Re: Why Am I Feeling This Way?
signatureincz said:
After reading so many pages, i realise ken is fanner.. he started this , then he run away.....
Miw will still be in power, the reason why so many cast votes to the opp , merely just to add pressure to the miw.. Showing them , ppl got balls to vote already, not like past.. so they better do their jobs better... whole sg knew the Miw will still be in ctrl, even the vote opp.....
I am no fanner. I am some uncle philosopher in some kopitiam. My thoughts are as follow:
First, poliitics aside, the government has somewhat confused foreign talent and foreign workers in their intended policies. Two months ago, our DPM Tharman cited a recent survey on talent migration in Taiwan that shows the stark consequences on the wages of its people from pursuing a closed-door policy against foreigners - its best and brightest were leaving the island, particularly for China as well as the United States and other countries. Citing the survey done by the East Asian Institute at the National University of Singapore (NUS), the nominal income of the average Taiwanese has flattened for more than a decade. Ironically, over here, such foreign talent/worker policy has created a wider income inequality, where (a) the wealthy income foreigners propped up the top tier income group and (b) the foreign workers suppressed the low income brackets. Granted, the inflow of wealth have benefitted the economy but not necessarily as a whole. It is a quite fix to solve investment outflow owing to the loss of manufacturing competitiveness, nothing more.
Second, the original idea of foreign talent/worker policy was to replace the declining population growth. Mr Wong Kan Seng said in 1997, “Since Singapore cannot produce enough people to come into the workforce each year, we need foreigners to sustain economic growth.” This is logical in the policy level, but a nightmare in execution. In the three largest economic segments of Singapore, manufacturing, oil/chemical and finance, the impact are entirely different. For instance, in manufacturing, a foreign engineer hire creates a suppression in wage level, while in finance, a foreign manager creates a higher benchmark for the local senior managers. This, in return, widened the income gaps. Of course, in the context of this forum, it will be hard to fathom the wage suppression impact from the foreign workers on our low-wage workers. But no matter what re-training, skills upgrading or government-induced paper talks they undergo, a local bus driver will lose out to a China bus driver, a local IT programmer will lose out to an Indian programmer..... as long as the skillsets are commoditised. How can the "peasants" ever climb out of their social holes? This, in fact, contradicts DPM Tharman's rationale on citing Taiwan's talent drain example.
Third, the government is not solving the costs issues, perhaps a direct or indirect impact from the widening income gap. Or beaucratic fats. An example is the hospitalisation costs. I can comprehend the need for more foreign nurses and doctors, but I cannot see the linkage to the rising costs of our medical costs. It is not the influx of foreign nurses and doctors which spirals the costs...... so where did the fats go? Or for instance, costs of transportation for the SMEs.... hire a foreign driver but costs still higher due to COEs..... what kind of consistency is in there for costs competitiveness? With the government owning all the major sectors and industries, and paying top dollars for the scholars, it is effectively draining the organic talents from its economy and the business running costs from its infrastructure. Eventually, everyone who is not a scholar working for the civil sector will be left to fend off the competition, with no advantage at all. This is a major setback for a economic vacuum in the middle class.
Ahwing said:
what i feel,
a simple analogy, your own son misbehave in your house, you can choose to punish him heavily. However, if a boy comes to your house and misbehaves, you cannot punish him like how you would punish your own son. No matter what, the boy is not your son, whatever you want to do to him you need to answer to his parents.
If you have adopted the boy as yours, he should undergo the same upbringing.
DrK said:
In 2000s, his son realised that population growth is undermining economic growth. Went berserk and implemented a no-hold barred immigration policy which include sucking, licking, cajoling, kum-ming all FTs.
Quick fix, but, like our national soccer team, it yields no long term results. The ranking slips lower and lower as more and more foreign players stepped onto the field.
