View Full Version : Why 6.9m was too much information
The Straits Times
www.straitstimes.comPublished on Feb 16, 2013
POLITICS 360
Why 6.9m was too much information
Major policy shifts eclipsed by uproar over population projection
By Rachel Chang
IN THE wake of the parliamentary debate on the Population White Paper, People's Action Party (PAP) politicians probably feel like they have been hit by a truck.
Some think that they had actually anticipated the national fu-rore and therefore scheduled the White Paper for the Monday after the Punggol East by-election.
But the chain of events was so unfortunate that it is unlikely that it unfolded by design.
It is hard to imagine any senior politician wanting to be caught on the backfoot, clarifying that the paper contained a "worst-case scenario" and beseeching the people to trust them.
It is hard to imagine any government wanting to contain backbench backlash by accepting an amendment to a parliamentary motion, or, before a vote on the most important document in recent years, having to apologise for a footnote.
It was all topped off with the Prime Minister, after being praised for not leaving the controversial issue to his successor, effectively leaving it to his successor by promising that the Government will not decide on a population size beyond 2020.
What happened over the last two weeks is a real pity, because the bulk of the document is worthy of praise. For starters, it is a policy roadmap that directly responds to, and embeds the lessons of, the difficulties of recent years.
The two key criticisms of the Government's population policy have been that the pace of economic growth - and consequently, the influx of foreigners - has been too intense, and that the infrastructure was not readied for the surge. This resulted in a myriad of problems, from high housing prices to wage stagnation, all of which took a toll on Singaporeans' lives and convinced them that high economic growth is not in their interests.
The White Paper marks policy shifts on both those fronts:
First, the pace of growth and intake of foreigners will be substantially less - only a third - than that of the previous three decades. Second, the Government will now build infrastructure ahead of demand.
The latter, especially, is a major political shift. For years, PAP ministers have been pointing to the costs of "white elephant" infrastructure, and invoking the "ghost towns" of the late 1990s, when blocks of flats stood empty after demand disappeared overnight due to an economic crisis.
Finally, the Government is acknowledging that the holding costs of empty flats and deserted train stations are more than compensated for by the benefits of slack in the infrastructure.
Whatever is lost when blocks of flats stand empty is more than earned back in the flexibility to respond to population surges - and in the goodwill that accrues when Singaporeans feel peace of mind.
All of these should have been welcomed by critics and supporters alike - the former for being vindicated, the latter for the evidence that the ruling party is not hopelessly wedded to dogma. But instead, they were all but drowned out by the uproar over the 6.9 million figure.
In the interests of better and more fruitful political discourse, let us engage in a thought experiment. What would the Population White Paper experience have been like if the population projections of 5.8 million to 6 million by 2020, and 6.5 million to 6.9 million by 2030, had not been included in the document?
For those who have actually read the White Paper, that would mean taking out the three pages that comprise Chapter 4: Population Trajectories.
I would argue that the document would have been essentially the same, minus the sound and fury over a number that succeeded in defining the debate without being real or particularly significant.
Hear me out.
One of the points National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan made during the past two weeks was that for the average person going about her day, there is little sense of the total population of which she is a part.
One does not interact with 6.9 million people in one day, one interacts with at most 200 or 300.
But when one cannot get into a crowded train, for example, it begins to feel like whatever the number, it's too many.
Importantly, this can arise in small populations or in big ones. This is a truism of urban planning and a key message that the Ministry of National Development tried to get across: Dense cities are not the same as unliveable ones.
Government planners are confident that they can, through innovative urban solutions and more efficient use of land, cater comfortably to a population much larger than Singapore's current size.
They may or may not succeed. The point is that in the grand scheme of things, the overall population size is actually a tangential piece of information: 5.3 million could seem like too many, and 6.9 million could actually seem like a comfortable fit.
But to give people a number millions more than what the population now is - at a moment of unanimity that it is currently "too many" - smacks of misjudgement.
I am not arguing for duplicity. It is imperative that the White Paper reveal the targets which the Government can control, and is working with.
The growth of the foreign workforce, productivity and gross domestic product targets are all essential pieces of information.
If these figures had been front-and-centre, then there could have been the same rigorous national and parliamentary debate over whether they are the right ones to aim for, minus the note of hysteria and anger.
These components do add up to an estimated population size, but with so many assumptions and variables along the way that the final figure should not be allowed to eclipse everything else.
For example, the White Paper's calculations were based on the current total fertility rate of 1.2. But what if it goes up? What if it goes down? What if technological breakthroughs bring about a leap forward in productivity? What if labour force participation rates spike? What if life expectancy climbs, or drops?
As any of these unforeseen and uncontrollable factors move, so lurches the population size.
This could have better illustrated if the White Paper had presented scenarios of a TFR of 1.2, a TFR of 1.5 (the Government's near-term goal), and a TFR of 2.1, which is the replacement rate.
While the National Population and Talent Division did put out an occasional paper last April charting how the citizen population would change under various TFRs, the Population White Paper could have expanded on this by pairing these scenarios with a variety of productivity growth rates.
The most optimistic of these scenarios would allow us to drastically tamp down on the growth of the foreign workforce.
The various scenarios not only would have illustrated just how contingent the population projections are, but also how important it is to get cracking on the twin national goals of economic restructuring and baby-making.
The key message from the Government should then have been that whatever the scenario, it is readying the infrastructure for many millions more than what we currently have - so that Singaporeans will never feel so under siege again.
Perhaps this seems like a call to be dishonest with the people, or disingenuous with the figures.
A long-standing criticism of the Government is that it is tight-fisted and non-transparent with information, so shouldn't we welcome the fact that it was open about that 6.9 million figure, rather than squirrelling it away, or labelling it a scenario for "year X"?
But I think that's a simplistic interpretation of how a mature electorate deals with its elected government.
I am a proponent of more information - but the numbers we should desire are real ones, such as the number of employment passes we give out, how many prisoners we send to the gallows, or how much we have in the national reserves. The 6.9 million is simply not in the same category.
The Government should also refrain from telling itself that what happened with the White Paper was the necessary fallout from doing the "right" thing. The PAP likes to believe that it would rather go down in flames having governed well, than "pander" to populist pressures. Like martyrs, it will take the political hit for the long-term benefit of the country.
Ironically, the Government actually was doing the popular thing in making those strategic planning shifts that many have been calling for for years.
Yet, not only did it earn no extra goodwill, but also the political rancour actually grew. This was not inevitable and it's important to examine why it happened and how it could have been avoided.
