Forum Index
this forum welcomes all forumers who appreciate decent and well thought out views and discussions. all forumers are encouraged to accept that different forumers have different views and often there is no absolutely right or wrong views.
Menu
 Forum IndexHome
FAQFAQ
MemberlistMemberlist
UsergroupsUsergroups
RegisterRegister
ProfileProfile
Log in to check your private messagesMessages
Log inLogin/Out

Quick Search

Advanced Search

Links
mysingaporenews
Singapore River Tour
Singapore Education
Singapore Orchids
littlespeck
ypapforum
Singapore Hosting
Sample Link 2
Sample Link 2

Who's Online
[ Administrator ]
[ Moderator ]


Google Search
Google

http://www.phpbb.com
Social and Economic Development in Singapore
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Sep 28, 2019 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CECA is a national security issue
The Trump Administration can be accused of over hyping the Huawei 5G technology as a national security issue. Their main reason for objecting to using Huawei equipment is based on what if, what can be, not that it is. Of course there is the fake element of competition with China, not allowing China and Huawei to take off into the future with Huawei as the main equipment supplier and technology leader in communication technology.

The use of national security in this case could be just an excuse and also not something to be trifle with. The security of a nation should not and cannot be compromised by superficial and short term economic trickery or benefits. Here comes the question if the CECA poses an existential threat to Singapore. Singapore history and demographic make up have propel the nation to high economic growth, political stability and development befitting of a first world developed nation.

Increasingly, with the economic growth rate declining and getting higher growth rate more difficult, the Singapore govt has dropped all its guards against existential threat to grow the economy the cheap and easy way by importing all the rubbish from around the world disguising as foreign talents. This reckless and indiscriminate importing of wildlife with suspicious and unknown backgrounds, some very dangerous to our well being, without the ability to vet their security threat and political inclination is getting to a level that is ringing a bell.

Some of the minorities are increasingly getting more vocal and naked in their intolerance to the Chinese majority in the island and calling for this to change towards a level when the Chinese majority is less pronounced, maybe even become an absolute minority to appease their anger. The new citizens and even foreigners employed to work here, paid by the public and private sectors, thought it their right to question this balance and even to champion this cause.

How would Singapore be in the next few decades if the population balance is changed with the Chinese no longer the majority? Would the new majority be as kind and magnanimous as the Chinese majority today towards a Chinese minority? Or would they shut the daylight out of a Chinese minority that stupidly allowed this to happen to seal their fate as a goner minority?

How and to what extent is the CECA with its loose and over generous provisions, a one sided agreement to allow India to flood this island with its jobless citizens and change the population make up of this island? Would Singapore be happy to be more like another Indian city in the future instead of what we are today, a modern cosmopolitan society, an advanced nation of clean streets and good amenities and infrastructure?

Would the intelligence and security agencies think about this existential threat in the way the Americans are looking at their national security and warn the govt in advance that going down this reckless road of importing so many foreigners to dilute the Singaporean core is a road of no return except down and out?

