One can understand why withdrawal from the nation's reserves during tough times need to be returned to keep the reserves healthy and strong. Some may think this is not necessary and to allow the reserves to be rebuild over time the natural way. To expect the reserves to be rebuilt and to return the sum withdrawn are two different things.
During this crisis, Heng Swee Kiat spoke about $52b being withdrawn from the reserves. How should this be returned to the reserves? $52b plus whatever that due from the country's surplus as before? If this $52b is treated as a separate and specific item to be returned in addition to the normal process of transferring surpluses to the reserves, this could become an additional burden on the tax payers. Would this lead to higher taxation to cover this hole? What the govt gave, the govt must take back?
What about individuals and their savings in the CPF? Must they return what they withdrew for housing and other essential expenses when they are nearer their death beds? The nation is a going concern, an entity that theoretically has a life span in perpetuity. In the case of an individual, every day or year passes, his remaining life span is shortened. An individual does not live in perpetuity and some may live a far more shorter life span than another. The argument or rational to keep building up the CPF with no limitation on the age of the individual is a very flawed policy.
CPF savings are meant to provide for retirement when one is no longer able to work due to age, to provide some form of income during the golden years of retirement. The concept is to save when young and spend when old. It is ridiculous to demand an aged individual to save more when he has very few years or days to live. There must be a cut of point when one does not need to put more money into the CPF. This includes returning what they withdrew for housing and others in his younger days.
The cut off point could be age and sufficiency of fund in the CPF. Under the present unthinking and one rule fixed all policy, many would die leaving behind a small fortune in the CPF. This is not the intended objective and also a very bad policy when the money saved by the individual could be put to better use when he is alive, to enjoy life better. It is his money to spend not to pass down to people he might not know or meaningless to him, or to the state. The people's life saving is not a debt to the govt.
There is no good reason to demand an old individual to continue endlessly to put money into the CPF without exception, without a cut off point. The policy makers may choose to look stupid and continue to bully the people into putting more money into their CPF indefinitely. The people affected must not choose to be stupid as well, to remain silent to allow this to go on unchecked. This is another form of discrimination ala white supremacy in the USA that was allowed to go on without any protest or objection. It does not need a George Floyd equivalent for a public outcry to demand for change to a stupid and unfair system.
Change is needed to allow the people to enjoy their savings while they are still alive and can use them. Money in the CPF is useless when the person is dead. No one lives forever. In fact after 60, one must expect to die any time, any day. How ridiculous it is to demand a 60 year old, 70 year old or older person to still put money into their CPF for retirement? This is another 'stupidity has no cure' mentality that must be checked.
You do not ask a 70 year old or 80 year old to save for the future! Assholes!
You do not ask a 70 year old or 80 year to put back what he used from his CPF to pay for his homes.
Twits!
12 comments:
Mr RB.
One good saying by the Chinese in Mandarin that's sound poetic if NOT translated literally in English thus:-
"Souls in Heaven but MONIES in Banks or in this case CPF"
"Lien chai Tien Tian, Yuan chai InHang"
One who earned these WEALTH must also deserved to spend them and NOT have to ask permission from others how to spend them.
Cheers
Whatever little confidence left in PAP policies has been extinguished after seeing the botched handling of COVID-19 by the arrogant and overconfident do-no-wrong PAP 4G elites.
Is it true that most of the money was used to benefit the government linked companies like SIA?
If true:
Then should not the companies that benefitted during the bad times ... return the money during the good times?
A working adult has at least a working life span.
For a land that is just like a transit point for any travellers that passby, there is no need for any of the Travellers to sustain the Jetty. Let the Operator to maintain it and make profit out of it. There is absolutely no obligation and or need for the Passerbies to play any role for the Jetty.
There
is no nation to talk about Sin, at it's best, it is just a jetty, a transit post.
Reminds of the 2009 Job Credit Scheme, when the aid money was sprayed on many companies, even on some that are not in need of aid money to survive.
eg, : "the funds are likely to be re-channelled into growing the company's presence here"
Rb, u agreed that some dudes needed to be sodomized or not?
Yes.
Shall we sodomize PAP?
These dudes treat CPF like gangsters collecting protection money. Just collect and collect with no regards to what CPF savings is all about.
VTO is the only way to make them wake up their silly idea.
Put them there to collect million dollar salary, don't want to think, don't want to rock the boat, don't care what is happening, right or wrong never mind as long as no body complains.
So blessed lives. Living is a bliss. Don't even have to apply for the jobs. Like the tortoises sicking on top of a high poles, put there by somebolee.
Everything is fine.
The fact that they do ask a 70 year old or 80 year to put back what he used from his CPF goes to show that they truly believe that CPF is their money. NOT OURS. So if you disagree with them, you have once-in-5-years opportunity to let them know in a way that they will listen. Don't waste this chance. You don't know if you can outlast them till the next one.
I believe VTO is too late to think about. The chance to do so should at least have been done two or three decades earlier. Now, at best, we may have some drowned out voices in Parliament, now and then. It is frustrating to see the opposition disunited. I know it is difficult for them to agree, with egos and ambitions taking precedent over fighting the common enemy.
Don't misunderstand me. I have been voting opposition for the last three decades and feel great disappointment each time I get outcounted. But at least I tried. And this time will be no exception.
After the election, it will be payback time. When that happens, lots of crying over spilt milk, curses, talk of voting for opposition. But come next election it is the same old same old story with the same old same old ending. Yawn.....
Post a Comment