CPF - Another Singapore miracle

'When netizen Rahayu Bte Mazlan went to the Central Provident Fund (CPF) board to collect her late mother’s CPF money, she found that it did not receive any interest, even though her mother had passed away 31 years ago. According to her, it took them 31 years to review her mother’s account, and therefore after the review, the money did not accrue any interest.

Rahayu’s post was shared on Facebook page All Singapore Stuff. In her post, she shared a letter from the CPF Board and wrote, “My mum passed away in 1987. She nominated me as her beneficiary. Last wed, I received a letter from CPF that there is money in her CPF after CPF review”.
However, after going to CPF Board, Rahayu was advised differently. She wrote, “I went to CPF yesterday. I said that since they had kept my late mum’s money, they should pay interest. They say that that her case was after review so no interest. What I don’t understand is that why after 31 yrs then they review? What is going on with our CPF?”'

I read the above posted in social media. Can't remember which blog posted it. Apologies. Below are quotes from the ST.

'Thirty-one years after Rahayu Mazlan received payouts from the Central Provident Fund (CPF) following the death of her mother, the outstanding balance - under $2 - finally found its way to her.
The 51-year-old housewife had received a letter dated Oct 4 from the CPF Board stating that as part of its "regular reviews", it had found some leftover savings in her late mother's account since the last withdrawal in 1987.
CPF has asked her to submit a completed form and necessary documents by Nov 5 to claim it.

In response to The Sunday Times' queries, a CPF Board spokesman yesterday said that all of the deceased's CPF monies were disbursed within two months in 1987 - except for a "small residual amount" which had been retained for a specific housing-related transaction. "This amount continued to attract interest until it was deducted several months later for the transaction. The interest accrued - which amounted to less than $2 - remained unclaimed," the spokesman added.'

The facts, some money was left in Rahayu's mother's CPF account to settle a specific housing related transaction. This amount continued to receive interest which the ST article quoting CPF, for up to 7 years only. Reading from the above ST quote, the interest accrued was less than $2. Take it as that for 7 years. Not sure if this is correct. So Rahayu is claiming the interest for the subsequent 24 years, ie 31-7=24. I think, just my opinion, if CPF members are charged interest from borrowing their own savings to pay for properties and the number of years to pay for this interest, regardless of whether the person is 100 years old or 200 years old, there is no limit as to how many years a person has to pay interest on borrowing his CPF savings, then why when money kept in CPF would not enjoy interest after 7 years? Is there a discrepancy and is this fair?

Many people would say nevermind, so little money, a few dollars only. But to some it is a matter of principle. You deserve to be paid, then you should be paid, the amount is immaterial.

Why I said this is a miracle? In many countries, whatever is left in a savings account like this case would likely be forgotten or lost in the files. Only in super efficient and clean Singapore would the CPF ask a person to make a claim for $2. The MRT fare to CPF would cost more than that. Again it is not only a matter of principle but a matter of right. The money belong to Rahayu and she should make a claim for it. So she is also claiming for the extra years interest not paid.

A $2 claim after 31 years is a record and a miracle. How many people lost all their savings in their bank accounts because they forgot the $200 in their savings, thought very safe in the banks but all kena eaten up by the $2 monthly fee the banks charged them for having too little money in the account?  Got money in the bank account ended no money left and account closed by the banks. This is like cheating the small people on the street.

Here we have the CPF asking a person to claim for $2 after 31 years, no extra charges, no monthly fee for having too little money in the CPF. Now was that lucky? The CPF does not cheat small people of small money.

Freedom of Navigation or provocative acts of war?

Many reading the western narratives have conveniently fell to believe that the American’s claim of freedom of navigation trips in the South China Sea are just innocent passages in the high seas without question, nothing more, nothing less. Are these trips so innocent, using warships, sailing all the way from the eastern Pacific Ocean to the South China and entering China’s 12 nm territorial seas?
 
