Foreigners - Friction on the rise
-
Foreigners
Friction on the rise
Immigration concerns: Singaporeans hope the spate of recent run-ins will not be a prelude of things to come. By Seah Chiang Nee
Nov 17, 2007
Ill feelings towards expatriates appear to be on the rise among some Singaporeans that could be attributed to the rapid immigration inflow.
They had resulted in recent incidents recently between locals and Westerners being blown into major angry outbursts.
If not because of foreigners, these everyday happenings in any crowded city would merit little or no attention. But because Westerners and non-Caucasian aliens were involved, it had become a public issue.
These are unusual times in a small city-state that has welcomed hundreds of thousands of foreigners to settle here in such a short time thanks to the reach of the Internet.
Recent incidents between Singaporeans and foreigners: -
-- Singaporean Michelle Quek said a Caucasian and his girlfriend attacked here and her friend after her school ‘accidentally hit the woman.’ A quarrel ensued which resulted in the Westerner – in her account – held up her friend by the arms, lifted her off the floor and dropped her onto the floor, while she was punched on the nose.
The scene resulted in a couple of angry bystanders among a gathering crowd confronting the foreigner, stopping him from leaving and nearly causing more mayhem. The incident was videotaped and released for public viewing. Public sentiment ranged from anger to calls for action against offensive foreigners.
-- Three British tourists mocked a 76-year-old rickshaw driver because he couldnÂ’t pedal fast enough for them, then posted a video of the struggling old man on You-Tube, causing uproar. They were also reported to have run off without paying the full S$10 fare.
-- American Anthony Wildberger, 23 (accompanied by his Singaporean wife) said he was beaten up by nightclub bouncers and other clubbers when some woman alleged he had pinched her bottom.
He claimed that he suffered a concussion, his nasal bone was displaced, three teeth were chipped, and there were cuts and bruises on his face.
Westerners are, of course, not the only people who are affected.
The target of local displeasure is mostly directed at the small army of mainland Chinese and Indians who have come here to work or given PRs. They often find themselves at the end of verbal insults or unable to rent accomodation.
The Thinker –
“Foreign talent resonates with negative connotations within the majority of Singaporean citizens,” said blogger The Thinker.
“Foreigners are viewed as threats to locals' livelihoods, they are viewed with suspicion and envy; yet many a Singaporean would fawn and grovel before white customers, often at the expense of their local 'brethren'.
“This love-hate relationship that exists in Singapore is one-of-a-kind, and does not exist in other premier cities.”
Respected bligger redbean, wrote of a growing potential for xenophobic tension.
“For those who have to face the foreigners daily in all his living activities, when every citizen has to fight for his space and the air he breathes, tension is likely to build up and break out.”
A frequent commuter of bus or train would likely encounter one or two foreigners for every Singaporean.
“When every citizen has to fight for his space and the air he breathes, tension is likely to build up and break out,” redbean added.
The complaints are likely to rise, rather than decrease, when inflation is cutting into the value of peopleÂ’s earnings, and this is partly attributed to a rapid immigration hike over the past decade.
There is also growing concern that the impact of immigration will upset the social and ethnic balance in Singapore.
The latest to voice concern was Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong who warned that cracks are already appearing not just between different ethnic groups, but also within races in Singapore, TODAY newspaper reported.
His worry made in a constituency speech was issued as the immigration inflow is set to reach a new high, exceeding last yearÂ’s total of 70,700).
He was quoted by TODAY as saying that "the new residents did not mix easily with Singaporeans" and Singaporeans, in turn, "tended to leave them alone".
And within the Chinese and Indian communities, crevices are deepening.
Said Mr Goh: "In terms of accent, culture and habit, Chinese Singaporeans are different from their PRC counterparts.
“As for Indians, I have heard that the Indians from India tend to bring their caste culture with them, and that some of them sometimes come across as sikit atas (slight air of superiority) to our local Indians.
"On the other hand, some Indian Singaporeans also display the same attitude towards the many low-skilled workers from India."
