Unless, my memory has failed me, I don’t recall anyone using the word “apologist” to describe Caplan, though from his initial ‘kind engagement’, it would not surprise me if anyone did.

I am more concerned about Caplan’s actual connections with and any remuneration that he may have received from the PAP government for such shoddy scholarship. (Not a reference to the points that he raised above, now that he is safely tucked away in the good ol’ US of A, payment – if, any – in hand.)

Prof Caplan,

I am still waiting for you to reply me on Econlog.

But I am curious about how you can consider the five aspects you mentioned here as “democratic”.

The only perhaps debatable one is Conscription, whether conscription is a legitimate use of legitimate force by the state.

Major Human Rights watchdogs like Amnesty International consider the death penalty and defamation suits to be violations of human rights, and hence undemocratic.

Freedom House considers censorship and State Ownership of media to be undemocratic.

So in fact, all the points you listed above prove that Singapore has “lack of democracy”. How truly ironic.

any need for clarification? we are not your pay master…and u r not running for the election…rite?

If Caplan is working in one of the government universities (or related institutions) he can’t really be critical about Singapore on specifics, otherwise he would be asked to get out of the country.

The really heavy-weight Western intellectuals are featured in Fora TV.

“The Internet has made Singaporean censorship largely obsolete”(Caplan),

That’s not the point, in any true democracy the government must allow for a free press to exist. The PAP government is doing all in its power to control the media in Singapore.

black feline (#3),

The assumed need for clarification is simply the academic mindset at work. Cheers.

5) Arix (@UK) on November 9th, 2009 8.20 am

The assumed need for clarification is simply the academic mindset at work. Cheers

Clarification beats PAP-style defamation suit any time!

This is another good article to read,but this time i totally disagreed with you as you
are comparing us with your country you live in.If we were to adopt all your liberal
social values and politics,surly we have a society identical to yours,which is a
dysfunctional one.No THANKS,Mr.Caplan.

The points that he highlighted surprise me, the only country similar to the points is the totalitarian Stalinist-regime of Soviet Russia.

1. There is a need to review the management of the military. All states need some form of defence…
2. I actually advocate harsh penalty for this; however, can the police really be sure if the ones got hanged are really the culprits is the main issue. Setting up others are not unknown.
3. This has become a real headache while it started off with pretty necessary concerns. But just like China’s inflation, it started off in the hope of a richer people… The point is, it’s all a mess in my view. It’s like you need the military, but you can’t just have it and anyohow manage…
4. This one is not about personal freedom, since no one likes to be maliciously adverised by others. But the point is,even Durai and many simpletons on obvious craps are protecting themselves with this… I mean, what-the-fxxx…
5. Where there shall be management and the managed, there will always be some sort of censorship. I’d like to spam TOC… will TOC allow my freedom to do so? So that’s obvious…

Bryan Caplan,

Allow me to offer the WHY.

Singaporeans have never experienced 1st hand what 2 party system is really like.
They may FEAR the unknown.
They are too pampered and nurtured in a similar way having gone thru the same system.

They may be complacent.
They may be too reliant on their leaders.
They may have the CRUTCH Mentality.
They are RISK Adverse (doing business etc) as it is well known to all.
They are small in numbers to stir up anything or waves. They are controllable.
In short they are made in singapore.

But not to worry, the new citizens can offer hope.
These will NEVER, I say again, NEVER become 100% like the native singaporeans.
These are mostly adults whose mentality and minds have been more or less matured and nurtured by their own motherland systems. These could slowly become more like Native Singaporeans. But by the law of nature, you just can’t teach an old dog new tricks. They have limitations.

So, to control these new citizens who are already at least 1 million or so or soon to be even more, would require a different strategy.

This in itself is an early introduction to CHANGE that will come.

NAtive singaporeans are proven and known to be UNIQUE.
These new citizens are not the Native Singaporeans some many of whom are characterised by the 5 K’s.

China’s 1 party system seems working but remember this is just the beginning of Change for China which recently opened up. It as already changed by opening up. It will take 100 years of 1 party system to remain for me to regard that such a system works. If only for short period of say 20 to 50 years , its not long term enough to me. Civilization is measured in Century terms and not decades.

Singapore’s short history seems to suggest 1 part system works. But to me, this is premature. Leaders come and go. No 2 is the same.

Thus, Change is the only Constant.

