Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[pirate]

3Boys:

There has been a lot of focus on the downsides of the PAP plan. Anyone figure out the downsides of the WP plan should they fail to execute?

Can! Once I manage to figure out exactly what their plan involves...

So far all I get is:

(1) White Paper say 6.9m, so WP say 5.9m

(2) White paper say assume x% growth, so WP say x-0.5%

(3) WP say increase local workforce by 1% a year by encouraging old folks and SAHMs to work

(4) Freeze total no. of foreign workers, presumably including EPs (\"We should strive to keep our foreign labour force constant between now and 2020, depending on our success in growing the local labour force. It does not mean that we shut the doors to foreign workers. Instead, new work passes will be issued only to replace expiring work passes or to supplement shortfalls in the local labour force.\" - per NCMP Gerald Giam)

(5) Somehow increase productivity (dunno how yet, though in fairness white paper also never say how)

(6) Somehow get Singaporeans to make more babies (but dunno whether compatible with somehow increase productivity and get more SAHMs and grandparents to work)

(6b) Somehow make more HDB flats for Singaporean couples (but \"Singaporeans must accept a slower pace of construction\" because don't want so many foreign construction workers - per MP Pritam Singh)

(7) Promoting Singaporean friendly immigration policies (this one I actually understand!)

(8) Single parents?

Any more?

[3Boys]

pirate:

3Boys:

There has been a lot of focus on the downsides of the PAP plan. Anyone figure out the downsides of the WP plan should they fail to execute?

Can! Once I manage to figure out exactly what their plan involves...

So far all I get is:

(1) White Paper say 6.9m, so WP say 5.9m

(2) White paper say assume x% growth, so WP say x-0.5%

(3) WP say increase local workforce by 1% a year by encouraging old folks and SAHMs to work

(4) Freeze total no. of foreign workers, presumably including EPs (\"We should strive to keep our foreign labour force constant between now and 2020, depending on our success in growing the local labour force. It does not mean that we shut the doors to foreign workers. Instead, new work passes will be issued only to replace expiring work passes or to supplement shortfalls in the local labour force.\" - per NCMP Gerald Giam)

(5) Somehow increase productivity (dunno how yet, though in fairness white paper also never say how)

(6) Somehow get Singaporeans to make more babies (but dunno whether compatible with somehow increase productivity and get more SAHMs and grandparents to work)

(6b) Somehow make more HDB flats for Singaporean couples (but \"Singaporeans must accept a slower pace of construction\" because don't want so many foreign construction workers - per MP Pritam Singh)

(7) Promoting Singaporean friendly immigration policies (this one I actually understand!)

(8) Single parents?

Any more?

A bit 'pie in the sky', isn't it?

Not very convincing leh.....especially 6 and 6b.

I think more honest if they just say we dun care about businesses and forgo economic growth altogether, that I can understand. SBF and SICC already cottoned on.

[ruohoo97]

sunflower:

All things being equal, priorities must be set. In this case, priorities of gahmen obviously are different from common people. Let me give an analogy…


An average child is doing pretty well with some tuitions but showing signs of fatigue in P5. Parent says by P6, must score 270 in order to go top school. So in the child’s interest, pump in lots of tuition and enrichment, believing that by doing so, child sure can achieve the target score. Whether child is agreeable is beside the point.

One possible scenario is child gets burn out and scores badly, much lower than expected, so unable to get into top school, or child may score as expected. BUT, during those two years, the child slog and slog, life is filled with studying and running from one tuition to another enrichment. The child has sacrificed his/her childhood for top schools.

OR

Parent feels that having a childhood life is more important than getting into top schools and may decide that a score of 240 is good enough. So parent decides to maintain the number of tuitions or even cut down. The child has free time to play and engage in other activities, other than schoolwork and tuition.

Come PSLE, the child may score lower than 240, but still able to get into a good enough school, or as the child may be free from pressure and stress, child may perform beyond expectations and score much much higher than 240, and ends up in a top school. Whichever the case, the child’s one and only treasured childhood life has not been lost.

Whatever it is, people need to reach a consensus and decide what is most important. However, we must be prepared for any consequences, be able to bear with sacrifices along the way and deal with unforeseeable outcomes.

