Six major flaws of the PAP’s immigration policies:
1. Too many, too soon:
Sg has been accepting immigrants since the 1980s and 1990s from Malaysia, Indonesia, Hong Kong and Taiwan without causing much discomfort to the local population.
This is because the immigrants have come in smaller numbers and are similar to Sgans in terms of culture, language and beliefs and have few problems assimilating into Sg society.
The pace of immigration picked up when Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong assumed office in 2003 and all of sudden the floodgates are opened to accept foreigners from all over the world especially China and India where the majority of the newcomers hail from.
In the span of less than 5 years, foreigners now make up 36 per cent of Sg’s population, up from 14 per cent in 1990. Of the remaining 64 per cent who are citizens, a significant proportion are new immigrants born overseas.
Does Sg really need to let so many foreigners into the country within such a short period of time?
In 2008 alone, there were over 90,000 PRs and 20,000 new citizens which is obviously stretching the nation’s infrastructure, such as public housing to accommodate all of them.
PM Lee now promised Sgans that the rate of immigration will be continued in a “measured and calibrated” manner. Is this a tacit admission that the uncontrolled influx of immigrants between the years 2003 – 2008 had been a mistake?
2. Inadequate infrastructure such as public housing to accommodate newcomers:
It doesn’t take a genius to realize that with so many foreigners flocking to study, work and live in Sg, one needs to increase the number of public amenities and upgrade the infrastructure to accommodate them such as public housing.
Only slightly more than 11,000 new flats were built between the years 2006 – 2008 when there were over 90,000 PRs and 20,000 new citizens alone in 2008:
The lack of foresight on the part of HDB to plan beforehand to build more new flats to house the immigrants is appalling and its failure to do so has led to sky-rocketing HDB flat prices today.
Due to the lack of new flats, especially those in the prime districts, Sgans have to compete with PRs in the resale flats which resulted naturally in the rise of the prices of resale flats.
Public transport such as buses and MRTs are also poorly prepared for the increase in population as evidenced by the packed buses and trains every morning.
3. Targeting the wrong people:
Sg should be targeting foreigners who can add value to Sg and not open its doors indiscriminately to every Tom, Dick or Harry.
Mainland China is one important source of immigrants for Sg, but we are not getting their cream of the crop.
According to a Gallup poll done in July 2009 among Chinese college students, their top emigration destination is the United States, followed by France and South Korea. Sg isn’t even featured among the top five.
Why isn’t Sg attracting the best Chinese talents? Instead of examining the cause, we settle for their “lesser talents”, many of whom are uncouth peasants from the poorer inland provinces.
What Sg is getting are not first class talents but economic migrants who cannot survive in their own countries and they are now competing with Sgans for limited jobs because they cost much less.
China is vast country with 23 provinces and more than 1 billion people of various races and religions.
The ethnic Chinese in Sg come mostly from the southern provinces of Guangdong and Fujian.
Sg should be focusing on luring prospective migrants from these two provinces instead of allowing Chinese from all across the mainland to come here.
As they share the same dialect and culture as local Chinese, they will have fewer problems integrating into Sg society as compared to Chinese from far-flung inland provinces who come from a completely alien world altogether.
4. Ease of getting PR and citizenship:
Unlike countries, getting a PR and citizenship in Sg is incredibly easy without any major restrictions.
Most developed countries like Australia, Canada and U.K set an English proficiency test for immigrants and only those who pass the test are able to work and live there.
In Australia, one has to live there three out of a period of five years before they are eligible to become PRs.
However in Sg, the newcomers are “fast-tracked” to become PRs and citizens without first familiarizing themselves with the country first and spending adequate time to make the decision.
A Chinese national and Sg PR Zhang Yuanyuan who worked as a teacher in a private institution in Sg revealed to the media that she became a PR within 2 months of application.
Even construction workers, cleaners, masseurs and prostitutes are able to lay their lands on a Sg PR, the stepping stone for citizenship.
According to the Home Affairs Ministry, two out of every three PR applicants are successful, an astonishingly high success rate for a first world country.
Because citizenships are given out too soon to foreigners, there is insufficient time for both parties to assess if they are really “compatible” with each other.
5. Lack of a comprehensive plan to integrate the newcomers:
Due to the large number of unsuitable migrants who are given citizenships too soon, we now end up with the problem of having to integrate them.
Again, the ruling party did not come up with a comprehensive plan to integrate the newcomers when they embarked on their ambitious plan to increase Sg’s population via immigration way back in 2003.
It is now very difficult to integrate those who are already in Sg because they have come in such big numbers that they tend to congregate within their own communities than to reach out to the rest of Sg.
We are already seeing ethnic “enclaves” emerging in different parts of Sg such as the Chinese in Geylang, Indians in Punggol and Filipinos in Tampines.
Furthermore, as they share few similarities with the Chinese, Malays and Indians though they may be of the same race, it is near impossible to expect them to assimilate into our society any time soon.