On voters' part, they should appraise the Government not on its means - working estimates and projections - but whether it succeeds in achieving its ends. In this case, that is to deliver on the high quality of life that the PAP says it can achieve. In 2030, that should be the only yardstick by which the Population White Paper is judged.
It's a shame that that "6.9 million" seems likely to be its legacy instead.
[email protected]
phantom_opera
16-02-13, 16:43
To me the most scary part of this paper is that there seems to be no other way of growing GDP other than immigration
And nothing is focus on how to increase TFR so I think pap has given up and assumed TFR below 1.0 in next 20y
To me the most scary part of this paper is that there seems to be no other way of growing GDP other than immigration
And nothing is focus on how to increase TFR so I think pap has given up and assumed TFR below 1.0 in next 20y
try so many time liao. cannot kick start. maybe take a worst case to plan .
To me the most scary part of this paper is that there seems to be no other way of growing GDP other than immigration
And nothing is focus on how to increase TFR so I think pap has given up and assumed TFR below 1.0 in next 20y
Actually there is. The new parent n child benifits. Hoping that will increase tfr
Hi....Do you think Hong Lim Park will be URA/SLA next development plan? This is a good piece of land for 99LH development?
Hi....Do you think Hong Lim Park will be URA/SLA next development plan? This is a good piece of land for 99LH development?
U ask the wierdest question. ?....
U ask the wierdest question. ?....
I am thinking from a leadership point of perspective.
Actually there is. The new parent n child benifits. Hoping that will increase tfr
More money does not solve the problem - it is not a problem of liquidity.
More money does not solve the problem - it is not a problem of liquidity.
More leave. So need wat ? Free emotionally support?
if they really do take if off imagine the uproar ...where then is the new speakers corner going to be ah
Wild Falcon
16-02-13, 21:48
Sometimes I wonder these ST reporters come from which planet. Why is 6 million by 2020 and 6.9 million by 2030 too much information? I mean it is almost 100k of foreigners taken in per year from now till 2020 - that has a lot of impact and till now the paper has too little info on foreigner breakdown (low skilled vs PMET?). And then this Chua Mui hoong asking Singaporeans to just accept the white paper. I think we need better quality commentary.
Sometimes I wonder these ST reporters come from which planet. Why is 6 million by 2020 and 6.9 million by 2030 too much information? I mean it is almost 100k of foreigners taken in per year from now till 2020 - that has a lot of impact and till now the paper has too little info on foreigner breakdown (low skilled vs PMET?). And then this Chua Mui hoong asking Singaporeans to just accept the white paper. I think we need better quality commentary.
Too much information becoz all everyone is fixated on is the no. 6.9 but never look at other things that might have been well addressed with the paper. We are throwing the baby out with the bath water.
No mindful conversation can happen once people perception are set. Ask ard who have actually read the 77 page document? I think I have encounter only a very hand full. All are just caught up in the hate frenzy.
More leave. So need wat ? Free emotionally support?
In all likelihood there is no solution to this problem, which from another angle is not even an issue in the first place.
phantom_opera
17-02-13, 06:35
Want to increase TFR? Free quality baby and childcare and medicals up to primary school .. free one Coe from 2nd kid
6k bonus yawn ...
Want to increase TFR? Free quality baby and childcare and medicals up to primary school .. free one Coe from 2nd kid
6k bonus yawn ...Agreed. Pediatrician treatments are crazily expensive. Free quality baby medicals is a must. Free education also. :)
Yes yes that $6k is useless. Gone before the child enters primary school. :( Govt tell u I help u for first 5 yrs and you're on your own for next 25 yrs. No wonder they don't dare to push birthrates too much coz they know they don't dare to do more in this area. Take in foreigners is an easier solution. :spliff:
Want to increase TFR? Free quality baby and childcare and medicals up to primary school .. free one Coe from 2nd kid
6k bonus yawn ...
Well said! :cheers5: And this is just to begin with... Also must have longer paternal, maternal and child care leave, flexi working hours and arrangement for parents with children under 10 etc.
Give me 10k bonus I also yawn.
Well said! :cheers5: And this is just to begin with... Also must have longer paternal, maternal and child care leave, flexi working hours and arrangement for parents with children under 10 etc.
Give me 10k bonus I also yawn.
If the govt give cash it is USELESS, I repeat, TOTALLY USLESS, cos pediatrician and child care centers etc. will 'adjust' their fees accordingly...
phantom_opera
17-02-13, 08:50
this is the right step ... looks like PAP is finally waking up
维文受访时说，政府将进一步研究，探讨如何让让更多小贩中心以非盈利的模式由社会企业经营。“我们会进一步研究，探讨如何支持这样的模式
The first hawker center managed by social enterprise opens at Simple Bedok
this is the right step ... looks like PAP is finally waking up
维文受访时说，政府将进一步研究，探讨如何让让更多小贩中心以非盈利的模式由社会企业经营。“我们会进一步研究，探讨如何支持这样的模式
The first hawker center managed by social enterprise opens at Simple Bedok
Hi...I am really worried - it means the government does not evaluate and assess the feasibility of the plan before confirming the white paper.
This is indeed worrying.
proud owner
17-02-13, 10:16
it is good if PAP can build infra structure first then talk about increasing population ...
i still feel there are insufficient primary schools around ...
take a look at manhattan ... a true cosmopolitan ... mainly tourists ,,, bankers ,,, etc ... and yet there are many primary schools in the city ...
to think that there are many singles living and working in the city ... there are actually sufficient schools ...
not so in spore ...
making parents worry about where and how to send their kids to school ...
making parents move house etc ...
To me the most scary part of this paper is that there seems to be no other way of growing GDP other than immigration
And nothing is focus on how to increase TFR so I think pap has given up and assumed TFR below 1.0 in next 20y
can someone give me the answer.. that one generation after that 6.9m, what is the next population number?
Want to increase TFR? Free quality baby and childcare and medicals up to primary school .. free one Coe from 2nd kid
6k bonus yawn ...
what do singaporeans want? coe, house, pri sch Q, etc.
solution: tag TFR to these "wants"... 1 kid 20k rebate coe, 2 kid 40k rebate coe (or whatever number it may be).... 3 kids get 3x the chances of balloting. or higher priority for matured estate balloting. pri sch admission based on # of kids (wun spiral out of control - how many kids can you have before the eldest reach p1 registration)?
other than the coe case, the other "privileges" actually cost the garmen $0.
i am sure our garmen not stupid to see this. but they do not wish to act on it. TFR is really not their key concern, because importing is faster and easier, and can secure more votes too.
So what is the magic number for population? People say 6.9 million too many so lets ask what number is good and why?
If govt starts giving strong incentives for SC to improve higher birth rates and if it works, won't we be touching the 6.9 million in 2030 also? :confused:
Have a national baby lottery then? All baby birth in the yr get a chance . 1m cash , 1 condo , 1 Coe + car?
Wat else is needed? Free medical? Free education , free child care , free holiday with mummy n daddy, free 30yrs transport pass on all sibgapore public transport, free 2 meals a day at Resturant for 30yrs.
Enough bo?
Oh forgot must include emotional support. 2x meet the MP 1:1 for emotional support for life. Min 3hr per session and direct hot line to MP desk.
Gam bo?
Wild Falcon
18-02-13, 09:41
And also working with outdated assumptions and die die need to import people to hit TFR of 2.1 . Come on, people are living longer, mortality rates no longer the same, so people can work longer. Imagine retire at 60 years old and wait to die for another 30 years. In short, the old TFR of 2.1 no longer applies and few developed countries in the world use that target.
And economic growth and $ is not everything in life. Look at the way SG has become a senseless construction site where we bulldoze everything of significance to build boring high rise blocks. Surely our heritage and culture matters?
Even LKY said before that this country can at best accomodate 6 million comfortably. Did you realise LKY did not vote? Even within the PAP, there are dissenters.
Want to increase TFR? Free quality baby and childcare and medicals up to primary school .. free one Coe from 2nd kid
6k bonus yawn ...
Wild Falcon
18-02-13, 09:47
And PAP like to use low TFR as an excuse to bring in foreigners. And they start to contradict themselves by saying they like to bring "low skilled" foreigners like construction workers and not PMET. Seriously, how does construction workers improve our TFR? How can construction workers provide support to our aged when they don't even pay taxes? Construction workers are transcient right and they don't settle down? The white paper has just too many loopholes. one has to be really daft to give it a "A1" and pass it with flying colours 77/90. Even 6 million by 2020 is a joke - it means 100k foreigners every year from today's 5.3 million. And PAP makes it sound like it's either 100k per year of immigrants or DOOMSDAY. Seriously? If I go to my Board of Directors and paint such a bad scenario analysis - either increase budget for foreigners or DIE, the BOD will fire me. Seriously? Singapore will crash and burn if we take in slightly less foreigners? And our women become maids in other countries? I just hope they realise Singaporeans are no longer fools. We have been to other developed countries and found out many have done reasonable well without selling their soul to foreigners.
And PAP like to use low TFR as an excuse to bring in foreigners. And they start to contradict themselves by saying they like to bring "low skilled" foreigners like construction workers and not PMET. Seriously, how does construction workers improve our TFR? How can construction workers provide support to our aged when they don't even pay taxes? Construction workers are transcient right and they don't settle down? The white paper has just too many loopholes. one has to be really daft to give it a "A1" and pass it with flying colours 77/90. Even 6 million by 2020 is a joke - it means 100k foreigners every year from today's 5.3 million. And PAP makes it sound like it's either 100k per year of immigrants or DOOMSDAY. Seriously? If I go to my Board of Directors and paint such a bad scenario analysis - either increase budget for foreigners or DIE, the BOD will fire me. Seriously? Singapore will crash and burn if we take in slightly less foreigners? And our women become maids in other countries? I just hope they realise Singaporeans are no longer fools. We have been to other developed countries and found out many have done reasonable well without selling their soul to foreigners.
to me, the white paper is a big 'F'
F - for content
F - for consultation
F - for PR
F - for U-turning and twisting after leaving a distaste among citizens
F - for the hare brained scholar who stated nursing is a low-skilled job
F - for the perm sec who approved it without vetting thoroughly
i do not think singaporeans are dead against FTs coming in. after all, there are certain jobs and sectors that no singaporeans will want to work in or do not have the expertise to (e.g. space, aeronautics, green energy, etc). whether such jobs can be repackaged or more incentives can be used to attract singaporeans, that is a separate issue. but we all know that the low-waged workers didn't share in the economic boom in the last decade, with inflation-adjusted wages moving southwards.
it is the mid-level jobs, which Singaporeans are up to the job, but companies are giving it to FTs cos' of cost - does the individual singaporean benefit? try talking to the one who lost his/her job to the FT. does the company benefit? certainly. does the country benefit? definitely.
The best speech on the White Paper debate was given by, ironically PAP's Indergit Singh who asked for tradeoffs in economic growth for a more comfortable life for all Singaporeans. Quote: "Our past decade of rapid population growth has already created too many problems which need to be solved first before we take the next step. I call on the government to take a breather for five years, solve all the problems created by the past policies of rapid economic and population growth. We can safely say that we have failed to achieve the goal set by the then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, of a Swiss standard of living for most Singaporeans, except for the higher income Singaporeans including foreigners who just recently decided to make Singapore their home. So I call for a breather in this quest of growing the population and focus on improving the lives of Singaporeans and achieve that promised Swiss Standard of living for most Singaporeans first before we plan our next growth trajectory."
So no point talking about 6.9m or whatever number that can be plucked out from the sky. Just take a breather, solve prevailing problems first.
Have a national baby lottery then? All baby birth in the yr get a chance . 1m cash , 1 condo , 1 Coe + car?
Wat else is needed? Free medical? Free education , free child care , free holiday with mummy n daddy, free 30yrs transport pass on all sibgapore public transport, free 2 meals a day at Resturant for 30yrs.
Enough bo?There are 3 groups of married couples. One don't want children and we can do nothing to encourage them to have kids. Second group is one who can afford to have many kids. Third group is one who wants kids but can't afford. So they don't have kids lor and if govt wants to enhance birth rate, this is their target group. Something enticing enough must be dished out. Medical and education cost is pretty high and they are necessities in life. Childcare don't have to be free coz its not a basic necessity in life. Holiday is a luxury so can't expect it to be free too. You sounded rich enough to afford these things so feel angry that people are asking from govt this and that.
Tell you for a fact its not the low income group who are suffering the most in this regard. They can always apply for bursary and financial aids. Its the middle class income group who suffer the most because they don't qualify for anything. Everything also must pay by themselves. :cheers6:
The best speech on the White Paper debate was given by, ironically PAP's Indergit Singh who asked for tradeoffs in economic growth for a more comfortable life for all Singaporeans. Quote: "Our past decade of rapid population growth has already created too many problems which need to be solved first before we take the next step. I call on the government to take a breather for five years, solve all the problems created by the past policies of rapid economic and population growth. We can safely say that we have failed to achieve the goal set by the then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong, of a Swiss standard of living for most Singaporeans, except for the higher income Singaporeans including foreigners who just recently decided to make Singapore their home. So I call for a breather in this quest of growing the population and focus on improving the lives of Singaporeans and achieve that promised Swiss Standard of living for most Singaporeans first before we plan our next growth trajectory."
So no point talking about 6.9m or whatever number that can be plucked out from the sky. Just take a breather, solve prevailing problems first.Poignant indeed...
And also working with outdated assumptions and die die need to import people to hit TFR of 2.1 . Come on, people are living longer, mortality rates no longer the same, so people can work longer. Imagine retire at 60 years old and wait to die for another 30 years. In short, the old TFR of 2.1 no longer applies and few developed countries in the world use that target.
And economic growth and $ is not everything in life. Look at the way SG has become a senseless construction site where we bulldoze everything of significance to build boring high rise blocks. Surely our heritage and culture matters?
Even LKY said before that this country can at best accomodate 6 million comfortably. Did you realise LKY did not vote? Even within the PAP, there are dissenters.
60 is still quite young can work till 65.
so also imagine at 65yrs have to work at Mac Donald or wait table or clear rubbish or maybe or still go work in a high stress environment trying to meet KPI. Isnt that what many people think are nightmare? Many people imagine post 65 is rear bird have coffee and play with their grand children, KTV or play mahjong .
So the question is post 65 we still expect people to work? Well there are those who can and want to should. Those who dont want to can also not need to.
Question is so if mostly choose to take it easier then with a aging population who will be actually working ? Also its known a 65 yr old spend less if they are retired. So who else support do work then?
In 1 breath we talk abt the blissfulness tat we can retire at 65 and in the same breath we say let the people who live longer work ! So what do we want? cannot be have it all!
And if we have 65yrs old retired doing things they like we need a next generation to still provide economic growth needed for tax $ to fund the retirees needs. the next wave to support the medisafe , infra etc.
Dont just all think so short sighted. FACT is singapore core will be smaller no matter what . foreign inject or not till be smaller than today in 2060.
Regulators
18-02-13, 14:56
So if you think it is wrong for the younger generation to care and look after the old, are you saying the young should kick the old out of the house and tell them to depend on themselves even if they have no means? Maybe you should try that with your parents first. :doh:
Our society has confucianism deeply rooted in it, so are you saying that the older generation that has built up singapore to where it is in one way or another should just be cast to one corner and depend on themselves when they grow old? Even your communist brothers in North Korea don't think that way :doh:
60 is still quite young can work till 65.
so also imagine at 65yrs have to work at Mac Donald or wait table or clear rubbish or maybe or still go work in a high stress environment trying to meet KPI. Isnt that what many people think are nightmare? Many people imagine post 65 is rear bird have coffee and play with their grand children, KTV or play mahjong .
So the question is post 65 we still expect people to work? Well there are those who can and want to should. Those who dont want to can also not need to.
Question is so if mostly choose to take it easier then with a aging population who will be actually working ? Also its known a 65 yr old spend less if they are retired. So who else support do work then?
In 1 breath we talk abt the blissfulness tat we can retire at 65 and in the same breath we say let the people who live longer work ! So what do we want? cannot be have it all!
And if we have 65yrs old retired doing things they like we need a next generation to still provide economic growth needed for tax $ to fund the retirees needs. the next wave to support the medisafe , infra etc.
Dont just all think so short sighted. FACT is singapore core will be smaller no matter what . foreign inject or not till be smaller than today in 2060.
So if you think it is wrong for the younger generation to care and look after the old, are you saying the young should kick the old out of the house and tell them to depend on themselves even if they have no means? Maybe you should try that with your parents first. :doh:
Our society has confucianism deeply rooted in it, so are you saying that the older generation that has built up singapore to where it is in one way or another should just be cast to one corner and depend on themselves when they grow old? Even your communist brothers in North Korea don't think that way :doh:
You are one Blind and Wood head Regular dumbass. Which blind eye of your read that I say is wrong for young to care for the old and kick them out?
I am responding to Wild Falcon question if we really need a TFR of 2.1 since people live longer. And he imagine people retire at 60 and wait to die.
I am am saying we envision people retire and have a good nice retirement. but if we dont produce enough kids and we all reject the notion that we need new citizen to fill the gap of the older folks retiring. it would mean we are expecting who to support them ? if they themselves have less children or none. The state will have to take over the role. and that come from taxation and GDP growth.
we can at one breath say we want the old to have a nice retirement reject GDP and yet expect state to support when there is no economy to keep the support going. It would be tough on the young generation also..
open ur blind eye and clear ur wood filled brain of yours.
Regulators
19-02-13, 02:52
numbskull, you were obviously suggesting that by having the old enjoying their retirement n not contributing to the economy, it would be a liability for the young, so don't deny that. whichever way you write it, that was how you meant. my question to you is what is wrong with having the government or the young supporting the older generation? nobody is saying that we should have zero population n economic growth forever. as mentioned to you before, population growth is just one aspect of boosting the economy, changing to high value outputs n less labour intensive sectors is another way to boost the economy. government should also look into families adopting children rather than giving birth, but do you even know what is the cost involved in adopting children n has the government even done anything to alleviate that cost? no! the government hasn't done much to help the population expand in the first place, so should we salute them for coming out with the white paper? you are just so naive n pathetic. every country should factor caring for the aged as part of national expenses instead of treating the old as liability. this is precisely what the miw are trying to brainwash into numbskulls like you n sadly, they have succeeded. I long for the day when you need money from cpf to go for some medical treatment like dialysis or buy hearing aids n the government tell you to go fly kite coz they need that money for investments with temasek n gic. you should also start telling your parents under your care that they are a liability to you and they shouldn't grow old :doh: :doh:
You are one Blind and Wood head Regular dumbass. Which blind eye of your read that I say is wrong for young to care for the old and kick them out?
I am responding to Wild Falcon question if we really need a TFR of 2.1 since people live longer. And he imagine people retire at 60 and wait to die.
