Pros and cons of living in Singapore for near future

[NYY1]

Personally, I don't bat an eye when I read about some issues late at night in certain areas of a city. Those have always existed and hopefully I can avoid putting myself there.

I do pay attention to specific cities and areas/suburbs that I know firsthand, and follow how things are doing because I know exactly what the environment was like over various stretches of time.

Adding on to the last comment above, I don't think safety is just after midnight. How many of these cities are you letting primary school aged kids take the public transport system home on? Some suburbs may be a different story but you still need to worry more than you do here.

[malcontent]

I know what the Amtrak is and do intend take their California Zephyr route one day. Have read & seen enough blogs & vlogs to know Amtrak is pretty good.

Again, malcontent mentioned he took the train in the early afternoon. By safety, we mean past midnight. That is where SG stands out. Anyone can walk on the streets after 12am here in SG without having an unfortunate encounter. You can go out, get drunk, and still reach home safely. Of course, walking into dimly lit areas anywhere in the world isn’t recommended, that is common sense.

I agree that virtually all parts Singapore are safe at all hours. In the US, there are definitely bad neighborhoods and areas you shouldn’t be venturing into at night. But there are also neighborhoods in the US that are as safe as Singapore at all hours. There are also areas in the US you can venture into at all hours without any concern. There tend to be more areas of concern in the city, although even my hometown, population 5,000, we had a place called “the zone” which was about 5 city blocks that you should avoid, kind of a mini-ghetto,with drugs, gang activity and young thugs who are looking for trouble. I never ventured into there on foot, and rarely in my car. But, there wasn’t any need to.

Honestly, personal safety while in the US is just not something I give much thought to because I always avoid unsafe areas. And it’s not rocket science to figure out which areas are not safe. I still remember when I arrived in Singapore, Geylang was still a bit run down… at the time and I remember thinking to myself - if this was the US, I wouldn’t stop here.

[malcontent]

[duplicate post removed]

[malcontent]

This was O'Hare then Blue Line to South Loop Area to Union Station?

I would say the perception is everyone gets mugged or shot at, which isn't true, as you have shown. However, there has been an increasing rate of incidents in this area, although probably more at night (which you mentioned you would have avoided). Even the area to the West of North Michigan Avenue hasn't been spared either (this is historically a very nice area). If you go South from Downtown to Chinatown or around the University of Chicago, things have deteriorated even more over the years.

Hence, while the news may be dramatized, one safe journey does not mean the issues are entirely fabricated either. If you want numbers, there are plenty of crime stats out there for the area.

Yes, it was the blue line from O’hare to Clinton, closest to Union. Just a word of warning to anyone attempting this, after you exit the station there are only stairs to get up to street level - luckily I didn’t have much luggage on the way in, so it was fine… but wouldn’t be advisable otherwise.

Agree, one safe journey isn’t any guarantee, but taking this train was actually recommended by a friend of mine (Indian PR here) who had a similar experience with the blue line in the daytime from O’hare to downtown. I honestly never thought about it or considered it before he told me about it.

[NYY1]

This was O'Hare then Blue Line to South Loop Area to Union Station?

I would say the perception is everyone gets mugged or shot at, which isn't true, as you have shown. However, there has been an increasing rate of incidents in this area, although probably more at night (which you mentioned you would have avoided). Even the area to the West of North Michigan Avenue hasn't been spared either (this is historically a very nice area). If you go South from Downtown to Chinatown or around the University of Chicago, things have deteriorated even more over the years.

Hence, while the news may be dramatized, one safe journey does not mean the issues are entirely fabricated either. If you want numbers, there are plenty of crime stats out there for the area.

Yes, it was the blue line from O’hare to Clinton, closest to Union. Just a word of warning to anyone attempting this, after you exit the station there are only stairs to get up to street level - luckily I didn’t have much luggage on the way in, so it was fine… but wouldn’t be advisable otherwise.

Agree, one safe journey isn’t any guarantee, but taking this train was actually recommended by a friend of mine (Indian PR here) who had a similar experience with the blue line in the daytime from O’hare to downtown. I honestly never thought about it or considered it before he told me about it.

Interesting you never took before. I think years ago it was much more convenient to get in/out of the city to the airport. More recently, I have been recommended to avoid it though.

Your friend and you both made it with no issues. Nevertheless, here are some articles reporting some recent issues (last 2 years or so). I guess it's all whether someone views as "low probability" in the context of total riders so give it a go or just want to avoid stuff like this altogether.

Anyways, glad you were not on the news!

https://chicago.suntimes.com/crime/2022 ... in-in-loop

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/m ... y/2840406/

https://www.nbcchicago.com/top-videos-h ... e/2582163/

https://www.nbcchicago.com/local-2/woma ... k/2581856/

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/m ... k/2522692/

https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/m ... p/2511000/

[sundaymorningstaple]

I know what the Amtrak is and do intend take their California Zephyr route one day. Have read & seen enough blogs & vlogs to know Amtrak is pretty good.

