• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

LKY say blaming current low fertility on Stop At 2 is absurd!!

muslims as a minority in the u.s. are already making a lot of political noise by pushing for more mosque and madrasah building and funding in every city. they have started complaining to cities and public transportation companies to prevent dogs from getting near them. very soon, they will be campaigning for burkhas and tudungs for all womenfolk, just like they are doing in europe. if they become the majority or get into power, they will upend the judiciary, trash the constitution and enforce shariah laws. :rolleyes:

I highlighted this article a year or so ago with a warning of what was to come in the future if the Sinkie Chinese aren't careful.

If they gain a foot in the door with 14%, You can image what will happen when the Malays form the majority.



http://is.asia-city.com/city-living/article/will-kampong-glam-turn-into-kampong-glum

Will Kampong Glam Turn into Kampong Glum?
A recent bid to prohibit alcohol around Singapore's hip Arab Street district might just kill its buzz. Terry Ong asks if there's a solution to keep everyone happy.

By Terry Ong | Jan 19, 2012



dsc_0588.jpg



The character of Kampong Glam may be about to change dramatically. A movement to gauge public support to ban alcohol consumption in one of the city’s most popular after-hours areas is fast gaining momentum, spearheaded by Dr. Ameen Talib, owner of Cafe Le Caire on Arab Street, who is petitioning for an alcohol-free zone situated along the neighborhood’s core area (see map below), which encompasses the peripheries of Haji Lane, North Bridge Road, Kandahar Street, Sultan Gate, Aliwal Street and Beach Road. Bali Lane, which currently houses bars and drinking joints like Twine, Blu Jaz and One for the Road, is currently not affected.

editmap_alcohol_ban.jpg


Talib is proposing a blanket ban on restaurants and convenience stores such as 7-Eleven selling alcohol. Along with certain stakeholders around the area (namely alcohol-free cafes and restaurants like Altazzag Egyptian Restaurant), Talib has been heavily petitioning to “maintain the core and heritage” of Kampong Glam by positioning it as an “alternative nightlife hub which is family-friendly, offers good clean, fun, and free of alcohol.” Others though are, unsurprisingly, not happy with the proposal. Yet the area’s history makes it a particularly thorny issue.

The Heritage Divide

The Arab Quarter was home to the city’s Malay aristocracy in 1819, before British settlement in 1822 afforded the area to different ethnic groups like the Chinese, Arabs and Europeans. Today, it remains a stronghold among the Malay-Muslim community. It is home to the Istana and the Malay Heritage Centre along Kandahar Street, numerous Malay-Muslim eating establishments around Arab Street, Bussorah Street, Aliwal Street, Kandahar Street and North Bridge Road, and The Sultan Mosque, a place of worship among the community, is located at the heart of Bussorah Street—and therein lies Talib’s point of contention. Convenience store 7-Eleven located on Bussorah Street sells alcohol, and Turkish Restaurant Istanbul Grill’s & Cafe serves beer to its diners in an alfresco space, diagonally across from the mosque.

“Over the last two years, the neighborhood’s character has declined,” says Talib. “People are seen carrying beer bottles right in front of the mosque and around the area and this is disrespectful and an eyesore. The area was where the Malay, Muslim and Indian community used to assemble. If no one says or does anything now, the situation will get out of hand.”

A Question of Lifestyle

Like Chinatown and Little India, Kampong Glam has been identified by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) as a conservation area—in 2006 rent-control was lifted for the old shop houses and the units were later refurbished and sold in an open market to private bidders. The area was soon awash with cafés, restaurants, fashion boutiques and a myriad of lifestyle retailers—it morphed from a relatively quiet and relaxed neighborhood specializing in shisha and Middle-Eastern and Malay food, to one of the city’s hippest lifestyle quarters (Download our Arab Street guide to find out more).

But unlike Chinatown or Little India, Kampong Glam’s redevelopment and repositioning is a little trickier because of its history and traditions—alcohol consumption is prohibited among the Muslim community. The URA has therefore been careful with their conservation plan here, putting in place “policies to guide the allowable uses to encourage traditional and activity-generating trades in the area,” says a spokesperson. “For example, incompatible trades such as new bars, pubs, nightclubs and health centers are not allowed in the core and exclusion areas in Kampong Glam.”

