7 ms·

I really wish there was a reasonable answer to this question. I lived in Singapore for many years, and its proximity to Sumatra, where most of the burning is ha

I really wish there was a reasonable answer to this question. I lived in Singapore for many years, and its proximity to Sumatra, where most of the burning is happening, is a huge burden on everyone in Singapore for most times of the year, and it is getting worse. I was there during the 2013 haze crisis and had to leave Singapore for several days just to get a breath of healthy air. Birds were dying in-flight and roads had flocks of them dead all over the pavement, and on park grounds. Yet nothing changes. This year, the haze crisis has been its worst in 20 years, and Indonesia fails to address it. It is illegal to start these fires, but the law is not enforced. If this happened in proximity to a nation like the U.S., after numerous warnings, the country would just cross borders without permission and put out the fires. But no one will do that in SE Asia. Singapore and Malaysia have every right to protect their citizens, but they also respect the sovereignty of Indonesia, so aside from public comments by leaders, they do nothing, and nothing changes. Even if you don't live in SE Asia, it is a devastating reality for the whole planet. Massive rainforest are getting destroyed. After decades of no action by Indonesia, it is clear the only way to fix this is for neighboring nations to be more forceful and go in there and do something about it. But fear of conflict in SE Asia is high, so I'm worried that this problem is only going to get worse without worldwide pressure by major nations.

