Majority of what I said is opinion and prefaced as such, other than fairly true bits about Singapore's communitarian culture (true) and tax rates (true).
Otherwise, very little is normative and instructive (telling someone that this what they should do instead of what I'd do in the same circumstances). So I am not sure how I am patronizing someone as opposed to stating deeply opinion.
I mentioned this in another comment, but John Rawls had the concept of a "decent state" -- which may have a radically different tradition than, e.g., US or UK, but one where basic civil rights are still honored and respected. Singapore fits this bill, so I don't think its system should be condemned in the same vein as many states (perhaps majority of the world today) where, e.g., civil wars flare and religious and ethnic persecution is a day-to-day reality.
> 2: People move to Singapore because they're narrowly selfish
Sivers did surrender his US citizenship, so I can assume taxation did have some reason that choice (although it could be simply to avoid double taxation -- .sg taxes plus US taxes on top -- rather only choosing lower taxes).
However, I never stated that all -- or even most -- immigrants to Singapore do this. I can only state this about Westerners moving there permanently (it's another matter about living there temporarily as part of a job, etc..), for most of whom taxation plays a determining role.
I am actually aware personally of many people who moved to Singapore for far different reasons (fleeing civil wars, seeking basic economic opportunity) -- but none of them were Westerners. For example, I attended high school and university with people who grew up in Singapore having fled grinding poverty in Burma or reeducation camps in Vietnam. In what I think is a huge criticism of US, their families were not initially allowed to enter the US: they were only able to move to the US once their parents established themselves in Singapore, obtained the right employment and education, and move to US on H1B visas.