15 years to reach 6.5 million pop.?
-
If 6.5 millions...then it will take us 2 hrs to find a table in a food court....30 mins wait for a mrt train with a standing spot ......40 mins queue at the cashier in NTUC...
Most importantly...forget abt finding any parking lot anywhere -
alright then:Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:You will probably get the same reception if you asked people in 1992 that if our MRT lines could really handle the population of 2007 in rush hour. They will probably find it hard to comprehend.
Can we take 45% increase? Probably. The ability of a nation to take it's population depends on its infrastructure as well. In terms of sheer land area we still have more then enough land to house an additional 45%. Of course new things will have to be built and current things upgraded.
At the end of the day, all said and done is this: Can we really, or pratically cap our population at where it is now? If not, shouldn't we be discussing more pratical things instead of always playing the tune of "more people=bad"?
anyway, go ask Joe Average and Jane Ordinary what the MRT trains PRICES are like during peak hours and if it can handle a 45% increase, they'll probably piss themselves, with faces white as a sheet of paper
coz, with a bigger population, transport companies will have to cope with "an increased number of busses or trains", "increased mantainence costs", "increased mapower costs", "increased taxes", " a stable economy".......
and increase costs -
Well, China's citizens don't have much of a choice, do they? It's either that or jail.Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:Yeah I agree with you, but shouldn't they work at stemming that outflow instead?
Looking at China's citizens, inspite of their corruption ridden government, they are immensely proud of their country (not government)... -
Never short of land for your new born baby!!
Updated and complete image.Note the reclamation in Jurong Island is almost completed, while reclamation in Tuas East Extension is being carried out.
Two projects will add 40 km2 of land.Jurong Island.,after reclamation, is 30km2.
Changi Airport is 1250 ha or 12.50 km2.
Also note the big piece of land east of Changi Airport,
twice the size of the airport.
In end of 2004 ,Sg is 699 km2.In the past 10 years,53km2 has been added.fr Statistics Dept.Yes 5300 ha. -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
Are all these land masses in Tuas and Changi Airport areas meant for people to raise kids?? Or commerce??
Never short of land for your new born baby!!
[b]Updated and complete image.Note the reclamation in Jurong Island is almost completed, while reclamation in Tuas East Extension is being carried out.
Two projects will add 40 km2 of land.Jurong Island.,after reclamation, is 30km2.
Changi Airport is 1250 ha or 12.50 km2.
Also note the big piece of land east of Changi Airport,
twice the size of the airport.
In end of 2004 ,Sg is 699 km2.In the past 10 years,53km2 has been added.fr Statistics Dept.Yes 5300 ha.[/b] -
Originally posted by chaser77:
[/b]
Hail to more horrific traffic jams. Hail for more stress and competition. Hail for even more crowded public transport. Hail for the jostling for walking space in shopping centres. Hail for longer queues for food during lunch hours. The lists shall go on....
Are Singaporeans just numbers that generate $$$ to the government? I hope the government will stop playing 'Sim Singapore'.
I think that it's clear that the sing gov doesn't put much importance on the quality of life; they know that locals will migrate to greener pastures and they would rather forego the people's loyalty for the sake of a bigger (and better???) economy. While it's true that singapore wants to remain competitive (God forbid that other south east asian countries should overtake singapore), there should be more balance drawn between the quality of life and the growing economy. Moreover, with a reduced quality of life, sing would become less attractive to the FTs and sing gov seems to forget that FTs are more mobile than the locals.
I guess one upside is that the locals shouldn't worry so much about increasing competition in the workforce; the higher the population, the higher the number of jobs created (provided that the gov does foresee the creation of new jobs) -
I think lionnoisy forgot to add in the reclaimed land in P.Tekong...Originally posted by ShutterBug:Are all these land masses in Tuas and Changi Airport areas meant for people to raise kids?? Or commerce?? -
well, have a read of this article i posted..
clicky here => The Myth of the Need to Increase Population
and hey.. more people = bad.. think about it.. the town is like a moshpit during weekends.. if there was more, what then? double-decked town?
btw, more people really is bad... think global they say.. i am.. we're way overpopulated already.. i think way over the ability for the planet to sustain us.. which is why there is global warming
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:You will probably get the same reception if you asked people in 1992 that if our MRT lines could really handle the population of 2007 in rush hour. They will probably find it hard to comprehend.
Can we take 45% increase? Probably. The ability of a nation to take it's population depends on its infrastructure as well. In terms of sheer land area we still have more then enough land to house an additional 45%. Of course new things will have to be built and current things upgraded.
