Nation or “Migrant City”?

Another interesting question:

Singapore, Forever a Migrant City?

Our forefathers from all ends of the globe coped pretty well then when they convened here, and so the nation prospered. Tolerance for diversity was in-bred or maybe, was sidestepped by the hunger for survival.

Either way, the impetus provided by the very intrusion of “foreigners” fuelled the economy and catapulted Singapore from an island let go by Malaya to become an independent, prosperous, thriving, and perfectly non-homogenous nation.

This comparison of “Singapore in the now” with “Singapore in the past” is somewhat fraudulent. I don’t think there was much of an “intrusion by foreigners” back then…

Let's have a look at our Immigration policy since Independence:

After independence in 1965, immigration laws were modified in 1966 to reinforce Singapore's borders as the fledgling country worked to establish its identity as a sovereign state. In fact, this task had begun earlier with the prohibition of dual citizenship in 1960.

With naturalization and the automatic conferment of citizenship, the total share of the nonresident population (i.e., those who are not citizens or permanent residents but hold an employment pass or work permit) in Singapore had dwindled to 2.9 percent of a total population of over two million by 1970.

Compared to now, where plans to increase the size of the population in Singapore to 6.5 million will clearly have to involve a huge influx of foreigners into Singapore, given our dismal birth rates.

Not to be blamed, the FT seems to be a more exciting, exotic and talented breed, and in some ways, even more attractive as life partners for some. Was it not the same in the past? Not quite I believe, or we would not have the Chinese, Arabs and Indians co-habiting here on the Same Small Space, no?

No, it was not the same “in the past”. I do not see recall “policies to import foreign talent” back then.

Assuming that the FT is indeed, more exciting, talented, and attractive, what does that imply for the general population of Singapore? Do we see a shift in the composition of the population in Singapore, from a unique ethnic composition of “Singaporeans”, to a “group of people who are exciting, talented and attractive”? A shift in values from fidelity to utility – “you are not attractive enough, therefore we should import foreign talents to make Singapore more exciting”?

To hedge this competition, I suppose we can only turn to a few options; one of them is self-improvement. I only wish there will be more avenues to help locals upgrade. And I look forward to such opportunities without the red-tape prerequisites of criterion/ paperwork/ qualifications/ experience/ self-financing capabilities etc etc. WDA is making rather good progress now and for a while more it seems, but there needs to be more stable and firm institution with easy-to-qualify provisions…

It is a false dichotomy – we can only upgrade, or be left behind by these foreign talents. I have yet to see a country that is composed only of “talents” as competent as the FTs we are trying to import.

Consider also the possibility of “structural unemployment”, discussed earlier on in class, about how certain people may not be able to upgrade, even if they are given the opportunity to do so (limited by their abilities). Are these people slated to be left behind?