How many of you know what Slyvia spoke in Parliament 19 Sep?
-
Taking your statement above in perspective, you are telling us that governance of a country is UNIQUE in EVERY country. So you are implying that we cannot learn from others?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?
Answer the question above. You sound more and more myopic and narrow-minded.
By the same token, do you also mean that MPs and ministers should not be asked to solve the poor's problem, coz they have NO IDEA what the poor's situation is all about (since our leaders are all fed with silver spoons)? -
Reminds me of The MatrixOriginally posted by Poh Ah Pak: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.
Some would prefer not to face the truth, but continue to live an ignorant existence. -
No, no, I am short-sighted, just read this:Originally posted by soul_rage:Taking your statement above in perspective, you are telling us that governance of a country is UNIQUE in EVERY country. So you are implying that we cannot learn from others?
Answer the question above. You sound more and more myopic and narrow-minded.
By the same token, do you also mean that MPs and ministers should not be asked to solve the poor's problem, coz they have NO IDEA what the poor's situation is all about (since our leaders are all fed with silver spoons)?
By the same token, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about? -
TheGoodEarth, if you use the local mainstream media for political content, than you are doomed.
Because when it comes to political issues, the local media is worthless as a source.
I repeat.
If you are talking about politics, there is no way in hell that you get anything of value in the Singapore mainstream propaganda media.
I am very disturbed in that you see value in the local media as a source of information.
What this shows is that your level of political awareness and knowledge is very low.
No surprise if your only source of info is the local media.
Do you know the ranking our local media is on "reporter without borders"?
http://www.singaporedemocrat.org/articlersf3.html -
hmmm ..... what truth are you telling us?Originally posted by soul_rage:Reminds me of The Matrix
Some would prefer not to face the truth, but continue to live an ignorant existence.
1) populace living longer - true or false?
2) low income earners do not have suffcient CPF savings to draw down if they live beyond 80years - true or false? -
So where is your source? And why do you think they are superior? And why do you think I am doomed and you are not?Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:TheGoodEarth, if you use the local mainstream media for political content, than you are doomed.
Because when it comes to political issues, the local media is worthless as a source.
I repeat.
If you are talking about politics, there is no way in hell that you get anything of value in the Singapore mainstream propaganda media.
I am very disturbed in that you see value in the local media as a source of information. -
PAP politicians are taking public money to pay themselves indecent salaries instead of using the public funds for the annuity, true or false?Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:hmmm ..... what truth are you telling us?
1) populace living longer - true or false?
2) low income earners do not have suffcient CPF savings to draw down if they live beyond 80years - true or false?
The scheme is just another hidden tax, true or false? -
Don't change the argument. You only repeated one part of your argument.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:No, no, I am short-sighted, just read this:
By the same token, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?
You said
(1) No other countries have a compulsory annuity scheme, so we should not compare with other countries
(2) THEN you ask the question, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?
(3) You are implying that we should not look towards other countries for advice or guidance since they have no (1)
So I am asking
(1) You are implying that all countries are UNIQUE, so useless for countries to learn from one another
(2) By the same token, since I cannot ask you to solve my problem since you have no idea about my situation, then aren't you implying that MPs and ministers should not help to solve the Poor's situation coz MPs and ministers, being so well-paid, wouldn't know the situation of the poor?
(3) You are also encouraging a system of learning from oneself, and not from others. Sounds like North Korea -
Maybe he's too busy with a lot of explanation to do with NatGeo for using their images so many times without permission...Originally posted by Coquitlam: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....
by the way, where is that ever faithful servant of the gahmen.....gazelle...seems like he's disappeared.....well, good riddance to bad rubbish
-
I meant you.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:hmmm ..... what truth are you telling us?
1) populace living longer - true or false?
2) low income earners do not have suffcient CPF savings to draw down if they live beyond 80years - true or false?
You would rather read from local newspapers and be happy about the 'good' news about Singapore, than to understand the dirt and filth that is beneath the surface.
Its the same as the traitor in Matrix.
He would rather go back to his self-deluding existence coz the real world is too painful to live in, so he betrayed the resistance to the Computers. -
Originally posted by soul_rage:Don't change the argument. You only repeated one part of your argument.
You said
(1) No other countries have a compulsory annuity scheme, so we should not compare with other countries
(2) THEN you ask the question, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?
(3) You are implying that we should not look towards other countries for advice or guidance since they have no (1)
hmmm.... you got my message very well.