I got what you mean. If I can choose, I will be later one.

[crony.026118in.026118ksp]

3Boys:

From LLL


\"In a recent ST report, Singapore sees an average of 12,000 abortions a year, and 4 out of 10 women who went for abortions were single women. Reducing the discrimination against single mothers may reduce the likelihood of single mothers having to resort to terminating their pregnancies for fear of lack of support. Furthermore, for a country suffering from a fertility crisis, each child should be valued, and not punished simply because he or she is born to unmarried parents.\"

Are we as a society, ready for this?

So Singapore women are not so infertile after all

And it is also not true that they do not have a HDB flat in which to make babies. They are quite good at it except not what they wanted. They have proven the ability to make babies with or without HDB flats

Just a matter of selfish attitude to have fun minus the responsibility. They call it the lifestyle thing.

Perhaps parliament should do the next logical thing to illegalize abortion as part of the population white paper....but then the ostriches may find it the sand no longer cosy to bury their heads in

[raysusan]

http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/379316_608040349212552_165554393_n.jpg\">

[raysusan]

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/singaporeans-plan-a-protest-next-week-80afGFGdShiIbrB5nhmjTQ.html

[toddles]

3Boys:

From LLL


\"In a recent ST report, Singapore sees an average of 12,000 abortions a year, and 4 out of 10 women who went for abortions were single women. Reducing the discrimination against single mothers may reduce the likelihood of single mothers having to resort to terminating their pregnancies for fear of lack of support. Furthermore, for a country suffering from a fertility crisis, each child should be valued, and not punished simply because he or she is born to unmarried parents.\"

Are we as a society, ready for this?

This was also raised by another PAP MP right?

I don't think there's as much discrimination as lack of support in terms of qualifying for the usual stuff parents qualify for. Because govt is worried that it will exacerbate problem... but urm, I don't think unmarried folks think about that when they urm, get pregnant.

Facilitate adoptions?

I dunno, I'd say it's worth doing whatever it takes to make it easier for women who want to keep their children, keep their children. Or for women who want to have their children, but who are incapable of raising them - give them all the support necessary, and VWOs can step in to help raise these kids for Singapore / place them in loving foster homes?

3boys, what is your take on whether we are ready for this as a society?

[pirate]

pirate:

(4) Freeze total no. of foreign workers, presumably including EPs (\"We should strive to keep our foreign labour force constant between now and 2020, depending on our success in growing the local labour force. It does not mean that we shut the doors to foreign workers. Instead, new work passes will be issued only to replace expiring work passes or to supplement shortfalls in the local labour force.\" - per NCMP Gerald Giam)

Actually, this one I have an issue with. How is this to be implemented?

Does it mean that new set-ups will not be able to get foreign workers because all quotas are already hogged by existing businesses by way of grandfather rights? Or does it mean that as and when a business' foreign workpass expires, it will have to compete with other businesses for a workpass since the demand for workpasses will be greater than the number that can be issued out? How are workpasses to be allocated? Like COEs? Does WP see this resulting in a reduction of the dependency ratio? Any idea what the reduction will be or are businesses supposed to guess? How is a business supposed to plan its manpower like that?

Since the effect is going to be a reduction of the dependency ratio anyway, why not just make a roadmap for the reduction of the dependency ratio? Wouldn't it make it easier for businesses to plan ahead? Or does the proposal primarily involve \"let's put this in place and see what happens\", thus effectively taichi-ing the uncertainty of what the dependency ratio will be to businesses?

Will employment passes be subject to the same regime? What will be the interplay between EP and WP under such a regime?

How will it apply to workpasses for FDWs? Are we going to have a COE system for families wishing to employ FDWs? Otherwise, how to freeze no. of FDWs? :scratchhead:

[JannettLee]

raysusan:

http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/379316_608040349212552_165554393_n.jpg\">

Based on the comparison, I must say WP scores better than PAP's

[JannettLee]

raysusan:

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/singaporeans-plan-a-protest-next-week-80afGFGdShiIbrB5nhmjTQ.html

Singaporeans Plan a Protest Next Week! :yikes: