APEC 2024 Peru. Biden shafted to a corner in the back row. Xi in front row next to Peru's President
8/26/2014
CPF – Still didn’t get it
After two protests and a third last week, and a fourth in September, the Govt does not seem to get the message that the CPF is the people’s money and they want it back, not another miserable 20%. The Govt is still thinking that it has the right to take over the management of the people’s life savings, and can do as it pleases.
Why is the Govt adopting this deaf frog attitude and ignoring the people’s cry and risking losing the support of the people? Let me guess. It really does not think there is anything wrong with taking over the people’s life savings. The Govt has the right to do so. Another possible reason is the arrogance that the people cannot do anything about it no matter how wronged and how angry they were. We are the Govt and the people have to live with it, at least until it is booted in the next GE. Of course the Govt does not think so and must believe that the majority of the people would not mind at all.
The third reason is that it is desperate and in need of money despite the claim of having hundreds of billions in the reserve. The persistence to hold on to the people’s money is wrong, but the Govt has no choice. Returning the money to the people at 55 is no go, not an option. Die die it must grab hold to the money. It can ‘no hew’ the people and even alienating a big number of voters. So be it. The situation is dire if the CPF money is returned to the people. It is a case of no choice, no way out.
What could be the real reason behind this aloof and arrogant decision to hold on to the people’s money despite the growing anger is puzzling. Politically it is unsound and unwise, and suicidal. The party cannot afford to take such a high risk at this moment and pretends that it is alright to do so.
What about the stand of the various ministers and MPs? Do they agree that this is an acceptable thing to do, a right thing to do, or an expediency that is a do or die option? Several ex MPs and top civil servants have this habit of saying that they did not agree to some policies when they were in office but only saying it out after leaving office. With the CPF issue a hot potato now, the ministers and MPs do not have the luxury to remain reticent and thinking that they could say their piece when out of office. They are in it, agree to the policy and supporting it, or they are not. By keeping quiet, they are telling the people they are for the policy. They support the withholding of the people’s life savings without the consent of the people, and saying yes when the people are protesting and saying no. This violation of a fundamental principle, that the Govt can unilaterally take hold of the people’s money and do as it likes, under whatever flimsy excuse, is indefensible. There is no good reason, no justifiable reason, to take the people’s money from them.
The next GE would see this principle being put to the test. It would be the main issue in the election with the people voting for or against it. It would be the deciding factor.
Kopi Level - Green
I think with few thousands people protesting is not a concern lar as its a very tiny minority mah. Some more third protest only 500 and fourth protest likely will drop to like 200. So your analysis of the reason why as pointed out by you in one of the possible reasons is correct.
ReplyDeleteI don't think there is anything the pap should worry about with the solid 60% behind them.
RB, the government has never come clean. We do understand the part that there is a need to manage citizen's fund so that people would not be swindled after retirement be it false investments, loans from relatives, spending on Mei Mei etc. The other part that is not clear is - do they have enough money in the CPF? If so, why don't say so up front and show us the proof. Rather tahn keep saying your CPF is safe.
ReplyDeleteI posted something along similar lines in a previous post here. Politics is a very practical business. If 50.1% are happy enough to vote for me, I win. Simple as that. Both PAP, and increasingly the opposition, understand that.
ReplyDeleteWinning a political battle really takes a lot more than a handful or very loud people act pitiful at HLP every month shouting "VTO" or "Give back my money". Its about convincing the majority of the country, getting to the magic number of votes.
Most Singaporeans want to see stair-stepped, progressive improvement, not some cultural revolution type chaos that some of these people, unknowingly or not, seem to portray themselves as wanting to happen. Show the former, and you will realise Singaporeans are not afraid of getting more opposition into Parliament. The WP and LTK have proved it. What Singaporeans are more afraid of, are the type of stuff that goes on at HLP. It might even scare them back to voting for PAP.
There has to be a lot more potential protestors out there, but even then, they have no conviction! And by this I am pointing to RB himself as one. Believing strongly in the cause, and yet making lame excuses like oh, its too expensive for people to take public transport down to HLP once a month. How to achieve anything great like that? If these protestors cannot make the effort to support something once a month that costs virtually nothing much, don't talk about being patriotic and seeking change!
This kind of protest will gain traction if one, there is quality, and two, there are huge numbers. If there is 20000 regular attendance instead of 2000 and below, the PAP will take further heed, because they know it can be a representation of a larger proportion of voters. Opposition too will come in, because they will see it as a viable avenue that they should be investing in.
Otherwise, continue your monthly fun and games. As someone who don't mind a bit more opposition in parliament, I'm glad to see the parties doing stuff out there. But not at HLP. If have to depend on HLP ranters, the way they are now, opposition will FAIL.
cunt u get it into your numb ?
