S'poreans must not create an image that new immigrants are n
-
Originally posted by RoyFang:
They flood our nation with foreigners with the excuse we need "FT"s, we put up with them...
They shift the blame onto us when they cock up and/or we voice out our opinions, we put up with it...
The PAP youth wing join the blaming game, we put up with it...
The "FT"s they brought in start attacking us verbally, I thought bloody hell, we should start fighting back but we put up with this...
Do they know that when you shake a soft drink bottle vigorously, it will explode in their faces? There is a limit to our, locals, patience and they just kept trying to provoke us with words with actions...like a child poking a cat with a stick...when will we reach our limit?
"We need FT". The "we" is referring to them. They benefit to get more foreigners here to convert them to citizens to vote for them.
By having influx of foreigners at our expense, they have created problems for locals and resort to grumble and name calling when locals pour out their grievances. They are expecting all singaporeans to suffer and die in silence in the mess they created for the nation. The oppression is becoming more and more serious.
-
Originally posted by Kuali Baba:
*Refer to parts in bold*
Are they going to understand or even listen/read what he said in the first place?
Pinoys, indians, burmese and Malaysians are adapting well. Majority of the PRCs hardly can speak English, reluctant to communicate in our language a common problem amongst the PRCs. -
Originally posted by Atobe:
What ever happen to the PAP insistence in learning from the experiences of other small countries with similar difficulties as was done when Singapore was suddenly given independence and had to grope around to find a path forward ?Did we not draw lessons from Switzerland, Israel, Malta, and some other smaller sized European countries as well ?
Have Switzerland and Israel need any help from massive inflow of immigrants to take up citizenship just to ensure progress in their economic enterprises, or to ensure full employment, or to supplement their falling birth rates to achieve replacement in their population numbers ?
All these countries - that Singapore had drawn lessons from in 1966 - continued with their open political system of full citizen involvement in the political process; with Switzerland having a political leadership that do not assume themselves to be smarter then the sum total of all the intelligence of the citizens.
The prosperity and stability of Switzerland is due to the Swiss Citizens being given a stake in the political process in that they are consulted on all major policies which can affect their interests - and done in a process called "Referendum".
Unfortunately, the PAP leadership has no confidence in their own policies nor with Singaporeans, and will not allow Singaporeans to have any say in political issues that affect our own lives through "Referendum".
It is a fallacy to claim that "The economy need to be expanded to the max possible, so that we can have the widest choice possible in goods and services" - given the fact that we have limited resources in land, relevant technical skills and technology.
The "father of Singapore's economy and industrialisation" - Dr Goh Keng Swee - had always advocated the need for Singapore to do what we do best, instead of trying to be the best in everything but being master of none.
The economic "theory of comparative advantage" that Dr Goh had led Singapore in the early path towards industrialisation had given a foundation to grow within our limited resources.
Now it seems to have been forgotten as the long period of success has resulted in sheer arrogance in the thinking of the PAP leadership - leading them to believe that they are omnipotently infallible.
Is Singapore spreading our resources too thin and attempting to be involved in too many directions - to be the top in technology, bio-science, pharmaceutical, ship building and maintenance; to be a regional hub for air and sea transportation, to be a regional financial hub; to be the center of Southeast Asia in the film industry, in computer sciences, and communications ?
It has always been the PAP policy of getting the "talent" if none is available locally so as to get the desired plans accomplished.
Has anyone actually done an audit to all the projects that the PAP government has led Singapore to undertake ?
What has been the returns - in financial terms - considering the huge R+D grants given to some of these new fields of bio-science and pharmaceutical niches that Singapore insist on having ?
Does the financial returns justify the social and economic burden to the Singapore population ?
Living within our means remains an Asian Value - and it seems to have been forgotten when it should never have been lost.
I think the shift away from a manufacturing base economy to a service one is a move in the right direction considering our size. Remember Malaysia's Multimedia Super Corridor, and the Iskander Regional Development each by themselves is much larger than the island of Singapore. Every inch of Singapore has to be covered with factories to compete with these developments.
Singapore is different from Israel and Switzerland, and have learnt from them in the begining. The early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee have seen to that.