Littlespeck.com
what is the point of warning if the govt is not doing anything to avert the possibility a clash? -
Expected. And do you expect this gov to do anything. It will be like slapping their own face if they do.
-
Actually some Singaporeans feel that they are being treated as 2nd class citizens!
-
Originally posted by lotus999:
Utter rubbish. It exists everywhere because its human nature.
[b]“This love-hate relationship that exists in Singapore is one-of-a-kind, and does not exist in other premier cities.”
/b] -
Its all economy.
I wonder if we need politicians anymore when what seems to be needed to run a country is CEO. -
This blogger, The Thinker is too absorbed with his thinking to look elsewhere!Originally posted by adetet:Utter rubbish. It exists everywhere because its human nature. -
Yea, it also exists elsewhere. But the increase in foreigners is far too rapid. Everything will be fine if the economy is good. But when economy turn bad, thing will certainly turn ugly.Originally posted by adetet:Utter rubbish. It exists everywhere because its human nature. -
Yes, I agree with your post - there is a potential conflict between local and foreigners waiting like a time bomb all ready to explode in the face of Minister Ng Eng Hen.
He is the one who started it. He therefore is the one who will have to deal with such a conflict situation with so many fights and frictions between locals and foreigners due to more conflicts over space, jobs and treatments and cultural difference.
Government so far only knows how to take short-cut instead of solving real problem based on assumptions that all foreigners are contributing to job creation of skill or have some talents to help us.
Mr. Ng Eng Hen had better realize from such incidents that not all foreigners are talents and many of them are trying to learn and understudy us and are coming in to displace our citizens of space, jobs and facilities without contributing anything good or beneficial in return. Many of them are just parasites.
As pointed out by ex-civil servant Ngiam Tong Dow we do not need a 6-million population. What we need is only a few good foreign talents with the skills we do not have to create new products and services and start new factories or new technologies.
MOM must review his pro-foreign policies and try to be more focused and more selective. Quality and not quantity please. Don't just assume or talk down to the people. Look at the problems and more potential problems in front of us before it is too late.
Just listen to the people's feedbacks based on so many incidents already happening for at least once. -
It is not MOM's policy. It is PAP's policy. They tested the foreign talent policy with forums in poly/unis a few years back before they threw the door WIDE open. I was in those forums.Originally posted by robertteh:Yes, I agree with your post - there is a potential conflict between local and foreigners waiting like a time bomb all ready to explode in the face of Minister Ng Eng Hen.
He is the one who started it. He therefore is the one who will have to deal with such a conflict situation with so many fights and frictions between locals and foreigners due to more conflicts over space, jobs and treatments and cultural difference.
Government so far only knows how to take short-cut instead of solving real problem based on assumptions that all foreigners are contributing to job creation of skill or have some talents to help us.
Mr. Ng Eng Hen had better realize from such incidents that not all foreigners are talents and many of them are trying to learn and understudy us and are coming in to displace our citizens of space, jobs and facilities without contributing anything good or beneficial in return. Many of them are just parasites.
As pointed out by ex-civil servant Ngiam Tong Dow we do not need a 6-million population. What we need is only a few good foreign talents with the skills we do not have to create new products and services and start new factories or new technologies.
MOM must review his pro-foreign policies and try to be more focused and more selective. Quality and not quantity please. Don't just assume or talk down to the people. Look at the problems and more potential problems in front of us before it is too late.
Just listen to the people's feedbacks based on so many incidents already happening for at least once.
LKY had foresight to use a FT to build Singapore's economy ( the dutch economist) and invite the Israelis to look at Singapore's defences. They went back to their own countries since they were actually first class talents in their own right and on loan.
However the subsequent years, PAP changed over that policy and invited second class and third class FTs to stay. I don't know whether it is about them being truly delusional that first class talents will actually stay or whether it was out of sheer arrogance that Singapore was the best.
On another front is wage control and globalisation - if you keep wages down , Singapore could remain competitive but with globalisation, it also means that the really good local talents could run out with other countries offering a bigger and fresher carrot. So yes they achieved wage control but failed to retain the best local talents and even the highly skilled worker.
