Singapore Permanent Residence (PR) Statistics: 2007-2017

Updated December 21, 2018. What are the odds of approval if you apply for Singapore Permanent Residence (PR)? "It depends." This post attempts to characterize the statistical realities of applying for PR.

Singapore's Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) handles PR applications, consistent with government policy goals. Unfortunately, detailed PR statistics are not publicly available. However, the government publishes some summary statistics in its annual Population in Brief publication, usually released in late September every year.

One important statistical series is the number of new PRs granted each calendar year. Here they are from "Population in Brief":

Year	PRs Granted
2007	63,627
2008	79,167
2009	59,460
2010	29,265
2011	27,521
2012	29,891
2013	29,869
2014	29,854
2015	29,955
2016	31,050
2017	31,849

As you can see, since 2010 (and probably starting in late 2009) the government set an absolute cap on the number of new PRs at 30,000 annually. Then there was a slight uptick from 2016.

Within each year's total PR number there are PRs granted through family ties (for example, to some of the foreign spouses of citizens and PRs), the Professionals/Technical Personnel and Skilled Workers (PTS) Scheme, and the Global Investor Programme (GIP). The government also invites international students to apply for PR, and, from 2008 to 2017, 7,251 applied and 5,932 were approved. Otherwise, we only know the aggregate annual PR numbers, not the numbers of PRs granted under each of these paths. We also don't exactly know how many PR applications ICA receives. However, the government has explained that it's becoming increasingly common for citizens to marry foreigners. Also, some years ago the government ended two other paths to Permanent Residence: the Landed Permanent Residence (LPR) and Financial Investor Schemes (FIS). The Ministry of Manpower also made it more difficult to qualify for the Personalised Employment Pass (PEP) and shortened its term from 5 years to 3 years. At the margins these PEP adjustments probably make it a bit harder to qualify for PR via the PTS Scheme. In short, it's reasonable to conclude that it keeps getting statistically more difficult, at least for those without family ties, to obtain Permanent Residence in Singapore. This trend is likely to continue given the government's overall population goals.

The total PR population is relatively stable in absolute numbers, at about 522,300 (June, 2018). As we've seen above, the PR inflow is about 31,000 per year. The PR outflow consists of PRs who become citizens (at a bit over 22,000 per year), who die, and who terminate or lose Permanent Residence. (A PR automatically loses his/her status if the PR's Re-Entry Permit expires while the PR is physically outside Singapore.)

The government strives to maintain relatively stable percentages of ethnic Chinese, Malay, Indian, and "Other" cohorts. In the government's view, ethnic compositional stability is fair, appropriate, and desirable. (That's not my view, as it happens.) To the extent birth and immigration rates diverge across these ethnic cohorts, so too will PR decisions.

While you cannot change your race, ethnicity, gender, parents, eye color, sexual orientation, or any other immutable human characteristic, you should be able to read and to follow ICA's PR application instructions. I recommend applying some common sense to the process. As a notable example, if you're applying under the PTS Scheme, ICA wants at least 6 monthly payslips and 3 Notices of Assessment (income tax notices from IRAS). You can apply for PR before you have what ICA requests, but in my view (unless you've won a Nobel Prize, as one of only a few exceptions), you're being quite foolish. Be patient, and good luck.

Nokia Phones Resurrected, Badly

I'm glad that HMD Global is resurrecting Nokia branded mobile phones. However, I'm disappointed in the "new" 2017 edition of the Nokia 3310. It's still a traditional GSM (2G/2.5G) phone. That's a problem. Around the world, carriers are progressively shutting down their older GSM networks or already have. Some countries, such as Japan and Korea, never adopted GSM. Singapore will shut down all its GSM networks within a couple months. AT&T has shut down its GSM network in the United States, leaving only T-Mobile with a "skeleton" 1900 MHz GSM network that has significant coverage limitations. Australia's last 2G/2.5G networks will shut down later this year.

In Europe it's possible that mobile carriers will shut down their 3G networks before they shut down their "skeleton" 2G/2.5G networks, but 3G phones can also connect to 2G/2.5G networks.

Nokia had many 3G feature phones, both before and during Microsoft's brief, disastrous stewardship of the brand. In fact, Nokia's 3G phones date all the way back to 2002. Nokia offered a truly global 3G phone as early as 2004.

There is still a market for feature phones, but they really need to function as phones. A 2G/2.5G feature phone in 2017 just isn't even a phone, sorry to say. I'd like to see HMD Global introduce (or reintroduce) a genuinely global 3G feature phone. There are a few directions HMD Global could choose. One approach would be to reintroduce something very much like the Nokia X3-02 but with one major improvement: a capacitive touchscreen. The X3-02 was the smallest 3G feature phone Nokia ever made (and probably the smallest anyone ever made), a miniature marvel. Its resistive touchscreen was troublesome, however. The Nokia 302 of similar vintage had no touchscreen at all, so another possibility is to update the X3-02 to make do without one. Yet another option is to reintroduce the Nokia 311 (or something very much like it) with a long-term supported and security patched Android software base. I think there's a market for a truly tiny, well supported Android-based phone, and the Nokia 311 form factor with modest, battery efficient internals would occupy that niche well.

