Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Dynamic Population For A Sustainable Singapore

It was definitely a home run for Member of Parliament Sylvia Lim of the Workers’ Party (WP). Straight off the bat, she took the words right out of our mouths when she reminded the House, “It is not just about population. It is about nationhood, the meaning of being Singaporean, how we want to face the future as a country. It is about reclaiming back Singapore.” At machine-gun rate, the soundbytes kept coming, shaving inches off the growing nose of Pinnochio Teo:

“55% is too close to the all important threshold of 50% majority.”
“The roadmap proposed in the White Paper will further dilute our national identity.”
“Indigenous Singaporeans feel under siege.” 
“for the Singapore core to be strong, the core must be strongly Singaporean in values, worldview, culture, sense of place and history, and network of friends and family.”
“new citizens see Singapore through through a different lens, and can equally make a decision to leave if the circumstances change.”

If the cabinet had not been dominated by the traitorous turncoats, Lim would have received a standing ovation for the pièce de résistance: The government has gotten its priorities the wrong way round. Instead of having a sustainable population for a dynamic Singapore, it should be “A Dynamic Population for a Sustainable Singapore”.

Quoting population expert, Frederick Meyerson, she pointed out that immigration is “essentially a one-way policy tool with permanent or long-term social, economic and environmental consequences, and it cannot be reversed without human rights violations”. Her party opposes the Population White paper because its road map will dilute national identity and shrink the ranks of born-and-bred Singaporeans to a minority. As a Eurasian, Christopher de Souza must have felt this was a bit too close to home. His own race has been thinned over the years, a pale shadow of the glory days of the likes of David Marshall and E.W. Barker.

Another point Ms Lim brought up is that immigrants grow old and consume public services as well, adding to the burden of the national budget. She asked the obvious question, “Who will support them when they grow old?" By that time, it may be very difficult to try to solve our population needs through improving TFR, but instead another White Paper may be introduced to justify bringing in even larger numbers of immigrants. She only missed the bit that most immigrants also bring in aged parents, which makes mockery of the dubious claim that newcomers "refresh" the age profile.

Isn't it nice to have our heart felt thoughts articulated in parliament for a change?

47 comments:

  1. Exactly true, we can't feather our own Singaporean's nest, if all the cowbirds of the world can invade it.

    Especially when you've only invited 700, but an additional 300 of the in-laws flock also showed up. But I suppose that would be worse-case for us, just-in-case for MW and best-case for hospitals and funeral parlors, eh.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good to have MP Sylvia Lim speaking up fir us.
    Am sadden that she added that compromised number of 5.9 million.

    The population right now, should be at least 5.3 million and it is all ready too much.
    How long will the "coverment" take to put in place all the infrastructures to bring us up to speed ?
    3 years time ? 1 year or 4 years ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. /// How long will the "coverment" take to put in place all the infrastructures to bring us up to speed ? ///

      This is an easy question.
      How quickly can we remove this PAP government?

      And install in a more competent and representative coalition government of our Alternative Parties who truly represent the interest of all Singaporeans.

      PAP is really an Opposition Party in disguise.
      They seem opposed to the better welfare of all Singaporeans.

      Delete
    2. Re : 5.9 million.

      Bear in mind, we're already at 5.3 million today. 5.9 million is just +0.6 million in 17 years time. As Gerald Giam clarified, almost all the +0.6 million increase comes from "organic growth", ie. birth from native Singaporeans, not injection of PR or foreigners. This is the sustainable way to grow. WP is not proposing cutting the number of foreigners yet because the restructuring of S'pore's economy will take time. But its essentially saying, we're maxed out on our "credit card debt" and lets learn to live with what we have.

      Delete
  3. Bingo, we have a winner... the 2nd last paragraph is what we all need to know, clearly shows that the emperor has no clothes. Why is he naked? Consider this:

    Luke: Is the dark side stronger?
    Yoda: No, no. No. Quicker, easier, more seductive

    Groupthinking destroyed their already small thinking capacity? Bonus-hungry civil servants all ready to believe Singaporean populace is as dumb as Li Ao claimed hence unable to see the illogical part of their "import and kick the can down the road" strategy?
    Or maybe just hoping the elites and intellectuals would bury their conscience and go along if the PAP throws enough crumbs at them?

    Who knows, bottom line, they are the dark side.

    ReplyDelete
  4. everytime the pap is engaged in a real debate - not those managed "debates" with sycophants, grassroot leaders and jc students - we see their pathetic quality of thought and substance for which they have deemed themselves worthy of millions in renumeration.

    ReplyDelete
  5. PAP is just a big employment agency. We are being run like a company, not a country, NS is irrelevant and totally unnecessary. No government in the world would rule with less than 70% citizens, let alone less than 50%. I really have doubts about our current leadership. Would the PAP/leaders have 50% foreign membership? Would be nice to see the tussle for control.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Thank you, Sylvia.
    Thank you, Aljunied voters, for sending Sylvia into Parliament.