So I am asking
(1) You are implying that all countries are UNIQUE, so useless for countries to learn from one another
oh no, this is your own implication!
(2) By the same token, since I cannot ask you to solve my problem since you have no idea about my situation, then aren't you implying that MPs and ministers should not help to solve the Poor's situation coz MPs and ministers, being so well-paid, wouldn't know the situation of the poor?
No, the implication is yours! MPs are supposed to help their constituents as well as the electorate. That's why so many queue outside Meet-the-People session like going to see a doctor at a clinic!
(3) You are also encouraging a system of learning from oneself, and not from others. Sounds like North Korea
Again, this is your implication! I learned a lot here, from various forumers. But I stand up to debunk their statements just like I do to yours! -
Originally posted by soul_rage:I meant you.
You would rather read from local newspapers and be happy about the 'good' news about Singapore, than to understand the dirt and filth that is beneath the surface.
oh, your implication? There are a lot of bad news in our local papers but the worse ones are found here!
Actually, I had a hard time trying to bring to the surface what all these gripes were about!!!!
Its the same as the traitor in Matrix.
He would rather go back to his self-deluding existence coz the real world is too painful to live in, so he betrayed the resistance to the Computers.
hahaha, I see your gripe with Matrix. You have a problem not me! -
Since when did I get the implications wrong? You have consented that I got your message (ESPECIALLY (3)) well, so you are literally encouraging that we should not look for other countries for guidance/advice, and should be learning instead from oneself.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:quote:Originally posted by soul_rage:
Don't change the argument. You only repeated one part of your argument.
You said
(1) No other countries have a compulsory annuity scheme, so we should not compare with other countries
(2) THEN you ask the question, do you ask me to solve your problem when I have no idea what your situation is all about?
(3) You are implying that we should not look towards other countries for advice or guidance since they have no (1)
hmmm.... you got my message very well.
So I am asking
(1) You are implying that all countries are UNIQUE, so useless for countries to learn from one another
oh no, this is your own implication!
(2) By the same token, since I cannot ask you to solve my problem since you have no idea about my situation, then aren't you implying that MPs and ministers should not help to solve the Poor's situation coz MPs and ministers, being so well-paid, wouldn't know the situation of the poor?
No, the implication is yours! MPs are supposed to help their constituents as well as the electorate. That's why so many queue outside Meet-the-People session like going to see a doctor at a clinic!
(3) You are also encouraging a system of learning from oneself, and not from others. Sounds like North Korea
Again, this is your implication! I learned a lot here, from various forumers. But I stand up to debunk their statements just like I do to yours!
And do you think the MPs and ministers really understand the situation? Pretending to understand, and really understanding is 2 different things.
Holding back monies is helping the poor?
Increasing GST is helping the poor?
You really believe in the above? -
I can forsee those age 40s onwards will have a hard time getting a job. Unless you have special expertise eg. chef . Than perhaps certain sector still will employ you. Things have change since a decade ago. Even if FT do not directly compete in the jobs. The job market wont be big enought for all of us.
So when you grow older, your chance of getting employ is lower. The goverment should know all this by now. Why they still expect us to work till 67? Live till 85?Originally posted by Rock^Star:There is sufficient empirical evidence that workers over the age of 40 already have difficulties competing with younger workers, even foreigners, for jobs. Even if they find work, there are issues about the amount of income, and job security. Part-time work or contract work is the lot for many.
It was reported in the press that in 2006, about 12% of the resident workforce or 172,000 workers were on contract work, the bulk of whom were older and with less education (ST 24/8/07). There must be unreported cases in the informal sector as well. It is not uncommon to find sole breadwinners doing odd jobs to feed school-going children. -
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Only you have the time and sanity to read all the links and their craps. Why don't you visit the old folks home or nursing home or hospice and spend some useful time there than to trash your garbage here?
[b]
Insane. This can only come from the mouth of someone whose eyes are still closed.
For the rest of us, we are just out of sight and out of mind! -
Non of what you said or implied is believable. But if you want to hold on to your belief, that is fine with me. I never trouble myself over other people's gripe.Originally posted by soul_rage:Since when did I get the implications wrong? You have consented that I got your message (ESPECIALLY (3)) well, so you are literally encouraging that we should not look for other countries for guidance/advice, and should be learning instead from oneself.
