CPF - Watch it very carefully

Below is an abridged article by Phillip Ang posted in TRE that explained clearly what the Enhanced Nomination Scheme is all about. Be very careful that you want your nominee to receive your life savings in their CPF account and not in cash. When it is deposited in their CPF account, it will be subject to all the restrictive rules of withdrawal by CPF, ie it will be stuck for good like why you are unable to withdraw your CPF now. To me it is NOT and enhanced scheme.

Why is PAP still trying to scam CPF members?
June 15th, 2017

....A few years ago, CPF Board (CPFB) introduced the Enhanced Nomination Scheme (ENS) without any debate in Parliament, zero public input/feedback and no media announcement. The ENS allows a CPF nominee to receive CPF savings in their CPF accounts. Members are required to contact CPFB for details of the suspicious scheme.
The ENS is described in ONE SENTENCE on CPF website:

Some inconvenient questions for CPFB:
Why didn’t CPFB consult CPF members before the introduction of this scheme?
Why didn’t CPFB publish all material information on its website?
Why did CPFB introduce a scheme which defies logic and common sense?
I have checked with CPFB and what I found out should worry CPF members.
I’ll use the example of a CPF member with a $218,000 bequest to his nominee. Under this make-no-sense scheme, members are given 2 ‘options’ for the transfer:
1 – Top up Medisave Account (MA) limit followed by topping up Special Account (SA) limit with balance going into Ordinary Account (OA) or
2 – Top up SA limit followed by topping up MA limit with balance going into OA.
Under the ENS, MA and SA must be topped up to current limits of $52,000 and $166,000 respectively!

Hmm ....Clearly, the scheme was introduced to trap more CPF for GIC to speculate in risky foreign assets.
CPF members would have preferred all monies to go into the nominee’s OA which could at least be used to finance housing or education.
If the nominee is a 15-year old child under ‘option’ 2, the money will be trapped in the SA till he reaches 65, ie for 50 years! At the stroke of a pen, PAP hopes to trap our CPF for another 2 generations.
Why would any CPF member plan for the nominee’s retirement which could be 5 to 6 decades down the road?
This is a clear case of PAP trying to scam CPF members and it doesn’t help with elected MPs playing deaf and dumb in Parliament, WP MPs included.
Readers should share the information and be very wary of CPF Board. Do not anyhow assume your CPF will be, logically, transferred to the nominee’s OA. Once the transaction has been effected, your nominees will surely cry no tears as it will be impossible to be reversed. Can you imagine $200,000 trapped for 5 to 6 decades at GIC’s disposal?
Is GIC in such urgent need of funds that PAP has to resort to introducing a scheme to scam CPF members?

Phillip Ang
* The author blogs at LikeDatOsoCanMeh.

Dark clouds over Red Dot

The open letter by Hsien Yang and Wei Ling took all Singaporeans by surprise. The allegations were serious and Hsien Loong would probably in a state of shock. Could he have seen this coming? Not likely as he is on holiday mood.  He would not have gone on vacation if he has seen this coming.

What were the allegations?

1.     Abuse of power

2.     Fear of personal safety from state organs

3.     No confidence in Hsien Loong’s leadership

4.     Disagreement between Hsien Loong and LKY over the demolition of 38 Oxley Road house

Details of the allegations are in the open letter by Wei Ling and Hsien Yang at http://statestimesreview.com/2017/06/14/original-letter-what-has-happened-to-lee-kuan-yews-values/

The allegations are very serious indeed and Hsien Loong would be compelled to make a defence to clarify the matters raised or he would not look good. His integrity is being questioned. In other cases that were slightly similar in nature when Hsien Loong’s integrity was questioned, a legal letter on defamation would be delivered to the alleger in double quick time.

Would Hsien Loong follow up like before after returning from his holiday? Many things, negative things, are now on the table. Not disputing and clearing them would put Hsien Loong in a very bad light and Singapore’s reputation too would be affected. He has replied with a 41 points argument today.

How would this family saga continue from here? And the matters are not only just about a family feud, many of the allegations concern Singapore as a free and democratic state, transparent and rule by law. There is now a dark cloud overhanging the bright little Red Dot and the whole world is watching, not just Singaporeans, in silence. The whole episode would describe what Singapore is all  about, warts and all, baring all, for all to see. This will be the ultimate hard truth about Singapore that no one would be able to read under normal circumstances. The shocking revelation and truth that all Singaporeans and the whole world would finally see and read about are surfacing.

