Wikipedia says so.
Wonder why this hasn't been published in ST yet...
If you look at the list of top 10 countries by population density, you will see Bahrain is 3rd on the list. Bahrain is about the same size as Singapore, but the population is roughly a fifth of Singapore's density.
Interestingly, their demographics show that there are about 54% foreigners living in Bahrain. From the ethnic groups mentioned in the article, it suggests that they are mainly construction workers (290,000 Indians, 125,000 Bangladeshis, 45,000 Pakistanis), and domestic helpers (45,000 Filipinos, 8,000 Indonesians). It would also be certain that most of these foreigners are engaged in the local service or retail industries.
Would it be fair to suggest that down the road, that's what Singapore is looking at? A sizable, albeit transient, foreign population, engaged to serve Singaporeans, or our richer neighbours?
I would also suggest that density is the bigger problem here. At about 5 times the number of people, there just isn't enough room for everyone to be comfortable here, compared to somewhere like Bahrain for example.
That's why the issue of cheap labour needs to be dealt with, and not kicked down the road for our children's generation to solve (or suffer from).
I can't pretend I know enough to come up with solutions to this, but isn't that what the elite chappies in government service are supposed to do?
/ac
Update: Here's a Wikipedia list of the largest municipalities in the world, ranked by size, density, etc. Even if you disagree with the view that Singapore has the densest population, it's not that far away. I will also concede that there are quite a few cities, eg New York City, Moscow, Jakarta, Seoul, even Tehran, which have higher densities. However, those cities have something Singapore doesn't have - a huge hinterland.
No comments:
Post a Comment