LHL incompetence to encourage Singaporeans to have more baby
-
Are you trying to insinuate that I'm a clone? Sorry to disappoint but I'm not oneOriginally posted by reddressman:Wow, you basically have revealed your identity in terms of where you come from.
Its alright, I pretend I don't know your identity , cybersquad. 
I am with you , ok?
Free education is not a social welfare.
It is called investment.
Education is an investment.
The reason why I introduce this free solution is because I do not see any solution provided that works , meaning solving the problem.
If you cannot offer a solution, doon come and comprain to me. I am not your minster of k.bnlb.
Why don't you call a spade a spade. It is social welfare though you can label it nicely as an 'investment'. Like it or not it will be coming out of taxes and not from the national coffers.
Are you sure that free education will spur everyone to have children?
Sure there will be some who will take up the offer, like those who went for the baby bonus. But are the target group the government wants to have children willing to have kids because it is of no difference to them as they can already afford the education.
As for the middle class, those that want to have children, will have children and already have children. A lot don't have kids like I mentioned is because it is now a lifestyle choice as well. Not everyone wants to have children these days and seriously speaking, cost is a helluva good excuse since the lower income group don't seem to have problems pro-creating. -
In that case, the more reason Free Education scheme I am proposing should be implemented.Originally posted by elindra:Are you trying to insinuate that I'm a clone? Sorry to disappoint but I'm not one
Why don't you call a spade a spade. It is social welfare though you can label it nicely as an 'investment'. Like it or not it will be coming out of taxes and not from the national coffers.
Are you sure that free education will spur everyone to have children?
Sure there will be some who will take up the offer, like those who went for the baby bonus. But are the target group the government wants to have children willing to have kids because it is of no difference to them as they can already afford the education.
As for the middle class, those that want to have children, will have children and already have children. A lot don't have kids like I mentioned is because it is now a lifestyle choice as well. Not everyone wants to have children these days and seriously speaking, cost is a helluva good excuse since the lower income group don't seem to have problems pro-creating.
If what you say is correct, what is the hum or fear to invest in our new borns?
If what you say is true, there would not be a need to use tax to pay for Free education since people lifestyle have changed. Wow, I din know you can generalise lifestyle for people. Who knows, precisely maybe it is due to the cost of child upbringing and time, effort required on the part of the parents and the cost of opportunity for the mother that they have this lifestyle of less babies?
You can say, I also can say.
The surest way to prove is implement the scheme I propose and for at least 1 year, we can see for ourselves who is right. What is the HUM ?
U-Turn is everywhere. -
1. Free education = additional expenditure to the government = increase in taxes. You can't get around that.Originally posted by reddressman:In that case, the more reason Free Education scheme I am proposing should be implemented.
If what you say is correct, what is the hum or fear to invest in our new borns?
If what you say is true, there would not be a need to use tax to pay for Free education since people lifestyle have changed. Wow, I din know you can generalise lifestyle for people. Who knows, precisely maybe it is due to the cost of child upbringing and time, effort required on the part of the parents and the cost of opportunity for the mother that they have this lifestyle of less babies?
You can say, I also can say.
The surest way to prove is implement the scheme I propose and for at least 1 year, we can see for ourselves who is right. What is the HUM ?
U-Turn is everywhere.
2. Change in lifestyle = People enjoy the free and easy life they have without the burden of responsibility of bringing up a child. One loses the mobility to move around too especially most jobs these days require both spouses to travel. Providing free education does not discharge the parents from their responsibility of bringing up the child at all!
3. Providing free education does not discharge the mum from suffering from loss of opportunities. As long as the work environment does not become more pro-family, you really won't see any changes to it.
4. Take away the privilage you give, especially something like free education, once implemented you can never take away without severe backlash. You will spend more time and money trying to clear the mess. It's not a tape where you can say sorry 'ba leh'
5. Sure you can generalise lifestyle of people. It is called profiling.
In my opinion, people will be more willing to have children if the government pass some laws that are more pro-family and laws that protect women when they get pregnant so that they won't have a bad performance over night so that the company can fire them coz pregant women are a burden.