One problem HMD Global seems to have is that, to date, there haven't been any MediaTek S30+ phones that support 3G. Maybe the S30+ software platform simply cannot support 3G yet, unlike Nokia's prior but more capable S40 platform that supported both 3G and Wi-Fi. And maybe HMD Global doesn't have rights to the S40 platform. Whatever the reasons, HMD Global still has some work to do to recover at least a part of Nokia's past glory. Nostalgia is terrific in certain ways, but the "new" Nokia 3310 is only bad nostalgia.

President Trump: Bad News for Overseas U.S. Citizens?

President Trump and the Republican Congress will try to enact several major policy changes starting in early 2017. Here are a couple policy areas that could seriously disrupt the lives of U.S. citizens presently living overseas:

1. Elimination of the Head of Household filing status. The Republicans' tax plan is not crystal clear yet, but Trump proposes the elimination of the Head of Household filing status. U.S. citizens with U.S. citizen children who are married to non-resident alien spouses (same and opposite sex) are among those who properly choose Head of Household when they file U.S. tax returns. The Head of Household filing status is much more favorable than the alternative Married Filing Separately filing status. U.S. citizens living in comparatively high income tax jurisdictions who presently collect the refundable Additional Child Tax Credit would lose that important income support, too. Trump's other proposed tax provisions are extremely generous to high income filers (much too generous), but other Head of Household filers would get hit with tax increases. That also includes millions of U.S. resident households, especially those with single parents or with several children.

2. Repeal of "Obamacare." Right now U.S. citizens (and their families) returning to the U.S. from overseas can enroll in "Obamacare" medical insurance as soon as they return, with full subsidies available. They have a 60 day special "welcome home" enrollment period, starting from the date they return. Republicans vow to repeal Obamacare. However, repeal without any substitute would cause tens of millions of U.S. residents to lose their medical insurance, and everyone else would face higher medical costs due to cost shifting effects. In Obamacare's place Republicans propose various "weak tea" substitutes, at best. Their proposed replacements generally bar medical insurance companies from charging new policyholders higher premiums if they have preexisting conditions, but that protection only applies if policyholders have no lapse in coverage. Returning U.S. citizens and their families do have "lapses" in coverage: they are typically enrolled in foreign medical systems when they live outside the U.S., and "enrollment" often means simply living in a country with publicly provided universal coverage. It's quite possible, even likely, that Republicans will not protect this cohort, perhaps out of sheer ignorance. (Healthcare policy is complicated.) Returning Americans could be faced with steep premiums since they won't have proof of continuous U.S. medical insurance coverage, and that's assuming they can even obtain any insurance. Also, relatedly, Obamacare is fairly well designed for legal immigrants, including for previously uninsurable, elderly foreign spouses of U.S. citizens who are not Medicare eligible for at least the first five years of their U.S. residence. Any repeal effort is likely to harm them, too.

3. Immigration complications. U.S. citizens married to non-resident alien spouses already face difficulties bringing their foreign spouses into the U.S. The process is expensive and lengthy. Those difficulties could get much worse.

I'll be keeping a close watch on these and other policy developments, with great concern.

Singapore Permanent Residence (PR): Advantages and Disadvantages

If you're considering applying for Permanent Residency (PR) in Singapore, or if you have obtained PR status, here's an excellent list of the advantages and disadvantages (posted to Singapore Expats Forum in mid 2016, plus my revisions as of November 13, 2024).

If you are considering applying for or maintaining Permanent Residence in Singapore, you should be aware of PR's evolving advantages and disadvantages. Every person will weigh the advantages and disadvantages at least somewhat differently. Nobody else can decide which characteristics of PR are more or less important to you.

This list is divided into three sections: Clear Advantages, Clear Disadvantages, and Mixed Advantages/Disadvantages (characteristics that may or may not be a net advantage or disadvantage). Whether any particular advantage or disadvantage is relevant depends on your personal situation.

The government can change (and has changed) PR-related rules and policies. This list only reflects the current situation, when last updated.

Clear Advantages

Immigration stability. Second only to citizens, Permanent Residents have the most stable immigration status in Singapore. They may live and/or work in Singapore as long as they wish. During the COVID-19 pandemic, PRs (and citizens) caught outside Singapore were allowed to return to Singapore, albeit with isolation requirements upon arrival, whereas foreigners had no such right of return. PR status is not absolute, but it is quite robust in practice. As examples, a PR who lied in his/her PR application or who commits a serious criminal offense could be ejected from Singapore (after facing any criminal penalties). Also, note that a dependent or spouse of a Singaporean citizen or PR can still enjoy good immigration stability with an approved Long-Term Visit Pass (either LTVP or LTVP+).

Ability to sponsor certain family members for immigration. Adult PRs can sponsor certain immediate family members for LTVPs and/or PR, to allow them to live in Singapore. However, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) reportedly denies about 15-20% of such LTVP applications and greater than half such PR applications. In other words, approval is not guaranteed, even for citizen sponsors, and will depend on financial and other factors.

