SG top in foreign reserve per capita
-
Not satisfied with the end result, and still trying to salvage some saffron pride ?
I could walk away from this useless debate, unfortunately your stupidity seems unending.
What theories were being discussed ?Originally posted by saffron60:To atobe:
Original post by atobe
''Why did you not complete the statement to read in total as - ''empty boast of HIGH Per Capita income based on National Reserves is NOTHING more then DELUDING ourselves ?
You have already agreed to my comparison that it is useless to boast about HIGH PER CAPITA income - what are you complaining about ?
If you are not a classic case of a nit going on a nit picking exercise, with no base to stand on but to make nonsensical criticism without any clear understanding of the statements posted. ''
There is not much difference whether the word 'empty' was in the sentence because we came to the same conclusion that the comparison is meaningless. And you accuse me of nit picking? i'm just trying to show you that you messed up the economic terms you were using, and because of that, your economic theories are flawed. It is not nonsensical criticism.
Can you manage to understand any discussion of such economic theories or concepts, when you had initially stated - I'm not an expert on economics either, so i can't simply draw theories and conclusions between foreign exchange reserves and gov spending. ?
Did you delude yourself that "we"
had - come to any conclusion that the comparison is meaningless ?
Which statements have been made concerning this meeting of minds ?
Are you so desparate to the point of pathetic self-delusion ?''What is your problem with this statement ? Are you disputing this statement of fact ?
You are great at splitting hairs in trying to score points, and doing it by attempting to ridicule other's position.
What are the words that I have put into lionnoisy's mouth ?
Is it not TRUE that a ''boastful high Per Capita income based on National Reserves is nothing more then self-delusionary'' ?
You did print your views on this subject as - ''Boasting high per capita income based on national reserves doesn't make sense to me.
You can be quite a ding, when you continue to dong.''
No where in lionnoisy's post did he mention 'high per capita [b]income' do you hear me????????? If lionnoisy had said that, then prove it![/b]
First, you made a useless attempt to ridicule my use of the words NATIONAL RESERVES - now you are attempting to question my use of the words HIGH PER CAPITA INCOME - are you capable ?
Do you understand the words 'PER CAPITA' and 'PER CAPITA INCOME' - before making any further ridiculous statements ?
Are you so desparate of winning a single point concerning lionnoisy's inclusion of the word 'INCOME' in his statement of high per capita ?
Can you even understand that 'Per Capita is also understood as 'PER CAPITA INCOME' - unless you can prove me wrong in anyway ?
Was there any mistake in my statement - ''empty boast of HIGH Per Capita income based on National Reserves is NOTHING more then DELUDING ourselves" ? This statement was made in response to lionnoisy's post that boasted of Singapore's 'PER CAPITA is amongst the Top 10 Reserves in foreign exchange and gold'.
Are you such a pathetic nut to be only capable of nit-picking ANY AVOID debating on the real issues ?
You are such a hopeless kid attempting to debate in such a uselss manner.
You are the one who said this:
''Without transparency, any discussion can only be based on the few information that is available; but the fact remains true that a boastful high Per Capita income based on National Reserves is nothing more then self-delusionary."'
i have to keep repeating myself because of your stubbornness. You are the FIRST person who came up with the term, high per capita income, not lionnoisy. Lionnoisy was talking about the companies profits in comparison with the per capita of foreign exchange reserves and gold. You put the word 'per capita income' in lionnoisy's mouth when you made the statement above.
Was lionnoisy "talking" about companies profits "comparing with the per capita of foreign exchange reserves and gold" ?
You are certainly brilliant to make such an observation when lionnoisy did not even make any reference to any companies' profit - let alone even a single company ?
If we carefully re-read lionnoisy's post - was he actually referring to the NATIONAL RESERVES - words which you dread even to think, let alone to print ?
Are you having some nightmares about being caught in the NATIONAL RESERVES - floating between national wilf life parks, to national military reserves, and buried alive in a mountain of cash ? -
continuation
Can you be such an expert in economics to make such comments when you had originally state that - I'm not an expert on economics either, so i can't simply draw theories and conclusions between foreign exchange reserves and gov spending. ?
