Taxes for permanent residents should be higher than citizens
-
sama-sama lah.
-
Clear message. If you want to derive the benefits due to citizens, take up citizenship, don't be a free loader, syphon off our capital to your country of origin.Originally posted by curryman:I think u r quite ignorant to start this topic.
what msg are u sending to foreigners?
no countries in this world is doing this double standards that u suggest...
the government is already doing the right thing by limiting the subsidies for PR.
w/o PR singapore economy would crash if u know ur economics well....
On the contrary, it's the citizens who are being treated with double standards. Well, no country in the world ban chewing gums, no country in the world has MM and SM, ..........Limiting subsidies for direct economic consumables is one thing, but what about those indirect economic cost like security?
What makes you think that all the PRs will return home with 1% to 3% increase in income tax?
A PR making $1 million will only pay an extra of $27,800 compared to citizens; while a PR making $100,000 will only need pay an extra of $1,400 compared to citizens.
-
If they serve NS to become citizens, I have no issue with them. It's those that are permanently permanent resident that I have issues with, they stay here enjoying the privilege of our safety and security, yet they don't pay their dues. I know of quite afew, they do not have the intention of staying on in Singapore, they just want to make all the money they can, then go back to their home country.Originally posted by Eiizumi:PR also serve NS is they are around 18 years of age. I have men from CHINA. -
The deduction is not really that substantial, I'd rather they decrease the cost of necessities rather than get the deduction.Originally posted by Jontst78:Then withdraw all the tax rebates that NS Men get? you rather continue to recieve your rebates, or tax PRs higher?
Can anyone verify that FTs are also on the same Tax Table as PRs?
5.5% out of $3,000 is only $165. Distribute it amongst 12 months, it's only $13.75. -
If you live in the same house, you either do your part in maintaining the house, else pay more money to get maids to do the work. No free loaders!!!Originally posted by maurizio13:You can claim that you are citizen and done NS, but who can testify to it. Who knows, I could be a PR fighting for equality for citizens.
Well, the issue isn't about females and males, but permanent resident with citizens. They are two totally different issues. I am merely stating the disparity between permanent residents and citizens. Permanent residents are free riders in the security of our nation, they have no duty in serving Singapore, yet they derived benefits of security accruing to citizens (who serve National Service).
If you live in the same house, you either do your part in maintaining the house, else pay more money to get maids to do the work. No free loaders!!!
Permanent residents who ultimately become citizens should serve their time in national service too, like all Singaporeans do till a certain age. Like I said, issue isn't about females serving national service, as Singaporean females don't serve national service. If Singaporean females serve NS, then it's only right that permanent resident females serve NS. But they don't, so no point of contention here. Please argue logically.
PR receive less benefits than pass holder? Can you please clarify? Like you said, they are receiving less benefits than citizens, which means they are still receiving benefits. If you have no intention of staying on to help build Singapore, just treating it as a circumstance of opportunity. Why should Singapore provide you with benefits? Are permanent resident stakeholders or are they like migratory birds, ready to fly off to their country of origin at the first sign of trouble.
With the current high unemployment trend for Singaporean citizens. What makes you think that those jobs cannot be taken over by true blue Singaporean? Contributing to the economy for now maybe, but it will create long term ills. The money they save, if they use it for retirement in Singapore, there is no doubt that it will somehow contribute to the economy. If they decide to take the savings and go back China or Malaysia, it will be bad for the economy. The status of their citizenship shows their future intention, doesn't it? If you have your future retirement plans in Singapore, you take up citizenship. Why remain a permanet resident?
The status of PR only needs, I think 2 years of work in Singapore as P1 or P2 employment pass.
Permanent resident pay the same taxes as citizens, but citizens have the added disadvantage of having to serve national service 2 + 10 years. A higher tax rate of afew percent needs to recognise this disparity.
Are female Singaporean free loaders too? They don't maintain the house. How do female Singaporean contribute to Singapore society? By giving birth? Female PR also giving birth too and these PR babies eventually have to serve NS because second generation PR have to serve NS.
Let say your wish is granted and PR have to pay higher tax and other benefits, PR will start leaving Singapore in seach of better home because they are being treated as second class. Then what happened? Singapore will have shortage of manpower and due to lack of manpower, MNC pull out and investment will reduce. Don't forget, whether you like it or not, some PR filling in top management position of local and MNC. Many MNC send their top executive from their HQ and these top exec will eventually become PR.
