Govt looking to cut both employees' & employers' CPF contr
-
SINGAPORE : Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen has said the government wants to do more to help low wage workers.
To make them more attractive to hire, the government is looking at cutting both the employees' and employers' contribution to their CPF.
He said, "The low wage workers - if you increase the CPF for them, they're more costly to employ and they might find problems with employability. And if you increase, for example, the employees' CPF, obviously they have less take home pay.
"And I think that's why there's merit in NTUC's suggestion for this group of workers; you actually reduce both, and that's something we're seriously considering - reduce the employees' CPF so that their take home pay is increased, and reducing employers' CPF so that they cost less to hire.
"Of course, then, something else has to be done if we did do that to match the reduction in CPF. And this is where WorkFare comes in and this is an active area we're consulting with various agencies." - CNA/ms
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/070122/5/singapore253979.html -
This Govt beri funny, always want to reduce this and that and then will increase something else. Why make it so troublesome, reduce CPF then give out Workfare bonus, might as well just take whatever workfare bonus that are suppose to be given out and then just give it to the employer.
-
If reduce our employer's CPF contribution, our CPF will 'have lesser $$$'. Like tat if a normal income sg worker buy a HDB flat from HDB, how many years of loan must he/she takes to pay fully?
For employee's CPF, our take home pay is more but some singaporeans tend to spend the money away instead of saving it up. -
A farking hen could lay eggs???
-
can.. an elite c0ckerel sees to it.Originally posted by Lowclassman:A farking hen could lay eggs??? -
i cannot understand what is the point...
Originally posted by Manager433:SINGAPORE : Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen has said the government wants to do more to help low wage workers.
To make them more attractive to hire, the government is looking at cutting both the employees' and employers' contribution to their CPF.
He said, "The low wage workers - if you increase the CPF for them, they're more costly to employ and they might find problems with employability. And if you increase, for example, the employees' CPF, obviously they have less take home pay.
"And I think that's why there's merit in NTUC's suggestion for this group of workers; you actually reduce both, and that's something we're seriously considering - reduce the employees' CPF so that their take home pay is increased, and reducing employers' CPF so that they cost less to hire.
"Of course, then, something else has to be done if we did do that to match the reduction in CPF. And this is where WorkFare comes in and this is an active area we're consulting with various agencies." - CNA/ms
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/070122/5/singapore253979.html -
all u have to know the meaning. I just read the first para and i think they are just trying to pretend reduce money here and there to increase employability than snatch the money away from other source.Originally posted by play_n_play:i cannot understand what is the point... -
Makes perfect sense...make it cheaper to employ the poor but the poor will not suffer from less retirement funds because the government will top up in workfare bonus..you benefit only if you work.Originally posted by ceciltan:This Govt beri funny, always want to reduce this and that and then will increase something else. Why make it so troublesome, reduce CPF then give out Workfare bonus, might as well just take whatever workfare bonus that are suppose to be given out and then just give it to the employer. -
pay you once but tax you forever...
here, it's give you bonus once and then cut your CPF forever..
like the GST.. give you back some money and the GST is there forever... -
That's why the workfare bonus is there to top it up. If employers don't employ the poor, they will NEVER be able to pay off their flat.Originally posted by Manager433:If reduce our employer's CPF contribution, our CPF will 'have lesser $$$'. Like tat if a normal income sg worker buy a HDB flat from HDB, how many years of loan must he/she takes to pay fully?
For employee's CPF, our take home pay is more but some singaporeans tend to spend the money away instead of saving it up.
If you are not responsible with your finances, you accept the consequences..there is a limit to what a nanny state can do. This may be a nanny state, it's not an institution for the mentally disabled. -
Don't be so implusive!!!Originally posted by oxford mushroom:That's why the workfare bonus is there to top it up. If employers don't employ the poor, they will NEVER be able to pay off their flat.
If you are not responsible with your finances, you accept the consequences..there is a limit to what a nanny state can do. This may be a nanny state, it's not an institution for the mentally disabled.
Saying is easier than done!!! Oxford mushroom, you think too highly of yourself, putting yourself so high up as if your are near perfection.
Being arrogant and impulsive. Watch out retribution that come upon you.....one day, you might become mentally short-circuit.
Then, i will throw s h i ts and pee on you...
Who on earth would like to fall into that kind of situation?
Condition changes are inevitably that might hit people who are weaker.
Weak is not a crime or something could be changed overnight.
How to be responsible if earning is not enough to pay for utilities, children education, medical fees, food for yourself, wife and 2 or 3 children...what if you have a disabled or severely ill parent to take as well. Worst....if ones is over 40+++ without qualification. -
As usual, shooting yourself in the feet again. If they have difficulty making ends meet as it is, and yet you criticize the government for trying to cut their CPF contribution and give them more take-home pay.Originally posted by Lowclassman:How to be responsible if earning is not enough to pay for utilities, children education, medical fees, food for yourself, wife and 2 or 3 children...what if you have a disabled or severely ill parent to take as well. Worst....if ones is over 40+++ without qualification.
Just shows how you attack the government without thinking... -
And while that happens, the Govt raises the GST...Originally posted by oxford mushroom:As usual, shooting yourself in the feet again. If they have difficulty making ends meet as it is, and yet you criticize the government for trying to cut their CPF contribution and give them more take-home pay.
Just shows how you attack the government without thinking...
See the only reason the Govt would even bother to contemplate this is because they want to raise GST, and while that happens, they try to give us the illusion of increased equity on our hands. Technically, we will still loose, since CPF contributions fall, and that leaves less money for retirement, and we get taxed more. -
In this case, better don't buy HDB cos CPF won't be enough to service the housing loan.Originally posted by Manager433:If reduce our employer's CPF contribution, our CPF will 'have lesser $$$'. Like tat if a normal income sg worker buy a HDB flat from HDB, how many years of loan must he/she takes to pay fully?
For employee's CPF, our take home pay is more but some singaporeans tend to spend the money away instead of saving it up.
The poor would be better off renting- the govt must continue to have cheap flats for them -
not if they cut employer's contribution too which would mean less fund overall. and of course the gst increase which come togetherOriginally posted by oxford mushroom:As usual, shooting yourself in the feet again. If they have difficulty making ends meet as it is, and yet you criticize the government for trying to cut their CPF contribution and give them more take-home pay.
Just shows how you attack the government without thinking...
-
This freaking pap.....cutting employer's CPF contribution is obviously helping businessmen in overcoming the increase of GST 2 percent.
What farking pap is talking???
All moves were on expense of peasants. Not only that...it allows businessmen to manipulate on employment of peasants. -
they should scrap the cpf scheme altogether.
-
PAP is becoming lamer & lamer every year by the half-assed things they do or dream up on their high-chairs... -
thank you 66.6%
-
er.. need not be the poor only..Originally posted by oxford mushroom:That's why the workfare bonus is there to top it up. If employers don't employ the poor, they will NEVER be able to pay off their flat.
If you are not responsible with your finances, you accept the consequences..there is a limit to what a nanny state can do. This may be a nanny state, it's not an institution for the mentally disabled.
if they cut the cpf contribution.. i dun see how it'd be easier for me..
me n nel might have to top cash for our 4 room..
it means less $$ in the bank.... AND cpf
its a dumb idea -
we're not eligible cos the combined income is more than 2k..Originally posted by gerrykoh:In this case, better don't buy HDB cos CPF won't be enough to service the housing loan.
The poor would be better off renting- the govt must continue to have cheap flats for them -
and 1 mth ago they said they're gg to raise employer contribution...
the fellas who suggest the cuts should get shot in their head -
again i wonder how low... is low wage?
-
GST in Hong Kong and Singapore and why we need to empower ourselves
23 Jan 07
There are many Singaporeans who cannot see the importance of people power as it relates to their everyday lives.
For them, political rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of peaceful assembly are idealistic notions that have nothing to do with bread-and-butter issues that affect their everyday lives.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Take the recent announcement of the hike in the GST. Despite the people's unease over such an increase, does anyone doubt that the PAP will again get its way, however negatively its policies impact on society and our economy?
There is hardly any scrutiny and zero public debate on the matter. Meanwhile the widening income disparity looks set to grow even bigger with the 7 percent GST hike. And like a joke coming out of a bad comic strip, the prime minister tells us that the increase will help the poor.
Contrast this with Hong Kong. When the SAR Government put forth the idea of introducing a GST, there was much debate in the Legislative Council as well as among the wider public through the free media.
Seeing how such a tax would hurt the competitiveness of Hong Kong as well as the poorer segments of society, opposition and civic groups conducted marches and protests to convey Hong Kongers' unhappiness over the introduction of the tax (see photographs).
It wasn't long before the administration got the message and shelved the idea of a GST.
That's active citizenry at work. That's how citizens make governments listen. That's how democratic rights help to protect our economic welfare, the issues that affect our everyday lives.
Without these fundamental rights to freely speak and congregate, how are we going to rectify the current imbalance that we now have where whenever the PAP says jump, everyone asks how high?
There are also many who see that protests are a political, albeit necessary, evil that must be conducted only as a last resort, lest society breaks down into violence and anarchy.
Alas, the PAP has managed to sear into our minds that public protests are dangerously subversive weapons that if unbanned will lead to the disintegration of society as we know it.
If truth be told, mass public activities such as protests help bond citizens together as well as to the State. A political culture that makes the people feel at ease in expressing themselves publicly, even vociferously, but peacefully, is one that will ultimately signal greater stability and continuity.
Again, Hong Kong provides us some valuable lessons. In the myriads of protests that have taken place in the territory, and there have been some massive ones, Hong Kongers have demonstrated how mass public action can be conducted with civility and dignity while at the same time send clear messages to the authorities how they want their city to be run.
Does the city look like its on the verge of anarchy?
The sad truth is that we in Singapore have lost our ability to hold our government accountable and to make sure it serves our interests rather than its own and those of the ruling elite.
But all is not lost. We can rebuild and we can regain our voice. To do this, we need to come together to discover how we can empower ourselves. And what better way to start than with the Empower Singapore Seminar Series.
If you haven't already registered yourself for the seminar this Sunday, 28 Jan 07, do it now and learn for yourself how we can all become active citizens in our own country.
So the next time you hear someone say that democracy and rights have nothing to do with bread-and-butter issues, tell him of the impending increase in the GST and ask him what he intends to do about it.
Then mention what his Hong Kong counterpart has done about it. -
Lower cpf contribution, does that mean statutory pay increase?Originally posted by Manager433:SINGAPORE : Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen has said the government wants to do more to help low wage workers.
To make them more attractive to hire, the government is looking at cutting both the employees' and employers' contribution to their CPF.
He said, "The low wage workers - if you increase the CPF for them, they're more costly to employ and they might find problems with employability. And if you increase, for example, the employees' CPF, obviously they have less take home pay.
"And I think that's why there's merit in NTUC's suggestion for this group of workers; you actually reduce both, and that's something we're seriously considering - reduce the employees' CPF so that their take home pay is increased, and reducing employers' CPF so that they cost less to hire.
"Of course, then, something else has to be done if we did do that to match the reduction in CPF. And this is where WorkFare comes in and this is an active area we're consulting with various agencies." - CNA/ms
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/070122/5/singapore253979.html
If it doesn't, they will know in 5 years time, it wont be just 33.3% votes going that way.