It has came to light that Singapore is actually housing a good amount of foreigners, more than one out of four people you see here a foreigner. This condition will undoubtedly cause some challenges to arise.
One of them would be to actually let the people of singapore accept this. As the article pointed out, people here do not seem to see this matter in a good way. It may be the fact that a large intake of foreign talent will take up opportunities that may otherwise go to locals. This may be jobs, residential areas and even education. However we rarely look at the fact that foreign talent need not only encompass high end talent. Most blue collar workers are included in the term "foreign talent". If we are to stop their entry, who would be the ones to build us houses, clean the streets and toilets. Are the people here willing to clean a toilet after JC education.
Another challenge we may possibly face is a less than united society. Foreigners who come in usually take time to assimilate completely into the society. As a country, we must show a united front so as to not be exploited by others. How can we effectively call ourselves one when a quarter is missing. Both sides should understand each other well and be less-prejudiced. Then can the 'foreigners' be integrated into our society and called a Singaporean.
Much like Malaysia, when Singapore tries to bring in foreigners, the country itself becomes extrememly multi racial. In Malaysia, there have been racial riots caused by sensitive issues regarding race. Since then, laws have been erected to prohibit one from even touching on these topics. I believe that Singapore has less restrictions as racist jokes are still heard here. Even i myself only truly understood the true extent of "racist jokes" here in Singapore. These small things disturb the unity of a society and if possible should be avoided.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Saturday, July 14, 2007
Blood Coal
I was recently reading through an issue of Time depicting the Chinese coal miners. It is said that officially 5000 coal miners died last year doing thier job, unofficially nobody knows. Human-rights activist think that as many as 20000 miners die in accidents a year and this count does not include the thousands more of China's 5 million miners who die of lung affliction and diseases every year. The awful conditions of the industry has earned it a name, blood coal. Aptly named indeed.
This issue highlights an important issue faced by Beijing:the inability of the central government to get local authorities to follow orders. The clash is between the central government's desires and the local authorities' pressing economic needs. 99% of the time, local wins.
This is a frightening prospect in a country whose future depends on how the economic boom is dealt with. If China continues on this path, its air and water will becime even filthier with its workers-many who work in appalling conditions-will never enjoy the fruits of the economic growth. No matter how enlightened the central government may be, if they fail to bend the local authorities to their wishes, all is still lost. When Beijing announced a plan to force the closure of thousands of small mines, it was ignored and actively blocked. Local authorities see mines as major capital resources. These small mines a re often subcontracted to individuals and with over 17000 mines, supervision by authorities is non-existent.
To maximize profits, mine owners ramp up production levels beyond the sanctioned limit and employ more than the regulated amount of mines while neglecting safety equips and procedures. Local officials are often bribed to turn a blind eye to this and corpses have been known to be shipped to other provinces to escape detection.
These are challenges that the state does not yet know how to meet. So long as China economic grows at its current blistering pace, the countrt's thirst for coal will continue. However there is still hope for the miners as they believe that the central government will do all it can to protect miners.
This issue highlights an important issue faced by Beijing:the inability of the central government to get local authorities to follow orders. The clash is between the central government's desires and the local authorities' pressing economic needs. 99% of the time, local wins.
This is a frightening prospect in a country whose future depends on how the economic boom is dealt with. If China continues on this path, its air and water will becime even filthier with its workers-many who work in appalling conditions-will never enjoy the fruits of the economic growth. No matter how enlightened the central government may be, if they fail to bend the local authorities to their wishes, all is still lost. When Beijing announced a plan to force the closure of thousands of small mines, it was ignored and actively blocked. Local authorities see mines as major capital resources. These small mines a re often subcontracted to individuals and with over 17000 mines, supervision by authorities is non-existent.
To maximize profits, mine owners ramp up production levels beyond the sanctioned limit and employ more than the regulated amount of mines while neglecting safety equips and procedures. Local officials are often bribed to turn a blind eye to this and corpses have been known to be shipped to other provinces to escape detection.
