Opinions on New TAFEP Guidelines

[Guest jobs]

Your last response doesn't contain any substance just insults. 

Simply copying my previous statements without any new supportive arguments. 

 

I never said anything about the gini coefficient, but this point has no relevance to the topic of foreigners and locals in the workforce. Why should I ponder on side tracks if they are not relevant to the issue? 

You are making yourself to the laughing stock of the day only. 

 

As you simply resort to insults, shall we conclude , you're intellectually not fit or in a position to respond adequately or to reasonably discuss this issue ?

[Guest Guest]

 

The points are there for you to read. When you run out of arguments, or have been successfully rebutted, have no further substance to add or anything to support your points, then you simply just resort to

 

(1) repeating old debated and rebutted points over and over again (which I bet you are going to do again), even though this could be due to your lack of intellectual abilities,

(2) and/or throwing out more misleading figures such as low unemployment and incoming FDI numbers, But this could be just some statistics to justify your own presence here in Singapore,

(3) and/or ignore real statistics showing that the supposed 60,000 new jobs created was not even enough to cover for the number of fresh graduates in the workforce, much less those who has been retrenched and other job seekers. But again,  your ignoring of these figures can be used to help you sleep better at night in Singapore, knowing full well that you are no foreign TALENT, and another freshly graduated or retrenched Singaporean can easily replace you,

 

(4) and/or pretend that the presence of 30% (THIRTY PERCENT!!) foreigners in our local workforce has no relevance to the fact that locals are being replaced in Singapore. But this could be due to your preconceived mindset that everything is fine in Singapore,

 

(5) and/or pretend that the global statistics for UAE and Germany did not support my line of argument, even though Germany had voiced their displeasure in a huge way during the 2017 elections, and that's even when their foreigner loading numbers were even much lower than what we have here in Singapore. But your deliberate attempt at sweeping this fact under the carpet simply be because you are not global-minded at all, which further allude to the fact that not all foreigners in this country are foreign TALENTS. 

 

(6) and trying to dumb down the entire nations by making STUPID suggestions such as "more students should be rejected or selected out for taking the A-levels, as they are not really qualified for a university degree", which is definitely not a type of suggestion made by any foreign TALENTS. This simply confirms that you are not a foreign talent, but that of a foreign TRASH! 

 

There are Singaporeans here, who are intelligent enough to call out fraudulent foreigners like you who trying to masquerade as "talents" here in Singapore. Even though some Singaporeans may fall for your misleading statistics at the beginning, but I think they are now ready to open their eyes to the real type of foreign trash around here lurking in this forum.

[Guest jobs]

Employment rate of Singapore citizens up

Share of PMETs among working S'poreans also went up in last 10 years: Report

Joanna Seow, Manpower Correspondent

Jan 24, 2020 06:00 am

 

The employment rate of Singapore citizens has risen over 10 years, along with the share of professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) among working Singaporeans.

Their real median income, which takes into account inflation, has also risen faster than that of the total resident workforce, which includes permanent residents (PRs).

Citizen unemployment, meanwhile, has remained low.

New figures on these trends were released by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) yesterday in an occasional paper on citizens in the labour force.

As citizens make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force, their trends track closely those of resident data, MOM said in the report based on data from June 2009 to June last year.

 

 

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June last year, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs.

 

 

Employment outcomes for citizens may be slightly lower than those of the wider resident population because people usually have to show good employability to get PR status, said the ministry.

The citizen employment rate rose to 63.6 per cent last year, up from 60 per cent year in 2009, driven by workers aged 65 and older.

Meanwhile, the residents' rate remained within 1.4 to 1.7 points higher, rising to 65.2 per cent last year from 61.6 per cent.

Also, the employment rates for working-age citizens - those between 25 and 64 - climbed to 80.5 per cent from 75.6 per cent.

The employment rates of citizens and residents may diverge over time as the population ages, with older cohorts typically having lower employment rates, said MOM. Around 27 per cent of working-age citizens are in the 55 to 64 age group, compared with 10 per cent of working-age PRs.

Among employed citizens, the share of PMETs climbed to 55.8 per cent last year, up from 47.4 per cent in 2009. For residents, the corresponding figures are 58.3 per cent and 51.4 per cent.

Manpower Minister Josephine Teo said in a Facebook post yesterday that "there is no sinister reason" as to why data on residents are not broken down into citizens and PRs.

"Internationally, statistical agencies cover the entire population residing in their country without a breakdown by nationality. The aim is comprehensive data coverage, so that analyses and comparison are accurate and meaningful," she said.

 

Citizens fared slightly better than residents on income growth for full-time workers, with real median income growing yearly, on average, by 3.9 per cent between June 2014 and June last year.

These preliminary figures for gross monthly income include employer contributions to the Central Provident Fund.

For residents, the real median income growth was 3.8 per cent.

 

[Guest Guest]

1 hour ago, Guest jobs said:

Employment rate of Singapore citizens up

Share of PMETs among working S'poreans also went up in last 10 years: Report

Joanna Seow, Manpower Correspondent

Jan 24, 2020 06:00 am

 

Lol... Interesting... Looks like election is really coming, isn't it? 

[Guest Guest]

7 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

 

 

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June last year, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs.

 

 

Seems like what they tried to hide is that there are another 1,143,800 Total Foreign Workforce (excluding FDWs) in addition to the 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs working in Singapore, i.e. only two locals to 1 foreigners. https://www.mom.gov.sg/documents-and-publications/foreign-workforce-numbers. This is exactly what I meant by distracting people away from the real data.

 

7 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

The citizen employment rate rose to 63.6 per cent last year, up from 60 per cent year in 2009, driven by workers aged 65 and older.

 

And this basically means that 36.4% of citizens are unemployed??? More than a third are unemployed??? Who exactly is proud of the numbers???? LOL! 

 

7 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Also, the employment rates for working-age citizens - those between 25 and 64 - climbed to 80.5 per cent from 75.6 per cent.

 

And there are 19.5% of working age citizens not having jobs??? One in 5 residents here in Singapore in working age group are not working, when there are enough jobs for foreigner to have 1 foreigner working alongside 2 locals here in Singapore???  

 

Oh my ... of course this still shows that our low unemployment rate indicates foreigners are not taking jobs away from Singaporeans??? LOL! What a laugh!

 

7 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Employment outcomes for citizens may be slightly lower than those of the wider resident population because people usually have to show good employability to get PR status, said the ministry.

 

Good employability like her ?  https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/filipino-woman-jailed-falsified-diploma-transcripts-ica-12262072 

 

 

[Guest jobs]

Guest Guest, still want to go on with your misleading slogans???

 

Do Singaporeans want to work as Domestic Helpers (Maids) and in Construction (Foreign Workers) and in any of these tiring manual labour jobs???

 

Who will do these jobs??? Singaporeans?

You must be out of touch of reality.

