In the political debate on CNA, several numbers were thrown up with the PAP using the 10m population red herring to attack Chee Soon Juan. The accusation is that Chee is 'attempting to mislead Singaporeans by claiming that the Govt planned to increase the country's population to 10 million, and further twisting facts when his falsehood was caught out'. And with this, SDP's integrity is now in question. Accepting that this is how politicians attacked each other and grabbing on any statement made to score a point, there are more to come in the campaigning and politiking for the next few days. Cheng Bock called this as political ploy. Some may call it papsmear or personal attack.
What did Chee said during the debate? Was he asserting that the Govt is planning a 10m population or was he asking Vivian if the Govt was planning for a 10m population? By the way, where did these numbers come from? Who originated these numbers? There is no smoke without fire. I thought I heard Chee asking Vivian to confirm if this is true. Those who watched this programme, please confirm my understanding. If Chee was asking Vivian to confirm, then what was so wrong about it? Cannot ask question meh? Cannot ask the Govt to confirm if it is or it is not meh? Asking a question like that also got integrity problem meh? Children in school better stop asking questions.
The question by Chee brought Vivian to give an affirmative answer that the Govt did not intend to go to 6.9m or 10m. In fact Vivian also said that the Govt did not set such a target. Anyway it would take time to reach 6.9m or 10m. Even if 6.9m is reached by 2030, no one is wiser. Many would be dead by then and no one would be around to settle the score. It is thus a moot point whether the Govt is working towards 6.9m, 10m or 20m. There were some educated clowns talking about 20m is a good target. Oops, cannot call them clowns. Apologies, educated professionals, experts are better descriptions of such people.
This whole issue is about whether the Govt is planning to grow the population to 6.9m, 10m or more. There is no time frame to it and the Govt can say anything. What is important is that Vivian has spoken on behalf of the Govt that it is not planning to do so to assure those who are against this idea. What if the Govt said before the GE there was no such plan but after GE there is?
Another interesting number that was quoted by Vivian was that 60,000 foreign PMETs have lost their jobs in the first 5 months of this year. I hope I did not hear this wrongly. Please correct me if I am wrong. I take this as a fact for the moment. If 60,000 foreign PMETs lost their jobs in the first 5 months of 2020, then how many Singaporeans PMETs would have lost their jobs in the same period? If the ratio is 1:1, then 60,000 Singaporean PMETs must have also lost their jobs, bringing the total to 120,000 in 5 months, ie 14,000 job losses per month. This is just a guess, it could be 1 Singapore PMET to 2 foreign PMETs or a different variation of this. What is the true number of Singaporean PMETs losing their jobs in the same period?
Take another ratio that was put up by Vivian. He said for every foreign PMET working here, there are 7 Singapore PMETs to match. If we use this ratio of 1:7 in a simplistic manner, for 60,000 foreign PMETs losing their jobs, then 420,000 Singaporean PMETs would have lost their jobs, ceteris pari bus. But this is not true definitely. But this 1:7 ratio could also lead to the estimate total number of PMET positions in Singapore. PSP used a number of 400,000 foreign PMETs here. So the number of Singaporean PMETs working must be 2.8m, giving a total population of PMETs at 3.2m. The number does not seem right. 3.2m is about the total working population of Singapore. Then how to account for the 2m or so non PMETs working here, ie the workers? Adding the two numbers together, it would mean the whole population of Singapore, young and old, Singaporeans and foreigners, must all be working.
It is easy to throw out numbers out of the blue and not many would have the full set of numbers in hand to dispute what is true or false. Anyway, if 60,000 foreign PMETs have lost their jobs, are they still here or gone home? Such a big number must have made its presence or absence felt. I don't feel a thing.
On the other hand, how many foreign PMETs were brought in during the last 20 years, with many converted to citizens and PRs. By the way, 60,000 foreign PMETs refers to what, locals, PRs or what? Without knowing the combination, it can be misleading when used in different situations. Are Singaporeans supposed to feel better knowing that 60,000 foreign PMETs have lost their jobs when there are still 340,000 working here, using the 400,000 number quoted by PSP? Or another 60,000 already brought in to replace them? I am just asking questions for discussion only ah, I am no asserting anything.
Then MOM is disputing the 100,000 Singaporean PMETs unemployed figure, coming out with a figure of 39,000 unemployed as at June last year. Trying to make sense or arguing with such numbers can be very tiring and misleading. The figures would only tell one part of the story at a particular time. What about those not counted, like retired after losing their jobs, or underemployed by taking up any job that came by? Using a static number like that is misleading too in many ways. No one is wiser and it is foolish to insist that one is right or wrong just by quoting a number.
What do you think?
Above 3 PSP posters from www.theindependent.sg showing them being torn down. Seemed like deliberate acts and PSP had made police report about the incidents.
Above posters are from Yahoo News. Think the posters were put up by our foreign talents who were unfamiliar with the PAP logo nor were they able to read and could not tell the diffence between an upside down poster. Or just suka suka hung them and went off to put up more, did not bother to check. Jaga supervisor also foreign talent I supposed.