Myth 190 - It could be worst

I am sure all Singaporeans are familiar with this myth. It could be worst. The current EMA raising electricity tariff by 21%. If not because of EMA and their buy forward policy, it could be worst. The raising of bus and MRT fares, it could be worst, or it could be more. The economy slowing down. It could be worst. Our high cost of living. It could be worst. We are all so lucky to be in good hands.

When the rebates stop coming

Landed properties owner can expect to pay between $570 to $1209 more for utilities this year, according to Today, or a monthly average of $78 for electricity. That should be chicken feat as these are the rich people. The increase is definitely affordable. For those in 3 rm and smaller HDB flats, they will receive rebates of up to $330 which should be more than enough. Bigger HDB flats will get a little lesser. So no problem also. What if the rebates stop coming in? Looks like the hardlanders will have to be dependant on rebates for the rest of their lives.

Pressure to sell

High Notes 2 is not low risk, according to Janet Mohan of DBS. And HN2 is rated A- by Standard and Poor. In fact most of the notes sold were rated A and above. And they were high risk. Why were there so many complains that the buyers did not know that they were high risk. And for HN2, the principal is not even protected? Can such notes be sold to the Ah Peks and Ah Mahs in the hardland? Looking at their risk profile and literacy, most of them would not know what they were buying. (I am waiting for something to ask S&P to explain what they were doing.) A letter to the Today forum by L H Tang said it all. A fresh graduate joining a bank and with a quota to fulfill to keep his job. By all means, get the sales or lose the job. And he is given the title financial consultant! And he confessed that he was 'under immense pressure to think of ways such products can be "beneficial" to them(consumers).' Performance, performance, performance. Profits, profits and profits. In paradise, high rewards and recognition will be given to whover can scheme something that can bring in more money. Whether suitable to the consumers, whether the consumers like it or need it, doesn't matter. Better still if it can be made compulsory.

No anger, no question, no protest

The announcement of the steep hike in electricity tariff is met with an expected silence. Not a single muffle of unhappiness. No one question why the hike is so steep, whether the formula is right, whether the mechanism in the forward purchase of oil is the best or whether there are better ways to protect the interests of consumers. This is the best kept secret of Singapore's success. Faith and confidence that everything is in good hands. It is the best that is being done. Accept it, or it could be worst.

Where are the thieves?

Cheap loans were bundled as triple A financial products for sale. Not unlike tainted milk. Rating agencies collaborated to give them the green lights. Govt regulators cheered them on or went to sleep. And the public were conned to part with their billions and trillions. And the thieves got rich, outrageously rich. Why is there no question being asked now, and why is it that no one is guilty for creating such a colossal financial mess? The anger in the main streets of America is understandable. The second point is equitable compensation. The super talents must be paid their worth in salary, bonuses, perks, stock options and golden parachutes. They deserved them more when they make millions and billions for the organisations. Pay must be performance linked. These sound so familiar and logical. Make billions paid millions. What happens if lose billions? Oh, sorry, just a bad decision. Give me my golden parachute. Bye. This is about the worst case scenario for corporate failures, the bankruptcy of mega institutions, the lost of billions and trillions of dollars and the lost of jobs for all the employees, not forgetting the destruction of a financial system. Where are the responsibility and accountability? The fat cats wanted to be paid in gold when they performed. But if they failed to perform, all they lose is the job. Is this an equitable formula? Gambling on billions of other people's money, risking other people's money, with only huge gains when the bet is right and nothing to lose when they lose? I sure love to be in such positions. Is it time to revisit such a sure win formula for success?