The Bitter Truth about the FT policy

[aurvandil]

I wrote the following article about nine months back. Mr Tan Kin Lian was kind enough to post it up on his blog. It addresses many of the issues of the FT policy in a frank, candid manner which PM Lee unfortunately did not do in his NDR. The article and the discussion which followed is worth a read is you want to know the bitter truth about the FT policy.

Please note that when I wrote the article, the problems of transport and housing were not as apparent as they are now.

http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2010/01/apply-foreign-worker-levy-to-other-jobs.html

The large immigration of foreigners into Singapore is one of the most divisive issues in Singapore today. There are many Singaporeans who are unhappy and bitter about the large number of FT that have been allowed into Singapore. They feel threatened by these foreigners as many of them have proven themselves to be as hardworking and capable as Singaporeans. Their salary expectations are significantly lower. A fresh graduate from NUS for example expects to earn $2,500 to $2,800. A graduate of similar calibre from China or India is willing to work for between $1,500 to $1,800.


The large gap in salary expectations has led to large amount of economic pressure to employ foreigners rather than Singaporeans. The common thinking among many Singaporeans who are employees is that businesses are greedy and immoral. In the pursuit of profit, they would sack their own countrymen and employ foreigners.


The truth however is a lot more complex. All businesses have to operate in a competitive global environment. Consumers value goods based on quality and price; they do not take into account who made them. Within Singapore, if you employ only Singaporeans while your competitors use foreigners, you will not be able to compete. Outside of Singapore, you will lose to global competitors who are willing to use the cheapest source of labour to produce their goods. Hence ultimately if you use a Singaporean only policy to run your company, then your business will most likely fail.


Recently, in response to negative sentiment on the ground, MOM has begun to tighten the issue of the various types of passes. Many speculate that this is window dressing ahead of a widely anticipated election. Regardless of the intent, this is not a viable long term strategy. This is because technologies like the Internet have made it very easy for business to cross national boundaries. As such, if MOM persists with a policy of not allowing foreigners into Singapore, the Singapore economy will eventually be hollowed out.


The emergence of an abundance of cheap and capable foreign labour means that the income of Singaporean workers WILL fall over the next 5 to 10 years. The unemployment rate among workers who are Singapore citizens will also rise. There is no known economic theory or policy which can stop or reverse this. This fall will continue until a new equilibrium is reached. This equilibrium is such that the income of Singaporean workers is comparable to that of workers from India and China. Here it should be noted that there is no magic economic law which states that the income of Singaporean workers must always be higher than those from India and China.


This unpleasant economic truth needs to be communicated to Singaporeans so that they can understand and accept the new economic reality. If the economic reality is hidden behind half-truths like “job redesign” and “productivity improvement”, then the bitterness and resentment will be even greater then the truth is known. I label “job redesign” and “productivity improvement” as half truths as they are completely ineffective ways of addressing the problem. This is because any training or re-design improvements that you do for Singaporeans, you can also apply foreigners. Singaporeans are not so special so that the training or job re-design can only apply to them.


Open and honest communication is also necessary so that Singaporeans do not make the wrong decisions based on unrealistic expectations. At present, there is a property boom in Singapore. Many Singaporeans are borrowing large sums of money to buy property in anticipation of “More Good Years” and the ability to sell the property at a higher price. Eventually the property bubble will burst and there will be a sharp decline in prices. If we superimpose this against higher unemployment and lower wages, then we are setting the stage for a very painful and bitter period for Singaporeans.


Other than open and honest communication about the future, what we also need are policies which moderate or slow the expected decline in income. Also useful would be policies which help people cope and adjust. The following is a policy recommendation which will address many issues simultaneously.


The root of the problem is the salary gap between Singaporeans and foreigners. In recognition of this gap at the low skill level, MOM has implemented a foreign workers levy for maids and other foreigners that work in Singapore under the work permit system. Given the success of this policy, it would now be timely to extend this levy to those in Singapore under the employment pass or permanent resident scheme. The successful implementation of the foreign workers levy for so many years suggest that if it were applied to the employment pass/permanent resident scheme, it would not “chase away the talent”.