What is freedom of navigation? Simply, freedom of navigation is the right for ships/boats, mostly commercial or pleasure, to travel the high seas freely, from one point to another without violating a country’s territorial sovereignty. Sending warships that would not have any reason to be in the South China, but deliberately and repeatedly entering the territorial limits of a country’s sovereignty is NOT freedom of navigation. These are deliberate acts of provocations, acts of war.
 
Sending warships from Europe into the South China Sea to intrude into another country’s territorial sea for no other purpose or reason is provocation and tempting war. Innocent passages by non military ships that needs to pass through a part of the sea for commercial or pleasure, sports or whatever are always protected and permitted by all countries.
 
The world must be accept the American and western lies of freedom of navigation when these are actually acts of provocation, acts of war. They are not innocent passage, they are deliberate passage to provoke, to instigate, to challenge another country to war.
 
These warmongering Americans and western gangsters must be told that their nonsensical military adventures into another country’s territorial seas are not innocent, not freedom of navigation. The American and western narratives are lies, conducting dangerous acts of war. Period. No one acting innocently would intrude into another person’s backyard or front yard carrying weapons of war and claiming to be there innocently when the provocateurs have no reason to be there. England and France sending their warships into Chinese territorial waters all the way from Europe are innocent passages? These ‘has beens’ colonial powers still cannot see the day of reckoning and waiting for China to sink their antique warships? China must sink one or two of these ships for them to wake up that the world has changed. They are now little countries, not colonial powers any more.
 
Asean has finally found the courage to ask the Americans what were they doing in the South China Sea and whether their provocative acts would lead to war unnecessarily.

Founders' Memorial - Take a leaf from North Korea

Singapore is setting aside 5 hectares of prime land in the heart of the new downtown city at Gardens by the Bay dedicated to our founding fathers. They deserved to be sited in the choicest part of the island. Somehow I got this uncomfortable feeling that 5 hectares may be too small to honour them. We need something more grandeur. Cost is not an issue. On that, with our good relations with North Korea and Kim Jong Un, I would recommend that Singapore send a team to North Korea to study how they honoured their great dear leaders. The North Koreans are perhaps the best in this area and their expertise is well recognised in Africa with many African states commissioning them to build gigantic statues of their founding fathers as well. This is one of their main exports and major source of foreign income.

Our westernised and heavily American influenced thinking may be satisfied with a library or a warship named after a President. We could do that and also copy from the North Koreans, taking the best from the East and West. The North Koreans are the best.

Here are some comments in the CNA on this historical project.

'The memorial site will include a garden, within which an indoor gallery will be built, the Founders’ Memorial committee said in a press release on Friday (Oct 19)....

The memorial will focus on stories and events in Singapore’s growth as a nation, the committee said, adding that it aims to take visitors on a journey that is “moving and inspiring, educational and reflective”.
"It intends to also capture the context for key milestones in Singapore’s nation-building history, the experiences and dilemmas of our leaders which shaped their values and principles, and how these affected their actions, policy deliberations and decisions," the committee said.'

Now you see why I said cost is not an important factor. It can be turned into a tourist attraction as well and the revenue would be enough to cover for its cost and general upkeep and maintenance, just like the two indoor gardens in the same area. And why bigger space, cause you need to prepare for the crowd, locals and tourists, to bring in tourist dollars. The visitors to North Korea never failed to take photographs of their dear leaders when in North Korea.

Singapore is always very particular about cost and returns and would not simply blow away money unnecessarily. If there were such incidents, they were anomalies and very few in between. Every project must be revenue generating, profit generating, like GIC and Temasek and our world best DBS and POS Banks. See how successful are our tourist sites like Sentosa and Haw Par Villa, capturing the tourists with their creative ideas.

I can imagine the long queues at least for the first few months of its opening to take a look at this new tourist attraction and to honour our founding fathers at the same time.

PS. If I let my imagination go wild I would like to see twelve 50m statues of founding fathers over looking the Padang and floating platform. In that way they could see the NDP every year, the fruit of their labour and sacrifice. A twelve statue monument would rival the statues in Easter Island and could earn the title of the 12th Wonders of the World. This would be money well spent as it would be income generating from tourists all over the world flocking here to see this new wonders. Definitely more fascinating than the Jewel in Changi.