People will also be more willing to have children if there are more childcare facilities near the work places and if more companies actually adopt flexi-hours.
I have to repeat again that lack of $$ is the best excuse to use on why I can't afford a child. -
People will also be more willing to have children if there are more childcare facilities near the work places and if more companies actually adopt flexi-hours.
1. who pays for the childcare facilities?
2. companies to implement flexi-hours. No money involved is it?
You shoot ownself.
Education can be free for some people.
Education should be free for all new borns , in my opine.
Parents should be the ones looking and upbringing the child.
outsourcing is a convenience and an excuse and avoiding responsibility.
Invest in the young, for the good of the nation.
Maids are not investment. They are costs.
Learn the difference between investment and cost. -
Free education does not mean quality. Singaporean high school and primary school is affordable and good. I would not complain about paying for them.Originally posted by reddressman:1. who pays for the childcare facilities?
2. companies to implement flexi-hours. No money involved is it?
You shoot ownself.
Education can be free for some people.
Education should be free for all new borns , in my opine.
Parents should be the ones looking and upbringing the child.
outsourcing is a convenience and an excuse and avoiding responsibility.
Invest in the young, for the good of the nation.
Maids are not investment. They are costs.
Learn the difference between investment and cost.
Come to the higher education sector like universities - I would not want to study in a free university. Free *shudders*
What Singapore could do is implement something similar to Australia to ensure equity - I have just taken out the part about their domestic full fee system in Australia.
A compromise can be reached if Singapore allows students to defer their costs, instead of using parental CPF, until they start working. Once they reach a threshold income - they have to repay a percentage back. That way it pressurises the government to raise wages because if the student does not hit threshold income , they cannot reclaim it back.
Hence that university/poly student becomes the added responsibility of the government to make sure that there are actually jobs in the market which pay fairly and get it stringently right with forecasting labour needs. The investment will come back when the student starts earning a threshold income or above it. -
bt my hubby says he's nt ready yet leh.
-
..hmm.. I seriously doubt, that the government would allow ANY form of responsibilities to be encumbered upon them... apart from keeping the economy lucrative to themselves....Originally posted by fymk:Free education does not mean quality. Singaporean high school and primary school is affordable and good. I would not complain about paying for them.
Come to the higher education sector like universities - I would not want to study in a free university. Free *shudders*
What Singapore could do is implement something similar to Australia to ensure equity - I have just taken out the part about their domestic full fee system in Australia.
A compromise can be reached if Singapore allows students to defer their costs, instead of using parental CPF, until they start working. Once they reach a threshold income - they have to repay a percentage back. That way it pressurises the government to raise wages because if the student does not hit threshold income , they cannot reclaim it back.
Hence that university/poly student becomes the added responsibility of the government to make sure that there are actually jobs in the market which pay fairly and get it stringently right with forecasting labour needs. The investment will come back when the student starts earning a threshold income or above it. -
Originally posted by reddressman:1. who pays for the childcare facilities?
2. companies to implement flexi-hours. No money involved is it?
You shoot ownself.
Education can be free for some people.
Education should be free for all new borns , in my opine.
Parents should be the ones looking and upbringing the child.
outsourcing is a convenience and an excuse and avoiding responsibility.
Invest in the young, for the good of the nation.
Maids are not investment. They are costs.
Learn the difference between investment and cost.
I'm not shooting myself
1. Flexi Hours does not mean there will be additional expenses. It is planning and setting a system. Once the system is in place, it might even be more beneficial to the company because you get happy workers who are motivated
2. Free education does not equate free child care. This is a cost that has to be paid for anyway. It is just to make it more convinient to the parents.
Your point all along had been free education for all. I believe there is already free education for some extremely poor families now or they are super heavily subsidised.
