Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
sleepy:
That is why I qualified myself by saying \"many\" or \"some\" couples. Because people are highly mobile, some men here even choose to go chinatown, gayland, batam or china to look for suitable mates in a bid for offsprings. This brings about lot of social, legal and productivity problems but it's one of the new norms the govt has to manage.sinoboy:
Adoption may not be an option for many couples. Singapore is a largely Asian society with traditional Asian values. It would be difficult to ask some parents to look after other people's kids unless forced by circumstances such as chronic infertility or sperm And egg got mixed up in test tube. In essence we are not ang moh pie. :lightrod:
I guess childless couples would be keen and they should have first priority to adopt.
-
concern2:
In the olden days, carrying on one's surname means something. To have children is fortune and they believe in yang er fang lau.
You'd be surprised how many actually 'adopted' others' kids in the olden days when they wanted to have a boy / girl in an all-sons/all-daughters household. Some gave birth but not able to afford to bring up so many and was willing to let neighbour or relative bring them up.sinoboy:
Adoption may not be an option for many couples. Singapore is a largely Asian society with traditional Asian values.
Today, what is the big deal with carrying on the surname, children are a burden, rely on kid in one's old age, rather rely on oneself.
Different mindset. -
3Boys:
It really looks like we are falling into it.You may have seen this before
http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=8321
Is Population Growth a Ponzi Scheme?
The basic pitch of those promoting population growth is straightforward in its appeal: \"More is better.\" Joseph Chamie, who has spent a lifelong career as a demographer, including 12 years of service as the director of the United Nations Population Division, finds that more is not necessarily better. -
Funz:
In the olden days, carrying on one's surname means something. To have children is fortune and they believe in yang er fang lau.
You'd be surprised how many actually 'adopted' others' kids in the olden days when they wanted to have a boy / girl in an all-sons/all-daughters household. Some gave birth but not able to afford to bring up so many and was willing to let neighbour or relative bring them up.concern2:
[quote=\"sinoboy\"]
Adoption may not be an option for many couples. Singapore is a largely Asian society with traditional Asian values.
Today, what is the big deal with carrying on the surname, children are a burden, rely on kid in one's old age, rather rely on oneself.
Different mindset.[/quote]Yes, I so agree with this! The older folks were wiser! -
goldfish2013:
\"Falling\" ? You used the word \"falling\"....Hm...
It really looks like we are falling into it.3Boys:
You may have seen this before
http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=8321
Is Population Growth a Ponzi Scheme?
The basic pitch of those promoting population growth is straightforward in its appeal: \"More is better.\" Joseph Chamie, who has spent a lifelong career as a demographer, including 12 years of service as the director of the United Nations Population Division, finds that more is not necessarily better. -
[quote]I will now write to give my views on the Population White Paper and on the target of 6.9 million people by 2030.
1. Singapore is already too crowded based on our current population of 5.1 million. Look at our MRT stations, trains and shopping malls next to these stations. - teeming with people. Already life is quite stressful in these crowded conditions; it will get worse.
2. We do not need a big economy to create sufficient jobs for our people. For each size of population, we need perhaps 70% to be working in the domestic sector, i.e. education, health care, housing, safety, law and order, and the other 30% in the export sectors. Our competitive export sectors, e.g. airlines, tourism, high tech manufacturing, education, financial services, trading, etc, can provide these jobs.
3. We have some economic activities that create jobs of questionable value, i.e. selling of properties and financial products, speculation in shares , COE and casinos and money lending (look at the number of pawn shops). We do not need so many people to be involved in these activities - which may be harmful for the future. If some of these people are deployed towards the other sectors of the economy, there is no need for a larger population.
4. We have to get rid of the wasteful activities in our economy; they create jobs but do not improve the quality of life. I refer to the people involved in GST accounting (my favorite grouse), in inefficient inefficiency (e.g. payments by cheques, submitting returns to complicated government websites), disruptions of town councils management, and the excessive time spent in National Service (most countries have reduced to one year).
5. We can allow some immigration of quality workers (i.e. those needed by our economy) and families who are willing to immigrate and make a home in Singapore, and to serve National Service and other obligations like the local born. We can accept them for a short term, but they have to make up their mind beyond the initial period.
6. Our population will grow, but much more slowly and consistent with our ability to provide the infrastructure and public services. For the time being, we should keep the population steady until the overcrowding and lack of infrastructure is sorted out.[/quote]http://www.facebook.com/kinlian/posts/435395383199786 -
![](\"http://i49.tinypic.com/2njkeoh.jpg\")
http://i49.tinypic.com/2njkeoh.jpg\">
This is a 2008 newsclip....
MM Lee also feels it is not right to have 6.5 million people on this small dot...
MM Lee ....please Save Singapore from sinking.....
The 2 casino are already bringing in a lot of social issues to Singapore...
Now to open and raise the population to 6.9 million....
I don't want Singapore to sink..... -
dolphinsiah:
Wow, you managed to find this old newsclip, I'm impressed !
This is a 2008 newsclip....
MM Lee also feels it is not right to have 6.5 million people on this small dot...
. -
No not me...this is now circulating in on facebook...
http://www.facebook.com/saynotooverpopulatedsingapore -
![](\"http://i46.tinypic.com/2lwt1me.jpg\")
How the MIW views of the 6.9 million people
And we the common people views :nailbite: :nailbite: :nailbite:
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 š
Register Login