With the money collected from the levies, we can then move to restructure the CPF scheme. The Employer CPF contribution can slowly be reduced to 0%. This would be replaced by payment made from the levies collected from foreigners working in Singapore. As the number of foreigners in Singapore increases, this CPF contribution would increase.


By implementing a policy like this, we put substance into the nice-sounding policy announcements that “foreigners are in Singapore for the benefit of Singaporeans”. It would help heal our society which is increasingly being polarized along the lines of Singaporean and Foreigner. Also we moderate the narrowing of the wage gap between Singaporean and Foreigner in a manner that is least painful to Singaporeans.

 

[colortv]

Very well written article. Only point is the levies are unlikely to fully offset employer contributions, which can go up to maximum of 14.5% x 4500=652 - much higher than the levy. Couple that with the fact that there are still more citizens than foreign workers, the most we can have is some token offset in the employer contributions.

Good concept nonetheless. If I were a minister / perm sec, I will ask that this concept be studied to balance competitiveness of foreign workers against citizens.

 

[besotted]

warped logic, if only life was so simplistic

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The root of the problem is rampant import of FTs. No country allows such a practice as Singapore has. Even in Hong Kong, they prevent mainland Chinese from going there to look for jobs.

Every first world country has stringent FT policies to prevent exactly the problem that Singapore has in the form of too many FTs from 3rd world countries displacing indigenous people from their jobs.

This is not rocket science but very plain and simple economic logic.

The PAP has been behind these policies. The PAP has failed its people miserably on many areas. From housing, education, healthcare, transportation, pension, economic freedom, and freedom of the media, the PAPies have utterly failed.

And yet people want to continue to vote them in.

The only thing good that the PAP has done is to award themselves out of this world salaries. Everything else has been a pathetic third world result.

 

[aurvandil]

The main points which I was driving at is:

1) The rise of a huge pool of talented labour is a dire economic problem which will affect ALL Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans will see their income fall or even become unemployed over the next 5 to 10 years.

2) There is unfortunately NO solution to the problem. The measures in the article can at best mitigate the pain of the economic adjustment. On the number of FT being admitted, even if we significantly reduce thier numbers, wages in Singapore will continue to stagnate and slide. It is a fantasy to expect that if we kick out all the foreigners, we will all see wages jump and we all will be happy and rich.

3) Instead of facing up to the problem and telling Singaporeans the truth, the PAP has been selling Singaporeans a series of half-truths. The most recent being the productivity drive headed by DPM Teo. The large amounts of money will be spent but we will almost certainly fail to achieve the objectives.

4) What's worse is that the PAP has compounded the problem by adopting policies which will worsen the impact. The most obvious of these is the high price HDB policy under Minister Mah. That party ended yesterday and Singaporeans are about to pay a very high price as the property market corrects. Based on the last major correction, a fall of 30% to 40% would not be unexpected.

So far, the response to PM Lee's speech has been very bad. This is because many Singaporeans have woken up to the truth. As written in the article, these Singaporeans have become very angry and bitter at being lied at.

The damage to the PAP appears to be permanent. Even if elections were delayed 1 year, there does not appear to be anything which can rebuild the lost credibility and trust. This is because the only thing which can restore the faith is an economic miracle that defy all the laws of ecoomics.

The only thing which remains now is final validation and confirmation at the ballot box.

 

[scroobal]

Good stuff bro. Impressive. You can handle policy making. I thought your point about levy on employment pass was worth looking at.

Your point about window dressing is spot on and the government is addicted to that approach in many areas.