''You seem to be continuously fixxated with the idea that I am ''the first person who tried to draw a link between per capita income with per capita of foreign exchange reserves and gold''.
Did you read the opening post from lionnoisy that started this thread ?
Did you not read the first line that was printed in his statement ?
''Per capita of TOP 10 Reserves of foreign exchange and gold in absolute value''
Am I the first person, or should not this credit go to lionnoisy ?
If you are not too clever in reading, can we trust your judgement with facts ?''
You are the person who picked the quote from the report, "Singapore : New Poor and Social Cohesion'', which was talking about per capita GDP and per capita income. After reading that, you developed some quack theories to use in your argument against lionnoisy. And you made the boo-boo right towards the end when you said ''but the fact remains true that a boastful high Per Capita income based on National Reserves is nothing more then self-delusionary.''
Hello!!!!!!! per capita income is not the same as per capita foreign exchange reserves and gold. You seem to only like to read what you write, since you write such long ego boosting statements about yourself...as if the world cares. Go talk to yourself in front of the mirror next time when you want to praise yourself..nobody's interested.
Per Capita is understood as the division of a pile of cash or value of gold or any asset by the population numbers.
For your simple mind, if Singapore has $1000 and there are only 10 Singaporeans, the Per Capita or Per Capita Income is $100 - per person.
Whether the $1000 is the value of gold - (when sold) or whether the $1000 is in Singapore Dollars or in Foreign Exchange, the final value in foreign currency value or in Singapore Dollar - will still be divided by the 10 Singaporeans.
To prove that it is stupid for lionnoisy to make such a boast about Singapore being in the TOP 10 PER CAPITA in foreign exchange and gold reserves - I introduced the extracts from "Singapore : New Poor and Social Cohesion'', which mentioned that even though Singapore boasted per capita of US$23,000 in Year 2000, Singaporean workers share of GDP is only about 42 per cent - the lowest amongst the NIE.
Unfortunately, you are incapable of appreciating this fact, but prefer to make yourself exist in this debate by concentrating on who said what and what I have put in anyone's mouth.
For a while I thought stupidissmart was the dumbest after OM, but it seems that now you have taken the cake and eat it too. -
Originally posted by saffron60:
Your initial post you told everybody that you are not an expert in the field of economics, yet you are able to correct forumers on the meaning of these economic terms. Aren't you contradicting yourself?
Originally posted by Atobe:
[b]''the fact remains true that a boastful high Per Capita income based on National Reserves is nothing more then self-delusionary. "
National reserves means wildlife parks or nature reserves which are protected by the government. I think you mean monetary reserves.
I know that per capita income is a measure of wealth of a country. I roughly know the functions of foreign exchange reserves but I don't understand how you can link per capita income with foreign exchange reserves or monetary reserves.
I also don't understand how lionnoisy can calculate the per capita of reserves of foreign exchange and gold and whether it is an accepted economic measure of the wealth of the country. Does per capita of reserves of foreign exchange and gold make any sense?
Without a basic understanding of these economic terms and measures, it's quite useless to talk about such a complex economic subject and trying to link it to gov spending.
Better let someone who is more knowledgeable about economics to do the talking, I'm not an expert on economics either, so i can't simply draw theories and conclusions between foreign exchange reserves and gov spending.
[/b] -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Did I make such a blunder ?
Your initial post you told everybody that you are not an expert in the field of economics, yet you are able to correct forumers on the meaning of these economic terms. Aren't you contradicting yourself?
Can you please quote which one of my initial post that this statement was made ?
Although, we may not be economic specialists, surely each of us have some interests in reading up on issues and form our own opinions ?
One may not be an educationist, surely that does not prevent us from contributing our ideas to improve the education system ?
Similarly, we may not be Politicians - does that prevent us from commenting about Politics ?
BTW - are you referring to saffron60 - in his first post that claimed he is not an expert in economics but began to lecture me about his views concerning economics ?
It is approaching dawn in Singapore, and if you have been sitting through the night at this Speaker's Corner, you can be excused for this human error in clicking the quote button at the wrong post. -
I was referring to saffron60, he said he is not an economic expert, yet he corrected and criticize other forumers posting on economic terms. I think it's contradictory.Originally posted by Atobe:Did I make such a blunder ?
