Singapore's population could hit 6.9 million by 2030
-
Also, some rich ones are enjoying life and they see no problem with PAP.
Not much tax on the rich. The PAP has been implementing a more right wing economic agenda on Singapore.
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
old man could be very sick now ..............
probably struggling to fight for survival .....................
I think maybe he is and I will not be surprised. -
Originally posted by Dalforce 1941:
Not much tax on the rich. The PAP has been implementing a more right wing economic agenda on Singapore.
Agree with you, no only on the economic part but in general. Even the logo is similar and not to forget that our beloved leader study in UK, perhaps he is influence by one of the party teaching and even the logo is so similar. See the attached 2 link..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Union_of_Fascists#Final_years_and_legacy.
-
Originally posted by Lazybumy:
Agree with you, no only on the economic part but in general. Even the logo is similar and not to forget that our beloved leader study in UK, perhaps he is influence by one of the party teaching and even the logo is so similar. See the attached 2 link..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Union_of_Fascists#Final_years_and_legacy.
but UK has welfare for her people ...........
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
but UK has welfare for her people ...........
I think you misread what I mean, the current UK government have nothing to do with the British Union of Fascists party as they kill off the idea. But if you take a look of their ideology and logo, it is quite similar to our beloved party. For you info, British Union of Fascists party do not believe in welfare just like our beloved party. -
Originally posted by Lazybumy:
I think you misread what I mean, the current UK government have nothing to do with the British Union of Fascists party as they kill off the idea. But if you take a look of their ideology and logo, it is quite similar to our beloved party. For you info, British Union of Fascists party do not believe in welfare just like our beloved party.ok. That is why some forumers in other websites called them fascists.
-
Originally posted by SJS6638:
ok. That is why some forumers in other websites called them fascists.
Is it? Never notice don't know which forum, but if one bother to go through ideology of different idea, I do agree that our beloved had a lot of similar with them in government. But in term of economic sector, I think it is more like a mix of fascism/capitalism Fascism outlaw strike and state control the wage level, it also promote that State full control the economic sector (which SG have go to some extend and area). -
Originally posted by Lazybumy:
Is it? Never notice don't know which forum, but if one bother to go through ideology of different idea, I do agree that our beloved had a lot of similar with them in government. But in term of economic sector, I think it is more like a mix of fascism/capitalism Fascism outlaw strike and state control the wage level, it also promote that State full control the economic sector (which SG have go to some extend and area).whatever, fascism does not benefit the people.
-
Originally posted by Lazybumy:
it also promote that State full control the economic sector (which SG have go to some extend and area).
State control of economy is left wing agenda not right wing or fascist.
Against the mainstream: Nazi privatization in 1930s Germany
It is a fact that the government of the Nazi Party sold off public ownership in several State owned firms in the mid-1930s. These firms belonged to a wide range of sectors: steel, mining, banking, local public utilities, shipyards, ship-lines, railways, etc.
In addition, the delivery of some public services that were produced by government prior to the 1930s, especially social and labor-related services, was transferred to the private sector, mainly to organizations within the party...
http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf
....In these strange exceptions we can find one of the central principles of the Nazi system. It is a principle which is often missed. We have been told that Germany had a corporate state or a totalitarian state. Neither was true. There was no real corporate organization (even fraudulent, as in Italy and Austria), and such an organization, much discussed before and after 1933, was quickly dropped by 1935. The term "totalitarian" cannot be applied to the German system of self-regulation, although it could be applied to the Soviet system.
The Nazi system was dictatorial capitalism—that is, a society organized so that everything was subject to the benefit of capitalism; everything, that is, compatible with two limiting factors: (a) that the Nazi Party, which was not capitalist, was in control of the state, and (b) that war, which is not capitalist, could force curtailment of capitalist benefits (in the short run at least). In this judgment we must define our terms accurately.
We define capitalism as "a system of economics in which production is based on profit for those who control the capital."
In this definition one point must be noted: the expression "for those who control the capital" does not necessarily mean the owners. In modern economic conditions large-scale enterprise with widely dispersed stock-ownership has made management more important....
...The traditional capitalist system was a profit system. In its pursuit of profits it was not primarily concerned with production, consumption, prosperity, high employment, national welfare, or anything else. As a result, its concentration on profits eventually served to injure profits.
This development got the whole society into such a mess that enemies of the profit system began to rise up on all sides. Fascism was the counterattack of the profit system against these enemies. This counterattack was conducted in such a violent fashion that the whole appearance of society was changed, although, in the short run, the real structure was not greatly modified.
In the long run Fascism threatened even the profit system, because the defenders of that system, businessmen rather than politicians, turned over the control of the state to a party of gangsters and lunatics who in the long run might turn to attack businessmen themselves....