And do you think the MPs and ministers really understand the situation? Pretending to understand, and really understanding is 2 different things.
Holding back monies is helping the poor?
Increasing GST is helping the poor?
You really believe in the above?
However, if you have a solution or alternative to the circumstances I posed, I would be glad to hear bcos it has impact for me. The rest of personal gripes and political vibes you can save if for yourself to live on till 85. -
Originally posted by CPTMiller:I can forsee those age 40s onwards will have a hard time getting a job. Unless you have special expertise eg. chef . Than perhaps certain sector still will employ you. Things have change since a decade ago. Even if FT do not directly compete in the jobs. The job market wont be big enought for all of us.
You have very valid point here, and I should think you have followed local events to know that this problem has been recognised not just recenlty but many years ago. It is also a problem for many other countries. Let's face it: if you are an employer, would you not want to employ someone you can afford to pay, which unfortunately means the lowest salary! And usually, a younger person would not demand a high salary for the simple reason that they lacked working experience and they do not yet have family commitment.
There are certain realities in life we must face. To put the blame squarely on just one party is not fair. In another thread someone suggested that the gahmen should create jobs. I said that is not difficult. If no one wants to buy bread, how do you create jobs for bakers? If no one wants to be janitor, how do create CEO posts?
So when you grow older, your chance of getting employ is lower. The goverment should know all this by now. Why they still expect us to work till 67? Live till 85?
They know but your understanding seems limited. I bet with you that if this Thursday you strike TOTO first prize, you might consider quitting your lousy-pay job straightaway! Who said you must work until 67? Also, if you can tell when you want to go, who said you must live till 85.
I think you have a genuine concern about employment but you do not grasp the entire issue or overall picture very well. -
What a poor illustration then with regard to annuities considering the age difference between 60 and 85. (Refer to blue above) If you know nuts about annuities, then just "diam diam". Real, solid debate is much preferred.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!
1) A population lives longer as the country progresses.
A survey by UN shows that Singapore's life expectancy at birth in 2006 is at age 80.
In other words, a Singaporean born in 2006 would live to 80 based on mean calculations. What about those born pre-2000? Simple maths would show that the life expectancy is even lesser, no?
And based on further UN estimates, the percentage of population aged 80 and above by 2050 is only 14.8%.
The only period where a Singaporean's life expectancy hits 85 is between 2045-2050.
The truth is, Singapore's greying population is enlarging but that does not equate to more citizens living beyond 85. See the world of difference?
Thus, is the need for annuities justified? Status quo would have been better.
Source: Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
2) With reference to your concern on low income earners not having enough for CPF retirement:
The current minimum sum of $94,500 can dispense approximately $700+ a month for the next 20-25 years. Since a CPF member draws his CPF at 62, soon to be 65, that means the money will last one till his mid 80s. How many live beyond that. A handful maybe but it doesn't reflect the population trend as evident in the UN statistics above.
Assuming a member who only has half that sum of money in his CPF upon draw down age, he would still be entitled to $300+ a month for the next 20 odd years...much better than the pittance that annuities are known to pay. -
As put forward by CPFMiller:Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
So when you grow older, your chance of getting employ is lower. The goverment should know all this by now. Why they still expect us to work till 67? Live till 85?
TheGoodEarth replied:
They know but your understanding seems limited. I bet with you that if this Thursday you strike TOTO first prize, you might consider quitting your lousy-pay job straightaway! Who said you must work until 67? Also, if you can tell when you want to go, who said you must live till 85.
I think you have a genuine concern about employment but you do not grasp the entire issue or overall picture very well.
------------
Nobody says in black and white that one must work till 67. But can you see the link here? When CPF draw down age is increased, the govt expects to raise employement rates to 65%, which even in their own words, is an ambitious target.
In other words, a delay in drawing one's CPF money will automatically mean that the average Singaporean has to work longer, hence the govt's initiative to raise employement rates for this age category. No? Of course, not taking into account the rich.
How many have the luxury to retire before their 60s? How many can actually be re-employed with the same salary. As Slyvia has quoted, only 20% managed to do so while 70 % had to settle for lower.
Perhaps it is you who, time after time, in your haste to reply, misses out the key points and fail to interpolate properly. And you probaly have no idea half the time what you are posting because your research is severely limited. -
How do the CPF reforms affect the low income earners? Read on.....
-----
......And now (22 September), the Minister of National Development says that even those under the HDB lease buy-back scheme will have the Longevity Insurance built into the scheme.
