Annuity Plan gets clearer

Annuity Plan gets clearer As the picture unfolds, we are getting glimpses of what this plan will look like. For one, I like the idea that it is to provide a 'subsistence level' of income until death. Not like the $120k minimum sum, a value that probably 70% of the people will never dream of having. And while the govt has been quite generous in giving an additional dollar to those under govt assistance scheme, lets hope the govt will not be overly generous when using the people's money to provide for themselves. Hey, let me remind the govt again that it is the people's money. Not the govt's. I think this message has not gotten across. They are not going to take the risk of allowing the people to squander their money away. Why can't the people squander away their own money? The next point that I like is that the govt will now have to 'sell' the scheme to Singaporeans. Do they need to? It is a compulsory scheme for the good of the people. Or does it matter if the people don't buy it? Actually, anything that has to become compulsory is a failure of a sort. It means that it is not something that people see a need for it. Now the small amount to be paid to the annuity? Would it be $30 or $300?

Time to stop the Crab

This nonsense about a minimum sum to be retained in the CPF or a compulsory annunity should be stopped once for all. Not everyone is an idiot or dependent on such a scheme to live their lives. Give people the option to withdraw everything at 55 and manage their own lives. If need be, let them sign a form to refuse any state assistance should they become destitute in the future. Anyone signing the form will be held solely responsible for his own life and finances. They cannot turn back to the state and if they do the state can throw back the signed document to them. Anyway this country does not believe in welfare and everyone is expected to provide for themselves. Why should the people be deprived of their hard earned money by some legislation?

No need for annuities and CPF minimum sum scheme

I say it again, there is no need for annuities and CPF minimum sum scheme for the oldies. Not everyone needs them. And I am not referring to the millionaires or those with family support. I am referring to those with a 3 rm or 4 rm HDB flat. They should be independent and and can expect to retire without the need for minimum sum in the CPF. For those with bigger flats, better still. The alternative and the best solution to this group of people is the newly created HDB leasebuy back scheme. With this scheme the income generated should be able to see them through their golden years. The scheme needs not be restricted to those with only one bite of the cherry. Why should it be if we can unlocked the value of the property for them? But I read in the Straits Times of some comments that the return will not be enough. How so? One commented that a 3 rm HDB flat worth $160k today will be worth only $50k when the remainder lease is 40 years after the buyback. Another commented that the return will only be $400 a month. Really? The experts said so, so must be true. Bull! I totally disagree. Depending on the location, a 3 rm HDB flat can be rented out, say in Redhill or Queenstown area, easily for $1200 to $1500. Maybe more, regardless of the lease life as long as they meet the tenant's tenancy. And very likely to be more in the future with inflation and the rising rentals in these areas. And that will be much more than what the minimum sum or annunity can provide. The rental value or power of these flats must be taken into consideration to ascertain the real worth of these flats. Please do not shortchange the flat owners just because they can't count.

The Grand Plan

Loh Chee Kong wrote in Today about the grand plan and massive strategy to narrow the income gap and said that 'experts have hailed it as a "well crafted" plan.' Did I hear someone shouting about apple polishing? There were so many things said about closing the income gap on Sunday. In order for us to know how successful this will be in 5 years or 500 years, no one knows the target, it is necessary for us to know how wide is the gap now. Show us some statistics and set the target as to how close will the gap be and when will it be achieved. That will be more meaningful and objective. Show us the milestones. Otherwise how will we know whether the income gap has been narrowed and how much it has been narrowed. Or actually nothing happens or no difference. Just say say only.

Sharing that Dream

Hsien Loong has shared with all Singaporeans his dream. We will have the best in housing and facilities for the people. Punggol 21 is indeed a world class township with landscape and facilities that will make many in the first world countries turn envious. It can become the model for all other towns. These may not come in cheap though. Good things must have a price. But fear not. We know you by your name. Singaporeans will be prepared to make this dream a reality. There will be more educational opportunities at tertiary level to raise their income so that all these best homes and facilities will be affordable. We will really be a first world nation if all the average Singaporeans can afford to live this dream, and not just an elusive dream. The Govt has promised that the hardware, the buildings and facilities will be there. Now it is up to the Singaporeans to work for it. There is one thing that the Govt may want to think about. The software of the people. Start with the cleaners in the kopitiams and hawker centres, and also foodcourts. Make sure that they are also first world cleaners. Learn from the Filipinos. Educate the cleaners with more courses on personal hygiene, cleaning methods and technology, good manners and a little courtesy, and pay them well. The upgrading courses will increase the value of the ah pek and ah mah cleaners. We cannot have a first world city with smelly cleaners that chuck all their dirty plates and leftovers beside you while you are eating. We cannot have cleaners who swipe all the things/leftover at people who are eating. We cannot have cleaners that bang around with their trolleys and giving everyone that hostile stare if one happens to be in the way. Upgrading of the cleaners and the toilet cleaners must be the first step towards a world class city. Hey, thought I heard about toilet trained cleaners sometimes ago? Live that dream or miss the boat.

Hishamuddin Hussein Onn, Jekyll or Hyde?

'We cannot afford tension or conflict between the races. If diversity is to remain our strength, communities must be brought together, not driven apart by unscrupulous politiking.' Hishamuddin Hussein Onn And he remembers the legacy of his father, Tun Hussein Onn, peace and racial harmony for development. I hope this is the real Hishamuddin. Which is real, the kris kissing, butt kicking, and threatening blood will flow, or this sensible speech? Who wrote his speech?

Hsien Loong's National Day Rally

What the speech will strike people, other than the enormous memory and command of the language of Hsien Loong, is that it is a rich govt's rally speech. Only a rich govt can afford all the plans that he revealed and the promise of delivering them. It contains a lot of things for the people at various levels. It has taken his last speech on the vision of a new Singapore a step further with more for the masses and the lower income. In all fairness, no country or govt, I think, could make such a generous offer to the people. But then, there are still areas that need to be looked at it more intensely. Ok, we are not building bridges and roads to collect more tolls. But many of the things that the govt is going to build will be paid by the people. They are not freebies. Even looking after the aged is how to plan their savings to last longer. Ok, 1% more for $60k. That is a plus. But shouldn't this be paid in the past as the compulsory savings should be managed and invested to generate higher returns all these while? And there were signs of fine tuning the CPF savings to fit the needs of different groups of people. But still not enough. The minimum sum was untouched. This sum is so meaningless to so many people. The attempt to close the gap between the rich and poor is barking up the wrong tree. Agreed that the govt should not hold back the rich from getting richer. Let them get richer. And also there is no way that the income of the lower income group can be artificially inflated at no cost. They will pay themselves out of the competition. It is a double aged sword. It is a futile exercise. What Hsien Loong completely missed out is the runaway cost of living. If this area can be arrested, then the people, especially the lower income group, will be richer and their money can be stretched a little longer. So will the savings of the retirees. The only way to hold back rising cost is to return public and essential services back to the nation and run at cost plus and not just for profit and the interest of the shareholders, or to line the pockets of top management. The concept of profit for profit sake must be relooked at. Even GLCs must not forget that they have a national duty to look after the people, eg in the area of job creation and employment. It is irresponsible to use public money simply to generate profit. Profit for who and for what if the people are being squeezed or retrenched just to improve the bottom line? Without reining in the cost of living, not only the lower income group will suffer. It will undermine our competitiveness as an operating base for foreign corporations in a matter of time.

