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
Kopitiam Movement
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
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: Mon Oct 13, 2014 9:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The silence of the sheep

The barrage of attacks against Roy Ngerng and Han Hui Hui for heckling Special Needs Children is followed by a police investigation for unlawful assembly at Hong Lim Park. Several protesters had been called up by the Police to assist in the investigation. Han Hui Hui had been called up too and so was Roy, but he was overseas.

Social media is on fire with what they see as victimisation against the two youngsters. Many netizens have stood up in their defence, to dismiss the accusations against them as senseless and baseless. Many have been working overtime digging out facts and even the constitution to prove their innocence. Other than the social media and netizens, who could the two youngsters and the protesters depend on to speak out for them? The Police are investigating a complaint against them and are unlikely to be on their side.

Could Roy and Hui Hui fall back on the politicians? Funny, this island got politicians or not? Why not a sound heard from any politician on this case? Maybe this is not a political issue and no politicians want to get involved. Politicians only want to serve the people but don’t like this kind of things. No wonder there is an eerie silence from the politicians of all stripes and colours. Hey, would the new Singaporean First Party seize the moment?

It looks like there in only one man, other than Leong Sze Hian, that the two can rely on to defend their innocence, and in the courts of law. Yes, this is a rule of law country and the only redress is in the courts of law.

Another crowd funding coming up? This is probably the last avenue for citizens like Roy and Hui Hui that are on the wrong side of things. They have no one else to seek redress and support except the people. Isn’t it pathetic?

The politicians are so quiet. It is none of their business. See nothing, hear nothing, say nothing is the best. We are a first world country with first world politicians that are always ready to help and serve the people, but not one stepping forward to help Roy and Hui Hui.
_________________
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 14, 2014 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No permit required for assembly and procession at Hong Lim

Below is copied from an article appearing in TOC discussing about the need for a permit to hold an assembly or a procession at Hong Lim Park. According t he Public Order Act(POA), no permit is required. Please read on.

‘The Public Order Act (POA), which was introduced in 2009, regulates public assemblies and processions and gives new powers to the authorities to preserve public order.
Among other things, it states that a permit is required for the conduct of any public assemblies or processions.

However, the POA also granted exemptions to certain areas and circumstances, namely:

- an assembly or a procession exempted from this section under section 46
- an assembly or a procession within any part of an unrestricted area not falling within a special event area.
Section 46 refers to the areas and people whom the minister, through the gazette, have granted exemptions from the POA.

It is the second provision which directly refers to Hong Lim Park as an exempted area.
Under the Public Order (Unrestricted Area) Order 2013, Hong Lim Park is declared as an “unrestricted area” and is thus exempt from certain provisions in the POA.
This includes the stipulation that Hong Lim Park is exempt from the permit requirement for assemblies and processions, as stated in the POA:

“The area in Hong Lim Park and delineated in the Schedule is designated as an unrestricted area whereby no notice under section 6, and no permit under section 7, of the Act shall be required for the holding of all assemblies or processions or both therein.”
The law, thus, seems to be quite clear that Ms Han did not need to obtain a permit for her march at Hong Lim Park on 27 September.’

From the above quote, it is quite clear to me that no permit is needed to hold an assembly or procession at Hong Lim. Then what is this permit that the NPark and Police are talking about? I would like to be enlightened.

I think the NPark Commission has the power to cancel an assembly or procession at Hong Lim provided he has good reasons to do so, eg if the event is going to turn into something dangerous or a security or safety issues. Or as provided by the regulations on the use of Hong Lim that the assembly should not be about race or religion.
_________________
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 15, 2014 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hong Lim Affair – Got illegal assembly or not?
This has been quoted in TRE by a commentator using the nick VTO VTO.
• PARKS AND TREES ACT (CHAPTER 216)
Identification card to be produced
6.—(1) The Commissioner or any authorised officer or park ranger, when exercising any of the powers conferred upon him by this Act shall, if not in uniform, declare his office and, on demand, produce such identification card as may be issued to him for the purposes of this Act or any other written law.
(2) It shall not be an offence for any person to refuse to comply with any request, demand or order made by the Commissioner or any authorised officer or park ranger not in uniform, who fails to declare his office and refuses to produce his identification card on demand being made by that person.
I think anyone reading the above will be very clear as to what a park officer must do if he is to cancel a permit given by the Park. Many people have viewed the video clip of the encounter between the NPark Director and Han Hui Hui and how or what he produced to identify himself when demanded by Han Hui Hui. Did he comply with the Park’s regulation? If not, can he cancel a permit without doing so?
There would only be an illegal assembly if the permit was cancelled. Some view that no permit is even needed as provided by the Public Order Act, POA, sanctioned by Parliament and the Constitution.
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 Oct 19, 2014 10:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Hong Lim Affair – What’s it all about?

