Guess I can save u a lot of trouble by answering for you.
IT IS BAD BECAUSE IT IS NOT GOOD!
IT IS BAD BECAUSE IT IS NOT GOOD!
WHY IS INCOME INEQUALITY BAD FOR SOCIETY!!!!!
WHY IS INCOME INEQUALITY BAD FOR SOCIETY!!!!!
ooo... someone did the maths, let's examine.
a grand a month, the disposable income is around 800, coupled with the workfare, the bloke would have some 950 to feed his family.
utilities: a hundred
transport: two hundred
food for family of two: five hundred
wow! he still has a hundred plus to spare!
30 years down the road, CPF minimum sum not met, savings minimal, can't afford to have kids.
OMG!!! this bloke can work till he dies!
what about comcare, wis (workfare), hope (subsidy for children education), medifund, u-rebates ?
That's because almost 99% of the population were poor then!BTW, gini got worse since we became independent under PAP
Looks like after one IB fail, another comes in. And another one who never studies or understands GINI. Gini is independent of the size of the economy. GINI is about pie sharing. If 99% of the people are poor, it is because the pie is almost eaten by 1%. In addition, Singapore had the 2nd highest GDP per capita after Japan (HK not country) in the 1960s. If PAP wants to send IB to engage the people, the better study and not come out with one liner feeling and acting superior when they look like blaadee fools to all educated intellects in the world. While subsidies are one way of addressing income disparity, higher real incomes is the way for an entire country to move forward together and not end up in civil strife. If you have a 50inch LCD tv in a kampung when everyone else does not even have a black and white TV, do not blame people coming to rob you. The art of ruling people is to make them feel they are getting a good deal when they are not.That's because almost 99% of the population were poor then!
And the gini measures the income disparity between the highest and lowest income earners without taking into consideration gahmen subsidies, grants and payouts.
Would really appreciate the anti-gahmen supporters to argue with at least some knowledge so as to give credibility to the alternative voice.
last noted, the top 10% earns about 9 times more than the bottom 10%...
I do not have figures but I doubt it is only 9 times.
bro,
you mean it's more?
Yes sir, I think it is much more than 9 times.
Looks like after one IB fail, another comes in. And another one who never studies or understands GINI. Gini is independent of the size of the economy. GINI is about pie sharing. If 99% of the people are poor, it is because the pie is almost eaten by 1%. In addition, Singapore had the 2nd highest GDP per capita after Japan (HK not country) in the 1960s. If PAP wants to send IB to engage the people, the better study and not come out with one liner feeling and acting superior when they look like blaadee fools to all educated intellects in the world. While subsidies are one way of addressing income disparity, higher real incomes is the way for an entire country to move forward together and not end up in civil strife. If you have a 50inch LCD tv in a kampung when everyone else does not even have a black and white TV, do not blame people coming to rob you. The art of ruling people is to make them feel they are getting a good deal when they are not.
PAP fails badly as the people can see they are being spat and kicked. Asking people to eat maggie mee to hit the daily calories to escaped absolute poverty defined as 2USD/day is called first world, when GDP per capita for Singapore is supposedly 63,000SGD due to the law of averaging but median is 28800 only after much massaging with some kind of money in kind in the form of subsidies ? Nobody is asking <.25 for GINI. When PAP field smart IB to engage the people cyberspace? No possible when you look at the quality in parliament and in the government. Not that Singapore lacks real local talent. They are considered threats. Go study, newbie IB.
Do you guys even read and analyze the stats you make or you just take one out and babble?
PAP IB trash talker as usual. Low on facts accuracy. For your easy reference refer to below by World Bank (IBRD) which was one of the main source of global data statistics collection and reporting. BTW, one respected ang moh did mention this fact as early as 10 years ago in an economics text that is also used as recommending readings in Singapore as well as many parts of the world on the GDP. How they send you PAP IB dogs for study is an insult to the world dog. Everything not relevant for PAP as long as it fits their alien argument in the world. What kind of shit world do you live in? The rest of the 7 billion people in this world have no fucking idea what you guess smoke. Is PAP worth only this kind of shit? We talk about Gini and income equality and you talk about absolute GDP size.Sigh, another oppo internet dog that insults more than rebut with facts. Whole day IB, IB.... that's the only way you guys know to avoid having to provide any substantive proof of what you say. Any how google some figure and throw, think damn clever liao. Works for the people who are too busy screwing other people's wives and saying no comments.
First, which part of my post says gini is dependent on size of economy?
Second, throughout the 60s, sinkie per capita gdp was not 2nd to japan in asia. We are behind Korea too. In any case, i don't even think the 60s is a relevant period as most asian countries were emerging from one conflict or another. Japan's GDP alone was more than 70% of total Asian GDP.
At the end of the day being able to own a flat in 30yrs still beats having to continue to pay rent after 30 yrs and his kids will rip the rewards of his hard work