In order for Singapore to maintain economy powerhouse, Singapore need PR and foreigner talent. If you treat them bad, they will move and if they move, MNC and investment will also move because MNC & investment will follow where the talents go. Why do MNC want to invest in Singapore if there is not enough citizens to fill the positions?
PR have many disadvantages. PR pay more for house, interest rate with HDB and now PR cannot loan from HDB. PR do not get grant for resale flat like citizen. Now PR have to pay more for medicine.
If you argue that PR take your resources, then let me ask you, where do you get your resources? Foreigner and some of these foreigners happened to be Singapore PR. Your water and food from Malaysian. Sand and granite from Indonesian (and others now). Oil from the Arabs. For those foreigner here in Singapore, they also pay their own resources at the market rate same as Singaporean. Shouldn't they get a cheaper price?
FYI, PR have to renew their PR every 5 or 10 years. Without employment, PR can kiss their PRship goodbye. -
Just saying that so that I'm not misunderstood to be pro PR, pro PAP or whatever.Originally posted by maurizio13:You can claim that you are citizen and done NS, but who can testify to it. Who knows, I could be a PR fighting for equality for citizens.
Do you see the connection? PRs and female citizens are equally freeloaders as PRs are, aren't they?Originally posted by maurizio13:Well, the issue isn't about females and males, but permanent resident with citizens. They are two totally different issues. I am merely stating the disparity between permanent residents and citizens. Permanent residents are free riders in the security of our nation, they have no duty in serving Singapore, yet they derived benefits of security accruing to citizens (who serve National Service).
If you live in the same house, you either do your part in maintaining the house, else pay more money to get maids to do the work. No free loaders!!!
Permanent residents who ultimately become citizens should serve their time in national service too, like all Singaporeans do till a certain age. Like I said, issue isn't about females serving national service, as Singaporean females don't serve national service. If Singaporean females serve NS, then it's only right that permanent resident females serve NS. But they don't, so no point of contention here. Please argue logically.
Unless the PR criteria is serverly flawed, the PRs living here should be already contributing to the local economy in a positive way. Why do you want to slap PRs with a liability? The benefits they are currently recieving give them a reason to be PRs. Remove all benefits for PRs then what seperates them from pass holders?Originally posted by maurizio13:PR receive less benefits than pass holder? Can you please clarify? [/quote]
Never said they recieved less benefits than an employment pass holder.Originally posted by maurizio13:
Like you said, they are receiving less benefits than citizens, which means they are still receiving benefits. If you have no intention of staying on to help build Singapore, just treating it as a circumstance of opportunity. Why should Singapore provide you with benefits? Are permanent resident stakeholders or are they like migratory birds, ready to fly off to their country of origin at the first sign of trouble.
The fact that they are working here already contributes to GDP. And the high unemployment should be addressed by first and very foremost, dealing with the FTs(emp pass holders). Like it or not, PRs are an essential contributor to the economy, regardless of whether they retire here or not. If you are going to slam them with a 2 year NS liablity, or higher taxes, its going to be very detrimental.Originally posted by maurizio13:With the current high unemployment trend for Singaporean citizens. What makes you think that those jobs cannot be taken over by true blue Singaporean? Contributing to the economy for now maybe, but it will create long term ills. The money they save, if they use it for retirement in Singapore, there is no doubt that it will somehow contribute to the economy. If they decide to take the savings and go back China or Malaysia, it will be bad for the economy. The status of their citizenship shows their future intention, doesn't it? If you have your future retirement plans in Singapore, you take up citizenship. Why remain a permanet resident?
The rationale for that is to prove your employability, hence not become an economic liability after become a PR.Originally posted by maurizio13:The status of PR only needs, I think 2 years of work in Singapore as P1 or P2 employment pass.
[quote]Originally posted by maurizio13:
Permanent resident pay the same taxes as citizens, but citizens have the added disadvantage of having to serve national service 2 + 10 years. A higher tax rate of afew percent needs to recognise this disparity.NS-men recieve Tax rebates, everyone else doesn't, for NS. Do we remove those rebates and charge higher taxes to PRs and not citizens who do not serve NS?