Many have rightly pointed out that this Hong Lim Affair has distracted many people from the real issues of CPF, influx of foreigners, PME jobs, Yang Yin, lawyers over charging clients by the millions, and many other major issues that were really hot with the people. Now everyone is engrossed first with the heckling of children and now with unlawful assembly, and the two main charactors of the Hong Lim Affair were kept very busy trying to shake themselves loose. Ariffin Sha is taking a long leave with no intention of coming back after being invited for kopi.

What is happening now is that Roy and Hui Hui would be so disturbed, troubled and preoccupied by the pressure mounting on them by the investigation. They would be kept very busy trying to ward off all the unnecessary attention and demands on their time. In a way they are now under attack instead of preparing their attacks on the CPF issues in the next rally on 25 Oct.

Tactically this whole drama is a good move, from defence to offence. Never mind if the charges or investigations would not come up with naught. And it has been quite successful with the netizens too being involved in trying to block all the attacks and throw back everything thrown at Roy or Hui Hui. They too did not have time to concentrate on the real issues at hand.

It is now a different agenda not set by Roy or Hui Hui. Would they be able to circumvent this new battle field, seize back the initiative and return to their own battle field unscathed, and in the right frame of mind to do battle again? It is a test of their resolute and resilience and how they face off with the authority. If they could survive the drama they would come out very much tougher and stronger to face more challenges and gruelling charges and arrows coming their way.

Could Roy and Hui Hui call upon more resources and supporters to their side? They need everyone to shield them from the assault. Would the people form a barricade around them? At the moment only the netizens and social media are taking up the challenge to stand shoulder to shoulder with them. It would be good if some of the political parties would speak out and join battle together. The job is cut out for the opposition parties to come forward and stand on the side of the people, to be seen to be doing something. Would they?

The last thing to happen is for the people to desert Roy and Hui Hui and leave them on the lurch when they needed their support badly. Could these two youngsters stand bravely against GPMGs, tanks, bazookas, sniper bullets, mortars, rockets, artillery and bombs raining on them from the air and everywhere and survive?

Would there be a bigger turnout on 25 Oct at Hong Lim? Or would the rally on 25 Oct not even take place? Would the two be able to stick to their agenda and pursue the CPF cause tenaciously to the end and not be driven by other people’s agenda?
_________________
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 22, 2014 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Return My CPF protest rally on 25 Oct cancelled by NPark

Just read from TRE that the protest at Hong Lim Park this Sat has been cancelled on the advice of the Police. The reason, both Roy Ngerng and Han Hui Hui are under investigation for illegal assembly. So they cannot apply for a permit.

Do they need a permit in the first place? Could they and the protesters just go to Hong Lim on Sat and have a party there? Is it illegal to gather at Hong Lim Park, a public park designated for free speech? Must there be a permit to make free speech? If that is the case, then it is no longer free speech.

Is the cancellation for a protest rally against the Constitution? Is NPark acting unconstitutionally?

So far Roy Ngerng and Han Hui Hui have held 3 such protest rallies and the attendance could not be anything near hysterical numbers. Why is there a need to curb this protest rally? Is the rally really something to fear, something like the netizens have been saying, disclosing an unpleasant truth about the CPF money?

By banning the next protest, the govt is sending out many negative signals to the people. There is nothing positive about this banning of a small peaceful protest in a confined park designated for such a specific purpose.

Would this act make the protesters angrier and turn up in full force despite the ban? What would happen this Sat? Would there be a bigger turnout instead at Hong Lim?

