Repost - Part 1
"Leo81June 14, 2026 6:19 am
"Earlier this year in parliament, DPM GKY spoke about Sg facing an "existential problem" ...
TFR (2025) PLUMMETED to 0.87!
In 2013, our beloved founding PM LKY（国父李光耀）published his last book (One Man's View of the World). In the Singapore chapter, founding PM LKY lamented that our Singaporean core will be halved in one generation if our TFR remains unchanged (in 2013, Sg's TFR was about 1.21). At that time PM3 was in charge (and his "personal TFR" was 4.0) holding helm for almost 21 years in all (Aug 2004 - May 2024).
PM4 now in his 3rd year is facing an existential Sg threat of 0.87 TFR ... (NOT sure what is PM4's "personal TFR", anybody knows?) ...
Have you ever wonder assuming PM4 serves as long as PM3 at the top, by 2043, what would Sg's TFR be?
If this problem is NOT serious ("事情大条”），what is?"
Uncle RB: "Or is it a case of not seeing the elephants in the room?"
In terms of Sg's low TFR (0.87) in 2025, probably YES ... Policy makers likely missed out "the elephants in the room" when attempting to solve Sg's TFR problems ...
The solution may lie in two terms or phrases, one in Chinese and the other in English.
Let's start with the English term first which is "cognitive ambidexterity"
(as the cohort in RB's following are mostly "Jiak Cunt Tongue" [potato aka french fries lovers], ie, mostly 英哥lish speaking elites) .
The Chinese has a term with similar meaning "辨证思维” 。。。
The TFR issue is NOT unlike an extremely complex, highly integrated structural system of myriad nodes and intricate links that need to be optimised at the micro as well as macro level, forming a huge social supply chain tied up with external environment and with many components exhibiting enthropic characteristic which need to be managed not as a social tax but a fuel to engender healthy TFR.
In the Chinese term "辨证思维", the first variable that one must understand in order to tackle a problem is "the situation" ... what (actually) are you dealing with (NOT what you see or think you are dealing with which in Chinese its meaning is embodied in the opposite term aka ”形式思维”）。
Uncle RB: "...barking up the wrong
tree?"
Likely yes because if one tries to address Sg's low TFR issue using ”形式思维”, then history is the best judge with each passing year's TFR worst than the year before ...
If one is suffering from say high blood sugar and being treated with say high bp medication, obviously the outcome could be like Sg's TFR and end up "disastriously". Hence, when they missed the elephants in the room in terms of Sg's TFR problem and barked up the wrong tree, the end result is the 0.87 TFR (2025)?
To put it bluntly, how does a potential Sg young mother say working in the financial sector view parenthood?
1) A child is NOT a hedgable liability?
2) It is 100% illiquid?
3) It is (at least) a 20+ years voluntary penalty?
When a policy maker sees the TFR issue in the wrong light, she/ he is hoping the players make a wrong move and go into parenthood which highly rational and intelligent Sg females understanding the efficient economic and business environment they are in would choose NOT to play the game?
If someone identifies the problem wrongly, the remedies will be incorrect and the problem remained unresolved. Period.
Hence the phrase "cognitive ambidexterity" ... (Chinese equivalent "辨证思维")."
Repost - Part 2
"Next, how to identify the solutions?
a) ASFR (32-39);
If one is a (senior) policy maker, likely she/ he has NEVER work in the PRIVATE SECTOR before? True? So they probably never work in any marketing position or how to achieve high revenue year in year out etc?
So what is the (possible) solution?
The hint(s) already given above. (Don't be "lazy", go figure out. Aren't you already paid humongously every month with fat bonuses every year?)
b) ASFR (15-25 and 40-49) likely near zero ...
c) 辨证思维 - 情况明， 方法对，决心大 - GO!
You use ”形式思维”, it is akin to what was incorrectly attributed to Einstein aka: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.""
"Next, how to identify the solutions?
a) ASFR (32-39);
If one is a (senior) policy maker, likely she/ he has NEVER work in the PRIVATE SECTOR before? True? So they probably never work in any marketing position or how to achieve high revenue year in year out etc?
So what is the (possible) solution?
The hint(s) already given above. (Don't be "lazy", go figure out. Aren't you already paid humongously every month with fat bonuses every year?)
b) ASFR (15-25 and 40-49) likely near zero ...
c) 辨证思维 - 情况明， 方法对，决心大 - GO!
You use ”形式思维”, it is akin to what was incorrectly attributed to Einstein aka: "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.""
Leo81
>>> "In 2013, our beloved founding PM LKY（国父李光耀）published his last book (One Man's View of the World). In the Singapore chapter, founding PM LKY lamented that our Singaporean core will be halved in one generation if our TFR remains unchanged (in 2013, Sg's TFR was about 1.21). At that time PM3 was in charge (and his "personal TFR" was 4.0) holding helm for almost 21 years in all (Aug 2004 - May 2024).
ReplyDeletePM4 now in his 3rd year is facing an existential Sg threat of 0.87 TFR ... (NOT sure what is PM4's "personal TFR", anybody knows?) ...