The issue is structural in nature. There is no one in cabinet that has the mind and the mettle to handle it. Here are the key policies that we are now stuck with and these were done circa 1998;

1) keep lowering wages to remain competitive. This has been their mantra.
2) casino
3) changes to banking regulations to allow more funds to come thru unhindered
4) liberalise immigration to allow growth in population as the numbers are good drivers of the economy

Notice that all 4 measures are not be part of usual economic measures adopted by countries. Items (2) and (3) have crossed the moral boundary.

Very soon all true born Singaporean family would have a taxi driver or have an immediate relative driving a taxi. Not that the vocation is bad but it is the last refuge of a Singaporean. The saddest part is that even if the Singaporean is prepared to work at a lower wage, he might not be offered the job to avoid "insulting" him.

The saddest part is the labels that the government has helped attach to unemployed Singaporean - fail to upgrade, fussy, choosy, unable to adapt, not prepared to work long hours, not hardworking, poor attitude etc.

If you know of a friend or relative that is unemployed or working below his potential grade, please vote the PAP out.





[QUOTEi=aurvandil;55039n2]I wrote theg following aarticle aboutp nine months back. Mr Tan Kin Lian wa kind enough to post it up nhsblg adss many of the issues of the FT policy in a frank, candid manner which PM Lee unfortunately did not do in his NDR. The article and the discussion which followed is worth a read is you want to know the bitter truth about the FT policy.
.[/QUOTE]

 

[aurvandil]

The issue is structural in nature. There is no one in cabinet that has the mind and the mettle to handle it. Here are the key policies that we are now stuck with and these were done circa 1998;

1) keep lowering wages to remain competitive. This has been their mantra.
2) casino
3) changes to banking regulations to allow more funds to come thru unhindered
4) liberalise immigration to allow growth in population as the numbers are good drivers of the economy

Notice that all 4 measures are not be part of usual economic measures adopted by countries. Items (2) and (3) have crossed the moral boundary.

There was quite a lively discussion which followed my intial posting. I strongly agree that 2) and 3) have crossed the moral boundary. If we continue lowering moral standards and accepting compromises, we are moving Singapore to the road of ruin. This is what I wrote.


Singapore has been trying to move up the “high value” industry of wealth management. As advocated by some contributors to this discussion, Singapore should develop “high value” industry so that Singaporeans can enjoy higher wages.

To develop the wealth management industry, the government has adopted tax policies which are regressive in nature. Good examples of this would be the removal of estate duty and the implementation of ever higher GST. The intent of these tax regressive policies was to attract people in the likes of Bill Gates or Warren Buffet to base themselves in Singapore. These rich people can live in exclusive communities like Sentosa Cove and spend their money in the increasing number of swanky establishments that are out of the budget of most ordinary Singaporeans. They have even built an exclusive terminal (http://www.jetquay.com.sg ) for them to jet in and out of Singapore without having to go through the hassle of going through Changi Airport

Unfortunately despite what many Singaporeans might think, Singapore is really no more than a small city of no great global consequence. As such, we have not been able to attract these global titans to base themselves in Singapore.

Instead we have attracted a host of shady characters whose money comes from questionable origin. For example, Singapore is currently home to a large number of millionaire fugitives from Indonesia. Many of these are from the Suharto years and the Asian financial crisis which ended his rule. We consciously refuse to have a comprehensive extradition treaty with Indonesia as it is deemed to be in Singapore’s national interest to allow this people to remain in Singapore. This was one of the reasons which led to the diplomatic quarrel that resulted in Indonesia banning the export of sand to Singapore. Indonesia wants to extradite these fugitives so that the can recover what is left of the money which was stolen.

Slightly further afield, the son of Thein Sein lives in Singapore. Thein Sein is the general who rules Myanmar and who ordered that machine guns be used on unarmed Buddhist monks during the recent protests. His son goes to an international school in a Ferrari. Most recently when Thein Sein visited Singapore, an orchid was named after him. Many other high ranking members of Myanmar operate in Singapore. Recently, US based NGO Earth Rights International (ERI) released a report which claimed that DBS and OCBC were “offshore repositories” for billions of dollars being siphoned off from the Yadana gas project. DBS and OCBC have denied these claims.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The main points which I was driving at is:

1) The rise of a huge pool of talented labour is a dire economic problem which will affect ALL Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans will see their income fall or even become unemployed over the next 5 to 10 years.

