Originally posted by Yunhaier:Imagine in 18 years time into the future, the available number for recruitment into National Service for the SAF, SCDF and Police will be alarmingly small, which require all three services to be shrunk in size of manpower that will have significant impact into the future.
[b]Govt reviewing baby bonus scheme
It is thinking of new ways to arrest low birth rate, says DPM Lee, adding that birth rate is one of top three priorities
By Lee Hui Chieh
AWARE that money alone cannot persuade the stork to visit, the Government is reviewing its baby bonus scheme as well as trying to conceive other ways to encourage Singaporeans to marry earlier and have more children.
So far, its attempts to arrest the slide in births has not worked. The number of births last year is believed to be the lowest in 26 years.
Advertisement
Just 31,171 babies were born between January and October. During the same period in 2002, there were 33,618. And for the whole of that year, 40,864 births, about 600 less than 2001.
Speaking to reporters during a Chinese New Year dinner at Teck Ghee Community Club yesterday, Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said: 'I don't think you can just depend on money to encourage people to have children. Having children is a very personal... decision.'
However, he declined to elaborate on whether the baby bonus would be increased and other ideas the Government is considering.
The baby bonus, introduced in 2001, offers parents $3,000 to have a second child and $6,000 for the third child over six years.
Earlier, in a speech to more than 1,300 residents at the dinner, he listed the low birth rate as one of the Government's top three priorities this year. The other two are economic restructuring and political transition.
Last year, each Singaporean woman produced 1.37 babies. She needed to have 2.1, just to replace the population. The problem was especially marked among the Chinese, with each Chinese woman producing 1.18 babies.
Citing these figures, DPM Lee said: 'It's not a new problem. To encourage people, we have incentives, we have tax rebates, we have all sorts of things, but still the number of babies has been going down.
'So this is a very clear problem. We have all these procreation incentives, I think we have to review them... and see how we can focus them, make them more effective, and where we need to enhance them...'
Echoing Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong's Chinese New Year message, he added: 'We have to change people's mindsets, so they think of having babies as something that's happy, that's good and that's what they'd like to do and not just, so much work...'
He was more certain of the direction to take on economic restructuring, saying that Singapore would have to make structural changes to stay two steps ahead of the regional competition, especially that posed by China and India.
Workers will have carry on being trained in new skills such that they can hold new jobs. The country will have to attract new investments, so it can handle more value-added production and promote services that in turn create new jobs, such as in health care, education and tourism.
'We have to make ourselves flexible, so we can adjust and roll with the conditions... That includes making our wages more flexible...'
He asked Singaporeans, especially those born after 1965, to rally behind their new leaders, expected to take over sometime later this year.
'We're opening up, we're getting people to be involved... We're wanting more diversity, to be more varied and rich culturally in terms of expression, in terms of views. At the same time, we want to maintain the unity and togetherness, so that we are one people, one nation, one Singapore.'
***What do you people think is the...
I) Critical factor/s affecting and contributing to such low birth rates?
II) Suggestion solution to effectively tackle this issue?
Cheers[/b]
Originally posted by Ah Ma:ban condoms in singapore![]()
1)Higher Goals set by the younger generation + higher costs of living = More time devoted to career, hence = less time/effort/reason to work on babiesWhat do you people think is the...
I) Critical factor/s affecting and contributing to such low birth rates?
II) Suggestion solution to effectively tackle this issue?
Cheers[/b]
Solutions!Originally posted by Farmer Brown:1)Higher Goals set by the younger generation + higher costs of living = More time devoted to career, hence = less time/effort/reason to work on babies
2) higher standard of living = higher cost for bearing children = disincentive for bearing children
3) Youth's being disillusioned by the notion of romance(like me) = higher desire to live a happy wandering carefree life = duh~
4) Condoms and their birth control brudders and sisters
cannot....then i will run out of business for my condy ventureOriginally posted by Ah Ma:ban condoms in singapore![]()

Originally posted by Atobe:Imagine in 18 years time into the future, the available number for recruitment into National Service for the SAF, SCDF and Police will be alarmingly small, which require all three services to be shrunk in size of manpower that will have significant impact into the future.
Assuming the annual sex ratio of 1:1 boy-girl babies, and 18 years into the future, the available manpower to mann our security forces will be -
20,000 for 2019 (from 40,864 births in 2001),
17,000 in 2020 (from 33,618 births in 2002), and
16,000 in 2021 (from 31,171 births in 2003).
The present intake per year is more then double these numbers.
The shrinking numbers will threaten not only the manpower requirements of our Security Services, but also the population make-up of Singapore.
It will require more qualified foreign workers to take up residence to fill the shortages in manpower, and accentuate the already competitive employment environment for Singaporeans..
The only way to encourage the young to form family nucleas is to lower the cost of living that include the purchase price of HDB or Private homes, transportation costs, food costs, essential services, children's welfare and education.
Such expenses should absorb no more then SEVENTY PERCENT of the TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME of each family, with the remaining THIRTY PERCENT being saved into CPF Account (20 percent) and into Private Investments (10 percent).
