Always enjoy TWS articles, and love this one in particular. It's a hard truth, but it's an argument that has to be made.
Other commenters have distilled your very thoughtful article down to "If you feel Singapore is too expensive for you, leave". That's way too simplistic, and IMO, not what you're saying at all. My takeaway from your article is:
- Life in cities is expensive
- As an island city-state we can't expand out into the hinterland to give our citizens cheaper living options, because no such hinterland exists.
- But as individuals, we can choose to make an informed choice between competing to exploit the many economic opportunities here, or migrate to the "sort-of" hinterland (the rest of SEA) and enjoying a slower pace of life but with maybe a lower standard of living.
Which is more or less the same takeaway I see in most of the TWS articles I've read - "This is the economic/financial reality, hence this is the trade-off, decide for yourself what is best for you". You're not telling people who can't afford it to leave the country; you're simply pointing out that because of our unique situation as a prosperous island city-state, moving out of Singapore can sometimes make sense, just as people in other countries move out of large cities to the suburbs to enjoy a lower cost of living. It's certainly not for everyone, but you're trying to introduce Singaporeans to a different point of view, one that is very common among city-dwellers in larger countries (and the minority of Singaporeans who have made the move overseas and found that it works for them). You clearly state that if anyone wants to get out of this "rat race", there is an alternative, admittedly one that is not without trade-offs. Thank you for having the courage to share this perspective, knowing full well that you would catch a lot of flak for doing so.
Can I say that I just LOVE the fact that you took the effort to superimpose Singapore's outline on top of maps of major cities and measure everything properly and make sure it's to scale! I've had the privilege of travelling to London and New York for work a couple of times, and I'm always mind-boggled by the size of these megalopolises - can't wrap my head around the fact that several Singapores can fit into some major cities, and those cities are further surrounded by endless suburbs, minor towns and farmland. It's a miracle that we can hold our own as a nation and even thrive in a world filled with so many other larger countries. Your maps make that point better than words could.
It's great that you mention our ageing population and the declining size of our workforce - these are the driving factors behind our openness to foreign talent and capital. We simply cannot afford to cut ourselves off from the rest of world as that means being cut off from new ideas and technologies as well - that would spell inevitable economic decline and a "shrinking of the pie" for all. I would love to live in an alternate universe where Singapore's birth rate was 2.1 and we were much less dependent on foreign talent and capital, but sadly that's a much more complex problem and so we don't live in that reality. To me, every rich foreigner that comes in is another one we can tax more money from to fund our uncles and aunties' health care in their golden years.
I for one don't want to see any native-born Singaporean decide that our home has become too expensive and decide to move out. Isn't the ideal reaction to incoming "foreign talent" to retrain/upskill ourselves for the new, higher-paying jobs on offer, so that we can show anyone who comes in that they're not so talented after all ("anything you can do, I can do better" attitude). We have to take advantage of our world-class universities and polytechnics, government support and the ever-increasing reservoir of free/next-to-free online courses on the Internet. It takes time and effort, but I don't believe that all the foreigners coming in have such special skills that we can't replicate in ourselves. The need to retrain and switch careers in this fast-moving, technology-disrupting global economy we lived in is a point you at TWS have made many times in the past, and it's something that all us TWS readers need to take to heart (and with Singapore unemployment at a 15-year low of 1.8%, it's something that will definitely pay dividends).
Thanks again for your courage in putting out this inconvenient truth.
Always a fan of your perspectives, but Singapore IS in a unique position because we are currently the only city-state to experience this. Comparing it to big cities like London and Paris doesn't really justify because as mentioned, their locals have other cities to rely on, and we do not. Sweeping that under the rug for neutrality in this article is of poor taste.
Take Hong Kong for example, their housing crisis and cost of living started stabalising after the merger with China. Unfortunately for us, we don't have any big bro backing us.
Moblity is a privilege for Singaporeans, it's not that easy for SG passport to move overseas. Agree that it shouldn't be taboo, but leaving Singapore today has a whole set of consequences that someone who did it 10 years ago didn't have. Leaving SG now means the possibility of never being able to afford our cost of living, our public housing, and losing our place as citizens. It has far greater negatives than positives, because moving is for survival and not some "hehe living overseas is fun!" trope.
Take it from a Singaporean that moved, I wish I can be in SG long-term. But the costs are just not viable, so I have to let my own country go. And if that is not sad I don't know what is.
Thank you for your comment Mel. I’ve read your comment and I realised we fundamentally don’t disagree in anything in particular!
