Singapore population sees biggest percentage drop since 1950
reuters.com
reuters.com
More people in SG are choosing to marry later, have kids later, or have fewer kids. Many people register a marriage just to qualify for subsidised HDB housing, get that out of the way and focus on their careers.
Talking about children, schools and universities are highly subsidised for citizens, and somewhat discounted for PRs. For example [1] a citizen admitted to the National University of Singapore to study engineering pays $8,200 (about US$6,050) a year vs the $38,200 a year that an international student without any subsidies would pay.
This differentiation is even more marked for primary and secondary schools and junior colleges [2] for example a citizen pays $0 in primary school fees while a foreigner pays up to $775++ a month. A permanent resident attending secondary school pays $400 a months vs about $20-25 for a citizen.
This is a direct incentive for citizens to have more children, but also discourages PRs and foreigners from having children in SG, or to remain in SG for a long time if they don't plan to become citizens.
Healthcare is also subsidised for citizens, you are covered by the CPF (pension scheme) MediShield plan, or a linked insurance policy, whereas PRs pay more and non-PRs have no CPF coverage.
In my experience, what you're seeing here is a readjustment towards a new normal, nothing alarming, and probably what was planned all along.
[1] NUS tuition fees: https://www.nus.edu.sg/registrar/administrative-policies-pro...
[2] MOE school fees: https://www.moe.gov.sg/financial-matters/fees
Health insurance is given to all employees if a company has > 50 employees. (Otherwise it’s up to the company if they want to give health insurance)
Singapore is cheap to live in. It can be expensive if you choose to live a high roller life style. All studies for the cost of living in singapore include things for expats that you don’t need, like owning a car.
Also, the HDB-style housing is often less expensive, as some are pretty run down and not likely popular with expats, but they are cheaper.
HDB can be run down yes, but most are not. They simply do not have things like gym and pool.
Majority of the expats will get a condo first and then realise they don’t use any of this stuff and later change to HDB.
Condos are often poorly constructed. I lived in a condo that had just been finished about 6 months earlier. In Jurong east called j gateway. It’s one of the worst buildings I’ve ever been in. They put tiles on the floor that are meant for walls, and the floor to the shower is flat so the water pools and don’t run out causing water splotches.
Anyway my point is: Singapore is cheap to live in. If you want to live near the cbd (unsure why cos most expats prefer to socialise around Holland village) then you have to pay for it. If you don’t want to eat locally and instead order grab food or eat at restaurants then yeah it’s expensive. But that doesn’t make Singapore expensive to live in, your chosen life style is expensive.
Similarly, that $2 hawker meal is rather outdated now.
Not sure they have an incentive to make it easier for PRs.
> Is there a reason they're reluctant to treat permanent residents the same as citizens for kid stuff?
My naive guess is, yes there is. PR is a merit based system to gain access to the "full thing" you need to be willing to put in the work.
At the core they need to solve the local population's birth rate problem.
Origin of country matters, so does race. The uniqueness of your job matters as well especially if it "can benefit Singapore society", <S$150k pay not so much. If you integrate yourself into society, have locals who can vouch (this one is not opaque, they ask for character references).
"Benefiting Singapore society" is this catch all term and very opaque/hard to pin down. But I've seen middle managers at colleges not get PR while classroom teachers do. But not all things were equal so it's very hard to tell, but there is/are discussions around it.
Over the years it has gotten increasing harder to obtain PR and thusly citizenship.
According to their cost of living plus rent index, Singapore is 32nd most expensive city
https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/rankings.jsp
Top 3 are Hamilton, San Francisco, and Zurich.
For instance, I was paying 2-3 times as much in living expenses in SF compared to here in Zurich, almost entirely because of rental costs. Apartments here are relatively cheap, and one can survive somewhat frugally by avoiding service-based spending such as dining in restaurants, taxis, etc.
If that's the argument, then I agree. But you've got a lot of other stuff doesn't speak towards that end because it's talking about how cheap it is for citizens.
