>Migrating to Canada? Good news – buoyant economy. Bad news – super long queue

>Ah, while the US is getting deeper and deeper down the doodoo hole, both economically and politically, its northern neighbour looks like the new land of opportunity. That’s the good news for those who are seeking to migrate there. Bad news is that if you are not in the queue (yet), you will have to wait quite a while because:

1) Hey, Canada’s one of the most sought after countries, so you will probably be Queue number 1 zillion, three trillion, twelve billion, ninety million and seventy thousand and eleven if you applied today.

2) Canada has tightened its immigration criteria and unless you are a doctor or a nurse, you have to wait about 5 years to have it approved, even if you qualify just to be in the queue.

Well, that’s what I’ve been told, at least.

Whether the above is true or not, I never really bother to find out, because I have already secured my Canadian PR. My (grown) children decided to return here, so here I am. But Canada’s economy has been booming and booming and booming, so much so that Toronto is now also becoming a fast paced city to a point I find it an irony why would I want to be there, if it is the same fast paced lifestyle as Singapore.

Back in Singapore, I have been keeping up with Canadian news and this one below truly shows that if you want to be in a place that ensures economic growth, rather than face uncertainty and stagnancy in a certain country (not going to mention where, when it is soooooo obvious), Canada is the place to be.

Canadian dollar likely to trump US greenback: experts

OTTAWA (AFP) – The Canadian dollar, or loonie as it is affectionately called here, is likely to soar above parity with the US greenback this year, experts at a Canadian bank said Wednesday.

Canadian Imperial Bank of Canada (CIBC) chief economist Avery Shenfeld said the Canadian dollar had already gained several cents in recent weeks as the market firms up expectations of an interest rate hike in July.

If as expected, the central bank “is out in front of the US Federal Reserve by a couple of quarters” in raising interest rates, the Canadian dollar could reach 1.02 dollars versus the US dollar by September, before dipping back to 0.97 dollars by year end,” Shenfeld said.

The Bank of Canada has maintained its key lending rate at a historic low of 0.25 percent since April 2009 to help bolster a fragile economic recovery, but is widely expected to review its position mid-year.

CIBC said other factors were also aligning to push up the value of Canada’s currency such as increased demand for oil, minerals and fertilizers; resurgent capital markets; and global debt fears.

“If the capital markets finally get an appetite for M&A (mergers and acquisitions) then Canada could be one of the first places to see the benefit of foreign inflows,” said CIBC analyst Zafar Bhatti.

Or “if the investing world starts looking for a place to park capital in the wake of deteriorating sovereign credits then Canada would look very attractive,” Bhatti said in a report.
Since the beginning of the year, the Canadian dollar has appreciated 2.5 percent against the US dollar and more than seven percent against the euro.

The loonie last achieved parity with the US greenback in 2008, and previously hit a record 1.10 dollars in 2007.

It is not that the Canadian Dollar has never been above value over the US Dollar. There was a short spell from about Sep 2007 to Jun 2008, where the US Dollar had a lower value than the Canadian Dollar. Over time, the Canadian Dollar has tried to breach the parity threshold again and as of the time of this post, the value of the USD/CAD closed at 1.0179 for the weekend. That means you need CAD 1.0179 to match one single US Dollar.

However, that is just the small part of the picture. The bigger picture is that Canada has real economic value. The major companies and industries in Canda are viable, especially the energy sector. Canada’s other main industries are mineral mining, fishery, farming and fishing. All these are industries that provide customers real and tangible goods and/or services.

If the above is not to your liking, you may choose to be in Toronto, which is a busy city like Singapore where commercial jobs are aplenty. In Canada, you have the choice to be in a cosmopolitan city, or choose a quieter country life.

America on the other hand, while boasts of a very diverse group of industries, is actually very heavily skewed towards Financials. Take a look at what makes up the Dow Jones Index. Er…wasn’t it these Financial Institutions that brought down the Dow Jones Index? Lehman? AIG? Citigroup?