How serious is CECA as an existential threat to Singapore vis a vis the rhetoric against the opposition political parties? Would Singapore survive like it is today in the next few decades going forward? What are the threats to our national security and national survival with the input of so many wildlife into our midst with dubious backgrounds, qualifications and political beliefs and interests?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The fairy tales of eternal economic growth
People are suffering, people are dying, entire ecosystems are dying, ‘We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth.’ Gretha Thunberg
The above quote is what this young girl said in her speech on Climate Change at the UN. Do they sound familiar? Anyone can relate to her words about economic growth? Who does not want economic growth? In this little island, everything is about economic growth, growth at all cost, because if you don’t have economic growth, how to pay million dollar salaries to the employees? And how to have easy economic growth? Grow the population by importing all the wildlife you can find to fill up every inch of earth on this island. When they are here, they need to have housing, services, food, cars, entertainments etc etc, ie they need to eat and consume goods and services. All these activities adds to one thing, economic growth!
But one problem, their activities would also lead to higher uses of plastic bags and plastic straws, and these are not good for climate change. So we must all work very hard to cut down use of plastic bags and plastic straws. Get it?
In Greta Thunberg’ speech she gave a scathing attack on world leaders for betraying the young people through a lack of action on climate change. She added. ‘You have stolen my dreams and my childhood through your empty words…The eyes of all future generations are upon you. And if you choose to fail us I say we will never forgive you.
How can the world leaders fail them when they are working so hard to provide better life for them through eternal economic growth? Is there a contradiction, is there a lie? Economic growth is the panacea of everything good in life, the more growth the better, never mind if it means stuffing 20m people in this little piece of rock. It is good.
When Adam and Eve were the only two living beans on earth, there is aplenty in everything, fresh air, food, green forests, no plastics, little waste and all the natural resources for the two beans to enjoy. Now the world’s population is 6b and growing because world leaders need more human beans to increase economic growth. Soon there will be 7b, 8b or more people sharing the earth, consuming all the resources, eating all the fishes in the ocean. Poisoning the ocean with plastic waste, nuclear waste etc etc. Temperature rising.
Not to worry, it would not happen to us. Don’t listen to this Greta Thunberg. She does not know how good economic growth is. You want your HDB flat to be worth $1m? If your answer is yes, you must want economic growth. You must want 10m, 20m people in this island. Please support the no holds bar immigration policy to bring in more and more people, then we can build more and more properties to house them, more shopping centres, more hawker centres and food courts, more reservoirs, more power stations….and more plastic bags.
A lot of serious thoughts have been put into this formula of more people equal more economic growth. No one can deny economic growth. Let’s go for it, Greta Thunberg or no Greta Thunberg. We know what is good for us, the residents of this little piece of rock. And we will share this piece of rock with more wildlife, the more the merrier.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Repealing S377A completely?
'An outlier in criminal law regime'
Section 377A doesn't criminalise gay sex and its purpose no longer exists, argues former Chief Justice
Writing in a 72-page article in the Singapore Academy of Law Journal, Mr Chan Sek Keong said: "Section 377A was enacted for the purpose of dealing with the mischief of male prostitution and its associated activities (which involved male homosexual conduct) which were rife in 1938, and not because homosexual conduct was not acceptable in Singapore society in 1938."

The above quote is from Today online. Reading Chan Sek Keong’s comment, it appears that this 377A is no longer relevant and should be repealed. The case for this to decriminalize same sex sexual activities in today’s context is to some extent justifiable from the non religious point of view. The morality issue from the secular viewpoint has changed and same sex activities are now tolerated. The religious tribes may still have their own reservations in view of their unflinching religious doctrines.
Assuming that the secular thinking rules the day and 377A is repealed, the law must not forget that the young must still be protected and not fall prey to sexual assault of the same sex, with or without their consent. As long as the young are protected until they become adults, I think there should be lesser resistance and opposition to repeal this Act.
We are going to be more advanced and progressive on this relative to Malaysia, I think. Anyone knows if Malaysia has such an Act since we inherited the same judicial system from the British?
What do you think?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2019 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Building Singapore for who?
SINGAPORE — There are many new plans to build Singapore for the next generation, but the country first needs birth rates to rise so that the population can grow “a little bit”, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Thursday (Oct 10).

“We have so many plans for Singapore, in terms of new industries, new businesses, new schools, new opportunities, new towns to live in, new parks — a new society to be built for the next generation. And what we need are new people — our children,” Mr Lee told Nikkei Asian Review editor-at-large Takehiko Koyanagi at a dialogue held at the National University of Singapore.

Laying out the state of Singapore’s demographic challenge today, Mr Lee said that the
Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/new-towns-industries-are-being-built-now-what-spore-needs-are-new-people-pm-lee

Is the govt building Singapore for Singaporeans, for the children of Singaporeans? Just look at the composition of the population, 5.8m of which only 3.6m are Singaporeans and of the 3.6m, probably 1m are new citizens. What does this mean? If the original Singaporeans are now only 2.6m, then 3.2m foreigners are enjoying what we built in this island.

