Some men believe that if they provide enough money, their partner will stay loyal — even love them.
They see marriage as a transaction: money in, affection out.
This mentality surfaces often in Singapore’s cross-cultural marriages, especially when local men marry foreign spouses from Thailand, Vietnam, or China.
Some assume that by offering housing and financial stability, they’ve done their part. But many make no effort to learn their partner’s language, customs, or values. The result is often a fragile, functional relationship — held together by necessity or children, not shared memory or true companionship.
Anyone who has built a real relationship knows this: love cannot be bought.
And neither can nationhood.
At the Asia Future Summit on 9 October 2025, Home Affairs and Coordinating Minister K Shanmugam openly acknowledged what many already observe:
“Singapore’s population growth… is driven mainly by foreign workers.”
He is right — the figures show it clearly.
According to the Population in Brief 2025 report, the non-resident population — comprising foreign workers, dependants, domestic helpers, and international students — increased by 2.7 per cent, from 1.86 million in 2024 to 1.91 million in 2025.
Much of this growth came from Work Permit Holders in construction and other labour-intensive sectors, confirming Singapore’s reliance on low-wage, high-volume foreign manpower to drive economic expansion.
Yet while these flows boost the headline population, the resident population — citizens and PRs — tells a more restrained story.
In 2024, Singapore granted 35,264 new PRs and 22,766 new citizenships, the highest in over a decade.
And yet, the resident population only increased by around 20,000, from 4.18 million to 4.20 million.
This modest growth comes even as Singapore actively brings in tens of thousands each year. One reason is that new citizens are converted from PRs, so they don’t increase the total.
Another is that Singapore’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR) remains below 1.0, among the world’s lowest.
Although births still outnumber deaths for now, the natural increase has shrunk significantly, and many PRs and even citizens quietly leave — whether for retirement or a better cultural fit elsewhere.
So while the headline population grows, it is clear: Singapore’s growth is now sustained by immigration — not fertility, not retention, not roots.
The government continues to roll out pro-birth incentives — baby bonuses, tax rebates, extended parental leave — hoping to reverse the decline.
But little changes. The problem isn’t just money. It’s environment.
And here lies the contradiction: while one arm of the state hands out cash to encourage childbirth, another fuels immigration policies that inflate housing costs, strain childcare spaces, and stretch work-life balance — all the reasons couples put off having children.
It’s no surprise then that, despite all the incentives, most Singaporeans still hesitate.
In practice, the government appears to have quietly shifted away from any serious expectation of restoring fertility. Instead, it relies on managed immigration to sustain population numbers.
And it is here that Shanmugam’s most striking line lands:
“We will collapse without them.”
He may be referring to labour and GDP. But collapse, if it comes, won’t be due to a lack of workers — it will be due to a lack of belonging.
Because Singapore has stopped asking what kind of society it wants to grow, and focused only on how to keep growing it.
Even Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong, speaking at the Kent Ridge Ministerial Forum on 9 September 2025, acknowledged this emotional fragmentation.
“Being Singaporean is important, but it may not be the most important part of your identity,” he said.
Drawing on findings from the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), he noted that many Singaporeans — and especially newer citizens — prioritise religion, language, political beliefs, or sexual orientation over national identity.
That may be natural in a globalised world. But it’s also a symptom of a deeper failure: Singapore has not built a compelling enough identity to be central.
This is where cultural gravity matters.
The Han and Tang dynasties succeeded in turning diverse populations into a shared civilisational identity. People called themselves Han not because of blood, but because of belief and culture.
Modern Japan, too, has managed to hold together a strong identity through language, philosophy, and tradition — even as it ages and shrinks demographically.
Singapore, in contrast, offers efficiency without emotional resonance. A place to work, not to love. A passport, not a purpose.
Nowhere is this clearer than in Chinatown.
Once a space that celebrated the dialect-speaking pioneers who helped build Singapore, it has now turned into a commercial centre catering to mainland Chinese food, signs, and tourist trends.
It is no longer a tribute to the local Chinese identity — Hokkien, Teochew, Cantonese — but increasingly a China Chinatown, indistinct from those in any other city.
It’s a symbol of what we’re losing: a rooted, Singaporean cultural story.
And as we bring in new people from around the world, without giving them something distinctive to join, we risk becoming a permanent transit zone, full of movement but devoid of meaning.
Source: Screenshot from Google Map
Conclusion: a nation cannot thrive on transaction alone
Singapore has succeeded in building a world-class economy, but it has yet to build a world-class identity.
Like the man who thinks money alone will hold a marriage together, Singapore assumes that prosperity will secure loyalty.
But love doesn’t work that way. Neither does nationhood.
If we want people to stay — truly stay — we must offer them more than opportunity. We must give them culture, connection, and continuity.
Otherwise, we may keep growing in numbers — but shrink, quietly, in spirit.
The post Singapore’s immigration model thrives on numbers, but fails on belonging appeared first on The Online Citizen.