 

Why count them into the workforce if they totally aren't "competing" for jobs of Singaporeans.

 

 

 

Please refrain from your silly useless anti foreigner propaganda!

[Guest Guest]

2 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Guest Guest, still want to go on with your misleading slogans???

 

Do Singaporeans want to work as Domestic Helpers (Maids) and in Construction (Foreign Workers) and in any of these tiring manual labour jobs???

 

Who will do these jobs??? Singaporeans?

You must be out of touch of reality.

 

Why count them into the workforce if they totally aren't "competing" for jobs of Singaporeans.

 

 

 

Please refrain from your silly useless anti foreigner propaganda!

 

Foreign Domestic Workers were already not included in the numbers. No need to debate this over and over again. And Construction work permit holders only account for 280k people, and this was already stated in the statistics link above. 

 

Thank you for proving what I have said of you all the time: you like to distract people away from the real data, and you like to repeat your own slogans over and over again. 

 

 

[Guest jobs]

 

On 1/21/2020 at 7:01 PM, Guest jobs said:

The total foreign workforce (excluding Foreign Domestic Workers and Foreign Construction Workers) in Singapore stand at 800,000 (EP Holders at 185,800, S Pass at 195,500, Work passes at 407,000 (excluding FDW and Foreign Construction Workers)).

It is justified for the data to indicate the numbers for FDW and Construction Workers as we can assume, Singaporeans would not intend to work in these sectors.

 

800,000 Foreigners against 2,4 million Singaporeans in the workforce. 

And from the 407,000 Workers within the group of 800,000 Foreigners, I probably rightly can say, 2/3 of Singaporeans would not want to work in these jobs (factory workers, cleaners, ship repair, oil bunkers.... )

 

Why want to indicate Foreign Workers in Construction Line?? No Singaporeans want to take such jobs!

Can only resort in inflating Foreigner numbers which are totally not relevant to the matter...?

 

You are the only one trying to repeat your false statements to distract away from the fact that from onset your statements were irrelevant.

 

The data from the news report

Employment rate of Singapore citizens up

totally defeated your arguments on "underemployed Singaporeans" and "Foreigners taking jobs of locals".

 

If the employment situation for Singaporeans even improved and with close to 100% full employment , how can Foreigners take away the jobs of locals???

 

Just guess who is the unrealistic daydreamer, clouded by pre-conceived but false mindset???

Nobody else than you.

 

Only thing left for you now is cherry picking of irrelevant numbers.

 

Eventually there is something like local trash?

 

Please stop misleading your fellow Singaporeans.

 

Give it a rest!

[Guest Guest]

2 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Why want to indicate Foreign Workers in Construction Line?? No Singaporeans want to take such jobs!

Can only resort in inflating Foreigner numbers which are totally not relevant to the matter...?

 

Why want to indicate Foreign Workers in Construction Line???? BECAUSE YOU WERE THE ONE TO RAISE IT UP IN THE FIRST PLACE,  YOU IDIOT!! Have you been bashed so hard that you are now senile already??

 

 

2 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

The data from the news report

Employment rate of Singapore citizens up

totally defeated your arguments on "underemployed Singaporeans" and "Foreigners taking jobs of locals".

 

If the employment situation for Singaporeans even improved and with close to 100% full employment , how can Foreigners take away the jobs of locals???

 

And round and round we go again? Do we really need to repeat this over and over again? Really? Foreign "talents"?? 

 

You are out of arguments to justify your own presence here in Singapore already, aren't you? 

 

Just pack your things and go home. 

 

[Guest jobs]

Last resort insulting is it?

 

I don't need to justify my presence.

Why should I?

 

You ran out of arguments. You are coming with mere propaganda slogans which are simply biased, unsubstantiated and only blaming foreigners unjustifiedly.

So far there has bern no backing to your untrue slogans.

 

You only intend to make people believe foreigners are taking jobs of Singaporeans whereas your slogans have been clearly proven wrong by the media, public data and other sources.

 

I m not very sure what's your contribution to the Singaporean society. I guess it is not much if your last resort is only insulting others.

 

Probably you can only rebut just some biased unsubstantiated slogans.

But nothing else.

 

Go back and continue daydreaming in your shell but spare us with more.

 

 

[Guest Guest]

19 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

I m not very sure what's your contribution to the Singaporean society.

 

At the barest minimum, I've served my National Service. You? What's your contribution to the Singaporean society, other than doing a job which another Singaporean can do? 

 

20 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

You ran out of arguments. You are coming with mere propaganda slogans which are simply biased, unsubstantiated and only blaming foreigners unjustifiedly.

So far there has bern no backing to your untrue slogans.

 

I think it is you who has ran out of arguments, and you are just trying to justify your unneeded presence here with mere propaganda slogans which are simply biased, unsubstantiated and only glorifying foreigners unjustifiably. So far, it is you who has been no backing to your untrue slogans.

 

20 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Probably you can only rebut just some biased unsubstantiated slogans.

But nothing else.

 

Did you just claimed that I have rebutted "some biased unsubstantiated slogans" from YOU? Thank you for your admission, finally! LOL! The more you post, the more your expose yourself.

 

19 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

I don't need to justify my presence.

Why should I?

 

LOL! You think you can just walk into anybody's home (country) without any justifications? Arrogance indeed! Arrogance! 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest jobs]

In all previous posts I gave public data substantiating what I said. 

I don’t think I “glorified” foreigners. Why should I? I simply recognise the reality for Singapore not being sustainable without foreign employees and workers complementing the workforce in Singapore. 
Pretending Singapore would be self-sustainable claiming locals would work in manual, laborious jobs or the Singapore economy could grow is an immature reflex not recognising the factual situation in Singapore.

 

Your sentence of “glorifying foreigners” exactly evidences your anti-foreigner / xenophobic mindset.
 

The recent newspaper article backed exactly what I wrote.

In all your recent posts you are only turning around like an endless wheel without adding any new substance to support your claims.

 

You are simply blowing hot air...

[Guest Guest]

13 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

In all previous posts I gave public data substantiating what I said. 

 

And it has already been proven that you were only showing the misleading data that you wanted others to see, while ignoring the real data that proves you wrong. And then what you do was to go round and round in circles regurgitating the same old data that you had. It's as if your supposed "foreign talent" mind is unable to wrap your logic around the true facts, and it has gone into an infinite error looping mode. 

 

13 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

I don’t think I “glorified” foreigners. Why should I? I simply recognise the reality for Singapore not being sustainable without foreign employees and workers complementing the workforce in Singapore. 
Pretending Singapore would be self-sustainable claiming locals would work in manual, laborious jobs  .....

 

Thank you for proving how you try to distract other people away from the issue again and again. Are we talking about "manual, laborious jobs" now? Go ahead, you can go feed yourself silly with the "manual, laborious jobs" if you want to. But what job are YOU having right now? Are you sitting in the comfort of an aircon place enjoying a cushy, easy job which another Singaporean can do?  Each time you are forced to face the fact that you are doing a job which another Singaporean could have done, you try running away from this point and justify your presence here by hiding behind the "manual, laborious jobs" which the locals are not keen to take up. We have seen through your tactics and antics already. Grow some balls and face the facts now. 