I am am saying we envision people retire and have a good nice retirement. but if we dont produce enough kids and we all reject the notion that we need new citizen to fill the gap of the older folks retiring. it would mean we are expecting who to support them ? if they themselves have less children or none. The state will have to take over the role. and that come from taxation and GDP growth.
we can at one breath say we want the old to have a nice retirement reject GDP and yet expect state to support when there is no economy to keep the support going. It would be tough on the young generation also..
open ur blind eye and clear ur wood filled brain of yours.
numbskull, you were obviously suggesting that by having the old enjoying their retirement n not contributing to the economy, it would be a liability for the young, so don't deny that. whichever way you write it, that was how you meant. my question to you is what is wrong with having the government or the young supporting the older generation? nobody is saying that we should have zero population n economic growth forever. as mentioned to you before, population growth is just one aspect of boosting the economy, changing to high value outputs n less labour intensive sectors is another way to boost the economy. government should also look into families adopting children rather than giving birth, but do you even know what is the cost involved in adopting children n has the government even done anything to alleviate that cost? no! the government hasn't done much to help the population expand in the first place, so should we salute them for coming out with the white paper? you are just so naive n pathetic. every country should factor caring for the aged as part of national expenses instead of treating the old as liability. this is precisely what the miw are trying to brainwash into numbskulls like you n sadly, they have succeeded. I long for the day when you need money from cpf to go for some medical treatment like dialysis or buy hearing aids n the government tell you to go fly kite coz they need that money for investments with temasek n gic. you should also start telling your parents under your care that they are a liability to you and they shouldn't grow old :doh: :doh:
hey blind man. and wood brian? did I say is a liability? if ur stupid head of yours want to read it as liability. There is nothing I can help explain to you. where in ur blind and stupid brain see I say young support the old is a wrong? u can talk big all you want. at the end of the day the model must be sustainable. Idiot.
what a clown.
There are 3 groups of married couples. One don't want children and we can do nothing to encourage them to have kids. Second group is one who can afford to have many kids. Third group is one who wants kids but can't afford. So they don't have kids lor and if govt wants to enhance birth rate, this is their target group. Something enticing enough must be dished out. Medical and education cost is pretty high and they are necessities in life. Childcare don't have to be free coz its not a basic necessity in life. Holiday is a luxury so can't expect it to be free too. You sounded rich enough to afford these things so feel angry that people are asking from govt this and that.
Tell you for a fact its not the low income group who are suffering the most in this regard. They can always apply for bursary and financial aids. Its the middle class income group who suffer the most because they don't qualify for anything. Everything also must pay by themselves. :cheers6:
i think this is very true. i have 3 and i am stopping because i do not foresee a huge increase in income from this point onwards, and another 1 that comes along means greater expenses, eating away my savings and investment bullet. i consider myself of decent genes, top 10%, maybe top 5% of my cohort. i am sure my kids will do equally well. furthermore, i am rare breed with 3 kids. most of my frens of equal social status have 2 or less. many not married.
if me being top 5% of cohort find it hard to have >3 kids, what about the rest?
me and wife do not mind having more if $$$$ can be solved. time is less of a concern, we have a pretty decent work life balance and CAN afford the TIME for kids. but no $$$.
can someone give me the answer.. that one generation after that 6.9m, what is the next population number?
minority, i am sure you are close to the ruling party.
do they have the answer to this?
i think this is very true. i have 3 and i am stopping because i do not foresee a huge increase in income from this point onwards, and another 1 that comes along means greater expenses, eating away my savings and investment bullet. i consider myself of decent genes, top 10%, maybe top 5% of my cohort. i am sure my kids will do equally well. furthermore, i am rare breed with 3 kids. most of my frens of equal social status have 2 or less. many not married.
if me being top 5% of cohort find it hard to have >3 kids, what about the rest?
me and wife do not mind having more if $$$$ can be solved. time is less of a concern, we have a pretty decent work life balance and CAN afford the TIME for kids. but no $$$.
even couple who can fully paid up hdb, invested in condo, say no $$$ to have more kid... :cool:
even couple who can fully paid up hdb, invested in condo, say no $$$ to have more kid... :cool:
yah, i shld sell my condo/car and downgrade my hdb to 3 rm flat, take MRT to work everyday. then i have 10 instead of 3. :doh:
it is a matter of lifestyle. and i already done more than my national service of 2 kids. it is not unreasonable for me to moderate my expectation and go for lifestyle over more kids.
my point is - even if someone like me complain about $$ not enuff.. what about the other echelons of society? cost of raising one kid is abt $1-2k per mth depending on expectations. say every extra kid cost 2k more, that is 3 lots of OCBC every year. alot of $$$ leh.
my marginal utility from having one more kid is much lesser than the MU from that extra OCBC share.
minority, i am sure you are close to the ruling party.
do they have the answer to this?
Sorry I am not close to any party. Only party I have is my family. As for 6.9 , 5.9. 5.3. 5.5. its just a no.
Why so focus on just the no.? I am more focus on the next 20yrs and beyond on sustainability and if we can evolved from it.
all look at 6.9M as a big no no and fear more after. Well perhaps we forgot people expire? the baby boomers will pass on beyond 2060. and population needs eventually level off.
So should we fear it? I dont think so.. we evolved with it. If then telling the initial population of singapore of 1.5M in the 1960s that singapore will be 5.3M I am sure the same fear will surface. but look back did we make it work? We did.
As long we focus on clear proper planning its sustainable.
Like the Regular woodhead screaming we see old as liable. I dont see it that way. base on his anal logy of liability , so if a parent buys insurance to cover the kid and buy insurance on themselves to ensure the kids growing yrs are covered in event they meet with a accident or the kid have a crisis that the parent cannot cover. Is regular butt head saying that the parent see the kid as liability? Dont confuse Planning and liability.
so I see if we plan properly look ahead and recognized our challenges earlier we will come of this in 2060 or beyond better. If we keep bickering on our own personal material short term gains then for sure we are doomed.
minority, i am sure you are close to the ruling party.
do they have the answer to this?
the White paper has already been largely discredited. So much for national conversation, lol.
i think this is very true. i have 3 and i am stopping because i do not foresee a huge increase in income from this point onwards, and another 1 that comes along means greater expenses, eating away my savings and investment bullet. i consider myself of decent genes, top 10%, maybe top 5% of my cohort. i am sure my kids will do equally well. furthermore, i am rare breed with 3 kids. most of my frens of equal social status have 2 or less. many not married.
if me being top 5% of cohort find it hard to have >3 kids, what about the rest?
me and wife do not mind having more if $$$$ can be solved. time is less of a concern, we have a pretty decent work life balance and CAN afford the TIME for kids. but no $$$.
These are life style choices. we are now use to a life style that we dont to change it. I have a friends with 6 kids. but he is well to do. I also have friends that are mulling of getting married. becoz of the change in life style options he is so used to.
u are lucky. Coz some of mine friend who married late. having 3 is a biological challenge.
