Let's give Suggestions to save the economy from recession.
-
Originally posted by Jianye:
To vote PAP out, our nation's foundation must be able to withstand the shock of such a change.
With the PAP out, we will have more money to develop local talents and the industries here better.
It is the other way around. Vote out the PAP and see the country's foundation strenghten. Forged by fire instead of slowly bleeding to death under the PAP while they help themselves to public money.
Just vote in any tom dick and harry and stop the PAP. The civil service will still be there to ensure that everything continues to run.
-
Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:
It is the other way around. Vote out the PAP and see the country's foundation strenghten. Forged by fire instead of slowly bleeding to death under the PAP while they help themselves to public money.
Just vote in any tom dick and harry and stop the PAP. The civil service will still be there to ensure that everything continues to run.
I'm begining to think you're not even in Singapore and you don't really give a damn to what happens to us if we follow your crazy suggestions.
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
I'm begining to think you're not even in Singapore and you don't really give a damn to what happens to us if we follow your crazy suggestions.
You are damn delusional if you think PAP=Singapore.
PAP=Sillipore
-
there is no way we can save our economy from this credit cause recession.
retrenchment is going to get more steam in coming 6 mths.
the one and only way we can reduce unemployment among the singaporeans among the fresh poly, ITE grads, is voluntary lengthen their NS period from 2 yrs back to 2.5 yrs. massive recruitment program to recruit SAF regulars.
-
Singaporean men to work in construction sites instead of using foreign workers
Singaporean women to work as nurses and domestic maids instead of foreign nurses and maids
More part-time workers and job share, cut pay and bonuses
Encourage more start-up companies
-
more trade agreements with middle east, south america, china, russia, india etc .
stop wasting of time reading people writing "delusional" on sg forums.
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Singaporean men to work in construction sites instead of using foreign workers
Singaporean women to work as nurses and domestic maids instead of foreign nurses and maids
More part-time workers and job share, cut pay and bonuses
Encourage more start-up companies
You can't have just any tom, dick and harry working on a construction site. Despite the perception of some elite members of our society, construction workers are tradesmen with skills and these cannot be learnt overnight. Same goes for nurses. We use foreign labour because not enough Singaporeans are trained to do these jobs. Someone posted earlier about Singapore being too dependent on external trade and how it has neglected building up internal capacity which I think is relevant in this case.
-
Originally posted by frakfrakfrak:
You can't have just any tom, dick and harry working on a construction site. Despite the perception of some elite members of our society, construction workers are tradesmen with skills and these cannot be learnt overnight. Same goes for nurses. We use foreign labour because not enough Singaporeans are trained to do these jobs. Someone posted earlier about Singapore being too dependent on external trade and how it has neglected building up internal capacity which I think is relevant in this case.
Many of the foreign workers in our construction sites are unskilled workers who have been farmers a few weeks before. If people are hungry enough, they can be trained to do a new job.
-
Internal Capacity ? Given our small population based , I do not think we can generate that much demand.
I agree on forging business relationship with other countries. We should not only encourage businees startups but also faciliate these startups in going into regional. It should be a game field whereby we go out to other countries and take their money into our economy. This game field should not be advantageoous to big companies like singtel with their India investment. Comfort delgro with the UK venture and ownership.
The economy of the past singapore has done tremendous in getting other countries into investing into Singapore that we have these pillars of support for manufacturing ( eg . Jurong Island petro refining and storage to downstream petrol chemical , Semicon manufacturing , Solar (REC and Norsun investment ), bio medical manufacturing ( SchringPlough ) etc.
I will prefer that are more singapore companies (eg. CaptialLand , Keppel but smaller startups) that are able to invest into foreign lands with a return of investment . Our sight should be set on having bases in places out of singapore where opportunities are plenty. One should also know that doing business out of singapore contain much risk , (eg China , where scams are plenty and being a indirect victim of one of them). A good start will be to have influenctial governing bodies in overseas to upkeep the safety of business overseas.
-
Get rid of PAP regime.
Americans got rid of republicans and brought in Obama.
We must get rid of PAP regime.
-
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
more trade agreements with middle east, south america, china, russia, india etc .
stop wasting of time reading people writing "delusional" on sg forums.
Trade agreements are only as useful as the paper itself. In truth, the actual tangible benefit is quite debatable.
-
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Singaporean men to work in construction sites instead of using foreign workers
Singaporean women to work as nurses and domestic maids instead of foreign nurses and maids
More part-time workers and job share, cut pay and bonuses
Encourage more start-up companies
And while we are at that, let's allow M'sians, Chinese, etc. to take over the low end jobs like waitresses... counter staff...
Oh wait, what's left for locals?
-
Originally posted by Ice Dive:
Internal Capacity ? Given our small population based , I do not think we can generate that much demand.
I agree on forging business relationship with other countries. We should not only encourage businees startups but also faciliate these startups in going into regional. It should be a game field whereby we go out to other countries and take their money into our economy. This game field should not be advantageoous to big companies like singtel with their India investment. Comfort delgro with the UK venture and ownership.
