2051 - A bright future

By 2051, Singapore will be renowned the world over for another great success story. Longevity and healthcare. The high quality of healthcare, the annuity schemes, and the drinking of Newater, have extended the lives of Singaporeans well pass the 100 year mark. And many Singaporeans are living beyond and still healthy and mobile. Singapore is a totally new city and a change landscape. The infrastructure and transportation mode also changed. Wheelchair is the primary mode of transport for many of the senior citizens to move around. They are all healthy and able, radiant, dark hair, full set of teeth, good eyesight and full of life, even over 100 years old. The little difference is that medical science could not replace everything and many have to rely on wheelchairs to move around. And some will have drip bags hanging over their heads, urine bags hanging below the seats, batteries hanging on their chests. But otherwise, everything is normal. They lead very healthy lifestyle, playing basketball, dancing, marathon races etc, on wheelchairs of course. And with the half a million dollars in their CPF and an annuity payout to boot, life is a breeze. Retirement is great fun. The flourishing industry in the island is health and medical care. The senior citizens need routine serviceing weekly to keep the system going strong. Wheelchair industry has overtaken the automobile industry. And viagra is doing roaring sales. With money and excellent medical care, life can go on forever. And the head of govt is a young 90 something.

One good thing from the CPF debate

We must thank Eng Hen for this annuity proposal thing and debated it rigorously in parliament. And despite the scheme being poked with holes all over, there is a little silver lining in the smoke screen. The issue of CPF interest rate, how the money is being deployed, how little it gets in return and how little it pays to CPF members and how it could actually return more to the people, is the only good thing that came out from this debate. We can only hope that MPs will dig their scalpels deeper to reveal more morsels for the CPF members to chew. Now we are having 1% more from the CPF, from the returns it gets from buying govt bonds without sweating. And if properly managed and invested, CPF members can look forward to higher returns. No need 10% or 18%. That the risk will be too high. Maybe 4% guaranteed and a couple of percentage points more will do.

Don't eat now, have more to eat in 30 years

What I would want to add on to the CPF debate is this. When you want to help the people to live better in the future, you either teach them to fish or you plant more seeds to reap more fruits later. You can also offer them a few loaves of bread. The last thing you want to do is to take whatever little the poor buggers have now and keep them in the storehouse and say they can come and collect in 30 years time. In the meantime they can tighten the belt. And if they die halfway before the 30 years is up, just too bad. The delay in withdrawal age and taking money from the CPF members to buy annuities come from the same principles.

CPF - Interference, violation, encroachment? Say it in whatever ways, the CPF savings is fair game. The rules governing the use and return of the money to the members have been changing over the years from the day it was created. The older members who joined the scheme earlier went in with a different set of terms and conditions. Now they have to accept a totally different set of terms and conditions which they have no say about them. The govt changes them for the good of the CPF members. And for this reason alone, it is justified and claimed the high moral ground. All those in favour of the changes, in the govt, agrees and support the changes and the principles behind it. Legally and legislatively, they have all the power to do so. But how right are they to do it and what about the rights of the members to say no and to protect their own money? Do the members have any rights at all to their own money, to insist that the CPF sticks to the agreement when they first start contributing to the scheme? Lim Wee Kiat did not considered all the changes as 'interference on personal freedom.' This view is echoed by SMU law lecturer Eurgene Tan who said that the changes was not 'encroaching' on one's rights. And Josephine Teo has this to say, 'Singaporeans will have to judge whether the intervention has created better results.' What she simply means is that the ends justify the means. The rights of the members is not an issue. Such facist ideas have been creeping into our mentality over the years without any challenge, and people have gradually grown accustom with them and accepting them as normal. If such values are not arrested, the future is unimaginable. NMP Siew Kum Hong has warned, 'Beware the slippery slope of "encroachment" into CPF members' rights.' Where will it end? There is another aspect which is indirect but equally dangerous. We do not pass laws to be effective retrospectively to affect people adversely. Our neighbours have done that and have undermined their own credibility, reliability and predictability as a govt. The constant changing of the rules governing the use of CPF money, the shifting of the goal posts to affect members who joined the scheme under different terms and conditions are as good as passing restrospective laws in a way. It is important that such encroachments and violations to the rights of CPF members be aired in Parliament. Would there be a motion on this? Unless we all accept that the rights of the people is secondary or non existence and the ends justify the means, that it is a non issue. What is the future Singapore?