Businesses can nevertheless work around this policy and can serve alcohol if they register their businesses not under bars or clubs, but instead under cafes and restaurants, and apply for a separate liquor license through the Singapore Police Force. And, of course, most restaurants want to serve alcohol to boost business.

Ethan Leong, who runs a cocktail bar located on the third story of café cum fashion boutique Maison Ikkoku at Kandahar Street, which opened four months ago, says that serving alcohol is just part of an investment and lifestyle decision. “We are here to promote cocktail-drinking as a lifestyle and not consuming alcohol per se,” he says. “For example, we don’t even have signage outside that says we serve alcohol. It’s about respecting the neighborhood and not abusing our trade so that all businesses here can still pull in individual visitors and chart their own paths. We definitely do not encourage consumption of drinks outside our premises.”

The situation along Bali Lane is a little more dicey, however. Dr. Ameen Talib’s current proposal to ban all alcohol consumption outdoors might put businesses like Pedra Negra—which relies heavily on alcohol sales at its outdoor space—out of business.

“Our regulars comprise mostly expatriates who make up about 70 percent of our customers who expect to drink when they’re here,” says owner Aileen Tan. “It’s definitely a different experience to be able to eat and drink under the stars. Before I came into the scene in 2006 with Blu Jaz, the crowd here comprised mostly youngsters who smoke shisha. It has since become more sophisticated. After all, the area should be considered as a collective, how businesses should benefit from one another with different crowds moving from one joint to another.”

A Win-Win Situation?

Jean Francois Nordin, who runs the halal French bistro Le Bistro Parisien, and who does not serve alcohol at his venue, says that the stakeholders of Kampong Glam must work together to maintain the neighborhood’s esprit des corps to resolve the matter. “Because of my own principle and beliefs, I choose not to serve or sell alcohol. It’s a personal choice, but I cannot impose on my personal beliefs on others,” he says. “The city has evolved to be very cosmopolitan and we have to respect that.”

Another unnamed stakeholder agrees that the various tenants at Kampong Glam must come together to resolve the matter collectively. “We are a multi-racial, multi-religious society,” he says. “We cannot create boundaries and polarize anyone in the area.”

Members of the Kampong Glam Association, comprising stakeholders in the area, including Talib, Tan and Nordin, met last week to discuss Talib’s personal crusade internally, although they have yet to resolve the matter and Talib is going ahead with his petition. “Every stakeholder should have an inclusive voice in this matter and if we push the issue further, there will be no end,” says Tan.

Talib maintains that the push for an alcohol-free zone is similar to that in cities like London and Sydney and the move will at least keep the number of alcohol venues in check. “I do not want this to blow out of proportion, but it will be sad if the area is known as a drinking neighborhood similar to Clarke Quay or Boat Quay,” he says.

A check with a legal source attests that, from a property zoning perspective, the move to ban alcohol consumption cannot be enforced without proper guidelines from the URA, which, according to its spokesperson, is still “reviewing the matter with the Singapore Police Force and other agencies. However, “the police can impose terms and conditions for the operation of the alcohol license, which would mean theoretically that consumption can be restricted to indoors and with restricted hours if the police are convinced that it is in the public interest to do so,” says our legal source (who asked to remain anonymous). The public seem similarly polarized by the current bid to keep the area alcohol free. Singer Marina Xavier, who visits the area frequently, says a blanket rule will create “animosity among the residents. It’s the current free-spirited vibe and general camaraderie that’s so enjoyable.”

A blanket outdoor alcohol ban does seem like a rather drastic step. Could a possible solution be to limit (and enforce) the ban within the immediate perimeters of the Sultan Mosque along Arab Street and Bussorah Street which just help yet curb alcohol consumption within Kampong Glam’s sacred grounds? The debate is sure to continue. In the meantime, send your views to[email protected].


 
While I may not have chosen polite, politically correct terms, all I'm doing is stating a fact.

