S’pore is now richest in the world

(16-08-2012, 10:15 AM)yeokiwi Wrote: Lots of FTs in the following industries.

Semiconductor industry. (electronics engineers)
Construction. (civil engineers)
Shipyards and oilrigs. (mechanical engineers)
Hospitals.(nurses)

And they are doing useful works that are shunned by locals.

F&B Sector
Hospitality Sector (hotels)

Personally, without many of them, the cost for these industries would increase a significant amount as many of these comapnies are experiencing difficulty in hiring SIngaporeans due to the job perception of them being tough as well as irregular hours and lower pay as compared to the office and clerical works.
This would mean higher costs for many firms operating in these industries.

(16-08-2012, 01:51 PM)CY09 Wrote:

(16-08-2012, 10:15 AM)yeokiwi Wrote: Lots of FTs in the following industries.

Semiconductor industry. (electronics engineers)
Construction. (civil engineers)
Shipyards and oilrigs. (mechanical engineers)
Hospitals.(nurses)

And they are doing useful works that are shunned by locals.

F&B Sector
Hospitality Sector (hotels)

Personally, without many of them, the cost for these industries would increase a significant amount as many of these comapnies are experiencing difficulty in hiring SIngaporeans due to the job perception of them being tough as well as irregular hours and lower pay as compared to the office and clerical works.
This would mean higher costs for many firms operating in these industries.

Ya lol! Even Euro with quite lot of guest workers is almost bankrupt now. If we don't have FTs, most probably we are more bankrupt than Euro. But is your living getting better and better or worse and worse.
If it's getting worse (compare to your fathers's) then what?
Is half a loaf better than none?

Low birthrate is caused by PAP. Recall in the 70's they advertised "Two is enough" so a whole generation of kids grew up with this thinking that government cannot feed people in singapore so people are reluctant to marry. So how can blame singaporeans?

FT is here only to help singapore government PAP. For singaporean like me no benefit. FT works here get high pay contribute to CPF, CPF board has money to buy singapore government issued bonds. More and more FT works here means more and more CPF account to open means government have endless supply of money to tap from CPF. Note that if FT leave their CPF is usually withheld from them unless they dun want to return to singapore forever than bo pian L L have to give them.

Many of our FT do take their CPF and leave here for good (after accumulating enough $$$). I remembered from some documentary on foreign workers. The pay here as a worker is much higher than being a public servant at bangledish. It is similar to many of the mid-high FT as well who seek to work in SG because our country wages are higher relative to other areas.

But to many Singaporeans, I believe the issue is not the presence of lower skilled workers working because they are doing the "unwanted jobs" for us. The citizens are more worried of the self-serving interest of why are there FTs competing at the higher value-added end as well as trying not to have migrant workers being so visible in the public domains of the citizen's life ( the recent example of Serangoon Garden resident's against the building of a foreign worker domitory). FYI if you are wondering where many of these foreign worker's domitory are; one of these places is along Lim Chu Kang Road besides the Chinese and Muslim Cemetery.

As for temperament questions, I cant really answer it as I am still a student whose living expenses are covered by my parents

(16-08-2012, 03:25 PM)Temperament Wrote: Ya lol! Even Euro with quite lot of guest workers is almost bankrupt now. If we don't have FTs, most probably we are more bankrupt than Euro. But is your living getting better and better or worse and worse.
If it's getting worse (compare to your fathers's) then what?
Is half a loaf better than none?

I would think that Singaporeans' expectation is higher and most Singaporeans are more self-centred.
Having kids will derail their careers and take up their precious time.
But, when they are asked, the fingers will point to government.
It's simply too hard to admit that you are selfish.

(16-08-2012, 04:21 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: I would think that Singaporeans' expectation is higher and most Singaporeans are more self-centred.
Having kids will derail their careers and take up their precious time.
But, when they are asked, the fingers will point to government.
It's simply too hard to admit that you are selfish.

I fully agree with what you say as I have the same conclusion...

Having kids means a lot of sacrifice... not just money but time and freedom to do what you want and as and when you want... makes your life a lot more interesting (stressful to those who doesn't enjoy it) as a lot of problems can happen and many of which are not within your control...Only benefits is intangible in nature and hard to explain to those who chose not to follow the proper course of nature.. Haha..

(16-08-2012, 03:53 PM)sgd Wrote: Low birthrate is caused by PAP. Recall in the 70's they advertised "Two is enough" so a whole generation of kids grew up with this thinking that government cannot feed people in singapore so people are reluctant to marry. So how can blame singaporeans?

Perhaps in perpetuity as HDB still build 3-bedroom flats?

> Difficult to hire local

So hire 1500 china bus drivers? I actually spoke up in a MP dialogue session, and suggested that companies hire 40 to 65 years workers... provide them with daily 30 min exercise, improve their health, and hire them for F&B, bus drivers.

When the elderly workers have $, they wont ask for $. When the workers exercise everyday, they will fall sick less --> less spending on health... Went down to the drain of course.

Dialogue??? Conclusion already made... it's just steering people to the conclusion they want...

---

(16-08-2012, 04:34 PM)KopiKat Wrote:

(16-08-2012, 04:21 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: I would think that Singaporeans' expectation is higher and most Singaporeans are more self-centred.
Having kids will derail their careers and take up their precious time.
But, when they are asked, the fingers will point to government.
It's simply too hard to admit that you are selfish.

I fully agree with what you say as I have the same conclusion...

Having kids means a lot of sacrifice... not just money but time and freedom to do what you want and as and when you want... makes your life a lot more interesting (stressful to those who doesn't enjoy it) as a lot of problems can happen and many of which are not within your control...Only benefits is intangible in nature and hard to explain to those who chose not to follow the proper course of nature.. Haha..

