Naw, it's not just the women's charter.
Singapore's dismal birth rate is the result of several factors,
and mostly a case of the government trying to do many different
things at once, and ending up not doing any of these things
well.
Case in point, one has to admit that the original population
control policies were greatly myopic. The natural development of
the nation will bring down the birth rate on its own, and in fact
one might argue that had the government not embarked on such an
aggressive "stop at two" policy, Singapore soceity would have had
quite a lot more Singaporeans to buffer and set off our current
population issues by quite a while.
Additionally, baby bonus and the like aside, one cannot avoid
the fact that the rising cost of living in Singapore ultimately
outweights whatever baby bonuses the government can provide. The
fact remains that by and large our pragmatic concern with economic
sucess and the lifestyle it creates in our society is often at odds
at us wanting to encourage our population to have more
children.
And of course, people are marrying and having children later as
well. This adds even more to the problem.
The women's charter really has little to do with it, and I say
this as a member of the male gender. Yes, I think it's unfair and
ultimately in the long run does not really benefit either women or
men the way it is currently done, but I do not think think it's the
main reason.
The current practice of importing "talent" to make up for the
shortfall of course, is not socially or economically sustainable in
the long run. It is a stop-gap measure. The crux of the issue is,
and will always be the birth rate and who will truly become
citizens. Because that is largely what it means to be
Singaporean.
I do not think Singapore will die if our birth rate carrys on
like that... but it will radically redefine what it means to be
Singaporean... given locals will feel increasingly disconnected
from their homeland, as well as seeing citizenship as a liability.
This cannot bode well for national identity.
If we are to select opposition who can really replace the PAP we
need to have a good understanding of the problem.
For one, our current population growth problem is about RATE,
not numbers. Our population numbers aren't dwindling like that of
Japan yet.
The rate of replacement is particularly important for us because
of our "social security" measure - the CPF. In an ideal scenario,
as more and more Singaporeans retire it becomes a neccessity to
ensure that the amount of contributors is constant with the amount
of people drawing their retirement funds from.
Of course, since our government treats the CPF like a free piggy
bank using it for god knows what without accountability it becomes
crucial to ensure that there is enough money to pay off the initial
contributors to the CPF. Essentially the CPF (Including its
counterpart - the Social Security and Pension System in the US) is
a Ponzi Scheme.
My theory is that they realised there isn't enough remaining
currently in the CPF to pay off the increasing number of retirees
leaving the workforce that's why they were so eager to impose
limits on the withdrawal amount and the bullshit annuity
measures.
That's also why they're so eager to let in so much foreign
workforce.
If a PR wishes to leave Singapore and wants to withdraw his or
her CPF, they would have to put back the money PLUS interest if
they want to ever come back here to work again. Since very few are
so confident to do that, they're not so eager to withdraw their
whole CPF.
SO basically that means the opening of the floodgates is to
refill the coffers of the CPF, not because we have a dwindling
population. They're using a potential future problem to cover up
the fuck up they're having now.
