MM - Today’s younger generation does not understand all this
-
Originally posted by anonymous_dickhead:
you should not ask a question you don't know the answer to; or does not want to know the answer to...
Singapore's Gini coefficient has increased to 0.485
http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/papers/people/op-s14.pdf (page 8)
Precisely
It has already been told to him that the gini coefficient of Singapore has been increasing.
Taking the values of 1998 actually helps Singapore.
-
likedatosocan... you need to learn to write.
http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?CountryCode=SG
Singapore has a total population of 4 million of which 2.16 million are eligible to vote. Of these 2.16million, 1.14 million votes were collected in the last GE... because of electoral boundaries and walk overs.
The current ruling party won 66.6% (according to their statistics). This translate to less than 18% of votes (total population) and 35.1% of votes (eligible voters). That's hardly a representation of resounding support.
Of course, we will never know unless the government does away with electoral boundaries and walkovers; and everyone gets a chance to vote.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I read tat hong kong had reached 0.525 and tat is in 2001. If u look at the chart, the gini rise especially within the last few years. Wat is the ranking of singapore compared with the whole world ? The later the data is, the more higher the country should rise. If u ask me, the data is not adequate enough to form a conclusion
http://www.scribd.com/doc/328232/United-Nations-Gini-Coefficient
Just asking... why do we have to follow western influence and must follow their style of governance ? I just felt tat liberal democracy is over rated and once u r in, u cannot make important decisions and the country start to decline.
If you ask me, I don't believe Singapore can rise to even 30th in position in 2008, from 78th position in 1998
Even at 0.425 in 1998, how many of the latest data (2005, 2006, 2007) in this page is higher than 42.5 (1998 value, of which it is of a higher value now)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
Just as you said, "the later the data is, the more higher the country should rise". What's more to explain if a 1998 value of Singapore's Gini Coefficient cannot even compare to the 2005 Gini coefficient's of so many other countries?
-
Originally posted by eagle:
If you ask me, I don't believe Singapore can rise to even 30th in position in 2008, from 78th position in 1998
Even at 0.425 in 1998, how many of the latest data (2005, 2006, 2007) in this page is higher than 42.5 (1998 value, of which it is of a higher value now)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
Just as you said, "the later the data is, the more higher the country should rise". What's more to explain if a 1998 value of Singapore's Gini Coefficient cannot even compare to the 2005 Gini coefficient's of so many other countries?
Wonder why some folks constantly compare themselves to worse off countries?I thought we wanted to achieve the Swiss standard of living, isn't it more appropriate that we compare ourselves to the Nordic countries or Swiss standard.
If we constantly compare ourselves to people less well off, very soon we will be pulled down to their levels.
While in school, I wonder if these folks get a middle position in class, compared themselves to 75 percentile range and said they did a good job, therefore no need to improve on themselves.
-
While in school, I wonder if these folks get a middle position in class, compared themselves to 75 percentile range and said they did a good job, therefore no need to improve on themselves.
You outdated le la
Now it's more hip to compare to 66th percentile
-
If you ask me, I don't believe Singapore can rise to even 30th in position in 2008, from 78th position in 1998
Even at 0.425 in 1998, how many of the latest data (2005, 2006, 2007) in this page is higher than 42.5 (1998 value, of which it is of a higher value now)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality
Just as you said, "the later the data is, the more higher the country should rise". What's more to explain if a 1998 value of Singapore's Gini Coefficient cannot even compare to the 2005 Gini coefficient's of so many other countries?
Then as said, it is hard to give a good estimation since the date of report is uneven.
I would tend to agree tat singapore is on the high side though
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Then as said, it is hard to give a good estimation since the date of report is uneven.
I would tend to agree tat singapore is on the high side though
yeah
but it will be extremely hard to believe that any of the countries below 35 at year 2005 will grow their coefficient by more than 10 to overtake Singapore by 2008
-
Originally posted by parn:
Since you're so lazy to use your brain to think further, and expects me to spoon-feed you...here goes....
