Over the years, and in the last few weeks, many people have been
regurgitating the same few reasons for the govt to withhold or retain
the people’s life savings for as long as the govt so decides. And none
of the reason is acceptable, reasonable, logical, sensible, justifiable,
morally ethical, believeable… without sounding deceitful, childish and
foolish, to hold back the life savings of a few million citizens of
sound mind, sensible, responsible, mature, knowledgeable, experience and
financially able to manage their own money. Many of those reaching 55
are well educated men and women holding very responsible positions in
top management, professionals, but all lumped together like the
ignorant, reckless, irresponsible and uneducated peasants that would
throw away all their money in a moment of fancy or be cheated of
everything.
The top reason, what if they spend all their money quickly? So?
The next hot favourite, what if they spend their money on pretty mei meis or go to Batam or Bintang or Lijiang? So?
What if they go to the casinos and gamble everything away? So?
What if they splurge on cars or luxury items to live like a king for a few days? So?
What if they really did not know how to manage their money? So?
What if they got cheated by the con men and con women? So?
What if they adopted some pretty god daughters who happily addressed them as sugar daddy? So?
What if they stand on top of a building and threw all their money away? So?
What if they live to 80, 90 or 100 years? So?
There are many reasons that we cannot think of, cannot imagine of, that a
person would squander all his money withdrawn from the CPF? So? For
every one of these reasons, or a combination of these reasons, or for
all the above reasons, is it good enough a reason for the govt to
withhold the money of all the innocent, sensible and responsible from
them at 55?
The act of withholding all the people’s money just because of a few that
would squander their money away, one way or another, is as good as
condemning every one reaching 55 as idiots, irresponsible, imbeciles,
and stupid. All will be found guilty and must be punished for a crime
they did not commit or would not commit but on the assumption that they
will commit. What kind of reasoning is that? What kind of justice is
that? Everyone presumed guilty, presumed to be reckless and
irresponsible with their money?
Such a reasoning and action cannot even hold water in a 3rd World
country where the majority of the people are uneducated and ignorant. We
are talking about a population of educated, widely travelled,
experienced, knowledgeable and responsible people at the prime of their
lives and would remain so for another 20 or 30 years! Why can’t they be
trusted with their own money? Which boy or girl in the govt said so?
And this is not even an issue. There is no good reason to retain or keep
a person’s life savings from him when he/she reaches 55. Absolutely no
good reason. Period. Even if he is of unsound mind, his family should
have the right to take care of him and his money. This is private
matter. What has the govt got to do with it?
To accede to such logic is a very dangerous precedent. In the same
thinking, all the people can be put in jail to protect their lives as
some are found to jump onto train tracks or walked into the reservoir.
Could a well educated populace be stupid enough to say such reasoning is
good, healthy and ethically correct to be used to restrict or restrain
the freedom of the people and the use of their money? It is
unbelieveable that some really think it is ok.
What right has the govt to meddle with the people’s money? It is not your money, dummy.
Kopi Level - Green
7/29/2014
The history of mercenaries or foreigners in uniform
In modern history, the practice of using foreigners or employing
foreigners in uniform was likely to originate from the colonial powers.
The European powers, the Japanese, all recruited foreigners to be
soldiers and policemen, to assist them in controlling their colonies.
The British were notables for having army units in big numbers, regiment
sizes, in India to govern the Indian subcontinent. And during the wars,
these units were ordered to fight side by side with the British
soldiers.
The Japanese recruited the Koreans and Taiwanese to rule their colonies in Southeast Asia, as defensive forces, guarding installations and some as fighting units. What was clear in the composition of these foreign uniform units was that they were used to control the colonies and foreigners. The Japanese would not, never, use the Koreans or the Taiwanese in Japanese soil to guard and check the Japanese citizens.
This was the same for the British and other European powers. The foreign soldiers would only be used to control the subjects of the Empire, never to control and to have authority over their own kinds. The Indian military and police units were used to control the Indians and rule India. The Gurkhas too were to control the colonies and to defend the Empire. And these units were always commanded by the British or the Europeans in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America.
