# data[].attributes.body
I will not accept his claim as firstly, there are no evidences to show or to support the claim that was said.
At first, the claims that were made kind of made sense, however there were no evidence behind it to support it and hence it is invalid.

# data[].attributes.body
1)Interpreting what the person meant.
2) Investigate if there are any evidences which can support the claims that were made.
3) Evaluate the whether the claims that were made were reliable and true.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a complex claim as there are no evidences and hence we are unsure if the statement is true or false.
This cannot be verified unless the government releases anything
about it.

# data[].attributes.body
I would not support the claim even though it is verifiable and there are evidence to support it. This due to the claim being that Singaporeans has no other choice other than to take a public transport to move from place to place.

# data[].attributes.body
Interpret if it is what does he mean by Singaporeans will still continue to take public transport no matter what.Investigate what I have to find to make sure if the claim is rue or false which is the number of the commuters before and after the increase of fares.Analyse the claim by doing surveys and getting official numbers from the public transport. Evaluate that the method of asking of official numbers is more accurate and would use the conclusion arrived from it.Explain what the steps were to get to the result.

# data[].attributes.body
It is a claim of fact. We can check objectively to determine if the amount if Singaporeans taking public transport has change.

It can be verified by doing surveys asking commuters if they see a difference in passengers in public transport, it can also be verified by asking SMRT or Transit on their average number of passengers before and after the increase of prices in the fares.

# data[].attributes.body
I would not support the claim. The claim is not verifiable as it cannot be checked objectively and is subjective. The claim cannot be proven right or wrong as there is no evidence to support it. We can only agree or disagree with the claim.

# data[].attributes.body
Interpret the sentence and identify the keyword. Investigate and identify the type of claim. To analyse the claim, we have to identify methods to examine the claim. Evaluate the claim to make a conclusion based on the method used. Explain the steps you take from the beginning.

# data[].attributes.body
I wouldnt accept his claim because afterall it is just a opinion with no evidence supporting it although his reasons for his claims are reasonable but that does not make it valid without any evidence shown.

# data[].attributes.body
Interpreting what he meant, investigate whether there is any evidence to support his claims and evaluate whether his conclusion is valid and trustable

# data[].attributes.body
It is a claim of value. We cannot check objectively to determine if the reason for the increase in public fare is true or not. What he said might vary from others think about the situation. Every individual has their own judgement. This is because the word 'sustainable' is subjective. Thus, we can only agree or disagree with the statement.

It cannot be verified as it cannot be checked objectively. Different people view the word "sustainable" differently. The best solution is to ask the government the reason behind the increase.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a complex claim. It cannot be verified because there is no evidence that his claims are true.

It cannot be verified because without a official statement from SMRT there is no way to verify his claims.

# data[].attributes.body
Singaporeans will still take public transport no matter what

# data[].attributes.body
government need money to sustain the public transport industry

# data[].attributes.body
- The reason for the hike in the public transport fare is to keep the transport system sustainable
-

# data[].attributes.body
To recoup for the losses made by SMRT during the break downs.