Ability to sponsor foreign visitors for short-term visas and stay extensions. Adult PRs can access ICA's SAVE and e-XTEND online services as sponsors ("Local Contacts").

The only realistic path to citizenship for foreigners. After a two year waiting period, PRs can apply for Singaporean citizenship.

Business and employment privileges. PRs can be self-employed, start their own businesses, be directors and officers of most Singapore companies, own businesses, and otherwise lead full economic lives in Singapore. They are also fully employable without requiring work permits or letters of consent, in practically any full-time or part-time employment including most government employment, and can even hold more than one part-time job. One exception: Unlike citizens, PRs cannot drive for ride sharing services unless they work for chauffeured services companies. Although financially unpleasant, bouts of unemployment are allowed.

Unemployment benefits. Some PRs are eligible for SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support cash benefits when involuntarily unemployed.

Ability to retire in Singapore. Singapore doesn't offer a "retirement visa." However, like citizens, PRs can generally stay in Singapore through their retirement years, living off their savings and pensions.

Lower cost public medical services. PRs pay a lower cash rate than foreigners for medical services obtained from public hospitals and public clinics in Singapore. PRs' prescription medicines listed in the Standard Drug Lists and obtained from public hospital/clinic pharmacies are subsidized (though to a lesser degree than medicines for citizens). PRs also enjoy the Health Promotion Board's subsidized rates for Screen for Life tests at Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) GP clinics. PRs are also eligible for certain wellness programs, such as the Singapore Cancer Society's free colon cancer screening tests and some Healthier SG benefits (particularly at polyclinics), and some HPB promotions, such as free step trackers, through the Healthy 365 mobile app. PRs only paid S$10 to see a doctor at any Public Health Preparedness Clinic for any suspected COVID-19 case. PR children attending government-supported schools may be eligible for a few free vaccinations, such as HPV vaccination for female PRs in secondary school.

Childcare and Education Advantages

• Lower cost infant care and childcare. PR children pay lower fees than foreigners to attend government-supported infant care and childcare centers, nursery schools, and kindergartens.

• Better, lower cost access to government-run primary and secondary schools. Citizen children come first, but PR children receive placement priority over foreigners when enrolling in government-run/supported primary and secondary schools. PR children also pay substantially lower school fees than foreign children.

• Lower university tuition rates. PRs often pay at least somewhat lower tuition and fees than foreigners to attend public universities in Singapore.

Housing and Real Estate Advantages

• Ability to buy resale HDB leaseholds. After a waiting period, PRs are eligible to buy resale public housing leaseholds for their own occupancy, without whole flat subletting privileges. Build-to-Order (new) HDB units are reserved for households with at least one citizen. PRs who own resale HDB units are eligible to participate in the Selective En bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS) if announced for their units. PRs who own HDB flats are occasionally eligible for incentive programs such as 2024's Climate Vouchers.
  

• Lower stamp duty (tax) on real estate purchases. PRs pay a substantially lower Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) than most foreign purchasers pay.

• Greater chance of approval to buy landed property. Non-citizens need government approval to buy so-called landed property in Singapore. PRs reportedly have a better chance of approval than foreigners.

• Ability to buy resale executive condominiums earlier. Singapore has a few executive condominium developments, a form of real estate that starts out as HDB (public) but that, after 10 years, reverts to private housing. Like HDB units they start out with 99 year leaseholds, but unlike traditional HDB developments they usually have more extensive amenities such as swimming pools. PRs are eligible to buy resale executive condos only 5 years after construction (with 94 years or less remaining on the leaseholds) and, unlike foreigners, do not have to wait 10 years. (Only citizens can buy new build executive condos.) 

Privileges at government-run sports facilities. PRs pay the same, lower rates as citizens for admission to government-run sports facilities such as public swimming pools, and they can also participate in the ActiveSG $100 rebate program.

Better, lower cost privileges at public libraries. PRs pay a one-time fee of only $10.69 for a basic National Library Board (NLB) membership, much less than the annual fee foreigners pay for more limited privileges. Alternatively, PRs (and citizens) holding PAssion cards, including DBS/POSB's PAssion debit cards (free even with DBS's zero minimum balance "My Account"), enjoy complementary NLB Partner Membership.

No need to renew driving licenses. Although new PRs must convert their Singapore driving licenses to reflect their new NRIC numbers and pay a fee to do so, unlike foreigners they do not need to renew their licenses periodically, saving time and money. (Older drivers' periodic competency checks still apply.)

Some limited merchant, attraction, and financial privileges. Like citizens, PRs enjoy some limited privileges from merchants, attractions, and financial institutions. As examples, it's somewhat easier to sign longer term contracts for telecommunications services and utilities (with lower deposit requirements), and some credit cards are only available to citizens and PRs. There are also a few discounts specifically for older PRs, for example the Senior Citizen Concession Card that offers discounted public transit fares. All citizens and PRs enjoy free admission to National Heritage Board museums and The Istana (during open house days).

SkillsFuture program benefits. A couple of the government programs to promote career and talent development are open to Permanent Residents, specifically P-Max and the Individual Learning Portfolio portal.

