BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast: PAP Vote Surge & Workers’ Party Corporate Candidates – E570
"I feel like, you know, the Singapore of our youth would not have produced this sort of candidate. Right? And yeah, so it's like really refreshing to see folks come out and try. And you know, he made a funny comment, right? He was like, 'Oh, you know, some PAP person's like: Who's this Jeremy Tan? I've never heard of him before.' And then he's like, 'Well yeah, who's my opponent? I've never heard of her before either.' Like, you know, he's just a regular person. So I think that in a place that tends to somehow, like, put people's credentials kind of on a pedestal, I think it was refreshing to have someone come through and sort of be like, 'Hey, I have ideas, I've done research, I care about this, and I'm going to run. I don't need validation from a party or anything.' Yeah, I thought it was kind of neat." - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund
"I did think that, you know, in WP wards where they are taking share — actually, even in Tampines where they lost — they still swung the vote share by quite a large amount. And so that's an interesting sort of result to me, which is that for places where the Workers' Party has been more entrenched, their management of the town council, the familiarity, them seeing their MPs walking around, continues to build trust amongst their constituents. And, you know, I think they're emerging as the most credible and organized opposition party, right? I think the other thing is that, like, ten plus parties contested, but everyone else lost their deposit except the independents. I think it's interesting because it's definitely fair to say that there was a sense that the quality of the candidates had improved for the Workers' Party — especially, I think, less so for the other political parties." - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund
"And I think the question you've got to ask yourself is: is this rewriting of the East and West relationship a four-year thing, or is this a forty-year cycle? Because if you're saying that it's a four-year thing, then Singapore's economic model doesn't have to change — in terms of its ports, logistics, and so forth. If it's more systemic, right, as a forty-year cycle that we're seeing here, then I think that's a serious headwind for the Singapore economy. So I think some serious thinking needs to be done, and we never really got that conversation going. Obviously, a lot of this is new and happening live. But I think there's going to be a serious debate over the next four years, which is like: if this is true, then what do we do? And I think that's a more fundamental debate. Because, I think, if you make an argument that East and West trade — let's say — goes to zero (I'm just saying as an example, right, not saying that's true), if you make that argument and go all the way to one end and say it goes to zero..." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast
Jeremy Au and Shiyan discuss Singapore’s election outcomes, unpacking voter behavior, opposition growth, independent candidates, and future policy challenges. They reflect on global trends, local issues like housing and education, and how politics, tech, and business intersect in a rapidly changing world.
01:27 Surprising Election Results: PAP exceeded expectations, rising above 66% vote share. Workers' Party retained voter support in key wards. Analysts underestimated incumbency and voter desire for stability.
06:10 PAP's Communication Strategy: Lawrence Wong and other leaders used podcasts and longer formats effectively. Jeremy highlights how this humanized the PAP and resonated with younger, thoughtful voters.
15:50 Independent Candidate Jeremy Tan: Jeremy Tan stood out with tech-forward and well-researched policies. His CPF Bitcoin idea drew mixed reactions but sparked debate. Other proposals, like scam prevention, were seen as creative.
22:15 Future Challenges and Hopes: Jeremy and Shiyan express concerns about AI, education readiness, and global trade risks. Singapore faces the challenge of adapting its economy if East-West trade tensions become permanent.
(00:54) Shiyan: Hey, Jeremy! Did you stay up late
(00:56) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(00:57) Shiyan: watching the results?
(00:57) Jeremy Au : No, I went to (01:00) sleep, obviously looking at the results and at the time, obviously a sample count had come up. The counts were pretty solid in terms of the trend but definitely had to wake up to the morning for the final counts because I think they made those final announcements that like 2, 3, 4 am and I'm getting old maybe.
(01:17) Shiyan: So, when you woke up this morning, was that sort of in line with your expectations? Were there any specific results that surprised you? Where were you betting on things?
(01:27) Jeremy Au : Yeah, I woke up surprised, I would say. And also, after like maybe like a few minutes, maybe less surprised. I would say the part that was surprising of course, was that I think talking to, like a friends, colleagues, I think there was this sense that if the consensus bet would have been that I think the PAP would have less of a vote share compared to the last election.
