Sammyboy RSS Feed
23-04-2015, 06:10 PM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
PAP IS NOT EVEN KEEPING TRACK OF IMMIGRATION POLICY
Post date:
23 Apr 2015 - 1:16pm
http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/crowded.jpg?itok=AZ45zovG (http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/field/image/crowded.jpg)
The PAP claims that “immigration helps to balance the shrinking and ageing of our citizen population”. (NPTD (http://www.nptd.gov.sg/portals/0/homepage/highlights/population-in-brief-2014.pdf) pg 12) Singaporeans have been repeatedly told that elderly citizens will triple to 900,000 in 2030 (https://www.facebook.com/todayonline/posts/248286108612013)in an attempt to fear monger us into accepting PAP’s flawed immigration policy.
In my query to the PMO (https://letterstostandtoday.wordpress.com/) 2 years ago, I discovered that the government has not even been keeping track of its immigration policy.
The chart below confirms the largest group of PRs are between 30 and 49 years old, similar to citizens’ age profile. New citizens are selected from the pool of PRs. Questions:
– How do new citizens, selected from a group of PRs with a similar age profile as citizens, help mitigate the issue of ageing population?
– During the last 2 years, about 3,500 new citizens were aged 40 and above, almost 9,000 were above 31 years old. In the future, will they not contribute to the elderly pool and reduce the old-age support ratio?
– How does the PAP confirm new citizens help to increase our low TFR when it does not even collate any data to support this claim?
NPTD (http://www.nptd.gov.sg/portals/0/homepage/highlights/population-in-brief-2014.pdf) (page 12)
https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/prs11.jpg?w=652 (https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/prs11.jpg)
Are Singaporeans not being taken for a ride?
The number of new citizens since 1987 is around 300,000. A new citizen aged 40 in 1987, forms part of the elderly pool in 2012 and their numbers will increase every year. Out of the 900,000 elderly citizens in 2030, there will be at least 100,000 new citizens. Is PAP exacerbating the problem or resolving the issue? Will PAP then further increase the number of immigrants to justify increasing the old-age support ratio?
The PAP has been using the NPTD to drum in the ‘we need more foreigners’ message into citizens. It seizes every opportunity to call for an increase in immigrants eg age profile of citizens increasing (Singaporeans growing older, new citizens needed), declining citizens birth and marriages (need immigrants to help produce babies but PAP doesn’t know their TFR), etc.
The population table below confirms the huge population increase has contributed significantly to our GDP growth.
Population table
YearPop (mil)Increase19702.074NA19802.413339,00019903.0476 34,00020004.027980,00020105.0761,049,000
Increasing the population has been a PAP shortcut to miraculous economic growth, much to the detriment of citizens. Because the PAP has been addicted to such a model for more then 2 decades, it MUST increase the number of immigrants AT ALL COSTS to prevent our GDP from collapsing.
Another piece of PAP’s propaganda – immigrants help to increase the old-age support ratio (table below) which is a fact … but PAP didn’t tell us about the cost.
https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/old20age20support20ratio51.jpg?w=652 (https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/old20age20support20ratio51.jpg)
Year: 2014
Population: 3.343 million
Citizens aged 65 and above: 12.4% X 3.343 million = 414,800
Citizen support ratio: 5.2 = 414,800 X 5.2 = 2.157 million
Residents support ratio: 6.0 = 414,800 X 6 = 2.489 million
Number of PRs = 2.489 mil – 2.157 mil = 332,000
Using an additional 332,000 PRs to boost the old-age support ratio from 5.2 to 6.0 is just a numbers game to our devoid-of-ideas scholars.
It is disingenuous of PAP to show only part of the equation ie the increase in old-age support ratio by PRs while ignoring the social costs of an additional 332,000 PRs (aged 20 to 64) and their family members.
To entice PRs to our high cost of living country, PAP has already sacrificed some 49,190 public housing units (http://www.propnex.com/mediareleasedetails.aspx?PressID=199) to accommodate them. For most of these PRs, private property is out of reach. And what about other benefits such as healthcare and education grants for their family members, courtesy of taxpayers? How many more resale HDB units will be owned by PRs in future, depriving locals of ownership?
In 1990, PRs number only 112,000. PRs more than doubled to 287,000 in 2000, which again almostdoubled to 541,000 a decade later. It appears PAP has increased the number of PRs to increase the old-age support ratio. This ratio is then used to justify its flawed immigration policy.
Conclusion
PAP’s immigration policy defies common sense. Upon closer scrutiny, the only objective of the PWP is toachieve economic growth. Citizens’ well being will be compromised ie public transportation will be more overcrowded, public resources will extremely stretched, etc.
Anecdotal evidence suggests new citizens are not helping to increase our low TFR ie many families with one child and many unmarried new citizens. PAP doesn’t even collate such data and is therefore in the dark.
Singaporeans should not play into PAP’s propaganda but instead scrutinise the PWP. The downsides to PAP’s immigration policy are too great to be ignored.
Phillip Ang
*The writer blogs at https://likedatosocanmeh.wordpress.com/ (http://0.0.7.223/04/23/20150423-population-white-paper-questionable-pap-not-even-keeping-track-of-immigration-policy/)
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?205296-Pap-is-not-even-keeping-track-of-immigration-policy&goto=newpost).
