Singapore Expats

Hi,

Do you have any thoughts whether are there any changes in immigration policy depending on the Singapore elections 2015 outcome?

Regards,
Lim.

Frankly, it's not going to get any better regardless of who wins and if the oppositions were to win, or even make a healthy gain, but still return the PAP to power, it's going to get worse, and if the opposition wins, don't ask. Just head for the airport and get in line.

sundaymorningstaple wrote:Frankly, it's not going to get any better regardless of who wins and if the oppositions were to win, or even make a healthy gain, but still return the PAP to power, it's going to get worse, and if the opposition wins, don't ask. Just head for the airport and get in line.

Quick question SMS, what do you exactly mean by the below quotes(i.e) Do you want to say the flood gate may still open?

"not going to get any better regardless of who wins"
"it's going to get worse"

No, I'm saying the tightened policies will stay and could possibly get even worse if the Idiots gain more opposition seats. If the Idiots actually win a fluke election, Immigration will stop and the country will quickly turn into a 3rd world backwater again as the MNCs beat feet out of Singapore to more hospitable locations. They've been moving out already and only leaving their R&D departments here or headquarters offices here. Singapore is shooting it's self in the foot because of a naive electorate who cannot/will not use common sense. What to do. If they want to dig their own graves, so be it. I'm past retirement age anyway.

SMS sums up my own thoughts but I'll add another factor apart from the obvious immigration one... if oppo gets in and looks to even slightly threaten the concept of 'rule of law' or appear to tolerate bribery and corruption...(and to be honest, their little stuff ups with contracts etc even as a minor party make them look like they will).... then every bank account/company account/land title held by a foreigner is at risk and Singapore's credit rating is at risk. I certainly won't be leaving money here. This has been a HUGE part of Singapore's success.

PNGMK wrote: if oppo gets in and looks to even slightly threaten the concept of 'rule of law' or appear to tolerate bribery and corruption...(and to be honest, their little stuff ups with contracts etc even as a minor party make them look like they will)....

Are you saying the nobody in the present administration hasn't benefited from the system they have in place, Its common knowledge that all the major construction companies are linked to the decision makers.

I for one hope the oppo's do something in the election, if its not to my benefit then so be it, however the crony capitalism pseudo-meritocracy that is in place here needs a complete re-think.

Barnsley wrote: Are you saying the nobody in the present administration hasn't benefited from the system they have in place, Its common knowledge that all the major construction companies are linked to the decision makers.

I am not smart, but, vs other countries, even though the contracts were given out to 'related' companies, unlike in other countries, there is no inflation of costs, or so I been believing so far. Or delivery of substandard output ...

And, maybe valid or not, an economist did quote the example of JICA, where Japan gives out aid, ensures the tender is only open to Japanese companies, and the winning company has to use all Japanese equipment and material as much as possible, to implement a project in say Cambodia - indirectly infusing the money back into the Japanese economy.

ecureilx wrote:
And, maybe valid or not, an economist did quote the example of JICA, where Japan gives out aid, ensures the tender is only open to Japanese companies, and the winning company has to use all Japanese equipment and material as much as possible, to implement a project in say Cambodia - indirectly infusing the money back into the Japanese economy.

Isnt this how the US "rebuilt" Iraq , all contracts had to go to American companies such as Haliburton and their ilk?

I have just been reading that management fees that some of the other Town councils have been on the high side throughout history in Singapore, lets face it , its been going on all through history , I am very surprised that the PAP are using this to poke the oppos with , when they have been as opaque as possible on almost any issue thats been in the public interest in the past few years.

They are feeling the pressure!!

Barnsley wrote: Isnt this how the US "rebuilt" Iraq , all contracts had to go to American companies such as Haliburton and their ilk?

Whether the US Contractors were paid fair pay or inflated costs - is another subject. Though considering the risks, a hyper inflated pay was probably due .. like how ADB is discovering in Afghanistan, when they are supposedly chosing the lowest bidder, who happen to be Chinese or Indians, with low standard work quality.

Barnsley wrote:I have just been reading that management fees that some of the other Town councils have been on the high side throughout history in Singapore, lets face it , its been going on all through history , I am very surprised that the PAP are using this to poke the oppos with , when they have been as opaque as possible on almost any issue thats been in the public interest in the past few years.

They are feeling the pressure!!

And again, if you understood how PAP has been running a tight ship running the country, post Independence, it is mind boggling.

And when the competition comes in, there are things the competition has to learn, from scratch I guess ! And the competition has to learn the lessons in a harsh way,

Some interesting thoughts here

http://themiddleground.sg/2015/07/28/tm ... nseen-ccc/

whatever the outcome, I believe the ruling party will still have the majority after this election...therefore not much changes in the policy..

i don't understand where this tighten policy is coming from...the 6.9 mill white paper was voted in and still due to plan

Barnsley wrote:They are feeling the pressure!!

And that is perhaps the primary role of an opposition, to question and test. So if you are right, then they are successfully fulfilling that function. The other role is to be a candidate for an alternative government... [instinctively laughs to myself]. Of course the latter is rare with minor parties.

Example: 2015 UK election, the UKIP party got 12.7% of the national vote, yet with the 'first-past-the-post' voting system, that only saw them getting one MP returned (of a total of c650!), the party leader Nigel Farage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... tion,_2015

In such circumstances what tends to happen is the winning party subsequently feign (aka pretend) to borrow the likes of UKIPs more popular policies, and there you are, UKIP are once again neutered.
As an example, UKIP stand almost singularly for giving the people more of a democratic participation in the ongoing integration of the EU; rather than the current situation of bending over behind closed doors and simply pre-greasing the ring. So the PM (Cameron/Conservative) gives his 'deeply concerned' look on TV after UKIP do very well in the election, and promises to go off to Brussels and boldly fight for the UK's rights. Total bullshit of course, since all the main parties are *fully* signed up to the EU... whilst pretending to be varyingly sceptical. That is why UKIP getting 1/8th of the national vote is useful, the people have spoken, and their concerns better get listened to...

There seems to be an awkward dichotomy going on in SG. #1 an opposition is required to provide a fig-leaf of 'respectable democracy', vs #2 the opposition can only function within such a straight jacket (example: pretty much all media is controlled by the state), it never gets out of the blocks. But it's existence still has a value, however controlled, neutered, ridiculed. The alternative of a one party state, or something akin to autocracy, tends to be the road to a nation's eventual ruin. The people know this, and hence why where they have free will at the ballot box, they tend to express it.

sundaymorningstaple wrote: and if the opposition wins

Exaggerating any vulnerability just a leeetle bit there?

and the reach of PA Controlled Grassroot Leaders

https://www.reach.gov.sg/participate/di ... tituencies

I have no idea how it has worked so far, in WP controlled areas.

not going to get any better regardless of who wins

JR8 wrote:
...
Example: 2015 UK election, the UKIP party got 12.7% of the national vote, yet with the 'first-past-the-post' voting system, that only saw them getting one MP returned (of a total of c650!), the party leader Nigel Farage.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... tion,_2015

...

Not that it changes your point but it wasn't actually Farage who was elected for UKIP, he lost to the Conservatives in the constituency he was contesting. The UKIPper who won was Douglas Carswell a former Conservative who switched parties prior to the election.

Mike