The very foundation of Singapore's economy is built on the accumulation of physical wealth and then growing that wealth. This accumulation of physical wealth is actually thru the CPF. Charge higher taxes to PRs, and risk a drastic drop in CPF contributions.
Do consider the fallout of the such a move. -
Originally posted by mark_docent:
By virtue of females being citizens, they are already a part of the household. Whether they deserve to do NS, it's for the government to decide. Can you see that these 2 topics are distinctly different, the topic is "taxes for permanent residents should be higher than citizens", NOT "should females Singaporeans serve NS".
[b]If you live in the same house, you either do your part in maintaining the house, else pay more money to get maids to do the work. No free loaders!!!
Are female Singaporean free loaders too? They don't maintain the house. How do female Singaporean contribute to Singapore society? By giving birth? Female PR also giving birth too and these PR babies eventually have to serve NS because second generation PR have to serve NS.
Let say your wish is granted and PR have to pay higher tax and other benefits, PR will start leaving Singapore in seach of better home because they are being treated as second class. Then what happened? Singapore will have shortage of manpower and due to lack of manpower, MNC pull out and investment will reduce. Don't forget, whether you like it or not, some PR filling in top management position of local and MNC. Many MNC send their top executive from their HQ and these top exec will eventually become PR.
In order for Singapore to maintain economy powerhouse, Singapore need PR and foreigner talent. If you treat them bad, they will move and if they move, MNC and investment will also move because MNC & investment will follow where the talents go. Why do MNC want to invest in Singapore if there is not enough citizens to fill the positions?
PR have many disadvantages. PR pay more for house, interest rate with HDB and now PR cannot loan from HDB. PR do not get grant for resale flat like citizen. Now PR have to pay more for medicine.
If you argue that PR take your resources, then let me ask you, where do you get your resources? Foreigner and some of these foreigners happened to be Singapore PR. Your water and food from Malaysian. Sand and granite from Indonesian (and others now). Oil from the Arabs. For those foreigner here in Singapore, they also pay their own resources at the market rate same as Singaporean. Shouldn't they get a cheaper price?
FYI, PR have to renew their PR every 5 or 10 years. Without employment, PR can kiss their PRship goodbye.[/b]
What makes you think that they will leave for another country? Didn't we just increase the GST by 2% to 7%? Can you give me the figures of PRs who left Singapore because of the extra 2% GST? Are there Singaporeans leaving because of the 2% increase in GST? Well, if they want to enjoy the benefits, all the better if they convert from PR to citizen. Your scenario seems like a doomsday apocalypse, like as if all the companies will pull out.
If these companies send their executives over to work, do you think they have a choice of not coming? If I am the CEO of a MNC, I send my middle management over to another country, do you think he has a choice? Firstly you have to determine who is in charge of running the company. Secondly, taxes is the least understood of all subjects, if I am seconded to let's say China to work. Do you think that tomorrow I will be going to the library to find out the tax consequence of my employment in China? Do you think I will call up the Big 4 to find out the taxes? How many will actually do it? The shortfall in manpower can be accomodated by currently unemployed Singaporeans. I won't call people making $4,000 to $5,000 talents. These positions can be readily filled by Singaporeans.
I think all your arguments stems from watching our Mediacorp news, where the news are flavoured to suit the regime. Fear tactics. If this happens all of our Singaporean women will become maids......yada yada yada.......
Pay more for house, does not mean that services such as security is provided for. It just means that their housing is not subsidised, nothing more. No provision of loans is because that they are not citizens, does not mean that without the loans, the government would be able to derive income to finance our military or police.
Those resources that the government purchased and resells to us, have gone through some processes, they are not the same water or crude oil anymore. Whether they pay same rate or not, is not a matter of national policy, it's a commercial decision made by businesses.
