Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[Harlequin]

sunflower:

When LKY first conceived the “Two is Enough” policy, my thought is that it was calculated based on theory. He might not have anticipated that with increasing affluence, there would be a change in people’s mindset and social behaviour. The policy would have worked if people continue with the same mindset with respect to procreation as when it was in the 60s and 70s.


In the direct opposite, Mao Zedong believed in strength in numbers, and he encouraged people to give birth to as many children as possible. How did he win the Korean war?....by the never ending supply of human walls! Even American bullets were not enough to kill all those soldiers!

However, it was tragic that China was unable to feed everyone in the country, and many died of starvation. Perhaps LKY upon seeing history being unfolded, did not want this to happen to Singapore, as our country was not rich and we were still building our nation then.

Times have changed and having children is no longer viewed as all that important anymore. The missing part of the equation is now staring hard at us. It’s a pity that fire-fighting measures have been implemented to fulfill KPIs and to counter the problem of population decline. It does not appear to me that those population/immigration policies were being thoroughly thought through, where ministries seem to work in isolation and not communicating with each other. We need meaningful policies that anticipate future problems with strategies that are well planned and executed correctly to address them. As of now, we are facing the brunt of inadequate and ill-conceived policies.

Of course with more people, especially those with spending power, it’ll boost the economy. However, I hope the reversal of the “Two is Enough” as well as immigration policies to counter the problem of population decline are something that have been carefully thought through, weighing the pros and cons, and whether the cons is something that we can deal with and not in the expense of the people already living in this small island.

I do hope we do not need to suffer the consequences and deal with another missing part of the equation again.

I remember I read from one of the earlier books of LKY, that the \"2 is enough\" policy was to encourage women to join the workforce, back then the country had less than optimal workforce partly due to the mandatory national service vacuumed out our male counterparts.

[wonderm]

sunflower:

When LKY first conceived the “Two is Enough” policy, my thought is that it was calculated based on theory. He might not have anticipated that with increasing affluence, there would be a change in people’s mindset and social behaviour. The policy would have worked if people continue with the same mindset with respect to procreation as when it was in the 60s and 70s.


In the direct opposite, Mao Zedong believed in strength in numbers, and he encouraged people to give birth to as many children as possible. How did he win the Korean war?....by the never ending supply of human walls! Even American bullets were not enough to kill all those soldiers!

However, it was tragic that China was unable to feed everyone in the country, and many died of starvation. Perhaps LKY upon seeing history being unfolded, did not want this to happen to Singapore, as our country was not rich and we were still building our nation then.

Times have changed and having children is no longer viewed as all that important anymore. The missing part of the equation is now staring hard at us. It’s a pity that fire-fighting measures have been implemented to fulfill KPIs and to counter the problem of population decline. It does not appear to me that those population/immigration policies were being thoroughly thought through, where ministries seem to work in isolation and not communicating with each other. We need meaningful policies that anticipate future problems with strategies that are well planned and executed correctly to address them. As of now, we are facing the brunt of inadequate and ill-conceived policies.

Of course with more people, especially those with spending power, it’ll boost the economy. However, I hope the reversal of the “Two is Enough” as well as immigration policies to counter the problem of population decline are something that have been carefully thought through, weighing the pros and cons, and whether the cons is something that we can deal with and not in the expense of the people already living in this small island.

I do hope we do not need to suffer the consequences and deal with another missing part of the equation again.

Singapore and China did not go opposite direction. Back in the 70s, many countries including China and Singapore, HK, etc. started the two-child policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-child_policy

http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/38105696.html

[sunflower]

Harlequin:

I remember I read from one of the earlier books of LKY, that the \"2 is enough\" policy was to encourage women to join the workforce, back then the country had less than optimal workforce partly due to the mandatory national service vacuumed out our male counterparts.

OIC, wasn’t aware of that. Perhaps that’s his “official” stand.

[sunflower]

wonderm:

Singapore and China did not go opposite direction. Back in the 70s, many countries including China and Singapore, HK, etc. started the two-child policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-child_policy

http://zhidao.baidu.com/question/38105696.html

Yes, I'm aware of China's one-child policy, but I think we are talking about different time frames. When Mao Zedong was in power, he encouraged procreation. Mao came to power in 1949, Korean war in the 1950s and cultural revolution from 1966 -1976, which ended when he died.

