Rebuttal: Our government allows foreigners to overtake us? Really?
I refer to the article by Gilbert Goh at http://www.transitioning.org/2011/12/03/political-reason-why-our-government-allows-foreigners-to-overtake-us/
Gilbert started off by quoting a reader, “Francis” “…wrote how he was ousted from his company – a global Fortune 500 conglomerate, by a foreigner Indian IT director from India. and what it irked him was how easily the Indian IT director could replace our own local executives, without any repercussion, with his own people from India. Somthing is wrong with our human resource policy here and so far the ministry of manpower has kept quiet about this hiring discrimination.”
Companies and their management are not idiots. Their interests are in corporate growth. If they practise cronyism, they will fail in no time. Having an inept director making the wrong decisions will doom the company to bankruptcy.
1. Corporations are profit driven – they have no love of your nationality, local or otherwise.
2. Do you know how difficult it is to hire people? Management, junior or senior are already such difficult positions to fill, let alone a Director.
3. The said company is thriving (I guess), and strong, capable leadership had allowed it to thrive.
“Economic cleansing”? Is there such a thing?
Let Google what is Economic Cleansing (of which there is no official definition) but Urban Dictionary says
The methods used by government or those in power to make those pesky poorer people get up and move from the geographic place they live. It could be higher property assessments, highways through poor neighborhoods, higher costs for food, shelter, and even water.If poor people can’t live in a certain area then economic cleansing has occurred. It is often subtle and no one ever admits to doing it. It is the final market solution to poverty in any growth oriented prosperous community
So we have Economic Cleansing? Howabout the welfare we hand out, the heavily subsidized HDB. The ComCare, the Workfare etc. Seriously? The agenda though subtle is equally damaging as economic cleansing has driven many of our citizens into deep depression and some have even attempted suicide.
Is Gilbert suggesting that countries like Japan, Korea and USA also practise “economic cleansing”? Their economies are also rocketing, inflation rising and property getting more and more expensive.
Depression rates were 9.6 per cent in the US, 8.5 per cent in France, 5.6 per cent in Singapore, and 3.1 per cent in Japan.
Now lets look at suicide rates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
Singapore is ranked… Tadah.. at 44th place, far below South Korea and Japan, and even the United States.Though it seems like there is no depression correlation between depression and suicide. So may I ask you, do they practise “economic cleansing”?
“Those who can emigrate will do so – leaving the country to well-to-do foreigners with good paying jobs to gain control.”
So “economic cleansing” involves in chasing away locals who can have the ability to emigrate – those obviously benefitted from the system, earning big bucks, well-educated, well-travelled…. Geez.. Sounds like political suicide for me. And the definition definitely doesn’t match what was mentioned.
Let me sum it up for Gilbert: Economic cleansing = chasing away the rich and educated and those that benefited from our system, and leaving behind the uneducated and underprivileged.
Sounds like the perfect political plan to stay in power!
He chose to ignore the fact that our unemployment is at 1.9%. There are far more jobs than there are employees.
“More significantly, the government has successfully got rid of frustrating citizens who will most likely vote for the opposition – further eroding the reduced power base of the ruling party.”
Foreigners replacing local citizens for political reason? Really? To even suggest this absurd idea shows the immaturity of his thinking. What makes the Government so sure that immigrants are faithful to vote the lightning? The limit on tertiary admission to eligible Singaporeans is also one sure way to force Singaporeans to study abroad as less than 23% of our primary school cohort enters local varsity programmes. Many who left the country to study seldom return and most educated voters here tend to cast their vote for the opposition as they are found to be more likely to clamour for change within the system.
Wait, don’t we have overseas varsity programs in the form of our “private universities” here in Singapore? They include Unisim, MDIS, Kaplan and others.
No, the main reason is we do not want our economy to be flooded by graduates. Whats the point of having 100% grads? We see that in many other countries where the quality isn’t controlled. Degrees are worthless without jobs to hire them. Did Gilbert consider the rammifications? Once the government liberalizes an intake, would then Gilbert launch a. Transitioning.org has also a myraid of articles saying how “local university grads cannot get a job/low end job/low paying job/etc..etc”
“For example, less than 3400 eligible overseas voters registered and casted their votes during the recent GE – out of 180, 000 Singaporeans who have stayed abroad! That is just a mere 2 percent of all Singaporeans who stayed abroad. This is a shocking statistics which could only pleased the government as most citizens who have ventured abroad are mostly unhappy with the ruling party and would have voted against the current regime if they have a chance to vote.”
According to statistics, it usually ends up tilting the favour towards the PAP or end up in a draw, usually too insignificant to vote. Many of them are also on scholarships. “More can be done by the opposition parties to try and persuade our overseas Singaporean voters to cast their votes in the next GE. Opposition party candidates could also gather overseas Singaporeans and organise political forums for them in future. It is estimated that every year, 5, 000 Singaporeans venture abroad both for work and study purposes. Many will not return and their votes will be a double loss to the opposition parties especially if our government replaces them with foreign citizens. Moreover, the state-controlled newspaper continued to broadcast feel-good propanganda about the economy reporting almost 78% of the resident population is employed now when the ground feels entirely different. Resident population includes our permanent residents and it is safe to say that 100% of our PRs are working now or else they will not be given PR status in the first place. From trying to blame the problem of our local citizens not giving birth sufficiently to replace itself to employers crying out loud that there are no takers for the many tens of thousands’ of jobs that went abegging, Singapore felt the onslaught of foreigners by the hundreds of thousands during the past five years. In the name of globalisation, our government has kept quiet as foreigners continue to flock to our island state in search of jobs and opportunities – leaving many native citizens high and dry. The recent demise of the hugly popular socio-political Temasek Review – thought to have influenced voters to cast their votes against PAP-backed Mr Tony Tan and continual persecution of political dissidents in the past were sure enough evidences proving that the ruling party will resort to extreme measures to stay in power.”