Extraordinary wage subsidies. During the COVID-19 pandemic the government subsidized the wages of employed PRs, including self-employed PRs who received direct subsidies. These subsidies helped reduce unemployment and income losses among citizens and PRs.

Retirement and Re-Employment Act (RRA) protections. Employers must not force PRs to retire before the minimum statutory retirement age and must offer a reasonable re-employment option for at least 5 years thereafter under the RRA.

Eligibility for certain Ministry of Social and Family Development benefits. Permanent Residents are eligible for some social "safety net" programs. Examples include ComCare, the Assistive Technology Fund, the Taxi Subsidy Scheme, and the Enabling Transit Subsidy.

Some greater ability to express political and social views publicly. For example, Permanent Residents (and citizens) can participate in the annual Pink Dot event. PRs can also pick up free National Day "fun packs."

Some privileges when obtaining visas to visit foreign countries. A few foreign countries may offer Singapore PRs greater odds of visa approval, longer term visas, and/or lower cost visas compared to otherwise similarly situated foreigners.

Singapore Armed Forces Volunteer Corps eligibility. Permanent Residents age 18 to 45, including female PRs, may join the SAFVC.

Commemorative Coins. The Monetary Authority of Singapore occasionally issues commemorative coins such as the LKY100 coins recognizing the 100th birth anniversary of Lee Kuan Yew. Only Singaporean citizens and Permanent Residents can purchase these coins at original issue.

Clear Disadvantages

National Service obligations. Young male citizens and PRs (and their sons) are required to perform National Service if physically and mentally able, i.e. to serve in Singapore's armed forces, police, civil defense, or another government-decided role, and to be available for periodic medical checks and training exercises for several years thereafter. In the event Singapore goes to war or has some other serious national emergency, most young male PRs and citizens would be required to serve. Young men with National Service (NS) obligations face certain international travel restrictions. NS obligations are waived for first generation PRs under the Professionals/Technical Personnel and Skilled Workers (PTS) and Investor Schemes and, generally, for men who acquire PR status under the Immediate Family Scheme who are in their late 20s or above.

Not Ordinarily Resident (NOR) tax break curtailed. In certain situations Singapore offered a special income tax break to fairly highly compensated (or higher) individuals based in Singapore who spent a lot of time working outside Singapore. This tax break was called the Not Ordinarily Resident (NOR) Scheme. Citizens and PRs apparently could not qualify for this particular tax break. This tax break is closed to new entrants and will be phased out completely in 2024.

Fee to access Singapore's casinos. Like citizens and unlike foreigners, PRs must pay either a daily or annual entry fee if they want to enter the gambling areas of the Marina Bay Sands or Sentosa casinos.

Limitations on other countries' residence and benefits (exclusivity restrictions). Certain countries may bar Singapore (and other foreign) PRs from obtaining permanent residence and/or from enjoying certain tax breaks (and other benefits) available to residents.

Some of Singapore's laws apply extraterritorially. A few of Singapore's laws apply to PRs even when they travel outside Singapore. For example, Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act makes it a crime for PRs (and citizens) to consume any form of cannabis (marijuana) even in countries where local laws allow cannabis.

Mixed Advantages/Disadvantages

Lower Supplementary Retirement Scheme (SRS) contribution limits. PRs are more limited than foreigners in how much they can contribute annually to Singapore's tax-advantaged SRS accounts. Also, PRs cannot make qualified (penalty free) withdrawals prior to minimum retirement age. However, PRs typically have a greater opportunity to make qualified withdrawals Singapore tax free (or at least tax reduced) than foreigners do.

Mandatory Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions. Working PRs and their employers are required to contribute to Singapore's mandatory national savings program, the Central Provident Fund. CPF is a comparatively safe and high yielding savings vehicle. Compulsory contributions and all earnings are Singapore tax free. (Also, Singapore provides income tax breaks for some voluntary CPF contributions and top ups. It's often wise for new PRs to make substantial voluntary CPF contributions/top ups to their MediSave and Special Accounts, at least up to their income tax break limits if possible.) CPF savings can be used for retirement and also for medical care, insurance, and certain real estate purchases in Singapore. Many individuals would voluntarily contribute to CPF if they could. However, there are some possible disadvantages. Take home pay is reduced compared to a similarly situated foreign worker. Also, those PRs with limited non-CPF savings who plan to retire outside Singapore could end up somewhat "over-invested" in CPF assets and thus incur some currency risk. In rare cases CPF assets and payments might cause reductions in a PR's entitled benefits from other countries.

MediShield Life. Singapore requires PRs, no matter where they live, to pay MediShield Life premiums (taxes). MediShield Life provides a basic set of medical insurance benefits at public hospitals (and to a limited extent at public clinics) in Singapore, with benefits designed for citizens staying in B2 or C public hospital wards. (Charges are higher for PRs while MediShield Life payouts are the same, so PRs experience a greater coverage gap with MediShield Life alone.) The premiums are set annually and increase with age, and they are paid from CPF MediSave funds (if there are MediSave funds available; otherwise the premiums must be paid out of pocket). Individuals with preexisting conditions are covered, although a 30% higher premium may apply for up to 10 years. Some PRs (particularly retired PRs) may qualify for MediShield Life premium subsidies of up to 25%. Extra cost Integrated Shield insurance policies are available to supplement MediShield Life, and since PRs already have mandatory MediShield Life (and somewhat subsidized charges in the public medical system) they pay a lower premium for an Integrated Shield plan than foreigners do. PRs and citizens also enjoy a wider choice of Integrated Shield plans than foreigners, although most of the lowest cost plans (designed to cover care in public hospitals in B1 ward) reduce coverage benefits for PRs. Whether a particular PR gets value-for-money from MediShield Life is highly situational.

