Rare mass rally over Singapore immigration plans

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Maslo
I think the problem of low birthrates is way overblown anyway. In a country like Singapore they have more than enough resources to take care of an excess of old people. In fact, a growing population puts a lot more more strain on economy than a shrinking one. What difference does it make if Singapore will have 3 or 6 million people? None, what is important is that they have good living standards per capita.

As long as a society is rich, then capital can replace people.

That is as long as the capital has been invested for the future rather than spent today by the government in a giant ponzi scheme. Sadly, most governments don't invests pension contributions for the future but rather squander them today. I'm not sure what the Singapore government has done.

Another issue is that the current banking system is set up in such a way that it collapses if growth is not perpetual. Essentially, an amount of new borrowing equal to the interest payments on existing borrowing must occur each year or the system collapses.

Thank the bankers and quite possibly the Singapore government for the need for population and economic growth to be perpetual.

Of course, ultimately it can't be...

edit on 17-2-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)

Money can't wipe your ass, feed and bathe you or give you a shoulder to cry on. It has no feelings and is cold and uncaring. Since when would capitalism take care of the elderly.......properly?

Singapore is a Freemason power base.
Kick them out, and then you'll be able to turn things around.

Originally posted by Noobastronomer

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by muse7
Seems pretty childish to me. No one should have the right to tell another human being where they can and cannot go in this world.

In that case, I'll be right round to live in your house. I hope your wife doesn't mind me sharing your bed with the two of you.

Occupying a certain area of land on Earth is entirely different from Choosing who you live with in that private space of yours ....Not a fair argument really

Lol don't expect to have an intelligent argument. These are the same people who compare apartment buildings to high powered rifles.

Originally posted by Noobastronomer

Occupying a certain area of land on Earth is entirely different from Choosing who you live with in that private space of yours ....Not a fair argument really

So people have the right to go anywhere in the world they choose?

Just not where you are living?

Originally posted by Noobastronomer

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by muse7
Seems pretty childish to me. No one should have the right to tell another human being where they can and cannot go in this world.

In that case, I'll be right round to live in your house. I hope your wife doesn't mind me sharing your bed with the two of you.

Occupying a certain area of land on Earth is entirely different from Choosing who you live with in that private space of yours ....Not a fair argument really

I dont think its different. The only difference is scale, residents of a house choose who can live with them inside their house, and citizens of a country choose who can live with them inside their country.

reply to post by muse7


Well we will all come around to your house eat all your food ,drink all your alcohol,coke etc ,drive your car until it runs out of gas then call you on the mobile we found in your desk and call you and make you pay for a cab back to your house ,use your credit card and cash to buy whatever we want ,not work ,party with our friends in your house ,call back home to our country and use your landline, and if you bitch or complain one bit about what we do in your house, we will sue you for discrimination and racism and have you kicked out of your home and in court and then in jail for treating us like dirt, and we will vilify you and your country on world news for what you have done to a minority group like us ,which you have NO Right to DO

Go and watch David Dukes videos on You Tube and wake up to yourself, and whats being done to countries cultures ,heritage ,traditions ,by having This FORCED ON THEM against their will ,by the scum in the U.N

Not surprised that liberals want to let everyone in - with their "we are going to look after you" sales pitch, wonder who they are going to vote for?

Their agenda is obvious.

Originally posted by ollncasino
The problem is that Singapore has one of the lowest birthrates in the world.

On average, a women needs to have about 2.1 to 2.2 children each to maintain the population.

Singapore currently has a birthrate of 1.15 children per women. It's population will half in one generation.

Singaporean women can either start having at least 3 children each (instead of 1) or allow massive immigration.

Otherwise Singapore will economically collapse.

Specifically answering to your last statement there. How do you figure this?

Why is it not a good thing if they actually get a smaller population naturally by having 1.15 children for each woman? Why is constant neverending growth always better?

Is it not true that automation and computers today make less people needed as workers?

In any country with underemployment, a lesser population would balance things out not only by getting a higher employment rate but also having a lesser drain on the taxes from the wellfare systems, freeing up more funds to be used in a more efficient manner. So why is this a bad thing again?

Surely even you must see that there is a point where any further population increase is undesirable. Where would you draw this line?

everyone in singapore is a foreign immigrant except for a few orang asli who may have camped on the island occasionally. singapore is predomionately chinese immigrants with a nice mix of indian, malaysian and others. they prefer to hate the filipinos and indonesians, thais and vietnamese now, while forgetting they are foreigners.

it is sad to see the arrogant simpliity of the singaporeans as they espouse their own superiority. but there is no doubt that a few years in that banal, soulless factory of a society they call their country would make a bothinking simpleton of any monkey.

Having been to Singapore on numerous occasions and spending craploads of money into their economy, I will never return there again being as my dirty, uncouth foriegn ass and horrible money is not wanted..

