ditch PR to avoid NS? can you say "black listed"?

[x9200]

Why is renouncing the other citizenship out of the question for people from a western country but not for those from say China though? People are very fond of saying that the P in PR stands for Permanent, but if you're going to keep your other citizenship and plan on going home sometime in the future then that's not technically permanent either is it?

Again I can only speak for myself and people have all sorts of reasons. I see a basic contradiction to submit and be loyal to one country and all the sudden give up this loyalty to my current country. Asking me to give up my citizenship is like asking to chose between my mother and father (sorry, I am aware it sounds like a cliche). If I do so it would be a betrayal as I still feel strongly emotionally connected to my country. What I would be worth for my new country if I am ready to do something like this? Not much at least according to my standards. This is a serious commitment at least for myself.

Where do you draw the line at who is abusing the system and who is a 'real' PR? 5 years, 10? Obviously SMS isn't abusing the system as he's been here a very long time, but it seems rather ridiculous IMO for those who have been a PR for say 3-5 years (and who got it quite easily then) to take the moral high ground with others when they themselves may end up moving on soon if circumstances change (another Asian financial crisis for example) and have no concrete commitment to Singapore by planning to become a citizen

What the length of stay has to do with it? A 7 year old child can not question somebody's morality for stealing something and stealing in general because he has not stolen anything for 7 years only? I have no problem with taking up the SG citizenship, I only have problem with giving up mine.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Why is renouncing the other citizenship out of the question for people from a western country but not for those from say China though? People are very fond of saying that the P in PR stands for Permanent, but if you're going to keep your other citizenship and plan on going home sometime in the future then that's not technically permanent either is it?

Where do you draw the line at who is abusing the system and who is a 'real' PR? 5 years, 10? Obviously SMS isn't abusing the system as he's been here a very long time, but it seems rather ridiculous IMO for those who have been a PR for say 3-5 years (and who got it quite easily then) to take the moral high ground with others when they themselves may end up moving on soon if circumstances change (another Asian financial crisis for example) and have no concrete commitment to Singapore by planning to become a citizen

In addition to MS points, those who take up PR but keep their kids in International Schools or send them to boarding schools in the home country, those who are "collector" of PR, e.g., Canada, Aus, Singapore & US PR when actually holding citizenship in none of them, but keep them as Boltholes. Those who use PR only as a long term visa so they don't have to leave the country after a local takes their job.

x9200 give a very good analogy. My country is my birthright. Additionally, by coming here and even taking up citizenship here, it's not like I'm moving up but more of a lateral move, unlike an immigrate from a 3rd world country who is trying to escape from their economic doldrums. It's ironic in a way, I went from 1984 till 1995 without stepping foot in the US. But she's still my heritage. I'm an American. I've put my life on the line for her, warts and all. I'm supposed to give that up? Nah. If I've got to make a choice, then the will win hands down. But, I've devoted three decades to the betterment of this country. I've stuck it out when other's ran during 5 recessions here. Why, if I can give that to this country, can't they give my wife and kids (Singaporean) the security of knowing that their father/husband will always be able to stay here. My beef is that they don't give equal rights to all their citizens. They should have the right to feel secure in their own country.

[JayCee]

Again I can only speak for myself and people have all sorts of reasons. I see a basic contradiction to submit and be loyal to one country and all the sudden give up this loyalty to my current country. Asking me to give up my citizenship is like asking to chose between my mother and father (sorry, I am aware it sounds like a cliche). If I do so it would be a betrayal as I still feel strongly emotionally connected to my country. What I would be worth for my new country if I am ready to do something like this? Not much at least according to my standards. This is a serious commitment at least for myself.

Sorry but I have to ask, if you're so loyal and emotionally connected to your country of origin, why did you up and leave and take PR somewhere else (which according to some here apparently means you should be intending to stay permanently and thus not go back)?

What the length of stay has to do with it? A 7 year old child can not question somebody's morality for stealing something and stealing in general because he has not stolen anything for 7 years only? I have no problem with taking up the SG citizenship, I only have problem with giving up mine.

A child stealing and new PRs criticising people applying for it? Apples and Oranges.

The length of stay has a lot to do with it IMO, how can someone who has only been a PR 3 years moralise about being a "real" PR and others making it worse for them when they've not been here 5 minutes and certainly nowhere near long enough to be regarded as "permanent"? It's double standards, they were happy to take advantage of the easy way to get PR when they were applying, yet now complain about others trying to do the same thing.

I'm just playing devils advocate a bit here as personally I couldn't care less who gets PR and how long they stay, I just find the hypocrisy shown on here sometimes to be a bit much (I'm not talking about you here as I have no idea of your circumstances)

[x9200]

Again I can only speak for myself and people have all sorts of reasons. I see a basic contradiction to submit and be loyal to one country and all the sudden give up this loyalty to my current country. Asking me to give up my citizenship is like asking to chose between my mother and father (sorry, I am aware it sounds like a cliche). If I do so it would be a betrayal as I still feel strongly emotionally connected to my country. What I would be worth for my new country if I am ready to do something like this? Not much at least according to my standards. This is a serious commitment at least for myself.

Sorry but I have to ask, if you're so loyal and emotionally connected to your country of origin, why did you up and leave and take PR somewhere else (which according to some here apparently means you should be intending to stay permanently and thus not go back)?