Free trade agreement harms us. Really?
The last I heard, FTAs were harming our neighbouring countries.
Gilbert then presented a wall of text here: “Signed agreement via the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) has also allowed countries such as India and China to gain strong foothold in our economy – robbing us of valuable jobs in exchange for an economy that thrives on free trade and mobility. Many analysts have agreed that FTAs mainly benefit third world countries more as they are developing and Singaporeans all along have difficulty trying to penetrate into other countries’ economics due to our risk-adverse business nature. A friend told me that on a monthly basis, hundreds of foreign businesses are trying to set up shop here – lured mainly by our friendly business environment and solid first class infrastructure. Many bought properties and apply for permanent residence with their business enterprises. Singapore also became one of the top emigration country for many rich families in China and India – this probably explains why we are the country with the most millionaires among us. This phenomenon has also widened the income gap further deepening the polarisation rife among the population. We also knew how our expats could earn the best wages in the world compared to our local citizens who only manage an income growth of around 1.1% for the past decade. While foreigners continue to purchase multi million luxurious water front apartments and sip long island tea at some all-foreigner pubs, Singaporeans could only manage with a small HDB 3-room flat and having $1 kopi at a stuffy filthy coffee shop. The comparison is garingly wide and can be disappointingly frustrating. Yet the most pressing bizarre question remains in most citizens’ mind – why does the government allows in so many foreigners and more seriously – systematically permitting them to replace local workers at the work place without even blinking an eye?”
Yada yada…. Wait hold on, do you even know what a FTA is? How does FTA affect the above?
The fact is FTA has positively given us more business and jobs. Our(The) government(s) has (mutually) agreed to voluntarily. It hurts governments the most when their countries rely on imports and there is a huge demand. Oh wait, isn’t that us? Why? Because our government could have taxed all these imports.
And those most against are those for protectionism for local industries, usually in low end manufacturing (Slippers, food, commodities and what-nots). Oh wait, do we have that?
Unless Gilbert can give some concrete example on how FTA hurts us.
In countries like Australia, Canada and New Zealand – traditionally places whereby there is strong emigration to fuel economic and population growth, systems are in place to provide basic check so that the locals are not compromised on equal employment opportunities.
(Note: Immigration, not Emigration)
In Singapore, the employment system is so fluid that an entire company can be easily replaced by foreigners if the company can hire them using the EP work permit passes – there is no quota for EP passes unlike the S-Pass and the company can staff its’ operations with 100% foreigners.
An EP pass is given out to any foreign talent who qualifies and if the company is willing to pay the minimum salary of $2,800. Most EP work permit holders can apply for permanent resident status after two years and then for citizenship soon after. It is estimated that more than 300, 000 of our foreigners are holding EP work permit passes and they remain the top cream for citizenship conversion. They are also allow to bring in spouses, children and their own parents once they have the EP pass approved.
Vote buying through foreign-born citizens
Now we all heard of this argument, from the Online Citizen, to Temasek Review (Emeritus, times, wadever)
Let me just sum the retort in one sentence – Isn’t it EASIER to just say NO to immigration and make your own local populace happy and get votes?
Wait, isn’t most of the foreigners under WP/S-Pass/E-Pass/PRs and not citizens with voting power (After all Gilbert did mention that most foreigners DO NOT want to get citizenship)
Another contradiction? Opposition camps have fortunately gained good ground in the eastern part of Singapore whereby foreign citizens have a poorer showing because of the pricier cost of the properties out there. Most of the opposition parties managed to garner close to 43% of the total votes casted.Wait, didn’t Gilbert mention that these foreigners are well-to-do and well-paid? And they cannot afford “pricier properties”. Probably only one in ten households residing in Tampines belongs to a foreigner family.
Er Gilbert, any data? Or the keyword is “probably” A property friend told me how rich foreigners have out-bid many locals in the east for resale HDB houses causing the resale price index to shoot up every quarter.Most of them could also pay most or at least half of their property cost in cash – making them the darling of many banks out to capture a lucrative slice of the mortgage home loans
Wait, didn’t awhile back you said foreigners cannot afford the pricier properties?? Eh, and if they can pay most or at least half their property in cash (I assume the locals can pay up less in cold hard cash), then how do they make the “darling of many banks”? Banks make money by lending. Gilbert is in serious need of some education. (And he claims to have background in the finance industry)
Gilbert is incoherent and at best, inconsistant. He flip flops the story to his benefit, he couldn’t even get th basics correct, especially with the “story about banks”
So readers, take it with a huge bowl of salt please.