ReplyDeletethese are pekkim for my idol, stinkapornang most favourite son, father of all daft, the only god that u can see, not something abstract .... onlee now u see a walking zombie, a living fossil, a living example of how karmic actions can take place
leemember ... it's old fart pekkim him ... u holding it in trust for him
leemember ... vote papigs for your descendent sake
stop masturbating on cyberspace
huat ah .... papigs 4 ever
I totally agree with Anon 9.14.
ReplyDeleteHe has a point. The PAP government is not too concern with the few ranters at HLP. To the government these are like little flies or mosquitoes to be swatted away easily.
I read what RB is trying to hint, but he does not have the courage to say. I have this feeling that he is trying to say that the government CPF coffer is empty or near empty and to return all CPF savings at 55 would reveal this fact. Am I right RB?
This CPF thing is worse than 强盗.
ReplyDeleteMost sinkies I spoke to are non-chalant about the CPF Thingy.
ReplyDeleteNor is the anti-normal calls to downgrade ones' home causing any worry or anxiety on sinkies.
It could be a case of 不见棺材不流泪, meaning to say it hurts only when one is beset with problem, otherwise one remains indifferent to potential and impending dire consequences.
There could also be resignation to ones future as one is not able to counter the policies implemented by the Authority. However, mostly could not be bothered and are taking things for granted.
@ Anon 12:41
ReplyDeleteThank you for agreeing. As mentioned, I like to see a parliament with at least 20% of opposition at the next election. Maybe more. But nothing gets me more frustrated with these "little flies or mosquitoes" thinking they are doing something damn big and helping to win more votes.
I am personally against ranters. Ranters go "VTO 2016", with little way in terms of new policies, ideas or thoughts.
But here's the thing. If you want to rant, make it big. Then people sit up and notice. If you can only rant all the time, and you are so pathetically small at doing it, what use are you? PAP won 60% of the votes last time, opposition 40%. Each can claim on more than a million people to validate what they are doing. Is there any wonder that neither are paying any attention to the 500-1000 HLP ranters? C'mon even Pink Dot can attract 26000!
By Anon 2:54
ReplyDeleteI also wanna touch on another point on the possibility that CPF coffers might be "empty". In my opinion, we can list many other problems with CPF, but to so that they are empty is rather far fetched, depending on your definition of empty.
Firstly, the CPF system is designed that any new person entering the workforce immediately starts contributing to it, no? So there is always an endless stream of money entering it right?
Second, I'm sure there are people withdrawing money now for housing payments. There are also those who have retired, cannot meet the minimum sum and are getting their few hundred bucks a month, yes? So the money is from somewhere right?
Its thus very unlikely that in a freak accident, CPF monies are "totally gone". Equally unlikely is the fact that the minimum sum policy was rolled out to make up for the coffers being "empty". Look, if I were the govt and I lost damn big money, eg. the 1998 financial crisis, what do I do if I desperately need money RIGHT NOW? Will I introduce some policy that will only allow me to lock money in 20 years down the road when a particular cohort reaches 35? Somemore in the meantime I still need to let them withdraw for HDB and what not.
Makes little sense right? I can easily collect that kind of money IMMEDIATELY from things like GST, COE, HDB prices what.
Anon 3:10, there is no need to worry about govt no money to pay CPF withdrawals. The whole island is an asset, solid like rock. If need to can sell a couple of smaller islands first.
ReplyDeleteThe recent tweakings of the CPF got nothing to do with Roy's ranting? Maybe not, but the tweakings are made. Even minimum sum would have to stop or slow down. $161k could be the last if the ranting continues and got louder for sure.
@ RB by Anon 3:10
ReplyDeleteTo your first statement, that's good to hear. But if you were being satirical, it's not that funny anyway.
To the second, does Roy's ranting play a part? What do you think? If all this ranting played such a big part as you claim it to be, would you be writing another post talking about why are we only allowed 20% withdrawal, and why does the PAP still "not get it" after so many protests. But never mind, I'm alright to be proven wrong. Lets wait few more months, to next year even, and see how much more tweaking is made due to these rants, and whether or not the PAP finally "gets it" due to the ranting?
Maybe I need to be clearer. PAP doesn't give a damn about ranters. I wouldn't as well. All I need to be sure about is that ranters are not eating too much into my vote share. In the meantime, is CPF of national concern? Sure it is. And if I can make a few concessions to show I am moving with the times, listening to the main body of the people's concerns, why not? But do I have to do every single damn thing that Roy Ngerng the "people's hero" says I should be doing? No, and for sure nobody gives a damn if I don't as well.
RB, your heart's in the right place in wanting improvement to the country. But sometimes, i think you need to differentiate who you need to support. Let me ask you, do you really think someone like Han Hui Hui can amount to anything in life, or that she can run for election and be considered a better opposition that what we have now? You think so? I'm alright to be proven wrong.
By Anon 3:10.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing abt ranting is this. You do nothing but kpkb. Govt makes minor tweaks. You kpkb somemore. In the end people start to think "govt trying to improve liao la why you still lidat?" You see the cycle it ends with? Minor tweaks, support back with the govt and end result, ranters are trouble.