As usual, the ruling party comes up with a grandiose $10 million Community Integration Fund to throw money at the problem.
How does organizing tea parties, community events and free language courses help to “integrate” the immigrants into Sg is anybody’s guess when they should have done their homework first before opening the floodgates to immigration.
They will simply turn up for the free food and goodies before return to their own cliques as before – do you call this “integration”?
6. Neglect of native Sgans:
The key reason why many Sgans are so vehemently against the ruling party’s immigration policies is because they feel they are not getting a fair deal as citizens from the elected government of the day.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said the government cannot “shield” Sgans from competition, but they are the ones who forced Sgans to compete with foreigners on unequal terms.
Firstly, the Sg male is already disadvantaged by having to spend 4 weeks away from work annually due to reservist obligations.
Secondly, there is no way Sgans can compete with foreigners in terms of cost because they do not have a family here and they can easily support them back home with their meager pay earned in Sg.
While in the past only extremely qualified professionals and blue collar workers in sectors shunned by Sgans are allowed into Sg, we are now seeing an increasing number of semi-skilled foreigners on S-passes and these are the group of foreigners who are competing with locals for jobs and depressing their wages in the process.
To exacerbate the situation, there is a dearth of social welfare benefits for Sg citizens who have to depend entirely on their CPF and medisave for retirement and medical expenses.
CPF is proving to be grossly inadequate to support Sgans through their twilight years and many have to continue working just to feed themselves and their families.
With so many grouses bottled up inside, it is only natural to expect Sgans to blame foreigners for their woes, whether rightly or wrongly.
Had the ruling party taken the necessary measures to ensure that Sgans are well taken care of first before they let the foreigners in, there will not be so much anger against them now.
Conclusion:
The PAP has screwed up badly on the immigration and foreign talent issues and there is no way it can salvage the situation now that we have accepted so many foreigners into our midst.
This policy oversight is the result of having a dominant one party in parliament without adequate opposition to keep it in check and to challenge its policies.
During a speech made yesterday at an event to celebrate HDB’s 50th anniversary, Sg’s octogenarian leader Lee Kuan Yew, one of its strongest proponents for its “foreigner first” policy, admitted tacitly that it was a mistake:
“We’ve grown in the last five years by just importing labour. Now, the people feel uncomfortable, there are too many foreigners. Trains are overcrowded with foreigners, buses too, property prices have gone up because foreigners with permanent residence are buying into the market.”
We cannot afford to give the PAP another 5 years to make more mistakes. Sgans have to vote wisely in the next general election or they will really be reduced to being in the minority one day, swarmed by the new citizens whom the PAP is actively recruiting and wooing to shore up its flagging support base so as to preseve and perpetuate its political hegemony for eternality.
Not sure whether you have seen this posted last Thurs. FYI.
-
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.
Six major flaws of the PAP’s immigration policies
- Thread starter iamtalkinglah
- Start date
IMO, overseas branding of singapore also kana.
Older generations of new citizens also buay song because they considered the ability to get PR as testament of their own standards and abilities then. And they made the sacrifice to become singapore citizens. But now, tom, dick and harry from his/her former country also can get and with ease. Better still, PR and citizens notch much different.
PRs returns to their own country in future, and take away the overseas job opportunities of our younger generations.:o
Older generations of new citizens also buay song because they considered the ability to get PR as testament of their own standards and abilities then. And they made the sacrifice to become singapore citizens. But now, tom, dick and harry from his/her former country also can get and with ease. Better still, PR and citizens notch much different.
PRs returns to their own country in future, and take away the overseas job opportunities of our younger generations.:o
There is a 7th major flaw. The massive influx of FTs is driven by industry who want cheap labour to remain competitive in the world market. In actual fact, cheap labour is what 3rd world countries supply, not a country like singapore. Productivity gains should be made thru investment in equipment and technology, automation and what not. This is what high wage countries like japan and Switzerland do. By letting in so much cheap labour, the PAP is not doing any favours for local industries. They are better off to give tax incentives to companies for new capital investments. This FT strategy cripples technical innovation and capital investment and productivity.
As you know, gahment want PRC Mei Meis and Ah Nehs and Ang Mohs to come to Singapore to make up the magical racial balance. But some people disagree because they want Singapore to become a little Malaya. As you know, Sporeans are not producing enough, but certain groups are producing more than their fair share.
So the question people should ask is : Do you want Singapore to be a little Malaytown or Singapore to become a cosmospolitan with people from all over the world, including the Ah Nehs and the Mei Meis?
Of course you when you import an apple, it comes with seeds. You can't complain that the apple has seeds? Even "seedless" durians have seeds?
So the question people should ask is : Do you want Singapore to be a little Malaytown or Singapore to become a cosmospolitan with people from all over the world, including the Ah Nehs and the Mei Meis?
Of course you when you import an apple, it comes with seeds. You can't complain that the apple has seeds? Even "seedless" durians have seeds?
This is a well written arguement.
