Forum Index
this forum welcomes all forumers who appreciate decent and well thought out views and discussions. all forumers are encouraged to accept that different forumers have different views and often there is no absolutely right or wrong views.
Menu
 Forum IndexHome
FAQFAQ
MemberlistMemberlist
UsergroupsUsergroups
RegisterRegister
ProfileProfile
Log in to check your private messagesMessages
Log inLogin/Out

Quick Search

Advanced Search

Links
mysingaporenews
Singapore River Tour
Singapore Education
Singapore Orchids
littlespeck
ypapforum
Singapore Hosting
Sample Link 2
Sample Link 2

Who's Online
[ Administrator ]
[ Moderator ]


Google Search
Google

http://www.phpbb.com
cpf is my money
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Jun 17, 2017 9:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Jun 18, 2017 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Govt debunks a sms message on CPF nomination
SINGAPORE: When Central Provident Fund (CPF) members pass away, their savings will be given to their nominees in cash - and not transferred to their Medisave account as claimed in a message making the rounds on social media.

"There is absolutely no basis to this rumour," stated a post on the Singapore Government website on Saturday (Jun 17), debunking the message circulating on WhatsApp, SMS and social media.

"The truth is, by default, your nominees will receive your CPF savings in cash when you pass away. This is unless you have opted for a different type of CPF nomination," it said.


The above govt statement is to debunk a sms message going around saying that in the event of death, all CPF money would be paid to the nominee's Medisave Account. This sms message is not true or inaccurate. But what Phillip Ang wrote about the ENS scheme is true. Read the govt statement above,

"The truth is, by default, your nominees will receive your CPF savings in cash when you pass away. This is unless you have opted for a different type of CPF nomination," it said."

What is this different type of CPF nomination? The govt statement did not elaborate and stopped there. This different type of CPF nomination is the ENS or Enhanced Nomination Scheme that Phillip Ang was talking about in his post that I quoted in this blog on Saturday.

What Phillip Ang is warning about is this ENS scheme. Make sure this is what you want for your nominee when you opted for this ENS scheme. Your CPF savings will go to your nominee's CPF account and not paid out in cash if you opted for the ENS.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPF – Phillip Ang carrying the touch

Thanks to Phillip Ang for his persistence in keeping the CPF money issue alive and current. Just keep talking about this subject less some donkey would say 'see, no one is talking about it anymore', so they have accepted their fait accompli about the CPF no longer their money and would not care what would happen to their CPF money anymore.

Here is a quote from 'bapak' in a comment in Philip Ang's post in the TRE.

Bapak:
September 9, 2017 at 11:51 pm (Quote)
And now they upped the brainwatching by advertising on MiddleCorpse a son telling his daughters he is topping up his father’s account as token for bringing him up. Whoever fucking stupid ones will do that. Got money give your aging parents CASH. Why need to topup their accounts?

How many people have read this or know about the foolishness of topping up the CPF of their parents when they should be giving them cash to spend as and when they like? Once the money is in the CPF, you lose control of that money and using it is subject to all the rules of the CPF and could mean tan ku ku.

How many people understand the meaning of putting more money into their CPF or topping the CPF accounts of their parents and did not know the consequences?

I have been told that there is another change to the CPF Medisave Fund. When the owner dies, the money would not be allowed to be taken out despite the owner choosing to pass all the money to the beneficiary in cash. The money in the Medisave will be transferred to the Medisave of the beneficiary, forever retain in the CPF. See how desperate they are to take your money.

A caveat, I need to confirm this change if it is true and if it is retrospective or only affect new CPF members. Phillip Ang and all of you reading this, please check up on this. I will be writing to the CPF to confirm on this change.

This is really frightening and disgusting. I hope it is not true. And Leong Sze Hian has recently reported that if you don't do anything after they sent you a letter at age 65, your piecemeal withdrawal for retirement will be deferred to 70 years old!

And no announcement again in the media.