No sensible country with some pride and dignity, and ‘thinking’, would recruit foreigners and give them authority over their own citizens. There is also the security risk of foreigners revolting against the masters as had happened in India and right in Singapore by the Sepoy Line units.
Today, would there be countries that would voluntarily go ahead to recruit foreigners into their military and police forces to have authority over their own citizens, to guard and rule over their own citizens? What would it look like if a country recruited foreigners to ‘protect and defend’ its territory, to guard its immigration points, key installations and depots and to ‘protect its people’ or to prevent its people from mischiefs or civil disobedience? What would it be like if the foreigners in uniform were to arrest the citizens for whatever reasons or to shoot at the citizens?
And the ultimate security fear, if the foreigners rebelled and take over the country? The British, Japanese and European powers were too smart for that. They only used the foreigners to guard and rule over foreigners, and with their own officers in charge. They were the masters and would rule the foreigners, never the other way. Never would they allow foreigners to rule over their people in the days of Empires.
Things have changed today with the blurring of nationalities and citizenship. The karmic retribution has resulted in the colonial masters having to absorb subject people from their former colonies to be their citizens, and to be in uniformed. And the dark Africans and Asians could be arresting English men and women in the streets of London or French in Paris. But it would not happen in Japan. It is unthinkable to the Japanese to have foreigners in uniform in their homeland and to have authority over the Japanese. Japan would still be Japan and belong to Japan. England and many European countries are gradually being colonised by the very people they colonised in the days of Empires. There is a process of reversed colonisation in Europe.
Kopi Level - Green
The Japanese recruited the Koreans and Taiwanese to rule their colonies in Southeast Asia, as defensive forces, guarding installations and some as fighting units. What was clear in the composition of these foreign uniform units was that they were used to control the colonies and foreigners. The Japanese would not, never, use the Koreans or the Taiwanese in Japanese soil to guard and check the Japanese citizens.
This was the same for the British and other European powers. The foreign soldiers would only be used to control the subjects of the Empire, never to control and to have authority over their own kinds. The Indian military and police units were used to control the Indians and rule India. The Gurkhas too were to control the colonies and to defend the Empire. And these units were always commanded by the British or the Europeans in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America.
No sensible country with some pride and dignity, and ‘thinking’, would recruit foreigners and give them authority over their own citizens. There is also the security risk of foreigners revolting against the masters as had happened in India and right in Singapore by the Sepoy Line units.
Today, would there be countries that would voluntarily go ahead to recruit foreigners into their military and police forces to have authority over their own citizens, to guard and rule over their own citizens? What would it look like if a country recruited foreigners to ‘protect and defend’ its territory, to guard its immigration points, key installations and depots and to ‘protect its people’ or to prevent its people from mischiefs or civil disobedience? What would it be like if the foreigners in uniform were to arrest the citizens for whatever reasons or to shoot at the citizens?
And the ultimate security fear, if the foreigners rebelled and take over the country? The British, Japanese and European powers were too smart for that. They only used the foreigners to guard and rule over foreigners, and with their own officers in charge. They were the masters and would rule the foreigners, never the other way. Never would they allow foreigners to rule over their people in the days of Empires.
Things have changed today with the blurring of nationalities and citizenship. The karmic retribution has resulted in the colonial masters having to absorb subject people from their former colonies to be their citizens, and to be in uniformed. And the dark Africans and Asians could be arresting English men and women in the streets of London or French in Paris. But it would not happen in Japan. It is unthinkable to the Japanese to have foreigners in uniform in their homeland and to have authority over the Japanese. Japan would still be Japan and belong to Japan. England and many European countries are gradually being colonised by the very people they colonised in the days of Empires. There is a process of reversed colonisation in Europe.
Kopi Level - Green
VEP – The most expensive ERPs
Singapore govt decided to raise vehicle entry permit fees for vehicles
coming in from Malaysia. Easy revenue! What’s wrong with collecting more
money? Malaysia also agrees and decides to raise fees for vehicles
going through Malaysia, in and out. Both govts are now very happy as
they will be the winners, collecting more money for the coffers. Some
say it is a tit for tat reaction by Malaysia. And to be one up on
Singapore, it is raising toll fees for vehicles entering and exiting
Malaysia as well. Singapore govt responded by saying it will match
whatever increases the Malaysians will imposed. Tit for tat?