I agree that Singapore maybe spreading out its resources too thin. Although there are a number of developments that gives the appearance that Singapore is much advanced that the neighbouring countries, I believe this is because of the compact nature of our nation. Cities like Shanghai and even Kuala Lumpur is in some areas much more "advance" than Singapore. They can have a manufacturing and services based economy, whereas Singapore can only choose one. If it has been manufacturing, we would all have been regimented factory workers now.
What Singapore has as a resource is manpower, and this limited in number and quality. Thus the need to "import". Singapore can stagnate or progress at a slower rate, and be a sleepy pearl of the orient like Penang and strive to attract tourist in Hawaiian shirts and straw hats to savour the colonial settings.
Like it or not, Singaporeans are just as voracious as any other nationality in consumerism, and want to be so. I personally don’t think Singaporeans as a whole will exercise humility and be not materialistic. Singaporeans want, and will want the latest and the best and also the cheapest. And this is what the government of the day has to endeavour to provide for its citizens.
There are numerous strategies to achieve this purpose. The ones that work well are deemed correct, the one that is disastrous is considered wrong, and all in between are open to debate. Therefore, considering that Singapore’s only resource is manpower, the shift to the various services industries should be in the right direction as oppose to manufacturing. And also in as many in this field as possible, and thus spreading the resources thin, as you have brought out. This has its pros and cons, as those not viable are left to their own demise, and those that take off are nurtured.
That’s why the government has my agreement on the importation of foreigners to supplement our workforce. Then how they do it, and how you would like them to do it, is the issue.
-
No religious to be involve here. Yesterday, my Dad and Ah ma brought me to Sin Ming Road temple for Ching Ming, tho I dun burnt or pray, i just go there and respect my long dead ah Kong. Somehow, as I looked around, being all Singaporeans devotees and prayers here, I found a sense of True Singapore culture here which i felt that I missed since kindergarden years, it is like to good times when we are all Singaporeans (me taiwanese PR aside). But as we drove out of the place, we begin to feel the present of foreigners in and around us again.
And the contracted peoples who burnt those hell papers for you and clean up the areas in the temple are all bangalas (muslim), how come temple dun employ Singaporeans, lots of yellow ribbons to pick on, help Singaporeans first.
-
Hopeless case this PAP.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
I think the shift away from a manufacturing base economy to a service one is a move in the right direction considering our size. Remember Malaysia's Multimedia Super Corridor, and the Iskander Regional Development each by themselves is much larger than the island of Singapore. Every inch of Singapore has to be covered with factories to compete with these developments.
Singapore is different from Israel and Switzerland, and have learnt from them in the begining. The early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee have seen to that.
I agree that Singapore maybe spreading out its resources too thin. Although there are a number of developments that gives the appearance that Singapore is much advanced that the neighbouring countries, I believe this is because of the compact nature of our nation. Cities like Shanghai and even Kuala Lumpur is in some areas much more "advance" than Singapore. They can have a manufacturing and services based economy, whereas Singapore can only choose one. If it has been manufacturing, we would all have been regimented factory workers now.
What Singapore has as a resource is manpower, and this limited in number and quality. Thus the need to "import". Singapore can stagnate or progress at a slower rate, and be a sleepy pearl of the orient like Penang and strive to attract tourist in Hawaiian shirts and straw hats to savour the colonial settings.
Like it or not, Singaporeans are just as voracious as any other nationality in consumerism, and want to be so. I personally don’t think Singaporeans as a whole will exercise humility and be not materialistic. Singaporeans want, and will want the latest and the best and also the cheapest. And this is what the government of the day has to endeavour to provide for its citizens.
There are numerous strategies to achieve this purpose. The ones that work well are deemed correct, the one that is disastrous is considered wrong, and all in between are open to debate. Therefore, considering that Singapore’s only resource is manpower, the shift to the various services industries should be in the right direction as oppose to manufacturing. And also in as many in this field as possible, and thus spreading the resources thin, as you have brought out. This has its pros and cons, as those not viable are left to their own demise, and those that take off are nurtured.
That’s why the government has my agreement on the importation of foreigners to supplement our workforce. Then how they do it, and how you would like them to do it, is the issue.
OK if you like the PAP so much then ask them to charge you heavy taxes lor and provide better welfare to the citizens and not make citizens feel more disadvantaged due to the influx of more foreigners.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
I think the shift away from a manufacturing base economy to a service one is a move in the right direction considering our size. Remember Malaysia's Multimedia Super Corridor, and the Iskander Regional Development each by themselves is much larger than the island of Singapore. Every inch of Singapore has to be covered with factories to compete with these developments.