Can you please quote which one of my initial post that this statement was made ?
Although, we may not be economic specialists, surely each of us have some interests in reading up on issues and form our own opinions ?
One may not be an educationist, surely that does not prevent us from contributing our ideas to improve the education system ?
Similarly, we may not be Politicians - does that prevent us from commenting about Politics ?
BTW - are you referring to saffron60 - in his first post that claimed he is not an expert in economics but began to lecture me about his views concerning economics ?
It is approaching dawn in Singapore, and if you have been sitting through the night at this Speaker's Corner, you can be excused for this human error in clicking the quote button at the wrong post. -
My apologies, I thot so - but it had been a long day, and time to get a bite before knocking outOriginally posted by maurizio13:I was referring to saffron60, he said he is not economic expert, yet he corrected and criticize other forumers posting on economic terms. I think it's contradictory. -
but SGrean are also the few top in debt. neither asset rich nor cold hard cash rich.
and the best part is.... all of you know to who? the HDB, LTA... ... ... OUR world best GOV.
can i look at this as a joke? i think others are. the word SINGAPOREAN has a new meaning and it means FUNNY, jokes. mock at.
I am mocking myself
hazi.... -
Saffron 60Originally posted by saffron60:We have already established that i made a wrong assumption on your interpretation on 'national reserves', why do you still want to go on about it? To boost youe ego?
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
''What theories were being discussed ?''
You were talking about the companies, so you are saying that the statements you made are not theories, so what are they? facts?
''Can you manage to understand any discussion of such economic theories or concepts, when you had initially stated - I'm not an expert on economics either, so i can't simply draw theories and conclusions between foreign exchange reserves and gov spending. ?''
Yes, at least i can admit that i'm not an expert, but you...hahahaha...made stupid blunders as well and you are toooooo proud to admit it.
''First, you made a useless attempt to ridicule my use of the words NATIONAL RESERVES - now you are attempting to question my use of the words HIGH PER CAPITA INCOME - are you capable ?''
It seems that once you latch to other people's mistake, you can't seem to let it go and you use it to discredit me when i'm trying to point out your mistake. This stupid tactic will not work. Like i said, you wasted 2 long posts talking about it and you still can't let it go. Your mistake about per capita income has got nothing to do with this, but you are using my mistake to avoid talking about yours. Oh grow up!
''Can you even understand that 'Per Capita is also understood as 'PER CAPITA INCOME' - unless you can prove me wrong in anyway ?''
Hahahaha..this shows what a moron you are...how can you say that per capita can also be understood as per capita income? You made a grossly wrong assumption on the use of the term 'per capita'. anybody who studied at least some basic economics will know that it's not the same thing. Hehe..you really a blur creature, picking out quotes that have economic terms and you don't really understand them. go do your own homework on this, if i am wrong, you prove it., otherwise i will maintain that you are a stubborn creature who refuses to accept his mistake.
''Was there any mistake in my statement - ''empty boast of HIGH Per Capita income based on National Reserves is NOTHING more then DELUDING ourselves" ? This statement was made in response to lionnoisy's post that boasted of Singapore's 'PER CAPITA is amongst the Top 10 Reserves in foreign exchange and gold'.
Are you such a pathetic nut to be only capable of nit-picking ANY AVOID debating on the real issues ?''
Yes, there was a mistake because you can't seem to understand that per capita is not the same as per capita income and you keep defending your statement. If you can't understand basic economic terms, it is useless to analyze people's posts based on your very poor understanding.
You accuse me of nit picking? Hahahahahahaha...who was the one who spent 2 long posts nit picking on the 'national reserves' issue....hahahahahhah..you really crack me up.
''Per Capita is understood as the division of a pile of cash or value of gold or any asset by the population numbers.
For your simple mind, if Singapore has $1000 and there are only 10 Singaporeans, the Per Capita or Per Capita Income is $100 - per person.
