FT stats - How to fog an answer - PAP style

[scroobal]

Note how the Minister answered the question. This has been typical style where nothing is given away.

Singaporeans are keen to find out how many PR who are supposed to do NS actually do NS. It is a simple question and requires a simple answer such as 50% and the actual numbers.

All this states are that

1) 8,800 PR males served NS over the last 5 years. They could have gained PR status 15 years ago, 10 years or 4 years ago.

2) 4,200 renounced over the last years 5 years. They too could have obtained their PR status ages ago or recently as 6 mths ago.





SINGAPORE: Over the last five years, about 8,800 males who had become permanent residents under the sponsorship of their parents were enlisted for and served National Service (NS).

About 6,100 of them have taken up citizenship.

Defence Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen gave the figures in a written reply to a parliamentary question from Nee Soon GRC MP, Dr Lim Wee Kiak.

In that same period, about 4,200 males who had become permanent residents under the sponsorship of their parents renounced their PR status prior to serving National Service.

Dr Ng said the failure of these permanent residents to serve NS will be taken into account when they subsequently apply to study or work in Singapore.

These PRs were warned about the consequences of their action at the point of renunciation.

 

[neddy]

You are as sharp as ever.
With PAP, it is what they did not say that is significant!

 

[Unrepented]

So........ how many PR who are supposed to do NS actually do NS, by age of PR status:*:

Note how the Minister answered the question. This has been typical style where nothing is given away.

Singaporeans are keen to find out how many PR who are supposed to do NS actually do NS. It is a simple question and requires a simple answer such as 50% and the actual numbers.

All this states are that

1) 8,800 PR males served NS over the last 5 years. They could have gained PR status 15 years ago, 10 years or 4 years ago.

2) 4,200 renounced over the last years 5 years. They too could have obtained their PR status ages ago or recently as 6 mths ago.

 

[Windsor]

So........ how many PR who are supposed to do NS actually do NS

Good question which the opposition fails to capitalised or was it because they are formulating their next question. Will this be the final answer?

 

[scroobal]

Mindef does projection based on PRs in the pipeline. So the way they do this the moment an FT become a PR, the NS eligibility status is updated. It does not matter at what age he became an PR or what year he did this. All that matters is on Jan 2015 for example, how many will be eligible for PR and how many will drop off.

So what we are looking for is the drop-out rate for PR liable for NS.

Its no point telling me that Ho Ching is ugly. I want to know her ranking in ugliness amongst all Singaporeans so that I know how bad her situation is.

 

[Ramseth]

Notice the low levels of the statistics. PRs over five years just in mid thousands? Use your brains and use your eyes as I've always said. So few PRs in Singapore? Those PRs who have to choose between renunciation and serving are males who had been PRs before age 26. Add on females, add on those medically exempted males, add on males above 26, that's the true figure and the true problem. The ratio of PR to citizen is the true problem, not NS.

I have no problem with PRs not serving NS. In fact, I'm not in favor of giving arms and to training to PRs in that respect. Do you trust them to defend you and your country? I can't honestly say I do. This PR-NS question is coming from a point of fustration of burden and being disadvantaged. NS is for national defence. PR problem should be addressed separately from national defence. The problem to address is the equitable restoring advantage of NS serving citizens.

 

[zhihau]

Singaporeans are keen to find out how many PR who are supposed to do NS actually do NS.

looks like bro madmansg's mantra must be proclaimed once again: NS IS KILLING SG!

and the PRs are fast to learn that :p:p:p

 

[neddy]

Mindef does projection based on PRs in the pipeline. So the way they do this the moment an FT become a PR, the NS eligibility status is updated. It does not matter at what age he became an PR or what year he did this. All that matters is on Jan 2015 for example, how many will be eligible for PR and how many will drop off.

So what we are looking for is the drop-out rate for PR liable for NS.

Its no point telling me that Ho Ching is ugly. I want to know her ranking in ugliness amongst all Singaporeans so that I know how bad her situation is.

Arrrgh! The difference between what technocrats want to know, and what real politicians want to find out.

 

[sleaguepunter]

I have no problem with PRs not serving NS. In fact, I'm not in favor of giving arms and to training to PRs in that respect. Do you trust them to defend you and your country? I can't honestly say I do. This PR-NS question is coming from a point of fustration of burden and being disadvantaged. NS is for national defence. PR problem should be addressed separately from national defence. The problem to address is the equitable restoring advantage of NS serving citizens.

NS do not equal SAF hor. many "unclean" background are posted to Home Team, mostly SCDF.

My last few ICTs, i noticed many service vocation troops are either new citizens and PRs. Most blur like sotong, many pinoys and ah tiongs serve as personal drivers to the trainers, officers/enciks. Spoken to a couple, told me with a straight face NS is the best chance they have to remain in spore. during nsf, i served together with an ah tiong who wanted a pink I/C so that his whole family can come to singapore. he cannot understand english and the csm an indian. i had many laughs seeing them trying to communicate. he served as a storeman in tekong camp III and i doubt he served even one ICT after he ORD. He now a hawker at alexandria hawker centre with his china wife. The chance of them holding a rifle is very low.

 

[tanwahtiu]

Notice the low levels of the statistics. PRs over five years just in mid thousands? Use your brains and use your eyes as I've always said. So few PRs in Singapore? Those PRs who have to choose between renunciation and serving are males who had been PRs before age 26. Add on females, add on those medically exempted males, add on males above 26, that's the true figure and the true problem. The ratio of PR to citizen is the true problem, not NS.

I have no problem with PRs not serving NS. In fact, I'm not in favor of giving arms and to training to PRs in that respect. Do you trust them to defend you and your country? I can't honestly say I do.

Dickhead! you think can trust Sinkies to defend own cuntry? Give these PRs same shit NS treatments, suffer for 2 years NS stink and then 13 years of reservists to face the same shit disruptions of works and life as we have. Who care if they will defend the cuntry? We want them to get the same shits from PAP if they want to live in Singapore.

This PR-NS question is coming from a point of fustration of burden and being disadvantaged. NS is for national defence. PR problem should be addressed separately from national defence. The problem to address is the equitable restoring advantage of NS serving citizens.

National defence my foot! when jobs are threaten and taking over FTs and that is defenceless and Sinkies cannot do anything about it, fuck you dickhead!

 

[myfoot123]

N

These PRs were warned about the consequences of their action at the point of renunciation.[/COLOR]

No need to warn lah. When they returned and bowed to PAP, they ended up being a minister to screw us further. Did I just said a couple of his colleagues didn't serve National Service too?:oIo:

 

[Unrepented]

You missed another perspective.:(

Was the question before the answer, or was the answer before the question.

Note how the Minister answered the question. This has been typical style where nothing is given away.