CareShield Life. Singapore requires PRs born after 1979 to pay CareShield Life premiums starting from age 30 or when PR status is granted, whichever is later. CareShield Life pays a monthly benefit for life when an individual is severely disabled, defined as an inability to perform at least 3 out of 6 "Activities of Daily Living." PRs born before 1980 who are not disabled can voluntarily join the program. Private insurance carriers offer optional supplemental policies to CareShield Life. Disability insurance in some form is quite important, but CareShield Life isn't always the best fit. Please note that CareShield Life coverage ends (and with no refund of premiums) if/when Singaporean citizenship or PR status ends.

Possible loss of "expat" employment compensation elements. If you arrived in Singapore with "expat" compensation provisions then your employer may reduce or terminate some or all of those elements after transitioning to PR status. Such provisions might include housing, children's education, tax preparation, tax equalization, continuation of home country social insurance and/or retirement savings contributions, pension, seniority privileges, employee stock purchase discounts and stock options, per diems, relocation/repatriation/moving, household goods storage, transportation/car, professional society memberships, disability income insurance, life insurance, unemployment insurance and severance, global medical insurance, medical evacuation, and home country travel, as examples. You might also lose an implied or even actual right to return to a home country position. On the other hand, you might be entitled to new employment benefits as a fully localized employee in Singapore. Highly compensated executives from developed economies on "expat packages" tend to suffer a net loss of compensation and benefits when transitioning to PR and local employment, while less highly compensated workers, including those from countries with few employment-related benefits, may find that fully localized employment in Singapore is a net positive.

Opt-out organ donation. PRs and citizens are automatically subject to the Human Organ Transplant Act (HOTA). By default, when a PR dies in Singapore, some of his/her organs (kidneys, liver, heart, and/or corneas) are donated for medical use. Organ donation cannot occur unless and until the patient is clinically deceased. Everyone ought to sign up to be an organ donor, to give the gift of life. (You or your family might someday be in need of a donor organ. The opt-in MTERA form is available to all adults, including foreigners, who want to donate more than the four HOTA organs.) However, there are a few PRs who do not wish to donate any of their organs after they die. They have a slight paperwork burden to bear; HOTA requires them to submit an opt-out form.

Fee changes. There are PR application fees, Re-Entry Permit fees, and NRIC ("blue card") fees. Depending on the circumstances, these fees could be higher or lower than the fees associated with other immigration statuses.

Donald Trump's "Liberal Heresies"?

Kevin Drum at Mother Jones doesn't understand why Donald Trump's "liberal heresies" aren't costing him political support. But I'm surprised he's surprised. I could quibble with Drum's list, but let's assume for sake of argument Drum has accurately reflected Trump's current views. Let's take a look at the list:

1. Affirmative action. That hardly matters if Trump wants to deport about 11 million undocumented immigrants immediately, does it? If you're compiling an Anti-Brown Person Score, Trump gets one zillion points for that and minus three for affirmative action among those who are left in the country, and that's still a great score. Besides, Trump is a beneficiary of affirmative action. He inherited a great deal of wealth from his father (and he made it bigger). That's also affirmative action of the most potent kind. Moreover, most importantly, Trump particularly favors affirmative action for beautiful women. cf. Omarosa. What red blooded Republican male doesn't?

2. Funding Planned Parenthood except for abortion. See above re: beautiful women.

3. The progressive income tax. The Republican Party's billionaire donors support a flat tax, i.e. cutting their taxes, sure. Republican Party rank-and-file members? Not so much. Besides, Trump favors dramatically simplifying tax filing. He says he wants to "put H&R Block out of business." Even the so-called flat tax always has at least two brackets: 0% and something else. So this is a distinction without a difference for voters, rightly so. Top 0.01% donors of course care intensely about the progressive tax rates they already don't pay often enough.

4. Not being able to fire gay employees. Well who needs the workplace competition for those beautiful women (see above)? And who's going to help with their hair and makeup to keep them beautiful? Besides, where is Trump going to find the artistic people to design his "beautiful" wall to keep out the Messicans?

5. No cuts to Social Security and Medicare. Republicans overwhelmingly agree! Even the Republican Party itself officially runs campaigns against cuts to Medicare -- successfully in the last Congressional election -- so Trump can hardly be faulted for being doctrinaire Republican. There's a long history of the Republicans trying to sell to their rubes: publicly defend Medicare (in particular) and Social Security but then try to get the Democrats to do the dirty cutting work they really want on behalf of their big donors. Pete Petersen and his followers have about 6 primary and caucus votes between them.