How is importing a sizeable FT population from 3rd world countries the solution?

That developed economies should be less labour intensive is an age-old economic theorem that has stood the test of time. The PAPies must have been busy reading their cheque books instead of building a people and an economy for a developed country.

2) There is unfortunately NO solution to the problem. The measures in the article can at best mitigate the pain of the economic adjustment. On the number of FT being admitted, even if we significantly reduce thier numbers, wages in Singapore will continue to stagnate and slide. It is a fantasy to expect that if we kick out all the foreigners, we will all see wages jump and we all will be happy and rich.

I can assure you that AT LEAST 50% of white collar FTs are no better than their Singaporean counterpart. It is imperative that any government ensure jobs for its citizens.

To sell their own citizens, wholesale, to the cheapest vendor is not what a government should do.

It is no fantasy BUT a requirement that citizens get first option for any job. This practice is required in most if not all first world countries. Why should Singaporeans be put at the short end of any policy especially one involving jobs?

3) Instead of facing up to the problem and telling Singaporeans the truth, the PAP has been selling Singaporeans a series of half-truths. The most recent being the productivity drive headed by DPM Teo. The large amounts of money will be spent but we will almost certainly fail to achieve the objectives.

The objectives are pathetic words in the air. Nothing will be solved for as long as the who created the problem are still in power. Do you seriously think the PAP cares for its citizens? Let's talk about fantasies then.

4) What's worse is that the PAP has compounded the problem by adopting policies which will worsen the impact. The most obvious of these is the high price HDB policy under Minister Mah. That party ended yesterday and Singaporeans are about to pay a very high price as the property market corrects. Based on the last major correction, a fall of 30% to 40% would not be unexpected.

It is all part of their plan. How many times do you want the old man to say that Singaporeans working everyday and worrying about their jobs and homes is what he wants. How many times does he have to say it before it gets stuck in your head?!?!?

So far, the response to PM Lee's speech has been very bad. This is because many Singaporeans have woken up to the truth. As written in the article, these Singaporeans have become very angry and bitter at being lied at.

In any other first world country this PM of ours would have been kicked out of parliament for accepting gifts in the form of discounts from a private property developer.

Since then he has gone on to do nothing but spew pathetic mother hen phrases with nothing of economic sense or morals to back his words.

The damage to the PAP appears to be permanent. Even if elections were delayed 1 year, there does not appear to be anything which can rebuild the lost credibility and trust. This is because the only thing which can restore the faith is an economic miracle that defy all the laws of ecoomics.

The only thing which remains now is final validation and confirmation at the ballot box.

I have said it many times, their greed is what will finally lead to their failure. Every dynasty suffers the same transition.

But why do you seem so sad at their impending demise? The hundreds of true blue Singaporeans who were wrongly jailed and tortured should easily tell you right from wrong.

The hundreds or even thousands who would have joined politics if not for the authoritarian rule would have made this country a better place. Just look at the law society. No where else in the world will you get such an apathetic law society where they can't even find a handful of people to want to run the society. What more about politics.

We have to rid ourselves of the PAP. We may transition with a group of not-so-stellar politicians but at least their intentions are much better. Then, with a more open civil society, we will again attract the best and brightest into politics to govern the country as one people.

 

[aurvandil]

It is no fantasy BUT a requirement that citizens get first option for any job. This practice is required in most if not all first world countries. Why should Singaporeans be put at the short end of any policy especially one involving jobs?

Put it this way, we have a funamental restructuring of the global economic order. Singaporeans will be badly affected in terms of wages and unemployment. Instead of implementing polcies which would help Singaporeans cope, the PAP has implemented polcies which grealy enahnced the pain. The FT policy is a case in point. Instead of slow gradual fall in wages so that everyone has time to adjust, the current policy seems designed to try and bring us to the bottom years in advance.

