Are you able to tell me who took up the 172,400 jobs created
-
Are you able to tell me who took up the 172,400 jobs createdThis is the title of the topic, it says who took up 172,400 jobs, the question did not mention anything about calculation it ask who. You understand? I can keep going on to talk to you but if you have the motive of attacking me I can do nothing to please you. Please go do some other things which are more constructive and beneficial rather than come here keep attacking. I don't agree with you you get so furious. You can't expect everyone to agree with you.Originally posted by eagle:1) You asked me to be more objective? Prove to me which content of mine in this thread has not been objective.
2) I am unreasonable? Prove to me again which content of mine in this thread has been unreasonable.
3) You are losing your cool now because you cannot prove yourself?
4) The thread is asking about figures. I replied with the focus on the questions on the figures. Now that I have answered it, you are not happy? Why? Because it does not tie down with your observations, something which I have already said you are Correct?
5) So how have I attacked you, other than comparing you with Gazelle in one of the statements? Did I call you names? Why is it that you would think that I have attacked you when I simply put out hard facts, figures and analysis? -
now now now, who is the one who got furious and use Caps for the whole post?Originally posted by qlqq9:Are you able to tell me who took up the 172,400 jobs createdThis is the title of the topic, it says who took up 172,400 jobs, the question did not mention anything about calculation it ask who. You understand? I can keep going on to talk to you but if you have the motive of attacking me I can do nothing to please you. Please go do some other things which are more constructive and beneficial rather than come here keep attacking. I don't agree with you you get so furious. You can't expect everyone to agree with you.
Show me which post that hint at some anger in me? No proof don't any how point finger hor.
You also said I need to be more objective and that I am unreasonable. That is a total of 3 charges you have levied against me without any proof from you.
Yup, you had known the title, but your conclusion came from your <0.1% labour force that you have seen. So what is wrong with me showing figures and hard facts to come out with a final estimation of how many people got the job? I had given an estimation based on facts and figures. Are you to say that this is not in accordance to the topic?
The fact is, the figures are out there for you to calculate. Do you agree with this statement?
Again,
More FTs and FWs to replace Singaporeans? With a figure that tells us that overall unemployment has decreased? There are definitely much more FTs and FWs nowadays in Singapore, but how true is it that Singaporeans are displaced so much that more were unemployed as compared to before?Originally posted by qlqq9:Don't need figures, just go round companies in Singapore, you will be able to see there are getting more and more FTs and FWs to replace Singaporeans.
An estimation based on previous year's number of jobs created gives me 80k.
A 2nd estimation based on current year's statistics also gives us 79k.
The number is already out for you to see, what more do you want to know?
My analysis is done with regards to the questions here and the statistics available. What remains is whether you believe their statistics. -
hi, kid, I am not into debating with you. What I see and what others have seen tell it all. If you want to insist on those figures, then let it be. Don't force into my throat to accept what you say. The very fact you compared me with Gazelle shows that you are furious. There is no need to get so agited, afterall I am not into producing figures and so on to wanna win. This is just a discussion and examination. OK, OK, you pass by producing the figures but I am not sure how accurate the figures are.Originally posted by eagle:More FTs and FWs to replace Singaporeans? With a figure that tells us that overall unemployment has decreased? There are definitely much more FTs and FWs nowadays in Singapore, but how true is it that Singaporeans are displaced so much that more were unemployed as compared to before?
An estimation based on previous year's number of jobs created gives me 80k.
A 2nd estimation based on current year's statistics also gives us 79k.
The number is already out for you to see, what more do you want to know?
My analysis is done with regards to the questions here and the statistics available. What remains is whether you believe their statistics.
To me my discussion style is based on facts, reality, experiences, observation, feedback and so on. These I consider to be more true than figures. -
This is just a discussion and examination.
Correction, the above should read "This is just a discussion not examination, election campaign or some kind of project for people to show off how good they are". -
facts?Originally posted by qlqq9:hi, kid, I am not into debating with you. What I see and what others have seen tell it all. If you want to insist on those figures, then let it be. Don't force into my throat to accept what you say. The very fact you compared me with Gazelle shows that you are furious. There is no need to get so agited, afterall I am not into producing figures and so on to wanna win. This is just a discussion and examination. OK, OK, you pass by producing the figures but I am not sure how accurate the figures are.