6. Favors an assault weapons ban. So do most gun owners, and nuttiest gun nut Ted Nugent apparently likes Trump.

7. Invited Bill and Hillary Clinton to his wedding. And they attended, and he brags about it, claiming he bought Hillary. He tested political corruption, it worked, and he tells voters all about it. Voters understandably love him for unmasking the corruption (or at least "corruption"). And who hasn't had a guest at a wedding, later regretted? Who wouldn't want a famous person at her wedding? Who wouldn't want Trump's billions and be able to "force" the Clintons to attend his wedding? It's a raw demonstration Trump's power and prestige, and they love him for it.

8. Doesn't "fully" believe in supply-side economics. OK, he lost Arthur Laffer's vote, but so what? That's a top 0.01% "issue" again, and maybe not even that.

9. Believes that Germany should take the lead in Ukraine. Well sure, and so do most Republicans! Messing around in some furrin' place that Republican voters couldn't even find on a map and that doesn't have oil is, to quote Trump, "stupid." The Trump Wall™ will keep out the Ukrainians, too. Pat Buchanan and Ron Paul tapped into the isolationist streak in the Republican Party, and if anything isolationism is a bigger, majority segment of the Republican Party today after the Iraq debacle. OK, he lost Dick Cheney's vote, but so what? Does he need Lockheed Martin's PAC money? On top of all that, there's a certain segment of the Republican Party that admires the Germans for the wrong reasons, know what I mean? (They do.)

10. Hates the Iran deal but would respect it in office. Yes, because he's a businessman, and businessmen honor their contracts. Except when they don't, frequently -- see Trump, Chapters 7 and 11 -- but never mind that. Republicans love businessmen, particularly loud ones and those who were fired from HP. Haven't you been paying attention?

I'm not at all persuaded that Drum has compiled a compelling list of "conservative" objections to Trump's candidacy.

Apple, iMessage, and Satellites?

Rumors abound that Apple is interested in satellite technologies, and the company has reportedly spent a bit of money on securing satellite-related talent.

The "killer feature" that I'd like to see Apple implement in its iPhones is truly global text messaging: the ability to send and receive both SMS and text-based iMessages anywhere in the world. That would presumably also include "SOS" messages with geographic coordinates, for example. All at a cost of about $5/month -- and free for a basic SOS service.

Text messaging is a limited bandwidth application that even today's satellite technologies (e.g. Iridium) can support at scale. The antenna(s) would have to be part of the existing iPhone form factor, but that too doesn't seem to be a significant engineering problem within even today's state-of-the-art.

Such a killer feature would continue to differentiate iPhones and would also fit well with the brand. It'd be entirely consistent with the "active lifestyle" image that Apple often conveys -- think mountain climbing and Antarctic expeditions, basically. Such a feature would also be a great fit for the iPod touch, iPad, and even (in the future, as the electronics get better) Apple Watch. Many people don't need or want cellular voice and data. Global satellite messaging would also find a ready audience among the Apple-IBM enterprise customers.

On a $5/month plan SMS would probably need a monthly cap due to carrier charges, but it could be something pretty high like 500 messages/month. Apple might also need to set an overall cap of, say, 2000 messages/month, to keep the satellites from getting too burdened. The free tier could be, say, 20 messages/month. All that'd work.

Let's hope Apple brings truly global text messaging to its devices soon. That'd be really exciting.

The United States Could "Buy" Greece (if Greeks Are Interested)

Here's a "crazy" idea, but it's so crazy it makes sense. The United States could "buy" Greece. It'd be the greatest deal in history for Greece and the greatest deal since the Alaska Purchase for the U.S.

Here's a broad outline of how that would work:

1. The President and Greek Prime Minister would hold a joint press conference announcing the offer, and a full "prospectus" would be published in both English and Greek for the people to consider.

2. Greece would hold a referendum to become a U.S. territory (and the U.S. would pass enabling legislation or, if necessary, a constitutional amendment) under the following terms.

3. The U.S. would offer to buy and bury all of Greece's public debt held by external governments and public institutions. The offer would be reasonable in the circumstances but represent a discount. The offer would be open for 60 days, take it or leave it.

4. Greece would convert to the U.S. dollar. The U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation would take over Greece's banks and insure all deposits up to FDIC limits. Euro-denominated accounts would be frozen as euro, insured within overall FDIC limits, and convertible when/if the depositor wishes, but no new euro could be added to those accounts.

5. As a U.S. territory Greece would enjoy immediate free trade to/from the U.S. European free trade would be up to Europe to decide.

6. Greeks would become U.S. citizens, though there would be a 5 year transition period with temporary policies that discourage people movement, probably via the tax code. European freedom of movement would be up to Europe to decide, though the U.S. would urge Europe to maintain residence rights for Greeks already in Europe and their immediate families.

7. Greece would have nonvoting representation in Congress and a Cabinet-level official in a new U.S. Department of Greek Recovery. Various transition policies would be set with strong protections for Greek language and culture, as examples. Tax policy would quickly converge, though the Greece would keep all U.S. federal tax revenues for at least 20 years.