The basis of the govt's argument is that we need more and more people for economic growth. Is that the best solution? Bringing in more people for economic growth must lead to real economic growth, eg if we increase the population by 1% foreigners, there should be at least 3 or 4 additional percent of growth. Today and for many years, our economic growth is barely 2%. Did the increase in foreigners lead to more economic growth? What happened is that we brought in more foreigners to come here and eat and shit and we called it economic growth. Whatever little miserable growth was eaten by the foreigners themselves and shitted away and we end up drinking their shit water.

What is more important is the well being of our own people, not foreigners, not the children of foreigners, not the parents of foreigners. Our economic growth should be proportional to our population and any increases should be from higher productivity, innovation and technology, not to bring in more people to eat and to shit and to use up whatever little space we have in building more homes.

If our population is smaller, we don't have to build so many more homes and parks and destroy more and more of our land, fauna and flora. The indiscriminate and reckless input of people is destroying the island and contributing to climate change. We are in a mindless pursuit of self administered destruction ie SAD by forcing more and more people into the island. It is definitely not for the good of our children.

In the 60s, when population was smaller, the pressure on land and on everything was so much lesser. Anyone starting to work could afford to own a car and a home at really affordable prices. Today owning a car is beyond the rich of many young people except those whose parents are ministers or millionaires. Today, owning a small little cubicle called home would need to be paid with an arm or a leg. Today the cost of living is so high that many are living from pay check to pay check which the got is gloating about economic growth and more economic growth like 1 or 2% which is actually no growth at all but a technical recession.

There is so much emphasis on economic growth when the truth is no economic growth except for the millionaires and the rich that got richer and the poor got poorer. The only superficial wealth of a Singaporean is his HDB flat. But up to a point, this becomes depreciating asset that will turn into a bumpkin after midnight, no value. At that point, all the superficial wealth and well being of a Singaporean will go up in smoke, becomes nothing.

More people means higher cost of living. Period. Not necessarily higher economic growth as the GDP numbers have proven. Building Singapore for what and for who? In the name of building a better Singapore for our children, is the govt instead destroying Singapore for our children? SAD.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2019 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Building Singapore for who?
SINGAPORE — There are many new plans to build Singapore for the next generation, but the country first needs birth rates to rise so that the population can grow “a little bit”, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Thursday (Oct 10).

“We have so many plans for Singapore, in terms of new industries, new businesses, new schools, new opportunities, new towns to live in, new parks — a new society to be built for the next generation. And what we need are new people — our children,” Mr Lee told Nikkei Asian Review editor-at-large Takehiko Koyanagi at a dialogue held at the National University of Singapore.

Laying out the state of Singapore’s demographic challenge today, Mr Lee said that the
Read more at https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/new-towns-industries-are-being-built-now-what-spore-needs-are-new-people-pm-lee

Is the govt building Singapore for Singaporeans, for the children of Singaporeans? Just look at the composition of the population, 5.8m of which only 3.6m are Singaporeans and of the 3.6m, probably 1m are new citizens. What does this mean? If the original Singaporeans are now only 2.6m, then 3.2m foreigners are enjoying what we built in this island.

The basis of the govt's argument is that we need more and more people for economic growth. Is that the best solution? Bringing in more people for economic growth must lead to real economic growth, eg if we increase the population by 1% foreigners, there should be at least 3 or 4 additional percent of growth. Today and for many years, our economic growth is barely 2%. Did the increase in foreigners lead to more economic growth? What happened is that we brought in more foreigners to come here and eat and shit and we called it economic growth. Whatever little miserable growth was eaten by the foreigners themselves and shitted away and we end up drinking their shit water.

What is more important is the well being of our own people, not foreigners, not the children of foreigners, not the parents of foreigners. Our economic growth should be proportional to our population and any increases should be from higher productivity, innovation and technology, not to bring in more people to eat and to shit and to use up whatever little space we have in building more homes.

If our population is smaller, we don't have to build so many more homes and parks and destroy more and more of our land, fauna and flora. The indiscriminate and reckless input of people is destroying the island and contributing to climate change. We are in a mindless pursuit of self administered destruction ie SAD by forcing more and more people into the island. It is definitely not for the good of our children.