To me my discussion style is based on facts, reality, experiences, observation, feedback and so on. These I consider to be more true than figures. I give you facts. You gave observations and experiences, facts that cannot be counted reliable at all with regards to the Singapore labour force. Which ones are truly reliable facts in your discussion? Do you think I'm debating? I gave you overall facts and figures for you to make a more well-rounded conclusion, and you would call it debating? The reason behind this will most likely be that you knew all along your conclusions were based on a limited view of the entire labour force, and when actual facts and figures are presented to you, you would feel that the presentation of these facts and figures are a form of attacking you.
Just a comparison between you and Gazelle and you would have to type in Caps Are you sure you aren't the one getting agitated? You surely can do selective understanding So the figures can be calculated from the singstats website. If you really doubt the validity of it, you could always go to the websites to do a check. No point talking all the points you want to raise are based purely on your experiences and observations. The sample size is just too small for you to have a conclusion. It is only an extremely limited window of the situation at hand..
What weird comparisons you made So how old do you think I am? How old are you? How many years working experience do you have? How companies have you actually seen? What do you work as, so much so that you could see a full picture of Singapore? An experience with a company of 20 employees is not exactly what one would use in an allegation against the PAP for the whole labour force.
Now, in which statement did I say your observations are wrong? Did I fight for being correct? I am merely challenging your conclusions with figures obtainable from the singstats website. You could always fight and defend them. Is there a need to type in Caps?
I'm not going to talk to you like I talk to Gazelle yet and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you missed reading certain facts due to my long posts. In case you have misunderstood everything I have pointed out from the facts and figures, I shall summarized them for easier understanding.
1) Out of 172,400 jobs, it is very highly likely that around 79k~80k jobs are taken up by locals
2) More FTs and FWs may perhaps have displaced Singaporeans, but many more Singaporeans have a job.
3) <46k Singaporeans are unemployed, which a large portion can be easily explained off (just went into early retirement, transition between jobs, etc ,etc)
4) Most Singaporeans are working in the largest employer in Singapore, the public service, thus your observations.
None of my points clash with your observations. -
Please please.
Comparing a forumer to Gazelle is an great insult for some of the forumers.
-
Understood. My apologies to qlqq9 for thatOriginally posted by Spartans:Please please.
Comparing a forumer to Gazelle is an great insult to some of the forumers. -
Ah...the truth hurts, does it?Originally posted by reddressman:you are not qualified to talk about the TRUTH to me. -
You are misinterpreting my words.Originally posted by eagle:Please look and analyse deeper before coming to quick conclusions. I too don't fully support the PAP, but to show their ineptitude, we should not give baseless allegations. Then the question comes back to you, why are you so anxious to say that my figures are wrong? I took my sources from others, I did my research, how could it be said that I'm anxious? Did you do your research and analysis before coming to your own conclusions? Or did your conclusion came just from your own 2 eyes, your experience with <0.1% of the labour force?
My questions all ask why the news do not report with clarity as to how many of the jobs created benefitted the sgreans.
Why no breakdown to how many sgreans benefitted from the jobs created in sg.
The news is supposed to inform the people and not for the people to do the investigation. So what if I am not a researcher of statistics? I am a layman reading newspaper like all. I do not see the figure published as to how many sgreans benefitted from the job creation. Is that wrong? How many news readers know the answer?
You can take bits and pieces of information from here and there.
If you understand the most fundamental of statistics, you should know that it is important to know how the numbers are derived. For example, if I say People are living longer, what does it mean? How many are living longer? Majority of a few? A few can also mean people are living longer. Please go for a quick course on fundamental statistics to help yourself.
"baseless allegations" I challenge you to proof I had baseless allegations.
Is saying the news did not report the details a baseless allegation?
It proves that you are trying very hard to answer my question but you cannot give a satisfactory answer. Not even convincing.
Worse is, you are trying to claim that I have baseless allegations.