What it could be

I am not going to make any proposal to this annuity drama. It was an unnecessary drama, wasting too much time and effort of everyone, kicking up emotions and touching on raw nerves for nothing. The present CPF system actually is more than adequate to serve the needs of the ageing population, with a little modification. Yeah, no need to sweat the small thing. At 55, the people should be allowed to withdraw whatever there is as provided under the present system. This should give them a pep high for the next few years till 62. After all they have been waiting for this day for their whole life. From 62-72, they should start to draw down on their minimum sum. A monthly sum of $500-$600 should be adequate as this is not going to be their only means of income except for some who are unemployable or in dire straits. With the new employment law, family support, their own savings and assets, a $500-$600 kopi money would be a welcome luxury. Therefore, the minimum sum need not be so huge, $50k should be more than adequate to do the job. From 72-82, people should be dying and should be preparing to die instead of building on more dreams of living to 100 and painting the town red. For those who are affected by serious sicknesses, many would have died by now. Those alive and relatively healthy should be allowed to draw down their $30k in the Medisave in the same way as an annuity. By the time they die, they should not leave very much behind. At least they live to spend their own money. From 82 onwards, there will still be survivors. Not many, and not many of these survivors would need charity. Some will. Maybe 10,000 or 20,000. At $300 pm, it will cost the govt $3 to $6 million or $36 -$72 million annually. Be generous, round it up to $100 million a year. Or put the survivor numbers of the needy and desperate to 100k, it needs only $1 billion. There is no need for the govt to cough out $1.2 bil or $2.4 bil to support this group annually. What is the problem? Must be my numbers. This is a very broadbrush look at the numbers that can be used to look at the problem. It is free. No need to pay a million so don't expect any details. Oh, in between, at 55 or 62, the govt may offer annuity or whatever schemes to encourage the people to keep more money with the CPF with incentives like $1 for $1 or higher interest rates. Those who are happy can opt to join the schemes.

A gingerly step forward towards more openess

Parliament has never been like this before. Blades were sharpened, sparkes flew. The debate on the compulsory annuity proposal was given a full grilling it deserved. The MPs came prepared, and were allowed to speak their minds. The end result, all stones were not left unturned, actually this little bit is not true, but most of the stones were turned to show how difficult it is to push through the proposal. The issues highlighted were genuine and disarming. Only a strong headed leader would dare to say 'It's water under the bridge. Let's move on.' Eng Hen was gracious enough to read the emotions and whole jigzaw puzzle being put together. It was not the same picture that was before, the picture he saw was unreal. Kudos to all the MPs who spoke passionately and argued sensibly on the issue. It would by hypocrisy at its supreme best if they dare to go back to their constituents to speak favourably of the proposal with sugar laced words and poetry. This is a small step towards more open discussion, at least in the confines of Parliament.

Singaporeans should say, 'No, Thank you very much.'

Published September 20, 2007 YESTERDAY IN PARLIAMENT We need CPF changes to stay viable: Eng Hen Govt not leaving citizens to fend for themselves, he says... Dr Ng emphasised that the government is not leaving Singaporeans to fend for themselves. 'We will spend at least $1.1 billion each year to build up their CPF savings through Workfare and higher CPF. We will provide up to $1.2 billion in deferment bonuses. These changes are real. They will see their CPF accounts grow faster after these changes.' Singaporean should say no to the billions that the govt is going to put into their CPF. The govt should use the billions for the annuity schemes and not to change the withdrawal age of the CPF. Thank you. Please don't meddle with the CPF scheme. We are very happy with the way it is.

Story of Sheeple and robber

The robber told the sheeple to hand over his wallet, watch and handphone. The sheeple pleaded with the robber. 'Please, leave $2 for me to take bus home.' The robber said, 'Sure, here is your $2.' Sheeple so happy, 'Thank you, thank you. You are most kind.'

My apologies to all bloggers and visitors

I am sure all of you have seen the postings of a few retards here. My apologies on their behalf for they know not what they are doing. Just ignore them and their posts. I truly empathise with them for having to post such deranged messages here just to earn a living. I forgive them. We all have to earn a living. Some do it with pride, some in shame. Some with dignity, some with ignominy. In this little red dot of an island, there are the red princes, and there are the red lords, and there are the redbeans and there are the red dogs.

