Population and demographics AQ/Eunice/10s403

The author in passage1 states that population will decline due to women being more educated. The increase in literacy rate in women has allowed them to have more "social and economic options in today's rich countries", which led to a delay in them having children. This has "pulled fertility below the natural replacement rate." The threat that this pose is that there is too much food which might affect exports and widen income inequality between the rich and poor countries. I agree that this point is relevant to Singapore because women here enjoy equal education rights as men and thus are highly-educated as well. Many women are pursuing careers and are reluctant to put their careers on hold to form a family. For example, our government have put in a lot of measures to try and get the birth rates up through baby bonus schemes and extended maternity leave. Hence, Singapore is also facing a declining birth rate and this is due to women being highly-educated as well. However, the view is not true that rich and poor countries will be even more segregated. People from poor countries are given opportunities to study in other countries to allow them to get a better job in the future and hence up their standard of living in their hometowns. For example, Singapore gives out ASEAN scholarships to allow students from poor Southeast Asian countries to study here. Therefore, the point that the author made that population decline will widen the rich and poor countries' gap is not relevant to Singapore.

The author in passage2 mentioned that sub-replacement fertility is due to graying population and population decline. This argument is relevant to Singapore because we are facing sub-replacement fertility and experiencing population decline and graying population as well. Due to a threat on our sustainability caused by the sub-replacement fertility, our government has put in measures to counter the graying population and population decline issues. For example, retired workers are encouraged to return to the workforce, retirement age has been increased and baby bonus schemes have been put in place to encourage people to have more babies. Hence, the author's point is relevant to the Singapore society. However, the point is not entirely true because our sub-replacement fertility could be due to other reasons like standard of living. Due to the high costs of living in Singapore, people are unsure about raising children as they are afraid they might be financially challenged. For example, people are choosing to have only one or two kids relative to more than five in the past. Hence, this point is not relevant to Singapore as it did not account for other possible reasons.

Therefore, the argument presented in passage2 is more relevant to Singapore because it gives more insight to the sub-replacement fertility issue.