(01:50) But that PAP will continue to defend all of the seats. So, I think because of the first pass support system where you know, you had to be the number one winner of that (02:00) district in order to get those seats. So, I think that was a sense. And I think that the fact that the PAP outperformed by beating analyst expectations of it going below 60% to actually increasing his vote share to 66%, I think was a surprise for many folks.
(02:17) Shiyan: Yeah.
(02:18) Jeremy Au : How about you for you shared? Yeah.
(02:19) Shiyan: I mean, I think we've seen a global trend, right? Which is that instability favors incumbents, right? So ,whether it's Canada, with Mark Carney or Australia who actually voted on the same day as we did, I think that perhaps is not as much of our surprise. I did think that, you know, in WP Wards where they're taking share actually, so even in tame where they lost, They still swung the vote share by quite a large amount, and so that's an interesting sort of result to me, which is that for places where the workers' party has been more entrenched, you know, their management of the town council, the familiarity, them seeing their MPs walking around continues to build (03:00) trust amongst their constituents. And you know, I think they're emerging as the most credible and organized opposition party, right? I think the other thing is that I think like 10 plus parties contested, but everyone else lost their deposit except the independence.
(03:16) Jeremy Au : I think it's interesting, because I think it is definitely fair to say that there was a sense that the quality of the candidates had improved for the workers party. I think especially, I think less I guess, so for the other political parties, I think what's interesting is that there's definitely been a sense that the quality of candidates has actually improved for the workers party.
(03:36) I think a lot of my peers were impressed, I think by, I think several candidates that came up. Obviously, there was um, Michael th, who was an ex- ACS student. I think he was a junior of mine, so I've known him for a while. And he studied at Harvard Kennedy School, in Boston.
(03:54) And then he had previously spent many years at Boston Consulting Group. So, I think there was one candidate (04:00) that was another candidate, obviously it was Andre Lao. He was also a Boston Consulting Group experienced, were experienced. And then he did his MBA in Seattle. So, I think these were candidates that were of the millennial generation.
(04:11) That come across as, like serious corporate experience and have gone to good universities, right? Which is an interesting bar, but, that's how people think about it, is hey, the quality of candidates seems have gone up and these would historically would've been PAP candidates because of that corporate, and public sector experience.
(04:29) So, I thought it was an interesting dynamic there. How about you? What do you think, Shiyan.
(04:32) Shiyan: Yeah, I mean, I do think that, you know, I think historically the sentiment amongst professionals has been like, why bother? Like it's a suicide mission. The fact that the workers' party is able to recruit beyond, I guess, the traditional sort of lawyer class, you know, expand into corporate and some entrepreneurial folks as well, I think is a great sign for the strength of their brand. And also I think, I wonder if I, I mean, I, I guess it's an (05:00) interesting question. Would those people ever have hit the PAP's bar? Or, you know, they, I mean, I, I think probably, you know, you are sort of making the argument that these are candidates that the PAP would've been happy to field given sort of the strength of their credentials.
(05:14) But, you know, is it that the PAP like isn't looking for folks who have views to different from theirs? Right? Historically, I think the PAP has co-opted folks and brought them in-house, right? Expanded the tent. So I think, I think that's, that's pretty interesting actually. And I think there's also the woman whom had represent the workers' party at the Chinese round table as well; she's XMFA.
(05:37) Jeremy Au : Yeah, I think there's actually quite a few ex- silver service actually in the workers party actually, which is also quite interesting pickup because yeah, I think it's I, I don't know, what's the word? I wouldn't say that they would've hit the PAP bar, but I'm just saying that I think it's perceived that those are the personas that would've represented, the People's Action Party from a Reddit perspective or from a man on the (06:00) street perspective.
(06:00) I'm just saying, hey, it's a great place to get like people's, like deep views, right? Or they're very . So, I think it's been interesting to see what that strategy continues to be. So, I think what's interesting actually talking about it is that, I think to be fair, it's not just about the macros and stuff like that.