1) Yes, Singaporeans are in a unique position we because we’re citizens or a city-state. So we can’t really go anywhere else without leaving the nation.
2) Potentially leaving your country is emotionally difficult and tough – as mentioned in the article. I don’t think we’ve swept anything under the rug in that sense.
3) I've known many people who've left Singapore for elsewhere. It's a mixed bag. Some regret it, others wish they'd left sooner. I guess the immigrant experience is different for everyone.
I’m really sorry to hear that you have had to leave Singapore long-term. And I hope you can return, if that’s what you wish for.
Honestly the people in the best position are the Malaysian SgPR holders . They can work in SG but live/retire in MY at any time or in early retirement. Not to mention free healthcare across the causeway. To them SG really is just the big city where they come to make money. I dare say they might even have a better deal than some SG citizens 😂
I am open to relocating for better work and life opportunities for myself. After all, I could not get legally married in Sg.
However, I kept thinking about my non-English speaking parents who are 63 and 60. They have no ability to retire (negligible amount in CPF too). I depend on Sg’s safe infrastructure, financial and medical facilities to look after me and my family for now and beyond. I’m an only child. Who would help my parents read the English letters and make digital payments and orders? Who will care for them like their own child? We all spend in SGD.
Since I’m only earning the median income… Is my only correct option to move abroad? Away from a safe place we’ve built? Where my family is?
Now I wonder. Should Singapore allow dual citizenship, but only allow countries in ASEAN, for example. Maybe work out some PR arrangements in certain countries in ASEAN for those who want a more relaxed life? 🤔
Governments will go broke sooner or later with huge ballooning subsidies, even if they have oil and other natural resources.
The rocketing energy and food prices sparked by the Russian invasion of Ukraine will be a test for both people and governments.
Governments everywhere are also discovering that price caps do not spur increase in production, and that shortages resulting from proce capa are a sure way to push prices to shoot up astronomically.
Subsidies, if any, need to be targeted, timely, and temporary.
Targeting subsidies ensure they help those most in need. Broad based cap say on petrol prices at the pump simply benefits the wealthier car owning population disproportionately.
Timely support help those who are most desperate to get their next meal. 30 bowls of rice a month later is a useless gesture to a starving man, than a bowl of soup within a day.
What does it mean when folks clamour for roasted chicken, when given half a tingkat of economy rice even before they are starving?
Temporary subsidies help cushion short term price shocks to give time for people and businesses to adjust, adapt, and find new solutions.
Long term subsidies will shift behaviours wrongly towards less productive and less efficient solutions and habits.
Canute wisely showed his courtiers that even kings cannot hold back the waves lapping at their shores.
We are better off helping people and businesses find new grounds and new opportunities that are more sustainable.
We are certainly better off helping people and businesses who are willing to help themselves.
People, businesses and governments must be willing to tighten their belts, and work to chart a better path out of difficulties.
Honestly, this reads like a PAP sponsored article. Yes there are elements of truth to it. But overall, this seems pretty lop sided. What about exploring ways to make things less expensive? why is there not more debate on that? Are GST increases really the only way? Or have we all just been fed and gulped down the koolaid? How about cutting necessary government spending? the bailout of the national stadium is one fine example. How about taxing foreigners more? Afterall LHL said himself, if we let them, millions more will come. Why are locals paying the same COE prices as foreigners?
The most troubling part of your article is that you make the implicit assumption that leaving Singapore is an OPTION. While you do acknowledge the difficulty, you do so very sparingly and almost naively. You have one headline acknowledging that it is difficult and the first small paragraph after that mostly attributing it to unfamiliarity and lack of dual citizenship options. This is probably beyond myopic, and downright asinine. What about the many uncles and aunties, who lack the economic means to even consider leaving the country? Are they a minority or outliers? No, they are the majority, and for the majority leaving the country is NOT an option. Beyond that you don't even address the difficulty of obtaining resident visas etc in other countries, you can only stay for a limited number of days in another country if you don't have the means to obtain that. Have you ever tried leaving yourself? I doubt it.
I normally really enjoy your illustrations / articles, but this one sorely missed the mark.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns regarding my article. I appreciate your engagement in the discussion and your perspective. Disagreement is a natural and healthy part of online discussions, and I value the opportunity to address your points and foster a meaningful dialogue.