nabla9 11y ago
In the North America analogy Indonesia would be U.S. burning and Mexico and Canada suffering. Indonesia is 4th most populous country in the world (250 million people). Singapore and Malaysia are outmatched in population, GDP and military.
- michaelflux 11y ago
  About being outmatched in GDP and military - you're joking right? Have a look at the figures over the last few decades for Singapore and Indonesia. Singapore is a tiny spec when it comes to size and population, but economically it's in a league of it's own.
  - xyzzyz 11y ago
    Sure, per capita GDP of Singapore is vastly higher, but here it's total GDP that's relevant, not per capita. Last I seen, GDP of Indonesia was 3 times that of Singapore.
    - coldtea 11y ago
      >GDP of Indonesia was 3 times that of Singapore. So, like 40-50 times less per capita. Total GDP doesn't matter much when there are size discrepancies that large.
      - mikeash 11y ago
        Why not? The amount of weapons a country can buy is related to its total GDP, not per capita. The number of soldiers a country can field is related to its total GDP and actually goes up when per-capita GDP is lower, because you don't have to pay them as much.
  - AlphaSite 11y ago
    Per capita it's much larger than Indonesians, yes, but Indonesians total gdp is significantly higher, 300 billion vs 2.8 trilllion.
    - adventured 11y ago
      Indonesia's GDP isn't close to $2.8 trillion. That would give them an economy the size of the UK and France. They have an estimated 2015 GDP per capita of $3,400 per the IMF. They have 250 million people. Their GDP is a lot closer to $850 billion. A $2.8 trillion GDP would require a $11,000 GDP per capita. That's not accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28no... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28no...
  - jfoster 11y ago
    GDP per capita versus total GDP. Indonesia is a developing country, but it's big. Singapore is a developed country, but it's small.
- hellofunk 11y ago
  Singapore currently has the most advanced airforce in the world. The size and prowess of its military relative to its size is unmatched anywhere on this planet. Economically, it is at least on par with Hong Kong and Tokyo. Nearly all major companies with a presence in Asia have an office in Singapore, many of them their entire Asian headquarters are in Singapore. I'm not sure I understand your analogy; I think it is the vice-versa of what you mean.
  - ptaipale 11y ago
    Singapore is advanced and rich, but it is small compared to Indonesia. Singapore has larger GDP and military per capita, but in absolute terms, Indonesia is much larger. Its army has four times as many men as Singapore (300,000 vs. 75,000), and Indonesian GDP is 2840 billion USD while Singapore is 453 billion. (edit:typos)
    - adventured 11y ago
      Indonesia's GDP is ~$850 billion, not $2.8 trillion. Singapore is ~$300 billion. Not sure why Indonesia's GDP keeps getting over-estimated by such a dramatic amount in this thread.
      - ptaipale 11y ago
        > Not sure why Indonesia's GDP keeps getting over-estimated by such a dramatic amount in this thread. Sorry, that was just a bit careless looking up of numbers. $850 billion is nominal GDP, $2.8 trillion is the PPP adjusted figure. For Singapore, the nominal and PPP adjusted values are much closer to each other ($300 billion vs. $450 billion).
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
    - JPKab 11y ago
      Not agreeing with the previous statement regarding Singapore's military supremacy, but measuring military effectiveness by number of troops is a hopelessly outdated method. Powerful armies are nothing more than logistics organizations, with 80-90% of members operating supply chains and maintenance to enable the 21st century weapons systems and their elite operators to destroy things. 300,000 guys with assault rifles and crappy Air Force are no match against 75,000 with modern technology and precision munitions.
bkor 11y ago
I'm just back from a business trip to Singapore. I never really understood what people meant with "haze" until one evening. From what I heard from my Singaporean colleagues the haze during my time there was pretty much cleared up. They have a number to measure how bad it is, they call it "PSI", see e.g. http://www.haze.gov.sg/ http://www.haze.gov.sg/. This is used in multiple countries, though the definition on what number constitutes bad air differs. During my entire stay, the number was 50-100 or so. Keep this in mind. So my experience: One evening there's like a fog, you can maybe see for 50 meters max. But the fog isn't water particles in the air, it is leftover material from the fire. Meaning: what you're seeing is utterly bad. Most of the time I spend either in the office, restaurant, a bar and public transport (AFAIK not only air conditioned but also filtered air). I wear contact lenses. Though only spending maybe 30 min in open air max: I got red eyes, had to clean my contact lenses again and had to buy eye drops to fix my red eyes. The haze was way worse before I arrived there. Only 1.5 day it was really bad. However, you could never see the sky. Just filthiness in the air preventing you from seeing it. I had it badly with 50-100 of "PSI". Before I was there it was around 300! Singapore is pretty interesting (fooooood! :-D), but living there will really shorten your life thanks to this. I never really understood haze until I experienced it myself. It's good to remember that it's not like the fog I am used to. It's like staying in the smoke of a burning building.
- geomark 11y ago
  Here in Thailand the impact has been pretty severe in the south. Very unhealthy air quality, a number of deaths of elderly from respiratory failure, many dozens of flights cancelled to Phuket and Krabi. Seems a lot worse this year than many years past. Next up is Thailand's burning season in a few months when the people in the north and neighboring Myanmar do their annual burn of farmlands and forest. That's usually pretty bad, too, but not on the same scale as the burning in Indonesia.
- vellum 11y ago
  >I had it badly with 50-100 of "PSI". Before I was there it was around 300! Kalimantan, where the fires are burning, hit 3300 PSI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Southeast_Asian_haze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Southeast_Asian_haze
JPKab 11y ago
Indonesia, not unlike Malaysia, is at it's core a corrupt country filled with an ignorant majority ethnic group that rides on the backs of the East Asian immigrant populations that actually value education and hard work. I work with numerous people who would otherwise be starting businesses in their home countries, but don't want to have their pocket picked by the absurd laws forcing native Malays and Indonesians to be employed in top positions despite having no skills.
- theworstshill 11y ago
  Theres an easy solution that people traditionally employed in those cases, e.g. whites in Detroit. Vote with your feet.
- liamconnell 11y ago
  This comment is completely unacceptable and racist at its core. > ignorant majority ethnic group In fact Indonesia is has thousands of native tribes that constitute many different ethnic groups with a huge diversity of cultures and languages. These are the NATIVE people of Indonesia: Indonesians. > rides on the backs of the East Asian immigrant populations that actually value education and hard work Those Chinese immigrants are notorious in Indonesia for being exploitative businessmen who treat Indonesians, regardless of education level, as an underclass, funnel money out of Indonesia and into China, and hiring exclusively Chinese to work in their businesses. Because of the weak government (Indonesia was admirably non-bloc during the Cold War years, leaving it economically vulnerable), Chinese businesses since the 90s have been able to bargain their way into the country in order to harvest its natural resources while giving as little as possible to the Indonesian people. > actually value education and hard work The argument presented in JPKab's comment is a common slander against poor countries. Similar arguments have been made by the US about basically the entire people of Latin America, and by imperialist European countries. But an examination of what motivations are actually driving them reveal the true sentiment: "You're not harvesting your countries resources for me well enough!" The "absurd laws" that aim to protect the Indonesians people and their land are some of the most promising things, as they are long-term assurances that the country will not grow up to be a two-tiered society, ruled by the Chinese. JPKab and those who think like him would do better to do business in their own countries rather than forcing their way into countries who dont want them while simultaneously spreading bigoted lies about thousands of tribes and hundreds of millions of people that make up the "majority ethnic group[s]" of Indonesia.