“So why do the critics keep complaining about “lack of democracy” when the real story is that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”

Is it so? What about GRC? Is our election fair to begin with?

Never tot he was.

He tried to provide an alternative, argued narrative to the one postulated online by commentators to TOC, TR etc.

The personal attacks reflected the closed-mindeness of the persons who made them.

Go read up on Neuroscience and using of computer chip to control a person’s dreams.

Trust me,it is happening now!

“So why do the critics keep complaining about “lack of democracy” when the real story is that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”

There must be a reason why social engineering and media control is effective to a large extent especially in the period where Internet is yet to be recognized as social-political media prior to the blog era. LKY should know how important for him to control every aspect of Singapore to in order to ensure his continuous reign. After all PAP had contested as opp party before, and therefore ingrained the experience necessitate to ensure that there won’t be another opp party to repeat the feat of PAP. In all, PAP will do whatever to make sure the Singaporeans will vote (or automatically vote for them through GRC) for them. The end justifies the mean even it means fixing the opp party, buying supporter’s vote using state money, implant the FUD, constant reminder of incumbent’s past achievement etc.

In 2006 election, how many people get exposed to blogosphere ? But this time, the PAP’s gameplay is different when they recognize that many Singaporean will play no fool anymore. The game has now switch to using mass foreigner-converted citizen to garner the vote and support, and to dilute the vote of true Singaporeans, with still-effective backing of GRC system. If Bryan Caplan still does not recognize this gameplay, perhaps Bryan will still be asking the same question “So why do the critics keep complaining about “lack of democracy” when the real story is that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?” after the next election.

“So why do the critics keep complaining about “lack of democracy” when the real story is that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”

There must be a reason why social engineering and media control is effective to a large extent especially in the period where Internet is yet to be recognized as social-political media prior to the blog era. LKY should know how important for him to control every aspect of Singapore to in order to ensure his continuous reign. After all PAP had contested as opp party before, and therefore ingrained the experience necessitate to ensure that there won’t be another opp party to repeat the feat of PAP. In all, PAP will do whatever to make sure the Singaporeans will vote (or automatically vote for them through GRC) for them. The end justifies the mean even it means fixing the opp party, buying supporter’s vote using state money, implant the FUD, constant reminder of incumbent’s past achievement etc.

In 2006 election, how many people get exposed to blogosphere ? But this time, the PAP’s gameplay is different when they recognize that many Singaporean will play no fool anymore. The game has now switch to using mass foreigner-converted citizen to garner the vote and support, and to dilute the vote of true Singaporeans, with still-effective backing of GRC system. If Bryan Caplan still does not recognize this gameplay, perhaps Bryan will still be asking the same question “So why do the critics keep complaining about “lack of democracy” when the real story is that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?” after the next election.

to continue from last comment

Will Bryan Caplan even bother to find out who is the “most Singaporeans” when he says “that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”

What is the constitution of foreigner-converted citizen to true-blue citizen in the “most Singaporeans” that vote for PAP ? Or perhaps , Bryan Caplan will never find out since he will either to be asked not to interfere with Singapore poltics, or gov will say that it is “state secret” .

#17 Utopia

67% of S”poreans who had an opportunity to vote in 2006, voted for PAP.

And in my area, the opposition consistently picks up at least 25% — this was when a looney stood for election in 80s. Depending on the quality of candidate, they can pick up another 15-20%. The balance votes PAP.

Pretty conclusive to me “that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”.

P P PAP esp if you own a private property.

“Will Bryan Caplan even bother to find out who is the “most Singaporeans” when he says “that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?””

.

I’m surprised Prof Caplan can list out items 3, 4 and 5 and yet still not draw conclusion to how PAP dominated Singapore’s political scene.

That said, he hit the targets on the sins of PAP. What remains then is analysing the negative effects on Singapore.

“Still, lest I be mistaken for a PAP apologist, ”

This need not mean anything, u know.

I say world peace, does it mean anything that there is world peace or will have world peace. Anyone can say that without having to prove anything.

Author,

you said
“…most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”

did you mention HOW MANY SINGAPORE DID NOT VOTE IN EACH OF THE MANY PAST ELECTIONS?

How CONFIDENT ARE YOU TO SAY THIS WHEN YOU NOR ANYONE KNOWS OUT OF ALL VOTING-AGE CITIZENS, HOW MANY WOULD HAD VOTED FOR which party?

come back here and reply to my questions, if you are able.

