Paying the best and getting the best

This must be an open secret to all. We pay the best for the best to give the people the best. The result of this brilliant policy is for all to see. We have the best govt, the best infrastructure and one of the biggest national reserve on a per capita basis in the world. We have billions and billions to spend or to fall back on. We are the envy of the world. At the people level, more than 80% are home owners. The people can afford to buy anything that they want, and paying top prices for them too, happily. For they can afford to. They buy cars at a price beyond anyone's imagination. They pay for a govt flat that can buy them a sprawling home in Australia or in some cheaper countries. They are learning to pay more for medical and legal bills. All these are in tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars. No sweat. Singaporeans can afford to pay. They also pay top dollars for the best people to manage an efficient and reliable power system. And they have the privilege to pay one of the highest electricity tariffs in the world. This is what they get for getting the best to enable them to pay more for things which others will pay less for it. And at the end of the day, many will have several hundred thousands in their savings when they retire, or if they ever retire. And they can carry along with them into the next life with plenty to spare.

Thank you Mr Tan Kin Lian

'Thank you Mr. Tan. You have done a lot for us w/o any compensation. You are such as selfless person. We really appreciated it.' This is posted in Tan Kin Lian's blog by an appreciative anonymous blogger. Two things strike me. One, Tan Kin Lian is a selfless person. I thought such animals are already extinct in paradise, when everyone is working for money? And that's the second point, working for free. Now I understand why Tan Kin Lian is standing there all alone and no one else would want to do the same. Who wants to work for free? The other connotation is that his talent is worthless. If he is worth his salt, then people will pay him for his talent. Or he should demand to be paid. The worst case is that because he is working for free, people start to question his motive. Now that is bad isn't it? I would like to suggest to Kin Lian that he charges a small fee. Then people who question his motive will not have anything to smear him. The more he demands, the more transparent he becomes and the better appreciated will be his talent.

Why are Singaporeans not saving enough?

We have this marvelous scheme called the CPF. This is meant to take care of our savings for old age. We put in a big chunk of our earnings into this scheme, thinking that it would be enough. Now we all know that it will never be enough. Inflation is not the only thing that will eat away whatever we have put aside. That is why Singaporeans are constantly reminded to save, outside the CPF. What a joke! For the baby boomers, one of the most disastrous policy that affected their life savings was the liberalisation of the CPF on the belief that if you put money in the stock market, in the long run, you will be richer. It has been proven that it was a folly and many lost everything they had in their CPF. The stockmarket is not the stockmarket that we knew in the past. It is now a casino, without fundamentals. But what are the main causes to fail this great savings scheme? The biggest item that Singaporeans need to spend on is the flat or home. If we keep raising the property prices, mark to market, Singaporeans will end up saving just to buy a flat and be left with nothing. The younger Singaporeans shall give up hope of withdrawing any money from the CPF when they reach 55, or to receive anything when they reach 62. A big chunk of their money will be buried in the flat with the rest locked up in minimum sum and medisave. The CPF scheme is now a red herring. The Singaporeans are saving but spending at the same time. I should have called this saving scheme a myth.

Myth 193 - We think we know what we are doing

We are a small country, a small economy but with an ambition that is bigger than the universe. We made the world our hinterland. Instead of closing up and retreating into a small corner, we took on the world, open up, liberalised and become a player punching above out weight. We have our successes, and in fact very successful in many areas. We are a role model for many countries. These days, we are starting to feel the pain of liberalising too rapidly embracing everything the world could offer, the good, the bad and the ugly. We forgot to put on the french cap and we are exposed to all the slimes and the sophisticated cocktails of drugs in high society, disguised as a must have for those who have arrived. We forgot to discriminate! The financial fiasco, not only the minibonds, but the stock market and the whole financial system, is leading to a lot of simple questions. Why are we going into things that we don't know, or things that many do not know? Even the financial experts and professionals, the people who make a living in selling these products, in selling derivatives, are fumbling to try to explain things that they too found difficulty to grasp. And we expect the tellers, the retirees, the unschooled, the general public who are not financially trained, to know them. Isn't this amazing? It is good that we now admit that we don't know. It is good that we start to think that we have erred somewhat, that we should not think too highly of ourselves. The financial experts who really understand and know what these products are are very few in between. Most of the Relationship Managers, their bosses, the financial advisers, even the stockbroking agents, did not know their products or the complexities of how these things work or are able to take advantage of them. They ended up being losers. These instruments are only for specialists, not the man in the street. But we keep churning them out, expecting or pretending that people will know, from sellers to buyers. Complicated instruments and derivatives demands full time attention and monitoring, including the assistance of softwares, nothing like buying and selling ice creams. Do we know what we are doing? If not, we must stop doing them and roll back our plans. It is criminal to keep pushing these financial instruments and derivatives when the people and market are not ready for them. Stop deceiving ourselves. Then in education, we want to turn ourselves into an education hub. A good strategy and very lucrative. But do we need to let the slimes to come in? The slimes are like tainted milk. Once our reputation for integrity and quality is destroyed, all our effort will be gone and it will take generations to rebuild them. The latest fiasco of unaccredited university, West Coast University, banned in some American states, is not a laughing matter. It is silly and it undermines everything STB is trying to do. And WCU is only one of them. Do we know what we are doing? We believe we know. We know that if we adulterated the core Singaporeans that we have imbued with our Singapore brand of discipline and culture with too many foreigners, we will lose our cutting edge. So we tell ourselves, the foreigners content must be limited. So we know what we are doing. In reality, in practice, we are doing exactly the things that we want to avoid. We have about 5 mil people here and 3 mil are Singaporeans. So as long as the Singaporeans out numbered the foreigners, we are ok. What if we increased the Singaporeans to 90% by making all the foreigners Singaporeans? Statistically they are Singaporeans, 90% of them. But are we not diluting our base? The new citizens, despite the pink ICs, are not the Singaporeans that we know, that were nurtured from our system from young. It will take them years, maybe a generation or two to be what Singaporeans are. Having a few new and good genes to cross breed with old local genes are good. But to add in so many in so short a time will dilute whatever there is left of the original Singaporeans which we believe are the ingredients that make us different and competitive. Of the 3 mil Singaporeans, how many are Singaporeans like us? Do we know what we are doing?

Quote from HDB

'A new four room flat can cost close to $300,000 to develop, but is priced at about $200,000 to $260,000 in locations such as Punggol and Sengkang, said the board(HDB).' This is quoted from an article by Jessica Cheam in the ST today. Wow, selling at a loss. Real subsidy. And when the Pinnacles were being built at Duxton, they could priced them below $300,000 at the first launched. That price must be a discount too. But they also said the discount was marked to the market price of resale flats. Now that market price of resale flats have gone up, they are pricing them above $450,000! Big year end bonus coming. Why can't I get the reasoning right? I am very confused.