Again, malcontent mentioned he took the train in the early afternoon. By safety, we mean past midnight. That is where SG stands out. Anyone can walk on the streets after 12am here in SG without having an unfortunate encounter. You can go out, get drunk, and still reach home safely. Of course, walking into dimly lit areas anywhere in the world isn’t recommended, that is common sense.

I've been here long enough to know that this isn't entirely true either. Like the US, here in Singapore you also have to use a modicum of common sense (which seems to be lacking on both sides of the big pond). In Singapore, if you were an white anglo-saxon female who'd been partying downtown, surely wouldn't go for makan at 3 am in Chinatown, Little India or even Golden Mile. I've seen an expat killed as he left the old Boots & Saddles in Sembawang due to a pool table altercation. When he left and went to the bus stop to try to flag a taxi, he was set upon by about a dozen local with chunkels and lengths of timber and proceeded to beat the guy to death. I also saw something similar happen at the old Anson Road Offshore Land Club at the top of the Anson Bldg from my car parked opposite the club in the petrol kiosk at 4 am when a couple of Scandinavian guys were set upon by local with brickbats. I didn't stick around as I had to meet the Conoco Albatross at Seletar Airport in a couple of hours for crew change to Indonesian (P. Matak).

There are places here it's not wise to be depending on the time and your colour, language, race or gender. You see it a lot recently on IG, HardwareZone, Singapore Scene, and other local fare (chinese papers as well). Heck you can see it in Holland Village as well, right PNGMK!

[smoulder]

^there aren't that many dingy dangerous places in Singapore that you can't go to past midnight.

Having said that, I do tend to agree with mals view about how the average Singaporean tends to exaggerate the risks in other countries - a combination of group opinions built up by lazy cherry picked news reports.

[MOCHS]

Eh, I was mildly concerned about natural disasters like earthquakes & tornados when I visited California & the Midwest since I really would not know what to do other than taking a cue from the locals. SG curriculum doesn’t have earthquake drills like Japan. I did read what you should do but theory and reality doesn’t go hand in hand all the time.

Guns & mugging on the other hand, I didn’t really think much about it, was more cautious of pickpockets and scams just like any other county I visit.

[NYY1]

Interesting thoughts. For me, I've never worried too much about natural disasters. Kind of like getting on a flight; there's always some chance you don't land successfully at your destination.

Personally, I consider violent crime more seriously. Risk is not just the probability of an event happening but more importantly the consequences if it happens. Along the lines of prior comments about different areas within a city/metro area, I also delineate between thugs blasting/slashing up each other vs similar actions against an unknown/random victim. Maybe these are also low probability events with very bad outcomes, just like natural disasters? I guess I still view them differently, as one is an "act of god" so to say whereas the other is due to the act of another human against me (in a negative way). I believe there is a way to control the later, albeit the risk cannot be eliminated completely anywhere.

I do encourage people to read the news more (get from multiple sources or better yet just get actual facts/data yourself). Things change and anchoring to prior views/experiences can cause just as large of a difference between perception and reality as one sided media can.

[sundaymorningstaple]

The obvious question I usually get when I relate these 1st hand anecdotes is why have I stayed here then. To be honest it's just like NYY1 just said. The media runs off sensationalism and without it nobody will tune in. Ratings are everything. I've seen my share of stuff around the world and both here and my former home in the US. Singapore tries to downplay the internal bad stuff as much as it can as it depends a lot on tourism so it's understandable. The US is different as everybody in the media is trying for eyeball hits and/or soundbites for viewership as they cannot operate without advertising revenue so they will play up and even lie (via misinformation & half truths - not lies but not the full truths either) For me. My whole family is here (now 3 individual family units with in-laws and grandkids as well. Considering me being a NamVet as well, it is interesting to note that I've never directly (indirectly yes, directing artillery fire) killed anybody during the war. Neither have I ever pointed any weapon at anybody in Singapore. But I have done so in the US in Dec 1968 and killed a man (ironically only 5 months after my military discharge). Yes, 2:30 am in the morning at the Holiday Inn where I was the night manager, during a holdup attempt. So I find it much safer here in Singapore truth be known (oh, my hometown where this happened only had a population of 9600 people at that time, It didn't cross 10,000 until some time after 2000. So it can also happen in rural communities as well.

"albeit the risk cannot be eliminated completely anywhere." Well said.

[malcontent]

I’ve run into people here who are overly invested in the narrative that Singapore is the safest place on earth. When I mention the fact that Japan is safer, they can’t accept it. And of course I have crime stats to prove it, but they don’t want to see it — because this was how they had been justifying the high cost of living all these years, and it would disrupt their world to entertain any thoughts to the contrary. Then if I proceed to mention how there are certain pockets of the US that are safer than Singapore too, with lower crime stats to prove it… that really starts to bother them!

