Jobless rate down
-
Hey bro, don't let them get to your emotions.. I believe these are the so called Internet Agents the government set up to "interact" with us...Originally posted by Rock^Star:You must be fcucking blind then to miss out on the first post of this thread.
can't you see they're just detracting and distracting the entire thread?
IGNORE... -
Well, this is the internet and its a public forum and anyone can join.
Being kiasu and control freaks, its highly probable that cronies and lackies are parasiting this site.
Like the transformer little midgit robot relaying messages back to the Decepticon Leader Megatron in return for some 'dog biscuits'.
humans what do you expect?
Self pleasure is ultimately important.
Self gain is ultimately important.
Humans can be the most selffish being.
Humans can be the most cruel of all beings.
I just had a nightmare last night...that there was a intergallactic war and the alien enemies conquered the earth which consist of not humans but AutoBots and Decepticons. They did not even shot a bullet or laser. They used Decepticons to destroy earth from the inside out. First, alliens offered lots of 'dog biscuits' to a high position Decepticon (appear like AutoBot but actually a Decepticon 'robot in disguise'. Some others were put under duress to become agents for the aliens and in return, they get tons of 'dog biscuits'.
To preserve their lives, decepticons betrayed their own decepticons and even sabo and sacrificed the lives of Autobots.
When it comes to 'dog biscuits' , some decepticons will kill even their own kinds in order to preserve their lives. Thus, to destroy Earth was relatively easy. Just offer the highest number of dog biscuits to Decepticons Mercenaries and they will start killing their own kind and of course the kind and righteous AutoBots.
When I woke up from this nightmare, I realised how wars can be won and nations destroyed using no bullets nor nuclear but 'dog biscuits'.
Sorry, for my rumblings. Hope some of you got my message. Which is obvious as I am not at ease to describe things too clearly. Can be very graphic.
thanks for reading.
R. -
go and see......dun ask stupid questions.Originally posted by Gazelle:how do you know they are jobless? -
if this also can happen in bad timing, the ministers indeed do an excellent job...
Originally posted by Rock^Star:CNA reported that:
1) Singapore's jobless rate fell to an all time low in the second quarter
2) Employment rose 61,900 at the same time
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/291348/1/.html
MOM's report stated:
1) An estimated 79,600 residents* were unemployed in June 2007, up from
the seasonally adjusted figure of 63,000
2) Manufacturing posted gains of 16,600....construction increased its workforce by 11,400
* - residents refer to Singapore citizens and PRs
http://theonlinecitizen.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/mom-2nd-q-report.pdf
What can one deduce?
Manufacturing and construction industries have always been an attractive ground for foreigners.
More Singaporeans are becoming unemployed but the jobless rate still fell due to the larger number of foreigners coming in for employment.
The power of statistics and how it may deceive.
For more reading, go to Leong Sze Hian's post.
http://theonlinecitizen.com/
Leong Sze Hian has 5 degrees and 13 professional qualifications. A Wharton Fellow, alumnus of Harvard University and the United Nations University International Leadership Academy, he has served as Honorary Consul of Jamaica, President of the Society of Financial Service Professionals, Representative of the Inter-American Economic Council, Chairman of the Institute of Administrative Management, and founding Advisor to the Financial Planning Association of Indonesia. He has been invited to speak more than 100 times in over 15 countries on 5 continents, authored 3 books and quoted over 700 times in the media. -
My question is not if you see human or ghost in the library, but how you know that they are jobless just by looking at them?Originally posted by de_middle:go and see......dun ask stupid questions.
Cant they be
1) on leave
2) in between jobs
3) retired
4) work night shift
5) having lunch break
6) on MC etc.. -
1) on leave?
2) in between jobs?
3) retired?
4) work night shift?
5) having lunch break?
6) on MC etc.?
Of course there is a question of what is your job as well... it is easily to say a person is employed when his job actually does very little to improve his situtation at all. -
Australia
America
Canada
London
Japan
-
[/b]YOu know, given the size of the above countries our learned Gazelle posted, it is not a wonder that the homeless, and the poor exists...Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
1) on leave?
2) in between jobs?
3) retired?
4) work night shift?
5) having lunch break?
6) on MC etc.?
Of course there is a question of what is your job as well... it is easily to say a person is employed when his job actually does very little to improve his situtation at all.Originally posted by Gazelle:
[b]Australia
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200503/r42585_109053.jpg
America
http://www.worldproutassembly.org/images/homelessness-america.jpg
Canada
http://www.canadianchristianity.com/missionfields05/graphics/streetbed.jpg
London
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/560000/images/_562427_home300.jpg
Japan
http://www.japanwindow.com/images/20051008035012_0506_sidelined.jpg]
But given the size of SG and its population, if our expensive and rich government wants to help, I'm sure we can have zero homeless, or poors... -
Lets recap what I posted earlier:
========================
Aged: Penniless in a land of plenty
(The Star)
23 July 2007 by Seah Chiang Nee
For many elderly folk, Singapore is a tough place to live in. Many senior citizens just do not have the skills for the modern economy.