(06:17) I think the People's Action Party has, I think, come across with the fourth generation. I think Lawrence Wong, he has done I think a great job. I think communicating the message, I had opportunity to tune into the Yah Lah BUT podcast with Lawrence Wong. It was about an hour plus, and I thought he did a fantastic job on the podcast.
(06:37) He came across as, just like a normal person who cared about Singapore. And had some thoughtful thinking about how the policies work out and he acknowledged that there were like things that the party could have done better. And I remember I watched a whole hour and I was thinking to myself, and I was like, this guy needs to do three hours-
(06:54) Trump style. But I think the longer formats, actually, really, I think from my (07:00) perspective, I think humanize the PAP lot more than, I think the format is not really like the rallies, maybe. The podcast, they seem to be doing well.
(07:08) And I actually watch a few more podcasts of other PAP ministers and they do well in that, I don't know, small group conversational format, I don't know. So, that's my point of view.
(07:17) You are saying, please stop the TikTok videos, right?
(07:20) Like I said, Lawrence Wong in know, in previous podcast, Valerie Vu said that, Laurence Wong did really well on TikTok in Vietnam. Clearly it's working for some people. Lawrence Wong also did a speech, right? I think where he was in, like addressing the trade war by our dynamics on a global basis.
(07:36) And then that went viral on Twitter and then I was getting like messages back from America saying, " Wow! A Singapore Prime Minister does such a great job explaining the Trump tariffs." And I was like, 'wow.' I don't, I don't know. I don't think he should stop. I think he needs to go multichannel.
(07:51) Yeah.
(07:52) Shiyan: No, no, I, I agree with you. I think long form benefits like more nuanced discussion, right? Which actually they are,
(07:59) I mean, I think, you (08:00) know, are technocrats are more than capable of. I think the TikTok stuff can just sometimes feel a bit cringe.
(08:06) Jeremy Au : I think if you find it cringe, you're probably not on TikTok, right? If you're on TikTok, you probably find it normal.
(08:12) Shiyan: So, now you're just saying I'm old.
(08:13) Jeremy Au : I'm calling you old Shiyan. A hundred percent.
(08:16) Yeah, I mean, I think, I think also there was a big macro effect, I think for sure. So, I think we saw that in Canada, like you said, we saw it in Australia. I think that voters actually rewarded people who felt like they were economically competent or had a very strong. I think foreign policy and global macroeconomic experience.
(08:34) And I think that the Singapore's opposition was very much focused on cost of living, I would say. And domestic policy as have a key focus area as well.
(08:43) Shiyan: Yeah, I mean, I think it is bread and butter issues at the end of the day, right? That's what elections tend to be fought on. And so, you know, that's, I think that makes sense, right? That's the, the the average citizen does not have a lot of control over what's happening with, like, US foreign policy, right?
(08:59) (09:00) So, they, they only have interaction over like, okay, can I afford an HD TV flat, you know? What is the impact of GST? All of these sorts of things. So, I mean, that, I think that makes a ton of sense. I went to a WP rally, by the way, and a lot of the conversation was focused on
(09:14) Jeremy Au : Senior Citizen.
(09:15) Ooh.
(09:15) Shiyan: No, no, I, I think it was, it was, it was very it was very personable, I would say. And
(09:22) I have
(09:22) Time to go to a PAP rally. I wanted to go to both just to have the contrast. But, you know, went to a WP one and really well attended, you know, the spectrum on age young people, old people, race, yeah, they were very natural, I thought. Been connecting with the crowd and
(09:40) and Sylvia Lim spent a lot of time talking about senior citizen policies and how
(09:46) about young people. And, and, you know, seniors are the ones who built Singapore. And so, you know, what are some specific things that we could do to help improve their life? So, yeah, I,
(09:57) It was like pretty thoughtful and not (10:00) particularly rabble rousing. I, I, I guess I didn't really know what to expect.
