Living on Charity

I briefly watched Cheryl Fox on CNA last night interviewing a Mdm Heng(not her real name). Mdm Heng is around 60, sickly and lonely. Her three children and husband had passed away. She depends on a monthly withdrawal of $290 from her CPF to get by. Not enough definitely. And she needs handouts from some kind souls to pay for her medicine and a bit more. Her social life is as good as zero. Living on charity is a life of shame and despair. She wouldn't dare to strut herself around to share her woes with everyone. But that could change if she can appear on one of the charity show as a star recipient. She would become an instant celebrity. Everyone will know her instantly. But Mdm Heng need not have to depend on charity. She has another $20k in her Medisave. Unfortunately or fortunately, this sum cannot be touched unless she is admitted to a hospital where she would have to pay a ransom. And the $20k is just for that, if, IF, she ever get herself admitted. But If she does not have this good fortune, she would probably never have the chance to touch her $20k, her fortune. Our well designed system has protected our people from the expensive medicare system by making sure that everyone has the money to pay. But no one ask the fortunate recipients of this kind and caring system whether they are beneficiaries or victims of the system. Why can't the system allow Mdm Heng to draw out her little fortune to live her life with a little self respect, a little dignity, but have to depend on charity, kindness and mercy of others when she has her own money stuck in the Medisave? At least she could live 5 or 10 years as a respectable person, independent and not having to wait for handouts? She is at best a wretch. When her money is spent, and if she is so unfortunate or fortunate to be still alive, then the charity can come in. She may not need any charity if her life is not that long. Is our system kind or cruel? I think we are so kind that we don't even know the difference between good and mean.


Anonymous said...

it is time to follow the great other great nation to legalise the right to die when you have lived to a ripe old age. in this case, 1k can be used for the death services and the other remainder cash can be enjoyed immediately. if still decide not to die after cash exhausted, then charity can come in.

Matilah_Singapura said...

> Why can't the system allow Mdm Heng to draw out her little fortune <

Because, as I have said time and again, the "system" is broken. It was never designed to succeed in the first place.

And about your fanciful idea of some kind of "system" to help people: any kind of "system" run by the govt means more laws, more regulation, more compliance... and more taxes—legalised theft—to pay for it all.

Being self reliance and engaging vigorously voluntary relationships, cooperating and assisting "one-on-one"—that is what the people can do to keep the govt off their backs, and to deserve a smaller, less intrusive government.

And BTW redbean, if you think Ms Heng's life is so worth "saving", what are YOU personally doing about it?

You are not willing to help VOLUNTARILY; so where do you get the justification to tell the govt to force us all to "help" by robbing us even more?

Stop being an asshole, before it's too late! If you don't help your fellow man, don't blame the government!

Matilah_Singapura said...


legalised theft

Anonymous said...

And she needs handouts from some kind souls to pay for her medicine and a bit more.

no one that is really in need shall be turned away, all u got to do is ask and we will see if she's qualified to be helped; this is a place with the highest compassion.

redbean said...

this is the country where one can own a $200k 3 rm flat, with savings in the CPF and Medisave but needs to live on charity.

redbean said...


who is talking about saving mdm heng? i am only interested in her $20k.

no asses can help any asses. don't try. don't even imagine. this is one ass talking to another ass.

we are here just to talk cock, or to bray.