WITH better living, Singaporeans are enjoying one of Asia’s longest life expectations, averaging 82 years – but it’s not everyone’s cause for celebration.
In fact, for half the retirees with insufficient Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings, it could be a terrible burden. Singapore is also one of the regionÂ’s most expensive cities to retire in.
The government obviously sees the downside of a citizen who retires at 62 and lives for two decades without any income.
Last week, it served notice of its intention to push the retirement age by three years to 65. In fact, where possible, it prefers citizens to carry on working until 70.
However, there is some contention over the prospect of a delay in the withdrawal of the minimum CPF savings from 62 to 65. .
CPF is the republicÂ’s mandatory retirement fund in which a member can withdraw a portion at 55, but has to leave behind a minimum sum. From this, he or she receives a monthly payout from age 62.
This sum now stands at S$96,000 (RM220,800) and must be gradually topped up to S$120,000 (RM276,000) by 2013.
“I think it is quite reasonable to raise it to 65 if our objective is to raise the employment rate of this group of people,” said the minister overseeing issues on ageing, Lim Boon Heng.
He is apparently preparing the people for the inevitable.
Twenty-five years ago when retirement and the CPF withdrawal age was 55, it was a different world. At that time life expectation was 70 years, 12 years less, so a change comes as no surprise.
Public reaction has been strong. CPF is one of the most cherished things in a SingaporeanÂ’s life, and any talk of delaying withdrawal is bound to bring out strong emotions.
(In the 1984 general elections, the governmentÂ’s vote fell by a hefty 12.4% just because of a rumour that repayment would be delayed beyond 55.)
It is understandable. For many elderly folk, Singapore is a tough place to live in. In the first place, many do not have the skills for the modern economy.
After a lifetime of work, they want to take charge of their savings and spend it as they wish. The trouble is that while the majority is financially conservative, others make a mess of it and get into trouble.
Many are simply not capable of managing such a large fund on their own. Either they become fair game for cheats or they gamble or spend lavishly on wine or women.
“When the money is gone, they become homeless or penniless, cursing the government for not looking after them,” said a small businessman.
A year ago I met a weeping gentleman in a hospital room being consoled by two nurses. A China woman whom he had befriended had cheated him of S$60,000 (RM138,000) of his CPF savings, he told the nurses.
In a fast-paced city very much preoccupied with the bottom line, the elderly get less respect and care than they deserve. In failing health and overwhelmed by SingaporeÂ’s new technologies, many are still toiling in menial work.
Liberal-minded Singaporeans decry two perceived wrongs. First, senior citizens are given only the minimum level of government financial help considering the stateÂ’s enormous wealth.
Second, they resent the governmentÂ’s control on peopleÂ’s retirement money.
“Something must be fundamentally wrong with society if one cannot retire after working for 30 to 40 years,” exclaimed a young professional.
Unlike in many western countries, Singapore has little or no social security or welfare. These factors partly explain the cityÂ’s low birth rates.
Living in a highly competitive nation has helped to turn Singaporeans into some of the most pessimistic people in the region when it comes to retirement savings.
The Thais have the most sanguine feelings about retirement, according to a survey by American International Assurance (AIA).
Some 61% of Thais believe they will have sufficient funds to retire, based on current savings patterns.
This contrasts with just 24% of those surveyed in Hong Kong, 47% in Malaysia and 27% in Singapore.
While the government wants people to work longer, until 70, many Singaporeans actually want to quit earlier.
A study by a financial protection player, AXA Group, showed that Singaporeans, on average, consider the ideal retirement age as 54, the earliest among the 15 countries surveyed.
Those in Hong Kong, Canada and Australia would opt to retire at 55, while the Japanese want to wait till they are 61.
The ruling People’s Action Party constitution still declares it as a “democratic socialist” party, but in the past 40 years, the “socialist” part of it has been in decline.
For their part, Singaporeans are learning to depend less on the government for their needs, including jobs and cheap public services -
Do you have statistic to show that Singapore has a higher % of homeless as compared to other big cities around the world?Originally posted by HyperFocal:YOu know, given the size of the above countries our learned Gazelle posted, it is not a wonder that the homeless, and the poor exists...