There are good foreigners and bad ones, similar to our human resources among Singaporeans. Can you say all Singaporeans are good employees and talents? You can't cos you know that there are some good employees/talents and plenty of bad, lazy, helpless, useless, expects to be spoon-fed and treated like a talent when they're not.
Creativity and role learning depends on your own abilities, and you can't learn creativity. However, you can copy and improvise by learning from others' creativity in certain aspects of your work....we called that "experience" don't we?
Ultimately it all boils down to your own individual abilities as a person in Singapore.
IT's funny reading so many Singaporeans' complaining that they aren't spoon-fed sufficiently by the government and their educational system. And it seems that they have regarded those spoon-feeding as a normal, and guess what? Nope, it's not a normal, and it's a benefits for you being born and brought up in Singapore. Such behaviour is truly childish, like a child upset because he did not get the toy that he wanted or he felt that he deserved.
And why do I feel that Singaporeans such as yourselves aren't able to survive outside Singapore on the world stage? It's because you are too dependable on the very government that you hated.
Are you sure you are hating the correct target?
My brain is very much intact and working, thank you very much.
I have compulsive evidence that one of your hobbies must be "selective reading". lol Right anwyay.....with regards to foreigners, I was referring to the excessive influx of unskilled foreigners...u mean u haven't understooded?
And creativity and rote learning..dude, it's not role learning as u think it is. These two terms are opposites. Nonono, we do not expect the govt to spoonfeed us...how can this be? We Chinese are an industrious lot. Put Koreans under one kind of system, u get poverty. Put it under the other, u get world brands like Samsung, Kia, Daewoo and Hyundai . The environment matters and it can't be done unless there's more democracy and opening up of the press.
Hmm....and pple like myself cannot survive outside of Sg? Ha thank u very much....I would like to refute that statement with a LOL.
Hot air! U remind me of a geyser spewing out of the earth's core but that's all there is to it.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Then as said, it is hard to give a good estimation since the date of report is uneven.
I would tend to agree tat singapore is on the high side though
Thanks to anonymous dickhead and eagle for the kind details. Such stats have been brought up before and appreciate it's resurfacing once again.I can safely tell u that S'pore's Gini coeff can only worsen. It's not difficult to tell when the govt's policy over the past ten years has been to increase the population with cheap unskilled foreigners. Even skilled foreigners, for eg IT professionals from India and the likes are enough to suppress wage levels and cause a middle class stagnation.
Simple logic.
-
Another clarification.
Gini coefficient, just like most other statistics, are best taken with a pinch of salt. One just can't qoute on the gini coefficient alone, for there are many other factors and quantiles which needs to be accounted for.
Worse still, Gini coefficient is not an effective measure of egalitarianism ( a political doctrine that holds that all people should be treated as equals, and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights )
If arguments are solely based on gini as a proven fact, then such 'facts' will be rendered questionable even by ordinary laymen, let alone academics.
-
I can safely tell u that S'pore's Gini coeff can only worsen. It's not difficult to tell when the govt's policy over the past ten years has been to increase the population with cheap unskilled foreigners. Even skilled foreigners, for eg IT professionals from India and the likes are enough to suppress wage levels and cause a middle class stagnation
As said before, the statistic can be questionable since the time frame is different for all countries. It is true tat singapore appears to be on the high side however 10 years ago it is already on the high side. The fact is, most countries r grappling with the rich poor divide and almost all countries have increased GINI over the years. Tis is a problem with capitalism and there is very real solution to it.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
As said before, the statistic can be questionable since the time frame is different for all countries. It is true tat singapore appears to be on the high side however 10 years ago it is already on the high side. The fact is, most countries r grappling with the rich poor divide and almost all countries have increased GINI over the years. Tis is a problem with capitalism and there is very real solution to it.
