To Debunk by way of Statistics all of his hairy apa’s fumbling and Goober di Goo stumblings… and then his own when he became PM too!!!… WOW… SURE runs in the FAMelee!!!

I urge you all to do the same.

You will know for yourself whether life lately has been tough or not. No need to listen to PAPaya’s bullshit!

Aiyoh, always the same nonsense.

Hello, PR is how many percent of “locals”? 15%? Of 15%, how many live here more than 5 years? 10-12%?

5 years ago you ever complain about PR? No, right? So you only complain the new 3-5%, right? Be honest leh. You also target the old PRs? How many of them married to Singaporeans? How many bring whole family stay here?

3-5% can distort your statistics by a lot ah? Really? Distort until totally out, as in Singaporean is totally the loser in every survey and the 3-5% can cover all up?

Wah, very convincing argument siah. Faintz.

‘Singaporeans’, ‘locals’ do not translate to ‘Singapore Citizens’

In PAP’s definition,
‘locals’ = ‘Singaporeans’ = ‘Singapore Permanent Residents’ + ‘Singapore Citizens’

But legally and in reality,
‘Singapore Permanent Residents’ = ‘FOREIGNERS’

singaporeans will never accept that their country is imperfect like any other country. they will rather crash the system than repair whats broken.

1. Old people are inaccessible, so only the fit, able and eager to participate will provide the statistical results. The SAMPLE IS LIKELY TO BE BIAS. Worse still, those that were omitted of participation for any reason/s or declined to participate are the true representative sample. If the participation rate is 30% and the positive response is 8 out of 10, the actual positive correspond to 24% AS COMPARED TO 70% who declined participation and who in fact hold negative response. The result is negative response is 76% BUT THE SURVEY RESULTS WILL BE PUBLISHED AS 80% OF THE SUBJECTS AGREED THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT INCOME. IT IS FALSE CONCLUSION!!!!

2. Words like sufficiency of income has different meaning to sufficiency. Most probably they have no income and as long as the children put food on the table. It is “sufficient” but when it comes to medical, they won’t see a doctor because of lack of affordability but not interpreted by the retirees as “income”. In other words, the wording of the question “suficiency” may be constructed to get the EXPECTED POSITIVE OUTCOME. The survey worker might even “interpreted” the word “sufficiency” (which mean different things to different people) to the respondent to elicit the “correct” preferred survey results.

With old people survey, it will be low response rate and the biggest fault is that the sample declined or unable of participation makes the survey results so obtained unreliable of interpretation.

I any case, who wants to admit their family is a failure?