Firstly, I want to clarify that I do have personal experience living overseas, including in Melbourne and Hong Kong. Therefore, I understand the challenges and complexities that can be involved in relocating to another country. I apologize if the article did not convey this effectively, and I appreciate the opportunity to provide this clarification.
Secondly, I acknowledge that not everyone in Singapore has the option to leave due to various constraints and circumstances. I fully understand and respect that reality. However, it's important to note that the article was primarily targeting millennial Singaporeans, who may have more flexibility and opportunities to explore living overseas compared to other segments of the population.
My intention was to highlight different perspectives and possibilities that some individuals within this target audience might consider.
Regarding the sponsorship of our content, I understand that you raised the question of whether the article was sponsored. I want to assure you that our page follows a strict sponsorship declaration policy. Transparency and honesty are fundamental principles in our approach to content creation.
If there were any sponsorships or affiliations involved in the article, we would have provided explicit declarations, as per our policy. I apologize if there was any confusion or ambiguity that led you to question the sponsorship aspect.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank you for your support of our page. Your engagement and participation in discussions are greatly appreciated. Your feedback and attention to detail contribute to the growth and improvement of our content.
Once again, I value your input and your willingness to engage in a meaningful dialogue. If you have any further concerns or questions, please do not hesitate to reach out.
Sincerely,
Ruiming
PS: You highlighted that we did not do a deep dive about the difficulties of moving away from Singapore this article. This is accurate. We did however, cover it in another article titled ‘Singapore is expensive. Should we start looking overseas?” if you’re interested in reading further.
I understand the challenges of living in a city-state, but the conclusion of this argument is seriously flawed. So, if Singaporeans can't afford to live here, should they just move to Southeast Asia like suburbs in other countries? Those suburbs are part of the same country. What do you do? Ship people who can't afford it to a country where they don't speak the language, have no family, or social security benefits? And bring in people who can afford Singapore? Other countries handle this differently. They raise taxes for the rich so that the government can do more for the people. It's not perfect, but that's an option that should have been mentioned here. You should apologize to the general public in Singapore for writing such an article without any empathy.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on my recent article. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a discussion about the concerns you raised.
While I understand your perspective, I would like to provide further clarification on the points you mentioned. It is important to note that your comment included some logical leaps and fallacies in its arguments.
While the concerns you raised about the challenges of relocation and the potential difficulties of integrating into a new country are valid, it is essential to recognize that the article did not suggest a blanket solution of moving to other Southeast Asian countries.
Instead, it aimed to explore the limitations and unique circumstances faced by Singapore as a city-state. Throughout the article, I endeavored to approach the topic with empathy, understanding the complexities and personal factors involved in such decisions.
Furthermore, while your suggestion of raising taxes for the wealthy and implementing social welfare programs is valid, it is crucial to consider the context and intricacies of Singapore's economic and social landscape. Policy decisions must be evaluated carefully, taking into account the potential impact on various sectors of society.
I appreciate your feedback and the opportunity to address your concerns. Engaging in open dialogue helps foster a more comprehensive understanding of complex issues. Thank you for contributing to the discussion.
...Unfortunately, due to a matter of principle I cannot accede to your request to apologise to the general public of Singapore.
Thank you, Ruiming, for your input. I appreciate your willingness to engage in an open dialogue and share your perspective. However, I must express my profound sadness regarding the publication of an article that seems to overlook the concerns of Singaporeans who wish to remain in their country but are unable to do so due to financial constraints. It is disheartening to consider the possibility of Singapore transforming into a populist state where the underprivileged are advised to leave while the wealthy are encouraged to enter. This, in essence, is the main point I have taken away from your article.
It's interesting that you and I read the same article and had very different takeaways. What I took away was -- there IS an option to relocate (for those who wish to). I didn't gather that TWS is ADVISING the underprivileged to leave SG and the wealthy to come to SG? The *really* underprivileged ones won't be able to leave anyway?
If SG is really a "populist state", the recent taxing the rich, hdb cooling measures targeted at private property owners, tightening foreign hires etc. --- populist?
It’s ok to have different perspective. I have both very wealthy family members as well as not so fortunate family members live in Singapore and as such provided a balanced view. This article from my perspective is deeply flawed in the way it had provided suggestion, comparing apple to oranges, and very much one sided.
Always enjoy TWS articles, and love this one in particular. It's a hard truth, but it's an argument that has to be made.
Other commenters have distilled your very thoughtful article down to "If you feel Singapore is too expensive for you, leave". That's way too simplistic, and IMO, not what you're saying at all. My takeaway from your article is:
- Life in cities is expensive
- As an island city-state we can't expand out into the hinterland to give our citizens cheaper living options, because no such hinterland exists.