In the 60s, when population was smaller, the pressure on land and on everything was so much lesser. Anyone starting to work could afford to own a car and a home at really affordable prices. Today owning a car is beyond the rich of many young people except those whose parents are ministers or millionaires. Today, owning a small little cubicle called home would need to be paid with an arm or a leg. Today the cost of living is so high that many are living from pay check to pay check which the got is gloating about economic growth and more economic growth like 1 or 2% which is actually no growth at all but a technical recession.

There is so much emphasis on economic growth when the truth is no economic growth except for the millionaires and the rich that got richer and the poor got poorer. The only superficial wealth of a Singaporean is his HDB flat. But up to a point, this becomes depreciating asset that will turn into a bumpkin after midnight, no value. At that point, all the superficial wealth and well being of a Singaporean will go up in smoke, becomes nothing.

More people means higher cost of living. Period. Not necessarily higher economic growth as the GDP numbers have proven. Building Singapore for what and for who? In the name of building a better Singapore for our children, is the govt instead destroying Singapore for our children? SAD.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Nov 10, 2019 8:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brad Bowyer - A plea to reclaim Singapore for Singaporeans
'To make matters worse, behind all that is an air of entitlement and unaccountability from a group who pursues policies that appear ever more clearly to be meant for the benefit of the few and to the detriment of the many. Policies and economic models that are moreover being put forward by a team who inherited most of what they have, who are insular and far less competent than their forebears, and are designing and implementing ways to make the nation unlivable for all but their chosen few.

So this coming election won’t just be about restoring good governance and running the nation as a country for all the people again. It will be about the very survival of the ordinary citizen in the face of what I can only describe as a cold, calculating and, for want of a better word, vicious “elite” who have no compunction to sacrifice anything or anyone to stay in their positions of power because they must know in their hearts exactly how undeserving they are and exactly what they are doing to Singapore as a whole.

This Machiavellian group must be ejected before the damage they are doing becomes irreparable. Already our society is fracturing and faltering and our country and culture is drowning in a sea of imports and the worst top down examples of extreme capitalism, callousness and indifference towards others. Poverty is growing, suicides are increasing and depression, stress, unhappiness and a sense of isolation are becoming widespread. We are now feeling like outsiders in our own country and it is only getting worse.'

The above are quoted from Brad Bowyer's article posted in the TRE. I am putting them up for discussion here. In the first paragraph Brad talked about entitlement mentality, a phrase that is often used to belittle Singaporeans for wanting to be treated like citizens for their sacrifices and the contributions of our forbears in building this successful city. Yes, we Singaporeans and our forbears built this island to what it is, not the wildlife that came recently, claiming that they built this city and some silly dumbasses also echoed this myth, that we owed it to the wildlife that came after we have made this island a success. We are entitled to a better life in this island than the wildlife. We don't owe the wildlife anything. They are parasites here to fleece on what we have built.

But what about the entitlement mentality of the elite that Brad Bowyer said above? What are the entitlements that the elites are demanding and taking them for granted, taking the people for granted? In short, economic benefits and power to the few that ruled the island as if it belongs to them. For mediocre performance they are demanding to be paid out of this world salaries as elected politicians, non employees that designed their own jobs as if they are employees with career path and salaries that can go up and up.

The people have been going along with the govt for several decades without questioning as they too benefited from the growing affluence and success of the island and economy. But this success story that benefits everyone is starting to look different, with the majority of the working class starting to feel the pinch, working furiously and desperately to make ends meet while the elites enjoy their world class living and lifestyle and demanding for more and more. The social divide is widening everyday with many of the pioneer generations have to work as cleaners to survive their golden years.

The survival of the ordinary citizens is at stake as Brad Bowyer said, 'inn the face of what I can only describe as a cold, caluculating and, for want of a better word, vicious "elite" who have no compunction to sacrifiice anything or anyone to stay in their positions of power...socienty is fracturing and faltering and our county and culture is drowning in a sea of imports...We are now feeling like outsiders in our own country and it is only getting worse.'

I can't disagree with Brad Bowyer's perception of the new realities that are affecting the people in general except for the elites and the few fools here earning a few dollars and thinking that they are very successful and pretending to be very happy with what is going on.