These are challenges that the state does not yet know how to meet. So long as China economic grows at its current blistering pace, the countrt's thirst for coal will continue. However there is still hope for the miners as they believe that the central government will do all it can to protect miners.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
God vs Science
Brought up an atheist, i have never really believed in god but when things go my way, i still call it a god-sent miracle. When taught of the Darwinian theory of evolution, i swallowed it all up and sincerely believe that a few million years ago my ancestors were monkeys. Yet, many do not see it as i do, believing the Genesis story. The debate over whether there is God in the first place has raged for aeons, and has since escalated to an unprescedented levels with scientific publications regarding this issue flooding the market. Time recently had a debate held at their office.
Richard Dawkins, author of "The God Delusion" was invited over, along with Francis Collins, Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute since 1993, also author of "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief" It is very clear which side they are on. Many of us prefer to be neutral, we cheer on the advancements in science, but still be humble on the Sabbath. We wish to believe in MRIs and miracles, trying to get the best of both worlds.However, the two experts strongly believe that science and God can never coexist.
In the case of the creation of humans, science had the Darwinian theory while God had the Genesis story. Dawkins believes that the Darwinian theory does more than simply contradict the Genesis story. For many centuries, the strongest argument for God's existence was the argument from design : Living thigs so beautiful and elegant and seemingly purposeful that only an intelligent designer could have created. Darwin provided a simpler explanation in that everything was done incrementally over millions of years to achieve more elegance, more adaptive perfection.
Universal constants are argued upon and seen in a way that i would have never bothered to. Collins argues that the gravitational constant if even off by one in a hundred million million would have made the expansion preceding the Big Bang not to have happened in a fashion where life could exist. It is difficult to assume that this- our existence actually happened by chance.
Collins believes that God is outside of space and time and that everything that is currently unexplainable can be explained by God. Which actually makes things very arguable as Dawkins counters by arguing that God may be Martians gods or even aliens from Alpha Centauri and not Jesus.
Reading on, i can conclude that the debate could go on for quite a while if there were no time limit. It is impossible for me to comprehend some deeply engaging issues in this matter but being someone quite engaged in science, i do beleive that science may solve everything someday, but some people may think that that would have to be a miracle.
Richard Dawkins, author of "The God Delusion" was invited over, along with Francis Collins, Director of the National Human Genome Research Institute since 1993, also author of "The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief" It is very clear which side they are on. Many of us prefer to be neutral, we cheer on the advancements in science, but still be humble on the Sabbath. We wish to believe in MRIs and miracles, trying to get the best of both worlds.However, the two experts strongly believe that science and God can never coexist.
In the case of the creation of humans, science had the Darwinian theory while God had the Genesis story. Dawkins believes that the Darwinian theory does more than simply contradict the Genesis story. For many centuries, the strongest argument for God's existence was the argument from design : Living thigs so beautiful and elegant and seemingly purposeful that only an intelligent designer could have created. Darwin provided a simpler explanation in that everything was done incrementally over millions of years to achieve more elegance, more adaptive perfection.
Universal constants are argued upon and seen in a way that i would have never bothered to. Collins argues that the gravitational constant if even off by one in a hundred million million would have made the expansion preceding the Big Bang not to have happened in a fashion where life could exist. It is difficult to assume that this- our existence actually happened by chance.
Collins believes that God is outside of space and time and that everything that is currently unexplainable can be explained by God. Which actually makes things very arguable as Dawkins counters by arguing that God may be Martians gods or even aliens from Alpha Centauri and not Jesus.
Reading on, i can conclude that the debate could go on for quite a while if there were no time limit. It is impossible for me to comprehend some deeply engaging issues in this matter but being someone quite engaged in science, i do beleive that science may solve everything someday, but some people may think that that would have to be a miracle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)