PAP IS NOT EVEN KEEPING TRACK OF IMMIGRATION POLICY
Post date:
23 Apr 2015 - 1:16pm
http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/crowded.jpg?itok=AZ45zovG (http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/field/image/crowded.jpg)
The PAP claims that “immigration helps to balance the shrinking and ageing of our citizen population”. (NPTD (http://www.nptd.gov.sg/portals/0/homepage/highlights/population-in-brief-2014.pdf) pg 12) Singaporeans have been repeatedly told that elderly citizens will triple to 900,000 in 2030 (https://www.facebook.com/todayonline/posts/248286108612013)in an attempt to fear monger us into accepting PAP’s flawed immigration policy.
In my query to the PMO (https://letterstostandtoday.wordpress.com/) 2 years ago, I discovered that the government has not even been keeping track of its immigration policy.
The chart below confirms the largest group of PRs are between 30 and 49 years old, similar to citizens’ age profile. New citizens are selected from the pool of PRs. Questions:
– How do new citizens, selected from a group of PRs with a similar age profile as citizens, help mitigate the issue of ageing population?
– During the last 2 years, about 3,500 new citizens were aged 40 and above, almost 9,000 were above 31 years old. In the future, will they not contribute to the elderly pool and reduce the old-age support ratio?
– How does the PAP confirm new citizens help to increase our low TFR when it does not even collate any data to support this claim?
NPTD (http://www.nptd.gov.sg/portals/0/homepage/highlights/population-in-brief-2014.pdf) (page 12)
https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/prs11.jpg?w=652 (https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/prs11.jpg)
Are Singaporeans not being taken for a ride?
The number of new citizens since 1987 is around 300,000. A new citizen aged 40 in 1987, forms part of the elderly pool in 2012 and their numbers will increase every year. Out of the 900,000 elderly citizens in 2030, there will be at least 100,000 new citizens. Is PAP exacerbating the problem or resolving the issue? Will PAP then further increase the number of immigrants to justify increasing the old-age support ratio?
The PAP has been using the NPTD to drum in the ‘we need more foreigners’ message into citizens. It seizes every opportunity to call for an increase in immigrants eg age profile of citizens increasing (Singaporeans growing older, new citizens needed), declining citizens birth and marriages (need immigrants to help produce babies but PAP doesn’t know their TFR), etc.
The population table below confirms the huge population increase has contributed significantly to our GDP growth.
Population table
YearPop (mil)Increase19702.074NA19802.413339,00019903.0476 34,00020004.027980,00020105.0761,049,000
Increasing the population has been a PAP shortcut to miraculous economic growth, much to the detriment of citizens. Because the PAP has been addicted to such a model for more then 2 decades, it MUST increase the number of immigrants AT ALL COSTS to prevent our GDP from collapsing.
Another piece of PAP’s propaganda – immigrants help to increase the old-age support ratio (table below) which is a fact … but PAP didn’t tell us about the cost.
https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/old20age20support20ratio51.jpg?w=652 (https://likedatosocanmeh.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/old20age20support20ratio51.jpg)
Year: 2014
Population: 3.343 million
Citizens aged 65 and above: 12.4% X 3.343 million = 414,800
Citizen support ratio: 5.2 = 414,800 X 5.2 = 2.157 million
Residents support ratio: 6.0 = 414,800 X 6 = 2.489 million
Number of PRs = 2.489 mil – 2.157 mil = 332,000
Using an additional 332,000 PRs to boost the old-age support ratio from 5.2 to 6.0 is just a numbers game to our devoid-of-ideas scholars.
It is disingenuous of PAP to show only part of the equation ie the increase in old-age support ratio by PRs while ignoring the social costs of an additional 332,000 PRs (aged 20 to 64) and their family members.
To entice PRs to our high cost of living country, PAP has already sacrificed some 49,190 public housing units (http://www.propnex.com/mediareleasedetails.aspx?PressID=199) to accommodate them. For most of these PRs, private property is out of reach. And what about other benefits such as healthcare and education grants for their family members, courtesy of taxpayers? How many more resale HDB units will be owned by PRs in future, depriving locals of ownership?
In 1990, PRs number only 112,000. PRs more than doubled to 287,000 in 2000, which again almostdoubled to 541,000 a decade later. It appears PAP has increased the number of PRs to increase the old-age support ratio. This ratio is then used to justify its flawed immigration policy.
Conclusion
PAP’s immigration policy defies common sense. Upon closer scrutiny, the only objective of the PWP is toachieve economic growth. Citizens’ well being will be compromised ie public transportation will be more overcrowded, public resources will extremely stretched, etc.
Anecdotal evidence suggests new citizens are not helping to increase our low TFR ie many families with one child and many unmarried new citizens. PAP doesn’t even collate such data and is therefore in the dark.
Singaporeans should not play into PAP’s propaganda but instead scrutinise the PWP. The downsides to PAP’s immigration policy are too great to be ignored.
Phillip Ang
*The writer blogs at https://likedatosocanmeh.wordpress.com/ (http://0.0.7.223/04/23/20150423-population-white-paper-questionable-pap-not-even-keeping-track-of-immigration-policy/)
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://sammyboy.com/showthread.php?205296-Pap-is-not-even-keeping-track-of-immigration-policy&goto=newpost).