Singapore is different from Israel and Switzerland, and have learnt from them in the begining. The early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee have seen to that.
I agree that Singapore maybe spreading out its resources too thin. Although there are a number of developments that gives the appearance that Singapore is much advanced that the neighbouring countries, I believe this is because of the compact nature of our nation. Cities like Shanghai and even Kuala Lumpur is in some areas much more "advance" than Singapore. They can have a manufacturing and services based economy, whereas Singapore can only choose one. If it has been manufacturing, we would all have been regimented factory workers now.
What Singapore has as a resource is manpower, and this limited in number and quality. Thus the need to "import". Singapore can stagnate or progress at a slower rate, and be a sleepy pearl of the orient like Penang and strive to attract tourist in Hawaiian shirts and straw hats to savour the colonial settings.
Like it or not, Singaporeans are just as voracious as any other nationality in consumerism, and want to be so. I personally don’t think Singaporeans as a whole will exercise humility and be not materialistic. Singaporeans want, and will want the latest and the best and also the cheapest. And this is what the government of the day has to endeavour to provide for its citizens.
There are numerous strategies to achieve this purpose. The ones that work well are deemed correct, the one that is disastrous is considered wrong, and all in between are open to debate. Therefore, considering that Singapore’s only resource is manpower, the shift to the various services industries should be in the right direction as oppose to manufacturing. And also in as many in this field as possible, and thus spreading the resources thin, as you have brought out. This has its pros and cons, as those not viable are left to their own demise, and those that take off are nurtured.
That’s why the government has my agreement on the importation of foreigners to supplement our workforce. Then how they do it, and how you would like them to do it, is the issue.
Good! Then let the government tax mancha more heavily
-
mancha,
to cross over to service side is not a wise move....................most of the useful and skilled people in singapore are in the manufacturing high tech side.those low tech manufacturing were phased out decades ago to china or india.
by going into service side means every skill used to build ,design and enabling billions of dollars in high tech side to be made with the least humans will go up in smoke .
in one of those high tech factories in spore ...they actually make close to a $billion/year with only a total of 7 operators n tech guys. in most normal factories overseas they need 500 people and 10 factories and vast materials to make close to a $billion /year even!
what they need are more of these high tech manufacturing plants and not those nickel n dime service sectors.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
With its brain stuck between its ‘Labia Majora’ and ‘Labia Minora’ - and a brain no bigger then the size of its ‘clitoris’ - all it can do is to flap in rapturous idiocy to attract attention to itself as an 'Attention Seeking Whore' fitted with a world class CBM.
Ah! Atobe again with his sublime use of language :) Perhaps he will have a chance to display his language skills at the election rallies of the opposition parties..
-
Originally posted by TERMINATOR4000:
mancha,
to cross over to service side is not a wise move....................most of the useful and skilled people in singapore are in the manufacturing high tech side.those low tech manufacturing were phased out decades ago to china or india.
by going into service side means every skill used to build ,design and enabling billions of dollars in high tech side to be made with the least humans will go up in smoke .
in one of those high tech factories in spore ...they actually make close to a $billion/year with only a total of 7 operators n tech guys. in most normal factories overseas they need 500 people and 10 factories and vast materials to make close to a $billion /year even!
what they need are more of these high tech manufacturing plants and not those nickel n dime service sectors.
I don't mean the service line per se, I meant the generic service base. This would include expertise in manufacturing, shipping, banking, technical, bio-tech, pharmaceuticals and medical, and whatever, Singapore would be the hub of as many of these sectors as can be rather than have a manufacturing based economy.
It is not whether it is right or wrong, but which is better, or what would be better. And whether to scale down the ambition, in view of the population numbers.
Atobe has another factor, that is the consensus of the people in the direction to take, but I am not going in that direction because this is a thread about "immigrant workers." This would open a whole new pandora's box and would be 'boh liau'.
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Ah! Atobe again with his sublime use of language :) Perhaps he will have a chance to display his language skills at the election rallies of the opposition parties..