So you don't just rant. You make sure you question constructively. You put forth ideas. In the long run its what works better for the opposition cause.
Cannot give back, better still hold on as long as possible until tide changes aka appropraite time then tweak the policy. If give back, money supply will increase and inflation will shot thru the roof. Want to have affordable necessity or not?
ReplyDeleteMost important is to give better than market returns. Since cannot give back and so many t&cs, must use returns to compensate lah.
ReplyDeleteMust support the gov and also provide goooood solution. kpkb is useless one. They are the ones with the mandate.
ReplyDeleteHi, the CPF is the people's money. No one, not the govt, has the right to keep without the people's consent. This is basic.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately Sinkies are so used to being abused and thinking that it is alright for the govt to take their money and decide what to do.
This is unbelieveable. That is why everyone is calling the Sinkies daft. They don't even know their rights to their money.
How the Sinkies do to their money is not the concern of the govt. It is none of the govt's business. At best the govt can encourage, can provide terms and conditions to induce the people to save their money longer and not to squander it.
Sinkies are not children and must grow up or they would be perpetually treated like children.
Just vote Opposition.
ReplyDeleteOur Millionaire PAP Ministers are the best that money can buy.
They will get the message.
Hi Anon 3:53,
ReplyDeleteRoy and Hui Hui are there to talk about an issue, a very fundamental issue. Whether they run for election is a totally different issue.
As for who to support, it is so scary what this govt is doing. It is a matter of time before the house of cards collapses. There are too many careless and dangerous policies that will bring down this party. Things are still looking good but would not last if the wrong policies are not corrected.
Maybe you are not seeing what I am seeing.
@ RB by Anon 3:53
ReplyDeleteMy last post on this thread. You're right, maybe I don't see what you see.
I see Singapore as not yet a mature democracy with a strong viable opposition. That's why when there are the likes of Han and Ngerng around and they make especially loud noises, they are mistaken as the best choice to opposition. Whereas in countries like the US, you have two equally strong parties vying for power,these kind of jokers normally don't even get any limelight.
Your point on CPF is based on rights. You want to harp on the fact that "you cannot never ask me only keep my money". Fair enough. I think its good to campaign based on human rights, freedom to speak and so on.
But CPF is money. Money is about maximizing what you have. Talking about your rights won't grant you a happy retirement. In my case I'm 35, how much will 161K be worth anyway when I'm 55? To me, I'm practical. If they want to retain it, and give it to me piecemeal, or letting me withdraw 20% at a time only, so be it. At least its earning a better interest than most local banks. I know by then I cannot survive with only 161K. If I cannot meet the sum, I don't mind because I would have been using it to fund my housing all the years before. If I can milk the account to the max by the time I'm 55 and therefore cannot meet the sum, so be it. I will plan, and have other nest eggs. The 50-60K that I might still have in CPF to be given to be few hundred at a time cannot help me survive anyway.
Talking about my "rights" won't put food on the table then. For those really poor people, giving them their "rights" can't help them survive too. You give a man a means to achieve a better life. You don't just make noise so he gets what he has back, which is not a lot anyway.
So I'm more inclined to agree with "b". Give better returns. Keep the economy going well so it becomes possible to invest and grow my money even outside of CPF. There are the bottom 20% who need help. Give it to them.
But I'm 35. Maybe I think differently from you.
Is it not good to have PAP brought down?
ReplyDeleteMany are hoping for them to be removed and be replaced
.
Redbean hoping for PAP to remain the Ruling Party after knowing that it has made Singaporeans losing much assets made through their hard works for the past 6 decades and more?
" So I'm more inclined to agree with "b". Give better returns. Keep the economy going well so it becomes possible to invest and grow my money even outside of CPF. There are the bottom 20% who need help. Give it to them. "
ReplyDeleteAugust 26, 2014 5:11 pm
You think it is so easy to change PAP-LKY ideology is it?
Is PAP's ideology to benefit the Singapore reserves or to benefit Singaporeans?
Simple question based on 50 years of PAP policies.
The logic is so simple.
ReplyDelete1. Some Sinkies are not able to look after their money held in CPF, so the whole population gets their money in CPF frozen and paid out on monthly basis.
Similarly we have...
2. Some Sinkies are criminal minded, so we lock up all Sinkies in jail, at least after work hours.
3. Some Sinkies are even sexual criminals, so we lock up all Sinkies as a sensible precaution.
If you agree with 1, you must logically agree with 2 and 3. If you disagree with 2 and 3, you must logically disagree with 1. Simple logic.
Sad that 60% Sinkies do not have the head for logic. Have to agree that Sinkies are daft.
Similarly if they said you are not capable of looking after your wife, they can take away your wife.
ReplyDeleteIf they said your visits to Batam makes you a danger to your daughters, they can take away your daughters.
Logical right?
When you surrender your rights to look after yourself to other people, you are a non entity.