Trust the govt with your money

Trust the govt with your money This is what Eng Heng was saying when he talked about the modified Lifelong Income Scheme. Do I want to trust anyone with my money? When I started to contribute to the CPF scheme, the contractual agreement, not just a principle, was that I would get to withdraw all my money at age 55. Did I get to get all my money back? My second disappointment was when it was announced that $30k of my money must be kept in the Medisave, only to be used on hospitalisation or serious illnesses. So $30k taken from me and I may not see it or touch it in my life. My third disappointment, when it was legislated that a huge sum of money, more than $100k, will have to be helded back as minimum sum. This too was not in the original scheme of the CPF. Now it is proposed that I have to buy Longevity Insurance to give me money after 85 which my god said I don't need it. Ok, maybe it would not affect me now with the Longlife Insurance as this will only affect those under 50 today. How could there be trust when I don't even have any right or say to my money. If I have a choice, I will take out every cent in the CPF immediately. For I do not know what schemes will appear tomorrow that will keep my money away from me.

The great planners

The thing that Singapore excelled and did very well is estate planning, infrastructure development and driving the economy, and many other things that planning can do. We have planned everything, and anything that can be planned, we have thought of it and planned ahead. But one area we have failed miserably, that is transportation. We have let the problem grow for too long, and not because we cannot afford to solve them. And this is weird. Of all things, transportion, the roads, vehicles, and population are all numbers that can be crunched easily. Dealing with numbers and being able to manipulate the numbers to a high level accuracy is our forte, what we do best. Can I say that these problems are predictable and could have been forseen and solved progressively instead of the gridlock we are talking of today. Luckily now we have Raymond Lim to look at it closely and to do something about it, quick and fast.

Myth 171 - Who is more talented

Today, talents are measured by the salary or income they get. So we have a $10m talent, $1m talent, a $100k so so talent and a $10k not so talent. It is very easy to spot a talent, just by the things that he can afford, his home, his cars, his accessories and his ability to afford holidays, fine dinings and the theatres. When monetary reward is the accepted means of comparing talents, our local talents will have difficulty matching up to those in the developed and rich west. How could we pay someone in our GLCs the equivalent of Citibank, Microsoft, Shell, Yahoo, or the Stock Exchange of New York? What we can afford to pay is simply peanuts to them. So they are more talented than all our talents. Even a small MNCs will be able to pay much more than our best GLCs. Or a senior executive, not even a CEO, will be paid more than our top talents, more than our ministers. So what else can we do to tell people our top talents are as good as these western talents of large international corporations? Shall we pay our top talents as high as them so that we can also be recognised as billion dollar talents? Or shall we hire billion dollar talents to boost up our pool of average million dollar talents? A top talent in public service in China will probably be earning 10% of our average talent in civil service. So our average talent must be more talented. In this way we can tell the world that our talents are the best in the whole of Asia, in monetary terms. But our best will be third or fourth best in the west. For that is likely the amount they are paying to their third or fourth rate talents. The suggested road for Singaporean talents is to go west, get a reasonably high paying jobs and come back to be better than our local talents as they will command a higher pay package. Otherwise don't come back.

Celebrating the unsung heroes

It is easy to notice the great achievers and share their successes. The fame of entrepreneurs, statesmen, professionals etc are well documented, acknowledged and published in the media. These people are generally those who have acquired fame and wealth. We spoke in awe at the doctor or lawyer who earned several hundred thousands for each case executed. The higher the fees, the more respectable they become. He is good and that is why he can charge more. Looking at another corner, there are great people who have done great things for the people by making their lives liveable at very low cost. They do not pursue high profit margin for themselves. They produce goods and services at the cheapest possible price and at reasonable quality to benefit the masses. The first name that came to my mind is the instant noodle manufacturers. At a few cents, they pack a decent meal for those who cannot afford to be lavished. Millions in the world are living on instant noodles daily, 3 or 4 meals a day, 365 days a year, and for several years. Not only the lonely and the unemployed or retirees are doing it, many students from not too well off families are doing eat, eating instant noodles to get by, saving every cent they could to get their education. For the good that these manufacturers have done and served humankind, their contributions are mostly taken for granted. Then there are the hawkers in some hawker stalls that are selling quality and excellent meals at $2 in this expensive city called Singapore. And they are continuing to do it, happily serving their grateful customers, not raising prices despite all other costs being up. How could they do it? Or why are they so stupid to continue to do it and not ripping off their customers by claiming that costs are up and they need to raise their prices? Or would people be looking down at them for not earning the millions they should be and to claim that they are also talents in their own fields? The answer, i think, is that these people are happy with what they are doing, and they are happy seeing their customers happy. They are happy with the profits they are getting and do not seek to maximise profits at all costs. Basically they are not greedy people. But we should not be too happy about this state of affair. Soon the greedy people will come into the picture to force them out of business, raise their rentals and whatever costs. Then they will have no choice but to raise prices or go out of business. Then people will all claim to be innocent and blame somebody else for the high cost of living. The BSE disease is a very good excuse to fall back on.

Cash prizes to improve govt efficiency

'Give the Govt an innovative, impactful idea to cut red tape for businesses and win $1000.' This is a new drive by the Pro Enterprise Panel(PEP), an agency to help cut unnecessary bureaucracy in regulations, to create a more pro business environment. My first suggestion, and I want to claim my $1000 prize, is to remove this agency and this award. You do not need an award like this to solicit suggestions from the ignorant and no talent public to improve govt efficiency. If the public can do that, then they should be running the govt agencies. And we are having the top talents, paying top salaries running these agencies. Why are they incapable of looking into the problem, cutting red tapes and improve their proceduces and efficiency? Who create the red tapes and inefficiency? What is happening? Million dollar talents asking the peasants to teach them to suck eggs? Let me rethink over the issue again. We pay top talents millions of dollars, in turn they are asking the no talents to teach them how to improve and willing to pay the no talents a miserable $1000 for it....