Whether the $1000 is the value of gold - (when sold) or whether the $1000 is in Singapore Dollars or in Foreign Exchange, the final value in foreign currency value or in Singapore Dollar - will still be divided by the 10 Singaporeans.''
you moron, you think i don't know what per capita means ah? It is usually used in the field of statistics to indicate the average per person for any given concern, e.g. GDP, income. Any given concern, you hear me? So a person can calculate the per capita of foreign exchange reserves and gold, (because it is a statistics calculation) but whether or not the OUTCOME of the calculation makes SENSE, you have to ask lionnoisy 'cos he's the one who calculated it. So to answer your stupid question, per capita is not the same as per capita income, there are other economic terms such as GDP per capita, GNP per capita, now, i would be really stupid if i said that per capita is the same as GDP per capita, which is what you are doing (but you are saying per capita income instead).
''To prove that it is stupid for lionnoisy to make such a boast about Singapore being in the TOP 10 PER CAPITA in foreign exchange and gold reserves - I introduced the extracts from "Singapore : New Poor and Social Cohesion'', which mentioned that even though Singapore boasted per capita of US$23,000 in Year 2000, Singaporean workers share of GDP is only about 42 per cent - the lowest amongst the NIE.''
what does the quote prove? I already said to you earlier that the per capita income is applied to the ECONOMY AS A WHOLE, do you know what is the proportion of the per capita income which is related to the companies (temasek, GIC, etc)? You were talking about the profitibility of these companies, how can relate the above quote about the per capita income to these companies profibility? Explain...... -
You seem to misunderstand what i mean when i said that i'm not an economics expert, not being an economics expert is not the same as HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE IN ECONOMICS. I do have some knowledge in economics, but i'm not an expert who is paid to work in the economics field, you get it now?Originally posted by maurizio13:I was referring to saffron60, he said he is not an economic expert, yet he corrected and criticize other forumers posting on economic terms. I think it's contradictory.
He also made another stupid blunder of falsely accusing you and then made some lame excuse of saying that it's been a long day..blah..blah..
Now i could attempt to discredit him based on this very obvious stupid blunder but i'm not going to. I will not go on and on and on like the way he did with the 'national reserves' issue. But i will still point out his mistake at least once, but won't be immature like him to go on like a broken tape recorder. -
I wanda why u bother talking 2 stupidissmart, who don't even noe the diff bet a sale which is govern by law of contract & the legal obligation regardin financial statement. When buyin co. cannot pay, you sue buyin co. for the sale thru law of contract, you can't sue them for faults in the financial statement.Originally posted by maurizio13:Well, I tried my best to understand your command of English. Your replies are so bad that I have to guess the meaning most of the time.
Ermmm....
If a Temasek wants to buy my company. Why would I bother to look at their financial statements? If I have a company that Temasek wants to buy and willing to pay me a good amount of cash, why would I look up on their financial statements to perform due diligence. It's normally Temasek that has to look at the financial statements of the company they are acquiring. The original point of contention was, "you said that Temasek has a legal obligation", I said they don't have because they are 100% owned by the government. You say that Temasek has a legal obligation to the companies it doesn't hold 100%. I didn't know an associate or subsidiary can check up on the holding company. With your command of English, I thought you meant that there were other shareholders in Temasek which has a right to check up on them. You came up with a totally non relevant point to side track the issue.
I think that is what most PAP supporters, when encountered with facts and not being able to provide a suitable response do. They sidetrack the whole issue.
Hehehe
He just protectin his ego. -
Sigh, I have already tried to advise you that your self centered and righteous deposition in you replies is just asking for people to slap you across the faceOriginally posted by saffron60:You seem to misunderstand what i mean when i said that i'm not an economics expert, being an economics expert is not the same as HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE IN ECONOMICS. I do have some knowledge in economics, but i'm not an expert who is paid to work in the economics field, you get it now?
He also made another stupid blunder of falsely accusing you and then made some lame excuse of saying that it's been a long day..blah..blah..
Now i could attempt to discredit him based on this very obvious stupid blunder but i'm not going to. I will not go on and on and on like the way he did with the 'national reserves' issue. But i will still point out his mistake at least once, but won't be immature like him to go on like a broken tape recorder.
