Government determined to increase population to 7 mil in 2030.

(11-02-2013, 03:39 PM)VIChris Wrote:

(11-02-2013, 03:37 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Given the gov direction and perception, please do not ask your kids to be nurses, retail staffs or anything related to personal services.
Their wages will be depressed.

LOL! Thumb up!

fr tan kin lian
Is nursing a low skilled job?
The Government described nursing as a low skilled job in the Population White Paper and had to issue an apology to the nursing profession.

Even so, the manner of their apology was done in a clumsy way, with a statement from the Chief Nursing Officer. Why was she giving the apology on behalf of the Government, when she was probably not responsible for the bad statement?

http://www.tremeritus.com/2013/02/09/gov...ite-paper/

This is not just a careless mistake, as the problem is more deep rooted. In the mindset of the elitist leaders, there are people who are talents, and others who are non-talents; there are people who are low skilled and others who are high skilled.

When a leader has this kind of mindset, they are bound to offend other people who they deem as non-talents, low-skilled or "lesser mortals".

What kind of leaders do we have, that show bad example for others to follow?

A better approach is to show respect for all types of useful work, including nurses, cleaners, construction workers, bus drivers, taxi drivers, plumbers and others.

We also need to pay people adequately for their work, enough for them to afford the cost of housing and the cost of living, and to raise a family. And they should also enjoy decent terms of employment, without having to work long hours in the fear of losing their jobs.

We need a government comprising of leaders with the decency to treat other people with respect, dignity and fairness.

(12-02-2013, 09:31 AM)pianist Wrote:

(12-02-2013, 01:11 AM)sgd Wrote: investment angle maybe, I don't think malls and rental related to be good,
Most of these people comes here is to make money not spend money. A lot of my FT colleagues spend more than 3 years working here but they don't know how to go to many places they tend to keep to themselves and only venture up to around 10km radius of their home or workplace. Go to work, Go to temple, Go to market and go home. Things like clothing or footwear they will buy when they go back home for their vacation where it is cheaper.

Things like food, telephone transport no choice have to spend but whatever else they can save here goes back to their own country. There they will buy land for investment or build their dream home normally a huge bungalow which they intend to go back and stay in it one day usually that day is when their children here have completed education that will give them the good head start back in their own countries then they will sell everything here and try to get a transfer back.

agree..the most they will go is to flood the sentosa beach and enjoy the nice 'scenery'.
maybe we shld marry a ft partner, so when they move back to their own countries for retirement, we can be tagged along. is this a gd idea?

It's really not a far off or bad idea. i know an ex- working colleague (technician only) who married a Filipino and tell us of his plan to enjoy retirement life in his wife's country. i suppose he is enjoying his life in Philippine now.

Rasa hotel staffs need to stop the bangah from invading into the hotel beach.

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/7628/rasai.jpg

(12-02-2013, 01:11 AM)sgd Wrote: investment angle maybe, I don't think malls and rental related to be good,

Most of these people comes here is to make money not spend money. A lot of my FT colleagues spend more than 3 years working here but

they don't know how to go to many places they tend to keep to themselves and only venture up to around 10km radius of their home or workplace. Go to work, Go to temple, Go to market and go home. Things like clothing or footwear they will buy when they go back home for their vacation where it is cheaper.

Yes, this category of workers do nothing much for the economy of Singapore.

1. They dont spend much
2. They compare prices with prices back in home town
3. If they don't earn > $30,000 a year, they dont pay much income taxes.

The other group, they live and spend more... More the party lots.

(09-02-2013, 02:16 PM)zhangwuji Wrote:

(08-02-2013, 05:16 PM)specuvestor Wrote:

(08-02-2013, 12:25 PM)zhangwuji Wrote: Raising fertility is not a problem. Some European countries have successfully done it before. I don't think our multi-million dollar salaried ministers are not capable of solving the problem. The problem is that the PAP gov is only interested in raising their vote count. Do you think they really care about fertility rate?

Can you please quote some examples of European countries increasing TFR without immigration? Some TFR increased I think is because the immigrants were more "productive". This has created massive social problems from UK to France to Denmark.

