The editor said, poreans need to welcome talents since your
great / grand fudder is also migrant.
1. Did he in anyway defined the meaning of TALENT? I see
many labelled as FT with salaries 2.5k . Is this
talent or is a talent valued at 25K ? Without clear definition
I find the article very general and not detail enough.
2. By welcoming immigrants of all types, with or
without jobs (dependents), does this not mean dilution of pore's
culture? lets say half the population is new immigrants? no
dilution right?
3. EP , as I understand, is employment pass for
professionals that is market valued from 2.5K .
The main thing to note about EP is that there is no quota set for
this category. Correct me if I am wrong. Why is this
policy in place? What is the rationale for this policy? Is there
any impact on your salary? No? For same skill and experience, is
asian paid more than european? So, why ? why no impact ?
4. The editor gives me the impression that he
is writing to encourage us to welcome them but did not
define is an EP holder of market value 2.5K a real talent, I can
only say what he is saying is agreeable to an extent only as he
does not define the meaning of Talent. If so, all earning >=
$2.5k are talents. If so, why is there still a
shortage?
5. Did he define how many is allowed to come in or did he say
there is NO LIMIT? Imagine, no limit in a company which, for the
same position, for every position keeps inviting new applications
for the same position. The better qualified ones keep replacing the
incumbent. This is called no limit. Is there a limit? He
did not discuss about this situation in the article. thus,
again, a pitty.
6. He quoted from 1 of the available polls in the world to
substantiate what he is saying . The poll was about what is
in the minds of most people and it is found
to be 'Good jobs'. I beg to differ. To me, and many, I am
confident it should be 'No need of any Good jobs' as in no need to
work. So, to me , what is in the minds of most people is no need to
work . Why did he not take this as a poll to
illustrate his point? If strike rich, no need a good job.
Where a job is still a kind of slogging - taking up
most part of your life by the time you die. Thus , in the minds of
most people, to me, would be no need to work after striking it
rich. And the article did not define what is meant by a good
job. 3 million a year shaking legs? 120k a month constantly put
under pressure and stress to perform or be sacked? 1.2million of
the same as a private sector CEO who is ACCOUNTABLE for
things under his watch? Or as a non-fiction writer shaking leg by
the poolside imagining what his boss wants to hear and writes these
for personal gains?
7. Last but not least, every topic is debatable or
arguable. I wonder what makes this writer tick and why he writes
what he is writing? He appears to be speaking from a
PROPOSITION perspective. If he can write his views, why is there no
other writer who writes another view or perspective? I mean, would
there be pluralism in our news in this case? Should news consumers
accept 100% what is published as the only perspective to accept?
Given that there is only 1 such newspaper? I must say, yes I accept
100%. u no believe of the me?
Examples of true talents:
1. Rare, skilled, intellectuals : Scientists with proven works.
Won international prizes. So many hundred millions in the
world are IT workers. Are they rare? Are they real talents ? If so,
the world does not lack talents. If a simple qualification entitles
one to be a talent, all graduates are talent no matter if they just
passed or repeated and passed after a lot help and tution given to
them. moreover, studying is just a game of passing an exam.
Memorise, regurjitate. 10 year series and get tips and bang on a
few topics. some copy.
