Singaporean Men are Pathetic

I can't believe that this article has appeared in the news:

"A young Singapore man has appealed publicly to Minister in Prime Minister Office Grace Fu during a townhall meeting recently to stop foreign men from ‘stealing’ Singaporean women from local men. 

During the Q&A session, he complained that Singapore men are losing out in the race to the altar because local women are increasingly favoring foreign men 

His complaint drew a round of laughter from the audience, but he silenced them with a glaring look: 

“I think we shouldn’t laugh. It is an important problem and we need to solve it,” he thundered. 

He added that foreign men tend to enjoy higher pay and better perks which give them an unfair advantage in the competition for Singaporean women’s heart."

Singaporean men are so pathetic. They cry to the PAP Gahmen about everything. Complain about foreigners taking away jobs, and now complain to the Gahmen about foreigners taking away girls.

And then in an act of what can only be described as pussy neurotic masochism, they keep on voting for this Gahmen who keep on screwing them over by bringing foreigners to the country.

The Negative Calculus of Foreign Talent

Shocking Fact: Only 1.7% of foreigners working in Singapore pay taxes.

The rest of the 98.3% are here freeloading off our economic infrastructure to earn a living without contributing a cent to the public purse.

These freeloaders are leeching off our transportation, healthcare, housing, education and national defence. Not only are they not paying a cent in taxes, they are the cause of massive negative externalities the economy and society.

The overloading of the transportation system is causing it to break down with alarming regularity, disrupting economic activity and being a drag on productivity.

The overloading of the housing system is causing living space to be more expensive, smaller and to be built in poorer locations than before.

Hospital queues and waiting times are longer, medical wards are packed, doctors are more stressed out, and healthcare costs are skyrocketing.

Foreign scholars are the worst in the negative calculus. They cost $175,000 a pop to subsidise their education. On top of that they deny locals a place in university. The taxes they pay after graduation hardly come close to paying for their education, and many of them leave for greener pastures at the first whiff of a better opportunity.

And don't even get me started about the cost of national defence. The personal cost ot each Singaporean male to defend this country can't even come close to the so-called benefits generated by foreign talent.

So tell me, how is this madness of an immigration policy justified, given that it scores a big fat F when you put the sums together?

In Defence of 'Xenophobia'

Much has been made about Singapore's growing aversion to the foreigners. Many PAP politicians have been quoted 'warning' Singaporeans against xenophobia, and various bloggers are writing about how Singaporeans are getting unreasonable in their attitudes towards foreigners.

But hold on a minute, are Singaporeans really xenophobic? Xenophobia is defined as "an unreasonable fear of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange." Let's examine the behaviour of foreigners in Singapore and ask ourselves if there is reason to be fearful of foreigners.

Make Community Service Compulsory For All Foreign Scholars

I refer to the article "NUS scholar fined S$3,000, gets 3 months community service" and applaud the disciplinary action taken by university provost Tan Eng Chye against the improper and insensitive behaviour of Sun Xu. In particular, I applaud the community service 'punishment' and would like to make a suggestion that all foreign scholars be required to complete compulsory community service as a prerequisite to graduation.

Compulsory community service ensures that these foreign students invest time and effort into the Singaporean community which spends millions of dollars to fund their education. It also ensures that they learn more about Singaporean culture and helps to integrate them into Singapore society.

Most importantly, it sends a clear moral message to students that academic achievement is meaningless if it is not accompanied by cultural sensitivity and a sense of social responsibility. It is time for us to require a substantial social return on our investment in foreign talent, rather than just contribution to GDP.

PAP Finally Comes to its Senses

After 15 years of madness, the PAP has finally come to its senses.

Ever since the 1997 National Day Rally speech when Goh Chok Tong announced the PAP shift in economic policy to open Singapore's doors to foreign talent, the PAP has gone on an ideological and public relations offensive to market and defend the foreign talent policy. At all levels, the policy was dogmatically defended - from the PAP parliamentary backbenchers, right up to the Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew himself.

The policy has literally wreaked havoc on this country.

Why it Pays to be a Foreign Talent PR in Singapore, Today!!

Singapore is a great place for foreigners to live, work and play! Just take the example of Mr Peter Breitkreutz, an Australian citizen who came to work in Singapore and who fell in love with the country!

