How to turn your critics into your most ardent supporter

[scroobal]

The lead author Dr Tan Khee Giap of the comment below in 2003 said the opposite and got crucified by the Govt. His boss and old man man's brother-in-law ran for cover faster than a speeding bullet and hid under the desk. This despite he unveiling the findings of his staff personally.


Its 9 years later and he realised which side of his bread is buttered. Read carefully.


http://www.spp.nus.edu.sg/docs/growing-pains-in-growing.pdf
Even if this were true, it does not make
logical sense that when the external environment
is highly favourable, the Government
should curtail employment growth
by tightening the labour market, and
drive up business costs in a bid to slow
economic growth. Such a direct interventionist
approach would have serious repercussions
for businesses and potential investors.
If multinationals conclude such
government measures are the official
mode of economic management, they
may decide to shift their investment
plans elsewhere, and would be most
unlikely to relocate back to Singapore.

For context, read our fellow forummer's blog
http://singstatistician.blogspot.com/2011/06/mistake-in-pap-think-tank-critique-on.html

 

[captainxerox]

The lead author Dr Tan Khee Giap of the comment below in 2003 said the opposite and got crucified by the Govt. His boss and old man man's brother-in-law ran for cover faster than a speeding bullet and hid under the desk. This despite he unveiling the findings of his staff personally.


Its 9 years later and he realised which side of his bread is buttered. Read carefully.

the reverse is just as interesting esp when the pap loses its grip ie. ardent supporters turn into fence-sitters at least and critics even. former speaker of parliament watchman tan sk and even president wannabe tan cb, turned fence-sitters actually. that said, even if they turned so-called critics from being supporters, not sure if they are really critics or planted or truly motivated by vendetta for whatever selfish or selfless reason.

 

[erection2015]

i have interacted with Tan SK briefly before outside of the political sphere. He is down to earth and a people person with good EQ.

If he really does speak up for us , i am quite sure his motivation will be of the correct type.

the reverse is just as interesting esp when the pap loses its grip ie. ardent supporters turn into fence-sitters at least and critics even. former speaker of parliament watchman tan sk and even president wannabe tan cb, turned fence-sitters actually. that said, even if they turned so-called critics from being supporters, not sure if they are really critics or planted or truly motivated by vendetta for whatever selfish or selfless reason.

 

[captainxerox]

i have interacted with Tan SK briefly before outside of the political sphere. He is down to earth and a people person with good EQ.

If he really does speak up for us , i am quite sure his motivation will be of the correct type.

perhaps. being fence-sitter rather than critic, harder to depict them as one who bite the hands that feeds them, a label stuck on supporters turned critic. sometimes it is a fair statement, sometimes not.

 

[erection2015]

TJS famously said that gratitude is not servitude.

Extrapolating that a little .... being in the party before does not mean that he cannot speak up. As long as he makes sense, can defend his words and speaks from the heart then he would have scant worry that others view him as biting the hand that once fed him

perhaps. being fence-sitter rather than critic, harder to depict them as one who bite the hands that feeds them, a label stuck on supporters turned critic. sometimes it is a fair statement, sometimes not.

 

[captainxerox]

TJS famously said that gratitude is not servitude.

Extrapolating that a little .... being in the party before does not mean that he cannot speak up. As long as he makes sense, can defend his words and speaks from the heart then he would have scant worry that others view him as biting the hand that once fed him

very true. no dispute here and it all depends on the person, and how he sells himself and his ideas as a product.

 

[erection2015]

haha yes...marketing reigns supreme.

very true. no dispute here and it all depends on the person, and how he sells himself and his ideas as a product.

 

[aurvandil]

For context, read our fellow forummer's blog
http://singstatistician.blogspot.com/2011/06/mistake-in-pap-think-tank-critique-on.html

Wow...you found this.

Within the academic community, Tan Khee Giap is known for his sloppy empirical work. At the time when he produced that paper, he seriously thought that he had "made it". With LCY fronting the paper, his expecation was that he would be identified as a talent and be invited to tea.

LCY is a dinosaur from the era before computers. He knows next to nothing about empirical work but nevertheless wanted to continue to be respected as a "wise man". He therefore took in an apprentice who he thought was a number cruncher extraordinare. He never suspected that he had staked his reputation on a moron.

The true wizards of the story are the statisticians at MOM. For years they had engaged in a form of statistical strip tease. While appearing to be transparent, they had actually constructed the numbers in such a way that revealed nothing. Such people are still in the Singapore government and would easily squash self proclaimed statistical experts like Leong Tze Han.

 

[scroobal]

I remember this case distinctly because LCY made the annoucement on the findings of the study with press called in. It was a big affair. When Ng as Minister in MOM, took out his sword, LCY disappeared like lightening and his 2 men were crucified mercilessly.

That was the last we heard about Lim Chong Yah except for SGX disclosure where wife and daughter buying million dollar properties in GLC where is a director.

Wow...you found this.

Within the academic community, Tan Khee Giap is known for his sloppy empirical work. At the time when he produced that paper, he seriously thought that he had "made it". With LCY fronting the paper, his expecation was that he would be identified as a talent and be invited to tea.

LCY is a dinosaur from the era before computers. He knows next to nothing about empirical work but nevertheless wanted to continue to be respected as a "wise man". He therefore took in an apprentice who he thought was a number cruncher extraordinare. He never suspected that he had staked his reputation on a moron.

The true wizards of the story are the statisticians at MOM. For years they had engaged in a form of statistical strip tease. While appearing to be transparent, they had actually constructed the numbers in such a way that revealed nothing. Such people are still in the Singapore government and would easily squash self proclaimed statistical experts like Leong Tze Han.

 

[scroobal]

They all start on the right note. But once they step in a politically sensitive arena, they start to modify their behaviour and over time, they cross over completely. They themselves don't see the change.