There is no baseless allegations. The news did not report how many sg'reans occupied the jobs created. It showed how many sg jobs were created. The 2 is a world of difference.
You are trying too hard. Tell me, why is the needful fundamental info not shown? How is the 170K jobs info derived? If there is a logic and sources of info backing that, which of course I think there is, I would assume there is also info as to how many of the sg jobs created went to sgreans.
I repeat my questions again :
1. What are the kinds of sg jobs created?
2. How many went to sgreans ?
3. How many went to PRs ?
4. How many went to non PR foreigners?
(if you can just answer any of the questions from 2 to 4 will suffice)
5. What are the nature of these jobs - Part-time, short term contracts, full time, permanent jobs?
These are fundamental questions I am asking on the behalf of the PEOPLE.
absolutely free service.
If many people knows after reading the news, then this thread would not have remained open. Is this commonsense of what? -
Have you read the other thread? It is a news report by a news report. You are basing your allegations of the government and the opposition by a report not from the government, but from a reporter? Isn't this a world of difference too? Wouldn't this be called baseless too? You are trying too hard.Originally posted by reddressman:You are misinterpreting my words.
My questions all ask why the news do not report with clarity as to how many of the jobs created benefitted the sgreans.
Why no breakdown to how many sgreans benefitted from the jobs created in sg.
The news is supposed to inform the people and not for the people to do the investigation. So what if I am not a researcher of statistics? I am a layman reading newspaper like all. I do not see the figure published as to how many sgreans benefitted from the job creation. Is that wrong? How many news readers know the answer?
You can take bits and pieces of information from here and there.
If you understand the most fundamental of statistics, you should know that it is important to know how the numbers are derived. For example, if I say People are living longer, what does it mean? How many are living longer? Majority of a few? A few can also mean people are living longer. Please go for a quick course on fundamental statistics to help yourself.
"baseless allegations" I challenge you to proof I had baseless allegations.
Is saying the news did not report the details a baseless allegation?
It proves that you are trying very hard to answer my question but you cannot give a satisfactory answer. Not even convincing.
Worse is, you are trying to smoke people that I have baseless allegations.
There is no baseless allegations. The news did not report how many sg'reans occupied the jobs created. It showed how many sg jobs were created. The 2 is a world of difference.
You are trying too hard.
Why no breakdown? If you had even read the posts properly, you would have seen that I have already mentioned the possiblepoints why a mere reporter would not risk his job by publishing them. Did you? -
1) This is the question I had wanted to ask too, if you had bothered to read the posts. It is extremely valid. Whether it is part time, contract, etc, or private/public jobs.Originally posted by reddressman:I repeat my questions again :
1. What are the kinds of sg jobs created?
2. How many went to sgreans ?
3. How many went to PRs ?
4. How many went to non PR foreigners?
(if you can just answer any of the questions from 2 to 4 will suffice)
5. What are the nature of these jobs - Part-time, short term contracts, full time, permanent jobs?
2,3,4 Look at my breakdown and estimation from 2 different calculations, with one done by you.
5) Similar to Question 1, which I wanted to ask too, but buried in this thread somewhere because some other forumer want to focus on something more irrelevant -
If I am referring to a news report by a news reporter, why do you claim baseless allegations? suka suka you claim allegation. I also claim you allegation can or not? where is a website that reports offically in 1 report, the answers I am asking for? These are fundamental questions. If you can proof there is such a single website by the officials, I will stop asking. If not, admit it.Originally posted by eagle:Have you read the other thread? It is a news report by a news report. You are basing your allegations of the government and the opposition by a report not from the government, but from a reporter? Isn't this a world of difference too? Wouldn't this be called baseless too? You are trying too hard.
Why no breakdown? If you had even read the posts properly, you would have seen that I have already mentioned the possiblepoints why a mere reporter would not risk his job by publishing them. Did you?
Is it not true that the news did not report the figures clearly to the extent that is meaningfully tells readers how many sg jobs created went to sgreans? sf job creation statistics without detail of how many sgreans are occupying these jobs and how many are occupied by foreigners? Is that world class reporting? You can decide to say that it is or it is not.