Who is going to sue who? Hsien Loong definitely has ample grounds to sue Wei Ling and Hsien Yang if the allegations were untrue. Do Wei Ling and Hsien Yang have any grounds to sue Hsien Loong before being sued? And whichever happens, more beans will be spilt for sure. This is Battle Royale uniquely Singapore that no one could expect coming from the near perfect family.

QS ranking downright shady and unethical

Would anyone not under the influence of drugs believe that NUS and NTU are better universities than Princeton, Cornell or Yale? Well, some Singaporeans are gloating over this great achievement by the two local universities, no ill intent in my statement as one is my alma mater. I should be proud that my alma mater is better than top Ivy League universities in the US. Soon many top American universities would be asking for joint NUS degrees to boost up their reputation instead of Singapore begging to host joint Singapore American university degrees here.

Some of the Singaporeans that were so impressed with the rankings are the uninformed or ill informed uncles in the kopitiams and aunties in the wet market. I heard them chirping about it with great excitement, and I can understand, given their exposure and lack of understanding on the QS criteria for judging.

Ok, maybe on face value, maybe the top American universities are living on their past glories while NUS and NTU are what they are today by today's standard. The good American universities were good in the past but no longer. Time has changed. For the well informed, the comments are different and some are outright cynical of the outcome with good reasons. Below are some comments taken from the onlinecitizen.


'On Thursday (8 June), Nanyang Technological University (NTU) was named Asia’s top university in the 2018 Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings, surpassing the National University of Singapore (NUS).

 

NTU is also ranked 11th in the world, ranking above other notable institutions such as Princeton University, Cornell University and Yale University, and two positions above its previous 13th spot.

 

Below is a response written by John Ouserhout on question-and-answer site, Quora on the question of "How accurate are the 2018 QS rankings? They seem to rank Nanyang Tech higher than Princeton, Yale, Cornell, Columbia, and Berkeley."

 

Ouserhout's response in full

First impressions suggest it is almost laughably inaccurate. UC Berkeley at #27? This is the same university that is affiliated with 91 Nobel Laureates, 13 Fields Medals, 23 Turing Awards and 16 elements of the Periodic Table. The rest of the ranking seems similarly strange as well; NUS and NTU ranked right alongside or higher than Princeton, Cornell, Yale, Columbia and Johns Hopkins?

 

(Haha, this Ouserhout does not know of the many great Nobel laureates hiding in the Singapore universities or akan datang, ie coming soon, going to happen).

 

Is it just my Anglo-American bias speaking? I know these universities have made rapid strides in funding and encouraging cutting edge research, so perhaps it’s inevitable that they’ve caught up and surpassed the more well known Ivy League universities. That is obviously partly the case, but after digging around for a bit, there seems to be a whole host of articles about the flawed methodology and downright shady practices of the QS organisation.

 

Some of the flaw methodology include counting more foreign students and faculty as good without any relations to academic merits. More foreigners mean more points. How silly.

 

And 50% of the points come from surveys from Academics and Employers. Look, there are hundreds of good American universities and only 2 or 3 good Singapore universities. In the latter, all the scores would go to these 2 or 3 universities while in the US the scores would be thinly spread. See the flaw? Which university would the Employers hired from? In the US they could hire from hundreds of universities but only 2/3 in Singapore.

 

Ouserhout went on with many other flaws in the methodology. Below are a few more.

 Secondly, QS’s business model is really shady:

• A dubious Star ranking system, where universities pay to be evaluated. (Conflicts of interest anyone?)
• ‘Branding Opportunities’ for $80,000 with QS Showcase
• A highly lucrative ‘consultancy service’ to help universities rise up the rankings

In short, ranking systems might have their flaws, but this one is downright shady and unethical.

No need to say anything more, just let the daft to gloat over this mirage as a badge of honour.  I don’t blame the uncles in the kopitiams or the aunties in the wet market. I understand where they are coming from. Would any reputable academics bother to question the allegation by Ouserhout that the ranking system 'is downright shady and unethical'?

Hsien Yang and Wei Ling leaving Singapore

From Yahoo News.

‘The siblings of Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong have issued a statement of “no confidence” against their brother, saying that they felt threatened by his pursuit of a personal agenda ….

Lee Hsien Yang and Lee Wei Ling, …made the open statement through their Facebook accounts in the early hours of Wednesday (14 June).

In the statement, Lee Hsien Yang said he felt “compelled to leave” Singapore “for the foreseeable future”.