But security is provided by the government, these services are indirect and invisible. Singaporeans and Permanent Residents (PR) pay income taxes under the same tax table; Singaporeans serve national service (NS), whereas Permanent Residents (PR) don't, so obviously there has to be some distinction, else, why would anyone want to be a Singapore citizen since being one carries the burden of serving NS. -
touch wood.. wat if war breaks out with the PRs home country.. lets use an example to illustrate easier..
singapore and malaysia declared war.. if PRs were to serve NS, where do they pledge loyalty to? singapore or malaysia? will they leak our military secrets? wat if they shoot us from the back if they still pledge loyalty to their original home country?
even if they do not, what abt female PRs? send them to NS? so if male PRs are sent to NS, female PRs are the freeloaders now? or shld they pay more tax? -
The reason I brought Singaporean Women into the equation, is your justification for higher taxes, is that PRs don't serve NS, just like female citizens, and they both enjoy the same protection, the same tax table, just employment opportunities.Originally posted by maurizio13:By virtue of females being citizens, they are already a part of the household. Whether they deserve to do NS, it's for the government to decide. Can you see that these 2 topics are distinctly different, the topic is "taxes for permanent residents should be higher than citizens", NOT "should females Singaporeans serve NS".
Don't you see that laying higher taxes on PRs can be use as a precedence for laying higher taxes on women? As they too don't serve NS, and contribute CPF and taxes just as PRs do. CPF and GDP contributions being the main reasons our country takes in PRs.
(not that I agree on the CPF or PAP system, but thats another story for another day)
There is already a distiction, citizens do NS, but get a better deal than PRs, And PRs get a better deal than Pass holders...Originally posted by maurizio13:But security is provided by the government, these services are indirect and invisible. Singaporeans and Permanent Residents (PR) pay income taxes under the same tax table; Singaporeans serve national service (NS), whereas Permanent Residents (PR) don't, so obviously there has to be some distinction, else, why would anyone want to be a Singapore citizen since being one carries the burden of serving NS.
Any individual who is working here, and living here, is making a positive contribution to the local enconomy, regardless of how much and whether they retire elsewhere with thier savings.
If they are deemed as liabilities, PR status will be revoked. Is there a need for further distiction? The fallout could not be worth it. We maintain security so that people will want to come, including PRs and Investors. -
Whether you are PR or citizen, nobody would know, stating it in cyberspace does not add to it's credibility as your status cannot be independently verified.Originally posted by Jontst78:Just saying that so that I'm not misunderstood to be pro PR, pro PAP or whatever.
In the world, everything is connected to everything else. Einstein's search of a Unified Field Theory to link up all everything in physics. But your association of PRs and female citizens is remote, because the topic is about PRs and citizens. I don't think the female citizens are free loaders, but you seem to associate them in a negative aspect.Originally posted by Jontst78:Do you see the connection? PRs and female citizens are equally freeloaders as PRs are, aren't they?
My apologies, I misread that statement. You mentioned they should be receiving more benefits than employment pass holders. Why should they, can you please explain? Employment pass holders and PRs are almost the same, they have no intention of staying the course (retirement) in Singapore. Their only motive is to extract profits and move back to their home country.Originally posted by Jontst78:Never said they recieved less benefits than an employment pass holder.
What do you understand from the term GDP (Gross Domestic Product)?Originally posted by Jontst78:The fact that they are working here already contributes to GDP. And the high unemployment should be addressed by first and very foremost, dealing with the FTs(emp pass holders). Like it or not, PRs are an essential contributor to the economy, regardless of whether they retire here or not. If you are going to slam them with a 2 year NS liablity, or higher taxes, its going to be very detrimental.
GDP: The total income earned domestically, including the income earned by foreign owned factors of production.
Let's have a scenario analysis. Let's say in a household (Singapore) of 4, their combined income (GDP) is $400,000, they save their income, which becomes their reserves. After 5 years, they have a combined savings of $400,000, but 2 of the family member decides to move to another household. They extract half of the reserves which is $200,000. Which means the othe 2 household members will have only half of the reserves available to maintain house.
Whether they be FTs or PRs, they share a common characteristic, they have no intention of making Singapore their permanent home. Having them to pay a higher tax for not becoming citizens will only bring about higher employment for Singapore citizens. A small percentage will decide it's not worth their while and decide to move to another country. This small percentage of jobs will be taken up by current unemployed Singapore citizens. I do NOT believe that there will be a mass exodus of PRs just because their income tax has been raised 1% to 3% (based on the marginal structure of the tax schedule). Afterall, indirect taxes has gone from 3% to 5% and will be going to 7% in July, but the influx of FT is still peaking. Doesn't this statistic prove that taxes has little influence over the migration patterns of individuals. People based their migration on environmental factors, tax does not play a major role. If you have a choice of migration to Ethiopia (say no taxes) and Tokyo (30% taxes); which would you choose?