I am not SO loyal and SO emotionally connected, just the same without SO. I'm pretty sure you understand that the world is not that black and white as you want to put it here for the purpose of this discussion.

What the length of stay has to do with it? A 7 year old child can not question somebody's morality for stealing something and stealing in general because he has not stolen anything for 7 years only? I have no problem with taking up the SG citizenship, I only have problem with giving up mine.

A child stealing and new PRs criticising people applying for it? Apples and Oranges.

IMO it's apples to apples. Abuse is abuse, potential or real. It may happen now, it may be intended even before the opportunity arises. True that millage is different but millage does not make any difference to say that something is good or something is bad – it is good or bad regardless of the millage.

The length of stay has a lot to do with it IMO, how can someone who has only been a PR 3 years moralise about being a "real" PR and others making it worse for them when they've not been here 5 minutes and certainly nowhere near long enough to be regarded as "permanent"? It's double standards, they were happy to take advantage of the easy way to get PR when they were applying, yet now complain about others trying to do the same thing.

Sorry, I don't get this double standards. You make the equal mark between someone who took up PR just to buy an HDB, sell it in 5 years or so and never intended to make his children the PRs or stay here longer and someone who intended to stay here longer, agreed to have his children serve NS (even if he didn't like it) etc. I don't think it is fair.

I'm just playing devils advocate a bit here as personally I couldn't care less who gets PR and how long they stay, I just find the hypocrisy shown on here sometimes to be a bit much (I'm not talking about you here as I have no idea of your circumstances)

It comes down to the intentions. Sometimes they are very obvious so I think it is the right stand to let such person know that what he does is wrong. The current difficulties with getting the status are also caused by such people so reacting you help these who's intentions are honest.
Of course it can happen to anybody (including the citizens) that you may need to leave the country but IMO it does not disqualifies the person if the intentions were different.
Myself? I am indeed a pretty fresh PR but our son (<1y old) is already a PR too what was not that easy decision as we thought it violated his right to go his own way. It took us (my wife and myself) 7 years to decide whether we want or don't want to be the PRs. This was for us a big commitment. Funny thing that both of our employers tried to persuade us to do it much earlier and we refused.

[ututu]

Oh, I understand legal obligations quite well, what I don't understand how some on this board imply moral ones too. I can't see any case with accepting whatever case of moral obligations is being made.

You accepted an agreement you were not going to fulfil. Nothing immoral in it for you? If provable and on more general ground this would be nothing but a common fraud.

Nowhere in that agreement it states that I have to do NS, and no my kids are not PRs. That's what I was pointing at: smirking and other moralizing comments like me being totally upfront about what I'm and am not going to do and is somehow bad thing. Get off your high horse for a second. There are loads of PRs with sons on LTSVP and SP. I'm not going to send my sons to SG army unless I have pretty good non-material justification. Strangely, malls and low taxes don't do that for me.

Well, I guess it depends on your partners.

Pretty much the same lot as of SG GLCs and SG government, so don't worry, I'm not the only one in bad company.

[ututu]

PR is for people who would like to stay here on permanent basis what should later lead to the citizenship. It isn't meant for some chip-s**t opportunists willing to abuse the system for their convenience only.

Not sure I agree with this first bit, isn't one of our own mods a long-term PR who never had any intention of taking up Singaporean citizenship?

He will probably speak for himself but IIRC he got the same problem as majority of the Western type PRs including myself: giving up our original citizenship is not an option.

And pray tell, why giving up non-Western citizenship is an option ? And reasonable argument except white people are lot more superior to brown people ?

[x9200]

Not sure I agree with this first bit, isn't one of our own mods a long-term PR who never had any intention of taking up Singaporean citizenship?

He will probably speak for himself but IIRC he got the same problem as majority of the Western type PRs including myself: giving up our original citizenship is not an option.

And pray tell, why giving up non-Western citizenship is an option ? And reasonable argument except white people are lot more superior to brown people ?

You can read the explanation further down the discussion thread but doubtful you will find it rational - there is no money exchange involved, so you can not earn like additional few hundred bucks justifying your choice of action. Brown people? White people more superior? What the color of somebody's skin has to do with giving up the citizenship? I bet brown people from the Western countries would be also hesitant in giving up their citizenships. I am afraid by trying to make it racists you lost the only person who still was willing to talk to you at least for the time being.

[ututu]

You can read the explanation further down the discussion thread but doubtful you will find it rational - there is no money exchange involved, so you can not earn like additional few hundred bucks justifying your choice of action. Brown people? White people more superior? What the color of somebody's skin has to do with giving up the citizenship? I bet brown people from the Western countries would be also hesitant in giving up their citizenships. I am afraid by trying to make it racists you lost the only person who still was willing to talk to you at least for the time being.

And do explain to me why the same reasons do not apply if someone has Japan or any other citizenship. Nothing SMS listed is exclusive to Western PRs. I have worked around the globe too with bunch of "indefinite leave to remain" and "I-551" (for those that do not know, US stamp) stamps in my passport, but I will never give up mine (my country doesn't allow dual citizenship), pretty much for the same reasons. And as for my sons, I'm raising them to be citizens of my country, not SG. There is nothing SG offers of non-material side of things in order for me to feel the same.