Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[toddles]

pirate:

raysusan:

This \"letter\" is making the rounds in some forum, purportedly written by a grassroots leader.


http://therealsingapore.com/content/letter-grassroots-leader-pm

very interesting letter
[We are not sure of its authenticity. Read it and judge for yourself:]

What can I say? Doesn't 'smell' right.

yeah this is going viral. whilst it might not be completely authentic, it doesn't detract from the fact that there are many good points being made there.

[toddles]

I thought this was interesting too.


http://www.todayonline.com/commentary/mind-short-term-trade-offs

Given the record to date, it is natural to be concerned about whether productivity gains can be raised to the level required, and how soon this could occur. Since the computation is done on a per worker basis, would curbing reliance on foreign manpower produce the gains required — or are there other conditions as well? How soon will the improvements be manifested?

If we use real output per worker as the measure of labour productivity, then Singapore’s growth performance deteriorated significantly after 2005. Using the World Bank’s World Development Indicators (WDI) database, among the 121 countries for which data is available, Singapore’s ranking plunged from 15th in the 2001 to 2005 period to 85th in 2005 to 2011.

In terms of number of places dropped, we were only outdone (or under-performed!) by Bahrain (which dropped 76 places), Iceland (77) and Kuwait (82). Interestingly, all are also high income countries. In addition, Kuwait and Bahrain also have high rates of dependence on foreign manpower.

While Iceland did not have the same extent of dependence on foreign manpower, its rate of immigration in the period 2005 to 2010 was one of the highest in the world. Yet, even if we consider only high income countries, our ranking in terms of productivity gains dropped from second to 21st out of 44 countries between the same two periods (2001 to 2005 versus 2005 to 2011).

[JannettLee]

pirate:

JannettLee:

How many people who are entertained to this GST vouchers let alone bigger GST vouchers?


I should not be the one who provide solution for them tackle this problem.

If those who are drawing million dollars of salaries can't really came out with the solution, they can make reference to those western countries such as waiving GST for those basic food, necessitates, medical expenses and children products for Singapore citizen - a scheme for Singapore citizen to claim back GST.

Nah, exempt this or exempt that for this but not that buyer is administratively cumbersome. How to exempt brand X stroller costing $200 but not brand Y stroller costing $800? UK had good fun over whether certain pastry falls under exempt food or non-exempt baked products. Is a $10,000 rare first edition technically a \"book\" and hence exempt from VAT? GST vouchers are much more straightforward.

But in the end it's a judgment call. I have no doubt those drawing million dollars of salaries have already looked at and considered it.

You should just take an average of low and medium range but not high range la. Those high range are considered luxury. Anyway, they can work out a figure for each category for basic food & necessitates, medical expenses (of course only for the sick) and children products (only for children). They should not go into detail which one can claim and which one cannot claim. Only those SG citizen (children, SAHW, retires, sick but unemployed) can claim the GST (dependent on which category) from them.

[JannettLee]

pirate:

3Boys:

I would agree we have underinvested significantly in healthcare. But then, all countries struggle with the issue of healthcare funding. Is there a benchmark? I suppose we can use a few, but in my view, an outcomes benchmark is more important than a spending benchmark.

Yes! A spending benchmark is putting the cart before the horse.

I wish they would have thought about it 2 decade ago.
Again, this is their oversight!

[JannettLee]

3Boys:

From Vivian Balakrishnan....


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10151186762841207&set=a.10150136201901207.284720.30332546206&type=1&theater

Political suicide vs Demographic extinction.

I would prefer to have a smaller population of foreigners in our Singapore but ......

We are facing the crisis of our lifetime. Our citizen population will halve every two generations. But that is a 'long' term problem. The real emergency is not babies, but ageing. That is why the population will increase in the short term before the inevitable decrease in the long term.