If you got an elegant solution, I think a lot of developed countries would like to do it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/opinio....html?_r=0

Another economist playing with numbers. The racial and social issues are well known. If Singapore wants to increase our TFR artificially we could import certain groups of "productive" people and convert them to Singaporeans. This is not meant to be racist, but meant to belittle people who look at numbers without knowing what the numbers encompasses:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_France
See also the EU immigration comparison within

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Sweden

An obvious right wing post talking about real perceived social problem, which is not uncommon in developed nations, as a lot of Arabic and Indians immigrate:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/report...ulati.html

The basic issue is how to maintain a Singaporean core and PURELY replace the ageing work force. These should be the 2 main issues to resolve. If we disregard any of these ie changing to a cosmopolitan with no allegiance or force GDP growth by quantity, then the short term solution is simple

There are pseudo solutions and there are credible solutions that looks at the bigger picture. I could easily suggest annexing Johore and put our old people at the front line. Solve 2 problems at one go. But its a lousy suggestion with disregard to the larger picture, just like encouraging single parenthood or making abortion illegal.

(12-02-2013, 05:41 PM)specuvestor Wrote:

(09-02-2013, 02:16 PM)zhangwuji Wrote:

(08-02-2013, 12:25 PM)zhangwuji Wrote: Raising fertility is not a problem. Some European countries have successfully done it before. I don't think our multi-million dollar salaried ministers are not capable of solving the problem. The problem is that the PAP gov is only interested in raising their vote count. Do you think they really care about fertility rate?

Can you please quote some examples of European countries increasing TFR without immigration? Some TFR increased I think is because the immigrants were more "productive". This has created massive social problems from UK to France to Denmark.

If you got an elegant solution, I think a lot of developed countries would like to do it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/opinio....html?_r=0


Another economist playing with numbers. The racial and social issues are well known. If Singapore wants to increase our TFR artificially we could import certain groups of "productive" people and convert them to Singaporeans. This is not meant to be racist, but meant to belittle people who look at numbers without knowing what the numbers represent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_France
See also the EU immigration comparison within

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Sweden

An obvious right wing post talking about real perceived social problem, which is not uncommon in developed nations:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/05/report...ulati.html

The basic issue is how to maintain a Singaporean core and replace the ageing work force. These should be the 2 main issues to resolve. If we disregard any of these ie changing to a cosmopolitan with no allegiance or force GDP growth by quantity, then the short term solution is simple

There are pseudo solutions and there are credible solutions that looks at the bigger picture. I could easily suggest annexing Johore and put our old people at the front line. Solve 2 problems at one go. But its a lousy suggestion with disregard to the larger picture.

No, I think the main issue to resolve is how to raise the TFR. If you can raise TFR those two issues of yours will not be issues.

I don't think you understand what I'm driving at. You massively import foreigners into Singapore citizens who are productive and your TFR will go up. Making abortion illegal will also drive up TFR. But question is whether they achieve social goals, rather than make it a simple numbers game.

(12-02-2013, 06:10 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I don't think you understand what I'm driving at. You massively import foreigners into Singapore citizens who are productive and your TFR will go up. Making abortion illegal will also drive up TFR. But question is whether they achieve social goals, rather than make it a simple numbers game.

Massively import foreigners into citizens will destroy the singapore core and a contradiction to one of the issue you highlighted.

(12-02-2013, 06:26 PM)kichialo Wrote:

(12-02-2013, 06:10 PM)specuvestor Wrote: I don't think you understand what I'm driving at. You massively import foreigners into Singapore citizens who are productive and your TFR will go up. Making abortion illegal will also drive up TFR. But question is whether they achieve social goals, rather than make it a simple numbers game.

Massively import foreigners into citizens will destroy the singapore core and a contradiction to one of the issue you highlighted.

Ya so the second derivatives of raising TFR due to these foreigners" import is not desirable. You are looking at foreigners' citizenship and TFR as 2 separate issues when they are correlated as other countries' experiences demonstrate, ie these foreigners turned citizens are the greatest contributor to the rise in TFR over time, roughly 10% of citizen population but 1/3 of new births.

> No, I think the main issue to resolve is how to raise the TFR. If you can raise TFR those two issues of yours will not be issues

I believe if TFR goes up, they will still import more foreigners. Because they want an economy to grow as big as possible, so that there is a huge base of tax revenues to support social needs, and this will anchor people to singapore, and never want to move elsewhere...