Nope we r not comparing with most countries, we are comparing with likes of Sweden, Switzerland, Norway etc. -
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Another clarification.
Gini coefficient, just like most other statistics, are best taken with a pinch of salt. One just can't qoute on the gini coefficient alone, for there are many other factors and quantiles which needs to be accounted for.
Worse still, Gini coefficient is not an effective measure of egalitarianism ( a political doctrine that holds that all people should be treated as equals, and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights )
If arguments are solely based on gini as a proven fact, then such 'facts' will be rendered questionable even by ordinary laymen, let alone academics.
Given that Gini has its flaws but an alternative? Suggestions.
The US Census Bureau uses it till this day....UN too. Not discreditng that other forms of data would be helpful too. Suggestions pls.
There's a reason why UK waiters earn $1,000p/mth and UK pilots earn $8,000p/mth....and yet Sg waiters earn S$1,000/mth and Sg pilots earn $20,000/mth.
And UK ranks much above Sg in the Gini rankings.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
Given that Gini has its flaws but an alternative? Suggestions.
The US Census Bureau uses it till this day....UN too. Not discreditng that other forms of data would be helpful too. Suggestions pls.
There's a reason why UK waiters earn $1,000p/mth and UK pilots earn $8,000p/mth....and yet Sg waiters earn S$1,000/mth and Sg pilots earn $20,000/mth.
And UK ranks much above Sg in the Gini rankings.
Now you know why EU would dispute with UN's use of gini as an indicator of its income disparity? It certainly is flawed and disputable, along with several other types of statistics. Statistics are only basic indicators and not an exact science.
If you truly want the truth, then you would have no choice but to find out its limitations, and not so as much as to 'discredit' it as you termed it.
If one had studied statistics before, one would know what are the limitations, its drawbacks and cons. It would be unfair to those who had not studied nor understand fully what a statistical indicator is used for. High flaunting names and indexes without listing its limitations are nothing more than a con job on the unwary mind.
As for your concerns and requests for suggestions, i would suggest that you be specific in what you are actually debating on instead of generalizing every angst filled issue in your own mind and lumping some big and european sounding term to lend weight to your opinions.
I unreservedly and humbly apologise if you find my response somewhat not pleasant to your ears, but for the sake of clarity, it is something i had to say with my right of freedom to express my views.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
Now you know why EU would dispute with UN's use of gini as an indicator of its income disparity? It certainly is flawed and disputable, along with several other types of statistics. Statistics are only basic indicators and not an exact science.
If you truly want the truth, then you would have no choice but to find out its limitations, and not so as much as to 'discredit' it as you termed it.
If one had studied statistics before, one would know what are the limitations, its drawbacks and cons. It would be unfair to those who had not studied nor understand fully what a statistical indicator is used for. High flaunting names and indexes without listing its limitations are nothing more than a con job on the unwary mind.
As for your concerns and requests for suggestions, i would suggest that you be specific in what you are actually debating on instead of generalizing every angst filled issue in your own mind and lumping some big and european sounding term to lend weight to your opinions.
I unreservedly and humbly apologise if you find my response somewhat not pleasant to your ears, but for the sake of clarity, it is something i had to say with my right of freedom to express my views.
Gini's limitations is there for all to see. I haven't denied it though I must admit this is not my forte. Precisely that's why I asked for ur suggestions (how else we may measure income inequality). You said using it alone isn't good enough, right? That's what we are debating about and then u turn around and ask me what we are debating lol.Now u come back with this thinly veiled attack and with an apology that stops nothing short of hypocrisy. Surely u can do better than all that.
-
Originally posted by Rock^Star:
Gini's limitations is there for all to see. I haven't denied it though I must admit this is not my forte. Precisely that's why I asked for ur suggestions? (how we may measure income inequality) You said using it alone isn't good enough, right? That's what we are debating about, isn't it?Now u come back with this thinly veiled attack and with an apology that stops nothing short of hypocrisy. Surely u can do better than that.