At the end of the day, all said and done is this: Can we really, or pratically cap our population at where it is now? If not, shouldn't we be discussing more pratical things instead of always playing the tune of "more people=bad"? -
If I were the government, my eyes would light up with dollar signs.Originally posted by the Bear:well, have a read of this article i posted..
clicky here => The Myth of the Need to Increase Population
and hey.. more people = bad.. think about it.. the town is like a moshpit during weekends.. if there was more, what then? double-decked town?
btw, more people really is bad... think global they say.. i am.. we're way overpopulated already.. i think way over the ability for the planet to sustain us.. which is why there is global warming
Imagine the additional revenue you can squeeze out from these new citizens. -
End of the day, money is what matters most in the eyes of the MIW, not the welfare of the current population. Based on the rate people are reproducing, they would need a hell lot of FTs... so more and more people would be replaced by these FTs leading to a whole new batch of problems.
From what we can all see, they need to solve this problems:
1) Creating more job positions while maintaining a balance between providing for the locals and FTs.
2) Road congestion and transportation - enough said.
3) Housing - more people = more demand. Resale prices would probably be driven up forcing more people to be saddled with lifelong debts.
4) Crime
5) NS - are male Singaporeans at a disadvantage compared to male FTs? Male Singaporeans do need to serve their reservist leading to what you might call unfairness.
6) Having more people would probably lead to greater competition for jobs, hence the need for people to further commit to their job. These would probably lead to reduced birthrates... thus defeating the actual purpose of getting Singaporeans to maintain a healthy and positive fertility rate.. -
That's the problem with our gov, for every step they take to try and move things forward, they created more issues that brings them back 3 steps.Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:End of the day, money is what matters most in the eyes of the MIW, not the welfare of the current population. Based on the rate people are reproducing, they would need a hell lot of FTs... so more and more people would be replaced by these FTs leading to a whole new batch of problems.
From what we can all see, they need to solve this problems:
1) Creating more job positions while maintaining a balance between providing for the locals and FTs.
2) Road congestion and transportation - enough said.
3) Housing - more people = more demand. Resale prices would probably be driven up forcing more people to be saddled with lifelong debts.
4) Crime
5) NS - are male Singaporeans at a disadvantage compared to male FTs? Male Singaporeans do need to serve their reservist leading to what you might call unfairness.
6) Having more people would probably lead to greater competition for jobs, hence the need for people to further commit to their job. These would probably lead to reduced birthrates... thus defeating the actual purpose of getting Singaporeans to maintain a healthy and positive fertility rate..
Bigger problem with them, is that they NEVER admit to any screw ups...
That's why, I always view them as LPPL... -
I agree with you, somehow they current batch of leaders seem to prefer shortcuts. They may have 10 - 12 bright ideas, but I feel that they always take the easiest one to implement.Originally posted by ShutterBug:That's the problem with our gov, for every step they take to try and move things forward, they created more issues that brings them back 3 steps.
Bigger problem with them, is that they NEVER admit to any screw ups...
That's why, I always view them as LPPL... -
Then I say; WTF for?Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:I agree with you, somehow they current batch of leaders seem to prefer shortcuts. They may have 10 - 12 bright ideas, but I feel that they always take the easiest one to implement. -
Take last year figures of new citizens and PR and allow for some
losing rate,i estimate 800,000 new citizens and new PR
in the common 15 years.
new PR 58200x 15 yearsx 70% retaining rate=610,000
new citizens 13,900 x 15 yearsx 90% retaining rate=187,000
TOTAL 800,000.U can make any discount u like!!Want to be a S'pore citizen or PR? Click here
---http://www.todayonline.com/articles/171658.asp
Sheralyn Tay
[email protected]
FOREIGNERS thinking of applying for Singapore Permanent Residency or citizenship will soon be able to assess their chances of success online.
.
In a move that could save potential applicants waiting time and money, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) is launching a free self-assessment tool at www.ica.gov.sg on Thursday.
.
The Naturalisation Eligibility Tool allows foreigners working or living here to check their eligibility based on personal information such as type of work pass held, occupation, nationality, educational qualifications and annual income, as well as on their spouse and children's details. Those overseas can also use the system, but if they lack a work pass, their results will only be speculative.
.
The system indicates — using a "traffic light" approach — if the aspirant should go ahead with an application.
.
A red light means the user has not met the minimum criteria, and is encouraged to try again when his personal status changes. Amber means the applicant can be reassessed in a year or two, while the green light (picture) means the minimum requirements have been met.
.
The online form takes about five minutes to fill and results are given instantaneously. Ms Clara Tan, ICA's head of Naturalisation, noted that other countries — such as the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand — have similar systems.
.
The tool is purely preliminary, she stressed. Indication of eligibility is no guarantee for approval.
.
Currently, an applicant for Permanent Resident status has to wait at least three months for a result. An aspiring citizen has to submit the forms in person and sit for an interview, during which he or she will be told of their chances of success. To go ahead, he or she then pays a $90 processing fee, with a six-month wait for the result.
