- Joined
- Jan 13, 2010
- Messages
- 459
- Points
- 0
http://www.temasekreview.com/2010/0...hetic-53th-ranking-for-liveability-worldwide/
Straits Times tries to play down importance of freedom in Singapore’s pathetic 53th ranking for liveability worldwide
Written by Our Correspondent
Despite having the most expensive government in the entire world, Singapore is ranked a miserable 53th position in terms of liveability worldwide in a recent global conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit.
Not surprisingly, the top 10 most liveable cities in the world are all found in democratic states.
The latest findings corroborate an earlier survey done by influential Ireland-based lifestyle magazine International Living, which ranked Singapore 70th in terms of quality of life in the world, below the likes of Romania, Croatia and Slovenia, former states of the Eastern bloc.
The data is collated from official government sources, the World Health Organization, The Economist, and many other journals, tables, and records.
Below is Singapore’s scores for each category:
http://www.temasekreview.com/wp-content/themes/church_10/images/thumbnails/ilsingapore.jpg
While Singapore scores high on risk and safety, health and infrastructure, it scores poorly in environment and freedom, bringing down its final score to a mediocre 61.
Environment and Freedom each contributed 10 per cent to the countries’ overall score:
Environment (10%). To figure a country’s score in this category, we look at population density per square kilometer, population growth rate, greenhouse emissions per capita, and the percentage of total land that is protected.
Freedom (10%). Freedom House’s survey is the main source for these scores, with an emphasis on a citizen’s political rights and civil liberties.
The survey by International Living was not reported in the mainstream media when we have already reported on it last month. Perhaps Straits Times finds the 53th ranking by The Economist Unit is more “respectable”.
As expected of its role as a mouthpiece of the PAP regime, the Straits Times had tried to put down the significance of the findings.
It quoted regional economist Song Seng Wun as saying that “culture and freedom” takes time to evolve.
It is not a matter of time, but a matter of political necessity. So long the PAP remains in power and continues to introduce ridiculous and repressive laws like the Public Order Act to curtail the civil and political liberties of Singaporeans, Singapore will continue to score poorly in this area.
The Straits Times also interview some Singaporeans to give the impression that they are not interested in freedom.
“Some Singaporeans, however, simply shrugged when asked about areas like the environment,” it reported.
Air stewardess Tan Xiu Mei, 27, said she is more concerned about bread-and-butter issues, like food prices. Asked about freedoms, she said: ‘I don’t really have much to voice anyway.’
Miss Tan seems ignorant of the fact that without the freedom to voice one’s concerns, dissatisfaction and unhappiness, she will always be at the mercy of those in power.
The Straits Times can continue pulling over a wool over the eyes of its own apathetic citizenry, but it will never be able to deceive first world global citizens.
It is little wonder that Singapore is unable to attract the best talents from mainland China, India and elsewhere to settle here despite its ultra-liberal immigration policies.
In a Gallup poll done last year July among Chinese college students, their top three emigration destinations are United States, France and South Korea. Singapore is not even featured in the top five.
A paranoid, insular and repressive regime, coupled with an ignorant citizenry and a third class media is a recipe for an impending disaster. Will any global talents in their right minds plant their roots in a sinking ship?
The PAP ministers are the highest paid political leaders in the world, but Singapore has the highest income gap and lowest standard of living among first world nations. Do they really deserve their salaries?
Straits Times tries to play down importance of freedom in Singapore’s pathetic 53th ranking for liveability worldwide
Written by Our Correspondent
Despite having the most expensive government in the entire world, Singapore is ranked a miserable 53th position in terms of liveability worldwide in a recent global conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit.
Not surprisingly, the top 10 most liveable cities in the world are all found in democratic states.
The latest findings corroborate an earlier survey done by influential Ireland-based lifestyle magazine International Living, which ranked Singapore 70th in terms of quality of life in the world, below the likes of Romania, Croatia and Slovenia, former states of the Eastern bloc.
The data is collated from official government sources, the World Health Organization, The Economist, and many other journals, tables, and records.
Below is Singapore’s scores for each category:
http://www.temasekreview.com/wp-content/themes/church_10/images/thumbnails/ilsingapore.jpg
While Singapore scores high on risk and safety, health and infrastructure, it scores poorly in environment and freedom, bringing down its final score to a mediocre 61.
Environment and Freedom each contributed 10 per cent to the countries’ overall score:
Environment (10%). To figure a country’s score in this category, we look at population density per square kilometer, population growth rate, greenhouse emissions per capita, and the percentage of total land that is protected.
Freedom (10%). Freedom House’s survey is the main source for these scores, with an emphasis on a citizen’s political rights and civil liberties.
The survey by International Living was not reported in the mainstream media when we have already reported on it last month. Perhaps Straits Times finds the 53th ranking by The Economist Unit is more “respectable”.
As expected of its role as a mouthpiece of the PAP regime, the Straits Times had tried to put down the significance of the findings.
It quoted regional economist Song Seng Wun as saying that “culture and freedom” takes time to evolve.
It is not a matter of time, but a matter of political necessity. So long the PAP remains in power and continues to introduce ridiculous and repressive laws like the Public Order Act to curtail the civil and political liberties of Singaporeans, Singapore will continue to score poorly in this area.
The Straits Times also interview some Singaporeans to give the impression that they are not interested in freedom.
“Some Singaporeans, however, simply shrugged when asked about areas like the environment,” it reported.
Air stewardess Tan Xiu Mei, 27, said she is more concerned about bread-and-butter issues, like food prices. Asked about freedoms, she said: ‘I don’t really have much to voice anyway.’
Miss Tan seems ignorant of the fact that without the freedom to voice one’s concerns, dissatisfaction and unhappiness, she will always be at the mercy of those in power.
The Straits Times can continue pulling over a wool over the eyes of its own apathetic citizenry, but it will never be able to deceive first world global citizens.
It is little wonder that Singapore is unable to attract the best talents from mainland China, India and elsewhere to settle here despite its ultra-liberal immigration policies.
In a Gallup poll done last year July among Chinese college students, their top three emigration destinations are United States, France and South Korea. Singapore is not even featured in the top five.
A paranoid, insular and repressive regime, coupled with an ignorant citizenry and a third class media is a recipe for an impending disaster. Will any global talents in their right minds plant their roots in a sinking ship?
The PAP ministers are the highest paid political leaders in the world, but Singapore has the highest income gap and lowest standard of living among first world nations. Do they really deserve their salaries?
