i agree with this part :
“Singapore is not a good development model and not one a developing country should follow. Singapore has basically conned the world about its nation-building achievement,” said King. “It is frightening that they should regard Singapore as a good model to follow.”
Years of robust growth in Singapore were driven initially by waves of foreign capital into the city-state and more recently by the import of foreign workers, who now make up one-third of the population. The government’s jealous husbanding of much of the economy, meanwhile, has rendered impotent much of the nation’s faculty for creative business.
“Its entrepreneurial, innovative capacity is quite small. It’s got a very small local private sector, unlike say South Korea and Taiwan, where there are vigorous entrepreneurial cultures. In Singapore, they don’t really have that,” said King, who spent many years working in the island-state.
I think Myanmar is a good model for Singapore. First they have many generals ruling the country, then they have a hero in Aung San Suu Kyi. Now we need a hero too. Sylvia Lim? Nicole Seah? Lina Chiam?
Not sure about Taiwan but in South Korea... if Samsung dies, South Korea dies. It is that big.
Not sure about Taiwan but in South Korea... if Samsung dies, South Korea dies. It is that big.
Thx God.... and please don't follow us... or your nation would end up with a whole brunch of people who will complain day and night about EVERYTHING... please please don't use us as any role model.... thx you.
We already have a hero.
He is Yaw Shin Leong.
If I wasnt living in Singapore then, I might have believed him. He has not seen the thugs & gangsters infested island that needed Section 55 of the CPC to control & eliminated, the farmlands & swamplands that was tampines, jurong, toa payoh, etc that was developed into what they are today. These arrmchair self appointed critics sucks imo.
not true. check out another book by bilveer singh. written by a singaporean prof.
we have inherited (whether you realised it or not), the whole british administration for public services. this includes a strong entrepot, stable efficient and reliable public service system, along with foreign missions that were located in sg which paved the path for foreign diplomatic relations.
we really didn't start from ground 0. a lot much better off. thugs gangsters everywhere have. even until now also have.
i agree with this part :
“Singapore is not a good development model and not one a developing country should follow. Singapore has basically conned the world about its nation-building achievement,” said King. “It is frightening that they should regard Singapore as a good model to follow.”
Years of robust growth in Singapore were driven initially by waves of foreign capital into the city-state and more recently by the import of foreign workers, who now make up one-third of the population. The government’s jealous husbanding of much of the economy, meanwhile, has rendered impotent much of the nation’s faculty for creative business.
“Its entrepreneurial, innovative capacity is quite small. It’s got a very small local private sector, unlike say South Korea and Taiwan, where there are vigorous entrepreneurial cultures. In Singapore, they don’t really have that,” said King, who spent many years working in the island-state.
since when was malaysia under the same strong british governance? sg was the entrepot, not whole of malaya as far as i remember.Well you should look at Malaysia. Inherited the same strong British governance but where is it today?