A lot of good architecture there but I found Singapore the most existentially-horrifying place I've ever been. It's like if the feeling of being on antidepressants was a city.
There is a third issue (freedom-of-speech), but I figure as a foreigner it's not my place to complain about that.
Compared to where? Singapore is probably the best example of ubiquitous public transport on earth. Owning a car in SG is more a flaunt than sensible decision from a financial or health point of view.
> There is a third issue (freedom-of-speech)
As an ang moh can relate but what exactly is stifling you from speaking your mind? Here we are talking about it. The young are rising up in the country and it's great to see, there's been windbacks on laws against gays along with other pretty stark sentiment changes in the population, there's a real fear in the ruling party about being the first to lose government and they are quick to bend to the whims of the populace.
The main outlet for an everyday person is online and here we are. No one is stopping you, no one is certainly stopping r/singaporeraw
> small, dense, urban environment
Borneo, one of the most biologically diverse places on Earth is an hour away on a plane. There's untamed jungle trails an hour across the border if you care to walk them.
> it's hot
For the first few months, then you adapt.
The public transit saves the city and the fact walkways do exist everywhere is great and a lot better than for example the US (hard to do worse than the worst), but it is seriously car centric of a city.
Singapore has over 500km of cycle ways: https://www.lta.gov.sg/content/ltagov/en/getting_around/acti...
What are you comparing it to when you say "little infrastructure for cyclists"?
You need to be very clear about who is the competition here worldwide because they are aiming for 1300km of cycleways by 2030 and this is a tiny city state 50km wide.
Since Singapore likes to set extremely high standards for itself, its competition is places like Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Cambridge, etc.
Admittedly the parent commenter mentioned 'infrastructure', which Singapore has a bit of, but there's more to cycling than just pathways laid across the ground and painted with bicycle motifs. For Singapore to be truly a 'good place for cycling', it's got to have the right mindset for cycling. This means giving less priority to motor vehicles.
Singapore ought to narrow its roads. There are too many non-highway stroads, and there is no reason for a semi-residential road to be 3+ lanes wide in each direction—look at any number of the Avenues in Toa Payoh, Ang Mo Kio, Bishan, Serangoon, Queenstown, Bukit Batok, Bedok, etc etc. Cars can easily reach 70+ km/h on these roads, which also makes it very unsafe for cyclists and pedestrians. The extra space from getting rid of these lanes could instead be used for much wider footpaths and grade-separated cycle lanes.
Pedestrianise the city centre and residential cores. This is related to the point above, but some roads (e.g. in the CBD) could be completely blocked from vehicle access altogether. Consider using trams in the CBD instead of buses and trains.
Improve bike-parking infrastructure. There are a handful of bike-parking spaces around MRT stations, but very few in other common areas like parks, HDB void decks, hawker centres, etc. Again, refer to the cities above for examples of how dense bike parking could possibly be.
Bring back park-and-rides. Singapore used to have them, but ditched them in favour of directly linking the heartlands into the city, which have made MRTs packed.
Incentivise bicycle ownerships: vouchers for bike shops, cycle-buying schemes, and of course, a bicycle licensing scheme similar to e-scooters and e-bikes (and cars).
There's a lot more, but these are the lowest hanging fruits.
As someone who's lived here for more than 20 years, I really don't know what you mean.
I think Singapore is the number one indication that the corruption indices are bogus.
One guy I met said he privately imported (some of) the goods needed to build his home by containers from Europe because buying them locally was like double the price, because that meant buying them from essentially government-party-appointed resellers.
I obviously have no way of verifying the truth of that statement but you did ask.
Someone having their own home built in Singapore would have to be extremely wealthy. And the fact that shipping goods from Europe made any kind of economic sense suggests these were luxury goods.
So, yeah. I'm going to entirely discount this anecdote.
Best to entirely disregard this anecdote.
You haven't even come close to supplying any real evidence to back this claim.
I work for a FAANG in Singapore. The above statement about remote work and software work being not valued are not based on facts/reality. My manager is the least bothered if I come to work or WFH, as long as I delver results/work assigned.
If this link was purely informational - I’m sorry, I’m not interested.
I really don’t think Singapore is very corrupt. I’ve lived and worked there, and every interaction I’ve ever had with the government reinforced my perception that they would always deal with me fairly. I trust them more in that sense than I have trusted the governments in western countries that I’ve lived in (many of which have recently started to abandon the free-speech advantage they’ve previously held over places like Singapore).
Hyperbole aside, I actually really enjoy my life here. It's just really expensive (that's the "rich are allowed to play" bit). People are very friendly and down to earth which is something I don't usually experience in the other big, dense cities I've visited (San fran, LA, NYC, DC, Paris, etc).