(10:03) I've been to a rally before. And you, you could just see people being like quite engaged. But it was in the stronghold, it was in the east, you know, so I think they had
(10:11) people who are actually residents as well.
(10:14) Like me from the,
(10:15) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(10:15) I think, it is really interesting because I think that kind of goes to the next stage, which is really about policy, right? And obviously we think about it from two lenses, right? What is the impact of business and tech in Singapore and Southeast Asia?
(10:27) Obviously, we think about it from other side, which is from the persona of business and techy folks as in the space, how do we see policies, right? Which is I think one is from a change of policy perspective and either one is more from a identity perspective. I think from a policy perspective, obviously I think that the Abuse action party has been in power since 1965.
(10:47) At least at a face surface value it seems like this election basically seems to be a mandate, right? To continue those policies from the PAP perspective, obviously that changes and so (11:00) forth, but obviously, since it wasn't like a vote decrease or and since the PAP continues to have a super majority of the seats so I think it could be viewed that the policies will continue to be the status quo, but with some changes.
(11:10) Do you think that's fair here or do you think that's what do you think is happening?
(11:13) Shiyan: I think that's fair. I mean, I think the key things that the tech business community cares about are, immigration, right? And sort of the ability to bring in talent. I think there's sort of like a employment policies. So, whether it's like, you know, parental leave, working parents, things like that, that impacts sort of like your costs. You know, no one really talks about research funding. But I think that's like another thing as Singapore's trying to make a big push into like deep tech. I think that's something like the business community would, would be interested and consider. And then I think the last one is around like venues for liquidity, right?
(11:51) So, the reform of SGX and you know, whether that will continue, but you know, that's, it's pretty wonky and none of the actually really (12:00) addressed any on those last couple points in their manifestos. I think there's fair amount of coverage on immigration policy. And some parties did cover employment policies, but you know, not really on, you know, research funding or, or liquidity venues. So, I mean, I think it's probably more of the same.
(12:17) I think immigration did not seem to be as big an issue in this election cycle as in 2011. And so hopefully that means that there's not a lot of change to, you know, ability for people to come here and start companies, or folks to be able to continue building their teams as needed regardless of where they originated from. So, I mean, I think it goes without saying, but you know, over half of the startups in Silicon Valley are started by immigrants. And so, you know, we should expect to see a similar dynamic here if we really wanna have a strong innovation ecosystem.
(12:47) Jeremy Au : Yeah, I think that's definitely true. And I think that, the immigration policy is probably the status quo, which is I think focusing on higher educated, more talented (13:00) immigration, or capital inflows as well. So, I think there's a big push and I think a bit of a difference across the past set of immigration policies as well.
(13:09) So, I think it's gonna be interesting to see that happen. I think the other aspect is that I think all the wonky stuff, generally, yeah. Nobody else really covered. I'll say maybe education is one of those topics that you and I have always been passionate about from first experience. Obviously, I think the status quo will continue to some extent.
(13:28) Obviously, some minor tweaks along here and there. So, yeah.
(13:30) Shiyan: I mean, that one is an area I have some concern, right? Which is I think that
(13:35) is continuing to advance and so, how will the education policy respond to that? I'm sure someone's
(13:42) It, but I think the question is like, changes be made quickly enough in order, you know, to respond, right?
(13:49) So whether it's like. And we
(13:51) Jeremy Au : talked
(13:51) Yeah.
(13:51) Shiyan: this, right? For recent grads, I don't know what you're gonna do for them. But you know, for, for all the people in school right now, are we equipping them with the right set (14:00) of skills and experiences to thrive in a, you know, in a world where there will be more and more sort of automation and not just in like for manufacturing, but also for desk jobs?
(14:12) Jeremy Au : I agree with you and I believe the only candidate to speak really about AI automation was the independent candidate, Jeremy Tan. So, he calls himself Encik Bitcoin. Encik meaning, Mr. MLA, but I think in the Army national service, I think it is pretty much a warrant officer. So, I don't know how he got his name
(14:29) encik called himself. I don't, was he a warrant officer in the Singapore military? I really doubted it, but correct me if I'm wrong. And then he called himself, encik check Bitcoin. So, I thought it was a catchy name, obviously. But I actually met a few friends who were turned off by that name because they're very skeptical about Bitcoin.
