Sammyboy RSS Feed
19-06-2014, 03:00 AM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
Even more things about CPF that I don’t get (http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/06/17/even-more-things-about-cpf-that-i-dont-get/)
http://www.tremeritus.org/simages/dmca_protected_sml_120n.png http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/themes/WP_010/images/PostDateIcon.png June 17th, 2014 | http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/themes/WP_010/images/PostAuthorIcon.png Author: Contributions (http://www.tremeritus.com/author/contributor/)
[The following comment from a reader first appeared in the TRE article 'Four things about CPF that I don’t get (http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/06/15/four-things-about-cpf-that-i-dont-get/)'.]
http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/confused_baby.jpgI am on writing leave of absence but since you’re asking tough questions, I would like to jump in. I would like to add to the list of CPF questions, if I may:
1. Most young Singaporean couples are taking up HDB loans of up to S300,- to $400,000 for a period of service of up to 25 to 30 years. How are they to earn the 2.5% interest in the OA account when for 20-30 years there is no money in their ordinary accounts as it’s used to pay for their flats?
2. Not only do young Singaporeans not get the 2.5% interest in the OA, they are required to pay this 2.5% interest back to their OA should they sell their flats? If we’re paying 2.5% interests on our own account based on the reason that the PAP government would have paid us that amount had we not used the OA to pay our flats? Does this make sense? If that’s our money, why do we have to pay interest on our OWN money? Here the PAP has skirted its social responsibility of even paying the 2.5% interest that it claims Singaporeans will benefit. That’s untrue and many Singaporeans don’t know this.
3. What are the implications of pledging one’s flat when one turns 55 and could not set aside the $155,000? The minimum sum is a moving target.
4. A pension fund is supposed to take care of Singaporeans, especially the low and low middle income Singaporeans. If the CPF does that well for all Singaporeans since all Singaporeans matter, then why do we have a Parents Maintenance Act? This Act is a shadow of whether our CPF system is robust. It is clearly not robust.
5. The CPF does not cover housewives. Are their work devalued by society? The civil servants have had their pensions taken away. They no longer earn pensions. This was 12 years ago. Was the Parents Maintenance Act institutionalized by then Walter Woo to allow the PAP to outsource its social responsibility back to Singaporeans? Parents talk about money and parents and children talk about money in Singapore but the PAP ministers pay themselves the highest political salaries and bonuses on the planet while this is happening over the past 20 years?
6. Why can’t the interests paid to the accounts be increased to match inflation? How come no REAL interest was paid? Is it because we have a strong Singapore dollar and the PAP government does not do better? Why are they under-performing in the people’s pension fund?
The reality is that the pension system is design for 2 working parents who are degree holders, each earning $5,000 per month. Everyone below this setup will face a compromised reality.
7. Also, the aim of the minimum sum is for subsistence living in one’s old age. Does it make sense to recognize minimum sum for subsistence living but discount the need for a minimum wage for subsistence living too? The argument by the PAP is lop-sided here. They took an extreme position and position it for a need to have a competitive age.
The reality is that many Singaporeans PMET are retrenched and out of a job because of PAP’s labour polices that do not support Singaporeans’ interests. They are left to the mercy of the markets while Pinoy, India Indians and PRCs are able to support their own families by benefiting from the exchange rate of their Singapore wages. These policies continue to weaken the Singaporean core these past 15 years.
8. How is a Singaporean suppose to live off at age 55 when they are out of a job while they have CPF which they can’t use to tide them over? At 55, a family needs more money to support their growing children and education costs. The ministers are unhappy that their pay is cut as they want money to send their children to Harvard universities? But there is no consideration for the non-ministers section of society? The policy has an elitist-bent as ministers do not need to worry about the minimum sum. Something is wrong with our values as a society or at least the values that the PAP is promoting for Singaporeans. Retirement age is now raised to 65 in Singapore as of this year. The government wishes to raise it to 67. Do you agree, Singaporeans? The PAP has a different sort of life that it wants Singaporeans to live.
9. Many thinkers are deluded to say that Singapore pays one of the lowest taxes in the world. One should make a holistic appraisal of the sort of lifestyle one is constrained to accept that. Suppose we accept that we are paying one of the lowest taxes in the world, we are also getting one of the lowest benefits in the world. Singaporeans can’t afford a car. One can buy 6 Honda civics in Japan for the price of one Honda Civic in Singapore. Singaporeans not paying supposedly claimed taxes are also not privileging from free education from primary one to JC2 as in these countries. They do not benefit from unemployment benefit. They do not get a robust universal healthcare when they fall sick. In fact, they have to co-pay when they fall sick. They do not have a robust pension system nor can they see their children through university as we’re sponsoring PRCs and IIs and setting aside only the top 20% our each cohort to get a place in our unis. Other countries can have easy access to university education.
The ministers know that the CPF is a problem and they are benefiting from it. One of the reasons why we always and will always have a budget surplus each year is we use 50% of the interest that we earn from our reserves for our annual budget. That’s why the excess is returned timely to Singaporeans during election year. The people’s very own money are used to entice the same voters to vote for the same people who are depriving citizens of a robust old age and future healthcare policies. In fact, logical fallacies are used to question Singaporeans to present a better CPF policy that can even match our own. Ignorance of the people is milked to win arguments. There are in fact better healthcare and national pensions in other parts of the world – Canada, Norway and Denmark. Even Japan with its stagnant growth has better pension schemes and they have unions to fight for better interests and run their own investments plans for their members. For example., the civil servants and teachers unions in Japan have their own unions to support retirement investments of their members on top of their national schemes. Singapore doesn’t.
Many young Singaporeans are over-purchasing their flats as they believe that they can never see their CPF, so they best way to use it is to purchase overpriced flats.
10. It has to be borne in mind. HDB flats revert to $0 at the 99th year. This fallacy of profiting from flat selling cannot last. So, what does a property mean to you? Is it a home? Is a home an investment? Also, if you’re paying for a flat for 25 years… how are you going to retire since there’s hardly anything in the OA. Moreover, the older you are, after 50 years old, your employer’s CPF contribution rate drops to as low as 6.5% from the current 16% you are enjoying assuming you are less than 45 years old at the time of reading this. Do you think it’s right that the government reduces the employers CPF contribution rate and further raises the minimum sum? You have to top up more of your monthly flat repayment in hard cash when you are past 45 years and into your 50s and 60s as there is less CPF contributed to your OA. You will have to struggle harder as you get older in Singapore especially from 55 to 65. This puts many Singaporeans to fall ill from life pressures of strokes and high blood pressure. It’s not only a reality but a challenging reality being a Singaporean. The challenge at the moment is that those who are benefitting from the system or who think they are comparatively benefitting from the system are not supportive of a holistic reform for some of the PAP’s mispolicies.
The Reality
* Submitted by TRE reader.
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://singsupplies.com/showthread.php?184330-Even-more-things-about-CPF-that-I-don’t-get&goto=newpost).
Even more things about CPF that I don’t get (http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/06/17/even-more-things-about-cpf-that-i-dont-get/)
http://www.tremeritus.org/simages/dmca_protected_sml_120n.png http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/themes/WP_010/images/PostDateIcon.png June 17th, 2014 | http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/themes/WP_010/images/PostAuthorIcon.png Author: Contributions (http://www.tremeritus.com/author/contributor/)
[The following comment from a reader first appeared in the TRE article 'Four things about CPF that I don’t get (http://www.tremeritus.com/2014/06/15/four-things-about-cpf-that-i-dont-get/)'.]
http://www.tremeritus.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/confused_baby.jpgI am on writing leave of absence but since you’re asking tough questions, I would like to jump in. I would like to add to the list of CPF questions, if I may:
1. Most young Singaporean couples are taking up HDB loans of up to S300,- to $400,000 for a period of service of up to 25 to 30 years. How are they to earn the 2.5% interest in the OA account when for 20-30 years there is no money in their ordinary accounts as it’s used to pay for their flats?
2. Not only do young Singaporeans not get the 2.5% interest in the OA, they are required to pay this 2.5% interest back to their OA should they sell their flats? If we’re paying 2.5% interests on our own account based on the reason that the PAP government would have paid us that amount had we not used the OA to pay our flats? Does this make sense? If that’s our money, why do we have to pay interest on our OWN money? Here the PAP has skirted its social responsibility of even paying the 2.5% interest that it claims Singaporeans will benefit. That’s untrue and many Singaporeans don’t know this.
3. What are the implications of pledging one’s flat when one turns 55 and could not set aside the $155,000? The minimum sum is a moving target.
4. A pension fund is supposed to take care of Singaporeans, especially the low and low middle income Singaporeans. If the CPF does that well for all Singaporeans since all Singaporeans matter, then why do we have a Parents Maintenance Act? This Act is a shadow of whether our CPF system is robust. It is clearly not robust.
5. The CPF does not cover housewives. Are their work devalued by society? The civil servants have had their pensions taken away. They no longer earn pensions. This was 12 years ago. Was the Parents Maintenance Act institutionalized by then Walter Woo to allow the PAP to outsource its social responsibility back to Singaporeans? Parents talk about money and parents and children talk about money in Singapore but the PAP ministers pay themselves the highest political salaries and bonuses on the planet while this is happening over the past 20 years?
6. Why can’t the interests paid to the accounts be increased to match inflation? How come no REAL interest was paid? Is it because we have a strong Singapore dollar and the PAP government does not do better? Why are they under-performing in the people’s pension fund?
The reality is that the pension system is design for 2 working parents who are degree holders, each earning $5,000 per month. Everyone below this setup will face a compromised reality.
7. Also, the aim of the minimum sum is for subsistence living in one’s old age. Does it make sense to recognize minimum sum for subsistence living but discount the need for a minimum wage for subsistence living too? The argument by the PAP is lop-sided here. They took an extreme position and position it for a need to have a competitive age.
The reality is that many Singaporeans PMET are retrenched and out of a job because of PAP’s labour polices that do not support Singaporeans’ interests. They are left to the mercy of the markets while Pinoy, India Indians and PRCs are able to support their own families by benefiting from the exchange rate of their Singapore wages. These policies continue to weaken the Singaporean core these past 15 years.
8. How is a Singaporean suppose to live off at age 55 when they are out of a job while they have CPF which they can’t use to tide them over? At 55, a family needs more money to support their growing children and education costs. The ministers are unhappy that their pay is cut as they want money to send their children to Harvard universities? But there is no consideration for the non-ministers section of society? The policy has an elitist-bent as ministers do not need to worry about the minimum sum. Something is wrong with our values as a society or at least the values that the PAP is promoting for Singaporeans. Retirement age is now raised to 65 in Singapore as of this year. The government wishes to raise it to 67. Do you agree, Singaporeans? The PAP has a different sort of life that it wants Singaporeans to live.
9. Many thinkers are deluded to say that Singapore pays one of the lowest taxes in the world. One should make a holistic appraisal of the sort of lifestyle one is constrained to accept that. Suppose we accept that we are paying one of the lowest taxes in the world, we are also getting one of the lowest benefits in the world. Singaporeans can’t afford a car. One can buy 6 Honda civics in Japan for the price of one Honda Civic in Singapore. Singaporeans not paying supposedly claimed taxes are also not privileging from free education from primary one to JC2 as in these countries. They do not benefit from unemployment benefit. They do not get a robust universal healthcare when they fall sick. In fact, they have to co-pay when they fall sick. They do not have a robust pension system nor can they see their children through university as we’re sponsoring PRCs and IIs and setting aside only the top 20% our each cohort to get a place in our unis. Other countries can have easy access to university education.
The ministers know that the CPF is a problem and they are benefiting from it. One of the reasons why we always and will always have a budget surplus each year is we use 50% of the interest that we earn from our reserves for our annual budget. That’s why the excess is returned timely to Singaporeans during election year. The people’s very own money are used to entice the same voters to vote for the same people who are depriving citizens of a robust old age and future healthcare policies. In fact, logical fallacies are used to question Singaporeans to present a better CPF policy that can even match our own. Ignorance of the people is milked to win arguments. There are in fact better healthcare and national pensions in other parts of the world – Canada, Norway and Denmark. Even Japan with its stagnant growth has better pension schemes and they have unions to fight for better interests and run their own investments plans for their members. For example., the civil servants and teachers unions in Japan have their own unions to support retirement investments of their members on top of their national schemes. Singapore doesn’t.
Many young Singaporeans are over-purchasing their flats as they believe that they can never see their CPF, so they best way to use it is to purchase overpriced flats.
10. It has to be borne in mind. HDB flats revert to $0 at the 99th year. This fallacy of profiting from flat selling cannot last. So, what does a property mean to you? Is it a home? Is a home an investment? Also, if you’re paying for a flat for 25 years… how are you going to retire since there’s hardly anything in the OA. Moreover, the older you are, after 50 years old, your employer’s CPF contribution rate drops to as low as 6.5% from the current 16% you are enjoying assuming you are less than 45 years old at the time of reading this. Do you think it’s right that the government reduces the employers CPF contribution rate and further raises the minimum sum? You have to top up more of your monthly flat repayment in hard cash when you are past 45 years and into your 50s and 60s as there is less CPF contributed to your OA. You will have to struggle harder as you get older in Singapore especially from 55 to 65. This puts many Singaporeans to fall ill from life pressures of strokes and high blood pressure. It’s not only a reality but a challenging reality being a Singaporean. The challenge at the moment is that those who are benefitting from the system or who think they are comparatively benefitting from the system are not supportive of a holistic reform for some of the PAP’s mispolicies.
The Reality
* Submitted by TRE reader.
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://singsupplies.com/showthread.php?184330-Even-more-things-about-CPF-that-I-don’t-get&goto=newpost).