When the stop at 2 policy was announced, the Muslims were 3 times more productive than the Chinese. LKY got his statisticians to do do a few sums and the answer was that if nothing was done, the muslim population would surpass the non muslim population within 30 years. We all know what the consequences of that would have been.

He therefore targeted the muslims indirectly by imposing hefty financial penalties for having a 3rd child. He figured that since the Muslims formed the majority of the poor at the time, they'd back off and produce less.

However, as we all know, religion ranks higher than $$$ and the muslims continued with their merry ways.

Ultimately, the mass importation of non muslims was the only workable solution and it has kept the % of the muslim population static at around 14%.

However, there is a limit as to how much more Singapore can import. It is not LKY's problem anymore. The next generation will have to figure out what needs to be done.

If they throw the book at me, I would happily go to trial as I have all the figures that prove my point. Ask yourself how many Muslims have been given PR and citizenship since 1980. The answer says it all. I'm also sure LKY would be more than willing to come to my defense.
It was fashionable at that era to reduce size of families, as popularized by western economists who claimed that if a family has less kids, then the wealth can be concentrated and the kids will get better education care etc. China also started their one child policy in 1978, while sinkieland started in 1974. I don't think in 1974 old man is that concerned about the Malays yet.

On the other hand, the graduate mother scheme was aimed at the Malays.
 
I personally believe that the first national interference in population control " STOP AT TWO " was purely for social and economic reasons. I don't think it had and racial agenda or any political motivation. It was purely economically driven.

The subsequent population policies and manipulations were more obvious and many Singaporeans - of all races - were very disturbed by the eugenics manipulation of a society. Many expressed their discontentment and disenchantment by voting with their feet and many left the country - never to return.

We are now at the cross-road - a result of all these vitally important changes. If we make the right choices , we will survive. If we make the wrong choices, we will be doomed.

So tread gingerly .....
 
It was fashionable at that era to reduce size of families, as popularized by western economists who claimed that if a family has less kids, then the wealth can be concentrated and the kids will get better education care etc. China also started their one child policy in 1978, while sinkieland started in 1974. I don't think in 1974 old man is that concerned about the Malays yet.

On the other hand, the graduate mother scheme was aimed at the Malays.

I would not want to say that the target was so specific on race and intelligence...and the gene pool of our society. But the policies implemented had polarised the people and many started to voice their great disenchantment. Many left the country ....Those who stayed will have to shoulder the burdens of such policies.
 
you are one smart dude. nice piece of info to share.

While I may not have chosen polite, politically correct terms, all I'm doing is stating a fact.

When the stop at 2 policy was announced, the Muslims were 3 times more productive than the Chinese. LKY got his statisticians to do do a few sums and the answer was that if nothing was done, the muslim population would surpass the non muslim population within 30 years. We all know what the consequences of that would have been.

He therefore targeted the muslims indirectly by imposing hefty financial penalties for having a 3rd child. He figured that since the Muslims formed the majority of the poor at the time, they'd back off and produce less.

However, as we all know, religion ranks higher than $$$ and the muslims continued with their merry ways.

Ultimately, the mass importation of non muslims was the only workable solution and it has kept the % of the muslim population static at around 14%.

However, there is a limit as to how much more Singapore can import. It is not LKY's problem anymore. The next generation will have to figure out what needs to be done.

If they throw the book at me, I would happily go to trial as I have all the figures that prove my point. Ask yourself how many Muslims have been given PR and citizenship since 1980. The answer says it all. I'm also sure LKY would be more than willing to come to my defense.
 
What's so absurd about it? The Stop at 2 policy stopped in the early 80s, those born then will be 30s + by now. Imagine if no Stop at 2 policy, how many more people in their 30s we will have now. Also the Stop at 2 policy is an incentive scheme for women to medically tie their tubes to prevent further pregnancies. A whole generation of women were made medically infertile as a result of the policy and u got to wait for the next gen of child bearing women to start the 'production' process going again. LKY has done enormous damage in this policy error and he's again denying responsibility!!

It was never about past policies that had or is still hampering population growth.

It is ' MONEY NOT ENOUGH' that is the cause!