No French cap in Paradise

The beautiful thing about living in Paradise is that there is no need for a cap. Everything will just go up, no need for any cap. Get what I mean? In our paradise, we can defy gravity forever. But that is our unspoken tooth or truth. Where got gravity in paradise? So we can expect everything to go up, all the prices must go up. All the cost of living must go up. But have no fear, all our salaries will also go up. We can be paid more and more everyday, so that we can afford to pay for all the GST, ERP, and all the fees needed to live and get around. No country can be so blessed as us. But we are in paradise. We do not need to conform to the any economic or natural rules, principles or laws. We decide our own operational parameters. Affordability is never an issue. We will make sure that everything is affordable to everyone. The prices will be raised, and the income will also be raised to catch up with the prices. Why is it that a TV set, or a PC, or fridge, or a camera, no matter how many improvements added into it, will still be sold at about the same price in the world market, including paradise? Are these affected by globalisation, by competition from around the world? The quality and power of these instruments have increased by 100s of folds, but the prices remain fairly the same. Is it because of affordability? Should these manufacturers raise their prices to atmospheric level since their products are of super quality? They should as their products are definitely of super quality and created by their super talents. If they do not price their products to world class prices, how are they to feed their super talents? Or are they under paying their super talents? Aren't they afraid that their super talents would quit, go elsewhere to get more money? Do we see all the super talents coming to paradise? Or we are seeing only the third or fourth rate talents here? And they too must be happy to know that there is no cap here and may one day shoot to the sky. At the rate we are going, our workers can expect to be paid in tens of thousands in a matter of time.

Feeling tired?

How many of you out there have been working for 30 or 40 years and feeling tired? Or how many of you are looking at your ageing parents, still working, and looking tired? An average Singaporean will spend about 15 to 20 years of his life in the confines of a school, from nursery onwards, cramming life sustaining information. And then he is expected to keep working for the next 50 years or so. Is that what our life should be? Why is it that our poor parents and grandparents were able to retire and slow down, and still live on and why, we are much better educated, and richer, cannot afford to retire? It is a strange development indeed? The richer we get, the worst we become and the more we need to slog to keep ourselves alive. There used to be a pension scheme that is life sustaining. There used to be a CPF scheme that worked. What happens? Now the pension scheme is as good as gone or eaten up by inflation. And the CPF is never enough. So we need to work and work and work. When I say 'we' I mean those who need to work to keep themselves alive. Not those who do not need to work but who work for fun and pleasure, for ego or some personal reasons, or a very profitable way of passing time, but really do not need to work. When a person has to work to live, and seeing that his work is getting more meaningless, his income is dwindling, and he cannot stop work, it can be very tiring and depressing. It is no fun to work in this way. Anyone looking forward to live to a ripe old age? It is a tiring thought. It is a new rat race, a never ending rat race. Like walking in the middle of a conveying belt and going no where. Have we screw up our life?

Been there, done that, will do it again

Billions of dollars were wiped out of the stock market in recent weeks by the sub prime loan collapse in the US. Though far away, we were not spared. What then is this sub prime loan and can we learn anything from it? The gist of this mess is 'clever' financing and refinancing. Lending to high risk debtors to buy properties and repackaged the high risk loans into something else thinking that the risk will go away. This is the American version of loan shark financing, except more glitzy and sophisticated. But when interest rate soared and the bad debtors defaulted or cannot afford to pay, the house of cards collapsed. It all started by not only selling properties. The housing agents, property developers and their collaborators, all joined in to paint a glory picture of a property boom. Prices were raised higher and higher or chased up. Analysts and reporters, maybe even paid, wrote about the euphoria as if it will never end. And during a time of low interest rate, buyers were roped into the mad rush as if they would miss out if they did not buy then. There was the fear of missing out, the greed of making money in a property boom, the selfish manipulation of property developers and their accomplices, the media, helped to shore up the whole industry. Sounds familiar? Were the regulators involved as well? The funny thing about this is that we have been through it and beaten very badly only 10 years ago. And we are going through the whole process again, driving up property prices, writing about how high the prices will go and how big is the liquidity that will absorb all the properties, that it is a sellers market. And we add in the foreign buyers into the pot, plus the en bloc phenomenon, all add in to the fury of a property boom and bubble. Why are we allowing this bubble to grow only to see it go bust? Why are we so irresponsible? There are really two kinds of property buyers. The very rich, including the speculators, buying and selling for profit. The next is the genuine property owners, the Singaporeans who need a roof over their heads. This group can only afford what their income dictates. Property prices that shot beyond their income will always be out of reach to them. And if those who have vested interest in high property prices continue to fan and allow the prices to shoot to the sky, the genuine buyers will be the one to lose out. Because of the limited income of the lower income group, maybe 70 or 80% of the population, they just cannot participate in the private property market. This sector can only be supported by the rich and foreign money. Maybe we should bring more foreigners to buy up all the private properties. Will we be digging our own grave?