(14:45) But at least, I think he might be the only candidate with a nickname like that. I don't know. I can't think of anybody else who had a nickname.
(14:51) Shiyan: Well, yeah, nicknames
(14:53) cut both
(14:53) ways, right? They can be memorable or they can pigeonhole you. If you actually look at his
(14:59) Jeremy Au : Maybe he's the (15:00) only guy who would label his own nickname. Yeah.
(15:02) Shiyan: Yeah, yeah. But if you
(15:03) look
(15:03) Yeah.
(15:03) at his website, right? Which is actually quite well researched, I have to say. Like you actually can get a sense of him and I don't agree with his Bitcoin. But in his education section, he does talk about like AI, and the impact and you know, how it pertains to some of his recommendations. So, I mean, I, I think it's something that is gonna be a bigger and bigger topic going forward, and maybe the government doesn't wanna scare people. But, but there is gonna be like a huge, huge change in how work is done, right?
(15:33) Jeremy Au : Yeah. I mean, I think Jeremy Tan did well. He got 36% of the votes, right? Which was pretty good for a newcomer independent. So, I think he outperformed many of the smaller parties as well. Outside the dub workers party. So, I think it's been interesting to see him do that. Maybe we should talk about, I think maybe his persona, and then we'll also talk about his policies.
(15:55) I think what's interesting is that of course, in terms of persona, he's (16:00) definitely a tech person, right? Based on obviously his LinkedIn profile, his track record in terms of startups and investing startups, I think his attire where he was like wearing all black during the rally.
(16:13) Shiyan: He is
(16:14) Jeremy Au : To speak.
(16:15) Wow, thanks. I actually gotten that comment twice now about how he is. It's 'cause it's the same name, Jeremy, right? We're both in tech and I tend to wear dark colors as well, sure. Shoot me. But I thought it was interesting. So, I thought it was definitely, I think he showed up in his website, right?
(16:31) I think he was talking about his policies and he subdivided them to multiple categories. I thought it was a interesting spread of policies that he had. Do you wanna talk about his website shared?
(16:42) Shiyan: I, I mean, I think it was like really. Like nicely laid out, you know, you can actually get a sense of,
(16:48) not like a talking points kind of play. You don't, it feels like a normal person talking. It doesn't feel like some sort of highfalutin language and it's laid out by different policy sections. There is a (17:00) Bitcoin section but there's also, you know, housing, education, and you know, all this sort of requisite, you know, transport, consumer, you know, political recommendations. I, I think like, it's actually well researched. It actually shows someone who's like trying and I watched part of his rally on YouTube and he seemed like personable, of like actually trying, done a bunch of research guy. So, you know, I think it's, it's I feel like, you know, the Singapore of our youth would not have produced this sort of candidate, right? And yeah. So, it's like really refreshing to see folks come out and try and, you know, he,
(17:42) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(17:43) Shiyan: he made a funny comment, right? He was like, oh, you know some PAP person's like, who's this Jeremy Tan?
(17:48) I've never heard of him before. And then he's like, well, yeah, who's my opponent? You know, I've never heard of her before either. Like, you know, he is just like a, a regular, a regular person. So, I think that in a place (18:00) that tends to somehow like, you know, put people's credentials kind of on a pedestal, like, I think it was refreshing to have someone, you know, come through and sort of be like, 'Hey, I have like ideas. I've done research. I care about this and you know, I'm gonna run.' I don't need like validation from
(18:15) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(18:16) Shiyan: A party or anything. I thought it was kind of neat.
(18:18) Jeremy Au : Yeah. I think so. And let's maybe talk about some of his policies at a high level. I thought the part where I think you disagree probably is the part where he says, we need to invest CPF into Bitcoin.
(18:29) Shiyan: Yeah, I
(18:30) Jeremy Au : so I think that's his headline message.
