Singapore has High Human Development (Rank 25) Index
-
Singapore, with no natural resources, small 'red dot', with only a population of est 3.5million,and only 43 years old, has rank 25th place, ahead of 152 other some bigger and older, resource rich countries in the world, in a UN 2007/2008 survey.
Citizens, you can pop the champagne. Your hard work and tax contributions had made a difference, and while we may not be satisfied with our own lives for we are a go getter nation ever seeking to be better than we can ever be, we can take comfort that we had done well, as viewed and observed by others impartially around the world, no less than UN.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
This post was posted in response to other threads that sought to downplay and downcast with gloom and doom on our citizens' and previous generations' efforts
-
The HDI – human development index – is a summary composite index that measures a country's average achievements in three basic aspects of human development: health, knowledge, and a decent standard of living.
Health is measured by life expectancy at birth; knowledge is measured by a combination of the adult literacy rate and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrolment ratio; and standard of living by GDP per capita (PPP)
-
Why on earth are we behind Hong Kong and Australia?!
-
Human Development Index is NOT Quality of Life.
You can develop so much, yet the Quality of Life is Poor.
-
Well you know DeerHunter needs to hunt for some good news, and prey in that area has been scarce recently...
-
... High Human Development..?? What does this mean? Is it Education? Is it Affluence? Is it Lifestyle? Is it Quality of Living/Life?
... I wonder, if we do posses and are loftily ranked in Human Development, why can't we do away with Courtesy Campagn, Gracious Campagn, Kindness Movement and such that is basically indicative that something is wrong, or not quite World Class yet, with society in Singapore & the Singapore's matrix itself...?
... WHAT, actually is being 'developed' that is human here in Singapore?
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Human Development Index is NOT Quality of Life.
You can develop so much, yet the Quality of Life is Poor.
Quality of life is subjective life satisfaction surveys, and at most use objective determinants in attempts to quantify the results.
You can practically ask even the richest man on earth and he will tell you he is not satisfied. Who is, more so we chinese dominant society here? Can subjective opinions be used as facts? Doubt so.
Thus, for peer reviewed and more proffesional determinants, it would be better to seek results and real data to determine the actual quality of life, based on Human Development Index, conducted by qualified and experienced academicians within the highest body of our world - the UN.
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Well you know DeerHunter needs to hunt for some good news, and prey in that area has been scarce recently...
Well you know DeerHunter needs to hunt for some good news, and prey in that area has been scarce recently...
If you have nothing better to contribute, your analysis on the subject matter, do go elsewhere and propound your beliefs. I won't say you have nothing in your brains here. -
In the Singapore's context, it means developing Singaporeans so that they can contribute CPF to the CPF Board.
Once you cannot be "developed" anymore, they will tell you "No Free Lunch".
-
Originally posted by DeerHunter:
Citizens, you can pop the champagne.
this sentence sounds so fake..
who in the entire singapore is actually feeling happy or even consoled by this ranking? you deerhunter?
-
Originally posted by purpledragon84:
this sentence sounds so fake..
who in the entire singapore is actually feeling happy or even consoled by this ranking? you deerhunter?
There is a survey done two years back, Sporean is ranked the least happiest. Another survey also show many youngster want to work in other countries. -
Originally posted by will4:
There is a survey done two years back, Sporean is ranked the least happiest. Another survey also show many youngster want to work in other countries.actually.. i'll pop the champagne.. use it as fuel for my car.. it's getting cheaper to use champagne by the litre..
-
The journalists at one time called this sort of propaganda selective comparisons or justification syndrome choosing statistics to glorify certain presumptuous feats while hiding the real problems unsolved.
Through this sort of culled statistics all the problems will be explained away or denied as if by professonal information when on closer analysis the problems remain unsolved.
For example, MOM has conveniently concealed the extent of true unemployment problems counting the employments of Permanent Residents as employments of residents to dilute the original unemployment figure for citizens.
Furthermore how does the MOM define unemployment. If a person is unemployed for some time say more than 20 months due to recessions and could not get any jobs and become permanently jobless is he included as unemployed.
If these long-term unemployed are excluded of course again the actual number of unemployed will also be diluted or lowered.
In the same manner, statistics on skill or educational development are lumped up government can easily look more generous when actually the government has levied a separate SDF tax for certain purpose where millions were collected from companies but the spending to promote skills were quite doubtful in nature.
If these millions spent were to be analysed it will be found they were not spent to help developing skills needed in new start-up technologies but on mundane for the bigger companies which had to be withdrawn in many cases because of certain abuses in the past by companies.
Education fees paid are shooting up because of incorrect policies aimed at paying up for the infrastructures which should have been financed out of taxes like COEs, ERPs, Housing Tax, Land sale profits, stamp duties etc.
So through taxing and hoarding of taxes paid as mentioned education fees will have to be charged on par with other countries to pay for costs of infrastructures all over.
-
Singapore has High Human Development (Rank 25) Index
State controlled propaganda media, brainwash people, how to have high development?
Total bullshit.
Pui.
Fuck off stupid propaganda.
Go and die lah fucking Lee Kuan Yew.
-
You don't come and fuck with me you understand or not Lee Kuan Yew.
Spread a bit of bullshit propaganda, human fucking development index rank 25, expect me to kowtow to you?
You can fucking dream on.
Fucking Bastard you.
No propaganda on earth can change my desire of wanting you to die.