- But as individuals, we can choose to make an informed choice between competing to exploit the many economic opportunities here, or migrate to the "sort-of" hinterland (the rest of SEA) and enjoying a slower pace of life but with maybe a lower standard of living.
Which is more or less the same takeaway I see in most of the TWS articles I've read - "This is the economic/financial reality, hence this is the trade-off, decide for yourself what is best for you". You're not telling people who can't afford it to leave the country; you're simply pointing out that because of our unique situation as a prosperous island city-state, moving out of Singapore can sometimes make sense, just as people in other countries move out of large cities to the suburbs to enjoy a lower cost of living. It's certainly not for everyone, but you're trying to introduce Singaporeans to a different point of view, one that is very common among city-dwellers in larger countries (and the minority of Singaporeans who have made the move overseas and found that it works for them). You clearly state that if anyone wants to get out of this "rat race", there is an alternative, admittedly one that is not without trade-offs. Thank you for having the courage to share this perspective, knowing full well that you would catch a lot of flak for doing so.
Can I say that I just LOVE the fact that you took the effort to superimpose Singapore's outline on top of maps of major cities and measure everything properly and make sure it's to scale! I've had the privilege of travelling to London and New York for work a couple of times, and I'm always mind-boggled by the size of these megalopolises - can't wrap my head around the fact that several Singapores can fit into some major cities, and those cities are further surrounded by endless suburbs, minor towns and farmland. It's a miracle that we can hold our own as a nation and even thrive in a world filled with so many other larger countries. Your maps make that point better than words could.
It's great that you mention our ageing population and the declining size of our workforce - these are the driving factors behind our openness to foreign talent and capital. We simply cannot afford to cut ourselves off from the rest of world as that means being cut off from new ideas and technologies as well - that would spell inevitable economic decline and a "shrinking of the pie" for all. I would love to live in an alternate universe where Singapore's birth rate was 2.1 and we were much less dependent on foreign talent and capital, but sadly that's a much more complex problem and so we don't live in that reality. To me, every rich foreigner that comes in is another one we can tax more money from to fund our uncles and aunties' health care in their golden years.
I for one don't want to see any native-born Singaporean decide that our home has become too expensive and decide to move out. Isn't the ideal reaction to incoming "foreign talent" to retrain/upskill ourselves for the new, higher-paying jobs on offer, so that we can show anyone who comes in that they're not so talented after all ("anything you can do, I can do better" attitude). We have to take advantage of our world-class universities and polytechnics, government support and the ever-increasing reservoir of free/next-to-free online courses on the Internet. It takes time and effort, but I don't believe that all the foreigners coming in have such special skills that we can't replicate in ourselves. The need to retrain and switch careers in this fast-moving, technology-disrupting global economy we lived in is a point you at TWS have made many times in the past, and it's something that all us TWS readers need to take to heart (and with Singapore unemployment at a 15-year low of 1.8%, it's something that will definitely pay dividends).
Thanks again for your courage in putting out this inconvenient truth.
Thank you so much Joel for reading my work and taking your time to write that magnificent comment.
I feel heard.
Have a great weekend!
Ruiming
Always a fan of your perspectives, but Singapore IS in a unique position because we are currently the only city-state to experience this. Comparing it to big cities like London and Paris doesn't really justify because as mentioned, their locals have other cities to rely on, and we do not. Sweeping that under the rug for neutrality in this article is of poor taste.
Take Hong Kong for example, their housing crisis and cost of living started stabalising after the merger with China. Unfortunately for us, we don't have any big bro backing us.
Moblity is a privilege for Singaporeans, it's not that easy for SG passport to move overseas. Agree that it shouldn't be taboo, but leaving Singapore today has a whole set of consequences that someone who did it 10 years ago didn't have. Leaving SG now means the possibility of never being able to afford our cost of living, our public housing, and losing our place as citizens. It has far greater negatives than positives, because moving is for survival and not some "hehe living overseas is fun!" trope.
Take it from a Singaporean that moved, I wish I can be in SG long-term. But the costs are just not viable, so I have to let my own country go. And if that is not sad I don't know what is.
Thank you for your comment Mel. I’ve read your comment and I realised we fundamentally don’t disagree in anything in particular!
1) Yes, Singaporeans are in a unique position we because we’re citizens or a city-state. So we can’t really go anywhere else without leaving the nation.
