Medisave - the magic cure

It is reported in the ST today that chronic disease patients managed their health better when allowed to tap on Medisave. In a study by the MOH, 'Diabetics, for one, experienced improved diabetic, lipid and blood pressure control over the two years... 46% had optimal control by the end of last year. And nearly 4 in 5 diabetics with initial poor control, had made improvements by the second year....As for hypertensive patients, up to 85% of those with poor blood pressure control made improvements by the end of last year.' These fantastic findings were due to they 'being allowed to tap on their Medisave for outpatient treatment.' Wow, Medisave must be a wonder drug. The MOH must allow more patients to dip into Medisave to improve their health. I was involved in a free health screening in one of the constituencies in the North. We were surprised that despite being free, and so many volunteer doctors, very few people came forward. So some of our volunteers went to one of the aged homes nearby to encourage the inmates to come forward. They were scolded by the oldies. Their reason, screening was free. But what about the followup and medicine that were prescribed after the free screening? They could not afford to pay for them. So they rather stayed put and gave the free screening a pass. The moral of the story is have money have good health. No money, poor health.

The greatest con game

This game is invented by the fund managers. They gamble with OPM, other people's money, and call it investing. When they placed a winning bet they pat themselves on their back and proclaimed how clever they were. When they lost, they still charged the investors a management fee. They cannot lose. Just like the doctors and lawyers, whether one is cured or otherwise, wins or loses a case, they are paid handsomely. But fund managers outdo the other professions by the way they measure their performance. They have a shifting or relative target, mark to market. If the market makes $1m and they make $1.2m, they are better than the market. If the market loses $1b and they lose $900m, they outperformed the market. In both instances the investors must thank them for being smarter than the market, and even reward them. The other trick which they invented is selective data. Choose a time frame or a specific area that makes money, just talk about it and ignore the rest that register losses. Or do some window dressing on a particular day of the month for book closing. Push up the prices before market closes to look profitable or lose lesser. I want to be a fund manager.

Is building 2 and 3 rm flats a sign of progress?

How many of you agree that building more 2 and 3 rm flats is a sign of progress? To me it is the clearest indicator that we are going down, getting poorer as a people. For those who are living in private properties, good luck to them. They are the people who are living well and progressing. What on earth is happening that we keep crowing about how rich we are and how much reserves we have and we are now launching a new batch of smaller and smaller flats? The uplifting of the lives of the people must be across the board, not just for the elite and the well endowed. As I have mentioned earlier, we went through a phase when everyone is thinking of buying the next bigger flat. There were hopes and aspirations. HDB even had to put into the back burner its building of smaller flats. The aspirations of the people is for a better and comfortable life, better and bigger housing. Today, the sentiment is reversed. A number of people are thinking of downgrading and many are actually downgrading. Even Wally Buffett is thinking of downgrading. And at the same time, people are buying their 10th or 11th property for their grandchildren or grandchildren's children. The divide is getting wider and wider. Many factors contributed to the people being unable to afford better housing. We all know why. Land is the most precious part of our limited resources. And if we keep on building to sell to foreigners and leaving the 2 and 3 rm flats for out citizens, will this lead to our own people being displaced or feel displaced in their own country? Are we for the betterment of our people or foreigners? What is the point of selling land and properties to foreigners, more profits for what? PS. Wally, the hell in Jalan Kukoh is not just the structural design. It is social, the people who are being displaced, who are desperate and with a mentality that can be dangerous to you and your family. Not all are like that, but all you need is a few and your life will be turned into hell. And in this modern slum of our first world city, the proportion of desperados are more than in other areas.

All bridges lead to JB. Why?

More opposing voices are being heard against the 3rd bridge. I can understand the people of JB for not wanting any bridge that does not go their way. I can understand all those with vested interests in JB, businesses, properties etc to want everything to go to JB. A 3rd bridge will only divert people and business activities away. But have they thought of the consequences of everything going into JB? Do they want a KL or our CBD in JB, when the place is jammed packed with vehicles and people and pollution? Could they not see any merits in diverting away traffic, people and vehicles that are not bound for JB, through other avenues, and bridges? Yes, the 3rd will not benefit JB directly but more for the east coast towns like Mersing, Kota Tinggi, Desaru, Pulau Tioman and all the islands, and also Kuantan and perhaps Trengganu and Kelatan. But JB will benefit from a cleaner and less congested city, less through traffic, less enforced travellers that must go through JB short of alternatives. The Federal Govt is right in looking at the big picture. Who will have the final say? I think not Najib. Another stillbirth.

Make yourself useful and work for life

Yesterday a Raymond Lo wrote to the ST to encourage Singaporeans to make themselves useful and they can be guaranteed of life time employment. His role model was LKY, who he quoted, at 86, 'MM Lee did, to a gruelling round of visits to Malaysia, meeting important personalities, gauging opinions and cementing ties. He has my respect and admiration because he does it for Singapore's well being.' In the same page a Kelvin Tan wrote to complain about the plight of his 81 year old father who was literally a football, being kicked all over the place and no one interested in his well being. The old man could not qualify for the Eldershield and need to be certified as 'disabled' to get help from the Interim Disability Assistance Programme for the Elderly(Idape). And it needs a simple process to confirm that he could not eat, dress, bathe or go to the toilet, move around and transfer from bed to chair. Kelvin Tan was able, and made many calls only to be pushed around too, with no solution to his father's plight. He was very disappointed. What is the moral of the two stories? 1. One must be useful. 2. One must be your own boss and have a job that is only yours, to work at your own time, to decide what you want to do and not to do. 3. No one there to breathe down your neck, to check on you and ask you to hurry. Why so slow? 4. The job must pay so well that you die die still want to work. How many of the taxi drivers would want to work to their 80s if they have a choice? How many cleaners, clerical staff, executives, mechanics, technicians or even professionals would want to work till their 80s if there is someone younger and fiercer yelling at them at every little mistakes they make? I would like to emulate LKY if I have that kind of job, or even be his personal blogger for the rest of my life for a pittance of a minister's pay. To be real, find something to do and enjoy doing it, like blogging or photography, and make yourself happy. No one to boss around with you and you decide what, when, where and how to do it. Happy blogging people. Forget about emulating LKY. Forget about emulating Nathan or Chok Tong. Find your own peace. But don't end up as a football to be kicked around, useless and unwanted.