But the article was very well written and the contents are very compelling.

It is for college thesis?

mevotex in lyn?

good read i would say

but one can sense by the way the article is written,
that sg will come out eventually as winner
against all odd.....a bit dramatic article

To be a success story in the areas of brains, u have to be fair to EVERYONE irregardless of race.

This is something Singapore does better than Brunei.

What's the use if wealth is not distributed evenly?

I thought in Malaysia also got "erm" at Johor with lots of Super Cars?

My sentiments are not really being pro-Singapore, I for example don't like their kiasuness and sense of superiority to us, especially to the Malaysian Chinese.

But facts are facts.

This tiny island, so poor in resources that even water have to piped to it from a foreign country, surrounded by bigger rivals that are in fact hostile to it and would like no more to see crawling back to Malaysia, in 60 years transformed into the only 1st world country in South East Asia. This is a fact.

You can say that this article may be biased towards Singapore, but do you have any data or facts to refute what has been written?

The only country that could replicate what Singapore did was Israel, and the Israelis received far more military, economic and diplomatic aid from the US. Singapore has to do more by its own.

Fact is, no matter how you dislike Lee Kuan Yew, he is probably the best leader in his cohort in the entire South East Asia hands down.

If Malaysia adopted meritocracy based system in the 1980's, we could have been as developed as Singapore.

But no, they prefer having stupid frogs like Ibrahim here barking and polluting the air space with dog shyt which does not add any value to our standard of living.

nah. investment research

More like what's the use if you don't know how to expand and secure your nation's wealth properly and successfully.

You have to first catch the chicken before even discussing how to divide it evenly.

malaysians are too pampered with goodies and handouts from goverment. PR makes it worse by providing free tertiary education and more subsidies. instead of private charities, poor people depend on goverment.

we need to acknowledge that free market capitalism turned 4 asian tigers including singapore from 3rd world backwater to 1st world country and yet socialists blame it for widening gap between rich and poor. of course socialistic policies like public housing and free early education are important as a starting point for social mobility and that's all. the rest should be left to free market.

kesian no reply after few pages. lemme donut 1 FUCUK to you

I don't think the issue is about capitalist vs socialism or goodies and handouts by the government.

Remember, the PAP is socialist party. Though in reality they are pragmatists in administration. The HDB is an example of socialist policies. They know how to blend both capitalist and socialist policies properly.

The real issue here is meritocracy, governance, planning and foresight. And a sense of constantly being feeling an existential threat as a nation by the bigger nations around you thus removing complacency that afflict all other governments in SEA.

Brunei has no future, when it runs out of oil.

Actually chinese in malaysia not reject stock wan but the gomen control and tie us up like tree people.

Thanks for sharing this eye opening article TS.A fine read i must say.

This post has been edited by Racerx: May 5 2012, 10:04 PM

Brunei is an economic time bomb,
dunno if they realize this or not.

Singapore dun want.. If the "tambak johor" is replaced by a bridge (added advantage to Johor Port), Singapore Ports have to fight for the survival by better service and lower costs (port charges, port dues, tax on bunker fuel, tax on portable water, etc) to retain the existing shipping lines and attract new lines.

pap a socialist party? not really. their opponent, the workers' party, is socialist - which resulted in them getting pretty much gagged and oppressed.

and it's because of this lack of opponents that the government was free to enact non-populist measures. if they had, likeus now, both sides will outbid each other trying to push for which party can give more unsustainable subsidies to the people. if you're the only kid on the block, you dont need to do that.

and of course, having a natural port and infrastructure that was built up by the brits and an already present concentration of educated workforce prior to independence helps too.

to name a single socialist policy in a tomb of capitalist movements is rather wrong.

the real issue not those that you mentioned, it is very typical for one to dismiss our rakyats flaws but to blame it on the government. first governments suck at making money, inreal fact they cannot they can facilitate, groom and influence but not make it.

even assuming we do have good governance it will be the same, why? our service industry is lackluster, we have the talent but not the systems and the vision to do it. we do things old school, which is a big curse. our companies are small and non competitive, look up bursa malaysia do you see any REAL regional beaters there? no. even our banks maybank and CIMB are nowhere in pure financial power close to those that lurk in asia.

these things are nothing to do with government, but it has everything to do with the rakyat not comming up to par with the world.

like our UM, once great the best university in the region or asia. today pifft......why? because at one point in time to win votes and improve "graduates" in malaysia our government reduced the passing grades for SPM and UM. the public? went in full support...

in the speeches, i only hear abolish ptptn, nothing about revamping our education system to be globally competitive, nothing about using english as the main medium, making elite schools only for the best and stuff.