Has this got to do with blocking Cheng Bock from the presidency? Money not enough?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Class action suit against the Govt on CPF savings
Philip Ang is proposing a class action suit against the Govt on accountability, transparency and the return of our CPF savings at 55. Below is his proposal posted in the TRE. I will definitely support this motion if it is finalized. Maybe Gilbert Goh should work with Philip Ang to hold a mass briefing at Hong Lim and collect signatures of CPF holders in support of this class action. Other forms of acceptance should be work out to make it easy for the rest of the CPF holders to accept this proposal, including house to house visit. The opposition parties could be roped in to help in this cause that affects the pocket of all Singaporeans.
While on this, the proposal should strictly be about Singaporeans and not about PRs and ‘locals’. Let them fight their own battles after all they could easily withdraw every cent they want when they decided to return to their home countries.
A class-action lawsuit against the government.
This will not be a mere request or begging the government for transparency and accountability in the management of hundreds of billions in CPF monies. CPF members will demand for a full set of accounts to be published.
On the assumption that GIC’s 6% rate of return claims are factual, we seek the return of the difference between the amount paid to CPF members and what GIC claims to have earned. Plus interest.
We also seek the return of our CPF savings at 55. Returning our CPF through monthly installments at 65 – till we die – is not acceptable.
Neither will we accept:
– Frequent tweaks of CPF rules which have impacted the well-being of hundreds of thousands of retirees.
– The appointment of unqualified CEOs such as former military personnel/civil servant with no prior fund management experience.
We are also opposed to government abuse of our retirement savings to:
– Conceal the size of our national reserves.
– Channel tens of billions to a single fund manager, government-linked GIC.
We seek a revamp of the failed CPF scheme which should be simplified. To increase retirement funding, a higher percentage of wages should be allocated to CPF SA with a corresponding reduction in CPF OA allocation.
The limits to the use of CPF MA – arbitrarily implemented by the government – for hospitalization, insurance premiums, etc must be removed. After all, this is our money.
The government should also appoint other non government-related fund managers to manage our CPF savings.
Besides the above, other factors will also be taken into consideration after CPF members have confirmed their support for the class-action lawsuit.
Costs
The lawsuit will be funded by CPF members through crowdfunding. Depending on the number of CPF members involved, the cost should not be prohibitive, eg 10,000 members X $100 = $1 million or 100,000 members X $10 = $1 million.
Transparency and accountability are of utmost importance and details could be worked out at a later date.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Oct 24, 2017 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPF – Do you want your money back?

An unending scheme that was meant to end at 55
A great saving scheme for retirement has now been turned into a nightmare for many hapless Singaporeans. They entered this compulsory scheme with the promise of getting their life savings back at 55. Without their permission and consent, many outrageous legislations have been introduced to hold back their money till eternity without having a say or a chance to say no or to opt out from it by the most honorable govt run by the most righteous and honorable men and women elected by the people to look after their interests and to protect their interests.
In the case of the CPF, many do not see their interests being protected but eroded by the very people they elected to protect them. Many want their life savings back but their voices were drown in the wilderness. Their elected representatives refused to hear them or to represent them. Instead their elected representatives participated in the horrendous schemes to hold back the money from them at 55. Now this scheme, instead of terminating at the age of 55, would only end when they die. Oops, not really the case. In some circumstances the scheme or the money would continue to be locked up in the CPF, transferred into the accounts of their beneficiaries and could go on and on, never ending.
What kind of monstrous scheme has this life saving scheme for retirement turned into? You ask me. Do you want it to be this way, without your consent, to becoming a money eating monster that eats away your life savings? Compulsory purchase of life insurance scheme, compulsory purchase of medical insurance scheme, and aka datang, or brooding, compulsory schemes for the seniors.
Take the case of the money that is to be pledged against the CPF you withdrawn, your own money, to purchase properties. Not only that you have to pay interest for borrowing your money, you would have to cough up more money to return to the CPF even if you are 100 or 200 years old or more if you have not met the minimum sum stipulated. Should not such pledges be terminated once a person reached the age to withdraw his CPF savings? There is no provision to end the pledging scheme. By right one’s obligation to contribute to the CPF should end at 55 and everything squares of as that is the age when one should be withdrawing his savings from the CPF. But now, when you sell your property, you must pay back to the CPF the money you borrowed from your own savings, plus interests, with no time frame in sight, with the conditions set for the minimum sum. Why like that?
What kind of fucking nonsense is this? Return our money. We want our money back.
Lim Tean and Philip Ang are risking themselves to fight for you, on your behalf to take back your money. The hope for success is very small, because the people you elected to protect your money would not be protecting you and your money but fighting against this. But don’t give up hope. This is your only chance to take back your money.
We must all do our part. This is what Philip Ang and Lim Tean expects from you, a small contribution to the huge legal fees that would be needed to fight this case legally. The details are a work in progress. Everything must start with a small step, a first step. Philip Ang wrote this, posted in TRE,
‘CPF members (non members are also welcomed) who wish to right this sorry state of affairs should contribute and no freeloading, please. Even if 20% of members contribute $10 each, this will be more than sufficient.
Our present priority is to create more awareness and raise sufficient funds before initiating action.
Lim Tean and I have set up a crowdfunding account @ https://www.facebook.com/tean.lim.75. (POSB Savings 198-91842-3) Please keep a record of your transaction as your particulars will be required before the launch of the class-action suit. Unused portion will also be returned, pari passu.’

