Very simplistic outlook indeed. How do you know the employment figures capture all the unemployed? What is the percentage of unemployed who are Sinkies? And do you know what is the figure for underemployment?
The percentage of unemployment in SG is that of Residents not including FTs. The current unemployment rate stands at only 3.2%(as of Sept 2009). Even if in the worse case scenario that all unemployed are citizens. if we chase all FTs out of the country we are still short of a whole lot of workers. How do U expect us to make up that shortfall without FTs?
If a cleaner earns $800pm 10 years ago and now earns $700pm because of increased competition, there is no rise in unemployment because he is still employed but does that mean that he is better off compared to 10 years ago? According to your logic, we need to import more foreigners to depress his pay further since there is no unemployment.
And which part of my logic or anything I said ever said that we need to depress their wages more so we import more FTs. I said we need to import FTs to make up the numbers, I never mentioned that we need to import FTs so that they can depress our wages. Please do not twist what I said.
So now, we are only considering only market forces in determining whether to accept immigrants. Are you also suggesting that there is no need to look at other factors like social and infrastructure issues?
Economy is and will always be the first to be considered. Like it or not, governments in any part of the world, even in the West where they pretend to value freedom more then money, will not get re-elected if they screw up the economy. It is sad but true however I agree we need to consider social and infrastructure issues.
Regarding infrastructure issues, we don't really face any serious issues. Quite frankly speaking, our traffic, public transport and housing issues has so far been adequate in handling the population. Yes I know there is less space in Buses/MRTs nowadays however these issues are nothing compared to just about every major city of comparable size, KL, Bangkok, Tokyo, London, Paris, Seoul, etc. Our public transport generally still does not face too much issue keeping the public moving. I can name U lots of things wrong with their infrastructure systems. Japan needs train packers, Seoul is one of the densest place on the planet and comparative housing cost a lot worse then us. Good luck trying to drive anywhere in Paris, KL and Bangkok, London Tube close down entire lines almost on a weekly basis. Our issues are nothing compared to them
The fact is that
1)we are a nation of immigrants
2)since founding in 1819 to this very day, immigrants have never stopped coming in
3)the rate of new immigrants coming into SG is not that significantly different today as compared to pre independent yrs. In fact the only time that we did not see any significant population growth was during the the late 70s and throughout the 80s.
So it is fair for one to assume that we should be able to accept migrants better then most other nations. due to all this factors. This of coz is not very much the case in SG
The fact is, like it or not, we need these pple to make sure the economy does not collapse, there is no ifs and buts about it. If U want to blame someone, blame PAP for their stop at 2 policy. Its the main reason why we now face a manpower shortage.
And if its any consolation, the migration rate for the last 5 years have actually gone down
Year Net migration rate (migrant(s)/1,000 population)
2000 26.8
2001 26.45
2002 26.11
2003 25.76
2004 11.53
2005 10.3
2006 9.12
2007 7.98
2008 6.88
2009 5.82
http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?c=sn&v=27
this one is really like 'PAP' style of talking..