The economy of the past singapore has done tremendous in getting other countries into investing into Singapore that we have these pillars of support for manufacturing ( eg . Jurong Island petro refining and storage to downstream petrol chemical , Semicon manufacturing , Solar (REC and Norsun investment ), bio medical manufacturing ( SchringPlough ) etc.
I will prefer that are more singapore companies (eg. CaptialLand , Keppel but smaller startups) that are able to invest into foreign lands with a return of investment . Our sight should be set on having bases in places out of singapore where opportunities are plenty. One should also know that doing business out of singapore contain much risk , (eg China , where scams are plenty and being a indirect victim of one of them). A good start will be to have influenctial governing bodies in overseas to upkeep the safety of business overseas.
Of course, as a growth engine, our population is too small but building up internal capacity will make our economy more robust. It doesn't have to be one or the other, we can do both and anyway, such a small market doesn't really need much internal investments, we just need to choke people less.
-
Rejunvenate the domestic economy. Singapore domestic market died many years ago when Singaporeans travelled for leisure, holidays, social, medical, business, incentive, etc out of singapore, and spent almost all their money overseas and invested overseas. and in nearby Malaysia, Johore, Batam, Bintan, Bangkok and even in Cambodia, Vietnam. There are no more provision shops, half the stalls in coffee shops are not taken up, half the shops and offices in shopping centres are empty. There is no demand and domestic consumer spending. Stop this and put in measures for Singaporeans to spend in Singapore, instead of supporting the Malaysian economy etc
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Get rid of PAP regime.
Americans got rid of republicans and brought in Obama.
We must get rid of PAP regime.
You can try. Singaporeans still vote for PAP cuz they want stability. Don't give me that brainwashing shit. Whose to say who has been brainwashed? PAP supporters can claim you have been brainwashed by CSJ and his antics, you can claim PAP supporters have been brainwashed by PAP since young. So who's right? You can argue all you want but fact is opposition does not have the credibility nor the ability to be able to govern Singapore well. Yes we need change but if you're talking about drastically increasing the number of opposition MP's then we're in trouble. Gradual change is fine and all but to get rid of the PAP regime? Who's gonna pm? CSJ? -
Originally posted by Chris88110:
You can try. Singaporeans still vote for PAP cuz they want stability. Don't give me that brainwashing shit. Whose to say who has been brainwashed? PAP supporters can claim you have been brainwashed by CSJ and his antics, you can claim PAP supporters have been brainwashed by PAP since young. So who's right? You can argue all you want but fact is opposition does not have the credibility nor the ability to be able to govern Singapore well. Yes we need change but if you're talking about drastically increasing the number of opposition MP's then we're in trouble. Gradual change is fine and all but to get rid of the PAP regime? Who's gonna pm? CSJ?Meh... Quite frankly, the reluctance to think beyond the PAP is itself symptomatic of brainwashing. But "brainwashing" really isn't the right word. Too many people have taken in the propaganda over the last few decades and started getting too comfy in our belief in superiority. Which was why Chartered Semiconductor went down the tube, and PSA slipped against TJP.
But that aside, people seem to have forgotten that once upon a time, the PAP was also criticised as inexperienced, and fratenized with "enemies of the state"... -
Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:
Meh... Quite frankly, the reluctance to think beyond the PAP is itself symptomatic of brainwashing. But "brainwashing" really isn't the right word. Too many people have taken in the propaganda over the last few decades and started getting too comfy in our belief in superiority. Which was why Chartered Semiconductor went down the tube, and PSA slipped against TJP.
But that aside, people seem to have forgotten that once upon a time, the PAP was also criticised as inexperienced, and fratenized with "enemies of the state"...
I'm not reluctant to think beyond PAP, thats why i say, gradual change is possible. And yes i know the PAP was once inexperienced, therefore i say afew more opposition members in the parliment, say 2 or 3 every GE would be good. But an immediate change where 50% of the parliment being replaced by opposition members with no idea how to rule the country is simple unreasonable..... -
Originally posted by Chris88110:
I'm not reluctant to think beyond PAP, thats why i say, gradual change is possible. And yes i know the PAP was once inexperienced, therefore i say afew more opposition members in the parliment, say 2 or 3 every GE would be good. But an immediate change where 50% of the parliment being replaced by opposition members with no idea how to rule the country is simple unreasonable.....The same thing could incidentally be said of most of the PAP MPs right now, mind you. Most of then have never governed. And the senior Civil Service and senior GLC executives form one heck of an old boy's club too close to the PAP to be even considered independent.
-
Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:
The same thing could incidentally be said of most of the PAP MPs right now, mind you. Most of then have never governed. And the senior Civil Service and senior GLC executives form one heck of an old boy's club too close to the PAP to be even considered independent.
The problem is that a sudden change demands a sudden response, that is how nature works and i have no reason to doubt it applies to us as well.
My main worry would be how factions within the PAP will respond if they suddenly saw their power diminished and do not have the capacity to accept it, which most likely they don't.