This is the time to act to do something good for yourself. You need to act to protect your own money. Whatever the amount you can contribute, just send it to them in the above account provided.
This is the first time that Singaporeans are standing up for their own right, fighting for the right to their money, their life savings. Every drop counts. Do something to help yourself. Do it now.
PS. I have sent in my contribution by the time you read this.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPF - It's now or never

The proposal of a class act to sue the govt on the CPF money by Lim Tean/Phillip Ang and their team is a once or never event. Never has such a task been taken up by a group of professionals for the people, to protect the people's money from disappearing without their consent, to return them to their rightful owners at the rightful time that the scheme was meant to be.

Lim Tean and Phillip Ang are asking just for $10 or $20 from each CPF account owners to build up a war chest to pay for the expensive legal fees to fight this case. Many are still hesitating, some even bo chap. Think about it, for $10/$20, what do you get? Lim Tean/Phillip Ang would have to gather a team of legal experts to study the case and to make a legal case to sue the govt. A lot of people, money and time will be involved to make this possible for a miserable $10/$20. That is about the cost of a pack of cigarette or a lunch.

And more, Lim Tean/Phillip Ang and their team would be putting their necks on the chopping block, risking their career and reputation, and many things at stake. It is not so simple as just fighting a legal case but with many political considerations and consequences. Some are still hiding behind the kiasi label and not willing to contribute the $10/$20 when the stake is so high for this commando team.

Now, where is Tan Cheng Bock, Tan Jee Say and Tan Kin Lian on this issue? And where are the political parties claiming to want to represent the people in Parliament? Would they stand up and join Lim Tean and Phillip Ang in this fight for the people? If they don't, they might as well pack up their bags and leave politics altogether. Do not stand for any election be it just as an MP or the EP if they cannot see it important enough to stand up and fight together with Lim Tean and Phillip Ang. They need to put down their differences and other agendas to close rank for once, to represent the interest of the people, to protect the interest of the people, to protect their life savings.

Where are you, aspiring politicians? Where are you Singaporeans, ever complaining that always talks only and no actions when there is now a group of dare devils brave enough to stand up to fight for you?

The team is not asking for that special peanut but $10/$20 which should be reasonably affordable. They are not asking for a drum stick or a whole chicken. It's now or never. If you fail this team, no one would be there to fight for you anymore when you needed help.

This is your chance to say yes and to do your little part to make this happen. Here is the POSB Savings 198-91842-3 of Lim Tean to deposit your contribution. This is not a donation, this is a contribution to fund the legal suit to get back your CPF money.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPF - Return to basic principles

The CPF scheme was and is a retirement scheme to provide some income for the retirees when they have reached their retirement age. They should then be living off their savings in their golden years. The original CPF scheme ends at 55 when all obligations came to an end when a person retires, take out his nest egg of a life time savings to decide how he is going to use his money. This is what a retirement savings scheme should be.