What is happening?
_________________
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 23, 2014 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Return My CPF - Ravi's demand letter to NPark

Below is an extract of M Ravi's demand letter to the NPark to withdraw its cancellation of the permit for this Saturday's protest rally at Hong Lim. The full article is posted in TRE.

'In response and acting on behalf of Hui Hui, lawyer M Ravi wrote to the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation of NParks, Dr Leong Chee Chiew, today (23 Oct) to voice his objection to the cancellation.

Mr Ravi told the Commissioner that the reason given by NParks for the cancellation – to assist the Police with investigations into an incident which occurred during #ReturnOurCPF event on 27 Sep – constitutes a breach of Hui Hui’s rights of freedom of speech and assembly.

Such rights, explained Mr Ravi, is guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution, and is ultra vires Regulation 8(3) of the Parks and Trees Regulations (Cap. 216. R 1). That is, Article 14 of the Constitution is beyond the legal power of Regulation 8(3) of the Parks and Trees Regulations.

Mr Ravi further explained that the act of assisting the Police “does not constitute nor can it be construed as an implication, assertion or proof of guilt of any offence, nor does it constitute evidence of a breach of any law or of the terms and conditions of approval for the Return Our CPF Event”.

“There is therefore no rational basis for the revocation and it is wholly unreasonable as being based on irrelevant considerations,” Mr Ravi said.

“Furthermore, our client emphatically rejects your characterisation of the fact that she has been interviewed by the police and has been assisting them in their enquiries as constituting a ‘case‘ against her, and it is submitted that this is in itself an error of law that vitiates your decision,” Mr Ravi said to the Commissioner.

The restriction for Hui Hui to speak is likewise a breach of her rights of freedom of speech and assembly under Article 14 of the Constitution, Mr Ravi said.

“Depending how long the Police investigations take, the restriction may last indefinitely. It is an indeterminate, wholly disproportionate and oppressive ban (on Hui Hui to speak),” he argued.

“The purpose of Speaker’s Corner is to provide an arena in which free speech is allowed to be exercised and it appears wholly out of keeping with this purpose for the residual authority given to a Commissioner of Parks and Recreation under Regulations to effectuate the Parks and Trees Act to deny and place a ban on free speech in the very place where it supposed to be allowed.”

Mr Ravi emphasized again that the ban, essentially for an indeterminate period of time, is in principle, a profound threat to Hui Hui’s Constitutional rights.

As such Hui Hui, through Mr Ravi, is formally requesting that the ban by NParks be lifted immediately.

Mr Ravi told the Commissioner in the letter that if the ban was not lifted by 1600 hours tomorrow (24 Oct), his client, Hui Hui, reserves the right to apply to the Court for relief without further notice to NParks....'
_________________
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 Oct 25, 2014 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

New recommendations for protesters at Hong Lim Park
All protesters planning to hold a protest or even a party at Hong Lim should take note of the charges against Roy Ngerng and Han Hui Hui. Both have been charged for “disrupt(ing) the YMCA event and caused annoyance to the public” and having committed the following acts:
1. marching around the general vicinity of the YMCA event
2. shouting loudly
3. chanting slogans
4. waving flags
5. holding placards
6. blowing whistles loudly
7. beating drums
I think the above charges are relevant when there is another event with participants in the Park. I am not sure if the above charges can be levied for annoyance to the public nearby. What if the hotel or hotel guests complained of the noise and disturbances? This point needs further clarification.
So, in view of the above, may I offer a few suggestions to protestors so that they would not be charged for the same offence by committing the same crime and doing the same things as Roy and Hui Hui. The Hong Kong Govt can learn a trick or two from Singapore and charge those students for causing annoyance to the public and all the 7 points above plus misuse of umbrellas and pitching tents at the wrong place.
Let me concentrate on the Singapore scene so that protesters in the future would not get into trouble with the law. Yes they can protest at the Speakers’ Corner but must get a permit first from the NPark. What about the provisions in the Constitutions and the POA? What about them? I am not a legal expert.
The protesters must observe the following:
1. Check if there is another event in the Park. If there is, speak to them nicely and beg them not to report to the police if they are disturbed by the noise make by the protesters or offended by the placards, slogans, flags etc etc.
2. Do not march around in the Park close to the participants of another event. I am not able to advise how close is close. This point must get clarifications from NPark or the Police.
3. Don’t shout loudly even if it is a protest. Speak in a normal tone like talking to someone in a kopitiam. I think loudspeakers are definitely out now. Too loud and very disturbing.
4. No chanting of slogans.
5. No waving of flags even if it is the national flag.
6. No placards, especially those with not nice things on them.
7. No whistles ok. This is not a football match and Hong Lim Park is not the National Stadium.
8. And also no beating of drums. What do you thing, a protest rally is not a dragon or lion dance ok.
9. The best is to ask NPark and the Police what can or cannot do for additional safety measures. Perhaps the two agencies could come up with a Can Do and Cannot Do list to help the protesters not to break the law.
10. And make sure it is not an illegal assembly even if the Park is designated for public assembly and protest. It can still be illegal.
I think protesters would be able to protest in peace and would not be heckled or harassed by other park users if they observe the above 10 Commandments. Good luck.