 

13 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

.... or the Singapore economy could grow is an immature reflex not recognising the factual situation in Singapore.

 

Your sentence of “glorifying foreigners” exactly evidences your anti-foreigner / xenophobic mindset.

 

Thank you for proving how you are trying to glorify foreigners here.... and in the very sentence just before you tried to do mudslinging on me when I pointed out that you were trying to glorify foreigners too. LOL!!! Yes, I believe Singapore can still grow without foreign "TRASH" like you lurking around trying to distract us from the real data and the real situations, just because you are trying to justify your presence here. 

 

You really have nothing new anymore to say, after you have been rebutted thoroughly, right? 

 

 

[Guest jobs]

Your post doesn't contain any new numbers, data or facts supporting what you claim. 

Your previous data was completely irrelevant to the issue and did not proof the matter you tried putting forward and was later rebutted by the media and newspaper articles. Neutral sources rebutted your claims. 

You have rebutted nothing so far, but are just revolving around irrelevancies. 

 

Tell me if there are so few unemployed Singaporeans in Singapore, where are the Singaporeans up for hiring for any air conditioned cushion jobs? 

Please tell it to us? 

In your deranges logic, even pure local companies would need to decrease their businesses, close outlets, reduce manufacturing, not uptake any service projects, reduce services if they can't hire any employees, because the employment market is swept empty and there are no employees to hire. Where are those Singaporeans who can be hired and who can do all those jobs??? Singapore already suffers a manpower shortage in various sectors and industries and you still want to put up new slogans such as the Singapore economy is self-reliant and self-sustainable and can afford to just employ Singaporeans for all required jobs and to run successfully and sustain economic growth? 

If all those companies suffer such a situation and can only hire Singaporeans, they would simply decline in business revenue and over the long term go insolvent or are pushed away by other business providers from overseas countries and are then totally out of business (because there are no employable Singaporeans available). 

 

You have just shown to us for not knowing anything about economy, economic growth, resilience in the market and business development and how a developed economy works. You don't even know anything about Singapore. 

 

I guess you just made yourself to the laughing stock of Singapore with your last post. 

 

Refrain from putting something into my sentences I never wrote at all. I never "glorified foreigners" in any of my posts at all. This is just something made up by you. 

At no point I justified my presence here, otherwise show us here, where I did so. 

 

You are not even aware whether I am a foreigner or not but still continue insulting me or putting me personally or as a person into the discussion whereas I m not the topic here at all. 

Please discuss on the topic.

Mostly people who ran out of arguments resort to personal attacks, will sidetrack on non relevant issues or start talking about irrelevant matters like putting the person into the discussion. 

 

If you can't argue with factual data or give any reasonable appropriate responses, then better refrain from responding. 

[Guest jobs]

CNA
 

Zero foreign labour growth hard to achieve without serious implications: Chan Chun Sing

By Tang See Kit

04 Feb 2020 07:06PM

 

SINGAPORE: To have zero growth in the foreign workforce may be a theoretical possibility but in reality, it is “very hard to achieve … without serious implications and trade-off” for the economy, said Trade and Industry Minister Chan Chun Sing in Parliament on Tuesday (Feb 4).

Mr Chan outlined three scenarios in his response to a supplementary question from Holland-Bukit Timah GRC Member of Parliament (MP) Liang Eng Hwa, who asked why Singapore cannot work towards zero foreign manpower growth.

 

 

In the first scenario, two new higher-paying jobs will be created from a new investment secured by Singapore. Without fresh foreign workers, the only way for this investment to materialise is for two Singaporeans to take up the new jobs.

But given how the local labour market is near full employment and labour force participation rate already among the highest in the world, there is “very little spare capacity”, said Mr Chan.

With that, chances are that Singapore may have to forgo this investment, he added.

 

The second scenario assumes that two Singaporeans have been put into the higher-paying jobs created by the new investment. However with zero foreign workforce growth, replacements will not be found for the job positions that have been vacated by these two Singaporeans.

 

This, in turn, renders the company with the unfilled roles unsustainable and could mean potential job losses for the other Singaporeans it hires, said Mr Chan.

 

The third scenario, which the minister described as “ideal” involves retraining workers and improving productivity to fulfil the labour demands of the new investment.

However, this is “not easy to do” as the opportunities for productivity growth differ across industries, he said, raising the example of services which have lagged behind the manufacturing sector in productivity.

The speed and scale in which workers can be retrained also depend on many factors, he added.

“Whether we can do it in time to catch the new investment is always uncertain.”

 

Singapore’s strategy is to “win (these) investment first” and then work hard to quickly upgrade the skills of the local workers so that they can take over these higher-paying jobs “as soon as possible”, said Mr Chan in an earlier parliamentary reply on how quality jobs are created for Singaporeans. 

 

As part of the process of attracting high-quality investments, foreign manpower “at different skill levels” may be needed to complement the local workforce, he explained.

 

Otherwise, it could mean losing a quality investment, which can translate into the loss of economic competitiveness and good job opportunities for Singaporeans of this generation and the future.

 

“To grow our economy and job opportunities, we will always need a certain local-foreign complement, both in terms of quality and quantity,” he said.

 

Mr Chan also noted with Singapore’s low resident total fertility rate, the local labour force will peak over the next ten years even with the planned increase in retirement age.

“So while (zero foreign manpower growth) is a theoretical possibility, we should not take it lightly and assume that there are no serious implication,” he said.

“We must be careful not to crash the gears and make our enterprises suffer the consequences of the lack of capacity to circulate and regenerate capacity.

 

“We must also be cognisant of the ability and the pace which we can re-skill and upgrade our workers,” he added.

 

STRIKING A BALANCE

At the same time, the Government is cognisant that the foreign workforce “cannot grow indefinitely” and the strategy is one that “requires constant fine-tuning” to get the balance right for both enterprises and workers.

“Too many foreign workers … our local workforce feels overwhelmed. Too few, our local enterprises and workers are unable to achieve scale or competitiveness for the global market,” said Mr Chan.

 

He added that there is also the need to diversify the country’s foreign manpower sources so as to avoid being overly-reliant on one particular source from a business continuity perspective.

From a societal perspective, the Government needs to “manage the externalities associated with too high a concentration of any particular foreign labour source”.

“Singapore is a diverse cosmopolitan and inclusive society, but we must also not ignore the public discomfort that can surface with too high a concentration of any particular foreign worker group,” he said.

“We must manage the number and quality of the foreign (workforce) to strike a good balance between economic needs and social acceptance.”

 

Mr Chan also said the Government will continue to help Singaporeans improve their skills and productivity, through the formal education system and investments in training such as the SkillsFuture programmes.

