Analysis of the Foreign Workers Issue

davetan3 · May 9, 2011

One of the opposition members said things are not so straight foward. I agree and think that all parties have not analysed or articulate the Foreign Workers Issue. As anyone talked about the pros and cons and discussed this with the public during the election?

The balancing between intake and restriction of foreign workers is a delicate balancing act that could easily go either way.

With a foreign worker policy that is "blunt" and based on supply and demand:

Friendly foreign worker policy: GDP growth, lower wages, more jobs in total
Restrictive foreign worker policy: Slower growth, high wages & increased inflation, less jobs in total

A refined foreign worker policy that puts Singaporean first for jobs would be a middle ground between the two outcomes above. However, how to manage this properly by the Government is not easy. Typically Governments do not do well trying to manage market forces, it will tend to supply more in time of demand and restrict in times of depression, creating more bubbles.

So we could end up with wild swings between the two outcomes. And how to have more jobs and still not have increased inflation due restriction on low paying foreign jobs? In the end, the wages will increase but the costs of living will also increase. And companies could leave to neighboring countries due to wage increase and now we have less jobs but high inflation.

I am not an expert on this - just an armchair amateur, reading WSJ, economist and economic books. So welcome your viewpoints.

karmabear · May 9, 2011

what you have just written is a regurgitation of the crap that PAP likes to feed, which is utter bullshit. Allow me to repost the shit that you have just written.

Friendly foreign worker policy: GDP growth, lower wages, more jobs in total
Restrictive foreign worker policy: Slower growth, high wages & increased inflation, less jobs in total

Fuck you ok? Who says that it has to be this way? More FT good, less FT bad. With the influx of workers, it has systematically depressed wages and opportunities for the lesser educated. Remember the enforced primary 8 education scheme, meant to create a supply of low wage workers for Singapore? I guess they should just jump MRT. And speaking about MRT, is it not obvious that our housing and transport infrastructure has not caught up with the influx of foreign workers? How does one not forsee these things as our precious LHL claims, I do not know... Have you seen the state of our hospitals? Its a perpetual full house. FTs do get sick and injured too. So much for the delicate touch of the PAP.

Increased inflation due to what? Higher wages? If you take in the housing, insurance, workers levy, the wage differential is not that much different. More importantly, the money being earned by locals stay in the local economy rather than being expatriated overseas. How does one account for that? The main reason for inflation (ex-commodities) is the asset appreciation scheme, which has caused property prices to rocket. As such, to maintain a roof overhead requires a minimum salary and just as importantly, high rental prices inhibits entrepreneurship.

So in short cheebye face, i am not sure what your agenda is in bringing about this thread. Either you want to broadcast your ignorance and stupidity or you are a PAP dog thinking you can smoke people into believing that more FT is good for us. More FT in your mother's pussy is probably good for you but leave the rest of us alone ok?

:oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo:

SpareTyre · May 9, 2011

davetan3 said:
One of the opposition members said things are not so straight foward. I agree and think that all parties have not analysed or articulate the Foreign Workers Issue. As anyone talked about the pros and cons and discussed this with the public during the election?

The balancing between intake and restriction of foreign workers is a delicate balancing act that could easily go either way.

With a foreign worker policy that is "blunt" and based on supply and demand:

Friendly foreign worker policy: GDP growth, lower wages, more jobs in total
Restrictive foreign worker policy: Slower growth, high wages & increased inflation, less jobs in total

A refined foreign worker policy that puts Singaporean first for jobs would be a middle ground between the two outcomes above. However, how to manage this properly by the Government is not easy. Typically Governments do not do well trying to manage market forces, it will tend to supply more in time of demand and restrict in times of depression, creating more bubbles.

So we could end up with wild swings between the two outcomes. And how to have more jobs and still not have increased inflation due restriction on low paying foreign jobs? In the end, the wages will increase but the costs of living will also increase. And companies could leave to neighboring countries due to wage increase and now we have less jobs but high inflation.

I am not an expert on this - just an armchair amateur, reading WSJ, economist and economic books. So welcome your viewpoints.