“This is the country that my father, Lee Kuan Yew, loved and built. It has been home for my entire life. Singapore is and remains my country. I have no desire to leave. Hsien Loong is the only reason for my departure,” the statement quoted Lee Hsien Yang.’

 Wei Ling is also saying the same thing, that she did not want to leave Singapore as this is home but will also be leaving.

Malaysia China relations: When shared interests dominate the narrative

The sale of Malaysia's national car, the Proton, to China has raised many objections from the nationalists in the country, especially Mahathir who gave birth to the idea. There must be good reasons for Najib to want to part with this national project that is all about pride and progress of the bumiputra policy. It is easy to criticise Najib for selling a national asset, though not strategic in any sense, on emotional grounds overriding economic and financial considerations. If the Proton is such an attractive proposition, not losing money but gaining popularity as a national car, with new technology and engines to propel it into an international product, Najib would not have done what he did.

 

The logic behind the sale of Proton to China is very similar to the sale of Lotus by Britain to Malaysia or Sweden selling its Volvo to China. In the case of Lotus and Volvo, there are technologies involved that the Chinese are interested. There is nothing of this when the Proton is concerned, an antique dressed up with bright colours to be sold only to the locals as a cheap product but losing its glitters as the days gone by. Najib either sells it now when there is a buyer or would have to end up folding the company when no one else is interested in this shell of a car manufacturing company. There is nothing worthy or worthwhile for anyone to want to buy the Proton unlike Lotus or the Volvo. Period. China is actually doing Malaysia a big favour by pouring money into a dead end product and giving it a future with the injection of modern technology and engines to give it a new life. Would the critics be able to see it in this light?

 

There are times when interests collide and times when common interests compliment and would bring about more cooperation to benefit both parties. China has a great strategic interest to want to invest in Malaysia for strategic and economic reasons. The greatest fear of China is the choke point in the water ways through the Malacca Strait and the Strait of Singapore. 80% of China's oil flow through these narrow channels of water and with the Americans posing a greater threat in its increasing belligerent rhetoric against China. The latter has to do something to avoid a blockage of the Straits by the Americans.

 

China is looking at the geography of the region and found several alternatives to break away from the choke points. China is making big plans to find alternative routes for its oil supply from the Middle East bypassing the Straits of Singapore and Malacca in Gwadar, Pakistan, oil pipeline in Myanmar, a possible cutting of the Kra of Isthmus and cutting across from peninsula Malaysia. The strategic plan would involved several options and Malaysia is just one of them.

 

Why would Malaysia want to be part of this Chinese strategic plan? What benefits would Malaysia derive from it? For centuries, Malaysia has been bypassed by the strategic location and infrastructure of Singapore as a regional transportation hub. In the Chinese plan, involving great engineering, infrastructure development and financing, Malaysia would become the next transportation hub of the region to rival Singapore. China stood to gain strategically with its development in Malaysia. And Malaysia stood to gain economically enormously in replacing Singapore as the new transportation and financial centre. When both countries have so much to gain, there are all the reasons for Malaysia to rethink its strategic interests to participate fully in a plan that would make Malaysia a vibrant hub of economic activities. Or would Malaysia choose to let this piece of pie go and seek closer ties with the Americans that are meddling in its internal affairs and could only offer to sell more arms and weapons that are totally unproductive and a waste of money?

 

Malaysia can also decide against being aligned and enmeshed intricately with China as some critics would caution. Malaysia has a choice, and so has the Chinese. If Malaysia does not want to come on board, China would accelerate its plan to cut the Kra Isthmus in quick time and by pass Malaysia totally. China has to do one or the other. Malaysia could choose one or the other. When China chooses to go the Kra way, all the benefits that Malaysia could gain would go up in smokes and Malaysia would remain on the side line of the world's major water way and transportation network.

 

The Chinese proposition makes a lot of economic sense to Malaysia. The Chinese would find a way out from the potential American blockage, and Malaysia would become the new shining centre of global trade. Najib and his govt must have gone through the whole thinking process to want in and the instant reward is the sale of a karung guni car that no one would pay a cent for to China, and at a good price and with potential of the Proton name gaining more traction with new technology and engines to compete in the international market. To Malaysia, there are so many avenues and opportunities to benefit from this strategic alignment with China's economic and strategic plan with no compromise to its national interests.

 

Now what would the critics say or could offer other than emotional gripes? Would the Americans buy the Proton for a song? Would the Americans turn Malaysia into a new transportation hub and a new financial centre, or into another war zone?