Comments by "K `" (@user-jt3dw6vv4x) on "What's Considered Poor In Singapore? | Street Interview" video.

You can get hints of the Singaporean accent but a very Westernised version of it. It's definitely a mixed accent.
2
She's from an older generation hence why she even prefers to communicate in Chinese (only the older generation will be more comfortable speaking in Chinese, Malay or Tamil rather than English). Singapore was one of the poorest nations in Asia in the 1960s but now it's one of the richest and most technologically advanced nations on earth.
2
@Ccb88888 I don't know why you think Singapore was some well off nation in 1965, it absolutely was not and there is a reason why Singapore is marvelled for its economic transformation within a generation. Singapore was a bona fide poor country and comparing Singapore to other Asian nations in 1965 doesn't mean anything really because in 1965, the continent was poor. Israel was at #1 with US$1389 GDP followed by Japan with US$857. Singapore came in at #4 with US$494. That is not the definition of "rich". Singapore was poor through and through. So like I said before, that woman is from an older generation who was alive when Singapore was still a poor nation. The very fact that she chooses to communicate in Chinese rather than English is a clear testament to the bygone era she belonged to. You will only ever see Singaporeans who speak an Asian language (Chinese, Malay, Tamil, maybe Hokkien) as a first language among those from the older generation.
2
@Ccb88888 No, Singapore was not a middle income country. I'm really confused as to why you think it did. Having a national income of US$500, which is what Singapore once had, is far from a middle income nation. South Sudan of 2023 has almost US$500 but it is not a middle income nation. Singapore was not classified as a middle income nation in 1965 by the World Bank. It was classified as a "low income country" and rightfully so. I don't know why you want Singapore to be classified as a middle income country so bad when that was not reality.
2
Singapore will never sit around and ait for that to happen, it will do everything it can legally do to prevent it from happening.
1
It's crazy how you think Singapore is an oppressive authoritarian regime with a lack of accountability or transparency. Idk what country you are from but wherever you live clearly is promoting propaganda to you if you think Singapore is on the level of a place like China or North Korea or Myanmar.
1
Malays in Malaysia get discriminated against? Lmfaoooo I wonder what Malaysia you are living in.
1
Not everybody believes in Islam. You really need to learn how to respect other people's beliefs.
1
@Ccb88888 No it absolutely was not. In 1965, Singapore had a GDP per capita of around US$500. It was a part of Malaysia throughout the first half of the 1960s before being expelled in August 1965 and becoming an independent nation against its will. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore's first prime minister and the lead architect for Singapore's transformation from developing to developed, cried on national TV out of an extreme fear that Singapore will not survive on its own. Singapore had been plagued by racial tensions, high illiteracy and high poverty. The country was bona fide poor and Singapore was a fishing village, it was a fishing village back in the time of the Sultante of Johore. When people say Singapore was a fishing village they are referring to the period just before it was colonised.
1
@Ccb88888 Compare Singapore's 1965 US$494 to South Sudan's 2023 US$467, will you say South Sudan is a well off nation with wealthy people? South Sudan ranks among the poorest nations in Africa in 2023. Just because Singapore was higher in Asia, does not mean it was well off with wealthy people. It was "richer" than most of Asia but it wasn't rich. It was incredibly poor and being ethnically diverse like neighbouring Malaysia, its cosmopolitan population of Chinese, Malays, Indians and Eurasians spoke a creole-like language called Singlish and an Asian language, it had become racially divided as a result of the British colonial segregation policy and the effects of its union with Malaysia and its inhabitants were largely of a lower class. It also had no natural resources. It had nothing going for it.
1
@Ccb88888 "In Singapore's case, the British colonial authorities were not doing their job properly" Sorry but why are you talking about the British colonial authorities? Singapore was not under full British rule for at least 10 years before it became the Republic of Singapore in 1965. It was partially self governing from 1955 until 1959 when it became fully self governing, then in 1963 it joined what is now Malaysia before being expelled from the union in 1965. Singapore was nothing but a low income nation in Southeast Asia, surrounded by other low income nations. Lee Kuan Yew marvelled at Ceylon (modern Sri Lanka), particularly of its capital of Colombo. At that time, Ceylon was considered a model ex-British Crown colony and on times that Lee would visit Ceylon, he would make remarks at wanting to create a "Garden City" like what Colombo had become. If Singapore was a middle income nation with good things going for it, Lee would not need to look at Ceylon for inspiration. However, Singapore had nothing and being so small it has no natural resources. Singapore turned itself around due to the sheer need of survival. It is why it is described as one of, if not, the greatest economic miracle of the 20th century.
1