And for that the Sinkie have been lacking of it since the 1990s till now. LOL
 
While I may not have chosen polite, politically correct terms, all I'm doing is stating a fact.

When the stop at 2 policy was announced, the Muslims were 3 times more productive than the Chinese. LKY got his statisticians to do do a few sums and the answer was that if nothing was done, the muslim population would surpass the non muslim population within 30 years. We all know what the consequences of that would have been.

He therefore targeted the muslims indirectly by imposing hefty financial penalties for having a 3rd child. He figured that since the Muslims formed the majority of the poor at the time, they'd back off and produce less.

However, as we all know, religion ranks higher than $$$ and the muslims continued with their merry ways.

Ultimately, the mass importation of non muslims was the only workable solution and it has kept the % of the muslim population static at around 14%.

However, there is a limit as to how much more Singapore can import. It is not LKY's problem anymore. The next generation will have to figure out what needs to be done.

If they throw the book at me, I would happily go to trial as I have all the figures that prove my point. Ask yourself how many Muslims have been given PR and citizenship since 1980. The answer says it all. I'm also sure LKY would be more than willing to come to my defense.

Sure, LKY might try to play that game of 'uppering his Chinks numbers by import them' vs the local ones producing them. He was afterall a m&d hater and distrust them to the core. Talk about racial harmony!

But in every game, there are risks and consequences.

And most of the back fires and social ills will come way after the Old Fart has turned to dust.

And as usual, the Old bastard wanted to be God and literally gamble his own Sinkie lives on the table just becos that is the way HE THINKS IS THE CORRECT WAY TO PLAY THE GAME! Any game that he thinks fit!

And how wrong he could ever be!

And as usual the Old bastard HAS NO APOLOGIES for whatever he has done wrong!
 
...started complaining to cities and public transportation companies to prevent dogs from getting near them. very soon, they will be campaigning for burkhas and tudungs for all womenfolk, just like they are doing in europe. if they become the majority or get into power, they will upend the judiciary, trash the constitution and enforce shariah laws. :rolleyes:
France is but 1 example, where it went wrong. If your uncle sam caved in, you will start greeting your cronies As-salam alaykum (السلام عليكم). Get circumscised, no more stuffing yourself with pork et al :p
 
And as usual the Old bastard HAS NO APOLOGIES for whatever he has done wrong!

Mr Lee has no need to apologise for anything because he has NEVER BEEN WRONG. :oIo:
 
Any learned bros here can point out when the Old Man ever admitted to errors in his policies? I don't recall any. He is Mr Perfect not the idiot from WWF.

The most he will say 'I stand corrected'...
Machiam after being fucked by Malaysians for his comments on JB.
 
While I may not have chosen polite, politically correct terms, all I'm doing is stating a fact.

When the stop at 2 policy was announced, the Muslims were 3 times more productive than the Chinese. LKY got his statisticians to do do a few sums and the answer was that if nothing was done, the muslim population would surpass the non muslim population within 30 years. We all know what the consequences of that would have been.

He therefore targeted the muslims indirectly by imposing hefty financial penalties for having a 3rd child. He figured that since the Muslims formed the majority of the poor at the time, they'd back off and produce less.

However, as we all know, religion ranks higher than $$$ and the muslims continued with their merry ways.

Ultimately, the mass importation of non muslims was the only workable solution and it has kept the % of the muslim population static at around 14%.

However, there is a limit as to how much more Singapore can import. It is not LKY's problem anymore. The next generation will have to figure out what needs to be done.

If they throw the book at me, I would happily go to trial as I have all the figures that prove my point. Ask yourself how many Muslims have been given PR and citizenship since 1980. The answer says it all. I'm also sure LKY would be more than willing to come to my defense.

This one I whole heartedly agree with you, BUT, it still his STOP AT TWO POLICY, that cause the shortage. It did help arrest the overpopulation by a certain race to an extend, it put a brakes on it, but it dis not eliminate the problem. You still see, many of them with 3, 4, 5, 6 & one I saw 8 on tow, like duckings following a duck... One section of the population, simply reduced drastically, some were extremely obedient that they fear the fines, the lost of place in school..They lived in fear for being compliant & obedient..so their next generation carried on with what their parents did..stop at Two but some, stop at ONE.. many these days, do not want kids...so, this is the problem the next generation leaders will have to solve..