Authorities will also ensure that Singaporeans are fairly treated at work. Errant companies who treat local workers unfairly can expect to face enforcement actions and penalties, he said. 

 

ASKING FOR DATA TO UNDERSTAND THE GOVERNMENT’S PERSPECTIVE: WP 

In his reply, Mr Chan had described the supplementary question by Mr Liang as one which has been raised previously, including by the Workers’ Party (WP).

 

To that, WP chief Pritam Singh said the party had suggested zero foreign manpower growth in the context of the debate over the Government’s Population White Paper in 2013.

 

“The position then was keeping the foreign workforce numbers constant, but if 1 per cent resident workforce growth was achieved,” said Mr Singh, while asking if there will be a debate soon on the country’s population policy.

 

Mr Chan responded that a 1 per cent resident workforce growth is “very significant”.

“Given our total fertility rate, it is not a given that we will be anywhere near this,” he said. “To what extent we can bring in fresh immigrants … this is also not a given. Whether Singapore can be the choice location for other people, is an open question.”

 

Singapore’s economic growth ahead is also not a given. The ongoing outbreak of the novel coronavirus, of one, will have a “significant impact” on the economy, added the minister.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest jobs]

Looks like 

Chan Chun Sing

carefully read what I wrote and repeatedly pointed out in all my earlier posts at this thread at BW on this topic.

 

😁

[Guest Guest]

Not that I  agree with CCS, but for a moment, let's just say that I do, for the sake of argument.

 

What makes you think you are the type of foreign talent we need to grow this country? What makes you so sure you are not a foreign Trash trying to bring it down? Did you set up any new companies here to create more job opportunities to hire more locals? Did you bring in hundreds millions of dollars FDI into Singapore? Are you one of those foreign talents that the country brought in to set up all the manufacturing factories or the financial institutions here in the 1980s and 1990s? I don't think so... 

 

Because, from what I see of how you go about twisting facts and manipulate data, and your deliberate attempts to distract readers from the real truth, and then started going round and round the same points like some broken record players when you are out of arguments, you are definitely not a foreign TALENT. In fact, you are worse than a foreign TRASH, because you are a foreign TROLL! 

 

And to think CCS can repeat the points of a Foreign Troll, makes me so sure that he is of poor leadership quality. 

[Guest jobs]

And you?

 

What did you do to grow this country?

 

What is your contribution in the build up of Singapore?

Are you one of the local talents?

 

How many companies have you set up to bring job opportunities to Singaporeans?

Are you one of the local entrepreneurs? How many successful start ups have you created?
 

Tell us here and now what you achieved?

Just wonder how citing public data can be fact twisting and manipulative?

And I seriously wonder who was the one trying to sidetrack, repeat irrelevancies and distract from the fact of not being able to substantiate your propaganda slogans and even resorting to put my person into the discussion which has never been the topic here. 
 

In summary: may all BW readers assume you are local trash because you never achieved anything?

 

Or are you just a local troll who is shouting loud but have not created anything much?

And now you are only left in making personal attacks because the media and neutral newspaper articles have indeed rebutted all your unsubstantiated slogans?

 

 I think it is clear for any neutral reader to see: Because of the media articles which clearly support my arguments, all what I reasoned in this thread was correct , plausible and substantiated. Since the newspaper articles your points have clearly been debunked as baseless and irrational.

 

Just go on and continue to make yourself to the laughing stock of Singapore and Blowing Wind.

[Guest Guest]

 

5 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

And you?

 

What did you do to grow this country?

 

What is your contribution in the build up of Singapore?

Are you one of the local talents?

 

How many companies have you set up to bring job opportunities to Singaporeans?

Are you one of the local entrepreneurs? How many successful start ups have you created?
 

Tell us here and now what you achieved?

 

Just for starters, have you done your National Service? And maybe, just maybe, I am really one of the local entrepreneurs who have set up companies to bring job opportunities to Singaporeans. But again, even if I am not, it is my birthrights to be here. And if it is my birthright to be here, what will I need foreign trash like you to be here for? To steal my lunch like some rats? 

 

5 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Just wonder how citing public data can be fact twisting and manipulative?

And I seriously wonder who was the one trying to sidetrack, repeat irrelevancies and distract from the fact of not being able to substantiate your propaganda slogans and even resorting to put my person into the discussion which has never been the topic here. 

 

Again, already answered in one of the post above, proving how you talk about some data and hide others, while interpreting irrelevant data to be relevant ones. No need for me to repeat again. 

 

5 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

In summary: may all BW readers assume you are local trash because you never achieved anything?

 

Or are you just a local troll who is shouting loud but have not created anything much?

 

In summary: all BW readers know you are foreign trash because you never achieved anything, not here and not in your own home country. Since if you really achieved anything in your own home country, you won't be here. You are just a foreign troll who is shouting loud but have not created anything much.

 

 

5 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

And now you are only left in making personal attacks because the media and neutral newspaper articles have indeed rebutted all your unsubstantiated slogans?

 

 I think it is clear for any neutral reader to see: Because of the media articles which clearly support my arguments, all what I reasoned in this thread was correct , plausible and substantiated. Since the newspaper articles your points have clearly been debunked as baseless and irrational.

 

Again, already answered in one of the post above. No need for me to repeat again. 

 

5 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Just go on and continue to make yourself to the laughing stock of Singapore and Blowing Wind.

 

Just go on and continue to make yourself to the broken record player of Singapore and Blowing Wind, playing the same songs over and over again. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest jobs]

And?

 

Any backing to your line of arguments?

 

Or do you intend to pull in again the numbers of Foreign workers ( working on jobs Singaporeans don’t want to do at all) to make your numbers of foreigners in the workforce in Singapore look bigger?

 

Does this change anything on the near to full employment situation of Singaporeans?

 

Is there a huge amount of unemployed Singaporeans?

Can Singapore sustain without foreigners complementing the workforce?

 

Is it economically viable for Singapore to close the shores for foreigners in the workforce completely?

 

There are still no substantiated responses you have given to back your slogans or any reliable data given in supporting your case.

 

There are no answers from your side.

 

So, we need to understand that you can only resort to personal attacks and insults to support your case?

[Guest Guest]

 

7 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

There are no answers from your side.

 

Answers are all there. No need for me to repeat over and over again. This is evidence why Singaporeans shouldn't be bringing foreign trash like you into Singapore. You are a waste of our time and a drag on our productivity.

[Guest jobs]

Sorry, you never brought up any relevant answers to the topic. Where are any relevant answers from you? 

 

All what you brought up was propaganda slogans so far. 

 

You claim you gave answers, but where are they?

There was nothing substantiated or relevant at all. 

 

The data and numbers you mentioned were irrelevant to the topic. 

The examples you gave to support your case were sidetracks or petty non critical matters. 