But why do you seem so sad at their impending demise?

I don't feel sad for the PAP. I feel sad for the hole the PAP has dug Singapore into. The problems are now so large and so overwhelming that they will take years to correct. Instead of entering a "Golden Age", we seem to be headed for the "Dark Ages".

The "Dark Ages" will start will a huge correction in the property market. Thanks to Minister Mah's polcies, we should brace ourselves for a drop of as much as 30% to 40%. The transportation problems which we face everyday when we go to work, might take as long as 10 years and $60 billion to fix.

 

[silverfox@]

5 years ago, I was in the food business. I advertised in the newspaper for kitchen helper.

Got 2 kinds of workers come and interview. Local and Foreign. I need headcount, so I prefer local. Locals pay more I also don't mind but the problem is locals are not willing to work long hours. They tell me other place 8 hours work, why my side must work 11 hours.

Foreign workers tell me OT never mind, I must know how to reward them.

Singaporeans are shunning jobs which has long hours and dirty jobs. They want high salary, aircon, less jobs, no stress, 5 day week.

In the food industry, just ask around anyone and they will tell you it is so damn difficult to get locals to work.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

Put it this way, we have a funamental restructuring of the global economic order. Singaporeans will be badly affected in terms of wages and unemployment. Instead of implementing polcies which would help Singaporeans cope, the PAP has implemented polcies which grealy enahnced the pain. The FT policy is a case in point. Instead of slow gradual fall in wages so that everyone has time to adjust, the current policy seems designed to try and bring us to the bottom years in advance.

Dear Sir, you are not well versed in economic theory. Correct?

Economic theory governing International Trade has been etched in stone for close to a hundred years and has seldom been disputed in its efficacy to explain situations and to guide policies.

Why has other first world countries not had similar problems as Singapore in terms of lower wages and tougher employment opportunities due to an influx of FTs? When the Soviet bloc left communism, why didn't western Europe allow hundreds of thousands of Eastern European nationals into their countries? These people would have been a lot cheaper then and even today they are still cheaper.

Even today, computer programmers from the Eastern Europe who are very good, have difficulty gaining employment in Western Europe.

Creating cheaper goods has never been the hallmark of true economic growth. More so for developed countries.

Your beloved PAP knew this ages ago. They must have. But staying in power over a subservient population is what is important to the old man. Ensuring that citizens do not have time for civil society activities is one of the PAPies' cornerstone towards staying in power.

You just do not understand the old man and his PAP at all.

I don't feel sad for the PAP. I feel sad for the hole the PAP has dug Singapore into. The problems are now so large and so overwhelming that they will take years to correct. Instead of entering a "Golden Age", we seem to be headed for the "Dark Ages".

The "Dark Ages" will start will a huge correction in the property market. Thanks to Minister Mah's polcies, we should brace ourselves for a drop of as much as 30% to 40%. The transportation problems which we face everyday when we go to work, might take as long as 10 years and $60 billion to fix.

If the PAP did the right thing and allowed for an education and societal system that allowed and nourished entrepreneurship and ideas, we would have been much better today.

The property correction is going to happen sooner or later. The PAPies have been preventing this from happening sooner due to the influx of FTs.

What we need to do is to vote in the APs or vote out the PAP.

All FTs requiring to renew their pass will need stringent checks. We need a system that has been tried and tested in the west. I have said it before, allowing property investment in Singapore is suicidal due to our small landspace. And yet we hear of PRs and FTs buying up multiple properties. And these are welcomed by the PAPies.

To get ourselves onto the right track, we must first remove the problem and that is the PAP. The problem isn't global economics. Globalization or international trade has been around for centuries.

You have been hoodwinked by the PAPies into thinking that this is a new phenomena. As I said, look at the west and how they have protected their citizens from FTs.