We are one of the fastest ageing nations in the world. By 2030, the number of senior citizens older than 65 years will triple to 900,000. Who will look after us? Today, we have almost six working-age citizens for every senior. In 2030, we will only have two. Even if we suddenly have an epidemic of babies now, they will only be 17 years old in 2030. Hence, we will need some kind of 'top up' over the next two decades - foreigners to work with us, care for us, pay taxes and to help create opportunities. Actually even 1M extra foreigners will still mean far less young people supporting seniors than today. However, I believe we must learn to do more with less. Actually, I hope we will need fewer foreigners. Only time will tell. In the meantime, it is essential that we start building ahead of demand and re-organise ourselves to ensure that our quality of life is enhanced and our children continue to have even more opportunities in a vibrant Singapore.

Our main focus must be the hopes, dreams and fears of our current 3.2 M Singapore citizens and our future children. Everyone and everything else is secondary.

The headline numbers and the speed of change are scary - but we must keep our cool and decide confidently as one people on our future destiny regardless of politics. That is why the government is taking such a big political risk in publishing http://population.sg/

BTW, I found this lecture by Prof Hans Rosling fascinating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Vog3uZ47O8 — with Vivian Balakrishnan.

Alamak! The highlighted parts expressed with very little enthusiasm or conviction. Cannot leave it to time la. Must plan ahead and have conviction.

[JannettLee]

Irrelevant:

WeiHan:

Did I just use developed countries as a benchmark? I showed a table which shows the data for all countries. Singapore ranks among the last even when comparing with developing countries and many oppressive regimes. It reflects badly about how this gov treats its citizens.


As for defense spending, I provided a list of data and nothing more need to be argued. Singapore spending on defense is almost 4% of GDP. To put it perspective, a few countries in war mode spend less than 3% on their defense (Taiwan, South Korea).

Of course you didn't. However, so far you are too shy to disclose the amount you have in mind and so I'm still waiting for your answer. I have it on good authority (from several doctor friends) that our healthcare system works and at a reasonable cost, compared to UK, US, Canada, etc. Can we improve further? Of course. I believe we can probably spend up to another 3-5 billion (1 to 1.5% of GDP) in healthcare annually without affecting our financial position significantly.

As for defence, I will not begrudge Mindef over their budget. Based on what I can see, our men in green are reasonably cost conscious. I certainly wouldn't want the lives of my loved ones to be imperiled in the battlefield, just because someone randomly decides that maybe we should spend less and end up with inferior equipment or a less than ready armed forces.

To me, Huge defence spending is completely wasting money! Even South Korea is spending lesser money per soldier than us. They should cut defence to very minimum.

[3Boys]

JannettLee:

pirate:

[quote=\"3Boys\"]I would agree we have underinvested significantly in healthcare. But then, all countries struggle with the issue of healthcare funding. Is there a benchmark? I suppose we can use a few, but in my view, an outcomes benchmark is more important than a spending benchmark.

Yes! A spending benchmark is putting the cart before the horse.

I wish they would have thought about it 2 decade ago.
Again, this is their oversight![/quote] :? :?

On a global scale, health outcomes in Singapore are pretty good.

What oversight are you talking about?

No, don't answer, I'm not getting into another merry-go-round with you....

[3Boys]

JannettLee:

To me, Defence spending is completely wasting money! Even South Korea is spending lesser money per soldier than us. They should cut defence to very minimum.

Oh someone please help this lady!! :faint:

Next thing she'll say we abolish NS completely......

[JannettLee]

3Boys:

JannettLee:

To me, Defence spending is completely wasting money! Even South Korea is spending lesser money per soldier than us. They should cut defence to very minimum.

Oh someone please help this lady!! :faint:

Next thing she'll say we abolish NS completely......

Sorry hor, I didn't ask to abolish NS completely but asked to cut defense budget to very minimum.

Why spend so much money? we are not going for war, even if we do, you thought we can win the war ?

[Iluvmygals]

JannettLee:

3Boys:

[quote=\"JannettLee\"]
To me, Defence spending is completely wasting money! Even South Korea is spending lesser money per soldier than us. They should cut defence to very minimum.

Oh someone please help this lady!! :faint:

Next thing she'll say we abolish NS completely......

Sorry hor, I didn't ask to abolish NS completely but asked to cut defense budget to very minimum.

Why spend so much money? we are not going for war, even if we do, you thought we can win the war ?[/quote]With this kind of thinking.....no need to even spend on defence...why do minimum.....just spend zero lah....