Government may make buying annuity compulsory
-
Doesn't this goes to show that CPF is a failure....if it is called Provident Fund and is supposed to provided us with the means to live into our golden years..then why the need to have annuities....why not just raise CPF contributions to increase the Funds....cause they are scared they will drive businesses away with the increased costs....I say its another grand failureOriginally posted by HyperFocal:Isn't this so amazing..?
CPF was said to take care of the needs of people in their golden years.. now they are desperately trying to keep people employed working pass the Golden Years, and forcing people to buy Annuity...
This just show how responsible and short-sighted PAP is... or perhaps it was their intention all these while to absolve themselves from the responsibility of caring for its people?
I wonder, what's the next sh|t-house idea?
-
Nah, by my calculation...I'd give Sillypore at most another 50 years...as a country....do not know whether it will be another gahmen or same gahmen....I'd say let Sillypore dissolve and become part of another countryOriginally posted by HyperFocal:Can Singapore, last for or past 100 years?
.. I shudder just wondering about it... -
This is what I predict to happen...Originally posted by Coquitlam:I'd say let Sillypore dissolve and become part of another country
the way PAP is doing things, they are heading for a Meltdown... -
Ewww... quite freaky to see you think that it will just simply dissolve into another country... where are your roots?Originally posted by Coquitlam:Nah, by my calculation...I'd give Sillypore at most another 50 years...as a country....do not know whether it will be another gahmen or same gahmen....I'd say let Sillypore dissolve and become part of another country
You should be ashamed to call yourself a Singaporean yet behave in such a manner... where is your dignity and the honour for your country? -
Let's see how things goes instead of predicting for the worst, shall we?Originally posted by HyperFocal:This is what I predict to happen...
the way PAP is doing things, they are heading for a Meltdown... -
what things, what is your definition of meltdown?Originally posted by HyperFocal:This is what I predict to happen...
the way PAP is doing things, they are heading for a Meltdown... -
thing1 /θɪŋ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[thing]Originally posted by Gazelle:what things, what is your definition of meltdown?
–noun 1. a material object without life or consciousness; an inanimate object.
2. some entity, object, or creature that is not or cannot be specifically designated or precisely described: The stick had a brass thing on it.
3. anything that is or may become an object of thought: things of the spirit.
4. things, matters; affairs: Things are going well now.
5. a fact, circumstance, or state of affairs: It is a curious thing.
6. an action, deed, event, or performance: to do great things; His death was a horrible thing.
7. a particular, respect, or detail: perfect in all things.
8. aim; objective: The thing is to reach this line with the ball.
9. an article of clothing: I don't have a thing to wear.
10. things, a. implements, utensils, or other articles for service: I'll wash the breakfast things.
b. personal possessions or belongings: Pack your things and go!
11. a task; chore: I've got a lot of things to do today.
12. a living being or creature: His baby's a cute little thing.
13. a thought or statement: I have just one thing to say to you.
14. Informal. a peculiar attitude or feeling, either positive or negative, toward something; mental quirk: She has a thing about cats.
15. something signified or represented, as distinguished from a word, symbol, or idea representing it.
16. Law. anything that may be the subject of a property right.
17. new thing, Jazz. free jazz.
18. the thing, a. something that is correct or fashionable: That café is the thing now.
b. that which is expedient or necessary: The thing to do is to tell them the truth.
—Idioms19. do or find one's own thing, Informal. to pursue a lifestyle that expresses one's self. Also, do or find one's thing.
20. make a good thing of, Informal. to turn (a situation, experience, etc.) to one's own profit; benefit by: She made a good thing of her spare-time hobbies.
21. not to get a thing out of, a. to be unable to obtain information or news from: The police couldn't get a thing out of him.
b. to fail to appreciate, understand, or derive aesthetic pleasure from: My wife likes opera, but I don't get a thing out of it.
22. see or hear things, Informal. to have hallucinations.
melt·down /ˈmɛltˌdaʊn/[melt-doun]
–noun the melting of a significant portion of a nuclear-reactor core due to inadequate cooling of the fuel elements, a condition that could lead to the escape of radiation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Origin: 1960–65; n. use of v. phrase melt down]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source melt·down (mělt'doun') Pronunciation Key
n.
Severe overheating of a nuclear reactor core, resulting in melting of the core and escape of radiation.
Informal A disastrous or rapidly developing situation likened to the melting of a nuclear reactor core: "After several corporate meltdowns, only two reporters remain in [the] bureau" (David Fitzpatrick).
Informal An emotional breakdown
(Download Now or Buy the Book) The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2006 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
WordNet - Cite This Source meltdown
noun
1. severe overheating of the core of a nuclear reactor resulting in the core melting and radiation escaping
2. a disaster comparable to a nuclear meltdown; "there is little likelihood of a meltdown comparable to the American banking collapse in March 1933"
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University. -
I dont see any of that rubbish happen unless it is related to global warmingOriginally posted by HyperFocal: -
I believe by involving the private insurance company, the gahmen also earns a fraction of it. Probably they find the private insurance company can handle better than them and at the same time they save cost and money to employ people to take care of this.Originally posted by lotiman:If this new Annuities Scheme is compulsory, why cannot the Govt run it themselves, and run it like non-profitable organsation with transparency ? ie.
...CPF payout will be lesser
...Govt promise to pay with life perpetuality, ie. pay until one goes into coffin. ( a CPF within a CPF, Coffin Paid For within Central Provident Fund)
Why must Govt sub-out to private insurance companies ? What is amiss ? -
in my humble opinions,
Scenario 1
IF our cpf is invested in private insurance companies' annuities products and there is no state guarantees for these products, then effectively a significant portion of our retirement funds is privatized which means our retirement funds are subjected to higher risk of the private sector than before and we are given no choice for this risk.
Scenario 2
IF our cpf is invested in private insurance companies' annuities products and there is state guarantees for these products, then our annuities (retirement) payouts are considered risk-free. If the pricing of the annuities are proven fair, then i think it is acceptable.
Under scenario 1, it is interesting to see the reaction of the public. I guess more than 50% of the people will dislike it.
Under scenario 2, i think nothing happens and most of the public would accept the arrangement. -
Does it not surprise anyone that when it comes to our CPF Monies, this Government will not allow any Singaporean any 'Opt OUT option' to this proposed Annuity Scheme - when this is allowed for the compulsory organ donation plan in the event of death, and more recently compulsory HIV testing on hospital admission.
Is the reason for this non-existent option not loud enough, when OUR Money is to be drawn out from the Government's Treasury ? -
Is NTUC under Temasek Holdings?Originally posted by sunnytv:Gahman relatives & fren working in insurance, so have to introduce business to them lah. His best friend NTUC. -
scenario 3. which is most troubling, is that there is no partial refund if the person dies before he draws out most of the lump sum he puts in. It there is no refund, the balance goes to the insurance company. Statistics showed that most die at 80 plus, so it is quite easy to make a profit out of it. The shareholders of this insurance company would be quite happy.
so below are the important things to look for
i) any refund ?
ii) state guaranteed ? -
Originally posted by Daddy!!:scenario 3. which is most troubling, is that there is no partial refund if the person dies before he draws out most of the lump sum he puts in. It there is no refund, the balance goes to the insurance company. Statistics showed that most die at 80 plus, so it is quite easy to make a profit out of it. The shareholders of this insurance company would be quite happy.
so below are the important things to look for
i) any refund ?
ii) state guaranteed ?
i) any refund ?
ii) state guaranteed ?
This will be going against the grain of this government's philosophy in the Citizen's Responsibility in 'self-help'.
'Self-indulgence' is only reserved for the Elites in Government, not for the Citizens. -
If Mr Lim Yan Beng starts with $48690 and earn interest at the rate of 4% and draws only $183 per month, the sum can last him 54 years!. Annuities is for those who cant smell a bad deal.Originally posted by Daddy!!:The fact that you use 240 means that $202 per month is over 20 years. But we are talking about perpectuality. So your calculation is off topic.
lets assume perpectuality to be 40 years, your calculation will be $48690/480 = $101 per month. Compare this with what Mr Lim Yan Beng got at $183.
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/business-calculator.asp -
I think i did mentioned in my post $202 was arrived without calculating the interest earned. But thanks for calculating the exact payout.Originally posted by maurizio13:Actually I disagree to some parts, the monthly payment should be around $272 (approximately), because the accumulated investment will still be earning returns until it's final payout.
$48,690 / PVIFA [3%, 20 years] = $48,690 / 14.8774 = $3,273 per year
Which means will get $272 a month.
Only if you can live longer than your investment's present value payout, then maybe it's worthwhile.
But I think what the minister meant was life annuities, which means they pay you annuity till you die. For such investments, unless you can forsee yourself living very long, else no point signing up because their payout is less than the normal annuity. -
Originally posted by kilua:
$183!!!
If Mr Lim Yan Beng starts with $48690 and earn interest at the rate of 4% and draws only $183 per month, the sum can last him [b]54 years!. Annuities is for those who cant smell a bad deal.
http://www.bankrate.com/brm/business-calculator.asp
[/b]
Maybe last 3-4 days in the future.
-
Mr Lim Yan Beng started with $37000 and not $48690.
Well, it is true that if he keeps his money in cpf and drawing $183 and reinvesting the balance at 4% per annum, his money will last him till around 90 years old. see below. if the pricing for our annuities is something ie $183 per month for a lump sum of $37000 , there is no added advantage for us to switch from cpf to annuities.
End of year capital Reinvested at 4%
Age Year Begin Withdraw End
62 1 $37,000 ($2,196) $34,804
63 2 $36,196 ($2,196) $34,000
64 3 $35,360 ($2,196) $33,164
65 4 $34,491 ($2,196) $32,295
66 5 $33,587 ($2,196) $31,391
67 6 $32,646 ($2,196) $30,450
68 7 $31,668 ($2,196) $29,472
69 8 $30,651 ($2,196) $28,455
70 9 $29,593 ($2,196) $27,397
71 10 $28,493 ($2,196) $26,297
72 11 $27,349 ($2,196) $25,153
73 12 $26,159 ($2,196) $23,963
74 13 $24,922 ($2,196) $22,726
75 14 $23,635 ($2,196) $21,439
76 15 $22,296 ($2,196) $20,100
77 16 $20,904 ($2,196) $18,708
78 17 $19,457 ($2,196) $17,261
79 18 $17,951 ($2,196) $15,755
80 19 $16,385 ($2,196) $14,189
81 20 $14,757 ($2,196) $12,561
82 21 $13,063 ($2,196) $10,867
83 22 $11,302 ($2,196) $9,106
84 23 $9,470 ($2,196) $7,274
85 24 $7,565 ($2,196) $5,369
86 25 $5,584 ($2,196) $3,388
87 26 $3,523 ($2,196) $1,327
88 27 $1,380 ($2,196) ($816) -
you missed the lock in period from 55 to 62.Originally posted by Daddy!!:Mr Lim Yan Beng started with $37000 and not $48690.
Well, it is true that if he keeps his money in cpf and drawing $183 and reinvesting the balance at 4% per annum, his money will last him till around 90 years old. see below. if the pricing for our annuities is something ie $183 per month for a lump sum of $37000 , there is no added advantage for us to switch from cpf to annuities.
http://forums.vr-zone.com/archive/index.php/t-40256.html
Mr Lim has to give the insurer $37000 when he is 55 and only starts collecting payout when he is 62.
If he left the money with the CPF board, at 62 he would have $48690. -
Yes. Both you and m13 are correct. See below. Wow! 110 years old ! I think i dont even live beyond 75. Lets say I am Mr Lim and I die at 75, i would be able to pass $41K to my family members. If there is no refund from the annuities, this money $41K goes to someone else.Originally posted by kilua:you missed the lock in period from 55 to 62.
http://forums.vr-zone.com/archive/index.php/t-40256.html
Mr Lim has to give the insurer $37000 when he is 55 and only starts collecting payout when he is 62.
If he left the money with the CPF board, at 62 he would have $48690.
End of year capital Reinvested at 4%
Age Year Begin Withdraw End
55 0 $37,000 $0 $37,000
56 1 $38,480 $0 $38,480
57 2 $40,019 $0 $40,019
58 3 $41,620 $0 $41,620
59 4 $43,285 $0 $43,285
60 5 $45,016 $0 $45,016
61 6 $46,817 $0 $46,817
62 1 $48,689 ($2,196) $46,493
63 2 $48,353 ($2,196) $46,157
64 3 $48,004 ($2,196) $45,808
65 4 $47,640 ($2,196) $45,444
66 5 $47,262 ($2,196) $45,066
67 6 $46,868 ($2,196) $44,672
68 7 $46,459 ($2,196) $44,263
69 8 $46,034 ($2,196) $43,838
70 9 $45,591 ($2,196) $43,395
71 10 $45,131 ($2,196) $42,935
72 11 $44,652 ($2,196) $42,456
73 12 $44,155 ($2,196) $41,959
74 13 $43,637 ($2,196) $41,441
75 14 $43,099 ($2,196) $40,903
76 15 $42,539 ($2,196) $40,343
77 16 $41,956 ($2,196) $39,760
78 17 $41,351 ($2,196) $39,155
79 18 $40,721 ($2,196) $38,525
80 19 $40,066 ($2,196) $37,870
81 20 $39,385 ($2,196) $37,189
82 21 $38,676 ($2,196) $36,480
83 22 $37,939 ($2,196) $35,743
84 23 $37,173 ($2,196) $34,977
85 24 $36,376 ($2,196) $34,180
86 25 $35,548 ($2,196) $33,352
87 26 $34,686 ($2,196) $32,490
88 27 $33,789 ($2,196) $31,593
89 28 $32,857 ($2,195) $30,662
90 29 $31,888 ($2,194) $29,694
91 30 $30,882 ($2,193) $28,689
92 31 $29,837 ($2,192) $27,645
93 32 $28,750 ($2,191) $26,559
94 33 $27,622 ($2,190) $25,432
95 34 $26,449 ($2,189) $24,260
96 35 $25,231 ($2,18
$23,043
97 36 $23,964 ($2,187) $21,777
98 37 $22,648 ($2,186) $20,462
99 38 $21,281 ($2,185) $19,096
100 39 $19,860 ($2,184) $17,676
101 40 $18,383 ($2,183) $16,200
102 41 $16,848 ($2,182) $14,666
103 42 $15,252 ($2,181) $13,071
104 43 $13,594 ($2,180) $11,414
105 44 $11,871 ($2,179) $9,692
106 45 $10,079 ($2,17 $7,901
107 46 $8,217 ($2,177) $6,040
108 47 $6,282 ($2,176) $4,106
109 48 $4,270 ($2,175) $2,095
110 49 $2,179 ($2,174) $5
111 50 $5 ($2,173) ($2,16 -
I was confident that you shall see the light and you have.Originally posted by Daddy!!:CPF's payout is higher because there is a time-limit to it, while perpectual annuities does not have any time limit. This big difference, you dont know meh. A financial planner before and yet dont understand this difference.
Don't just support every damn policy blindly. It makes one look spineless. -
clearly annuity is dependent on the "bonuses" and the "bonuses" are forecasted figures. remember the incident where many thought that they need not pay by x years as forecasted by the insurer but ended up still having to pay.Originally posted by Rock^Star:I was confident that you shall see the light and you have.
Don't just support every damn policy blindly. It makes one look spineless. -
Seems that only NTUC has the bonus feature. Other insurers and banks do not because they only have the purely guaranteed payment portion. Can't blame them for trying to make the annuity look attractive but they do deserve flak for not living up to initial picture presented.Originally posted by Lin Yu:clearly annuity is dependent on the "bonuses" and the "bonuses" are forecasted figures. remember the incident where many thought that they need not pay by x years as forecasted by the insurer but ended up still having to pay.
Your latter comment was referring to AIA. Well, allow me to say that it is only a half-truth. The ST finance repoter, Lorna Tan, was eager to score a quick one and she reported without ascertaining all facts. She later won an ST award for "objective reporting". Only those within the industry who really study the facts, know.
As you mentioned, the key word is 'forecast'. This non-guaranteed clause was already written in the policy contract. Insurance selling 10-15 years ago was not as complicated as today. Financial analysis was not exactly necessary and many unscrupulous agents who wanted an easy sale deliberately omitted mention of this clause. Of course, there are also those who have highlighted it to the customer's attention. And moreover, there are also forgetful customers. -
This fuking PAP leaders only think about money n nothing else.As if after their death,they can bring their money to the afterlife world......Dream on man.
-
how about buying shares of local insurance companies?