I'm supposed to be doing my work and start studying but i'm not.

But.

I'm lolling@ the foreign worker dormitory thing.

Someone from serangoon gardens are actually are writing in going : "I'm upset with the plan .. despite some residents having expressed their unhappiness about the issue...I believe it (Singapore) is not that small that there is absolutely no other suitable place than this neighbourhood. ... today in Serangoon Gardens, tomorrow Ang Mo Kio, Toa Payoh ... By letting more workers come in Singapore, the government bodies should be responsible for housing them in a suitable area, and not dump them in a neighbourhood like this ... we and the workers have different cultures and living habits. Do you really think we all can get along together? ... People will get bored enclosed in one place. And what if they loiter around in the vicinity? ... property prices will definately drop and be affected by 20 to 30 percent. Who wants to buy property near a workers' domitory? And who is going to compensate the residents for their loses?"

This is a really really ugly reflection of the attitude of singaporean citizens. Not only that, the whole argument is littered with selfish assumptions and totally fail reasoning. So I'm going to rebutt these premises one by one.

Firstly, this thing about
"I'm upset with the plan being implemented .. despite some residents having expressed their unhappiness about the issue"
Wha? This person actually seriously believes that some residents saying THIS IS BS without actually having proper reasons is actually going to change something.

Lets move on to
"I believe it (Singapore) is not that small that there is absolutely no other suitable place than this neighbourhood. ... today in Serangoon Gardens, tomorrow Ang Mo Kio, Toa Payoh, Clementi..."
Uh huh... the writer clearly has no idea how constrained land space in singapore actually is. Lets uhm stuff them in... the water catchment areas? nature reserves?
Singapore is divided into several main areas, recreation(parks, beaches...), city(business districts, banking areas, (shenton way, the like)), government(airports, high court ministries), nature reserves + water catchments(reservoirs, Bukit timah hill...) and.... residential.
So, naturally, the "suitable place" will have to be referring to the residential areas, since the other areas cant be touched.
Now notice that the writer seems to be citing examples of (slightly more) developed residential areas of singapore, and refrains from giving more "ulu" places, such as tuas, yio chu kang? This also slightly changes the meaning of the phrase "suitable place". The author is indirectly ( on purpose or not) suggesting that the foreign workers get housed in less developed residential areas - Which, in turn, means that those areas get less developed (dont flame for this bit). There's also the small problem of residents in those areas having certain, uhm, "expressions of unhappiness"
So basically, this is a void point, since there is no such "suitable place".

"By letting more workers come in Singapore, the government bodies should be responsible for housing them in a suitable area, and not dump them in a neighbourhood like this"
OH MY !@#$!@#$.
Nice one, push all the responsibilities to the government. Keep up the good work.

"we and the workers have different cultures and living habits. Do you really think we all can get along together?"
This is the part where it starts getting uglier. different cultures and living habits indeed. What do you think these people are, theives by culture and unhygenic(living habits)?
Granted, different races. but arent singaporeans supposed to get along well with people of other races?
This loser (after rephrasing) is actually saying : OMG THEY DIFFERENT FROM US WE DONT LIKE THEM WE WONT GET ALONG.
EXCUSE ME?
The only way for foreign workers and locals to not get along is for these locals to not want to get along. Unless you want to admit you habitually practice discrimination, it is unwise to say you can't get along with them.

People will get bored enclosed in one place. And what if they loiter around in the vicinity"?
This stays ugly. basically this loser is saying ROFL THEY WORK, THEY SHOP, THEY EAT, THEY SLEEP, JUST LIKE US. HOWEVER, THEY SHOULD STICK TO WHERE THEY ARE AND NOT WANDER OUT. (contextually >>> the word "enclosed")
another worse intepretation would be THEY LOITER AND MIGHT STEAL WHILE LOCALS ARE IMMUNE TO BEING BORED AND LOITERING.
I dont even want to go into the implications of this.

" property prices will definately drop and be affected by 20 to 30 percent. Who wants to buy property near a workers' domitory?"
WHAT THE HELL.
Singaporeans better not dislike properties near foreign worker domitories. This is beyond ugly. not just the 20-30 percent bit (utterly overexxagerated imo, prices might drop by 1%?). Even if the domitories are set up, WHAT IMPACT does this do to the residents or buyers? Unless you are saying having a foreign worker for a neighbour is worse than having a local (by the way, this would mean that you are racist), there is no impact at all.
This guy saying "DEFINATELY" just makes it worse.
OUR IDEALS!!!

And who is going to compensate the residents for their loses?"
Singaporeans are spoonfed by PAP :P

On a last note, this is the singaporean pledge:
We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people. Regardless of race, language, or religion to build a democratic society, based on justice and equality, so as to achieve, happiness, prosperity, and progress for our nation.

This is plain ugly IMO

EDIT: lol the next day someone wrote a reply to the paper. (s)he wrote her letter in the same vein as mine, just a bit more polite. it seems that 'sg is not full of hysterical hacks! woooooh! (his/her surname was balakrishnan, same as that MP, so i have no idea if its just more propoganda)