PS: The above should be read in conjunction to my other recommendations posted earlier.
_________________
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 Oct 25, 2014 11:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hong Leong Affair - Latest news

Reported in ST today 25 Oct 14

'She(NParks spokesman) said NParks did not cancel the approval given to Ms Han's "Return Our CPF" event on Sept 27. One of the charges Ms Han and Mr Ngerng are expected to face on Monday is of organising a demonstration without approval.' Rachel Au Yong
_________________
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 Oct 31, 2014 2:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Parents of Special Needs Children speaking out

Below are a few paras of a letter by the parents of Special Needs Children at the Hong Lim Park YMCA event. The full article is posted at The Real Singapore. It gives a different viewpoint, from the parent’s perspective.
PARENTS OF SPECIAL NEEDS CHILD – TEO SER LUCK, YOU ARE A DISGRACEFUL HUMAN BEING
Shame on you Teo Ser luck and all you despicable PAPs grassroots leaders who hijacked the YMCA event and used our children as pawns to score political points. No, the protesters in no way scared our children. It was clearly a set-up and GOD is our witness to this shameful act. As the father of one of the children, I can clearly testify the following facts.
1) The children were stressed by the loud sound system, which we suspect was done on purpose to disrupt the CPF protest. The show initially was supposed to begin at 12noon to 2pm. Then at the last minute, we were told the time is changed to 2pm to 4 pm. I think to clash with the CPF protest, they changed it to 4pm to 6pm on the same day….
5) Our Lord Jesus truly works in mysterious ways, turning a cunning scheme by the government to fix the CPF protesters, into one that has shed light on the difficulties for parents with special needs children. Let’s see how much they do to help us, now that our plight is out in the open. Hope Roy and Han Hui can do a protest to highlight the plight of struggling parents like us. I am sure you have friends who can apply the permits for you.
6) As for people like Roy Ngerg and Ms Han Hui, I wish to thank you from the bottom of my heart for making the sacrifice to stand up against the tyranny . GOD bless you both and I’m sure many are praying that you will come out safe from your selfless sacrifice. As for Mr Ngerng, I am sorry that you lost your job in the process and are now made to look like a criminal for standing up for your fellow men and women….
Mary & Joseph
TRS readers
_________________
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 Nov 08, 2014 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why need so much in CPF Minimum Sum Schemes?
Below is quoted in a post in TRE on Gerald Giam’s question on the CPF Scheme in Parliament and a reply by Tan Chuan Jin.
Mr Tan Chuan-Jin: Most seniors have various sources of financial support in retirement. Based on the findings of the latest Household Expenditure Survey, a retiree household in 2012/2013 received $1,740 of non-work income on average a month. The sources of income include monthly payouts from CPF, contributions from family members, rental income and investment income. Results from the National Survey of Senior Citizens 2011 also indicated that about two-thirds of senior citizens received income transfers from their children.
Many of our seniors today also have savings in their housing assets which have appreciated significantly. A typical retiree household who owns a three-room or a four-room flat has $300,000 or $400,000 worth of net equity in the flat respectively. The Government has introduced schemes such as the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) to provide Singaporeans with additional options for unlocking the savings in their flats to supplement their retirement income if they wish to do so. Seniors who have other forms of financial support might not see the need to take up LBS, or they may choose to move to a small flat or rent out rooms in their flats instead.
Exactly, most seniors have other forms of income and financial support. The CPF savings is only one of these supports. Why is there a need to compel all the seniors to keep so much money in the CPF like ‘dalit’ money, untouchables? From the huge numbers, the statisticians must have used the premise that this is all the money needed for a senior to live on. This is false, a great flaw in assumptions. Many seniors not only do not need to depend on their CPF savings, many have more to spare and did not have to rely on their CPF savings. Ask the rich, the elites, and the ex ministers and political appointment holders.
