Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
The author is simply rehashing old arguments. He did not address the main criticisms of the White Paper. First, is a liberal immigration policy the best way to achieve economic growth? Second, the government has considered the consequences of an economic slowdown, but it does not appear to have considered the negative impact of its policies.
-
Mdm Koh:
The author is simply rehashing old arguments. He did not address the main criticisms of the White Paper. First, is a liberal immigration policy the best way to achieve economic growth? Second, the government has considered the consequences of an economic slowdown, but it does not appear to have considered the negative impact of its policies.
I think this could be a case of seeing the glass as half full or half empty.
For the bold parts above, my take is that the White Paper is not proposing a liberal immigration policy. Following the tightening started in 2009, the White Paper is actually proposing further slow down of immigration and FW inflow.
On considering the negative impacts of its previous policies, to me, one major problem was that the public housing and transport infrastructure built-out were lagging behind the population growth, the White Paper proposed to address that by building before the demand. -
limlim:
No, because it is just plain stupid. :slapshead:No one feel that perhaps govt wants to encourage SC-SC union..? :evil: :evil:
in other words.. will aware make noise if govt makes it easy for foreign bride..? :evil: :evil: -
limlim:
For those cases who are rejected, there are many factors such as length of stay, income, qualifications, skills etc.. But for the case which you posted which seems to have met the requirements but always rejected for LTVP, it is very fishy.
Income, qualifications and skills are just plain stupid factors to consider when assessing LTVP+ and PR for a foreign spouse who is also a parent of a Singaporean child. The child is here. The family is here. If the Singaporean spouse is not able to support the foreign spouse, he/she will not be able to support the foreign spouse whether or not that foreign spouse is given LTVP+ or PR. Granting LTVP+ or PR will allow that family to have a second income, thereby making it more likely that the child will have adequate financial support than if that family only has one income earner.
A cynical observer will say that the policy of considering income, qualifications and skills is just a subtle way to get rid of lower income Singaporeans, because if the foreign spouse goes, the children will follow, and the Singaporean spouse too. Yay! We are rid of another low income family. :celebrate:
Who needs all these low class people who cannot even find a Singaporean wife/husband? We certainly don't want all these non-English speakers and their halfblood children lengthening the HDB queue. All we want is for the gov to keep out foreigners so that we can have our PMET jobs. :rahrah:
As for granting LTVP and LTVP+ but not PR, the only logical explanation is that the intention is that after the children grow up and the foreign parent grows old, it would be time to kick the foreign parent out of Singapore. If we are lucky, the low income Singaporean spouse will follow too, and Singapore can get rid of two old fogeys at the same time. After the cost of bringing up the children, he or she probably couldn't save enough for retirement here anyway. The logic is impeccable. What's not to like from a purely economic point of view?
Oh, yeah. It's just a little bit heartless. I will say it again.
H E A R T L E S S -
In the past, there is not GST but higher income tax % for the top-tier income. The top tier income tax had been reduced from 25% to 20% and hence there is a need for GST. So why you are saying as though no GST means got problem? Instead, shouldn't we ask why implement GST and reduce top tier income tax? :roll:
3Boys:
False.
Exactly!limlim:
[quote=\"JannettLee\"]Benefits of good growth of GDP are not cascaded down to many Singaporean but everyone got hit by the high costs of living/inflation.
How much does the g'ment give back in GST rebates?
How much healthcare subsidies are in place for lower income, funded from taxes (inclusing GST)?
How much school subsidies are funded from taxes (including GST)?
Do you not benefit from the defence umbrella funded by taxes (including GST)?
This whole falsehood about GST not benefiting the common Singaporean, wait till you don't have it, then you'll see.[/quote] -
From your reply, I can safely assume that you are either not a businessman or not in a business where GST rebate can be subjective because their business deal with both end-consumers and intermediate products. The difference is that 1 is entitled to GST rebate while the other is not. Businessmen are not sure whether they can successfully claim back the GST rebate, hence they priced with the assumption they can't, and if they do, it is an extra profit for them because of the additional paperwork and justifications etc required to claim the GST rebate. I can't believe that the ignorant think that they are so smart to call others rubbish. :yikes:
3Boys:
Now that I've read this again, I can't believe this rubbish you are trying to pass off as fact. Is there not a GST offset you can use?JannettLee:
Whoever is running a business in Singapore will know that 7% GST is added for every changing-hand and hence there are a few times (changing hands) of 7% GST are compounded and factored into the costs and they price their goods accordingly. Consumer would have to foot the bill.
Do you really know what you are talking about? -
3Boys:
No you can't.
Sweden is a monarchy of a few centuries standing, Volvo is older than Singapore, they are located in a high cost, high education region.
Their situation is absolutely not comparable to Singapore.
Agriculture based industries contribute up to 6% of GDP or more, if you count things like paper products. Mining and related industries contributes a further 3%, conservatively.
Is this something Singapore can do?
This drives other industries like machine tools, vehicles, trucks, tractors. Can we do these also? Of course, but it's a natural win for them, they have a home market to sell to, we don't.
