OUR MOTHERS CRIED BUT NOBODY LISTENED? Is he for real talking about things so far past when he was yet to be born.
This is unbelievably bizarre highlighting archaic policies. Is Luke Koh quarreling with the past?
Is Singapore today better than yester-years. Those policies were a set of initiatives among many others that made Singapore what we are today. In the 1970, exploding population growth was dangerous. While we gained independence, with a 2 million population we could hardly survive. In the 70s, 80s, big countries including China had to adopt a one-child policy. This was to ensure survivability of a nation and not to kill the nation. Hence we should not begrudge the issues of yester-year but to think of today and tomorrow. How to build a better Singapore going forward?
Disappointing calibre. Are these their best? Hardly able to express his thoughts coherently. What state of affair is this for the opposition? I fear. I fear that silliness perpetuate in the opposition. It is just beyond words.
Calvin Cheng
This afternoon, new Workers Party candidate Luke Koh used shocking, archaic and emotive language about “missing brothers and sisters” and “crying mothers” to blame our population woes.
Ignoring his choice of words, is this true?
Ah Kong said “Stopping at two has nothing to do with what’s happened. It’s happening throughout the developed world.”
And as we know, Ah Kong may be harsh with his words, but a stickler for facts.
Most of the developed countries in the world have low fertility rates and NONE OF THEM had the Stop At Two policy.
Replacement is 2.1 and Germany is 1.4, Italy 1.4, Spain 1.4, Japan 1.4. Even Sweden who spends a lot on fertility support has a TFR of 1.9 which is still below replacement and seems very poor returns given that it is not far from countries who spend far less such as Australia (1.8) and Holland (1.8).
If Stop At 2 were to blame, why didn’t any of these other countries have Stop At 2?
The only exception is the US (2.0) because first generation Hispanic immigrants boost up TFR.
The UK also has a relatively high TFR of 1.9 despite not having any special fertility support programmes akin to Sweden, with birth rates boosted by non-European immigrants.
This is also an answer to the question to the criticism that immigrants will also have low TFR, and we are just creating a Ponzi scheme – other countries’ experience shows that new immigrants typically have a high TFR which gives our population a double boost. One boost from ready-made working age adults, and another from them having more children than old citizens.
Debunking another election myth.
Please share.
P.S. My problem with the Government’s immigration policies is not with the broad strokes but a) it needs to improve quality control and b) assimilate immigrants better.
-
Workers Party new candidate Luke Koh causes uproar with misguided remarks
What Singaporeans’ Say?
Jonathan Lim Instead of harping on the 6.9 million figure from PAP , why not explain how the 5.8 million figure from WP is better ?
Or maybe he doesn’t know why his party has proposed that figure ?
Liu INan yeah, decades later than call it as misguided. Can understand our parents generation and our grandparent generation faces different population crisis from us or not? can understand the meaning of 马后炮 or not, Luke Koh? Better go back to school. You are worse than PAPER general!
Liew Patrick II The circumstances were different. We were a developing country and our economy was vulnerable. The Stop at 2 policy prevented the country and economy from being overburdened. That was more than 30 years ago.
The low total fertility rate challenge is a challenge faced by many developed countries. The trend of marrying later and having less children is faced by developed and affluent communities.
Robert Koh WP had so far been emphasizing on the “misguided” past policy (20-30 years back?) in population, education, economy etc….. but the question I would like the WP to reply did PAP “Misguided” Singapore from 3rd to 1st world within 50 years can’t recalled if WP played a part in our progress. We are looking for an alternative party to challenge PAP to bring Singapore forward with constructive and sustainable policies that will ensure continue progress and prosper as a Nation not dwell on the past. By having more WP in parliament just to make up the numbers is not what we need, I will be happy with 1 that can contribute sensible and sustainable alternative.
Nelson Huang Why bring up the past? Tell me how are u going to move Singapore forward for the next 50 years.
Hunter Yap Kian Siang Are u standing for election in 2015 or 1975 ?
Michelle Lim We will cry in future if we listen to you now
丽霞卓 Eh my mother never stop at 2 leh. I am No 4.
Carol Yeo If my mummy heard what you have said from my mouth, she will also cried and said : If you got nothing wise to speak, don’t speak and nobody will call you a mute.”
Trish Lim My family is a product of the 2 children policy…and we can’t be more thankful for that! Why? Cos Mom & Dad were struggling…imagine they had more mouths to feed! BTW, Mr Luke Koh…are there any real issues you can address? I like to know what you can address on my children’s FUTURE, rather than my past leh.
克里斯 This is stupid. Sorry WP I love u but this is stupid.
There are so many policies that are lousy but the 2-child policy was apt at that time. It was NOT wrong.
George Choa Blame government again.. Last time, police wear short too. Maybe that a mistake too. WP, can think of something new for the future of Singapore?
Lotus Phua Why didnt WP ask Ah Gong…..when he was alive?
Kaethy Goh Yes . Your mum is crying why she never abort u .. Hopeless n brainless
Chan Lw He hopes to be voted into parliament by pointing out the “mistakes” made by the PAP government. How silly is that? Were those “mistakes” mistakes in the first place? Every policies and every decisions the government makes will have upsides and downsides. This is universal truth and every government in the world knows that. Perhaps, the people in WP do not know this yet. There will be trade offs and it is the government’s job to find that balance. If 75% of the people can benefit from the upsides, there will be the remaining 25% who will experience the downsides and will be extremely unhappy with the government. This government is not perfect, and no government in the world one is. But this PAP government has an impeccable 50 years record for getting things done and is always working towards continuous improvements, tweaking policies when necessary to make them relevant for the era, the constraints and for more people in the 25% to benefit as well. Very often tweaking of policies were considered by many as mistakes the government had made, and very often opposition parties credited themselves for having influenced the government. Mr Goh CT defined opposition parties’ as “roosters” claiming credits for the sun to rise.The PAP government has governed this place well for 50 years and we have progressed and prospered. My vote will be for the team with this impeccable record because the odds are good that Singapore will be better in the next 10, 20, 30 years. I will not get to see it but my children and grand children will.
George Han The Stop At 2 has allowed 2 generations of Singaporeans to grow and prosper resulting in the Singapore Middle Class that powered our progress to developed nation status.
Maureen Lim Oh is it? I have 2 sisters and 1 bro leh. My grandparents had 10 kids leh. Listen to you will really cry in future.
Raymond Huang My parents already empowered themselves and had 6 children instead of stopping at 2.
Juliana Tan Why start digging out the sad past & provoking emotions. What needs to be done now is learn from past mistakes & come out with plans of a better future. Given the situation back then, you think the govt had any better options?! Bread & butter was major issues back then..not enough to eat how to keep giving birth..and resources were limited. And some can really give birth! Pls what’s past let it past..Dun start digging it out. I find this is so distasteful!