Asian affairs, western perspective

I just read 'The week in Review' in the Straits Times this morning. There was this whole page touching on issues in Thailand, Japan, Sino Russian relations and the Asian market downturn. Only the first article had the author's name under it. So it is clear who wrote the article. The other 3 articles did not specifically said who wrote them. But at the top of the page was the photo of Jonathan Eyal of the Straits Times Foreign Desk. So presumably they must be contributed by Jonathan. There is no doubt that Jonathan is a prolific writer and an expert in Asian and world affairs. And I enjoy reading his articles. But the approach of his writings is very similar to writers like William Pesek and Tom Plates, a western view, tinted, to reflect western interest, obsession and agenda. And this is the kind of material that readers are fed with practically everyday. And eventually they will used these material subconsciously to form their opinions and viewpoints of things, especially the negative perspective and agenda of the west on Asian countries. It would be more balance if national papers of Asian countries publish more of the views of their local writers on Asian affairs and give them an Asian favour. Maybe the Asian countries truly are lack of Asian talents to write about issues and matters concerning Asian interests. This must be the greatest failure of all their institutions of higher learnings. Can't even produce writers and commentators on their own affairs. It is a pathetic state of affair that today, we are still looking at ourselves through western glasses. When will this change?

Capitulation of Opposition Parties

All the opposition parties are silent and dare not breathe a word on the issue of whether Malaysia is an Islamic state. They were told to shut up and they shut up. I thought this happens only in the red dot. Only an East Malaysian Minister in the Prime Minister's office, Tan Sri Bernard Giluk Dompok, dares to speak out on the issue. To him the minorities cannot live in a state of denial when things are obviously wrong. To him, if the people's representatives, the leaders representing minority races, refuse to speak up, then they must give up their positions as leaders of their people. The MCA and MIC have sold out their people in the past and are doing so in this issue. So are the other minority parties. Do they still believe that they have the right and moral authority to represent their people? As Malaysia progresses, certain issues must be discussed in the open, intellectually and rationally. Not by the threat of the kris and blood letting. If it is too much to debate in public, at least it should be debated in parliament among civilised men. Can this be taken for granted? And it needs not be telecast live to the people. Keeping mum and not talking about it is a betrayal of the people they represent. The Malaysian politics have been held at ransom by the ultras under threat of violence for too long. It is time Malaysia changes its course in the political development of the country and works towards a more progressive and mutually tolerant society among the various races.

