I think he is still reading this blog. Whenever I claimed that the money in my CPF was my money he would pour cold water on my head and pointedly told me that it was govt tax. He would add that it was money down the drain.
I refused to believe him. But as everyday passes, it is proving him more right than my fat hope that I will get to see all my savings back. They are scheming with more schemes to make sure that our CPF will last for as long as we live. Now how long would that be? And if that is long long long, then those jokers that surrender their ICs before 60s or anytime earlier will see a lot of money left behind.
I still want to think that I am right, that I will have all my money back at my own time and use it to do what I want. Maybe got to wait till 2016. Definitely I would not want to wait to spend my money when I am 120 years old. Maybe that is what many Singaporeans want and will keep the system going forever.
It is my money, our money. Matilah must be proven wrong. And only through our votes can this be changed, with a new govt to overturn things that we are not happy with, especially our CPF savings.
10/12/2011
When policies were enlightened
There was a time when govt policies were enlightened, or were they policies initiated by enlightened men? Housing was a big issue when the colonial govt did not build enough for the people. Families were squeezed into little cubicles, and made do with the squalid conditions, sharing kitchens and toilets with neighbours and everyone.
Housing became a top priority of the govt, to provide every citizen with a roof over their heads, a stake in the country. The govt went further, to provide housing quarters for their employees in the civil service and the uniformed group. Then to encourage home ownership and loyalty to the service/country, priority schemes were launched to help uniform officers to own their HDB flats. Normanton Estate was specially built to house SAF officers as an employment benefit, as an important arm of nation building and the defenders of the country. The uniformed groups were seen as vital to nation building and the security of the country.
Somewhere along the way policies changed. No pension for armed services and no more housing priorities. They were treated just like any organization and will have to bid with everyone for public housing. Are the uniformed personnel less important today than the past? Is housing no longer that important to the people than the past? When prices were really reasonable, and when one could walk into HDB and get a flat within months, everything was fine.
Somewhere down the road, things changed, and policies changed. The new policies must be better and more enlightened, by more talented men. And the people must be happier.
Housing became a top priority of the govt, to provide every citizen with a roof over their heads, a stake in the country. The govt went further, to provide housing quarters for their employees in the civil service and the uniformed group. Then to encourage home ownership and loyalty to the service/country, priority schemes were launched to help uniform officers to own their HDB flats. Normanton Estate was specially built to house SAF officers as an employment benefit, as an important arm of nation building and the defenders of the country. The uniformed groups were seen as vital to nation building and the security of the country.
Somewhere along the way policies changed. No pension for armed services and no more housing priorities. They were treated just like any organization and will have to bid with everyone for public housing. Are the uniformed personnel less important today than the past? Is housing no longer that important to the people than the past? When prices were really reasonable, and when one could walk into HDB and get a flat within months, everything was fine.
Somewhere down the road, things changed, and policies changed. The new policies must be better and more enlightened, by more talented men. And the people must be happier.
Another piece of frightening news?
The people may find this piece of news frightening, but to the govt it is good news. The MOM is going to help the oldies again. Dunno why, whenever the govt says it wants to help the people, I got a very strange and uncomfortable feeling. This time the MOM is thinking of reviewing CPF rates for the above 50 uncles and aunties, the vulnerable group that have found themselves having not enough savings after a life time of savings. Dunno why, and nobody knows why. They must have squandered them away in wasteful spending.
So here comes the govt to help them, and very likely to raise their CPF and employers contributions. And the magical scheme called CPF Life will be relooked into to ensure that the annuity will be paid for life. The insurance men are smiling. Tell you what, I don’t like their smile. The longer the payout, or the more the payout, the more will be the pay in. And the longer annuity is to last, the longer it will stay in. As simple as that. If they plan the annuity to last till 120 years, it means whatever money, a big portion will stay in till 120 years. Simply ingenious and logical.
And I can already see how good the scheme is. And it is so good that it will be made compulsory for sure. Our reserves are going to get another boost and the country will be richer, and have more money to invest in big big deals. We can buy up the world.
This is going to be another win win formula, good for oldies, good for employers and good for the national reserves. It can’t be that frightening right?
The people are so lucky. Now they can live till 120 years or more, forever, and there will be more to take.
So here comes the govt to help them, and very likely to raise their CPF and employers contributions. And the magical scheme called CPF Life will be relooked into to ensure that the annuity will be paid for life. The insurance men are smiling. Tell you what, I don’t like their smile. The longer the payout, or the more the payout, the more will be the pay in. And the longer annuity is to last, the longer it will stay in. As simple as that. If they plan the annuity to last till 120 years, it means whatever money, a big portion will stay in till 120 years. Simply ingenious and logical.
And I can already see how good the scheme is. And it is so good that it will be made compulsory for sure. Our reserves are going to get another boost and the country will be richer, and have more money to invest in big big deals. We can buy up the world.
This is going to be another win win formula, good for oldies, good for employers and good for the national reserves. It can’t be that frightening right?
The people are so lucky. Now they can live till 120 years or more, forever, and there will be more to take.
