HDB lease buybacks is on

The first batch of HDB owners have opted for the HDB lease buyback scheme yesterday. The scheme will ensure that they will have a roof over their heads and an annuity payout for the rest of their life. By this scheme, these people would have some form of income in their old age, a replica of what CPF annuity scheme and minimum sum scheme were trying to do. So, does it mean that now these people do not need to buy annuity scheme or have their CPF locked up in the minimum sum scheme? To continue to retain their money in the CPF will not be accepted as good faith. People will now see the retention of CPF minimum sum in a different and negative light. The money must be returned to these folks as they have made provisions for their retirement and old age. To claim that the amount from the lease buyback scheme is insufficient and the need to continue to hold back to the minimum sum is anything but atrocious. No amount is enough if the reasoning shall go this way.

A proactive and caring govt - A big thank you

In the 60s and 70s, most of the population were living in wooden huts, squatters and cubicles in the city. Then came the govt to the rescue. They built cheap and affordable HDB flats at less than $10k in Queenstown for the people. When the people get richer in the 70s/80s, the govt started to build better and bigger flats, 5rm, executive and HUDC flats for the people. Then came 90s, people getting more prosperous. And the govt was pleased. They started to build condominiums for the people. All still quite affordable. Now comes 2000s, what happens, flats are now too expensive. People cannot afford to buy bigger flats. So comes the proactive and caring govt. It starts to build smaller flats, 2/3 rms and even 1 rm rental flats. The people are so lucky. They can always downgrade. Always a roof of their choice to befit their pocket. Very affordable.

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.