Singapore is just an airport transfer point anyway... Pffft

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by Noobastronomer

Occupying a certain area of land on Earth is entirely different from Choosing who you live with in that private space of yours ....Not a fair argument really

So people have the right to go anywhere in the world they choose?

Just not where you are living?

edit on 17-2-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)

counting hairs much?.....going in circles again....like i said. not a fair comparison ...nobody wins in this argument..It all depends on one's opinion i guess

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
Singapore is a tiny island state, about half the size of hongkong which has a densely packed population of 7 million today. Singapore plans to have 7 million within that small island? Insane.

Singapore is not USA, China, Africa or Australia with a HUGE landmass that easily accomodate billions of immigrants and everyone well fed if resources are used and managed wisely. Singapore has no mineral resource, only a well placed geological position in the world, the centre for trade, finance and tourism with its intelligent and secular workforce.

Immigration and cheap foreign labour is never an answer to economics. Economics do not stand alone by itself and is only a contributing factor to the building of a nation.

Slavery was outlawed for both economic and social reasons, as the costs were high. Immigration and cheap foreign labour is nothing more than legalized slavery and much worse off, as at least slaves have their lodging and food taken care of. Immigration and cheap foreign labour only impoverise eveyone, including the citizens whom will be out of job or have low wages to compete against rising inflation and property prices. Only the rich will get richer from slavery while everyone else suffers.

Better the economic policies rely heavily on well trained local labour with better productivity through intelligent use of technology in value add services and manufacturing output, which will give better wages to build up a strong, reliable and loyal supporting middle class.

GDP growth figures are great. But if the citizens are discontented, the GDP figures can easily go south in a flash, as Libya, Tunisia and Egypt found out. And packing 7 million into that dense small space with strangers competting and reacting with one another is gonna cause a heck lotta social discontent, with blame falling squarely on the state administrators.

I thank you so much for understanding the pain and cries of local Singaporeans. As I speak, my close buddy (in his 30s) has been jobless for many years.

Our leaders remain super rich (the richest in the world), while the locals in Singapore trying to survive so hard. How long will this go on?
Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand too have low birth rates.
But their government didn't dump in 50% foreigners and immigrants.

That just shows how xenophobia is downright stupid and misguided.

Singapore, a city-state built by FOREIGNERS (British empire) and massively populated by Chinese and Malay people from the very first decades of its colonial existence...

In a totalitarian city where you get arrested and fined a steep price for stupid things like spitting on the ground, people are protesting against... immigration!?

Wow.

Talk about a bunch of fascist yuppies sitting on their privileges and attempting to make sure that no one else takes a bite out of these.

This looks all too familiar, I don't know why...

Originally posted by NeoVain
Why is it not a good thing if they actually get a smaller population naturally by having 1.15 children for each woman? Why is constant neverending growth always better?

Is it not true that automation and computers today make less people needed as workers?

In any country with underemployment, a lesser population would balance things out not only by getting a higher employment rate but also having a lesser drain on the taxes from the wellfare systems, freeing up more funds to be used in a more efficient manner. So why is this a bad thing again?

Surely even you must see that there is a point where any further population increase is undesirable. Where would you draw this line?

Well said. Automation is certainly getting rid of low skilled intensive labour with the rise of all types of robots in the workplace and homes. It is such automation that will level the playing field for nations that have low birth rates but a better standard of living compared to those with huge cheap labour nations.

There is the fear that robots will replaced workers, but that is misplaced. It still needs human to programme, build and maintain those robots, and free up the workforce to focus on other more technologically advance products in our ever advancing increase in tech knowledge.

Look at the washing machine robot. Did it replace any housewife? It didn't, and because of its ease and uniformity of cleaning standards, today, whole new cleaning industries had been build around it till you can even drop a coin into a slot just to get your washing done now. And makers of washing machine had progress beyond that model into better and advance quality models in the competitive markets to make life easier for everyone.

So too will robotic tech be the same.

For Singapore and other similiar nations that lacked mineral resources and cheap local labour, developing and manufacturing robots and 3 d printers are the way to go if it wants to be ahead of the game. Currently, USA and China are competting in the same industries, for all do know the value it would push up GDP when such products are sold, which creates employment and better wages.

If not, there are still 2nd tier industries which requires less labour but gives better growth, such as health and energy products. Singapore is small and will always lack the numbers to produce or profit massively, but if it can find its niche in terms of trust and quality, its citizens need not starve or rely on cheap foreign labour or mass immigration that will only cause social discontent.

And with the GDP revenues in, it can take care of its few million aged citizens through social welfare than to have an high immigration policy which in the end drains the revenue in terms of taking care of them as well in security, health, education, social expenditure, etc, and worse, pushing up inflation and property prices.

There are some americans, brits and pratically everyone else who is suffering in the world due to their own nation's economic mismanagement, fleeing into other nations as migrants or cheap labour. And it is common for these types to spit upon the host nations and scream racism or xenophobia whent the citizens there are left behind socially and economically.