At present, for any young couple to consider a commitment to build a family, both parties will have to consider themselves to be in debt to the Financial System for the next TWENTY to TWENTY-FIVE Years of their working lives.
Without any social safety net to cushion the impact of any severe economic upheavals - as had been experienced in the sudden economic downturn in 1985, 1997, and 2002-2003 - the hard lessons seen and felt by the young will only discourage them to even consider building a family until they are able to meet at least FIFTY PERCENT of the various basic needs.
This will require a delay of at least another TEN to FIFTEEN years from day of graduation from Tertiary or High School Education.
With the recent reduction in wages, salaries, and CPF contributions, and increases to GST and other Government related and controlled essential services (that include utilities charges, hospital fees, public transportation costs), the ball is clearly in the court of the Singapore Government, and not in the hands of any young Singaporeans to influence the outcome.
It is in the power of the Singapore Government to lower the cost of development for housing developers and HDB, which ultimately will have a snowball effect in lowering the costs of a multitude of prices for homes, transport, goods and services for Singaporeans.
Let us not have the Government pass the buck and make the Citizens responsible for the problems that they have largely created with a short-sighted Family Planning Program, and a myopic view of trying to transplant the concept of a 'Swiss Standard of Living' into an Asian setting by enforced artificial means.
This planet 'Earth' may not contain us, that is the reason we have to support the efforts of the European Community, People's Republic of China, and the USA - in their search for ways to Colonise the Universe.Originally posted by nismoS132:i honestly feel that the human population should start reducing now.
6 billion of us is too many.
from a human, economic sense, we ought to be growing bigger since there's still so much land. but if we look at the entire planet in perspective, there's just simply too much of us.
look at the rate that the population has jumped in the past 100 years, and the amount of devastation we've done.
the planet can't contain us for much longer.
Originally posted by Ah Ma:ban condoms in singapore![]()
Originally posted by Yunhaier:Your analysis is detail and clear. As what I felt as well, unless cost of living are going down - people wouldn't have much financial security to start a family.
[b]The only way to encourage the young to form family nucleas is to lower the cost of living that include the purchase price of HDB or Private homes, transportation costs, food costs, essential services, children's welfare and education.
Seriously speaking, I doubt the garmen will lower cost like what you have stated above. Guess, our population would still be shrinking for the next many years to come.
Cheers [/b]
It is with great interest that I read your post, Atobe.Originally posted by Atobe:Imagine in 18 years time into the future, the available number for recruitment into National Service for the SAF, SCDF and Police will be alarmingly small, which require all three services to be shrunk in size of manpower that will have significant impact into the future.
Assuming the annual sex ratio of 1:1 boy-girl babies, and 18 years into the future, the available manpower to mann our security forces will be -
20,000 for 2019 (from 40,864 births in 2001),
17,000 in 2020 (from 33,618 births in 2002), and
16,000 in 2021 (from 31,171 births in 2003).
The present intake per year is more then double these numbers.
The shrinking numbers will threaten not only the manpower requirements of our Security Services, but also the population make-up of Singapore.
It will require more qualified foreign workers to take up residence to fill the shortages in manpower, and accentuate the already competitive employment environment for Singaporeans..
The only way to encourage the young to form family nucleas is to lower the cost of living that include the purchase price of HDB or Private homes, transportation costs, food costs, essential services, children's welfare and education.
Such expenses should absorb no more then SEVENTY PERCENT of the TOTAL HOUSEHOLD INCOME of each family, with the remaining THIRTY PERCENT being saved into CPF Account (20 percent) and into Private Investments (10 percent).
At present, for any young couple to consider a commitment to build a family, both parties will have to consider themselves to be in debt to the Financial System for the next TWENTY to TWENTY-FIVE Years of their working lives.
Without any social safety net to cushion the impact of any severe economic upheavals - as had been experienced in the sudden economic downturn in 1985, 1997, and 2002-2003 - the hard lessons seen and felt by the young will only discourage them to even consider building a family until they are able to meet at least FIFTY PERCENT of the various basic needs.
This will require a delay of at least another TEN to FIFTEEN years from day of graduation from Tertiary or High School Education.
With the recent reduction in wages, salaries, and CPF contributions, and increases to GST and other Government related and controlled essential services (that include utilities charges, hospital fees, public transportation costs), the ball is clearly in the court of the Singapore Government, and not in the hands of any young Singaporeans to influence the outcome.
It is in the power of the Singapore Government to lower the cost of development for housing developers and HDB, which ultimately will have a snowball effect in lowering the costs of a multitude of prices for homes, transport, goods and services for Singaporeans.
Let us not have the Government pass the buck and make the Citizens responsible for the problems that they have largely created with a short-sighted Family Planning Program, and a myopic view of trying to transplant the concept of a 'Swiss Standard of Living' into an Asian setting by enforced artificial means.
he didn't run not because he was brave. he didn't run because he didn't really believe the americans would invade iraq.Originally posted by Ecxentrique:The only one I know who din was Saddam.
He is a taurus - stubborn and fixed.Originally posted by nismoS132:he didn't run not because he was brave. he didn't run because he didn't really believe the americans would invade iraq.