Have you ever wonder assuming PM4 serves as long as PM3 at the top, by 2043, what would Sg's TFR be?"<<<
Assuming the rate of TFR decline in Sg is constant (TRF fell by more than 25% over a 12-year period from 2013 to 2025), over the next 12 years by 2037, if the trend is NOT REVERSED, TFR could further free-fall to around 0.52%？
Going by the analysis of what our founding PM LKY mentioned in the "Singapore" chapter of his last book (One Man's View of the World) published in 2013, if TFR (UNFORTUNATELY) reached 0.52 by 2037 (hope NOT!), technically for every 100 Singaporeans, after one generation there could be only 1/4 of them or 25 left ... (mathematically if we use summation, it is a trend tending to zero aka extinction [as pointed out a few months back by Elon Musk, the first trillionaire in human's history and arguably the modern day version of Thomas Edison]).
If you want to know EXACTLY and ACTUALLY what a person is thinking, do you go by what she/ he says? Or (more wisely?) by what SHE/ HE does?
Intuitively, retirees, oldies, disabled, those nearing retirement etc (who need sufficient younger generation to be around to see them through till they go meet the creator) would choose to hope that nobody has (unintentionally or intentionally) "GIVEN UP" a battle that is helmed by "generals" who (supposedly) have NOT attended a "single day in B[asic]M[ilitary]T[raining]" ...?
As much as this sounds a bit "hopeless" and "demoralising", don't give up (hope) yet ...?
Now, having heard that there could be "hope" and the cause is NOT lost yet, any indication in the action part that (subconsciously) says otherwise?
One subtle clue could be the ("permanent") "demolition" of four JCs or rather the "rebuild" of the old compound for other use or entities ...? The old Hougang compound of one of the (defunct) JCs will be rebuilt (down the road) to house (possibly) another entity. The fate of the other 3 (defunct) JCs compound is more or less similar. In economic terms, it equates to supply (of available JC capacity) permanently lost, gone ... What does this mean? Down the road, will there be more JC students coming onstream or diminishing numbers?
As mentioned earlier, mathematically this is a summation tending to zero ... aka the numbers will likely shrink and shrink ...
Given the dwindling TFR number, will anybody be surprised if more JCs will be merged (in time to come)? What does this imply mathematically? Technically, as the decline continues, possibly one day you could be left with 2 (top) JCs? And again with insufficient enrollment in the cohort, they need to be merged? Then which name to use for the JC left standing? (Any suggestion?)
Sounds depressing?
No worries!
If you look at the bigger scheme of things, this is NOTHING?
The next few articles will supposedly look at possible attempts of exploring some reasons (possibly 10 or more) WHY SG TFR is possibly on a (terminal) decline [how this came about and what could be done (if any) to cure this (terminal) "cancer" ...]
Ending with a poem dedicated to ancient Song Dynasty (宋朝）hero 岳飞：
【红尘轮回叹·兼寄岳公】
浮生步步尽狐疑，只字片言总被欺。
以回恩怨千年结，世世相仇何苦悲？
冷眼未防身后箭，东窗又演卖身棋。
风波亭畔斜阳尽，唯有岳公含泪知。
Will the fate of "岳飞” be "enacted" in "modern history" metaphorically? (Time will tell?)
Cheers,
Leo81
Part 1 - Why is TFR possibly on a terminal decline in the Lion City?
ReplyDeleteFor may oldies (who have left school long ago), they may not understand what or how TFR is computed.
1) TFR - total fertility rate mathematically is the summation in a particular year say 2025 of all the ASFR (age specific fertility rate) for females aged 15 to 49 in that year all the ratios of the children born to women of a particular age divided by the number of women at that age;
2) The author was thinking about this issue during COVID-19, during the start of the Russia-Ukraine War on 24 Feb 2022 and after the Nov 3, 2024 US Election. The ASFR for women aged 15 to late twenties likely will be near to zero;
3) During those 3 periods, some (extra) measures could have been done to mitigate the "free-fall" of the "TFR" ...
4) It is NOT rocket science that during those period, the intuition for ordinary females would be to shelve their marriage and/ or push back parenthood. Mathematically, the TFR for each year significantly will likely be compressed around ASFR 31 to 39. However, even if these females choose to have the same number of children during their life time, mathematically likely it is not going to make up for the near zero for ASFR 15 to late twenties?
5) In Chinese ancient warfare, there is a phrase: "兵马未动，粮草先行。“ Usually, for armies where the supplies are uncertain, it is common for “军心 to 动摇“ 。。。When generals tell their soldiers they have their backs covered, supplies all "swee swee" (everyone 管饱）， the frontline can fully focus on the battle in front of them. Outcome of the battle is likely to be more favourable. Cannot wait until the battle over liao then as an after thought suddenly remember dunno the soldiers in the battlefront got enough supplies aka food, water etc or not? No surprise outcome of battle is "horrendous"?
Continue Part 2 - Why is TFR possibly on a terminal decline in the Lion City?
Cheers,
Leo81