8. The U.S. would be limited to opening one naval base and one land (joint Air Force and Army) base in Greece. Some current Greek military facilities would convert to territory/state National Guard facilities, and others would be closed.

9. After a period of 25 years but not more than 50 years, Greece would hold a statehood referendum, and the U.S. would be bound to honor the result. The vote would be between two irrevocable choices: statehood or independence. If no referendum is held within 50 years then Greece's U.S. territorial status would be automatically terminated, and Greece would become an independent nation again. In other words, permanent territorial status would not be an option. (Congress would also consider adopting the same 50 year transition clock for all other existing U.S. territories.)

Can Greece Keep the Euro and End Austerity? Perhaps So!

I've been trying to read and to listen carefully to what the Greek government has been writing and saying. This Greek government's public representations have so far matched its actions, so it's particularly important to listen.

Today, Greece's Foreign Minister, Nikos Kotzias, reportedly told China's Ambassador to Greece that Greece is not leaving the euro zone. (The press report used "euro zone" instead of "Eurozone.") Is that possible? It might be.

The key to understanding how a sovereign default could work within the euro, at least in theory, is that there are important, critical differences between the Eurozone (including European Central Bank support and the Eurosystem) and maintaining the euro as legal tender. There are two countries that adopted the euro as their medium of exchange without any monetary agreement or other coordination with the Eurozone: Montenegro and Kosovo. Their entire economies operate on the euro. In principle Greece could do the same. The Bank of Greece could legally maintain its Eurozone membership but, with an uncooperative European Central Bank, de facto operate as Montenegro and Kosovo do.

OK, without commenting on whether that outcome is desirable, is it possible? Probably. Even assuming an ECB that doesn't return the Bank of Greece's phone calls, there's no available mechanism for the ECB to prevent Greeks from using euro. Indeed, efforts to prevent the free exchange of euro would undermine the euro's status as global, convertible currency. Such efforts would also harm Montenegro and Kosovo.

The Bank of Greece has already adopted capital controls including withdrawal limits of 60 euro per day per depositor. A significant fraction of the Greek economy, perhaps a third, is already operating "in the black" and off the books, primarily on a euro cash and barter basis. Austerity-fueled and ECB-supported "bank jogs" have already done great damage to the Greek economy and its financial system. The Bank of Greece could, in principle, maintain capital controls and (probably) nationalize what's left of Greek banks. Moreover, there's no particular reason why Greeks in Greece need to have bank accounts in Greece, and many have already established accounts elsewhere in Europe.

The Greek government is already running a primary surplus, meaning that tax revenues (even with significant compliance problems) are supporting government services and benefits. When (not if) the Greek government defaults on its external debt it'll have more euro to keep. The Greek government won't be able to borrow more, but that's already true.

Could that be the plan, to tell the troika "piss off," run the Greek government on a neutral domestic cashflow basis (better than sending the surplus to the troika), and remain within the euro zone (lowercase) de facto, just as Kosovo and Montenegro do? It could be. Moreover, Greece could be on firm legal footing in doing all that. The troika and the ECB, on the other hand, might have several legal problems (at least) if they try to act maliciously. It's one thing to suspend support but quite another to go to war (metaphorically one hopes) against one of its members. They may be very, very angry, as foolish creditors often are, but I don't see how they legally retaliate against a sovereign in their midst.

Greece: What's Really Happening, What Matters

If you'd like to understand what's happening with Greece and its economic situation, here's a quick guide.

1. Before the 2008 Financial Crisis, Greece borrowed too much and European banks lent too much. This credit overextension problem was the direct result of a poorly designed Eurozone, a monetary union without fiscal union.

2. Government institutions bailed out the overextended banks, assuming the bad Greek (and many other bad) debts. That bailout was not handled particularly well.

3. Just as there was no way the banks could sustain those bad debts (hence the bailouts), equally there is no plausible (or even implausible) way the Greek government can repay all of its debts. Yet the government institutions substantially have not (and continue to refuse) to write off Greece's debts.

4. Greece's governments have tried to service that debt held by public institutions (and all other debt), but in the process the government created great misery and horrific economic depression in Greece. This set of self-defeating policies is called "austerity." Greek unemployment is now about 26% and Greek GDP fell by about the same percentage. Greater poverty and immiseration means it's even more impossible to pay off euro debt.

5. A new Greek government came to power on a promise to end austerity. That government negotiated with its external creditors (government institutions, i.e. the "troika") for months and failed to reach an agreement that included debt relief -- or indeed any material changes to the existing, counter-productive austerity policies. The troika offered more of the same: never-ending economic depression in Greece.

6. The Greek government refused more of the same and now seeks a public referendum backing its refusal. The Greek government will presumably stop servicing its external debt and will default on that debt. (As it should have done years ago in a negotiated but still deliberate way.) That's the only decision the Greek government can make, and it's a good one. Or at least it's the only realistic one. The math doesn't lie. There's just no way the debt is repayable. (Importantly it appears that the Greek government can and will continue servicing internally held debt, particularly the debt held by its domestic banks. It just isn't going to continue playing a mathematically impossible charade with the IMF, in particular.) On June 30 the Greek government owes $1.6 billion to the IMF, and the Greek government does not plan to make this payment. That's "default."