With longer life expectancy, perhaps it is logical and reasonable to extend the retirement age to 65 and the CPF scheme ending at 65. Under a normal retirement scheme like the original CPF scheme, a person should have enough savings to live the rest of his life of another 15 or 20 years. Under such a situation, the relationship with the CPF in terms of more contribution to the scheme should end. No one should need to contribute further into the CPF scheme as life after 65 can be terminated any moment.

A person should be allowed to withdraw every cent he has in the CPF. No such nonsensical things like minimum sum this and that, no such nonsense as pledging half of his assets to the CPF forever till his death.

However, the CPF scheme should offer to the people options to buy annuities or whatever medical insurance if they wanted to, strictly on a voluntary basis. Anyone can still voluntarily choose to contribute and save more if so desire with the CPF offering them more attractive terms. The important point here, the key principle, is voluntary. No one shall be compelled by legislation to continue to be stuck in the CPF scheme under whatever farcical schemes without their consent after the retirement age say at 65. Period..

A retirement scheme is to provide the savers an opportunity to retire comfortably and financially to live through his golden years. A retirement scheme is not to hold on to his money forever, after his death with many leftover to spare. There would be exceptions when some people may outlive their savings by living to the 90s and 100s. These are rarity. And one must not forget that the CPF is only one source of income to provide for the retirees. Many have other forms of support from families and relatives and other sources of income. The CPF is not the only source of financial security. At the very worst case, there would be a few that the state can pick up the tap. Why not, after living off the cheap loans from the savings of the members over a life time, it is only fair and equitable and ethical that the govt provide this last safety net.

The current CPF has been turned into a little monster when the people contributing to the scheme are held at ransom while others are feeding on the scheme like parasites, depriving the real owners from access to their money. And some happily think this is their money and not the savers money and suka suka would think of ways to take away this money from the real owners by legislation. This is unethical, immoral, and dishonourable. Only very mean people can go on living on the people's life savings as if it is money there up for grabs, with no owners. Anyone who claims that the CPF savings is not the owner’s money has very little conscience of justice and fairness. Anyone going along with this kind of devious thing is just as guilty.

The CPF scheme must have a termination date when all obligations to save would come to an end and anything more should be voluntary. Legally all money saved must be returned to their rightful owners to enjoy their hard earned money saved over a life time. Tentatively under the present life expectancy, a good ending point is age 65 plus or minus a couple of years and nothing more.