There should be immigration but not this kind of volume

Equally, or even more, economically advanced cities like Melbourne, San Jose, Helsinki, Vienna and Taipei have managed to do it without adopting extreme immigration measures like Singapore

ivebert · May 9, 2011

karmabear said:
what you have just written is a regurgitation of the crap that PAP likes to feed, which is utter bullshit. Allow me to repost the shit that you have just written.

Friendly foreign worker policy: GDP growth, lower wages, more jobs in total
Restrictive foreign worker policy: Slower growth, high wages & increased inflation, less jobs in total

Fuck you ok? Who says that it has to be this way? More FT good, less FT bad. With the influx of workers, it has systematically depressed wages and opportunities for the lesser educated. Remember the enforced primary 8 education scheme, meant to create a supply of low wage workers for Singapore? I guess they should just jump MRT. And speaking about MRT, is it not obvious that our housing and transport infrastructure has not caught up with the influx of foreign workers? How does one not forsee these things as our precious LHL claims, I do not know... Have you seen the state of our hospitals? Its a perpetual full house. FTs do get sick and injured too. So much for the delicate touch of the PAP.

Increased inflation due to what? Higher wages? If you take in the housing, insurance, workers levy, the wage differential is not that much different. More importantly, the money being earned by locals stay in the local economy rather than being expatriated overseas. How does one account for that? The main reason for inflation (ex-commodities) is the asset appreciation scheme, which has caused property prices to rocket. As such, to maintain a roof overhead requires a minimum salary and just as importantly, high rental prices inhibits entrepreneurship.

So in short cheebye face, i am not sure what your agenda is in bringing about this thread. Either you want to broadcast your ignorance and stupidity or you are a PAP dog thinking you can smoke people into believing that more FT is good for us. More FT in your mother's pussy is probably good for you but leave the rest of us alone ok?

:oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo::oIo:

Chao Ah Beng Sinkie spotted

Wanna argue, don't pepper your reply with vulgarities lah

:rolleyes:

youtalkcock · May 9, 2011

ivebert said:
Chao Ah Beng Sinkie spotted
Wanna argue, don't pepper your reply with vulgarities lah

All i have to do is to search your posts history and you can easily be the record holder here that uses profanities. :biggrin:

ivebert · May 9, 2011

youtalkcock said:
All i have to do is to search your posts history and you can easily be the record holder here that uses profanities.

I never intended to argue like this ah beng

I wanted to fuck the Sinkies and swear at them

:biggrin:

Cheebye!!! :biggrin:

steffychun · May 9, 2011

davetan3 said:
One of the opposition members said things are not so straight foward. I agree and think that all parties have not analysed or articulate the Foreign Workers Issue. As anyone talked about the pros and cons and discussed this with the public during the election?

The balancing between intake and restriction of foreign workers is a delicate balancing act that could easily go either way.

With a foreign worker policy that is "blunt" and based on supply and demand:

Friendly foreign worker policy: GDP growth, lower wages, more jobs in total
Restrictive foreign worker policy: Slower growth, high wages & increased inflation, less jobs in total

A refined foreign worker policy that puts Singaporean first for jobs would be a middle ground between the two outcomes above. However, how to manage this properly by the Government is not easy. Typically Governments do not do well trying to manage market forces, it will tend to supply more in time of demand and restrict in times of depression, creating more bubbles.

So we could end up with wild swings between the two outcomes. And how to have more jobs and still not have increased inflation due restriction on low paying foreign jobs? In the end, the wages will increase but the costs of living will also increase. And companies could leave to neighboring countries due to wage increase and now we have less jobs but high inflation.

I am not an expert on this - just an armchair amateur, reading WSJ, economist and economic books. So welcome your viewpoints.

Exactly. Kicking thme out sounds nice but no nation can last economically with a mixture of local and foreigners.

Analysis of the Foreign Workers Issue

davetan3

Alfrescian

karmabear

Alfrescian

SpareTyre

Alfrescian

ivebert

Alfrescian

youtalkcock

Alfrescian (InfP)

ivebert

Alfrescian

steffychun

Alfrescian

Similar threads