This is a quick response to "The inevitable problem with foreigners and what to do about it"
You think that the solution to foreigners "stealing our jobs" is to improve ourselves. Strangely enough, you already have the refutation to yourself in the earlier part of your opinion.
"The fresh graduates who have a diploma is looking for $1,900-$2,000, and are unwilling to take a supposedly meagre pay of only $1,400, stating that they do not wish to ‘short-change’ themselves."
And from the earlier part:
"It’s painfully obvious that a majority, if not all Singaporeans will decline to take the jobs of these 42%, who are earning barely enough to support themselves in a land of rising costs such as ours. These jobs pay far too low for our daily needs, and majority of us would not even consider these jobs when we are job hunting."
But I have something else to add. I always ask this question: imagine the worst possible job in the world, maybe a sewerage worker for example (please note, I respect them a lot, precisely because the conditions are demanding). Next imagine you were paid $1,000,000 a month (in our present Singapore Dollars) for this job. Would you turn it down?
I don't think anyone in their right mind would turn it down. In fact, they'd probably take the job, then outsource it to a foreign worker (:D). But the point remains that there is no such thing as an inherently unwanted job: it is all about getting paid enough to make it worth your while.
One very important thing is that the government does control costs here in a very significant way. Practically everything is indeed nationalised, for all means and purposes (except profits go into private hands). So, it is extremely disingenuous for the government to claim that we demand too much, when they are the ones jacking up the costs. Sure, we can be happy with starting pay of $1400 if houses only cost $100,000 (using the basis of 3 years of income as affordability, here assuming household income). Sure, we can be happy with starting pay of $1400 if going to work and back doesn't cost more than $3.
The point is that if the company cannot survive without exploiting underpaid labour, then maybe it should be allowed to die a natural death, and let other companies take over. If they free up the space, rentals would go down. A new start up will not be viable for a few years, but once it is, it might become the most successful company ever. But we remain stacking the deck against it.
What you need to remember is that what you do with one part of the economy affects every other part of it. You cannot change one bit and expect everything else to remain the same. We are all responding to incentives and doing our own sums. If you raise the labour supply, the price of labour (i.e. wages) must necessarily fall. There is no other way around it. If we have a huge growing native population, then that is another problem. But if we are importing people so as to raise the labour supply, then you are responsible for the fall in wages. If you lower the cost of living in tandem, then no problem. But they are doing both things at the same time: cause wages to fall, while raising cost of living. And you are still wondering why people are angry?
ASE
TRS Contributor