Can you please clarify what do you mean by economic liability? The last I know the government does not provide any unemployment benefits. So what is your definition of economic liability? The closest I can envisage is a budget air ticket to your country of origin.Originally posted by Jontst78:The rationale for that is to prove your employability, hence not become an economic liability after become a PR.
NS-men relief is an appreciation of those who have served National Service (NS), as compared to those who are exempted (medical disability, religious belief and women) from serving NS. You cannot associate NS-men relief with PRs and employment pass holders, as they do not have a pre-requisite to fulfil NS liabilities (they have NO such obligations). e.g. if A from a country with an education system while B is from a country with no education system. Can you compare B as if he had an educational system. I doubt you can, because it was not even in his choice (if he had one) to pursue an education. If NS-men relief is a distinction between citizens and PRs, then it should be aptly called citizens relief and not NS-men relief.Originally posted by Jontst78:NS-men recieve Tax rebates, everyone else doesn't, for NS. Do we remove those rebates and charge higher taxes to PRs and not citizens who do not serve NS?
The very foundation of Singapore's economy is built on the accumulation of physical wealth and then growing that wealth. This accumulation of physical wealth is actually thru the CPF. Charge higher taxes to PRs, and risk a drastic drop in CPF contributions.
Do consider the fallout of the such a move.
Generating wealth, isn't that the premise of any laissez faire economic system? I don't think it's only unique to Singapore.
I can't see your logic of associating CPF with PRs. Maybe you can provide some examples.
Any fallouts with the PR community is unavoidable, but the benefits reap by Singapore citizens is many times over the loss in PR fallout. Afterall, Singapore citizens are the ones who has a stake in the future of Singapore, they decide to make Singapore their home permanently.
Thank you. -
why not instead we singaporean pay less or dont pay.
-
I'd rather they institute this move, rather than the 2% increase in GST.Originally posted by reyes:why not instead we singaporean pay less or dont pay. -
Ok fine, so I'll leave my identity out of it, just stated out of god faith, and hopefully my perpective was not misunderstood by other readers. sheesh...Originally posted by maurizio13:Whether you are PR or citizen, nobody would know, stating it in cyberspace does not add to it's credibility as your status cannot be independently verified.Originally posted by maurizio13:
Negative? I hardly think so. Don't you see that laying higher taxes on PRs can be used as a precedence for laying higher taxes on Singaporean women? As they too don't serve NS, and contribute CPF and taxes just as PRs do. CPF and GDP contributions being the main reasons our country takes in PRs.
In the world, everything is connected to everything else. Einstein's search of a Unified Field Theory to link up all everything in physics. But your association of PRs and female citizens is remote, because the topic is about PRs and citizens. I don't think the female citizens are free loaders, but you seem to associate them in a negative aspect.Originally posted by maurizio13:
The foundation of the signapore economy built on the accumulation of physical wealth through the CPF. Its like a Bank, you sound like you understand your ecomonics. The more cash a bank can accumulate, the higher the potential growth of that wealth. The economy of Singapore, sadly was not built on laissez faire, we may be moving in that direction tho. How else to increase CPF contributions, or contributers? Citizenship should not be given out easily, hence, an interim (PR) but still has to put his money in the bank.
NS-men relief is an appreciation of those who have served National Service (NS), as compared to those who are exempted (medical disability, religious belief and women) from serving NS. You cannot associate NS-men relief with PRs and employment pass holders, as they do not have a pre-requisite to fulfil NS liabilities (they have NO such obligations). e.g. if A from a country with an education system while B is from a country with no education system. Can you compare B as if he had an educational system. I doubt you can, because it was not even in his choice (if he had one) to pursue an education. If NS-men relief is a distinction between citizens and PRs, then it should be aptly called citizens relief and not NS-men relief.
Generating wealth, isn't that the premise of any laissez faire economic system? I don't think it's only unique to Singapore.
I can't see your logic of associating CPF with PRs. Maybe you can provide some examples.
