Government determined to increase population to 7 mil in 2030.

[specuvestor]

1) land is limited. Extrapolating from history is like saying he will be 12feet tall when he hits 80 years old

To be fair to the author of the article, he did match conceptual analysis with whats happening in the real world. Blindly extrapolating is never acceptable. Do you happen to see a 12ft tall 80 y/o walking ard?

Isn't that the point? He is extrapolating infrastructure growth to the future. There is a limit because land is limited. It's not just simple arithmatics.

And by his logic of density, city slumps should be the richest place on earth. Agriculture's biggest factor of production is land. Hence by definition density will be low. US transforming from labour to capital in agriculture. Density is NOT a determinant. Connecting to the first point that's why Singapore can never do agriculture because we cannot provide land and reduce labour.

See my previous posts on growth by perspiration. The govt is barking up the wrong tree. And this economist is barking from his ivory tower. If you read my posts in context, I'm not anti-govt; I'm anti-stupidity

[AlphaQuant]

inderjit has the best speech so far and i totally agree with what he is saying.

to me, we have a crisis. The crisis is not what the DPM is saying (abt old people burdening us in the future) but the rapid erosion of Singaporean nationality. The growing displeasure over the PAP is disturbing to me. 6 years ago, the WP rallies were fun. Last few years, it got a bit scary at times with the very blatant curses on the ground. - i even fear the day when a freak election puts a CSJ-type govie in charge. Imagine a scenario of total fiscal irresponsibility leading to capital flight, ccy devaluation, and spiralling hyperinflation. 10 years ago Taiwan was a gem, today it is a pale shade of itself after the DPP-KMT spats.

what the govie needs to do now is to restore citizen's faith (the people who WILL stay here when dirt hits the fan), cater infrastructure to solve the existing backlog etc.

i don't think a 6.9mio population is unthinkable if the infrastructure is right (i think with people like Khaw doing the planning it is feasible but i am personally biased agst the ex-generals). but the urgent thing now is to solve the current problem i/o steamrolling onto it.

[godjira1]

Alphaq - my personal take is that we have reached a tipping point. We will get an significant opposition presence in the gov in the near future.

Whether its good or bad hard to say for the citizens (depends whether we get the solutions we want and need as opposed to those that we just want) but on a purely economic perspective the uncertainty applied to the country risk of singapore makes it a poor risk/reward trade in the long term.

I am sure i am in the minority for thinking this but i have sold all my sing equities to allocate elsewhere, and am looking to sell my properties as well. I am happy to pay rent and put my money on my view.

[specuvestor]

Talking about stupidity also look at WP"s lee proposal. It is well documented the issues and social problems of single parenthood. That is not something that you would want to encourage. But the problem of single parenthood is real. How to strike a balance between helping those who made a mistake and encouraging the act is very difficult. Just as how you incentive entrepreneurs but not taking away the ills of bankruptcy.

Raising TFR this way is just another numbers game. No diff.

[AlphaQuant]

I am sure i am in the minority for thinking this but i have sold all my sing equities to allocate elsewhere, and am looking to sell my properties as well. I am happy to pay rent and put my money on my view.

if you are in the minority, then i am too, though not that extreme to sell off my property - i am not buying a second one here though.

an outlier event of a freak election leading to a downward spiral of events cannot be ignored - i started thinking abt it very seriously after 2011 after visiting all the rally events. the change in the mood is quite disturbing - it is moving from frustration to even hatred.

i do think there's a need to hedge agst this low delta (maybe not) event, esp over a 50-60 year horizon

[Temperament]

1) land is limited. Extrapolating from history is like saying he will be 12feet tall when he hits 80 years old

To be fair to the author of the article, he did match conceptual analysis with whats happening in the real world. Blindly extrapolating is never acceptable. Do you happen to see a 12ft tall 80 y/o walking ard?

Isn't that the point? He is extrapolating infrastructure growth to the future. There is a limit because land is limited. It's not just simple arithmatics.

And by his logic of density, city slumps should be the richest place on earth. Agriculture's biggest factor of production is land. Hence by definition density will be low. US transforming from labour to capital in agriculture. Density is NOT a determinant. Connecting to the first point that's why Singapore can never do agriculture because we cannot provide land and reduce labour.

