Relentless pursuit of population growth

Population grew from 5.3m to 5.47m in 12 months. The target for 6.9m, supposedly a planning parameter, will be reached in no time. Anyone still believes that it is only a planning parameter? The details of this ‘slow’ population growth are better left to Leong Sze Hian and his team to elaborate.
 
And like a programme reflex actions, all the horror stories are uttered, in fear, that there will be consequences of an economic slow down, of belt tightening, of labour squeeze. Did anyone say anything about the adverse consequences of 6.9m and an unceasing thirst for more population? The only people that said anything of this side of the coin were from the social media. The official view is that population growth is all goodness. Where got anything negative? You want growth with no bad consequences just add more population and you will have economic growth and growth.
 
Now, horrors of all horrors, the population is not growing as fast as desired, but still growing rapidly. Is there no goodness in a slowing down of the economic growth? Is there nothing good in slowing population growth? Everything is going to be bad? China is deliberately slowing its economic growth and the western soothsayers are all praying and saying see, China’s economy is crashing. But the Chinese know what is good for them and are engineering a slow down. And their economic growth is attained by real productivity growth and manufacturing growth, not by adding more and more people.
 
Why is it that there are no negative consequences in pumping growth by adding more people into a piece of rock? Why are there no benefits to a slowing down of population growth in a small red dot? Are the analysts and economists objective in their remarks and comments? Are they blind and can only see one side of the coin?
 
Are they real? Can they put up a balance report to reflect the other side of the coin? The people need responsible people to put up a balance picture of what is happening, and what is the real thing, what is good and bad for them.

Kopi Level - Green

Schoolings' good, degrees no good

Joseph Schooling scored a gold for Singapore in the Asian Games in Korea, and with a record time of 51.76 sec in the 100m Butterfly event.

Well done young man. We need more Schoolings to do us proud.

Given the right motivation, training and support, we can do it. No need more foreign talents. Singapore has talents.

Agree?

University Rankings, be the best

Behind the success of Singapore universities
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 Posted by Abhijit Nag in pressrun.net

Congratulations, Nanyang Technological University. NTU is now No 1 among all the universities in the world that are less than 50 years old, according to the Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings. The question now: Will the university have more Singaporean postgraduates?

We should aim to be the best in the whole world. Maybe we will get there if we change all the teaching staff to foreigners. If that does not work, we can fill the universities with foreign students. That should do it.

Come on, let's get it done. Be Number One, be better than the Harvards, Stanfords, Yales, Cambridges and Oxfords. Aspire to be the best like aiming for the World Cup.

Kopi Level - Green

Lee Kuan Yew Series

This is a series of quotes from LKY in honour of his contributions as one of the founding fathers of Singapore. I will post a quote a day until I run out of quotes.

“But we either believe in democracy or we do not. If we do, then, we must say categorically, without qualification, that no restraint from any democratic processes, other than by the ordinary law of the land, should be allowed. If you believe in democracy, you must believe in it unconditionally. If you believe that men should be free, then, they should have the right of free association, of free speech, of free publication. Then, no law should permit those democratic processes to be set at nought.”
 
- Lee Kuan Yew as an opposition leader, April 27, 1955

Kopi Level - Green

Hong Kong Tiananmen in the making?

The Hongkies are at their best again, protesting for more democracy. They did not see this as an important thing when hiding under the skirt of Queen Elizabeth. They were ruled by the British, a bastion of democracy, for 150 years without democracy. I think they were having a good time then. Then came Patten who taught them what democracy is all about and they now die die must have democracy, to the fullest. If they did not get their way they would not mind doing a Tiananmen in Hong Kong. Good luck to them if that is what they want.
 
Between the authoritarian rule of mainland China and what democracy could offer, it is undisputed that what the Hongkies are demanding for is a good thing. Bearing in mind that democracy can also be corrupted. I would agree that China needs more democracy and a pulling back on authoritarianism. It is not that the new regime is bent on ruling with a stick. I also think that with prosperity China would become more like western countries in practice and a communist state on paper. When life is good, when there is peace and prosperity all around, when the people are happy and living well, there will be lesser demand for authoritarian rule.
 
Having said that, the political culture of China and the mentality of the power oligarch need a massive change in favour of greater democracy, more rule of law, and lesser authoritarianism. And this must be enshrined not only in the psychic of the leadership and the people, but also in the political system. Hong Kong could be the spark that is needed to keep the spirit of democracy alive in China and to spread it across the country. China is also changing and despite being an authoritative communist state, the Chinese people are enjoying a lot of political freedom and expression as long as they did not threaten national security and interests. Less haste may be a better way to achieve this result in the long term.
 
As Hong Kong pushes for more democracy, it must never forget that Hong Kong is a small part of China and is being ruled under the ‘One country Two Systems’ model. Remember, ‘One Country’ comes first if ‘Two Systems’ is to exist. When ‘Two Systems’ threatens the ‘One Country’ formula, when national security is compromised, the ‘Two Systems’ would have to go. Hong Kong is expendable if it threatens China as a country. So don’t push your luck too far. Work within the system and know that Hong Kong is China. China as a unified country, a nation, must never be shaken if Hong Kong is to exist as a prosperous autonomous region.
 
Hong Kong’s Chief Executive cannot be simply determined by the people to create problems for China, at least not now. The Chief Executive is like the one Golden Share, one vote that can over rule everything when national interest is at stake. Other than that, this Golden Share will be dormant and unseen, and Hong Kong could do as it pleases in almost anything. You don’t sell your country away by allowing the top post to be in the hands of a suspect, someone who would not mind serving the interests of foreigners or a foreigner.
Hong Kong should remain the catalyst, the stimulus to advocate for greater democracy in the whole of China, like the yeast that would change the character of the whole pack. But while doing it, it must not mess up the dough, it must always bear in mind that ‘One Country’ comes first

Kopi Level - Green