Singapore is no different from China, honestly… if you look at it. At least they change leaders from time to time, but we have one person for 60 years, passing to his son and then perhaps grandson.

To those who have aired their views in this and the other relevant threads about what Caplan has said:

Sigh, such lack of ideas & rebuttals.

“If we were to adopt all your liberal social values and politics,surly we have a society identical to yours,which is a dysfunctional one.” – Preston Loon @7

How do you measure functionality of a society? Is it by the willingness to sacrifice and tolerate for the higher up in society? Is it the blind respect one must have regardless for those above you? Is it the willingness to accept to be programmed by your leader? Is it the high praises one must give to your leader regardless? Is it to be seen but not heard if you are nobody? Is it…..

Preston Loon, how do you measure? Pls stick to context. Don’t deviate to sexual freedom and alcohol abuse type of dysfunctionality. For these, let me also remind you that not reported or not heard does not mean there is none in our SG society.

Once you are in power,you will fight tooth and nail to cling on to it.Even going on to sacrifice values like democratic principles.So now social and political stability overrides democracy.
PAP’s realpolitik.
Another long-term strategy to stay in power:”blood transfusion”(admitting more foreigners to gradually replace the native populace.)

“So why do the critics keep complaining about “lack of democracy” when the real story is that most Singaporeans persistently prefer the PAP to the opposition?”

Oh yah,

Hitler was voted in by the Germans;

Mao Zedong was regarded the savior of the Red China;

Saddam Hussien was re-elected with 99.9% of votes

These countries must be truly democratic and its people enjoyed their rulers’ reign.

My answers to #24.
What is a functional society?Unlike many anglo-spheres,we respect our politicians regardless whichever labels they belong to.We do not make
fun or mock them of their failings on television.We do not assassinate them just because we disagree with their policies.We do not organize violent demonstrations.
We chastise them when they make made mistakes on rare occasions and if the
politicians are willing to rectify them,fine and life moves on.If not,there is always a
ballot box to remove them.We have a 1st class educational system and our govern
-ment did not use it as a tool to program our children to hate or like one particular
race group or a particular political party.When was the last time your children coming back from school and telling you how great PAP is or how bad WP is?Sure,what is wrong in giving them credit when credit is due.I am willing to give
them high praises and even reward them with another term in office if they do us
good before this coming election.
Unlike the West,we do not legalize racist groups or bikers gangs or mafia as
legitimate organizations.It is insane.As to your last paragraph,societal sins know
no boundary.Agreed.we do have illicit activities behind closed doors but there is
a difference btw us and the West.We do not change laws to accommodate those
debaucheries .

@27) preston loon on November 10th, 2009 6.04 am

who is this “we” that you speak of?

Singaporeans or Asians? Since you are comparing against the “west”.

Going by the comments posted here, it shows clearly that the truth hurts, and it hurts very badly. Indeed, there is truth in the words written by Bryan Caplan. However, I must add that the truth he has presented is only true insofar as the previous generation is concern.

What Caplan failed to recognized is that the Singapore and Singaporeans he had described are of a generation gone by. The new Singapore, and the new Singaporean are today louder, more brave and more daring to push the boundaries. This is a generation that will not take orders from anyone, especially orders that do not add to their expectations of what the other citizen is enjoying, the one in the high place. It is a generation that is smart, cultured and not afraid to choose what they want, even at the expense of groping in the dark.

Take for example conscription. Where the older generation believed (and rightly so) that conscription was necessary for safeguarding the country when the country was emerging as a tiny nation, the younger generation of today are so given in to technology that they feel that conscription to fight with bare hands in a concrete jungle makes no sense. It is time conscription be done away with and be replaced with paid professionals who might be able to do the job of military defense – with the brains rather than the muscles. In other word, military defense must now be a paid job, with market rate salary of a professional, rather than the mindless and forceful conscripting by numbers.

Death for drug traffickers is to be seen in the same light. It was necessary in our growing years when drugs were rampant and easily accessible. Many lives of individuals and their families were destroyed. It was a time when the drug lords were able to take advantage of illiterate minds and bodies to feed and hooked drug users. We are now dealing with a smarter generation where most are more knowledgeable over the effects of drugs and its harmful consequences. It is time the game changes from going after the kuching-kurap pusher to going after the syndicate chiefs. After 50 years of experience tangling with the drug lords, the law cannot remain the same, that the small time pusher gets the death penalty while the kingpins continue to evade the law and live in luxury and freedom. As long as they cannot capture these kingpins, they cannot sentence the pusher to death. It is better to use the pusher to help them capture the big fish. Or is this something they rather not prefer.