But given the size of SG and its population, if our expensive and rich government wants to help, I'm sure we can have zero homeless, or poors...
Maybe you should ask why countries like USA, a super power with the most number of billionaire in the world, is unable to wipe out poverty in their country? -
i don't think these have much to do with democracy. All thinking self-respecting human beings should take responsibility of their own actions.Originally posted by reddressman:Dear Friends,
Do you agree that we as democratic citizens are responsible for how the country is behaving?
If so, with this responsibility , what can we do?
I do the following:
1. Educate people I know that we as democratic citizens have the responsibility for our own future and should contribute our own effort in
realising this. If we fail to achieve this, if we kpkb again, we must admit that we are also partly responsible for the situation.
2. Take on the responsibility to educate people that Honesty and Transparency are basic expectations of democrats like us.
Democracy cannot run by itself , a concept. Its all about the PEOPLE. What you want is what you can expect to get. If you fail to expect, you simply will not get what you want. As simple as that.
3. Admit that no matter how tough is the situation, how mission impossible the situation appears to be, everything is actually ultimately in the hands of
the PEOPLE. The people should be encouraged to believe in themselves and what they can do. If our country is not a democracy, what I said will not make sense. But it is. Its up to every tom and dick to uphold the Truth. -
how do you wipe out poverty in a country as big as U.S.?Originally posted by Gazelle:Do you have statistic to show that Singapore has a higher % of homeless as compared to other big cities around the world?
Maybe you should ask why countries like USA, a super power with the most number of billionaire in the world, is unable to wipe out poverty in their country?
it is not fair to compare singapore to U.S. -
The difference between us and them is that they don't see the need to downplay their homelessness and poverty problems with constant back-patting or pretending the problem does not exist.
For some reason we do.
If you tell an American that there are homeless and poor in his nation he would not be surprised or get defensive... on the other hand, our Minister Mentor did say to the world that these people for something reason, do not exist in Singapore.
So why the difference? -
sure, lets focus on NY, the big apple then.Originally posted by dragg:how do you wipe out poverty in a country as big as U.S.?
it is not fair to compare singapore to U.S. -
nah...Singapore gov dont downplay statistic, if the the whiners who are overly inflated them.Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:The difference between us and them is that they don't see the need to downplay their homelessness and poverty problems with constant back-patting or pretending the problem does not exist.
For some reason we do.
If you tell an American that there are homeless and poor in his nation he would not be surprised or get defensive... on the other hand, our Minister Mentor did say to the world that these people for something reason, do not exist in Singapore.
So why the difference?
If you think otherwise, I would appreaciate if you could please quote me a statement from the government who claim that singapore has got no poverty. -
"You go down New York, Broadway. You will see the beggars, people of the streets...Where are the beggars in Singapore? Show me."
Lee Kuan Yew
The Tuth About Poverty
THERE IS THIS MYTH THAT Singapore is a rich country and its citizens are well-taken care of. Nothing could be further from the truth. The 1998 United Nations Human Development Index showed that Singapore ranked 28 on the list behind countries like Barbados and Malta.
In fact many households earn so little that they cannot afford to give their children pocket-money for school, resulting in the students going hungry for the day. The following is a snapshot of some of the more recent cases uncovered:
In 1999, nearly 2,000 children did not attend school because their parents could not afford it. Mohammad Hirwan is one such child. His parents earn about US $600 a month, hardly sufficient for a family in Singapore. As a result the boy\'s parents had to take him out of school when he was nine. His siblings did not fare any better. All of them dropped out of school because of poverty.
A technician lost his job and had no income for about half a year had to watch his two young children live on biscuits for days. A social worker said that the man had no money even to take the bus to find a job. The family was literally penniless.
A man with a wife who suffered from manic depression, asthma and diabetes had to stay home to look after her. Whenever he found some contract work, his children took turns to skip school to watch over her. The family had to survive on US$200 a month they received from welfare organizations.
A young divorcee cannot find enough money to but schoolbooks and food for her children. Most days, by 10pm, her sons ask if there is any more food. They cannot afford to eat and live mainly on fried rice.
The elderly poor in Singapore lead just as tragic lives. Many have to, literally, work until they die:
An elderly woman in her seventies was fatally run over by a hit-and-run driver as she was returning home at 6:40 am, working as a night-shift toilet cleaner. Not only did the elderly lady have to toil in the night shift, her pay was so meagre that she could not even afford to eat lunch. To top it off she had to save to help take care of her 50-year old mentally retarded daughter.
Another septuagenarian woman worked as cleaner for a measly US$200 a month which she had to share with her 70-year-old sister. The sisters are so hard-up that even vegetables during meal-times are a luxury.
