Are you able to tell me who took up the 172,400 jobs created

FBI SG

my kind of place is slowly turninig into chinatown and soon it will b international.

seotiblizzard SG

bam bam bam.

Phew phew phew.

Cool

reddressman SG

eagle,

why are you so eager to say that
our friend there is giving wrong estimation?

I also , based on my past and current experience, witness majority FT and PR syndrome in the many many companies I have been to.

I am so confident of saying this, I challenge you to proof me wrong.

Why are you so anxious to make people think that our friend's estimation is a big wrong?

Someone can also say you are wrong.

I give you some benefit of doubt for 1.16 PR : 1 sgrean ratio.

Then you are indirectly saying:

1. there are 46% (i.e 1 div 2.16 multiply by 100%) of jobs occupied by sg'reans only. Also , you are giving an estimate of 46% of 172,400 jobs are occupied by sg'reans only. The rest PRs. This means 79304 jobs only went to sg'reans ????

2. Even using this guide to estimate, you forgot to include jobs created and occupied by FT non-PRs and non FTs non-PRs where non-FT is WP and laborers, toilet cleaners and road sweepers plus maids. Maids! You should admit there are many of them. Why ? You neigbors and colleagues and friends and relatives are all using them.

Assuming its true that 46% jobs went to sg'reans means :

1. 64 % of all jobs created in sg went to non-sgreans?

Eagle, are you saying all the above?

2. What is the basis of your ratio? Why you can convince me that you have the truth? Are you suffering from Clonism?

3. You sound like you come from the sources but using eagle as your net identity to spread your wisdom to convince people ?

4. Proof what you said. Else, I also can say.

Up to now, no one in sg can provide the needful figure. Absolutely no one. Eagle needs to prove his words. I challenge anyone of you out there to come up the answer. Else, you would have admitted to your subconscious that you are no better, that you know nothing about the truth. how 1st world leh.

now, I sing to you a song:

HK liao ! HK liao !! HK ALL THE WAY !!!!!!

reddressman SG

Cool message must be at least 8 characters long. Cool

reddressman SG

To answer you,

maybe you can consider the fact that someone is tasked, paid and compensated to do a certain job.

I am not paid to do that. I am just doing the PEOPLE a free service.

Money does not drop from the sky.
No one owes anyone a living.
Perform or next better player please.
I propose a appraisal by the PEOPLE system to mark the performance of opposition and petition to ask them to elect a better candidate IF the PEOPLE does not think they are getting value for the PEOPLE's hard earned money.

what say you ?

reddressman SG

you are not qualified to talk about the TRUTH to me.

eagle SG

Bear in mind... Let's give him that he has seen a total of 2000 employees. That is less than 0.1% of the labour force in Singapore. Do you think that can be an accurate estimate?

1) Doesn't this confirm my initial estimation of 80k? Rolling Eyes

2) Well, if you are not convinced of the truth of the statistics Singapore website, there's nothing I can do right? I have merely calculated according to the figures there. And so has the reports from online citizens... Which in case you are doubtful, you can confirm them from the singstats website

3) So you are to say this when I have raised figures and statistics to show you 96% employment of Singaporeans? I'm disappointed with you... You would be better off saying that the Sg government should further reduce this 46k estimate, which they should anyway.

4) If you want the proof, you could always go to statistics Singapore to get the values for your own calculations, and prove my estimations wrong.

All available information are out there on the net for you to analyse and think through. Just whether you want to look and analyse deeper into the information, or skim on the surface of the information like Gazelle. If the news is pro-PAP, why do you think they should spoonfeed you information and analysis that casts bad light on the PAP, or perhaps subject themselves to possible court cases?

In addition, if you have analyse my calculations, I have already calculated the worst case scenario for Singaporeans. Do you seriously think there is 100% employment of foreigners and PRs? This 100% is my assumption, thus if less than 100% are employed, then the number of Singaporeans employed should be even higher than calculated.

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?

eagle SG

I just realised I didn't address this statement in my previous post. Look at the post of mine that you have quoted for my analysis of yours and ql99's experience.

qlqq9 SG

He is not happy because I don't buy what he said. I prefer to talk to people who have sufficient job experience be it they are from the top management or rank and file who have been through in working life to know the employment status in Singapore. Now he is throwing tantrum and making it sound that I am Gazelle. It is so vicious of him to do that. Childish! Talking to him is like zhi shang dan bing. Well, so could this be a growing up stage for him that is why he behaves such.

