The ugly truth about TFR and foreign influx....

[Confuseous]

Take the HOPE scheme as an example. It is meant to help poorer families with children's education and housing. However, families only qualify for aid if they have only one or 2 children - they get nothing if they have more children. Doesn't a family with 3 children need more help? How does denying help to families with 3 or more children lead to better outcomes for them? This help scheme is hijacked for the purpose of social engineering to discourage certain groups from having more children. How can our TFR be raise when hundreds of thousands of families belong to these groups are discouraged from having more children? How many of you come from modest income families with more than 2 children...you wouldn't even exist if your parents went on the HOPE scheme!

Instead of simple financial incentive given to all women who have children, the govt decided to give financial incentives in the form of tax rebates - $20,000 for the 3rd & 4th child[Link]. These tax rebates have to be used within 5 years. Such financial incentives are targeted at high income families who can fully utilize the rebate because they pay higher income taxes - those earning $40K and below claim less than one tenth the rebate. Anyone with common sense knows that giving more money to those who are already highly paid and less or nothing to those who need it most is a bad incentive scheme to encourage Singaporeans to have more children. These schemes are not effective and have failed to boost our TFR.

We are in our present situation because of various policies the PAP has pursued over the years. Now they are using the current low TFR figure to justify importing more foreigners. Why not revamp the incentives scheme and encourage more women to have children by removing the discriminatory nature of the current schemes? Why not solve the housing issue and ease the burden of married Singaporeans?

- http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2012/04/ugly-truth-about-tfr-and-foreign-influx.html

 

[Scrooball (clone)]

This makes sense. What's wrong?

Poor families with low education should not have too many kids. They should stop at 1 or 2.

 

[Unrepented]

Frankly, if one cannot afford to provide for their children, then don't reproduce like rabbits. Look at Africa.

And tax rebates imo, are appropriate and equitable incentives to make sure people earn their keep. Rather than being bums who wait for handouts.

Also, people want to enjoy fucking and making babies, but expect govt to raise their children, more subsidies better. Then on the same note, do you allow govt to enjoy your wife as well?

Take the HOPE scheme as an example. It is meant to help poorer families with children's education and housing. However, families only qualify for aid if they have only one or 2 children - they get nothing if they have more children. Doesn't a family with 3 children need more help? How does denying help to families with 3 or more children lead to better outcomes for them? This help scheme is hijacked for the purpose of social engineering to discourage certain groups from having more children. How can our TFR be raise when hundreds of thousands of families belong to these groups are discouraged from having more children? How many of you come from modest income families with more than 2 children...you wouldn't even exist if your parents went on the HOPE scheme!

Instead of simple financial incentive given to all women who have children, the govt decided to give financial incentives in the form of tax rebates - $20,000 for the 3rd & 4th child[Link]. These tax rebates have to be used within 5 years. Such financial incentives are targeted at high income families who can fully utilize the rebate because they pay higher income taxes - those earning $40K and below claim less than one tenth the rebate. Anyone with common sense knows that giving more money to those who are already highly paid and less or nothing to those who need it most is a bad incentive scheme to encourage Singaporeans to have more children. These schemes are not effective and have failed to boost our TFR.

We are in our present situation because of various policies the PAP has pursued over the years. Now they are using the current low TFR figure to justify importing more foreigners. Why not revamp the incentives scheme and encourage more women to have children by removing the discriminatory nature of the current schemes? Why not solve the housing issue and ease the burden of married Singaporeans?

- http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2012/04/ugly-truth-about-tfr-and-foreign-influx.html

 

[Scrooball (clone)]

Threadstarter asking to be flamed.

Give money to poor families who have many kids is encouraging irresponsible family planning.

 

[Leongsam]

This makes sense. What's wrong?

Poor families with low education should not have too many kids. They should stop at 1 or 2.

The poor should be neutered.

 

[Fook Seng]

Threadstarter asking to be flamed.

Give money to poor families who have many kids is encouraging irresponsible family planning.

But that is the key to the problem. Overly strategic family planning based on solving a different problem definitely cannot solve our problem with TFR. You either plan to grow the population or curb the population. Try not to tinkle with both at the same time. Use other tools to fine-tune your social engineering if you have to. In fact, it is time to simplify our processes and make our objectives more pure.

 

[Fook Seng]

The poor should be neutered.

In fact those who sit on seatless bikes should be neutered as they probably have lost the function of proper procreation.

 

[tonychat]

This makes sense. What's wrong?

Poor families with low education should not have too many kids. They should stop at 1 or 2.

Why no zero children better, just castrate them.

 

[Scrooball (clone)]

Why no zero children better, just castrate them.

If only someone told your parents that