Yes, we can appreciate the intelligence of a parasite to be able to find some relevance for itself by clinging on to the work accomplished by others.All that a parasitical mushroom can do is to 'mushroom itself uselessly' - if it can even first begin to overcome its inertia and impotence.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
I think the shift away from a manufacturing base economy to a service one is a move in the right direction considering our size. Remember Malaysia's Multimedia Super Corridor, and the Iskander Regional Development each by themselves is much larger than the island of Singapore. Every inch of Singapore has to be covered with factories to compete with these developments.
Singapore is different from Israel and Switzerland, and have learnt from them in the begining. The early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee have seen to that.
I agree that Singapore maybe spreading out its resources too thin. Although there are a number of developments that gives the appearance that Singapore is much advanced that the neighbouring countries, I believe this is because of the compact nature of our nation. Cities like Shanghai and even Kuala Lumpur is in some areas much more "advance" than Singapore. They can have a manufacturing and services based economy, whereas Singapore can only choose one. If it has been manufacturing, we would all have been regimented factory workers now.
What Singapore has as a resource is manpower, and this limited in number and quality. Thus the need to "import". Singapore can stagnate or progress at a slower rate, and be a sleepy pearl of the orient like Penang and strive to attract tourist in Hawaiian shirts and straw hats to savour the colonial settings.
Like it or not, Singaporeans are just as voracious as any other nationality in consumerism, and want to be so. I personally don’t think Singaporeans as a whole will exercise humility and be not materialistic. Singaporeans want, and will want the latest and the best and also the cheapest. And this is what the government of the day has to endeavour to provide for its citizens.
There are numerous strategies to achieve this purpose. The ones that work well are deemed correct, the one that is disastrous is considered wrong, and all in between are open to debate. Therefore, considering that Singapore’s only resource is manpower, the shift to the various services industries should be in the right direction as oppose to manufacturing. And also in as many in this field as possible, and thus spreading the resources thin, as you have brought out. This has its pros and cons, as those not viable are left to their own demise, and those that take off are nurtured.
That’s why the government has my agreement on the importation of foreigners to supplement our workforce. Then how they do it, and how you would like them to do it, is the issue.
Your new position taken in this post is a far cry form your last statement that claimed - "The economy need to be expanded to the max possible, so that we can have the widest choice possible in goods and services" .
Can it be true that "Singapore is different from Israel and Switzerland, and have learnt from them in the begining. The early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee have seen to that." - which I assume you are suggesting now that there is no more to be learnt from Israel and Switzerland ?
Your opinion reflects the sheer arrogance of the likes of the PAP political leadership - who have not appreciated the wisdom of the "early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee" - which is even more relevant in the present times of economic challenges.
It is even more remarkable that you can appreciate - "What Singapore has as a resource is manpower, and this limited in number and quality" - and will go into an irrelevant tangent by continuing to propagate further fallacies in your statements that - (1)"Singaporeans are just as voracious as any other nationality in consumerism", (2) that you "personally don’t think Singaporeans as a whole will exercise humility and be not materialistic" - when there is no relationship with the preceding point; (3) that "Singaporeans want, and will want the latest and the best and also the cheapest" - to be accomplished at any price (?).
If what you state is true that "this is what the government of the day has to endeavour to provide for its citizens" - the PAP Leadership has shown miserable success when one consider the humongous and growing negative feedback concerning the rising costs of living caused by the price increases in utilities, transport, food, and now even public housing as seen in the growing debate even in this Forum.
If "There are numerous strategies to achieve this purpose. The ones that work well are deemed correct, the one that is disastrous is considered wrong, and all in between are open to debate" - it is obvious you do not seem to know which strategy work well and deemed correct and which one is disastrous - until it is too late, when everything goes wrong and have a negative impact on Singapore and Singaporeans.
It is obvious that LKY and the PAP Government had followed this experimental trial and error method over the last five decades, and which you have shown your unique brilliance to continue the erroneous ways of the past.
LKY's arrogant decisions during the '60s, '70s and '80s - have brought disastrous results that had lasting effects up to this day - as seen from his Family Planning "Stop-At-TWO" program that was implemented in the late 1960s through the '70s that had planted the small family into the minds of Singaporeans.
His insistence on Mandarin as the "Second Language" for the majority of Chinese, which stunted the educational progression of hundreds of thousands of young Singaporeans that could not advance into tertiary education without a Pass in Mandarin.