Allegation. Are you alleging that the news reporter does not dare to write truths that hurt? be careful of your allegations. just a friendly warning. -
Originally posted by reddressman:If I am referring to a news report by a news reporter, why do you claim baseless allegations? suka suka you claim allegation. I also claim you allegation can or not?
Is it not true that the news did not report the figures clearly to the extent that is meaningfully tells readers how many sg jobs created went to sgreans? sf job creation statistics without detail of how many sgreans are occupying these jobs and how many are occupied by foreigners? Is that world class reporting? You can decide to say that it is and it is not.
So you want to question the opposition or the ministers due to a news report by the reporter? Not baseless allegations?Originally posted by reddressman:btw,
What effort have we seen our Opposition in asking this on our behalf?
What has the so-called Opposition done in this aspect?
You ask us to ask the MOM.
Why don't you 1st go ask your MOM?
Why don't Sylvia Lim go and ask the MOM?
Why don't Low Tia Kiang go and ask the MOM?
Why don't Chiam See Tong go and ask MOM?
How many decades does it take to get the figures?
What is the EFFICIENCY?
Why don't the MPs and Ministers go and ask the MOM?
You are the one who wanted to know the breakdown, you could either go to MOM to ask it yourself, or do the calculations yourself from singstats. Why us?
And, no one ever said or agreed that Singapore news reporters are world class reporters. However, the fact remains that you have questioned the opposition and the ministers based on a news report not by them, but by a mere news reporter.
I'm saying this is highly probableOriginally posted by reddressman:Allegation. Are you alleging that the news reporter does not dare to write truths that hurt? be careful of your allegations. just a friendly warning.
The analysis of statistics is a game played by the govt and the media as a form of propaganda. -
There is definitely something very wrong with you. SEems that you are so fond of finding fault with forumers here. If you have problems, please sort out and solve them don't allow your problems to affect you and that due to problems you are manifesting here.Originally posted by eagle:facts? I give you facts. You gave observations and experiences, facts that cannot be counted reliable at all with regards to the Singapore labour force. Which ones are truly reliable facts in your discussion? Do you think I'm debating? I gave you overall facts and figures for you to make a more well-rounded conclusion, and you would call it debating? The reason behind this will most likely be that you knew all along your conclusions were based on a limited view of the entire labour force, and when actual facts and figures are presented to you, you would feel that the presentation of these facts and figures are a form of attacking you.
Just a comparison between you and Gazelle and you would have to type in Caps Are you sure you aren't the one getting agitated? You surely can do selective understanding So the figures can be calculated from the singstats website. If you really doubt the validity of it, you could always go to the websites to do a check. No point talking all the points you want to raise are based purely on your experiences and observations. The sample size is just too small for you to have a conclusion. It is only an extremely limited window of the situation at hand..
What weird comparisons you made So how old do you think I am? How old are you? How many years working experience do you have? How companies have you actually seen? What do you work as, so much so that you could see a full picture of Singapore? An experience with a company of 20 employees is not exactly what one would use in an allegation against the PAP for the whole labour force.
Now, in which statement did I say your observations are wrong? Did I fight for being correct? I am merely challenging your conclusions with figures obtainable from the singstats website. You could always fight and defend them. Is there a need to type in Caps?
I'm not going to talk to you like I talk to Gazelle yet and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you missed reading certain facts due to my long posts. In case you have misunderstood everything I have pointed out from the facts and figures, I shall summarized them for easier understanding.
1) Out of 172,400 jobs, it is very highly likely that around 79k~80k jobs are taken up by locals
2) More FTs and FWs may perhaps have displaced Singaporeans, but many more Singaporeans have a job.
3) <46k Singaporeans are unemployed, which a large portion can be easily explained off (just went into early retirement, transition between jobs, etc ,etc)
4) Most Singaporeans are working in the largest employer in Singapore, the public service, thus your observations.
None of my points clash with your observations. -
He is becoming very ugly. Going round finding fault with me and reddressman. It seems that he is punishing me for not agreeing with him. Just by reading his posts, one who is sensible, mature and objective know what is this fellow up to. Really absurb. If he goes on like that, he is no different from Gazelle. Seems that he can say whatever about a person and when the person respond to him he gets angry and starts to attack.Originally posted by Spartans:Please please.