Parameters for retirement CPF

Today we are not dealing with chief clerks that only had a primary education to work out policies and decisions for us. We are paying top dollars for top talents and we must demand for serious and meticulous computations and for the best solutions money can buy. No more straight jacket one solution fits all occasions decision with no regards to how it can adversely affect many. We need to tailor make policies and decisions that are meaningful and appropriate and logical to the diverse population. The present one minimum sum for all and one medisave for all are unacceptable. If the govt still think that these kinds of solutions are good enough, then they don't deserve the million dollar price tag. The $120k minimum sum is too much for many and too little to many. How can this sum be shafted down the throat of all Singaporeans? You don't need a super talent to make this kind of decisions. An average university grad, pay him $3k a month will be able to come up with a better alternative. The parameters to revise and compute the minimum sum and medisave portion should include the following: 1. The income of the individual, which means what he is used to live on, or his lifestyle. It is not easy and simple. That is why the people are paid top dollars. When you get top dollars, you must serve out top dollar decisions. 2. The average life expectancy. Male and female life expectancies are different. Don't simply lump them together. 3. The assets of the individual. 4. The educational level. 5. Occupation. 6. Family support. 7. Health at 55, to determine the medisave quantum. And if someone is already served a notice that he has a limited days or years to go, he should be allowed to take back all his money. 8. There must be several options and variations for the people to choose from. Do not force people to accept simple and unpractical solutions by making them compulsory. This is the 21st century. We not only have super talents, we also have super computers, science and technology to come up with a sophisticated systems that can be tailor made to individuals or at least classes of individuals. Maybe class is a bad term. Called it social or income groups. The policy makers must start cracking their super brains for a super solution for the unthinking masses. The people are waiting, and watching. Any slipshod solutions must be criticised. The people must not allowed slipshod solution to get by without questioning and poking at them. Only then will we get a deserving and sound solution. The people must raise their level of expectation and push the govt to its limits. Only then can we get progress. The unreasonable man changes the world to suit his needs. We can have aircon in the middle of the desert and a heated room in the centre of the arctic. These are unreasonable things that are against nature. Man has conquered nature by being unreasonable.

New laws needed to protect the weak and innocent.

The Odex case is revealing in the sense that the weak can be subject to extortion by the rich and powerful. People can be dragged to court or pay a ransom for the slightest infringement of the law. Then there is this guy who wrote to the press begging that something be done to restrain his neighbours 5 rottweilers from attacking any passerbys. After highlighting the fear and the possibility of a child being tear to pieces by the dogs, he pleaded sheepishly on what recourse he would have from the barking of the dogs. There must be laws to protect the innocents from people who live dangerously and exposed others to potential harm and destruction of lives. No recourse is going to make any difference to a child or an oldie who is badly mauled by ferocious animals. What the hell is happening? Are we waiting for disasters to happen just to make a few idiots happy with their wild animals? Tame? Animals are only tame when they don't attack. You just can't be too sure how the animal minds work and when it is going to be provoked or go berserk. Please, get rid of those beasts. Or at least have a law to cane the owners if their beasts attack anyone. Monetary compensation is useless to the victims. Make caning of the owners mandatory when an attack takes place.

CPF minimum sum should be $300,000

James Chi Han Hsuan in a letter to Today suggested that the minimum sum in the CPF should be raised to $300k. His justification is that he has many friends who have more than $200k in their savings accounts and they are squandering their money buying all kinds of luxury goods. I can't agree more with James. All these rich people with so much money and do not know what to do must be made to save more. I have also many friends who have millions in their bank accounts. I would want to suggest that the minimum sum be raised to $1 mil so that these people cannot squander away their money. 'Pssst, what about me, I don't have any money in my savings account?' Ah Pek asked.

Natural for citizens to criticise, as well as praise Govt.

'It is natural that citizens should criticise the Govt. It is also natural that citizens should praise the Govt for doing good. This is how a healthy relation is established between the individual and the collective.' George Yeo I could have copied the whole article in the Today paper by Nazry Bahrawi. The expression by George, perhaps the most down to earth minister with a halo over his head, shows a different kind of maturity and security in a person. He does not see every criticism as an attack and a need to respond with a sledgehammer. He sees a healthy relationship with the people that may not see eye to eye with the govt in some issues. And he accepts that it is the right of the citizens to criticise if needed be. 'But for a country to work, an active citizenry is crucial.' This is a comment by Nazry in his article.