LKY is riding or sliding or fading into the sunset...the present leaders will have to thank him for starting the problem...He was right in implementing the STOP AT TWO policy...but the fallout we already know...can we not blame him?:rolleyes:
 
Mr Lee has no need to apologise for anything because he has NEVER BEEN WRONG. :oIo:

That the final judgements of whether you are right or wrong , I'm afraid is not up to you or me to make.

And those judgements will be delivered to him fairly soon. LOL
 
#54

I told you again to go clean your toilet
eat your joss sticks, lick the wax
take your medicines and shut your vulval mouth
stop harikiring yourself here....be good ok
 
If this is true and this gets out, PAP can kiss goodbye to the Malay vote. Our neighbor up north will have a field day with this news!!
 
Singapore's Lee says not to blame for low birth rate

hahahahhahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Singapore's founding father Lee Kuan Yew has denied his policies were to blame for the city's low birth rate and said financial handouts for young couples would not solve the problem.

In excerpts from a new book to be launched later Tuesday, Lee insisted that the reluctance of couples to have more children was the result of changed lifestyles and mindsets, which no amount of financial perks could alter.

Despite a slew of so-called "baby bonuses" to encourage couples to have children, Singapore's total fertility rate last year stood at 1.20 children per woman, far below the 2.1 needed to maintain the native-born population.

The former prime minister, who retired from politics in 2011 and turns 90 next month, rejected as "absurd" suggestions that his "Stop At Two" children campaign in the 1970s played a part in the decline of current fertility rates.

Fearing that a population explosion would hit growth and overwhelm infrastructure, Lee's government instituted the tough measures to persuade young couples to have only two children.

The policy saw the government legalise abortion, encourage voluntary sterilisation and introduce disincentives for larger families wanting to live in public housing.

Large monetary incentives would only have a "marginal effect" in correcting the low fertility rate, he added.

"I cannot solve the problem, and I have given up," he wrote in his new book entitled "One Man's View of the World".

Excerpts from the book were published in the Straits Times newspaper on Tuesday ahead of the official launch.

"I have given the job to another generation of leaders. Hopefully, they or their successors will eventually find a way out," said Lee, who handed power to his deputy Goh Chok Tong in 1990 after 31 years in office. He stayed on as a cabinet adviser until 2011.

Lee's son, Lee Hsien Loong, is now prime minister of the affluent Southeast Asian island-state after succeeding Goh in 2004.

Singapore's birth rate has languished at low levels for decades, forcing the government to open the country to foreigners, who now comprise a third of the population.

The foreign influx, however, has also sparked protests from citizens and prompted the government to tighten immigration flows in recent years.

The declining fertility rate remains the biggest threat to Singapore's survival, Lee said.

He pointed to the example of Japan, which he said is on a "stroll into mediocrity" as the ranks of its elderly swell due to young couples not producing enough babies.

Japan's reluctance to open up to immigrants will further lead to its decline, he said.

"If I were a young Japanese and I could speak English, I would probably choose to emigrate," said Lee.
 
Re: Singapore's Lee says not to blame for low birth rate

hahahahhahahaahaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Singapore's founding father Lee Kuan Yew ......

"If I were a young Japanese and I could speak English, I would probably choose to emigrate," said Lee.

This comes as no surprise. Those words of “wisdom” came from a man who, when he was a young Straits Chinese neither proficient in Chinese or Japanese, was prepared to work as a “translator” for the hated Japanese occupiers of the Little Red Dot so that he could eat and live well. The traitorous nature of this man is evident for all to see. He had this trait from cradle to grave. Dumbass Sinkies who voted and trusted this man because he could talk down to them in impeccable Queen’s English, rejoice, you got what you deserved! And by the way, Sinkieland does not have or need a founding father. It was already the richest place in Southeast Asia in 1957.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nw7toyYrqjs
 
Re: Singapore's Lee says not to blame for low birth rate

He cannot deny that it was the party because they had been in power since then.
 
Back
Top