Population woes

[WeiHan]

3Boys:

I disagree with your analysis. I don't see how keeping our currency strong protects them at all, particularly as it is clear that this is by no means a long term strategy. The fact that we are a a safe haven is due to our stable political situation and economy. Or would you prefer that we were not a safe haven?

They park their money in Singapore not totally because of political situation. They know that their wealth will be inflated away through money printing in their home countries. They know that their government will put their sticky hand on their wealth to cover huge debt when situation come to the worse. Singapore is a safe haven, is less likely to do the same thing because we are not in any fiscal deficit. By keeping our currency strong, the riches do enjoy the benefit of having their wealth better preserved. The less well off has not much wealth in the bank to preserve to start off with. What they need are jobs rather than preserving of wealth.

[zarahsmom]

limlim:

3Boys:

[quote=\"limlim\"]3Boy, I do not discount what you wrote about biz operations.


I just want to clarify why my views towards importing foreign labor with regards to FW & FT is different.

But you keep repeating over and over and over, \"if all those companies are so profitable, why don't they pay more.\"

You say \"Landlords should bite the bullet\".

I mean, do you even know what you are asking for?

Just saying.. I mentioned before, most pple like me are only exposed to 1 side of the story most of the time.. you cannot expect any layman to be economic or biz experts.

Does it mean layman cannot comment? cannot post in forums? No right?.......

It also created opportunity for you to share the \"other\" side of the story for readers who may never post. Isn't it?

You mentioned \"vacuum of understanding of how business\" work.. ok lor.. I'm not a businessman so not going to dispute that.

no need get so worked up mah..

Anyway, I guess the govt knows best how to deal with it.. I don't want to debate further as I have nothing constructive to add at the moment. Also not free to dig deeper.. I'll trust them in their judgement for now.[/quote]
:xedfingers: 3boys, I think what our dear limlim is saying is Peace!! I also love this thread as it gave everyone a medium to \"think\" out loud and gave us a platform to safely share our thoughts.

[bupashu]

the recent changes in labour policy has resulted in a cancellation of an investment into singapore that could have created 200 jobs in the S’pore company (perhaps 80 locals / 120 foreign workers)


with it, the banks like UOB and DBS are losing out in servicing the business with a targeted turnover of US$200m in the first year, rising to US$500m in the third year; the lawyers and auditors lose a client that could have given more jobs and fees…their planned IPO in Singapore will be shifted to elsewhere that welcome them

the shipping business lose out as S’pore will not be the manufacturing base any more

the R&D sector also lose out as there is no point transferring the R&D into Singapore as manufacturing will not be in S’pore any more

net result : singaporeans lose out because we don’t welcome foreigners

Singapore is getting nationalistic and xenophobic

[pirate]

Hmmm… a proposed investment with a local employment target of only 40%. But I think it is fair for any proposed host country to seriously consider whether this is necessarily of net benefit to the host country. Even before the tightening, unless they have some stupendous technology or knowhow that can be transferred to our workers or propose to build some highly sophisticated infrastructure that cannot be removed, I doubt that they would have been given permission to have a 60% foreign workforce .


As for the planned IPO, I am not impressed. What? They want to tap Singaporean capital on top of bringing in a 60% foreign workforce? Seriously?

I think they should look for a host country that is a better fit for their investment. Perhaps somewhere they can operate with a 60-70% local workforce instead of 40%. Like maybe across the causeway…

[WeiHan]

bupashu:

the recent changes in labour policy has resulted in a cancellation of an investment into singapore that could have created 200 jobs in the S'pore company (perhaps 80 locals / 120 foreign workers)


with it, the banks like UOB and DBS are losing out in servicing the business with a targeted turnover of US$200m in the first year, rising to US$500m in the third year; the lawyers and auditors lose a client that could have given more jobs and fees....their planned IPO in Singapore will be shifted to elsewhere that welcome them

the shipping business lose out as S'pore will not be the manufacturing base any more

the R&D sector also lose out as there is no point transferring the R&D into Singapore as manufacturing will not be in S'pore any more

net result : singaporeans lose out because we don't welcome foreigners

Singapore is getting nationalistic and xenophobic

So which country has this company chosen to be listed? Hong Kong? Kuala Lumpur? Taiwan? Which of these allow them to bring in 60% foreign workforce? or can single handedly provide all the expertise required?

[bupashu]

the relevant departments have agreed to be flexible in view of the technology transfer and the spin offs, but the owner is thinking thrice due to the uncertainty of govt policies

[matrix0405]

pirate:

Hmmm... a proposed investment with a local employment target of only 40%. But I think it is fair for any proposed host country to seriously consider whether this is necessarily of net benefit to the host country. Even before the tightening, unless they have some stupendous technology or knowhow that can be transferred to our workers or propose to build some highly sophisticated infrastructure that cannot be removed, I doubt that they would have been given permission to have a 60% foreign workforce .


As for the planned IPO, I am not impressed. What? They want to tap Singaporean capital on top of bringing in a 60% foreign workforce? Seriously?

I think they should look for a host country that is a better fit for their investment. Perhaps somewhere they can operate with a 60-70% local workforce instead of 40%. Like maybe across the causeway...

Totally agree. This type of low value investment better off in jaybee and batam. They can access large number of cheap workers. Banking, auditing and legal fee there are also cheaper.