Note that while Canada has real and tangible goods and services for customers, American skews it heavily towards synthetics, like offering highly complex and structured investment instruments, promising high returns, but failed to deliver them. In other words all the high figures America had before the Financial Crisis, was just window dressing.

Singapore, being heavily dependent on US will of course suffer the same fate to some extent. Also note that the PAP is now trying its best to diversify towards China and the Mid East. A little too late, but better late than never.

Back to Canada. I have always believed that Canada’s economic potential has been under-emphasized. About less than ten years ago, when I decided to apply for emigration (my children were still young then), I had three countries in mind. Australia, New Zealand and Canada. US was not on my list.

The most obvious choice to most people was Australia. That’s because of the proximity to Singapore, including Sydney, which is very much like Singapore’s lifestyle. New Zealand would be a good choice for those who want a slow and quiet pace. NZ actually was my original choice. But then, Canada has a large base of natural resources, is severely under populated, and the Canadian govt was very open to emigration.

Of the three choices, Canada had the toughest criteria – no thanks to 911 and its proximity to the US. The waiting period (then) was also the longest – about three to four years. But I chose Canada because of its economic potential, as compared to the other two countries.

Today, although I am in Singapore because my children decided to stay here, I feel that if they ever changed their minds, I am happy that they have at least the chance to migrate to Canada, should Singapore’s situation not improve.

It is not that I am trying to down America’s economy, or speak ill of Singapore’s ability to recover. It is my genuine personal belief that America would take ages to recover, not forgetting that it does not want to pull out of the two wars. At the same time, because Singapore has skewed much of its exports to America, we are also facing this economic crisis. If America doesn’t recover soon, neither will Singapore.

The consolation I have is that my children still have the choice to leave stagnant Singapore if they wish. But then, that has to be their choice, of course.

>Slower Intake of Foreigners

>The issue of foreigners in Singapore is a hot topic among citizens. I will put aside the usual “they oust us from our jobs” approach. Instead, I will touch on a point PM Lee said.

Excerpts from the ST on 16 Sep 2009
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking+News/Singapore/Story/STIStory_430387.html

Indeed, in a competitive and integrated world, a ‘sustained, calibrated inflow’ of immigrants is necessary to ‘safeguard the long-term interest of Singaporeans’, he stressed.

Mr Lee posed a question to the students: ‘What type of Singapore do you want – a relaxed, quiet kampung, or a buzzing cosmopolitan city?’

Noting that some say Singapore can be more relaxed and does not need to ‘go for Number 1 in everything’, he said: ‘But with that attitude, soon we will be Number 2, then Number 3, and eventually end up a kampung again.’

Singapore, he said, has the potential to do better and become an outstanding city similar to London, New York or Shanghai.

There lies the incompetence of our PM – and the highly paid ministers and civil servants. The above is like comparing apples with oranges.

Singapore is a country. London, Shanghai etc are cities. Residents of cities, if they feel they do not want the fast paced life, have the option to move out to the suburbs or even into the country and have a slower paced life.

In Singapore, where can you go (other than migrate to another country)? Of course, PM Lee wants to see that Singapore is the number one and stays number one. But that is a fallacy. Nothing is static. Nobody can be number all the time. And the price to be the number one? It starts from the very young, isn’t it? It starts right at the primary school level.

Today, we see many students being pressured even at primary school level. Doing well in PSLE means getting into better secondary schools and JC. Getting into better JCs means more resources and better chances to get into university. Singapore is one country where our children are already pressured at a young age. No use comparing the pressured life of say Tokyo in Japan. Tokyo is a city. You have the option to move out to slow the pace down.

I cannot understand why highly paid ministers can make the basic mistake of comparing Singapore, a country, to cities.

So, what do people do if they want to have a slower paced life if they are in Singapore? Not much, other than to migrate, isn’t it?

And the highly paid ministers and civil servants wonder why our emigration rate is among the highest in the developed countries.