If you're a citizen, it's quite affordable to live in SG vs many other first world countries, all inclusive. US seems cheap at first, but factor in any amount of healthcare and you've got a real problem on your hands. HK far out weighs housing costs.
Still trying to understand the core thought.
This hit me hard when in Singapore. In particular because of the size: in such a small place, you can’t avoid seeing the migrant workers/maids etc whereas it’s hidden in say, Paris. The contrast is so vivid.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-populati...
Most interesting is not the foreign workers, which you would expect, but the loss of Permanent Residents (6.2%) and Citizens (0.7%).
Long term visit passes are provided for spouses and children of citizens/PRs, they can apply to be allowed to work.
Dependent passes are the same but for foreign workers, they may not apply work in Singapore.
Permanent Resident is the only way for a foreigner to stay long term and work in Singapore out of their own merit. And the requirement are probably more like what you expect for citizenship.
Currently it's essentially impossible to become citizen if you were not born to Singaporean citizens. However in the past citizenship has been offered to PR-holders.
* Citizen.
* Permanent resident (PR). Previously given out in boxes of cereal, particularly if of Chinese descent, now very difficult to attain. Military service required for male children.
* Employment pass. Professional expats with high qualifying salaries (depends on age, educational qualifications etc, but generally $5000/mo minimum). Pass tied to job, 30 days to get out of the country/find new sponsor if job ends. No subsidies for education, health etc, but can bring in families, marry locals, eventually apply for PR.
* S-pass. Semi-professional roles (eg. construction foreman), strict limits on how many can be employed.
* Work pass. Disposable laborers in construction, factories, landscaping, etc. No path to become residents, cannot marry Singaporeans (edit: without explicit government approval), generally brutally exploited and for the past two years 100% confined to their dormitories and worksites.
* Foreign domestic workers aka maids/helpers. Disposable laborers living and working in Singaporean households. Not covered by employment legislation, so can be legally forced to work 365/24/7 with no holidays whatsoever. Not uncommonly physically confined (locked in) to the employer's apartment, denied means of communicating with the outside world, and have both their passports and salaries confiscated for "safekeeping".
I don't think Singapore is exploitative as you describe it. Maybe you are thinking of Dubai.
Anyway most of what he says about “maids” is wrong - weekly rest day, must be paid monthly (no keeping of salary), … etc. as stated in the aforementioned link.
You're correct in that employers are not supposed to confiscate salaries or passports, but rest assured, both are very common practices, as are things like working in multiple households, having to work outside the home, etc.
More reading: https://www.home.org.sg/
You must not keep her bank book or bank card.”
https://www.mom.gov.sg/passes-and-permits/work-permit-for-fo...
All this happened in 2020.
Have a read through some of the stories here: https://www.home.org.sg/our-updates
This case got a lot of press lately, but while the employer was obviously a monster, also consider how it was possible that the victim had no avenue to escape or complain during the 14 month period of abuse: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/gaiyathiri-murugay...
* Economic: Singapore is an expensive place to live and both parents typically need to work to make ends meet. A foreign domestic worker is the cheapest way to get child or elder care, but it's still a significant expense, so there's a natural incentive to cut costs by providing only the absolute minimum (feed them ramen, make them sleep on the kitchen floor, etc).
* Power dynamics: The stereotypical domestic worker is young woman from a deeply poor rural background, sometimes underage with fake ID (illegal but particularly common with Burmese), who speaks little to no English, is unfamiliar with city living, and knows nobody in Singapore. They are often deeply in debt to the broker who found the job, supporting family back home who will literally starve if she can't provide, unaware of the little rights they do have, and thus very strongly incentivized to tolerate whatever is thrown their way. The employer thus finds themselves in a position of near-absolute power over them, and as the old saw says, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. In the case above, where the maid was essentially tortured to death over a year, there was an entire household watching and the deviance was normalized quickly because there was nothing she could do to fight back.
Sadly, it's not just Singapore. This also happens in other places in Asia, especially in the domestic workers' respective home countries. I feel that the abuse is even worse in places where there's more available physical space. Why? Because more physical space allows for more privacy and secrecy. Rape is very common in these places yet it wasn't commonly reported until about 10 years ago. Before, society would just treat this as infidelity. It's a grim subject, but at least things are slightly improving, though still not fast enough.
