For advertisement

Sample

9/13/2006

myth 63

'Population growth is necessary for our survival' China is facing a high growth rate despite population control. In fact the official policy of China is to reduce population growth as too much growth in this area will put a huge burden on the country. But I am too clever in selecting an out of context example to prove a point that people do not believe in. Ok, lets look at a smaller countries that can sustain growth without forcing a population growth, and maintaining a high standard of living for its own people. Yes, yes, you guess it right. Our model country Switzerland. Belgium, Luxemburg, Denmark, etc are all small countries. Australia is also a small country in terms of population size. Do they need to frantically boost up their population for more growth? This is very low level if not primitive approach to economic growth. What happens to high tech and leading edge industries as engines of growth? Fail? The influx of foreigners as a good thing today is just the reverse of the 2 child policy and population control in earlier days. One more is good and the other less is good. When all our systems and physical networks are choked up by a huge population, we will die like a fat man under his own weight, with all his blood vessels blocked, cannot breathe.

4 comments:

Quick Draw said...

The stop at 2 policy was right at that time. Singapore was then just reeling from the traumatic separation, its future was uncertain. The government at that time implemented a policy that seemed prudent given the prevailing conditions. You are criticising with the benefit on hindsight, and as they say hindsight is 20/20.

redbean said...

hi quick draw,

you missed my argument completely. the stop at 2 was right then. and i am not criticising that it is wrong now.

what i am saying is that though the open door policy may look right now, which i do not agree completely, if we are not careful, it can be badly wrong in the future. and the consequences can be worst. we could face the same regrets like the british, australians and the europeans for opening their doors indiscriminately and now crying.

in such matters it is better to take things in small gradual steps. it is not like a big investment in monetary term. we can cut our losses in optus or in shin corp. the most we lose some money. but to mess up the population and the social impact, it cannot be untangled so easily.

Anonymous said...

The floodgates were first opened up in 1997. Since then, the people have had two general elections to signal their disagreement on this policy to the government. They didn't. Can you blame the government then for being so brazen now as to fully open the floodgates ? Singaporeans only have themselves to blame for this.

redbean said...

there are some merits to open up and to welcome foreign talents. and within limits, they are welcomed by singaporeans. now it seems that the limits are being stretched and some singaporeans are uncomfortable with it.