My position, no change

After hearing the full debate in the internet and Parliament, I am more convinced that there is no need for any drastic change to the present CPF system. The proposed changes are so flawed that the word flaw has taken the status of taboo. No one dares to say that the whole concept is flawed. It is flawed in principle and violated many rights of the people to their money. It starts on the premise that the govt has all the rights to legislate away the peoples money in whatever way it so decides on the ground that it is good for the people. It touches on a very sensitive part of the people's interest. $20k, $30k or $120k, that number may be small to many people, but it is the life long savings, the fortunes of the poor redbeans. There are many redbeans in this little red dot that never see such money in their lives. And they will be furious to think that anyone can just keep distancing them from their little fortunes. The pain, anger and frustration cannot be underestimated, no matter what reasons are being put forth. There are many other reasons and reservations and flawed premises that have been pointed out and became obvious over the last few days and no need to elaborate further here. Here are the few reasons why there is no need to change the current system. Grunt has rightly explained how several billion dollars could be set aside for the old and needy. Mind you, the number that is above 80 is small. And the number of old and needy will be even smaller. If the govt can cough out so many billions to support a flawed scheme, why not use the same money to set up a fund for the needy oldies, a simpler and no farce system? And with the push to extend retirement age to as old as possible, the need for a hefty retirement savings is much lesser. If a person is to work to 70 and die at 70, he does not need any savings. Not a cent! And lets not brush aside and refuse to see the elephant in the classroom. Most Singaporeans are not desperately poor. Many are asset rich and with the HDB lease back scheme, or even without, they can rent out their 3 rm flats to earn an income. And many have alternative support for their old age. The current problem faced by the aged is of a lost generation. It will come to past. The number of helpless cases will not be as bad as today. An old couple, even jobless, cannot die of poverty or live below the poverty line if they have an asset in the form of a 3 rm flat. And many Singaporeans will have more. Unless our flat ownership scheme has failed. Unless our education system has failed. Unless our CPF scheme has failed. I say it loudly here, there is an elephant in the classroom. Please look at the elephant and don't turn your head the other way.

Notable Qoutes - Ng Eng Hen

'I need you to spout poetic lines to convince your constituents that these measures re meant to help them. Spew forth with passion your Hokkien lyrics and poetic metaphors.' Ng Eng Hen Reading these lines really made me worried. When one is selling diamonds, does one need to go to the extend of spouting poeting lines?

Govt cares for the elderly - here's the proof

Govt cares for the elderly - here's the proof This is a sub heading in the Straits Times. And the proof is 1% extra interest for the CPF savings up to $60k. Govt does not care for the elderly - here's the proof If you want to live longer, you must have the money to do so, or else... Your own money! If not, the govt will want you to buy a compulsory annuity insurance to make sure you can afford to live with your own money. How much is this compares to the 1% extra interest? This is on top of the delay withdrawal of your CPF minimum sum to start at 67 and to last how many years? 20 years till 87? or 20 years from 65 to 85? The gist is that you must have your own money to live. Which of the two hypotheses above is right?

Only the healthy live past 85

Would this statement be true? I think generally this should be the case. Those that have a lot of medical problems will highly likely to knock off earlier, in their 60s or 70s. And these people will use up their Medisave faster. There will be a few exceptions of course. For those healthy oldies, could they live on the huge sum of $30 left in their Medisave at 85? By this age, I don't think they would want to waste on expensive medical operations to prolong their lives further. Even those in their 70s may not want to do so. If they have live past 70 healthily, they should be allowed to used their Medisave as a replacement for annuity. What the fuck is the $30k for if they cannot use it while living? To be buried with them? Would any MP bring this suggestion up in Parliament, that the oldies, once past 75, be allowed to dip into their Medisave and not let their hardearned money go to waste? In fact, with a little modifications, the Medisave is a ready alternative waiting to be used as a substitute for annuity. Why the need to build another huge sum of money to be set aside? Putting so much money aside is a luxury that the poor cannot afford. Only people who have millions of dollars can do that and think that the poor also must be coerced to do the same.

Cull the CEOs

Gan Kim Yong is cracking his brains to find out more ways to make organisations employ more older workers. One area to look at is the CEOs. There are still many CEOs that are anti oldies. They will get rid of oldies at the earliest opportunities. You could hear some making remarks that the old farts should not be around or giving instructions to HR to retire them at the first opportunity. Definitely no more hiring of old farts. What the ministry and trade union can do is to open a channel for people to send in their complaints of such violation. Let the whistle blowers blow their whistles. I think that is another way to contain the problem. Cull the CEOs that are the source of this employment problem.