2) Potentially leaving your country is emotionally difficult and tough – as mentioned in the article. I don’t think we’ve swept anything under the rug in that sense.
3) I've known many people who've left Singapore for elsewhere. It's a mixed bag. Some regret it, others wish they'd left sooner. I guess the immigrant experience is different for everyone.
I’m really sorry to hear that you have had to leave Singapore long-term. And I hope you can return, if that’s what you wish for.
All the best and take care.
Ruiming
Honestly the people in the best position are the Malaysian SgPR holders . They can work in SG but live/retire in MY at any time or in early retirement. Not to mention free healthcare across the causeway. To them SG really is just the big city where they come to make money. I dare say they might even have a better deal than some SG citizens 😂
I am open to relocating for better work and life opportunities for myself. After all, I could not get legally married in Sg.
However, I kept thinking about my non-English speaking parents who are 63 and 60. They have no ability to retire (negligible amount in CPF too). I depend on Sg’s safe infrastructure, financial and medical facilities to look after me and my family for now and beyond. I’m an only child. Who would help my parents read the English letters and make digital payments and orders? Who will care for them like their own child? We all spend in SGD.
Since I’m only earning the median income… Is my only correct option to move abroad? Away from a safe place we’ve built? Where my family is?
Perhaps, I should be more adventurous.
Hmm, then.. does my parents have to relocate too?
Now I wonder. Should Singapore allow dual citizenship, but only allow countries in ASEAN, for example. Maybe work out some PR arrangements in certain countries in ASEAN for those who want a more relaxed life? 🤔
Governments will go broke sooner or later with huge ballooning subsidies, even if they have oil and other natural resources.
The rocketing energy and food prices sparked by the Russian invasion of Ukraine will be a test for both people and governments.
Governments everywhere are also discovering that price caps do not spur increase in production, and that shortages resulting from proce capa are a sure way to push prices to shoot up astronomically.
Subsidies, if any, need to be targeted, timely, and temporary.
Targeting subsidies ensure they help those most in need. Broad based cap say on petrol prices at the pump simply benefits the wealthier car owning population disproportionately.
Timely support help those who are most desperate to get their next meal. 30 bowls of rice a month later is a useless gesture to a starving man, than a bowl of soup within a day.
What does it mean when folks clamour for roasted chicken, when given half a tingkat of economy rice even before they are starving?
Temporary subsidies help cushion short term price shocks to give time for people and businesses to adjust, adapt, and find new solutions.
Long term subsidies will shift behaviours wrongly towards less productive and less efficient solutions and habits.
Canute wisely showed his courtiers that even kings cannot hold back the waves lapping at their shores.
We are better off helping people and businesses find new grounds and new opportunities that are more sustainable.
We are certainly better off helping people and businesses who are willing to help themselves.
People, businesses and governments must be willing to tighten their belts, and work to chart a better path out of difficulties.
Let’s not become a Sri Lanka.
I love the drawings, wei choon!
Honestly, this reads like a PAP sponsored article. Yes there are elements of truth to it. But overall, this seems pretty lop sided. What about exploring ways to make things less expensive? why is there not more debate on that? Are GST increases really the only way? Or have we all just been fed and gulped down the koolaid? How about cutting necessary government spending? the bailout of the national stadium is one fine example. How about taxing foreigners more? Afterall LHL said himself, if we let them, millions more will come. Why are locals paying the same COE prices as foreigners?
The most troubling part of your article is that you make the implicit assumption that leaving Singapore is an OPTION. While you do acknowledge the difficulty, you do so very sparingly and almost naively. You have one headline acknowledging that it is difficult and the first small paragraph after that mostly attributing it to unfamiliarity and lack of dual citizenship options. This is probably beyond myopic, and downright asinine. What about the many uncles and aunties, who lack the economic means to even consider leaving the country? Are they a minority or outliers? No, they are the majority, and for the majority leaving the country is NOT an option. Beyond that you don't even address the difficulty of obtaining resident visas etc in other countries, you can only stay for a limited number of days in another country if you don't have the means to obtain that. Have you ever tried leaving yourself? I doubt it.
I normally really enjoy your illustrations / articles, but this one sorely missed the mark.
Had a typo in the 4th line - un*necessary govt spending.
Dear Alvin,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and concerns regarding my article. I appreciate your engagement in the discussion and your perspective. Disagreement is a natural and healthy part of online discussions, and I value the opportunity to address your points and foster a meaningful dialogue.