There are places where domestic workers don’t have the protection of the law. Like the UAE for instance, where somebody reporting their abuse can lead to them being charged with adultery.
Yes we can go the usual avenue of whataboutism and name places which are much worse than SGP, but the truth is, SGP is not a democracy and at its core doesn't share the western values of equality and human rights.
But as long as partying and cheap flights to Bali is all you ever wanted from life and don't care about rampart social issues everywhere around you, life can be great there. If you like hard long working hours and have something to offer on job market that is.
Partying in Singapore? You sure? They are snoozefests.
You get some really awful factors working against you for parties:
1) Some 16% of population doesn't drink
2) No drugs allowed
3) People are exhausted from working
4) Can't fool nature: The best parties are in places which are considered dangerous such as Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Cuba, Panama...That's because the strong emotions and impulsivity which makes a good party are the same that can cause stuff to go south immediately as soon as sombody interacts with a girl in a wrong way or disrespects somebody. People are very dull and emotionless in Singapore.
Yes, there are abuse cases, some which are particularly bad. No, this is not the norm, at least as far as my social circle's expectations are, and at least one or two hops out.
Singapore has a pile of issues, and I'd include "not a true democracy" in that, but normalized abuse of maids is not one of them. It makes the news for a reason.
In short, as another person alluded to with the "reverse caste" comment, here's the rough pecking order as perceived by domestic helpers.
#1 - European or American or Australian employer, living in a condominium in the expat part of town
#2 - Other nationality employer, living in a condominium (expat part preferred)
#3 - Other nationality, living in an HDB
#4 - Singaporean-Chinese employer, living anywhere, but HDBs are bottom preference compared to condos, and "landed-houses" have their own nuances (multiple maids, pecking orders therein etc.)
In our experience, with #4 the helpers are justly concerned about being over worked, under fed and denied sleep. We had an interview where the helper and we were shocked that the work hours expected were 5am to 12pm, with a single ill-willed break for lunch, and the prospective employer had just had a kid that the helper was to look after all day. The explicit interview comment was "when I return from work, you will give us dinner, then I need to work, so you must look after the child until she sleeps". My wife and I just stared gob-smacked at each other after that call, as this was contrary to all the rules we learnt in the training we were given by MoM for employing domestic helpers (the applicant has to pass an online test and undergo training) but apparently common among that cohort.
For those who do not know SG:
#1 Explicitly pointing out nationalities & race is not only accepted, it is Govt policy. They still follow the "one drop of blood" rule from the Secessionist South and this race classification is printed on the NRIC ID card. A single non-Chinese ancestor apparently puts you out of the Chinese category. Source: an uber-driver kid I spoke to who had a Chinese mother & Indian father. Officially, the 'races' are Chinese, Malay & Indian.
#2 I don't like using a sock-puppet, but do not wish to invite trouble for my circa-2007 account. I will answer questions for a day, but will delete the account after or forget the random password.
#3 I am (was?) a big fan of LKY and loved reading both his books. I am cognizant of many of the different internal pressures and divisions within the country and am not being judgmental, this is simply the way it is, and it is a LOT better than the neighbouring countries with their xenophobic and genocidal histories. COVID has hit the country hard, there is a resurgent nationalism and xenophobia within Singapore, and LKY's legacy is a ship steering through treacherous straits, with a mutiny on board, and several prospective captains fighting for the helm.
I thought we had left this back in the Middle Ages. It always surprises me how come some journalists still praise Singapore.
Bow we can see this matrimonial novation alive and feeling well in Singapore. I wonder what happens if you go to Thailand and marry there.
I'm also not sure how it is going to work since citizen/PRs seem to be able to bring spouses in. Is it "unless they are already in Singapore and of low caste"?
You are maybe confused by the multiple different types (and subtypes) of work-visas in Singapore.