>Something fishy about Canadian Eric J Brooks

>In the Straits Times Forum (8 Aug 09), the following letter was published.

Stop buying into this hollow chestnut

I REFER to Mr Paul Chan’s letter last Saturday (‘…but so should Canadians’), rebutting my view that Singaporeans should be thankful for the benefits of good government (‘Be grateful, Singapore’, July 31).

Mr Chan states that in Canada, ‘a distressed family of four with children under 17 years old receives…a total of up to C$1,106 (S$1,480) a month’.

In a large Canadian city, rent for a bachelor apartment starts at about C$800 a month, while an individual public transit pass costs close to C$150 a month. After rent and transport, how will a family of four eat on an allowance of C$1,100 a month? That is why, when I lived in a prosperous part of Toronto, I would pass up to 15 beggars on my five-minute walk to the train station.

Are there that many homeless beggars on a five-minute walk to an MRT station here? Are Singaporeans reading only dry economic statistics? After hearing coffee-shop talk for the past 10 years about how people in Western countries do not have to work because the government pays them, I think it is time Singaporeans learnt the truth.

Many people will refuse to believe that poverty in the West is much worse than in Singapore. Well, google ‘homeless Toronto’ or ‘homeless New York’ and find out. If Singaporeans believe Western governments pay people to be idle, why are homeless beggars freezing to death in the streets?

Most of those homeless Canadians or Americans were not lazy; they were not taken care of, by either the government or private sector job creation.

Indeed, many Canadian citizens were turned down for such generous subsidies, while foreigners claiming refugee status (but without even permanent residence) were granted generous welfare benefits and health care when they landed in Canada.

Does the Singapore Government deny benefits to citizens while giving them to newly landed foreigners? The Singapore Government is not perfect, but it should be respected for the good it does for its people.

As for ‘free education’, university at undergraduate level in Canada costs about C$5,000 a year, out of pocket, not including textbooks or residence.

I know of many bright Canadians who would have qualified for a full government scholarship if they had been born in Singapore. Instead, they worked in unskilled, low-paying jobs as the price of their unassisted poverty.

How much of what Singaporeans believe about Western social benefits is based on hearsay, rather than reality? Rather than listening to coffee-shop gossip or reading the press statements of foreign governments, Singaporeans should compare Singapore’s ground-level social conditions to those in the West.

Ultimately, actually seeing the street-level socioeconomic conditions of Western countries puts Singapore’s Government in a very good light indeed.

Eric J. Brooks

Something is fishy. Why is he out to to taint Canada, his homeland? If he likes Singapore, so be it. But why taint Canada?

Here are my views on his letter. I am a Singapore citizen with a Canadian permanent resident status, residing in Singapore. My family and I are in Singapore because my (grown) children have decided to make Singapore their home. I decided that since we should stay as a family, I obliged and granted my children’s wishes – so we are now back in Singapore.

Emigration is not a simple affair. You need to do a lot of research like cost of living, cost of education, job opportunities, social benefits etc. Here are some inconsistencies I find in Brook’s letters, which don’t seem right to me.

Brooks makes a claim that it costs about CAD$800 to rent a bachelor room in Toronto. True. What he does not highlight is that he has chosen an upmarket price. There are cheaper ones some as low as CAD$400 or less – further away from City Central areas.

He quotes the out of pocket CAD$5000 a year for university studies. Again, true. But there are outright subsidies and scholarships from the government and universities that are available. There are also outright loans from the banks which you only start paying back when you work.

The most important point is that there are ENOUGH VACANCIES for the places in the universities, if you make the mark – UNLIKE SINGAPORE where only 15% of current school cohort ever get to smell a degree in any of Singapore’s universities.

Another important point about entry for undergrads is that in Canada (like in many other developed countries too), you know if you qualify for the course, because the entry system is transparent – again unlike Singapore. This is important because you won’t be wasting your time applying for a course you don’t know if qualify in the first place.

