Population woes
-
I find the argument that foreign investments will move out if we dun allow FT deeply flawed. Other than the minority of the FTs that have skills and qualifications that SCs don’t have, for the majority of these FTs, what skills or experience do they have that SCs don’t? And these are definitely jobs that SCs want to do. If the foreign investors are here because they want these FT workers, why dun they just invest in these countries directly, with a running cost of less than half of SG? I find that SC think too little of ourselves. We have an edge over these countries, eg good infrastructure, honest and efficient workforce, and a clean and efficient gov. So what is the deciding factor that caused these differences? SC! In the past, FTs are the minority in the workforce, therefore the work ethics and culture is defined by the SCs, and the FTs have no choice but to integrate. However, with the workforce at almost 50% FTs now, and >50% in the near future if we really go to 6 mil people, the FTs will not integrate. Instead they have brought they work culture and ethics over. I have shared in another thread that it has affected the reputation of SG in my industry in another thread. If this goes on, I really worry abt the future of SG. Even the stat board that i am in currently is 50% FTs. The foreign investors may move out of SG soon, not because they are unable to hire FTs, but they would realize that the quality of work and service that they are getting is the same as the country of origins of these fts. So might as well move over there with a fraction of operating cost!
-
What low birth rates mean for Singapore
Published on Oct 10, 2012
The Straits Times
If Singapore does not raise its birth rate, the number of grandchildren of today's generation will shrink by two-thirds - and will still have to support their parents and grandparents.
Apart from the increased burden tomorrow's generations will face, the shrinking citizen population will also mean a shrinking local workforce. So, while efforts are being made to get more Singaporeans to reproduce, immigrants are needed fill the gap to maintain the Singapore core.
This is the crux of the nation's population challenge as laid out by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean in a speech that was delivered at the start of last night's forum, but also appeared to wrap up a debate that has dominated dialogues in past months.
In a speech to about 220 participants, he painted a stark picture of what could happen.
\"If our birth rates stay at 1.2, and we don't have immigration, our citizen population will start to decline from 2025,\" he said. \"With all of us doing our part, I hope our birth rate can increase... maybe, at least, to 1.4 or 1.5,\" he added, noting that Singapore had such rates just 10 or so years ago.
\"Of course, I think it would be very good if our birth rate was higher than 1.5, but it will take time to change this, and we will need a really huge effort. But I hope one day, we will get there.\"
The minister in charge of population matters said the Government would do its part to encourage Singaporeans to get married and have more children. These included pro-marriage and parenthood policies and measures, which he said the Government is looking at enhancing.
But Mr Teo also stressed the need for society to enhance a family-friendly culture. \"We have to strive to create a supportive and conducive environment for raising children, and we hope couples will make the decision to start a family, even if circumstances don't quite fit their expectations completely or perfectly.\"
At the same time, he highlighted the need for some 20,000 new immigrants a year to keep the citizen population stable.
Many will come from marriages between Singaporeans and foreign spouses - which accounted for four in 10 marriages last year, or 9,000 marriages - and others, adults in their prime working years and families.
\"We select those who are able to contribute to Singapore, and to integrate into our society,\" said Mr Teo, even as he acknowledged that many Singaporeans were worried about integrating them into society here.
But he expressed confidence that this would happen over time in an immigrant society known for turning diversity into strength. \"We are united, not by where we are born, but by the values we live by and a common desire to want to make Singapore, our home, better.\"
JANICE HENG -
I am really perplexd by this so called 2.1 birth rate that the govt has been advocating all these years. Singapore will never have this birth rate of 2.1 and not even anything close. We are already a developed country. Look at all the other developed countries in Asia such as Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc. Their birth rates are not close to 2.1. So what I see is, this is an impossible task and someone out there has been using this excuse to further their whatsoever objectives and trying to \"educate\" people. This is just like asking my ds to get full marks in all four subjects including HCL!
Our productivity is declining and this is a FACT! As long as there are ample cheap labours, whether FWs or FTs (PMET), employers will not make an effort to increase productivity. From what I see, Singagpore has moved a few steps backward. When I see some FWs idling around doing jobs that can be done by fewer workers, I can't help but shake my head in disbelief. When can we achieve the level of productivity such as in Japan (eg.retail), not sure if I can see it in my life time from the way we go.
So what is this Magic number? For now it's 6m, so what is next? 7m? 8m? There will be no end to this, all these really make me depressed, thinking of the next generation and my ds.... :gloomy:
The FTs now is different from the FTs whom I encountered 10yrs ago. Back then, these ppl came to Singapore at the request of the company (HQ) to transfer their skills and expertises to locals and will eventually leave Sin in good hands of locals.
What I see now is Greed, greed of \"money never enough\", for who? for those SMEs employers and big corporations and shareholders. This is a vicious cycle. Period. -
Mamago
Like I mentioned previously, I am not saying we should not allow FTs at all. I really hate it when the gov put forth their argument like it is all or none. We should have immigrants to make up the shortfall in birthdate, that’s it. Not to grow the population by >1 million in 5 years. That is way above the replacement rate for birth. And because of the sudden increase, we are having all the associated problem mentioned. And not to mention the CMI quality of a lot of the recent FTs due to the lax selection criteria to make up the huge numbers. -
limlim:
This such a self contradicting and befuddling statement. So overcrowding by other Singaporeans is ok?Anyway, I'm not interested in debating the need for FTs..