By then, people would have learnt the lessons of what over population could do to a country, that was why the zeal to reduce population size in the 70s – 80s. So in that aspect, Singapore and China were indeed in tandem to reduce population size during this period.

[sunflower]

concern2:

sunflower:

When LKY first conceived the “Two is Enough” policy ..

I do hope we do not need to suffer the consequences and deal with another missing part of the equation again.

Has anyone of you wondered why China, after seeing what is happening to Singapore, isn't calling their one-child policy to a halt?

It was reported in the news some weeks back that China was concerned about the aging population. However, I’m not sure whether they see the problem as serious enough to take any action at this point. China has now become richer due to the economic reforms during Deng Xiaoping’s time. Perhaps China has a much bigger base and adequate resources (more can be discovered) to counter it. However, I think there needs to be long term planning to avoid any catastrophic effects.

[concern2]

sunflower:

concern2:

[quote=\"sunflower\"]When LKY first conceived the “Two is Enough” policy ..

I do hope we do not need to suffer the consequences and deal with another missing part of the equation again.

Has anyone of you wondered why China, after seeing what is happening to Singapore, isn't calling their one-child policy to a halt?

It was reported in the news some weeks back that China was concerned about the aging population. However, I’m not sure whether they see the problem as serious enough to take any action at this point. China has now become richer due to the economic reforms during Deng Xiaoping’s time. Perhaps China has a much bigger base and adequate resources (more can be discovered) to counter it. However, I think there needs to be long term planning to avoid any catastrophic effects.[/quote]I won't be too sure about that. With urbanization as a Global trend and little/ slow innovation on how to increase food supply, I think a drop in population isn't exactly a bad thing. What's more that we rely so heavily on imports.

[sunflower]

concern2:

sunflower:

[quote=\"concern2\"]
Has anyone of you wondered why China, after seeing what is happening to Singapore, isn't calling their one-child policy to a halt?

It was reported in the news some weeks back that China was concerned about the aging population. However, I’m not sure whether they see the problem as serious enough to take any action at this point. China has now become richer due to the economic reforms during Deng Xiaoping’s time. Perhaps China has a much bigger base and adequate resources (more can be discovered) to counter it. However, I think there needs to be long term planning to avoid any catastrophic effects.

I won't be too sure about that. With urbanization as a Global trend and little/ slow innovation on how to increase food supply, I think a drop in population isn't exactly a bad thing. What's more that we rely so heavily on imports.[/quote]Am a bit confused here…are we talking about Singapore or China? You were asking why China did not stop the one-child policy right? My view is that with China, they are rich now, also have the luxury of space/resources to expand/explore, hence enough resources to boost economy, accommodate the aged and to feed them. With the vast resources available, China can indeed afford to reduce population size (the population is already too big to start with). They may not see the urgency to increase birth rate in order to replace population at this moment. The threshold not reached yet.

As for Singapore, there aren’t any natural resources so need people to boost economy. However, given the space constraint here, there needs to be a balance between economic gains and quality of life/well being of residents. 7 mil in my opinion is a tad too many. The KPIs should not just be a number, but should also consider the intangible effects and results as well.

[octoberbaby]

can they just screen these FT first? creating social problems.

Reclaim more land.
Tanjong Pagar PSA is shifted to Tuas. They are going to built WaterFront something, connecting between the train station and PSA.

[pirate]

octoberbaby:

can they just screen these FT first? creating social problems.

Got screen what. You never hear WP rally meh? They screen out the husbands/wives of Singaporeans and the mothers/fathers of Singaporean babies. Then they give the PR/SC to I don't know who.

And this one I know personally - they also screen out the PRC boss of a multinational company whose Singapore subsidiary employs tens of Singaporeans (apparently because he has to fly here, there and everywhere to run his business so not stay in Singapore long enough), and then give the PR to the PRC who...

:mad:

[octoberbaby]

Think hor, qing qing cai cai give one lah.