As for begging, it is not accurate to say that just because he sees 15 beggars a day, the social welfare system is not there. I have not checked the amount paid to the unemployed (because I never did want to use that benefit). However, a Canadian friend of mine has said that the amount is CAD$10k a year! That’s quite a sum. In my opinion, there really is NOTHING to stop these people from begging even after they have collected their social welfare payments!

In Singapore, why you hardly see beggars is because they get hauled up by the government.

I question Brook’s statement, “Indeed, many Canadian citizens were turned down for such generous subsidies, while foreigners claiming refugee status (but without even permanent residence) were granted generous welfare benefits and health care when they landed in Canada.”

He is comparing apples with oranges. “Refugee status” is granted on humanitarian grounds. What he should look at is how the Immigration Department sees the new immigrant as economically viable to be admitted into Canada as a resident.

Here is what “refugee status” is about.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/refugees/index.asp

Now compare that to what it takes to be accepted as a Canadian resident. Look at the high entry requirements, vis-a-vis “refugee status”. Like other countries, is not the Canadian government filtering only the highly skilled, professionals and economically high value added immigrants to boost its economy?
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/index.asp

So what is it that Brooks is not happy with refugees? Refugees are unfortunate people who seek asylum and they are few in number. Why does he begrudge them, when he should be thankful that all Canadians have social benefits?

In fact, why bring up the point on refugees at all, unless he begrudges the Canadian government for being compassionate to these unfortunate people?

Canada also has one of the best and most affordable health care services in the world. Much better than America! See for yourself what it costs you to enjoy these benefits, if you are a Canadian resident – and compare that to Singapore.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/newcomers/after-health.asp

Finally, Brooks also made a mention in his first letter to the ST that trash is collected only once a week. He fails to highlight that Canada’s climate is very dry and cold. Things do not rot as easily over there as in hot, humid Singapore. That’s why so many things are much more rotten and smellier in Singapore than in Canada.

I wonder why Brooks kept these facts away from Singaporeans. Something is fishy here.

>Our Leaders are still truly out of touch – Part 2

>Mass emailed to my group felllows on Sat 03/03/2007 3:23 PM SGT

To all (my group fellows that is),

I did not expect a load of replies to my email within such a short period. Guess I was wrong about Singaporeans being politically apathetic. Initially, I thought of answering individual emails. But after seeing the replies coming in fast and furious, I thought it would be easier to reply and address the points brought up as a single post. I hope individuals who have posted to me don’t mind this not-so-personal style.

Grass is Greener on the Other Side Syndrome –

Please do not get the idea that I have that thought in me. Every society has its own ills. My concern is not if it is greener on the other side. My concern is that I am quite confident that Singapore’s economy will not be as resilient as it is today, in 20 years time.

For the last 20 years or so, Singapore’s policies have been changing. I am sure for the next 20 years or so, it will keep changing. In comparison, other countries have remained about the same the last 20 years. By projection, it would probably remain the same the next 20.

As a long-term planner, I find it is easier to plan 20 years ahead, if I know the kind of environment I face the next 20 years. In Singapore, what I plan today for the next 10 years, will be nullified by a simple stroke of the pen, due to the government’s ever-changing policy. It is like running a marathon thinking you are about to hit the finish line, only to be told by the officials they relocated the finish line somewhere else.

I am not complaining that we have to face changes. I am simply saying that I am a long-term planner and hence, a society that has a more predictability, suits my style. Whether the grass is greener to me is immaterial. One makes the grass green for himself. Just show me where the finish line is and I will finish it. But in Singapore’s context, we know that there is no finish line.

As the saying goes, life in Singapore is good, but you cannot fall sick or retire. In other words, there is no finish line in Singapore. You either work till you drop dead if you are a Singapore citizen, or work and retire and return to your home country, if you are a Singapore PR. There is no finish line in Singapore.

Food is cheap and life is good in Singapore, so be satisfied -

Did I say life is not good in Singapore? It is strange how the PAP has fashioned Singaporeans to think only one way. So much so if someone highlights the cost of living in Singapore, he is a complainer.