Since it was said at the National Day rally speech that “We will pay you for the tail of the lease and you get some money out, a lump sum upfront and then the rest pay into CPF, some form of annuity, monthly payments for the rest of your life.”, why is it that those on the HDB lease buy-back scheme who will have “some form of annuity, monthly payments for the rest of your life”, in exchange for giving up the ownership and equity of their HDB flat to HDB, will also have to take the Longevity Insurance?
Why does one need Longevity Insurance when one already has “some form of annuity, monthly payments for the rest of your life”?
Or will those on the HDB buy-back scheme be exempted from the LI scheme, just as those who are chronically ill – as mentioned by the Minister without portfolio?
So, those who will be exempted are the rich (because they have enough for retirement), the chronically ill (because they are going to die soon) and those who sell back their flats to HDB (becauseÂ…. ?).
The rich who have other means may be exempted from the Longevity Insurance, but the poor who have only one 2 or 3-room HDB flat to fall back on in their retirement will have to take the Longevity Insurance, despite already having a life annuity under the HDB lease buy-back scheme?
by Andrew Loh
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2007/09/24/uniquely-singapore-f1-or-f9-are-our-ministers-also-confused-by-the-annuityerm-longevity-insurance-scheme/#more-498 -
Thanks for the members in replying my posts.
I think it is very hard to convince everyone what is right and wrong.
I believe there still a nos of people doing quite well financially during the asian crisis few years ago.
As I mention in my previous posting.
Things has change in the last decade.
Not only the economy but also the employment markets.
As the job pile is limited and only the fittest will survive.
I have seen for the past decade, our government cant solve this jobs employment problem.
I believe they will still unable to solve it in the next decade.
As for working till 67 or even live till 85.
I dont mind living fully till 100.
Who want to die early.
But only if I am capable to support myself till then.
So it is better to start preparing ourselves now.
This is my point of view only. -
As I said again, whether its annuity or something else, is secondaryOriginally posted by TheGoodEarth:Non of what you said or implied is believable. But if you want to hold on to your belief, that is fine with me. I never trouble myself over other people's gripe.
However, if you have a solution or alternative to the circumstances I posed, I would be glad to hear bcos it has impact for me. The rest of personal gripes and political vibes you can save if for yourself to live on till 85.
The main thing is
Its your money, and you want someone else to control it for you?
For me, I am a responsible person and I take responsibility for my life.
In a democracy there should always be a choice, and not something forcing down the throat
Like I said, you have no right to force your old relatives to take up whatever you plan for them, coz this is a free world, and everyone should be free to make their own choices.
If you are so dumb as to get a cheena concubine and get cheated, that's your business as well. I don't think the compulsory annuity was ever created with your reason of being cheated in mind -
if u wanna talk bout yourself.. please do so.. but dun drag the rest of us in your 'class'..Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:For the rest of us, we are just out of sight and out of mind!
do u have any other places to recommend except your constant rant of 'visit old folks home...blah..blah..blah..?'
Becuz me or my brothers would not even think about putting up my parents there... so if you plan to put your's please do so...
I dun have time for china girls either.. they're not my taste.. i guess that ends the possibility of me getting scammed..
Save your 'philosophies' on a 6yr old kid.. it won't work on me...
'heavan & hell is here' ? who you kidding?
-
hahaaha, yes, I forgot to exclude certain forumers OUT of my 'out of sight' and 'out of mind' analogy. I read all your postings and all I get are just garbages from self-proclaimed intelligent and foreign-informed 'old' people since they likened me to a 6-yr old kid. Unfortunatley, these 'wise' old men have nuthing to offer other than to nitwit, nitpick, and call names. They are able to quote foreign sources and run local presses down. They are the only ones who read and internetnised the world web for their worldly knowledge on politics.
But they have no idea what are conditions in Myanmar, the old folks in nursing homes and the dying in hospice. Don't waste your time trying to convince how intelligent or knowledgeable or foreign-informed you are. I am not impressed nor are the many readers here. If you are that GREAT, come with me to visit the old folks/nursing home. Put your name and contact here:
1)
2)
3) -
Shut up if you are finding fault. I did not talk big, it is in your own small mind perception that I talked big. You are the one who talk big here on this thread. YOu talk as if people should not give negative comment at all about the gahmen. Crap lah!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??
The way you whine about the people, I find you just have nothing good to offer here.