There is no need to imprison the money of all the seniors in the CPF. I quote, ‘Most seniors have various sources of financial support in retirement.’ So, what is happening? Head I win tail you lose argument? When is the govt going to review the CPF Schemes and return the money to their rightful owners?
Listen to the insurers, everyone must have more than $1m in savings when they retired. How many people have $100k in savings when they retired? Are they going to starve to death? When don’t they say everyone must have $10m to live like a king?
_________________
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 Nov 15, 2014 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Roy Ngerng – In the cauldron of fire
It was a bit sad to read Roy’s confession that he was feeling the stress and strains fighting the CPF battle alone and facing charges in court for defamation and a public nuisance. I must say that it is no mean feat for a young man, and Hui Hui included, to face such pressure at such a tender age. It is like the whole world closing up on them, no jobs and no prospect but with an axe over their heads.
There are not many people, young and old, who could take this kind of heat like JBJ and Chee Soon Juan. And no one is resolute and tough enough to give up a good life like Poh Soo Kai and Chia Thye Poh. These people too went into the political cauldron of fire and survived, becoming bigger men but financial paupers.
Roy Ngerng is starting to go through the same regime, to be melted down in the cauldron of fire, to be turned into pig iron or steel. Could he continue to take the heat? Women are described as made of porcelain and would get harder and stronger in extreme heat. Men will melt like iron. But at the end of it, they would still be iron or strong as steel.
Is it worth it to sacrifice once life for a cause, for the good of a nameless mass who may or may not appreciate what Roy and Hui Hui are doing? It is not only a thankless task. Some would even ridicule them for being silly and nothing better to do. This separates the ordinary from the extraordinary, the men from the boys, from people who lived for an idea or cause and people who just live simply and die in a life of non events.
I can’t tell Roy and Hui Hui what they should or should not do. If the heat is unbearable, they might want to call it a day and take a breather. It is all a matter of a calling, to answer to their hearts, to do what their hearts want them to do, not the reasoning of their heads. Rational thinking would say, why waste time on a losing cause and worse, when the people whom they are standing up for just do not care.
It is your call Roy, and Hui Hui. Yes it is a very lonely journey, a battle against a huge machine with many buttons to press to hurt, to persecute and to humiliate. How many of you out there appreciate what these two young persons are doing and are going through? When they need you most, would you be there to stand by their sides?
The only positive thing is that the end is near. Roy and Hui Hui did not come along for no reasons. Together they have scored three goals, the CPF issue that awoken the sleepy masses, raising the consciousness of the people to act in the crowd funding when he was charged for defamation, and making things looked ugly and silly, the biggest goal, when the machinery came down hard on them but with very little to go on. Many ended up with red faces and many would have to face their desserts for what they had done to Roy and Hui Hui.
Even if Roy and Hui Hui would to call it quits now, these three goals would be the legacy that could be very telling in the next GE.
_________________
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 Nov 26, 2014 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Return Our CPF Rally – 29 Nov Sat at Hong Lim (4pm)
The Return Our CPF Rally is coming back to Hong Lim even with the banning of Roy and Hui Hui from booking the place. I cannot use the term ‘prohibited by law to apply and speak in Hong Lim’ as the Constitution specifically provided the use of Hong Lim for this purpose and the right of the people for free speech. How could there be such a prohibition on Roy and Hui Hui is puzzling and very disturbing. Rule by law? What kind of law or whose law?
Leong Sze Hian and his friends have picked up the torch to keep the flame burning. In the past, raising an issue, no matter how serious, would soon be forgotten when met with a stony silence. The MSM would simply ignore the issue. Or someone would sweep it under the carpet, it’s over, let’s move on. Many issues raised died a natural death.
