Singapore Democrats

Anybody wants to venture a guess of the corresponding numbers for politicians?

....for every $1 earned by politicians... they destroy $??? of value (or hope).

Anyway, Mark Twain has something to say about such mathematical conjectures : "Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable."

...and what the writer has produced are not even statistics.

Eilis Lawlor, spokeswoman for the New Economics Foundation, said: "Pay levels often don't reflect the true value that is being created. As a society, we need a pay structure which rewards those jobs that create most societal benefit rather than those that generate profits at the expense of society and the environment".

Reminds me of the greedy bunch of useless MPs!!!

"The point we are making is more fundamental - that there should be a relationship between what we are paid and the value our work generates for society. We've found a way to calculate that," she said.

It'll be nice to apply this method to all the 82 MIW and see for ourselves what kind of value are we getting for paying them such obscene salaries.

Minister Mental said in Parliament that we should pay our A-TEAM top dollar so that we don't lose such 'talents' to the private sector. And one of the comparison he cited was to peg salaries comparable to banking industry.

While based on this research, it says that 'Rather than being wealth creators bankers are being handsomely rewarded for bringing the global financial system to the brink of collapse.

Paid between £500,000 and £80m a year, leading bankers destroy £7 of value for every pound they generate".


Can we then says our MIW destroy SGD7 for every SGD1 they generate???? Yes??? Or No????

What does Mark Twain know?

Try imagine a society without bankers, can you live inside?
Then try to imagine a society without cleaners, can you live inside.

Mark Twain once said something like this, for a man with a hammer everything looks like a nail.

After the hullabaloo about “self-centred” and “self-interested” American, quoting Mark Twain is rather inconsistent with one’s belief. Personally, the whole Mark Twain experience, Tom Sawyer and all that, it really evokes the American perfectly.

Now, statistics have a bit of a bad name, perhaps thanks in large part to that Disraeli’s quote (often credited to Mark Twain): "there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics". Obviously, statistics can be warped to prop up any argument, but when used dutifully they can also be very enlightening.

Just because I think it is a waste of time and very misguided to believe that the (“self-centred” and “self-interested”) Americans would be convinced over the radio to come to the "rescue" of the local rabid democrat-wannabes, there is still room for some among them to offer a wise quote or two occasionally.

Yes, statistics can be revealing and enlightening, but do we not lend ourselves to accusations of being gullible to a journalist wielding a set of concocted and highly contorted numbers just to sell a story?

The only credit I would give Mr Shankleman is his creativity, in being able to create such questionable mathematics .... which are pointless to question.

You are obviously blind. The writer did not create all these himself. His reference is the think tank: the New Economics Foundation.

Try imagine a society without bankers, can you live inside?
Then try to imagine a society without cleaners, can you live inside.

You are not even logical.

Hello,

For the Pinnacle Flats about SGD 600,000. Inorder to service the loans the next 35yrs you "eat grass everday" every month you fork out SGD 1,500 aside (not including others expenses kids education retirement medical car etc) we are heading towards a future when "contract jobs" which is gaining popularity? You must be nuts?

Mr Shanmugam said on the Straits Times
Singapre need good governance and only PAP can deliver?? you think too highly of yourself, thick skin.

Voting for opposition party
1st point) And if the majority chooses slower development?
Answer, what have the Singaporean gained from we want it now, instant, faster development just more grey hairs

2nd point) And Lower Quality Of Life?
We can do without air-conditional wet market if the price of food is cheaper. We can do without bus terminal with air-conditional. We can do without bus with music that nobody listened, telvision broadcasting CNA news that nobody watch when you are only 8 stops from reaching your destination. We can do without any these fanciful things, that end up a burden to our S'porean pocket.

3rd point) Willing to accept more tension within our society
We are sure Opposition Party will carry on business as usual without tinkering too much. If it is not broken, the Opposition will not fix it

If the people vote against the PAP in the coming election, the property market will crash, then the flats and houses will be affordable again, inflation will also go down.

"... create such questionable mathematics .... which are pointless to question."

Oh. You mean like, employment rate of residents, as opposed to citizens?

My apologies... then delete "Mr Shankleman" and insert "New Economics Foundation" in my last comment. Otherwise, pretty much the same.

Apologies accepted.

Let say the banker creates a value of x while the waste recycling worker creates a value of y.

According to the article, x = -7 while y = +12.

You may not agree with the exact numbers for x and y, saying that this is fanciful mathematics. But that is not true, it is actually based upon simple mathematics not much more difficult than those used by your insurance companies to calculate your premium, except that they use the concept of SROI ( Social Returns on Investments). The bankers did bring down the financial system, causing a lot of people a lot of suffering. Now the governments have to borrow heavily, and servicing such great debts incur a lot of cost, which can be calculated. The hospital cleaners prevented a lot of infections, which could have caused a lot of people to suffer. The economic cost for that can be calculated.
For technical details of calculations, please see:
http://www.neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/files/A_guide_to_Social_Return_on_Investment_1.pdf

But putting aside the detailed calculations, lets go into the qualitative aspect of it.

My question is: Do you agree that
i) x > y
ii) x = y or
iii) x < y ?

I ask this question in order to know whether you have grasp the substance of the message from the New Economics Foundation, or have purposely ignore the Truth, using maths as an excuse. The underlying message of the report is not maths but a new concept, ie SROI.

For your info. NEF is a charity organization and it does not speak for any corporations. and hence has no vested interest except for the greater good for society by doing the right things.

Thanks for the effort to attempt to unravel the maths by NEF. Just by the example provided, the conveniently skewed assumptions used to arrive at such are quite obvious.

It is plainly another case whereby the "message" is decided first, and then "deriving" the maths to back up the hypothesis.

We see enough of such pseudo-statistics in the media (including those of our beloved MSM and govt), as was probably alluded by Foxtrot. It just needs a bit of creativity to hatch these.