Don’t get me wrong, Singapore is safe, and that is nice and all… but I do not believe it is such a big deal that it can be used in any way to justify the high cost of living here. Maybe I am just a frog that does not see a huge risk outside of the well.

[malcontent]

Your friend and you both made it with no issues. Nevertheless, here are some articles reporting some recent issues (last 2 years or so). I guess it's all whether someone views as "low probability" in the context of total riders so give it a go or just want to avoid stuff like this altogether.

Anyways, glad you were not on the news!

Yes, I did do a search before my trip and found some crimes like that in the news. I knew it wasn’t without ‘some’ risk.

I do consider myself to be fairly well informed and reasonably risk averse. Here is what I did to avert some of that risk on the blue line… I prepared a throw away wallet with some old expired credit cards and some US cash. I had this in my back pocket, just in case, ready to throw it and run the other way if needed. Probably overkill, but hey, I’d rather be prepared than not.

[NYY1]

Yes, I did do a search before my trip and found some crimes like that in the news. I knew it wasn’t without ‘some’ risk.

I do consider myself to be fairly well informed and reasonably risk averse. Here is what I did to avert some of that risk on the blue line… I prepared a throw away wallet with some old expired credit cards and some US cash. I had this in my back pocket, just in case, ready to throw it and run the other way if needed. Probably overkill, but hey, I’d rather be prepared than not.

It's a reasonable strategy. When some people I know were students in USA and living in not the best areas, they always had some spare cash ready to give to someone. A few of them mentioned they would always look the people in the eye and greet them as well. Basically telegraph to them that they are not afraid but also respect the other person.

On crime stats, most figures were falling for many years after the 80s-90s. Giuliani is largely credited with cleaning up NYC, but if you look nationally there was a broader movement going on as well. However, things seemed to have bottomed out in the first part of the last decade and things have been choppy since but slowly trending upward (with a large spike on the back of COVID, unclear if this is still temporary or part of a larger issue). If you look more broadly, incarceration rates have also been dropping for years, and perhaps this is leading the aforementioned increase (or stopped the decreasing trend). Unfortunately, I don't think the incarceration rate is a reflection of a better behaving society though, and this is where policy matters (or why I say things change if you have not been on the ground consistently for decades or monitoring closely).

In the end, the stats are what they are but they also only mean so much (in both ways). As we've mentioned, some areas can be avoided, and it is nearly impossible to get apples-to-apples stats across jurisdiction on only "better or safe" locations. Hence, it is good if you can monitor a few locations that you know very well to assess what has or hasn't changed.

[Wd40]

To me, the most critical question you have to ask yourself is what you are looking to gain from your stint in Singapore. Usually there are 2 different routes
1)You are looking at SG as an expat destination. Want to work here for a few years and you are here for the money, the experience or whatever. But you dont call this a home. You know where your home is and eventually you plan to go back. Singapore is awesome if this is your goal. You dont need to learn a new language, you dont need to buy a home or car or develop any kind of materialist or emotional attachment to this place. You enjoy your time here living like a long term tourist then you go back to whereever you came from, and you pretty quickly forget about Singapore, even if you lived here for 3-4 decades.

2)You are looking for a place to immigrate to. You come from a place where you dont really plan to go back to and retire. You are shopping for a new passport to settledown, build your house, grow your family and retire. Then Singapore is a horrible choice. You are better off to go to another developed country which still takes in immigrants.

[malcontent]

To me, the most critical question you have to ask yourself is what you are looking to gain from your stint in Singapore. Usually there are 2 different routes
1)You are looking at SG as an expat destination. Want to work here for a few years and you are here for the money, the experience or whatever. But you dont call this a home. You know where your home is and eventually you plan to go back. Singapore is awesome if this is your goal. You dont need to learn a new language, you dont need to buy a home or car or develop any kind of materialist or emotional attachment to this place. You enjoy your time here living like a long term tourist then you go back to whereever you came from, and you pretty quickly forget about Singapore, even if you lived here for 3-4 decades.

2)You are looking for a place to immigrate to. You come from a place where you dont really plan to go back to and retire. You are shopping for a new passport to settledown, build your house, grow your family and retire. Then Singapore is a horrible choice. You are better off to go to another developed country which still takes in immigrants.

There are also those who start out #1 and end up #2… whether by choice or by circumstance. I’ve now spent half of my life in SG, but still feel perfectly at home in the US (just spent the last 3 weeks there). And, I just got my EP renewed for the umpteenth time.

To your point - - Singapore is a great place to make money, not spend money. So if you can swing it, spend your peak earning years here and sacrifice your lifestyle, then leave Singapore to enjoy what you’ve earned — where you’ll get way more bang for your buck. It can be a win for you and a win for Singapore as well — to shed that dead weight.