What we need is more space

What we need is more space and not more people. When we were 2m, life was definitely much more comfortable with lesser congestion and more space for everything. We have bigger homes, more room for cars and car ownership did not cost a leg or an arm. We have many parks and land for recreation and simply running around.

We now have more than 5m people. We are digging out our ancestors’ graves, doing away with cemeteries and sending our old folks to homes across the causeway. And we keep on building skyscrapers that cost a lifetime to pay when better and bigger homes could be had at cheaper cost if we have more land.

What I thought would be better is to reclaim more land and provide more living space instead of stuffing them up again with people and concrete. I believe the quality of life will be much better for young and old when the island is less congested instead of all cramming up in little pigeon holes in the air, and the roads so congested with cars. The quality of life cannot be better with more people squeezed into this piece of rock. This is not progress but regression.

We do not need more people for some economic growth numbers. We need more space to live and play and a more leisure and less stressful environment. Would it not be better for a family of four living in a 1,500 sq ft flat, where one does not need to knock into each other or against the wall or furniture? Would it not be better if there is more private space for everyone in the homes and outside the homes?

What is so good or great to squeeze with 7m people? What is so good quality to be crammed up in hard concrete and all the artificialities that cost a bomb, like the Avatar Garden? There is nothing better than having more natural space to live and for recreation. It is so silly to reclaim more space only to stuff them up with more people, provide more public transport only to make sure the commuters are packed like sardine again. Whose great idea is this? Better quality of life Ya?

We must be responsible to our future generations by leaving them enough room/space to grow. We cannot be so irresponsible as to build up every inch of land in the island.  The White Paper is to exhaust every land and space we have with more people. The citizens must decide on the number we want and work around it. We should not go the other way, letting the dubious economic growth numbers to dictate our fate and the number of people on this island.

White Paper - The nonsensical arguments so far

We must plan for the worst than to underprovide. This is what Boon Wan said about the 6.9m population projection. I dunno if he knew what he was talking about. He quoted the example of wedding dinner guests and not sure how many would eventually turn up. Hello, the population of a country is not a wedding dinner. The number of people in the country can be calibrated and controlled especially when a big chunk is made up of foreigners. When the number is reaching the target, just turn off the tap. It is so easy, unlike the fertility rate of the citizens, more or less, the govt would have to accept. Is this simple enough illustration to say there is no necessity to plan for the worst when population number is concerned?

Boon Wan also said that he was confident that he would be able to ‘calibrate its plans,…adding that the housing supply will be paced “accordingly, a little bit ahead of demand.’ He should have taught his predecessor this and there would not have been any housing problem today.

The next thing I heard is that Lim Swee Say said that we would not have all the problems associated with the 5.3m population if we have had the national conversation yesterday. This is so as the natcon would have raised the problems of the need to upgrade the infrastructure before the population surged from 4.1m to 5.3m. Uhhhh…., beg your pardon? Did he mean that the govt would only be able to avoid all the overcrowding and lack of infrastructure problem if there was a natcon, and that the govt is incapable of planning ahead, lack of foresight?

I am so terrified. Do we still want to believe that the White Paper is carefully thought out? So scary isn’t it?

Protest at Hong Lim Park on 6.9m population

Protest at Hong Lim Park on 16 Feb (Sat) at 4.30pm  This event is organised by Gilbert Goh of Transitioning.org blog. Please note the change of date as it was supposed to be held this Sat 2 Feb.   Would the Sinkies feel strong enough to make a strong presence for this event?

So far 415 people have voted in the Poll. Please keep it going. 4 more days to go before the poll closes.

And don't forget to click on the advertisers. Cheers.

2030 the Good Year for Sinkies

In the year 2030, with 6.9m rich and prosperous Sinkies, PRs and foreigners, Sin City will be the crown jewel of the world. Sinkies will still be the richest people in the world, enjoying world class facilities and all the material comfort available. All the PRs and foreigners will be living happily and in harmony with the Sinkies, something like the paradise where lions and lambs will eat and play together.

Are there any conditions attached? This is too good to be true. And anything that is too good to be true deserves a second thought. The recent cases of gold trading companies paying out 2% monthly interest and all the great profits of toxic notes and bonds were also too good to be true. What is the catch? Can all the Sinkies be PMETs and earn half a million or more in annual income to live it up with the great life? How much will it cost to buy a HDB flat or a COE? How much will a plate of char kway teow or a ride in a taxi or any form of public transport? What will be the cost of living like for such a grandiose lifestyle? Would it be only for the rich or for the average Sinkies?

I dare not ask about hospitalization and how much the Medisave Minimum Sum would be or the CPF savings. All I know is that nothing is for free. There is no free lunch, even today.

One condition for this happy dream to come true is to continue to vote PAP into power to carry out this plan all the way to 2030.

Is PAP commiting hara kiri?

Shortly after the debacle in Punggol East, the PAP lost no time to push out a very controversial White Paper in favour of a 6.9m population in the island. The negative sentiments and all the problems the people are facing are perceived as caused by the 5.3m population. The people are angry, very angry. Why would the PAP think it appropriate and timely to rush through a White Paper that is going to be badly received by the people? Why the urgency? Is it political naiveity, or are there more extenuating reasons that not pushing out this 6.9m population idea now would lead to some irreparable damages or grave consequences? Or as Vivian Balakrishnan said, ‘we are facing the crisis of our lifetime’?

There is absolutely no reason or urgency for the PAP to discuss this unpopular issue at this juncture. It is political suicide to do so. And the reactions by the people have proven that this is so. A long term projection of the country’s population need not be talked about now, it can be discussed in a more congenial time and conducive environment later.

What can be the compelling reasons for doing so? Is it that the PAP thinks that the people will be happy to go along with this projection? Is it that not doing now, not getting it passed in Parliament now may not be able to do so later on? Or is it that it has already decided and the PAP is just going through the motion of getting it passed in Parliament?

I am still baffled by the decision to push out this White Paper now. I can’t think of a good reason to do so. Is it that a few hundred plane loads of FTs are already in the pipeline and a quick decision is needed to let them in? There is just no sense at all. What is happening?

Ah, maybe the PAP knows best. They know that this is the best way to go forward for the good of the people and country. The people must be mad for not seeing the great benefits of this plan. So just act like deaf frog. Just get it done and the people will appreciate it later. The Govt must lead, make tough decisions, even if they are painful for the people and the people disagree.

I don’t believe that having more foreigners and new citizens is to buy votes for the next GE. The PAP cannot be so desperate to take such drastic measures for self preservation. And the people should not take AIM at anything or try to find a reason for it. It is something that will come true in the next 15 to 20 years. Talking about it now or then is just like crystal ball gazing. But implementing it is very serious.

Australia is a continent about the size of the USA. It has a population of less than 22m. And it is very careful not to increase its population and to preserve it as it is for its future generations. We are not even a quarter of Tasmania and we are already 5.3m and wanting to go 7m?

What do you think?