately:
“Would Singaporeans be willing to be taxed heavily to support the country’s ageing population in 20 years’ time? This would be the case if Singapore did not bring in foreign talent.”
Dr Vivian’s conjecture will only hold true if the immigrants have a higher birth rate than native Singaporeans and if they consume less public resources than them.
Both scenarios are unlikely to happen.
In 2003, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced his most ambitious plan to increase Singapore’s population to 6.5 million people by 2030.
(To put things in perspective, New Zealand, which is more than 370 times the size of Singapore has a population of only 4.3 million people.)
All of sudden without warning, the floodgates were flung open without any proper screening and Singapore was swarmed by foreigners who now make up 36 percent of Singapore’s population.
A population will only grow if its total fertility rate exceeds the minimum replacement rate of 2.1 which means that each woman should have two children on average.
Though the inflow of immigrants will increase Singapore’s population in the short-term, it will not boost its birth rate unless the newcomers and their descendents have more children than the locals.
The key reason behind Singaporeans not wanting to have more children is economic, due to a combination of five factors: unstable job, stagnant wages, increased cost of living, sky-rocketing HDB prices and increased stress.
Unless the new citizens live in the offshore islands or in ghettos, they are likely to be subjected to the same conditions as Singaporeans.
Not all immigrants are as rich as Jet Li. In fact, most of them are like middle-class Singaporeans living in HDB flats.
Will they be able to afford to have more children than Singaporeans?
It is highly improbable that the new immigrants will bear two or more children in Singapore given the same constraints in financial resources.
Their children will have a fertility rate closer to the national average of 1.2 rather than 2.1.
At the end of the day, Singapore’s fertility rate will not increase by much so long the limiting factors remain in place.
It is myopic of the PAP to mass import foreigners into Singapore at such an alarming rate now without realizing that they are only going to create another set of problems.
Though foreigners may help to support our aging population right now and in the near future, they will also grow old themselves in 20 to 30 years’ time. Who will come and support them then?
According to figures from the Home Affairs Ministry, the number of new citizens averages around 20,000 between the years 2007 – 2009.
Assuming it remains the same for the next twenty years, we will have an additional 400,000 new citizens.
The new citizens in their 40s now will be in their 60s and those in their 30s now will be in their 50s in twenty years’ time.
Some of them may fell ill along the way and become unfit to work. Others may succumb to sudden heart attacks or strokes and a rising number will be afflicted with chronic diseases like hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidaemia.
Will the increased taxes paid by these immigrants help to offset the expected increase in public healthcare costs?
Singapore has a progressive tax system in which the top earners may the full income tax and the lowest income group pay no taxes at all.
No statistics are available on the income status of the new citizens though it is likely that they will mirror that of Singaporeans with about 20 – 30 percent in the lower income group and 40 – 60 percent in the middle-income group.
Even now, our public healthcare system is being stretched to its limits with chronic over-crowding at polyclinics and hospitals especially Tan Tock Seng Hospital, long waits for specialist appointments and shortage of doctors and nurses due to high turnover rates.
Though no official figures are available, anecdotal evidence on the ground suggest that almost 90 percent of Singapore-trained doctors will leave for the private sector once their 5-year bond with MOH ended if they are not undergoing further training to be specialists and more than half the nurses will leave or change professions each year.
To plug the gaps in manpower, MOH has resorted to recruiting more foreign doctors and nurses overseas without exploring ways of retaining their services within the public healthcare system.
Can our healthcare professionals cope with the increased demand on their services fueled by immigration?
Increasing the population blindly via immigration without any proper planning is a stop-gap measure which does not address the underlying causes of Singapore’s decline birth rates.
Ultimately, a nation’s population will only grow from natural births and not from import of foreigners elsewhere.
The PAP should tackle the problem right at its roots by improving the standards of living among ordinary Singaporeans so that they will be inclined to bear more children instead of taking an easy shortcut by turning to foreigners.
In fact, the relentless influx of foreigners may have contributed to the declining birth rates of Singaporeans as their increasing numbers has depressed the wages and increased the cost of living for Singaporeans, especially that of HDB flats – the very reasons why Singaporeans are not having children.
Unlike other developed countries, education and healthcare are not free in Singapore.
It costs alot to bring up a child and to support him/her all the way till university in Singapore.
If the PAP wants to encourage Singaporeans to have more children, it should first control the prices of HDB flats and reduce them to a more realistic and sustainable level.
The present prices are way too high for ordinary Singaporeans earning a median monthly income of around $2,600.
After deducting the mortgage loans for their flats and living expenses, a household will have little left for the children.
Not only will the continued inflow of immigrants not improve Singapore’s birth rates, it will compound the problem and create new ones such as escalating social tension and conflict.