People should not disguise themselves as angels to control and keep the money from the CPF members for as long as they want while dipping into the fund for their own benefits.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Daft complaining about not getting CPF savings back
There is another article posted in the TRE by a JW complaining that the ever caring and kind hearted people in charge of the CPF are rationing her withdrawal of her savings till the age of 95. And for so stretching the time span, she is getting $16 a day for the next 30 years.
Here are some of her comments.
‘First excuse: “Increasing life expectancy ”. This is just a rubbish excuse not to return our sweat and blood savings and pretend to act as good guy to look after us till age of 95 (Of course there are people who can live up to this age but is rare). Even our SM don’t even live up to age of 95 despite of having the best medical team to attend to him. For me, an ordinary working class auntie, I might not even last for another 15 years with this kind of pathetic payout. Ridiculously, without knowing me or my medical condition, they can speculate I can last for another 30 years to receive the payouts. HaHa!
Second excuse: “Extra Interest”- another rubbish excuse. I have indicated many times that I am not interested in their extra interest. I might not be alive any more to enjoy. I am not begging for any handouts but only getting back my rightful savings which I had worked so hard for the past forty years. Initially we were being told that these savings will be released to us when we reached 55 years of age….
CPF Board has been very inconsiderate and very cruel in giving this kind of treatment to senior citizen. I am not sure whether I am the only unlucky one or there are other brothers and sisters in the same situation. We are the ones who had struggled very hard to build up today’s nation. Instead of showing appreciation, we are being treated like old dirt with such low respect. Where is justice?
I have copied my mails to the Labour Minister who oversee the CPF Board. As expected, the betterer guy is acting blind and deaf to my concerns. Lastly, I have to thank my MP’s effort who has helped me along.’
JW
She is asking for respect and justice! Did she really believe that she will get justice and respect at the way they held on to her savings and finding all kinds of reasons to delay returning to her? Did she not condone this act by voting for the people who made these rulings to be the govt? She should be very grateful and thankful that she had made the right choice. And yes, she is very grateful that her MP is trying to help and very helpful. See how daft it is? Who does she think the MP is working for and when come to the issue of the CPF, what is the stand of the MP, what did the MP voted for?
These daft deserved the govt they voted for. And they will keep voting for the same govt over and over again to show their appreciation. Maybe this is their way of showing how happy they are with the govt for caring for them and planning their retirement with their life savings. Why are they complaining when they voted for all these policies that are for their own good?
PS. Just accept the fact that CPF is not their money and everything will fall in place, and all will be fine.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun Jan 07, 2018 9:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HDB/CPF transaction – Dead man is alive
I am wondering if this is a good analogy of the transaction involving the purchase of a HDB flat using CPF money. Many would believe that once the purchase is fully paid up, by cash or CPF money, the deal is done, the end of the story. In reality the purchase of a HDB flat using CPF money, even when fully paid, is like a man suffering from cancer. The ‘dead’ man may not be walking around, but inside him the cancerous cells are fully alive and kicking, non stop. Even if the man drops dead, the cancerous cells continues to multiply until the body is burnt or rotted away.
Many would thought they would have peace of mind once they have fully paid for the property even with CPF money. If it is cash, the transaction is done and everything ends. Once CPF money is involved, the whole deal is alive and kicking, because someone said the CPF money is not yours. There are two parts to this deal that will continue to be alive like the living dead. One part is the financial obligation owed to the HDB that could be changed over time. The second part is the interest owing to the CPF money which is rightly your money, but to some not your money.
In the case of the HDB part, when you sell the property, the HDB has the right to impose a levy on your capital gain. Who owns the property? And when you resell the HDB flat, you would have to pay up, to the HDB, a percentage of the sale price as levy. It is your property, you pay property taxes, but HDB is sitting there waiting to rob you of your capital gain as if it is a passive owner of your HDB flat. Clever or sneaky, up to you to call it. In the case of a really private property, you sell and get back whatever is the transacted price.
The CPF part is that though the money is yours, though the purchase is fully completed, the CPF is still counting the interest on the CPF money you used for the property. There is no such thing as a done deal. The CPF interest is forever kept alive, like cancerous cells. Some were so intrigue by this ridiculous thing of paying interest on using your savings to buy properties. When you sell the property, the interest would be computed, back dated to the day you buy the property with the CPF money. Clever or sneaky, say what you like.
It is as good as dead man alive. When one takes a bank loan to pay for a property, this transaction is fully closed. The part that is alive is the repayment of the loan taken from the bank. When using your CPF, you will still be owing interest to your own money you withdraw from the CPF. You borrow from yourself to pay for a property and you owe interest to your own money. If you die without selling the property, I dunno whether the CPF would insist on your beneficially to pay for the interest when they sell your property. Presumably they would not as you will be dead and gone.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pale attempt by the ST to clear the air on Eldershield
