The key issue is not whether foreign workers are paid more or less
than our own citizens alone or whether employing them will help our
employers save some costs. Our government must study the policy of
employing foreign workers in a more thorough manner.
But how can we attract the good foreigners if we don't pay them
well?
Not every issue is so simplistic and only one-dimensional as by
saving some monies in employing foreign workers we may end up
getting over-simplistic answer and results.
Thats right, you put it so simplistic. Why don't you give
specifics as to how the govt can do what you said?
By opening up our employment opportunities to foreigners, we should
consider also that there are social costs and issue of undermining
of our own political stability due to neglect of our own citizens
in areas of providing them with support in time of crisis or
education, training and giving of right opportunities for the right
economic upgrading.
They already did and explained it very well, we do need foreign
workers.
My view is that by importing foreign workers, even if our employers
can save some short-term gains as a society we will have to provide
houses and facilities and other wellbeing to foreigners as well.
There might be a lot of injustice in the long run. At the end if
our economy is at a downturn and we have to bear with empty houses,
more wastages and under-utilized facilities. Is there a higher cost
to our economy by importing too many foreigners?
The only foreigners who get housing are the construction
workers. The rest paid for it themselves and boost the property and
contruction sectors which is good.
Therefore citizens should not just accept the minister's
over-simplistic reason that we need foreigners to create jobs as
the real answer might not be that simple.
I don't think the govt is simplistic over the matter. It is you
who is simplistic about it.
My view is that there should be more thorough study of the issues
of loyalty to our own citizens as not every thing can be based on
dollars or cents.
Loyalty? But Singaporeans are not loyal to their employers.
People just walk out of jobs in the boom years.
Isn't it time to study all the past policies more objectively to
avoid problems due to simplistic assumptions often adopted by the
over-pragmatic government. We should have a government that is
loyal to training and upgrading and job opportunities to citizens
first and only when foreigners are in possession of the skills we
do not have do we grant them this kind of opportunity. For quite
some time now citizens have been suffering some form of disloyalty
to our own citizens and the government has not been listening.
I notice you like to complain but provide no solutions. Whats
the point?
Many recentl news reports have already unveiled employers' practice
of switching to foreign workers to save some costs neglecting other
aspects of like social and political trade-off. Does anyone
understand the issue in proper perspective so that we will not end
up with many problems when all the local companies are turning to
short-term gains.
Are you loyal yourself?
But MOM does not seem to differentiate the grade that we want and
the grade the we already have probably because EDB and MTI do not
have the means to get people to start up new technology ventures so
there is headway to create more advanced technology start-ups. They
have to learn the holistic way of creating new technology start-ups
from the Taiwanese who succeeded in stealing the lead in computers
from the Japanese and West from the 1970s.
Do you realise that we are richer than Taiwan with lower
unemployment? Our system is more successful.
Do you also realise that Taiwanese have no loyalty in business?
They hire foreign workers too and they move their factories to
China w/o any restrictions.
Can anyone really say that our ministers or our many scholars in
the public sector can save us from rstructural unemployments or
upgrade our economy to value-adding or advanced technological
economy to uplift our competitiveness.
So how do we objectively grade foreigners? Please advice.
What did our ministers and scholars in public service do during the
last two recessions. More significantly what did they propose to do
to get out of the last two recessions.
All I could remember is that all the ministers only gave excuses
that Singapore was too vulnerable to external economic downturn and
that there is nothing that can be done to save jobs due the
phenomenon called structural unemployments. They conveniently
forgot that some of the tiger economies were turning around faster
than Singapore because they were more resilent owing to their less
reliance on foreign investments and more nurturing of their own
local companies and falents.
I think they did a great job. In fact, they averted a recession
in 98 even when much of Asia went into deep recession.
Yes up to the 1970s, we do have growths. However, since then no
matter how many economic restructuring or reviews we have not yet
upgraded the economy to value-adding or technologically advanced
economy as was being built by other Asian tigers. Clinging on to
the past success forgetting that we have lost ground in important
key areas is no solution. The comparison made on GDP without
looking closely at our own people's sector of the economy will not
answer this issue honestly and objectively. The fact that we have
surpluses in the government does not mean that people are
successful.
Growth not only in 70s but 80s, 90s and today too.
The greatest growth occured in the 90s. Looks like you do not know
the Singapore economy very well.
Can I suggest you do more research before your next post?