(18:33) Shiyan: Yeah. And I think he made a lot of money on Bitcoin and that's good for him if he can personally withstand that volatility. But I think as a national policy for people, that feels very risky. And so, yeah, I don't, I don't advocate that.
(18:48) Jeremy Au : You don't want your idiot or auntie to experience Bitcoin going up 30, 40% swings.
(18:55) Shiyan: No. I don't. I,
(18:57) Jeremy Au : it sounds like a nightmare to communicate.
(18:58) Shiyan: Yeah. And I think also (19:00) there's this sort of like, almost feels like good policy should be boring, right? It should work and it should be boring and it should not be exciting. And I think. Crypto is, is too volatile for most, for most the average person, right? And at the end of the day, if it doesn't perform, then what? T government is still left holding the bag. So, yeah, I think that's, that's
(19:20) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(19:21) Shiyan: challenging. But don't let that, I think, take away from some of the other recommendations which are like, not, not crazy. And there was one questionable one, I don't know, he is, wants to do a study on the effects of fluoride and water.
(19:34) That feels a bit too r fk for me.
(19:36) Jeremy Au : I didn't see that one.
(19:37) Shiyan: It is in the consumer section, but I did think, you know, you had some interesting ideas about how to reduce scams, whether it is like, know, having digital advertisements be verified by court pass, or doing a two factor authentication for government bodies to help protect, you know, vulnerable sections of the population from being preyed on by (20:00) scammers over the phone. So, yeah, like it's creative. You know, someone's like thinking outta the
(20:05) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(20:06) Shiyan: proposing things.
(20:07) Jeremy Au : Yeah,
(20:08) Shiyan: encourage more of that.
(20:09) Jeremy Au : I didn't notice the fluoride one. Okay. Yeah. Maybe we will invite him next time and I'll have a debate about the fluoride issue, the CPF. But I would say that one thing that's true is that I think obviously that catchy pieces, right? So, I think the CPF Bitcoin is a catchy thing. I think obviously for people who are into crypto, obviously would see him as probably the first
(20:30) ever pro crypto candidate in Singapore's history. So, I think obviously it's a great way to activate a crypto group that's one. Two is, a lot of young people, gen Z people who crypto. If you teach a university like, is easily a quarter to a third of people, hold some form of crypto. So, I think it's a good way to get some of that gen Z vote, I would say.
(20:51) But of course, I think when you flip it outside, obviously I have other friends who are turned off by crypto statement. So, I think it's, as a (21:00) tool to get visibility ahead. I am, I'm sympathetic to it. So, I think it'll be interesting to see how that policy changes over time on the crypto side.
(21:09) Shiyan: I don't think CPF is adding crypto. I don't think that policy will change. But yes.
(21:14) Jeremy Au : I think it's
(21:14) Shiyan: you'll get exposure
(21:15) Jeremy Au : it's a interesting one. I.
(21:17) Shiyan: Temasek or GIC investing in like, you know, blue chip crypto infra companies. That's how you're gonna get your exposure.
(21:24) Jeremy Au : Ooh, that'll be an interesting component calculation to make, which is hey, for the average Singapore, what percentage are they exposed to crypto currently? As part of, and divided across all the various investment verticals, right? That'll be interesting analysis to see what the implicit asset allocation and you would be.
(21:41) I'm sure someone has that number, but that's interesting to hear. Actually, one interesting thing that also came out of this is talking about this entire landscape like, who's happy? Who's unhappy? What will change? I think that's because, I think whenever we say the status quo more of the same (22:00) obviously, for people whom, for whom it benefits today, then obviously people are gonna be like, okay, that's good.
(22:04) But obviously there are gonna be people who are unhappy about the results. And obviously I think the People's Action Party will continue to, I think triangulate, right? And work towards it as well. Yeah. When you think about the next four years, what do you hope things will actually get addressed? I think one of them is education, right?
(22:23) Shiyan: Yeah, five years. You're not an American. I think education, I think is an important one. I do think that they need to solve the housing HDB question. Those are probably top of mind for me. I think a more systemic question is probably like, how do you incorporate more voices and allow people to bring more different ideas to the table even as people have voted for the incumbent? And I, I mean, I guess you could say the last two elections were like crisis moments, right?