.
The ICA hopes the tool will improve the approval rate. Last year the agency approved 58,200 and 13,900 applications for PR and citizenship status, respectively. -
Originally posted by bigmouthjoe:
Having a higher population may not necessarily lead to more competition for all jobs, maybe in some industries, but not all, there will always be specialized jobs which need to be filled by highly skilled locals and FTs. So the gov has to do something about the proportion of foreign and local talents in order to create more balanced healthy competition between locals and foreigners.
6) Having more people would probably lead to greater competition for jobs, hence the need for people to further commit to their job. These would probably lead to reduced birthrates... thus defeating the actual purpose of getting Singaporeans to maintain a healthy and positive fertility rate..[/b]
There is also a fear that some people feel that in 15 to 20 years time, they are not ready to retire and need to continue earning income, and that they might be displaced by newer, better talent. It's not that these people don't want to retire, it's just that they can't afford to, if they did, they would have a reduced quality of life or forced to move to country where they can afford to live. -
2.Good to have more people to share cost of defense !!
you must be out of your mind.
the only thing you can think of when singapore pop reach 6.5million is someone to share defence cost??
do you worry about jos competitions? job availability? social cohesion amond too many diverse immigrant? cost of living such as higher housing prices? lower standard of living as a result of over population?
dont just kiss PAP ass for the sake of it. find a better reason to do it man. -
[b]Having a higher population may not necessarily lead to more competition for all jobs, maybe in some industries, but not all, there will always be specialized jobs which need to be filled by highly skilled locals and FTs. So the gov has to do something about the proportion of foreign and local talents in order to create more balanced healthy competition between locals and foreigners.
that a perfect scenerio that the govt trying to paint to us. hoping that the system will workout by itself. assuming all companies in singapore will have a social responsibility to take care of fellow singaporeans.
a higher population will causes more problem for the lower and lower middle class as definitely the cost of loving will be raise and their salary will be keep low.
the only reason why govt wish increase pop of singapore is increase pool of taxpayers money, and more ways to tax us. -
Originally posted by reyes:
[/b]
that a perfect scenerio that the govt trying to paint to us. hoping that the system will workout by itself. assuming all companies in singapore will have a social responsibility to take care of fellow singaporeans.
a higher population will causes more problem for the lower and lower middle class as definitely the cost of loving will be raise and their salary will be keep low.
the only reason why govt wish increase pop of singapore is increase pool of taxpayers money, and more ways to tax us.
It may be true to some extent that an extreme meritrocacy system will squeeze out the less talented/bright/hardworking individuals, but that's not the point that i'm trying to make. Sing's economy is also dependent on foreign investment to a certain extent, so the gov has to 'please' the foreigners as well; these foreign companies create jobs for the locals.
I'm not denying that the lower classes will face problems, especially if their salaries does not commensurate with the cost of living, but how does that relate to a higher population? Are you saying that, the higher the population, the lower the salaries will be? If you look at the performance of asian countries, and other countries around the world, salaries of people have increased over the years as well as the population, so how does your theory work? -
what are you saying?Originally posted by iLuVpOrKyPiG:where are we gonna get another 2.5 million people? locally borne singaporeans will become second class citizens.
We already are.. -
less pple ,less competition.
u better stay in Pulau Ubin.or St John Is. -
whoever can get out of SG better get out first
---future of SG---
decreasing size of flats
increasing cost of flats
worsened traffic jam
good jobs for foreigners lousy jobs for local
work till ur last breath
good bye SG -
wrong choice of words lahOriginally posted by valentinoo:whoever can get out of SG better get out first
---future of SG---
decreasing size of flats
increasing cost of flats
worsened traffic jam
good jobs for foreigners lousy jobs for local
work till ur last breath
good bye SG
maids and those labourers in the streets are foreigners too -
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
pls lah how much can u reclaim?
Never short of land for your new born baby!!
[b]Updated and complete image.Note the reclamation in Jurong Island is almost completed, while reclamation in Tuas East Extension is being carried out.
Two projects will add 40 km2 of land.Jurong Island.,after reclamation, is 30km2.
Changi Airport is 1250 ha or 12.50 km2.
Also note the big piece of land east of Changi Airport,
twice the size of the airport.
In end of 2004 ,Sg is 699 km2.In the past 10 years,53km2 has been added.fr Statistics Dept.Yes 5300 ha.[/b] -
not talking bout general workers..but hey who knows, maybe sporeans will start clearing their rubbish, build roads, and build housesOriginally posted by udontknowme:wrong choice of words lah
maids and those labourers in the streets are foreigners too -
Your ability to understand is.... non-existant.Originally posted by lionnoisy:less pple ,less competition.
u better stay in Pulau Ubin.or St John Is.