'hypocrisy' and 'thinly veiled attacks' are merely your perceptions and shows your ungraciousness. Why the need for hostility? I am not here to debate you, only to seek for better clarity in your rather ambigious rants. I leave you to your delusions.
Cheers.
PS: a junior waiter in Spore earns $1000. ( do not forget the tips he would makes more) and would be promoted to senior waiter or annual increments if the establishment is small. A junior SIA Singapore pilot earns an average $10,000 a month and nowhere near the '$20,000 a month you speak of, unless he has years of experience. And don't forget, it is often market forces that determines salaries.
An error on your part or a deliberate misrepresentation to support your biased view?
-
Nope we r not comparing with most countries, we are comparing with likes of Sweden, Switzerland, Norway etc.
Tat is a good sign. U have already acknowledge tat the gov is performing better than other countries and r demanding more by comparing with the tip top countries tat even beat US and England. Well if u wanna compare with strictly on GINI, maybe singapore GINI is indeed worse than them. However take note tat singapore is still fundamentally different from these countries in terms of resources and economy and therefore its GINI loses out
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
PS: a junior waiter in Spore earns $1000. ( do not forget the tips he would makes more) and would be promoted to senior waiter or annual increments if the establishment is small.
That's a rather pathetic attempt to inflate a junior waiter's salary. Singapore is a non-tipping country and if you take into consideration, the UK junior waiter will be earning so much more.
Besides.. I think you're missing the point.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Tat is a good sign. U have already acknowledge tat the gov is performing better than other countries and r demanding more by comparing with the tip top countries tat even beat US and England. Well if u wanna compare with strictly on GINI, maybe singapore GINI is indeed worse than them. However take note tat singapore is still fundamentally different from these countries in terms of resources and economy and therefore its GINI loses out
hmm.. apples are definitely larger than grapes but not as sweet.. they are definitely sweeter than guava but may not be larger.. and I know that apple is definitely a different fruit (not a guava or grape).
the point is, apples will always be larger and sweeter when you change the item you are comparig them with to suit your arugment.
-
Originally posted by anonymous_dickhead:
Besides.. I think you're missing the point.
And what exactly is 'the point' am i missing? Or are you alluding that there is more to the disparity in income gaps between the wealthy and the poor?
This is not something that a statistical indicator can just be pulled out of the thin air and be claimed as an irrefutable fact, without looking deeper in the socia-economic strata of each nation which is vastly different for a homogenous apple to apple comparison.
You would only get entangled in the numerous pitfalls of never ending debates on each socia-economic issue.
Rather, if you want to compare our society's income gaps, i would suggest a reading up on our Dept of Statistics for relevant data, to support your thesis that there is indeed an income gap in Singapore.
But my view on this issue is that:-
a. ) To narrow the gap, Karl Marx vison is the best, with all drawing the same income with those in positions of responsibility drawing a slightly higher income, national wealth redistributed equally to all - leading to a stable society.
But we know how it ended up eventually.
b. ) USA from the 30s to the 60s experimented with high middle class. It suceeded, but after Vietnam war, it became everyman for himself/herself. The income gap grew wider each year till today, it is known as a winner society - winner takes all, the poor left to die on the wayside, to hell with social spending such as health care.
These are factual realities you have to acknowledge in place of 'statistical indexes'.
Singapore has chosen the USA of the 60s' path - high middle class. Till date, we had achieved an est.80% middle class drawing salaries between $3k to $5k /mth, with a wealthy class of only est 5% and a small poor group of below $3k a month(excluding commissions).
This is not an ideal society yet to the vision of Karl Marx, and can be improved further, but still, it is a remarkable achievement for a nation state with NO natural resources except its citizens.
-
Till date, we had achieved an est.80% middle class drawing salaries between $3k to $5k /mth, with a wealthy class of only est 5% and a small poor group of below $3k a month(excluding commissions).
xtreyier, can you provide a source for above data?