What is Singapore’s ideal population? How many immigrants do we need? What is a reasonable birth rate to aim for?
It is time we realize that being a developed economy like the United States and Europe now, we can no longer grow at breath-taking speed like in the past.
The use of cheap foreign workers to keep our labor costs down and GDP growth high is no longer a viable option.
We have to accept the fact our population is aging and make contingency plans to tackle the “Silver Tsunami” which will hit us 20 years from now.
Bringing in middle-aged immigrants into Singapore is tantamount to adding more senior citizens into our population later on.
We need a more directed, comprehensive and holistic approach to our current immigration policies instead of increasing the population blindly via mass importing of foreigners from elsewhere.
I'd like to know what kind of social support he thinks the government gives to retirees.
As far as I know, retirees and the aged are all depending on their own CPF money to survive, all of which is being released bit by bit after retirement age.
-
Originally posted by charlize:
I'd like to know what kind of social support he thinks the government gives to retirees.
As far as I know, retirees and the aged are all depending on their own CPF money to survive, all of which is being released bit by bit after retirement age.
I don't think the writer is referring to the govt's social support per se.
He is referring to that influx of aliens, that govt seen as the Holy Grail in solving our aging population, which he feels can exacerbate our projected aging population, even more. -
Originally posted by 4sg:
I don't think the writer is referring to the govt's social support per se.
He is referring to that influx of aliens, that govt seen as the Holy Grail in solving our aging population, which he feels can exacerbate our projected aging population, even more.I was refering to minister's retort:
"Would Singaporeans be willing to be taxed heavily to support the country’s ageing population in 20 years’ time? This would be the case if Singapore did not bring in foreign talent.”
He makes it sound like the government is supporting all the aged through their retirement via some pension scheme. Most if not all retirees, are depending on their own CPF money for their retirement and definitely not getting free money from the government. So why should Singaporeans be "taxed heavily" to support the ageing population?
Other countries can use the "taxed heavily" argument if they have social welfare schemes for their retirees. But Singapore doesn't have that.
-
OIC
It is another scheme to bloodsuck more money, that all.Singaporean breed dies out, bring alien breed to bloodsuck.
It should read:-
"Would Singaporeans be willing to be taxed heavily to feed the ever hungry govt in 20 years’ time? This would be the case if Singapore did not bring in foreign talent.”
-
Originally posted by 4sg:
OIC
It is another scheme to bloodsuck more money, that all.Singaporean breed dies out, bring alien breed to bloodsuck.
It should read:-
"Would Singaporeans be willing to be taxed heavily to feed the ever hungry govt in 20 years’ time? This would be the case if Singapore did not bring in foreign talent.”
Damn, maybe minister salaries might be up to 20-30 million per annum each by then.
Yes, Singaporeans will be "taxed heavily" to support minister salaries.
-
in my view , i caution that we should not fall into the Trap of creating friction between FT and Locals.
Here's why.
1. We are all humans and go to greener pastures, if allowed.
2. We are all immigrant decendent.
3. Don't worry, there's more! We should be Focussing instead on the Policies , Timing and Extent of the Influx.
eg. for illustration purpose only :
'Policy' : Drinking red wine is good for your heart. This is generally perceived as a Truth.
Timing : Drink red wine and then drive is bad. This is another truth.
Extent : Drink red wine too much for too many years consistently is bad for the health. This is also another truth.
Lets put our focus on the right spot. when all light is focussed on the right spot , a Spark can be generated. We see light!
-
Originally posted by likedatosocan:
in my view , i caution that we should not fall into the Trap of creating friction between FT and Locals.
Here's why.
1. We are all humans and go to greener pastures, if allowed.
2. We are all immigrant decendent.
3. Don't worry, there's more! We should be Focussing instead on the Policies , Timing and Extent of the Influx.
eg. for illustration purpose only :
'Policy' : Drinking red wine is good for your heart. This is generally perceived as a Truth.
Timing : Drink red wine and then drive is bad. This is another truth.
Extent : Drink red wine too much for too many years consistently is bad for the health. This is also another truth.
Lets put our focus on the right spot. when all light is focussed on the right spot , a Spark can be generated. We see light!
Rather to focus on spending S$10 million to deport foreigners if they dare to create trouble with Singaporeans here.
-
“Would Singaporeans be willing to be taxed heavily to support the country’s ageing population in 20 years’ time? This would be the case if Singapore did not bring in foreign talent.”
If it can be proven to my satisfaction that my tax money are really used in such a manner and that any of those ministers are removed the moment they screw up with an investment why the hell not?
They may like the survival of the fittest society in America, i don't.