I hope you can understand that Lee Kuan Yew.
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Why on earth are we behind Hong Kong and Australia?!
Could it be due to Singapor shorter history and they have more resources and the support from the British? -
Originally posted by will4:
There is a survey done two years back, Sporean is ranked the least happiest. Another survey also show many youngster want to work in other countries.
How many Singaporean were leaving Singapore everyday? -
Originally posted by £ Ĭ €Ú°:
Could it be due to Singapor shorter history and they have more resources and the support from the British?Could it be due to the fact there is a disparity between what we are told in the mainstream media and what they want us to believe and the actual state of affairs.
No matter how you cut it, you can't say much about being 25...
-
If you have nothing better to contribute, your analysis on the subject matter, do go elsewhere and propound your beliefs. I won't say you have nothing in your brains here.
Awww... we hit a raw nerve there.
-
Originally posted by robertteh:
The journalists at one time called this sort of propaganda selective comparisons or justification syndrome choosing statistics to glorify certain presumptuous feats while hiding the real problems unsolved.
Through this sort of culled statistics all the problems will be explained away or denied as if by professonal information when on closer analysis the problems remain unsolved.
For example, MOM has conveniently concealed the extent of true unemployment problems counting the employments of Permanent Residents as employments of residents to dilute the original unemployment figure for citizens.
Furthermore how does the MOM define unemployment. If a person is unemployed for some time say more than 20 months due to recessions and could not get any jobs and become permanently jobless is he included as unemployed.
If these long-term unemployed are excluded of course again the actual number of unemployed will also be diluted or lowered.
In the same manner, statistics on skill or educational development are lumped up government can easily look more generous when actually the government has levied a separate SDF tax for certain purpose where millions were collected from companies but the spending to promote skills were quite doubtful in nature.
If these millions spent were to be analysed it will be found they were not spent to help developing skills needed in new start-up technologies but on mundane for the bigger companies which had to be withdrawn in many cases because of certain abuses in the past by companies.
Education fees paid are shooting up because of incorrect policies aimed at paying up for the infrastructures which should have been financed out of taxes like COEs, ERPs, Housing Tax, Land sale profits, stamp duties etc.
So through taxing and hoarding of taxes paid as mentioned education fees will have to be charged on par with other countries to pay for costs of infrastructures all over.
True, but then again, a ranking of 25 for a government that claims so many "world's no. 1" is hardly anything to cheer about.It's kinda amazing how DeerHunter is trying to say this is good news, if he had some common sense as to what was good for his agenda in here, he's better off not starting this thread at all.
What can we say?
Apparently our SAF is buying more ROFLCOPTERs in light of his latest great mishap of judgement.
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Why on earth are we behind Hong Kong and Australia?!
And behind Germany as well
-
We x2 also win malaysia .
Even though they are our neighbours .
really cannot make it lol
-
Originally posted by SingaporeTyrannosaur:
Awww... we hit a raw nerve there.
Well, what can you expect from someone who seems happy and satisfied about being 25th instead of the 1st few?
Reminds me of the student who was happy with his 66.6% grade in his exams
-
Originally posted by DeerHunter:
Singapore, with no natural resources, small 'red dot', with only a population of est 3.5million,and only 43 years old, has rank 25th place, ahead of 152 other some bigger and older, resource rich countries in the world, in a UN 2007/2008 survey.
Citizens, you can pop the champagne. Your hard work and tax contributions had made a difference, and while we may not be satisfied with our own lives for we are a go getter nation ever seeking to be better than we can ever be, we can take comfort that we had done well, as viewed and observed by others impartially around the world, no less than UN.
http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
This post was posted in response to other threads that sought to downplay and downcast with gloom and doom on our citizens' and previous generations' efforts
Is this the best production from a dearHunter's 1% inspiration - with 99% perspiration in plagiarising and bastardising the well arranged propaganda from some surveys ?
Singapore has been around since 1819, had limited self-rule since 1953, full self-rule by 1959 and independence since 1965 - why should you start your historical count on an ignominous date when Singapore was kicked out of a wilfull merger with Malaysia through a sham Referendum that was shamelessly conducted ?
Has Singapore performed in such sterling manner compared to those countries behind its ranking at 25 ?
Why did you not compare Singapore with similar size countries - in usuable land area even with larger population size - such as Hong Kong which also has no natural resources and dependent on the industry of its people ?
Hong Kong was colonised by Britain in 1842, and given self-rule only in 1971 - yet according to your UNDP score, Hong Kong had achieved a ranking of 21 despite the shorter history compared to Singapore.
Incidentally, Singapore's population is 4.5 million - {unless you clearly state that the 3.5 million are citizens only}; compared to Hong Kong's larger population of 6.98 million {July 2007 est}.
Considering the quality of environment influenced by human ingenuity to control the carbon dioxide emission {CO2} - the index for Hong Kong in 2004 was 37.4; and the index for Singapore in 2004 was 52.2. {according to your UNDP reference}
How could this have happened considering the long history in Singapore Garden City campaign, and the tight regulation in vehicle and industrial emission ?
Both Hong Kong and Singapore have a majority of the population being ethnic Chinese - how could the score be so different given Singapore's longer political history in self-governance ?
Have lies been told here, or facts been twisted, or has the 99% perspiration by the 'dearHunter' achieved nothing from his characteristic low inspiration score of 1% ?
-
double post