"If you are a current or former Work Permit holder who wishes to marry a Singapore citizen or PR, you must apply for approval from MOM."
https://www.mom.gov.sg/faq/foreign-worker/as-a-work-permit-h...
I feel like it's really strange that HN commenters hate on Singapore for having standards for immigrants. To the point of lying and saying that Work Permit holders aren't allowed to marry citizens in order to drum up outrage, and only backtracking when called out on it.
https://www.mom.gov.sg/passes-and-permits/work-permit-for-fo...
Work permit conditions:
>Not marry a Singapore citizen or permanent resident in or outside Singapore without MOM's approval. This applies even after their Work Permits have expired, been cancelled or revoked.
>Not get pregnant or deliver a child in Singapore during the validity of their Work Permit unless they are already married to a Singapore citizen or permanent resident with MOM's approval. This applies even after their Work Permits have expired, been cancelled or revoked.
https://www.mom.gov.sg/passes-and-permits/work-permit-for-fo...
>As an employer, you must send your female Work Permit holders for medical screening every 6 months. This medical examination screens for pregnancy and infectious diseases such as syphilis, HIV and tuberculosis.
Note how they prohibit marriage outside Singapore even after the permit expires. It's clear what it means. If you've ever had a work permit, you're marked as unfit until proven otherwise.
- citation please. Or did you not learn to provide references at NUS?
Compare to SF. SF I think there are 5 restaurants in the entire city open past 2am (5 might be wrong but the number is small. SF clubs have a curfew. SF has homeless everywhere. Just got the pleasure of having one squat and defecate in front of me in front of the local market. SF has car breakins and garage breakins all over.
I'm not saying Singapore doesn't have problems but if any other city is worthy of praise so is Singapore. All cities have problems, they're just different problems.
"[Mars] must be a great place to live"
"Sure, if you're rich"
"Then I'm sure we will be quite happy."
SG nightclubs have been closed since the beginning of covid (over 1.5 years now) so I'll be surprised if many are left when it finally reopens (a reopening which is nowhere in sight now in spite of Singapore having 85% vaccinated).
We are not even 2 years into the pandemic. Not that many countries are sufficiently vaccinated. There are going to be lots of different strategies and there’s not much to do but wait and see what pans out.
I can't vouch for the nightclubs and bars bit but there are plenty of cities like Detroit, Gary, Newark and Baltimore (the list goes on) that don't have nearly the frequency of petty property crime and poo in places other than the sewers. Don't get me wrong, these cities have their problems but the baseline level of petty lawlessness and flagrant anti-social behavior is far lower than it is in the west coast cities. You don't have to oppress the heck out of the poors Singapore style to prevent people from crapping on the sidewalks.
What you said may have been true in the past, but it hasn't been true for a long time, and at this rate may never be true again.
The end result is similar, but the state _will_ recognize a marriage performed abroad (i.e. go to Cyprus, get married, come back), same as same-sex unions.
(I am somewhat confused as to why a christian catholic court won't celebrate an interfaith marriage in Israel, since they are allowed by the church, and there are even specific protocols for jewish/catholic and muslim/catholic marriages, AFAIK)
> (I am somewhat confused as to why a christian catholic court won't celebrate an interfaith marriage in Israel, since they are allowed by the church, and there are even specific protocols for jewish/catholic and muslim/catholic marriages, AFAIK)
The problem is that usually the audience for the mixed marriages are non-halachic Jews, not Christians or Muslims, nor they see themselves as half-Christians.
Another reason is that the Christian churches don't want to intervene into affair of the Jews, even non-halachic ones.
The situation in Israel is nothing comparing to what happens in Lebanon [1]. People there converting for various reasons: from divorce, inheritance to emigration to the Gulf countries!
In a phone interview with Archbishop George Saliba from the Syriac Orthdox Church, he said that they stopped converting other Christian sects into their own sect about 3 years ago, stating that “each person should solve his own problems in his own church”.
--
[1] Converting One’s Religion in Lebanon
https://medium.com/@zubaidajamal/converting-ones-religion-in...