State-own companies and businesses are fine if these are independent of the government or the party that the government belongs to. We must agree that the MSM is the biggest problem facing the new Singaporean. Yes, it was again necessary to have the MSM echoing a common refrain during the years when we were building the nation from scraps. Unfortunately, we have overdone it to the extent that the MSM became the PAP’s newsletter and news medium to brainwash the people into giving support to the regime … or else….

Defamation and censorship came to being at a time when the Singapore generation of old were constantly fed with the PAP’s fear tonic. Strangely enough, Caplan did not mention the Internal Security Act. The ISA is the driving force behind Singapore’s defamation and censorship laws. Forgive me, it is not the driving force – the ISA is the stand alone component of fear. It was the ISA that drove the climate of fear deep into the older generation’s hearts.

So you see, there is truth in Caplan’s writings. Only it was true of a generation gone by. What we see in our young today is cause for celebration. What I hope to see at the next election is not for the PAP to be booted out from governing Singapore, but a better showing by the people. The next election is not going to be about the PAP and its track history. It is not going to be about the slate of Opposition candidates either. It is going to be about the new Singaporean and whether he wants to reclaim what rightfully belongs to him – his voice.

The basic assumption that the majority of Singaporeans prefer the present government – is this really the case in reality?

67% out of the pool of citizens, who were eligible voters, who had the chance to vote in a contested ward, who were sufficiently informed about person(s) they were voting for – what is the absolute percentage of those who consciously prefer the present government, after all these discounts?

As with most foreign writers trying to “align” with the Singaporeans’ situation, this Caplan chap, even with a Prof. qualification (aka a very important consideration in our society meritocratic system), is really like living in the stone ages. List of REAL dirty laundry? Wake up, man! This is like LHL boring us with 2-hour lecture during NDP rally on racial harmony while the Now-and-Present issues were conveniently sidetracked. Caplan dear boy, this is called Act Blur, or Smoking us out.

1. Conscription – enlisted at 18, get to vote earliest at 21, 2.5 + 13 years cycle later, how many times voted? New citizens in 2-5 years, voting rights immediate.

2. For those still too stupid, 67% did NOT vote PAP in 2006. Only 34% did. 44% did not get to vote at all — legally marginalised. That 34% gets massaged to 67% that gets massaged to 98% seats in Parliament that gets massaged to total control that get massaged to highest pay for ministers.

3. US President = USD400K salary; Singapore PM = USD2.05 million. Still clueless why no corruption in Singapore?? (See pt.2 above on how to snowball bank…err .voting…. numbers legally)

4. US = 12.5% foreign content (Ok, understand plus about 11% illegals); Singapore = 36% and still counting (Ok, no idea plus how many illegals here. All I know is Minus one illegal — MSK, having made it across to Johore).

5. One week one bonzo announced HDB prices are “affordable”, next week another announced release of more land for housing — indeed uniquely Singapore.

6. @1) Robox on November 9th, 2009 7.25 am
Yes our friend Caplan sure fits the definition of FTs we are so desperately in need of ….. did we give him a blue IC to flash on CNN??

7. Effects of failed policies like Stop-at-2 are not recognised and even stone-walled. We don’t even have a minister name on who is responsible for our declining TFR — tortoises hiding in their shells? Events like ministers kissing babies gets big time coverage on our MSM.

8. After 50 years, we are told we are not a nation nor country (only a city) and the National Pledge is only an Aspiration. We are at needle-end what other “surprises” in store for us, e.g. we will soon be a province of China?

9. Junta-established countries use tanks as voting machines; our regime uses lifts and flats (aka upgrading).

etc…etc…

So, Prof. Caplan, your list smells like (yesterday’s) roses ……

I think we should cut the Prof some slack. I would say that the biggest problem with his viewpoint, which quite a number of Western academics are gulity of, is they tend to be come from top-down prospective. If he’s really interested, maybe he could come down to Singapore and we can take him around.

Only this time, we’ll take him around the heartlands and allow him to take a look at the situation on the ground, instead of being herded by bureaucratic civil servants.

IIRC, he mentioned that opposition used an anti-immigration populist platform. We can walk around and show him all the foreign workers everywhere, explaining that influx of foreigners is a most valid concern.