What do you think? Do you think it is time to reclaim our country from the elites and the wildlife they brought in?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you Singapore, for being so generous and kind
Thank you Singapore for giving jobs to more than 1m Indians that would be jobless and unemployed in India.

Thank you for helping to support our poorly managed telco companies by the billions and to pay for their upgrades and employees.

Thank you for investing in the US$5 billion Amaravati City Project in Andhra Pradesh. Sorry that we have to terminate the project and the millions that you have lost, a mere drop in your pocket, no big deal. Come try again next time, we have many such billion dollar projects waiting for Singapore to pump money in. Thank you very much.

As for the displaced Singaporean PMETs due to our 2m unemployed being employed in Singapore, please send them to India. We will provide the with good jobs and good environment for growth. India is a very big country and have plenty of jobs for unemployed Singaporeans. But we can only pay in rupees.

India still have a few hundred millions of unemployed and jobless talented and armed with many degrees available. Just open your legs and we will send them to you. Thank you CECA.

And thank you for creating so many jobs here and all the investments in India and the billions pumped into our economy. We hope you are making money in India and not losing money as a result of your faith in India.

Singapore is such a wonderful place, with wonderful and generous people, so kind, so daft, so easily conned. We are coming to buy over Singapore, any land or properties that you can sell India and Indians will buy up.

Thank you Singapore. You are so nice.

PS. India has the money to buy up all the properties in Singapore, starting with the condos in the East.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

22 year old PR caught for sex with 13 year old
Rojas Gil Dominic Babosa was caught again for having sex with a 13 year old student. Caught again, not his first time. According to thenewpaper, 'He was given probation in 2014 and sentenced to reformative training a year later for having underage sex'. And this 22 year old wildlife is a PR. How did he get his PR. And he is unemployed. How could an unemployed became a PR? Foreign talent? Do we have another CECA with the Philippines?

What kind of talent this wildlife possesses to be granted a PR? Special skills in having sex with underage children? Is this skill so exceptional that he could still remain in this heavenly and peaceful island city and would not be repatriated because his special ability is lacking here?

Why no one in immigration or the govt thinks this kind of wildlife should not be here and be deported immediately as he is not only undesirable but also a risk to our young life? Or this is the new normal and his special sexual urge is nothing to abhor and nothing to be excited about all for nothing?

Now this wildlife is facing a 20 year jail, caned or fined. Why waste money and our highly expensive room space in Changi to keep and feed this wildlife? Send him away would be the best thing. And someone should check how this wildlife could become a PR without a job.

Today another wildlife was reported to be molesting girls brazenly in the bars and was in defiance when told to stop and even telling the bar manager how important he was. Singapore is really getting more oomph and vibrant with so many wildlife nesting here. It is indeed turning into a wild city with exciting adventures for the wildlife.

The dull and daft Singaporeans should confine themselves to the bland and lifeless 4 walls of their HDB flats to be safe from the wildlife. The city has become a playground, oops, hunting and mating ground for wildlife. Not to worry, such activities of wildlife will not get them deported. They are needed here for their talents and to create jobs for the jobless PMETs.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Malaysia considering restricting Singaporeans visitors
Lim Tean
Yesterday at 11:07 ·
Malaysia Considering Restricting Access To Singaporeans.
I just received this clipping from a Friend across the causeway. It is today’s edition of the Sin Chew newspaper in Malaysia. It appears that Malaysia is considering restricting access to Singaporeans because of the nCOV crisis.
Already India is screening travellers from Singapore and Britain has advised its citizens to self-isolate if they have travelled from Singapore....

The above is from a post in theindependent.sg

If Malaysia really does this to Singapore, don't think they won't if the number of confirmed cases rises rapidly and the virus is found to be spreading in the city state. For the time being it is still touch and go as the two economies are too tightly intertwined and interdependent.

Assuming Malaysia did impose restriction on Singaporeans, it would mean not only the tourists cannot get into Malaysia, Singaporeans and others, it would mean businesses would also be affected as well. But this is not the only problem. Not allowing Singaporeans going into Malaysia is only one part of the problem of limiting access.