Mr Peter Breitkreutz is an Australian citizen who attained his Singapore Permanent Residency (PR) in 2008. Mr Breitkreutz is currently a Senior Vice President of Citibank in Singapore, and is very proud about the fact that he is a Singapore PR. He owns a resale HDB flat in Sengkang West and is married to a Shanghainese wife, and they have two sons.

Mr Breitkreutz is the self-proclaimed "Singapore's favourite expat" and who writes the "most read and subscribed to expat blog in Singapore." He has won several blogging awards, and has even been recruited by the Singapore Government (MICA) to help promote Singapore to foreigners as a great place to live, work, study and play! The Singapore Government absolutely LOVES talented foreigners like Mr Breitkreutz, so much so that it has a special name for them - "foreign talent"!

Nonsensical Forum Letter on Cheap Foreign Labour

A letter by a certain Ng Ya Ken was published on the TODAYonline Voices section. It contains several nonsensical and idiotic statements that I would wish to debunk. Note: I have no affiliation with SPP and have no vested interest in defending the SPP.

Cheap foreign labour: Who's responsible?
Letter from Ng Ya Ken 04:46 AM Feb 22, 2012

THE Singapore People's Party's chairman, Mrs Lina Chiam, thinks that the effect of foreign labour "is akin to the use of performance-enhancement drugs in sports", as reported in "Opposition parties weigh in on Budget measures" (Feb 19).

Her analogy may not be appropriate, as the use of foreign labour is mainly out of necessity and demand stems mainly from the private sector.

Tharman's 2012 Budget Speech & the Spectre of Government Failure

One of the key features, if not the key feature of the 2012 Budget Speech, is the reduction in foreign worker dependency ratio ceilings (DRCs) and Man-Year Entitlement (MYE) quotas. Stung by the results of the 2011 general elections, the PAP has u-turned on its pro-foreign worker stance and the Minister for Finance has stated unequivocally to businesses that they must reduce their dependence on foreign labour.

Read deeper between the lines, however, and you will see a tacit admission of Government failure. Here are two critical paragraphs in Tharman's budget speech regarding the clamping down of foreign labour inflow:

"Foreign Talent" Issue is a Symptom of the Power Struggle between the Political, Corporate Elite and the Working Class

There has been a lot of argumentation about whether the "foreign talent" policy is the right policy for Singapore and the PAP Government as the primary proponent of Singapore's hyper liberal immigration policies, has given all sorts of reasons why Singapore needs a massive influx of foreigners. These reasons consist of arguments regarding Singapore's need for foreign labor to supplement economic growth, and to "top-up" the shrinking population." Meanwhile the opposition and other critics of the foreign talent policy usually fall into the trap of engaging the PAP on their terms and use counter arguments as to why the policy doesn't really work. Such arguments usually run along the lines of foreigners overloading the infrastructure, depressing wages, lowering the standard of living, lowering productivity etc.

Does PAP Government Work for Singaporeans or Foreigners?

I decided to delve into an analysis of some of Singapore's Economic statistics today. I did a bit of sleuthing around and some analysis of our GDP data, and what follows below is the results of my analysis. All the data below is publicly available from Singstat. (all charts clickable for full version)

The chart above shows the nominal GDP breakdown from 1999-2009. From the chart we can see that GDP has been steadily on the rise, apart from the recent dip following the financial crisis. The chart also breaks down the GDP into the Foreign Resident share and the indigenous share of GDP.

This chart performs a statistical analysis on the first chart above. As can be seen, the % share of GDP that went to Foreign Residents increased consistently from 37.85% in 1999 to 42.58% in 2009. In other words, a progressively larger proportion of our economy belongs to foreigners. Correspondingly, the indigenous share of GDP has declined from 62.15% to 57.42% from 1999-2009.

Foreign Residents Should Just Shut Up

(see below for context)

I refer to the letter, "Be prouder of this great little red dot (ST, Nov 7)" by Mr Sam Ahmed, and find it amusing that the author criticises Singaporeans for complaining about their own country or wanting to "save up and leave."

Indeed, it is ironic for a person who has left his own country, lived his life in several cities around the world, and finally decided that a country not his own should be where he wants to settle down - should then have the gall to deprive others the right to choose where they want to live, or to decide that their country of birth has room for improvement.