...Many of the economic activities which had come under state control were "re-privatized." The United Steel Works, which the government had purchased from Ferdinand Flick in 1932, as well as three of the largest banks in Germany, which had been taken over during the crisis of 1931, were restored to private ownership at a loss to the government. Reinmetal-Borsig, one of the greatest corporations in heavy industry, was sold to the Hermann G๖ring Works. Many other important firms were sold to private investors.
At the same time the property in industrial firms still held by the state was shifted from public control to joint public-private control by being subjected to a mixed board of directors. Finally, municipal enterprise was curtailed; its profits were taxed for the first time in 1935, and the law permitting municipal electric-power plants was revoked in the same year...
....The danger from labor was not nearly so great as might seem at first glance. It was not labor itself which was dangerous, because labor itself did not come directly and immediately in conflict with the profit system; rather it was with labor getting the wrong ideas, especially Marxist ideas which did seek to put the laborer directly in conflict with the profit system and with private ownership.
As a result, the Nazi system sought to control the ideas and the organization of labor, and was quite as eager to control his free time and leisure activities as it was to control his working arrangements.
For this reason it was not sufficient merely to smash the existing labor organizations. This would have left labor free and uncontrolled and able to pick up any kind of ideas. Nazism, therefore, did not try to destroy these organizations but to take them over. All the old unions were dissolved into the German Labor Front. This gave an amorphous body of 25 million in which the individual was lost. This Labor Front was a party organization, and its finances were under control of the party treasurer, Franz X. Schwarz.
The Labor Front soon lost all of its economic activities, chiefly to the Ministry of Economics. An elaborate facade of fraudulent organizations which either never existed or never functioned was built up about the Labor Front.
They included national and regional chambers of labor and a Federal Labor and Economic Council. In fact, the Labor Front had no economic or political functions and had nothing to do with wages or labor conditions.
Its chief functions were (1) to propagandize; (2) to absorb the workers' leisure time, especially by the "Strength Through Joy" organization, ( 3 ) to tax workers for the party's profit; (4) to provide jobs for reliable party members within the Labor Front itself; (5) to disrupt working-class solidarity.
This facade was painted with an elaborate ideology based on the idea that the factory or enterprise was a community in which leader and followers cooperated...
http://real-world-news.org/bk-quigley/09.html#28
-
Nope, fascism is only all in for State Control economic but with slight different compare to socialism. Socialism is not profit driven in their state control economic, whereas Fascism is profit driven in this (which is like capitalism). However capitalism do not believe in State control at all.
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html
Where it indicated
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest�—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions.
Maybe a good way is to take public transport. For socialism, they will run this under State control and make sure that it is a service rather than profit driven. For Capitalism, they will privatize it but ensure free market and allow free competition (which mean though the company is profit driven, it is up to them, which is why some private public company overseas making losses instead).
Now come fascism, they will privatize it in name but retain full State control and ensure that it is profit driven rather than a service to the public.
-
The first Privatisation: Selling SOEs and privatising public monopolies in Fascist Italy (1922-1925)
-
knn, whatever right wing, left wing, chicken wing or buffalo wing, they're screwing up the country
-
watever wings, they have the money suck from the peasants to run road when things go chaos /.//////////////
-
Originally posted by Dalforce 1941:
The first Privatisation: Selling SOEs and privatising public monopolies in Fascist Italy (1922-1925)
Base on what you post, that is what happen, though they still privatize it. They still have a lot of control like the products can only sell back to State etc.. Maybe put in more layman term. Socialism will go for State Own. Fascism will go for State Control. Capitalism which go choose to opt for free market. -
It is time to take the ownership of the country back.
The country cannot be run by a few to benefit a few.
It is time to do the work and fix the problems that caused by your complacency and NOT lack of foresight.
The population thing is simply rubbish if the existing issues cannot be resolved.
Stop throwing smoke and start doing the work.
Enough of the empty talk as none of the promises was delivered since 2011.
The MRT is not fixed and the influx of foreigners was never fixed.
If the upgrade of a mall cannot be resolved, there are other issues that you need to fix.
-
we will be like a 3rd world country wen 2030 comes , No JOBS , No CASH , No HOPE and a housing debt.
-
pushing the productivity frontier is not just a simplistic throughput process regardless of the social fabric...
they have all forgotten about the balanced economic scorecard...not everything is judged by economic perspectives...
-
next GE, any people worry kaylong vote wrong gahmen too soon follow my mode of operation. GRCs and SMCs with promising opoositions past votes last GE2011 with 40% or more. the people just vote them in. with this model, after GE2016 we will still have the gahmen, but more opossiton. they learn how to mamnage TCs slowly build up numebr sin parlihment. cum GE2020/2021 and after reaching 2030, their whitevapper proposals will still be outcome status quo 1, then we will have an oposition groups waiting in parliahment.
-
so much talk about what is wrong, but what is right?
