Everyone's HAPPY!

[Leongsam]

There's so much whinging in this forum about how most sinkies, especially the elderly, are suffering under PAP's reign. However, the facts reveal an entirely different story!

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_501233.html

<table class="georgia11 whiteBg" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td class="padlrt10">Mar 12, 2010</td></tr> <tr> <td class="padlrt10"> Elderly in HDB happy, active
</td> </tr> <tr><td class="padlrt10"> By Melissa Pang </td></tr> <tr><td class="marginbottom8 padlrt10"> ELDERLY residents living in Housing Board estates are an active and happy lot.

Most of them also feel a sense of pride in their HDB homes, and possess a strong sense of belonging to their neighbourhood, according to an HDB Sample Household Survey (SHS) carried out in 2008.

More are also taking part in community activities, have sufficient sources of income to cover their daily expenses, with adequate support from their children, or own savings to meet their old age needs.

The survey, which polled elderly residents above 65 years, showed that 98.5 per cent of them were happy with their flats, and 97 per cent were on the whole, satisfied with their neighbourhood.

It also found that 46.9 per cent of the seniors take an active part in community events organised by the Community Clubs (CCs), Residents' Committees (RCs), and religious organisations. This marks a 30.1 per cent jump from the 16.8 per cent 10 years ago.

The proportion of elderly residents in HDB flats grew to 9.8 per cent in 2008, up 2.2 per cent from 2003. The proportion of elderly households in HDB flats also rose from 10.7 per cent in 2003 to 14.5 per cent in 2008.
</td></tr></tbody></table>

HDB's findings
* 98.5 per cent of elderly households indicated that they were happy with their flats, a slight increase compared to 97.9 per cent in 2003
* 97 per cent also indicated overall satisfaction with their neighbourhood
* Over 97 per cent of elderly households were satisfied with the overall provision of facilities within their estates
* 81.5 per cent of elderly households surveyed in 2008 were proud of their homes. At the same time, 93 per cent of them agreed that their flats were value for money
* 85 per cent of elderly households had no intention of moving in the next five years, up from 79.4 per cent in 2003
* The proportion of the elderly who were inclined to move declined slightly, from 7.8 per cent in 2003 to 7.3 per cent in 2008
* 99.5 per cent of elderly households felt a sense of belonging to their towns or estates, up from 90.1 per cent in 1998 and 96.4 per cent in 2003.
* Almost all the elderly (99.6 per cent) identified at least one financial source from a list of possible financial sources to meet their old age needs
* About 81 per cent of the elderly mentioned that their sources of income were sufficient to cover their daily expenses

 

[IR123]

The Straits Times report is very impressive.

Tonight i will take a walk around my estate and look at the infectiously happy faces of the elderly.

 

[Frankiestine]

Sam haven't you learned better then to trust reports from a news agency that is rated 154 worldwide??

 

[balajii]

how come never ask the elderly how many % worry not enough $ if hospitalise?

99.9% i suppose.

 

[chao_ah_beng]

You can post that news article again, Leongsam.
The PAP is the best, bar none!

 

[Leongsam]

Sam haven't you learned better then to trust reports from a news agency that is rated 154 worldwide??

I trust the ST a lot more than the garbage posted by the anti PAP brigade. All they do is post hoaxes and related crap.

 

[chao_ah_beng]

I trust the ST a lot more than the garbage posted by the anti PAP brigade. All they do is post hoaxes and related crap.

Very true, Leongsam.

Look at Gopalan Nair's hoax about LKY's heart attack. All those anti-PAP crap and hoaxes are losing their credibility online and offline.

The worst thing the anti-PAP brigade did was banned me from this forum yesterday although my last post yesterday, immediately prior to the ban, was neither rude nor spam nor advertisement. yellow people gave me 4 separate infractions within a few minutes time that led to the ban. My crime? Because of my difference of opinion. I was shocked to find out that many anti-PAP brigades don't tolerate free speech online. How can Singaporeans trust them with all their crap, hoaxes, and intolerance of free speech?

The PAP is still the best, bar none!

 

[General Veers]

Very true, Leongsam.

True ki lan lah. Use your regular nick yellow_people. For me i have made it known to forummers here that i am a clone of the OA so it's no secret. No balls to use yellow_people for fear of people here reporting you to the authorities for non stop racist posts?

 

[General Veers]

So many PAP por lumpars here! I could have easily zap them all except for the forum host whom i have to respect if i choose to remain here.

 

[UseYourBrain]

Agree !00% OR ELSE how could they submit themselves for 40 over years to One Mane without protest!

 

[aurvandil]

The Straits Times report is very impressive.

Tonight i will take a walk around my estate and look at the infectiously happy faces of the elderly.

Maybe you should take a bus ride/MRT ride as well.

http://www.sammyboy.com/showthread.php?t=53817

According to Minister Raymond Lim, Singaporeans are overwhelmingly happy with public transport too. Scores well above 90%. Although in the same sentance, he somehow manages also to talk about long waiting times and how people are unhappy.


Media report was the best. After showing how everyone was so happy with the public transport, they show person after person complaining about the waiting times.

 

[IR123]

I had made my comments on that thread.

The public transport system especially MRT is reliable - that's the happy part.

The overcrowding - that's the unhappy part.

6.5million - that will make it even more unhappy.

 

[aurvandil]

The public transport system especially MRT is reliable - that's the happy part.

The overcrowding - that's the unhappy part.

Help me out with the logic here:

1) I have to wait a long time.
2) It is cramped and uncomfortable during the ride.

When I get there, I become deliriously happy (?).
The reasoin I am so happy is because the MRT is reliable (HOORAY ... we made it !).