We can show him the old folks picking cardboards on the streets and the cleaner who is earning $400 a month.

We can show him the ST and allow him to understand that it is truely a “great” paper.

We can show him our social studies textbook (must get the old one though which is more blatant in promoting progandistic BS).

Since the elections are forthcoming, we hope that the Prof would be able to join us then. Maybe he’ll have a clearer understanding of the grievances the citizens have and the mentality of the voters. An election where voters vote based on the politicians’ qualifications, not platform.

Your post: “Unlike many anglo-spheres,we respect our politicians regardless whichever labels they belong to. We do not make fun or mock them of their failings on television.”

- If an adult does not behave as an adult, similarly if a politician fails his or her people because of stupid mistakes, a message need to be put across immediately (not wait 5 years for election time). I think it is brilliant that the Western media put the message across in a fun way. Eg if there is a corrupt politician, at least everyone gets to know a certain politician is lining his or her own pocket. What is so wrong about this? Only a bad politician himself or herself, will not like this democratic system as he or she always has something to hide. Are you one of them?

The beauty of a democratic society is, people become mature and the fun or mocking thrown at these politicians is nothing more than entertainment plus the subtle message behind it. It actually reverses what you said about people’s violent demonstration. The fact that people are allowed to put their message across (and in a fun way) cools matters down and forces other politicians to act to resolve the matter. How will politician problems be resolved in an authoritarain society esp if the leader himself or herself is also bad, where respect means you do not say anything bad about politicians?

Your post: “We do not assassinate them just because we disagree with their policies.We do not organize violent demonstrations.”

- Are many politicians being assassinated in Western democratic societies? Where did most of the violent demonstrations happen? Is it in Tianamen, China, Tibet, China, Maymar? They are not even in the West!

Your post “We have a 1st class educational system”

- You must be the Minister of education so only you say so! I beg to differ and differ greatly. May I remind you that scoring in Spore exams is not a measure of good education. If the education is soooo good, why do we need entice foreign talents with so much freebies which even our own don’t get? Why Spore scholars need to go US or UK to pursue higher education? Why no scientific breakthrough? Why not a single product or brand made it to international stage? Why the inability to think of alternatives (always following)?

Your post: “Unlike the West,we do not legalize racist groups or bikers gangs or mafia as legitimate organizations”

- Please name them. I haven’t heard of any LEGAL racist group. There may be illegal group operating underground. They are not in a tiny country like Spore ok, in a vast country like US or Australia where there are outbacks, even Spore Minister (highest paid) won’t have a clue about them. Do you ?

Reply to #33.
I believe you are not from North America or else you would have known
legit organizations like Hell’s Angels,Satan choice,Bambino’s Brothers,Mafias,the
Outlaws.The whole world knows that they exist and their illicit dealings in drugs traffickings, weapon smuggling ,prostitutions,gambling.Correct me if i am wrong on this one.Isn’t KKK and that black Muslim Group led by Farakhan which are legitimate organizations in the US are a racist groups?
Being a human and also having my own short-comings,i would not
allow myself to stoop so lowly to mocking and making fun of Bill Clinton’s sexual
tryst in his oval office,or Bush junior in his bad pronunciation of words.Neither do i
want to make fun of politicians who are of different sexual orientations.As an
astute person like yourself,you should know the difference between making fun of
and exposing or criticizing politicians’ wrong doings.
You have requested me to stick to the context of Mr.Caplan’s article
which i have.But somehow you have deviated a little by bringing out other Asians
countries as examples.Just Singapore and USA,OK?.I find it strange that you have not heard of JF and his brother Robert Kennedy,Martin Luther King,Abraham
Lincoln.Their lives had been sniped out by the hands of assassins in a demo-
cracy.Do you know that it is a culture in North America to own weapons?Surely,
you would not want to have this type of wacky culture in Singapore,Right?.I want
to take you back to 1982,when another politician by the name of Ronald Reagan
His life too was almost taken away by his own country man.Can you name me a
local politician in Singapore being murdered by someone just because of
political differences.No not one.
C’mon,you and i know the reason why there are large influx of FTs
coming to Singapore.Like anywhere else in the world,the Singapore Government
in doing its best to replenishing its citizens who have moved out to a greener
pasture or somewhere have offers of good paying jobs.
Have a nice day my friend.

“…Can you name me a local politician in Singapore being murdered by someone just because of political differences.No not one…“.