Israel still regulates marriages, because it picks and chooses which religious authorities to recognise for the purpose of marriage, and it does so based on non-objective and non-neutral criteria. It refuses to recognise marriages performed in Israel by non-Orthodox Rabbis, and it doesn't have any neutral/objective reason for doing so, which makes it a form of religious discrimination.
There are other countries who have government recognition of religious marriages on a non-discriminatory basis. For example, in my own country of Australia, the federal government has a list of recognised religious denominations, whose clergy are automatically recognised as legal marriage celebrants – https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L01607 – there are published objective criteria to be added to the list – https://www.ag.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-03/Informatio... – and they are all about making sure the religion is real and serious (that it has identifiable leadership and clergy and a significant number of members, that it isn't just some guy in his garage claiming to start his own religion, that it wasn't started yesterday, etc) – it is not about letting the government play favourites with religions or denominations. And I'm not aware of any evidence the government is non-objective or non-neutral in maintaining the list – controversial groups such as Scientology have managed to get themselves added to it. By contrast, if a community of non-Orthodox Jews in Israel want their Rabbi to be able to perform legally recognised marriages, the Israeli government is just going to point blank refuse the request.
Well, apart from all the religions that have lay priests, such as the Methodists (who predate Australia as a country), Budishm (same), various indigious religions and so on.
You can get around that by not treating one religion special and just let everybody register with the state as they want to. Then it is up to the couple what, if any, religious rites they want (or they can have only the religious rights, and not register with the state).
The list of recognised denominations I shared – https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L01607 – includes four Methodist denominations (Chinese Methodist Church, Methodist Church of Samoa, Welsh Calvinistic Methodist Connexion, Wesleyan Methodist Church; and also the Uniting Church, which is the successor to Australia's historically largest Methodist church), two Buddhist associations (Federation of Australian Buddhist Councils, and International Buddhist Association of Australia), and a group based on indigenous spiritualities (Spirit of the Earth Medicine Society). Given that, I don't think your point is correct.
> You can get around that by not treating one religion special and just let everybody register with the state as they want to. Then it is up to the couple what, if any, religious rites they want (or they can have only the religious rights, and not register with the state).
Australia has civil marriage too – if couples do not want a religious ceremony, they can be married either by a government official or a professional civil celebrant. But, if they do want a religious ceremony, if they have a government-recognised religious ceremony, there is no separate civil marriage ceremony – the government recognises the religious ceremony as its own.
On the other hand, in Singapore, the act of sex between men is illegal(it's legal for women).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Singapore
>Singapore law inherited from the British Empire prohibited sodomy regardless of sex. As such, heterosexual and homosexual anal or oral sex was illegal. In 2007, such sexual activity was legalised for heterosexuals and lesbians, but not for gay men.
Indeed the law was reviewed in 2019 and the government didn't see anything wrong with gay sex between men being illegal.
One wonders why a country (SG) which professes extreme economic liberalism (well, until it doesn’t…) cares so much about social illiberaism like this. It’s not like the PAP needs to appeal to tubthumping angry populism for votes, is it? (Genuinely asking. I assume that people vote for them on the basis of administrative competence. Wrong?)
Perhaps it’s more a case of “rocking the boat on this topic can only harm us, and gain us nothing”.
Liberals in Singapore think this is the case. An informal survey at that time observed that a majority were against homosexual relationships and sexual acts. https://web.archive.org/web/20190605181337/https://www.strai...
The ruling party won't throw away legitimacy points just to do what only a minority of its base regards as the ethically correct thing to do.
Australia is even worse – the standard fee is AUD 7850 (over 5600 USD).
Sure, you can marry anybody you want, but you may not be able to afford the necessary visa so that they can live with you.
The worst thing about the UK – pre-Brexit, any EEA (EU+Norway+Iceland+Liechtenstein) or Swiss national could work in the UK, and get working rights for their spouse too, by applying for a free EEA Family Permit. So citizens of 30 countries could bring their spouses to the UK for free, but UK citizens had to pay over 3000 pounds. There was a workaround, the so-called Surinder Singh route, named after the court decision which established it – a UK citizen could move to an EEA state and accept a job there, and after working there for three months, move back to the UK, and then they were eligible for an EEA Family Permit for their spouse. But it seems heartless to make your own citizens to jump through such loopholes just to have a common life with their spouse, when you'd let citizens of 30 other countries do it for free.