It's not about FTs.. it's about overcrowding.. -
Dora1:
So, what is the optimal population size for Singapore, in your view.Mamago
Like I mentioned previously, I am not saying we should not allow FTs at all. I really hate it when the gov put forth their argument like it is all or none. We should have immigrants to make up the shortfall in birthdate, that's it. Not to grow the population by >1 million in 5 years. That is way above the replacement rate for birth. And because of the sudden increase, we are having all the associated problem mentioned. And not to mention the CMI quality of a lot of the recent FTs due to the lax selection criteria to make up the huge numbers. -
3Boys:
That is the million question that should be determined by the world highest paid ministers, who also have access to all the data and consultants and sociologists, economists and whoever else that it takes to obtain this data. if i, a layman, can come up with the number, what are the million dollar ministers and the very expensive senior civil servants for? i don't think there is a fixed number and it should be evaluated periodically. And this review cannot be based only on GDP and economics numbers. Sociologists should be consulted and people's feelings should be considered. Frankly speaking, the recent gov policies are all geared towards numbers, GDP, etc. but is that what the general population want?
So, what is the optimal population size for Singapore, in your view.Dora1:
Mamago
Like I mentioned previously, I am not saying we should not allow FTs at all. I really hate it when the gov put forth their argument like it is all or none. We should have immigrants to make up the shortfall in birthdate, that's it. Not to grow the population by >1 million in 5 years. That is way above the replacement rate for birth. And because of the sudden increase, we are having all the associated problem mentioned. And not to mention the CMI quality of a lot of the recent FTs due to the lax selection criteria to make up the huge numbers.
Maybe we should have a national poll on what population size we want, with the projected economic trade offs highlighted. Let the people decide. Don't assume that everyone wants to grow the economy at all costs.
Seriously, do you feel that the recent influx is completely acceptable? -
Dora1:
That is the million question that should be determined by the world highest paid ministers, who also have access to all the data and consultants and sociologists, economists and whoever else that it takes to obtain this data.i don't think there is a fixed number and it should be evaluated periodically. And this review cannot be based only on GDP and economics numbers. Sociologists should be consulted and people's feelings should be considered. Frankly speaking, the recent gov policies are all geared towards numbers, GDP, etc. but is that what the general population want?
So, what is the optimal population size for Singapore, in your view.3Boys:
[quote=\"Dora1\"]Mamago
Like I mentioned previously, I am not saying we should not allow FTs at all. I really hate it when the gov put forth their argument like it is all or none. We should have immigrants to make up the shortfall in birthdate, that's it. Not to grow the population by >1 million in 5 years. That is way above the replacement rate for birth. And because of the sudden increase, we are having all the associated problem mentioned. And not to mention the CMI quality of a lot of the recent FTs due to the lax selection criteria to make up the huge numbers.
Maybe we should have a national poll on what population size we want, with the projected economic trade offs highlighted. Let the people decide. Don't assume that everyone wants to grow the economy at all costs.
Seriously, do you feel that the recent influx is completely acceptable?[/quote]Well, you just contradicted yourself in this post. You say the figure should be determined by the ministers who are paid millions, and then you say that you should let the people decide. What if the people and the ministers disagree?
Truth is, you ask 10 different 'people' you will get 5 different answers.
Easy to complain, much harder to actually figure if something is actually valid to complain about.
Which is why I am not a fan of armchair policy making.
To your last question, my answer is 'somewhat yes'. But that's me, a small minority. -
Nope, what I’m advocating is for the million dollar ministers and the expensive senior servants to come up with a few population range with the corresponding trade offs. E.g, if 4 million, what is the pros and cons, 5 million, 6 million. The research and calculations should be published and allowed for public audit and scrutiny by any indrpendent experts. And then let the people vote, I mean all the SCs like a GE. Yes, different people will give different answers, but the majority should win.
Arm chair critique, that’s what the majority of the population is capable of. are you suggesting we should all just shut up? There had been a few very good alternative suggestions by some experts, eg A/p Pauline. But seems to be so far selective listening has been adopted by those in the ivory tower. -
Dora1:
Nope, what I'm advocating is for the million dollar ministers and the expensive senior servants to come up with a few population range with the corresponding trade offs. E.g, if 4 million, what is the pros and cons, 5 million, 6 million. The research and calculations should be published and allowed for public audit and scrutiny by any indrpendent experts. And then let the people vote, I mean all the SCs like a GE. Yes, different people will give different answers, but the majority should win.
Arm chair critique, that's what the majority of the population is capable of. are you suggesting we should all just shut up? There had been a few very good alternative suggestions by some experts, eg A/p Pauline. But seems to be so far selective listening has been adopted by those in the ivory tower.
You are essentially asking everyone to be part of the government? This mean everybody has a say in any major gov policy... You know how great the price this nation has to pay?
No government in the world have done that, not in the history and civilization of mankind.... there must be a reason.
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