7. The European Central Bank (Mario Draghi, really) now has a decision to make. Will the ECB destroy the euro-based Greek banking system simply because another entity, the Greek government, is defaulting on its external debt? In the language of central bankers, will the ECB decide that Greek banks are facing a solvency problem instead of a liquidity problem because the IMF isn't getting paid? It's the ECB's decision to make, and it's a very strange one indeed, a decision Draghi has desperately wanted to avoid having to make. Central banks aren't usually in the habit of destroying their own banking systems, even partly. There are no precise analogies here, but this would be a bit like the U.S. Federal Reserve deciding to torpedo Alabama's banks if the Alabama state government stopped paying its bonds held by Wisconsin. Yet that's the "logic" of the Eurozone.

8. Of course the Greek government must prepare for the possibility the ECB will act to destroy Greece's banking system. The Bank of Greece (Greece's central bank) will bear most of the responsibility to protect and defend Greece's banking system. If the ECB does terminate Greek banks' access to Emergency Liquidity Assistance (ELA) then the Bank of Greece will likely have to respond in these three basic ways:

(a) Declare a bank holiday (that could last several days), keeping the banks closed;

(b) Introduce capital controls, meaning limits on withdrawals (particularly internationally);

(c) Possibly introduce a new currency, most probably a purely electronic one that operates via debit cards and smartphones.

Cyprus has recent experience with (a) and (b). There may also be another option:

(d) Request and obtain a loan from Russia to help keep Greece's banks capitalized. (The Russians have offered in part for geopolitical reasons.)

The Bank of Greece will probably also have to nationalize the banks, meaning to take equity (probably all of it) in those banks. That's a minor detail in terms of execution, but it's an important one for public governance.

9. If the ECB acts to destroy the Greek banking system, and the Bank of Greece is forced to respond to protect and defend Greece's banking system, there will be disruption and turmoil, and not only in Greece. However, with the key assumption that the Greek government and the Bank of Greece execute well -- the Greek government does have many smart people, fortunately -- the disruption will be relatively short lived. There are several countries that have followed this path, and they've recovered nicely. Iceland is arguably a useful, recent example, though Iceland always had its own currency and never joined the euro.

10. Greece will remain within the European Union and Schengen Area unless other European governments do something particularly stupid and perhaps even illegal. True, European policymakers have often acted stupidly in recent years, but I would not bet heavily on this particular form of stupidity on this occasion. Note that Norway and Iceland do perfectly well outside the European Union as members of the European Economic Area (EEA) with their own currencies, so Greece does not actually require EU membership to restore economic growth and prosperity. The only real advantage to EU v. EEA membership is the ability to influence policy within the EU, but since Greece hasn't been able to do that anyway, it doesn't matter.

11. In the hopefully unlikely event EU governments continue to act stupidly with respect to Greece's membership, EU leaders should bear in mind that Greece is housing many thousands of asylum seekers and refugees. There are costs to continuing policy stupidity.

12. EU policy leaders talk as if they are confident Greece's issues will not "blow back" to cause turmoil in the rest of the Eurozone. I wish I were so confident. The financial markets have shown a strong ability to sense "blood in the water" and attack, shark-like, the weak and the vulnerable. European public institutions will likely discover that this botched exercise is even more expensive than a negotiated, managed write-down and Greek economic recovery plan would have been. One of the ways Greece will be "expensive" is in Spain where that government is more likely to fall at the next election. One of the ways European leaders have been particularly out of touch and particularly stupid is in their tolerance (or obliviousness) to the pain and suffering of the unemployed amidst persistent economic depression. It's a human emergency, and the EU's inability to solve that emergency is its greatest, overarching failing.

In Praise of the Greek Government

I wrote about Greece's economic situation earlier this year. A few points:

1. Greece's government is acting reasonably, logically, sensibly. (See the Greek Finance Minister's latest verbatim statement, for example.) Unfortunately Greece is dealing with European ministers that are not. They're not even acting like good (or even average) bankers would.

2. To reiterate, the European Central Bank could act to destroy what's left of Greece's euro-based banking system or not, but make no mistake that it's the ECB that will be at fault if it does so. Blame where blame is due.

3. To reiterate, if the ECB destroys what's left of the Greek banking system then Greece's new currency (after a bank holiday) will be entirely electronic, primarily based on debit cards and smartphones. Greece will become Europe's first truly cashless society, and (ironically) the euro will become Greece's black market currency (in a hopefully shrinking black market). The Greek government won't even bother to mint new coins and print new bills. The transition will be tumultuous, of course, but after the dust settles it'll work quite well. Tax evasion and undeclared labor will become harder to pull off since all Greek currency transactions will be electronically recorded. The Greek government has some smart people who will make this work.

4. Greece will remain in the Schengen Area and in the European Union unless European governments somehow act in concert (and with unprecedented malice) to expel Greece. Blame where blame is due again. That'd be completely dumb from the point of view of Europe's self interest (and the European public interest), but see #1 above.