Best suggestion from Lily Neo

The govt is going to fund the extra 1% given to CPF account holders from the interest CPF is earning. How long have CPF been earning this extra interest that it can now pay the people 1% more? And how much interest has CPF been getting all these years relative to how much it is paying to the CPF account holders? Does anyone know? With the good performance of Temasek and GIC, Lily Neo's suggestion of pegging CPF interest to them at -2% is one of the best suggestion so far. And given the track records of these two agencies, did I hear 18% return?, -2% still gives a return of 16%. Swell! But let' not be too ambitious, make it -4% to give the agencies some incentives to make the money work harder but with a guaranteed return of 4%. Now that will be cool.

A chicken and egg story

The kpkb in the internet was not in vain. Ok, maybe the govt did not listen to cyberspace whiners. But the govt is listening and will take note of the unhappiness raised by the public through all the channels available. We will see more in dept study of the annuity plan before it is being push out to the people. But changes there will be to revamp the CPF withdrawal plans. The new scheme plus the bonus for deferred withdrawal will cost the govt $1.2 billion each, or $2.4 billion in total if I heard it correctly. The govt appears to be very generous in this area. But someone has to foot the cost, all $2.4 billion. There is no free lunch. We would have to wait for Eng Hen to explain how he is going to pay for this proposal. Before the chicken are out we need to know who is going to lay the eggs. I think we all know the answer.

Role of Internet in the Odex Saga

Can the internet claim some credit for the change of tune in the Odex saga? I think in this case, the internet played a great role in putting a lot of adverse publicity on how Odex went about demanding compensation from the children. Definitely much more than what the main stream media had done. We are now seeing the table being turned and the parents and children breathing a little easier. But of course the court decision was a big help. Otherwise the service providers will be happily providing Odex the names of the downloaders. And for that they need to thank PacNet for standing up to Odex and saying NO. It is a lesson that Sheeples must learn. They must know their rights and what is theirs, eg the CPF money, and say NO when needed. Or else they will be trampled by every organisation with threats of legal actions.

1 in 6 mentally ill

This is what is happening. Does that answer your concern? Think very carefully...1 in every 6 Singaporeans is mentally sick. This is what is reported in the msm, that 'if Singapore follows the trend in other developed countries, the numbers are set to go up....Citing previous studies, Assoc Prof Chong Siow Ann of the Institute of Mental Health said that between 16 and 18 per cent of people here have some form of mental health problem.' And I was having lunch, sitting in a table of 6, and I can believe one of them is sick. I suddenly got worried when I think of Parliament. For the ordinary people, just make sure that you are not diagnosed as mentally ill and be sent to IMH. We need to build not only hospices, but more IMH.

Tan Sri Muhyiddin speaks

It's been a long time since we last hear about Muhyiddin. His promotion or kicked upstair to become Agriculture Minister has put him safely in a corner despite his heavyweight status as an UMNO Vice President and a potential PM. And his Mentri Besar position was filled by Abdul Ghani, a favourite of Mahathir. After so many years in the shadow, he is speaking out. He feels that the Malaysians are mature enough to discuss privately, not under the glare of TV coverage, and not kris kissing, on the issue of the social contract between the three key racial groups in the country. Even for saying this, he is risking his position as some quarters in UMNO will see it as an undermining of the special position of Malays in Malaysia. And he also commented on the IDR and that Singaporeans should work around the sticky problems of Malaysian politics. There are ways. And this sounds rather interesting. If only that he is the Mentri Besar of Johore. But getting around is only temporary and investors are not going to risk millions and billions just to get around a corner without any long term protection under the law should some hot brands start to wield their krises and beat the kombangs. It is a difficult and winding road to negotiate for all parties, the Malaysian govt and the foreign investors.

3.3% better than 4%?

CPF pegged to bond maybe unfavourable to the oldies Citi economist Chua Hak Bin has come out with a different calculation on the peg and suggested that the pegging to bond rate would benefit the young rather than the oldies. His numbers showed that in the longer term, the young could get 3.7% while the oldies will only get 3.3%. Now is that good or bad? So far the official explanation is that pegging will give more in returns to the CPF holders. And is 3.7% or 3.3% better than 4%. I know the answer. Yes, with a lot of faith. Chua Hak Bin better make doubly sure that his numbers are correct or he will have to retract them soon.