Years down the road, Tan Ghee Kiap decided to bat for the PAP by criticising the UBS study and got shot to pieces by Lim Kok Lim and it became a running skimish.

i have interacted with Tan SK briefly before outside of the political sphere. He is down to earth and a people person with good EQ.

If he really does speak up for us , i am quite sure his motivation will be of the correct type.

 

[aurvandil]

That was the last we heard about Lim Chong Yah except for SGX disclosure where wife and daughter buying million dollar properties in GLC where is a director.

If you look at the timeline, this happened round about the time when LHY was becoming increasingly indiscreet. My understanding is that LCY took this quite badly as would any father who loves his daughter.

 

[kingrant]

I read the blog links and this is what I have to say.

For a "wise man" and "think tank", his grammar is horrendous. Even my young grandson can write better.

Liddat, how to deem him credible? This call Govt economist ah?

 

[Summerbee]

Not normally mentioned, Chen Kang had been a consultant to MOM for some high profile projects for a number of years before the publication. Although he was supposed to have work on dummy data, the setup of his model parameters and information he requested would gave him lots of points to connect. I am sure both professors were not too far away. The only issue was to reconcile their analysis with MOM official statistics.

They later replaced him with an overpaid nobel professor from Wharton with an absurd model we got in today. In my opinon, NEH who just took over had over-reacted and blew up the issue for PAP in what was an academic interest. His defence was the official stats, something the professors already knew would give them problem.

They had been quite active all those while, voicing out on various local business issues and stock markets and not just that particular report. I am sure they did not do the report to be invited to tea party as their professional social circle would already put them under PAP radar. Moreoever the report was not conducive for that purpose. I believed they did that because they were genuinely interested in research and academic applications. They knew enough to feel strongly they had something to offer on the manpower front.

Both of them were really nice and humble people. I also believed that they were politically neutral and more interested in academic intepretations. LCY I did not understand why he got involved. Shortly later, Hong Hai became their new dean.

Wow...you found this.

Within the academic community, Tan Khee Giap is known for his sloppy empirical work. At the time when he produced that paper, he seriously thought that he had "made it". With LCY fronting the paper, his expecation was that he would be identified as a talent and be invited to tea.

LCY is a dinosaur from the era before computers. He knows next to nothing about empirical work but nevertheless wanted to continue to be respected as a "wise man". He therefore took in an apprentice who he thought was a number cruncher extraordinare. He never suspected that he had staked his reputation on a moron.

The true wizards of the story are the statisticians at MOM. For years they had engaged in a form of statistical strip tease. While appearing to be transparent, they had actually constructed the numbers in such a way that revealed nothing. Such people are still in the Singapore government and would easily squash self proclaimed statistical experts like Leong Tze Han.

 

[scroobal]

Really interesting, yes on the timeline.

If you look at the timeline, this happened round about the time when LHY was becoming increasingly indiscreet. My understanding is that LCY took this quite badly as would any father who loves his daughter.

 

[scroobal]

Thanks for this. They usually are nice guys and in this environment, it had to be an academic and publish your views. After for a while, you end up joining the crowd just to keep up. I thought it was poor form for LCY not to defend his own people. He left them high and dry. Despite all the investment in NS and SAF, I suspect when they it comes to war, you will see the same reaction.

Not normally mentioned, Chen Kang had been a consultant to MOM for some high profile projects for a number of years before the publication. Although he was supposed to have work on dummy data, the setup of his model parameters and information he requested would gave him lots of points to connect. I am sure both professors were not too far away. The only issue was to reconcile their analysis with MOM official statistics.Both of them were really nice and humble people. I also believed that they were politically neutral and more interested in academic intepretations. LCY I did not understand why he got involved. Shortly later, Hong Hai became their new dean.

 

[scroobal]

I once met an NUS academic who is fluent in 6 languages but not in English. He literally murdered the language. No, he was not expat. He is a Singaporean who studied in Nantah and then went to a number of non-english speaking countries for his post grad and doctorate. Wrote papers in German but none in English.

I read the blog links and this is what I have to say.For a "wise man" and "think tank", his grammar is horrendous. Even my young grandson can write better.Liddat, how to deem him credible? This call Govt economist ah?

 

[aurvandil]

Both of them were really nice and humble people. I also believed that they were politically neutral and more interested in academic intepretations. LCY I did not understand why he got involved. Shortly later, Hong Hai became their new dean.

I have a somewhat different memory of what happened but perhaps that is just me. There are a lot of adjectives which can be used. "Humble" and "politically neutral" are not what I would use.

On the quality of his empirical work, I have a vague memory of what was done that earned the stern rebuke from NEH. As I remember it, there was no complicated model. There were a series of extrapolations. The basis of these extrapolations was from data published by MOM. Before publishing the numbers, MOM had carefully considered that someone might do what Tan Khee Giap was going to do. They therefore published the numbers in such a way so that the rounding and measurement error was so large that it rendered extrapolation techniques unreliable. I remember NEH was extremely impressed by the innovativeness of the MOM statisticians and praised them extensively.

To prove the point, MOM subsequently published the actual numbers using raw unit record data which showed just wrong Tan Khee Giap was. Tan Khee Giap made that embarassing apology not because of political reasons. He did so because MOM had conclusively proved that he was saying 1+1 =3. I believe that this sloppy empirical work was a huge shock to LCY when he found out about it.

More evidence of the poor quality of Tan Khee Giap's work can be seen in his later critique of the UBS study. As it is an area of interest for me, I documented it extensively in my blog. It should be noted that the UBS study continues to stand the test of time and is still being used by many HR companies/MNCs to adjust their expat packages. For Tan Kee Giap's fumbling critique, no one ever quotes from it.