A 77-year-old toilet cleaner was on his way home around midnight after work. He couldn't afford the fare for a bus ride and had to walk home. He was hit and killed by a car.
A 96-year-old woman has to go to the garbage dump to pick out odds and ends to sell to support herself.
A 76-year-old man ran a little business selling household provisions. His paltry income had to support middle-aged daughters who are wheelchair bound and suffering from polio since birth, and a wife who is senile and incapable of looking after herself. His problems took a dramatic turn for the worse when the Government upped the rental of his shop from US$150 to US$450 a month.
Below are some statistical indicators of the poor in Singapore:
In 1999 monthly wages for low-skilled workers decreased by as much as 34 percent.
Nearly 30 percent of households were not earning enough to afford the minimum standard of living. The Government estimates that the subsistence level in Singapore is US$600 for a household of four people—a conservative figure for a country that is consistently ranked among the most expensive cities in the world to live in.
Between 1998 and 1999, the average household monthly income of the poorest 10 percent of the population decreased by nearly 50 percent. The following year, the figure nose-dived by another 54 percent.
In 1990, the richest 10 percent of households earned 15.6 times more than the poorest 10 percent. (Households with no income-earners are excluded from this category.) By 2000, the gap widened: the richest 10 percent earned 36 times more than the poorest 10 percent.
The number of households with monthly incomes of less than $3,000 was 40 percent in 1998 but increased to 42 percent in 1999.
According to the 2000 Census, 12.6 per cent of households earned less than $1,000 per month. A monthly gross total household income of $1,500 and below is considered “poor” in Singapore.
A more recent survey found that 16 per cent of the respondents had family members who often went hungry.
In 2004 37,823 households could not afford to buy their own flats or rent homes in the open market.
Because of the system, an increasing number of Singaporeans are driven to seek the help of mental professionals:
In 1990 there were 88,000 such cases. This figure escalated to 147,000 in 1998.
In 1990 only 8.4 percent of Singaporeans suffered from neurotic disorders such as anxiety and depression. In 1998 16.6 percent succumbed to these disorders. (This problem continues into the present with a newspaper report highlighting that more people are being diagnosed with mental disorders due to financial woes.)
In 1997, psychiatrists noted a sharp increase in the number of teenagers attempting suicide and attributed the phenomenon to the youths being alienated from their parents. The main reason cited is the stressful lifestyle and high cost of living.
In 1999, a consumer health survey found that among the various Asian societies, Singaporeans are most likely to have suffered depression, stress, and fatigue. In addition, job-related stresses continue to be the biggest problems for working Singaporeans.
In 2003, a study found that Singaporeans aged between 20 and 49 years made up 70 percent of suicide cases from 1997 to 2001. They also constitute the main bulk of cases of attempted suicides.
Between 1994 and 1998 the number of divorces shot up from 3,772 to 5,651 cases.
Social workers attribute this occurrence to intense stress experienced by workers who have households, children and aging parents to take care. National figures compiled by the Registry of Births and Deaths show that on average, 1 person takes his/her own life in Singapore every day.
Visitors often remark about the tidiness and orderliness of Singapore. It is because of such an impression that makes the cases of poverty described in the earlier paragraphs so hard to believe.
The reason why the poor in Singapore are not more visible is that the Ministry of Community Development and Sports conduct frequent raids through its Destitute Persons Service, looking for and picking up vagrants. If Singapore seems to have less destitute, it is not because the numbers are not present. The real reason is that the PAP Government is just much more efficient in clearing the streets of homeless people.[/b]
For all the hype claiming that Singapore is a near-paradise, 20 percent of its citizens indicated that they want to leave the country, predominantly because of the [b]stressful lifestyle and high cost of living. These would-be émigrés are mainly from the strata of younger, higher-income professionals.
With the costs of living rising, or at least not decreasing, and wages continuing to be depressed, Singaporeans are going to facing increasingly dire economic times. Without any rights, their problems will persist. -
Flapperty flap, flap flap, flappety flap...
I say: "whine whine, whine whine whine..."
-
Yah.
Having high GDP does not mean there is no poverty or a high standard of living. After the government takes a large portion away from you and leaves you with pittance to make ends meet. Sad to see the government takes a step backward in helping the poor by reducing high income earners tax liability and making up for such loss through the use of GST. Low income earners don't pay income taxes at all, now they have to pay 7% GST (an equivalent 7% income tax).
Even income tax does not tax the full 7%, because it is stratified. For an income of 80,000, a tax payer would pay less than 8.5% of taxes because, for first $20,000 is zero tax, next $10,000 is $350, next $10,000 is $550 and next $40,000 is $3,400. Ultimately the $80,000 income earner only pays $4,300, which is 5.375% effective tax rate, much less than the 7% which low income earners have to pay as GST.