If Singaporeans cannot enter Malaysia, no Singaporeans would be able to bring the virus into Malaysia. What about the hundreds of thousands of Malaysians commuting here daily to work? They too would have to be barred from entering Singapore if the isolation is to be effective. Otherwise they would bring along whatever Malaysia does not want Singaporeans to bring into Malaysia. This development would have very serious impact on the economic activities and social life of both countries.

Malaysia would only take this drastic measure if the virus is on the loose in Singapore. Till now it is not. Let's pray it would not be the case.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed May 13, 2020 8:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

'Racist Singapore' has two choices on migrant workers from the subcontinent
The label 'Racist Singapore' is not cooked up by me but by many racists from the subcontinent that have been accusing Singapore of being racist towards migrant workers and white collar workers from the said continent. Though none of them have been beaten up in the streets of Singapore like they had in Australia, UK and the US, these racists have been very vocal in calling Singapore a racist country and Singaporeans, particularly Chinese Singaporeans as racists.

How did Singapore came to earn this glorified label from the racists in the subcontinent? Read this from theindependent.sg for a start.

'While the Singapore Government has “done well in safeguarding the lives and livelihood of migrant workers”, there are underlying issues, such as racism and a lack of embracing diverse perspectives, that cannot be ignored, according to a letter published in Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post on Sunday (May 10).

The letter writer, Gauri Venkitaraman, was responding to the letter “Singapore is not racist: City has stood by migrant workers in coronavirus crisis” (April 26) from Lee Teck Chuan.

Lee had defended Singapore’s handling of the outbreak of coronavirus cases in the country, writing that foreign workers’ lives and livelihoods had been well taken care of. He gave the examples that they had been given SIM cards so they could keep communicating with their families, and that meals, accommodation and medical treatment were given for free. Lee had asked: “Is it fair for our international audience to think that Singapore is a racist society?”

Gauri responded by writing that all the good the Government has done “does not justify the racist undercurrents, nor address a problem that some Singaporeans refuse to acknowledge”.'

What is the problem of these racist writers to attack Singapore as a racist country? What did Singapore do to deserve this honour or dishonour? The sin of Singapore is to provide employment to the hungry jobless men from the slums of the subcontinent. These poor and illiterate and unskilled workers were given good decent jobs, decent income that they could not imagine, would never even get a job in their slum country, and living in decent dormitories that were many times better than where they came from, with proper sanitation and toilet facilities that they did not have. But these are not enough, to these racists critics, the workers must be treated better, how better is up to their wild imagination. They could not even provide these poor workers with a job, with 3 meals, let alone a decent place to live and are demanding Singapore to provide for them, things that would be a luxury in the slums where they came from.

Since these critics are so unhappy with Singapore, why don't they provide a better alternatives to these workers, bring them home where they would be happy and with decent jobs and decent incomes and a better life and not be 'discriminated' in Singapore with good jobs, good living quarters they could never dream of, and a better life for their families. Why come to be exploited in 'racist Singapore' that treated them so badly?

Singapore has two choices to avoid this stigma of dishonour, one, by stopping migrant workers from the subcontinent to work here. Period. The racist critics would provide them with better jobs and better lives in their slum country. No doubt about that. Why go all out to please these ungrateful foreigners and treating them in many ways far better than Singaporeans?

But if the daft in Singapore want to continue to employ these workers, provide them job and a future they could look forward to, a better life, then the alternative is to adopt some of the suggestions of our good and wealthy citizens and provide the foreign workers a lifestyle similar to Singaporeans, live like Singaporeans, live among the Singaporeans. Perhaps Singaporeans should even integrate them into their lives by marrying their daughters to these single workers. That may please these critics and Singapore would not be called a racist country by them.

Raise their salaries to that of the average Singaporeans, provide housing like those of Singaporeans, in HDB estates and enjoy the same cost of living as Singaporeans. Treat them like first world citizens, good pay, good accommodation, good environment etc etc. The employers would be very generous to raise their pay and would be able to continue to run their businesses profitably for sure.

What do you think? Is Singapore deserving of the label 'Racist Singapore' accorded by the racists from the subcontinent? Is Singapore doing enough or need to do more, like having them living in districts 9, 10 and 11 and have meals in restaurants, foodcourts or hawker centres? What do these racists want? One good spacious place to accommodate them is the big garden in the Istana and the President can lullaby them to sleep.