Yah, not one – only because we have very strict gun laws. But one must not forget also that Singapore’s government is too clever than to use guns to kill off its opponents. It prefers killing in a slow and sadistic manner – leaving it opponents to die a slow death. It is more pleasurable not only to see them die slowly but to see their friends and families suffering along with them.

Only when you are a direct threat to its hold on power will they make sure that you die a sudden death a la Teh Chean Wan style.

@34) preston loon on November 11th, 2009 5.57 am

“….C’mon,you and i know the reason why there are large influx of FTs
coming to Singapore.Like anywhere else in the world,the Singapore Government
in doing its best to replenishing its citizens who have moved out to a greener
pasture or somewhere have offers of good paying jobs …”

This view is becoming less and less defensible, at least with anyone I talk to daily. Don’t get me wrong as I am truly interested in why this continual faith placed on this reason, or are you simply echoing the govt. position? (Cos’ I used to think that 67% of voters did vote for the ruling party, something that is echoed until it becomes fact).

As I have mentioned often in TOC, the larger developed countries even don’t have foreign influx to the extreme of 36% like Singapore. Next is probably Australia/Canada at 20+%. If everyone is indeed replenishing their citizens with imports, kindly inform everyone which country is more than 36%, and is seeing positive results from it, apart from maybe increased GDP.

Otherwise, don’t you ask yourself why we are in such dire need to “replenish” our population? Do you not think it is somehow related to failed policies, past and present? That the large foreign intake is just a quick-fix solution for purely economical reasons? Pls do share your views with everyone. I don’t think anyone is trying to kill any politician, but that doesn’t mean that politicians are NOT accountable to the citizens.

reply to #36.
Please google Statcan and come back with the right figure regarding about total human intakes in Canada yearly.Without accuracy,both of us cannot have a proper discussion.I have no idea where you got your 20%+.Was it yearly intake or
over a period of 5 yrs.Your figure of 20% might be right in terms of new immigrants
excluding work permit holders and refugees claimants..Do you know that
an average of about 350,000 new immigrants come to Canada yearly for the last
10 years?Countries like Singapore and those in anglo-spheres are having the same
predicament -a quick fix in labor shortages.Until we find a better solution,we have to
apply a desperate measure for desperate time policy.Maybe you know of some PAP
secret agenda that most of us are not aware of.

Actually China governing party consisted of 8 parties. The CCP is the most powerful and have the most influence. That is why it is a republic, that is why power sharing is so weird there unlike in sg, it totally a one party system.

theforgottongeneration on November 10th, 2009 8.41 am -

Come clean lah brother. Singaporeans are smarter than you think. That’s why they will continue to vote in the PAP and not become hungry people like the rest of the world.

“44% did not get to vote at all ” – Why? Walkovers lah. Stupid!

Who dares to go into a fire and burn one’s deposit? Try challenging MM’s ward for example?

It’s between safe and unsafe. Can makan or not.

For such wards condoms won’t work lah.

Reply to #37

You are right , without accuracy or substance, maybe you shouldn’t be misleading anyone further. If you can’t read stats even from the source you have provided, then it is sure no one can have a proper discussion with you.

Just to be sure, we are talking percentage of foreign-born population, right? In absolute numbers, any developed country intake will likely look larger than ours — any 5-yearold can tell you. Or perhaps you don’t see it that way, like Singapore is as big as Canada?

@39) Rick on November 11th, 2009 3.45 pm

I am coming clean — there is lots of hungry people now even though they might had been the 34% that voted PAP last. Maybe you should come clean with the direction you are getting at.

Like how “condoms” comes into the discussion … maybe you mean they consider distributing condoms to the opp, wards this time round but thought that probably wouldn’t work, so die-die must spend some money on lift-upgrading.

Like “Can Makan or not” — yeah, that is the kiasu/kiasi attitude that makes Singaporeans so famous for. Way to go, brother. Can Makan the APEC people currently in town or not?

Re: Reply to #37

Sorry, impolite of me to forgot to include what you asked to check at www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo46a-eng.htm?sdi=foreign%20born%20population, which shows only 18.4% foreign-content in Canada as of 2001. If my maths is still credible, that is about HALF Singapore’s current.

I will try to find the OEDC report of 2005/2006 where I got my numbers (in early TOC article) if you can provide a proper discussion. FYI, +/-2% over a DECADE is pretty normal in the OEDC countries.