 

If all Singaporeans fit to work are in employment  (1.97 million Singaporeans) and there are  in total 10,000 unemployed Singaporeans in 2019 and thereof approximately 6,000 Singaporeans retrenched in 2019 please just simply explain  to us here again how foreigners take away the jobs of Singaporeans???

The employment rate of all Singaporeans stands at 80% (actually 80.5%)

 

Besides that the 10,000 unemployed Singaporeans in 2019 found a new job between 1 month to three months...

 

The unemployment rate of Singaporeans seems negligible compared to the total Singaporeans in the workforce in employment. 

 

As Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force, their trends track closely to those of resident data, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) noted on Thursday (Jan 23).

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs.

Broken down by age group, the under-30s had the highest rate of unemployment (6.2 per cent), reflecting their recent entry into the job market and greater churn in job search. But they took about one month on average to find a job, compared with two months for all unemployed citizens.

Those aged 50 and over took about three months on average to secure an offer, even though they are less likely to be unemployed.

Discouraged citizens - those no longer looking for work, as they think they will not succeed in their search - have continued to decline. Numbering 6,700 in 2019, they make up just 0.3 per cent of the citizen labour force.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/employment-rate-for-singaporeans-rose-over-last-decade-mirrors-trend-for-resident

 

At all instances you failed to rebut this fact. 

 

SINGAPORE - Around 60 to 70 per cent of the jobs created by the foreign investment attracted here in 2019 will be for professionals, managers, executives and technicians, a category known as PMETs. Other roles will be well-paying "rank and file" positions.

All in all the EDB expects 32,814 jobs will stem from the $15.2 billion of investment commitments made in 2019.

 

The vast majority of job creation in Singapore is due to FDI to Singapore what I said earlier. 

Significant job creation is not happening through local Singaporean companies or employers. 

 

 

 

Do you still intend to keep on barking your false slogans??? 

 

The last days you are simply resorting to personal attacks.

Personal attacks and insults are your last straw, when you were rebutted even by neutral third parties? 

 

Can't you do any better? Is that the very best you can do? 

 

If you can't, then spare us with revolving around your continuous brawls and evidencing your personal deranged mental state as to your view on foreigners and simply demonstrating that you know nothing about economy, job creation in a resource weak country and the requirement for employees to fill in the jobs to sustain a growth environment. 

[amuse.ed]

Another significant milestone ON PAPER. Let's see if it really happens from the hiring end and anyone has benefited from it moving forward. 

 

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/public-service-committed-to-provide-inclusive-and-mental-health-12389904

[Guest Guest]

1 hour ago, Guest jobs said:

As Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force

 

1 hour ago, Guest jobs said:

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs

 

Let see if you want to reply to this question directly: How many FOREIGNERS are you alluding to be in the workforce? What is the number? That's the point of discussion, right? Foreigners? 

[Guest jobs]

 

Why "alluding" ? 

 

Use allude when you want to refer to something without making a direct or explicit reference to it.

 

The numbers are public. 

Dig the numbers out for yourself. 

 

I don't need to allude to anything about these figures because they are in the public domain. 

 

Are you revolving around more irrelevancies? 

 

Sidetracking again just to avoid to acknowledge that you had been defeated in this discussion?

 

 

[Guest Guest]

24 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

 

Why "alluding" ? 

 

Use allude when you want to refer to something without making a direct or explicit reference to it.

 

The numbers are public. 

Dig the numbers out for yourself. 

 

I don't need to allude to anything about these figures because they are in the public domain. 

 

Are you revolving around more irrelevancies? 

 

Sidetracking again just to avoid to acknowledge that you had been defeated in this discussion?

 

 

 

What are you trying to hide? Where is that number? What's so difficult about telling us that number if you are trying to say the numbers are public? Have you shown us that number yet?  I repeat again:

 

 

Let see if you want to reply to this question directly: How many FOREIGNERS are you alluding to be in the workforce? What is the number? That's the point of discussion, right? Foreigners? 

[Guest jobs]

Are you again revolving around irrelevancies to distract from the fact that your slogans were debunked? 

 

I have never been "alluding" for Foreigners to be in the workforce. I don't need to allude, because there is clear data on this fact. 

 

Are you masochist? Still want to go on beating after you lost your face already? 

 

What is the purpose of your question? 

 

Scroll back: I already gave the number in an earlier post. It was this post: 

 

On 1/21/2020 at 8:01 PM, Guest jobs said:

 

 

Otherwise dig out the numbers from the recent MOM data. It is public and available to everyone. 

 

https://www.singstat.gov.sg/find-data/search-by-theme/economy/labour-employment-wages-and-productivity/latest-data

 

https://stats.mom.gov.sg/Pages/LabourForceTimeSeries.aspx

 

 

It still won't serve as any evidence to support your claim of any foreigners taking away jobs of Singaporeans. 

 

I think you have a sort of intellectual disability to understand the correlation of a full employment situation of Singaporeans, because it just doesn't go into your head due to your pre-conceived thinking.

It just can't be true is it? 

You can stick to your illusionary "truth" if you prefer not to acknowledge the facts and reality. If you intend not to acknowledge, there is nothing I can do. 

The only thing I can do is pointing out rightly: your "truth" does not match the statistical data and is false and a slogan. 

 

If you intend to run on on your slogans with closed eyes, ignoring the data and not taking note of the actual data, you will never understand. 

 

I need to repeat again: It is futile to discuss this with you due to your refusal to acknowledge the reality. 

[Guest Guest]

Since you so clearly lack the intelligence to understand numbers, and since it is also so obvious that foreign trash like you do not comprehend any other point of views except that of your pathetic own, let me dumb it down for you to some simple "Yes/No" questions for you to answer: 

 

9 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

As Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force,

 

On your above statement, are you alluding that there are only 15% foreigners in our total workforce? Yes or No?

 

9 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs.

 

On your above statement, are yo alluding that there are no other foreigners in the labour force other than the 360,000 PRs? Yes or No? 

 

 

If you cannot even answer simple Yes/No questions, you are really beyond pathetic. Really goes to show the type of foreign trash we have here in Singapore. 

[Guest jobs]

The point of discussion is actually your wrongful slogan "Foreigners taking away jobs of Singaporeans" . The point of discussion is not on Foreigners per se. 

 

This "resident" thing is  one of the word creations in Singapore. 

 

15% are the PRs as 360,000 PRs and 1.97 million Singaporeans (85%) add up to 2.33 million (100%) in the work force of the "resident" population. 

 

The other numbers I gave exactly in this post. 

On 1/21/2020 at 8:01 PM, Guest jobs said:

 

You are making more allegations without looking up the numbers. The numbers all exist. 

The workforce number of the total population stands at 68% for 2019. Total population is 5.64 mil. 

The workforce is at 3,715,8000. 

That makes 2,380,000 Singaporeans in the workforce. 

