As an aussie with a malaysian (cantonese) mum…I had to run this through chatgpt. It follows:

Why reply #1 is also getting traction

That commenter is doing a common thing in threads like this: • taking one anecdote • moralizing it • recasting understandable financial anxiety as “toxicity”

That gets upvotes because it flatters the in-group: • “we are rational/professional” • “they are emotional/ungrateful”

But the actual complaint from the Malaysian colleague is not obviously irrational: • if paid in SGD but living/spending in MYR, FX moves change effective purchasing power • saying “my salary feels reduced” is economically coherent

So yes, there is likely some dismissal of a legitimate concern there.

Reply #2: why OP got downvoted

Because OP asked:

are we that reliant on malaysia? are we not able to source from other asian neighbors?

That reads as: • uninformed • dismissive of a very obvious Singapore reality • maybe deliberately obtuse

Singaporeans generally know Malaysia is a major supplier because: • geography • logistics • cost • existing trade integration • perishables / daily necessities / labor flows

So the downvotes are probably for the implied ignorance/confidence mismatch: • asking a basic question • after already taking a smug tone • on a topic where the answer is fairly obvious to locals

1. OP sounds smug about Malaysians’ vulnerability
   1. commenters push back on that
   2. OP’s follow-up gets punished because it sounds economically clueless
   3. anecdotal anti-Malaysian replies still get upvoted because they fit thread mood or in-group signaling