Life in Singapore is good. No doubt. That is if you have a stable job and good health.
What if you don’t?

Currently, I am financially OK and my family’s health is good. But there is no guarantee that it would remain that way.

So is everyone who is against my highlight that the cost of living is escalating, very confident he gets to keep his job and good health, until he drops dead?

Or is it that those who feel differently from what I posted, never put a thought to the fact that he/she could one day lose his job and/or good health?

What then if it happens?

If those who disagree with me, never put a thought to that, then it confirms my statement that the PAP has successfully moulded Singaporeans to think one way and only one way – ie that those who disagree with the government are complainers.

I think I made my point on that one quite clear, so I will leave it at there.

(Other Issues)
Foreign relations with our neighbours -

I think the government should stop repeating the “we are bullied by others because we are a red dot” argument. It must be remembered that most of the sea and airspace around us are made available to us because of Malaysia’s and Indonesia’s hospitality. If they were to be nasty and lock us out of from their sea and airspace, our ports and airports – military air bases included – would be paralysed. This is because sea and especially air traffic to and from Singapore, would somehow encroach into their space.

Just remember that their airspace and sea space is their right and our privilege and not the other way. It must also be remembered we have that privilege only because of their hospitality.

That is just one of many examples where our neighbours have been very flexible with us, yet the government tries to portray to citizens that we are being “bullied”. Singapore is very small and has limited resources. It is better for us to be humble and be the nice guy, than the little fry who tries to act tough among the big boys.

Since I mentioned the extradition of Indonesians in my last email, I would like to highlight that what Singapore has done is harbouring suspected criminals as well as allowing those illicit funds to be placed here. This has serious implications. If Singapore wants to be seen as a clean government with first class status, we cannot afford to have “dirty” funds in our land.

It must be remembered that this is not just an issue between Singapore and Indonesia. The world is watching us. They are watching what and how we work with the Indonesians to stem corruption. Allowing such illicit funds to be placed in Singapore is definitely a no-no.

Genting prefers Singapore to Macau –

It does not matter what Genting prefers. The fact is that Singapore has changed the terms of the contract after it awarded Genting. That is akin to the car salesman telling you that you need to buy the engine of the car, because when you purchased the car, you should not assume that the contract to purchase includes the engine!

Telling Genting that the casino licence does not come with the IR contract after awarding the contract? Is not the government pushing this one a little too far?

Again, the world is watching Singapore. If Singapore can change terms of agreement after signing a contract with Genting, other investors will think that we can do it to them too. Do you think this builds investor confidence? What first world standard is MM talking about?

My personal view –

I feel that what is most important now is my family’s future. I used to think about Singapore’s future. That was more than 10 years ago. Today, it is different. My plan is to find an environment that is predictable enough, such that if I make plans for my family, in 20 years’ time, I get to see it bear fruit.

In Singapore, because we are small and because it is volatile – and because the government does not listen – I find that any plan that has more than a 5-year period objective, usually gets nullified. On the other hand, a more stable environment like Australia, NZ or Canada, would be a better choice if you have a 20-year plan.

I am not looking it from the greener grass perspective. I am looking it from the perspective of certainty and predictability. If the grass is less green in Canada than Singapore today, so be it. I am willing to make it green. But at least, I am confident that in 20 years’ time, Canada will still be the same Canada, while Singapore will in all probability, not be the same Singapore.

Those of you who are still not convinced, just reflect on this. What are Canada, Australia, NZ like today? What were they like in 1980? Now compare that to Singapore. What is Singapore like today, compared to what was it like in 1980?

Do you still pay same price for a new flat today as what you could in 1980? What about a car? What about school fees for premium schools then, compared to today? What about NUS fees then, compared to today?

Let’s not forget the all important burning question. What about medical bills?

Sorry, I forgot that in 1980, you were very young, fit, healthy and had no children – No medical bills then.

Can you guarantee yourself it remains this way for the next 20 years?

That is my point to my critics. No need to compare whose grass is greener.