A foreign acquaintance of mine, an avid reader of Forbes Magazine, has such a rose-coloured view of Singapore, and I can see why. Take this recent column by Joel Kotkin.

My comments:

1. It’s amazing how many articles about Singapore tend to start by announcing its high income. What Kotkin states about income is true, if you look at GNI per capita, PPP. But the financial reality that is more familiar to most Singaporeans is that outlined by UBS in its purchasing power survey: compared to most [all?] countries in the developed world, Singaporeans work longer hours for lower pay, and their purchasing power is no better than that of people in Kuala Lumpur. What can explain this disparity? Well, perhaps because, for example, housing prices are one of those items that are “comparison resistant” [pdf] across countries. If you look at UBS’s survey, their weighted average for housing costs for Singapore is second only to Oslo, Miami and NYC. It could easily be the main reason why Singapore’s purchasing power figure is so low.
2. Kotkin writes:
   

   For their part, Singapore’s leaders have focused on providing parkland, building a functioning subway and recycling city wastes. But these pragmatists show little tolerance for such Western-style species self-hatred. A society proud of its accomplishments, its agglomerated cultures–Chinese, Indian, Malay–continue to value family as the supreme societal unit.

   Here’s one consequence of valuing “family as the supreme societal unit”: most singles live with their parents, partly due to a taboo against moving out before you’re married. There are obvious consequences for their opportunities to meet other singles. I know someone who is 25 years old and still has a 10pm curfew set by her parents.

   As for parkland and subways, I suppose it depends on what you mean by ‘focus’! Public transport in many European cities is still superior to Singapore’s, in my opinion. And our parkland is frankly pathetic. On weekends, unless you go in the middle of the day when it’s scorching, the parks are packed. Even at Bukit Timah Nature Reserve, there’s a constant stream of people going up the steepest stair sections — forget about getting away from the bustle of the city.

3. the city’s bureaucracy is cleverer than most and may be able to change some policies–placing more emphasis on leisure time for mate-chasing and child-raising to building larger apartments–to reverse the current birth dearth

   Ummm. I don’t think people are not having kids because the apartments are too small. Or, at least, that’s not a major reason. A more important reason is that they can’t afford the apartments. Larger apartments are only going to be even more unaffordable. As for leisure time, “cheaper, better, faster” anyone? How does one get more leisure time while becoming cheaper and faster?

4. Kotkin mentions high immigration rates but not emigration rates. Even the Singapore government admits that those are a problem. Furthermore, the level of education among new permanent residents seems to be lower than that among Singaporeans.