Firstly, I want to clarify that I do have personal experience living overseas, including in Melbourne and Hong Kong. Therefore, I understand the challenges and complexities that can be involved in relocating to another country. I apologize if the article did not convey this effectively, and I appreciate the opportunity to provide this clarification.
Secondly, I acknowledge that not everyone in Singapore has the option to leave due to various constraints and circumstances. I fully understand and respect that reality. However, it's important to note that the article was primarily targeting millennial Singaporeans, who may have more flexibility and opportunities to explore living overseas compared to other segments of the population.
My intention was to highlight different perspectives and possibilities that some individuals within this target audience might consider.
Regarding the sponsorship of our content, I understand that you raised the question of whether the article was sponsored. I want to assure you that our page follows a strict sponsorship declaration policy. Transparency and honesty are fundamental principles in our approach to content creation.
If there were any sponsorships or affiliations involved in the article, we would have provided explicit declarations, as per our policy. I apologize if there was any confusion or ambiguity that led you to question the sponsorship aspect.
I also want to take this opportunity to thank you for your support of our page. Your engagement and participation in discussions are greatly appreciated. Your feedback and attention to detail contribute to the growth and improvement of our content.
Once again, I value your input and your willingness to engage in a meaningful dialogue. If you have any further concerns or questions, please do not hesitate to reach out.
Sincerely,
Ruiming
PS: You highlighted that we did not do a deep dive about the difficulties of moving away from Singapore this article. This is accurate. We did however, cover it in another article titled ‘Singapore is expensive. Should we start looking overseas?” if you’re interested in reading further.
I understand the challenges of living in a city-state, but the conclusion of this argument is seriously flawed. So, if Singaporeans can't afford to live here, should they just move to Southeast Asia like suburbs in other countries? Those suburbs are part of the same country. What do you do? Ship people who can't afford it to a country where they don't speak the language, have no family, or social security benefits? And bring in people who can afford Singapore? Other countries handle this differently. They raise taxes for the rich so that the government can do more for the people. It's not perfect, but that's an option that should have been mentioned here. You should apologize to the general public in Singapore for writing such an article without any empathy.
Dear Commenter,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts on my recent article. I appreciate the opportunity to engage in a discussion about the concerns you raised.
While I understand your perspective, I would like to provide further clarification on the points you mentioned. It is important to note that your comment included some logical leaps and fallacies in its arguments.
While the concerns you raised about the challenges of relocation and the potential difficulties of integrating into a new country are valid, it is essential to recognize that the article did not suggest a blanket solution of moving to other Southeast Asian countries.
Instead, it aimed to explore the limitations and unique circumstances faced by Singapore as a city-state. Throughout the article, I endeavored to approach the topic with empathy, understanding the complexities and personal factors involved in such decisions.
Furthermore, while your suggestion of raising taxes for the wealthy and implementing social welfare programs is valid, it is crucial to consider the context and intricacies of Singapore's economic and social landscape. Policy decisions must be evaluated carefully, taking into account the potential impact on various sectors of society.
I appreciate your feedback and the opportunity to address your concerns. Engaging in open dialogue helps foster a more comprehensive understanding of complex issues. Thank you for contributing to the discussion.
...Unfortunately, due to a matter of principle I cannot accede to your request to apologise to the general public of Singapore.
Sincerely,
Ruiming
Thank you, Ruiming, for your input. I appreciate your willingness to engage in an open dialogue and share your perspective. However, I must express my profound sadness regarding the publication of an article that seems to overlook the concerns of Singaporeans who wish to remain in their country but are unable to do so due to financial constraints. It is disheartening to consider the possibility of Singapore transforming into a populist state where the underprivileged are advised to leave while the wealthy are encouraged to enter. This, in essence, is the main point I have taken away from your article.
It's interesting that you and I read the same article and had very different takeaways. What I took away was -- there IS an option to relocate (for those who wish to). I didn't gather that TWS is ADVISING the underprivileged to leave SG and the wealthy to come to SG? The *really* underprivileged ones won't be able to leave anyway?
If SG is really a "populist state", the recent taxing the rich, hdb cooling measures targeted at private property owners, tightening foreign hires etc. --- populist?
It’s ok to have different perspective. I have both very wealthy family members as well as not so fortunate family members live in Singapore and as such provided a balanced view. This article from my perspective is deeply flawed in the way it had provided suggestion, comparing apple to oranges, and very much one sided.