Are you ready for 7 million people on tiny Singapore?

[pirate]

MR06:

You guys are fantastic! Come back from CNY break and the pages had doubled. :yikes:

Sorri lah. Cannot afford to go away for CNY... :siam:

[Harlequin]

pirate:

Sorri lah. Cannot afford to go away for CNY... :siam:

Ai yah, with data roaming to boost, you go away also no one notice lah, har? :evil:

[Just relax]

Funz:

limlim:

Maybe it will be better if they implement the policy with a corresponding decrease in COE issued.. at least there is some benefit of a reduce car population.

COE issued has been reducing.

I think the tightened loan requirements is a good move. With interest rates at all time low people who can barely afford cars are buying. Now with the loan restrictions those who can afford to buy will buy and those who cannot can rely on our public transport system. The number of taxis will be increased as well so those who require a car to travel around will have a greater number of taxis to use. This restriction on car loans is good and follows the restriction in home loans. The objective is to prevent prices from ever increasing both for houses and cars. the big difference though is that public housing is an asset that retains its value and in fact increases in value over the years but a car just continues to fall in value.

Cars are a luxury especially in Singapore where taxi fares are among the lowest in the developed countries and where the transport network will continue to expand. The number of COEs has also fallen so in the end only those who can really afford to pay all the various charges such as ERP, road tax, insurance, car park charges etc. should buy a depreciating asset that after 10 years has to be removed from the road unless the COE is extended.

[concern2]

Anyone seen this funny video? Checkout Thy Neighbours in Singapore:


http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=4553403749921&set=vb.1136226995&type=2&theater

[raysusan]

[quote]The signs of overcrowding and urban stress are palpable to any visitor. Prices are surging, public services in a nation famed for nanny-state tendencies are slipping and some of the finest infrastructure anywhere is buckling under the strain. Locals blame the influx of immigrants, which Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s ruling party touts as one key to Singapore’s success in the years to come.


The city-state, with about half the area of New York City, has 3.3 million citizens and 2 million foreign residents, many of whom have contributed greatly to Singapore’s growth in finance and construction. Yet complaints that overseas workers deprive locals of jobs and drive up housing prices fill the air. Singapore is the third-most-expensive Asian city and ranks as the sixth most costly in the world, according to an Economist Intelligence Unit ranking of 131 cities.



Sadly, some of the rants one reads in the media and online veer toward xenophobia. If Singaporeans are so livid, they should stop supporting Lee’s party. After all, isn’t the government, by seeking to import more human capital, telling its own people that they lack the skills to compete?




The human-pyramid scheme works like this: Population growth, either through births or immigration, boosts demand for goods and services, increases borrowing, boosts tax revenue and adds to corporate profits. Everything seems grand and leaders take a bow. It’s a bubble, though, and it eventually bursts when population growth stalls. Incomes top out, high debt crushes consumption and investment, the need for public assistance rises, environmental degradation increases and angry people take to the streets.[/quote]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-14/ponzi-schemes-built-on-people-always-crash-too.html

[3Boys]

pirate:

Mdm Koh:

Not necessarily, pirate. They can still hire foreign talent if the job requires relocation to countries that Singaporeans are unwilling to move to.


Anyway, I do have friends who travel frequently for work and know of families that have relocated to countries like China. Let's not assume that only foreigners are willing to travel or relocate. The companies just need to hire the right Singaporeans and offer the right benefits.

I never say all Singaporean PMEs unwilling. I am sure those who are willing to do so are highly capable, motivated and resilient.

I only say the PMEs back home should not be surprised if the head office/towkay drops the problem on their desks. Isn't figuring out how to improve productivity the PMEs' jobs?

Anyway, if any of our PMEs have to relocate to other countries, they are no longer locals. They become the FT... over there. Then they can enjoy competing over there on a \"level playing field\" with Malaysian, Indian and PRC FTs. :evil:

Exactly right! And the original post was made without even the slightest hint of irony.

It's ok for Singaporeans to be FTs elsewhere, but not ok for FTs from elsewhere to work in Singapore.......

[Mdm Koh]

3Boys:

pirate:

[quote=\"Mdm Koh\"]Not necessarily, pirate. They can still hire foreign talent if the job requires relocation to countries that Singaporeans are unwilling to move to.