There was the belated acknowledgement by MM LKY to his mistake in helping to pass through Parliament - the Women's Charter, that was drafted by his wife - and which was made into a law that one man can have only one wife. He did lament that this had resulted in those successful businessmen with great genes not being able to have more wives so as to produce more capable, stronger and larger families.
Over the years, Singaporeans have consistently witnessed the acknowledgement by MM LKY of his mistaken policies only when his progenies begin to experience the hardships of his past policies that remained stubbornly in place, and which have already affected generations of past and present Singaporeans.
Is the importation of foreign labor the only solution for Singapore's continued advancement - especially with the need for low cost laborers to work in all the various menial jobs in the low wage industries and enterprises ?
Whatever happened to the call for technological advancement in tooling and training so as to make Singapore less dependent on such cheap labor ?
Are you certain that the experience of Switzerland, Israel and even Sweden has nothing to offer Singapore in the ways that they have resolved their economic progress in the face of their own limited human resource ?
Obviously you have no clue as to the dependency of countries like the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, and other similar wealthy oil producing Middle-Eastern Countries that are flooded by the large foreign labor pool that ensured the smooth running of their economies.
The day will come when these countries will find themselves, their country and their economy suddenly hamstrung when the cheap foreign labor hold these countries to ransom - by suddenly withdrawing their services.
Depending on cheap foreign labor is clearly sabotaging the concept of Total Defense for Singapore.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Your new position taken in this post is a far cry form your last statement that claimed - "The economy need to be expanded to the max possible, so that we can have the widest choice possible in goods and services" .
Can it be true that "Singapore is different from Israel and Switzerland, and have learnt from them in the begining. The early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee have seen to that." - which I assume you are suggesting now that there is no more to be learnt from Israel and Switzerland ?
Your opinion reflects the sheer arrogance of the likes of the PAP political leadership - who have not appreciated the wisdom of the "early founders like Dr Goh Keng Swee" - which is even more relevant in the present times of economic challenges.
It is even more remarkable that you can appreciate - "What Singapore has as a resource is manpower, and this limited in number and quality" - and will go into an irrelevant tangent by continuing to propagate further fallacies in your statements that - (1)"Singaporeans are just as voracious as any other nationality in consumerism", (2) that you "personally don’t think Singaporeans as a whole will exercise humility and be not materialistic" - when there is no relationship with the preceding point; (3) that "Singaporeans want, and will want the latest and the best and also the cheapest" - to be accomplished at any price (?).
If what you state is true that "this is what the government of the day has to endeavour to provide for its citizens" - the PAP Leadership has shown miserable success when one consider the humongous and growing negative feedback concerning the rising costs of living caused by the price increases in utilities, transport, food, and now even public housing as seen in the growing debate even in this Forum.
If "There are numerous strategies to achieve this purpose. The ones that work well are deemed correct, the one that is disastrous is considered wrong, and all in between are open to debate" - it is obvious you do not seem to know which strategy work well and deemed correct and which one is disastrous - until it is too late, when everything goes wrong and have a negative impact on Singapore and Singaporeans.
It is obvious that LKY and the PAP Government had followed this experimental trial and error method over the last five decades, and which you have shown your unique brilliance to continue the erroneous ways of the past.
LKY's arrogant decisions during the '60s, '70s and '80s - have brought disastrous results that had lasting effects up to this day - as seen from his Family Planning "Stop-At-TWO" program that was implemented in the late 1960s through the '70s that had planted the small family into the minds of Singaporeans.
His insistence on Mandarin as the "Second Language" for the majority of Chinese, which stunted the educational progression of hundreds of thousands of young Singaporeans that could not advance into tertiary education without a Pass in Mandarin.
There was the belated acknowledgement by MM LKY to his mistake in helping to pass through Parliament - the Women's Charter, that was drafted by his wife - and which was made into a law that one man can have only one wife. He did lament that this had resulted in those successful businessmen with great genes not being able to have more wives so as to produce more capable, stronger and larger families.
Over the years, Singaporeans have consistently witnessed the acknowledgement by MM LKY of his mistaken policies only when his progenies begin to experience the hardships of his past policies that remained stubbornly in place, and which have already affected generations of past and present Singaporeans.