By the way, below is reported in theindependent.sg.

'More than 38,000 netizens have signed a petition calling for more protection for migrant workers from the Covid-19 virus.

The petition, started by one Kokila Annamalai a week ago, shared it with the hopes that Minister for Manpower Josephine Teo would take notice.

She asked that their living conditions be better taken care of, explaining that “in current dormitory set-ups, which are overcrowded; There has been consistent evidence of unsanitary and very poorly-ventilated environments”.

Workers often do not get their meals on time, and there is a shortage of face masks, she wrote.

“Fear and anxiety are high among workers, who aren’t allowed to leave their dorms (or their cramped rooms, in the case of the dormitories gazetted as isolation areas). Many feel akin to sitting ducks trapped in a ticking ‘time bomb’”, Ms Annamalai wrote.'

If these 38,000 people really wanted to have, it can be easily done by offering to invite a foreign worker to stay with them and enjoy the comfort of their homes. Surely all the homes in Singapore, including HDB flats, would have space for one foreign worker to sleep in and not feel crowded. As for those living in landed properties, they would easily have a few spare rooms to offer.

If this is done, the foreign workers would be so happy that more would be queuing up to come here, calling Singapore a paradise for foreign workers instead of 'Racist Singapore'.

PS. My observation, Singapore has no Chinese race. The whites and other racists may threw vicious attacks against Chinese, verbally and physically, no Singaporean Chinese would react. They did not see themselves as Chinese but Singaporeans. They have no race, no ethnicity. They are aliens. Thus they cannot be racist in any terms. And they love foreigners, especially angmohs and Indians and many have married them. And many key positions in Singapore are filled by Indians, including the President, Chief Justice, DPM, senior ministers, the national bank etc etc.

A racist Singapore never allow these to happen. These are facts, not imaginations of the racist critics.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue May 26, 2020 8:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Singapore's new reality - CMIO redefined
All Singaporeans are familiar with what CMIO means. This is the general classification of the racial composition of the Singapore population comprising Chinese, Malay, Indian and Others, with Others meaning the minorities that are not of the three major racial groups. Since independence, the composition of the population has a Chinese majority of about 78%, with the Malays about 12%, Indians 8% and Others 2%. The composition could be quite different today given the huge influx of foreigners, and though the Chinese is still the majority, the percentage of each racial group could be different. What is the official statistics?

Many are still calling this a Chinese majority state, legally, according to what were stated in their Birth Certificates and Identity Cards. But there is a new reality in Singapore based on a different definition of race officially sanctioned by the govt with a President that is legally Indian according to the race in the identity card/birth certificate but accepted officially as a Malay be virtue of her adopted way of life and acceptance by the Malay community. I stand corrected as to what was her legally stated race as written on her IC or birth certificate. I don't know as this is not made known publicly.

Using this new interpretation of a person's race, the racial composition of Singapore population is quite different, starkly different. The Chinese is not the majority race in Singapore if the chosen way of life of a person is good enough to redefine his race. Quite a significant number of Chinese in Singapore, particularly the English educated, do not see themselves as Chinese. They would only want to be known as Singaporeans. They have no race or refused to be identified as persons of the Chinese race. Some hate be called Chinese, ashamed to be called Chinese. Some hate being Chinese, anything Chinese, anything to do with China. They lived more like westerners, think like westerners and know more about Snow White and the 7 dwarfs and all the western fables and fairy tales but nothing about Chinese fables or nursery rhymes. And of course they could not speak Chinese, refuse to speak or learn to speak Chinese, and got angry with anyone speaking to them in Chinese. How can they be Chinese, when they even despised Chinese?

Under the new officially sanctioned definition of race, these ethnically Chinese are anything but Chinese. They should more appropriately be classified under the Others category. There are also the nyonas and babas, ie Straits born Chinese that have been here for many generations whose way of life is more akin to the Malays, speaking Malays and not a word of Chinese. And there are also the mixed parentage with many chose to live like the other half than the Chinese half and did not know Chinese and did not want to be called Chinese. Ask a Straits born and he would say he is a baba, not a Chinese.