You may have faced opponents with a inferior command of the english language compared to yours in the past, resulting in an inabaility to out-alk you.
But then again as I have advised you before, just because you got a degree, doesn't mean none of us here do. Wise up huh... -
Originally posted by Kree:
[b]''Sigh, I have already tried to advise you that your self centered and righteous deposition in you replies is just asking for people to slap you across the face''
What's wrong with you? Don't you see that there are others here who are worse than me? I don't spend time writing 2 long posts attacking an issue which has already been resolved in an earlier post. Why are you making stupid assumptions?
''You may have faced opponents with a inferior command of the english language compared to yours in the past, resulting in an inabaility to out-alk you.''
What is your purpose in this forum anyway? Do you really want to discuss issues or are you here to pin point on who is doing what and finding fault with people and making premature assumptions? What have i done to you that you want to continue to antagonize me? Have i attacked any of your remarks before? why the sour grapes then?
''But then again as I have advised you before, just because you got a degree, doesn't mean none of us here do. Wise up huh...''
Again, what is the matter with you? And who said that i have a degree? I said that i have been to uni and yes, i have uni qualification, but did i say that i have a degree? for all you know, i could have a dip, or masters, or PHD. How do you know? Why are you making stupid asumptions? I only mentioned it once, oh my god, some people are such sour grapes.
[/b] -
Originally posted by saffron60:
Still not satisfied, and wanting to salvage loss saffron pride ?
Originally posted by Atobe:
''What theories were being discussed ?''
You were talking about the companies, so you are saying that the statements you made are not theories, so what are they? facts?
Are we talking about Per Capita that concerns countries or nations ?
Did we talk about companies ?
Are you in the right thread, or in the right track of mind ?
Hang loose a wee bit, and you may get your mind back again, and probably find your lost saffron pride too.''Can you manage to understand any discussion of such economic theories or concepts, when you had initially stated - I'm not an expert on economics either, so i can't simply draw theories and conclusions between foreign exchange reserves and gov spending. ?''
Sadly, only a clown will laugh at his own mistakes, and attempt to make it appear as expert antics .... and will hahahaha over his own foolishness.
Yes, at least i can admit that i'm not an expert, but you...hahahaha...made stupid blunders as well and you are toooooo proud to admit it.
How long did you grind your teeeth before you were able to hahahaha about this ?''First, you made a useless attempt to ridicule my use of the words NATIONAL RESERVES - now you are attempting to question my use of the words HIGH PER CAPITA INCOME - are you capable ?''
What mistake did you achieve to point out ?
It seems that once you latch to other people's mistake, you can't seem to let it go and you use it to discredit me when i'm trying to point out your mistake. This stupid tactic will not work. Like i said, you wasted 2 long posts talking about it and you still can't let it go. Your mistake about per capita income has got nothing to do with this, but you are using my mistake to avoid talking about yours. Oh grow up!
Was it not a fact that you have made the excuse that you are not an "economic expert" but yet will make all kinds of baseless statements and wild interpretations that simply exposed your stupidity.
If you persist in being supremely stubborn in your stupidity, to continue your baseless assault on my writing, do I not have the right to reply to your stupidity and provocation ?
Your continued insistence to shore up loss saffron pride will soon make you turn from pungently acrid saffron color, to pale yellow that is decomposingly putrid.''Can you even understand that 'Per Capita is also understood as 'PER CAPITA INCOME' - unless you can prove me wrong in anyway ?''
Try harder at laughing instead of some feeble Hahahahha and Hehe - as it still cannot hide the fact that you begin to sound more silly than what others can possibly make you out to be.
Hahahaha..this shows what a moron you are...how can you say that per capita can also be understood as per capita income? You made a grossly wrong assumption on the use of the term 'per capita'. anybody who studied at least some basic economics will know that it's not the same thing. Hehe..you really a blur creature, picking out quotes that have economic terms and you don't really understand them. go do your own homework on this, if i am wrong, you prove it., otherwise i will maintain that you are a stubborn creature who refuses to accept his mistake.
Not too clever with your views to shore up your wounded saffron pride, when you have been exposed to be nothing better than a loud mouth fraud, with nothing to substantiate your positions taken against others.