Comparing a forumer to Gazelle is an great insult for some of the forumers. -
Friend, guess we will have to agree with those figures given by him if not he will not let us off.Originally posted by reddressman:You are misinterpreting my words.
My questions all ask why the news do not report with clarity as to how many of the jobs created benefitted the sgreans.
Why no breakdown to how many sgreans benefitted from the jobs created in sg.
The news is supposed to inform the people and not for the people to do the investigation. So what if I am not a researcher of statistics? I am a layman reading newspaper like all. I do not see the figure published as to how many sgreans benefitted from the job creation. Is that wrong? How many news readers know the answer?
You can take bits and pieces of information from here and there.
If you understand the most fundamental of statistics, you should know that it is important to know how the numbers are derived. For example, if I say People are living longer, what does it mean? How many are living longer? Majority of a few? A few can also mean people are living longer. Please go for a quick course on fundamental statistics to help yourself.
"baseless allegations" I challenge you to proof I had baseless allegations.
Is saying the news did not report the details a baseless allegation?
It proves that you are trying very hard to answer my question but you cannot give a satisfactory answer. Not even convincing.
Worse is, you are trying to claim that I have baseless allegations.
There is no baseless allegations. The news did not report how many sg'reans occupied the jobs created. It showed how many sg jobs were created. The 2 is a world of difference.
You are trying too hard. Tell me, why is the needful fundamental info not shown? How is the 170K jobs info derived? If there is a logic and sources of info backing that, which of course I think there is, I would assume there is also info as to how many of the sg jobs created went to sgreans.
I repeat my questions again :
1. What are the kinds of sg jobs created?
2. How many went to sgreans ?
3. How many went to PRs ?
4. How many went to non PR foreigners?
(if you can just answer any of the questions from 2 to 4 will suffice)
5. What are the nature of these jobs - Part-time, short term contracts, full time, permanent jobs?
These are fundamental questions I am asking on the behalf of the PEOPLE.
absolutely free service.
If many people knows after reading the news, then this thread would not have remained open. Is this commonsense of what?
-
Cannot prove your point dun need to do personal attacks one you know? I already apologize for comparing you with Gazelle already you knowOriginally posted by qlqq9:There is definitely something very wrong with you. SEems that you are so fond of finding fault with forumers here. If you have problems, please sort out and solve them don't allow your problems to affect you and that due to problems you are manifesting here.
You also need to explain why post hard facts and figures is finding fault with you.
You haven't tell me which post of mine is not objective. You have also yet to explain to me why posting hard facts and figures are punishing youOriginally posted by qlqq9:He is becoming very ugly. Going round finding fault with me and reddressman. It seems that he is punishing me for not agreeing with him. Just by reading his posts, one who is sensible, mature and objective know what is this fellow up to. Really absurb. If he goes on like that, he is no different from Gazelle. Seems that he can say whatever about a person and when the person respond to him he gets angry and starts to attack.
Please poll everyone in this forum on the objectivity and how reasonable it is of both your posts and my posts ok? -
You will have to prove the figures wrong, which I had got and calculated from singstats. The fact is, the figures, along with deeper analysis and explanations, do prove your observations and experiences correct. I fail to understand how it was finding fault with you, unless you could not believe the figures, which in this case, please find other sources to prove me wrong.Originally posted by qlqq9:Friend, guess we will have to agree with those figures given by him if not he will not let us off. -
OK, you are the smartest alec here, happy ! You lack working experience to talk about employment.Originally posted by eagle:You will have to prove the figures wrong, which I had got and calculated from singstats. The fact is, the figures, along with deeper analysis and explanations, do prove your observations and experiences correct. I fail to understand how it was finding fault with you, unless you could not believe the figures, which in this case, please find other sources to prove me wrong. -
For your information, I myself have worked with 2 companies before, and personally entered and seen at least 2 other companies as far as I remember. Doesn't mean that students nowadays do not have working experience, which in case you think so, you will need to think again.Originally posted by qlqq9:OK, you are the smartest alec here, happy ! You lack working experience to talk about employment. -
That is not full time. Go see for yourself when you work full time in future. Sometimes, theory and reality differs.Originally posted by eagle:For your information, I myself have worked with 2 companies before, and personally entered and seen at least 2 other companies as far as I remember. Doesn't mean that students nowadays do not have working experience, which in case you think so, you will need to think again. -
I was there for 8 months straight. While there, I have worked with an external banner company to make a banner for inter-department games. I'm going back to the same company to work after graduation.Originally posted by qlqq9:That is not full time. Go see for yourself when you work full time in future. Sometimes, theory and reality differs. -
no fear, qlqq9.Originally posted by qlqq9:He is becoming very ugly. Going round finding fault with me and reddressman. It seems that he is punishing me for not agreeing with him. Just by reading his posts, one who is sensible, mature and objective know what is this fellow up to. Really absurb. If he goes on like that, he is no different from Gazelle. Seems that he can say whatever about a person and when the person respond to him he gets angry and starts to attack.
