America shall reap what it sowed

What the Americans had done to Iraq, Egypt, Libya and Syria and to the Palestinians are way too far from redemption. They have unleashed a force so vicious and deadly that they would not know what hit them when it hits them. The story is unfolding and America shall pay and pay dearly.

There is another act in East Asia, another uncontrollable and destructive force that the Americans could contain but chose to unleash for its short term interest. This short sightedness could cost the Americans dearly one day.

The Americans were victims of the most vile and vicious attack by the Japanese at Pearl Harbour. The sneak attack, without warning, caught the Americans with their pants down and till today many are still crying under the water of Pearl Harbour, not knowing what hit them or who did it. And some silly Americans were still dramatising and praising the Japanese for their spirit of bushido, honour and righteousness.

When President Truman dropped the A bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, he vowed that America would make sure Japan would not be able to make war again. And the Americans did that for 60 years. The Americans could not prevent the Japanese from making war in WW2. They did not know how ambitious and vicious were the Japanese. They believed the Japanese were honourable men of peace and let Japan developed into the biggest Asian power militarily, and the ability to wage war across the earth. No one could blame the Americans then for the aggression of the Japanese across Asia and across the Pacific Ocean to deal the Americans the deadly blow below the belt.

Today, the Americans could stop Japan from making war again. Instead, the Americans gave Japan the green light to make war, to have the power to wage war. And the short sighted Americans thought it was good. They forgot the lessons of Pearl Harbour. They are thinking that the new Japanese were also honourable men like their predecessors in WW2. Perhaps they knew that the Japanese have not changed but they were only using the Japanese to contain China, to fight the Chinese, and think the Americans could reap the benefits without having to pay a price. America must not forget that what it sowed it shall reap.

To allow Japan to remilitarise, to wage war far and wide, does not guarantee that the Japanese would not do a Pearl Harbour version 2.0. The Americans shall pay dearly, more dearly this time round, for their irresponsible act of allowing Japan the capability to make war. All things come full circle, and there is no exception.

American exceptionalism would not escape this exception when Japan is rearmed and again able to conduct war across the Pacific Ocean. Yes, what you sowed you shall reap. Japan was a rogue nation and is still a rogue nation given a chance.

Kopi Level - Green

How does an insurance company make money?

When you are young and healthy, they sell you life insurance. And they win if you live long long till the expiry date of the insurance. So they pray you live long long and pay your premiums long long.
 
And when you live long long, near your expiry date, they sell you annuities. And they make money when you don’t live long long, for they need not pay you annuities for long long.
In the first case they pray you live long long. In the second case they wish you well.
 
Interesting thought from a blogger who made a comment in TRE. The blogger said the insurance companies actually placed a bet on your life in both cases. First case play long, second case play short.

Kopi Level - Green

CPF savings not enough

‘According to a recent survey by Manulife, only one in 5 Singaporeans feel confident that their CPF savings will be sufficient for them to retire comfortably.
 
The survey, which was conducted online with over 500 respondents over the last three months, found that almost half (47%) believed that they didn't have enough CPF savings to meet even their basic retirement needs.’ Posted in TheRealSingapore
 
What to make out of this survey? The first thought, let’s make sure that the 80% would have enough CPF savings when they retired. Let’s help them! One way is to make sure that they save more. If 50% of their income not enough, make them save 60%. This should help. If not, increase to 70%. This should be easy. The second option is spend less, to stop them from buying properties that they cannot afford and at too high a price. This option may be a bit difficult to implement as all of them would swear the properties they are buying are affordable, especially HDB flats. And they will quote the ministers as the authority that HDB properties are affordable. The problem part is that the 80% most probably bought HDB flat and now say they would not have sufficient savings for retirement. Don’t ask me why. The third option, make sure they can only take out their CPF savings 5 years before they are about to die. As an example, if they are to live to 100 years, allow them to take out their savings at 95. Like that sure got enough. But problem is how to know they will expire in 5 years? Maybe can ask god.
 
Another way to look at this problem is to question what they meant by not enough? Are they thinking of living like a king, a minister, a civil servant or an ex PME? If they are thinking of living like the first 3, then even if they contribute 80% of their income to CPF also not enough. But if they think like living like an ex PME, willing to be taxi drivers until they expire, then whatever they have in their CPF, or don’t have, also got enough. Ex PMEs are more down to earth and would probably downgrade to eat in the hawker centres. They would also be happy to drive their taxis till the last day. So got or no got CPF, never mind as long as they can drive their taxis. Can’t imagine them be cleaners or security guards at 90 years old,
 
So, looks like the problem is about explanations or is it expectations. Want to eat in restaurant sure not enough. Want to eat in foodcourt maybe enough, maybe not enough. But if happy to eat in hawker centre, sure enough.
 