In 2011, David Cameron gave a "hard line speech on immigration" [0]; to quote an article from the time describing it:
> The Government is planning to increase significantly the minimum amount that UK nationals must earn before being allowed to bring a dependent foreign spouse to live in Britain.
> In a hard line speech on immigration today David Cameron will also announce plans to lengthen the time that couples have to be together before they can settle in this country.
> The Prime Minister hopes the measures will reduce the 50,000 visas granted to family members of British citizens every year.
Sounds like there is more to their motivations than simply extracting money from prospective immigrants.
[0] https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-camer...
Being able to financially support dependent foreign spouses seems like a very reasonable requirement.
EDIT: The spousal visa requires the sponsor to have an income of £18,600 (about 25,000 US dollars). That's not at all a high income.
What percentage of wealthy Brits sponsor spouses that never seek work (and therefore unlikely to pay tax) but consume gov resources?
> For instance, when my wife was rejected an extension for her spouse visa in 2017 despite us meeting all the requirements, the rejection letter stated that we should leave the UK and continue our marriage in India.
> This decision was passed despite the fact that I was born and brought up in this country and have had a British citizenship throughout. I had worked over 10 years in the NHS. However, in the eyes of a Home Office driven by a Tory-generated hostile environment, none of this was of consequence due to the ethnicity of my wife and I.
> The Home Office was happy to banish another doctor from the short-staffed NHS, and indeed the refusal letter stated that I should leave this country with my wife. My wife, meanwhile, is highly educated, with four degrees and a history of working as a language consultant at SOAS University.
And before the woke brigade shows up, yes in my -- hopefully not antiquated -- mind, status has a lot of influence in attraction, guys (well women too) want attractive mates to feel good about themselves and women find richer men attractive.
Since the EU member was the UK, not Scotland, how they treated _other_ UK citizens was considered an internal matter. So if you were English, Welsh, Northern Irish or non-EU you had to pay, if you were Scottish or other EU nationalities you were paid for.
Seems like they can
> but you may not be able to afford the necessary visa so that they can live with you.
“If the problem can be solved by money, then it’s not a problem”
https://www.mom.gov.sg/faq/foreign-worker/as-a-work-permit-h...
https://www.asiaone.com/print/News/Latest%2BNews/Singapore/S...
https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2021/06/16/when-pregnancy-is-...
But when "extra steps" are put in, they are circuit-breakers with the "intent to deny" and no explanation required. The "health measures" to protect Singapore during COVID were implemented by the Ministry of Manpower.
The "optics" as Singaporeans would say, are bad on the face of it. The reality is worse. I, with my November 2007 account, feel the need to use a sock-puppet on HN!
An LTVP/LTVP+ holder who is married to a Singaporean or PR.
An unmarried child (under 21 years old) of a Singaporean or PR, who holds an LTVP.https://www.mom.gov.sg/passes-and-permits/letter-of-consent/...
Singapore and many other countries recognize immigrants, which is what the PR/Green card/etc bucket is for - a merit path to citizenship.
Doesn't have to be so black and white.
Seem like an artifact of the measurement system.
From your link,
> “Travel restrictions during the pandemic was the main factor affecting the size of the (citizen) and PR population in 2021, as more (citizens) and PRs were staying overseas continuously for 12 months or more, who therefore were not counted as part of the resident population,” the National Population and Talent Division said.
The ones staying outside the country are doing so voluntarily. So I’m ok with how they counted it - if the US citizen population decreased due to people leaving and staying outside the country that seems like a fair measure.
Singapore has also public housing(HDBs) for locals which are more affordable. Sydney has no affordable housing at all.
I'd say I saved 30-40k more in SG every year.
https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/society/article/3144845/...