 

The total foreign workforce (excluding Foreign Domestic Workers and Foreign Construction Workers) in Singapore stand at 800,000 (EP Holders at 185,800, S Pass at 195,500, Work passes at 407,000 (excluding FDW and Foreign Construction Workers)).

It is justified for the data to indicate the numbers for FDW and Construction Workers as we can assume, Singaporeans would not intend to work in these sectors. 

 

 

Explanation: The slight difference in numbers was due to the fact when writing above post on 21 Jan, the 2019 workforce numbers were not yet out and were published only some days later on 24 Jan. Only the percentage of the workforce (68%) was published.  I mean 2.380,000 against the actual number of 2,330,000 in the workforce on the residents. There was no breakdown of the "resident" workforce available. 

 

The rest of foreign employees and workers I had given in that post from 21 Jan 8:01PM already. 

To repeat again: 

Foreign Domestic Workers (FDW) and certain Foreign Workers in Construction and specialised industries are not listed, because

Foreign Domestic Workers and Foreign Workers do not "compete" with any Singaporeans or PRs because none of them would want to do those jobs. 

 

In fact in my view the 407,000 Work Pass Holders (excluding FDW and Foreign Construction Workers) do not compete with any Singaporeans either, because Singaporeans would not want to do these jobs of these Work Pass Holders (factory workers, cleaners, low skilled manual jobs).

 

The 85% of Singaporeans in the workforce stand for the "residents", the 68% for the total workforce. 

Anyhow you always missed out that total population and workforce are two separate matters. 

 

 

But this number calling doesn't make any difference and doesn't contradict what I said earlier and it doesn't at all support your claim. 

 

[Guest Guest]

Good! Even though it actually took me several post to force the answers out from you, we are finally making some progress. 

 

 

I asked the question below: 

11 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

As Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force

 

1 hour ago, Guest Guest said:

On your above statement, are you alluding that there are only 15% foreigners in our total workforce? Yes or No?

 

 

And you finally admitted that your answer as follows: 

41 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

The 85% of Singaporeans in the workforce stand for the "residents", the 68% for the total workforce. 

This means there are 32% (or so) foreigners in the workforce, unlike the 15% which you were alluding towards previously.

 

 

 

 

I also asked the question below: 

11 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs.

 

1 hour ago, Guest Guest said:

On your above statement, are yo alluding that there are no other foreigners in the labour force other than the 360,000 PRs? Yes or No? 

 

 

And you also finally admitted your answer as follows: 

45 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

This "resident" thing is  one of the word creations in Singapore. 

 

15% are the PRs as 360,000 PRs and 1.97 million Singaporeans (85%) add up to 2.33 million (100%) in the work force of the "resident" population.

This means that there are actually  MORE foreigners in the labour force, unlike only 360,000 PRs that you were alluding towards previously.  

 

 

 

Thank you for self-incriminating evidence that you were deliberately distracting readers from the facts with misleading data such as "Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force" and "There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs".

[Guest jobs]

Please refrain from misinterpreting me and refrain from putting things into my posts that have never been written. 

 

At no point I have ever been alluding, there are only PRs as Foreigners in the workforce in Singapore. At no point I ever said there are only 360,000 foreigner in the workforce. 

At no point I ever alluded there are only 15% Foreigners in the total workforce. 

Everybody can check here that I never mentioned any number of "only" 15 % or foreigners in the total workforce at any earlier post  (only in responding to the breakdown of the "resident" local workforce  in this post following your questions):

 

3 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

The point of discussion is actually your wrongful slogan "Foreigners taking away jobs of Singaporeans" . The point of discussion is not on Foreigners per se. 

 

This "resident" thing is  one of the word creations in Singapore. 

15% are the PRs as 360,000 PRs and 1.97 million Singaporeans (85%) add up to 2.33 million (100%) in the work force of the "resident" population. 

The 85% of Singaporeans in the workforce stand for the "residents", the 68% for the total workforce. 

Anyhow you always missed out that total population and workforce are two separate matters. 

 

But this number calling doesn't make any difference and doesn't contradict what I said earlier and it doesn't at all support your claim. 

 

Refrain from making up things. 

That was the first time the 15% appeared in my post. 

 

Already with my previous post on 21 January 2020 I came out with the proper figures of Foreigners in the workforce, even giving a detailed breakdown. 

 

On 1/21/2020 at 8:01 PM, Guest jobs said:

Unfortunately, you are repeating slogans which do not stand against the facts and numbers. You have not come out with any facts, data or numbers to support your allegation for "Foreigners taking away the jobs of locals". Where is your data, where are your numbers? 

 

You are making more allegations without looking up the numbers. The numbers all exist. 

The workforce number of the total population stands at 68% for 2019. Total population is 5.64 mil. 

The workforce is at 3,715,8000. 

That makes 2,380,000 Singaporeans in the workforce. 

 

The total foreign workforce (excluding Foreign Domestic Workers and Foreign Construction Workers) in Singapore stand at 800,000 (EP Holders at 185,800, S Pass at 195,500, Work passes at 407,000 (excluding FDW and Foreign Construction Workers)).

It is justified for the data to indicate the numbers for FDW and Construction Workers as we can assume, Singaporeans would not intend to work in these sectors. 

 

Just to avoid for you coming up with "naturalised" citizens. Citizenship has been granted to an average of roughly 20,500 per year for the past 10 years. That makes 205,000 new citizens in 10 years (62.5% from South East Asian countries, probably the majority Malaysian Chinese). Not all would be in the workforce. 

 

And from the 407,000 Workers within the group of 800,000 Foreigners, I probably rightly can say, 2/3 of Singaporeans would not want to work in these jobs (factory workers, cleaners, ship repair, oil bunkers.... )

All what you have been putting up here is people to believe in your falsehoods and propaganda slogans.

None of your anti-foreigner slogans are fit for a reality check. 

 

Do you intend to say I did not come up with figures and reliable data on Employment/ workforce numbers in my post from 21 Jan 2020? 

Everybody can scroll back and verify. In that post already I wrote the total foreign workforce (excluding FDW and Foreign Construction Workers) stand at 800,000. 

 

How could I allude there are only 360,000 Foreigners in the workforce, if I myself posted the proper numbers in a detailed breakdown? 

Can you explain this to the BW readers? 

 

You always try to follow the same strategy to make others look dishonest and posting "misleading" facts or data and allege others  do "mislead" are "liars" and hope the readers will have a short memory and trying to discredit posts who debunk the myths you post here. 

 

I have at no point ever been deliberately distracting readers from the facts with any misleading data. The data is from public sources and quoted from these sources. 

So far I am the only one here coming up with any relevant data. 

 

The sentence: As Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force, their trends track closely to those of resident data, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) noted on Thursday (Jan 23) originates from a newspaper article in Straits Times. It is a quote. The following sentence clearly gives the breakdown on Singapore citizen and  PRs. 

13 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

 

As Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force, their trends track closely to those of resident data, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) noted on Thursday (Jan 23).

There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs.