See my previous posts on growth by perspiration. The govt is barking up the wrong tree. And this economist is barking from his ivory tower. If you read my posts in context, I'm not anti-govt; I'm anti-stupidity

" I'm not anti-govt; I'm anti-stupidity"

Unquote
HA! HA! Well put!
I think it's the same coin. Only a coin has 2 sides but still the same coin.
So will you vote "anti-gov or anti-stupidity"-the same coin?
But PAPYs always think the masses are "stupid" leh.
Shalom
NB:
i always think you put your "arguement" quite beautifully even a layman like me can understand to admire.

[2V.]

Another BT article has form but NO substance

Unlike 1970s & 80s, time has change. Most citizens exercise critical thinking now

Are you in favour of white paper?

For those who are blinded by the common fallacies about immigration and population, namely:

1) foreigners are taking away the job of locals
2) by stopping low unskilled foreigners, local unskilled workers will be better off

Pls do yourself a favor by reading page 20 in Business Times.

[Temperament]

Alphaq - my personal take is that we have reached a tipping point. We will get an significant opposition presence in the gov in the near future.

Whether its good or bad hard to say for the citizens (depends whether we get the solutions we want and need as opposed to those that we just want) but on a purely economic perspective the uncertainty applied to the country risk of singapore makes it a poor risk/reward trade in the long term.

I am sure i am in the minority for thinking this but i have sold all my sing equities to allocate elsewhere, and am looking to sell my properties as well. I am happy to pay rent and put my money on my view.

Can you share a little more. Like which country/countries. Singapore is really a little RED DOT if screwed up by a GOV, we (masses) are really finished. i have talked to many highly educated FTs b4; almost all of them don't believe little RED DOT has a bright future for their DNAs. Almost all of them think one "screw-up" and that's it.
i think the same too. And it's screwing-up now by the PAPYs.

[godjira1]

Temp - in my way of looking at things i look at risk versus rewards profile. Maybe not quite value investing.

Now i like USA, China and Indonesia.

USA has great demographics, lots of natural and human resources. And the gridlock in gov has been priced in. They have fantastic companies with strong brands and the shale gas boom will generate massive growth in years to come. I like conoco, valero, apple and the homebuilding sector etf.

China stock market was cratering until dec12 and risen quite quickly since. But long term china is a transformational bet - if they get it right and survive the odd correction/imbalance u get a multibagger. If not... Well u lose some money. I am very long the a50 etf (it is my largest single holding).

Indonesia is booming, i know its corrupt and the extremist factions make noise once in a while but it is all priced in. If things improve, their market can rise quite dramatically. I like the banking sector as that will get a big boost if the growth in jkt and mining towns start to spread.

I am not scared of losing money as long as i feel the assymmetry in probability or payoff is on my side.

As for Singapore - it is fragile. It would not be one of WB's investments because he says "i like businesses that even an idiot can run. Because eventually one will. "

[arthur]

I am sure i am in the minority for thinking this but i have sold all my sing equities to allocate elsewhere, and am looking to sell my properties as well. I am happy to pay rent and put my money on my view.

if you are in the minority, then i am too, though not that extreme to sell off my property - i am not buying a second one here though.

an outlier event of a freak election leading to a downward spiral of events cannot be ignored - i started thinking abt it very seriously after 2011 after visiting all the rally events. the change in the mood is quite disturbing - it is moving from frustration to even hatred.

i do think there's a need to hedge agst this low delta (maybe not) event, esp over a 50-60 year horizon

You guys are not in the minority, I myself divest my portfolio in different geographical locations as well.

It is undestandable that investors (regardless individuals or companies) would seek a high return/risk ratio.

Singapore has entered an age of Renaissance, an era where the citizens start to practise critical thinking, dares to speak up and take actions to do so.

The government is still adopting the old method of increasing pop in order to meet the GDP growth target and by adopting the old way of being non-inclusive to citizens, ie. bulldozing its way to implement policies.

Being the wealthiest nation in the world with largest proportion of millionaires per cap is useless if we cannot even hold our nation's identity together.
Having such glamourous infrastructures are useless when we lose the very soul where we citizens can call this place, Our Country, MY HOME.

How we as a nation manoeuvre through the next 2 GEs, will set the path where we would be in 2065, our nation's 100th birthday.

I do not hope to see the day Singapore knock down from its pedestal in world most prosperous nation ranking because we kept using the only method of injecting GDP growth that we know.
I do not want my grandchildren to ask me, "Where were you Grandpa, when Singapore was at a crossroad?"