Understanding NS liability for PRs

[oration37]

Some edmwers are replying that we shouldn't flame TS as what he intents to do is perfectly legal. That is retain PR-ship to the max duration while being able to "escape" from NS liability.

Pls remember that it takes 2 hands to clap. A system must have loopholes present before it can be exploited. Additionally, there must be someone with an intention to exploit the system.

One example: there are FL and geylang girls out there. This system is open to be exploited by all man. Why most married man who kept to their marriage vows don't exploit this system and seek fun?

Another example: ur colleague left his/her wallet behind on the desk while rushing from home. Do u take it, keep it and don't return?

Therefore, do u think TS has an intention to exploit?

 

[eAtNeAt]

I lazy to Google but i think that this deposit should be pegged to the parent's income. 30k means nothing to a MNC VP FT

can't find anything for PR. only for sinkies - higher of $75k or 50% of income. PR should be much higher rite.

duno why so difficult to find such info.

 

[AvEngErZx]

I understand your viewpoint. I have two comments.

a. A citizen would NATURALLY WANT to defend his or her country against foreign invaders as said country would probably comprise his family, his properties, his livelihood. NS for citizens makes sense because it is a collective approach to the individual natural want. But would a PR have that same natural want? A PR may have much of his family still in his natural land. What incentive does he have to defend, with his life, a foreign land?

b. If foreign invaders were from the same country as a PR then would a PR do his best to defend his country from the foreign invader?

The only incentive is not getting ****ed by us

 

[Franzz]

Read Liao also hot... Ts still around? PM me for a free one way air ticket (leg powered ejection force direct to where the sun don't shine!) to wherever you're from.