What happens with skill shortage? Open up courses in Polytechnic and University to train more locals/foreigners to fill that market . Then markets reach oversaturation , jobs become highly competitive , people get angry because the degree /diploma they paid for is worth close to a piece of toilet paper and they have no returns.
They cannot direct their anger at the government. Each time someone speaks up : the same reason pops up - GLOBALIZATION . If the person could overcome the obstacle and actually redirect their focus to answer their question - then the excuse is FOREIGN CONSTRUCTION/FACTORY WORKERS because nobody wants to do their job. Refocus our leaders again and they will pull out THE SUCCESSES OF THE FEW WHO ARE LUCKY (OR rich and well connected) and say if they can do it - how come you the commoner cannot? So the working class feels that no one in the ivory tower will listen to them.
So the citizens direct their anger at foreigners who had nothing to do with that FT policy in the first place. Convenient targets - foreigners - they stick up like a sore thumb aka big bullseye. So if one foreigner is accused of something against a Singaporean, the mob mentality takes over - every angry Singaporean who had been turned down from a job in favor of a foreigner, forced to accept the "competitive" low wages OR even work under a foreigner, will happily join that mob.
For example , Michelle Quek's case - it happened in a neighbourhood in Toa Payoh- not Sixth Avenue of Holland. Why? Because the people there are the working class citizens , just like alot of us here , who will suffer the most from the FT policy . They will be living next to foreign workers who may or may not be competing for the same jobs. They have to fight for the rice bowl to feed their families. An affront like this to their face, they will not stand down. I would not either if I have the same degree of frustration. But then again I moved out and became a red bullseye for citizens of another country.
I am not saying that Singapore is the only country with this problem. It is the same everywhere . When the economy is good and everyone has a job, nobody cares about foreigners. When the economy is crap and people are fighting for jobs , foreigners become a target - a focus - an eyesore because they take the jobs from those who rightfully there in the first place. If a foreigner is wealthier than they are, they get fed up. That is why the chinese diaspora, asians, and the jews have been targets overseas. They tend to do better at school , be socio economically better off than the population in western countries.
The only problem that makes Singapore different: The problem is amplified by 100 times by favoring foreigners whilst other countries make a very firm point to favor their citizens. I just made the view simpler. -
pretty true i guess.
-
In other countries, the gov probably out of fear in losing vote, will implement policy which favor its citizen. Whereas, Singapore is a unique country whereby the gov is not concern abt how it citizen feel since it is over-confident that it will always win the election.Originally posted by fymk:The only problem that makes Singapore different: The problem is amplified by 100 times by favoring foreigners whilst other countries make a point to favor their citizens. I just made the view simpler.
-
Because every election has to do with hip pockets. Money in the pockets of citizens drive the favor to the party who can drop a huge carrot and say we will bring you more money.Originally posted by royston_ang:In other countries, the gov probably out of fear in losing vote, will implement policy which favor its citizen. Whereas, Singapore is a unique country whereby the gov is not concern abt how it citizen feel since it is over-confident that it will always win the election.
Why do you think each time elections come , they start promising upgrades to increase the "value" of the 99 year lease apartments ? Money - people want it in their pockets. No other way around it.
Even in Australia, they play on keeping interest rates low , they play on keeping the economy strong for jobs . Money factor again. However the Liberals have been in power for 11 years and people are tired of them because of the workchoices policy which cost alot of families money. I always make it a point to be under a certified agreement than an AWA even if it is tied to a higher position and pay. The common people get screwed by AWA - time for a new government because this government screwed their hip pockets.
Same as Singapore but Singapore has no worthy opposition party . That's the main problem. The ones who could do alot good for Singapore will not speak up because they have the possibility of being "black marked" , sued til they have nothing and their families will be affected. Even if one opposition party came into power and reinstate protectionism , it will slow the growth of Singapore for a while where you cannot see the immediate gain but in a long run , it will benefit Singaporeans - do you think that most Singaporeans will care to think longterm other than their hip pockets? No . Most want to see the magical wand waved around so that their 99 year lease HDB flats will increase in value again. -
Originally posted by fymk:
The problem can be summarized as follows :-
It is not MOM's policy. It is PAP's policy. They tested the foreign talent policy with forums in poly/unis a few years back before they threw the door WIDE open. I was in those forums.