Your PAP has actually accentuated the negative impacts of international trade onto its citizens all because they deem it necessary to put the spurs behind the backs of their citizens so that they don't participate in civil society.

A thinking populace is the PAPies' worse enemy. All fascist political parties work are like that. They have a very narrow mindset of the populace and they will even ensure that what they think is made to come true.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

5 years ago, I was in the food business. I advertised in the newspaper for kitchen helper.

Got 2 kinds of workers come and interview. Local and Foreign. I need headcount, so I prefer local. Locals pay more I also don't mind but the problem is locals are not willing to work long hours. They tell me other place 8 hours work, why my side must work 11 hours.

Foreign workers tell me OT never mind, I must know how to reward them.

Singaporeans are shunning jobs which has long hours and dirty jobs. They want high salary, aircon, less jobs, no stress, 5 day week.

In the food industry, just ask around anyone and they will tell you it is so damn difficult to get locals to work.

You are a typical PAP minion always looking to increase your profit at the expense of exploitation. Are you aware of the legally allowed hours for work done within a week?

A western boss would allow for shared profits to entice their own workers to work harder.

You are a lazy and demanding boss. Schedule your working hours better. It is as simple as that. Include profit sharing - don't be greedy!

You see, the problem isn't Singapore workers. It's Singapore bosses! You ae all always looking for cheaper alternatives without thought of the country and economy as a whole. Sure you can't all thing about such things because that is why we have governments to think of such macro policies.

Singapore workers do not want to be exploited. FTs don't know better or won't mind because what they receive in salaries is many times more than what they will get back home.

But this is all very basic economic theory. What we must ask ourselves is why does our government allow such practices to happen in Singapore.

Will you have lost your business if you had a profit sharing scheme for locals? Would you have gone out of business if you hired an extra half-shift of workers? DId you think about improving productivity so that workers don't have to work 11 hours at a stretch?

 

[Ramseth]

The problem of willing versus unwilling to work long hours can never be reconciled. The locals want a life besides working and sleeping. The foreigners come here to work and sleep enough to work again, no other life nevermind, even better. That's what they come here for, maximise working hours and earning powers. With enough money, then go back to their countries to get a life there, not here.

 

[ChaoPappyPoodle]

The problem of willing versus unwilling to work long hours can never be reconciled. The locals want a life besides working and sleeping. The foreigners come here to work and sleep enough to work again, no other life nevermind, even better. That's what they come here for, maximise working hours and earning powers. With enough money, then go back to their countries to get a life there, not here.

This is common sense and that is why international trade theory covers this very well.

Why have other developed countries not suffered from 'globalization' as Singapore has. Why do other developed countries have stringent systems in place against hiring FTs? Even Hong Kong has stringent policies against mainland Chinese from working there.

It is all very simple. Governments do not work on the premise of only wanting the cheapest input for their country's businesses. This seems to be the PAP's primary focus.

Do take note that even after hiring cheaper FTs, businesses atill charge the same for their goods. What does this tell you about businesses in Singapore? But this is actually the same for all businesses all over the world. They want cheaper inputs, especially labour.

And this is where the government comes in to ensure that such negative acts prevented from happening. Governments put in place policies to ensure that locals get first bite of the cherry. Governments ensure that all workers, including FTs are not exploited.

In Singapore you have none of these. The PAPies are the largest employer in Singapore. This is another problem that we have. These fascists must show profits and hence, they need cheaper FTs to show the profits. These GLCs are run by incompetent, unqualified minions who not only slowly destroy their own companies but the crowd out true entrepreneurs from the economy.

 

[moolightaffairs]

The problem of willing versus unwilling to work long hours can never be reconciled. The locals want a life besides working and sleeping. The foreigners come here to work and sleep enough to work again, no other life nevermind, even better. That's what they come here for, maximise working hours and earning powers. With enough money, then go back to their countries to get a life there, not here.

