Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?
-
WeiHan:
the most puzzling part is that using population increase to achieve growth has already been a strategy for the past 15 years, and so, why is there a need to a White Paper? Aren't they just continuing with an old idea?
Because they are shifting to a strategy to slow down the population increase, which is likely to result in lower growth in the future. This is a new idea, so they don't want Singaporeans to kpkb if they do as you guys want and the slower growth results in fewer good jobs for those aspiring to be PMETs - which is what 'slower growth' usually means. -
WeiHan:
Definitely.sunflower:
I feel that we should not possess only one-way-track thinking that increasing population is the ONLY way to achieve desired growth. With re-structuring, re-engineering, creative innovations etc, who knows, (and may Singapore be the first to be able to prove it), we may be able to overcome the problem of population dilemma after all!
There must be a different way. It probably needs a totally different minset to think of it. The Govt more than others must be desparate to find solutions too. Till then what? We dont plan, we dont have a road map? We dont prepare ?
Growing through innovation and increased productivity isn't a new idea. Easy way out by increasing population isn't something new and creative too.
S. Korea with one of the world lowest fertility rate and the fastest aging population did not succumb to using wanton immigration policy to\"bypass\" their problem. In their version of \"population white paper\" , immigrants will only constitute 6% of their population by 2030 compare to 2% presently.
Wow! that is a 3 fold increase from the current immigration population !
And that doesnt strike you ?
They too have business lobby pressurising their government to open the floodgate for cheaper labors but their government is sensible enough not to betray the majority by pleasing minority elites. Instead, they ambarking on a path of innovation and increase productivity with minimal augmentation from carefully selected immigrants.
http://singaporemind.blogspot.sg/2013/02/s-korea-growing-economy-through.html -
WeiHan:
Some neighbors have been contemplating different ways to skin a cat......Mdm Koh:
Brunei has oil, though. Singapore doesn't have any natural resources.
I agree. Brunei has oil and that makes it an attractive and extremely lucrative target. Singapore has nothing except skyscrapers and if the aggressor shell bomb all skyscrapers down, they will have nothing but a big ruin to clear. -
WeiHan:
Yah lor hor, I bet Singaporeans are more interested in movements in lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) than they are about future crowding in our own country!
Pink dot is probably 15,000.sleepy:
Just realized today's turn up at hong lim is fewer than pink dot event
http://pinkdot.sg/more-than-15000-singaporeans-at-pink-dot-2012/ -
well, we're certainly not alone... so deja vu...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2247258/Immigration-Labours-unforgivable-betrayal-British-people.html
[quote]The 2011 census figures for England and Wales broadly confirm what we already knew. Since the previous census in 2001 there was an unprecedented surge in the number of immigrants coming to this country.
Nearly four million arrived in a very short space of time. There are now 7.5 million people living in England and Wales who were born abroad. In London, the transformation has been so rapid that less than half the population now describe themselves as white British.
This is the way I see it. We supposedly live in a democracy. That means we should have a say in the way our country develops. Of course, we are not all going to agree. But, in fact, immigration is one area in which most people do see eye to eye. They are in favour of it, but want it to be controlled.[/quote] -
pirate:
WeiHan:
the most puzzling part is that using population increase to achieve growth has already been a strategy for the past 15 years, and so, why is there a need to a White Paper? Aren't they just continuing with an old idea?
Because they are shifting to a strategy to slow down the population increase, which is likely to result in lower growth in the future. This is a new idea, so they don't want Singaporeans to kpkb if they do as you guys want and the slower growth results in fewer good jobs for those aspiring to be PMETs - which is what 'slower growth' usually means.
Haha, this pirate has sailed the seven seas!
We have to be careful of what we wish for. -
\"When it comes to what qualities immigrants should have to be considered Singaporean, 69% of Singapore-born citizens said they should send their male children to serve NS.
However, only 43% of foreign-born citizens thought so.\"
:rotflmao: :rotflmao: Singaporeans ask for it! Foreigners didn't! -
A friend of mine, Singaporean, hated NS. Hated how people say it is for good of the nation, hated how it slowed him down in his advancement in education, hated how people like to say how NS makes "boys to men" (incidentally, he’s an ardent PAP supporter, but this isn’t my main point).
He did not think NS should be compulsory, and wished that his children need not do NS. Looking at his FB, I realized that his wish had been granted - he has 2 girls, no boys, and have no plans to have more children. Interesting. -
Sun_2010:
Oh no, no…of course we need to plan and prepare. We can’t wait for solutions to manifest themselves. We need, however, to PURSUE the solutions with the right motive. It seems to me though, that the brainstorming might have been constrained or limited.
Definitely.sunflower:
I feel that we should not possess only one-way-track thinking that increasing population is the ONLY way to achieve desired growth. With re-structuring, re-engineering, creative innovations etc, who knows, (and may Singapore be the first to be able to prove it), we may be able to overcome the problem of population dilemma after all!
There must be a different way. It probably needs a totally different minset to think of it. The Govt more than others must be desparate to find solutions too. Till then what? We dont plan, we dont have a road map? We dont prepare ?
Hmmm… how should I put it, let’s just say that I did not have the impression that exhaustive and thorough thought process had gone into producing the White Paper. -
pirate:
There is no evidence that the liberal population of the past 15 years have gave SCs more PMET jobs. In fact, wages were depressed because of foreign workers. Structural unemployment in the PMET section remains unsolved due to cheap PMET foreign workers displacing those above 40s. What you say is almost like pouring milk into a upside down cup.WeiHan:
the most puzzling part is that using population increase to achieve growth has already been a strategy for the past 15 years, and so, why is there a need to a White Paper? Aren't they just continuing with an old idea?
Because they are shifting to a strategy to slow down the population increase, which is likely to result in lower growth in the future. This is a new idea, so they don't want Singaporeans to kpkb if they do as you guys want and the slower growth results in fewer good jobs for those aspiring to be PMETs - which is what 'slower growth' usually means.
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