a piece of paper cannot contain the Fire BALLZ of TRUTH.
Not many can handle the TRUTH.
Stay True and Stay righteous. We will win.
People have eyes and ears. They can see what is going on.
When one cannot win, they will resort to fault finding.
I was just asking a super obvious question that all non-Gazelloids want to know. Maybe he is Gazelle ?
He is now alleging that the news reporter was 'plain lazy', I quote him.
This guy har, trying to put the fault onto someone else.
I think his superior must take action and put in someone more competent to counter my questionings. I have 10 more I have yet to post. Watch out for puzzles 3-10 coming to you soon! 2008. -
Please point out how I was finding fault with your observations and experiences. Thank you.Originally posted by reddressman:no fear, qlqq9.
a piece of paper cannot contain the Fire BALLZ of TRUTH.
Not many can handle the TRUTH.
Stay True and Stay righteous. We will win.
People have eyes and ears. They can see what is going on.
When one cannot win, they will resort to fault finding.
I was just asking a super obvious question that all non-Gazelloids want to know. Maybe he is Gazelle ?
He is now alleging that the news reporter was 'plain lazy', I quote him.
This guy har, trying to put the fault onto someone else.
I think his superior must take action and put in someone more competent to counter my questionings. I have 10 more I have yet to post. Watch out for puzzles 3-10 coming to you soon! 2008.
What is the truth? Your observations and experiences of <0.1% of the labour force? Or a statistics of the whole labour force? Bear in mind that I have claimed that both qlqq9's and your observations are correct. I'm merely stating the figures and explaining your observations. In the case I have explained wrongly, please advise.
If you have truly read everything, you would have seen that my posts are objective. In case you think they are subjective, please point it out too. What you could do is to re-interpret the figures in another way which I have not yet seen, and I would agree with you. Instead, the replies to my figures and calculations are
1) I have more working experience than you
2) This is what I have seen, so I must be right
So in your opinion, do you think those replies are reasonable?
As you have said, people have eyes and ears. Why don't you poll the rest of the forumers instead of just addressing qlqq9?
Lastly, either the reporter is plain lazy, or he's just plain ignorant that he needs to calculate such numbers to satisfy the demands of the readers. Yes, this is my allegation. You could direct the reporter to this post, and thus me. -
Not all things or matters can be solved by talking about figures and numbers. The truth is the reality and facts. It is out of context to even mention about Gazelle, it is absurd. Working life can change an individual, let's hope he will change for the better when he starts working full time permanently.Originally posted by reddressman:no fear, qlqq9.
a piece of paper cannot contain the Fire BALLZ of TRUTH.
Not many can handle the TRUTH.
Stay True and Stay righteous. We will win.
People have eyes and ears. They can see what is going on.
When one cannot win, they will resort to fault finding.
I was just asking a super obvious question that all non-Gazelloids want to know. Maybe he is Gazelle ?
He is now alleging that the news reporter was 'plain lazy', I quote him.
This guy har, trying to put the fault onto someone else.
I think his superior must take action and put in someone more competent to counter my questionings. I have 10 more I have yet to post. Watch out for puzzles 3-10 coming to you soon! 2008.