Anyway, I do have friends who travel frequently for work and know of families that have relocated to countries like China. Let's not assume that only foreigners are willing to travel or relocate. The companies just need to hire the right Singaporeans and offer the right benefits.

I never say all Singaporean PMEs unwilling. I am sure those who are willing to do so are highly capable, motivated and resilient.

I only say the PMEs back home should not be surprised if the head office/towkay drops the problem on their desks. Isn't figuring out how to improve productivity the PMEs' jobs?

Anyway, if any of our PMEs have to relocate to other countries, they are no longer locals. They become the FT... over there. Then they can enjoy competing over there on a \"level playing field\" with Malaysian, Indian and PRC FTs. :evil:

Exactly right! And the original post was made without even the slightest hint of irony.

It's ok for Singaporeans to be FTs elsewhere, but not ok for FTs from elsewhere to work in Singapore.......[/quote]It is only ironic if you assume that every country is like Singapore.

Not every country is as heavily reliant on foreigners as we are. The point has already been made that Singaporeans are not against the hiring of foreigners, but many would like the practice to be better regulated. In short, it is \"ok\" to be an FT anywhere in the world, but companies that hire foreigners to cut costs at the expense of locals should be discouraged from doing so.

As our living standard is much higher than that in a country like the Philippines, it is difficult for Singaporeans to have low expected salaries. We will lose out if companies hire employees not based on merit, but based on who can offer the lowest expected salaries.

Don't tell me that cost isn't a consideration and that we are a meritocracy. That view is unrealistically optimistic. :boogie: Think back on your personal decisions and you will see that cost plays a huge part in decision-making. The problem is whether (in those industries that appeal to Singaporeans) it's justified to have a liberally large number of foreigners come to Singapore and accept comparatively lower salaries. This spoils the market.

When Singaporeans request for lower salaries to be more competitive, it may lead to other problems, such as not having enough spare cash to save, not being able to afford their children's higher education, etc.

[dorisp]

Say, a local company now hires 5 locals and 15 FTs.


Owing to request for lesser FTs, we raise levies for FTs hoping this will get more locals being hired. After a while, this company cannot afford the higher levy for FTs and also cannot afford locals with higher pay expectations.

This company may subsequently decide to relocate to another country where labour costs are lower or may decide to close down as they are no longer competitive owing to higher labour cost. Either way, all 5 locals and 15 FTs lose their jobs.

Is this a possible scenario or a totally unrealistic example?

:?

[Mdm Koh]

dorisp:

Say, a local company now hires 5 locals and 15 FTs.


Owing to request for lesser FTs, we raise levies for FTs hoping this will get more locals being hired. After a while, this company cannot afford the higher levy for FTs and also cannot afford locals with higher pay expectations.

This company may subsequently decide to relocate to another country where labour costs are lower or may decide to close down as they are no longer competitive owing to higher labour cost. Either way, all 5 locals and 15 FTs lose their jobs.

Is this a possible scenario or a totally unrealistic example?

:?

It is entirely possible. In fact, I am not sure how the increased levy helps. It may even lead to more companies hiring illegal workers. I do feel that there are some industries where foreigners are needed to fill the jobs. For example, the construction industry has a lot of jobs that locals would not find attractive. Perhaps a better option would be to design a more flexible system rather than implement a blanket policy.

[limlim]

dorisp:

Say, a local company now hires 5 locals and 15 FTs.


Owing to request for lesser FTs, we raise levies for FTs hoping this will get more locals being hired. After a while, this company cannot afford the higher levy for FTs and also cannot afford locals with higher pay expectations.

This company may subsequently decide to relocate to another country where labour costs are lower or may decide to close down as they are no longer competitive owing to higher labour cost. Either way, all 5 locals and 15 FTs lose their jobs.

Is this a possible scenario or a totally unrealistic example?

:?

If the company can go bust bcoz of the increase in levy, the company are probably not doing well in the first place and the locals in that company likely doesn't have good prospect anyway..

The 5 local could possibly find employment in another company that is doing well.. and 15 FTs leave the country, and maybe another 5FT replaced by this 5 locals whose coy go bust.

So total 20FTs less and less crowded by 20pax.. :evil:

Sounds not bad leh.......