Ramseth is very correct. i think everyone wants a life beside working and sleeping. this is the basic right for all of us!

if good foreigners exposed to our good working culture and environment, they will choose to stay. but now a lot of them choose to leave after contract expired, regardless of blue collar or white collar. make enough money and leave or get citizenship and migrate again to US, AU or CA. thats what i can see the trend now. our foreigners policy can only get foreigners to come, but cant retain talents. because even our local bred talents also leaving!!! if you want outsiders to join your group, you have to treat your own people well first!

 

[silverfox@]

You are a typical PAP minion always looking to increase your profit at the expense of exploitation. Are you aware of the legally allowed hours for work done within a week?

A western boss would allow for shared profits to entice their own workers to work harder.

You are a lazy and demanding boss. Schedule your working hours better. It is as simple as that. Include profit sharing - don't be greedy!

You see, the problem isn't Singapore workers. It's Singapore bosses! You ae all always looking for cheaper alternatives without thought of the country and economy as a whole. Sure you can't all thing about such things because that is why we have governments to think of such macro policies.

Singapore workers do not want to be exploited. FTs don't know better or won't mind because what they receive in salaries is many times more than what they will get back home.

But this is all very basic economic theory. What we must ask ourselves is why does our government allow such practices to happen in Singapore.

Will you have lost your business if you had a profit sharing scheme for locals? Would you have gone out of business if you hired an extra half-shift of workers? DId you think about improving productivity so that workers don't have to work 11 hours at a stretch?

Lunch hour at 12pm. Dinner ends at 9pm. Plus cleaning up. I hope to see the day when restaurants open at 1pm and close at 9pm sharp. Saturday Sundays closed.

I should ask my chef do either lunch hours or dinner. 2 kinds of standard.

You think food industry is like office work 9am start 5pm finish?

It's so easy for you to say exploiting manpower. Try telling that to all those who open food eateries and ask them how much is their rent and salaries to pay.

Shared profits everyone also want. Shared losses anyone wants to share

The young in singapore are not used to hardships. Want clean job. Want high pay, want no responsibilities. Want many off days, leaves. Want aircon. Who would want to stay in a kitchen for long hours? The Malaysians are hungry for money.

Govt wants everyone to have basic education. This is good for everyone. But let me ask a simple question. 15yrs down the road, everyone is educated, is there anyone who wants to be a dishwasher? Anyone wants to be a toilet cleaner? Any singaporeans? You want to do? Will you do?

I can tell you 1st, I don't want:o

 

[silverfox@]

The problem of willing versus unwilling to work long hours can never be reconciled. The locals want a life besides working and sleeping. The foreigners come here to work and sleep enough to work again, no other life nevermind, even better. That's what they come here for, maximise working hours and earning powers. With enough money, then go back to their countries to get a life there, not here.

Singaporeans are not willing to work long hours. Foreigners are willing. Certain industries requires long hours. This is a fact.

So for jobs that singaporeans are not willing to undertake, foreigners have to fill up.

If today no locals want to drive a bus, where to find people to drive buses? Public transport comes to a standstill?

Aim of every individual is different.

 

[Ramseth]

If today no locals want to drive a bus, where to find people to drive buses? Public transport comes to a standstill?

Aim of every individual is different.

Why didn't public transport come to a standstill in the 70s and 80s, even before MRT? Why did locals want to drive buses in the 70s and 80s, and were very happily contented with it?

 

[kingrant]

The gist of yr proposal boils down to imposing a levy to the EP/PR scheme a la the foregin maid levy.

By yr same logic, this would make foreign labour more costly to businesses here who will then move offshore to places where there are no levies. Hollowing out is still inevitable!

Given the success of this policy, it would now be timely to extend this levy to those in Singapore under the employment pass or permanent resident scheme. The successful implementation of the foreign workers levy for so many years suggest that if it were applied to the employment pass/permanent resident scheme, it would not “chase away the talent”.

 

[Watchman]