 

[IR123]

Help me out with the logic here:

1) I have to wait a long time.
2) It is cramped and uncomfortable during the ride.

When I get there, I become deliriously happy (?).
The reasoin I am so happy is because the MRT is reliable (HOORAY ... we made it !).

1) Why is it a long wait? Up to 6 mins at most

2) cramped and uncomfortable is true but it is only for a certain stretch; try the bus as alternative and the MRT is far better; try the taxi and you wished you had taken the MRT ($26 versus $1.50)

deliriously happy is your opinion, not mine; MRT is reliable - that says a lot doesn't it. If not to you, it does to me.

by the way, which system in the world are you comparing our MRT to? Maybe you can share your opinion

 

[aurvandil]

1) Why is it a long wait? Up to 6 mins at most

2) cramped and uncomfortable is true but it is only for a certain stretch; try the bus as alternative and the MRT is far better; try the taxi and you wished you had taken the MRT ($26 versus $1.50)

deliriously happy is your opinion, not mine; MRT is reliable - that says a lot doesn't it. If not to you, it does to me.

by the way, which system in the world are you comparing our MRT to? Maybe you can share your opinion

Sorry you did not get the joke. I was taking a dig at the survey results which are not credible.If you want to understand why, have a look at this url.

http://www.lta.gov.sg/images/PTCSS 2009_Annex-A.pdf

The satisfaction score for each question was measured using a 10 pt scale. If you look at the mean score, the mean score averages between 6 to 7. The % satisfied is however very high.

The classification of "satisfied" is not provided in the release. Based on the numbers, it is likely that as long as a person gave a score from 6 to 10, he is classified as "satisfied".

This is a non-standard methodology in survey research. It inflates the results as it groups "indifferent" respondnents with the "satisfied" respondents. A more common grouping is

8 to 10 Satisfied
6 to 7 Neutral
1 to 5 Dissatisfied

Even using this highly questionable methodology, we see some alarming results. At the bottom of the release, we see a table on crowdness. On a 10 point scale, almost 50% of respondents gave a score of 1 to 5.

 

[IR123]

.......

ok, sorry....

i am not surprised. There had been a lot of brainwashing nowadays, defending of policies by outright assertions that it is good, people are happy, etc, etc. Elections are coming.

 

[Goh Meng Seng]

Alas, I was thinking of giving Minister Raymond a break because at least he admitted honestly about the waiting time... but he left out the crowdedness figures! LOL!

Anyway, I will just leave him alone for now. At least he has done something good to get things done about the situation, not recalcitrant in denying the plain facts.

Goh Meng Seng

Sorry you did not get the joke. I was taking a dig at the survey results which are not credible.If you want to understand why, have a look at this url.

http://www.lta.gov.sg/images/PTCSS 2009_Annex-A.pdf

The satisfaction score for each question was measured using a 10 pt scale. If you look at the mean score, the mean score averages between 6 to 7. The % satisfied is however very high.

The classification of "satisfied" is not provided in the release. Based on the numbers, it is likely that as long as a person gave a score from 6 to 10, he is classified as "satisfied".

This is a non-standard methodology in survey research. It inflates the results as it groups "indifferent" respondnents with the "satisfied" respondents. A more common grouping is

8 to 10 Satisfied
6 to 7 Neutral
1 to 5 Dissatisfied

Even using this highly questionable methodology, we see some alarming results. At the bottom of the release, we see a table on crowdness. On a 10 point scale, almost 50% of respondents gave a score of 1 to 5.

 

[Medusa]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/HxgQ6YaI4V0&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/HxgQ6YaI4V0&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

Happy shalalala it's so nice to be happy shalalala..

 

[aurvandil]

ok, sorry....

i am not surprised. There had been a lot of brainwashing nowadays, defending of policies by outright assertions that it is good, people are happy, etc, etc. Elections are coming.

sigh .... Somewhere along the way, the PAP seriously got lost.

I sometimes think that those huge salaries play a large part.

In the past when Ministers/MPs were more modestly paid, it was quite easy to walk away because of principle.

These days however, the huge salaries serve as a kind of golden handcuff. If you choose the moral thing and walk away, you face a huge loss of income. As an example of just how large a loss of income, Minister Yeo Cheow Tong used to gross more than $1.5 mil. After his fall from grace, he was offered a consultant position at Lippo. It is reported that he is only being paid $16k per month.

In this way, good men who join the system get corrupted by the system. They learn to look the other way and only speak up when it is "safe". Policy failures and errors are allowed to fester until the situation becomes so bad that the truth can no longer be concealed. And even then, in the face of overwhelming evidence, attempts are made to hide to truth by leveraging on control over the mass media.

A further example of just how bad the rot is can be seen from the selection of people who will serve as future MPs. To win, a blind eye is turned to people with serious characther flaws. If a person was already abusing the little power he had to prey on young girls, it is almost too painful to imagine what it would have been like if he had the benefits of high political office to bolster his extra-cirricular pursuits.

 

[IR123]

.............

A nation is only as good as its leader.

The salary is actually a S$15m entitlement for winning the Election for the Ministers. This has the effect of tying in closer the governance of the country with the political party. The opportunity cost of a lost election is $15m. This makes it personal.

The salary increase also impacts the oppositions. It is a $1m entitlement for winning the Election. In Singapore's context, part of winning is to get into the good books of the PAP. That is one possible reason why the largely silent WP announced upfront that it will not contest in AMK.

My opinion is that with the increase in salaries, both the PAP and the oppositions are in greater alignment than before. A lot of noise is made before the Elections. The prize is very good.

However proving it is another thing. There are always at least two sides to everything. That is why lawyers can earn a living. Besides we ourselves can be wrong.