The climate has changed today. With social media, with more serious issues, and with the people becoming more tenacious in wanting to right the wrong, wanting justice and fair play, no issues would be put away so easily. As long as the issues are not resolved, as long as the people are not happy with the way they are being handled or mishandled, they will be repeated over and over again. Don’t ever think that the people can be shut out.
Roy and Hui Hui may be down, but there will be others to pick up the fight, to keep fighting for a fair solution or conclusion. This Sat the crowd will be back at Hong Lim to demand for the Return of the people’s 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: Tue Dec 16, 2014 8:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PAP reviewing the CPF Scheme?
The CPF Scheme is a damn good saving scheme gone wrong. If the scheme has not be subject to so many abuses and misuses, today the retirees would be smiling in contentment in their twilight years, living off the savings they have set aside for a life time of work and toil. We are about the biggest savers as a people, saving as much as 50% of our income for retirement. How could this be not enough? How could this, with other savings, be not enough for our retirement?
Anyone wants to know why? Now Chuan Jin is going to review the CPF Minimum Sums to make it more flexible as the govt suddenly realized that not everyone has the same need or money problem. So a lot of efforts and resources will be devoted to make Minimum Sum more flexible, designed to the needs of different groups of individuals.
Is this not pathetic? One of the greatest and bestest saving schemes in trouble, money not enough! Anyone wants to know why money not enough? Think HDB prices. Anyone wants to scratch the pimples when the system is cancerous? Anyone wants to know what is the cause of the cancer?
This is like the Stock Exchange, nothing is wrong, very fine. Just massage the little thing, and all is fine. Why is everyone buying pimple creams when the body is dying of cancer?
If the hole is so big, no matter how much is put into the savings, nothing much will be left if the hole is not patched. The tweaking of the Minimum Sum which is not the problem but a symptom of how nonsensical the CPF Scheme has become is but just a diversion.
Deal with the real problems and causes that are eating away at the people’s savings. There should not be any minimum sums schemes at all. Return the money to the people as it was intended when the Scheme was first conceived. The CPF savings are the people’s money and it must be returned to the rightful owners, nothing less.
_________________
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 Dec 19, 2014 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPF – Govt please, help not wanted
Chuan Jin is going to make sure the people have enough for retirement by adjusting the Minimum Sums of the CPF account holders. The few variations that can be expected, contribute more if not enough. Contribute less if got enough. Use less if not enough. If no need to touch the savings when got too much money, can take out more? What is going to happen to those who have a lot of money and do not need their CPF savings, like the multi millionaires and billionaires? Can they withdraw all their CPF savings?
What is going to happen to those who have very little in their CPF savings? Please contribute more. Or please, your CPF not enough, cannot take out or take up lesser to last longer? If got only $10k, will make it last another 30 years! When one does not have enough, either must put in more or take out less right?
The problem here is that the Govt will not be contributing a single cent to make up for those who really need more savings in their CPF. This is not a govt pension scheme and the money is the people’s money. Not enough, top up, don’t expect the Govt to top up for you.
So, how? I think it is better for the Govt not to help. The more the Govt wants to help, the more painful and difficult it will be for those who got money not enough.
Please, please, please don’t help us. Thank you very much. God bless you for your kindness. God will bless you to win the next GE. So no need to do so much. The people can understand your kindness and will vote for you. Just leave the people alone to manage their own few dollars left in their savings. Just return their CPF money to them and the people will pray for you.
_________________
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 Dec 22, 2014 9:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CPF – Shadow chasing