Its all life style choices. Marry young? Marry late, have 1 , 2, 3, or 6. no amount of $$$ can make a person want to change their life style choices that they are so used to.
Say give u a lot of $$$ ask u have 6 kids but no Time at all is that something everyone can envision? Well some can , some cannot. Coz its not $$$ after that its the life style it impacts.
yah, i shld sell my condo/car and downgrade my hdb to 3 rm flat, take MRT to work everyday. then i have 10 instead of 3. :doh:
it is a matter of lifestyle. and i already done more than my national service of 2 kids. it is not unreasonable for me to moderate my expectation and go for lifestyle over more kids.
my point is - even if someone like me complain about $$ not enuff.. what about the other echelons of society? cost of raising one kid is abt $1-2k per mth depending on expectations. say every extra kid cost 2k more, that is 3 lots of OCBC every year. alot of $$$ leh.
my marginal utility from having one more kid is much lesser than the MU from that extra OCBC share.
I a bit confused here. is $$$ the problem or life style choices the problem?
the White paper has already been largely discredited. So much for national conversation, lol.
Well everyone is debating about it. fighting over it. protesting abt it. I think it got the conversation going and people thinking. So I think it worked.
I a bit confused here. is $$$ the problem or life style choices the problem?
$$$ = (tangible) lifestyle
i think your perception of lifestyle is work life balance (intangible), but my perception of lifestyle is what extra money can buy (tangible). don't forget that to a certain extent, money can also buy time. even health.
standard of living can mean $$$ ($ to buy better food?), or also amount of time to relax (more time=better lifestyle/standard of living)
so for me, i have the time to have kids, but i want to maintain my (material) lifestyle of car, house, etc. for others, it may be no time for kids (hectic lifestyle).
Well everyone is debating about it. fighting over it. protesting abt it. I think it got the conversation going and people thinking. So I think it worked.
i think .. we may have our differing views on this thing. but the healthy outcome is, everybody has a passion for it. imagine if society dun even care what goes on.
would you rather have a high voting attendance.. or 50% of pple never even turn up to vote?
u are lucky. Coz some of mine friend who married late. having 3 is a biological challenge.
it is both luck and choice. luck because i managed to find a life partner early in life. choice because we both decided to forego our freedom to have kids early (first kid born within first yr of marriage - and no, not shotgun. :scared-4: ). and because married young, so chance of bulls eye also higher.
for your frens.. it might have been a conscious choice. if regret, also can blame no one.
Personally, i am fine with 6.9 or even 10mil if our infrastructure can support it.
However, the increase should not make up mostly by foreigners. Citizens be it native or new citizens excluding PR should make up at least 60% imo.
Our economy will be very fragile when foreigners including PR make up more than 50% of our population. Look at the rise and fall of Dubai.
it is both luck and choice. luck because i managed to find a life partner early in life. choice because we both decided to forego our freedom to have kids early (first kid born within first yr of marriage - and no, not shotgun. :scared-4: ). and because married young, so chance of bulls eye also higher.
for your frens.. it might have been a conscious choice. if regret, also can blame no one.
Ture. not saying they blame anyone. I was pointing out its life style choices. and we live with the choices we make.
Personally, i am fine with 6.9 or even 10mil if our infrastructure can support it.
However, the increase should not make up mostly by foreigners. Citizens be it native or new citizens should make up at least 60% imo.
Sure then we have to chop chop go work on it. problem is people these days have life style choices . So my pt is we cant have it all. if we want life style choices and we recognizes we have a continue to evolved we have to out sourced some of this.
If not we have to quickly DIY.
chicken and egg. which we want 1st must take a pick.
Sure then we have to chop chop go work on it. problem is people these days have life style choices . So my pt is we cant have it all. if we want life style choices and we recognizes we have a continue to evolved we have to out sourced some of this.
If not we have to quickly DIY.
chicken and egg. which we want 1st must take a pick.
give me more money. we will have 2 more. :D
give me more money. we will have 2 more. :D
hah hah then u wont have time.
Not time for yr self but time to split with the kids and urself n wife ;)
i think this is very true. i have 3 and i am stopping because i do not foresee a huge increase in income from this point onwards, and another 1 that comes along means greater expenses, eating away my savings and investment bullet. i consider myself of decent genes, top 10%, maybe top 5% of my cohort. i am sure my kids will do equally well. furthermore, i am rare breed with 3 kids. most of my frens of equal social status have 2 or less. many not married.
if me being top 5% of cohort find it hard to have >3 kids, what about the rest?
me and wife do not mind having more if $$$$ can be solved. time is less of a concern, we have a pretty decent work life balance and CAN afford the TIME for kids. but no $$$.Me too... Have 3 kids. When I took my kid to the doc, its always at least S$150. 3 kids taking turn to fall sick and possible spread from one child to the next in the same bout of flu. Visit doc every 3 months, each time costing no less than S$300 for 2 or all 3 kids. In a year its easily S$2000 just on outpatient treatment. Can take them to GP but most don't have suitable medicine for very young kids so pediatrician consultations are necessary at times. Last time one of my kid was hospitalized and it set us back S$4k. I had to request for discharge at the displeasure of that doc who is squeezing every bit of cash from us... :scared-3: No insurance then. Got insurance already... Govt gave baby bonus but it is just not enough. Some people ask why we complain so much but its not complaining. Its calling for help... if like that don't have so many kids? Then if govt is willing to help, this problem can be lightened. :sleep:
Also, when govt insisted that all kids below certain height must have car seats. I called traffic police and asked point blank... if I have 3 kids and a maid, all 6 of us travel on my small sedan, how to have car seats??? :scared-4: I asked the police does it mean i have to buy an MPV just to satisfy that law??? How come all these expenses are on us suddenly? Check out car prices today! Think its not complaints. Its more of calling for help. No wonder those who want kids but can't afford would rather not have kids. Govt can do something about this group of couples but they aren't. :beats-me-man:
give me more money. we will have 2 more. :DAgreed! :D
Me too... Have 3 kids. When I took my kid to the doc, its always at least S$150. 3 kids taking turn to fall sick and possible spread from one child to the next in the same bout of flu. Visit doc every 3 months, each time costing no less than S$300 for 2 or all 3 kids. In a year its easily S$2000 just on outpatient treatment. Can take them to GP but most don't have suitable medicine for very young kids so pediatrician consultations are necessary at times. Last time one of my kid was hospitalized and it set us back S$4k. I had to request for discharge at the displeasure of that doc who is squeezing every bit of cash from us... :scared-3: No insurance then. Got insurance already... Govt gave baby bonus but it is just not enough. Some people ask why we complain so much but its not complaining. Its calling for help... if like that don't have so many kids? Then if govt is willing to help, this problem can be lightened. :sleep:
Also, when govt insisted that all kids below certain height must have car seats. I called traffic police and asked point blank... if I have 3 kids and a maid, all 6 of us travel on my small sedan, how to have car seats??? :scared-4: I asked the police does it mean i have to buy an MPV just to satisfy that law??? How come all these expenses are on us suddenly? Check out car prices today! Think its not complaints. Its more of calling for help. No wonder those who want kids but can't afford would rather not have kids. Govt can do something about this group of couples but they aren't. :beats-me-man:
have you try poly clinic? I go there its very cheap. one visit is $20+. even kid immunization also they do much cheaper than the private GP. medicine is also the same.
