3 ms·
Your goals are wildly inappropriate for Singapore, which is a tiny island that has been extensively developed for centuries, and is considerably wealthier than
by dustintrex 5y ago
Your goals are wildly inappropriate for Singapore, which is a tiny island that has been extensively developed for centuries, and is considerably wealthier than the US. There is essentially zero primary forest left, unskilled foreign workers are far more oppressed than anything approximating an "indigenous population" (most Malays are immigrants and the odd Orang Laut has long since fully assimilated), and Singapore has one of the most successful public housing schemes in the world with something like 80% of the population owning a modern flat.
- quacked 5y agoYou're not wrong. I should have done a better job of explaining my point--this discussion about Singapore reminds me of discussion about other wealthy nations that uses the same phrases and focus, which is what I commented on Singapore itself is a very strange nation, utterly dependent on other nations to provide it with almost everything it uses (food, machinery, raw product, etc). The fact that it can be managed like a reality-themed theme park is a testament to the ability of first-worlders to press-gang the rest of the world into service. Turning it into a real, self-sustaining nation with wildlife and personal independence is impossible.