Not easy to tell the truth and nothing but the truth

'20 days after Perera posed his question on bonuses to PM Lee, sparking public uproar over the lack of transparency, top Mediacorp news presenter Bharati Jagdish interviewed Ho Kwon Ping – the executive chairman of Singapore-based leisure business group, Banyan Tree Holdings – on her noted ‘On The Record’ programme.
During the interview, published on CNA on 30 Sept, Ho Kwon Ping remarked that his salary is lower than that of ministers. The CNA report went on to state that Ho’s salary, inclusive of bonus and benefits, comes up over S$2.5 million.
The wording on the article seemed to imply that if Ho’s claims that he is paid less than what ministers earn, ministers actually earn a lot more than the S$1.1 million for entry-level ministers and the S$2.2 million for the Prime Minister, when bonuses are included....' theindependent

See how Bharati Jagdish and Ho Kwon Ping were caught in a mess that Chee Hian had to comment on it and both had to explain and explain to make sure the water is crystal clear, to see that truth, that Ho Kwon Ping's  income or salary of $2.5m is not less but more than the ministers, more than the PM. The issues involved telling the basic salary or with all the bonuses and perks. Not telling correctly can lead to misinformation and confusion.

The Independent reported that Bharati had been dismissed or forced to resign.

During the interview with Ho Kwon Ping, she did not double check Ho Kwon Ping's salary and thus gave the impression that someone was lying for saying the PM earns only $2.2m, the ministers lesser than $2.2m, then how could Ho Kwon Ping's $2.5m be lesser? See, when the numbers are not clear,  it could become half truth or fake news or misinformation, misleading. Anyone making such half truths must be made to clarify so that the public would not be misled. And the main media cannot afford to make such mistakes. Now with the committee on fake media being formed to deal with such matters, for a media staff to report unclear numbers became a very serious business.

Ho Kwon Ping had clarified that his basic was less than the minister/PM. His $2.5m was gross, including bonuses and benefits. It is very important to compare apple with apple, not with orange or durian. Anyone still blur and cannot tell the difference between apple and orange or durian?If you want to compare Ho Kwon Ping's gross salary, then you have to compare minister's gross salary also. Gross is gross.

Americans do not meddle in the domestic affairs of countries

Trump and his lying gangsters have continued their barrage on China meddling in American domestic politics and trying to influence American opinions in the November election. He added that the Chinese meddling were worse than what the Russians were doing. He did not say whether the Chinese and Russian meddling in American domestic affairs were worse or less than the Americans meddling in other countries, especially Chinese and Russian affairs. The answer is no as far as the lying Americans are concerned. The Americans did not meddle in other countries’ domestic affairs or tried to influence them.
 
The breakup of the Soviet Union was not due to the Americans meddling in the USSR’s affair. Agents meddling in the domestic affairs of countries to try to influence nation states to be more friendly with them are very easy to be dealt with. Just send them packing home.
 
In the case of the Soviet Union’s breakup it was regime change, not just simple meddling or trying to influence a country’s policies. These are kid’s stuff. The Americans are more serious than that and many countries have had their bad experiences with the Americans. Just look at what is happening in Iraq, in Libya and in Syria, in Korea, in the South China Sea, in Myanmar, would tell you that the Americans did not meddle with their domestic affairs but conducted regime change, threatening invasion and wars.
 
The tools of the Americans are not diplomats or academics but the CIA and Special Forces and military bases. The CIA would invite themselves into countries they chose to conduct covert operations. The Special Forces could be invited or invited themselves in likes the CIA with or without the consent of the local govts. And you cannot expel them or send them home. They would not leave and may turnaround to fight, with the insurgents they recruited, trained, financed and armed as their front.
 
And the military bases, once in, no way would they leave. They are there to control the colonized or semi colonized countries like they are part of the USA, or part of the American Empire. Ask the Japanese and the South Koreans how they tried to rid their countries of the Americans and how difficult it was to do so.
 
See, the Americans did not meddle with the domestic affairs of countries nor tried to influence their policies. They are much more vicious than that.