You like to talk about the GDP so much. Free education for the masses = Government expenditure. Pray tell me where is the revenue coming from? As I pointed out earlier, it will come from high taxes. Go find out the tax rates of the Scandinavian countries and tell me if you like those figures
If you really want to invest in the young a lot of policies will have to be more pro-family. Right now the work environment is not. It's not about money now seriously. A lot of people hesitate having children these days because they feel that a child is their responsibility and they don't have the time to commit and therefore not want to have them besides other factors.
I have to repeat again that by providing free education, it does not take away the problems most working adults face like having no time for the family and having no one to look after the child without a high possiblity of jeopardizing their job.
Plus, I wouldn't call it investment as well because humans being humans take things for granted. What can be worse than people who lack the drive to study and excel because 'Aiya it's free ma'
Anyway, why implement free education when it is not the crux of the problem where the majority of people cannot afford it, therefore not wanting to have children? -
maybe parents are petrified of bringing a child into the world filled with people who rant and rage in SC without a clue
or they saw people like the aforementioned ranters and ragers in SC and are afraid they'll have a child who is like that?
p.s. those cluelese people who rant and rage.. you know you are -
Malays bear more children because they worry too little.
Chinese bear too few children because they worry too much.
How does government become part of this picture? -
I sense anger and selfishness in you. What a f.ucked up attitude.Originally posted by fymk:Australia , Singapore - all got problems. And both the same - TOO EXPENSIVE TO HAVE CHILDREN.
Australia - so what if they have the damn baby bonus .....I am not touching it . It is way too expensive to have a baby even and let alone bring up a child with the subsidies. Being single without dependencies is more beneficial.
Singapore - great place to bring a child into the safety of the police state where drugs are virtually unheard of and only occasional gang fights happen but also with wages like sh*t for commoners , how to support a baby? Let alone plan for your child's future.
If I have a kid , I better be a millionaire. And he/she better damn well get a HECs place for university - I didn't migrate to pay full fee for their damn university education. -
s'pore is like a hotel... expensive and no sense of belonging...
so do you bother for hotel business? definitely NO NO NO
so don't bother... s'pore is not a home, it's just a hotel...
THERE'S NO FREE LUNCH HERE
-
i want to ask this of people who keep saying what is said by seven dragon..
what sense of belonging are you talking about if you require the bloody gabrament to provide you with it?
it is from inside you... it is not something people can do something for you to get it... if you do not have it, nothing on the planet will do it for you...
and if you don't go do it yourself, what sense of belonging are you talking about?
do you even understand what that means anyway?
will you even begin to understand the gravity of what that means anyway?Originally posted by Seven_Dragon:s'pore is like a hotel... expensive and no sense of belonging...
so do you bother for hotel business? definitely NO NO NO
so don't bother... s'pore is not a home, it's just a hotel...
THERE'S NO FREE LUNCH HERE -
can you tell me the difference between your home and the hotel?Originally posted by the Bear:i want to ask this of people who keep saying what is said by seven dragon..
what sense of belonging are you talking about if you require the bloody gabrament to provide you with it?
it is from inside you... it is not something people can do something for you to get it... if you do not have it, nothing on the planet will do it for you...
and if you don't go do it yourself, what sense of belonging are you talking about?
do you even understand what that means anyway?
will you even begin to understand the gravity of what that means anyway? -
MistyOriginally posted by mistyblue:when compared to the lows of the past years, it will seem to have increased. But still the total number if you can provide the number, might still be small. And even with that number, it must be broken down to Citizen and PR and non Citizens as well as race and age groups to see the correct picture. In statistics, its talks about generalizations. Therefore, to really know the situation, is to know the details. To manage the situation is not just to think, oh birth rates are up. But if its non-citizens or PRs who are contributing to the increase, and they can at any time uproot. Therefore, its only a temporary solution. I even ask Malaysians our closest neighbours (PRC and most other foreigners were also asked the same question) why they didn't want to become Singaporeans. The reasons they gave were staring at our face. Though our papers like to only publish the select few who choose to stay here. Most are here either as stepping stone to better careers or just to make money due to exchange rates and retire home bringing their locally born off-springs back there as well. Singapore is just a good hotel for them to trash up and leave. Who cleans up after them? Who benefit from these people? You have the answer.
