Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
pirate:
The suggestions, while encouraging, would face some implementation challenges. For a new citizen that did not complete full time NS, it would be difficult to assess the military or leadership ability of that individual and to assign a vocation and to confer an appropriate rank. There needs to be a minimum induction period or BMT to learn at least the basic military skills to be able to contribute to our defense force. If like what you proposed we have 40 days of ICT for an uninitiated 'soldier', I'm not sure what assignment you can give to that kind of soldier. End up we have battalions of GD men doing mundane tasks while loading our defense budget paid by our taxes. So perhaps a solution with some BMT and vocational training included would work.
I suggest changing the criteria for granting citizenship to include the willingness of new male citizens to do national service. If the man is not even willing to do national service, then it is reasonable to question his proclaimed 'commitment' to Singapore.
National service for new citizens can take one of 2 main forms. The first is the usual 2 years of full-time national service plus the 10 year ICT cycle. The second is just the 10 year ICT cycle of up to 40 days a year. The difference is that if one has completed full-time NS, one is entitled during ICT to receive make-up pay. If the new citizen has not completed full-time NS, he will be entitled to the usual rank and service pay during ICT, but not make-up pay. The other difference is that since the new citizen has not done full-time NS and hence has not completed training, ICT for this class of servicemen is likely to be closer to 28-40 days a year than the usual 15-21 days.
But question is why and how many new citizens would want to do NS? :scratchhead: -
The answer to the stupid question is that we beef up our professional core in the armed forces, and reduce the liability of NS for our males, to the extent that it becomes less of a rallying call.
Theoretically, if Singaporean boys did not do NS, would there be the same amount of angst in admitting new citizens?
My guess is, less, but will still be present. So in a way, this NS issue is a bit of a red herring, and making new citizens do NS solves nothing, other than some equalization of terms, and soothing some hurt feelings. -
Bottom line is gahmen die die (with their long justifications) fully intend to squeeze 6.9m people into tiny Singapore.
So what's on our plate?
It's either 'take it' (honestly, what can we do? They seems to have decided & are merely informing everyone else, afterall they are the elected gahmen)
or 'leave it' (perhaps migrate!) bitter pill for Singaporeans to swallow -
sleepy:
Bottom line is gahmen die die (with their long justifications) intend to squeeze 6.9m people intto tiny Singapore. So it's a take it (honestly, what can we do? endure?) or leave it (perhaps migrate!) bitter pill for Singaporean to swallow
Have to swallow lor...what to do ? -
janet_lee88:
treasure your vote when come to 2016sleepy:
Bottom line is gahmen die die (with their long justifications) intend to squeeze 6.9m people intto tiny Singapore. So it's a take it (honestly, what can we do? endure?) or leave it (perhaps migrate!) bitter pill for Singaporean to swallow
Have to swallow lor...what to do ? -
Fish tank too small to support the fish population. Put in more fish, the fish will die.
-
goldfish2013:
Fish tank too small to support the fish population. Put in more fish, the fish will die.
already suffering...insufficient oxygen :imdrowning:
my vote in 2016 will be cast with very very serious considerations. -
Actually, most people missed this very important word:- COULD BE, could be 7 m in 2030.
Other part of the world, the people are like Singaporean, they do and will change their minds when consider migration. Some may not want to when their country is doing better, some may change their target country due to circumstances arises from the targeted country etc etc etc.
It’s not difficult at all, to make this country lose it’s lustre; it’s not that we have a lot to begin with, small land size with no natural resources.
To my shallow knowledge, it’s definitely easier to tear down than to build. -
Relax, pals… it’s not like the whole world of people is locking their migration target at Singapore, or there are no other attractive countries to accommodate them. 17 more years compares to the 48 years of Singapore legacy is a bit too hard to gauge, after all, 17 years is more than 1/3 of what our nation has come to be.
Japan is a locked door for migration, look at how happy are the folks there spending their silver-dollars. -
On second thought, if the fish tank is overpopulated, why it can still attract other fish to it? Unless, they are arowana.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login