(30-01-2013, 03:08 PM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]After 20 years , we know the 'stop at 2' policy implemented 20 years ago was a big mistake, now we could face another big mistake that can only be proven 20 or 30 years later. Who should be responsible for this ?
Is not a mistake because the government never admitted it was a mistake so it was intended.
By 2030 I will be close to 60 retired along with most other folks here nobody will want to hire us by then. We will have nest eggs our stocks and maybe a roof or two over our heads no worries.
The younger generation have my sympathies will grow up in a stiff environment of competition from cradle to grave will have to fight for a place for everything
(30-01-2013, 03:51 PM)sgd Wrote: [ -> ] (30-01-2013, 03:08 PM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]After 20 years , we know the 'stop at 2' policy implemented 20 years ago was a big mistake, now we could face another big mistake that can only be proven 20 or 30 years later. Who should be responsible for this ?
Is not a mistake because the government never admitted it was a mistake so it was intended.
The devil is in the details (or assumptions) my friend. In 1970, the TFR was nearly 2.1. If our TFR had maintained at 2.1, the yearly number of babies born today should be nearly 70,000 per year. Just by tweaking one variable, our population problem has been "solved" and we won't need to have any new citizens. If the TFR had maintained at 2.1 since 1970, our "native" population would have increased by 600,000 (40years * 15,000 births - my chin chai estimate) without any need to take in new citizens or PRs.........
"Stop at 2" implemented 20 years ago??? more like 40+ years.
Anyway, even if TFR is at 1.7, 1.8 or 1.9, we will not have much of the aging problem.
The problem is that it is at 1.2 and going lower.
It's nice to hammer anything from keyboard.
So what happen when we reached the 7m and yet the population continues to grey?
import another 5m???
Is the government kicking the can down the road?
No, i got no solution....but then i am not paid millions with the support of bright scholars to solve the problem.
(30-01-2013, 05:57 PM)camelking Wrote: [ -> ]So what happen when we reached the 7m and yet the population continues to grey?
import another 5m???
Is the government kicking the can down the road?
No, i got no solution....but then i am not paid millions with the support of bright scholars to solve the problem.
Export them (the grey ones) to JB??
(30-01-2013, 07:20 PM)Nammo Wrote: [ -> ]Export them (the grey ones) to JB??
Need two links soon. Traffic jams are terrible.
(30-01-2013, 07:22 PM)edragon Wrote: [ -> ] (30-01-2013, 07:20 PM)Nammo Wrote: [ -> ]Export them (the grey ones) to JB??
Need two links soon. Traffic jams are terrible.
Good idea! One for incoming (the talented ones) and one for outgoing (the expired ones), 2 way communication.
(30-01-2013, 07:24 PM)Nammo Wrote: [ -> ] (30-01-2013, 07:22 PM)edragon Wrote: [ -> ] (30-01-2013, 07:20 PM)Nammo Wrote: [ -> ]Export them (the grey ones) to JB??
Need two links soon. Traffic jams are terrible.
Good idea! One for incoming (the talented ones) and one for outgoing (the expired ones), 2 way communication.
Don't forgot to impose "export levy"......
Long live Singapore Limited!
Yes I agree with you...
We should focus how to optimise this event, yr 2020 6M population. yr 2030 7M population...
When you are old and poor, nobody will sympathise you
(30-01-2013, 03:51 PM)sgd Wrote: [ -> ] (30-01-2013, 03:08 PM)cfa Wrote: [ -> ]After 20 years , we know the 'stop at 2' policy implemented 20 years ago was a big mistake, now we could face another big mistake that can only be proven 20 or 30 years later. Who should be responsible for this ?
Is not a mistake because the government never admitted it was a mistake so it was intended.
By 2030 I will be close to 60 retired along with most other folks here nobody will want to hire us by then. We will have nest eggs our stocks and maybe a roof or two over our heads no worries.
The younger generation have my sympathies will grow up in a stiff environment of competition from cradle to grave will have to fight for a place for everything
i wonder if the white paper about population ever considered about factors such as living temperature in the island? if more concrete walls are built more cements for malls, infrastructure, the heat will be even more unbearable..
is the paper revolves around GDP figures, economic growth only?
what about women kena molested in mrt trains due to crowding effect?
i think this white paper is an insane exercise.