Any fallouts with the PR community is unavoidable, but the benefits reap by Singapore citizens is many times over the loss in PR fallout. Afterall, Singapore citizens are the ones who has a stake in the future of Singapore, they decide to make Singapore their home permanently. -
If you think in that direction, anything is possible. You can also claim that making PRs pay slightly higher taxes is a precedence for them to tax pre-NS old folks, medically unfit males, religious exemptees. Them not serving NS is not a choice they make voluntarily, it's legislation that precludes them from serving NS.Originally posted by Jontst78:Negative? I hardly think so. Don't you see that laying higher taxes on PRs can be used as a precedence for laying higher taxes on Singaporean women? As they too don't serve NS, and contribute CPF and taxes just as PRs do. CPF and GDP contributions being the main reasons our country takes in PRs.
Citizens contribute to CPF too. It's not restricted to PRs. By having these PRs here, a certain percentage of Singapore citizens will lose their jobs to them. By increasing the income tax by 1% to 3%, some of these PRs will leave, making room for more employed Singapore citizens. The increase in tax revenue can go into social welfare services to increase the living standards of poor citizens (not into the reserves).Originally posted by Jontst78:The foundation of the signapore economy built on the accumulation of physical wealth through the CPF. Its like a Bank, you sound like you understand your ecomonics. The more cash a bank can accumulate, the higher the potential growth of that wealth. The economy of Singapore, sadly was not built on laissez faire, we may be moving in that direction tho. How else to increase CPF contributions, or contributers? Citizenship should not be given out easily, hence, an interim (PR) but still has to put his money in the bank.
A problem needs to be addressed too, with the increase in PRs our Singapore citizens will lose jobs, find it hard to eke out a living, subsequently migrate to a better country. We are losing citizens here. PRs and employment pass holders have the effect of inching out our Singapore citizens. Let's say the current currently it's 10% PRs and 90% citizens, if PRs keep coming in while the growth of citizens is in decline, it will someday be 50% PRs 50% citizens. Since the government has the intention of increasing the population till 6 million. At 6 million population, there will be alot of strain on all our public services. You need more policemen to patrol the streets. You need more NS men because our population is in decline, else some army units will have to be closed. Where are they going to find the resources to provide for 6 million?
Since PRs who have no intention of staying permanently in Singapore, only want to extract profits for a certain number of years and return to their homeland. Shouldn't we make them pay afew percentage more taxes, afterall they do not have to succumb to the hardship of NS, while citizens do.
It's better to encourage more PRs to convert to citizenship, than to let them keep the status quo as PR.
LKY's wanted independence because he was weary of watching foreigners coming to Singapore, extract their profits and return to England when time is due. Ultimately a PR who hasn't revoke his citizenship and taken a Singapore one will return to his/her homeland, thus bringing along his/her pot of gold.
If you think 1% to 3% increase in personal income tax will promote a mass exodus. Why hasn't GST (an indirect form of tax) done the same and chased away all our PRs? Perhaps tax on income is inelastic when compared to environmental factors. -
By differentiating citizens and PRs, we hope that we will be able to persuade more PRs to convert to citizenship.
If there are no differences between a citizen and PR. Why would anybody convert to citizenship, since citizenship carries with it the duty of national service. -
you are a dumb fuck.Originally posted by maurizio13:I wonder how many would agree that the taxes paid by residents and permanent residents (compared to citizens) should be higher irrespective of their domicile.
Reasons:
1) They do not have a legal requirement to do national service, they are a free rider in the security provided by our forces. The provision of these security cost money, therefore the government should take the initiative to increase their taxes to recover the cost for the provision of this security.
2) These residents and permanent residents made Singapore their home because they feel safe here, a price must be paid for such safety. Like all Singaporean citizens who pay the price of such safety by serving their nation for 2 + 10 years.
3) These residents and permanent residents consume other economic resources (transport, water, electricity, medical, roads, HDB) which are also consumed by citizens, at the same price. Surely there must be a difference between citizens and non-citizens, if there isn't any; why even bother being a citizen.
For taxes, I mean income tax.
1. it is mandatory for PRs to serve NS.
2. non-citizens already have to pay more than citizens in many areas. -
National Service Liability
Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs) are liable to register for National Service (NS) upon reaching 16 1/2 years old. They are required to serve 2 years of full-time NS at 18 years old, followed by 40 days of Operationally Ready National Service per year till the age of 50 years (for officers) or 40 years (for other ranks).
