6/12/2014
The CPF is a good scheme if….
The CPF was a good scheme and can continue to be a good scheme with many people happily putting their life savings into it. What needs to be done is to modify the terms with more elements of options and choices and the removal of compulsion.
Let the original withdrawal age be at 55, or perhaps, this is a big retreat from its original position, to allow two withdrawal age, ie 55 and 60. The minimum sum schemes should be hanged or mothballed. There is no good reason to dictate that a person’s life savings should be retained against his wish even if by legislation. Where is the moral justification to mess around with other people’s money?
What the Govt can do is to provide a few options for the people to want to leave their life savings with the CPF after the withdrawal age. A 4% interest rate against a near zero bank interest rate would be very attractive for people who do not need the money urgently. And to make the scheme more attractive, those who left their money in the CPF after the withdrawal age should be allowed to make withdrawals any time if they so choose to. This will give confidence to people to keep their money in the CPF.
Not everyone will want to keep all their life savings in the CPF when they could withdraw them. But there will be a substantial number of people who would want to enjoy the higher interest rate or whatever attractive annuity schemes the CPF board could offer on a voluntary basis.
The Govt would have a much more happier group of people putting their money with the CPF as a matter of choice. There would be people who, no matter what, would not want to leave any money with the CPF. But when they can withdraw them at will, anytime, it makes sense for many to leave their money with the CPF. And there will be the odd balls that would squander their money away the very next day they took them out. These are social problems that the Govt would have to deal with and cannot be reasons to punish the whole population in a straight jacket policy. What kind of logic is that? Simple Simon?
Make the CPF an attractive scheme that the people would chose to keep their money by choice after the withdrawal age and be grateful to the Govt. The present schemes have started to smell and the rotting smell will only get worse and becomes unbearable. It is nearly there.
The Govt has a choice to do the right thing.
Kopi Level - Green
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
"The Govt has a choice to do the right thing."
RB
What is the right thing? Is it the right thing to benefit the country/PAP govt more than to benefit Sinkies?
NS benefits the country/PAP govt but male Sinkies have to make sacrifices, tio bo? So is it the right thing?
So I think the PAP think it is the right thing to increase CPF minimum sum so as to benefit the country/PAP govt, although some Sinkies may have money no enough to withdraw at 55 lah.
Well said. I fully agree. This should be the right scheme.
Many Sinkies will have more than $100k in the CPF, or at least $50k after retirement age but barely have any money in their pockets. It is like feeling rich but living poor after saving for a life time.
The right thing for PAP is of course majority Sinkies vote PAP in a GE.
An if majority Sinkies also think it is the right thing to vote PAP in a GE, then the right thing coincide.
So positive + positive = lagi positive.
"Many Sinkies will have more than $100k in the CPF, or at least $50k after retirement age but barely have any money in their pockets."
Anon 8:57 am
So they will be unhappy and will not vote PAP, tio bo?
But how many percent are such Sinkies? 40%? 60%?
Sinkies can cash out by selling their flats or do a reversed mortgage and can still go to Batam to be happy.
Aren't they lucky?
Oh dear, shuldn't have leaked out this secret. They might not allow Sinkies to reverse mortgage and go squander their money away or go to the casinos.
RB, I agreed with u 1000%. If keeping the money is voluntary and can be withdrw anytime after 55, then the interest rate become attractive as versus the banks. But if it's by compulsion and lock up long term then the existing rate is not arractive. So with that change, the scheme looks very different.
I will definitely leave my CPF balance to enjoy the 4% interest rate and be very grateful. Maybe take out a little to feel like an emperor for a while.
And I think many people will be telling their friends to put their life savings in the CPF. Interest very high, 4%!
No need any compulsion, no need to make people angry. The people will be selling the CPF by words of mouth.
However the rate is still not attractive to those before 55
" the ruler seeks riches, as flies seek festering sores, ..."
-Chanakya,
List of subsidies Singaporeans give the PAP government
===========================
1)CPF money
2)National service
3)Private tuition to subsidize sub-standard teaching
4)Paying rents 99 years in advance for HDB flats that we rent
Can others please help me add to the list.
Thank you.
Paying $43k medical bills in advance, sick or not doesn't matter.
Not able to get your CPF at 55 years old as stipulated in the Original Rules.
Hundred of Thousands are required to be placed in the Account instead.
If it is not tax then why should it be compulsory. We cannot avoid tax and death but not 'CPF' a scheme that is imposed upon us.
"The Govt has a choice to do the right thing."
- what is right in the eyes of rich and powerful people is very different from the eyes of the ordinary folks.
- easier to migrate and get another passport than to change the minds of the pigs who are in charge here.
The CPF is a good scheme if......
everyone ...is willing to accept it as a form of tax.
Mrs Lee Hsien Loong is a beautiful woman ... if everyone is willing to accept it as a form of praise.
A beautiful woman is not necessarily a good mate.
If a woman is able to keep her rich and powderful man from straying, she is good.
Woman who is capable of helping million of men to stay away from straying at age 55,this woman is the besterest.We must admit and respect.
agongkia
Post a Comment