    ReplyDelete
  7. When the "salary cut" was implemented, they ostensibly removed the GDP bonus. BUT they replaced that with a new "National Bonus", which includes GDP growth rate as one of the incentives. Still think they are on the side of Singaporeans? Tan Chuan Jin was lying like Teo Chee Hean when he said the Government's goal was to "generate the level of growth which we can provide for our people."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Any surplus budget generated by Singaporeans is transferred to the reserves.
      And only an independent (previous PAP member) President can unlock.

      So where is the money going to come from?
      Only from the bank accounts of Singaporeans AND working Singaporeans to death

      Delete
    2. bro, that applies only to ministers. The top civil servants salary and bonus structure was promised to be reviewed but NEVER happened, unless I missed it. GDP bonus is still pegged to 3% minimum growth, therein lies the strong internal support for FT. The politicians cannot move unless the pen pushers in the Admin Service who work for the Perm Secs. This is what is failing Singapore - a totally incompetent and self-serving top echelon of the civil service, people who boast of their french riviera cooking holidays, people who fucked up the transport, helathcare, education, TLCs/GLCs, bromptongate, FT policies, casinoes, legal system, people who serve side by side Mr Ng B gay and milk the system until they grow too fat for the public not to see. The problem goes well beyond the PAP.

      Delete
  8. Afraid that a good speech does not move a mountain. Sigh.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then a good show up MUST move the mountain. Get everyone, friends and family to go for the protest at Hong Lim. If you can't, please wear black top on that day, wherever you are, to show your politicians and businesses that you are objecting to their bullying!!

      http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-06/singaporeans-plan-protest-as-parliament-debates-population-boost.html

      Delete
    2. It is good to have spirit. But Singaporeans are practical people, and most will still vote for stability.

      Delete
  9. Speaking of President. Where is the President that claims to speak for the singaporeans? Yet all very silent.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It makes my blood boils when I learn about the doings of PAP. They purport to serve the people; in reality they are serving themselves to preserve and grow their vested interests. PAP is a goner, they are now irrelevant and belongs to the history book.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I've seen performers at Cirque du Soleil go through fewer contortions than the sommersaults attempted by PAP to justify population ponzi scheme.

    The TCH-TCJ-AK effort is simply another entry in "don't look over there, just look at what we say" balderdash. They don't really understand the damage they're doing - not just to their reputation but to the country. Because they and their ilk truly do not see how we are coming apart at the seams.

    ReplyDelete
  12. After the caucophony then what? Is the WP going to organise anything or support anything that is being organised to prevent the impending disaster the Sylvia Lim talks about? Will they be at the Speakers Corner on 16th February?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What about you?
      In GE 2016, votes matter.

      Have you converted your quota of one PAP supporter into an Opposition voter yet?

      Delete
    2. Indeed I have, have you?

      Delete
    3. I got 5 converted voters so far.
      How about you?

      Delete
    4. Excellent. We are on the same side.

      Delete
  13. A debate about Singaporeans' future degenerated into concern about supplying foreign workers to foreign companies.

    Those people are more interested to be foreign worker agents.

    Where is the focus on Singaporeans?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. /// Where is the focus on Singaporeans? ///

      In 3 year's time at GE 2016.

      Delete
  14. SG should issue a 20 years COE for New Citizen , only those not exceeding 30 years old are allowed & must leave when he reaches 50, of course can renew his/her COE by paying a Market Rate - win win win situation !!!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Wow, great speech, showing her maturity and understanding of the people's aspiration and plight. I daresay there is now none among the PAP MPs including the PM who can overtake her in clarity, analytical skill, and sincerity in explanation.
    I have also heard the great speeches of Chen Show Mao and Gerald Giam.
    Why am I seeing so many great speeches from the WP and none from the PAP?
    It makes me feel that the time is now ripe for a change of government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. YOu don't have TCJ's speech any good when he used GG as a punching bag" instead of CSM? Something to the extent of "great rhetoric, but how does that translate to practical solutions..can you spell out ideas"?

      Delete
  16. WP can suddenly change and go with the flow ie. vote in favour of the white paper..

    ReplyDelete
  17. Only Inderjit Singh is talking the truth...and the facts just make you boil. Not forgetting that 70% of PR whose kids grew/educated here DID NOT serve NS!!!
    So what do we gain? + 2 PRs who will contribute to the elderly data!!!

    #@&%$ PAP
    ---

    Reconsider the dependents policy - I have come across a number of cases where our targeted one child from China brings in 2 parents who then bring 2 parents each as their dependents - Net is that we gain one young one child who we brought in for our future but also inherited 6 older people - making our ageing population issue worse not better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a fact.
      I have observed the same.

      It's not the Alien's fault.
      They are human beings and will want to look after their parents.
      If Singaporeans emigrated, we would also want to be treated the same way.