But I do believe that it is not racism or xenophobia by the host citizens, but a real cry of despair as they lost their jobs in their own homeland to a foreign immigrant, something that is happening to America today as the huge amount of wetbacks had lowered salaries accross the country. Seems its happening to many other nations as well....

Originally posted by wisdomnotemotion

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101
Singapore is a tiny island state, about half the size of hongkong which has a densely packed population of 7 million today. Singapore plans to have 7 million within that small island? Insane.

Singapore is not USA, China, Africa or Australia with a HUGE landmass that easily accomodate billions of immigrants and everyone well fed if resources are used and managed wisely. Singapore has no mineral resource, only a well placed geological position in the world, the centre for trade, finance and tourism with its intelligent and secular workforce.

Immigration and cheap foreign labour is never an answer to economics. Economics do not stand alone by itself and is only a contributing factor to the building of a nation.

Slavery was outlawed for both economic and social reasons, as the costs were high. Immigration and cheap foreign labour is nothing more than legalized slavery and much worse off, as at least slaves have their lodging and food taken care of. Immigration and cheap foreign labour only impoverise eveyone, including the citizens whom will be out of job or have low wages to compete against rising inflation and property prices. Only the rich will get richer from slavery while everyone else suffers.

Better the economic policies rely heavily on well trained local labour with better productivity through intelligent use of technology in value add services and manufacturing output, which will give better wages to build up a strong, reliable and loyal supporting middle class.

GDP growth figures are great. But if the citizens are discontented, the GDP figures can easily go south in a flash, as Libya, Tunisia and Egypt found out. And packing 7 million into that dense small space with strangers competting and reacting with one another is gonna cause a heck lotta social discontent, with blame falling squarely on the state administrators.

I thank you so much for understanding the pain and cries of local Singaporeans. As I speak, my close buddy (in his 30s) has been jobless for many years.

Our leaders remain super rich (the richest in the world), while the locals in Singapore trying to survive so hard. How long will this go on?
Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand too have low birth rates.
But their government didn't dump in 50% foreigners and immigrants.

So why don't you try taking back the "pains and cries" to those super rich leaders, instead of pointing the finger at the immigrants and immigration. You just admit the issue that the ultra-rich oligarchy are maintaining their wealth by empoverishing the people in Singapore.

SOOO, logically, if the roots of the economic mess in which Singaporeans seem to be, according to you, is the super-rich oligarchs, what's the point in redirecting the issue on immigration? Bring down those ultra-rich capitalists! Bring down their social order, from which they derive and maintain their profits!

I dunno, I'm just suggesting clues...

"Your" place has been "dumped" by foreigners and immigrants for more than 170 years. Since when, exactly, this is wrong to LET new people in? What is your damage?

reply to post by ollncasino


this is true for the whole world. Check the UN stats on world birth rates. Parts of Russia, the US, and Europe will be un-populated.

Birth rates are WAY down everywhere.

reply to post by muse7


you cant move into my house......its full...

reply to post by Maslo

reply to post by MidnightTide


exactly...

reply to post by zedVSzardoz


I agree that birth rates are dropping everywhere. Thanks to UN WHO intervention with BIRTH CONTROL, who STUPIDLY claims over population and lack of mineral resources to support the world, such as 'peak oil', etc.

Worse hit was Africa. It is NOT poverty that cause suffering in Africa, which led to massive birth control efforts there. It is endermic corruption by its leaders and flunkies who had MIS-MANAGED those nations ECONOMICALLY and SOCIALLY. Africa still have VERY MUCH agricultural and mineral resources UNTAPPED today. Who will tap them now? China will, and robbing the africans blind. It is insane.

Afghanistan is FILLED with trillion dollars worth of resources untapped. But which human wants to form a family nucleas in that misused religion wasteland whereby education is slaughtered and health kept regressive by the milatants?

Europe and USA has the most educated people there, whom are fully capable to make that hop to space to tap the riches there, as well as MANY closed down mines still unexhausted locally. And yet, thanks to its corrupted and partisan political leaders, it is now mired in unneccesary poverty, so much that like the afghanis, who dares to think of having children today?

The huge underwater landmass in the South China Sea offers great riches, and yet all asian leaders is doing right now is to bicker, postulate and fight, rather than to SHARE and tap those wealth. Which asian parent, like everyone else, want their children to be born to feed wars?

The solutions are staring right at our faces to get us all out of the funk we are in today, around the world, and yet, leaders REFUSE to do anything correct. We, as a race, will only doom ourselves soon, no need for any outside agency to do it. We do it to ourselves, readily......

reply to post by Echtelion

That just shows how xenophobia is downright stupid and misguided.

If you really consider opposition to 1/3 increase of the population by 2030 xenophobia, then I am a proud xenophobe.