WP is honest enough to say they are not ready to form the government yet, more professionals are joining them so hopefully the day will come when they can come up with feasible alternatives.
CSJ will continue to hope that WP will put his candidates into the parliament, so they don't take the risk of losing deposits...hahaha...the little price to pay for democracy, for that Jayaretnam is honorable.
-
MRT with virtual interchanges
all sorts of bus types and models
the buses are poorly maintained
-
Cabinet ministers over the past week sought to clarify the projections made in a government-issued white paper on Singapore’s population, saying the 6.9 million figure expected by 2030 is not so much a target but more a projection.
Most recently, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office S Iswaran said on Sunday at a dialogue in Jurong Central that the 6.9 million figure forms the upper bound of a range between 6.5 and 6.9 million people, by the year 2030.
“6.9 million is there to give an idea of the upper end, the upper bound of the possible scenarios we can see looking ahead for 18 years,” he said, according to local media reports.
“Why do we need to look at the upper bound? Because if you decide that... is the possibility even though it’s not a target, then we have to make decisions now about infrastructure,” he added. “It doesn’t mean we have to hit that number, but we have to prepare.”
Also speaking on Sunday, Minister for Law and Foreign Affairs K Shanmugam reportedly said the white paper is intended to spur discussion on Singapore’s population situation in 20 years’ time.
Although economic growth rates were projected to be between 3 and 5 per cent up to 2020, and 2 to 3 per cent up to 2030, the minister said the actual rates depend on a variety of factors, including those of the external and internal environment.
“But the task of a responsible government will be to look at 20 years ahead, 15 years ahead, and say, ‘These are the possible, different things that might happen. Let’s talk about them now’,” he was quoted as saying.
He also said he could understand grouses from the public over the government’s population estimates.
“They say, ‘I have difficulties with infrastructure, transport, housing with today’s population and you want to increase it even more; doesn’t make sense.' That’s a reaction and it’s understandable,” he added.
Shanmugam said the government has to explain their need and resolve to solve the country’s current infrastructure problems. Regardless of the population size in the long term, infrastructure must be adequate and deliver a high quality of life, he noted.
“That has to be a cast iron position that the government has to deliver and will deliver,” he reportedly said.
Over the past week, the government also released a land use plan to accommodate its projections as stipulated in the White Paper.
Following that, Minister for National Development Khaw Boon Wan declared that Build-To-Order (BTO) flat prices would remain affordable, even as the resale market continues to edge upwards.
He also reportedly said that “it’s possible” for the government to cater to a population of 6.9 million, even as it works to raise the quality of life for Singaporeans.The Cabinet ministers' comments come after the white paper sparked a wave of negative sentiment against the government over the population numbers.
-
DPM Teo pushes for support of population paper in Parliament
Yahoo! Newsroom – 3 hours agoAmid widespread fury from Singaporeans after the release of the government's population white paper, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean stood up again Monday to publicly endorse it in Parliament.
Speaking to Members of the House on Monday, Teo said that he understood the concerns Singaporeans had over an increase in the migrant population and fears of "Singaporeans feeling like strangers" in their own country.
He went on to emphasise the importance of integration.
"Most of these migrants come from similar ethnic backgrounds. They will adapt to our lives, become more like us over time," said Teo as he sought to assuage a wave of negativity about Singapore'sprojected population of 6.9 million by 2030, of which little more than half would be Singaporean.
Speaking specifically on the issue of an increase in the number of foreigners with work passes, the deputy prime minister said that these migrant workers would be here to support, rather than join the population.
"Let us be clear. These foreigners with work passes are here to support Singaporeans' needs in the areas of healthcare, domestic workers and supporting our ageing population and families."
The jobs these work pass holders would be doing, he said were "jobs and services Singaporeans need but do not want to do ourselves."
Teo also said that criteria for the awarding of these passes would be made more stringent in terms of salary requirements.
"Work pass holders are only here during their productive years. They help boost the ratio of working people to retirees but do not add to the retiree population. With them, the dependency ratio will fall," he argued. -
don';t try to con us that it is only projection. In any organisation, projection means they have decided and have planned to go ahead to make it materialise. We are no fools you know lee hsien loong, teo chee hean and all those who support this crap.
-
they are also getting the transport people to do something to accommodate 6.9 million
so don't give us this crap la........................
you PAP think we are like our ancestors or the generation in the 60s so simple minded to be conned. fat hope lol.
More will vote you out. We all aim to get you out, get PM out.
A lousy PM being paid world class salary is a waste of our time and money. We do not need expensive PM. We need something practical and cheap.
-
nobody wants to vote against what is good...thats the very basic nature of voters...
soon we see residents from the following towns....
BLOCK 100 #50-111
Pulau Ubin, Avenue 1
Singapore 444100
or..
BLOCK 101 #44-440
St. John's Isle, Street 11
Singapore 666101