Longevity Insurance - So what's new?

It was called National Longevity Insurance Scheme. Now it is called National Lifelong Income Scheme. A high power team has done its work and the scheme has been revised, repackaged and ready for the ears. The scheme met with a lot of unhappiness when first announced. Presumably everyone will be celebrating and very happy when the revised scheme is heard. Heard that instead of withdrawing at 85, now can withdraw at 80. Great, fantastic! And money need not go to someone else but back to the families. Another great improvement. And there are options. Great ideas. Never heard of options before. So, is it still compulsory? Have they addressed the issue that many do not need such insurance as they are well covered or have made plans for themselves? What ever, if 50% as believed will live past 85, maybe to 86 or 120 years, the other 50% will not reach this age. The error is 50%. I woke up this morning and a saw a bright light. And I realised that everyone must die. I challenge anyone to dispute this truth with me. I am 100% right! Not 50%. So I am going to recommend that life insurance be made compulsory for everyone since all must die. Brilliant isn't it?

Near full employment

Unemployment rate at 2.1% is as good as full employment. And according to a UOB economist Ho Wei Chean, '...most locals who want a job are able to do so. There is competition but it is not creating a lot of unemployment among locals.' This is good news and as good as tooth, I mean truth. I only hope that our university graduates and professionals are happy driving their taxis. Ok, their income has risen with the taxi fare hike and they should not be complaining. 236,000 jobs were created last year and 61% or 144,000 went to foreigners. 39% went to locals or a new group called 'indigenious workforce.' I call this term ingenious for it does not tell whether they are citizens or non citizens. Anyway full employment is better than unemployment. Parents should still spend hundreds of thousands to send their children to university and they can be assured that if all else fails, their children can still drive taxis and enjoy a mobile office.

Singapore govt smarter than Malaysian govt

While the Malaysian govt can only think of building bridges to collect tolls, Singapore only needs to erect ERP gantries to do that. In the former, building bridges will take a long time and a lot of money upfront. In the later, the roads are all there and erection of gantries will cost next to nothing. And the money collection is instant. See how fast we generate revenue. And gantries can be added anywhere. In a bridge, you can't have more than one collection gate.

Take Public Transport Month

In view of the traffic congestion, Singaporeans should drive less. We should support Raymond's initiative by taking public transport to work or play. Let's make February 2008 a 'Take Public Transport Month.' For the month of February, everyone should leave their cars at home and try taking public transport for a month. If we can do that, we may change our habit of travel and free the roads for the rich car owners. Hopefully, when the public start to take public transport, the transport companies will not find the excuse that they cannot cope and thus have to raise fares to stop people from taking public transport. Can the Raymond promise that this will not be the case?

Comprehensive changes to improve transportation

It is a major overhaul of the road system and the changes are very well thought of and should make our roads freer not from no need to use but unable to afford to use. For those who still need to use the car, they will just have to pay more. For the casual drivers, they can jolly well park their cars at home. For those who really need to drive for some reasons but cannot afford to pay, just too bad. This point may hit hard on essential driving and casual driving for those who can afford to pay. Got money can travel, even for the fun of driving everywhere. Maybe the Raymond may want to consider allowing a $10 upfront free usage for all motorists as a kind of gesture for those who may need to drive on some important or urgent matters. A second point that raised my eyebrows is the provision of electronic info for carparks 400 metres away. This is a sheer waste of public fund and technology. When use in a car park it makes sense. Putting such information on the road at quite a distance is, to put it kindly, rubbish. How would it help when 20 cars see the info and rush for a parking lot? One development from all these changes is that many will have to park their cars at home. That will provide a new opportunity for car parking business. HDB car parks can be spruced up, carpet the carpark, cameras to allow owners to view their cars in their homes, car washing facilities in every floor, private lots for owners to print their names on the floor etc etc. Aircon the carpark so that owners can read books sitting besides their $100k cars. These additional services will allow owners to happily park their cars at home. And a small circuit can be provided for the owners to drive their cars in circles to warm up the engine. Otherwise there will be starting problem from lack of use. Car parking business will be changed dramatically.