-
Originally posted by anonymous_dickhead:
likedatosocan... you need to learn to write.
http://www.idea.int/vt/country_view.cfm?CountryCode=SG
Singapore has a total population of 4 million of which 2.16 million are eligible to vote. Of these 2.16million, 1.14 million votes were collected in the last GE... because of electoral boundaries and walk overs.
The current ruling party won 66.6% (according to their statistics). This translate to less than 18% of votes (total population) and 35.1% of votes (eligible voters). That's hardly a representation of resounding support.
Of course, we will never know unless the government does away with electoral boundaries and walkovers; and everyone gets a chance to vote.
Again an assumption and wild allegation on your part using figures. Just because you or those in walkover constituencies did not get to vote, you blame the ruling party and claim 'no chance to vote'?
Are the opposition parties so unattractive that they fail to attract citizens to join their cause? Had you, complaining here, do something constructive instead and join them yourself? Opposition parties are supposed to form a new govt, to push their reforms. If they cannot even field candidates, are they then capable of forming govt or even fulfilling citizens' expectations?
I am only a citizen, not affliated with any political parties, writing this post.
Poh, search singstat. singapore's dept of statistics. All the data is there
-
I can't find it xtreyier.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
'hypocrisy' and 'thinly veiled attacks' are merely your perceptions and shows your ungraciousness. Why the need for hostility? I am not here to debate you, only to seek for better clarity in your rather ambigious rants. I leave you to your delusions.
Cheers.
PS: a junior waiter in Spore earns $1000. ( do not forget the tips he would makes more) and would be promoted to senior waiter or annual increments if the establishment is small. A junior SIA Singapore pilot earns an average $10,000 a month and nowhere near the '$20,000 a month you speak of, unless he has years of experience. And don't forget, it is often market forces that determines salaries.
An error on your part or a deliberate misrepresentation to support your biased view?
Did u not mentioned the word debate first? Lol
And the pay I speak of is Captain's pay. You don't know what's happening, do u.
No deliberate misrepresentation on my end...not too sure about yours.
I am still waiting to be enlightened what other forms of data we may use to determine income gap besides the Gini. Much appreciated.
-
Originally posted by xtreyier:
And what exactly is 'the point' am i missing? Or are you alluding that there is more to the disparity in income gaps between the wealthy and the poor?
This is not something that a statistical indicator can just be pulled out of the thin air and be claimed as an irrefutable fact, without looking deeper in the socia-economic strata of each nation which is vastly different for a homogenous apple to apple comparison.
You would only get entangled in the numerous pitfalls of never ending debates on each socia-economic issue.
Rather, if you want to compare our society's income gaps, i would suggest a reading up on our Dept of Statistics for relevant data, to support your thesis that there is indeed an income gap in Singapore.
But my view on this issue is that:-
a. ) To narrow the gap, Karl Marx vison is the best, with all drawing the same income with those in positions of responsibility drawing a slightly higher income, national wealth redistributed equally to all - leading to a stable society.
But we know how it ended up eventually.
b. ) USA from the 30s to the 60s experimented with high middle class. It suceeded, but after Vietnam war, it became everyman for himself/herself. The income gap grew wider each year till today, it is known as a winner society - winner takes all, the poor left to die on the wayside, to hell with social spending such as health care.
These are factual realities you have to acknowledge in place of 'statistical indexes'.
Singapore has chosen the USA of the 60s' path - high middle class. Till date, we had achieved an est.80% middle class drawing salaries between $3k to $5k /mth, with a wealthy class of only est 5% and a small poor group of below $3k a month(excluding commissions).
This is not an ideal society yet to the vision of Karl Marx, and can be improved further, but still, it is a remarkable achievement for a nation state with NO natural resources except its citizens.
Hail the Messiah....
Kindly enlighten why S'pore has chosen this path of the US and not those the likes of Switzerland, Norway or Denmark.
As this is not my forte, I sincerely would like to hear your views.