Main applicants who are granted PR status under the first generation Professionals/Technical Personnel and Skilled Workers (PTS) Scheme or the Investor Scheme are exempted from NS. Male children who are granted PR status under their parents' sponsorship are liable for NS upon reaching 16 1/2 years old.
You must be the 2nd generation PR.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
LOL, if people already are parent, you want them to go serve NS? dumbass.
National Service Liability
Under the Enlistment Act, all male Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs) are liable to register for National Service (NS) upon reaching 16 1/2 years old. They are required to serve 2 years of full-time NS at 18 years old, followed by 40 days of Operationally Ready National Service per year till the age of 50 years (for officers) or 40 years (for other ranks).
[b]Main applicants who are granted PR status under the first generation Professionals/Technical Personnel and Skilled Workers (PTS) Scheme or the Investor Scheme are exempted from NS. Male children who are granted PR status under their parents' sponsorship are liable for NS upon reaching 16 1/2 years old.
You must be the 2nd generation PR.
[/b] -
PRs - Must have at 2 PRs to buy old HDB (5Years old and above)... medical subsidies cut... childcare cut... No bonuses from gahmen like singaporean had... NSmen get higher starting pay after graduate or NS... Singaporean pay lower School fees... PRs need to pay to renew the PRships, pay a one time payment for the driving license.... mMm....
what else can we take away from those PRs ? -
maybe their children? and make them slaves, then idiots like the OP will be happyOriginally posted by yongyong:PRs - Must have at 2 PRs to buy old HDB (5Years old and above)... medical subsidies cut... childcare cut... No bonuses from gahmen like singaporean had... NSmen get higher starting pay after graduate or NS... Singaporean pay lower School fees... PRs need to pay to renew the PRships, pay a one time payment for the driving license.... mMm....
what else can we take away from those PRs ? -
By even suggesting that we use tax to persuade PRs to convert to citizen is a clear indication of how shallow minded this person can be.
It is as good as using money to buy love and relationship. -
Don't think thats his point. From what I understand he just wants PRs to pay for the peace and security that comes from the Men that do NS.
What the many of us are trying to point out is that, they already are less priviledged than citizens in many ways. Hence already paying for it in other different ways.
There should be an interim between pass holders and Citizens, which also in a way promotes the persuit of citizenship. Of course there will always be some that just want to work here and retire else. Bear in mind that as long as they live here and work here, they will spend money here, its inevitable. That in itself is a positive contribution. -
My question is, how much of these peace and security that we are seeing is actually contributed by our Men doing their NS, and not the legal, social and education system and economic prosperity.Originally posted by Jontst78:Don't think thats his point. From what I understand he just wants PRs to pay for the peace and security that comes from the Men that do NS.
What the many of us are trying to point out is that, they already are less priviledged than citizens in many ways. Hence already paying for it in other different ways.
There should be an interim between pass holders and Citizens, which also in a way promotes the persuit of citizenship. Of course there will always be some that just want to work here and retire else. Bear in mind that as long as they live here and work here, they will spend money here, its inevitable. That in itself is a positive contribution. -
You mind giving a breakdown of how much of these peace and security are contributed by the legal , social and education system and economic prosperity first?Originally posted by Gazelle:My question is, how much of these peace and security that we are seeing is actually contributed by our Men doing their NS, and not the legal, social and education system and economic prosperity. -
If you look at the police/population ratio of some of these countries, you will realise that by having more police on the street it doesnt mean you will have less crime.Originally posted by Trump_Card:You mind giving a breakdown of how much of these peace and security are contributed by the legal , social and education system and economic prosperity first?
Just look at singapore police to population ratio and compare with malaysia and Thailand. If your by having more people serving NS is the key factor to our security, I am sure that Malaysia and Thailand will be more secure than Singapore isnt it?
1 Bangladesh 1:1200
2 India 1: 728
3 Philippines 1: 665
4 Pakistan 1: 625
5 Japan 1: 563
6 New Zealand 1:416
7 Singapore 1:295
8 Malaysia 1:249
9 Thailand 1:228
10 Hong Kong 1:220
http://www.rabbd.com/peoporat.html
http://www.usj18.nwatch.net.my/article.cfm?id=152