I WOULD like to make the case that while the particular globalisation strategy that Singapore embarked on soon after independence was the right one - perhaps the only sensible one, given the circumstances and constraints then - we may have overstayed in applying this strategy as the dominant one. As a result, our shortage of land, labour and other capabilities is becoming more obvious and severe. I believe it is timely to have a second strategic pillar, which I would describe in short as creating a second Singapore outside Singapore - the economic space of Singapore and Singapore companies should be much bigger than the geographical space of Singapore. A similar idea was mooted nearly 20 years ago, when there was talk of creating a second wing for Singapore. Singapores land and labour constraints are immutable. In the long term, there is clearly a limit as to how much more we can do in land-use intensification, given how much we have already done. [...] The question also arises as to the marginal benefit of such further large capital investments in a limited space and, given the recent policy shift, with the limited supply of labour. In economic theory, when one factor of production - land - is largely fixed, and another factor - labour - can grow only slowly, adding more and more capital leads to diminishing returns. About 20 years ago, the American economist Paul Krugman argued that Singapores growth (and that of a few other East Asian economies) was driven largely by inputs of labour and capital, rather than productivity. If this is true, are we in the process of doing more of the same, even if the declared intent is to develop a more innovation-based, productivity- driven economy? [...] FURTHER expansion overseas by Singapore companies would ease the pressure on our land and labour market. It would ease the inflow of foreign workers since our companies would employ them in their home countries. It would enable our small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to achieve scale more easily. A McKinsey study released early this year found that Singapore SMEs, with their limited market size, need to go overseas at a much earlier stage of development, compared with those of other countries. Because of the speed at which our land and labour costs have risen, many of our SMEs have useful technologies and capabilities which could enable them to continue operating profitably in a country where such costs are lower. Their chances of success could be lower if they remained totally in Singapore. *************** HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA... A second Singapore? Why dont they call it by its proper name? LEBENSRAUM Honestly, this idea of a second Singapore is absurd. You cannot reconcile the economic goals of a second Singapore to expand overseas with the national political goals of fostering loyalty to this little piece of land. When the bulk of the material life of Singaporeans shifts overseas, their loyalty inevitably will shift as well. Britain coped with sending its masses of surplus population and people overseas by building a global empire, under various regional and colonial administration, but united under one Monarch. What equivalent will Singapore create to manage such an unwieldy global monstrosity? This is bloody idiotic. Everyone KNOWS that Singapore is economically unsustainable and impossible, but nobody dares to slaughter the sacred cow of nationalism and national integrity which is incompatible with Singapores fundamental physical and economic flaws. I have to make long term plans to get off this island.
Posted on: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 02:26:24 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015