Added together, these groups of ethnic Chinese but not wanting to be Chinese, also known locally as OCBC, should be classified as Others rather than Chinese. If this is the case, then the biggest racial group in Singapore should be Others. Thus it is not right to call Singapore a Chinese majority state. The Chinese, or those that still identified themselves as Chinese, could be a minority or would be a minority given the trend.

The implication of this development is that being a state with a Chinese minority, with Others as a majority, it is a fallacy to make the accusation that this is a racist country with the majority Chinese in a way practising racial discrimination against the minority races. The Chinese is not the majority, the majority is Others. If one is to look at the govt set up, one would not fail to notice that many top appointees are actually not Chinese. And to add the Chinese/Others into this interpretation, the Chinese in top govt positions is even smaller. How many of the top appointees, political and administrative, are or should be classified as Chinese/Others or rightly as Others? How many of these top appointees would call or rather identify themselves as Singaporeans and not Chinese?

This is a new phenomenon in Singapore where a people have chosen to have no ethnicity except a nationality called Singaporean. Oh, this only affects the ethnic Chinese, not the other races. The Indians and Malays are proud of their ethnic origins, not the OCBC 'Chinese' that have chosen to be 'raceless', a people that has no ancestry and can choose whichever ancestry they preferred as reflected in their thinking and way of life, what they like and what they dislike or even hate.

So, instead of CMIO in that order, perhaps it should read OMIC or OIMC, with O the majority and C the smallest minority group in Singapore.

What do you think?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 14427
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Jun 17, 2020 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What are Singapore's intangible strengths?
SINGAPORE’S INTANGIBLE STRENGTHS

Noting the Future Economy Council, formed in 2017 and led by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, had already been driving such preparations, Mr Chan highlighted the things that set Singapore apart – its intangible strengths.

He noted that while many investors have chosen to locate and expand their businesses in Singapore, this was not based on factors such as the availability of natural resources or cost.


“They chose us because of our strengths, which are not easy to replicate elsewhere. We are open, and connected with the world, we are trusted, we are united and stable as a society, and we have a skilled workforce,” he said. CNA

Chan Chun Sing is flying Singapore's intangible strengths as the key reason why foreign investors chose to invest here. What then are these intangible strengths of Singapore? In short it is the system and the people. The system is created and developed and maintained by the people, a product of the people, the early Singaporeans, the Pioneer and Merdeka Generations.

What has happened to these generations of hard working and disciplined Singaporeans? They are ageing and passing away, and being replaced by funny and unpredictable third world wildlife that are pretending to be law abiding and hardworking and disciplined workers like our earlier generations. They are very nice....some said. Just you wait. Just wait till they find their footings and be more familiar and confident of the environment and the timid kiasu, kiasi, kia cheng hu Singaporeans, and then only will their true colours emerged. Wildlife would be wildlife. That is why they are kept in cages and not allowed to roam free. Even after years in cages, when released, they would return to their wild behaviour at the slightest opportunity.

If these wildlife and third world beans are that good, they would not be here, their countries would be just as good or better than Singapore. To believe that they are the talents to replace our hardworking and disciplined Pioneer and Merdeka generations is foolishness.

Our intangible strength has been compromised and would not be the same again. Remember what LKY said about the tenacity and vigorous of the culture of our early generations? What have they been replaced with, contentious, cheating, racist, lying, back stabbing third world work ethics and culture? Whatever work cultures or values the new wildlife brought with them will determine the intangible strength of Singapore for good or for bad as we go forward. Only the blind would not be able to see the stupidity of it all, like exchanging Singapore dollars for rupees and exclaiming very good and pretending to be happy about it while the smart ones are exchanging their rupees for Singapore dollars.

Is Singapore bringing in the right mix of people to strengthen its social fabric and the work ethics and talent of its workforce, or doing the opposite? What kind of intangible strength is Singapore hoping to develop under this stupid open leg policy for wildlife to come here to replace Singaporeans and calling them talents when they are armed with fake or funny certificates and CVs?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 28, 29, 30
Page 30 of 30

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Hosted by Vodien Internet Solutions