For every dollar of the first $20,000 = Nil
For every dollar of the next $10,000 = 3.5%
For every dollar of the next $10,000 = 5.5%
For every dollar of the next $40,000 = 8.5%
For every dollar of the next $80,000 = 14.0%
Their policies will only increase the income gap, thus making the Gini coefficient wider. -
Did somebody say Wine???Originally posted by HyperFocal:Flapperty flap, flap flap, flappety flap...
I say: "whine whine, whine whine whine..."
What wine???
Don't whine, those cyber counter-insurgency units don't like us to voice our discontentment online.
They prefer to mislead others into thinking that everything is fine and dandy.
They are afraid that those who have not awaken will be awaken by our whining. -
We wake them up???Originally posted by maurizio13:Did somebody say Wine???
What wine???
Don't whine, those cyber counter-insurgency units don't like us to voice our discontentment online.
They prefer to mislead others into thinking that everything is fine and dandy.
They are afraid that those who have not awaken will be awaken by our whining.
We don't need to do that what...
The government's emboldened implementation of such policies and relentless increments of Living Costs, will wake them all up even faster...!! -
I wonder how much will PAP give us for next election???Originally posted by HyperFocal:We wake them up???
We don't need to do that what...
The government's emboldened implementation of such policies and relentless increments of Living Costs, will wake them all up even faster...!!
Then after election, increase GST to 10%, increase all the basic necessities, increase their salaries another few millions. -
i thought your dear mm once mentioned that there are no homeless in singapore once?Originally posted by Gazelle:nah...Singapore gov dont downplay statistic, if the the whiners who are overly inflated them.
If you think otherwise, I would appreaciate if you could please quote me a statement from the government who claim that singapore has got no poverty.
-
Personally i would like to think there is hope, but if we seek a fast and quick solution, that is impossible.Originally posted by reddressman:Sir, are you saying that you have given up?
I am convinced that many know and heard about the word democracy. But I doubt many of them know what it truely means.
Education is key.
People also lack a sense of Righteousness.
Blinded by money. A culture of shallowness is not desirable nor pleasant to have.
1st world country but 1st world mentality?
Whereas education is indeed key, apathy has a tendency to defeat it especially when people have no hope. In the West, apathy has already reared its ugly head. The question is to energise the population somehow and get them to do something. How that is done is a question I believe many have not quite solved, although some have through sheer charisma. Possibly many Singaporeans know that things are messed up, but they have lost hope in changing the system.
Actually Singaporeans have no small amount of Righteousness, but it is often followed by resignation. Case to point was the NKF saga, which has fallen by the wayside now, as many predicted.
First World Nation? Nay, we will unlikely get that far unless something drastic galvanises the country. -
Originally posted by maurizio13:
The Sadder truth, is that idiots like that deranged zebra, and that mad bull, and that parasitic mushroom, is that they have a sore lacking in knowledge of basic economics, and there is such a thing as a povety line, and as such, there is a % of the population who can barely make ends meet. Just because they are hiding in their HDB flats does not mean they have basic necessities like power and water.
Yah.
Having high GDP does not mean there is no poverty or a high standard of living. After the government takes a large portion away from you and leaves you with pittance to make ends meet. Sad to see the government takes a step backward in helping the poor by reducing high income earners tax liability and making up for such loss through the use of GST. Low income earners don't pay income taxes at all, now they have to pay 7% GST (an equivalent 7% income tax).
Even income tax does not tax the full 7%, because it is stratified. For an income of 80,000, a tax payer would pay less than 8.5% of taxes because, for first $20,000 is zero tax, next $10,000 is $350, next $10,000 is $550 and next $40,000 is $3,400. Ultimately the $80,000 income earner only pays $4,300, which is 5.375% effective tax rate, much less than the 7% which low income earners have to pay as GST.
For every dollar of the first $20,000 = Nil
For every dollar of the next $10,000 = 3.5%
For every dollar of the next $10,000 = 5.5%
[b]For every dollar of the next $40,000 = 8.5%
For every dollar of the next $80,000 = 14.0%
Their policies will only increase the income gap, thus making the Gini coefficient wider.[/b] -
They are not homeless, they just prefer to be in tune with nature, so they prefer to make their homes along the streets.Originally posted by 4getmenot:i thought your dear mm once mentioned that there are no homeless in singapore once?
You should watch Mr. Brown's podcast on the homeless living in the streets.
http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2007/07/03/the-mrbrown-show-city-sleepers/