Did anyone come to your side of the views to what I have posted ?
I am opening myself to be corrected by anyone who believe that what I have posted is in error - and perhaps draw some real lessons in economic terms; but surely you cannot be the person, as you have already stated that you are not an economic expert.''Was there any mistake in my statement - ''empty boast of HIGH Per Capita income based on National Reserves is NOTHING more then DELUDING ourselves" ? This statement was made in response to lionnoisy's post that boasted of Singapore's 'PER CAPITA is amongst the Top 10 Reserves in foreign exchange and gold'.
Is it odd that you keep returning to this 'Per Capita' and 'Per Capita Income' issue - and will even refuse to accept the previous referenced site given in my last reply.
Are you such a pathetic nut to be only capable of nit-picking ANY AVOID debating on the real issues ?''
Yes, there was a mistake because you can't seem to understand that per capita is not the same as per capita income and you keep defending your statement. If you can't understand basic economic terms, it is useless to analyze people's posts based on your very poor understanding.
Is there a need for you to be so concerned with these two terms, when you cannot even accept the given explanation in the usage of these two terms ?
per cap·i·ta (pər kãp'ĭ-tə )
adv. & adj.
Per unit of population; per person: In that year, Americans earned $15,304 per capita. Among the states, Connecticut has a high per capita income.
Equally to each individual.
The noun per capita income has one meaning:
Meaning #1: the total national income divided by the number of people in the nation
The above is not something that I have made up, and you would probably have saved your saffron pride a few days ago if you had taken the trouble to accept my advise to you - "to research your position first before jumping into something that you are not prepared for" .
Somehow, you will not accept good advise, thinking yourself to be cleverer than all those around you.
Too bad that so much tattered pride need to be salvaged, and the remaining shreds will soon be torn off - if you persist in your stupidity. -
From Collins Dictionary of Economics:
per capita income see INCOME PER HEAD
income per head or per capita income
the GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT (GNP) of a country divided by its POPULATION. Income per head gives a more general indication of a country's monetary STANDARD OF LIVING than its absolute level of GNP as Fig. 87, overleaf, shows, although the USA has a higher absolute level of GNP than Japan, its income per head is much lower. However, an income per head measure of people's standard of living is itself also flawed as an indicator of typical living standards because, in practice, the distribution of income is not equal and non-monetary elements of lifestyle quality differ as between different people.
I hope this helps. -
Originally posted by saffron60:
Is it not odd that I had responded to maurizio13 when his remarks were clearly meant for you; and my response was seen to be 'falsely accusing' maurizio13 - which I am sure he did ?
Original posted by maurizio13:
I was referring to saffron60, he said he is not an economic expert, yet he corrected and criticize other forumers posting on economic terms. I think it's contradictory.
You seem to misunderstand what i mean when i said that i'm not an economics expert, not being an economics expert is not the same as HAVING ABSOLUTELY NO KNOWLEDGE IN ECONOMICS. I do have some knowledge in economics, but i'm not an expert who is paid to work in the economics field, you get it now[/b]?
He also made another stupid blunder of falsely accusing you and then made some lame excuse of saying that it's been a long day..blah..blah..
Now i could attempt to discredit him based on this very obvious stupid blunder but i'm not going to. I will not go on and on and on like the way he did with the 'national reserves' issue. But i will still point out his mistake at least once, but won't be immature like him to go on like a broken tape recorder.
[/b]
I stood by waiting for maurizio13 to respond as I believe he would have been puzzled too; and made an immediate apology without revealing too much of my intention.
In my first response to maurizio13, I had intentionally laid several gemstone statements that were intended for you to pick up - and you gladly obliged with your similar statement above which seems to have been pirated from my piece :
"Although, we may not be economic specialists, surely each of us have some interests in reading up on issues and form our own opinions ?
One may not be an educationist, surely that does not prevent us from contributing our ideas to improve the education system ?
Similarly, we may not be Politicians - does that prevent us from commenting about Politics ? "
What you had seen to be my stupid blunder was intended for you to pick-up, so as to allow me to measure the level of intelligence that you have, and how originally different you can possibly be.