If this were to be graded in a General Paper for English Composition on "What are the flaws of the PAP's immigration policies"
It would have been graded an A1 with Distinction by me. haha
V for Vendetta...
"The Government Should be Afraid of it's People"
Hey dude Cunnosieur, what is the resume all about?
The biggest obstacle is the PAP
Which constituency you standing for election?
I will definitely vote for you if you stand in my area
Do you really believe that PAP is unaware of the problems of immigration? I believe they simply want to push their luck as much as possible knowing the SGrean behaviour. They chose to implement without putting effort into worrying about the downstream effects. Their trick is to keep feeding SGreans nasty policies but hold back, fine-tune or revoke those policies when the noise from the ground gets too loud. If the dissent is manageable, oh well, they will just plan for the next policy to screw SGreans more.
Do you see any protests on the streets? If not, then SGreans must be living happily under PAP rule.
Do you see any protests on the streets? If not, then SGreans must be living happily under PAP rule.
This is a well written arguement.
If this were to be graded in a General Paper for English Composition on "What are the flaws of the PAP's immigration policies"
It would have been graded an A1 with Distinction by me. haha
I agree.
BTW is this from chiobu Chairwoman Sylvia Lim who spoke at the recent NUS talk with PAP MP & an academic ?
Peasants failed to consider the utility of foreign talents.
1. Increase consumption of local goods and services. FTs have singlehandledly drove up property prices for ungrateful Peasants. Most peasants are tenants of one pigeonhole and do not benefit from this boom. The winners are property developers, rich 'flipers' and regime who between 2007-2009 reap record revenues 2-3 billion peanuts from land sales, development charges and stamp duties.
2. FTs depress wages of all peasants. Cheaper FTs are willing to work inhuman hours, the usually hail from Chinka, Nehia, Banglaland, filipines and Burma!!! They can be deported with ease should they dissent. Generally FTs are pro regime given the basket case conditions in their native countries and will certainly be pro-regime supporters if given a chance to be 'local peasants'.
3. FTs are humans and must consume goods and services e.g. food, housing. They provide income for wealthier peasants who resell goods and services and eliminate another source of potential dissension.
4. Force local peasants to toil harder so that they will give less problems to the regimes. Lackeys and minions routinely talk down to local peasants, suggesting their inept skills and lazy attitude are to be blamed.
1. Increase consumption of local goods and services. FTs have singlehandledly drove up property prices for ungrateful Peasants. Most peasants are tenants of one pigeonhole and do not benefit from this boom. The winners are property developers, rich 'flipers' and regime who between 2007-2009 reap record revenues 2-3 billion peanuts from land sales, development charges and stamp duties.
2. FTs depress wages of all peasants. Cheaper FTs are willing to work inhuman hours, the usually hail from Chinka, Nehia, Banglaland, filipines and Burma!!! They can be deported with ease should they dissent. Generally FTs are pro regime given the basket case conditions in their native countries and will certainly be pro-regime supporters if given a chance to be 'local peasants'.
3. FTs are humans and must consume goods and services e.g. food, housing. They provide income for wealthier peasants who resell goods and services and eliminate another source of potential dissension.
4. Force local peasants to toil harder so that they will give less problems to the regimes. Lackeys and minions routinely talk down to local peasants, suggesting their inept skills and lazy attitude are to be blamed.
The many flaws listed in this thread are merely the side-effects or lesser of 2 evils for a solution of a greater threat - the devaluation of the S$ leading possibly to a epic financial crisis, hyperinflation and the loss of business confidence spiralling into a panic.
This more ominous picture not yet realised by S'poreans because it is being concealed or hidden by:
1. More and more new immigrants are desperately needed to inject new foreign cash that they bring to S'pore that is converted to S$. This helps greatly to prop up the S$ from collapse due to the massive hemorrhage of CASH RESERVES in overseas bad investments. The poor yield of extremely low interests rates for term deposits would not attract idle cash from overseas markets as investments into S'pore banks.
2. More new accounts being opened by PRs etc are needed to maintain liquidity in the CPF to meet the cash payments for rising numbers of emigrants' full cash withdrawals and for deferred installment payouts to 'stayers'.
This more ominous picture not yet realised by S'poreans because it is being concealed or hidden by:
1. More and more new immigrants are desperately needed to inject new foreign cash that they bring to S'pore that is converted to S$. This helps greatly to prop up the S$ from collapse due to the massive hemorrhage of CASH RESERVES in overseas bad investments. The poor yield of extremely low interests rates for term deposits would not attract idle cash from overseas markets as investments into S'pore banks.
2. More new accounts being opened by PRs etc are needed to maintain liquidity in the CPF to meet the cash payments for rising numbers of emigrants' full cash withdrawals and for deferred installment payouts to 'stayers'.
And also, the higher housing cost maybe because they don't want us to withdraw our CPF (invest our CPF in funds etc).
Of course they know the problems, but since they and their families are not affected, it's not a problem for them.
There is actually one major flaw - the people making the decisions.
Vote them out!
Similar threads