nabla9 11y ago

In the North America analogy Indonesia would be U.S. burning and Mexico and Canada suffering. Indonesia is 4th most populous country in the world (250 million people). Singapore and Malaysia are outmatched in population, GDP and military.

michaelflux 11y ago
About being outmatched in GDP and military - you're joking right? Have a look at the figures over the last few decades for Singapore and Indonesia. Singapore is a tiny spec when it comes to size and population, but economically it's in a league of it's own.
- xyzzyz 11y ago
  Sure, per capita GDP of Singapore is vastly higher, but here it's total GDP that's relevant, not per capita. Last I seen, GDP of Indonesia was 3 times that of Singapore.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >GDP of Indonesia was 3 times that of Singapore. So, like 40-50 times less per capita. Total GDP doesn't matter much when there are size discrepancies that large.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      Why not? The amount of weapons a country can buy is related to its total GDP, not per capita. The number of soldiers a country can field is related to its total GDP and actually goes up when per-capita GDP is lower, because you don't have to pay them as much.
- AlphaSite 11y ago
  Per capita it's much larger than Indonesians, yes, but Indonesians total gdp is significantly higher, 300 billion vs 2.8 trilllion.
  - adventured 11y ago
    Indonesia's GDP isn't close to $2.8 trillion. That would give them an economy the size of the UK and France. They have an estimated 2015 GDP per capita of $3,400 per the IMF. They have 250 million people. Their GDP is a lot closer to $850 billion. A $2.8 trillion GDP would require a $11,000 GDP per capita. That's not accurate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28no... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28no...
- jfoster 11y ago
  GDP per capita versus total GDP. Indonesia is a developing country, but it's big. Singapore is a developed country, but it's small.
hellofunk 11y ago
Singapore currently has the most advanced airforce in the world. The size and prowess of its military relative to its size is unmatched anywhere on this planet. Economically, it is at least on par with Hong Kong and Tokyo. Nearly all major companies with a presence in Asia have an office in Singapore, many of them their entire Asian headquarters are in Singapore. I'm not sure I understand your analogy; I think it is the vice-versa of what you mean.
- ptaipale 11y ago
  Singapore is advanced and rich, but it is small compared to Indonesia. Singapore has larger GDP and military per capita, but in absolute terms, Indonesia is much larger. Its army has four times as many men as Singapore (300,000 vs. 75,000), and Indonesian GDP is 2840 billion USD while Singapore is 453 billion. (edit:typos)
  - adventured 11y ago
    Indonesia's GDP is ~$850 billion, not $2.8 trillion. Singapore is ~$300 billion. Not sure why Indonesia's GDP keeps getting over-estimated by such a dramatic amount in this thread.
    - ptaipale 11y ago
      > Not sure why Indonesia's GDP keeps getting over-estimated by such a dramatic amount in this thread. Sorry, that was just a bit careless looking up of numbers. $850 billion is nominal GDP, $2.8 trillion is the PPP adjusted figure. For Singapore, the nominal and PPP adjusted values are much closer to each other ($300 billion vs. $450 billion).
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - JPKab 11y ago
    Not agreeing with the previous statement regarding Singapore's military supremacy, but measuring military effectiveness by number of troops is a hopelessly outdated method. Powerful armies are nothing more than logistics organizations, with 80-90% of members operating supply chains and maintenance to enable the 21st century weapons systems and their elite operators to destroy things. 300,000 guys with assault rifles and crappy Air Force are no match against 75,000 with modern technology and precision munitions.