LKY had foresight to use a FT to build Singapore's economy ( the dutch economist) and invite the Israelis to look at Singapore's defences. They went back to their own countries since they were actually first class talents in their own right and on loan.
However the subsequent years, PAP changed over that policy and invited second class and third class FTs to stay. I don't know whether it is about them being truly delusional that first class talents will actually stay or whether it was out of sheer arrogance that Singapore was the best.
On another front is wage control and globalisation - if you keep wages down , Singapore could remain competitive but with globalisation, it also means that the really good local talents could run out with other countries offering a bigger and fresher carrot. So yes they achieved wage control but failed to retain the best local talents and even the highly skilled worker.
What happens with skill shortage? Open up courses in Polytechnic and University to train more locals/foreigners to fill that market . Then markets reach oversaturation , jobs become highly competitive , people get angry because the degree /diploma they paid for is worth close to a piece of toilet paper and they have no returns.
They cannot direct their anger at the government. Each time someone speaks up : the same reason pops up - GLOBALIZATION . If the person could overcome the obstacle and actually redirect their focus to answer their question - then the excuse is FOREIGN CONSTRUCTION/FACTORY WORKERS because nobody wants to do their job. Refocus our leaders again and they will pull out THE SUCCESSES OF THE FEW WHO ARE LUCKY (OR rich and well connected) and say if they can do it - how come you the commoner cannot? So the working class feels that no one in the ivory tower will listen to them.
So the citizens direct their anger at foreigners who had nothing to do with that FT policy in the first place. Convenient targets - foreigners - they stick up like a sore thumb aka big bullseye. So if one foreigner is accused of something against a Singaporean, the mob mentality takes over - every angry Singaporean who had been turned down from a job in favor of a foreigner, forced to accept the "competitive" low wages OR even work under a foreigner, will happily join that mob.
For example , Michelle Quek's case - it happened in a neighbourhood in Toa Payoh- not Sixth Avenue of Holland. Why? Because the people there are the working class citizens , just like alot of us here , who will suffer the most from the FT policy . They will be living next to foreign workers who may or may not be competing for the same jobs. They have to fight for the rice bowl to feed their families. An affront like this to their face, they will not stand down. I would not either if I have the same degree of frustration. But then again I moved out and became a red bullseye for citizens of another country.
I am not saying that Singapore is the only country with this problem. It is the same everywhere . When the economy is good and everyone has a job, nobody cares about foreigners. When the economy is crap and people are fighting for jobs , foreigners become a target - a focus - an eyesore because they take the jobs from those who rightfully there in the first place. If a foreigner is wealthier than they are, they get fed up. That is why the chinese diaspora, asians, and the jews have been targets overseas. They tend to do better at school , be socio economically better off than the population in western countries.
The only problem that makes Singapore different: The problem is [b]amplified by 100 times by favoring foreigners whilst other countries make a very firm point to favor their citizens. I just made the view simpler.
[/b]
Government (PAP/MM Lee/Ministers) => FT Policy (Assumptions all FTs have skills which local do not possess) => Abuse by employers => Citizens with skills bypassed by employers => Instability and tensions due to conflicts between FT and local citizens
Have our ministers the ability or talents to understand this equation of problems with FT from the start and know how to implement the FT fairly and creatively to help our unemployed citizens to be employed first.? -
economy is good now, FTs are already kana blamed now...Originally posted by royston_ang:Yea, it also exists elsewhere. But the increase in foreigners is far too rapid. Everything will be fine if the economy is good. But when economy turn bad, thing will certainly turn ugly.
when economy is bad hor, FTs kana f**k until @ss crack
see lor -
Remember what happen to the Qing dynasty? They were bullied by the western powers and became a semi western colony. If Singapore is going to continue to invite foreign talent, she will become the 2nd Qing dynasty and ah lee party will soon become a puppet government
-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Why not put it this way. Singaporeans are good at their jobs but the cost differential between hiring a foreigner and a Singaporean is high.Originally posted by viper146:Foreign talent come here in the first place because Singaporeans are lousy at their jobs. Furthermore, many of the foreign talent are hired because they are way more productive than the locals.