You seem to stretch the meaning of democracy quite a bit to include the legitimacy to break the law. Of course any group should be allowed to be formed, like if there is a group of bike lovers in Spore who want to call themselves ‘Dare Devils’, they should be given the freedom to do so if we are to practice democracy. If the people in the group then start to do very bad things that break the law like the activities you listed, there are laws in decmocratic countries to deal with the people just like any criminal. To pinpoint that the group exists to do bad things will need to be proven as it is a very different thing and this is not as easy. If this is not so, then the Govt can shut any group down as they want on premises of their activities without trials or proofs. The implication of this is that the group will get arrested if they meet or gather. On the same note, we should never condemn all Muslims just because terrorists claim themselves to be Muslim fundamentalists. We do not have the right to shut Muslim gatherings or meetings down (even if we suspect anything) and this is rightfully so. BTW I am not a Muslim and I have no bias, just practising democracy, thank goodness otherwise it would hv got out of hand, criminalising innocent Muslims.

So, Preston, it does not mean “the whole world knows that they exist and their illicit dealings in drugs traffickings, weapon smuggling ,prostitutions,gambling” means that democracy is to blame. Just like the whole world knows the Muslim fundamentalists exist as terrorist and their plot to blast people off does not mean Govts should shut Muslim orgns down.

With regards to mocking politicians like Clinton or Bush junior, or mocking anybody for that matter, or saying anything about anybody, it does reflect on oneself. It is up to your self respect and maturity, again democracy is not to blame. I still don’t think politicians should be any special and put on a pedestal in a glass box. If he or she knows the consequence of their shameful acts, then don’t do it is the simple answer. Taking away democracy just because of saving their skin when they make mistakes will only turn even a saint politician into a dictator.

If only it is as straight forward as the large influx of foreigners is to replenish the mass Sporean exodus. Those who come include unskilled workers (ship loads of them). Our locals who left got to be of some professional calibre, highly skilled or successful entrepreneurs before even contemplating to leave for countries like US, Canada, Aust or UK. We don’t get cleaner Ah Sohs leaving for Switzerland do we? How can the Govt even think of using influx of Siow Chang, Muthu & Imelda to replenish talents who left!

Reply to #43
I see,you would very much prefer to model Singapore after America the
Great democracy.Do you really think that setting up a chapter here, of say,Hells Angels or KKK or Nation of Islam led by that so-called Rev Lois Farakhan are good for your Singapore democracy.No local bikers groups in their right mind would pick a tainted name like that.For that matter,they won’t even stand a chance of getting registered by Singapore government.In you mind,that’s undemocratic,right.?
Do not think that unskilled FWs are not contributin to Singapore society
and its economy.Once they learned how to lay bricks and mortars during their stay in
Singapore,they will move on to a greener pastures just like those locals who are
skilled professional.Those unskilled FWs paid thousands to come just for that
reason alone.Hey,maybe you should pick up a trade like brick laying and perhaps
after some experience you might qualify to have a chance to work in those
countries you have mentioned.Let this be my last words for you to digest.

They will challenge you to the GRC and more walkovers and Singaporeans happily once again and time and again, overwhelmingly supported you know who? Uniquely Singapore. Friends, forget about this the GRC is the best.

GRC is the the most innovative and best political means to ensure absolute and perpetual power. Only available in world class Singapore. Be grateful and let us move on.

Singaporeans will strongly endorsed the GRC and the PAP, you wait and see in an easy governed city. Salute the GRC. Love live GRC for greater prosperity,future and Sigh!!

This is why, to me, the replacing of citizens who left, one way or the other, by new immigrants is the only hope left for change.

@37) preston loon on November 11th, 2009 11.10 am

So, Preston Loon, are U ready for a good discussion? Have U check yourself what is the foreign content of Canada? Is Singapore as big as Canada for that matter? U wanna to discuss Australia instead? It’s Ok with me.

Frankly I am getting disappointed as your replies indicated you have answers to the foreign content issue, or at least what is happening in Canada. Understanding how other countries have manage their national fabric would help us understand how to build a nation. Or maybe U think we still need another 50 years. Or just another smokescreen?

I do not support his view on death penalty, although I not PAP supporter, I believed that death penalty is a strong deterrent to drug traffickers and serious crime such as murder and kidnappings.

I do not want to see drugs lords ruling in the streets and around out housing estates.

The other arguments from the Ang Mo, i support!