Mr Ahmed, of course, has never been a Singaporean taxi driver, nor has he ever been a Singaporean undergraduate. Incredibly, however, he claims to have the insight and wisdom to understand how 'foolish' Singaporean taxi drivers and undergraduates are when they criticise their own country. Perhaps Mr Ahmed should take a few years off his own busy schedule to attempt to live life as a taxi driver in Singapore and to study as a Singaporean undergraduate before blowing his trumpet in the national newspaper.

Mr Ahmed has also clearly never paused to consider the fact that amongst the many other foreigners who have passed through Singapore's shores, he is but amongst a minority who have decided to settle here. This leaves me wondering, does Mr Ahmed have superior judgment to all those other foreign fools?

The hypocrisy of foreign residents like Mr Sam Ahmed is astounding. While attempting to belittle the opinions of Singaporeans, they conveniently ignore the fact that they themselves have abandoned their own homelands for another one which they perceive to be a superior place to live. Where, Mr Ahmed, is your own pride in your own home country?

Mr Ahmed is patently unqualified to make any of the comments he made in his forum letter. Indeed, It is time for foreigners like him to keep their mouth shut and mind their own business.

Singaporeans are fully capable of making their own informed decisions and forming their own opinions about their country. The last thing we need is a foreigner with little understanding of how things work, pontificating about how Singaporeans should think about their homeland.

------------

ST Nov 7, 2009

Be prouder of this great little red dot

I REFER to Thursday's report, 'Singapore a top choice for migrants'. I am a new permanent resident, and this report not only makes me proud, but also affirms my fundamental belief that Singapore is destined to be a global centre from a financial standpoint and a cultural and social perspective.

After living most of my life in Sydney, Paris and Tokyo, I have embraced Singapore as my home - I never felt so intimate with the other cities.

My only beef with Singapore is that its citizens do not necessarily share my passion for this country. From personal observations, I have noticed that Singaporeans are both competitive and in a constant pursuit to improve their daily lives, whether economically or in some other sphere.

In this challenging environment, it is natural that one loses perspective of the overall big picture, which is that Singapore, a country of about 700 sq km, has come a long way from a backwater trading post to establishing itself as arguably the financial and technological hub of Asia.

Perhaps Singaporeans should be prouder of their country. Cab drivers complain about everything and university graduates I come across talk of saving up and moving to Spain or Italy.

Perhaps it is time citizens took a step back from the frantic demands of everyday life to reflect a little on what their country has to offer - a safe, ecologically aware and technologically advanced metropolis with excellent public transport and infrastructure, a thriving arts scene and a welcoming multicultural local population.

If foreigners from all over the world can see this and are coming to Singapore, why can't Singaporeans?

Sam Ahmed

Singapore's Population Statistics - The Rise of Foreign Talent

Singapore adopts an open immigration policy with a strong belief in attracting “foreign talent” to drive the country's economic growth. As shown below, this has contributed to a consistent growth in the number of non-residents in Singapore since 2003, rising from 748 million to about 1,005 million in 2007, for an annual growth rate of about 7.7%.


The % of the Singapore Population who are non-residents has also been on the rise, recently breaking through the 20% mark in 2007 to 21.48%.

At the current rate, the % of foreigners in Singapore looks set to rise significantly, as the country continues to import "foreign talent" - both cheap foreign labour and senior executives - to boost the population and to drive the country towards a knowledge-based economy, and target wealthy foreigners to grow its tourism, private banking and premium real estate businesses.

The % of foreigners in the country could easily rise to 25%, and even 30-35% in the coming years.

All statistics are publicly available from SingStat.

Jackson Tai to leave DBS

DBS bank has just announced that CEO Jackson Tai is to leave DBS at the end of the year to return to the USA to be with his family.

Said Tai: “Under my watch, DBS has established a sound platform for growth. Today, DBS has extended its geographic presence beyond Singapore with inroads into Hong Kong, China, India and Indonesia. I am confident the team will build on the strong momentum created in a resurgent Asia to further strengthen our position as a leading bank in this region.”

He added: “For more than eight years, I have dedicated myself to DBS and Singapore, even as my family remained in the States. There’s never a perfect time to leave but having been CEO for five years, I believe it’s now right for me to catch up with my family.”