Is the importation of foreign labor the only solution for Singapore's continued advancement - especially with the need for low cost laborers to work in all the various menial jobs in the low wage industries and enterprises ?
Whatever happened to the call for technological advancement in tooling and training so as to make Singapore less dependent on such cheap labor ?
Are you certain that the experience of Switzerland, Israel and even Sweden has nothing to offer Singapore in the ways that they have resolved their economic progress in the face of their own limited human resource ?
Obviously you have no clue as to the dependency of countries like the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Libya, and other similar wealthy oil producing Middle-Eastern Countries that are flooded by the large foreign labor pool that ensured the smooth running of their economies.
The day will come when these countries will find themselves, their country and their economy suddenly hamstrung when the cheap foreign labor hold these countries to ransom - by suddenly withdrawing their services.
Depending on cheap foreign labor is clearly sabotaging the concept of Total Defense for Singapore.
Ah Mr Atobe,
You are digressive in your arguments.
My stand is still the same, in that the economy need to be expanded, and expand it must.
And I would add that whatever direction Singapore takes there is a cost. Whether it is blatant consumerism, or frugalities, or laid back lifestyle, there will always be a trade off, and not everyone will be fully satisfied.
This will always be the bone of contention between any persons who have their own opinion and care to express them.
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Ah Mr Atobe,
You are digressive in your arguments.
My stand is still the same, in that the economy need to be expanded, and expand it must.
And I would add that whatever direction Singapore takes there is a cost. Whether it is blatant consumerism, or frugalities, or laid back lifestyle, there will always be a trade off, and not everyone will be fully satisfied.
This will always be the bone of contention between any persons who have their own opinion and care to express them.
It is a surprise that you will wish to digress from the main issue which began with your false claim that it is critical for Singapore that - "The economy need to be expanded to the max possible, so that we can have the widest choice possible in goods and services" .
Have you simply resigned from your position without even bothering to make a reasonable defense for the false statement made above - which you claim is the reason that justify the need for the huge influx of foreign labor to Singapore ?
It is not too clever to simply dismiss my preceding reply as digressing when you could have attempted to be honest with yourself by addressing the issues raised.
It is also not too creative to simply hide behind a simple excuse that there is "the bone of contention between any persons who have their own opinion and care to express them".
If you believe in your opinion as valid you would have the conviction in yourself to push your ideas through instead of resigning from fear of having to change your views, or fear of something worst - to be debunked.
To put it all in a nutshell - are you prepared to see Singapore being so dependent on foreign labor to justify the maximum economic expansion for Singapore - to the extent of ignoring the pitfalls experienced by other countries such as the named Middle-eastern countries ?
What kind of resilient Total Defense for Singapore is there - when continued economic progress is dependent on an ever growing need for foreign labor to sustain the growth ?
Can this be digression ?
Surely you can learn something about being honest to yourself ?
-
Originally posted by mancha:
Ah Mr Atobe,
You are digressive in your arguments.
My stand is still the same, in that the economy need to be expanded, and expand it must.
And I would add that whatever direction Singapore takes there is a cost. Whether it is blatant consumerism, or frugalities, or laid back lifestyle, there will always be a trade off, and not everyone will be fully satisfied.
This will always be the bone of contention between any persons who have their own opinion and care to express them.
So what stand is it?
I don't mind you saying Chee Soon Juan is a sucker as he tends to bring the whole opposition down.
But if you say that Chiam See Tong, Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim as well, then I should call you a Mother-fucking Nabei Cheebye Son of a bitch pussy!
What fucking good has the PAP done for you, you tell me?
People are coping with rising costs of living and social problems with foreigner influx!
Not just lack of freedom of expression!
-
When one cares about others more than it's own family, it's sad. Time to disown them.
-
Originally posted by Fallen-Angel:
When one cares about others more than it's own family, it's sad. Time to disown them.
Great nations can only arise - when a community of individuals come together to live together and commit to the communal defence of the Rights of the Individuals - with the confidence that each personal commitment to those around us will have the community defending and watching over the interests of ourselves.It is when one commits to the community, that one can hope for the community to defend one's own interests.
Can man be an island to itself ?
-
New Zealand has a project to attract Singaporeans to work study and live there.