have you try poly clinic? I go there its very cheap. one visit is $20+. even kid immunization also they do much cheaper than the private GP. medicine is also the same.Medicine is not suitable for kids. Trust me. Initially I took them to KK hospital coz subsidized but after taking the medicine, child is still sick. KK is the more expensive polyclinic... also, not all medicine is suitable for children. ;)
Not mentioning that the wait is horrendous. Children will not stay still waiting for 3 hours. One restless kid is still manageable. If there are 3, you will beg them to keep quiet and in the end take them away before the police help you take them away for causing a nuisance. :D
Medicine is not suitable for kids. Trust me. Initially I took them to KK hospital coz subsidized but after taking the medicine, child is still sick. KK is the more expensive polyclinic... also, not all medicine is suitable for children. ;)
Not mentioning that the wait is horrendous. Children will not stay still waiting for 3 hours. One restless kid is still manageable. If there are 3, you will beg them to keep quiet and in the end take them away before the police help you take them away for causing a nuisance. :D
hmm ok. I go KK. but dont have same no. of kids as u. but I find the wait quite fast these days. and the docs experience are much better as they handle more cases than the PED outside. price wise is much more reasonable.
Actually some of the medicine are the same unless its special cases.
hmm ok. I go KK. but dont have same no. of kids as u. but I find the wait quite fast these days. and the docs experience are much better as they handle more cases than the PED outside. price wise is much more reasonable.
Actually some of the medicine are the same unless its special cases.Not sure about the wait these days... haven't been there for some years already. Anyway, my colleague and I have the same sentiments.. the nurses there at KK is good but not so for the doctors... I even heard the nurse teaching the doc what to do for my kid and for my colleague's kid. Lol... :banghead:
Cyberknight
19-02-13, 15:23
Not sure about the wait these days... haven't been there for some years already. Anyway, my colleague and I have the same sentiments.. the nurses there at KK is good but not so for the doctors... I even heard the nurse teaching the doc what to do for my kid and for my colleague's kid. Lol... :banghead:
That doc is a houseman or medical officer = junior doc.
The really good doctors are the assoc consultant / consultant / senior consultant.
But if u dun give junior doc a pl to learn, how to become senior consultant?
In poly clinics, nurses do the immunization.
In private clinics, doctors do the immunization.
Drugs n needles r the same. The difference in $$ paid goes where?? U answer urself lor.....
Regulators
19-02-13, 19:46
new docs need to consult nurses for procedural matters sometimes.
Not sure about the wait these days... haven't been there for some years already. Anyway, my colleague and I have the same sentiments.. the nurses there at KK is good but not so for the doctors... I even heard the nurse
Me too... Have 3 kids. When I took my kid to the doc, its always at least S$150. 3 kids taking turn to fall sick and possible spread from one child to the next in the same bout of flu. Visit doc every 3 months, each time costing no less than S$300 for 2 or all 3 kids. In a year its easily S$2000 just on outpatient treatment. Can take them to GP but most don't have suitable medicine for very young kids so pediatrician consultations are necessary at times. Last time one of my kid was hospitalized and it set us back S$4k. I had to request for discharge at the displeasure of that doc who is squeezing every bit of cash from us... :scared-3: No insurance then. Got insurance already... Govt gave baby bonus but it is just not enough. Some people ask why we complain so much but its not complaining. Its calling for help... if like that don't have so many kids? Then if govt is willing to help, this problem can be lightened. :sleep:
Also, when govt insisted that all kids below certain height must have car seats. I called traffic police and asked point blank... if I have 3 kids and a maid, all 6 of us travel on my small sedan, how to have car seats??? :scared-4: I asked the police does it mean i have to buy an MPV just to satisfy that law??? How come all these expenses are on us suddenly? Check out car prices today! Think its not complaints. Its more of calling for help. No wonder those who want kids but can't afford would rather not have kids. Govt can do something about this group of couples but they aren't. :beats-me-man:
agree on the PD. luckily my kids are slightly older, they have outgrown the PD. so sometimes i go GP except the youngest one still go PD. i still rem my eldest one, once she had fever (when young), in one week we spent 1k on PD.
as for car seats, you just need to fill up the car. say 3 adults seated behind, TP cannot fine you for no car seat.
Medicine is not suitable for kids. Trust me. Initially I took them to KK hospital coz subsidized but after taking the medicine, child is still sick. KK is the more expensive polyclinic... also, not all medicine is suitable for children. ;)
Not mentioning that the wait is horrendous. Children will not stay still waiting for 3 hours. One restless kid is still manageable. If there are 3, you will beg them to keep quiet and in the end take them away before the police help you take them away for causing a nuisance. :D
when kids are sick, you rather go PD in the neighbourhood and get it over and done with. going KK too far and wait too long.
one of my kids super power. she really cannot wait. once at KK, she was screaming so loudly that the nurse let her cut Q all the way to the front. within 15min, we were done. (don't say i never teach you :D )
Me too... Have 3 kids. When I took my kid to the doc, its always at least S$150. 3 kids taking turn to fall sick and possible spread from one child to the next in the same bout of flu. Visit doc every 3 months, each time costing no less than S$300 for 2 or all 3 kids. In a year its easily S$2000 just on outpatient treatment. Can take them to GP but most don't have suitable medicine for very young kids so pediatrician consultations are necessary at times. Last time one of my kid was hospitalized and it set us back S$4k. I had to request for discharge at the displeasure of that doc who is squeezing every bit of cash from us... :scared-3: No insurance then. Got insurance already... Govt gave baby bonus but it is just not enough. Some people ask why we complain so much but its not complaining. Its calling for help... if like that don't have so many kids? Then if govt is willing to help, this problem can be lightened. :sleep:
Also, when govt insisted that all kids below certain height must have car seats. I called traffic police and asked point blank... if I have 3 kids and a maid, all 6 of us travel on my small sedan, how to have car seats??? :scared-4: I asked the police does it mean i have to buy an MPV just to satisfy that law??? How come all these expenses are on us suddenly? Check out car prices today! Think its not complaints. Its more of calling for help. No wonder those who want kids but can't afford would rather not have kids. Govt can do something about this group of couples but they aren't. :beats-me-man:
just curious brother. when you say PD's medicine is different compared to GPs, how different? I dont know what I miss out. Myself and my wife can claim the consultation but we dont' bother to bring them to PD, just GP will do if necessary. Sometime we even buy the medicine like fever, cough and flu medicine from the pharmacy partly we also believe in building up their body resistance
did i miss out anything? my kids are still young and we have been doing it for the last 10 years. by the way I got 5 kids.
