• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

LKY says 'Unless we have more babies, we need to accept immigrants’ (like it or not!)

Fook Seng

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Cerebral said:
I may not be a mathematical wizard, but the number does not add up. If the target is only 2.1 and the reason for importing FT is to help the decreasing birth rate, then how did we end up with 5 million in 10 years? Someone is not telling the hard truth...

There was a screw up in the calculation. Somebody took in the FT's numbers now what would be required in 25 years' time. I believe there was a Lucky Tan (?) analysis on this.
 

geylangchickenloyangduck

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: LKY says 'Unless we have more babies, we need to accept immigrants’ (like it or n

nah beh....i hate his "listen-to-me cos i am god" attitude.

everywhere in the world, population growth is declining, esp for developed economies. Just how fast the decline is.

Taiwan, HK, Korea all have low population growth & they share one commonality - they work fucking hard, put in long hours behind the desk.

ditto for Singapore.

PAP government - you want organic growth, you jolly well implement sweeping change and not the fucking convenient excuse of asking us to accept immigrations.
 

Scrooball (clone)

Alfrescian
Loyal
Re: LKY says 'Unless we have more babies, we need to accept immigrants’ (like it or n

I like the way Old Man puts it...

LIKE IT OR NOT! :rolleyes:
 
Top