In an editorial piece in the ST on 10 Feb, it had a title, Clearing the air about Eldershield, and concluded with this paragraph:
‘Basic concepts ought to be explained now so that people can appreciate how lowering the enrolment age “makes sense”, as experts have observed – both to cover every Singaporean and to smooth out premiums. Of course, it’s natural for many to seek bigger benefits over longer periods. That’s why pains must be taken to show how costs will then rise and why a basic scheme must remain affordable. As for calls for a state subsidies for all, people need to see how this could lead to a blowout of healthcare expenses, especially when the Govt is obliged to offer premium support to the needy, and ensure the poor and frail elderly are not neglected. Any compulsory insurance scheme deserves to be closely scrutinized but first, the fundamentals must be made clear.’
After talking so much about the fundamentals, the most important question is still avoided, not to be spoken. Is the Eldershield Scheme a profit making scheme? Why should the people be compelled to pay for a profit making scheme and who is going to benefit from the profits? A compulsory scheme, a national scheme, forcing the people to pay from their life savings CANNOT BE A PROFIT MAKING SCHEME. Period.
If this point is addressed, all the woolly talks and deceptions about subsidies, helping the poor, high cost low benefits, overblown expenses, etc would take care of itself, would be non issue. The devil is that this scheme is going to be a profit making scheme, squeezing the people’s life savings to make profits…for who? Unless this is categorically denied by the govt, with a clear statement that the scheme is a NON PROFIT MAKING SCHEME, you can smell a rat.
No need to go round and round the bush. Profit making or Non profit making is fundamental to the real intent and agenda of this scheme.
More theatrics would not make any difference.
PS. With so many schemes and so many scheming to empty the people's life savings, you can guess the financial health of the country.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2018 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why not use some of the reserves instead of more taxes
When this was raised in Parliament, Heng Swee Kiat’s PAP style reply was that the reserves cannot be touched. If now take a bit, tomorrow a bit, then eventually nothing left. What kind of logic is this? This is like the asking for one drumstick and they said you want to slaugher the chicken. There will be time when it is necessarily to use a bit from the reserves to tie things over like the how many times the reserves were used during Nathan’s time, was it thirteen times. How much was taken out and were they put back?
Why when there is supposed to be nearly a trillion reserves and not a cent can be touched? Is it like someone here said, want to keep the reserves as big as that of China? Or are the reserves thing a bottomless pit, can put in cannot take out? Or is it that there is really nothing left at the bottom of the pit?
Over three generations we, I used we because a big part of the reserves are the people’s own savings in the CPF, have squirreled quite a big sum of savings. Who is benefiting from these savings if the people contributing to it are not? At the rate the original Singaporeans are vanishing, the reserves would be benefiting foreigners that are being brought in by the millions and will be the main beneficiaries of our savings. The other main beneficiaries of our reserves are the millionaire fund managers getting paid by the millions. And the bigger the reserves, the bigger will be their appetite for risk and for more pay.
The other consideration will be that the sum is now quite huge and no one is so irresponsible to suggest spending them away. What the people are asking is to set aside some of the earnings to benefit the people. With the clever millionaire fund managers managing the reserves, the reserves should be growing every year and putting aside a sum to benefit the people would not deplete the reserves. I say again, no one is asking to spend everything, but just a part of the profits. Can understand this simple logic or not?
What is the truth? The reserves are actually the people’s CPF savings, or at least a big part of it. If they have problems returning the savings to the people andkept coming out with all kinds of schemes not to return, even to take by compulsory schemes, and keep telling people to put in more, you can make your guess whether there is enough money to return to the people. From this point, try to extrapolate how much is really there in the reserves.
The reserves are your money, not the govt’s savings or money, unless you believe one joker in Parliament claiming that the CPF is not your money and you deserve to be robbed of your life savings. Go and ask your MP and MP/Minister if the CPF is your money. If it is your money, then how much left are the reserves minus the CPF money and why you should not be benefiting from your savings but foreigners that are coming in to take over this country?
What do you think? I think they have a lot of money in the reserves. If not how to pay the fund managers tens of millions, some even wondered if some of the fund managers are being paid near to a hundred million. How near no one knows as their pay and bonuses are state secret. But surely if they can pay by the millions, the reserves sure got a lot of money.
Actually if they just put a few civil servants to park the reserves in FDs, safe and secure for 3% interest, there is no need to pay by the hundreds of millions to the fund managers and risk losing their pants and the reserves.
What do you think?
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Sun May 27, 2018 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ElderShield - Do no evil
My apologies, I forgot where I copied this from, probably TOC or TREmeritus. Could also be from the main media.