So, what is the problem with the survey findings? Want to tell them not enough and then help them by increasing their savings to 60% or 70%? Or want to tell them the hard truth, everything is enough if don’t buy expensive affordable HDB flats and eat in hawker centres? See, no problem right? Or shall I con them by agreeing with them that money not enough so that I can help them, to save more for the future and eat lesser now?
 
Tiok boh?
 
PS: I have not told them the secret formula…sell their homes, sure enough.

Kopi Level - Green

When should one stop saving for retirement?

Theoretically one should never stop saving for retirement if one can afford to as no one can tell how long would a person live. For practical purposes, and with statistics available, it is reasonable to say that most people would have died before they hit 90. By 80 probably 80 percent could have died. By 70 very likely 60 percent would have died too. These are just estimates but not too far from realities.
 
Under normal circumstances, people should start to enjoy their life savings about 10 years before the end of their lives. If not, what is the point of saving for retirement? Leaving it too late would mean not benefitting from their savings or leaving too much money unused when they die. Taking them out too early would likely lead to a depletion of the savings, assuming that the life savings are the only source of fund for retirement. In many cases this is not so and many don’t really need to touch their savings when they have too much money or with family support.
 
Would it therefore be reasonable for people to start to withdraw from the savings at 60? It used to be 55. Or would it be a practical thing for people to stop saving for retirement after 60? Why continue to stress on your finances and stinge on your expenses to live a bit better by not savings after 60? Those who have a lot of money to save, by all means keep saving.
 
Is it reasonable for the Govt to force the people to continue to save irrespective of their age? Why are people forced to save at 60, 70, 80 or 100 years? Is the Govt being unreasonable? No such things?
 
For people who are self employed, who need to renew their licences, they are required by law to contribute to their Medisave Accounts regardless of how old they are. There is no limitation on the age of the person. As long as the person wants to renew his licence, pay up. 100 year old also have to pay if one happens to be self employed. Why? The Govt said so.
 
And in the case of people selling their properties that they bought using their CPF savings, regardless of age, they must repay what they took from their CPF savings plus interests. So, if one is 80 and decided to sell his property, if he borrowed $300k from his CPF, he needs to repay this plus the interest, assuming 2.5% for 30 years, or 75% of the loan. The total sum to be put back into his CPF could be $525k. Why would an 80 year old person need to have $525k in his CPF account? It could be a bigger sum, and at an older age.
 
Why is this happening? No one bothers to think through it? No one bothers to amend these irregularities? Or the Govt really wants this to be the case?

Kopi Level - Green

VEP could be a blessing in disguise

Not that I think it is a good thing as it hits everyone in the pocket from both sides of the causeway. Any hike in such fees will only hurt the people, the ordinary people. The rich would not think of it as a cost thing. In fact it would be good if the fees are higher, like some suggesting the ERP charges should go up to $50 per pass so that their Merces and BMWs and Bentleys could have the roads to themselves.
 
Now a return trip is going to cost $40 or $50 daily and those that have to pay for it would become a real source of pain. For those Singaporeans who have bought homes in JB and commuting daily to Singapore will bear the brunt of these high charges. It would definitely put off people who are thinking of doing the same or relocating their factories or workshops to JB.
 
Why I say that this is a blessing is that it is a prelude to more of such to come. You can the light at the end of the tunnel. And this is just an eye opener. It is better to know what would be coming now before plunging in with all the money and cannot extricate without suffering huge losses later.
 
I hope no one has built any nursing homes for the oldies there or thinking of doing so. Now every trip to visit the old folks is going to hurt the pocket real bad. Filial piety and wanting to be near the oldies are going to be very costly if the oldies are residing in nursing homes in JB. For those who have done that, they may want to bring back their old folks as the cost of commuting would negate the comparative advantages that were there before.
 
The VEP and toll charges have eroded whatever advantages JB has over Singapore. They have leveled the playing field of cost differences. In the case of Iskandar EZ, before the hen lays its golden eggs, it has been strangled to death.
 
See the blessing in disguise? The oldies too would be celebrating as their children would no longer find it attractive to park them overseas unless they chose not to visit them too frequently.

Kopi Level - Green