Unfortunately it seems your talent is as clear as daylight, but need further confirmation to be led by the nose.
It is clear that you are only capable of grabbing what comes your way, and use it to continue with your pitiful low level whining to seek suport to your useless position. -
Just trying to make him understand what is per capita income.
I don't know what's wrong with these PAP supporters (SIS = stupidinsipidstupidus, OM = oxymoron, grizzle), their arguments defy basic logic, they just want to blindly support PAP, but without any hard evidence or any form of critical thinking, they just cut and paste some news article and expect people to accept their logic. -
Thanks for the help, and my apologies again for making use of your reply in the early hours of 26 February 2007 when we exchange postings from 05.56AM to 06.11AM - so as to trap saffron60.Originally posted by maurizio13:Just trying to make him understand what is per capita income. -
Hear hear, this guy too:Originally posted by maurizio13:Just trying to make him understand what is per capita income.
I don't know what's wrong with these PAP supporters (SIS = stupidinsipidstupidus, OM = oxymoron, grizzle), their arguments defy basic logic, they just want to blindly support PAP, but without any hard evidence or any form of critical thinking, they just cut and paste some news article and expect people to accept their logic.
He doesn't bother to think how if affects the majority! He thinks that to just cut and paste is enough!Originally posted by lionnoisy:2.If not PAP,u cant make SGD 1 m.But without, u will make million of
dollars.Why ,the SGD will drop like a rock!!
Check how SGD APPRECIATE from 1965 to date.
Check how our neighbours' currency performed in the same period!!
S$ Per
year..US...Pound Sterling..100 Japanese Yen .Australian
1984 2.1780 2.5363 0.8674 180.26
2006 1.5336 3.0102 1.2887 121.32
* Yearly, monthy and weekly figures are end period values.
* Daily figures are values as of noon.
https://secure.mas.gov.sg/frames/dataroom/msbhExchange.html...Exchange Rates,(Yearly)1984 to 2007 -
To atobe
''Is it odd that you keep returning to this 'Per Capita' and 'Per Capita Income' issue - and will even refuse to accept the previous referenced site given in my last reply.
Is there a need for you to be so concerned with these two terms, when you cannot even accept the given explanation in the usage of these two terms ?
per cap·i·ta (pər kãp'ĭ-tə )
adv. & adj.
Per unit of population; per person: In that year, Americans earned $15,304 per capita. Among the states, Connecticut has a high per capita income.
Equally to each individual.
The noun per capita income has one meaning:
Meaning #1: the total national income divided by the number of people in the nation''
i went to your website and sure enough, due to your short sightedness, you missed out the so-called other meanings of 'per capita'. The above quote that you took is related to income. There are other examples which is in the website, whereby the term 'per capita' is applied to different contexts. I still maintain that my definition of 'per capita' is correct, which is:
'per capita' is used in the field of statistics to indicate the average per person for ANY GIVEN CONCERN, some examples of the given concern are income, GDP, GNP, even crime!
Here's some other quotes from the website that you choose.
In the legal context, 'per capita' can also mean:
[Latin, By the heads or polls.] A term used in the descent and distribution of the estate of one who dies without a will. It means to share and share alike according to the number of individuals.
In the business terms, per capita can also mean:
By or for each individual. Anything figured per capita is calculated by the number of individuals involved and is divided equally among all. For example, if property taxes total $1 million in a town and there are 1,000 inhabitants, the per-capita property tax is $1,000.
In my earlier post, in response to your statement:
''Can you even understand that 'Per Capita is also understood as 'PER CAPITA INCOME' - unless you can prove me wrong in anyway ?''
I said that:
You made a grossly wrong assumption on the use of the term 'per capita'
Why are you trying so hard to hide the other meanings of the term 'per capita' when it used in different contexts? Why do you insist that the term 'per capita' is only related to income?
I have to remind you again, that it is was originally lionnoisy's post that stated:
''Per capita of TOP 10 Reserves of foreign exchange and gold in absolute value''
So even he used the term 'per capita' in a different context, but you keep insisting that your use of the term 'per capita' is correct. Your own website proved you wrong, go look at it again. Just because you can search things on the internet, doesn't mean that you can just cut and paste without understanding what it really means. -
Oh man!!!
