Government determined to increase population to 7 mil in 2030.

[cif5000]

I don't know about politics and policies. But I know how a Ponzi scheme operates.

For a Ponzi scheme to continue, it has to attract more and more people into it. And at the same time, the people must be able to pay to join the scheme.

Businesses deliberate between organic growth and acquisition - which is cheaper and easier?

You can grow organic but if those you grow can't produce profits, why grow them?

[touzi]

Never forget how powerful the government is. Singapore may be a small country, but within it the government is all-powerful. When it gives excuses for why something cannot be done, it is simply saying that it does not want to do it badly enough.

Every solution comes with a price and not just financially. Frankly it is meaningless to propose solution without weighing the pros and cons. It is like those games organized by SGX, you "invest" without having to worry about real loss.

[safetyfirst]

WEIRD!!

The governent says the current population is ageing so got to increase population to say 6.5-7m in 2030.

Hmm, as time passes, the 7m population will eventually age. Is the solution going to be another influx of population growth so that we hit 10m in 2060?

We solve the problem of ageing pop by increasing the pop, this sounds retarded because the larger population will eventually age. I dont earn $1million a year but i can see that this solution of increasing the pop is not sustainable. In fact, i respect the japanese, they have learnt to live with it.

There may just be no solution to the ageing population, why not just learn to live with it.

Rapheal05 from channel news asia expressed it best
http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/showthr...art./page2

[arthur]

And when you extraplolate this to year 2080, NO native Singaporeans left behind? Is this what we want?

Think carefully exactly what you want...

Err..how did you extrapolate? I would think that if we succeed to bring the population to 6.9 Million by 2030 with the help of immigration, 50 years down the road we should have a strong core of at least second generation Singaporeans!

I am second generation Singaporean. I hope I qualify as a native Singaporean by your book.

You should try to extrapolate the other way - no immigration - and see where it leads to eventually. There are many investment experts here, so I am sure the power of compounding is well understood. This is like "reverse compounding".

BTW, having a 6.9 million population may also mean more political choices. Native Singaporeans' wish for a 2 party parliament may be fully realized with a bigger population. You know...WP and NSP dominating parliament. No more PAP by then.

I think I might need to clarify.
No I do not think having foreigners migrants is a big no-no.

Rather (you may choose to agree with me or not) we seek migrants who are:
1. Able to assimilate into our culture and way of lives.
2. Not selective using only ONE parent as citizen while the other as PR so as to take advantage of our subsidized housing for commoners.
3. Sending their sons off back to other countries when the call up age for NS is near, citing a lot of cock and bull stories. What's worse, the parents are still allowed to continue working here.
4. Capable in their fields and not because their kampong cousins are already managers here so it's a hiring through connection. The government has it's fair share to be blame on such easy hiring policies as well.

I am not against total blanket cut off of migrants. What is needed is a consultative, true consultative attitude of the government towards its electorate, us citizens.
I fully recognized the limits of our citizens birth ratio but as some forumers had pointed out, solving the declining ratio with a easy fix solution rather than encouraging local births rate through high subsidies is what the current government is doing.

End of the day, recognising a problem, facing the problem reality AND solving the problem are all VERY different sides of a coin.

I believe all of us here are smart people, else we won't be prodding into a forum looking for ways to increase our investment returns.
And we all definitely can recognize the existence of a declining birth ratio. It's the solution imposed that is very draconian and smack of no questions asked.

Anyway, this thread isn't the one that is blowing up with the 7mil pop criticism. Many more forums are having a field of a day today and probably the whole of this week.

Government has always view us as Internet warriors. End of day, we do provide a grassroot service feedback to government on their policies.

By the way, the first generation of new citizens may cast their gratitude votes to PAP, but the 2nd gen would definitely has same mindset as us currently.
In the end, we may end up having many more disgruntled voters and a top-heavy political party PAP without any knowledge how to solve issues because it's previous solution of continuation of political stranglehold and increasing GDP is smply importing migrants.

This is WHEN the leadership of the nation would be tested. And I can't see us escaping anymore the effects of migrants importation.

[Behappyalways]

read this with a little bit of imagination......