So Singaporeans should only blame themselves for the large influx of FTs.
just my opinion.
So what happens when you employ cheaper foreigners in place of experienced and skilled Singaporeans? The good ones who can run will run out . The rest bide their time.
Any first class foreign talent won't stay long in Singapore. They have no reason to when there is USA who will pay them much more for their expertise.
Even the best Australian brains go to USA.
The ones you have in Singapore are using her as a stepping stone to USA, UK , Australia etc for their permanent residency because they cannot go straight there.
The select few who come here are on temporary posting because of their company or because they want to experience life in Asia . You think that they are so stupid to give up their citizenship and become a local with local crap pay, have their kids serve NS? Some are paid in USD and I think that they like their USD alot. -
LOL, are you a Singaporean? If you are lousy and less productive than FT, don't push the blame to other Singaporeans.Originally posted by viper146:Foreign talent come here in the first place because Singaporeans are lousy at their jobs. Furthermore, many of the foreign talent are hired because they are way more productive than the locals.
So Singaporeans should only blame themselves for the large influx of FTs.
just my opinion. -
nope, i am NOT a singaporean.Originally posted by royston_ang:LOL, are you a Singaporean? If you are lousy and less productive than FT, don't push the blame to other Singaporeans.
-
Well I think that you will have to be gracious to the people of the country which invited you over assuming that you are a permanent resident or on a visa.Originally posted by viper146:nope, i am NOT a singaporean.
Which country are you from?
Contrary to what you say, if Singaporeans were not an efficient hardworking bunch , Singapore won't be in the first world list. Singaporean overseas won't do well but most of us do well.
So there you go. -
Immigrants as percentage of state population
UK 9%
Aust 20%
Brunei 33%
Sgp a whopping 42.6%
Something tells me there will be a potential serious repercussion.
Damn the c*cksucker who made the policy. -
Let me tell you the loophole of Australian dual citizenship laws. They can renounce to get Singaporean citizenship and then reacquire their australian citizenship back later.Originally posted by googoomuck:Immigrants as percentage of state population
UK 9%
Aust 20%
Brunei 33%
Sgp a whopping 42.6%
Something tells me there will be a potential serious repercussion.
Damn the c*cksucker who made the policy. -
Th US also has the premise that no one in his clear state of mind would give up the US citizenship. However, I'm not sure if this applies to naturalized US citizens.Originally posted by fymk:Let me tell you the loophole of Australian dual citizenship laws. They can renounce to get Singaporean citizenship and then reacquire their australian citizenship back later.
Do Foreign Citizenship Oaths Strip you of Previous Citizenship(US citizenship)?
In general, no, although some countries (such as the US but not Canada or Australia) have verbal oaths that state that all former citizenships are relinquished, there are few (if any) modern cases in which this has happened to dual citizens. Most citizenship oaths are historical and have little legal power. In general, most countries that allow dual citizenship require very specific acts for you to relinquish your citizenship, and routine verbal oaths delivered in a foreign country are rarely considered valid. Marc Rich (of Clinton pardon fame) is one of the well-known cases (Action and Deltamar v. Rich, 951 F.2d 504 (2nd Cir. 1991)). Rich assumed an oath in Spain would remove his US citizenship. The Spanish naturalization oath he took included an explicit renunciation of US citizenship. Due to a variety of circumstances the court judged that he was still a US citizen.
The US State Department's position is:
The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to routine declarations of allegiance to a foreign state, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government. Both the Australian and Canadian citizenship oaths do not require giving up previous citizenships -
.................................