Give it a break!!!
You are right, Atobe is wrong!!!
Happy???
I hope that boosted your ego.
Now stop your retarded discussion!!! -
YOU ARE THE BIGGEST BULLSHITTER IN THE FORUM, YOU EVEN TRY TO JUSTIFY THAT YOUR FALSE ACCUSION IS NOT A MISTAKE BY SAYING THAT IS A PRE-PLANNED STRATEGY TO TRAP ME.Originally posted by Atobe:Is it not odd that I had responded to maurizio13 when his remarks were clearly meant for you; and my response was seen to be 'falsely accusing' maurizio13 - which I am sure he did ?
I stood by waiting for maurizio13 to respond as I believe he would have been puzzled too; and made an immediate apology without revealing too much of my intention.
In my first response to maurizio13, I had intentionally laid several gemstone statements that were intended for you to pick up - and you gladly obliged with your similar statement above which seems to have been pirated from my piece :
"Although, we may not be economic specialists, surely each of us have some interests in reading up on issues and form our own opinions ?
One may not be an educationist, surely that does not prevent us from contributing our ideas to improve the education system ?
Similarly, we may not be Politicians - does that prevent us from commenting about Politics ? "
What you had seen to be my stupid blunder was intended for you to pick-up, so as to allow me to measure the level of intelligence that you have, and how originally different you can possibly be.
Unfortunately it seems your talent is as clear as daylight, but need further confirmation to be led by the nose.
It is clear that you are only capable of grabbing what comes your way, and use it to continue with your pitiful low level whining to seek suport to your useless position.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA x 1 TRILLION TIMES
EITHER WAY, YOU LOSE.
FIRST OF ALL, IF IT REALLY IS A MISTAKE, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU ARE TRYING TO COVER UP YOUR MISTAKE AND YOU GET THE COOPERATION OF YOUR NO.1 ASS LICKER, WHICH IS THE EASIEST THING IN THE WORLD TO DO. HE GOT NO MIND OF HIS OWN THAT'S WHY YOU CAN MAKE HIM JUMP THROUGH HOOPS.
SECONDLY, EVEN IF IT REALLY WAS A TRAP FOR ME FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, WHY ARE SO PATHETIC THAT YOU CARE TO SET A TRAP FOR ME? AM I SUCH A THREAT TO YOU THAT YOU NEED TO SET A TRAP FOR ME? IS IT BECAUSE I ACCUSE YOU OF USING THE SAME OLD BORING PERSONAL ATTACKING TACTICS AND THAT'S WHY YOU CHANGE YOUR TACTIC WITH THE HELP OF YOUR SECOND MORON IN COMMAND? WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACHIEVE BY SETTING A TRAP ANYWAY? MAKE ME LOOK BAD? YA..I CAN REALLY SEE IT WORKING HERE...HAHA. I AM SO FLATTERED THAT YOU GUYS THINK THAT YOU NEED 'THE POWER OF TWO' TO 'TRAP' ME. LIKE I SAID EARLIER, YOUR POSTS ARE EMPTY, FULL OF RUBBISH, THIS JUST PROVES IT. -
this should be easier to read.Originally posted by saffron60:BLAH BLAH BLAH LET'S IGNORE LIONNOISY'S PROPAGANDA AND FOCUS ON THE INTEPRETATIONS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE BLAH BLAH BLAH.
of course, the same plea also goes to atobe, please stop entertaining saffron. we're skirting the main issue here. -
haha foreign reserve is for emergency use only... So this years Budget I have case sG citizen will get $1000 to be distubute in 4 years ... NSF have $100 .... So indeed we are unique govt give money to the people...None of the other nation have done this???
-
It should be more like;Originally posted by nismoS132:this should be easier to read.
of course, the same plea also goes to atobe, please stop entertaining saffron. we're skirting the main issue here.''BLAH BLAH BLAH...LET'S ALL LISTEN TO ATOBE'S BRILLIANT INTERPRETATION OF ECONOMICS..BLAH..BLAH..LET'S IGNORE ALL HIS MISTAKES...''
