Many people worried about not saving and providing enough for their
retirement. So die die must make sure they will have enough money when
they are still alive at 90 or 100. Lets assume that a person needs 200
packets of chicken rice to live during his economically active and
younger life. And lets say he needs another 200 packets of chicken rice
during his retirement.
Case 1. A is wealthy and has 2000 packets of chicken rice. He sets aside
500 packets of chicken rice for retirement. Very comfortable retirement
I should say and would not affect his luxuriously lifestyle in his
youth.
Case 2. B has 400 packets of chicken rice. So setting aside 200 packets
for retirement not a problem and would live happily ever after with no
drop in his standard of living during retirement.
Case 3. C has only 300 packets of chicken rice. He can either set aside
100 packets for retirement and live normally. Conversely he can set
aside 200 packets for retirement but tighten his belt a bit for an
easier retirement.
Case 4. D has only 200 packets of chicken rice. He can set aside 100
packets for retirement and stinge a bit now. It is like living with half
a stomach full now and also half a stomach full during retirement.
Case 5. E has only 100 packets of chicken rice but needs 200 packets to
keep his stomach full. So how? Live with half full stomach and leave
nothing for retirement or set aside 50 packets for retirement and live
with only a quarter full stomach now and a quarter full stomach during
retirement?
Case 6. F has only 50 packets of chicken rice to live on. Barely enough to survive. How to set off for retirement?
Then comes the do gooder. Everyone must save for retirement. It is
compulsory. Everyone must have 200 packets of chicken rice for
retirement. Case 3 and 4 must set aside 200 packets for retirement. How
much they are left with is not the do gooder’s problem. Case 5 and 6
must set aside all they have, 100 packets from Case 5 and 50 packets
from Case 6 for their retirement. If not who is going to feed them. And
Case 5 and 6 would need to top up the balance to 200 packets when they
have more incomes. Tomorrow is more important than today.
I remember a Buddhist teaching about today and now. Today and now are
the more important and precious moment, for tomorrow and the next moment
one could be dead. The philosophy of saving for tomorrow is to have a
lot in the future is more important than being dead now. Always look and
plan for tomorrow, even if it does not come.
The intention is good. And all of them will have a good retirement up to
90 years old with no worries, provide they are still alive. Those who
have not enough to eat now, just too bad. They must go and find their
own way to feed their hungry stomachs.
What happens if they die at 60 years old? Well they will leave behind a
lot of chicken rice uneaten while in the case of Case 5 and 6, they were
hungry while setting aside the chicken rice for retirement but never
live to enjoy them. They could have filled their stomach while alive or
at least half filled their stomach when they could.
Should they thank the do gooders for helping them to save for their
retirement and suffered while in alive, while in the prime of their
youth and not enjoying a single packet of the chicken rice they were
forced to set aside.
What do you think?
Kopi Level - Green
Actually PAP very good to Singaporeans.
ReplyDeletePoor sod earns $800 entire life, forced to have minimum sum in CPF if not top up with HDB pledge. Then if he is not dead by 62 or later, he gets 1200 a month. 50% increase leh? lim Swee Say will say they so happy to look at their CPF Statement each month tio bo?
@Anon 8.57.
ReplyDeleteAre u kidding? Someone earning $800 per month now can have $1200 per month in retirement? Show me the numbers.
Theoretically can or not? You believe insisting poor people to save and the huge minimum sums are to help them?
ReplyDeleteJust work hard and spend on whatever you wish,eat whatever you like and hug as many you know who when there is an opportunity.
ReplyDeleteEverything to me is fated.
Produce as many children as possible. Out of a dozen,at least one will take care of you .
Today also don't have enough to eat want to save for tomorrow. Siao.
ReplyDeleteCannot even feed ownself and yet want to produce more children. Unless your backside is so irresistible lah. You think everyone is like matilah?
ReplyDelete@RB:
ReplyDeleteOne Buddhist teaching you missed -- the one which forms the basis for the one you stated: "Life is uncertain, Death is certain".
What causes people to go nuts is that they cannot handle uncertainty. It scares the shit out of them.
However, had they paid more attention in math class in school, they will realise that uncertainty is actually a cool deal. When something is deemed "uncertain", it means that you can calculate probabilities and stats.
Unfortunately, the "default" wiring of the human brain is like this: a specific cause will have a definite consequence. Actually, NO, that is grossly incorrect. Sometimes systems appear to behave that way, often they don't.