>> And area where other developing countries like India are in position of advantage, but need to channel right.
https://tradingeconomics.com/india/corruption-rank
These days people want luxurious life. Those days are simply gone where people would be satisfy wit basic needs + education. And with the advent of social media like facebook/instagram where people tends to show off a lot this will make the situation more worst.
One example is passport. Previously it took few months and you had to bribe multiple offices to get a passport faster. Now you get passport within a week. And the only physical link left is the police verification. Vehicle registration, transfer etc also moved online recently and reduced the scope of bribe there. Land registration and records are also in the process of moving online.
But on the other side, corruption at political level etc are not reducing .
The 70's called. They want their boogeyman back.
70s were full of boogeymen. Not that other decades were / are much better. The methods shift, the profit stays.
It is not just a developed country issue.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_and_union_ter...
The easiest way to tackle climate change is to drastically reduce the population. Short of genocide - which only authoritarian governments can pull off - the easiest way is to set up an environment that puts as many barriers as possible on reproduction.
Make children extremely expensive so that only the elites can have multiple children. Inflate the cost of everything so it's impossible for a single-worker household to survive, and the cost of a third mouth to feed/educate/raise prohibitive. Then sit back and wait a generation or two. It's China's one child policy, but applied globally, through economics and social dynamics.
/tin foil hat off, but I also wouldn't entirely be surprised if there's a meeting precisely on this at Davos every year.
Ironically, they repealed that policy because it was having a negative effect.
> Make children extremely expensive so that only the elites can have multiple children.
Another irony since it's the elites that tend to not have many children, not the poor.
Kidding of course. I’ll be eating cheeseburgers and driving a V8 full sized pickup into oblivion (even if I have to become a cattle rancher to do so). No regrets, the world that the “Great Reset” is creating is not one worth living in.
> “Travel restrictions during the pandemic was the main factor affecting the size of the (citizen) and PR population in 2021, as more (citizens) and PRs were staying overseas continuously for 12 months or more, who therefore were not counted as part of the resident population,” the National Population and Talent Division said.
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/singapore-populati...
The SG gov has been celebrating this, with some of them going so far as to say that 'foreigners' are 'ballast to be shed' during tougher times. https://twitter.com/wongdouglas/status/1298802033462394881?l...
Liberal societal goals (many of which I happen to support) include preservation of the natural environment, robust sovereignty of oppressed indigenous populations, increased availability of housing and resources, and in general an profound sense of the importance of any individual within their community. Every single one of these goals becomes easier to achieve the fewer people there are within a single geographic area, so why are these complaints about declining populations always coming from left-leaning thinkers and speakers? (I know Reuters isn't exactly left wing, but the language they're using is identical to 'progressive' politicians all over the west.)
The time immediately following the Black Death in Europe was a massive boon for the (surviving) commoner. When people talk about declining populations in Western countries, I imagine razing the unsustainable, disgusting post-war boomtowns, layering farmland and forest over their remains, and pushing a philosophy of local self-reliance born out of community solidarity. It is truly unnerving to see so many publications talk about this issue and imply that the only hope for any nation with a declining population is to bring in as much supplementary labor as possible. I can only hope the people of Singapore are happy with whatever their economic leaders have decided is best for them.
As for Malthusianism - it seems to me the GP is correct in pointing out ecological stress is proportional to human population size, and that the ecosystem is in crisis. Were you hoping we would overlook this fact by calling it "Malthusianism"?
Rarely have I seen so many dishonest arguments compressed into so few words.
Population size? No, the problem is human greed and corruption.
The claim is so simple and obvious I'm sure you misunderstood it deliberately.
There are certainly many high-skilled professional workers in that cohort, including the few Singapore residents I know who left, but it's certainly not all.
Singapore itself is a very strange nation, utterly dependent on other nations to provide it with almost everything it uses (food, machinery, raw product, etc). The fact that it can be managed like a reality-themed theme park is a testament to the ability of first-worlders to press-gang the rest of the world into service. Turning it into a real, self-sustaining nation with wildlife and personal independence is impossible.