This is certainly a surprising announcement that must be unexpected to many people. In fact, it seems that it is only now that DBS is starting to get its overseas growth plan going, having just emerged from the legacy of its expensive acquisition of Dao Heng bank and only just begun its official entry into the mainland Chinese banking market.

It is unlikely that Tai's departure has anything to do with the subprime crisis, of which DBS had little exposure. What seems more likely is that managing DBS's future is not exciting nor challenging enough for this former top investment banker to want to stay around in Singapore for the longer term. While it is true that Tai has established a platform for growth for the bank, there still is a lot to be done in terms of expanding the company's businesses in overseas markets; in many ways, Tai's successor will have his work cut out for him, to say the least.

But perhaps Tai's departure underscores DBS's difficulty in selecting the right talent to lead the company. Foreign candidates of Tai's calibre and experience may be lured to Singapore's shores for a period of time, but they will find it difficult to stay for the long term. Hanging around in Singapore for a few years may be an interesting experience, but the novelty wears off after a while.

In pursuing its global exective search for a new CEO, DBS may want to consider sacrificing international experience for someone who is more likely to stick around for the long term in order to give the bank a sense of continuity of leadership at the top. Constantly replacing CEOs without promoting from within makes the leadership disjointed, and top management has to constantly readjust and adapt to a new man or woman at the helm.

Of course, there is no better way to ensure continuity and consistency of leadership than by appointing someone who is homegrown and whom DBS can be sure of having his/her heart in Singapore.

Read DBS' press release here.

Young Foreign Talent in Singapore

Mr Wang has an interesting post about foreign kids coming to Singapore to enjoy education subsidies, where he laments that these are not the kind of "foreign talent" that Singaporeans want, because the foreign kids pack up and leave after finishing their secondary education, and do not contribute to the country after having received the education subsidies.

Instead, he implies in his argument that the focus on foreign talent should be on bringing in talent and expertise that Singapore lacks, and that Singaporeans themselves are not able to provide, an example being Darrell Metzger.

While these are interesting points made by Mr Wang, I do not think that the main problem lies in the 'importing' of young kids into Singapore. Rather, I think that the real challenge lies in making Singapore a place where people will be happy to settle down and consider home, after having spent their primary and secondary education years here.

Consider, for example, the US, where many foreign students enrol and later on, stay in the country and take up citizenship - the situation is different from Singapore because the US is a much nicer place to stay after you have completed your education because there are bountiful opportunities to pursue your ambitions, and there is an active political culture where citizens have a real say in how their country is run.

Singapore, in contrast, is a country dominated by one political party, where freedom of expression is curtailed, and where a political culture is deemed as a threat to the nation. It is difficult for individuals to be motivated to take up residence here when there is little opportunity to feel like you have played a real part in shaping the nation. Furthermore, for males, there is the question of having to do national service, and then reservist for many years after that. The job opportunities are also restricted, compared to a place like the United States.

As such, while we may never expect to be able to provide the same kind of opportunities that a country like the USA can, we can endeavour to make our country a much more attractive place to live in (than it currently is), and that retains the young talent that we 'import.'

Such measures can include

1. an opening up of the political culture such that the young are able to feel a sense of ownership in the country - this not only encourages young foreign talent to hang around to shape the nation in which they have spent their childhood, it also encourages Singaporeans to stick around instead of emigrating.
2. heightened recognition for the sacrifices that Singaporean men make to defend and protect their country - both monetary and non-monetary. Indeed, national service can not only be made less of a chore, it can even be transformed from a liability into an experience that Singaporean male (and foreign immigrant) can be proud of.
3. a recognition that alternative lifestyles, other than the typical doctor/lawyer/accountant/engineer are not only feasible, but are worthy of respect and dignity. The skewed technocratic mindset of the government has resulted in a rather elitist view of certain professions, to the exclusion of others. Unlike other countries where you can work at McDonalds and still be treated with dignity, Singaporeans seem to treat 'lesser occupations' with less respect. A broadening of mindset to recognise alternative occupations will go a long way in welcoming those who might otherwise be discouraged to hang around.
   

These measures are not exhaustive, i'm sure they are only the beginning. And while they cannot guarantee that the young foreign talent will definitely stick around, it does greatly increase the chance that they will. And instead of stopping the influx of 'young foreign talent' completely, we can bring them into our society and assimilate them as people who may one day be proud to be called Singaporean.