      The fault lies squarely with our overpaid Traitors.
      No brains. No talent.
      No foresight.
      Only competency they have is that they are blindly loyal to PM Lee and not to Singaporeans.

      Vote the Traitors out in GE 2016.

      Delete
    2. You forgot the increase of women molest cases has also gone up in the MRT trains. Soon we will be like Japan, need men/women segregation of carriage cabin.

      Delete
  18. This is what a Pro Singaporean White Paper should look like;

    http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571136-politicians-both-right-and-left-could-learn-nordic-countries-next-supermodel

    ReplyDelete
  19. "The fault lies squarely with our overpaid Traitors." - I totally agree.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Vote the traitors out. It will vote out the 7m population, vote out all those good for nothings and their big houses, big cars and big fat salaries.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Chan Chun Sing said bottom 20% have only seen a 0.1% increase in their salary increase. In other words, if they earn $1000 10 years ago, their pay increase today is $1010. Enough to buy 2 rolls of toilet papers.

    If you tell me this is quality of living for the peasants, then you won't be hard to see where 2030 is headed.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Any idea why our PAP Govt does not see the need for any central agency to register those who are unemployed for whatever reasons?

    Because if they have such an agency, there is no way they can lie about our jobless figures, I suppose. All this while we are told that the more foreigners we have, the more jobs are being created for Singaporeans.

    But they don't have an iota of facts to prove this is so. For all we know, they could be lying and NOBODY can tell if they want to be dishonest, isn't it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Enlighten me please2/06/2013 6:13 PM

      Is that why the LFPR still has some room to grow, as Chen Show Mao alluded? If 1% increase means 30,000 people will re-join the workforce, then that is alot of untapped potential in the 1 million of residents who are inactive today!! Gosh, and Tan Chuan Jin has tried to quick smoking how many times already?

      Delete
  23. For those MPs who spoke against this Silly White Paper, thank you, you have a heart and you are at the side of Singapore.

    And as for those who close their eyes and ears while singing praises of it (for whatever reasons best know to themselves), I hope very soon you will be drown in the saliva of those foreigners you brought in.

    ReplyDelete
  24. omfg ..... starhub starting to block blogger sites

    need to use other service providers to access these blog .... shake head!!!

    when will the other ISP start using their own initiative to prevent access too?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Can't believe Khaw is pushing for endorsement of the land use for 6.9m population!

    People are voicing out against the wedding, and here he is, trying to sell us that the banquet venue should be at the Westin Hotel that has seating capacity of 1000 pax! Does he even know whether he only needed a capacity venue in Royal hotel for 700 pax! But here's the best part -- NOBODY is approving the marriage!!!! So no guests are invited!!!! Get it??!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah. And ESM Goh is providing the usual irony. Does he even know that if the citizens went ahead with this policy, we are just kicking the can further down the road for our children?

      So between the then-PM & now-PM, was it sensitivity or was it cowardice that they had not tackled the aging issue earlier? We are talking about 2.5 decades of time lost. Leading us to why it is now labeled a Silver Tsunami because we are 17 years away? Whatever happens to the Govt who is not afraid of tough policy? It's become clear where the mismanagement and execution of both our Birth and Aging policies have been, and now we can add Population too.

      Time matters. We have waited too long and get caught in the low-fertility trap, with high aging and we want to solve it with massive importation. The people have misplaced their trust in PAP and you have very little credibility left. You have just lost 6 votes from our family.

      Delete
    2. Jane.
      Don't stop at just the 6 votes in your family.
      60% of your friends & family voted PAP.
      You need to convince & convert them too.

      Delete
  26. Not only is White Paper textbook wrong, but it's also off the reality chart.

    ReplyDelete
  27. PAP should do an Survivor experiment. Pack 6,900 visitors into Istana, build shelters to house them, provide food and medical care for 40 days. Have the Ministers join them since thy love them so much and share shelters and whatever little comfort available. Transport within Istana is via COE pricied bicycles. Have ERP gantry to control bicycles traffic.

    Then ask the President, PM and the ministers whether Singapore can increase any more population or not after 40 days of bonding with visitors at Istana.

    ReplyDelete
  28. “55% is too close to the all important threshold of 50% majority.”

    This so-called 55% core includes those new and instant citizens in the recent past, present and future. The true blue born-and-bred-in-Singapore core will be less than half.

    ReplyDelete
  29. " Isn't it nice to have our heart felt thoughts articulated in parliament for a change?"

    Alas, the 13 supporting the opposition of this White Paper was still insufficient to reverse the motion similar to a GE "walk-over" scenario. Until we have more counterchecking voices and voting rights in Parliament, the best we can hope for is just to be heard.

    Wake up, dear born-and-bred fellow Singaporeans.

    ReplyDelete
  30. wasn't David Marshall a fully blooded Iraqi Jew ?

    quite a few famous ones in Singapore, notably the Sassoons who own Coffee Bean and Harry Elias

    ReplyDelete