bkor 11y ago

I'm just back from a business trip to Singapore. I never really understood what people meant with "haze" until one evening. From what I heard from my Singaporean colleagues the haze during my time there was pretty much cleared up. They have a number to measure how bad it is, they call it "PSI", see e.g. http://www.haze.gov.sg/ http://www.haze.gov.sg/. This is used in multiple countries, though the definition on what number constitutes bad air differs. During my entire stay, the number was 50-100 or so. Keep this in mind. So my experience: One evening there's like a fog, you can maybe see for 50 meters max. But the fog isn't water particles in the air, it is leftover material from the fire. Meaning: what you're seeing is utterly bad. Most of the time I spend either in the office, restaurant, a bar and public transport (AFAIK not only air conditioned but also filtered air). I wear contact lenses. Though only spending maybe 30 min in open air max: I got red eyes, had to clean my contact lenses again and had to buy eye drops to fix my red eyes. The haze was way worse before I arrived there. Only 1.5 day it was really bad. However, you could never see the sky. Just filthiness in the air preventing you from seeing it. I had it badly with 50-100 of "PSI". Before I was there it was around 300! Singapore is pretty interesting (fooooood! :-D), but living there will really shorten your life thanks to this. I never really understood haze until I experienced it myself. It's good to remember that it's not like the fog I am used to. It's like staying in the smoke of a burning building.

geomark 11y ago
Here in Thailand the impact has been pretty severe in the south. Very unhealthy air quality, a number of deaths of elderly from respiratory failure, many dozens of flights cancelled to Phuket and Krabi. Seems a lot worse this year than many years past. Next up is Thailand's burning season in a few months when the people in the north and neighboring Myanmar do their annual burn of farmlands and forest. That's usually pretty bad, too, but not on the same scale as the burning in Indonesia.
vellum 11y ago
>I had it badly with 50-100 of "PSI". Before I was there it was around 300! Kalimantan, where the fires are burning, hit 3300 PSI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Southeast_Asian_haze https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Southeast_Asian_haze

JPKab 11y ago

Indonesia, not unlike Malaysia, is at it's core a corrupt country filled with an ignorant majority ethnic group that rides on the backs of the East Asian immigrant populations that actually value education and hard work. I work with numerous people who would otherwise be starting businesses in their home countries, but don't want to have their pocket picked by the absurd laws forcing native Malays and Indonesians to be employed in top positions despite having no skills.

theworstshill 11y ago
Theres an easy solution that people traditionally employed in those cases, e.g. whites in Detroit. Vote with your feet.
liamconnell 11y ago
This comment is completely unacceptable and racist at its core. > ignorant majority ethnic group In fact Indonesia is has thousands of native tribes that constitute many different ethnic groups with a huge diversity of cultures and languages. These are the NATIVE people of Indonesia: Indonesians. > rides on the backs of the East Asian immigrant populations that actually value education and hard work Those Chinese immigrants are notorious in Indonesia for being exploitative businessmen who treat Indonesians, regardless of education level, as an underclass, funnel money out of Indonesia and into China, and hiring exclusively Chinese to work in their businesses. Because of the weak government (Indonesia was admirably non-bloc during the Cold War years, leaving it economically vulnerable), Chinese businesses since the 90s have been able to bargain their way into the country in order to harvest its natural resources while giving as little as possible to the Indonesian people. > actually value education and hard work The argument presented in JPKab's comment is a common slander against poor countries. Similar arguments have been made by the US about basically the entire people of Latin America, and by imperialist European countries. But an examination of what motivations are actually driving them reveal the true sentiment: "You're not harvesting your countries resources for me well enough!" The "absurd laws" that aim to protect the Indonesians people and their land are some of the most promising things, as they are long-term assurances that the country will not grow up to be a two-tiered society, ruled by the Chinese. JPKab and those who think like him would do better to do business in their own countries rather than forcing their way into countries who dont want them while simultaneously spreading bigoted lies about thousands of tribes and hundreds of millions of people that make up the "majority ethnic group[s]" of Indonesia.