This is why not everyone who smokes or drinks dies from activity-related illness; why people who do bad things get away with it; some children who grow up in solid families turn into criminals, while some children who grow up in dysfunctional families turn out to be top citizens...we find examples that defy causality everyday.
I'm going to say something that will make many fuckers mad. So be it, and here it goes:
The people who are complaining about this "minimum sum" crap are the younger ones. Those of us who are past mid 50, and into 60's and beyond did extremely well from the CPF system. We bought property in the 1970's-1980's for 50k, 70k whatever. Then we upgraded and leveraged that wonderful start in life (which we worked for) into several properties and a (small, maybe 3-5 million) multimillion dollar holding now.
I don't know of any cuntree in human history where the govt "assisted" you to do this. what's more in the "good old days" there was very little checking. You could rent out your rooms, or the entire flat. During sales when you "upgraded", you could pocket the COV (Cash Over Value) money from the buyer to do other wonderful things.
And when you were paying off your HDB, your monthly salary contribution would cover the mortgage because prices were still OK.
I know people who rented out their entire flat, then moved into cheap landed property in places like Seletar Airbase where you could get a big ex-British Army house for $600 -- with huge garden and space for 4 cars.
My point is this: Singaporeans are many "ugly" things, but one thing they excel in is looking for and exploiting "lobangs" in any system. CPF is a system.
You owe it to yourself to exploit every available lobang to your advantage. If you don't, you are a complete idiot.
In Singapore, you always will need money to continue existence. Being poor sucks...I say this from many painful experiences.
Recently, an MP has suggestted school excursions to poor Asian villages to foster a sense of gratitude amongst the spoilt young brats of Singapore. I think he is way off the mark.
If you really want to motivate these youngsters, take them to the Ferrari and McClaren showrooms for a test drive, a ride in a private Lear Jet ... or something of that nature.
Better still, do both: have them go and live in a poor Asian village for a week, and then bring them home and lavish them with an experience of high-cost luxury.
You are right on this one. It is the mentality. The MP was trying to tell the little children how lucky they were and stop bitching. It is to tell them to be happy and grateful.
ReplyDeleteYour second explanation is to show them life can be better off and they can be if they work for it.
Different people, different mentality. The first own would lead to contentment and mediocrity. The second would motivate people to push for excellence.
@RB:
ReplyDelete>> Different people, different mentality.
Actually in the context of neurology, we are more similar than different. Biology is biology -- you have no choice on this. People who are "different" neurologically speaking usually have anomalies -- some beneficial, mostly deleterious.
For the aforementioned "kids' experiment" to work properly, all variables must be controlled for and every detail to make the experiences as "immersive" as possible must be planned.
For e.g.: the excursion to the village: no mobile phones, PSP's or any other gadgets, no internet, no food or snacks, no extra clothing -- you live like a villager.
For the "luxury" experience: visit expensive shops, allow the kids to play with all the high-ticket gadgets, feed them Ha'agen Daas, keep them happy, allow them to Tweet and post to Facebook their experience in real time...etc
Trust me, I manipulate people for a living :-)
P.S.: the human brain doesn't fully mature until around age 25. So this experiment is good for even young adults.
ReplyDeleteCan you stop manipulating the people here? But a few will disagree. You can't manipulate the thinking ones.
ReplyDeleteWhen the minimum sum is based on an absolute amount rather than a percentage, it is clearly to penalise the poor people. $100k is a lot for a poor guy who earns $20k pa and peanuts to someone who is raking in $200k pa. Is PAP fair and good? you decide. Voting for a different party is the only way out.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the rich can easily migrate and cash out all their cpf. Is PAP fair and good especially to the poor? you decide. This world is full of bullshits.
ReplyDeleteThe $200k tells you the intent. A poor guy who lived on $5 daily does not need $200k.
ReplyDeleteIf the people can chip in with a small financial contribution each, the rich and powerful will have to fight the people and would not get their way, buying justice that is not affordable to the poor.
ReplyDelete@RB:
ReplyDelete>> Can you stop manipulating the people here?
Please lah uncle. You damn paranoid one leh. I come here just to shoot the shit, to write my opinion which is largely of dubious merit.
It is not so easy to manipulate by words. To be affective one needs to be close to the "subject", in order to read their body language and observe their micro-expressions. Manipulating people is a dynamic process, and you have to be able to respond to the subject's moods, reactions etc.
There are other factors you need to consider too. But I will not be giving my "stock-in-trade" away for free :-)
>> You can't manipulate the thinking ones.
In the real world, these are the easiest to manipulate. Smart, thinking people have a confidence in their own abilities. Need I say more? ;-)