10/11/2011
When a govt discriminates against its own people
Tony Tan talked about an all inclusive society and no one will be left out. Then why are citizens being discriminated by incompetence or bad policies? The citizens who are being barred from buying public flats because of some frivolous reasons, especially earning higher income is a glaring example of bad policies. In the first place, all the young people started with incomes within the HDB ceilings and exceeded only because they could not get a flat earlier. Over the years their incomes are bound to go up. Should not the criteria of income measure be at the time of application when they first started to work?
Then the stupid excuse that they will deprive the lower income buyers from getting a flat, or added to the demand. What kind of bull is that? There is no shortage of land to build public flats. In fact the govt is offering a lot of land to build private properties to be sold to foreigners.
Now, what is the real problem? The truth is that the govt is not building enough or had slowed down the building programme and created the shortage by its own bad policies. It is the artificially created lack of supply that is the problem. So who got blame and who had to suffer for such bad policies or bad planning?
The very own citizens are paying for it. And at the same time there are plenty of flats for new citizens, who are flooding into the market without anyone complaining that they are causing the demand to balloon and resulting in higher market prices. And the affected citizens suffered in silence with the govt refusing to acknowledge its own mistakes. We have many citizens who have done their NS and cannot afford to buy private properties and cannot buy public flats. How can such a situation be allowed to exist in an all inclusive society where no one will be left out?
It is govt logic versus people’s logic, or supertalent logic versus no talent logic. Of course supertalent or govt logic wins, and it is the right logic. This is simply brilliant. Create a supply problem and blame it on the young buyers who happened to earn a little bit more. Just pass the buck to them and force them to buy private. They die their pasar. So wicked.
Then the stupid excuse that they will deprive the lower income buyers from getting a flat, or added to the demand. What kind of bull is that? There is no shortage of land to build public flats. In fact the govt is offering a lot of land to build private properties to be sold to foreigners.
Now, what is the real problem? The truth is that the govt is not building enough or had slowed down the building programme and created the shortage by its own bad policies. It is the artificially created lack of supply that is the problem. So who got blame and who had to suffer for such bad policies or bad planning?
The very own citizens are paying for it. And at the same time there are plenty of flats for new citizens, who are flooding into the market without anyone complaining that they are causing the demand to balloon and resulting in higher market prices. And the affected citizens suffered in silence with the govt refusing to acknowledge its own mistakes. We have many citizens who have done their NS and cannot afford to buy private properties and cannot buy public flats. How can such a situation be allowed to exist in an all inclusive society where no one will be left out?
It is govt logic versus people’s logic, or supertalent logic versus no talent logic. Of course supertalent or govt logic wins, and it is the right logic. This is simply brilliant. Create a supply problem and blame it on the young buyers who happened to earn a little bit more. Just pass the buck to them and force them to buy private. They die their pasar. So wicked.
Daylight robbery
The robbing of motorists continues. We have not heard of the study by CASE on why motor insurance is going up and up like housing prices, despite motorists with clean no claim records and maxing their NCBs. Looks like it is thrown into the waste paper basket oredy. No political value and not worth looking into.
Today the oldies motorists are crying foul. They are going to be slammed with higher motor insurance premium because of their age. Did they say senior citizens should be treated with some respect? What about robbing them of more money? Why not, they are quite helpless. Just tell them they are old and more prone to accidents and it is only logical to make them pay more. A forum writer asked in his letter to the ST for statistical proof that oldies are more accident prone. I think he is asking for it. Statistics is the easiest instrument to bluff people with a little bit of juggling here and there.
Another intelligent reply from another forum letter by a William Tay caught my eye. He said these oldies can afford to drive expensive cars, why are they complaining about a few thousands more in insurance premiums? I love the logic. All those who can afford to buy big cars must pay more premiums. And oldies who can afford to buy big cars must pay lagi more because the cars are big and they are oldies. I second that with all my heart. I am going to give up my car and let the rich oldies go and pay and pay. It will be good for the GDP I supposed.
May I add a few more brilliant recommendations. Make oldies pay motor insurance according to their age, like 65 pays $6,500, 70 pays $7,000 or use the age as a multiplier. I really love the way I think. Maybe the motor insurance company can adopt my suggestion and allow me a free insurance for life. I am so brilliant.
Today the oldies motorists are crying foul. They are going to be slammed with higher motor insurance premium because of their age. Did they say senior citizens should be treated with some respect? What about robbing them of more money? Why not, they are quite helpless. Just tell them they are old and more prone to accidents and it is only logical to make them pay more. A forum writer asked in his letter to the ST for statistical proof that oldies are more accident prone. I think he is asking for it. Statistics is the easiest instrument to bluff people with a little bit of juggling here and there.
Another intelligent reply from another forum letter by a William Tay caught my eye. He said these oldies can afford to drive expensive cars, why are they complaining about a few thousands more in insurance premiums? I love the logic. All those who can afford to buy big cars must pay more premiums. And oldies who can afford to buy big cars must pay lagi more because the cars are big and they are oldies. I second that with all my heart. I am going to give up my car and let the rich oldies go and pay and pay. It will be good for the GDP I supposed.
May I add a few more brilliant recommendations. Make oldies pay motor insurance according to their age, like 65 pays $6,500, 70 pays $7,000 or use the age as a multiplier. I really love the way I think. Maybe the motor insurance company can adopt my suggestion and allow me a free insurance for life. I am so brilliant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)