More intelligent people are coming out to comment on the CPF hot potato. Unfortunately many still cannot remove the blinkers placed over them and still talking like the blind men describing the elephant. After decades of conditioning, the mind will stay clear of the invisible OB markers and did not even know they are there. Some one sent me a story of a cage of monkeys that would beat up any monkey trying to climb to the top to take the hanging bananas but did not know why. Even the monkeys themselves did not know why and instinctively did what they were conditioned to do, beat up any monkey attempting to climb up for the bunch of bananas. And all the new monkeys put into the cage would soon learn to behave that way and think that way.

There are still many basic and fundamental issues and principles that all the do gooders have forgotten. First and foremost, the CPF is not a govt pension scheme. The govt does not contribute a cent to it. In fact the govt is riding on it and benefiting from it so much that it is looking at the CPF from a very different perspective, as a nation’s reserves, as a cheap source of fund, and forgot that it is the people’s private savings. It is the people’s money and must be returned. Nothing more, nothing less. The people did not give the govt the authority to mess around with their life savings.

Here is the another important principle. No one, no even the govt, is allowed or can be allowed by legislation to touch the people’s savings, be it in the CPF or any organisation, or in any form. This is a very dangerous precedent that must not be violated and taken lightly, and must be opposed vehemently. Unfortunately the daft Sinkies cannot see anything wrong with it.

The other issues are all about what is a savings scheme for old age. I make it clear here, we are not talking about a pension scheme but the people’s own savings scheme using their own money. By right, the first principle is that the govt should get lost, get out of the way unless it is contributing money, real money, into it. Other people’s money cannot be touched under whatever stupid excuses. It is none of the govt’s business except in an advisory capacity, using persuasive arguments to encourage the people to save.

How much is enough to save? Here all the do gooders would like the people to save to live like a king. Even if the people did not have enough to eat and may die tomorrow, the do gooders would want to seize the few cents in their hands to put into a savings scheme. KNN. They kill you and you got to say thank you to them and be eternally grateful.

No savings scheme is enough even for the super rich. But the super rich do not need to save. And for the poor, it is a case of daily struggle for survival. Where got money to save? Did anyone forgotten about the phrase ‘live within your means’? Yes live within your means, save within your means and live with whatever savings you have. Minimum sum to the rich is nothing, sup sup suey. To the poor, it is their blood, forcing them to set aside a minimum sum even of $10k is like squeezing blood from them. $10k is a lot of money for a lot of necessities they could not afford. A hundred thousand or more is luxury to many. Why don’t the do gooders spare a few dollars to them instead if they are that caring?

One of the biggest problems with the CPF is the draining of the members’ savings by you know what. No need to elaborate on this as they are taboo. What, got elephant in the classroom? Where is the guilt for causing the CPF scheme to be in such a deplorable state when many, after saving so much over a life time have to cry money not enough?

Forget about the silly discussions on minimum sums and the silly reasons quoted to justify the minimum sums. Only the daft will waste time discussion daft and farcical issues and reasonings and think they are valid and reasonable.

There will be many people at the bottom end of a society that need help. There will be many more among the very senior citizens that need financial help that no amount of minimum sums or saving schemes can help. This is where the govt must come in. What is the point of having a govt and paying taxes? No, don’t be a fool to think that we are paying very low tax.

The CPF cannot be the only instrument for a retirement plan or scheme. You cannot load everything into the CPF scheme to cover every hole that needs to be covered. In reality, people depend on many alternative means to support their retirement. The CPF can be one of the many retirement plans and schemes. And it should be one that provides a minimum retirement fund, depending on the individual and their ability to save. An airy fairy minimum sum quoted from thin air, oops, my apologies, computed by geniuses and very talented statisticians, is a ‘knows all’ answer to a good retirement plan for the people. Really, got such a perfect formula meh?

The final sum in the individual’s savings has to be the sum that the individual has to live with, within his means. If one is to satisfy this godly minimum sum, many would not have money to eat everyday in their life time. The govt cannot run away or shirk its responsibility from providing a safety net to those who are in need, not because they are stupid, but there are many circumstances that turned their miserable lives upside down. Even those who are blessed to be super talents or who have millionaire ministers as parents, do not be cocksure you would not end up in the shit hole. Life is unpredictable and don’t be smug.

Let me end here by saying it again, the CPF cannot be the only savings scheme for retirement and the amount to be saved by the individuals must vary according to their means. And the govt has a big responsibility, other than paying themselves in the millions, to use their million dollar brains to work out some retirement backup schemes for those that are not well endowed and been dealt with a bad hand in life.

And please, do gooders, be real. Not everyone is the same, as good and blessed as you.
_________________
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, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
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