Broken down by age group, the under-30s had the highest rate of unemployment (6.2 per cent), reflecting their recent entry into the job market and greater churn in job search. But they took about one month on average to find a job, compared with two months for all unemployed citizens.

Those aged 50 and over took about three months on average to secure an offer, even though they are less likely to be unemployed.

Discouraged citizens - those no longer looking for work, as they think they will not succeed in their search - have continued to decline. Numbering 6,700 in 2019, they make up just 0.3 per cent of the citizen labour force.

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/employment-rate-for-singaporeans-rose-over-last-decade-mirrors-trend-for-resident

 

 

 

Refrain from making up more Wayang only to divert from your posting of propaganda slogans, which had been clearly debunked by data, media articles and the press. 

 

Since 19 January 2020 I am asking for data from your side to support your claim, but you did not come up with anything relevant. 

 

On 1/19/2020 at 12:27 AM, Guest jobs said:

You prefer to ask others for data, while you yourself never provided any data to support what you make up here. 

Your repeated untruth of stating "foreigners taking away jobs of locals" is well known but you failed to ever provide any statistical data to support this repeated untruth.  Your statement foreigners are taking away jobs of locals is a myth. There is no truth in it in Singapore. 

 

Nor has there been any valid point from you to support what you claim. 

 

Refrain from further sidetracking and distracting and making up for me having presented "misleading" data. This is false. 

 

You failed to make any valid point. You never supported your slogans with any data or statistics. 

In fact, you can't because all data does not support your case or what you intend to claim and make BW readers believe. 

 

In summary:

All these statements are correct (and have been backed by media and reliable data): 

Foreigners are not taking away jobs of locals. 

Singaporeans are in a near to 100 % full employment situation. 

There is a manpower crunch in Singapore. 

Unemployment in Singapore is negligible. 

The unemployment rate of Singaporeans is negligible. 

 

 

I think it is clear for any neutral reader to see: Because of the media articles which clearly support my arguments, all what I reasoned in this thread was at all times correct, plausible and substantiated. Since the various newspaper articles and supported by public accessible data from Singapore government boards on workforce and unemployment numbers your points have clearly been debunked as baseless, irrational, biased slogans with no backing in reality.

You have been simply repeating myths. 

 

Finally, if you don't come up or can't come up with any data, supporting media references of reliable sources to back your statements or claims, it is useless to continue discussing this topic with you. 

[Guest Guest]

Your previous post basically PROVES that you have access to the REAL data on the TRUE NUMBER of foreigners in Singapore. But yet, you only wanted to show the numbers that can mislead the public into thinking that the number of foreigners is much lower than what it truly is. What was your intention of skimming past the real number of foreigners in Singapore, but bringing up statements such as

(1) "Singapore citizens consistently make up about 85 per cent of the resident labour force" and

(2) "There were 2.33 million residents in the labour force as of June 2019, comprising 1.97 million Singaporeans and 360,000 PRs".

 

Ans: You were deliberately distracting readers from the facts with misleading data, And even if the source of your statistic may (or may not) be coming from legitimate sources, you are merely trying to whitewash all your MISLEADING STATEMENTS with small element of truths! And these are merely TWO statements which I am using to prove the liar you are! There are countless other mistruths in every single one of your posts! But these two evidences is already sufficient to prove that you are a LIAR! 

[Guest jobs]

Stop sidetracking and distracting from the topic and evading into irrelevant simply made up side issues.

 

Your allegations are totally baseless because a long time back I gave the actual numbers with my own post from 21 January 2020.

 

Here again:

 

44 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

I think it is clear for any neutral reader to see: Because of the media articles which clearly support my arguments, all what I reasoned in this thread was at all times correct, plausible and substantiated. Since the various newspaper articles and supported by public accessible data from Singapore government boards on workforce and unemployment numbers your points have clearly been debunked as baseless, irrational, biased slogans with no backing in reality.
 

You have been simply repeating myths. 

 

Finally, if you don't come up or can't come up with any data, supporting media references of reliable sources to back your statements or claims, it is useless to continue discussing this topic with you. 

It is easy to allege others of presenting “misleading” data while not coming up with any data at all. 

If you intend to continue to discuss the topic come up with supporting factors to back your statements on the issue.

 

Otherwise BW readers can conclude you have nothing on your hand to support your claims and you have been merely repeating false myths and wrong allegations on foreigners in Singapore.

 

Every BW reader can identify from your last posts, it doesn’t make any sense to discuss the topic with you as you are unable to back your statements. 

[Guest Guest]

6 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

Every BW reader can identify from your last posts,

 

and every BW reader can identify you from all your consistent lies from this thread, and the thread where you defended Brochez, to the thread where you made racist remarks saying that Chinese has a rotten mee goreng smell, because only ONE person on the whole of BW can tell so much lies and that's none other than GUEST DISCLOSED YOURSELF .  

 

6 hours ago, Guest jobs said:

it doesn’t make any sense to discuss the topic with you

 

I've known who you are for a while already, but I wanted to see if a young punk like you can have integrity enough to make use of public data to show the complete and truthful picture of the situation. But over and over again, you tried to whitewash all your lies and layer them with "official statistics" to make it look as if you are being truthful. We all have our eyes on you. You are going to fail miserably in your exams and you won't be having much of a future,  GUEST DISCLOSED YOURSELF because you are just so full of shit and lies! You won't amount to much this way in any place, not now, not ever, regardless how you think you are in any good shape right now

[Guest jobs]

You were requested to present any substance to support your claim about foreign employees and these taking jobs of local Singaporeans.

But there is still nothing so far...

We are waiting here.

 

Until today, you have failed to come up with any data.

You have failed to support your slogans with any true facts, evidence or any relevant substantiation.

 

Simple conclusion:

1) You have no data on hand to support your slogan.

2) You can only utter biased anti-foreigner propagandist slogans not backed by any data or true facts.

3) You are living in your own illusory reality and have lost touch to the real world and tend to ignore the facts.

 

It looks like you are just another rabble-rouser.

 

May I ask if your last post is your final straw you are clinging on? Or do we need to expect more "wayang" coming up?

 

It seems when you are running out of arguments, then you will try some character assassination and smear campaigns.

You have no clue who I am and still want to guess on the person posting or associate me with other people?

I know with such means you simply intend to discredit my posts and my person and think the BW readers would doubt on the content of my posts.

Everybody at BW can follow, I was reasonable, gave data and explanations to the posts, never ever resorted to name calling or insults and supported it with public available data and newspaper articles. The same cannot be said about you.

You seem being unable to discuss something reasonably and in usual common manner. 

 

You mean by resorting to any such strategies you can clean your hands and wipe away the fact for not having come up with any factual substance to your anti-foreigner slogans???