Currently, some 4,500 Singaporeans had applied for different visas to the country, while statistics from Australia's Immigration Department showed that the country's now home to some 50,000 Singaporeans. - CNA/vmmy advice to those singaporeans taht had apply to NZ , do your own research before commiting. As far as i know, NZ is a hotspot for crime! neighbourhood are forming their own watches for security. NZ is not about what you see in lord of the ringsm beautifyl scenery and peaceful. Once you are there, you will know what kind of shit you are getting into.
-
once again PAP twist and turn our words against us. we are saying,there are huge influx of foreigners into singapore. we never say, we dont need them at all. the problems is the numbers!!
the govt should ask themselves have they done their job to cater to this influx.
1. dormitory.
2. escalating HDB prices.
3. shortage of HDB units.
4. jam pack public transport.
5. social cohesion.
if they had done their jobs, all this unhappiness about the Foreigners would never have occured. before PAP start to point finger at us, they should look at themselves.
public risk, personal gain kinda mentality huh.
-
So what stand is it?
I don't mind you saying Chee Soon Juan is a sucker as he tends to bring the whole opposition down.
But if you say that Chiam See Tong, Low Thia Khiang and Sylvia Lim as well, then I should call you a Mother-fucking Nabei Cheebye Son of a bitch pussy!
What fucking good has the PAP done for you, you tell me?
People are coping with rising costs of living and social problems with foreigner influx!
Not just lack of freedom of expression!
i would not say, everything PAP has done is bad. but i would say, what they had done in the last 5 years is definitely not ideal and can be better.
If CSJ had born in taiwan, he would be alright. but as long as opposition is minority, he should be smart enough to know , play by the rules. PAP set the rules because they control the parliament.
the opposition can only change the rules and guidelines when they had the majority in parliament.
however good candidate like low, chiam, silvia did command my respect. they had dare to stand up where most of us din have the guts and balls!!
-
what is the real issued for Singapore?
The turn and twist is merely the way the govt screen the issued for the messes that they create on both job front and productivities on economy and worst of all no real solutions to tackle population issued. And we have no idea where Singapore is heading to...........
Take Japan as example...they too are facing aging population and illing economies for along time but look at what they are really way ahead in artificial intel and robotics technology for human assist. I think that when we are facing social intergration problems and continuing declining productivities due to aging population try to maintain standard of living...The Japanese would have master robotics and artificial intelligent technology and will come up maintaining productivities and standard of living.....
The point here is that how does our govt process solutions? the so call Elite and Talent ?
In Singapore....what happen to our Gen and bio tech research?, Singapore is every kind of Hub.....but no significant at one thing.....than all of a sudden we become Casino...
-
Originally posted by Arapahoe:
what is the real issued for Singapore?
The turn and twist is merely the way the govt screen the issued for the messes that they create on both job front and productivities on economy and worst of all no real solutions to tackle population issued. And we have no idea where Singapore is heading to...........
Take Japan as example...they too are facing aging population and illing economies for along time but look at what they are really way ahead in artificial intel and robotics technology for human assist. I think that when we are facing social intergration problems and continuing declining productivities due to aging population try to maintain standard of living...The Japanese would have master robotics and artificial intelligent technology and will come up maintaining productivities and standard of living.....
The point here is that how does our govt process solutions? the so call Elite and Talent ?
In Singapore....what happen to our Gen and bio tech research?, Singapore is every kind of Hub.....but no significant at one thing.....than all of a sudden we become Casino...
No solutions now.
All they care about is making a quick buck.
The hub this and hub that are just smokescreens to make it seem like they are creating jobs.
All I can see are low waged jobs being created mainly due to the increasing population.
-
new immigrants are the sure-fire way of creating new jobs, more taxes since we now have raised GST etc.
imagine a population from 3m to 6m. Of course the consumption will double, money is spent and of course jobs created. With indirect taxes like GST, the more population the better.
-
new immigrants are the sure-fire way of creating new jobs, more taxes since we now have raised GST etc.
imagine a population from 3m to 6m. Of course the consumption will double, money is spent and of course jobs created. With indirect taxes like GST, the more population the better.
-
new immigrants are the sure-fire way of creating new jobs, more taxes since we now have raised GST etc.
imagine a population from 3m to 6m. Of course the consumption will double, money is spent and of course jobs created. With indirect taxes like GST, the more population the better.