EAgles, please if you think so badly of me, stop communicating with me and I definitely don't like to communicate with you for communicating with you is a pain for you just can see what others see. When I don't agree with you you are so damn angry. Stop communicating to me on this topic. I give up on you where this topic is concerned.

qlqq9 SG

YOu are suggesting appraisal system to mark performance of opposition. Think it is not appropriate, it is appropriate for us to come out with appraisal system to assess the performance of the PAP rather than opposition. Other than the few oppositions are paid for they are members of the parliament, the rest of the oppositions are not paid. WE should instead concentrate on assessing the performance of PAP for they are all paid by the taxpayers. It is only right and necessary to assess the greedy PAP.

qlqq9 SG

If everything can be calculated by figures then many problems will be solved. Go talk to a man who is out of job who is highly educated and was holding high positions about figures, see what reaction this man will have.

eagle SG

suits you. It is obvious that in the face of hard facts and figures, you prefer to continue in your own delusions. Either that, you have not read through the whole analysis and argument before making a sensible post. However, it seems that you do not understand the reason behind your observations, as I have explained. Hint: Most Singaporeans are in govt jobs. Why? Cannot accept facts and figures that a student compiled from singstats website? If you are really that experienced, show me your facts and figures to prove me wrong, not draw a conclusion from the

Think badly of you? Nah, you haven't reached that stage yet. I'm trying to put hard facts and figures in front of you so that you won't make wrong and uninformed conclusions. Again, I'm answering with respect to your first post, whether we are able to interpret the news. I have shown you my analysis. To prove your point, you should give further analysis.

Of course, all of us agree that the news did not give a breakdown. Again, my point is that such figures can be calculated from available sources of information in the singstats website. My earlier estimation of 80k has been proven correct by reddressman, when he took my calculations and came out with a value of 79k. Is that a coincidence?

Anyway, I wouldn't see how your first post stands if we are talking about the Singapore news. Why would a Singapore news reporter bother to
1) really calculate and analyse statistics
2) publish information that might cast bad light on the PAP
3) publish information that might land him in court?

In addition, why don't you just claim that the news did not publish HOW MANY of these 172,400 jobs come from the private sector in addition to the number of Singaporeans employed. Now, that is a more important factor, and a more valid point of argument.

P.S. I like the way you describe me being vicious when I compared you with Gazelle Laughing Shows what you think about Gazelle.

eagle SG

What you have suggested in your very first post is, how many

Also,
I realised I am reading at a figure that does not tell me the details. Not even a simple percentage breakdown of x% of jobs were taken up by PRs, FTs and Foreign Laborers and Y% taken up by singaporeans.

You had wanted to start talking about figures. Now that figures are in front of you, you want to say problems cannot be solved by figures? Which is also true. Figures are there to give you an estimation/feel of the general situation at hand, not the solution to the problem.

qlqq9 SG

yOU ARE BEING VERY UNREASONABLE, YOU ASK ME ABOUT IT FOR I HAVE BEEN WORKING WHEN i TOLD YOU ABOUT IT YOU GO ALL THE WAY TO ATTACK ME. SO EITHER WAY, WHETHER I ANSWER YOU OR NOT YOU STILL GO ALL THE WAY TO ATTACK ME. IF YOU ARE IN SOME KIND OF PROBLEM AND FIND ME A VICTIM TO JUST VENT YOUR FRUSTRATION , THEN I WILL SAY TO YOU STOP YOUR NUISANCE, BE MORE OBJECTIVE AS A MALE.

ENOUGH, I HAVE ENOUGH OF YOU. iF CAN'T BE SOLVED BY FIGURES WHY CONCENTRATE SO MUCH ABOUT IT. ENOUGH, HOW LONG MORE DO YOU WANT TO ATTACK ME LET ME KNOW?

eagle SG

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?

qlqq9 SG

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.

eagle SG

now now now, who is the one who got furious and use Caps for the whole post? Laughing 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 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?

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.

qlqq9 SG

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.

qlqq9 SG

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".

eagle SG

facts? Laughing 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 Laughing 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 Laughing 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)
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.

« Previous Page Next Page »