Singaporeans are ageing fast — let’s get planning

[This is quite a bit late - a letter from June. Better publish it before the end of the year. What can I say? Getting old.]

Ku Swee Yong

June 10, 2016


I am not bringing up this subject because I see my hairline receding rapidly or because I need bifocals.

As highlighted in my latest book, Weathering a Property Downturn, if we took a snapshot of Singapore’s population tree in 2015 and assumed that the population was with us all the while (that is, no inward or outward migration), 400,000 residents celebrated their 60th birthdays between 2006 and 2015, and in the next 10-year period between 2016 and 2025, more than 600,000 residents will celebrate their 60th year on earth.

Our resident population in 2015 was 3.9 million, of which 700,000, or 18 per cent, were already over 60 years of age. If we froze the population based on the 2015 demographics and accounting for about 19,000 a year for residents who pass away, by the year 2025 at least 30 per cent of us will be older than 60. That equates to more than 1.1 million Singapore residents.

Depositors have no say in banks' business activities

Aug 10 2016

I am surprised by Mr Christopher Tang Wai Leng's view that DBS Bank owes depositors an explanation for its loan losses ("DBS must explain Swiber debacle"; last Saturday).

Yes, in classic banking theory, banks lend out their customers' deposits, so if there is a big loan loss, a bank could fold and it is possible that customers won't be able to get their deposits back. However, this theory is long out of date.

A bank is a corporate entity separate from its customers (both depositors and borrowers).

As long as customers can get their deposits back with the agreed interest, which is still the case with DBS, depositors have no say in the business activities of the bank.

Banks have capital, profits and reserves, their own borrowing ability, and even a possible government bailout, with which to first fund losses (well before getting to deposits).

If anyone, it is the bank's shareholders who deserve, or have a right to ask for, an explanation, certainly not its depositors or other customers.

Gerard de Vaz

Create fun TV programmes to educate public on how to recycle

LYNNETTE LOW

JUNE 9, 2016

It is a bad idea to make residents “pay as you throw” in order to reduce waste (“Pay as you throw among ideas to cut down waste in Singapore”; June 4).

First, it would raise the high cost of living and send stress levels here even higher. That surely cannot be a good thing.

Second, littering is already a problem in Singapore. If we have to pay as we throw, unclaimed and anonymous rubbish would probably be more prevalent.

A more effective and meaningful way to encourage recycling and to cut waste here is to educate the public and create awareness of this subject through interesting programmes on Channels 5 and 8 during prime time.

Singlish must not be allowed to displace Standard English

MAY 25, 2016

I agree that the Government cannot afford to ease up on its strict stance on Singlish ("PM's press secretary rebuts NYT op-ed on Singlish"; yesterday).

Singlish has indeed taken on a life of its own, and has flourished as a vernacular with a distinctly Singaporean heritage. We use and flaunt it like a badge of national pride.

While poet and literary critic Gwee Li Sui, in his opinion piece on Singlish published in the International New York Times, said that even politicians and officials use Singlish, I believe most do so with an awareness of the specific context and register that Singlish should be used in.

It is often used to establish an instant rapport with the audience, as it transcends barriers of race and social class.

Does ethical consumption have to cost so much?

[This was not a forum page letter. But it is silly enough to get my dander up. So here it is and here I go.]

TODAY

VAIDEHI SHAH

MAY 13, 2016

Eat organic food. Drive an electric car, not a gas-guzzler. Buy clothes made by fairly paid workers: Such calls have grown louder and more frequent in recent years.

While responsible consumption advocates mean well, they often overlook the fact that not everyone can afford these sustainable goods, which are usually more expensive than mass-market products.

The poor are being priced out of sustainable and ethical consumer options, and this is wrong for many reasons.

[But not as wrong as your inability to see that arguing for the right of the poor to drive electric cars instead of gas guzzlers, presumably to reduce carbon emission, in order to save the planet, is the WRONG solution to saving the planet. We should move towards aggregated transport, i.e. public transport. But a great start to a blinkered, ill-informed, unthinking essay.]

Recast the S’porean identity based on inclusivity, fairness — not materialism

[I clip and pasted this article to this blog because I thought it was a reader's letter. Only at the end, did I realise that it was supposed to be a commentary or opinion piece. But seriously, I found the quality of thought to be no better than some forum letters. And the verbosity hinted at some insecurities or immaturity.

Maybe I am being too harsh... NAAAAHHHH! 

Or, rather, why don't you decide. I found his writing rather pompous.]

Want more babies? Help families afford cars

[This was not a forum letter. But it might as well have been. It is not an original blackmail point. Many car-loving would-be parents have written in before threatening to withhold their sperm or eggs unless they get a car. 

The tactic is so transparent. Let's see how this one does.]


Ezra Ho

April 27 2016


Last month, officials from the National Population and Talent Division, led by Senior Minister of State Josephine Teo, went on study trips to Denmark and South Korea to understand how these countries dealt with their falling fertility rates.

The consensus is that we need a holistic approach that cultivates a more family-friendly society. Raising the fertility rate would require an equalising of the demands of childcare by enhancing paternity leave, promoting a more supportive work culture, providing adequate infantcare and fostering a shift in societal attitudes.

So here is a crazy idea to add to the mix: help families afford cars.

[If this is a crazy idea, there are lots of crazy people in Singapore. If there are enough of them, they are no longer crazy. Just a vocal minority.]