According to statistical figures, foreign born inhabitants in Sweden number just over 14% in 2010. There are 120,000 Iraqis in Sweden, 60,000 Iranians. In 2011, 1.4 million Swedish residents were born abroad. Not a trivial figure, is it? Hardly a closed society that you would make it out to be.
How about insulation from foreign competition?
Pray tell, what has happened to Saab? Who now owns Volvo cars? (Hint, an Asian company). Just because you think you can shut your economy to foreigners doesn't mean they can't trounce you worldwide and bankrupt you.
Plenty of lessons from Sweden, unfortunately you and others are learning all the wrong ones.
A quick check does shows that agriculture just make up 2% of their GDP. Industry 27% and services makes up 70% of the GDP. It is indeed very similar to Singapore. One just need to ask : how can a developed nation be heavily dependent on agriculture?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Sweden
On population. I am afraid that no matter how you want to argue, Singapore is still way ahead of Sweden in dependency on both immigration and foreign workers.
Net immigration rate for Sweden: 1.65 /1000
Net immigration rate for Singapore: 9.12/1000
Just compare yourselves
Total population of Sweden increase from 8.3 millions in the 80s to 9.3 millions in 2010.
In contrast, Singapore takes less than 20 years to increase population from 3 millions to 5.3 millions.
It appears that you are cherry picking certain numbers to make your point but avoid others which show the big picture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore -
JannettLee:
Because as one would diversify streams of income, so should a government diversify it sources of tax dollars. Over reliance on any single stream can lead to unexpected shortfalls and can result in distortions in the economy. Taxing consumption is a legitimate and proven tool, not only in this country but in many progressive nations as well. If we did NOT have GST, and instead taxed on income ONLY, then the question MUST be asked, WHY are we out of step with the rest of the world? If that were the only tax, what happens in a down year if a small number of very high earners decide to leave the country (due to high taxes) and suddenly we have a shortfall of receipts? Then what?In the past, there is not GST but higher income tax % for the top-tier income. The top tier income tax had been reduced from 25% to 20% and hence there is a need for GST. So why you are saying as though no GST means got problem? Instead, shouldn't we ask why implement GST and reduce top tier income tax? :roll:
3Boys:
False.
How much does the g'ment give back in GST rebates?
How much healthcare subsidies are in place for lower income, funded from taxes (inclusing GST)?
How much school subsidies are funded from taxes (including GST)?
Do you not benefit from the defence umbrella funded by taxes (including GST)?
This whole falsehood about GST not benefiting the common Singaporean, wait till you don't have it, then you'll see.
Imagine a household with an annual income of 30,000 versus a household with an annual income of 300,000. Lets say the both spend every single dollar. The tax value of having spent $30,000 is approx $2100, whereas the tax value having spent $300,000 is approx $21,000.
If the government then returns GST rebates worth say $1500 (Cash/Medisave/U-Save) per eligible households (those with high value homes need not apply), then how much are they out of pocket?
http://www.gstvoucher.gov.sg/top-10-things-on-the-gst-voucher.html
If measures are put in place that the less well off are MORE THAN adequately compensated for the GST, what's the issue with having a GST?
I really don't understand your logic. -
WeiHan:
Err.....I've been saying all along that Sweden is different from Singapore, but you say they are the same (and the reasons I've raised you have conveniently ignored). No economist in their right minds would suggest that Singapore share the same economic model.
It appears that you are cherry picking certain numbers to make your point but avoid others which show the big picture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore
If our reference point is different, why would our interpretations be the same?
The point I make is that Sweden ALSO has a highish immigrant population. It's not as high as Singapore, but it is not 5%, or 8%, its almost 15%.
What is the right number for Singapore. I wouldn't be arrogant enough to suggest one, because its a complex issue with complex ramifications, and no, we are NOT Sweden.
How about Norway and Finland, since you accuse me of cherry picking..... -
3Boys:
The point is why don't Sweden resort to massive population import like Singapore if it is such an easy solution to stagnant growth and aging population. Like what you said, they have so much land. I am quite sure they won't have crowded issues like ours (which is one of the main complaint) if they use the same solution but yet they do not use it as a solution to such an extreme like us.
Err.....I've been saying all along that Sweden is different from Singapore, but you say they are the same (and the reasons I've raised you have conveniently ignored). No economist in their right minds would suggest that Singapore share the same economic model.WeiHan:
It appears that you are cherry picking certain numbers to make your point but avoid others which show the big picture.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Singapore
If our reference point is different, why would our interpretations be the same?
The point I make is that Sweden ALSO has a highish immigrant population. It's not as high as Singapore, but it is not 5%, or 8%, its almost 15%.
What is the right number for Singapore. I wouldn't be arrogant enough to suggest one, because its a complex issue with complex ramifications, and no, we are NOT Sweden.
How about Norway and Finland, since you accuse me of cherry picking.....
Finland and Norway, both don't use population increase to get an easy solution out of their slow growth.
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