Who would be unhappy, the commercial vehicles that have no choice but to go in and out of both countries. The cost will just go up. The visitors, the tourists from both sides would also have to pay more. The workers working in both sides of the causeway would also have to pay more. Then the people from Singapore who have bought homes and living across the causeway would have to pay more too. It will become very unattractive if they have to commute daily to Singapore. The new charges will be quite prohibitive for those who thought the homes were bigger and cheaper.
The bigger picture, Iskandar Economic Zone, all the property developers too, would be affected. The advantages of lower cost over Singapore would be eaten up in no time if fees and taxes keep going up. Those people eyeing properties in Iskandar, or those wanting to relocate their businesses would have to recompute their costs and the comparative advantages.
Actually the commercial vehicles coming into Singapore would not bear the cost. They would simply pass the buck. And many businesses would also do likewise. The main casualties would be the developers and the Iskandar project. Would investors get cold feet, would potential property buyers get cold feet knowing that out of the blue some rules will change against their favour?
On Singapore’s side, the masses would be the one paying for the VEP hike and toll fees. The food, vegetables, fruits and goods coming from Malaysia would just be priced higher. And those who holiday in Malaysia often, or those who went in for their daily shopping, would no longer find it cheap to travel there. Some retail businesses in Johore would be affected for sure.
While everyone would have their pockets affected in one way or another, both the Malaysian and Singapore govts would be the beneficiaries and their coffers fattened. Or is it a conscious decision to reduce the flow of people and goods from both sides? Oh, one positive point, the roads on both sides of the causeway could be freer with less vehicles. And the jams at the Causeway would be relieved.
Looking at it from another angle, it appears that one made the decisions consciously with clear objectives in mind, a decision made using the head. The other made all the decisions with the heart, and not sure what would be achieved and the negative consequences.
Kopi Level - Green
Who would be unhappy, the commercial vehicles that have no choice but to go in and out of both countries. The cost will just go up. The visitors, the tourists from both sides would also have to pay more. The workers working in both sides of the causeway would also have to pay more. Then the people from Singapore who have bought homes and living across the causeway would have to pay more too. It will become very unattractive if they have to commute daily to Singapore. The new charges will be quite prohibitive for those who thought the homes were bigger and cheaper.
The bigger picture, Iskandar Economic Zone, all the property developers too, would be affected. The advantages of lower cost over Singapore would be eaten up in no time if fees and taxes keep going up. Those people eyeing properties in Iskandar, or those wanting to relocate their businesses would have to recompute their costs and the comparative advantages.
Actually the commercial vehicles coming into Singapore would not bear the cost. They would simply pass the buck. And many businesses would also do likewise. The main casualties would be the developers and the Iskandar project. Would investors get cold feet, would potential property buyers get cold feet knowing that out of the blue some rules will change against their favour?
On Singapore’s side, the masses would be the one paying for the VEP hike and toll fees. The food, vegetables, fruits and goods coming from Malaysia would just be priced higher. And those who holiday in Malaysia often, or those who went in for their daily shopping, would no longer find it cheap to travel there. Some retail businesses in Johore would be affected for sure.
While everyone would have their pockets affected in one way or another, both the Malaysian and Singapore govts would be the beneficiaries and their coffers fattened. Or is it a conscious decision to reduce the flow of people and goods from both sides? Oh, one positive point, the roads on both sides of the causeway could be freer with less vehicles. And the jams at the Causeway would be relieved.
Looking at it from another angle, it appears that one made the decisions consciously with clear objectives in mind, a decision made using the head. The other made all the decisions with the heart, and not sure what would be achieved and the negative consequences.
Kopi Level - Green
7/28/2014
CPF not the only way in retirement plans
For
those who have been following the public discussion on the CPF schemes and how
it should be tweaked into a better system must be very assured of how good the
improved version 1.01 would be, or must be. The experts have them all worked
out. The new system would be carefully structured and calibrated to apportion
the CPF savings for retirement, for medical, for emergencies, for sudden short
of funds, and for the savers to retire comfortably with no worries.