'I feel like a stranger where I live’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/i...-live.html


Sometimes when I am waiting at traffic lights to cross the road, I close my eyes and listen to people talking around me, and can imagine myself in a different country!
http://wp.sg/2013/01/23-jan-2013-punggol...ylvia-lim/

[yeokiwi]

In fact, i respect the japanese, they have learnt to live with it.

Technical perspective..

Although Japan is facing the same problem as Singapore, their problem cannot be resolved by immigrations unlike Singapore.
Cultural difference aside, the number of immigrants to top up Japan is huge. Just this year alone, in order to maintain the same population as last year, they will need 200k immigrants and the number will get bigger and bigger yearly. The scale is liken to importing all citizens of a small country to Japan in the next 10-20 years.

In Singapore context, 10-20k per year to top up population is still inherently possible.

So, essentially, from the point of cultural difference and technical difficulty, immigration is not a solution for japan.

[LionFlyer]

In Singapore context, 10-20k per year to top up population is still inherently possible.

But is it just 10 - 20k per year to top up? If it's 10k per year, it is just another 100k in 10 years. We are looking at around 10x that number per year if we are to hit 6.9 million by 2030.

[HitandRun]

Before anyone starts shooting from the hip, allow me to summarise the figures:

Figures in thousands

In 2012
Total Population: 5,312.8
Citizens: 3,285.2
PRs: 533.0
Others: 1,494.2

In 2030 (using mid-point of estimate)
Total Population: 6,700
Citizens: 3,700
PRs: 550
Others: 2,450

In the 18-years time frame, we expect to take in 20,000 PRs as citizens per year to increase our population by 360,000 and the balance increase is probably a rounding figures or natural growth in the citizens category.

[KopiKat]

In Singapore context, 10-20k per year to top up population is still inherently possible.

But is it just 10 - 20k per year to top up? If it's 10k per year, it is just another 100k in 10 years. We are looking at around 10x that number per year if we are to hit 6.9 million by 2030.

The Population comprises of Citizens, PRs & Non-Residents. You're confusing Population with new Citizens. The bulk of the growth in Population will be from Non-Residents ie. Foreign Workers / Talents... These are the ones who'll contribute the most to our infrastructure & Housing strain...

[specuvestor]

The root of the problem is that they are still looking to grow GDP by perspiration. We have reached a stage whereby that is going to be structurally difficult because of our small size. I think the govt is barking up the wrong tree.

So safetyfirst has a point. The govt is TOO hostage over the the aging baby boomers and Gen X, though the problem is genuine. I would say a policy that maintains Singapore's population at 5.5-6m with 3.7m citizens next 20 years probably makes more sense. They are putting the cart ahead of the horse by working the maths backwards from 2030.

WEIRD!!

The governent says the current population is ageing so got to increase population to say 6.5-7m in 2030.

Hmm, as time passes, the 7m population will eventually age. Is the solution going to be another influx of population growth so that we hit 10m in 2060?

We solve the problem of ageing pop by increasing the pop, this sounds retarded because the larger population will eventually age. I dont earn $1million a year but i can see that this solution of increasing the pop is not sustainable. In fact, i respect the japanese, they have learnt to live with it.

There may just be no solution to the ageing population, why not just learn to live with it.

Rapheal05 from channel news asia expressed it best
http://forum.channelnewsasia.com/showthr...art./page2

But I wouldn't envy the Japanese. Their inaction is going to have huge repercussions decades down the road especially their debt to CURRENT tax income is 24X while their population halve by 2050. Somebody's got to pay for that.

US even have green card lottery to ensure diversification of immigrants. They are well aware that the whites are going to be minorities by 2020, but they are well anchored by the strong US culture and identity, despite the diversity, which Singapore is diluting. The figures are huge but the US is tackling head-on unlike the Japanese "head-in"

In fact, i respect the japanese, they have learnt to live with it.

Technical perspective..

Although Japan is facing the same problem as Singapore, their problem cannot be resolved by immigrations unlike Singapore.
Cultural difference aside, the number of immigrants to top up Japan is huge. Just this year alone, in order to maintain the same population as last year, they will need 200k immigrants and the number will get bigger and bigger yearly. The scale is liken to importing all citizens of a small country to Japan in the next 10-20 years.

In Singapore context, 10-20k per year to top up population is still inherently possible.

So, essentially, from the point of cultural difference and technical difficulty, immigration is not a solution for japan.