The Royalties - A new dynamics

Amidst the throes of heightened tension in a country that has lost its direction, when parochialism and kampong politics were elevated to the national stage, a calming voice is emerging from an erstwhile quiet corner. The crown prince of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, a Harvard PHD holder in Political Economy and Govt, is steadily making his voice of reasons heard. The diminshing presence of the Malaysian Royalties, once seen as not contributing much to the development of the country, is emerging from its past shadow. A Harvard PHD, and a rational and sensible approach to nation building, is a far cry from the wild minds of what UMNO now represents. UMNO is no longer the vehicle of modernity and progress, but regression. UMNO is all about money and how to enrich one another by sucking the wealth of the country without any positive contribution. It is about sharing without contributing. A similar position that the royalties were once in. Straits Times has an article on Raja Nazrin Shah and his views of Malaysian politics. It is refreshing, and more impressive to have come from a Malaysia prince. This is the kind of leaders that Malaysia needs, well educated, progressive, confident and insightful. Not the yelling, chest thumping and kris kissing type. Those are kampong politicians, not statesmen. Malaysia needs more of such leaders to be in office to lead the country forward, not backward. As Badawi has said, Malaysia shall not be what the football team is today, regressive, backward and nothing to prove or show except being more bumiputras. Yes the Malaysian football team is a good example of what Malaysia is today. Study the football team carefully to understand why it fails and why Malaysia will also fail.

Odex or Odium?

The hefty fines that children are made to pay for downloading anime from the net is just. A crime is a crime. So age is a non issue. You download you infringe on people's copyright and intellectual properties. You must pay. I also believe that the law looks at children differently. Children cannot be jailed or caned, or hanged. But we are a nation that operates under the rule of law. We must accept the law with no exceptions. Reminds me of the school girl without a student pass. Just administer the law. And also of the streetdirectory provider. You download a few pages, the damages will come to tens of thousands. That is justice in a rule of law country.

America has started a war with China

Human rights, yuan revaluation, now poison paint, micro magnets etc are but the tools of an economic warfare. The Americans have fired the first shot and China is hurt. The damages are in hundreds of millions and bad publicity, lost of confidence and market etc China will have to react. China will need US$ to pay for all the losses. China will start to dump US bonds to pay for the losses. And the war will escalate. This is another front, other than the Middle East and Afghanistan that the Americans are opening. Fight on America. The righteous shall win. God will bless America.

CPF is forced saving

The CPF is a forced saving for the old age just in case everything is gone. It is not meant to be the sole means of survival for anyone. That is why the term used even to retain after 55 is called minimum sum. It is not the maximum sum or something extravagant. Now that people are talking about compulsory this and that, let them not forget that you can make things compulsory as long as they are within the confines of a minimum sum. Anything excessive will invite rotten eggs and anger. Now, what is minimum sum? This is an illusive figure that varies according to one's pocket, lifestyle and appetite. The $120k figure being used is a ridiculous figure to many people who hardly see $5k in their savings in their whole life. The premises for a compulsory saving scheme after 55 should include a clearer definition of what is minimum. A useful number should be the $300 pm that the govt is giving to the destitutes. This should form the basis of minimum sum. Compulsory saving should work upwards from this number. The people are not saving to eat in restaurants. Such luxury should be voluntary and be left to those who can afford them. Many will do well eating in hawker stalls or cooking for themselves. The next factor is a 20 year time frame, ie 62 to 82. Forcing people to save after 82 is ass talk. By 82, the bulk of the people would have gone. The remaining few if still needed state assistance would not be too much a burden for the state to bear. $300 pm or less. Whether it is annuity or to leave the sum in the CPF should be optional. And for those who wanted to save $120k or $300k in their CPF, by all means. The people must be allowed the option to opt for more savings to be left in their CPF at 55. The compulsion part should only be for the minimum sum, using $300 pm as the starting point for computation. For people who are working beyond 62, the minimum sum can be lowered proportionately and not increased. Who's the idiot who said the longer one works, the more must be saved? The above should be some of the basic premises to compute the minimum savings needed for the aged. As I am not paid for this, this is as far as I am prepared to offer. Let those who are being paid in millions to think of something more realistic and workable. They are not paid that kind of money for nothing. The higher one is being paid, the greater is the expectation. No more slipshod solutions. They must justify the supertalent pay that they are being paid for.