I
would not hazard to guess how much one would need to put into the CPF to have
peace of mind and no financial worries in the golden years. And it would likely
have to prepare the people to save enough to live till 100 years.
All
this sounds so good. The main assumption is that the people can afford to save
all the money they need to save. Question, what about those who cannot afford
to save? What about those who don’t even have enough to meet their daily needs?
There
is also this tussle between saving enough to retire and live comfortably or a
scheme that treat the CPF as one of many other provisions for old age, and that
a compulsory scheme should only dictate one to provide for the minimum or basic
needs. Even the Medishield Life which I thought was on the right track in
providing for the basic coverage, there are people, rich people, who wanted the
Medishield Life to provide for B1. If this is an upgrade for those who are able
to pay for more, it is fair. If this is used by the rich for their rich nees,
and used as the premise for computing the premiums for all, then the not so
rich would end up sharing the cost of the rich.
I
still think that such compulsory schemes should be designed to cater for the lowest
denominator, the basics while the extras should be an options for those who
demands for them and able to pay for them. Do not make the poor pay for the fancies of
the rich in a public compulsory scheme. And the CPF must not be thinking of
becoming the only means of savings and thus must be loaded up for a comfy
retirement for the rich. People have many other ways to provide for their
retirement and CPF is not the only way. Do not impose a savings schemes on the
people that cannot afford to have one. And do not make the CPF the mother of
all savings schemes to provide for everything under the sky. Not many can
afford such a comprehensive and rich scheme, or need such a scheme. Many would
rely on family support for their golden years and even regard the CPF as superfluous.
There
are many roads leading to Rome.
Kopi Level - Green
Selamat Hari Raya Aidil Fitri
The Israelis are in total control of the West
Bank and Gaza and with
overwhelming superiority in fire power, they would use them happily and readily
with no hesitation. There is no inhibition on the part of the Israelis as no
Arab country could do anything, and no Western country will lift a finger to
stop the killings. And any Arab country that dares to intervene would only
incur the fury of the Israelis and the West. It is a one sided sideshow that is
allowed to go on unrestrained. The Western powers would simply look the other
way, and the only power that could restrain the Israelis has little reason to
do so.
The Palestinians, their lives and their right to live as ordinary
people, were abandoned by the West the day they moved the Jews into their land.
They could only cry and cry but helpless and powerless. So were the Muslim
countries as the world’s Number One superpower would not allow anyone to come
to the aid of the Palestinians. Obama might shed a few crocodile tears as if he
bothers, to make a show of it. Most of the time the Americans would act so
civilise, please talk, no military intervention like they did in Iraq, Libya,
Syria and elsewhere, to do anything but forcing the Israelis to stop. They have
been ‘wayanging’ for the last 70 years. And the daft Arabs and the Muslim world
are still placing hope on the Americans and the Western powers to save the
Palestinians. They never learn, they did not know who is the real devil behind
the killings.
This must be the biggest joke of the century. Would the West
spare a thought for the poor Palestinians? Oh, why should they? The
Palestinians are the bad guys, the Israelis are the good guys. Didn’t they kill
3 Israelis boys? The revenge killings of more than a thousand Palestinians did
not make the Israelis the bad guys. And good guys will only support the good
guys.
If only the balance of military power is not one sided, the
Israelis would not be so trigger happy to strike. They knew that they are in
control and it is up to them to dictate, to attack or not to attack the
Palestinians, to kill or nor to kill the Palestinians.
Would anyone wish to send best wishes to the Palestinians in
the equivalent of Hari Raya Aidil Fitri? Power is right, might is right. If the
Palestinians want to live a decent life, they have to be as strong as the
Israelis, but that is not going to happen with the Americans and the Western
powers on the side of the Israelis. They would not allow the Palestinians to be
military strong to take on the Israelis.
More protests at Hong Lim on Gaza
killings? Would there be justice for the Palestinians? Who decides? Who is
behind it?
Kopi Level - Green. Thank you everyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)