Duke Teo explaining why the regime loves to maintain information asymmetries

[mscitw]

Transmodified from hxxp://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1258545/1/.html

PEASANTPORE: Peasant Representative for Unrepentant Aljunied GRC Sylvia Lim is trying very to be funny and has asked if Peasantpore's population data could be made public.

In reply, Deputy Prime Minion and Gestapo Affairs Minion, Duke of Punggol, Teo CH said most of the useless information is already available in the public domain.

Duke Teo said: "This Sylvia Lim, not married, perhaps a virgin huh...but in asking this question, confirmed fucking malicious. Everyone knows autocratic regimes hoard information to retain its political edge.

"You think Ruler Loong so stupid to give up his information asymmetry advantage? Otherwise how cum you are only a political pariah but he is a Ruler? Never use your cunt is it?"

"No despot will willingly give up his information asymmetry edge. Just like a used car merchant, he knows the lemon cars in his shop but he will never inform the customer? Which used car merchant is so honest and tell his customer that so and such a car is a lemon? They are ex-loan sharks turned used car merchants! Get it?!

Same case for OKTs. They will tell you all their whores are super, even the not so good looking ones got service. Which idiot OKT will point out the dead fishes to his horny bastard customers?

Bargain Hen once claimed 7 in 10 jobs goes to 'locals' but he fucking refused to reveal he treat PRs as locals too. This is another notorious example of information asymmetry.

For similar reasons, Ruler Loong directed his minions and lackey to provide scant data on the number of immigrants but we will never divulge information for pariahs to use against us. Lumpar we may import more Commies PRCs to maintain the 7-2-1 ethnic ratio but which goondu will give you the numbers so that you will use it to gang bang us during debates? In your wet dreams perhaps!"

 

[Confuseous]

Population data cannot breakdown because not in our interests?

By Leong Sze Hian

I refer to the article “Most of Singapore population info available in public domain: DPM Teo” (Channel NewsAsia, Mar 8).

Please breakdown population data?

It states that “MP for Aljunied GRC Sylvia Lim has asked if Singapore’s population data could be made public.

Most data already in public domain?

In reply, Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Teo Chee Hean said most of the information is already available in the public domain.

Not in our interests to disclose?

Mr Teo said: “In some cases, we provide aggregated information or data instead of a more detailed breakdown because it may not be in our interests to do so.”

We need transparency?

I find it somewhat incredulous that the subject reply in Parliament seems to have evaded the crux of the issue on the transparency of the population statistics.

Breakdown into Singaporeans and PRs?

For example, what is the breakdown for employment growth every year for locals into Singaporeans and permanent residents (PRs)?

If we can breakdown the unemployment statistics into Singaporeans and PRs, why can’t we do the same for everything else, like employment growth?

Sometimes, we get the median and 20th percentile wage data for residents, and rarely for Singaporeans. So, why can’t we be consistent and breakdown these statistics into Singaporeans, PRs and locals?

The same issue above may apply to the household data as well – income, citizen, PR and foreigner households, etc.

Regular consistency in statistics?

Also, why can’t we have regular annual breakdown of the population statistics into how many new citizens, PRs, LTVPs, employment passes, S-passes, work permits, etc, were granted?

How many gave up their citizenships, PRs, employment passes, etc, instead of inconsistent release of the absolute change in the various categories in a year.

To illustrate this issue, if the number of say PRs increased in a year by 30,000, but in fact 40,000 new PRs were granted, and 10,000 have left Singapore either temporarily or permanently – just telling us that the nunber of PRs increased by 30,000 is insufficient.

Not counted in foreign worker quota?

We should also be given the statistics on those who are not counted in the foreign worker quota, like foreign university interns and foreign spouses on LTVP-Plus.
Without this data, how do we know how many of the local jobs created went to Singaporeans?

What about foreign workers on short term projects of less than a year, which may not show up in the annual increase statistics?

In whose interests not to disclose?

I think most Singaporeans may be more interested or concerned about some of the above statistics, instead of the countries where foreigners are from, which was the reason cited for not giving more detailed population statistics because these are sensitive information which may not be in our interests to disclose.

- http://leongszehian.com/?p=3307

 

[soIsee]

If they can disclose..

EVERYTHING.

The Sinkie will be shocked to learn why they are NOT getting back their CPF at 55 where it was so long long time ago.