Have u ever compared your parents to you as a parent, how much life has changed? 2 person work, vs 1 person work, what is the impact on the family size, quality of family life and divorce rates?

I am not convinced if the family with 2 full time couples working is most conducive for family happiness and more kids... In a football team, there is a striker and a defender. If there are 2 strikers, who take care of the back?

Building on this VB thread's theme, I just read the following piece on CNBC's website .............

++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Singapore: World’s Richest Country by 2050?
Published: Thursday, 16 Aug 2012 | 10:40 AM ET
By: Patrick Winn

If you enjoy peering inside the minds of the world's super rich, take a spin through the 2012 "Wealth Report." Compiled by Citibank, and a property consultancy called Knight Frank, it's a lengthy analysis based partly on interviews with the super rich. (Definition: people with more than $25 million in investable assets.)

Yes, the report contains musings on why yacht sales are down and the pros and cons of buying a sports franchise. But that's not the most interesting part. The study predicts that Singapore — that little Southeast Asian city-state with loads of Type A zeal — will be the world's richest nation by 2050.

And by that, they mean its per capita GDP at purchasing power parity (For those who skipped economics class, this attempts to more accurately measure the average income by considering inflation, cost of living and exchange rates). According to Citibank's 2050 prediction, the top five countries by this measure will be:

1. Singapore: $137,710
2. Hong Kong: $116,639
3. Taiwan: $114,093 (Congratuations, Taiwan, Citibank analysts think you'll make it 2050 without being consumed by China.)
4. South Korea: $107,752
And sliding in at number five, the only non-Asian nation, the U.S.: $100,802. But there are glaring questions about these numbers, which are based on Citibank's own analysis.

According to the report, Singapore is already the top GDP per capita champ with a figure of more than $56,000. But that doesn't account for tiny, oil-rich Qatar, which leads most rankings with an average of more than $92,000 according to the World Bank. And there's no mention of super-affluent Luxembourg either.

Regardless, Singapore is genuinely affluent and the report suggests why. In interviews with "high net-worth individuals" around the globe, the Wealth Report asked the super rich about their "favorite things." In response, Indians said cars and gadgets, Latin Americans said traveling and Africans said safaris.

The favored items of extremely wealthy Singaporeans? "Books and reading materials."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++

(16-08-2012, 09:11 PM)Contrarian Wrote: > Difficult to hire local

So hire 1500 china bus drivers? I actually spoke up in a MP dialogue session, and suggested that companies hire 40 to 65 years workers... provide them with daily 30 min exercise, improve their health, and hire them for F&B, bus drivers.

When the elderly workers have $, they wont ask for $. When the workers exercise everyday, they will fall sick less --> less spending on health... Went down to the drain of course.

Dialogue??? Conclusion already made... it's just steering people to the conclusion they want...

---

(16-08-2012, 04:34 PM)KopiKat Wrote:

(16-08-2012, 04:21 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: I would think that Singaporeans' expectation is higher and most Singaporeans are more self-centred.
Having kids will derail their careers and take up their precious time.
But, when they are asked, the fingers will point to government.
It's simply too hard to admit that you are selfish.

I fully agree with what you say as I have the same conclusion...

Having kids means a lot of sacrifice... not just money but time and freedom to do what you want and as and when you want... makes your life a lot more interesting (stressful to those who doesn't enjoy it) as a lot of problems can happen and many of which are not within your control...Only benefits is intangible in nature and hard to explain to those who chose not to follow the proper course of nature.. Haha..

Have u ever compared your parents to you as a parent, how much life has changed? 2 person work, vs 1 person work, what is the impact on the family size, quality of family life and divorce rates?

I am not convinced if the family with 2 full time couples working is most conducive for family happiness and more kids... In a football team, there is a striker and a defender. If there are 2 strikers, who take care of the back?

IMO, there're a lot of similarities between your two posts. To borrow a phrase from your posts, for both the politicians and DINKs (Double Income, No Kids),

Quote:Conclusion already made... it's just steering people to the conclusion they want...

I'm also not the right person to ask why you need 2 strikers for the following reasons,

1. We started out as a DINKs. We made the decision to have kids and less than a year after we had one, we were left with one striker. With less than half the original income, our lifestyle inevitably suffered. We cut down on restaurant dining, long haul holidays,... dreams of a bigger private property,... and many wants and prioritised on basic needs plus the occasional wants. No, we were definitely not less happy.... After a few more kids, we no longer have any striker... The kids helped us to re-focus on our priorities in life and we worked towards such goals with new found energies... The power of having kids!

2. It seems like I must have been less privileged than you when I was a kid. With a family size of 5-12 kids a norm during my parents' time, I do see many mothers (mine and my classmates' and neighbours') who need to work just to make ends meet. Jobs available to uneducated mothers back then were rather limited and many were washer-woman (wash clothes for others as no washing machines back then), seamstress (make clothes), maids (take care of kids or clean house), hawkers (sell food, snacks, vegetables,..). Only when Singapore started on it's Industrialisation, then we start having factory worker jobs for them. Subsequently, when the Hotels and F&B comes along, then jobs such as Chambermaids, Kitchen helpers,.. came along.

So, ask yourself, why on earth do you need 2 strikers? My parents' time, it was to help make ends meet for the less privileged as they have easily 5-12 kids to feed. Fast forward to now, would your lifestyle be any worse than your parents' time if you're privileged enough to be able to have only 1 striker, if you choose to have kids?? If not, why not have kids and make do with one striker??? The honest answer will lead you to the conclusion drawn by 'yeokiwi' and me on why many DINKs chose not to have kids...