 

I simply wonder how any copying of public available data and quoting direct excerpts from Singaporean newspaper articles can result in "whitewashing" of data and "manipulating" data and presenting "misleading" data.  I did not alter any data I presented earlier from the news and public accessible resources and you still want to talk about "misleading" data?  If you fail to rebut arguments you resort in claiming the data has been misleading or manipulative? Data directly copied from public resources and copied from newspapers is misleading and false? Who is going to believe this?

Maybe the data just doesn't fit into your view of the world and Singapore.

 

All this extended show you need to come up with to avoid for admitting you were debunked with all your slogans and false claims on this topic at BW?

Is it so difficult for you to admit for having only uttered silly anti-foreigner slogans?

 

Give us factual data, explanations, supporting statements to back your point or just let it be!

 

[Guest Guest]

 

1 hour ago, Guest jobs said:

I simply wonder how any copying of public available data and quoting direct excerpts from Singaporean newspaper articles can result in "whitewashing" of data and "manipulating" data and presenting "misleading" data.  I did not alter any data I presented earlier from the news and public accessible resources and you still want to talk about "misleading" data?  If you fail to rebut arguments you resort in claiming the data has been misleading or manipulative? Data directly copied from public resources and copied from newspapers is misleading and false?

 

Even after you were caught red-handed using irrelevant data to make misleading statements, which you even FURTHER admitted after getting cornered with simple "Yes or No" questions, you still want to deny your lies now and to your last dying breath? 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Guest jobs said:

You have no clue who I am and still want to guess on the person posting or associate me with other people?

Are you denying that you are  GUEST DISCLOSED YOURSELF? 

[Guest jobs]

You are retracting to nonsense now.

 

Still you further have failed to come up with any data in support of your claim.

Hello? Where is your data?

You still have failed to support your slogans with any true facts, evidence or any relevant substantiation.

 

The BW readers are waiting for your substantiated rebuttal on the topic and are not interested in your illogical sidetracks. 

 

This what you call "admission" is only your imagination. 

There was never any need to admit to anything from my side because there was never any misleading data. Everyone here can scroll back to the start. 

You are the one now who is running this deranged theory of misleading data. 

 

You did not bring up any relevant data at all so far! 

 

The only one who was caught red handed in uttering biased anti-foreigner slogans with no substantiation has been you. 

Everyone here at BW is able to verify and read this from your posts. 

 

Your claim of "Foreigners taking away the jobs of locals" has been dismissed as you failed to substantiate it or support it with any relevant data. 

 

Do you intend to discuss the topic or continue sidetracking on non relevant issues here? 

 

If you have nothing to add on the topic or if you continue not to provide any substantiation, I will close the case for good. 

[Guest Guest]

5 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

This what you call "admission" is only your imagination. 

There was never any need to admit to anything from my side because there was never any misleading data. Everyone here can scroll back to the start. 

You are the one now who is running this deranged theory of misleading data. 

 

You were caught red handed and the evidences were laid out in this post here. 

 

 

6 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

You did not bring up any relevant data at all so far!

 

Relevant data including the real actual number of foreigners in our total workforce versus the number of Singaporean workforce, and also research on the underemployment of graduates, have already been brought up in various posts above. There's no point repeating them over and over again.  

 

 

12 minutes ago, Guest jobs said:

The BW readers are waiting for your substantiated rebuttal on the topic and are not interested in your illogical sidetracks. 

 

BW readers have already seen all the needed substantiated data from me.There's n illogical sidetrack done by me at all. Your expose as GUEST DISCLOSED YOURSELF  who is going all out to deceive the general public with misleading data is not a sidetrack, but an important course to let everyone out there to determine if your credibility is worth trusting at all. Yes, you are the very person who tried to defend Brochez, and you even made racist remarks against Chinese and their supposed "rotten mee goreng" smell. Are you denying that? 

[Guest jobs]

Help!

 

You really have a great talent to make yourself to the laughing stock of BW.

 

The post you singled out is your own post. How can your own post serve as an admission made by me?

This is simply your own personal interpretation.
There is no admission from my side. I have been making my point clear in all my posts. You are riding on word definitions made by the Singapore government on “resident” workforce. I am not the one who has been inventing such word creations like “resident” workforce and “non-resident” workforce.

 

 I really have to laugh.

 

Even the evidence you brought up to support your claims, don’t serve to anything because it still remains a fact for all work fit Singaporeans being in employment. There is full employment of Singaporeans! The 6000 (sic!) retrenched Singaporeans in 2019 found a new job in 3 months. 10,000 unemployed Singaporeans in 2019 found a new job in same time.  

You still fail to show how in a society where all work fit Singaporeans are absorbed by the employment market, foreigners take away the jobs of locals?

The article you digged out for the graduates is soon 2 years old. 
 

Survey findings on underemployment show S’pore’s ‘graduate poor’ earn less than $2,000 a month

Published 10 APRIL, 2018
https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/survey-findings-underemployment-show-spores-graduate-poor-earn-less-2000-month

 

Is the current situation still the same?

 
The amount of concerned cases:

 quote: “It found that about 70, or 4.31 per cent, of the respondents were severely underemployed . “

 

70 Graduates had been affected. Yes 70!!!

You are doing as it affects many or most graduates!

 

Second in same article the journalist already clearly stated the reasons why the graduates had these issue:

 

quote : “The problem could also be industry-specific as the bulk of the companies with underemployed individuals (64 per cent) served mainly the domestic market. Some small- and medium-sized enterprises, for instance, may not be able to pay competitive wages. Ms Ling also questioned whether those underemployed were in jobs that required more generic, rather than specialised skills, or whether they were underemployed because of individual circumstances.

Mr Song said the majority of the underemployed may be from private universities, which could account for the vastly lower salaries.“

Aren't you making up things here and your reference to underemployed graduates is totally exaggerated?

 

But all your points don’t support your line of arguments . 
 

Anyone needs to qualify your arguments as totally overblown.

 

You evidently failed to rebut my arguments.

 

All your arguments don’t serve to rebut what I presented here.

 

It still stands: You had only been uttering biased slogans. 

[Guest Guest]

Hahahahaha! The MOTHER OF ALL IRONIES JUST happened!

 

Guest jobs can come here and talk about using his "data" to support his arguments. Yet, on other threads, he himself can go translate and post other articles that says that "The infectious disease experts interviewed refuted the fallacy and emphasized that the epidemic situation cannot be interpreted based on data alone." 

 

So which is it supposed to be now? Are the infectious disease experts WRONG?? Why don't you go tell them that? Or are you a HYPOCRITE who now agree that "the epidemic situation cannot be interpreted based on data alone."?? 

 

And to think you were dumb enough not to go use another name to be found out to be Guest jobs too! Hahahahaha... 

 

Let's see Mr PrataMan at work and see how you are going to be flip flopping out of this now! Which one is it : the infectious disease experts are wrong, or is the epidemic situation cannot be interpreted by data alone?? 

 

Lakes and gentlemen, presenting to you the largest HYPOCRITE on BlowingWind itself : GUEST JOBS!