About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 years

General comments and chit-chat, or tell us how we can improve KiasuParents.com
Post Reply
raysusan
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 1414
Joined: Tue Jul 22,
Total Likes:6

About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 years

Post by raysusan » Tue Jul 08, 2014 10:24 pm

how accurate is this number?

http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/ ... st-5-years

Green_white
OrangeBelt
OrangeBelt
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Apr 12,

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by Green_white » Wed Jul 09, 2014 1:17 am

Hmm....sets me thinking...

Thanks for sharing

ChiefKiasu
Site Admin
Posts: 15870
Joined: Mon Sep 03,
Location: Singapore
Total Likes:325

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by ChiefKiasu » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:05 am

I don't understand the correction at the bottom of the article that says that it is incorrect to say that over 25% of NS liable PRs have revoke their status. If the 7200 eligible PRs include those who have not reached the age for enlistment, then wouldn't the 2600 that revoked that up a much higher percentage of the group?

The number is shocking and sad for Singapore.

littleprince
BlueBelt
BlueBelt
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Mar 22,
Total Likes:3

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by littleprince » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:16 am

These are the same "kids" who fought for a place in "good" schools and rob Singaporeans of their place via Phase 1, 2A1,2A2 and 2B.

Nebbermind
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 16422
Joined: Tue Dec 22,
Total Likes:163

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by Nebbermind » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:35 am

ChiefKiasu wrote:I don't understand the correction at the bottom of the article that says that it is incorrect to say that over 25% of NS liable PRs have revoke their status. If the 7200 eligible PRs include those who have not reached the age for enlistment, then wouldn't the 2600 that revoked that up a much higher percentage of the group?

The number is shocking and sad for Singapore.
I think 7200 is the number who had reached the age of enlistment and enlisted.
2600 include those who are younger than enlistment age.

But I think not much difference...coz some would also renounced their PR status earlier (> 5 yrs ago) in this group


pirate
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 4824
Joined: Mon Jul 02,
Total Likes:186

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by pirate » Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:37 am

ChiefKiasu wrote:I don't understand the correction at the bottom of the article that says that it is incorrect to say that over 25% of NS liable PRs have revoke their status. If the 7200 eligible PRs include those who have not reached the age for enlistment, then wouldn't the 2600 that revoked that up a much higher percentage of the group?

The number is shocking and sad for Singapore.
The 7200 cannot include those who have not reached the age of enlistment lah, because the 7200 refer to those who have already either enlisted or completed NS. Only the 2600 can include those who have not reached the age of enlistment.

atrecord
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 2265
Joined: Wed Feb 17,
Total Likes:6

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by atrecord » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:16 am

So about 1 in 4 of these 2nd generation PRs will not serve our country. They (or their parents) earn our salary, enjoy our transport and housing, healthcare, education, safety, etc etc. but run far far when need to serve.

i think the govt should relook at the benefits of their whole extended families in SGP, rather than just them in future…

Why should me and my son protect these people in times of conflict???

hquek
Councillor
Councillor
Posts: 6702
Joined: Fri Jul 18,
Total Likes:72

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by hquek » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:24 am

These PRs also pay our taxes la, so not one way street. And cheng hu will tell us that these pp contribute to hiring SGs.

I'm not quite surprised by the numbers becos I keep hearing stories of PRs who come here to enjoy the safety and security for their young kids, but fully intending to go abroad once their kids get older. It's just the way of the mobile society.

What irks me more are those FOC scholarships we offer to pp all over for SG university and here we have pp from lower strata of society staring at fee increments almost on a yearly basis. Not sure if this practice has stopped but sure hope so. Apparently this group lagi worse, there are those don't intend to serve out their bond by working in SG and just hop on the next plane out once they get their degree. I just don't get the feel that this group has been dealt with and SG end up looking like a fool.

limlim
KiasuGrandMaster
KiasuGrandMaster
Posts: 6939
Joined: Mon Aug 02,
Total Likes:108

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by limlim » Wed Jul 09, 2014 10:55 am

hquek wrote:These PRs also pay our taxes la, so not one way street. And cheng hu will tell us that these pp contribute to hiring SGs.
No they don't. Their parent may do, but not them before turning NS age.

nansk
BrownBelt
BrownBelt
Posts: 684
Joined: Fri Apr 09,
Total Likes:10

Re: About 2,600 NS-liable PRs renounced status in last 5 yea

Post by nansk » Wed Jul 09, 2014 11:39 am

atrecord wrote:So about 1 in 4 of these 2nd generation PRs... (or their parents) earn our salary, enjoy our transport and housing, healthcare, education, safety, etc etc..
Your choice of words is misleading. The PRs don't earn our salary; they earn their own salary for their own work. Their work benefits companies in Singapore.

Your choice of the word 'enjoy' implies that PRs avail of transport, housing, healthcare, education, etc. for free. They do pay for these services, and, esp. in recent years, have been paying much more than we do for the same service.
but run far far when need to serve
To be honest, I have met some Singaporeans who appeared to be going to serve NS under duress. I got the impression that if they had the option to not serve, they would have taken that option. It is entirely possible that the ratio of these Singaporeans may be 1 in 4, too.

I have also met several PRs who understand the rationale behind, and
benefits of, NS and whose sons have served, or will serve when it's their turn.

So it is egregious to paint all PRs with the same black brush.

Post Reply