The #ElderShield Review Committee (ESRC) shared their interim recommendations today, after getting feedback from more than 800 #Singaporeans from all walks of life over 26 focus group sessions. To help Singaporeans prepare for their long term care needs, the Committee has recommended that the enhanced ElderShield should be a universal and inclusive scheme for cohorts aged 40 and below when the scheme takes effect. Policyholders will join the scheme from age 30 so they can spread their premiums over a longer period while they are working, to enjoy lifetime coverage after they have grown old and retired. At the start of the enhanced ElderShield scheme, those aged between 31 and 40 will be included as these cohorts are not covered by the existing ElderShield 400 scheme. The ESRC further recommended that the enhanced scheme be administered by the Government as a key pillar of our social safety net. The Committee has also made some useful recommendations on how to make the claims process more accessible and convenient for policyholders and their caregivers.

I welcome the Committee’s interim recommendations. The enhanced ElderShield will enable Singaporeans to pool our risks and resources in preparation for old age, when one faces higher risks of becoming severely disabled. It is an important pillar of #Singapore’s social safety net as our society ages. The Government will look at providing premiums subsidies to keep the premiums affordable for lower and middle-income Singaporeans. This reflects our values in building an inclusive society, where we help and care for one another.
I thank Mr Chaly Mah and the ESRC members for their hard work in engaging different groups of stakeholders and developing their recommendations. We look forward to receiving the Committee’s final recommendations by the middle of this year. -- Hong Tat


I just have one word for these young punks. Do no evil. Stealing the people's life savings without their permission is a very evil thing no matter how it is cloaked or disguised. Remember, retribution will come, it is a matter of when, not if. Look at what is happening to Najib and his cronies and learn to be sincere, honest and really care for the people.

Do not steal the people's life savings. It is their money, they earned by their sweat, blood and tears.

Any govt that have designs on the people's life savings and started to steal the people's life savings has lost its moral authority to rule. The mandate of heaven would soon be taken away from them. Malaysia is a case in point. And many of the accomplices of crimes against the people would be brought to justice and live in shame when the day arrives.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2018 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CareShield Life – A big black hole exposed. You save I spend
CareShield Life is the third compulsory insurance scheme that the people are forced to pay for by the govt. The two existing compulsory insurance schemes are the CPF Life and Medishield Life. Insurance schemes are useful as a form of protection to those that were hit by unforeseen events. They are the good to have things. But not many people can afford the luxury of paying for so many insurances.
Be clear about these three insurances. They are not govt schemes to help the people. They are govt schemes to compel the people to pay for insurances that many could not afford to. Insurance is a luxury for those who could afford them. Many are trying to make ends meet and cannot afford such luxuries. Forcing them to pay for such insurances is to force them to cut down on other expenses.
No one would say no to having insurance if they could afford them. It is a no brainer to as anyone if they need insurance or if they want these insurances. But it is not what they want but whether they can afford it. All these insurance premiums are going to make a bigger dent into the shrinking CPF savings of the people. And the sillies are pretending they did not know why the biggest savers in the whole world could not save enough for their retirement. They did know want to know why the savings are being depleted, robbed, stolen, while the people are saving as much as they could, much more than any human bean in the world.
What is the big black hole? The committee claimed to be stressed by difficult issues on whether people could afford to pay and whether the payout would be enough. But they forgot or conveniently refused to talk about the big black hole.
They do not want to tell you what would happen to the excess cumulated fund from these schemes. They did not want to tell you that these compulsory schemes are profit making in nature, not to help you but to make money from you, from your compulsory payment of premiums. For many years, the excess funds collected were in the billions, but conveniently kept by the govt.
If the main objective of these schemes is to help the people, they must not be profit making in nature. Excess funds must be rechanneled back to the people in the scheme to lower the premiums they are paying.
The main objective of these schemes are not so paternalistic, altruistic, but to make money from you. Period. This is the glaring big black hole. You think they are really so caring, thinking about helping you, like raising GST to help the poor? It is all about making profits from you, from your life savings, from your retirement fund. They are forcing the people to pay for schemes that they may not want to make profits from the people.
I withdraw everything I say about this profit making motive if the govt comes out to say that they are not profit making schemes and all excess funds collected would be ploughed back to the schemes to lower the burden of the people in lower the premiums they have to pay.
As for now, you save, they spend for you. And when you don't have enough for retirement they would say you must save more.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
redbean



Joined: 07 Mar 2006
Posts: 13853
Location: singapore

PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
_________________
what i posted is just my personal view. feel free to disagree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic     Forum Index -> Singapore Current Affairs All times are GMT + 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group. Hosted by Vodien Internet Solutions