How to play with statistics?

Singapore residents by Age Group: 0-4 yr 196 K 5-9 yr 239.3 K 10-14 yr 263.6 K 15-19 yr 238.1 K 20-24 yr 222.4 K 25-29 yr 253.7 K 30-34 yr 303.6 K 35-39 yr 310.1 K 40-44 yr 331.2 K 45-49 yr 314.5 K 50-54 yr 260.5 K 55-59 yr 202.8 K 60-64 yr 120.8 K 65-69 yr 104.3 K 70-74 yr 79.7 K 75-79 yr 56.2 K 80-84 yr 30.9 K 85 & abv 25.8 K What do these figures tell us? There are many ways to read statistics. One can read it funnily, creatively, seriously, or to read it just to serve one's own perspective and declare, 'Eureka! the statistics support my case.' Look at the above statistics once again. Look at the age group from 30-49 and you will find the numbers are fairly constant. This means that most of them are well and kicking. Not dying. When they hit 50-54, there is an immediate drop of 54K. Looks like they started to die from 50 onwards. 55-59, another drop of 58K. And 60-64 another big drop of 78K. The bulk of the people dying are within the age group of 50-64. A decrease of 190K. Then comes a lull. The 65-69 groups seems to die lesser, only 16K. This is the safest group. The next big drop is the 70-74 group. Though the number is only 25K, it is actually 25% or 1 in 4 will die in this group. By then the survivors have dropped to only 79.7K. And the dying gets smaller but percentage wise gets bigger. Once hitting 75-79, 1 in 2 will die. The above 85 figure is a distortion as it includes everyone above that age. Oh, the babyboomers should be in the 55-64 groups. But their numbers indicate that many have already died. Isn't this a nice way of looking at numbers?

The people support the annuity proposal!

I woke up this morning and started to scan the msm. I was looking for a black page or some reports on the Black September event yesterday. The only thing black are the black words on white paper. I couldn't believe my eyes and went through the paper one more time. Confirmed. No Black September Incident reported. But wait a minute, as I look closer, more blacks started to appear. The featured policemen of the Star team were all in black. The lawyer was in black, CPF staff were in black. And the leaders attending the APEC meeting were in black. Duh, they wore black for a different reason. So there was no Black September to protest against the annuity scheme. And the online petition only received a pathetic 700 signatures, including mine. This should be enough evidence to prove that the people are all in support of the annuity scheme. I am just a minority. The govt shall now feel more comfortable to go ahead with the scheme and all the parliamentarians can vote with their conscience that the people are all for it. I still do not want anyone to mess with my life saving, even if it is $2. It's my money. Back off!

The cost of justice

In our first world justice system, the cost of justice does not come cheap. But that is the price that we have to pay for a first world system. Good quality cannot be cheap. The Straits Times reported about a school teacher who had a relatively minor road accident and was awarded $188 for damages to his motorbike. The other party appealed and through a series of court appearances, this poor school teacher is now landed with a $45k liability which he could not pay and a legal fee of $80k which he owed his lawyer. And justice is still eluding him as he has to engage another lawyer to defend him from paying the $45k compensation. He must be consoling himself for living in a system where justice will be delivered to him eventually. But if he cannot pay, his two lawyers will stand to lose all their fees when he declares himself bankrupt. Now I understand why there is a call to pay lawyers higher salaries. They are faced with professional risk of clients not being able to pay for their professional fees.

Talking back is here to stay

Janadas Devan wrote about talking back in the Net and how this development is here to stay. The genie is out and you can't put it back. Actually it is not about Net. This talking back phenomenon is growing by the days and will be equally robust and responsive in the main stream media if allowed to. We all know why there seems to be so little feedback in the msm. No fault of the citizens for sure. We have educated a whole new generation to think. And think they must. Having gone through the grinds in tertiary institutions, local and overseas, it will be very sad if the population still cannot think. We have taught them to read and write. And read and write they must and they will. Education is not simply to produce unthinking and mute workers. Those are machines. The voices in the Net may come in different hue and colours and vary in quality. Janadas said, 'At one end there are some exceptionally intelligent ones; at the other end, some exceedingly dumb ones; and in between, a vast grab bag of sense and nonsense.' And there are those that live and thrive in vile languages and seek pleasure in attacking everyone instead of discussing with their brains. And some of the superficial journalists scorned upon the netizens as a bunch of unschooled that are below their class. For these bunch of nose in the air journalists, Janadas has this to say. They ' should at least have the honesty to admit that the mainstream media too can be described in similar terms - some good, some dumb, and in between, a vast grab bag of middling sense and sometimes outrageous nonsenses.' The main stream media pride itself of bleached honesty. The Net surpasses it with its flying colours of honesty and dishonesty, unbleached and unedited truths and views, and styles of expression. The beauty of the Net is the freedom of expression and choice of lingo. Nothing is forbidden. This is where the msm will always be a far distance from the Net, dull and predictable while the Net is full of surprises. And one is dying while the other is blooming and spreading like wild fire. The fields of weeds swarming around the little landscaped gardens.

Quality journalists

By Ong Sor Fern I HAVE never, nor will I ever, read blogs. Yes, I am an information snob. I prefer my writing to come in published formats: newspapers, magazines and books. As someone who grew up on a hearty diet of old media, I trust these established systems of delivering information simply because there is quality control. When I read a newspaper, I can be assured that the journalist is subject to a code of ethics, his work has been audited by editors and his sources verified. Ditto a magazine and a book. Blogs, however, are a Wild West frontier, a welter of undifferentiated information that blends fact with opinion with merry disregard for consequences. No doubt there are intelligent bloggers out there. But trying to find them is akin to looking for a single brainy needle in an exceedingly large and, mostly dumb, haystack.... ________________ I must say that she is very logical and objective. And all her articles are not opinions but well researched, well edited and well verified.