I don’t know about Singapore, but in the rest of the countries in the top 8 those “immigrants” are slave labor with zero rights and no hope of citizenship ever.
Why is it so hard to make whatever point this individual is trying to make without fudging the numbers and emptying words of all meaning?
6 thoughts on “Rancid Fudge”
“Why is it so hard to make whatever point… without fudging the numbers and emptying words of all meaning?”
Because modern political discourse is about deception and obfuscation. The point of most modern political terms is to make and keep people ignorant of what’s going on. The more progressive the namer, the obfuscation is likely going on….
In terms of migration, only a small percentage of those who move to other countries are really immigrants and using the word of them simply makes any kind of functional policy harder to achieve… which is, I guess, the whole point.
In my taxonomy, those that move to the Gulf Arab countries are going as gastarbeiters, the intention is to work and either save money or support family back home before returning home. The problem is that the host society sees most of them as servants (at best) and slaves at worst.
Again I welcome any dialogue or critique of my preliminary taxonomy of migration….
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Why is it so hard to make whatever point this individual…”
I shan’t be as thorough-going and scrupulous as the inestimable cliff arroyo, but much blunter and down-to-earth: BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO ARGUMENT.
“Why is it so hard…”
Because it’s a lie.
Squid-like, he must throw out a screen of ink to hide what direction he’s going.
“I don’t know about Singapore …”
William Gibson called it “Disney with the Death Penalty”.
Sentences for various punishments include being beaten with a leaden cane.
Accidentally transiting Singapore with a few compounds you may regard as “mostly harmless” could get you executed.
Also, anyone else here remember the Barings Bank scandal?
Singapore, doing decadent deals with dodgy derivatives done dirt cheap.
One Billion Dollars(tm) sounds so quaintly small these days in terms of a company getting “all meth’d up”, doesn’t it.
Certain kinds of arrangements are speculative at best, plus corporations may close without anything more than a summary settling of final affairs. There’s little in the way of procedurally forcing an orderly accounting of the books on the way to closing, especially when it comes to foreign creditors, and so you’re forced to sue these corporations in a Singapore court.
Or you can do what we did: write the liability down to £0 because we were never going to get paid.
This is also what Sequoia did with FTX very recently, BTW.
There are things I like about Singapore, but the list of things I don’t like about it is a much longer list. Nice shops, safe to walk around, and the number of beautiful free parks and entertaining places makes it a fun visit. The big mall near city centre makes Westfield London look like a small regional mall in the US.
But the number of ridiculously specific and petty laws for petty offences puts Singapore in competition with the Swiss for what I regard as the ultimate personal crime, which of course is to bust my balls with absolute bullshit.
Check out the rules on such things as durians and chewing gum, just for starters.
No need for me to visit: Harrods will do me just fine the next time I manage to make it back to London, and they stock the tea I like that’s from Singapore.
Your mileage may vary (widely), but I have a sense I’ve helped prove your point. 🙂
To be fair, there need to be restrictions on durians.
“Sentences for various punishments …”
My whisky stands by this statement. 😉