(22:53) So first, the last one was during Covid, and this one is kind of in the middle of the Trump tariff trade war, which obviously has a big impact on (23:00) Singapore, like, you know, people are still handing the mandate back to the, to, to the incumbent. But how do you, you know, continue to give people room to express their concerns and frustrations and not get to a point where people are like, I just wanna flip the table. Right. Because I think that's very dangerous. So, the sort of redistricting didn't sit well with a lot of people. So yeah. How about you?
(23:25) Jeremy Au : Yeah.
(23:26) Shiyan: What do you hope gets addressed in the next five years, Jeremy?
(23:29) Jeremy Au : I think that, I think the topic for everybody, zooming out from my perspective is that I think there is a recession coming for Singapore. And the net effect obviously of the Trump slash you know, republican administration debate on, is trade relationship with China and the world.
(23:48) I think it's a fair, obviously domestic issue from the perspective of America. It's just that for Singapore is such a existential dynamic, right? Where the ports are function of the trade right between east and (24:00) west. The airports right? Is also a function of that same logistics channel.
(24:04) I think, I just think that there, there's a recession coming. Fundamentally there's really a slow down that's really been projected. Obviously, maybe there's some off ramps, right? For how China and America deal with this issue and maybe the impact is not so bad.
(24:18) But I think that's really like the crux of it. And I think the question you gotta ask yourself is, is this rewriting of the east and west, like relationship, is this like a four- year thing, right? Or is this a 40- year cycle? Because if you're saying that it's a four- year thing, then Singapore's economic model doesn't have to change in terms of its ports, logistics, and so forth. If it's more systemic, right? It's a 40- year cycle that we're seeing here, then I think that's a serious headwinds, right? For the Singapore economy. So, I think some serious thinking needs to be done and I, and we never really got that conversation going.
(24:51) Obviously, a lot of this is like new and happening live. But I think there's gonna be a serious debate over the next four years, which is like, if this is (25:00) true, then what do we do? And I think that's like the, I would say there's a more fundamental debate because I think if you make an argument that east and west trade, let's say, goes to zero, I'm just an example, right?
(25:09) I'm not saying that's true, if you make that on a spectrum, you go all the way to one end, say it goes to zero. Then using that hypothetical then, what kind of industries and is it like Singapore's focus on homegrown, entrepreneurship, capital, immigration but moving away from a, like a trade perspective, but more from a innovation perspective?
(25:30) I think that could be one argument that you make that other one can make is that it goes to the services, which is not a different answer, but it's a different set of answers. So it could be a Venn diagram, you can do multiple of these things. But I think all I'm just trying to say is I think there's a bit of a fundamental rewrite of the economy that's potentially in play.
(25:47) And I think that's a difficult, like you said, maybe a bit too wonkish, discussion. But I think that's gonna be something that's top of mind.
(25:54) Shiyan: Well, it's not a discussion you can have in a nine- day campaign period, right? So that's like, you (26:00) can't
(26:00) Jeremy Au : just drop
(26:00) Yeah.
(26:00) Shiyan: people, you
(26:01) Jeremy Au : and then you put this.
(26:02) Shiyan: people into that conversation.
(26:04) Jeremy Au : Yeah,
(26:04) Shiyan: yeah.
(26:05) Jeremy Au : I think I'm just saying that this is something that will happen. I think that has to happen over the next four years, I think, because, because I think we're gonna find out next four years whether again, this is a temporary thing or is this a structural, systematic change.
(26:16) Shiyan: Well, how many days are we into the 90- day renegotiation of all the trade agreements? Again, I think we're.
(26:22) Jeremy Au : I, I've lost track of the time, windows and all this other stuff. Yeah, I think it'll be an interesting debate that will be had. But on that note, I think this is a good way to wrap things up. I'll see you next time, Shiyan.
(26:32) Shiyan: Sounds good, Jeremy. Thanks a lot!