The whole situation of local citizens not giving birth is summed up above by another poster and perhaps more reason that are not because of economy and numbers. How about the intangible thing call emotion. Ask any local born Singapore citizen if they feel emotionally attached to this land? Do they see a bright future for themselves and kids? Do they want to retire here? Do they foresee a harder time in future? Will they be able to survive given the current political party were to continue for the next 20-50 years? etc. The total environment, macro, micro and everything in between - and now people are given a choice medically if they want to bring a next generation into this land knowing what they know about the system, politics, economy, world, future and about themselves - perhaps, just perhaps, people lost that confidence in the future because they are finding it so much harder to just survive now.
Everyone knows you can get killed, raped and robbed anywhere else besides Sillypore or even be a druge addict -
yeah it just depends on the probability and frequency..Originally posted by Coquitlam:Misty
Everyone knows you can get killed, raped and robbed anywhere else besides Sillypore or even be a druge addict -
I couldn't agree more with what you have said ... What is eg. Johor known for ?Originally posted by kramnave:yeah it just depends on the probability and frequency.. My friend got mugged there 3 days ago -
wah that sucks..hopefully he wasn't hurt.Originally posted by Trump_Card:I couldn't agree more with what you have said ... What is eg. Johor known for ? My friend got mugged there 3 days ago -
if you cannot tell the difference between your home and a hotel, i kinda pity you.. and i save my pity for retards...
home is where the heart is..
the gabrament didn't and can't do that for me...
which is my point..
you seem to want everything to be served to you on a silver platter and refuse to do anything for yourself..
in fact, from what i see, things have been given to you on a silver platter.. but you are complaining that it's not platinum, there are no servants peeling chilled grapes to pop into your mouth and no slaves to wave palm fronds to cool the air around you...Originally posted by Seven_Dragon:can you tell me the difference between your home and the hotel? -
uncle, what is the link with sillypore's birth rate?Originally posted by Trump_Card:I couldn't agree more with what you have said ... What is eg. Johor known for ? My friend got mugged there 3 days ago -
Aunty , Do I look like I'm answering your question ? I'm just reinforcing kramnave's pointOriginally posted by Seven_Dragon:uncle, what is the link with sillypore's birth rate? -
LOL. I sense trolling in you.Originally posted by Daddy!!:I sense anger and selfishness in you. What a f.ucked up attitude. -
you f.ucked up your own life if you cannot even gather enough sense to set up a normal family for yourself.Originally posted by fymk:LOL. I sense trolling in you. -
Welcome to the world which you think is more humane, frog in a well.
LONDON (Reuters) - Restaurants are pushing customers into buying expensive bottled water instead of offering them tap water for free, the government's consumer watchdog said on Friday.
(Advertisement)
A five-star hotel in London charges water at 50 pounds a litre and even chain restaurants charge 3.80 pounds for bottled mineral water.
But despite the high prices, one in five diners are "too scared to ask" for tap water, a survey of just under 1,000 people carried out on behalf of the National Consumer Council (NCC) found.
Nine out of every 10 restaurants are pushing consumers to buy bottled water and fail to offer them free tap water, the survey found.
"Some restaurants are willing to offer tap water to their customers but the majority push water just to make a quick profit," said Carl Belgrove, senior policy advocate at the NCC.
Seventy percent of respondents said they felt bottled water was too expensive in restaurants and want to see free tap water readily available.
Britons consume 37.6 litres of bottled water per person a year.
More than 90 percent of bottled water comes in plastic bottles. Their disposal and the impact on climate change through the shipping of millions of bottles around the world has raised concern among environmentalists.
(Reporting by Astrid Zweynert; Editing by Stephen Addison) -
LOL whatever.Originally posted by Daddy!!:you f.ucked up your own life if you cannot even gather enough sense to set up a normal family for yourself.
A male chauvanist telling me what to do ! HHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHA.