How many of you know what Slyvia spoke in Parliament 19 Sep?
-
By all means respect a person for what he/she is worth. But don't do it blindly and out of displaced loyalty.Originally posted by qlqq9:Whatever, I respect her for she has the heart to serve the people as compared to the PAP regime who is all the way out to get our money.
I would expect a parliamentarian to have a heart to serve people, otherwise she would be cheating on the voters! So, for that matter, isn't the annuity scheme also helping people - especially those with low incomes and do not have suffcient CPF to see them thru if they do live up to/beyond certain age? What is so negative about the annuity scheme? It is bcos it is compulsory? It is bcos you want to withdraw one lump-sum the moment you retire or reach 55 so that you can enjoy life, and also have a cheena concubine? -
What has the annuity scheme got to do with cheena concubine? Nobody likes the age to be set at 85.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:By all means respect a person for what he/she is worth. But don't do it blindly and out of displaced loyalty.
I would expect a parliamentarian to have a heart to serve people, otherwise she would be cheating on the voters! So, for that matter, isn't the annuity scheme also helping people - especially those with low incomes and do not have suffcient CPF to see them thru if they do live up to/beyond certain age? What is so negative about the annuity scheme? It is bcos it is compulsory? It is bcos you want to withdraw one lump-sum the moment you retire or reach 55 so that you can enjoy life, and also have a cheena concubine? -
That shows you know little about the annuity scheme but you talk so BIG like you know everything. Hey, do not let your personal likes or dislikes cloud the issue here. You think I don't like to have my money at 55 so that I can have a good time with cheena concubine? If after good time I died at 60, that's OK - maybe my bank is still not broke yet. But what if I don't die at 60 and cheena concubine had milked me till zero balance, are you going to feed me??Originally posted by qlqq9:What has the annuity scheme got to do with cheena concubine? Nobody likes the age to be set at 85. -
In your case, I suggest that you read carefully before commenting. There was no talk whatsoever that says one cannot hand in his or her resignation at anytime that the individual wishes to.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:wah, the CPF fund debate run over here. Sylvia was a law lecturer. If she taught me law I would have failed her. What is she talking? Employment is a contract between you and your employer - not a jail sentence. Have you heard of these words "I quit"? At anytime you can hand in your resignation. Who can make you work if you don't want to? If I strike TOTO, I will give Sylvia money to re-study law again!
She mentioned the possibility of Singaporeans retiring early to pursue their own passion and interest. She also spoke about Singaporeans not being gainfully employed when they are 62 as statistics that she broached has shown. Now, compare that with the increased DDA (Draw Down Age) that puts these very category of people at a disadvantage.
Those were a few of her key concerns.
Well, one can always argue that if the govt does not plan early, what happens if these retirees have no money for retirement some time down the road?
As Slyvia put it, the govt has made $6b more in revenue as compared to 5 years back. Surely the govt can do more than by just increasing the CPF savings by a mere 1%? (which of course is easily eroded by inflation)
As Peter Yeo put it (as quoted from theonlinecitizen.com):
Thus, setting aside the $1.2 billion now, could solve the longevity insurance problem for 10 years from 2042 to 2052, if not longer, because the yearly increasing number of those who turn 85 and older, and are destitute, will also die off gradually every year, with about half being still alive at age 92, according to the life expectancy statistics.
By 2052, our reserves (currently about $250 billion) would have grown to about $64 trillion, assuming its historical rate of return of 13.1 per cent (TemasekÂ’s 18% + GICÂ’s 8.2% divided by 2) continues.
So, by 2052, if we use just 0.1 per cent of the reserves every year, the longevity insurance problem could be solved forever! -
Before you the pot, call the kettle black, do reflect on how much you about annuities too.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:That shows you know little about the annuity scheme but you talk so BIG like you know everything. Hey, do not let your personal likes or dislikes cloud the issue here. You think I don't like to have my money at 55 so that I can have a good time with cheena concubine? If after good time I died at 60, that's OK - maybe my bank is still not broke yet. But what if I don't die at 60 and cheena concubine had milked me till zero balance, are you going to feed me??
In the other thread where I questioned your knowledge on annuities, you mistook it as my quest for knowledge rather than a test of your comprehension, wasn't it? Done on purpose, I suppose.....in order to masquerade your lack of understanding on this longevity scheme.
What is this figure of 60 about? Annuities begin payout at 85. Even if one runs out of money at 60 but because the scheme starts at 85, a citizen can only do that little much about it. An haven't you read statistics posted not too long ago that the average life expectancy of Singaporeans at birth is aged 80 based on a study conducted by the UN in 2006?
Well, perhaps I am darn right. That you are just an opportunistic, lazy forumite who comes in as and when he pleases, choosing not to read up the many important info that has transpired. -
Originally posted by Rock^Star:OK, the part about resignation is to highlight that no one is forced to work till 62 or 65, which was the impression I get from your post.
As Peter Yeo put it (as quoted from theonlinecitizen.com):
Thus, setting aside the $1.2 billion now, could solve the longevity insurance problem for 10 years from 2042 to 2052, if not longer, because the yearly increasing number of those who turn 85 and older, and are destitute, will also die off gradually every year, with about half being still alive at age 92, according to the life expectancy statistics.
By 2052, our reserves (currently about $250 billion) would have grown to about $64 trillion, assuming its historical rate of return of 13.1 per cent (TemasekÂ’s 18% + GICÂ’s 8.2% divided by 2) continues.
This is an assumption not a gurantee or forgone conclusion.
So, by 2052, if we use just 0.1 per cent of the reserves every year, the longevity insurance problem could be solved forever!
I like this forever part - sounds very romantic! But I am a realist, nothing is forever, don't be fooled! -
Yes, I remembered posting question for you. Ah, don't be quick to jump off the table. Read the local papers and you get all the answers. I don't bother about foreign sources, not lazy, they are not reliable (that's up to you to disagree).Originally posted by Rock^Star:Before you the pot, call the kettle black, do reflect on how much you about annuities too.
In the other thread where I questioned your knowledge on annuities, you mistook it as my quest for knowledge rather than a test of your comprehension, wasn't it? Done on purpose, I suppose.....in order to masquerade your lack of understanding on this longevity scheme.
What is this figure of 60 about? Annuities begin payout at 85. Even if one runs out of money at 60 but because the scheme starts at 85, a citizen can only do that little much about it. An haven't you read statistics posted not too long ago that the average life expectancy of Singaporeans at birth is aged 80 based on a study conducted by the UN in 2006?
Well, perhaps I am darn right. That you are just an opportunistic, lazy forumite who comes in as and when he pleases, choosing not to read up the many important info that has transpired.
What about 60, well read again - it just an illustration that if one can draw CPF at 55 with no annuity scheme, that's one scenario to challenge you. Of course, you can come up with so many permutations until the cows mutate but it still the basic issue you all seemed to missed:
1) trend is populace will live longer (yes or no?)
2) those with low incomes may not have sufficient CPF to see them to grand old age.
Remove your fixation on 85, just tell me how you are going to solve this problem - realistically, not romantically! -
Actually, the Parliament public gallery is nearly empty most of the timeOriginally posted by LazerLordz:Parliament sessions are open to the public, but seats are limited, so check the Parliament website regularly to keep track of their sessions.
Go down and listen, it will help you to be better informed.
http://www.parliament.gov.sg
I gather it is because, apart from non-interest, interested people have to work. The CNA website is starting to put video clips of speeches, which is a good thing.
Regards -
There are many ways to help the people. I remember when the GST was increased by 2%, I was personally against it but they said it was to help the people, so there.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:By all means respect a person for what he/she is worth. But don't do it blindly and out of displaced loyalty.
I would expect a parliamentarian to have a heart to serve people, otherwise she would be cheating on the voters! So, for that matter, isn't the annuity scheme also helping people - especially those with low incomes and do not have suffcient CPF to see them thru if they do live up to/beyond certain age? What is so negative about the annuity scheme? It is bcos it is compulsory? It is bcos you want to withdraw one lump-sum the moment you retire or reach 55 so that you can enjoy life, and also have a cheena concubine?
While it may be too early to say, I have not seen the revenue from the extra 2% emerge anywhere.
When longevity issue first emerged, I expected the 2% to come in somewhere. Instead, at present, after having the GST hike, an additional cost for the people in the form of the annuity comes into place.
Regards -
Actually, while the trend is longer lives, it is unsure what the lifespan of our generation is, simply because we have not died.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:Yes, I remembered posting question for you. Ah, don't be quick to jump off the table. Read the local papers and you get all the answers. I don't bother about foreign sources, not lazy, they are not reliable (that's up to you to disagree).
What about 60, well read again - it just an illustration that if one can draw CPF at 55 with no annuity scheme, that's one scenario to challenge you. Of course, you can come up with so many permutations until the cows mutate but it still the basic issue you all seemed to missed:
1) trend is populace will live longer (yes or no?)
2) those with low incomes may not have sufficient CPF to see them to grand old age.
Remove your fixation on 85, just tell me how you are going to solve this problem - realistically, not romantically!
For all we know, it may come down. Our generation is at our prime age at a time when globalisation has set in and more stress has been added. This has led to, among other things, longer working hours and more health issues.
I, for one, believe that there will be more illnesses when our generation reaches old age.
Regards -
That someone who can make you work if you don't want to is "poverty"Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:wah, the CPF fund debate run over here. Sylvia was a law lecturer. If she taught me law I would have failed her. What is she talking? Employment is a contract between you and your employer - not a jail sentence. Have you heard of these words "I quit"? At anytime you can hand in your resignation. Who can make you work if you don't want to? If I strike TOTO, I will give Sylvia money to re-study law again!
That someone who make you can't work even if you want to is "age"
When both of them are your good friends, who never leave you in the lurch, Mr. 85 is somebody you don't wanna be friends with. Since Mr. 55 and Mr. 62 was murdered by PAP, you can only wish that Mr. 85 likes you and make friends with you so that Mr.poverty goes away, while Mr disease makes friends with you, bringing back Mr. poverty to you.
You should reconsider the decision to give the TOTO prize to Sylvia unless you like being with Mr poverty.
-
On another note.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:wah, the CPF fund debate run over here. Sylvia was a law lecturer. If she taught me law I would have failed her. What is she talking? Employment is a contract between you and your employer - not a jail sentence. Have you heard of these words "I quit"? At anytime you can hand in your resignation. Who can make you work if you don't want to? If I strike TOTO, I will give Sylvia money to re-study law again!
Your contract also states the following
"Company and employee can terminate employee's services anytime, so long as the terminating party gives one month's notice."
This term also IMPLICITLY means that anyone can be terminated for no adequate reason by the company, SO LONG as the company gives 1 month's notice of termination.
When reading your contract, please learn to analyze deeper. The above means that nobody's job is safe anymore (I am not even talking about secure). You can be terminated anytime even if you are a good performer. -
If you take up a cheena concubine and you get cheated, serves you right.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:That shows you know little about the annuity scheme but you talk so BIG like you know everything. Hey, do not let your personal likes or dislikes cloud the issue here. You think I don't like to have my money at 55 so that I can have a good time with cheena concubine? If after good time I died at 60, that's OK - maybe my bank is still not broke yet. But what if I don't die at 60 and cheena concubine had milked me till zero balance, are you going to feed me??
I am highly against the annuity for the following reasons:
1) I don't know if I will live till 85
2) I believe that everyone should have the freedom to make the choice of how to spend HIS OWN money
3) That the govt should stop being a nanny, and allow Singaporeans to live their retirement however they want.
4) That I believe the OTHER reason behind this annuity (scam) is to absolve all responsibilities by the Govt to take care of its citizens when they reach old age.
Freedom is the way to live the life I want. Of course, freedom means that I may be stupid enough to take up a concubine (like you), and serves me right if I get cheated, coz its my choice.
I don't want to live my life as a bird in a cage. Yes, the bird is safe (Coz caged up), get food at regular intervals, get to fly around (in that cage), but its life and death is controlled by the person owning that cage. -
I don't want to live my life as a bird in a cage. Yes, the bird is safe (Coz caged up), get food at regular intervals, get to fly around (in that cage), but its life and death is controlled by the person owning that cage.
How true and wise.
A detainee remembers
...Peter asked him, "Doesn't she have any rights?" He looked at Peter in a funny way and the rest laughed cynically...
...At one point during the interrogation I was threatened with indefinite detention and asked whether I intended to emulate Chia Thye Poh. They warned me that if I chose to remain quiet, they could wait for 20 years or more, just as they had waited for Chia Thye Poh.
I refused to believe it but somehow my heart went cold. I felt I could not stay in this place for another minute, let alone 20 years. I also felt immense admiration for Chia Thye Poh...
...I shall not rest until they are our entrenched rights and not mere privileges, removable at the arbitrary whims and fancies of the powers-that-be...
http://www.singapore-window.org/tfhmemo.htm
Rather die a hungry wolf than a fat dog as they say. -
yeap agreed.. but just don't go to the government to ask for funds when you have no more money le. Freedom comes with responsibility.Originally posted by soul_rage:If you take up a cheena concubine and you get cheated, serves you right.
I am highly against the annuity for the following reasons:
1) I don't know if I will live till 85
2) I believe that everyone should have the freedom to make the choice of how to spend HIS OWN money
3) That the govt should stop being a nanny, and allow Singaporeans to live their retirement however they want.
4) That I believe the OTHER reason behind this annuity is to absolve all responsibilities by the Govt to take care of its citizens when they reach old age.
Freedom is the way to live the life I want. Of course, freedom means that I may be stupid enough to take up a concubine (like you), and serves me right if I get cheated, coz its my choice.
I don't want to live my life as a bird in a cage. Yes, the bird is safe (Coz caged up), get food at regular intervals, get to fly around (in that cage), but its life and death is controlled by the person owning that cage.
If i take cheena concubine and kena cheated all my money, I will not go ask money from the government, if i still can hold up my moral values by then -
Yes I agree. Freedom comes responsibility for your OWN LIFE.Originally posted by cloud210:yeap agreed.. but just don't go to the government to ask for funds when you have no more money le. Freedom comes with responsibility.
If i take cheena concubine and kena cheated all my money, I will not go ask money from the government, if i still can hold up my moral values by then
By agreeing with the compulsory annuity policy, I tend to think these people are just cowards who don't dare take charge of their own lives, and instead wants the govt to babysit them and change their diapers until they are old
Only by taking responsibility, will we live meaningful lives. -
Hi Hyper....sometimes I wonder why do we even bother with the gahmen....we've all left this little piece of rock....sometimes its pointless going thru all these...knowing we all have a much better life away from this congested superficial red dot....Originally posted by HyperFocal:In all Goodness of God....
Do you actually think, PAP will expose to public apprehension such debates by Ms Formidable Sylvia Lim???
I tell you, PAP & their cohorts, are clearly INTIMIDATED by her sharp wit & clear presentations of their flawed ideals as well as "solutions" & or 'Policies'...
Stop hiding from the truths, PAP...It's time you take on some REAL responsibilities to care for the population of Singapore.... not evasise & vaguely structured policies around the CPF Totem Pole...
Stop the dance, start your walk from your talks...
by the way, where is that ever faithful servant of the gahmen.....gazelle...seems like he's disappeared.....well, good riddance to bad rubbish -
Ya, what happened to Gazelle?
There are some here who view Gazelle as nothing but the running dog of the PAP clique, but I actually share some common views with Gazelle. -
All these talks here whether for or against the CPF annuity scheme are all clouded by our personal ignorance, prejudice, selfishness and worst still - hidden political agenda. One thing that emerges here is this: whatever the gahmen do - it is done for their own good, not the general public. This line seems quite obvious to me after reading the many posts here.
There are a couple of suggestions here:
1) go visit old folks home or nursing home - talk to the patients and the administrators there, get a good insight
2) make a trip to Myanmar - ask the people there whether they like to have CPF, 1% more interest and annuity scheme
After you have done both, then come to debate here again. -
What seems obvious to me is that, given you only read Singapore newspapers, your judgement have already been clouded by whatever reports they have.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:All these talks here whether for or against the CPF annuity scheme are all clouded by our personal ignorance, prejudice, selfishness and worst still - hidden political agenda. One thing that emerges here is this: whatever the gahmen do - it is done for their own good, not the general public. This line seems quite obvious to me after reading the many posts here.
There are a couple of suggestions here:
1) go visit old folks home or nursing home - talk to the patients and the administrators there, get a good insight
2) make a trip to Myanmar - ask the people there whether they like to have CPF, 1% more interest and annuity scheme
After you have done both, then come to debate here again.
Your above is what I call selective perception. Your behavior is similar to the govt selecting countries to compare with so long as these countries fulfill the end they have in mind.
Why don't you go to the welfare countries and ask the old folks there whether they worry about medical costs and transportation costs and whether they need to go to an old folks' home?
When you have done that, then come back here to debate again. -
I see your soul raging. I read local papers for information not judgment. Foreign papers cannot make any sense to me as they are not in our unique situation. Tell me which other country is having the same issue right now - compulsory annuity in CPF? By the same token, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?Originally posted by soul_rage:What seems obvious to me is that, given you only read Singapore newspapers, your judgement have already been clouded by whatever reports they have.
Your above is what I call selective perception. Your behavior is similar to the govt selecting countries to compare with so long as these countries fulfill the end they have in mind.
Why don't you go to the welfare countries and ask the old folks there whether they worry about medical costs and transportation costs and whether they need to go to an old folks' home?
When you have done that, then come back here to debate again.
I have been to welfare countries and the folks there love all the freebies - free medical care, no compulsory CPF payment, no co-payment, free senior citizen rides, and so on. But they were just enjoying their own money taxed while they were young and working. Any fools like you will think the same way - I want freebies.
So, I have been to welfare countries already. Have you been to the old folks home or nursing home? -
Which foreign paper u refering to? Some of the foreign paper here are subjected to MICA for approval for circulation before they can beOriginally posted by TheGoodEarth:I see your soul raging. I read local papers for information not judgment. Foreign papers cannot make any sense to me as they are not in our unique situation. Tell me which other country is having the same issue right now - compulsory annuity in CPF? By the same token, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?
I have been to welfare countries and the folks there love all the freebies - free medical care, no compulsory CPF payment, no co-payment, free senior citizen rides, and so on. But they were just enjoying their own money taxed while they were young and working. Any fools like you will think the same way - I want freebies.
So, I have been to welfare countries already. Have you been to the old folks home or nursing home?
circulated to local for reading. Which welfare countries u talking about? -
I read local papers for information not judgment
Insane. This can only come from the mouth of someone whose eyes are still closed.
Let me open your eyes.
http://en.rian.ru
http://english.people.com.cn
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com
http://www.spacewar.com
http://news.google.com
http://www.antiwar.com
http://www.counterpunch.org
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info
http://www.atimes.com
http://www.globalresearch.ca
http://www.democracynow.org
http://www.fpif.org
http://www.flonnet.com
http://www.zmag.org/weluser.htm
http://www.monthlyreview.org
http://www.wsws.org
http://www.socialistworker.org
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net
http://www.chomsky.info/articles.htm
http://www.killinghope.org
http://fbc.binghamton.edu/cmpg.htm
http://www.johnpilger.com
http://petras.lahaine.org
http://www.slate.com/?id=3944&cp=117404
http://www.johnperkins.org
http://www.gregpalast.com
http://www.tomdispatch.com
http://www.tariqali.org
http://www.michael-hudson.com
http://www.ericmargolis.com
http://markcurtis.info
http://www.craigmurray.co.uk
http://www.exile.ru -
If you follow the links I gave for a week, TheGoodEarth, your eyes will be opened.
You will then realise that all this time, you have been living in a tightly controlled dream world.
A fool's paradise if you will. -
Hello, I think you are faking it. I doubt you have seen or got yourself interested in the living standards of other countries.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:I see your soul raging. I read local papers for information not judgment. Foreign papers cannot make any sense to me as they are not in our unique situation. Tell me which other country is having the same issue right now - compulsory annuity in CPF? By the same token, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?
I have been to welfare countries and the folks there love all the freebies - free medical care, no compulsory CPF payment, no co-payment, free senior citizen rides, and so on. But they were just enjoying their own money taxed while they were young and working. Any fools like you will think the same way - I want freebies.
So, I have been to welfare countries already. Have you been to the old folks home or nursing home?
Yes they are taxed, have you seen my other posting? Germany middle income is between EURO $2k to $3+k AFTER TAXES, compared to our middle income of S$1.5k to S$4k BEFORE TAXES. And Germans get welfare. We get compulsory annuity using OUR money.
You still want to argue some more with people whom have seen other countries, read foreign news with an open mind?
Your arguments are seriously flawed, and you pretend to know what is happening in other countries. I am not for freebies, but I am not one who wants the govt to change my diapers, till old age (unlike you).