If this sudden change of government is to happen, it has better be while LKY is alive. At the very least he would be able to keep things from going out of hand.
There are a lot of reprecussions and side effects that would result from a sudden change of political power and may not be apparent immediately to the casual observer.
Just because people chose to take a more pro PAP stance does not neccessarily mean they are blind to the ills of the PAP.
To me the most desirable outcome is for the opposition to net a GRC or 2 next election, an outcome much like the Malaysian elections. Able to form a bigger minority but not a big majority yet. This would give them a bigger voice in Parliament in favor of the people and give them the neccessary experience to perform better on the next elections, understand better the functioning of the bureaucracy and essentially be better politicians.
The main reason i dislike CSJ is that he has not shown himself to be a shrew politician and thinks that taking a confrontational stance will solve problems. After being sued so badly, i have no doubt that he's now an extremely bitter man who should not be allowed anywhere near a position of power.
-
But while LKY is still alive, the regime change will not happen. He won't allow that to happen...He will order the opposition to bre crushed like a bug...
An anarchy is inevitable....LKY's role will be more of a stabilising factor where he longer has any real power...he will just be a consultant, that's all...the final say rests on the people whom we have voted in
-
Originally posted by Fingolfin_Noldor:
Trade agreements are only as useful as the paper itself. In truth, the actual tangible benefit is quite debatable.
True and false .. I think it depends on how its excerised or leveraged upon. It may be a good platform if it is used wisely.
Taking a example instead of giving a general comment ( which by itself does not have much substance to convince or debate upon) . We can see that some companies are distributors for certain products of suppliers. Most of them started off with market analysis which will show the pros and cons for both the supplier and distributor. Tehn there is a distributorship agreemenbt. It is a basis whereby the 2 companies can collaborate. The partnership itself may be successful or may not as seen from the distributors around ( this success or failure factor could be due to lack off real demands or mismanagement or follow through effort etc).
Business venture by itself in the first place have no guarantee of success but it needs to start off somewhere .
-
Originally posted by Ice Dive:
True and false .. I think it depends on how its excerised or leveraged upon. It may be a good platform if it is used wisely.
Taking a example instead of giving a general comment ( which by itself does not have much substance to convince or debate upon) . We can see that some companies are distributors for certain products of suppliers. Most of them started off with market analysis which will show the pros and cons for both the supplier and distributor. Tehn there is a distributorship agreemenbt. It is a basis whereby the 2 companies can collaborate. The partnership itself may be successful or may not as seen from the distributors around ( this success or failure factor could be due to lack off real demands or mismanagement or follow through effort etc).
Business venture by itself in the first place have no guarantee of success but it needs to start off somewhere .
The main premise of the trade agreements is to cut back on tarrifs to near zero on exports and imports on both sides of the agreement, and the opening of markets. This in turn means that companies involved in the trade benefit from reduced costs.
However, how does it stimulate more trade? Costs is only one factor in the overall decision matrix. The first question is what we have to offer. The next is what the other side offers. The final is whether we are a large enough market worth caring about. All of the above vary from trade agreement to trade agreement, because for example, in the case of the Singapore-US FTA, the actual benefit is at best mostly limited to the banking sector, because that's the only sector that is most appealing to foreigners. And even so, HK has long benefited from its willingness to open up the gates of its financial sector. We were merely playing catch up. For the India/Singapore FTA, I'm not sure how to quantify that. On one hand, we can go offer services in India, on the other, the legendary Indian byzantine bureaucracy is sure to put a damper on anything.
In the case of the banking sector, it expanded quite a lot over the last 5 years because of government liberalisation. Let's face it, the local banks suck monkey balls when compared against their larger European and US counterparts. So letting more sophisticated competition in meant that our local banks had to reform considerably to fight back. But note, that banking sector is the main sector that actually saw considerable benefits. Even the telecommunications sector is still dominated by a triad of government linked companies.
Another thing to note, for companies who have no choice but to deal with middle men, given the small size of our economy and the lack of competition, the benefit is low or neglible. Why? Simple. Just because costs have gone down, does not mean the middle men are willing to cut back on prices. They won't. So the actual tangible benefit is going to be hard to analyse and quantify.
-
since Stanford Raffles, Singapore has been a trading place. FTA reinforced this status. by having many unilateral FTAs, businesses would be attracted to Singapore and use Singapore as an export or re-export location.
For instance, an exporter would route its products through Singapore towards other locations.
-
Originally posted by Daddy!!:
since Stanford Raffles, Singapore has been a trading place. FTA reinforced this status. by having many unilateral FTAs, businesses would be attracted to Singapore and use Singapore as an export or re-export location.
For instance, an exporter would route its products through Singapore towards other locations.
You have no real idea what an FTA does don't you?
A very key component of an FTA is the issue of rules of origin. The above does not work. Tarrifs are applied to any article that does not originate from Singapore. Simply put, whatever is sold has to be made in Singapore, and sold from Singapore.
-
yes. assemble in Singapore and put a chop "made in Singapore".