just curious brother. when you say PD's medicine is different compared to GPs, how different? I dont know what I miss out. Myself and my wife can claim the consultation but we dont' bother to bring them to PD, just GP will do if necessary. Sometime we even buy the medicine like fever, cough and flu medicine from the pharmacy partly we also believe in building up their body resistance
did i miss out anything? my kids are still young and we have been doing it for the last 10 years. by the way I got 5 kids.
it's very different.
GP usually stock up on generics, or expensive originals meant for adults. GP never did a HMDP on paeds too.
PD usually stock up on originals meant for kids. PD spend at least a year of HMDP training to gain specialization
it's very different.
GP usually stock up on generics, or expensive originals meant for adults. GP never did a HMDP on paeds too.
PD usually stock up on originals meant for kids. PD spend at least a year of HMDP training to gain specialization
U pay for wat u get. But KK is ok n fast these days
agree on the PD. luckily my kids are slightly older, they have outgrown the PD. so sometimes i go GP except the youngest one still go PD. i still rem my eldest one, once she had fever (when young), in one week we spent 1k on PD.
as for car seats, you just need to fill up the car. say 3 adults seated behind, TP cannot fine you for no car seat.Yup... traffic police told me that finally when I questioned them point them... lol...
just curious brother. when you say PD's medicine is different compared to GPs, how different? I dont know what I miss out. Myself and my wife can claim the consultation but we dont' bother to bring them to PD, just GP will do if necessary. Sometime we even buy the medicine like fever, cough and flu medicine from the pharmacy partly we also believe in building up their body resistance
did i miss out anything? my kids are still young and we have been doing it for the last 10 years. by the way I got 5 kids.Wow proud of you bro for having 5... :not-worthy:
I sent my kid to a GP but at 2 years old, GP said they do not have this and that medicine coz dosage is v high for the young kid. Then for my older kid, took GP medicine but still not recovered. 2 weeks later and still coughing, etc. Sent to PD and took another 1 wk and then feeling much better.
U pay for wat u get. Agreed... :cheers1:
Wow proud of you bro for having 5... :not-worthy:
I sent my kid to a GP but at 2 years old, GP said they do not have this and that medicine coz dosage is v high for the young kid. Then for my older kid, took GP medicine but still not recovered. 2 weeks later and still coughing, etc. Sent to PD and took another 1 wk and then feeling much better.
hahaha.. that's why nobody invite us to CNY :ashamed1: ... all run away...:D we dont mind another one but getting old liao lah.... body aching when carry the baby for too long..
we moved house abut 3 times and have been to serveral GPs along the way... the current GPs seen most of my kids but I must admit that I dont know what kind of medicine to ask also.. he prescribed and i just acept...
the good thing about my kids is that they recover very fast when they are sick, same like my wife... so I deduce that they inherit the good genes + my wife breast feed them till they are 14 months.. solid right... really salute her....save a lot on milk powder leh...
hahaha.. that's why nobody invite us to CNY :ashamed1: ... all run away...:D we dont mind another one but getting old liao lah.... body aching when carry the baby for too long..
we moved house abut 3 times and have been to serveral GPs along the way... the current GPs seen most of my kids but I must admit that I dont know what kind of medicine to ask also.. he prescribed and i just acept...
the good thing about my kids is that they recover very fast when they are sick, same like my wife... so I deduce that they inherit the good genes + my wife breast feed them till they are 14 months.. solid right... really salute her....save a lot on milk powder leh...Lol... u the man and your wife the woman... anyway hear what DPM got to say on 25 Feb whether have any goodies for having more kids... lol
After the backlash from the White Paper, they will try to redeem themselves with a very sweet Budget.
I sent my kid to a GP but at 2 years old, GP said they do not have this and that medicine coz dosage is v high for the young kid. Then for my older kid, took GP medicine but still not recovered. 2 weeks later and still coughing, etc. Sent to PD and took another 1 wk and then feeling much better.
yes, same case for me. for younger kids, the GP med dun work for them somehow. or the GP diagnosis.. is GENERAL diagnosis lor. hardly relevant for kids. so after trial and error, decided that kids up to around 4-5 yrs of age.. better go PD. becoz if you don't 病从浅中医, it may get really horrible after that.
After the backlash from the White Paper, they will try to redeem themselves with a very sweet Budget.
on the contrary, i believe they were expecting the backlash. i dun tink they care. just wait for NC come in to dilute SC votes.
ok anyway, let's not go into politics again.
on the contrary, i believe they were expecting the backlash. i dun tink they care. just wait for NC come in to dilute SC votes.
ok anyway, let's not go into politics again.
"You may not think about politics. But politics thinks about you." - Aung San Suu Kyi
:)
yes, same case for me. for younger kids, the GP med dun work for them somehow. or the GP diagnosis.. is GENERAL diagnosis lor. hardly relevant for kids. so after trial and error, decided that kids up to around 4-5 yrs of age.. better go PD. becoz if you don't 病从浅中医, it may get really horrible after that.
Yup.. those machines for asthma is only available in PD clinic... :sleep:
Yup.. those machines for asthma is only available in PD clinic... :sleep:
not true leh... now that you mention about the inhaling machine... my eldest daughter needed 1 + my No 3..... a few years back.. got to rent from them... so maybe the one i go to is a mix (GP + PD)...
oops.. i just realise we are off-topic...
not true leh... now that you mention about the inhaling machine... my eldest daughter needed 1 + my No 3..... a few years back.. got to rent from them... so maybe the one i go to is a mix (GP + PD)...
oops.. i just realise we are off-topic...Yup... most GP don't offer that machine.. anyway yes we are off... :D
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.